The Pretense is Shed; Puppet Masters of Vested Interests Coming out of the Woods

With barely three weeks to the first phase of General Elections 2024, the preparations for the electoral battle are going on full throttle. Unlike the previous General Elections, the Indian Opposition is entering the fray openly acknowledging the return of the incumbent dispensation with renewed majority and strength. No less than the Congress Party president and leader of the Opposition, Mallikarjuna Kharge in the concluding session of the 17^th Parliament humorously alluded to “Ab ki baar 400 par…. With a current majority of 330-334 seats, this time it will be 400”. The desperate attempts of the opposition to put up a sham unity of the INDI Alliance in the face of Modi’s rolling juggernaut of “Once more Modi Sarkar” is falling like a pack of cards.

Even the much-touted attempt to grab the people’s attention through Bharat Jodo Yatra and Bharat Jodo Nyay Yatra ended up doing more harm than good to the Opposition and especially to the Congress. The body blows suffered by the Indian opposition parties have been their making given their inability to challenge the government on real issues and ineffectiveness to play a constructive role. As a result, the elections have turned out to be largely one-sided with people now waiting for what next rather than who next. Airing a modicum of confidence in returning to power, PM Modi has pledged Rs 10,000 crore financial assistance to Bhutan for the next five years. Even the media is also abuzz with PM Modi’s meeting with ministers for the first 100 days of his government in the third term.

Ensuring sustained political stability is one of the hallmarks of any developed country. Bereft of an absolute political majority, for three decades, Indian polity was roiled by a series of coalition governments. Concomitantly, the developmental agenda was sacrificed at the altar of the so-called “coalition dharma”. Lack of political stability in India caused a laggard growth. In terms of GDP, India and China were of roughly similar size till the early 1990s. But subsequently, China rapidly zoomed past India with a consistent double-digit growth rate and now China is 4.8 times richer than India. An unobtrusive development vision backed by a strong political leadership in China has made all the difference.

A third term for the Modi government is poised to bestow such an advantage on India. India is at the cusp of a critical development phase. But unlike the authoritarian regime of China which has effectively insulated itself from external influences, thanks to the filial loyalty to the Communist party, nonexistence of political diversity and dangling sword of corruption purges, India has been a playground for foreign players. The fidelity of Communists to the Soviet Union facilitated the latter’s infiltration into the Indian political system which subsequently declined following its collapse. Since its stoic rise as a developing economy after the economic reforms, external agencies forged connections with influential media, academic, social and political organisations of democratic India.

The dangerous gameplay of these foreign agencies which went unchecked under the pliable political regimes suffered a jolt under the Modi regime. An uncompromising nationalistic strategy and a developmental vision of the Modi government frustrated the vested interests bent on making India an experimental ground for proselytization and turning it into a fractured, disunited, laggard nation. To have their way, vested interests in cahoots with external agencies have rolled out concerted attempts to vitiate India, its polity, and its democracy with international media under its fold. Resultantly, India began to suddenly slip in all rankings ranging from Poverty Index through Happiness Index to even Democratic Index.

The abrupt fall of India in the international rankings has been steady and consistent notwithstanding the stable and steady development enabling environment. The unabashed bias became so glaring that the common man began to mock the Western aptitude of giving a better rank to Palestine and Afghanistan, the seedbeds of terrorism as much happier places to live than India. According to the World Happiness Report, India is at 126^th position among the 146 countries below its neighbours-Nepal, Bangladesh and China. The Varieties of Democracy (V-Dems) reports placed India among the top ten autocracies deeming it an “electoral autocracy”. The sudden fall of India in all these indices from 2013 is glaring.

The Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU) which relies on the annual reports of US-based think tanks like Freedom House, Pew Research, Human Rights Watch, and Reporters Sans Frontieres termed India a “Flawed Democracy”. JSF has downgraded India from completely free to partially free in terms of press freedom

Similarly, India is being pulled up on global platforms for its strategic choices even as the Western countries continue to violate the sanction regime with impunity. The attacks have been multi-pronged and multi-sided. Unfortunately for the West, the decade-long sabotage attempts to taint India's polity and malign the robust democratic institutions boomeranged. Instead of trust-deficit, these despoiling attempts appear to have heralded a steadfast faith in the current dispensation. Frustrated by the futility of biased narratives bolstered by toolkits deployed to unseat the political dispensation, the vested interests and their masters in the West have now shed the pretense of propriety.

The attacks reached a tipping point with the arrest of AAP supremo and Delhi Chief Minister, Arvind Kejriwal. From providing a platform to the disgruntled and reluctant politicians to spew venom against the syncretic fabric of India, countries are now openly hitting at the democratic framework. Lending weight to the opposition claims of “politically motivated” arrest, the German foreign minister in response to a question remarked, “We assume and expect that the standards relating to the Independence of the judiciary and basic Democratic principles will also be applied in this case. Like anyone facing the accusations, Mr. Kejriwal is entitled to a fair and impartial trial”¹. After MEA summoned the German envoy and issued a demarche, Germany retracted the statement expressing faith in the Indian Constitution that guarantees basic human rights and freedoms.

A day later, the US responding to an emailed query voiced, “We encourage a fair, transparent and timely legal process for Chief Minister Kejriwal”. The note also lamented the freezing of Congress party bank accounts and toed the line of Amnesty International’s Aakar Patel-“the growing crackdown clearly shows the authorities blatant disregard for human rights and rule of law”².

Taking a serious objection to US spokesperson Miller’s remarks, MEA summoned US Deputy Secretary Gloria Barbena and at the weekly briefing MEA Spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal lodged a strong objection and protests and said, “The recent remarks by the State Department are unwarranted. Any such external imputation on our electoral and legal processes is completely unacceptable”. He even added, “India is proud of its independent and robust democratic institutions. We are committed to protecting them from any form of undue external influences…. Mutual respect and understanding form the foundation of international relations and states are expected to be respectful of the sovereignty and internal affairs of others”³.

India is proud of its independent and robust democratic institutions. We are committed to protecting them from any form of undue external influences…Mutual respect and understanding form the foundation of international relations and states are expected to be respectful of the sovereignty and internal affairs of others.

Interestingly, even after summons, Miller reiterated that the US is “closely monitoring the situation” raising questions about its alleged interference in the internal affairs of a fellow democratic country. Washington’s replies have recapitulated the entrenched fears about the US’s dubious reputation in the orchestration of “Colour Revolutions” across different countries.

Earlier in the week, Washington criticised India’s Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) over “human rights”. This is in line with USCIRF’s (US Commission on International Religious Freedom) gross misinterpretation of “religious requirement” of asylum seekers in India by glossing over its historical context and relevance. India strongly hit back at these regurgitated narratives as “misplaced, misinformed and unwarranted”. The above three back-to-back unwarranted references to India’s domestic affairs have inadvertently stoked the old mistrust towards the US. The US which crossed India’s redlines by hosting Kashmiri Separatists is adeptly playing a double game with its inaction against the mushrooming Khalistani ideology on its territory despite its repeated requests. Above all, the timing of President Biden’s letter to Pakistan's Prime Minister after three years of long prolonged silence is also raising spurious speculations.

After the US and Germany, the UN waded into Kejriwal’s row saying, it hoped that “everyone’s rights are protected in India” and that they “encouraged fair, transparent and timely legal processes”. It is interesting to note that a Bangladeshi Journalist, Mushfiqul Fazal Ansarey serving as a White House/UN correspondent for SA Perspectives and Just News BD has directed these queries to Germany, the US and the UN. Ansarey, a Columnist for The Wire, connected to Jamaat-e-Islami, a proscribed terror organisation, has been a supporter of the Bangladesh Nationalist Party, the architect of the “India Out Campaign” in Bangladesh. An IPA Newspack Report indicated that William B Milam, former US ambassador to Bangladesh with ties to the Democratic Party and co-manages Right to Freedom has reached an agreement with Ansarey⁴. A close look indicates that an unholy nexus of anti-India, Civil Society Organisations and political parties is relentlessly at work to tarnish India’s image and to politically destabilise the country.

