Africa Stays Up All Night to Hear US ...

Africa Stays Up All Night to Hear US Election Results
By Peter Heinlein
Addis Ababa
05 November 2008
 
Heinlein report - Download (MP3) 
Heinlein report - Listen (MP3) 

Millions of Africans are exhausted after staying up all night watching expectantly to see whether a man of African descent will elected to the America's highest office. VOA's Peter Heinlein attended an all-night party of journalists and political enthusiasts in Addis Ababa where everybody was talking about being American for a day to share in this historic election.

It's a long night here in front of the television at this upscale Ethiopian home. Half a dozen anxious viewers drift in and out, trying to control the nervous energy. It's well after midnight, but the TV screen shows long lines of voters standing in the rain waiting for their turn in the voting booth. TV commentators kill time until the first polls close.

"There is a good deal of confidence in the Obama campaign that he's going to win this evening," they said. "So far, there's also the unknown. As one strategist put it, 'I'm a nervous wreck."

That comment sends a thrill through this audience. This is Africa and there are no McCain supporters in the room.

Deresse Kassa, a professor at Addis Ababa University, says he has never stayed up late for any elections results. But this is a moment he says he doesn't want to miss.

"America has history whereby the African-American community has to struggle to be considered citizens themselves and be a franchise in order to cast their votes," said Kassa. "Coming from this segregation and inequality, to be able to see Democratic candidates running for the presidency, the highest office, by itself is big achievement."

 The televisions are on as the first results come in during the wee hours of the morning. The news is encouraging for viewers here.

Journalist Lulit Amdamariam says she is energized by the possibility of witnessing, what she calls, a great moment. "We're going to be here all night," she said. "Thirty-two hours, if we have to."

Lulit is not an American, but she lived in the States for several years and attended Howard University in Washington.

"I attended a black college, so I understand what this means to the black community in the United States," said Lulit. "This is a candidate the entire world can relate to."

Lulit's colleague Tamrat Negera, editor of at the Amharic-language newspaper Addis Neger, has not been to the United States, but he says he can understand what this election must mean to African-Americans.
  
"Africa shared the pain of being black, or the pain of status, or colonization, which you understand there was a limitation for a black in this world," he said. "But Obama is breaking that through."

Journalist Lulit Amdamariam calls it an American moment.

"I think this is the only time the entire world wishes they were American," she said. "So they could vote. Seriously, I think the entire world would go out and vote if they had the opportunity tonight."

This is a moment to remember. Although some Africans may have a hangover on Wednesday, the prospect of the first black U.S. president has enthralled a continent. 

http://voanews.com/english/2008-11-05-voa13.cfm

Kenyans, Unsurprisingly, Favor Obama
By Mil Arcega
Washington, D.C.
04 November 2008
 
Kenya-US election - Download (WM) 
Kenya-US election - Watch (WM) 

Although citizens of the world cannot vote in the U.S. presidential election, a new Gallup poll shows if they could, Democrat Barack Obama would win by a landslide over his opponent Republican John McCain.  Nowhere is the interest more intense than in Kenya, where the African American senator is considered the hometown favorite. VOA's Mil Arcega reports.

 
Residents of Nairobi, Kenya are closely watching the US presidential election
In the streets of Nairobi, a photograph of the Democratic candidate is almost as good as money. At a music store in the Kenyan capital, customers line up to buy Barack Obama-inspired music.

At a nearby print shop, T-shirt designer Tony Ndolo says shirts with the candidate's image sell out almost as quickly as they are printed. "Barack is a blessing for Kenya and for my wallet in particular," he says. At most newsstands, the biggest headlines are reserved for stories about the U.S. presidential contest.
 
One Nairobi resident said the election may be thousands of miles away.  But if Kenyans could vote, she says the 47-year-old senator would already be president. "We hope that Obama wins because we believe he is going to bring change into Africa and the whole world."

Tee shirts with Obama designs are selling as fast as vendors can make them
For many, the idea that the son of a Kenyan professor could become the first black president of the United States is powerful inspiration.

Milka Akinyi even named her son after the Illinois politician. "I named the kid Obama because long time ago Obama was also like this, a baby, and now he is intending to be a president in the U.S.A." says the proud mother.

At a small village in western Kenya, where Obama's paternal family lives, Kenyan police are already posted, ahead of festivities expected here when U.S. polling stations close.

That's how confident Malik Obama is that his American half-brother will win. He says, "Everybody is extremely happy and excited and looking forward to celebrating the day after the elections."

This mother named her son after Barack Obama
Most national polls put Obama ahead of his Republican opponent by a few percentage points. But some Kenyans believe the only way Obama can lose is if the election is stolen from him. "Because he has been leading in the polls all along and I will not understand why Obama have lost, if they tell us Obama has lost,” says one Kenyan. “That will definitely show that they have rigged Obama out because of racism and color."

Despite the Democratic candidate's popularity in Africa and Europe, a recent Gallup poll shows Republican candidate John McCain is preferred in some countries -- but by much smaller margins.

http://voanews.com/english/2008-11-04-voa69.cfm

Bush Pledges Complete Cooperation With Obama

By Howard Schneider
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, November 5, 2008; 11:23 AM

President Bush today called President-elect Barack Obama's victory a "triumph of the American story," and pledged "complete cooperation" with him during the upcoming transition.

Bush said he had a "warm conversation" on Tuesday night with the man who will replace him in the White House, congratulating him on what the president called an "impressive victory."

"All Americans can be proud of the history that was made yesterday," Bush said, focusing on the broader implications of a vote that swept his own Republican Party from power. "Across the country, citizens voted in large numbers. They showed a watching world the vitality of America's democracy and strides we have made toward a more perfect union."

