Dissecting Brussels Attacks

As yet another series of orchestrated bomb attacks ripped apart Brussels, the functional capital of European Union, the colossal terror network seems to have strengthened its footprint across the globe. The stranglehold of global terrorism which has inevitably paralyzed the Middle East of Asia and North Africa sapping their vitality and financial treasures is now spreading its tentacles to the West. The despicable rise of terrorism and its gradual metastasis has already claimed unimaginably high numbers of victims. The twin suicidal bomb attacks at the Zaventam airport during the busy morning hours at the airport and another explosion at the Maelbeek metro station (close to top notch European institutions) claimed 37 lives so far. The element of surprise associated with suicidal attacks wasn’t too obvious as terror strikes were anticipated to avenge the arrest of the prized cache, Salah Abdelslam, mastermind of 13/11 Paris attacks. Terror experts indicated that the attacks might be the handiwork of IS, whose central agenda has always been creating panic among the masses. On expected lines, IS soon claimed the responsibility of the attacks. Following the attacks, the city with one million population is shut down. Brussels has a unique distinction of being the Centre of European integration and by bringing the city to its knees, the terror elements unabashedly challenged the European identity. The terror attacks in a happening city raised serious doubts about the vulnerability and propensity of these iconic western cities.

Invariably, brutal terror strikes, especially those occurring in the west have become matter of intense debate. By now it has become increasingly clear that Western adventurism across the globe for larger strategic gains coupled with its uncanny alignment with extremist ideologues for resources propelled the rise in the terror outfits. Terrorism of late has evolved as a state policy of many players because of its low cost-benefit ratio. The cost of nurturing and patronizing a terror operative turns out to be negligible when compared to the economic and psychological damage inflicted on enemy countries. No other country can analyze and evaluate the extent of damage better than India which has been a victim of terror for several decades.

Coming to the current context of why Belgium? Experts unequivocally reprimanded Belgium for a slackened security surveillance but in reality it turns out that the country has been a safe den for terror outfits. A detailed study observed that Belgium has highest number Saudi sponsored Imams stationed in its mosques making it an epicenter of jihadism in Europe. Further a disproportionately large number of Belgian citizens travelled to Middle East to join the jihadi group than any other European country. Belgium a country of 11 million due to various reasons has been grappling with issues of ethnic and linguistic division making integration of immigrants more difficult. Split identities, discrimination too augured drifting of society. Moreover, the fractures continued to exist as the Belgian civic authorities like police, judicial system and intelligence agencies too fostered the fragmentation. Eventually poor immigrants failed to find work and assimilate in the society. Politicians have focused their attention on addressing issues along linguistic (Dutch vs French) and ethnic identities (Fleming, Walloon or Bruxellios) undermining the national problems. Further, the anti-immigrant policies advocated by the right-wing political parties pushed further pushed these groups into a dock. With relative ease in obtaining weapons cheaply, jihadism began to make deeper roots into the sub-urban regions like Molenbeek in Belgium. Molenbeek, a north-western suburb of Brussels has a large population of unemployed Muslims, isolated from the central authorities has become an ideal ground for indoctrination. It has become a protected shelter for nefarious activities with law enforcement agencies refusing to enter. Incidentally even the only living terror operative of the Paris attacks was arrested four days ago from Molenbeek raising serious doubts about the suburb. Besides it was also believed that the security agencies of Belgium are poorly staffed. Current attacks have shone light on the existence of Islamic extremism in Europe. Needless to say, the asinine European policies turned the region into a perfect breeding ground for Islamic fundamentalism. Another important aspect highlighted by increased propensity of Belgium to terrorism is that of integration.

While it is known fact that the north western border of Europe largely inhabited by immigrant Muslims is a fertile ground for anti-Semitic and anti-western Islamist ideologues, the areas were allowed to fester. Consequently the regions have become spring beds for discrimination, poor assimilation making them a cesspool for radicalization. Lack of political will and coordinated assimilation program has further exacerbated the situation. In part the exiguous socio-economic factors in these regions have promoted Islamic radicalisation which was facilitated by the unhindered financial and ideological support from the Middle East nation. The process of embracing the violence to bring about a change is highly disastrous. The invincible presence of the terror outfits on the social media is making the process of radicalization even more swift, unencumbered and enticing. All the countries with large proportion of unchannelized energies are at risk of being drawn into the cult of radicalization.

Presently Europe is going through a precarious phase of migrant influx. The open borders in Europe can present a formidable task for nabbing the terror operatives. Since the neighboring countries of Belgium already burdened by their problems of accommodating the refugees may for brief period consider clamping down the free movement of men. Moreover through border controls and checks may further help in tracking suspicious activities. But the key issue that needs serious contemplation is that of assimilation of refugees into Europe. While this is one facet of the current terror attacks, the open declaration of IS in which it claimed responsibility of Brussels attacks had warned all the countries part of US-led coalition of similar strikes. Undoubtedly while the current attack is a retaliatory strike, the larger question remains as how will the West overcome the hideous monstrosity of IS.

In this context, the deafening silence of the international community to the terrorist attacks in parts of World other than the west is humiliating. In the last fortnight IS struck twice in Turkey killing several innocent people. The brutal assault on the tourists in Ivory Coast hardly received any attention. Similarly the continuing air raids by the Saudi-led coalition on the poorest country of the Middle East, Yemen are completely ignored. March 15^th marked the completion of 5 years of Syrian war and still the war torn country finds hardly any reprieve. Needless to say, the terror strikes on India from across its western border continues to haunt Delhi. While the global nations continues to be raged by the menace of terrorism, it is highly unfortunate that a collective global action against terror failed to evolve as yet. Despite the grievous terror attacks on several countries, rich nations are busy taking sides to foster their strategic interests instead of annihilating the roots of the terror. Brussels attacks has once again necessitated the need for global intervention to check the burgeoning reign of terror.

 

@ Copyrights reserved.