Indeed, every pillar of Indian democracy is under attack. Calling the Indian Judiciary as “majoritarian”, “not as strong as it can be”, “at its weakest in modern Indian history” and “Pakistan’s Judiciary has done much better than India in many cases”, a lobby group has been casting aspersions on its functioning⁵. Underscoring the dubiety of these systemic wanton attacks over 600 advocates in an open letter to the CJI expressed concerns about “vested interests” attempting to “pressure the judiciary”, “influence judicial process” and tarnish the reputation of the judiciary with “frivolous logic and stale political agendas”⁶.

The current scenario validates Late CDS General Bipin Rawat who cautioned against a “two and a half front war”⁷. The oblique reference to the malicious agenda of the “vested interests” is the prescient “half-front war” India is now faced with. Calling the bluff of this nefarious narrative war, EAM Jaishankar showed a mirror to the US by pointing at the Jackson-Vanik Amendment, Lautenberg Amendment and Spector Amendment that fast-tracked citizenships of certain minorities. India is now going full guns blazing against the Western hypocrisy reminding them of the cardinal rules of diplomacy and vociferously questioning the Western precedent of judging countries as their imperial moral compass.

The fumbling opposition incapable of garnering the electoral mandate is hanging to the coattails of the West to tilt public support in their favour. The brazen interference of the West in the internal affairs of a sovereign country is uncalled for and reeks of unjustifiable moral constabulary. The subversive acts perpetrated by the vested interests at the behest of the foreign puppet masters can potentially destabilise India and can pose a security threat. India must rebut, counter and confront the agenda now!! The decision to have India’s own Democratic Index is the first pragmatic effort in this direction.

@ Copyrights reserved.

PM Modi’s Visit Honours India’s Special Bond with Bhutan

Amid the drifting winds of geopolitics, one thing has remained a constant in the India-subcontinent. The consistency of the long-standing Bharat-Bhutan relations anchored in mutual trust, goodwill and understanding.

The recent back-to-back visits between the leaders of both countries within a span of less than 10 days invariably hint at an exigency and solemnity. After assuming office in January 2024, Bhutan Prime Minister Tshering Tobgay embarked on a five-day visit to India in line with traditional keeping between both countries on March 14. Accompanied by a delegation of Ministers of Foreign Affairs, trade, industry and other senior officials, besides holding restricted and delegate level meetings with PM Modi, Bhutan PM Tobgay met business leaders of India at Mumbai¹.

Honouring the invitation of the Bhutanese King, PM Modi announced a two-day visit to the Land of Druk amid the thick of electioneering. This marked departure, of heading on a foreign visit after the announcement of general elections, a rarity, signifies the importance India attaches to Bhutan. Besides the political mileage, the government is equally focused on the strategic importance of the powerplay in the precarious Himalayan contours. Within India’s neighbourhood, Bhutan occupies a special position both in terms of relationship and national and security interests. The security interests of India and Bhutan are deeply intertwined.

Cherishing the special relations, PM Modi who began both his terms by making his first visits to Bhutan has made his last foreign trip in the second term to the Land of Druk. The high-level visits which began with the Foreign Secretary’s visit to Bhutan immediately after elections are now followed up by PM Modi. It is no secret that the elephant in the room in the conservations between India and Bhutan is undoubtedly China.

Being a guided democracy with a constitutional monarchy in charge of defence, security and economy, the fundamentals of the foreign policy are largely unchanged. Clearly, the foundation of India-Bhutan relations is the India-Bhutan friendship treaties of 1949 and 2007. Unlike the countries in the neighbourhood, besotted by ‘small country syndrome’, Bhutan sandwiched between two emerging powers has refrained from the hedging game. The successive Druks, perceptive of Mao’s five-fingers policy have maintained a continuity in foreign policy. Communist China embraced warlord Zhao Erfeng’s dream of controlling Tibet which is the putative right-hand palm along with the five fingers- Ladakh, Sikkim, Arunachal Pradesh, Nepal and Bhutan on its periphery.  

Aware of China’s ambitious territorial claims to the entire Himalayan terrain and after the 1962 Indo-China war, Bhutan has made amendments to its isolationist policy. In 1971 Bhutan became a UN member and recognised PRC but didn’t establish diplomatic relations. China has always been forbidding about India’s primacy in Bhutan’s foreign policy. As per some records, Bhutan and China held the first bilateral talks in 1981. The border talks between both countries over the largely un-demarcated region between Tibet and Bhutan began in 1984. As of October 2023, Bhutan and China held 25 rounds of talks and 13 Expert Group Meetings (EGMs). In October 2021, Bhutan and China signed a Three-Step Roadmap (TSR) and at the 13^th EGM held in October 2023, the countries agreed to set up a Joint Technical Team (JTT) for delimitation of the border between both countries.

The official boundary talks have been an attempt to create an illusion of formal, negotiations as Beijing has been surreptitiously salami-slicing Bhutan’s territory in the North by sending herders for grazing. Bhutan has been test-case for China’s aggressive incursion tactics. Giving into China's unrelenting claims, Bhutan has voluntarily relinquished its control to the Kula Khari area in the north citing Cartographic error².

In 1996 China offered a ‘package deal’ of ceding claims to the uninhabited and glaciated Pasamlung and Jakarlung areas of 495 sq. km territory in favour of a strategically important watershed 269 sq. km region in the West comprising parts of Doklam, Charithang, Dramana and Shakhatoe. Eyeing easy access to the Indian Ocean Region through the Chicken Neck Siliguri region, China has cajoled Bhutan. Sentient of India’s national interests, Bhutan turned down the offer.

Siliguri is pivotal for India’s territorial security and serves as the connecting bridge between Mainland India and the Northeastern region. Leveraging Doklam China wants to put India on the back foot. Doklam overlooks the Siliguri region. Chinese access to this region can put India on the defensive.

Through the boundary talks, Bhutan has explicitly reiterated that they are largely restricted to the northern territories of Bhutan with the demarcation of the Doklam to be resolved by all the three parties- India, Bhutan and China. China’s nefarious attempts to build roads up to the Jhampheri Ridge adjoining the Doklam trijunction has triggered the 73-day Doklam standoff. Insidious incursions into the Doklam trijunction have completely exposed the expansionist strategy of China. It was also an indirect attempt to drive a wedge between India and Bhutan by exerting pressure on the smaller country.

To coerce Bhutan, in June 2020, China laid claims to the 650 sq. km Sakteng sanctuary in Trashigang district which abuts the Tawang district of Arunachal Pradesh. Bhutan vociferously refuted these claims and successfully frustrated Chinese attempts. Subsequently, Bhutan and China expedited boundary talks. In 2023, both countries held 11^th, 12^th, and 13^th EGM. Apprising the details of the mechanism, King of Bhutan Jigme Khesar Namgyal Wangchuk visited India twice last year- April 2023 and November 2023.

As is Chinese won't, alongside the boundary negotiations, Beijing has intensified its stealthy incursions into Bhutan. Besides, intensifying the infrastructure development close to the Doklam region, as a part of the Xiaokong or ‘Moderate Prosperity Border Village Programme’ of President Xi Jinping, China is rapidly constructing new villages as far as 3 km inside Bhutan territory.

South China Morning Post reported that on December 28, 2023, 38 households from Tibet’s Shigatse have moved to the newly constructed Tamalung village³. Satellite images also confirmed the doubling of constructions in the expanded village which are now doubling as ‘citadels’- to strengthen border security and poverty alleviation. Similarly, another village adjacent to Tamalung, Gyalaphug village has witnessed a rapid increase in the number of dwellings.

In contravention of the first peace agreement between countries in 1998 that recognised Bhutan as a sovereign country- “Maintain Peace and Tranquillity on the Bhutan-China Border Areas”, and desisted the unilateral change to the border status quo, China is transgressing the borders. After the 1998 agreement, China has insisted on expanding engagement, especially towards developing trade and formal diplomatic relations.

