How India’s Role in US Indo-Pacific Strategy Diminished |
President Donald Trump’s recently released National Security Strategy (NSS) has understandably set off alarm bells among American treaty allies. However, it has also caused concern in countries like India, which had become accustomed to a world order in which the United States was an engaged global power for the last 78 years. Ever since the end of World War II, American grand strategy has centered around preventing the rise of a peer competitor, first the Soviet Union and later China. This involved the creation of a lattice of global alliances and partnerships with the United States, providing a security underpinning and encouraging free trade.
For over two decades, successive American presidents have stated that the United States no longer seeks to be the global policeman. And yet, in every NSS, the strategy remained, by and large, the same. The latest NSS appears to reverse course on many of these long-held views. There is an inward orientation for rebuilding domestic industry (rather than friendshoring or offshoring). Instead of supporting globalization, the document advocates for the weaponization of commerce through tariffs and trade restrictions. In place of an America with global interests, it puts forth the vision of an America primarily focused on the Western Hemisphere.
In 1946, diplomat George Kennan sent his famous “Long Telegram” from Moscow, which provided the ideological basis of American strategy during the Cold War. At a time when the United States faces a similar peer competitor, China, a similar diagnosis is needed. However, the challenge from China is not portrayed as a clash of worldviews or ideologies. Instead, it is put forth in the context of rebalancing trade, preventing technology theft, and bringing back American capital. Interestingly, Chinese analysts appear to have interpreted the NSS not as retrenchment by the United States but simply as a reorganization so that the United States can rebuild its capabilities and then push back against China.
Every country’s priority is its own national interests, and it is understandable that the United States seeks to rebuild its domestic industry. Still, there are inherent limitations to this policy in today’s world, where it is difficult to live in splendid isolation. Finally, there is a difference between interference and involvement in the global order. Nature abhors a vacuum, so does the global order.
American security allies in Europe and Asia are understandably concerned about the ramifications of the NSS. However, even a non-treaty ally like India faces challenges. In the latest NSS, alliances and partnerships are no longer chess pieces positioned to contain the enemy; they are investments whose returns are........