Fledging Islamic Militant theatres in Philippines

Martial Law was imposed in the Mindanao island of Philippines on May 24^th following eruption of intense clashes in Southern city of Marawi, the home province of President Rodrigo Duterte. After military launched surgical strikes against the militants belonging to Abu Sayyaf Group (ASG) and Maute Group, Duterte cut short his state trip to Russia as the situation spiraled into dangerous proportions. More than four weeks, fighting persists and dead toll is increasing. What began as an attempt to capture Isnilon Hapilon, leader of ASG who pledged allegiance to ISIS has now turned into an intense battle. Hapilon, is listed as World’s most wanted terrorist by US department, has $5 million bounty on his head. He abducted and killed Canadian business man in 2016, and was responsible for bombing campaign of Metro Manila. While the Maute Group was behind the Davoa City bombing, attacks in Butig and Lanao del Sur in Feb 2016. Both these Pro-ISIS militant groups operating in the Southern Island of Mindanao have joined hands with sole objective of turning the island into a caliphate. With Armed Forces of Philippines (AFP) intensifying combing operations in the islands, militants began occupying various buildings, prayer places, schools, hospitals using innocent people as human shields. As of now, martial law was imposed for 60 days. But in every likelihood, it would be extended.

Despite burgeoning militant attacks, Duterte predecessor Aquino down played the threat of ISIS in the country and assured that there were mercenaries trying to garner attention of ISIS. Though Duterte confirmed that Maute Group had links with ISIS and regained control over Butig in December 2016, he was obsessed with waging war against drug peddlers and traders later. His brutal crackdown on drug dealers coupled with mass encounters created a furor in International community and earned him severe rebuke of the West. Outspoken Duterte picked up a war of words and hurled expletives at President Obama over Human rights issue straining the bilateral ties. The US even deferred aid package of $430 million to Philippines (1). Eventually, Duterte have moved strategically closer to China indicating that foreign troops shouldn’t be interfering in the internal affairs. But now as the battle against Islamist militants showing no signs of remission, Duterte have reconciled and US is now involved in the battle.

Official reports of Philippines security agencies confirmed that fighters from Indonesia, Malaysia, Yemen, Saudi Arabia and Chechnya were killed in combing operations of AFP indicating the extensive global connect of the militant groups operating in Mindanao. Moreover, with ISIS suffering huge losses in Syria and Iraq, various threat assessment reports of countries in the region indicated that ISIS is encouraging allegiance groups operating elsewhere to launch intense attacks in their home countries. Intelligence agencies have even linked the suicide bombing cum shooting attack in Jakarta, in January 2016 and June 2016 grenade attack in Malaysia to ISIS. It is believed that Singapore is on their radar (2).

Reports are increasingly pointing out that with ISIS retreating, fighters are coming back to South East which were earliest harbingers of Islamist militants. Home grown militant group Jemaah Islamiyah (JI) of Indonesia allied to Al-Qaeda in 2002 engineered the deadliest attack in 2002 that killed 202 people in Bali. It was even reckoned as the IS of the South East. Indonesia with support of US dismantled JI through massive counter terror operations. Indonesia has the largest Muslim population in the World and hence a likely breeding ground of radicalization. It is believed that IS sleeper cells are active in almost every province of Indonesia. 2015 Pew Survey suggested that 4% of Indonesian population has a favorable view of ISIS.  While the absolute numbers of Indonesian militants fighting in Syria in comparison to the population size is low, recent developments in the region portend a dangerous scenario. Experts suggest that the radicalized youth who couldn’t make to Syria are now keen on carrying out such struggle in their home lands. Now the emerging trends and targeting killings of Christians and moderate Muslims in Mindanao islands suggest a deepening ISIS imprint.

Though Philippines security agencies were cognizant of burgeoning impact of ISIS on the regional militant groups, officials exercised cautioned in acknowledging ISIS influence, fearing a negative impact on FDI flows.

Mindanao island has a history of rebellions dated back to pre-World war II era against Spanish, American and Japanese forces for a Bangsamoro Nation. It had been home of indigenous Muslims, Moro. But colonial American government promoted resettlement of Filipino Christians in this island who soon outnumbered the native population altering the demographic composition. Moros under the leadership of Nur Misuari formed the Moro National Liberation Front (MNLF) in 1969.  It was believed that President Ferdinand Marcos, then allowed the Christian settlers in the island to raise a militant group, Ilaga to fight Moros. Manili Massacre of 1971 carried out Ilaga led to killings of 65 Moro Muslim emerged as flash point and insurgency battles intensified between MNLF and Philippines government. Though both parties signed ceasefire agreement in 1976, President Marcos reneged and violence ensued. In 1978, Sheikh Salamat Hashim split from MNLF and formed Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) with an objective of establishing Islamic State. Later, successive regimes of Aquino and Ramos held several rounds of negotiations with MNLF and were at the brink of instituting the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (ARMM). In 1991, a Muslim scholar, Aburajak Janjalani after his meeting with Osama bin Laden in 1991, started an extremist Islamic militant outfit, Abu Sayyaf group (ASG) recruiting radicalized MNLF cadres. President Estrada, launched a massive campaign against MILF wherein AFP, successfully decimated the militant camp in 2000. Having suffered severe causalities, leader Sheik Hashim fled to Malaysia. President Estrada then hoisted Philippines national flag in Mindanao Islands. Humiliated by defeat several Muslim militant groups launched series of attacks on National Capital Region on December 2000. Even ASG intensified its fight with Philippines government through random kidnappings, beheadings and attacks on government institutions. Between 2002 and 2015, Philippines and America launched counter terrorism offensives on militant groups as it was believed that Al-Qaeda linked ASG planned a part of 9/11 conspiracy. America launched Operation Enduring Freedom: Philippines, war against terror.

In 2013, MILF and other militant groups attempted to raise Bangsmaro Republic Flag over the city hall of Zamboanga and took several civilians as hostages. AFP launched joint combative with American forces leading to surrender of thousands of militants. Militant groups were convincingly defeated. Later Philippines government and MILF signed Comprehensive Agreement on Bangsmaro in 2014. Accordingly, militants are to transfer arms to a mutually agreed third party and government would reduce military troops in the region paving way for the creation of new Muslim Autonomous Entity Bangsmaro. Later in 2015, with the killing of most wanted Malaysian militant, Zulkifli bin Hir popular as Marwan in the area held by Bangsmaro Islamic Freedom Fighters (BIFF), who declared allegiance to ISIS, America called off its operations in Philippines. In 2016, when Duterte assumed power, reposing faith in the leadership MNLF and MILF promised to abide by peace agreement. But ASG, Maute group who declared allegiance to ISIS were on prowl launching attacks.  Unlike the militant groups MNLF and MILF, active militant groups in Mindanao now are radicalized; not interested in peace negotiations and compromise. Now reports emerge that ISIS keen on expanding its tentacles made Hapilon, Emir. Experts believe that in a bid to prove his allegiance, ASG might resort to ruthless violence and criminality.