Subsequently, China made inroads into Bhutan and continues to dominate the crucial telecom sector. Huawei has been operating in Bhutan since 2009. Currently, China accounts for a quarter of Bhutan’s trade. Weaponising trade and tourism, China is exerting tremendous pressure on Bhutan to establish formal diplomatic ties.

Bhutan is to India what Tibet is to China. India is challenging China by standing up to its bullying tactics. Beijing considers Bhutan as India’s soft underbelly. Having adopted a no-holds-barred approach, China is going ballistic by unleashing a previously subdued ambitious expansionist agenda. China is provoking the Philippines in the South China Sea, intensifying drills along the Taiwan Straits, increasing intrusions into the Sea of Japan, making forays into the Indian Ocean and prolonging de-escalation along the LAC. Hence, expectedly the China angle is prominently finding space in India-Bhutan relations.

The post-COVID recovery of Bhutan’s economy is rather tepid with the country witnessing slow growth, high inflation, high urban youth unemployment and growing “outmigration” of the working population to the most favoured destination- India followed by Australia. Foreign reserves are dwindling barely meeting the mandated constitutional requirement to cover 12 months of essential imports⁴. The government has indeed, imposed a ban on vehicle imports to maintain adequate reserves.

Avowedly committed to green economy and sustainability, striking a balance between the conservation agenda and economic recovery, Bhutan King launched the “Gelephu Mindfulness City” in December 2023, a separate administrative zone with investor-friendly laws. Planned along the lines of Saudi’s Neom and Indonesia’s Nusantara, the Gelephu lying along the Assam border is landlocked. Hence Bhutan is primarily dependent on India regarding infrastructure for trade and transport. During high-level reciprocal visits, leaders of both countries reviewed the full spectrum of bilateral cooperation and regional issues of mutual interest⁵.

Countries have initiated and launched projects that are in line with the Indian aspirations of becoming a developed country by 2047 and Bhutan’s vision of progressing into a high-income nation by 2034. India hailed Bhutan’s vision of the Gelephu Mindful City and promised to support the initiative that adeptly integrates the goal of economic prosperity in a sustainable manner to strengthen economic and investment linkages.

To propel investments and connectivity, particularly to prop up Gelephu as an investment destination, countries have initialled a text for MoU on the establishment of Kokrajhar in Assam to Gelephu and Banarhat - Samtse rail links. Countries have opened additional points for immigration and trading routes. Ahead of Bhutan PM Tobgay’s India visit, Bhutan announced interest in rejoining the Bangladesh-Bhutan-India- Nepal Motor Vehicle Agreement (BBIN-MVA).

Both sides signed a slew of MoUs including those for the supply of Petroleum, oil, Lubricants (POL) -from India to Bhutan; recognition of products by the regulatory agencies- Bhutan Food & Drug Authority (BFDA) and Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI); cooperation in sports and youth, space cooperation, pharmacopoeia, peering agreement between National Knowledge Network of India (NKN) and Druk Research and Educational Network. In tune with green economy objectives, a cooperation agreement is signed on energy efficiency and energy conservation measures through capacity development, information exchange on policies, research and technologies⁶.

PM Modi congratulated Bhutan for graduating from Least Developed Countries in December 2023 and pledged Rs 10,000 crores over the next five years. Bhutan thanked India for the Rs 5000 crore development assistance to its 12^th Five Year Plan (FYP). India’s economic stimulus would include the development of infrastructure for the seamless movement of goods and services; enhancing rail, air, digital connectivity and in agriculture, healthcare, education, startups, STEM, skilling and cultural preservation, education sector.

During PM Modi’s visit, countries have forged an energy partnership giving a huge fillip to the hydropower cooperation, a vital pillar of bilateral economic partnership. The partnership besides providing necessary access to financing and financial institutions for power sale, sub-regional energy cooperation will enable seamless cross-border trade in electricity⁷.

Hydropower cooperation has been an important pillar of the India-Bhutan bilateral economic partnership. Now countries have agreed to expand cooperation to non-hydro renewables like solar, wind and green initiatives for hydrogen and e-mobility and called for expeditious consultation on the planned projects- 1020 MW Punatshangchhu-II.

Unlike the coercive mercantilist relationship of the Northern neighbour, the guiding mantra of Bharat-Bhutan ties is mutual benefit. The developmental partnership is a happy confluence of “sabka saath, sabka vishwas, sabka prayas” and Gross National Happiness. The exemplary friendly ties have been a source of strength for both countries which have agreed to continue close coordination and cooperation with each other on issues related to national interests. 

The enduring partnership anchored in common values as well as shared cultural and spiritual heritage has now incorporated the doctrine of “Together for Progress and Development”. In recognition of PM Modi’s contribution to strengthening India-Bhutan ties, the Order of Druk Gyalpo, the highest civilian decoration announced in December 2021 during Bhutan’s 114^th National Day Celebrations was presented by Bhutan King Jigme Keshar at a ceremony in Thendrelthang, Thimphu ⁸. Reinforcing that Bharat for Bhutan and Bhutan for Bharat is an abiding reality, PM Modi pledged India’s commitment to a transformative partnership with Bhutan.

The long-standing exceptional bilateral ties between India and Bhutan is a touchstone of India’s Neighbourhood First policy. In appreciation of Modi’s State Visit amid domestic commitments and crucial elections, Bhutan PM Tobgay received him at the airport and extended an exceptional warm ceremonial welcome. Indeed, Bhutan people lined up along the entire stretch of 45km from Paro to Thimpu. In a first for an Indian Prime Minister, the Royal Family has hosted PM Modi at K5 residence, Lingkana Palace for a private dinner. As a special gesture, the King of Bhutan and Bhutan's PM came to see off PM Modi at the airport.

Invoking civilisational ties and historical links India is bolstering friendships and cementing economic and development partnership with the immediate neighbourhood. India is stymieing Chinese overtures with mutual understanding and goodwill.

In a post on X, PM Tobgay wrote, “A big thank you to my brother, PM @narendramodi Ji, for visiting us. Neither his busy schedule nor inclement weather could prevent him from fulfilling his promise to visit us. This must be #ModiKaGuarantee phenomenon!”. By standing with Bhutan in the wake of Chinese intimidation, India has signalled its commitment to promoting the interests of neighbours and adherence to Security and Growth for All in the Region (SAGAR). India’s timely economic support to Sri Lanka and steadfast relationship with Bangladesh is a case in point.

@ Copyrights reserved.

A Landslide Victory is a Shot in the Arm for Putin

 In the Russian Presidential elections held over the weekend from March 15-17, Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin secured a landslide with 87.97 % votes. Bettering his own previous election numbers of 77% in 2018, Putin aged 71 will now begin his sixth term becoming the longest-serving leader after Joseph Stalin. The Western governments have termed them as ‘illegitimate’ and ‘undemocratic’ since the opposition is allegedly silenced. The sudden death of Putin’s staunch critic Alexei Navalny, in Arctic Circle jail weeks ahead of the election and the blocking of anti-war activist Boris Nadezhdin from contesting the election has further bolstered the perception of ‘unfair election’ and ‘restrictive democracy’.

The Western government refused to accept the electoral verdict terming it ‘rigged’ since the elections were held even in Russian-occupied territories of Ukraine- Donetsk, Luhansk,  Kherson and Zaporizhzhia. Putin’s three opponents who were in the fray in the election - Nikolai Kharitonov, a member of the Communist Party, Vladislav Davankov of the New People Party and Leonid Slutsky of the Liberal Democratic Party of Russia (LDPR) polled less than five percent of the votes.

Amid the international news coverage of brewing dissent against Putin’s regime especially among expatriates, there were widespread speculations of less voter turnout.  But an unexpectedly high turnout of 77% as opposed to 67.5% in the 2018 election mirrored voter enthusiasm despite a surge in Ukrainian bombardments on all three days of the polls. Russian state media hailed Putin’s victory as confirmation that “he is on the right track”.