Denial of visas to USCIRF team

USCIRF is in news of late since India has denied VISA to its officials for a six-date investigation about the state of religious freedom. The United States Commission of International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) in its annual report for the year 2015 placed India in a spiteful tier 2 category along with nine other countries. This independent US Federal government advisory body created under the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998 makes recommendations to the President, the Secretary of the State and the Congress. It documents the religious freedom violations in 33 nations and generates a report. All the developed nations, the US and Christian countries of West are excluded from its scrutiny. The body was basically created to appease the Christian bigots of the US and most of its commissioners are from non-Abrahamic faith.

Tier 2 designates all those “nations where violations engaged in or tolerated by the government are serious and are characterised by at least one of the elements of the systemic, ongoing and egregious standard but don’t fully meet the CPC (Countries of particular concern) standard.” India was placed in the watch list in 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2009 and 2010. Other nations in the Tier 2 category are: Afghanistan, Azerbaijan, Cuba, Indonesia, Kazakhstan, Laos, Malaysia, Russia and Turkey. It is worth mentioning that the countries under CPC remain relatively unchanged-Burma, China, Eritrea, Iran, North Korea, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan. The commission has recommended additional actions for promoting religious freedom in countries like- Central African Republic (first time entrant), Egypt, Iraq, Pakistan, Nigeria, Tajikistan, Syria and Vietnam. Tier 1 (CPC) otherwise called Tier 2 threshold includes- Bahrain, Bangladesh, Belarus, Cyprus, Kyrgyzstan and Sri Lanka. India instead of being touchy about any comment articulated by the Western World has loftily dismissed the report on the basis of “limited understanding of our constitution and our society”.  But this report provided fodder to media acolytes to rake up the issue of communal harmony by its swindling and partisan analysis.

As we delve into the origins of USCIRF, it reeks of the evangelical bigotry and consequently its outpourings can bear least significance. While all kind of moral policing and high branding of nations in the third world has become a free right for USCIRF it barely makes cognition of derogatory remarks made by its religious leaders. The offensive and repugnant remarks of its senators about other religious are blissfully ignored and obliterated off its purview of surveillance. Depending on countries prominence in US strategic foreign policy, countries which served as hotbeds for appalling atrocities are pardoned off. Hence it would be preposterous to expect disciplinary action against countries like Iran, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. Even nations like Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan which serve interests of US are exonerated of all charges. Our western neighbour Pakistan is bestowed with a special bounty, economic aids and modern weaponry for religiously making it to the list of CPC enabling it to interminably run the jihadi terror outfits.

USCIRF 2015 report implicates that campaign for 2014 elections sowed the seeds of religious polarisation causing a spurt in “religiously-motivated attacks” on minority communities. It claimed that incandescent statement of Hindu leaders has further augured the religious-divisiveness. Report says that Christian leaders expressed concerns about the future of their community in the Indian states where Freedom of Religion (FoR) or Anti Conversion law is enforced. Truly, the issue is of grave concern since the unabated evangelisation is checkmated by this law. States like Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Himachal Pradesh, Gujarat, Arunachal Pradesh, Odhisha having high population of tribal have strictly enacted this act to curtail the attempts made by the evangelical lobby that coverts people enmasse by force, fraud or inducement. The huge sections of vulnerable people in India make it a lucrative breeding ground for proselytization. Indeed Indian evangelical lobby is one of the heavily funded unit. Despite the commission’s serious objections to the existence of FoR in India, US can ill afford to snap ties with New Delhi as India is a potential counter-balance to China in this region. It alleges that existence of “a climate of impunity” in India is escalating the social and religious tensions in India. The report raised tirade against the gharwapsi program.

Interestingly, USCIRF has problem with both the Freedom of Religion Act (FoR) implemented in certain Indian States and gharwapsi which is a reconversion program. Opposing both these programs simultaneously is beyond comprehension since FoR prevents religious conversion and ensures freedom of religion. It alleges that Indian approach is one-sided. Finally it rubbed a pinch of salt into report by bringing in remarks made by President Obama on in January 2015 visit that country shouldn’t be “splintered along the lines of religious faith”. In short, the commission has been baying for Modi’s blood since 2002 Gujarat riots and irrespective of the ground realities, the report has been very critical of India. USCRIF vociferously maintained that Modi be denied entry to US in the aftermath of 2002 Gujarat riots and steadily upheld the stance till 2013. In 2013, USCIRF commissioner in an interview announced that Modi’s shouldn’t be allowed to enter US even he becomes Prime Minister of USCIRF. But after Modi was elected as Prime Minister with thumping majority, denial of entry into US held no sway and USCIRF had to concede.

Like an Ostrich whose head is buried in muck of intolerance, the USCIRF is busy pointing fingers at the pluralistic status of India and for gross neglect of minorities. A couple of days ago in Washington a naked man, wielding a ceremonial sword desecrated sacred items of a gurudwara. Last year, Baltimore became hot bed for protests and rioting over the mysterious death of a black youth in police custody. The state reeled under the burden of a week-long night curfew following the riots. Over the last few years there is increase in incidence of vandalizing Hindu temples and Gurudwaras. The attack on an Indian grandfather in Alabama too reflected the intolerance of US which is above such surveillance ordained for third world countries.

The situation in Europe, which is beyond any scrutiny is no better. There has been considerable rise in right-wing parties promoting marked intolerance towards foreigners. In fact France banned use of hijab or veil or other religious symbols in public places reinstating their conservative approach. The latest internal churning in the continent of Europe following the influx of refugees has become fresh breeding ground for hate crimes. USCRIF, which holds the mantle of upholding religious freedom hardly raised any mention of these aspects brewing in the West. But all these instances don’t make India a land true to paradigm of secularism.

According to some insiders, people openly remarked that the prime objective of USCIRF is to “name and shame a country”. Religious intolerance and bigotry has been trademark of USCIRF and its double speak is clearly reflected in its vehement objection for gay marriages and abortion. Indeed one of the USCIRF commissioner’s is chief campaigner of anti-gay marriages in Indiana. USCIRF in a bid to enforce its agenda is strong advocating inclusion of issues related to religious freedom in strategic dialogue framework and urging the central government to press Indian states to repeal anti-conversion laws. This duplicitous recommendations of the commission clearly blows the lid off its reviling intentions.

