Is Obama Pro-Pakistan and Anti-India?

There is no denying that a section of Indians view President Obama with suspicion. There is among them a lurking, and for reasons of political correctness, unarticulated fear that he could be sympathetic toward Pakistan, which, in many contexts, is a code word for Islam.

Obama's paternal lineage, his formative years in Muslim-majority Indonesia and, of course, the extreme right-wing propaganda, contributed to the impression that he could be a closet Muslim, or at least sympathetic to Muslims.

Obama's highly publicized speech on Islam and the West, his conciliatory overtures toward radical Islamic countries and the priority his administration has given to helping Pakistan are being inexplicably interpreted as a snub to India.

Obama's own unwitting contribution to this impression has been his oft-expressed intention to wrest concessions from India to placate Pakistan's insecurities so the latter could turn its attention and resources to countering the immediate threat of Islamic terrorism on its western border. While one can legitimately quibble about his so-called Kashmir policy, it is ridiculous to attribute it to either Obama's special sympathy toward Islamic Pakistan or his antipathy toward "Hindu" India.

Before we examine if the president has any special connection to Muslims in general, it is pertinent to clear the slate about his attitude and policy toward India. At the outset, if Obama has not made dramatic announcements or speeches concerning U.S.-India relations, it is because bilateral relations have reached such a level of maturity that they needn't be embellished with platitudes.

If anything, President Obama has left it to his Secretary of State Hillary Clinton -- whose disposition toward New Delhi is beyond reproach -- to nurture the relationship. The fact that the Obama White House quickly reversed its initial intent to include India in special envoy Richard Holbrooke's scope of operations (along with Afghanistan and Pakistan), testifies to the new president's sensitivity to India's responses.

In sum, people who think that Obama is not giving India its due fail to see that the strategic partnership between Washington and New Delhi has reached such a level that it can be taken for granted. As for Obama's relationship with Islam, one has to look, not into his fictional religious or cultural sympathies, but his life experiences.

He may have had emotional and intellectual curiosity in Africa and Islam thanks to his absentee Kenyan Muslim-turned-Catholic-turned-atheist father, whom he met just once when he was 10 years old. In popular imagination, Obama's relationship with his polygamist father acquired larger-than-life dimensions, thanks mostly to the title of his book, Dreams From My Father, which, incidentally, was all about race and his quest for an identity.

But Obama's understanding of the world and its many cultures, his empathy for the poor and defenseless, his trust in reason and reasonable dialogue even with enemies, comes from a much more dependable and indelible source: his mother, Ann Dunham Soetoro.

Here I'd like to refer to a very thoughtful op-ed recently in the New York Times by Michael A. Dove, an anthropology professor at Yale University, in which he writes about how his colleague and friend, Soetoro, an accomplished anthropologist herself, may have shaped Obama's worldview.

He says Soetoro, who worked in Pakistan and Indonesia, completed her 1,043-page dissertation, Peasant Blacksmithing in Indonesia: Surviving Against All Odds, in 1992 after 14 years of research. Dove considers it "a classic, in-depth, on-the-ground anthropological study."

The most instructive thing he says about Soetoro's life and work is the lesson they convey: "No nation -- even if it is our bitterest enemy -- is incomprehensible. Anthropology shows that people who seem very different from us behave according to systems of logic, and that these systems can be grasped if we approach them with the sort of patience and respect that Dr. Soetoro practiced in her work."

That should sum up where Obama, the man and the president, is coming from.

It is this secular, compassionate and multicultural outlook that made Obama comfortable with people of different hues and persuasions. He made lifelong friends with diverse backgrounds, who are fiercely loyal to him till this day and are happy to remain incognito, resisting the temptation to acquire 15 minutes of fame that would come to any FOO (now, that's clever, you must admit).

And what about Obama's alleged proximity to Pakistan? This assumption is based on three Pakistanis he befriended while he was 18 or thereabouts, and on his visit to Pakistan during the same time.

But people who draw conclusions from these facts conveniently ignore the second leg of his South Asian journey, when he visited Hyderabad in India, possibly to visit the other South Asian he was friends with since his days at the Oriental College in Los Angeles, Vinai Thummalapally, who has been appointed U.S. ambassador to Belize.

Perhaps Obama, who had a clear idea where he was heading politically even during his Harvard days (when he started writing his book), anticipated the song and dance his detractors would make about his visit to an Islamic country. That's probably why he didn't mention the Karachi days in his Dreams.

Being respectful toward Islam or being responsive to Pakistan's predicament doesn't make President Obama anti-Indian. That kind of zero-sum worldview is antithetical to everything he was raised to believe.