Filipinos anticipated that Duterte with a strong-hold over administration and commitment towards federalism would make progress in fostering peace process. In fact, Maute group’s takeover of Butig town in November 2016 should have been a revelation. But Duterte shifted attention to drug trafficking and misjudged the pernicious offensives of ASG and Maute group. In the meanwhile, militant groups stockpiled an inexhaustible supply of firearms, other supplies needed for the offensive through series of extortions, ransom killings and kidnappings.

 As of now, in the battle between AFP and forces that sieged Marawi, over 250 militants, 65 soldiers and 62 civilians were killed and 34,000 locals fled the region. Though militant numbers have dwindled, leaders of South East Asia are alarmed by assault of the radicalized Islamist groups that paralyzed the Island.

The gradual transmogrification of resistance struggle into a battle for establishing a caliphate in the island has sent the region into tizzy. Indonesia which shares porous borders with the affected regions and faced the scourge of radicalization is now conducting joint military patrols with Malaysia and Philippines in the Sulu sea. Both Indonesia and Malaysia are increasingly concerned about the Marawi siege since fighters included their citizens. Duterte has now sought the assistance of US security personnel based in the military base near Zamboanga. Philippines have signed mutual defense agreement with US and Australia. With the battle to recapture Marawi entering second month, Australia has promised to deploy two P3 Orion Reconnaissance and Surveillance planes.

@ Copyrights reserved.

Speculations Galore: Modi’s forthcoming visit to the US

With Prime Minister Narendra Modi, all set to travel to visit US for the fifth time to meet President Trump, intense speculations await the future of Indo-US relations. Indo-US relations reached hilt in 2015 when both nations signed “Joint Strategic Vision for the Asia Pacific and Indian Ocean Region” fortifying bilateral ties. Incidentally, the personal chemistry and bonhomie between Modi and President Obama triumphantly glued the relations between the “World’s two largest democracies”. Later with inking of LEMOA in 2016 both sides significantly expanded the scope of naval cooperation. Undeniably 123 Agreement in 2008 and Joint Strategic Vision of 2015, have infused new momentum and depth into Indo-US relations. But with US foreign policy currently undergoing a massive churn under President Trump, Modi is faced with a daunting challenge of working out renewed bilateral paradigm.

Unprecedented geopolitical revelations have changed the contours of World order. Erstwhile dominance of a lone super power is now making way for multipolar world. These changes superbly coincided with change of leadership in the US. Ever since assuming Presidency, Trump has navigated uncharted paths that were antithetical to basic precincts of the US. Riding on doctrine of “American First”, Trump pulled US out of the TPP (Trans Pacific Partnership) leaving all other nations in lurch. As President Elect, irked China due to a telephonic conversation with Taiwanese President, a move hailed by strategic experts as tough posturing. But soon patched up things with Beijing a promise of honoring “One China Policy”.  His infamous telephone diplomacy marred relations with Mexico and Australia, listless executive orders over travel bans scuttled ties with Muslim nations. In the meanwhile, Trump’s diplomatic messaging to anxious heads of states most of them allies like Japan, Canada, Mexico, UK, Germany, and adversaries like China who made a bee-line to White House surprised strategic experts. Intriguingly, baring Japan leaders of friendly European leaders received a lukewarm response. Though Trump accused China of “raping American economy” and “currency manipulator”, he extended a warm reception to President Xi by hosting him at his private resort Mar-a-Lago, Florida. In fact, Trump ordered air strikes against Syria in response to Chemical weapons usage at a time he was hosting President Xi in US. Emboldened by this bluster, he unleashed MOAB (mother of all bombs) against IS (Khorasan) in Afghanistan. Impromptu air strikes against Syria widened the schisms between US and Russia while heightened military action reflected misplaced priorities of Trump administration. These audacious actions of Trump were in sharp contrast to his campaign call of softening stance toward Russia and condemnation of Obama administration’s military intervention in Syria. Interestingly, Trump’s appeasement of China has close underpinnings to his business establishment. American media agencies indicated that Trump’s placatory tone in early February can be traced to obtaining approval for Trump trademarks in China. His overt friendly gestures towards President Xi was an outcome of minor trade concessions offered by Beijing in financial sector investments and US beef exports. In fact, both China and Saudi Arabia found a way with Trump by cultivating back channel contact with son-in-law Jared Kushner. Kushner and Ivanka Trump have huge business interests in China.

Trump’s offer of jointly working with Sunni-NATO to crush terrorism was catalyzed by the massive $110 billion military deals between US and Saudi Arabia. Enamored by the robust deal with Saudi Arabia, Trump joined the Saudi-led chorus in isolating Qatar for which he even claimed the credit. A week later Qatar and US signed $12 billion agreement for purchase of 36 F-15 fighter jets. This deal supposed to create 60,000 US jobs in 42 states eventually forced the US defense department to issue a stinging rebuke to Saudi Arabia questioning the justification for imposing embargo on Qatar. Trump’s actions and tone have so far indicated that he is highly transactional and that state and defense departments are following different tacks. Till now US presidents irrespective of party affiliations, religiously followed well-laid out foreign policy but Trump refuses to abide orthodox policy frameworks. Interestingly while Western media left no stone unturned in drawing parallels between Modi and Trump labeling them as Uber nationalists. With time, Modi acclaimed reputation of a statesman while Trump’s insinuating volte-face posited him as a maverick. 

Modi upcoming meeting with Trump is complicated by his ludicrous allegations of developing countries like India benefitting by Paris Climate Accord while announcing America’s withdrawal from the 2015 treaty. His infamous decision not only put America together with two other countries that refused to sign the accord- Nicaragua and Syria but also elicited scorn from foreign policy observers who sharply criticized the irresponsible remarks of Trump. While justifying his decision, Trump said, “For example, under the agreement, China will be able to increase emissions by a staggering number of years-13. They can do whatever they want for 13 years. Not us. India makes its participation contingent on receiving billions and billions and billions of dollars in foreign aid from developed countries”. He added, “China will be allowed to build hundreds of additional coal plants. So we can’t build the plants, but they can according to this agreement. India will be allowed to double its coal production by 2020. Think of it: India will be allowed to double its coal production. We’re supposed to get rid of ours. Even Europe is allowed to continue construction of coal plants”. By singling out India, Trump had immodestly undermined India’s painstaking efforts of complying with the targets set by Paris Accord. Issues of climate change, conservation of nature have been on the top tier of Modi’s agenda who co-authored a book, “Convenient Action-Continuity for Change” which was released along sidelines of Paris Summit. Modi’s concerted push for renewables and launch of International Solar Alliance (ISA) are testimony to India’s towards Climate change. Hence unlike in the past under Trump, India can’t jointly work together on climate change. But both leaders can enhance cooperation on issues like space exploration, counter terrorism, intelligence sharing, cyber security, security realm and energy cooperation.