Indictment of India as being intolerant by USCIRF rises more suspicion as Home Ministry cracked down nearly 9000 NGO’s that received funds from the overseas entities for infringing certain provisions of the Foreign Contributions Regulations Act (FCRA). These include some US based organisations with dubious evangelical connections funding NGO’s engaged in activities that compromise on the national security. Ford Foundation is one such institution under watch list for diverting funds to such alleged activities. US has been the front runner in raising tirade of religious intolerance in India. Intriguingly while 34 US lawmakers wrote to Minister of External Affairs expressing their concerns towards growing religious intolerance in India, they utterly failed to rein in on a Presidential nominee, Donald Trump from making outlandish statements.   

While the targeted killings of Shias and other minorities in Pakistan are officially pardoned and rewarded monetarily, the ruthless executions of Saudi Arabia escaped admonitions, India is unduly hounded on the global platform for religious violations. For all the hue and cry, USCIRF weren’t denied visas for the first time, New Delhi has refused visas to the commission twice earlier. The current regime simply followed the stance of the previous governments. Indian government defended its stand by questioning the locus standi of the commission for interfering in the domestic affairs of constitutionally secular nation. Barring occasional aberrations of religious violations, by and large India commands a respectable position in the international community. It is puzzling as why the commission hasn’t made a big issue about visa denial all these years and raised serious doubts about its intentions of portraying the BJP-led government in a wrong vein. The reports produced by USCIRF so far have exposed the hypocritical attitude of the US and India consistently rejected its claims. Its study has been based on versions of hand-picked individuals and are largely aimed at implicating the majority for any spurious religious violations whatsoever. Its overwhelming fears about the religious freedom of minorities is an exaggeration embellished with partisan mockery. Moreover, USCRIF is a US government organization unlike international agency like the UN which is mandated to evaluate any situation. Any sovereign country has a right to deny or allow access to such bodies for scrutiny or assessment.

There is no denying that India is facing the brunt of religious and sectarian violence. It is high time that government contemplates stringent action against those convicted of such treacherous action. India with its humongous diversity should adopt a holistic approach in enforcing the concept of secularism in true sense. Further, it is essential to rein in on the motor mouths that threaten to thwart the communal harmony and peace. By and large it would be nonsensical to judge the credentials of a secular country based on a report formulated by a body whose termination has been periodically extended through amendments on regular basis to pamper its elitist religious bodies. 

 

@ Copyrights reserved.

Raisina Dialogue: India Unleashing Soft Power

In a sharp departure from the decade long UPA regime where India narrowed its identity by a self-imposed isolationism, Modi government realized India’s inevitable engagement with the Asian realm. NDA regime exuded enthusiasm to engage with the World. To provide momentum to the raising economic stature of India and to explore the opportunities and challenges for the region, India has unveiled its first ever massive flagship conference on ‘geopolitics’ and ‘geoeconomics’, the Raisina Dialogue. Indian conclave is believed to be organized on similar lines as Shangri-La Dialogue conducted by the International Institute of Strategic Studies (IISS), a UK based think-tank and funded by Singaporean government. The conference derives its name from Raisina Hills, an elevated region on which lies India’s Presidential Palace Rashtrapati Bhavan and the seat of Central government. The inaugural session of the three-day long conference from March 1^st through March 3^rd was launched by the Minister for External Affairs Sushma Swaraj and attended by political luminaries of South Asia. This global conclave was jointly organized by the Ministry of External Affairs and the Indian think-tank Observer Research Foundation (ORF) hosting over 100 distinguished speakers from over 35 countries. This conclave was aimed at catalyzing debates that shape progress of India & Asia and aims to work towards Asian integration and Asia’s integration with the World.

At the inaugural session of Raisina Dialogue, Sushma Swaraj reiterated India’s renewed interest in promoting connectivity –physical, economic and strategic in a bid to enhance its economic efficiency. She underscored India’s efforts in sustaining the momentum of cooperation in South Asia through SAARC and informed about India’s efforts in building sub-regional connectivity initiatives like BBIN, (Bangladesh Bhutan India and Nepal). She emphasized on the urgent need to contain the menace of burgeoning terrorism and was critical of its impact on the economic development. Hamid Karzai, former President of Afghanistan and Chandrika Kumaratunga during their address made a scathing remarks on Pakistan’s interventionist approach of blocking India’s access to Afghanistan, Central Asia and Russia and prevailing trust deficit between India and Pakistan preventing integration and growth of South Asia respectively.  Admiral Harris Harry of US has pitched for a quadrilateral security dialogue between India-Japan-Australia and US. Bangladesh’s former foreign secretary termed that South Asia region is least connected and anticipated for more regional and sub-regional cooperation. Former Seychelles President James Mancham stressed on the greater need for working together in Asia for development of the people.

Asia, the largest continent on the planet, is far-flung, dynamically active and extremely diverse. It is home to some of the oldest civilizations too. While the concept of Asian integration and India’s attempts to integrate with it are not novel, the trajectory of Indian engagement with the Asia have witnessed several highs and lows. Eventually the new found enthusiasm to integrate and enhance its engagement with Asia and the World beyond led to launch of Raisina Dialogue. The idea of Pan-Asianism was first propounded by Japan which propagated and nurtured this concept to foster its imperialist interests. Later to consolidate its authority over the new territories it reinforced the paradigm ‘Asia for Asians’ and resented the European Colonialism. But towards the mid-20^th century, the anti-colonial protests of the Asian countries brought them together and they reconnected well culminating in upsurge of the Non-Alignment Movement (NAM). The solidarity among the Asian nations under the banner of NAM was further strengthened at the Asian Relations Conference in 1947 and Afro-Asian Conference at Bandung 1955. Jawaharlal Nehru, nurtured the idea of Asian Federation. But the harmony of the Asian countries was soon lacerated by inter and intra state disputes and aggravated by Cold war geopolitics. In the meanwhile, embracing the tested western mechanisms, Asia’s economic tigers sculpted a new frontier of economic progression, soon emulated by China and India. China by the virtue of three decade long financial reforms has emerged as a new financial power toppling Japan as the second largest economy. India too slowly climbed the economic trajectory. Incidentally the chronology of changes occurring in India and China are believed to have a greater impact on Asia because of their sheer numbers. These countries are rallied as the emerging nations of Asia and are projected to play greater role in building and integration of Asia.