"They chose a president whose journey represents a triumph of the American story -- a testament to hard work, optimism, and faith in the enduring promise of our nation."

Pointedly referring to Obama as the country's next commander-in-chief, Bush said he would brief the Illinois senator on any significant decisions he makes in coming weeks, as Obama's transition team begins the new president's ascension to the White House.

"We're embarking on a period of change in Washington, yet some things will not change" Bush said, including the country's commitment to its own security. "The world can be certain that this commitment will remain steady under our next commander in chief."

Bush congratulated Republican nominee Sen. John McCain (Ariz.) on what he referred to as a "determined campaign," but made no mention of the strong Democratic gains in the Senate and House.

Instead, he harkened back to the civil rights movement that, just a generation ago, helped ensure all Americans could exercise their right to vote -- a franchise used on Tuesday to usher in not just a change of administration, but the election of the country's first black president.

"Many of our citizens thought that they would never live see that day," Bush said, and called it "especially uplifting" for those who participated in the early civil rights struggles to "four decades later see a dream fulfilled."

"It will be a stirring sight to watch President Obama, his wife, Michelle, and their beautiful girls step through the doors of the White House," Bush said. "I know millions of Americans will be overcome with pride at this inspiring moment that so many have awaited so long."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/11/05/AR2008110502458.html?hpid=topnews

Obama's Win A "Nonviolent Revolution"
The Early Show: African-American Icons Rep. John Lewis, Rev. Jesse Jackson, and Maya Angelou Reflect On His Victory
Comments 8
Nov. 5, 2008
E-Mail Story
Print Story
Sphere
Share
Text Size:  A  A  A

President-elect Obama in Chicago's Grant Park late Tuesday night (AP Photo/Morry Gash)

 

Supporters cheer victorious candidate at huge Chicago gathering.

 

 
(CBS) Rep. John Lewis says the nation "witnessed a nonviolent revolution" when Barack Obama was elected president.

The longtime Democratic congressman from Georgia and civil rights leader -- who was brutally beaten at the hands of segregationists in the Deep South in the early 1960s -- described it to Early Show co-anchor Maggie Rodriguez Wednesday as "a revolution of values, a revolution of ideas. I've been saying over and over again -- that the vote is the most nonviolent instrument that we have in a democratic society. And the American people used that vote ... to make Barack Obama the next president of the United States of America."

Asked if Obama is up to taking on the enormous problems facing the U.S. as he gets set to enter the Oval Office, Lewis responded, "This man, young, smart, gifted, leader, is prepared to lead the American people and be a leader among the men and women of the community of nations. He has a vision -- he is the right man. He is so gifted. He is so decent. And he's so calm and deliberate. I think he will be a great president. He personifies the best of a John F. Kennedy, a Robert Kennedy, a Martin Luther King Jr., a Lyndon Johnson."

Lewis marched with Dr. King, as did the Rev. Jesse Jackson, another veteran leader of the civil rights movement. Jackson observed to Rodriguez that Obama "stood (giving his victory speech in Chicago's Grant Park before a throng of more than 100,000) overcoming so much. ... I thought about those who suffered to make it possible -- the marchers, the murdered, the martyrs (seeking civil rights and the right to vote), many of whom are nameless and faceless. But in some sense, their suffering was redeemed last night with that victory.

" ... America is a work in progress. And last night, we saw that work in a more magnificent way expressed. ... (We're in) a crisis in trust. We don't trust a president. We don't trust a Congress we see as complicitous. We don't trust Wall Street. Barack emerges as this larger-than-life figure who can be trusted, who brings about hope and who now helps redeem America from our sordid past about race. Here's the guy who has the capacity ... to take America to the next level."

A sentiment echoed by Maya Angelou, the famous, best-selling poet and author.

She was bursting with pride when she told co-anchor Harry Smith Wednesday she was thinking of "all of us" as she watch Obama's speech late Tuesday night, "all of those who went before, who paid dearly. And all of us today. All of us.

"I'm so proud. I'm filled-- I can hardly talk without weeping. I'm so filled with pride for my country. What do you say? We are growing up! My God, I'm so grateful.

I believe in the heart of every American there's the desire to belong to a great country. And look at it -- not just powerful, not just might, not just things, not consumer goods. I mean, look at our souls, look at our hearts. We have elected a black man to talk for us, to speak for us. We, blacks, whites, Asians, Spanish-speaking, Native Americans, we have done it. Fat, thin, pretty, plain, gay, straight. We have done it! My Lord -- I am an American, baby!"

Why this man?

"Because he's intelligent, Harry. I don't mean intellectually clever, I mean intelligent. I mean what used to be called 'mother wit.' He has common sense that is, I'm sorry to say, most uncommon. Because he knows that, together, we can be somebody. And he is inclusive, as opposed to exclusive. I know that he knows he is the president of every black person, every white person -- he's the president of the bigots, and he must remember that."

Smith commented that Obama "said in his acceptance speech, 'For those of you who voted against me, I hear you, too.' "

"Exactly!" Angelou said. "That's what I mean."

Does she really believe it happened?

"Yes! Yes! Sitting in the waiting room to come on and talk to you -- Yes! This morning, I have not slept, really. I can't pull my nose out of the television. And I go from one channel to the next to the next. And I want to embrace everybody. I'm just so proud. And grateful."

Smith said Obama's victory reminds him most of Angelou's poem, "Still I Rise," and she agreed to recite some of it:

"It begins," Angeou said:

"You may write me down in history
With your bitter, twisted lies,
You may trod me in the very dirt
But still, like dust, I'll rise.