Amidst wide spread concerns of personal rapport between both countries, ongoing geopolitical flux impels both countries to expand strategic cooperation. Though India is rapidly forging ties with like-minded countries to counter the overwhelming hegemony of China, in the region, US concurrence is inevitable for any middle-countries grouping. World is privy to the fact that inability of Obama administration furthered strategic rise of China. Now, Trump’s reluctance to assume the traditional role of World’s policeman has weakened American stature. Even Obama’s doctrine of pivot to Asia paralyzed. Dragon’s strangle hold had engulfed India’s neighboring countries and all the South East Asian countries have drifted into Chinese Orbit. Burgeoning Chinese aggression is inimical to India. India and US share common concerns with respect to China. India should thus, aspire to strengthen strategic cooperation with US to have greater command over Indian Ocean Region (IOR). To play the role of security provider in the IOR and to mitigate the looming threats of belligerent neighbors on both fronts, India must upgrade military capabilities. US is now India’s largest arms supplier. With India’s arms requirements set to grow Trump should be happy about upcoming arms deals. In this regard, India should push offer of co-production, which can not only create jobs in US but also fits Modi’s “Make in India” initiative. Already, Trump’s press secretary Sean Spicer hinted possible dovetailing of “Make America Great Again” and “Make in India”. Unlike European countries, India is not dependent on US for security issues. Since India will pay up for its security, Trump should have no qualms in expanding security cooperation.

Though Trump administration announced hardening of stance towards Pakistan and discussed expansion of drone attacks and withholding aid and downgrading its status as a major non-NATO ally, US officials are skeptical about the plausibility of such an approach. India should wait for situation to unfold with bated breath since Trump is a manifestation of unpredictability.

Presently, Trump’s quick turnarounds, double standards, ruthless deal making obsession is disrupting the World order with America’s close allies forced to reconsider their relations with the US under him. White House staff is working overtime to defend the irresponsible statements of the President. Crucial vacancies are not yet filled. Administration is not yet even-keeled. The divergence between the state and defense establishment is widening with every passing day. Meanwhile, reports of Trump camp’s alleged links with Russia and other scandals is taking away the focus of White House from core issues. With deep state mulling the prospect of instituting serious investigations against Trump, his term might be marred with serious disruptions. Modi should effectively seek cooperation in areas of mutual interest that are in line with whims of exceptionally transactional Trump. But, Modi must reach out to American business community, Indian Diaspora and other like-minded entities for building long term strategic partnership.

@ Copyrights reserved.

Venezuela’s catastrophic collapse propelled by China’s non-concessionary loans

Yet another country bearing uncanny resemblances to erstwhile Soviet Union is heading towards financial collapse. The combined burden of accumulated debt, dictatorial socialist regime, and a benefactor ready to extend endless credit led to collapse to Venezuelan economy. Underscoring woes of countries like Sri Lanka, Tajikistan, Pakistan who sought infrastructure development loans from China to trigger growth, near collapse of Venezuela economy highlights the role played by Chinese cash. The OPEC country, wadding through severe financial crunches for the second year, sold its sovereign bonds, slashed the imports by 50% to struggling to pay off debts.  Plummeting oil prices, droughts, reduced hydro-electric power production exacerbated the crisis.

For over a decade, when oil prices skyrocketed, Venezuela proactively signed various infrastructure deals with China. With massive oil exports keeping the socialist regime afloat, it doled out numerous subsidies though unbridled expenditure, and state-owned companies began to drain the economy. The extravagant burden of debt travails of Venezula hardly created any ripples till the death of President of Hugo Chavez in 2013. Plummeting oil prices in 2014, markedly depleted cash inflows paralyzing debt repayment. Mounting debt trap began to ensnare the Latin American economy. The country was brought to its knees with major debt-defaulter is state-owed oil company, PDVSA (Petroleos de Venezuela), also the principal source for cash inflows started grappling for funds for repayment. The wealthiest country in South America and major oil supplier to Caribbean countries reeled under terminal loans.

Domestically, the cost of food imports began to shoot up. To keep up with rising prices, wages were increased and to sustain this cycle, more Bolivars are printed. This led to hyper-inflation reaching three- digit mark. To cater the poor, government stores sold food at subsidized prices. People queued up at these stores and resold them in black market. With many businesses closing shops, unemployment peaked. People slowly began reselling goods obtained from state stores to black marketers. Rampant black marketing, intense domestic unrest and turmoil prevailed. Embattled, President Nicolas Maduro’s government is finding it hard to survive until the Presidential elections of 2018.

Though there was no historical, cultural, or religious connect between China and Venezuela, Beijing’s unquenchable appetite for energy resources and grand ambitions, propelled it towards resource-rich countries in the American backyard. Ideological congruency and dislike for basic American tenets deepened their relations. Besides, China which was eyeing for a larger role in emerging geo-political realm, endeared to befriend Latin American countries, a majority of whom recognize Taiwan. China’s rendezvous with Venezuela began in 2001 under President Chavez wherein both countries entered “strategic development partnership” which was elevated to “comprehensive strategic partnership” in 2014. Subsequently bilateral trade grew exponentially from less than $100 million in 1999 to $5.7 billion in 2014. China which has been steadily rising and maturing into a global manufacturing giant signed over 600 investment projects and lent $63 billion till now. Over a period, China emerged as a key strategic player in Latin America and Caribbean region, effectively weakening influence of Taiwan in the region. In 2004, China obtained permanent observer status in the Organization of American States.