These resurgent Asian nations emerged as forerunners by carving a special conglomeration, Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) for rejuvenated regional and economic integration. For enhanced political engagement new platforms propped up, these include ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF), East Asia Summit (EAS) and Conference on Interaction and Confidence building in Asia (CICA). Along similar lines, India developed a sterling example of regional cooperation in South-Asian region by instituting South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC).  

Aside the regional cooperation, Asian countries soon realized the imminent need for deepening economic cooperation whereby ASEAN is now promoting Regional Comprehensive Economic Cooperation (RCEP) with India, China, Australia, Japan, Korea and New Zealand. Similarly some ASEAN countries and others with US consolidated trade agreement Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP). Flourishing Chinese economy has grossly impacted the geopolitical and geo-economic architecture of Asia.  With aggressive leadership at Beijing ambitiously pursuing One Belt One Road (OBOR) and Maritime Silk Route (MSR) in pursuit of new markets for its superfluous production and to expand its foot print, the infrastructure connectivity of Asia is now witnessing a sea-change. Besides these China is actively pursuing other initiatives like the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), Bangladesh-China-India-Myanmar (BCIM) connectivity project and China-Mongolia-Russia Corridor. To fund its humongous infrastructure building spree, to challenge the Western hegemony and to signal the emergence of new super power, China began establishing new financial institutions like Asia Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB), New Development Bank with BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India and South Africa) nations. Now it is contemplating a Free Trade Area of Asia-Pacific. Intriguingly, the growth motors instead of cultivating solidarity among nations in Asia began to spark conflict and power rivalry. The steady rise of China is now marred by shifting of balance of power from the West to Asia. Now within Asia, undeterred aggressive maritime aspirations of China in South China Sea, East China Sea have worsened maritime territorial disputes between China and its immediate neighbors and sharpened the Sino-Japanese rivalry. Now China began endorsing its hegemony over Asia and started expounding the theme of Asia for Asians. Small nations wary of China are now running to US for support.

During the course of history, India’s connectivity with Asia and the World beyond ranged from the best to worst. Under the colonial rule, India has turned into a global supplier of raw material and finished goods to various countries across the globe. The unimpeded movement of men and material was facilitated by a robust infrastructure connectivity which included roads, rail and ports. Matters worsened for the Indian sub-continent after partition when both Indian economy and connectivity suffered. The situation was exacerbated by border conflicts with Pakistan and China which ended up in wars. By late 1980’s India was reduced to a subsistence economy, the grievous state of economy was resurrected by financial reforms of 1991. While the financial status showed a marked recovery during the past two decades, India is now keen on expanding financial and trade connectivity. To bring prosperity to country through meaningful engagement with various global players Indian leadership has unveiled Raisina Dialogue to address the domestic problems through foreign policy. To this end, Indian priorities are improving connectivity and boosting economic efficiency. Modi government laid special emphasis on regional connectivity and strengthening of engagement with immediate neighborhood. Modi significantly infused a new hope and enthusiasm in SAARC, created in 1985 and thriving to realize its full potential. India has also created an economic confederation Bay of Bengal Initiative for Multisectoral Technical and Economic Cooperation (BIMSTEC). But unfortunately India’s ambitions of expanding physical connectivity with SAARC region are stalled by the impervious approach of Pakistan. To surmount this tumbling block India is now pushing BIMSTEC to further its trade interests in the Bay of Bengal region. China is miles ahead in terms of its efforts and initiatives in integrating with Asia. It assiduously attempted to further its interests through Shangri-La Dialogue, initiated in 2002. While it remained as a mild affair in the beginning, the platform started to gain momentum with heads of states addressing the conclave and military chiefs of the countries meeting along its sidelines. It acted like track one inter-governmental security forum for 28 Asia-Pacific countries. This soon turned into a perfect platform for military diplomacy. Shangri-La Dialogue is functionally similar to Munich Security Conference (1963). It is soon acclaimed as the Davos of International Security. In 2009, a similar programme Halifax International Security Fund was conceived which has 40 member states. Since 2007 China has been sending its top brass for the annual meet of Shangri-La and has been unabashedly engaging with member countries in bilateral/security dialogue

Despite being part of various global conclave, Indian growth story failed to enthuse global stake holders due to absence of a global platform that can project India’s interests and global aspirations. The genesis of this global conclave is a culmination of shared objectives of Indian political leadership, intellectuals and the executive to project the unique Indian dimension to the World.  The initiative stemmed from India’s desire to shape global conversations, veneer new trajectories and trudge ahead to carve a dynamic world by engaging the like-minded stake holders.  The theme of the inaugural session is Connecting Asia with an integral emphasis on physical, economic, digital and strategic connectivity. 21^st century is dubbed Asian century and to cherish this dream an effective engagement between various countries of the World with Asia and of Asia with World is essential. Unlike Europe wherein institutionalized mechanisms ensure cogent integration facilitate its working as strong functional entity, Asia is enormously diverse continent necessitating the need for integration. This conclave attempts to foster India’s connectivity with the region, Asian continent and with the World as such. By all means, through Raisina Dialogue, India made a humble beginning to reassert its position as dynamic power.

 

@ Copyrights reserved.

International Fleet Review: A Diplomatic Frontier

International Fleet Review (IFR) at Visakhapatnam from Feb 4^th- 8^th drew international attention for enthusiastic participation of World Navies. Fleet review has been an old maritime tradition where the head of the state would review the naval fleet. The provenance associated with the British was emulated by India with the first one being organized in 1953. So far 11 fleet reviews were held and the recently concluded second edition of IFR at Visakhapatnam generated a renewed sense of euphoria both in Indian public and international community. India hosted 29 countries during the first IFR held at Mumbai in 2001. The second edition conducted by the Eastern seaboard was a grand visual spectacle with ships from over 50 countries performing awe-inspiring orchestrated feats in tandem. Of the 100 naval vessels, 71 were from Indian Navy (37 indigenously-built), 24 warships of foreign countries and ships from Coast Guard, Merchant Navy and Survey vessels enlivened the majestic fleet review. Indian fleet reviews occurs once during the tenure of a president. Fleet reviews in general connotes battle readiness and symbolizes nation’s maritime strength. Ideally during IFR, the host country would display its maritime capabilities and attempts to build ‘bridges of friendship’ with other maritime nations (1).

