America's strategy to deal with China is to push back in “virtually every domain'' including “outsized demands to claim sovereign territory” in the Galwan Valley.
US Deputy Secretary of State Stephen Biegun’s remarks on Monday came on the same day that news broke that Indian soldiers had thwarted another Chinese attempt to occupy the Pangong Tso heights. Biegun's words offer comfort for India, but might do little more.
While India may have American sympathies, there may not be appetite for American interference in a conflict between the two. Vasabjit Banerjee, a professor of political science and Timothy S. Rich, conducted a survey with over 1,000 Americans to assess the public mood on whether they supported America aiding China, India or neither side if there was a military conflict or an economic conflict.
Over 63 per cent of Americans support neither China nor India if they were to engage in a military conflict. In the case of an economic conflict, 60.6 per cent of respondents supported no interference.
“For those who did choose to support one of the countries, however, it was overwhelmingly in favour of India,” the paper found. “For a military conflict between India and China, 32.6 per cent preferred that the US support India, as opposed to 3.8 per cent who preferred that the US support China. For an economic conflict, 36.3 per cent of respondents preferred US support for India, while 3.1 per cent preferred US support for China,” the paper found.
It is clear that Americans don't want to be drawn into a conflict. Broken down along party lines, the survey reveals that support for India cuts across the divide. But, more Republicans favour India the Democrats.
Among the Republicans, 49.7 per cent “preferred that [the] US not support either country during a military conflict” and 54 per cent “during an economic conflict”. But, 47. 1 per cent of Republicans batted for India in the case of a military conflict while among Democrats it was 27.8 per cent support for India. In the case of economic conflict, 41.9 per cent of Republicans chose to support India, while among the Democrats it was 37 per cent.
The survey provides a window into the American mindset against further involvement in conflict, but it does suggest that there is support for India. This is a sentiment that can't be ignored—and the Presidential nominations make that clear. Especially, at a time when tensions with China are only likely to get worse.
Biegun's remarks on Monday at the third India-US Leadership Summit organised by US India Strategic and Partnership Forum (USISPF) offer insight into the long road ahead. In a conversation with former US ambassador to India Richard Verma, Biegun talked about the “failed experiment”.
"For a very long time, there had been a desire to extend to China special privileges and benefits, and even the benefit of the doubt among them, to bring China into a more modern and prosperous future," he was quoted as saying. However, his remarks over the push back suggest that the conflict won't end soon.
But he also made it clear which way the wind is blowing. Biegun said that Washington was hoping to formalise the Quad—which is a grouping between Japan, the US, India and Australia along the lines of NATO.
“It is a reality that the Indo-Pacific region is actually lacking in strong multilateral structures. They don’t have anything of the fortitude of NATO, or the European Union,” he said. With India likely to open the Malabar exercise to Australia too, this is a space worth watching.