Venezuela’s largest resources of oil in the World had been China’s lucrative catch. Beijing’s overtures bespoke its logistical approach of clinching deals with resource-rich nations under the newly launched Resource for Infrastructure Swap (R4I), program a forerunner of OBOR. In the first decade of the millennium, China rolled out R4I contract forum in African countries making huge investment in infrastructure development in return for extracting/exploring the natural resources. China instinctively adopted similar doctrine for Venezuela. Venezuela began shipping crude oil to China in return for the huge infrastructure investment loans offered by National Bank of China and the Export-Import Bank of China. Invariably all the investment projects employed Chinese personnel who eventually dominated even the food and agriculture sector. Massive investments in infrastructure failed to kickstart economic growth. Instead country’s reliance on oil exports increased from 70% in 1998 to 98% in 2013 (1). This critical development reflected failure of Venezuelan leadership in diversifying development and exclusive use of oil in return for Chinese loans.

Sino-Venezuelan engagement which began with preferential market access, stretched to arms purchase, launching of satellites to guaranteed repayment through oil. This agreement worked well for both sides till 2014 when crude prices were over $100. Unlike other countries, Venezuelan crude is little heavier. Hence cost of extraction is high and not profitable unless value of crude in global markets of over $60. With the collapse of global oil prices, extraction of oil became less remunerative for Venezuela. As oil prices continue to sink, financial crisis aggravated. By 2016, Venezuela could make repayments to China only through crude oil deliveries as revenues dropped. Operational crisis, financial disputes, power outages critically reduced the functioning of state refineries of PDVSA. Crude output reduced and Venezuela struggled to make loan repayments in crude oil to both creditors China and Russia. As oil prices continued to decline, PDVSA stopped crude oil exports to India and US which could make payments in cash. In a desperate bid to meet requirements of crucial customers, Venezuela started importing oil from Mexico, Saudi Arabia and Iraq.

If Venezuela continues to renege on its pledged supplies to China and Russia, countries might eventually recover the loans in the form of assets. Already Sri Lanka, is facing similar ordeal and is on the verge of giving up 80% of share in Hambantota port to China. As of now, both Russia and China have been supportive and flexible but a prolonged evasion of loan payments is bound to have serious repercussions including losing control over the Citgo, US subsidiary of PDVSA (since 50% of its was pledged as collateral to Russia).

Reports indicate that China alone gave more loans to Venezuela than Inter-American Development Bank and World Bank put together. In 2006, World Bank President cautioned Venezuela of worrying debt levels. To greater dismay of Venezuelans, it is observed that majority of Chinese projects are incomplete and some haven’t started yet. Insiders, indicate that huge amounts of loans are siphoned off by corrupt socialist elites and the regime loyalists. Transparency International ranked Venezuela as the 10^th most corrupt country in the world. No wonder, unofficial accounts puts that $11 billion was looted by cronies. Together, China under the guise of infrastructure development offered non- concessionary loans with interest rates on par with commercial banks. Interestingly, Beijing’s aspirations of expanding its global influence through financial diplomacy had robust engagements with dictatorial or authoritarian regimes (that had mild scrutiny and least checks/balances). China had thus far effectively sold the dreams of growth and development to emerging countries by way of infrastructure development regardless of long term economic viability of the projects. Moreover, the attached strings with OBOR like use of Chinese inputs, material, personnel had stunted the prospects of domestic employment.

With PDVSA failing to pay workers, there are mass uprising across Venezuela. Empty shelfs in stores, scarcity of medicines, absence of jobs is triggering protests and creating refugee crisis. As per IMF report, currently unemployment rate is 25%, economy has shrunk by 18% in last year and inflation is expected to reach 720% (2). Over the past two decades, China dominated domestic markets of Venezuela.  Now most of the stores are owned by Chinese, who also held high-profile jobs. Starved Venezuelans at started attacking and burning down Chinese owned stores. With the Latin American country sliding into financial abyss, Chinese government is evacuating its citizens. Approval ratings of President Maduro have declined significantly for quelling the simmering protests with an iron-hand. Street rioting, looting increased and clashes between protestors and security personnel intensified leaving 47 dead. US ambassador Nikki Haley, last week decried Venezuela “for rapidly deteriorating human rights situation” and implored that the country should withdraw from UN Human Rights Commission (UNHRC).  Maduro’s outdated and communist styled monetary policy is unlikely to stop the catastrophic collapse of Venezuelan economy unless foreign debt burden is restructured. Despite deepening recession, China offered $2.2 billion loan to Venezuela in November 2016. Telling stories of Venezuela should thus be a revelation for all the countries warming up to Beijing’s OBOR.

@ Copyrights reserved.

Alarming Developments in West Asia

Trouble in the Arab World erupted days after President Trump’s visit to Riyadh. The simmering conflicts finally snow-balled into a full-fledged regional tiff, with Saudi Arabia and its allies calling for boycott of Qatar on June 5^th. Saudi Arabia, UAE, Egypt, Bahrain, and Maldives announced closure of borders and imposed economic, diplomatic and trade ban on Qatar. Traditionally the sectarian divide of Sunni (Wahhabi-Salafi) Vs Shia (Arab-Persian) dominated the discourse in the Middle East. But this new fragmentation and attempts to isolate Qatar brought to fore a conflict that can be traced back to 1995.

In 1971, the largest natural- gas reserves spread in an area of 9700 sq km was discovered in the Persian Gulf shared by Iran and Qatar. Region in Iran territorial waters (3700 sq Km) was referred as South Pars and the other half in Qatar waters (6000 sq Km) was called North Dome. The Qatari section has 99% of recoverable gas and accounts for 14% of World’s gas reserves. The reserve had by far the most easily recoverable reserves. Economic sanctions, prevented Iran from accessing these reserves after Iranian revolution in 1979 and actual production could start only in 2002. During the same period falling oil reserves compelled Qatar to sign series of agreements with Western companies to accelerate natural gas production. By 1989, production started. In 1995, Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa Al Thani deposed his pro-Arab father and began exporting natural gas from 1997. This remunerative exploration changed the fortunes of the small peninsula catapulting it to the club of richest countries with an enviable annual per capita of $130,000. Qatar eventually became the largest exporter of liquefied natural gas breaking the domination of Saudi Arabia in the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC). Qatar subsequently accumulated huge reserves of sovereign wealth and supported Muslim Brotherhood of Egypt, Hamas in West Bank and other militant fractions that opposed Saudi Arabia and UAE in Syria. Interestingly, aside offering aid to Hamas for reconstruction in Gaza Strip, Qatar had friendly relations with Israel. It is also believed that Qatar funded jihadist organizations in Africa. Qatar also maintained influence over the Arab World through the Al Jazeera Media group which irked and angered the Arab world.