IFR symbolizes India’s new salience and signals advent of new era in maritime diplomacy. The event eventually boosted India’s role as a net security provider in the Indian Ocean Region. Under Modi India has displayed a renewed enthusiasm to reconnect with the world. Purging off self-imposed isolationism, India now aspires to occupy a distinguished place in the regional and global missions. Till now, India as a front runner in disaster management, rescue and humanitarian crisis won laurels from various countries. With the official theme IFR, United through Oceans, India intends to foster regional stability, multilateral collaboration and interoperability through good will and trust. IFR 2016 was reviewed by the supreme commander of armed forces the President. President after the traditional 21-gun salute and the ceremonial guard of honor embarking on the Presidential yacht INS Sumitra reviewed various formations of naval vessels. Major highlights of the display included a fly-past that had 15 formations of 45 aircrafts and the ethereal presence of prestigious aircraft carriers INS Vikramaditya, latest acquisition from Russia and the oldest carrier INS Viraat.

Maritime power includes two major aspects: maritime cooperation between coastal navies and defending maritime domain. Seas are the arteries of global trade and currently over 90% of global trade occurs through seas. Aptly so, 21^st century is referred to as Century of seas highlighting the enormity of maritime domain. India has become world’s Centre of gravity in maritime domain since 66% of World’s oil, 50% of world’s container traffic and 33% of world’s cargo pass through the Indian Ocean Region (IOR). Nearly 80% of the trade that emanates from this region moves to Pacific and Atlantic Oceans. Any obstruction in this region will have spiraling consequences on the global economies too. Interestingly unlike the aerial space where nations have a sovereign right, oceans are not under any sovereign rule except for territorial waters. While operating in Global commons (trade flowing from once Ocean to another) aspects like safety, security and stability will be collective responsibility of all the coastal navies. Naval cooperation is integral aspect of global peace as operating on seas demands cooperation and collaborative approach. India at the helm of the Indian Ocean Region has an immense role in harnessing the naval cooperation to ensure that global commons are safe and secure.Hence navies must have comprehensive maritime domain awareness to adequately protect individual maritime interests.

India being a vital stakeholder with 90% of the trade operating through seas, constantly monitors the deployments of other navies closely. With a huge coast line of 7615km, several island territories and an exclusive economic zone of over 2 million sq kms India needs a strong navy to defend its maritime domain. To protect its vital maritime interests, India has congenial relations with all its IOR littoral states. In fact, India regularly holds friendly naval exercises with several big and small nations frequently to strengthen maritime cooperation. Core aspects of maritime cooperation are capacity building and capacity enhancement.

History is replete with chronicles where great powers endowed with an extravagant fleet of ships exercised global control. Congruently we are currently witnessing intense competition between reigning super power and the emerging superpower to develop robust blue water navies. Lately, rampant maritime terrorism an offshoot of asymmetric warfare, has been a grave threat. Thankfully, collaborative efforts of global navies effectively curtailed the nefarious operation of the pirates operating in the international waters. In a unique display of naval cooperation, undeterred by border disputes Indian and Chinese Navy have been working together since 2008 to warding off pirates threat in the Indian Ocean. Simultaneously, defending maritime domains in contemporary times has become extremely onerous. India paid a heavy price for a lapse in coastal surveillance when infiltrators managed to enter Indian Territory through water and launched the clandestine 26/11 attacks. Post Mumbai attacks Indian navy reoriented its focus on anti-terrorism strategy by integrating 16 different agencies working in the coastal waters and by leveraging technology. Earlier seas were relatively benign but nowadays any innocuous boat can pose threat. Hence safe guarding the frontiers is very crucial. The frequent interception of foreign boats in Indian waters has been a regular feature and last year, one Pakistani boat allegedly infiltrating India’s maritime domain was blown away to avert insidious attacks.

Currently international waters have become regions of intense rivalry. The Freedom of Navigation exercise by US in South China Sea, aggressive nine-dashed line policy of China and its unabated artificial island building activity insinuated conflicts between the nations in the region. The proactive Chinese aggression in the East China Sea, reignited conflict between China and Japan. Consequently, China was excluded from Japan’s IFR at Sagami Bay. Interestingly, under the semblance of expanding connectivity, China’s dubious penetration making new forays as per One Belt One Road (OBOR) and Maritime Silk Route (MSR) initiatives into IOR fuelled tensions. The panoply of naval bases built by China encircling India pumping in huge investments with it submarines docking at Hambantota port of Sri Lanka has been a major security concern for India. Perturbing strategic maritime expansion of China in IOR is witnessing a constant jostle for power between the two countries. Despite formidable provocations, by China in the spirit of new maritime strategy launched in October 2015 (Freedom to use the Seas: India’s maritime military strategy 2007 is replaced with Ensuring Secure Seas: Indian Maritime Security Strategy 2015) extended invitation to China to join IFR.

Intriguingly, recent geopolitical maneuvers too are auguring more suspicion, uncertainty and contempt. According to some reports, a Chinese submarine was spotted in international waters near Port Blair. The Chinese flotilla, deployed for anti-piracy mission off the coast of Africa included a submarine, guided missile frigates (Type Jiangkai-II Class frigates PLAN Liuzhou and PLAN Sanya and a comprehensive supply ship Qinghaihu (2). The flotilla which is returning to China after four months of surveillance after participating in the joint naval exercises with Pakistan in Arabian Sea and later docked into Sri Lankan port meandered into Indian waters. Soon Indian Navy deployed an anti-submarine warfare capable Boeing P-8I to search for the suspected intrusion. Coincidentally during the same period Indian air craft carrier INS Vikramaditya was dispatched to Sri Lankan port on an official mission. Interestingly the Chinese frigates that lurked in strategic Andaman Nicobar region participated in the IFR. While China has been a calumny aggressor, it is highly suspicious of any joint naval exercises in its sphere of influence. Consequently, China is miffed over Indian maritime interests in Western Pacific. INS Sahyadri participated in the Japanese Fleet Review in Oct 2015 and later it visited Na Trang in Vietnam. India generous inclusion of Japan in the annual naval exercise Malabar and in the first India-Australia naval exercise (AUSINDEX) irked China. With IFR, India rightly picked up an opportunity of extending a hand of friendship and good will to China and invited Chinese Navy for IFR. India has even reached out to Pakistan but Islamabad’s unfavorable diplomatic handling resulted in a no-show.