Out of the huts of history's shame
I rise

Up from a past rooted in pain
I rise

A black ocean, leaping and wide,
Welling and swelling, bearing in the tide.
Leaving behind nights of terror and fear
I rise

Into a daybreak miraculously clear
I rise

Bringing the hopes that my ancestors gave,
I am the hope and the dream of the slave.

And so, Harry Smith, we all rise."

"And I rise," Smith recited the third-to-last line of the poem, in a poignant moment.

"Yes, we do," an emotional Angelou said.

"I rise," Smith recited the second-to-last line.

"Yes, we do," Angelou repeated.

"And I rise," Smith concluded.

Copyright MMVIII, CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/11/05/earlyshow/main4574642.shtml

Gates says crisis could last 2-3 years
Wed Nov 5, 2008 6:41pm IST  Email | Print | Share| Single Page[-] Text [+]  
1 of 1Full SizeBy Matthias Williams

NEW DELHI (Reuters) - Microsoft founder Bill Gates on Wednesday said he was worried the global financial crisis could last two to three years might drive rich countries to cut back spending on health aid for the developing world.

Echoing comments made last week by U.N. chief Ban Ki-Moon, the billionaire philanthropist said the world's poorest people will suffer the most during the economic slowdown, and said a "strong voice" was needed to keep them a global priority.

"We certainly are concerned that some of the rich world governments could either reduce their increase or even cut back the amount they spend on these issues," Gates said in New Delhi.

"We have to admit that getting that generosity gets even more challenging when there's tough economic times".

Gates said he expected the United States to undergo a period of “economic contraction” as a result of a meltdown in the housing market and heavy consumer debt, after nearly two decades of strong growth.

“Now it looks like the US will have a little bit of a economic setback. Will it be two years, three years, how deep will it be?”

Gates was optimistic about the newly elected American president Barack Obama's efforts to tackle global health issues, saying Obama has "shown a lot of interest" and would "drive improvements in those areas".

Gates is on a visit to India on behalf of his charitable foundation to tackle health issues, focusing on polio eradication and fighting HIV/AIDS.  Continued...

The Future of Indo-US Trade
Shivnath Thukral
Monday, November 03, 2008 (New Delhi)
EMail |Print |Blog|Comments: Read (0) Post |Rate the story
       Over the last few days we have been talking about various issues, be it business, be it IT outsourcing or the way the American campaign is looking at India an the rising power of Indian voters. But as we go into the period post the election verdict the big questions will be who takes the bold steps on the multilateral trade talks, the WTO aspect, and the Form subsidy aspect.

Our focus today is the future of Indo-US trade when it comes to WTO and the trade treaties.

Joining us now from the US in Washington DC is Susan Esserman, a former Deputy USTR in the Clinton administration. She is a well-known attorney and a friend of India, just like Ron Somers. Back home in India we have G K Pillai, Commerce Secretary, to give his perspective on the issue.

The issues that we are going to touch upon are what is the future of the WTO talks stalemate? Can the controversial farm subsidy issue be resolved and who is better for trade relations?

NDTV: In your assessment, it seems like it’s quite a deadlock. We haven’t really moved much in terms of trade talks. That is all that will confront the new president.

Susan Esserman: I believe there’ll be a great opportunity to move forward under WTO in the future. The WTO round, the conclusion of the WTO round will be an important trade priority, no matter who is elected president. But I think it is important to understand that the first focus immediately with the new administration in place, no matter who is elected, Obama or McCain, will be economic recovery and financial stability and the WTO round will be looked at. But I do believe, no matter what has happened in the past, that there would be an opportunity for India and the US to work together in the future. India is a very important player in the international arena and I think they can play a leader ship role.

NDTV: In India as well, starting early next year, there might be a new administration. In your experience, the way the politics of the both the countries have played out, do you really think we are very close to a resolution or would we have to begin all over again because there would be a new president in the White house and there could be a new Prime Minister back home?

Susan Esserman: I believe that we can build on the work that is done before, but of course, any new administration will make a fresh assessment and look at trade not only in the WTO context but also in a broader context as I mentioned before, like the economic recovery issues. Yes, we will build on the past, we’ll learn from the past and but the new administration will come in and take soundings, work with all the different key international players, of which India is such a leader, and try to move forward.

NDTV: We have seen beyond the stalemates, the deadlocks and the roadblocks. There have been movements forward. There have been positives at the far end of the Bush term, when it comes to bilateral talks, investments, and businesses. You could shed some light on what groundwork has been done with respect to the benefits of the bilateral trade talks that we have had in the past few months?

Susan Esserman: There has been progress on the bilateral side. First the Bush administration, building on work done by the Clinton administration, made relations with India a very important priority and I think this has business ramifications. Second, the Bush administration, working with the Indian government has decided to move ahead to launch bilateral investment treaty negotiations. I think it is a very positive step for both the nations. It comes at a time when both countries are investing in the other country and it is an important foundational trade step that has mutual benefit. An investment really provides great benefits to both sides because foreign investment provides legal protection against arbitrary and discriminatory government actions. So this is a positive step. I hope these negotiations move forward, both on the Indian and the US side and this is very important to our business community.

NDTV: As we look forward to hearing from the Indian side as well, in your experience what would be the major roadblocks right now, when it comes to the Indian businesses wanting to enter the US? In your recession where are the roadblocks today, where you have to intervene, whether there are clauses in terms of job loss aspect of it or the kinds of recessionary trends that we are going to witness in the US?

