India, US ties moving forward: American experts

The meeting between Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and US President Barack Obama has signalled a forward movement in bilateral strategic ties with key agreements signed in defence and energy sectors, eminent American experts have said.
"I think it was a very important trip in difficult times for both sides. There is political turmoil both in the US and India. So it is all the more important that there be continuity to show that the US-India relationship is going forward no matter what the events of the day may be," Raymond Vickery, senior director at Albright Stonebridge, told PTI.
"I think that combined with the strong personal relationship between President Obama and Prime Minister Singh was a very important sign to give that this is going forward," Vickery said.

During the Clinton Administration, Vickery served as Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Trade Development, where he was responsible for India in the Department's Big Emerging Markets initiative.
Vickery identified pre-early works agreement between Westinghouse and NPCIL and joint defense declaration as the key achievements of the India-US summit.
The Westinghouse-NPCIL agreement should facilitate progress toward licensing the AP-1000 nuclear reactor technology in India.

Taking their defence ties to a new level, the two countries also decided to undertake joint development and production of military hardware, involving transfer of high-end technology from America, bringing India at par with closest US allies.

"We have a strong mutual interest in fighting terrorism and the fact is that US technology with regard to homeland security, in regard to border patrol, coast guard operation is important," he said.
Acknowledging that there are a lot of problems in US- India trade and investment relationship, Vickery said there is "entirely too much negativity", and described the recently launched anti-India campaign as purely "inside the Beltway thing".
Ganging up against India on one issue or the other, he argued, really does not reflect the true relationship on trade and investment.