Qatar, having signed deal with Iran with regards to North Dome gas reserve in 1969 has maintained good relations with Iran. Recently Qatar, revamped ties with Russia with a promise of investing sovereign in Russia’s Rosenft Oil Corporation. Unlike other GCC members, Qatar pursued independent foreign policy. During the 18 yr rule of Hamad, Qatar was projected as a progressive country by hosting various international events like the 2006 Asian Games, 2012 UN climate Change Conference, Doha Agreement etc. and managed to win the controversial bid for hosting the FIFA cup 2022. According to an estimate, Qatar owns 40% of London’s assets. Soon, it also became key strategic player by housing American and Turkish forces on its territory. In 2003, US Combat Air operations Centre for Middle East was forced to move from the Prince Sultan Air base in Saudi Arabia. Qatar then offered Al Udeid Air base in addition to the As Sayliyah army base of US used for coordinating activities in Iraq and Afghanistan from 2000. In 2013, Hamad handed over power to his son Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani.

Gas dollars like Petro dollars of Saudi Arabia drastically changed the fortunes of Qatar. Doha began using natural gas a strategic weapon against its neighboring countries which had no natural gas reserves. With rising demand for LNG in Gulf countries, much to their consternation of Middle East neighbors (who expected Qatar to sell gas at discounted prices), Qatar preferred exporting gas to markets in Europe and Asia. Qatar’s emergence as a reliable gas and oil exporter and assertive approach irked Saudi Arabia and its friendly coterie.

Over time, fissures in the Arab world deepened. Qatar’s strategic play of supporting the groups like Muslim Brotherhood that opposed the hereditary rule miffed Saudi and UAE. Its continuous engagement with Houthi rebels fighting the pro-Arab Al Salah regime and Iran, support to Al-Nusra exacerbated the differences. In 2014, Arab nations snapped ties with Qatar recalling ambassadors, citing the violation of GCC clause of interfering in domestic affairs of other GCC member countries. After Riyadh’s stern warning to Qatar, Tamim curbed funding to Al-Qaeda affiliates in Syria but doubled its involvement with Houthi rebels and Muslim Brotherhood. Subsequently, Kuwaiti intervention broke the stalemate. But the current crisis is far-fledged with Arab countries hardening their stance which included punishing the Qatar sympathizers with 15-year jail sentence. Qatari citizens are given 14-days’ notice to leave Arab countries.

This time around, President Trump’s flawed Arab policy spurred Qatar’s diplomatic crisis. Audaciously attributing radical Islam ideology for rise in terrorist attacks, on the eve of Trump opening of Global Centre for Combating Extremist Ideology at Riyadh, he called upon Sunni-Muslim nation conglomerate to join hands with US to crush terrorism. Lashing out at Iran for wreaking havoc in the region by patronizing militant groups, US added heft to Saudi Arabia’s approach of castigating Iran in Gulf. Emboldened Arab nations which had fractured relations with Qatar after the recent developments, strategically unleashed a tirade to isolate Qatar. Ever since his election campaigning Trump made vociferous attacks on Iran holding it responsible for proliferation of terrorism. The dislike intensified manifold with US and Iran proxies competing for the territories earlier held by IS in South Syria. Iran is particularly keen on occupying large swathes of land along the Iraq-Syria border will be ideal land route to connect Hebollah operating in Lebanon. Gaining a strong hold in South Syria will augur well for American intervention in the region.

In reality, all Arab states consider radical Muslim militant groups as strategic assets. They invariably patronize and support at least one such group to out maneuver each other. Saudi Arabia and its affiliates have been established exporters of Wahhabism. In 1996, Bahrain and Saudi Arabia planned a coup against Qatar Emir Hamad. But he survived. While Saudi affiliate states demand expulsion of Islamists of different groups from Qatar, Saudi provides safe-havens to most vicious Wahhabi preachers and is a global supplier of Salafi-Wahhabi Imams. On the other hand, Qatar sitting on vast forex reserves has mastered the game of double-cross. Another interesting dimension of the Gulf countries is the complex web of friendly relations buttressed by economic interests. Qatar a staunch Islamic state adhering to Salafi version of Sunni Islam has no qualms in deepening economic relations with Shiite Iran. UAE, close affiliate of Saudi Arabia is the fourth largest trade partner of Iran. Similarly, Kuwait and Oman both dominantly Sunni states have good relations with Iran. Egypt has good contacts with Houthi rebels and with Iran. Saudi is upset with Egypt supporting Russian veto regarding Syria. Dampened economic growth of Saudi Arabia witnessed emergence of UAE as the leader which soon fostered relations with Al-Sissi of Egypt. Saudi began losing its hold over Yemen and Libya to leadership of UAE and Egypt.

Sinking oil prices has weakened Saudis economic clout. Riyadh fears losing hegemony in GCC and hence unwilling to make way for Qatar, the largest exporter of natural gas and third largest exporter of Oil. Moreover, Qatar’s strong economic ties with Iran have for long been a bone of contention. Trump’s calumnious provocations has stoked simmering differences. While Trump started boasting that his visit was “already paying off” adding “they said they would take hard-line stand on funding….extremism, and all reference was pointing to Qatar. Perhaps this will be beginning of the end to the horror of terrorism” the region might seriously be slipping into malicious diplomatic anarchy. Meanwhile, Rex Tillerson and US State department issued statements to contain the diplomatic damage over Trump’s statement by offering to negotiate and assuring Doha of strong relationship and cooperation. But the crisis deepened in the region by twin attacks in Iran by alleged IS militants.

On June 7^th suicide bombers dressed as women and four men launched simultaneous attacks on Parliament and the Mausoleum of Ayatollah Khomeini killing 18 people. These attacks infuriated the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps blamed Saudi Arabia and accused them of supporting IS. They vowed revenge and linked this attacks to President Trump’s visit to Saudi Arabia. Trump’s condolence message to victims of Iran which read as “We grieve and pray for the innocent victims of terror attacks in Iran, and for the Iranian people, who are going through challenging times. We underscore that states that sponsor terrorism risk falling victim to the evil they promote” heightened the animosities further.

Gulf countries want Qatar to stop communicating with Iran. But Qatar would never undermine ties with Iran, which transformed its economy. Aside Trump’s visit a report containing the statements by Qatar emir Tamim which appeared on website of Qatari News Agency fueled the current diplomatic crisis. According to the report, Emir Tamim was believed to have harshly criticized UAE, Bahrain, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia of waging a smear campaign against Qatar depicting it as a supporter of terrorism. Though CNN and other agencies apprehended that this might be fake news implanted by Russian hackers, in any case, Arab states of late are seething with fury and the conundrum of mistrust. Irresponsible intervention by America triggered the explosion of pent up mistrust. Moreover, if warring Arab factions fail to strike a middle ground, in every likelihood, Qatar may deepen ties with Oman and Iran causing a vertical split in GCC.

