Is historic Inter-Korean Summit a new beginning to a catastrophic conflict?

Asia is going through a major diplomatic churning and the day April 27^th, 2018 will be reckoned in history for being a witness to three important events that can offer plausible solutions to long-festering morass. While Indian subcontinent is deeply engrossed in evaluating Wuhan, informal meet between Modi and Xi, the historic Korean-summit is capturing the attention of the World.  Besides, these two pioneering developments, President Trump is going to hold talks with Angela Merkel at White House regarding trade tariffs on Iron and Steel and the historic Iran nuclear deal.

Korean leaders, Kim Jong Un of North Korea and Moon Jae-in of South Korea met at the truce village of Panmunjom, South Korea, a demilitarised zone (DMZ) separating two Koreas. The meeting is truly historic, as for the first time, a North Korean leader has set foot on South since the Korean war of 1953. The handshake between North Korean leader Kim Jong Un, grand son of Kim Sung Il and his South Korean counterpart Moon Jae-in, son of North Korean refugee who moved to South will go down in history as a fervent attempt by two countries to unveil peace on the Korean peninsula. Kim accompanied by his sister, Kim Jo Yong and inter-Korean relations head are warmly welcomed by Moon, South Korean spy chief and chief of staff. The emotional meeting began with Moon stepping into Northern side briefly, before leading Kim and his delegation to the Peace Summit Building.

The Third Inter-Korean Summit is convened by leaders is largely believed to set stage for the much-anticipated meeting between Kim and President Trump next month. Another underlying interest of summit is to uphold legacies of their predecessors: Kim’s mission of safeguarding dynasty and Moon’s of unifying the peninsula. Days before the meet, Kim announced moratorium on nuclear tests and pledged to dismantle the nuclear site Pungyye-ri and revive economic development. In reciprocation, South turned off propaganda devices at the DMZ zones. Interestingly, Kim hasn’t imposed a precondition of evacuation of American troops from South Korea for talks. While a display of harmonious reciprocity is ostensibly good news, hushed talks of reunification are also mooted with interest. Though it may be premature to comment anything in this regard, a survey conducted by Korea Institute for National Unification last year showed that 71.2% of respondents in 20s opposed reunification.

Inter-Korean Summits

As of now, Koreas held three Inter-Korean summits since 1953. In 2000, South Korean President Kim-Dae Jung, who advocated Sunshine Policy travelled to Pyongyang for talks with Kim Jong Il. Second summit too place between Roh Moo-hyun and Kim Jong Il took place at Pyongyang in 2007. Seoul and Pyongyang are 160 km away but the journey by flight took over one hour since it flew over West Sea to avoid the heavily militarised zone between the countries. Denouncing Cold war style politics, South Korea adopted Sunshine Policy and generously aided the North and initiated various projects to foster economic cooperation. Indeed, Kim-Dae Jung was awarded Nobel Peace Prize for his reconciliatory approach. But the terms of engagement took a massive hit after North Korea conducted first nuclear test in 2006. Despite, concerted opposition of conservatives, Roh made last ditch attempt to reach out to North. But with North remaining uncooperative, in 2010, conservatives who swept the elections, stalled all aid programs and ended the Sunshine Policy. Moon, a supporter of Sunshine policy served as presidential secretary to Roh. When North approached South to broker peace deal, Moon who has several years of political experience gladly agreed. Korean peninsula has been living under the shadow of war for over six and half decades as Armistice of 1953, temporarily stopped the war but formally didn’t end it.

To attend the third Korean summit, Kim walked into South passing through DMZ. Leaders wished each other courteously and steered the engagement personally. The leaders sat across 2018 centimetres table and had freewheeling discussions accompanied by interpreters alone. After parting for lunch and returning to their respective camps, leaders manured 65- year old tree and had a private walk, beyond the range of microphones. While analysts have been deeply sceptical of North Korean intentions, Kim effused warmth, remained receptive and cordial. A day before the Summit, Kim reportedly said that he wouldn’t need nuclear weapons if security of his government is guaranteed and no nuclear power launches an attack.

Joint Declaration

In the joint declaration, both leaders pledged to end war. Sharing the commitment of ending the era of confrontation and division, a relic of cold war, they promised to lead the countries towards an era of conciliation, peace and prosperity. They expressed desire to build and reconnect blood relations and implement all agreements and declarations adopted by both the sides. Both countries agreed to renew cooperation in various fields, encourage development of people to people ties, stage joint events on important days and jointly participate in international events. Agreement is reached to convene Inter-Korean Red cross meeting to relocate and arrange for reunion of separated families and to stop loud broadcast and distribution of leaflets along the border region.

