 "Why India needs to prepare for 2028 and woo future American leaders to guarantee strong relations")
The US presidential elections are now just two months away. American pundits’ description of the election as the most consequential in US history is an exaggeration. The United States has weathered episodes of political polarisation before. The chants of “Lock Her Up” that Gen Michael Flynn led at the 2016 Republican Convention were nothing compared to Vice President Aaron Burr shooting his rival, Alexander Hamilton, on July 11, 1804. Beginning in the 1830s, disputes between north and south about slavery and abolition dominated by politics and often turned violent, culminating in the Civil War which, to date, was a deadlier conflict for Americans than either World War. Political polarisation marked the 1870-1900 ‘Gilded Age’. Party machines dominated regions, and political violence was frequent.
Culture clashes erupted in the 1960s against the backdrop of the Vietnam War as hippies challenged the dominant culture of the baby boomers. In the 1980s, yuppies represented a backlash against the communal, flower-power values of their parents. (Family Ties, a television serial that propelled Michael J Fox to stardom, worked to find comedy in the generational divide).
The pendulum of partisanship is again extreme today, fuelled by 24x7 news and the Internet as well as two candidates defined more by their partisan rancor than policy expertise, ideological consistency, or general competence. If Democratic nominee is the valedictorian (top-ranked student) of a high school summer school programme, Republican nominee Donald Trump appears at best the salutatorian (2nd-ranked student) of the special education class.
Sometimes, however, the backlash to partisanship and rancor enables political greatness. When Republicans went into their 1860 convention, the presumptive nominee was William Seward. His radical opposition to slavery polarised Americans, though Seward won the endorsement of liberal outlets like the New York Times. Seward had a tendency to throw fuel on the fire. Democrats largely blamed Seward’s incitement for John Brown’s 1859 raid on Harpers Ferry, Virginia, in which the militant abolitionist sought to seize the armory and free slaves. The raid ultimately failed and Brown hanged for treason.
Impact Shorts
More ShortsWith passions running so high and Republicans fearing the never-Seward vote could deny them the presidency, they turned to the relatively unknown Abraham Lincoln, a gangly and well-spoken Illinois lawyer and one-term congressman who had, prior to the 1860 convention, failed even to win his party’s support for Illinois’ seat in the US Senate. Historians today rank Abraham Lincoln (1861-1865) as America’s top president, above founding father George Washington (1789-1797) who established the precedent of leaders retiring, Thomas Jefferson (1801-1809) who both masterminded the Louisiana Purchase and slashed national debt, Theodore Roosevelt (1901-1909) who implemented progressive reforms domestically and an active foreign policy, and Franklin Delano Roosevelt (1933-1945) who shepherded the country through both the Great Depression and World War II. Few Americans remember that he was a relative unknown when he reached the White House.
The 2024 American election might concern India. Kamala Harris has Indian ancestry, but her tendency to defer to progressive activists makes her susceptible to “Modi Derangement Syndrome”. Should she win the 2024 elections, she will at best mirror Canadian Premier Justin Trudeau, and at worst might needlessly derail the growing partnership and trust between Washington and New Delhi in favour of short-term political virtue signalling. Trump may not be better. US-India ties grew during his first term (as they had under Presidents George W Bush and Barack Obama) but Trump is erratic. Hateful rhetoric to Hindus, protectionism, and a willingness to allow regional dictators in China and Pakistan to woo him could all setback relations. Even if Trump is generally better than Harris for bilateral ties, such statements are really just making the best of a dysfunctional situation.
The same will not be true in 2028. Harris’ vice presidential sweepstakes highlighted the depth of the Democratic field. Colouring Harris’ decision was insecurity. Voters saw Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro and Arizona Senator Mark Kelly as more intelligent and capable as Harris; voters preferred them to the head of the ticket. In 2028 or 2032, voters will relish a choice between figures much more competent and accomplished. They can choose between men or women who excelled on their own merits to the top of their fields.
Republicans will also have a deep field in 2028. Trump will have wiped out a generation of politicians who disqualified themselves in voters’ eyes by pivoting to Trump populism rather than standing on principle, but governors like Brian Kemp or Glenn Youngkin are not similarly tainted. Nikki Haley served Trump in his first term, but stood independent long enough that voters might give her a fresh start. Senators Ted Cruz and Tom Cotton could lead a drive by traditional conservatives to win the White House.
The question then for New Delhi and India’s diplomats in Washington is what they are doing to develop their relations with the men or women who could enter the Oval Office on January 20, 2029. The time to build personal relationships and teach them about India’s reality is prior to their victory. If the Ministry of External Affairs waits until a new president emerges, not only must India compete with every other country, but its officials will also have perhaps an hour rather than a week to make their case. To invite prospective candidates now to New Delhi, to tour the Line of Actual Control in Ladakh, to see the reality in Kashmir is not what Human Rights Watch suggests, or to experience the innovation engine of Bangalore, is the way to guarantee relations between the two largest democracies remain on track.
If Indian diplomats continue to sit on the laurels, however, reacting to events rather than shaping perceptions, the crises of the next four years could set the stage for New Delhi-Ottawa ties to seem permanently placid by comparison to the tensions and grievances which could come to define New Delhi-Washington ties.
Michael Rubin is director of policy analysis at the Middle East Forum and a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. Views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect Firstpost’s views.
 "Russian drones over Poland: Trump’s tepid reaction a wake-up call for Nato?")
 "As Russia pushes east, Ukraine faces mounting pressure to defend its heartland")
 "Why Mossad was not on board with Israel’s strike on Hamas in Qatar")
 "Turkey: Erdogan's police arrest opposition mayor Hasan Mutlu, dozens officials in corruption probe")
 "Russian drones over Poland: Trump’s tepid reaction a wake-up call for Nato?")
 "As Russia pushes east, Ukraine faces mounting pressure to defend its heartland")
 "Why Mossad was not on board with Israel’s strike on Hamas in Qatar")
 "Turkey: Erdogan's police arrest opposition mayor Hasan Mutlu, dozens officials in corruption probe")