At the victory rally, Putin deeply thanked the people of Russia for their “show of support and trust”. Dubbed a sham and one-sided election, Putin hit out at critics saying, “We have many tasks ahead. But when we are consolidated-no matter who wants to intimidate us, suppress us- nobody has ever succeeded in history, they have not succeeded now, and they will not succeed ever in the future” and promised to prioritise the successful conclusion of the “special military operation” in Ukraine. Breaking his silence for the first time, Putin called the death of Navalny as “unfortunate incident” and claimed that he agreed for talks on prisoners’ exchange with a condition that Navalny would never return to Russia.

Notwithstanding the Western media reports of growing anti-Putin sentiments in Russia, the massive voter turnout and consolidation of support for Putin exposes a stark reality. The Ukrainian war has propelled Russians to rally behind Putin more than ever.  The expulsion of Russia from various multilateral organisations like the Council of Europe and the United Human Rights Council etc, suspension from the Olympics, and International Ice Hockey Federation, etc, freezing of Russian assets, and the unending sanction packages have inadvertently created a narrative of a beleaguered Russia defending its interests. Burgeoning Western embargoes and attempts of the West to isolate Russia have generated grassroots support for Putin.

At the same time, the flight of Western investment from Russian markets, loss of employment and business opportunities, and the fear of conscription have forced Russian youth to migrate to greener pastures. But by and large, the vast majority stood by Putin.

Indeed, the “Noon against Putin” protest call given by Navalny’s widow Yulia Navalnya failed to make a great impact. Long queues of people during the last day of voting reinforced the confidence of the general public in the political process. This suffices to indicate that Putin still commands a lot of Russian support. While the outcome of the election is a foretold conclusion with near absent opposition incapable of putting up a tough fight, following his re-election Putin will be at the helm till 2030.

Commemorating, the 10 years of annexation of Crimea, at the victory rally, Putin announced a Railway line to connect the Sevastopol port. With the bridge connecting Crimea coming under intense attack during the Ukraine war, Putin is now contemplating reliable connectivity with Crimea through the occupied Ukrainian regions.

Holding the highest position since 2000, Putin has been instrumental in reviving the fragile economy. Defeating the Chechen militants, he restored Russian pride, reinstated stability and provided leadership to the Russian Federation post-Soviet Union collapse. Putin recognised Chechen separatists who received Western support as an existential threat and a challenge to Russian sovereignty. By overwhelming them with disproportionate use of force, Putin averted Western threats and rejuvenated Russian consciousness. He restored Russian national pride and resurrected the national sentiment.

Above all, what set Putin apart from his predecessors is his formidable vision for Russia as a great empire and his efforts to reposition Russia as a global power. Seeking inspiration from the past to make Russia a modern civilisation as envisioned by Tsar Peter the Great, Putin defended his Ukrainian operation, citing Peter’s 21 years of the Northern War with Sweden.

Putin has successfully weathered as many as 16,000 Western sanctions intended to cripple the economy. Besides withstanding these sanctions Russia surprised the West with a growth rate of 3.6%. At a time when Ukraine is scrambling for weapons and ammunition, Russia has allocated 6% percent of GDP for defence spending. Russia which has been under a sanctions regime since Crimean annexation has managed to isolate its economy strategically avoiding transactions that required payments in US dollars. Among the many strategies, Russia in 2022 pegged its currency with gold. Russia used its huge gold reserves to settle domestic and foreign transactions. The Ukrainian war has further cemented his status as the 21st-century Russian Tsar.

The Ukraine “special military operation” which was supposed to throw away the pro-Western regime in three days has entered its second year. In the ongoing war of attrition, both countries have lost several lives and valuable strategic assets with a remote chance of Russia seizing control over entire Ukraine. The war which witnessed a major mobilisation of forces since the Second World War has now turned into a “frozen” conflict.

Ukrainian war effort supported by the NATO countries is encountering a resource crunch with countries coming under intense pressure to reassess their financial and military assistance. A war fatigue has already set in to retrieve the occupied Ukrainian territories. With Ukraine becoming a political issue, the US is reassessing its aid to Kyiv. Biden insisted that he would continue to assist Ukraine, “as long as it takes” even as a growing number of Republicans and Democrats are against the “blank cheque” approach. The re-election of Trump in upcoming Presidential Elections can jeopardise US aid to Ukraine. Poland, Ukraine’s neighbour, is now facing a severe backlash from the farmers over Ukrainian grain who have blockaded the borders.

Though Ukraine has signed security agreements with six countries- UK, Denmark, Germany, Italy, France and Canada, the dissensions between the NATO countries are out in the fore. Media leak of German officials in conversation with US counterparts of plans to force Ukraine for peace talks vindicates the perception of deepening war fatigue. As per some reports, the Western countries are now running out of ammunition. On the contrary, Russia is expediting missile production, defence manufacturing has increased standing forces and fund allocation from the budget.

The façade of a united coalition of European countries on long-term support for the Ukrainian war is facing threats from domestic constituents. On the contrary, Putin in the wake of American stoked-European ostracization expertly launched Russia’s Asia-centric approach and started forging strategic relations with the anti-West actors. Spanning the two continents of Europe and Asia, for centuries, Russia tried to emulate European values and traditions. Now, swiftly shifting gears, Russia is unambiguously unleashing its Asian identity, building strong economic ties with China and spawning a primordial anti-western alliance. Renewing ties with Africa, and Latin America Russia is trying to regain influence.

Despite Western reservations and criticism of Russian democracy, a huge people’s mandate is a big boost to Putin. The big victory came in the wake of Macron’s warning that the deployment of European troops cannot be “ruled out” warranting an issuance of a nuclear threat from Putin. Responding to the prospect of war between Russia and NATO forces, Putin quipped, “Everything is possible in the modern world. It is clear to everyone that this will be one-step away from full-scale World War Three. I think hardly anyone is interested in it”.

Ironically clouded by anti-Russian sentiment, the Americans propped up Ukraine and made an enemy out of Russia while the real competition and threat was from China. The unrelenting sanctions regime has pushed Russia into Chinese arms and eventually heralded the emergence of a new axis and insinuated a Cold War 2.0

Even as the partisan Western narrative expounds that Russia is paying a staggering price for Putin’s imperial dreams, Russians are aware of the West’s grey zone warfare. In reality, the support for Ukraine is waning. With people firmly rallying behind him, Putin is in no hurry to negotiate with Ukraine. Having successfully managed the unprecedented sanctions regime, Putin has positioned himself as the defender of Russian sovereignty and custodian of Russian values.

Interestingly, Putin has expressed his interest in talks on France’s proposal of a ceasefire during the Paris Olympics 2024 and the possibility of the creation of a buffer zone out of Ukrainian territory to help Russia defend its territory in the future.

Notwithstanding the Western criticism of Russia’s election as ‘pseudo election’, countries like China, Saudi Arabia, Iran and India have extended congratulatory messages to Putin on his re-election. Despite the Western pressure, India refused to take sides and strengthened economic and energy cooperation with Russia. In a telephone conversation with Putin after the election, Modi conveyed India’s consistent position in favour of diplomacy and dialogue for the peaceful resolution of the Russia-Ukraine conflict.

Irrespective of the outcome of the ongoing conflict, by resolutely standing up to Western pressure Putin has demonstrated his commitment towards building a sovereign Russia. An emphatic victory has further consolidated Putin’s credentials as a strong leader.

@ Copyrights reserved. 

The Long Game: How the Chinese Negotiate with India

Negotiations with China prominently etch the diplomatic landscape of independent India. Even before India could recover from the pangs of brutal partition and the Pakistani Lashkar attack on Jammu & Kashmir, India began to feel the tremors of another invasion to its northern frontier. Ever since India’s tryst with Communist China turned out to be its major security challenge. Oftentimes, past experiences serve as valuable sources of feedback for learning and unlearning (even). Besides helping in recognising a pattern and avoid repeating the same mistakes, a relook at the events in the past can help identify the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats. Embarking on such an exercise, India’s Premier Sinologist, former foreign secretary of India and Indian Ambassador to China, Vijay Gokhale in his book- “The Long Game: How The Chinese Negotiate With India” discerns China’s negotiation skills.