Militarily, they agreed to cease hostilities on all three domains air, land and water and convert demilitarised zones into peace zone by May 1^st this year. Accordingly, Northern Limit Line in West Sea will be turned into a maritime peace zone to avoid military clashes and ensure safe fishing. To generate trust, both sides agreed for regular mutual exchanges, visits and cooperation between the military authorities of both countries. As a confidence building measure, both sides agreed to carry out phased disarmament. Both countries decided to hold a trilateral or quadrilateral with US and China to permanently declare end of war and establish a permanent peace regime. Finally, both leaders reiterated their commitment towards complete de-nuclearization for a nuclear-free Korean peninsula and sought the cooperation of international community to realise the same. To invigorate friendship and trust, leaders agreed to hold regular discussions, meetings and telephonic conversations. Truly, Korean rapprochement seems to be enlivened by the tall promises and broad smiles. But the million-dollar question remains…will Kim deliver on his promises?

After signing the joint declaration, Kim said, “We will make efforts to create good results by communicating closely, in order to make sure our agreement signed today before the entire World, will not end just as a beginning like previous agreements before today”.

Kim’s soft approach to avoid further ostracization and isolationism is in sharp contrast to his intransigence in carrying out a barrage of missile testings. Trump has been credited for the new shift in stance of Kim for threatening North Korea with more crippling sanctions and exerting pressure. Hailing this new historic summit Trump tweeted “KOREAN WAR TO END!!! The United States and all of the GREAT people, should be now proud of what is taking place”.  Interestingly, while Trump had made the right moves, the road ahead seems to bumpy, riskier and augury.

American Dilemma

Till now North carried out six nuclear blasts (equal to India’s nuclear tests), one intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) testing and several rounds of missile blasts. Kim’s nuclear ambitions sent the countries in its immediate vicinity into a tizzy. After the soaring success of the sixth nuclear test and ICBM, and having completed development of nuclear weapons, North began to climb down and attempted to broker a deal with South and Washington. After Trump agreed for a formal meeting with Kim, he travelled to China last month and promised to work towards peace and stability of the region. There are four important stakeholders in the Korean issue besides two Koreas-US, China, Japan and Russia. For both Koreas, summit is more about rapprochement, ending the Korean war and bringing peace. Korean border is the most heavily militarised border the in the World and both countries are in suspended state of war ever since. US and Japan want near total verifiable, nuclear disarmament. China and Russia, close allies of North Korea are closely watching the developments.

Despite the optimism of Korean leaders, Kim is cognizant of American’s manner of treating countries with weapons of mass destruction (WMD) like Iraq and Libya. In 2015, 5+1 cut a verifiable, complete denuclearization deal, JCPOA, Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action with Iran. This deal had as of now become prototype for dealing with nuclear belligerent state. But ever since Trump assumed power, he adamantly castigated JCPOA as a “bad deal”. He reluctantly signed a waiver suspending sanctions after much persuasion in January. As per JCPOA, America must certify Iran every 120 days that it is complying with set guidelines and sanctions need not be applied. Next approval is due for May 12^th. Trump has upped ante against Iran calling it a state sponsor terror and urged European counterparts to make fresh changes in the deal to rectify “disastrous flaws”.

European countries wary of dismantling the deal which was put in place after years of persuasion and talks with Iran. To prevent unravelling of JCPOA, French President Emmanuel Macron visited US tried to convince Trump to uphold the JCPOA but failed. Trump threatened to tear the agreement. Iran has now warned that it will pull out the agreement if US exits. Trump persistence for making unilateral changes in negotiated document will create fresh doubts for Kim who is immensely concerned about security of his government.

Besides, tough stance on JCPOA is now creating new fissures in its already fractured relations Russia and China. In a new development reminiscent of cold war era, US and Russia are now modernising and developing new and advanced missiles that can escape detection at an alarming pace and resurrecting a fresh nuclear arms race. Appallingly the stakeholders of Korean issue are bitterly divided. With Trump having agreed to hold talks with Kim work is cut out for America. It must now productively engage and charting out objective course of denuclearising Korean Peninsula.

While sceptics belied enthusiasm of Kim and snapped back that North Korea has cut several deals with countries in the past but never honoured them, Trump optimistically responded, “I don’t think he is playing…Its never gone this far. This enthusiasm for them wanting to make a deal”. He added, “We are going to hopefully make a deal. If we don’t that’s fine”. North Korea denuclearization issue has become a nagging issue at a time when major powers are unabashedly justifying proliferation of weapons to safeguard national interests. At a time when world is enveloped by dark nuclear clouds, can concerned stakeholders provide a peaceful solution for systematic denuclearization of Korean peninsula? Also, how can outsmart an astute and audacious Kim, who knows how to use his limited diplomatic leverage?

Successfully ending the summit, Korean leaders released joint declaration after the banquet, watched a music performance which ended with words “be a family again” and parted with warm farewells. Bonhomie of the historic summit, reminded the World of a happily ever after kind of scenario. But as a matter of fact, the long story of Korean saga, is yet to be untangled...miles to go becomes the peninsula becomes nuclear free.

@ Copyrights reserved.