Susan Esserman: First of all, there has been great progress in terms of investment and trade, but there remain certain issues and trade is not as robust as it could be. There are a variety of issues. In some cases there are high tariffs. There is a great deal of concern about aggressive, arbitrary and inconsistent tax enforcement. Of course there are concerns about labour restrictions. These are some of the critical issues that the companies face.

But it is important to keep in mind the broader context of optimism by the business communities about the prospects of business in India.

NDTV: Let's come to the Doha deadlock, since you have worked in the area extensively. I read in an article in the American Press that said that Kamal Nath assumed the mantle of taking forward the developing economies’ agenda.  Talking about the Doha deadlock whether it is the sharp differences in the safeguards limits, the differences of the approach, of what you see the new president’s, could be on the farm subsidy because there would be a huge lobby in the US as well and the entire assumption that India has a protectionist approach. On all those three counts, why do think that all of a sudden India and the US are, especially in trade and the WTO, on such adverse positions?

Susan Esserman: It is always difficult to conclude the WTO trade negotiations since there are so many issues at stake. I would just say, most broadly, I believe there has to be broad benefits on all parties’ side in order for there to be a conclusion for an agreement. We have to be sensitive to India’s sensitivity on the farm issues and I think India too needs to be sensitive to some of our constituent needs. But having said that the US government, whoever is in power, will view the WTO negotiations as very important. I think if the government sees there are significant, sufficient concessions made by other trading partners then they will make meaningful concessions and get a conclusion of the round.

I feel far too much time is spent pointing fingers at one party or the other. That would not help any party to move forward. I think you need to get down, look at the details, look at the policy and work in a sphere of compromise, then perhaps there could be a conclusion to the agreement. It is a very difficult thing to do, as there are so many parties now involved. But I do think that India plays a very big role and should play a big role. Today they are an international powerbroker and as an international powerbroker they have a very big responsibility in playing a leadership role and bringing the stocks to a conclusion.

NDTV: We have Mr G K Pillai, Commerce Secretary of India with us to give us the Indian perspective; as to how strong is India’s position on the entire negotiating table when it comes to WTO. Mr Pillai, in your assessment, as we head into the new presidency in the United States, do we have to go back to base one, from where we started, or will the new president have an action plan to engage with India right now?

G K Pillai: I don’t think we’ll ever go back to base one. I think we already have about 70 per cent of the work on the agricultural and NAMA negotiation. It should be possible for us to work forward. In Geneva, the negotiators are at work trying to narrow the differences. I expect the new President would have quite a lot of a agreed modalities and then would take off from there.

NDTV: We had talked about the issues of the safeguard clauses. Why is that suddenly India and the US, the so-called great economic allies, are in such opposite directions on so crucial issues?

 

G K Pillai: I think, primarily it's because in one sense the US looks upon itself as a major agricultural exporter, whereas here in India we have quite a large number of small and subsistence farmers. Their protection and their concerns have to be met for us to get a development the deal.

NDTV: Ambassador Esserman let me ask you to identify the issues of the future talks or the kind of priority items that the new president will have to look at when it comes to India. In your assessment, how should the new president approach this entire thing?

Susan Esserman: The new administration will build on the already very strong political strategic partnership that the Bush administration has championed and which the Clinton administration initiated. So we start on a very strong political base and it is really heart warming to see the extent of the broad bipartisan support behind this new relationship with India. I think it would be very productive if the new government built on this political partnership by seeking to strengthen the economic partnership. There are various steps that the government can take. First is moving forward rapidly to proceed with the bilateral investment negotiations that the two countries have just launched only a month ago. Our business community sees this as a very important step. First of all, it's foundational, it will build confidence in the economy and will help to deal with arbitrary and discriminatory actions that investors might face. That is the first and foundational step. Second, our countries share so much in terms of values and now so much common interest in the other’s economy. I think we need to look hard and how the governments can help to facilitate, in the broadest possible way, investment in trade that is going on between the two countries.

NDTV: Mr Pillai, how would you put forward India’s cause? We have seen the entire rupee-dollar factor helping our exporters. But in terms of policies and roadblocks, which are the key areas you would want to be addressed by the US administration that would help boost India’s potential?

G K Pillai: I think between India and the United states, currently if you look and last year’s figures, there is clearly a trade balance of around $20-$21 billion exports and imports. For the US there was a surge in exports to India, by almost 70 per cent during the year 2007-08. I think where the US businessmen are lacking is that they are not willing to take the risk and come into the Indian market and invest. We have seen so many businessmen from Europe, Japan, Korea, to name a few, who have come to India and made lots of money. I think, the US businessmen must not be shy and come forward and invest in India.

NDTV: Why do you think there is a holding back on the part of the investments that you’d say are not coming in hoards like the other countries?

G K Pillai: One reason, I think, is that the US businessmen are very unfamiliar with the Indian business environment. Now that the Indo-US bilateral investment promotion treaty is also being negotiated, and we hope that it will be conclude in the next few months, I’m hopeful that they will get the confidence to invest. We have found that those foreign countries that have come to India and invested have all done well, including the American companies.

NDTV: Ambassador Esserman, you too have pointed out the unfamiliarity angle, many a time in the past. In your assessment, what kind of initiatives would you want to see, both sides, especially the new administration, to take for these unfamiliarity issues to be resolved?

Susan Esserman: I think we must try build on the good things that have already been started. I think giving investors greater confidence in the rule of law and the hope that the decisions that the government takes will be consistent and will remain, would be very, very helpful. I feel that it would be very beneficial if the two governments took a look at the tax policies and worked together to give investors greater confidence in the tax policies that the governments are adopting. This would really help to stimulate greater American investment in the Indian economy.