Deliberating on six major incidents from independence till 2019, Gokhale distills into this book his vast experience and scholarship on the India-China relationship to make a compelling case for policymakers to revisit the records to restructure our negotiations. The stand-off along the LAC indicates that Beijing is up for a long haul. India can’t afford to have a weak hand to tackle the trained diplomatic corps of China. The six defining events of the India-China bilateral ties constitute the six chapters of the book and the last chapter delves into lessons for India.

In the early years of independence, unlike China which has always handled its foreign affairs and directly dealt with leaders of Russia and the US, colonial India under the British never had the opportunity to negotiate directly. Along with a lack of diplomatic experience, India's misconceived notion of “Asian resurgence in the post-war period can be possible with China as a major player”, India squandered away a massive tactical advantage to be in the good books of China. Indian leadership further tied itself into knots with apprehensions that hostility with Chinese Communists might rankle the Indian communists.

Anxious about India’s global stature and largely worried about the international perception of being seen as a junior partner of the US or British, defying the “institutional consultation” on foreign affairs, the government of India displayed unrequited haste in recognising the People’s Republic of China (PRC) and meekly tendered the leverage. India’s haste had clouded its judgment. Nehru indeed prevailed on Raghavan to close the deal at the earliest. He wrote- “If the Indo-Chinese agreement on Tibet is signed and announced, soon it will have a salutary effect. If, however, this is postponed indefinitely, this will have contrary effect… this will create an impression of failure which will not be good”. Unlike the clear, objective approach of China, India’s focus was on timing. India even waived off the financial compensation China was willing to pay for taking over the Indian telegraph, post facilities, guest houses and vacant fields to get the deal signed before the May 1954 Geneva Convention.

In sharp contrast, Communist China adopted a methodical approach. It outmatched and outmaneuvered India. In pursuit of temporary global acclaim, Indian leadership unilaterally surrendered all its cards, lost special privileges in Tibet and failed to secure national priorities.

Ignoring Sardar Vallabhai Patel’s prescient warning, “even though we regard ourselves as friends of China, the Chinese don’t regard us as friends” and C. Rajagopalachari, the leadership failed to readjust the strategy. Undermining the first-hand information from the liaison officers and trade representatives, India tendered written assurances and committed a historical blunder. This presumptuous diplomacy has permanently weakened India’s position as New Delhi missed an opportunity to resolve the boundary issue. An issue that continues to be a drag on India’s sovereignty and territorial integrity.

Without getting much into the details of China’s invasion of Tibet and the subsequent developments, the author scrupulously adhered to underscoring the Chinese step-by-step negotiations of steadily escalating pressure on India to extract concessions. Having suffered the consequences of trusting without testing, India subsequently learned from some of its mistakes and successfully frustrated Chinese attempts to isolate India after the 1998 nuclear tests. Trouncing China at its own obtained a clean nuclear waiver too.

For China, party and state are the same and aligning with the party lines is paramount. Diplomats everywhere owe their allegiance to the country but the Chinese diplomats are agents of the party. Their diplomatic style is “theatrical” and sovereignty for them is a principle that cannot be sacrificed at any cost, says the author. The variant offshoots of ‘wolf warriors’ in just a shift. These ideologically oriented diplomats chosen for negotiations have always relied on past records and meetings with India.

New Delhi always harboured anxiety about the influence the Communist Party of China (CPC) wielded over the Indian left parties.  Nehru indeed, expressed his concerns regarding Indian Communists in two separate communications with Ambassador Panikkar and Ambassador Vijaya Lakshmi Pandit. Some analysts even believe that these fears have hustled India to grant recognition to China, a pariah state then. Though these apprehensions have an iota of truth to them, that can’t be an excuse for comprising on national interests.

The CPC had and continues to have a great influence on Communists across the world.  The Chinese used the left parties and left-leaning media to stir up hostility against the US by creating an illusion of strategic alignment with the US when India was close to signing the nuclear agreement. To scuttle the ‘Agreement for Cooperation Between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of India Concerning the Peaceful Uses of Nuclear Energy (known as 123 Agreement), instead of raising its concerns in a bilateral meeting, China manufactured a narrative of India’s goal of becoming an independent pole and its unwillingness to accept any binding agreement because it interfered with its strategic autonomy.

So, the reports, including the latest reports of the United States Intelligence Community warning about Chinese attempts to interfere in the 2024 US presidential elections aren’t a figment of imagination. Instead of confrontation, the modus operandi of China has been to sophisticatedly manipulate the discourse through interest groups operating in respective countries. The author also mentions eight organs that work in tandem in crafting narratives. China having mastered the art of operating in unorthodox ways dons the role of a puppet-master to build domestic pressure.

Unlike authoritarian China, democratic governments are expected to showcase outcomes. The Indian leadership faced a similar predicament in 2003. In a bid to score diplomatic points domestically, ahead of the elections, the Indian government acknowledged Tibet as a part of the PRC despite China’s not so explicit recognition of Sikkim as part of India. Drawing from this incident, the author urges India to overcome the pitfall of the compulsion of democracy. The book gives a peek into Chinese methods like –“intimidation, falsehood, victimhood, fear psychosis and exerting maximum pressure”. Reflecting on the India-China relations, a Chinese commentator, in the aftermath of the Chinese technical block on the listing of Masood Azhar in 2018 said, “China can obstruct India’s demands without paying nearly any price, or even need not give a special response”.

Atal Bihari Vajpayee on the eve of the 1998 nuclear testing remarked, “We can change our friends but not neighbours”, China being India’s largest neighbour is an undeniable reality. Hence it is incumbent on India to learn from the failures and miscalculations and prepare for the ‘Long Game’. The incisive insights from the book can serve as an invaluable guide for young and aspiring diplomats.

Written in simple English, the book caters to the inquisitiveness of strategic analysts as to what goes into these long-drawn negotiations, especially with China. The individual events chosen for the book besides demonstrating India’s gradual understanding of the Chinese psyche, explore the dynamics of negotiations. Expertly summing up Chinese diplomacy, the author says, “They are adept at generating feelings of gratitude in the opponent and in disguising their own feeling of guilt”. The book successfully deconstructs the myth of China as a “beautiful swan gliding on the placid surface of a lake in sylvan surroundings” and identifies the methods, tactics and tools used by the Chinese to make the adversary concede out of sheer frustration.

 

Pages: 180

Publishers: Penguin Random House India

@ Copyrights reserved.

Israelophobia: The Newest Version Of The Oldest Hatred & What To Do About It

Recently a meeting between Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and his Italian counterpart scheduled to be held at the Art Gallery of Ontario was cancelled due to blockades created by Palestinian protestors. Last month, security was beefed up at Toronto’s Mount Sinai Hospital, founded by the Jewish community after Palestinian protestors raising calls for ‘Intifada’ held demonstrations and tried to disrupt the medical services.

In the last week of February, Palestinian protestors gathered outside the Israeli Embassy in London and demanded the arrest of the Israeli ambassador over war crimes. Amid a sudden surge in pro-Palestinian protests across the UK, security officials have increased the threat level to that of 9/11. Prime Minister warned that the extremists are trying to “tear us apart” and called on the country to “beat this poison”¹. These protests aren’t just isolated instances of escalatory demonstrations. But these are accompanied by an alarming rise in antisemitic attacks.

Since the October 7^th Hamas terror attack on Israel, the Western world has been rocked by protests. The chants of “From River to Sea, Palestine will be free” rented the air.  Open calls for the obliteration of Israel situated between the Jordan Sea and Mediterranean Sea instead of inviting opprobrium and apprehension were feted as slogans of resistance and liberation.

Why is the right to exist, which is a universal right denied to Israel? Why is the call for the liquidation of Jews not repudiated and meted out without any vehemence? To answer these questions and more, Jake Wallis Simons has published a book- “Israelophobia: The Newest Version Of The Oldest Hatred & What To Do About It” in September 2023 ahead of the gruesome October 7^th Hamas terror attack on Israel. The event has quickly spiralled into a major crisis in the Middle East with no signs of a return to the status quo ante.

