By Prof. (Dr.) D.K. Giri
(Prof. NIIS Group of Institutions)
Donald John Trump resumed office of the American President for the second term after a gap of four years. He became the 47th President of the United States. There is a good deal of discussion across the world, certainly in India about the nature of the swearing-in ceremony and the participation of various countries. The media is full of who’s who among the attendees, especially who attended and who did not or could not. Prime Minister Narendra Modi, who is considered to be a close friend of Donald Trump, was conspicuous by his absence. Critics, admirers and a section of media are raising a hullaballoo about Modi being ‘ignored’ by the swearing-in ceremony team of Donald Trump.
In the 248 years of American political history, the convention has been to invite junior ministers or diplomats not the Heads of Governments or States to the inauguration of American Presidents. Trump, as per his wont, broke the tradition and invited a few Heads of Governments and politicians mainly from the right-wing of the ideological spectrum. He also invited some of his rivals, notably Xi Jinping of China. On both counts – right-wing as well as breaking the tradition – Modi was an obvious candidate to be in the Capitol Hill.
The notable politicians included Argentinean Prime Minister Javier Milali, a close ally of Trump, Viktor Orban, President of Hungary, an admirer of Trump, Italian Prime Minister Georgia Meloni, a right-wing politician, El Salvador’s President Nayib Bukele, former Prime Minister Boris Johnson of Britain, a right-winger, Eric Zemmour, President of France’s Nationalist Reconquete Party, a hardcore rightist, Nigel Farage, leader of the UK-Anti Immigration Reform Party, a ultra-nationalist. Australia and Japan were represented by their Foreign Ministers, as was India and China by its Vice-President Han Zheng.
As anticipated, there was a big band of business houses present in the Capitol Hill. In addition to obvious names like Sunder Pichai, Mark Zukerberg, Elon Musk (member of Trump’s team), there were a number of businessmen from India or of Indian origin. To name a few, Ashish Jain of a Pune-based real estate called Kundan Space, Kalpesh Mehta, a partner in Trump Towers Project, Pankaj Bansal, M3M Developers and of course, Mukesh and Nita Ambani flew from India to be a part of the ceremony.
Why was Modi left out? Was it a deliberate omission by the Trump Administration? It could certainly not be an oversight. There could be two possible interpretations of Modi’s absence from the grand international event. One, in case of India, Trump team stuck to the tradition and did not invite Modi as the Head of Govt of India. This perspective flies in the face as Modi is supposed to be close to Donald Trump. He had openly declared support, in a departure from Indian political tradition, for Donald Trump in 2020 presidential elections.
The US Ambassador Eric Garcetti asserted that the inter-personal bond between Modi and Trump is amazingly close. He said in an interview about the inauguration, “I think it would be more meaningful for Prime Minister Modi to meet President Trump one-to-one than being a part of very large crowd”. He also hinted that an invitation for Prime Minister Modi from White House is coming pretty soon.
The second interpretation is that Modi was purposefully not invited to the inaugural ceremony. This point of view merits introspection and investigation as India-America relations are becoming closer or rather should be stronger in view of the emerging geo-political scenario in the Asia Pacific. If we stick to the theory of Modi being ignored, it is in order that the reasons for such eventuality should be identified.
To my mind, three possible reasons pop-up; these are, India’s strategic autonomy, New Delhi trashing American agencies on democracy rating etc and its turbulent bilateralism with Canada in recent times. Let us elaborate on these points as it is time for reality check irrespective of Modi’s absence from the ceremony and in view of ascendency of Trump to the high table.
Some of us have been arguing that strategic autonomy, a reformulation of non-alignment, or a euphemism for multi-alignment is not a tenable position in an inter-dependent world. Any country big or small can ill-afford strategic autonomy. Big powers will not appreciate or accept such positions. Certainly, not Donald Trump who likes to have friends and enemies. His team, from his last term, has openly declared China as a strategic rival, but has not said clearly that India is a friend like Washington treats Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Israel, the United Kingdom, Canada and a few other countries. New Delhi is paying a heavy price with its defence purchases to build its deterrence in the name of strategic autonomy. A poor country like India, this is absolutely inadvisable.
Interestingly, New Delhi is being paid in its own coin, so to say, as other countries, certainly its neighbours are balancing their relations between Beijing and New Delhi perhaps in the name of strategic autonomy. Take the case of Nepal, which has been the closest ally of India, Sri Lanka, again the closest to India, Bangladesh, which is balancing India with Pakistan, and Maldives. Pakistan has walked into the Chinese sphere of influence and has almost become a satellite state. Can New Delhi blame the smaller neighbours when it has been doing the same with USA and former USSR, and now with USA (Quad) on one hand and China and Russia on the other (BRICS, SCO)?
Following the concept of strategic autonomy, India also has erroneously started behaving as a big power. New Delhi becoming the fifth largest economy in terms of GDP has perhaps given that premature confidence. Politicians in power are overstating this fact for political purposes. Yet, it is important to realise that India has not arrived at the world stage. A slice of statistics should dispel that misconception.
In terms of per capita GDP, India is 142nd in the ranking. The growth rate, which was 7.8 per cent between 2004 to 2014, has come down to 5.8 per cent. This is not enough to be a developed country and a world power by 2047. Is India the fastest growing economy? Yes, it is, but it has been the second fastest for over 20 years. As the Chinese economy, which was the fastest slowed down, India became number one. In actual fact, Indian economy has not galloped as it is claimed.
On relations with Canada, American government will be very sensitive as they consider it to be their backyard. In fact, Trump, in his inimitable style, has suggested that Canada should become the 51st state of USA. Justin Trudeau who was sparring with Indian leadership has gone. The other party, namely Modi may have also come under the scanner of Trump. This is allied with New Delhi consistently trashing American agencies on their comments on Indian governance and democracy etc. Trump himself was the target of American media, yet he did not go after them.
To conclude, Modi being left out of Capitol Hill during inauguration may be a trivial political issue. But this important event should prompt Indian current leadership to rethink on some of the points referred here. Self-introspection and course-correction are necessary for democracy and good governance. —INFA
(Copyright, India News & Feature Alliance)
New Delhi
22 January 2025
Follow our WhatsApp channel