Deteriorating state of affairs in Gulf is bound to have severe repercussions on the Arab states and all other countries heavily dependent on this region for Oil and remittances. Unity of Gulf states seems to have reached a break-even point and a hardline approach by any state may spell doom for the security order of the entire region. Soaked in Petro and gas dollars, states till now had built massive regimes and patronized extremist religious groups of various hues and unleashed an interminable war. Though countries like Kuwait, Turkey and Germany have so far offered to negotiate to avert the crisis. But alas!! time for remedial rectification is forgone a religious revival and renaissance alone can extricate the venomous seeds of jihad.

India is closely watching the unfoldment of Qatari crisis closely. West Asia is home for 7 million Indian diaspora that send home $63 billion remittances. New Delhi has always adopted a neutral approach and steered clear of intra Arab state rivalries. Peace and stability of West Asia is extremely crucial for economic well-being of India.  

@ Copyrights reserved.

Revitalizing 70 years of Indo-Russian Diplomatic Ties

Seventy-year-old time-tested Indo-Russian diplomatic relations withstood several affectations.  But drifting Indo-Russian relations eliciting far-fetching interpretations with Moscow’s increased closeness with Islamabad coming under intense scrutiny. With the global order tending to be more multilateral, a feature largely accelerated by the inward-looking US, the random cacophony of realignments is touching a new crescendo. Resurgent Russia’s desperate moves to globally position itself and wield a significant influence in ongoing narratives is adding more noise to the chaotic tussle of global rebalancing of powers. While India has every reason to be touchy about Russo-Pakistan relations, strategists by and large observe that such ties are largely tactical and not strategic. Propelled by deep ambition to be more relevant, Russia is rolling out a strategy to reduce western imprint in Afghanistan. Instead of taking shots at Taliban who is threatening the peace and security of Afghanistan, is seeking the intervention of Pakistan to reinstate peace along with China. Till now Russia-China-Pakistan held three trilateral consultations so far to review the situation of Taliban. US reports even claim that Russia is arming Taliban. Trilateral meetings are now seriously mulling the prospect of working towards removing the names of dreaded Taliban leaders from the list of sanctioned persons as Russia fledging IS(Khorasan) as the real threat. This approach of working with Taliban is against basic precincts of India’s Afghanistan policy.

In the recent past, Russia significantly ramped up military cooperation with Pakistan actualized by sale of four Mi-35 helicopters. This was followed by joint narcotic exercises by both navies and first military exercise initially planned in the disputed Gilgit-Baltistan region that coincided with Uri-attack. While India was contemplating a stiff action against Pakistan for Uri, despite India’s objections Russia went ahead with bilateral exercises. Later, Russian officials clarified that Moscow will not undermine Indian interests. Additionally, Russian reluctance on including the Pakistan terror groups in BRICS joint statement against terrorism and Moscow’s support for CPEC, flustered India.

In 2011, after the killing of Osama bin Laden, Pakistan’s ties with US began to wilt, Islamabad decided to broaden foreign policy and rapprochements to Moscow. Ever since, Pakistan started cultivating ties with Russia. Russia which was stifled by economic sanctions of the West responded favorably to Pakistan by selling attack cum transport helicopters. Battling the economic woes, Putin while igniting nationalism passions, stepped into Chinese Orbit. A vigorously ambitious Putin though irked by China’s increased penetration into Central Asia, its sphere of influence, neck deep financial crisis prompted him to toe in line with President Xi. By 2014, resilient Russia began to reshape its geopolitical ambitions through the Russia-China-Pakistan axis. Going by the dictum “there are no permanent friends or enemies but permanent interests” Russia is now energetically recalibrating bilateral ties to reclaim international influence and reach.

Despite seeping misunderstandings in the long standing bilateral ties, Prime Minister Modi steadfast in his approach, days before his visit to St. Petersburg, warmly reached to Russians recapitulating the 70 yrs of diplomatic relations. In an article, he wrote to Russian newspaper Rossiyskaya Gazette, Modi reinforced that “India-Russia relations have been the one constant in the World that has changed dramatically since 1947. They have withstood test of time and grown from strength to strength”. He richly praised Russia’s invaluable in India’s economic and industrial development and held ode to Moscow’s military assistance, deep cooperation in sensitive spheres like missile technology.

Indo-Russian diplomatic relations were established much before India’s independence i.e., April 1947. Though the relations had initial glitches around 1950s, both countries developed exceptional camaraderie by 1961 after Russia broke off with China. Bilateral ties touched new heights with the signing of Treaty of Peace, Friendship and Cooperation in 1971. Sudden collapse of Soviet Union, in 1991, hit bilateral ties and both parties started looking towards the West for support. India was forced to reorient foreign policy. In 1992, India launched Look East Policy, sought relations with the West and Israel. But in 1993, reinstating new energy into bilateral ties, India and Russia reaffirmed inviolability of peace treaty. In 2000, both countries signed “Declaration of India-Russia Strategic Partnership” unveiling a new chapter in bilateral ties. Ever since both countries expanded scope of cooperation and fortified the relationship with annual summits. By 2010, strategic partnership was elevated to “Special and Privileged Partnership”. Modi on his third leg of Europe tour (from May 31^st to June 2^nd) landed in St. Petersburg for the 18^th annual India-Russia Summit meeting.

Last year, along the sidelines of BRICS summit at Goa during the 17^th Annual Indo-Russian Summit meet, Modi and Putin agreed to evolve a roadmap celebrating achievements and planning future trajectory of the close partnership. Closely after Modi-Putin, bilateral talks at Konstantin Palace,  both leaders unveiled a “Vision document for 21^st century” pledging to build an “energy bridge” to expand energy cooperation in nuclear, hydrocarbon, hydel and renewable energy sources. In line with provisions of the Paris Climate Agreement, both countries agreed to cut greenhouse gas emissions through wider use of natural gas. Amidst perceptions of crinkles in Indo-Russian relations, the much-awaited General Framework Agreement and Credit Protocols for units 5 and 6 of Kudankulam Nuclear Power Plant was successfully concluded. The MoU for development of nuclear energy was signed in 1988 by Rajiv Gandhi and Mikhail Gorbachev for construction of 8 reactors. It was reduced to six in 2008. Adding a fresh chapter to hydrocarbon cooperation, India and Russia will now jointly explore the Arctic Shelf.