NDTV: Do you see expect some surprise positive decisions or any major announcements coming through from the American side immediately after, or in the back drop of the November 15, G-20 meeting. Or do you feel that nothing can really happen before January in the US?

Susan Esserman: As far as trade is concerned, I don’t think there will be any immediate announcement. Of course, the big attention immediately will be on how to bring an economic recovery to the United States and how to stabilise the financial situation, both in United States and abroad. I think that will be the critical focus, as I said at the outside and trade, I feel, will be a part of it. I do not expect there to be a big announcement on trade between now and the start of the new administration. That would be highly unlikely. The trade issue will take time to resolve. We must do it in the right way, in a way that brings the support of the key countries in the WTO and I think that is not going to happen overnight.

NDTV: Now let me conclude by asking Mr Pillai how do you look at the next six months, because we are going to live in politically uncertain environment when it comes to India. US will have its clarity by next week. What do you see emerging between the two countries in the talking table?

G K Pillai: As far as bilateral trade is concerned, we have the institutional framework already there, we have the trade policy forum, we have the private sector advisory group, we have the US-India CEO forum, we have the commercial dialogue going on. I think these would enable industries on both sides to understand each other better and to move forward. So I’m quite optimistic on the trade front. There are a lot of programs under way and I’m sure that the trade between India and the United States would possibly double in the next three years.

NDTV: All right double. It’s a very optimistic note that we end on.

http://profit.ndtv.com/2008/11/02205038/The-Future-of-IndoUS-Trade.html
 

Obama, McCain back strong Indo-US relations

Press Trust of India / Washington November 05, 2008, 8:25 IST
 

Barack Obama and John McCain, heading for a showdown in the US presidential polls today, support the growing Indo-US partnership and favour strong ties with the world's largest democracy, but differ on critical issues like outsourcing.
The 47-year-old Illinois Senator who is aspiring to become the first black-American President, is said to have a close affinity with things Indian. He carries a small figure of Lord Hanuman for luck, was familiar with the Ramayana during his days in Indonesia and had a picture of Mahatma Gandhi placed in his Senate office.

However, his strong-anti-outsourcing stance, which came to fore repeatedly during the campaign trail, is creating unease among Indians.

"When I am President I will give tax credits to companies that hire in the United States and end tax breaks for companies that ship US jobs overseas," he has said.

Obama also introduced a 'killer amendment' during debate on the Indo-US civil nuclear deal in the powerful Foreign Relations Committee, though he voted for the agreement later and asserted that he backs the landmark accord.

His recent remarks that the US should try to help resolve the Kashmir problem so that Pakistan can focus on hunting down militants on its restive north-west border have also been seen in some quarters as suggesting outside interference in the issue.

Despite this, an informal opinion poll has suggested that an overwhelming 81 per cent of Indian-Americans will vote for Obama while merely 19 per cent will support McCain.

The African-American Senator is being seen by many as a symbol of the aspirations of the immigrant community.

There is also the factor that Indians had traditionally been Democrats and, like any other community in the US, are worried about the economic policies of the Bush Administration amid the financial turmoil.

"Barack Obama's vision for America is our vision, and his story is our story. As the son of a foreign-born father, he has personally experienced the challenges of race and identity that affect our community... We support Senator Obama's candidacy because of the promise it holds for our future," South Asians for Obama, a lobby group, says on its website.

Still, many Indian-Americans oppose Obama for President, arguing that if McCain wins, he would continue the Bush Administration policies of bulilding a startegic partnership with India and keep the commitments made in the nuclear deal.

The 72-year-old Republican Senator "understands we have a global economy and realises that if we raise taxes on small businesses here, many will simply relocate abroad and America will lose out," 'Indians for McCain' says.

McCain is seen as a supporter of outsourcing and globalised economy and raising the cap on H-1B visas for highly-skilled professionals, which are sought by a large number of Indians every year.

Both the candidates have all along maintained they want strong ties with India and ackonowledged the contribution of the Indian-Americans, saying their knowledge, skills and entrepreneurial spirit have benefited both the countries.

Observing that India's recent economic achievements remain a "great source of admiration" in the US, McCain had said in a message on the country's Independence Day that it is one of America's "closest democratic partners".

"It is only natural that the world's oldest and the world's largest constitutional democracies should enjoy strong relations...With India, America has one of its most important relationships in an uncertain world," Obama had said on the same day.

South Asia Analysis Group  
Papers  

INDO-US RELATIONS  
An Update 
  
 It would be unfair and ungenerous even on the part of the critics of the present Government in New Delhi to deny that in its handling of  the process of re-adjustment of Indo-US relations after the Pokhran-II nuclear tests, it has succeeded, to some extent, in imparting to the relations a certain dignity and equality which were previously lacking. 

This should be obvious to anyone, whose sense of fairness and objectivity had not been weakened by prejudices against the present Government, after the recently-concluded eighth round of  talks at New Delhi between Jaswant Singh, India’s Minister for External Affairs, and Strobe Talbott, the US Deputy Secretary of State. 

There has been some confusion in New Delhi and Washington after the talks on the nature and timing of what a member of the US delegation has described as the mutually-reinforcing (he avoided using the phrase quid pro quo in view of its negative connotation in India) steps on which the two delegations reportedly agreed  in order to give the bilateral relations a forward-looking momentum instead of continuing to remain mired in Pokhran of May,1998. 

In their non-attributable-by-name briefings for journalists in New Delhi, members of the US delegation have conveyed the impression that these steps would consist of a definitive commitment by India to sign the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) on a date earlier than September,1999, and   US support for the World Bank funding of  a power project in Andhra Pradesh. 

