Press ‘gaggle' gives US game away
B.S.RAGHAVAN
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The ‘gaggle' was apparently meant to brief the US media on the US President, Mr Barack Obama's India visit.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Anyone who submerges himself in all the Niagara of words emanating from the US Administration officials and the think-tanks (again mostly peopled by former Administration officials!) on the visit of the US President, Mr Barack Obama, to India is bound to be left with the definitive conclusion that it is historic, in a class of its own, meant to lift the strategic partnership to stratospheric heights and reflective of the US regarding India as an ‘indispensable' ally in shaping the world's destiny. No hyperbole has been left wanting in describing its cosmic significance.
Most sections of the Indian commentariat too have been warming up to this build-up, raising enormous hopes of the relations between the two countries getting on to a soaring trajectory. The picture emerging is one of the US President taking all the trouble to come to pay his tribute to the pivotal role India is playing, and can play, on the world stage.
But what is it that the Americans are saying amongst themselves?
If you go through the transcript of the press “gaggle” that was held on October 27 in the James S. Brady Press Briefing Room of the White house (
LINK), you will be startled to know that the purpose of the visit is down-to-earth, earthy. In fact, it is confined to one single objective which is underplayed, if not unstated, in public.
(Incidentally,
the word ‘gaggle', meaning, among other things, ‘a group, aggregation, or cluster lacking organisation, such as a gaggle of reporters and photographers' (according to the dictionary), is
not mine but one used in the White House Web site to describe the occasion).
Basically economic
First, the setting. The ‘gaggle' was apparently to brief the US media on the President's India visit, bearing in mind the general ignorance about the country that used to prevail till recently, and perhaps still prevails among the hinterland media there. It was attended by the Press Secretary, Mr Robert Gibbs; the Under-Secretary of State for Political Affairs, Mr William Burns; the Deputy National Security Adviser for International Economic Affairs, Mr Mike Froman; and the Deputy National Security Adviser for Strategic Communication, Mr Ben Rhodes.
The sum and substance of what they repeatedly gave out as the main, if not sole, purpose of the visit is to promote exports
“to ensure that there's a level playing field there, there's open markets (sic) there, and that our exports have an opportunity to penetrate that market and support jobs back here….the President will make clear the importance of removing barriers to US exports and US participation in their market”.
The officials were categorical that “the trip is basically economic in focus”. As Mr Froman put it,
“….with 1.2 billion people and an economy growing — expected to grow at 8 per cent a year for the next several years, we really see India as a potentially very important market for US exports. Exports of American goods have already quadrupled over the last seven years to about $17 billion. And service exports have tripled to about $10 billion a year. So it's a fast-growing economic relationship. And it's a two-way street as well. Indian companies are the second-fastest-growing investors in the US (the first being United Arab Emirates). And they now support about 57,000 jobs here in the US. So it's a great market for US exports. It's a good place — source of investment for the US. There are a lot of jobs in the US tied to both of those things. And that's the reason why the President will be there …I would simply say that a key part of the message is going to be that we want to make sure there's opportunities for US jobs, US exports. And that's a big part of his mission there …”
Of course, the ‘gaggle' referred to issues such as nuclear deal, cooperation on counter-terrorism, climate management, defence matters and the like, but only in passing.
On India's long-desired permanent seat on the Security Council,
Mr Burns told the ‘gaggle' “…the US recognises the significance of looking at ways to adapt international architecture, including the UN Security Council, to reflect the realities of the 21st century. We want to approach that challenge in a way that ensures the effectiveness — and hopefully strengthens the effectiveness — of the Security Council. Given India's rise and its significance, we believe that India will be a central part of any consideration of a reformed Security Council.”
Missile defence shield
This was
so obfuscatory that the media person was prompted to ask whether there was a ‘downside' which he was seeking to hide. Mr Rhodes stepped in to make the response, if anything, more obfuscatory. See what you make of it. Here it is: “It's a very complicated issue that involves international architecture in many countries. But we'll continue to work — to talk this through as we move forward on the trip.”
The ‘gaggle' threw up an
intriguing revelation about the signing of an agreement between the US and India on missile defence when a questioner, more inquisitive than the rest, asked about it. It was
made more intriguing by the evasive reply of Mr Burns who simply contented himself with saying: “…we have a pretty wide-ranging discussion with India about a whole range of issues, and … our defence relationship has expanded quite dramatically in recent years — but (I can say) nothing in particular on missile defence….”
Unlike in the case of nuclear deal, the Government has not taken the people into confidence about the implications of the deal between India and the US to jointly build a ballistic missile defence (BMD) shield, incorporating radar and anti-missile missiles, or interceptors, which are able to destroy incoming and possibly nuclear-tipped ballistic missiles possessed by Pakistan and China.
Whether the arrangement entered into with the US subjects India's national security to the command, control and operational jurisdiction of a foreign power is a question to which the people are entitled to an answer. 