 Another core aspect of the IFR 2016 was to demonstrate the meticulous achievements of indigenization and also to promote the Make in India campaign. To reflect on the progress made by Naval and its allied scientific partners, indigenously built INS Kadmatt, the anti-submarine warfare corvette built in Kolkata was proudly displayed. Prime Minister Modi aptly chose the occasion to reiterate that Indian Ocean region remains New Delhi’s first priority. He drew attention to the new maritime approach, SAGAR –Security and Growth for all in the Region where India aims to revitalize its economy with a renewed focus on tapping the marine potential or working towards transforming India through blue economy. A compendium tabulating the great maritime heritage of India titled Maritime Heritage of India and in Hindi Hamari Samudri Virasat was released by Prime Minister at IFR. IFR gave a new fillip to the biannual naval exercise Milan, hosted by Indian Navy at Port Blair (participated by 14 countries of Asia-Pacific region) and the Indian Ocean Symposium (IONS) (initiative seeking greater maritime cooperation among the littoral states of IOR and includes 35 countries).

Despite commendable achievements to its account, dwindling strength of submarines has been cause of major concern for Indian Navy. While effective steps are taken to address this grievous situation by expediting modernization, indigenization, acquisition of modern equipment by all accounts, strategists still believe that Indian Navy doesn’t receive requisite emoluments needed to build a robust blue water navy. With geopolitics reaching a hilt, India with its formidable coastline has to indeed invest more to secure its maritime boundaries. India must now seriously reorient defence strategies to checkmate its belligerent neighbors by making best use of its strategic geographic location and the lucrative sea coast.

Visakhapatnam which was devastated by the Cyclone Hudhud 14 months ago was bestowed with the honor of hosting the International Fleet Review for various reasons. Bay of Bengal is the largest bay in the World and the depths of the waters at Visakhapatnam allows warships to come closer to the shore. India is now increasingly conscious of its responsibility as a formidable power to forge strategic alliances with other partners in the region. Indian Navy After 26/11 Navy revamped its maritime security architecture (MSA) and acquired the rare acumen of translating its vision into action.

 

@ Copyrights reserved.

Deconstructing US-Pakistan relations: An Indian Perspective

Despite India’s strong reaction, US has steadfastly defended its decision of selling eight F-16 aircrafts to Pakistan. In the meanwhile, Dana Rohrabacher introduced a resolution in the House of Representatives to block the sale of the aircrafts to Pakistan. Pakistan claims that F-16 would help in counter-terrorism operations and will promote regional stability.  Currently Sartaz Aziz, Pakistani adviser on foreign affairs is in Washington for the sixth Ministerial Level US-Pakistan Strategic Dialogue with John Kerry. With US leadership upholding the decision of sale of F-16s to Pakistan, Aziz reiterated that F-16s will help not only Pakistan in carrying out counter-terrorism operatives but would promote regional stability. It is widely believed that despite disapproval of Congressmen, it will not be impossible for US leadership to go ahead. In light of present scenario it would be incumbent on India to deconstruct the US foreign policy towards Pakistan. Indo-US watchers critically opine that Indian strategists by and large failed to interpret US policies in a logistical way. While some believe that by far Pakistan successfully managed to hoodwink Washington and effectively milked it for own ends. Others rally that Washington has de-hyphenated its relations with India and Pakistan since 1990s.

As illustrated by Zorawar Daulet Singh, US didn’t de-hyphenate its relations with India and Pakistan. Rather India has consciously de-hyphenated its relations with US by passionately ignoring Washington’s disposition with Pakistan. During the Cold war regime the US was keen on extending its power across the globe. Even UK was enamored to build better relations with Pakistan over India with UK proclaiming to remain close and friendly with Pakistan. Britain reiterated that it wouldn’t hesitate “to avoid any action which might weaken these relations”.  In the aftermath of partition when India was battling critical refugee exodus from East Pakistan, the western powers, US and UK despite their divergent policies towards South Asia favored Pakistan. Amidst threat of heightened hostilities, in 1950 US diplomatic arm strongly viewed that Pakistan would be an ideal candidate to foster its larger geopolitical interests in Asia. Further Pakistan’s repeated pleas for military assistance and Washington’s anxiety to portray themselves as neither Pro-Indian nor anti-Muslim consolidated US’s official drift towards Islamabad. Subsequently, US tried to strengthen Pakistan’s view point on Kashmir at UNSC. Categorized as a middle power, bilateral relations with India were deliberately undermined owing to Delhi’s unflinching commitment to remain independent (non-aligned).

The West largely believed that maintaining solidarity with India burdened by internal and external hostilities would be rather improbable. Further they construed Indian policies towards accession of Princely states after independence and its defiant attitude towards Kashmir as traits of imperialism and if unchecked might become another Japan. To maintain a balance of power in South Asia, they propped-up Pakistan. US state department minutes of 1949, shortly after Jawaharlal Nehru’s visit to US noted that, “national traits if not controlled could make India Japan’s successor in Asiatic imperialism. In such circumstances, a strong Muslim–bloc under the leadership of the Pakistan, favorable to US might offer desirable balance of power in South Asia”. Subsequent American leadership too have been highly critical of India and even berated India’s independence as largely undeserved. Richard Nixon, Henry Kissinger unabashedly pronounced their inimical opinions regarding India.

