I think we generally agree, but regardless, I am going to be more explicit in what I mean.
I thought I made clear that I don't wish for a fundamentally pro-India policy for America which generally harms American interests. Perhaps I should have spelt it out clearer: It is my personal
(not to be taken as blanket statement of Americans, or Indian-Americans in general) fundamental belief that America should have friendly (hence the "pro-" prefix) relations with India.
In the balance of fundamental-ideals, self-beneficial macro-economics, and self-beneficial geo-policy, which I consider 3 major factors of national patriotism in dealing with foreign policy, it is my belief that America may have to trade off economic and political benefits in the name of (my) ideals, in the process of being India-friendly. Since I am American, and since, theoretically, America as a democracy is the collective will of the people, I am very much entitled to this opinion, and should do what I can to influence American foreign policy thusly
Let me explain in more detail...
I said before that I do not define national progress purely in terms of economics, but also in terms of ideals. India and America the nation states are borne of the same ideals (democracy, pluralism, etc) - for this reason alone should steps be taken to harmonize the two countries.
Further, since I am of Indic civilizational background/influence I feel as much offense in harming Indic civilization (India, as was said, is the largest and most inclusive example of the 'Indic' civilization) as an American of European-background would, with regards to Europe. I am not a Euro-Centrist, or a Western-civilizational-centrist as most Americans are. By nature of by race, ancestry, religion, upbringing, and the morals I have personally chosen, I am an Indo-centrist*, and my civilizational worldview is as Indo-centric, as the American of European descent is Euro-centric.
To pre-empt the argument I've had altogether too many times with some in this forum (and stil have nightmares about), let me state for the record and in finality that there is nothing wrong about being an Indo-centrist, especially as an American. Period.
Civilizational-centrism is not to be equated with civilizational-chauvinism. To argue as such is to be intellectually dishonest. Centricity in this case means being central to, while recognizing that others are equally valid - pluralism, unity-in-diversity, and the like. Chauvinism in this case is treating your world-view as superior, and/or others as inferior.
And when I say, "especially as an American" I mean this: America is a land of immigrants and cultural diversity. This country is not the product of one religious, ethnic, racial, or national group, but a medley of individuals. I am not going to, nor am I expected to, conform to the civilization/religion/etc. of the majority. Thusly, I can as confidently strut my Indo-centricity, as much as another American can strut his ____-Centricity.
I've noticed that those who argue against this idea tend themselves to have conflicting interests/patriotism. I see no conflict in my own American patriotism and Indo-centricity.
Back to my pre-tangent point: Furthermore, I consider India to be the motherland of my religion. It is my own personal bias (and bias need not be a negative thing) to egg American policy to be pro-India for this reason.
You can draw the parallel by American Jews and Christians influence in American foreign policy toward Israel - and though I support Israel, the economic/political benefits of this vehemently pro-Israel policy to America are downright iffy - and when you base policy boons on strictly economic or political motives, without factoring in ideals, America's Isreal-bias, can be considered a negative foreign policy. However, the 'ideal' factor more than makes up for this, to us Israel-lovers, and likewise will be made up to us Indian-lovers.
Being familiar with (and a product of) both cultures and countries, I, and Indian-Americans who think like me, are in a good position to proactively bring necessary elements of both countries together to develop a mutually beneficial policy, or at the very least, a policy that doesn't harm the other. In general, Indian Americans do just that.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- -DJ Detroit Desi
...a webmaster of: The 1962 Sino-Indian War Website.
[edited- out some of my rambling]