Often, a single act is what it takes to redefine the geopolitics. A case in point is the two World Wars and in contemporary times, it is the largest terror attack 9/11. It has divided the geopolitical landscape into- pre 9/11 era and post-9/11. Foreign policies, legislature, migration policies and security policies have changed drastically. The ongoing conflict between Israel-Hamas is certainly going to be a tipping point, in terms of how the Middle East will regroup and consolidate. The conflict besides amplifying the binaries gave a huge fillip to the Palestinian cause downplaying the terror aspect which is a potential threat to global security.

It is often said, ‘timing is everything’ and the book indeed rightly provides answers to the motivated, surprise terror attack by Hamas on Israel. The spectrum of responses of various countries to this carnage ranged from indifference to callous justification with some of them contending that Israel deserved it, unequivocally attests to the fact that ‘Israelophobia’ is not a figment of imagination. The widespread celebrations after the Israeli killings and the chilling conversations of Hamas terrorists bragging about their massacre with their parents affirm that the hatred is deeply entrenched. But what is more disturbing is the fact that a dislike for Israel has become a “non-negotiable ticket of entry into left discourse”.

In Medieval ages, Jews were hated for their religion and later it mutated into a dislike for the race or antisemitism. After the Holocaust and international condemnation, to be politically correct, antisemitism has transmogrified into anti-zionism. By conveniently shifting the target of hatred from race to country, the secular progressives are ducking the allegations and perpetrating an anti-Israel narrative.

Zionism is Israeli patriotism and stemmed from the desire of Jews for self-determination of their homeland who were driven out from their homeland around 598 BCE by various invaders and colonisers. Evidently, like every other country, Israel's patriotism is valid. Israel is a multi-racial, post-colonial state established legitimately under international law and not by deceit. But the hatred for the Jewish state or anti-Zionism remains the staple of the non-Israeli supporters.

Positioning anti-Zionism along with anti-racism and decolonization, a bigoted narrative suffused by misinformation propaganda and distortions has been established. This blind prejudice rejects Jewish entitlement to statehood, characterises Israel as the epitome of evil, questions its right to exist and justifies its annihilation. Since Israel shares liberal democratic values with Western countries like the US and the UK every attack on “Western history, value and culture often goes hand in hand with attacking the Jewish state”.

Currently, Israel is home to 2 million Arabs while the West Bank administered by the Palestinian Authority (PA) has driven away all Israelis, demolished their synagogues and defaced tombs. So motivated propaganda of the occupier or even oppressor would hold no ground. The exception is a few Orthodox settlers in the West Bank who stayed back to protect the graves of Abraham, Issac, Jacob their wives Sarah, Rebecca and Leah in the West Bank. However, the administrative issues of the so-called families of settlers are taken care of by the Israeli government.

On the other hand, over 50% of Arabs in Israel are granted citizenship and some of them occupy the highest positions like Supreme Court judges and are part of the political process as well.  But Israel still is labelled an apartheid state. So, the unsparing attacks against Israel under the guise of supporting Palestinian rights is nothing but blatant antisemitism.

Fighting the bogeyman of the Jewish state is among the popular causes of the left-leaning liberals. As a result, Israel Apartheid Week is popular across campuses even as millions of people suffer the atrocities by authoritarian regimes like Syria, China, Yemen, Libya, etc. Apartheid in the past was used to topple the South African regime and so the same strategy is activated against Israel. Though Israel was subjected to apartheid kind of discrimination, this tactic is employed since the pro-Palestine movement had failed to garner much support.

The dislike for Israel has become the tenor of the progressives who set the narrative ascribing negative connotations to Zionism as white supremacy and colonialism. The Black Lives Movement (BLM) has deemed Jews as White Oppression forces and #jewishprivilege trended during the BLM protests. Jews who suffered the worst form of genocide continue to be targets of hate crimes and are ironically castigated as a privileged race by progressive academicians.

The author notes that a not-for-profit black community group in Crown Heights contended that ‘Jewishness’ was a ‘form of almost hyper-whiteness’. In reality, only 20% of Jews are white and over half of the Jewish population in Israel are Middle Eastern or North African, the remaining have migrated from Asian countries including India and some of them have Caucasian features. So pitting Jews as white when whiteness carries negative association is bigotry.

Like any other country, Israel has its share of virtues and evils but the unusual scrutiny and the double standards set for it has a history to it. Israelophobia comprising of antisemitism and antizionism, is an intelligent word jugglery that has three characteristics. The author delves into details in respective chapters- Demonisation, Weaponisation and Falsification. Demonisation is smearing Israel as evil and as a threat to the world; Weaponisation is the use of the social justice movement as a Trojan horse for hatred of Jews and Israel and Falsification is an amplification of lies of the Nazi and Soviet propaganda.

Spread in six different chapters, the author has been uncharacteristically forthright in dissecting the cultist conviction of hatred for Jews. Israel has been the victim of the propaganda narrative of countries that wanted to settle scores with the West and dismantle the alliance of Allied countries during the World Wars. The insidious agenda spearheaded by the Nazis in collaboration with the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Hajj Amin al-Hussaini, the father of the Palestinian Arab National Movement was utilised to the hilt by the Soviet Union to bond with Arab allies.

Jake Wallis Simons, a seasoned journalist and novelist adopting an unhinged approach brings to light the lasting notoriety of bigoted tropes that continue to fuel Israelophobia. This unremitting coloured vision has for decades blockaded a permanent solution for the Israel-Palestine issue that continues to simmer and sow dissensions among the nations. The book also highlights the disproportionate influence of the progressive activists and their emergence as the ‘cultural gatekeepers’ and ‘opinion framers’. Under the garb of equality and social justice, they are redefining the values and concepts to suit their interests. Adept at cascading their views through every channel of communication, research conducted at Kings College London showed that these activists are six times more likely to reinforce their views on social influence than others.  

The big two takeaways from this book for India and especially Sanatanis are to factor in the incommensurate influence of the highly dogmatic and evangelical progressive activists and to be circumspect about the wordplay. The virtue signalling of condemning antisemitism is a farce. It continues to thrive under the banner of anti-zionism which is a norm in the bastions of progressives, on university campuses. Sanatanis would do themselves more good if they read antisemitism as ‘Hinduphobia’ and ‘Hindutva’ for anti-zionism. The Western bias towards Sanatana Dharma is not a secret anymore. “Dismantling Global Hindutva” conference was just a trailer. Jews are at the forefront of the Progressive Activists' propaganda. Sanatanis are next in line.

Deeply incisive and categorical, this book expertly demolishes prejudiced discourse, falsehood and double standards. Written in a conversational style, this highly engaging book makes for a quick read. This book is a must-read for every enthusiast who wants to understand the interplay of bigoted narratives, venomous extremist ideologies and the amplifying effect of disinformation literature suffused by undercover agents to capitalise on moral inversions for geopolitical gains.

 

Pages: 224

Publishers: Constable

@ Copyrights reserved.

 

Why Bharat Matters

India was and continues to be perceived through a foreign lens. With Indians unquestioningly subscribing to this vision, the Western definition of India dominated the worldview. Outlining the metamorphosis of India's foreign policy stratagem, former diplomat and India’s external affairs minister Dr Subramanyam Jaishankar in his first work, “The India Way: Strategies For An Uncertain World” expertly laid out India’s approach to tackle the global turbulences. His latest book, “Why Bharat Matters”, presents a strategic overview of India’s perspective on contemporary global challenges. Unabashedly crediting the Indian values, beliefs and the role of ethos in shaping India’s foreign policy, the book swiftly segues into the importance of foreign policy and its impact on our daily lives.

With over five decades of experience as a career diplomat and now leading the role the implementing foreign policy, the ideation of Jaishankar, a distillate of wisdom dissects the global vulnerabilities clinically. Adeptly integrating the role of domestic growth with the bigger picture he presents the larger canvas of the international scenario with an Indian perspective. While his first work dotted on the strategic acumen at play in Mahabharata, his current work competently extracts relevant episodes of Ramayana to interpret the foreign policy perspective. To a world, accustomed to generously drawing from Iliad’s Homer epithets, Jaishankar narrates about diplomatic geniuses like Hanuman, Angad and Tara of Ramayana in his book.