US’s penchant for Pakistan stems from its profound keenness to shape the balance of power in South Asia. Pakistan, in effect served as a launch pad, wherein US not only made forays into subcontinent but also secured safe access to facilities and bases to contain Soviet Union. In turn, US ensured that Pakistan had all the sophisticated weaponry and equipment to take on India in a direct combat. Robert Komer in 1966 cabled to Lyndon Johnson: “We have built up Pakistan’s own independent position and sinews- to the tune of almost $5billion in support. We have protected Pakistan from India”.

India’s assertions to be independent from the beginning was incongruent with the US’s foreign policy which relies fundamentally on maintaining balance of power in a region. As per the dictums of its calibrated geopolitical strategy, US intended to neutralize an independent middle-power (India) and tried to maintain the balance by aligning with Pakistan. By and large, Indian strategists logically failed to deconstruct US foreign policy towards India. The underlying conjecture that prompted Indo-US civil nuclear agreement were unencrypted. By late 1990’s when India’s rise became imminent, US aspired to reshape, the contours of India’s regional and global roles and also wanted to quash India’s concerns of US’s Pakistan policy. Nuclear agreement was in fact a bait to deflect Indian concerns and fears of US’s Pakistan policy. Moreover, after the collapse of Soviet Union, US’s resolve of reigning as supreme global power became more preponderant. US envisioned that India with its significant landmass and economic reliance post 91 reforms had the needed potential to be a significant regional player. Under the ruse of strategic congruence and to checkmate the nuclear aspirations of New Delhi, Washington harped on the nuclear agreement. Simultaneously, it aptly, chose the occasion to follow up its decision of delivering F-16s to Pakistan. The uninterrupted logical flow of aids despite the 9/11 testimonies the “unalterable” stance of US. Since 2001, nearly $31 billion were pumped into Pakistan by US of which $17 billion were diverted to buttressing Islamabad’s military capabilities.

Over the past six decades, US has hardly changed its geopolitical strategy, rather India re-oriented its policy framework. Even now despite obfuscations, detractions, calumny and serious U-turns Pakistan occupies pivotal place in US’s foreign policy stratagem. In spite of India’s strong reaction and severe opposition from US congress men, Washington is all set to deliver eight F-16’s worth $700 million. By far, Pakistan, a major non-NATO ally of US remains it largest benefactor. The Quadrilateral Consultative Group constituted by the US with Pakistan and China ignoring India to restore peace in Afghanistan stands as a latest testimony to US’s obstinate obsession for Pakistan.

The list of the nefarious activities of Pakistan shrouded under patronage of the US have hardly affected its policy. The genesis of Pakistan from India was on religious lines and over the years, it mobilized anti-India jihadi forces by projecting India as a Hindu nation. The Kashmir issue is symptom of the larger malaise that afflicted Pakistan. Pakistan by seeking parity with India fleeced resources from US. It tacitly lured China to its ambit by gifting 1942 sq km of Pok along the Indo-China border and by stealthily handed over the prized secret designs of the latest weaponry gifted by the US. In return China fast tracked nuclear facilities in Pakistan and gifted it a nuclear weapon. In the meanwhile, Pakistan under the guise of assisting US in fighting Soviet Union in Afghanistan promoted its own agenda of creating terror outfits which later attacked the US. Despite the double-cross, deceit, calumny and multiple casuistries, US leadership had supported Pakistan. In fact, President Ronald Regan intervened to prevent the prosecution of A. Q. Khan who purloined a treasure-trove of nuclear secrets while working at Holland.

Indo-US relations began to witness a new dawn in late 1990’s due to a drastic change in India’s perception towards regional security. India began to slowly overlook the US-Pakistan relations and began reposing interest in building bridges of friendship with the US. In reality, US’s Pakistan foreign policy is deeply entrenched and rooted in West’s symptomatic geopolitical strategy of maintaining a regional balance of power. The interminable generous bounties conferred by US is part of its statecraft, critically evolved and pursued by its state department over decades. Pakistan defected US on several occasions and Washington till now refused to admonish Islamabad. The strategic alignments, nurtured by US are hardwired to serve its dubious ends. Its time India comprehends, the canonical state craft of US and envisions its geopolitical strategies logistically. Pakistan has been viewed as a strategic asset by US. While US nonchalantly ignored India’s concerns, it would be interesting as how Washington will craft its Pakistan’s foreign policy with China emerging as profligate donor to Pakistan’s military coffers. Moreover, with animosities between US and China escalating, how long US will accost its strategic asset in South Asia?

 

@ Copyrights reserved.

Propitious Beginnings: Make in India Week

Last week, while the main stream media of India passionately indulged on abrasive anti-national debates, Make in India Week (MII) of Mumbai held from Feb 13^th to 18^th was featured in nearly 3200 articles world over (1). Except for the fateful fire accident that engulfed the main stage during the Maharashtra Night Program at Girguam Chowpatty, MII week was barely covered by the 24X7 Indian media channels. Make in India (MII) was launched by Prime Minister Modi on September 25^th 2014 to turn India into a manufacturing hub by encouraging the multi-national and indigenous companies to manufacture in India. The underlying objective of MII is to create more jobs by increasing the share of manufacturing to GDP which is currently 16% to 25% over the next decade. The idea of ushering India into economic prosperity was envisaged by Modi during his first address to nation as Prime Minister from the ramparts of Red Fort on August 15^th 2014.  Ever since the launch of MII, Modi with his jamboree team of dedicated professionals have consistently worked towards attracting foreign investments. Congruently, business interests, fostering trade and attracting FDI has been high on Modi’s agenda on his bilateral state visits too. In the past 20 months, Modi government received an FDI of $64 billion and now the MII week managed to get investment commitments worth $222 billion (15.2 lakh crore). Out of the total commitment, 30% is from foreign firms and 8 lakh crore was received by the host state Maharashtra alone (2).

