President Obama's win means great bonhomie for India

New York: The race was tight from the start. But in the end sitting President Barack Obama held on to win in key battleground states on Tuesday trouncing his Republican rival Mitt Romney. Within the context of expectations created upon assuming the presidency, Obama overpromised and under delivered in foreign policy. His 2008 campaign agenda remains largely unfulfilled, particularly in the Middle East which was central to the final debate between him and Romney. The Obama presidency even started off on the wrong foot with India when he initiated a courtship with China that was later abandoned. Then sensing a growing nostalgia for former Republican president George W Bush in New Delhi, Obama sent Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on a charm offensive to India and he himself visited Mumbai and Delhi early in his presidency to elegantly and effectively dispel Indian apprehensions about an Obama administration. Obama has now built on the Bush era bonhomie with New Delhi so his presidency means continuity. More to the point, the longer Obama is in office, the more his administration realises how much it needs India. As one White House adviser put it: “India is one of our five most important interlocutors on almost every global challenge you look at whether it is combating terrorism, managing the rise of China, building the G20 or helping to stabilise Afghanistan.” Earlier in the year, New Delhi may have sulked after Obama accused it of dragging its feet on free-market reforms. But real economic ties between India and the US, as opposed to the formal frictions at the World Trade Organisation, get closer every year. India-US total merchandise trade was $57.80 billion in 2011 — making the US India’s third largest trading partner. [caption id=“attachment_517755” align=“alignleft” width=“380”] President Barack Obama waves as he walks on stage with first lady Michelle Obama and daughters Malia and Sasha at his election night party. AP[/caption] Tough line on terrorism emanating out of Pakistan Analysts say an older and wiser Obama is likely to tweak policy on South Asia and adopt a tougher line on Islamic terrorism emanating out of Pakistan. The past four years have shown that Obama views military-dominated Pakistan with deep distrust and in this area his impulses are completely in synch with New Delhi. Forget aid, Obama’s tough call against Pakistan is underscored by a surge in drone attacks. As a result of these attacks, the US has been able to achieve at least 41 high value targets, according to estimates by the New American Foundation. Even Obama’s critics don’t doubt his commitment to using military pressure on terrorist groups in Pakistan after the daring raid on Osama bin Laden. “A second Obama administration will pursue the same foreign policy and economic policies as during his first administration. It is a known quantity,” Mira Kamdar, a fellow at the World Policy Institute, and author of Planet India, told Firstpost. She added that although there may be small frustrations, US policy toward Pakistan and toward Iran would not be pursued in a way that threatens fundamental Indian interest. “Obama is the favoured candidate all around the world, including in India. It’s the first time a Democratic candidate has bested a Republican candidate in India sentiment polls in recent memory,” said Kamdar. “It means that Obama’s unique trajectory, his becoming the first black president of the US, his being elected with the name Barack Hussein Obama, resonates with people around the world who believe democracy can sometimes deliver unexpected victories, that an aam admi can make it to the very top. At least that’s what Obama’s victory meant in 2008. In 2012, for India, it means continuity,” she added. Obama will want India to replace Pakistan in Afghanistan Overall, the India-US relationship is a sturdy one today. Obama has maintained that deepening ties with India are a “first-order of priority.” “The team that Obama has assembled knows how to deal with India. They have certain expectations, understanding of how India works, and what might be accomplished with India. It is better than a new set of people who will have to acquaint themselves with Indian expectations,” said South Asia expert Sumit Ganguly, who is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations. The Obama administration wants India to fill up a post-US vacuum in Afghanistan and to play a bigger role training Afghan security forces as a Nato deadline to withdraw all its combat troops from that country by the end of 2014 draws near. There is irony in the situation as the same US administration earlier wanted India to downsize its footprint in Afghanistan till a couple of years ago for fear of offending Pakistan. At the cost of sending Pakistan into a paroxysms of rage, the Obama administration has instituted a trilateral engagement between the US, India and Afghanistan. “It is foolish to say there is no difference between Mitt Romney and Obama when it comes to Iran. I disagree with other analysts who have suggested there is a complete bipartisan consensus when it comes to India. No there isn’t, because Romney made very strong statements about Iran. It was totally unclear what Romney intended to deal with Pakistan and Afghanistan,” said Ganguly, who holds the Rabindranath Tagore Chair in Indian Cultures and Civilizations at Indiana University in Bloomington. Obama will have to learn to work with the Republicans Ultimately, voters in a handful of battleground states had the final say in what has been the most expensive presidential contest in history. Despite lavishing $3 billion into attack ads, voting went down according to predictable fault lines and vote banks. Exit polls showed Obama won 55 percent of the female vote while Romney won 58 percent of the white vote. Obama had the support of 93 percent of black voters and 69 percent of Latinos. Four years ago, Obama become the first African American to win the country’s presidency after pushing a reformist message of change that resonated across America and well beyond its shores. Surprisingly, he is now one of the most polarising presidents America has ever seen. He has pushed through measures like Obamacare with no Republican support. Also controversial are his record government spending and what critics claim are Obama’s efforts to grow big government. Americans are now hoping a second-term Obama will maneuver toward the centre, seeking compromise with Republicans on major issues as did his Democratic predecessor, former President Bill Clinton. They are hoping he might rethink his call for raising taxes on wealthier Americans to pay for deficit reduction and come to a compromise with the opposition on tackling the fiscal cliff in the interest of getting things done for the American people. Obama has been unable to make any headway with Republicans in addressing the fiscal cliff, at least to date, and the looming deadline is spooking the financial markets. World leaders urged the US this weekend to act decisively to avoid a rush of spending cuts and tax hikes. The fiscal cliff is the biggest short-term threat to global growth and has much to do with US taxes. If the Bush-era tax cuts expire as scheduled in December this year, most Americans will face a crushing tax bill on 15 April, 2014. America’s bitterly divided Congress has to move swiftly to reach a deal after the US elections on Tuesday, about $600 billion in government spending cuts and higher taxes which are otherwise set to kick in from 1 January. Economists have warned that if the Bush-era tax cuts expire it could push the US economy back into recession. “Obama’s victory in the bruising campaign marks a landmark in modern election history. No sitting president since Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1940 has won re-election with a higher unemployment rate, which stands at 7.9 percent,” said The Wall Street Journal.