In the context of the need to cultivate awareness about competitors, Jaishankar draws from Rama’s encounters with various demons and the display of his capabilities in confrontation with Parashurama. Delving into the jostling of rising powers, he aptly refers to the competition between Sage Vasistha and King Kaushika (Vishwamitra) where the drive to push ahead is spurred by humiliation even though the former was at peace with himself. These ‘value-additions’ definitely sets the books apart in establishing a quick connection with Indic proclivities.

Comprising eleven engaging essays, the book encapsulates national interests, articulates India’s position and attempts to find solutions. Elucidating the five phenomena that have dominated the last couple of decades- globalisation, rebalancing, multipolarity, the impact of technology and games that nations play, Jaishankar also reminds rising powers like India of the tasks at hand. He underscores the importance of balancing amid the North-South divide and East-West dissensions and the importance of diplomacy.

Diplomacy, he calls is the “natural partner of defense as military confrontations end at conference table”. He says, “foreign policies and defense policies are joined at the hip” and advocates building capabilities and deterrence through multiple acquisitions from different countries. “Diplomacy supports, empowers and facilitates national security efforts”, he says and warns about the “separatism, violence, fundamentalism propagated from far-off destinations”. Implicitly hitting out at countries that downplay preaching of violence against others as not at odds with democratic rights, he favoured firmer diplomatic measures.

Lucidity, the hallmark of his oration is characteristically reflected in his writing style. The choice of words and crisp sentences evocatively sustain the import of his messaging. At the helm of the affairs, Jaishankar has lent a distinct sharpness to Indian foreign policy. His straight talk is mirrored in the book where he indicates, “Diplomacy has a responsibility of both shield and sword of polity”. Reinforcing the importance of effective foreign policy, he narrates how modern economies like Japan, Korea and China have used it to create new capacities at home through wide-ranging external interactions in obtaining technology, resources and best practices.

Under Modi, Jaishankar argues that India has embraced a mindset of using foreign policy as an instrument to accelerate national development, and modernisation by effectively wooing the world for best practices. Expounding that economic security and national security are deeply intertwined, the strategic clarity of the present government on various aspects has helped India to tide through the worst cataclysmic event of the millennium- Covid. Lauding India’s generous “Vaccine Maitri” which reached out to 150 organisations and 100 partner countries, he noted how the crisis has exposed countries like China and the West.

Contemplating the basics of diplomacy and its preeminence in a country’s destination, he recalls Nehruvian times when ideology took precedence. Reminding of the quixotic non-western solidarity and the price paid for the utopian “Asian togetherness” and “Asia for Asiatics”, Jaishankar reiterates the need for a confident leadership capable of incorporating systematic changes.

Recalling the fallouts of the complacent diplomacy and excessive trusting, Jaishankar alludes to threats from India’s adversaries- Pakistan and China. Lambasting the “ChiIndia” lobby that advocates for deepening ties with China, Jaishankar calls for a downgrade of the strategic partnership with China that fails to uphold mutuality- “mutual respect, mutual sensitivity, mutual interests”. While India and China subscribe to a multipolar world, there should be acceptance of multipolar Asia. China’s refusal to accept India’s rise, her priorities and interests has complicated the issue. Relations between countries should be reciprocal in nature, China’s inability to accommodate India and its inconsistencies has complicated the relationship.

Globalisation and technological revolution which erased distances creating interdependence and interpenetration have engendered unprecedented security challenges. Cautioning about these vulnerabilities, he believed that a nation like India must be vigilant given its potency of being wielded as “war by other means” through “radicalisation, violent extremism or even terrorism”. In the same breath, Jaishankar hits out at this burgeoning impact of “borderless politics” in “shaping narratives and argumentation, it seeks to legitimise and de-legitimise” and the willingness of external interests in aligning with the local elites in using “toolbox of influence and capability”. The only way to counter this bias given “free-pass from fact-checking” and replete with “selectivity of judgement” is to create our own narratives. Indicating, “sections of the world have their views, but we should not be intimidated from having a view on those views” and moans, “Swimming upstream is the karma of all rising powers”.

Discretely identifying the challenges, Jaishankar extols the leadership of Prime Minister Modi for conceptual clarity supplemented with strategic communication, determination, vision and perseverance to enhance global standing. Any leadership is judged based on the government’s response to the crisis and ensuring delivery. He credits Modi for pursuing national interests with responsibility for collective good and for giving primacy to national security.

Instead of restricting to a silo of foreign policy, Jaishankar presents an overview of the strategic course adopted by the Modi government including the integration of economic security with technological security. He showcases the achievements of Modi’s innovative diplomacy and its unfaltering commitment to seeking strength from Indian Civilisational values.  Clearly, the rationale of “Building Bharat is not a matter of falling back on our past, it is primarily about reimaging our future”.

The book has been vocal in constantly alerting the policymakers of the tendency to slip back into default complacency. Skirting away from casual implementation or downright neglect, he calls for an integrated governance process to bolster national security. Learning from the past, India must stop downplaying issues like cross-border terrorism and competitive geopolitics for it forestalls us to turn away from hard choices. As a scathing reminder of idealism-driven diplomacy, that came back to bite us hard even now, he derides the desire for acceptance, particularly from competitors.

Harping on the moot issue of why India’s rise matters- aside from India’s commitment to rule-based order, and Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), India is emerging as a consensus building in this highly fractured world. Home to one-sixth of humanity with 32 million diaspora spanning the world, India’s developmental partnership, a conscious policy of responding to the priorities and needs of partner countries is making a cognisable difference. As a democracy capable of delivering, India is refurbishing her credentials as a leading power in the making.

India, a civilisational state transitioning into a modern nation-state is “uniquely positioned to bridge modernity and tradition”. He contends, “It will be more impactful by embracing its heritage, not by diminishing it. A combination of cultural beliefs and modernising agenda helps address many current dilemmas. Its historical characteristics are a source of strength once they are approached with confidence…. Similarly, stronger nationalism at home exists traditionally with enthusiastic internationalism abroad. Rising India wants to engage the world more, not less. India matters when it is more authentically India”.

The depth of understanding and the realism of the foreign policy expounded in the book make it an endearing read for any person who is passionate about India’s rise. The book brilliantly turns the spotlight on the external interests, internal challenges, opportunities and anxieties associated with globalisation, the unremitting powerplay of competitors. This complex geopolitical web presents a narrow latitude of opportunity for a confident leadership to seize it and innovatively use it to pursue national interests.

“A more assured India is more expressive”. India matters because of its distinct characteristics. Above all, he concludes by saying- “With each passing day, it is becoming clearer that India matters because it is Bharat”.

Pages: 237

Publisher: Rupa Publications India

@ Copyrights reserved.

Greece Upbeat About Partnership with India

The Citizenry of one country, in particular, overwhelmingly congratulated when Bharat celebrated the grand reclamation of the Rama Janabhoomi.  Having legislated laws prioritising cultural restoration, India and Greece collectively share an intimate historical, cultural and civilisational linkage. While trade and exchange of wisdom integrally deepened the connections between the grand old sea-faring civilisational states. From this perspective, the Hellenic Republic is a natural ally and traditional friend of Bharat. Building on the strengths of these affinities, India and Greece, the resident powers of the Indian Ocean and Mediterranean Region began a new era galvanising bilateral engagement.

Reconnecting and reviving the cultural proclivities, PM Modi on his visit to Greece, the first by an Indian Prime Minister after 40 years, in August 2023, leaders of both countries have catapulted the relationship to a strategic orbit. Describing the bilateral partnership as a “a natural reunion” PM Modi reached out to Greece. Sustaining the same momentum and in line with India’s renewed focus on strategic outreach to the Eastern European Region, New Delhi has invited Greece Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis to deliver the inaugural lecture at the 9^th Raisina Dialogue 2024. This would be the third consecutive year of having a European Chief Guest at Raisina Dialogue. In 2023, Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni presided as Chief Guest and the year before India hosted European Commission President Ursula Von der Leyen.