Indian economy unlike the stabilized economies of the South East Asia is largely supported by services sector. Modi government believes that the potential of manufacturing sector capable of creating vast number of employment opportunities is largely untapped. Taking the advantage of the demographic dividend, Modi Government objectively pushed MII with a grand aim of creating 100 million manufacturing jobs. Unfortunately, India critically lacks extensive infrastructure, further the global perception of India in terms of ease of doing business and impervious tax regimes largely works to its disadvantage. On the contrary, India endowed with enviable human resources, strong network of entrepreneurs and growing consumer market make it a lucrative investment destination. The campaign of MII stuck a global cord as MII week witnessed the participation of over 2500 international and 8000 domestic companies; foreign delegates from 68 countries and business teams from 72 nations. The opening ceremony was attended by the Prime Ministers of Sweden, Finland and deputy Premier of Poland. Besides, 13 Union Cabinet ministers, representatives from 17 state pavilions were present luring the manufactures to invest in their respective states.

There are conflicting opinions about India’s march towards becoming a global manufacturing destination. To this end, it is important to understand the contemporary global manufacturing scenario. Ever changing wage costs, energy costs, productivity, and depreciating currencies are to be taken into account to assess cost competitiveness of a country. As per Boston Consulting Group (BCG) India has second lowest manufacturing costs after Indonesia making it a potential choice in terms of cost competitiveness (3). But it loses ground in factors related to business environment, ease of operation, transparency, access to credit, administrative hassles and low judicial strength. In order to maintain cost advantage, India has to substantially keep a check on labor wages. India aims to spur development by empowering middle class who can steer the economy but by keeping wages low, the entire glitzy of MII would be counterproductive. Setting stage ready for MII, government of India has increased the FDI in defence (to 49%) and Railways infrastructure (to 100%) in August 2014 itself. MII identified 25 sectors which includes construction, textiles, food processing that require low to moderate skills and high skill-intensive sectors like aviation, defence equipment, manufacturing an electronics. Thus MII, according to some firms is expected to generate 7.2 lakh temporary jobs by next year and as investments gain more traction 8-13% additional jobs can be created (4). MII apart from job creation aims at skill enhancement, production of high quality goods with a minimum impact on environment. The slogan Zero Defect and Zero Effect coined by Prime Minister aptly describes the objectives of MII. Implying that pet initiative of Prime Minister aims at producing goods with zero defects through processes that have zero adverse effects on the environment. In the process, MII will offers a great scope for new innovation too.

In the past 20 months major foreign players have pitched in to invest in India. The illustrious list includes $ 5 billlion investment from electronics manufacturer Foxconn over a period of five years to set up R&D and sophisticated semi-conductor manufacturing unit in Maharashtra and $ I billion investment from General Motors. Lenova has set up Motorola smart phones manufacturing unit at Sriperambadur near Chennai. Boeing announced that it would soon start assembling of fighter planes and defence helicopters Apache or Chinook. Taiwan’s Wistron Corporation will soon start manufacturing unit at Noida. Ministry of Railway signed a deal with Alstom and GE transport to set up locomotive manufacturing at Madhepur and Marhaura in Bihar. Even Spice Group, Samsung, Huawei, Xioami has entered into talks with respective state governments to setup manufacturing units in India and some of them have even begun their operations. Under the Design in India, Qualcomm announced that it would mentor 10 Indian hardware companies in upgrading their innovative solutions. Besides, Japan Prime Minister Shinzo abe on his visit to India agreed to invest $12 billion in Made in India related projects. On his visit to Russia, Modi sealed first defence agreement under which Kamov Ka-226 multi-role helicopters would be built in India. Announcement by Lockheed Martin during MII week to manufacture F-16 possibly by early next year is a major shot in arm for India. Major commitments made during the event include those of Oracle, Ascendas and by the Indian firm Rashtriya Chemicals and Fertilizers. With investors reposing great faith in Indian markets, India clearly emerged as a preferred destination for foreign investments. For the first time at the MII week, India-made robot Tata Brabo was showcased. This affordable robot intended for small and medium enterprises was developed by TAL Manufacturing Solutions of Tata Motors.

With foreign investments entering the Indian markets, there has been palpable excitement and people are optimistic of better employment opportunities. But economists argue booming investments may not create proportionate number of jobs because of competitive rise of robotics. Most of the multinational companies of late, are replacing manual labor with machine. Foxconn which assembles Apple products is now slowly automatizing its units dashing the hopes of creating millions of manufactured jobs. In fact, Modi during the inaugural session of MII met Yu Mi, a state of art robot designed to meet the needs of manufacturing units. Rapid technological advancement and consequent fall in price of robots are paving way for increased automation. Manufacturing units are now opting for robots due to attractive returns on investment. Hence while India might truly emerge as an important manufacturing hub, the extent of job creation may fall short of the expectations. India with a burgeoning pool of employable youth automated manufacturing may be counterproductive. Economists do opine that developed countries have reached saturation levels in manufacturing jobs and China in fact is the latest country to join that pool of industrialization. While the efforts undertaken by Prime Minister are laudable, but India seems to be a late entrant to the process of industrialization. For a sustainable development in a country like India alternative mechanisms of engaging the new labor force entering every year has to be unleashed.

In fact some researchers who believe that industrial revolution has reached a pinnacle are lobbying for an alternative stratagem for MII- the Circular economy. It is a system wherein resources and materials are endlessly recycled. “It’s not just about product recycling or take back-programs or reuse, it’s about the reordering of global production and consumption systems, of sustainable living and of course it heralds new business opportunities”. This latest system pioneered by Aditya Birla Group has been successfully tested and tried by many multinational companies like Dell, Caterpillar, Coca-Cola, General Electric, Ford, Jaguar Land Rover (5).

Finally, to realize the gains made by the ambitious MII program, government has to clearly chart out policies for improving ease of doing business, develop a stable and transparent tax-regime. Moreover, to capitalize the investments there should be greater coordination between the Centre and states. Modi government has strengthened India’s federal fabric by allocating more resources and finances. The success of these enterprising ventures largely depends on firm footing of respective state governments. MII, in part mirrored interests of various state governments. Interestingly, all BJP-ruled states, Karnataka, Odisha, Uttar Pradesh and Telangana have actively participated in the event. Of all, MII is expected to give major boost to the defence sector through strengthening of defence industrial base (DIB). India is currently the largest arms importer accounting for 14% of global share. 

 

@ Copyrights reserved.