While this impression is yet to be categorically confirmed by spokesmen of the Government of India, spokesmen of the State Department and the White House in Washington seem to have gone out of their way in dampening any undue expectations from India that a lifting of the economic sanctions was round the corner.  

They have been underlining in their open briefings of journalists in Washington that while the recent round in New Delhi was more positive than the preceding ones, it would be premature to talk of a consequent break-through in Indo-US relations. 
 
In a presentation on “ Pokhran II : International Response” at the Centre For South-East Asian Studies of the University of Madras in August, 1998, (subsequently published in full by the “Indian Defence Review” of Lancer Publications,July-Sept,1998, Vol 13-3), this writer had drawn attention to the three voices with which Washington seemed to be talking to India—a voice of moderation and reasonableness emanating from Talbott and his deputy Karl Inderfurth, a voice of impatience and even virulence from Madeleine Albright, the Secretary of State, and her spokesman James Rubin, and the voice of the White House, which was reflecting sometimes the moderation of Talbott and sometimes the virulence of Albright. 

This cacophony of reactions and assessments from Washington has since weakened, but not yet substantially. The virulence has disappeared from the remarks of Albright and Rubin, but not yet the rigidity of approach. The ambiguity of the White House is seemingly less, but its stand is not yet as predictable as India would have liked it to be. The only consistency in a forward-looking approach has been that of Talbott and Inderfurth. 

Whether all this is part of a pre-agreed negotiating strategy at Washington or whether this is the way Washington always works is not clear. 

Whatever  it may be, Indian diplomacy, while apparently showing tactical flexibility on the CTBT issue, has remained firm on certain other issues, which are of greater consequence for India’s future security and autonomy in decision-making on national security matters. These issues relate to the threat perception which impelled India to go nuclear and Indian requirements, conventional as well as nuclear, to enable an adequate response to future threats. 

Through its firm and dignified refusal to indicate to the US what, in Indian perception, would constitute an adequate, minimum nuclear deterrence and to agree to any steps, such as the freezing of fissile material production and a moratorium on missile tests and development, which could amount to a freezing of India’s nuclear and delivery capability at the May,1998, level, the present Government, instead of letting itself be overawed by US badgering on such issues like its predecessor Governments had done, has made it clear that Indian decisions on India’s future security would be based on Indian perceptions and assessments, past experience in dealing with  potential adversaries and continuing concerns with regard to the future and not on US perceptions. 

While India would listen to US views in the matter, the determining factor in policy-making would be Indian perceptions and concerns. The importance of a flexibility in determining the nature and extent of the minimum nuclear deterrence in order to continuously adjust it to the evolving regional situation in future has been underlined in no uncertain terms. 

That is what the US itself does in national security policy-making as would be evident from its recent decision to step up funding on theatre missile defence after reports of the upgradation of North Korea’s missile capability. It is unreasonable on the part of the US to try to refuse to India a flexibility in national security policy-making which it allows to itself. 

A close study of the eight rounds of Indo-US talks held so far would indicate two important gains for Indian diplomacy – an acceptance by the US of the inevitability and the irreversibility of  India’s de facto status as a nuclear power even though it is disinclined to  accord to India the de jure status and of the legitimacy of India’s concerns relating to China. 

However, it needs to be noted that while there is now a greater recognition of the legitimacy of India’s concerns vis-à-vis China, there is still a reluctance to express this recognition in categorical terms in public, in deference to China’s sensitivities. A similar deference to India’s sensitivities has been lacking in US policies which is partly responsible for the relations between India and the US, the two greatest democracies of the world, failing to blossom to their full potential despite the best of intentions on both sides.  

Another point which needs to be underlined in any analysis is that the US Administration, while now accepting the legitimacy of India’s concerns regarding China, continues to give the impression that in its belief  these concerns, while legitimate, are still overstated in order for India to justify having a nuclear and delivery capability much larger than warranted by ground reality. 
 
At the same time, there is still an attempt to keep the focus narrowly on Indo-Pakistan relations while closing the eyes to the broader picture of  China’s continuing upgradation of its nuclear and missile capability, its close military relations with Myanmar which legitimately add to India’s nervousness despite assurances from China and Myanmar and China’s assertion by stealth of its territorial claims in the Spratly group of Islands. 
 
The experience of the Philippines proves, if further proof was needed, as to what could happen to a country if it accepts Chinese professions of friendship and good intentions and neglects its defence. 

While there has been a lot of spotlight on the so-called benchmarks approved by the five permanent members of the UN Security Council and the Group of 8 Countries and which the US has been using as a yardstick for measuring the progress of the talks, little notice has been taken in the American press and by US analysts of the  two benchmarks which the present Government in New Delhi has been using for measuring the seriousness of the US desire for improving its relations with India and for according to India the importance which it merits. 

The first benchmark relates to India’s autonomy of decision-making in national security matters and the second to the removal of the unfair and discriminatory denial of advanced technology to India in various fields on the  baseless ground that such technology could enable India upgrade its nuclear and missile capability. 
        
The denial is unfair because there is no previous evidence of India misusing dual-purpose technology for military purposes and discriminatory in relation to the USA’s kid-glove approach to China. 
        
On paper, similar technological disabilities have been imposed on China too since the Tiananmen Square massacre of 1989, but exemptions have been  given to Beijing on a case by case basis as in the case of nuclear power stations and China’s flouting of these restrictions to acquire sensitive technologies with the connivance of US companies, which has been well-documented by Congressional committees, has been overlooked in the long-term interests of Sino-US relations. 
        
