President Barack Obama's three-day visit to India

came on the heels of an economic recession and a

losing war in Afghanistan. Just before his visit,
Obama felt the full lash of frustration from the
American people in the midterm elections on account
of a stagnant economy and increasing unemployment.
Thus creation of jobs in the United States is his prime
objective.
American businesses desperately need markets to sell
their products. They are looking towards the
developing world with great optimism. India, being
the second-fastest growing economy after China, is a
major consumer of everything from bikes to aircrafts,
nuclear power to defense equipment. In order to take
advantage of the burgeoning demand from India, on
the very first day of Obama's visit, 20 business deals
worth a total of $10 billion were signed between the
two countries.
The deals included sales of Boeing passenger
aircrafts, Boeing C-17 Globemasters to Indian armed
forces, GE 107 F414 jet engines to the Indian Air
Force, GE power turbines, and the setting up of a
Harley Davidson assembly plant, among others.
Obama declared that these deals will create around
54,000 jobs in the United States. All this was said
and done despite the restriction on outsourcing from
India.
Obama also declared to lift the ban of high-tech and
dual-use exports to Indian agencies—Indian Space
Research Organisation, Defence Research and
Development Organisation, and Bharat Dynamics
Limited. Moreover, his administration has supported
India's full membership in Nuclear Suppliers Group,
Missile Technology Control Regime, the Australian
Group and the Wassenaar Arrangement. It is being
said that these concessions will help India to develop
its space technology and defense industry.
All this might seem to be the generosity of the
Obama administration towards India, but the reality
is different. Apart from eyeing economic gains by the
sale of high-tech and dual-use products, the United
States also wants to make geopolitical impact in Asia.
Worried by the rapid rise of China, the United States
wants to create a counterbalance in Asia by allying
India with itself.
On the last day of his visit, Obama addressed the
Indian Parliament. He said many things India wanted
to hear, and a few things it didn't. The most important
was his vocal support for India getting a permanent
seat in the reformed U.N. Security Council (UNSC).
Since such a statement would not come without
conditions attached, he asked India to play an active
role in passing and enforcing sanctions resolutions
during its two-year stint as a non-permanent member.
By this, he wanted India to change its consistent
stance on Iran. This was also reflected in the joint
statement issued by both countries. On Iran, both
leaders reaffirmed their commitment to diplomacy
and discussed the need for India to meet its
obligations towards the International Atomic Energy
Agency and UNSC.
On Pakistan, in line with Indian expectations, Obama
said that terrorist safe havens within Pak borders are
unacceptable and also called on Pakistan to punish
the terrorists behind the Mumbai attacks. This was
the most an American president could do
notwithstanding the lack of strategic convergence
between India and the United States on Pakistan.
While for the United States Pakistan is a part of the
solution, for India it is the heart of the problem. The
United States badly needs Pakistan in its war against
al Qaeda and the Taliban in the AfPak region. On the
controversial issue of Kashmir, repeating his earlier
stance, the U.S. president said Washington couldn't
impose a solution and intends to work with both sides
to resolve the issue bilaterally. His silence on
Kashmir was ensured by the above aircraft and
defense deals.
Stressing the phrase "two largest democracies,"
Obama sought to send an indirect message to China
that development can be achieved by following
democratic norms and values. This was in contrast to
his visit to China where he talked about "G-2"
leading the world. It clearly shows that the United
States seeks to contain China in Asia by supporting
India. In reality, India and China cannot be
compared. China has more than $2.6 trillion of
investment in U.S. securities. Moreover, the annual
bilateral trade between the United States and China is
more than $500 billion, with balance of trade in favor
of China. China has leverage with the United States
that India does not.
Also in his speech, Obama questioned the silence of
India on human rights violations in Myanmar and
maintained that being upfront on such issues did not
mean interference in the affairs of another country.
One could say that the same should apply to U.S.
policy towards Saudi Arabia and other West Asian
allies where citizens don't know the meaning of
human rights—not to mention the human rights
violations of Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay.
This visit was different in the sense that it was a give-
and-take event, unlike prior visits by U.S. presidents
who sought only to extract from India as much as
they could. Obama gave many concessions and
assurances to India. Still, there are many issues on
which both countries do not share a common view.
India, being a sovereign nation, has always followed
an independent foreign policy. Our defined principles
determine our relations with neighboring countries
and the world. As Prime Minister Manmohan Singh
rightly said, "We cannot choose our neighbors." We
need to learn to live in peace with them without
bowing to any external pressure. Indian policymakers
should keep in mind that, in the 21st century,
America may need India more than India needs
America.