Bed rock of Indo-Russian relations has been defence cooperation. For the past five decades, Russia remained largest military supplier for India. Only recently, India began to diversify its defence imports. Contrastingly, bilateral trade has slipped from $11 billion to $ 8 billion. Countries have set a target of $30 billion by 2025 which seems unreachable going by present trends. Enhancing economic cooperation through investments and expanding trade is on the agenda now. To facilitate expansion of trade, negotiations are expedited on Free Trade Agreement between India and EEU (Eurasian Economic Union). Leaders contemplated the prospect of developing a new credit rating agency which is more transparent. Further both countries agreed to expand scope of cooperation in various areas like space technology, aviation, agriculture, ICT, robotics, nanotechnology, pharmaceuticals, skill development, development of generic marketing programs for Diamonds, ship building, high speed railways and food processing. India and Russia five agreements. Days before Modi’s visit to Russia, India gave special waiver to sanction hit Russian defence entities to secure military tenders. To foster military to military cooperation both countries will continue to hold joint land and sea military exercises. Annual military exercise INDRA-2017 will witness tri-services exercise. Russia reaffirmed support for India’s candidature to the reformed UNSC and admission into NSG (Nuclear Suppliers Group).

Allaying India’s fears of Moscow’s Islamabad dalliance, Putin reiterated that “We don’t have such deep cooperation in sensitive defensive spheres (like missiles) with any country of the World and we do have such cooperation from India”. Replying to a question at press meet, Putin stressed ties with other countries wouldn’t affect Russia-Indian relations. In the joint Press conference, Modi and Putin unequivocally condemned terrorism in all forms and manifestations. Sending a stern message to Pakistan, St Petersburg declaration pronounced “we are convinced that the unprecedented spread of this threat requires decisive and collective response on the part of entire global community without double standards and selectivity, in accordance with International Law and UN charter”. Further Modi said that both India and Russia hold similar views on terrorism, whether in Afghanistan, Middle-East or Asia-Pacific. Putin concurring with Modi on Afghanistan is particularly reassuring since Russian stance has been particularly disconcerting for India recently. With respect to Kashmir and cross-border terrorism, Putin asserted that, “no matter where the threat comes, it is unacceptable and we will always support India in its fight against terrorism”.

Aside, intensifying ties, fostering soft power is an indispensable aspect of Modi’s Doctrine. In his three-day long visit, Modi paid homage to martyrs at the Piskarevskoye Memorial Cemetry, presented “Ugra Kujur” sacred Buddhist Treatises to Head Priest of Datsan Guznechoinel Buddhist Temple, visited State Hermitage Museum and attended the first ever collective meeting of Governors of 16 regions of Russia. Modi announced that a road in National capital is named after Russian Ambassador Alexander M Kadakin, friend of India.  

On June 2^nd, Modi attended St. Petersburg International Economic Forum (SPIEF) dubbed as “Russian Davos” as Guest of Honor. Addressing business delegations from over 60 countries Modi hard-sold India and wooed investors. Indicating that India is designated as top three favored investment destinations by rating agencies, Modi apprised foreign investors of opportunities galore in India. Reiterating the slew of measures introduced by his government in the past three years, Modi spoke about GST (Goods and Services Tax) aimed at dismantling the interstate trade barriers and appealed Russian investors to participate in Make in India, Skill India and Digital India. Modi bulldozed the “doctrine of good and bad terrorism” and urged the world to join the fight against terrorism. Prime Minister also reiterated India’s commitment towards climate change. President Trump’s announcement of pulling out from Paris Climate Accord alarmed the global community. Modi’s renewed emphasis and India’s conviction towards preservation of environment for future generations at International Forum thus assumes greater significance.

Deftly replying to the questions posed by Megyn Kelly what was described as “light-hearted” interview at SPEIF, Modi avoided a diplomatic wrangle on the multilateral forum. Displaying a rare acumen typical of a seasoned diplomat, Modi put to rest lingering doubts of his intellectual perspicacity. Modi concluded Russia visit on a high note in aplomb and style. He characteristically pulled off what can be termed another Madison Square Garden kind of event, though of not of same scale and reach. While Modi enthralled the audience with his eloquence at Madison, SPEIF interview generated similar buzz among the twitterati. Modi smartly handled controversial questions, avoided making barbed references. Though he demurred, he comfortably articulated Indian position.

Currently, the Asian arena is dominated by devotedly ambitious leaders like President Xi, Vladimir Putin and equally tenacious Modi. But unlike China and India, Russia is keen on challenging the Western interests across the globe. China avowed aggressiveness have finally elevated it to a status of ‘super power in waiting’. India, a responsible power, aspires to be a middle-income country. Economically shrunken Russia having tamed Iran, Syria and Turkey is leaning on China to position itself. (At the same time Russia has enough leverage in North Korea and Libya). But now Russia is becoming increasingly suspicious of Chinese intentions. Moreover, like India, Russia also has unresolved territorial issues with China. Though declining US command, might tighten Sino-Russian embrace, the provisional Russia-China alliance may not be indissoluble. Also, President Trump’s inimical and uncharitable references towards India are casting a shadow on blooming Indo-US relations. Putin’s response to US presidential hack is bound to grievously damage US-Russian relations. In this background, Prime Minister Modi has reached out to Russia with full vigor. Though it may be too early to conclude, Modi seems to have struck right cords with Russia.

@ Copyrights reserved.

Amidst trans-Atlantic Rifts India strengthens ties with Germany: Modi Europe Tour

Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s tour to Europe comes amidst of tectonic shifts in global order. Rapid geopolitical convulsions are forcing nations to rise their level of engagement to restore balance of power. India, a responsible middle order power, responding to new transformational alliance reconfigurations is taking one step at a time to position itself in the changing global scenario. Brandishing “America First” agenda, embracing protectionism, President Trump by pulling off from TPP (Trans-Pacific Partnership) created a vacuum. While his friendly overtures to Sunni-Alliance perplexed strategic experts, deranged remarks at the recently concluded NATO meeting deepened trans-Atlantic rifts.

Further, Trump’s drifting perceptions towards Russia as opposed to Germany’s uncompromising stance have sharpened the differences. Trump’s outlandish expositions on US-Germany trade surpluses at the recent G-7 summit further frayed the relationship. German Chancellor Angela Merkel, in a press conference responding to queries of NATO and G-7 summit remarked that “the times in which we would depend on others are on the way out” hinting at wider rift between European countries and the US. Clearly, European countries are miffed by Trump’s dogged reminder that NATO countries must pay up their fair share of defense spending. Trump’s rather uncharitable remarks and unpredictability has accelerated America’s transition from an “indispensable nation” to a great power. At the same time, China’s hegemonic rise, contemptuous disregard for international laws and the shrouded BRI touted as a phenomenal global infrastructure initiative is raising serious doubts about its real intentions. A declining American leadership muddied in uncertainty and obscure investment treaties of China created strains in the existing global order.