 

Follow Sunil Adam on Twitter: www.twitter.com/SunilAdam

Comments

[atif]

Actually , i don,t have the trust on any politicians don,t know wats their stratigies wat they want to do wat they have in their mind but just hope for better.
http://www.paktraveler.com/01-Pakistan_Hotels-Karachi.html

[mr101]

Contd.. from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sunil-adam/is-obama-pro-pakistan-and_b_260622.html?show_comment_id=29438493#comment_29438493

In short, the "India vs Pakistan" mode of thinking about the subcontinent (which was misguided from the very beginning) should be replaced with the geopolitical triangle of US-China-India, within the broader context of the US-China-India-Russia-Pakistan-Israel hexagon, to reflect the dynamics at play in the Indian subcontinent, in my opinion.

[mr101]

Politics of the Indian subcontinent can't be understood unless one factors in China, its disposition towards India and its designs for the subcontinent. China has always used Pakistan to destabilize India, and to keep India's progress in check in various ways, but China's hostility towards India has gone up significantly in the last 3 to 4 years; I suspect that's because China sees India's warm relations with the US during the Bush administration as a threat to its own economic and geopolitical ambitions and domination. Then there is the burning issue of terrorism and the umpteen number of terrorist groups operating out of Pakistan who are anti-(India, US, Israel, the West, Hindus, Christians, and even Muslim sects within Pakistan and other Islamic countries). On the ideals level, Obama is overall a humanist and has a liking for India (and a respect for its secular democracy), in my opinion, but on a political level, a multitude of pragmatic calculations enter the picture. Not the least of which is the fact that US has allowed China (over the last 15 year or so) to become the dominant player in the US-China economic relationship (by allowing China to amass whopping trade surpluses over the US, to the tune of 200-300 bn $, year after year.) Contd...

[SaulZ]

There is absolutely no need to compare Pakistan with India. For a long time, Pakistan was a strategic ally of the USA through at least two treaties directly (CEATO and CENTO) and one treaty indirectly (RCD). Pakistanis used to be revered and Indians were looked down upon. In 1980s there was a total blockade of Indian news on any US based TV networks, while Pakistan was treated as a genuine strategic partner and given wholesome coverage. Indian students in the US used to be subdued in front of Pakistanis. This is reality. India, on the basis of its economic potential, earned world’s respect while Pakistan lost its stature due to the lost decades of 1990s. However, it is in the hands of the present democratic Pakistani leadership to earn the respect back. Its population of 180 million is too huge to be ignored economically. Pakistan offers awesome potential of growth and prosperity.

[Tenjikuronin]

Wishful thinking. In the 80's (much like today) the average American couldn't tell the difference between a Pakistani and an Indian.....and really, the average American didn't care. To say one was favored over the other is silly, especially considering both groups were subject to the exact same racism.

[desirock]

This is article is blasphemous. So if I visit Mecca, maybe I will side with Pakistan as well?

Mr. Adam, did you throw out the history books on Indian/US relations? It has nothing to do with religion

[SergBen]

Both countries are important in their own right. Contrary to popular belief, Pakistan is not a "failed state" but poised to be one of the largest economy in coming decades: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Next_Eleven.
Some of assertions on his travel and his mother's work is stupid and completly misunderstands how U.S. government operates. U.S is not a banana republic and Obama's personal preferences will not make foreign policy of U.S. Democrat or Republican, there is bound to be clash between U.S. and India on issues like free trade and carbon emissions. Some part of indian elites do feel a need for U.S. affection because they admire it.

[ModernTimes1]

Pakistan is an ally of expedience. India is an ally by choice and similar world views.

[dargay]

Hmm, only time will tell.

[blue planet blues]

We can all tell right now..What you said didn't make any sense

[Peter Madaka]

No, Obama does not prefer Pakistan over India. The truth is that India is a stable Democracy; the largest in the world, with more than a billion people. It does not need help from Obama the way Pakistan does. Pakistan is a near failed state, unstable, run by corrupt politicians, military dictators and threatened by Islamic radicals who hate America. Indcia is a class above all this nonsense and Obama recognizes that in his handling of the relationship.

[dargay]

Pakistan isn't a failed state, it is a struggling state, and Obama is willing to help as both countries face common enemies.

India has a growing economy, lots of insurgency, terrorism and political violence. however it doesnt make the papers as westerners can now make money in India.

[blue planet blues]

Nobody said Pakistan is a failed state.It is a near failed state.
India's problems don't make the papers because India is addressing those problems. Unlike Pakistan which not only runs away from its problems but also drags the entire world in the mess it has created(again don't blame India US and the rest of the world).
I don't understand why Pakistanis have such a huge ego.Its not like you all have accomplished anything at all in the history of your existence.