India’s praiseworthy record of refraining from misuse of technologies acquired from the US and of adhering to US restrictions however unfair they might be without trying to clandestinely circumvent them as China has been repeatedly doing, has remained unrecognised and unreflected in US policies. 
        
The eight rounds of Jaswant Singh-Talbott talks have shown that given the required vision and understanding, the two countries could be on the threshold of a new era of  bilateral relations devoid of the complexes and mindsets of the past, but to what extent such relations would mature and flourish would depend, amongst other factors, on the US  giving up using two yardsticks in policy-making in nuclear matters—one for India and the other for China— and on its showing the same deference to the sensitivities of  India as it does to those of China.  
  

B.RAMAN                                                         7-2-99  

(The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, and presently Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai.E-Mail Address:corde@md3.vsnl.net.in  ) 
 
http://www.southasiaanalysis.org/papers/paper33.html
 

India–United States relations
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Indo-American relations)
Jump to: navigation, search
Indo-American relations    
 
     India      United States
Indo-American relations refers to the bilateral relations between the United States of America and the Republic of India.

India, though being one of the founding members of the Non-Aligned Movement, developed a closer relationship with the Soviet Union than with the US due to the nations' regional proximity, which setback Indo-American relations throughout the Cold War. However, after the collapse of the Soviet Union, relations between the two countries have warmed, especially under the current Bush Administration seeing India as a strategic partner in Asia and the world's largest functioning democracy.[1]

John McCain and Barack Obama, the nominees for the 2008 US presidential election, both have bright visions of the future of Indo-American relations, though with some differences. McCain appears to see India as a counterweight to China's ever-growing influence over the world; he would like to see India become a permanent member of the annual Group of 8 meetings and would warmly accept India's bid for a permanent seat on the UN security council. Alongside this a McCain presidency would develop closer strategic and military ties with India. Obama offers a different, though not opposing, relationship that would be marked by closer economic ties.[2]

Contents [hide]
1 History
2 Military relations
3 Economic relations
3.1 Trade relations
4 See also
5 Notes
6 Sources
 

[edit] History
 
Swami Vivekananda in Chicago, 1893.The historic relationship between India and the United states was very strong. One event is the visit of Swami Vivekananda who introduced Yoga and Vedanta to America. Vivekananda was the first known Hindu Sage to come to the West, where he introduced Eastern thought at the World's Parliament of Religions, in connection with the World's Fair in Chicago, in 1893. Here, his first lecture, which started with this line "Sisters and Brothers of America," [2] made the audience clap for two minutes just to the address, for prior to this seminal speech, the audience was always used to this opening address: "Ladies and Gentlemen". It was this speech that catapulted him to fame by his wide audiences in Chicago and then later everywhere else in America, including far-flung places such as Memphis, Boston, San Francisco, New York, Los Angeles, and St. Louis.

After Indian independence until the end of the cold war, the relationship between the two nations has often been thorny. From 1961 to 1963 there was a promise to help set up a large steel mill in Bokaro that was withdrawn by the U.S. The 1965 and 1971 Indo-Pakistani wars did not help their relations. During the Cold War, the US asked for Pakistan’s help because India was seen to lean towards the Soviet Union. Later, when India would not agree to support the anti-Soviet operation in Afghanistan, it was left with few allies. Not until 1997 was there any effort to improve relations with the United States.

Soon after Atal Bihari Vajpayee became Indian Prime Minister, he authorized a nuclear weapons test in Pokhran, which got the immediate attention of the US. The Clinton administration and Vajpayee exchanged representatives to help build relations. In March 2000, President Bill Clinton visited India. He had bilateral and economic discussions with Prime Minster Atal Bihari Vajpayee. Over the course of improved diplomatic relations with the Bush administration, India has agreed to allow close international monitoring of its nuclear weapons development while refusing to give up its current nuclear arsenal. India and the US have also greatly enhanced their economic ties.

 During the 9/11 terrorist attacks on the U.S., President George W. Bush chose India as the country to control and police the Indian Ocean sea-lanes from the Suez to Singapore. The tsunami that occurred in December 2004 saw the U.S. and Indian navies to work together in search and rescue operations and to reconstruct the damaged lives and land. An Open Skies Agreement was made in April 2005. This helped enhance trade, tourism, and business by the increased number of flights. Air India purchased 68 US Boeing aircraft, which cost $8 billion.

Former U.S. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice have made recent visits to India as well. After Hurricane Katrina, India donated $5 million to the American Red Cross and sent 2 plane loads of relief supplies and materials to help. And on 1 March 2006, President Bush made another diplomatic visit to expand relations between India and the United States.

[edit] Military relations
 
Naval ships from India, the U.S., Japan, Australia, and Singapore during a naval exercise in Malabar 2007.The U.S.-India defense relationship derives from a common belief in freedom, democracy, and the rule of law, and seeks to advance shared security interests. These interests include maintaining security and stability, defeating terrorism and violent religious extremism, preventing the spread of weapons of mass destruction and associated materials, data, and technologies and protecting the free flow of commerce via land, air and sea lanes.

In recent years India has conducted joint military excercises with the U.S. in the Indian Ocean. Despite this the Indian government sees the sole U.S. base in the Indian Ocean, Diego Garcia, and the permanent presence of the U.S. military there, as a potential escalation point in a future war, especially because of the current U.S. operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.