India afflicted by American inconsistencies in visa regimes and severely encumbered by the BRI is keen on fostering relations with middle order countries. Furthering this new approach, India in collaboration with Japan has kick started “Freedom Corridor” initiative for connecting Indo-Pacific region with Africa.

European nations frayed by Britain’s divorce from EU and battling the tides of Euroscepticism are showing signs of stabilization. Besides both Europe and India are severely threatened by the venomous cult of radicalization and extremism. Needless to say, Modi sought active cooperation of Europe in Counter-terrorism. President Trump’s indecision and plausible withdrawal from Paris Climate Accord has prompted Germany to pivot to Asia.  While it might be too early to draw conclusions on Germany’s drift to Asia since Europe accords high weightage to trans-Atlantic relations. Merkel’s outburst and preference to free trade deals will eventually augur well for India, keen on joining hands with technologically advanced country like Germany. Hence, Prime Minister’s Europe tour assumes greater significance.

Fresh from the celebrations commemorating three years of completion of office, Modi embarked on a six-day four nation Europe visit which include- Germany, Spain, Russia and France in order. Flagging off the tour, Modi first landed in Berlin where he was extended an official welcome with military honors at the Chancellery. Later Modi held bilateral talks with German Chancellor Angela Merkel at country retreat Schloss Meseberg under the frame work of India-Germany bi-annual Intergovernmental Consultations (IGC). The last IGC was held in October 2015.

India was one of the first few countries to acknowledge the Federal Republic of Germany after the World War II in 1945. Both countries established economic relations in 1951. Bilateral relations picked up momentum after the economic reforms in 1991. In 2000, both countries elevated relations to strategic cooperation and enacted the “Indo-German Agenda for the 21^st Century”. Ever since both sides intensified bilateral cooperation and pace of engagement was significantly enhanced through high level diplomatic visits. Defence cooperation agreement was signed in 2006.  In 2007 both sides signed “Joint Statement on the Further Development of Strategic and Global Partnership between Germany and India” and the strategic partnership was strengthened by the IGCs which basically identified new areas of cooperation. Other than China and Israel, India is the only country outside EU with which Germany has close partnership. Besides India and Germany are now closely working together on the UNSC expansion through the G-4 framework and on other global issues like sustainable development, climate change along the sidelines of G-20. Also, Indian States and German provinces also enjoy tantalizing sister-cities relationships.

Germany is India’s largest trade partner in EU with bilateral trade volume of $17.42 billion. Being a strong economic partner, Germany took keen interest in India’s flagship initiatives likes Make In India, Digital India and Skill India. In April 2015, India delegation under the leadership of Modi attended as a partner country to the Hannover Messe trade exhibition promoting the Make in India initiative.  In return, Germany Embassy launched the Make in India Mittelstand (MIIM) in September 2015, to facilitate the entry and investment Small and Medium Enterprises (SME)s of Mittelstand in India. Of the 73 companies that were facilitated through MIIM, 43 companies have made good progress. As of now Germany with $9.7 billion is the seventh largest foreign direct investor in India while Indian investments in Germany account for $7 billion. Over 200 Indian companies are operating in Germany. Both countries signed Intergovernmental Science and Technology Cooperation Agreements in 1974. Currently there are over 150 joint S&T research projects. Till now ISRO has launched 10 German satellites. Another important area of cooperation is developmental cooperation, wherein Germany has offered both technical and financial assistance to India. At the 3^rd IGC, both countries signed the Indo-German Solar Energy Partnership with Germany extending a concessional loan of $1 billion over next 5 years. Phenomenal contribution of the scholarly works of Max Mueller who translated Rig Veda and Upanishads laid a strong foundation towards deepening Indo-German cultural ties.

India and Germany which are on same page with regards to restoring peace and stability in Afghanistan, expansion of UNSC both permanent and non-permanent memberships, freedom of navigation and right to passage, have condemned terrorism in all manifestations called for finalization and adoption of Comprehensive Convention on International Terrorism (CCIT). At the fourth IGC, both countries signed 12 pacts on disaster management, cyber security, skill development, sustainable urban development, vocational education and training, health, alternative medicine, cooperation in solar technologies etc.

India and Germany agreed to deepen trade relations by resuming negotiations on the India-EU Broad Based trade and Investment Agreement (BITA) for mutual protection of new investments. Indo-German BITA has elapsed in March. It is one of 23 BIT agreements India has with EU countries. A swift conclusion of India-EU FTA can give needed impetus for investments. Both countries are keen on enhancing cooperation in defence manufacturing and maritime cooperation for development of blue economy. Modi has personally pledged India’s unstinted commitment towards climate change and reiterated that jeopardizing nature is against Indian heritage. India promised to support Merkel on climate goals at the upcoming G-20 summit at Hamburg. Underlining the prominence of Indo-German bilateral ties, Modi described Germany as a reliable partner in India’s development. He added, “the pace of development of our relations is fast, the direction is positive and destination is clear. Germany will always find India as a powerful, prepared and capable partner.” Modi later addressed the Indo-German Business Summit highlighting the huge untapped potential of the bilateral economic partnership. Prime Minister called upon German President Frank-Walter Steinmeier at Bellevue Palace Berlin.

It must be recalled that Germany has a very deep economic relationship with China with volumes of trade 10 times higher than India. By consequence, Germany favors China over India but the relationship developed few glitches owing to China’s expansionist tendencies and predatory economic practices. Though China overtly advocates free trade regime, a cautionary and rather reserved approach towards foreign investments and access is making European nations suspicious. Hence the tide seems to be shifting to India which is reaching out to nations with free trade practices. But India certainly needs to work hard to walk the talk to eventually realize true potential of the Indo-German relations. Close on heels, China’s Premier Li Keqiang will be in Germany on Wednesday to re-engage with European countries. Beijing has already made significant forays into Europe with its Railway connections and is well placed to nudge European nations into Free Trade Agreement, an issue which India reluctantly prolonged.  But unlike China, India religiously abides by the democratic values and judiciously adheres to International laws and negotiates trade deals with transparency. India certainly have an advantage in the International realms for its democratic credentials. New Delhi must channelize this pragmatic outlook to its advantage in engaging with Germany, the most powerful nation of EU.

@ Copyrights reserved.