At a time when New Delhi and Washington are a bit distanced, the US assertion to join hands with India to work against terrorism especially Pakistan-based Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) and Jaish-e Mohammad (JeM) is no doubt, a bit surprising but a welcome step. The declaration comes at a time when both differed on some of the issues like US hauling India before a World Trade Organisation dispute panel saying its national solar mission norms discriminate against American companies. India filed a complaint before WTO accusing the US of erecting trade barriers by hiking fees for guest worker visas to unreasonable levels. Between these commercial disputes is the political one over the Obama administration’s backing of a US panel to study religious freedom in India — for which New Delhi denied visas – which the BJP Government sees as a thinly-disguised pinprick engineered by liberal elements in the US. And then there’s the small matter of the Obama administration, like its predecessor Bush dispensation, being unmindful of India’s concern while supplying F16 fighter jets to a country that unremittingly backs terrorist groups, followed by India’s Defence Minister dismissing Washington’s proposals for joint patrols in Asia-Pacific. One would never guess if any of these issues featured in the Indian Foreign Secretary and US Interlocutor level talks judging by the word from the Indian Embassy that his meetings “focussed on further consolidating bilateral relations in the year ahead and enhancing convergence on regional and global issues”. But apparently, friends can live with differences, and in keeping with the long history of wrangles between the two sides during the best and the worst of times. Significantly, the two sides discussed “US-India collaboration against Lashkar-e-Tayyiba, Jaish-e-Mohammed, and other terrorist threats,” came not from the Indian Embassy’s guarded statement, but from the National Security Council spokesman Ned Price. It’s possibly the first time Washington has spoken so openly and bluntly about collaborating against terror groups on whom it has taken little action beyond putting them on terror lists. This is a robust development which can endure differences.