[edit] Economic relations
The United States is India's largest exporting market and second largest trading partner after China. India’s exports to the United States in 2003 totalled nearly USD $13.1 billion, led by export of apparel and household goods, diamonds, and jewellery. American exports to India were valued at USD $5 billion.[3]

The United States is also one of India’s largest direct investors. From the year 1991 to 2004, the stock of FDI inflow has increased from USD $11.3 million to $344.4 million, totaling $4.13 billion. This is a compound rate increase of 57.5% annually. Indian direct investments abroad were started in 1992. Indian corporations and registered partnership firms are allowed to invest in businesses up to 100% of their net worth. India’s largest outgoing investments are manufacturing, which account for 54.8% of the country’s foreign investments. The second largest are non-financial services (software development), which accounts for 35.4% of investments.

[edit] Trade relations
 
U.S. President George W. Bush and Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh during a meeting with Indian and American business leaders in New Delhi.The United States is India's largest trading partner. In 2007, the United States exported $17.24 billion worth goods to India and imported $24.02 billion worth of Indian goods.[4] Major items exported by India to the U.S. include Information Technology Services, textiles, machinery, ITeS, gems and diamonds, chemicals, iron and steel products, coffee, tea, and other edible food products. Major American items imported by India include aircraft, fertilizers, computer hardware, scrap metal and medical equipment.[5][6]

The United States is also India's largest investment partner, with American direct investment of $9 billion accounting for 9% of total foreign investment into India. Americans have made notable foreign investment in India's power generation, telecommunications, ports, roads, petroleum exploration/processing, and mining industries.[6]

In July 2005, President George W. Bush and Indian Prime Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh created a new program called the Trade Policy Forum. It is run by a representative from each nation. The United States Trade Representative is Rob Portman and the Indian Commerce Secretary is Minister of Commerce Kamal Nath. The goal of the program is to increase bilateral trade which is a two-way trade deal and the flow of investments.

There are five main sub-divisions of the Trade Policy Forum which include: Agricultural Trade group- This group has three main objectives: agreeing on terms that will allow India to export mangoes to the United States, permitting India’s APEDA (Agricultural and Process Food Products Export Development Authority) to certify Indian products to the standards of the USDA, and executing regulation procedures for approving edible wax on fruit. Tariff and Non-Tariff Barriers group- Goals of the group include: agreeing that insecticides that are manufactures by United States companies can be sold throughout India. India had agreed to cut special regulations on trading carbonated drinks, many medicinal drugs, and lowering regulations on many imports that are not of agricultural nature. Both nations have agreed to discuss improved facets on the trade of Indian regulation requirements, jewelry, computer parts, motorcycles, fertilizer, and those tariffs that affect the American process of exporting boric acid.

The two nations have discussed matters such as those who wish to break into the accounting market, Indian companies gaining licenses for the telecommunications industry, and setting polices by the interaction of companies from both countries regarding new policies related to Indian media and broadcasting. This group has strived to exchange valuable information on recognizing different professional services offered by the two countries, discussing the movement and positioning of people in developing industries and assigning jobs to those people, continuation of talks in how India’s citizens can gain access into the market for financial servicing, and discussing the limitation of equities.

The two countries have had talks about the restriction of investments in industries such as financial services, insurance, and retail. Also, to take advantage of any initiatives in joint investments such as agricultural processing and the transportation industries. Both countries have decided to promote small business initiatives in both countries by allowing trade between them.

The majority of exports from the United States to India include: aviation equipment, engineering materials and machinery, instruments used in optical and medical sectors, fertilizers, and stones and metals.

Below are the percentages of traded items India to US increased by 21.12% to $6.94 billion.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indo-American_relations

Indo-US relationship is very important for Obama: Saran

5 Nov, 2008, 2237 hrs IST, PTI

NEW DELHI: Describing the US election outcome as "a generation change", Former Foreign Secretary Shyam Saran on Wednesday said the Indo-US relationsh
ip is very important to US president-elect Barack Obama.

"He had written a very nice letter to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh in September saying he would vote in favour of the Indo-US nuclear agreement and assured his full support to it," the PM's special envoy Saran said today in an interview to NDTV.

Attaching great importance to the Indo-US relationship Obama said he would like to work together with India on various other shared interests as the President of the US, Saran said.

Obama talked about not only shared values but also about shared interests, he added.

"At least the sentiments expressed in that letter make me believe that infact this presidency would be another interesting and a very positive chapter in Indo-US relations," Saran said.

Indian-Americans hope for record appointments in Obama admin

5 Nov, 2008, 2222 hrs IST, PTI
WASHINGTON: With Indian Americans having played a vital role in Barack Obama's successful Presidential campaign, the community is expecting to surpass the number of appointments it received during the Clinton and Bush administrations.

The Indian American community has been seen as a strong force of support for the Democrat within the larger Asian American population, with one estimate being that they voted for Obama by more than a two to one margin.

"The presence and appointment of Indian Americans in leadership roles should go beyond the records set by Presidents Clinton and Bush," said Kamala Edwards, President of the Indian American Leadership Council, a non-partisan group.

"While we do not know how Obama is going to govern, an Obama administration will need to heed Indian Americans' voices in light of their growing political clout in divided electorates in many swing states," Edwards added.

Predicting a less favourable foreign policy for India as compared to the outgoing Bush administration, Edwards said Obama will have to focus more on domestic issues as discontent with Bush's regime was a major reason for Obama's thumping victory.

"The shift in foreign policy is not likely to be as favourable for India as President Bush on environmental issues, nuclear proliferation, outsourcing and the IT sector. Since Obama's victory is due to discontent with Bush's Iraq policy and the economic meltdown, he will have to focus more on domestic issues," Edwards said.

 

 

 

Palash Biswas

 

Pl Read my blogs:

 

http://nandigramunited.blogspot.com/

http://www.bangaindigenous.blogspot.com/

http://www.troubledgalaxydetroyeddreams.blogspot.com/