So how does Prime Minister Modi do it? As we were talking to Foreign Secretary S Jaishankar earlier today, I think he was right when he mentioned that the business community is going to have to step up in US and India to align themselves more carefully with policy-makers. How do you promote a business community, private sector that has a voice in the area of policy, one that is integrated with the policy-making apparatus? This will be a challenge, but I do think Prime Minister Modi recognises this as a need and I suspect this will be part of what he endeavours to do. We, from the US, want to fashion a policy that integrates nicely with the private sector in India. I believe a strong private sector-private sector alignment probably would do more for a relationship that has everything else going for it than not.
If you can imagine, a US-China relationship, one that has moved along quite nicely over the years, where overall bilateral trade account is now over $500 billion. We don't see eye to eye on a lot of issues, but we do see eye to eye on business and commerce and we do have a very close private sector community. We do see eye to eye, US and India, on a whole lot of issues that we have in common: governance issues, human rights, religion and if you are able to align the private sectors, where we haven't been able to in the past, you can imagine the power that would be derived in that stepped up kind of relationship.
In China, the challenge is going to be quite different: there will be a tendency in the run up to the 2016 election to find fault with the US-China relationship; define the weak spots to use it for political expediency. This is part of every election cycle: China has largely been demonised. And then it takes some time to overcome the rhetoric of the political cycle and then rebuild it.
If you look domestically within China, Xi Jinping is consolidating his power, he's two years into office. He is clearly sending a signal loud and clear that he wants to reform the party and there's no guarantee that would be done. But I think he knows there is no alternative governing mechanism in China - so if the one-party system collapses, that can lead to catastrophic failure, not just in China but in the whole of the Asia-Pacific region. So, he has embarked not only on a very aggressive economic reform agenda, that is looking at fiscal, financial reforms, reform of state-owned enterprises, urbanisation, how to deal with the Peoples' Bank of China so that it has sufficient stand-alone independence. But he has also embarked on a very strong anti-corruption campaign. To my mind, he is setting up an environment for the 19th Party Congress that will take place in 2017, to fully consolidate his power base, such that between 2017-2022, he will focus primarily on economic reforms - which he has done very little about, by the way, and this has frustrated many observers and practitioners.
The relationship between US and China is competitive, it is touchy, it is sensitive but we have to find ways to collaborate. We have to ensure that we have a strong economic component in the relationship. As this year plays out, the most prominent part of US-Asia ties will be the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP), which includes about 40 per cent of the world's GDP. There have been 25-30 rounds of negotiations already on this very ambitious deal. No guarantees that we will reach the promised land - because much of this will be dependent on the Trade Promotion Authority, which is the authority granted by the Congress to the individual trade negotiators to sit down at the table and negotiate a deal, and then to return it to Congress for an up or down vote. Unless you have that authority from the Congress, you will never get the best offer from those with whom you are negotiating. If we get the authority from the Congress, that will be considered a big bipartisan win.
The India-US relationship is on an upward trajectory. I say that because those who will take power, Republicans or Democrats, in 2016 - will be looking for new friends in the region, particularly those with mass, those with an economy that is ready to be built, with whom we can trade, and those who share our values. I think India has fit that natural slot for many years now - we just have to figure out how to get the machinery working on both sides to maximise things. We are getting closer, and I sense we have enough goodwill built on both sides, where I think we will be able to do more with the relationship. But for me, having watched this, both from abroad and as a participant in various aspects of the US-India relationship, it has been frustrating that we have left, as you would say, in the deals and the negotiations, too much cash on the table.
With India, we have bilateral opportunities that haven't been maximised. That's where the conversation should begin. If we are to up our game in terms of our overall standards of trade, then it's an agreement that welcomes all commerce. But make no mistake about it: US should be shooting for gold standard trade agreements. If you look at the agreements we have been able to negotiate in the last 10-15 years, you have arguably some gold standard agreements, in terms of protection of IPR, trade facilitation, technology, financial services. Now, between US and India, we have plenty of opportunities. But do we want to engage to up our game?
Edited excerpts from a speech by Governor Jon M Huntsman Jr, Chairman, Atlantic Council at an Ananta Aspen session on "India and The Emerging World Order" in New Delhi, March 16, 2015