PM Mitsotakis arrived in New Delhi on February 21 for a two-day state visit, the first visit by a Greece Prime Minister in 15 years. Accompanied by a high-level delegation including a 63-member strong Business contingent, PM Mitsotakis after the customary guard of honour held delegation-level and restricted talks with PM Modi. Affirming interest in expanding and enriching the strategic partnership, during the bilateral talks, leaders have identified areas of cooperation that can help reach the target of doubling the trade by 2030. The volume of India-Greece bilateral trade in 2022-23 is $2 billion.

To double the bilateral trade, countries have focussed on cooperation in pharmaceuticals, infrastructure development, ports, shipping, chemical industry, food and communication sectors, agriculture and tourism. To strengthen the platform of strategic partnership, leaders in August 2023 decided to establish an institutional mechanism for dialogue at the NSA level. Setting the stage for future cooperation and the upcoming Greece Prime Minister’s visit, the NSA of both countries met in New Delhi on February 8^th and identified avenues of cooperation for a futuristic partnership aligning with the shared vision of both countries¹.

Charting the course for enhanced bilateral cooperation, leaders recognised the potential of cooperation in space, nanotechnology, biotechnology, quantum computing, clean energy, renewable energy, e-governance, e-learning, upskilling in emerging technologies, start-up and innovation sectors.

The structural reforms of Mitsotakis have stabilised the Greek economy reeling under severe inflation and unemployment. Greece was under an economic meltdown and needed three mammoth bailouts to the tune of € 260 billion to prevent bankruptcy. Mitsotakis has catapulted the economy to investment grade now. Months into his second tenure, the Prime Minister has doubled down on his pro-business by facilitating a favourable business climate to accelerate the growth trajectory.

Keen on shoring up an economic partnership with India, tipped to become the third largest global economy, at the India-Greece Business Conclave held in Mumbai, PM Mitsotakis invited Indian businesses to seize opportunities in logistics, energy and supply chains. To facilitate the organised migration of Indian labour, Mitsotakis is expediting the early conclusion of the Migration and Mobility Partnership Agreement (MMPA). Greece is currently facing labour shortages in construction, hospitality and agriculture sectors and plans to harness Indian talent.

The maritime powers, India and Greece strategically located in geopolitically volatile regions encounter similar threats and challenges. In a bid to bolster national security capabilities countries have steadily cultivated interoperability through regular joint exercises. Taking it to the next level, countries expressed interest in advancing joint ventures in defence manufacturing. In his remarks to the media after the bilateral, PM Modi said, “New opportunities for co-production and co-development are being created in defence manufacturing in India, which can be beneficial for both countries. We have agreed to link defence industries of both the countries”².

India and Greece share the vision of a free and open and rules-based Mediterranean Sea and Indo-Pacific, which in fact, is an indirect dig at blatant incursions of Turkey and China respectively. Reinforcing the commitment to building partnerships in the Mediterranean Sea and Indo-Pacific region, Mitsotakis announced Greece’s decision to join India’s Indo-Pacific Ocean Initiative (IPOI).

In the face of unabated Red Sea attacks, safe and secure passage of trade has become the foremost challenge for both countries. Hence leaders emphasised the need for enhancing maritime connectivity along dedicated corridors under the India-Middle East- Europe Economic Corridor (IMEC) Partnership and also the air connectivity. Maritime connectivity is under the ambit of IMEC. Leaders encouraged the private sector to take the lead by starting direct flights between India and Greece to improve air connectivity.

Before embarking on India’s visit, Mitsotakis said, “India will find no better gateway to Europe than my country and for Greece, there is no better gateway to Asia than a close strategic relationship with India”³. Reiterating the same position, Mitsotakis in his interview with Times Now remarked, “And I think after Brexit, Indian companies are looking for a new anchor in Europe and Greece could very well play that role”⁴.

Greece is a gateway to Europe. China in 2008 bailed out Greece during the economic recession. China’s state-owned shipping company COSCO acquired the operational rights of Port Piraeus. Over the years, it steadily increased ownership stakes in the port by 67%. With Piraeus as an operating base, China expanded its footprint in Europe. Instructively, Indian private companies are actively engaged with Greek partners in port construction. These joint ventures can counter Chinese forays in the region.

Along with strong G2G partnerships, countries are promoting B2B engagements. A commendable outcome of the visit has been the finalisation of several MoUs and agreements in the private sector. These include- MoU between Raisina Dialogue and Delphi Forum; EuroBank and NPCI; bilateral dialogue on security issues; Enterprise Greece and CII; Enterprise Greece, FICCI and Athens Chamber of Commerce and Industry⁵.

Notwithstanding the Israel-Hamas conflict which has stalled the diplomatic normalisation and stonewalled the Abraham Accords, last week UAE firmed up the partnership on IMEC, especially in terms of putting in place a robust logistics infrastructure. Much to the dismay of the naysayers who presaged the eventual collapse of IMEC, it figured majorly in the bilateral discussions and Raisina Dialogue lecture.

Sanguine about IMEC, Mitsotakis remarked that India and Greece should persevere with the “peace project” and said, “The war in Gaza and turmoil in the Middle East is undoubtably destabilising but it does not undermine the powerful logic behind IMEC. Nor should it weaken our resolve to work towards realising it”. He added, “Groundbreaking projects like IMEC hold promise to supercharge connectivity between India, the growth economies of the Middle East and Europe. To India I say, Greece is your natural doorstep to Europe and beyond”⁶.

IMEC corridor posits as a viable connectivity alternate for the trade that has to pass through the region infested by pirates and state militia. IMEC bypasses the maritime route riddled with narrow straits and unsafe regions. It presents a viable option of rerouting the trade via a safe overground transport network passing through land borders. Deeply strained US-Iran relations have further exacerbated the already tenuous security challenges in the Middle East and augmented the need for reliable connectivity.

With India already in the advanced stage of FTA talks with the EU, a strategic partnership with Greece which controls the world’s largest merchant shipping fleet can be a huge boost to India’s economic aspirations. Also, Greece can play a significant role in India’s energy security given its significant reserves of oil and natural gas.

On the global challenges like the Ukraine war and the West Asia conflict, without making any direct references, countries believed that all “disputes and tensions should be resolved through dialogue and diplomacy”. Underscoring India’s rising international stature, Mitsotakis emphasised New Delhi’s role in addressing the ongoing conflicts, climate change, food and energy security and said, “For all these challenges, one thing is certain. In order for governments to tackle them, international partnerships and collective action are paramount. India has a critical role to play in this endeavour and we view India as one of the main pillars of stability and security in the broader region of Indo-Pacific”⁷.

Mitsotakis affirmed India’s call for the reformation of multilateral organisations and backed India’s candidature for the expanded UNSC. Both countries strongly condemned terrorism in all forms and manifestations. The Indo-Greek bilateral ties draw strength from the fact that countries support each other in their national interests. Greece adopts a principled approach towards J&K and firmly asserts India’s position. India strongly supports Greece on the Cyprus issue. To foster people-to-people ties, leaders encouraged cultural exchanges and contemplated educational partnerships between universities and think tanks of both countries. The leaders have also asserted the need to preserve the heritage of ancient linkages.

Referring to India as a “consensus builder” and “leading democracy of the Global South”, Mitsotakis hailed the Indian democratic system. Given her adherence to the rules-based system and preservation of democratic virtues, India is now slowly emerging as a pole whose voice now carries a lot of weight on the international stage. Amid the geopolitical volatilities and burgeoning global challenges, countries are looking forward to a reliable partnership like India.

Driven by civilisation links and contemporary strategic convergences, leaders have laid the ground for deepening partnerships. The short time frame of the high-level reciprocal visits hints at the urgency with which countries aspire to cement a stable partnership to serve as a bedrock amid uncertainties and massive geopolitical configurations. The mutually beneficial strategic partnership holds a promise of immense potential and the leaders must seize every opportunity.  

@ Copyrights reserved.