The run-up to US President Barack Obama’s visit to India has been an opportunity for IDSA to interact with eminent experts in the super-power’s domestic and foreign policy spheres and on this occasion, Prof. Cohen addressed an informed audience on the subject of the current administration’s involvement in South Asia. The Director General of IDSA, Mr. N.S. Sisodia, inaugurated the session by welcoming Professor Stephen Cohen and lauding his long-standing association with IDSA and academic interest in South Asia. Prof. Cohen’s visit to India was sponsored by the American centers, and he also participated in a Brookings dialogue in early November.

At the outset, Professor Cohen predicted continued progress of US-India relations regardless of the outcome of high-level visits. He reviewed the range of reactions elicited by the Indo-US nuclear deal – both favourable and less so – within the United States, deeming as legitimate concerns over some of the associated proliferation implications. He went on to add, however, that India’s impeccable democratic credentials had gone a long way to facilitate ultimate consensus over the deal. Regarding immediate priority ranking of the Obama Administration’s foreign policy, however, he rated India below Afghanistan and Pakistan. Vis-à-vis China, the US and India have both adopted a wait-and-see policy, but this, according to Professor Cohen, has only further strengthened the basis for a meaningful partnership between the two democracies.

On the question of Afghanistan, he came out in support of revival of the Bonn Agreement as a way to successfully combat radicalization. Given the shared stakes India and Pakistan have in a stable, moderate Afghanistan, he expressed hope for close cooperation between the two nations. Regarding American involvement in the region, he identified facilitation of Indo-Pak rapprochement and better relations with Iran as deserving consistent effort.

A member of the audience called into question the idea that India and Pakistan shared interests in Afghanistan, in response to which Professor Cohen suggested that radicalization of Afghanistan being detrimental to both actors, a distinction needs to be drawn between interest and policy. Responding to another question, he characterized a Pakistan riddled with uncertainty as worrisome to the US and candidly admitted that its weaknesses sometimes played out in its favour. Professor Cohen held India partly responsible as far as the closeness of China Pakistan relations is concerned. In answer to a query related to American assistance to Pakistan, Professor Cohen acknowledged the possibility of diversion of funds to the Taliban, yet argued that this was an inevitable fall-out if Chinese influence over Pakistan were to be held in check. He went on to suggest that the American dilemma vis-à-vis Pakistan was not too different from the Indian one, as the outcomes of a more aggressive stance against Pakistan were far from clear. Support to radical groups by the Pakistani ISI was seen – albeit ill-judged – as historically a widely employed instrument of statecraft. Professor Cohen’s assessment of Indo-US relations over the long-run was that the initiative lies with India on most outstanding issues.

In the Chair’s summary, Mr. K. Subrahmanyam argued that the tipping point for Pakistan would be triggered by internal constituencies reacting to American intervention in tribal areas. He predicted decline in American financial support to Pakistan pending decisive action on the latter’s part to counter radical groups. He portrayed India as the default partner for a US attempting to win the “knowledge race” and maintain it’s pre-eminence.

Report prepared by Kalyani Unkule, Research Assistant, Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses, New Delhi.