What to make of Modi-Xi informal meet at Wuhan

The Doklam standoff that lasted for 73 days brought India and China to the brink of war and severely crippled bilateral ties.  Ever since bilateral relationships witnessed a paradigm shift marked by a significant change in foreign policy stratagem. Undermining the animosities and shark differences India and China began to close in to each other. This was reflected in growing number of bilateral visits between the nations. Last December, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi and State Councillor Yang Jiechi visited India which was closely followed by Indian Foreign Secretary, Vijay Gokhale’s trip to Beijing in February. In April, National Security Advisor and Special Representative for Border Issues, Ajit Doval visited China weeks ahead of External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj and Minister of Defence Nirmala Sitharaman’s visit to Beijing for attending foreign ministers and defence ministers of SCO (Shanghai Cooperation Organisation) members meeting respectively. Ever since escalation of Doklam issue till now both countries witnessed hectic diplomatic activity. The flurry of exchanges, together with MEA’s (Ministry of External Affairs) notice to Indian officials to stay away from official appointments of Dalai Lama has prompted strategists to suggest that India is probably seeking to “reset” its ties with China. These meeting are seen in the contest of setting stage for Prime Minister Modi’s meeting with president Xi at the SCO summit at Qingdao, China. Much to the surprise of strategists, Foreign Ministers of India and China at the SCO meeting announced an informal meeting between leaders of both countries at Wuhan, China on April 27^th and 28^th. This unprecedented development of Prime Minister Modi travelling to China twice in the gap of two months to hold meetings with Xi has surprised international community. While insiders, claim that efforts were underway for the past eight months for such an arrangement, approval of both leaders for such high-level engagement has increased chances for deepening of cooperation related to issues of common interests.

This informal meeting besides raising hopes for revival of ties on a plethora of issues, underscored the diplomatic astuteness of Modi and his signature style of building personal rapport with World leaders. India for long relied on the coterie of envoys to communicate and engage with countries, taking a break from this arrangement, both leaders, known to be “hard-headed nationalists” will reflect on bilateral issues. While the format of the meeting is not clear, it will be a close-door conversation between the leaders assisted by interpreters. No joint statement or document will be released. A person familiar with the plans said, “The intention of this is to ensure that at the leadership level there is a strategic communication. Both countries are emerging as important countries in the World, we are both neighbours. These are risks involved as well, therefore there is a need for discussions to mitigate and handle those differences and of course growing the relationship. I foresee a discussion that is focussed on the positives of the relationship.” Former Indian foreign secretary Lalit Mansingh said, “the format will give two leaders the room to discuss all issues without the weight of too much expectation. The discussions can be seen as the beginning of the resolution of problems rather than be seen as resolving all problems.”

Amidst talks to renewed engagement with China, India unequivocally expressed its reservations towards BRI (Belt Road Initiative) and CPEC (China Pakistan Economic Corridor) and stayed away from the joint communique issued after foreign Ministers SCO meeting on OBOR. Speaking at the Summit, Swaraj condemned the protectionism and stressed on the need for economic globalisation that is open, inclusive and equitable. While refraining from directly naming Pakistan, Swaraj, expressed concerns over burgeoning terrorism calling it “an enemy of basic human rights” and urged members of SCO to “identify and take strong measures against states that encourage, support and finance terrorism and provide sanctuary to terrorists and terror groups”. 

Upon hearing, India’s willingness for robust engagement with China and Modi’s informal meetings, China Observers contended that India is bending over backwards to appease China. But India’s categorical objections to certain sticky issues and uncompromising approach towards terrorism should allay fears of strategists who believe that India will toe Dragon’s line hence forth. It must be recalled that the heightened escalations during the border stand-off could be remarkably quelled due to the proactive diplomatic approach embraced by both countries. Days before the Xiamen, BRICS Summit in 2017, NSAs of both countries held close diplomatic talks paving way for cooling heels over the Doklam issue.

In the meanwhile, the Global Times, Chinese official mouth piece began creating a new paradigm saying, “India is dissatisfied with the US definition of the strategy (Indo-Pacific strategy). India has also realised that the huge gap between China and India and worries that China will take even tougher measures against India which may hinder India’s domestic development”. It added, “changes of India’s China policy are tactical, not strategic, as India’s traditional hegemonic and cold war mentality has not changed. The Modi government thinks that India should become a leading country rather than simply a balancer. India believes that China is India’s geopolitical rival”. China always believed to putting the blame on somebody else for its aggression and this outburst of Global Times is no different. But this statement makes it amply clear that Beijing is ruffled by India’s proactive diplomatic engagements with various regional groupings. China is intimidated by revival of Quad, strengthening of Act East Policy and consolidating ties with ASEAN countries, India’s renewed engagement with European countries. This was reflected in the closing statement of Global Times saying, “The warming of ties between China and India is out of the needs of both countries”.

Beijing which is now profligate about its global domination strongly believes the West is playing India against Beijing to contain it. Reflecting Dragon’s wariness, The Global Times, in an editorial spluttered “The US and Japan began underscoring Indo-Pacific strategy last year in an explicit attempt to rope in India against China. But the strategy hasn’t brought India any strategic benefit except to trigger vigilance between New Delhi and Beijing. Indian elites now realise that India shouldn’t develop cooperation with the US at the cost of ties with China…. The West wanted India and China to confront each other. But it didn’t work that way. Asian powers and emerging countries both China and India share common interests in international affairs. They both have to strive for the right to develop and face Western pressure on issues like trade and intellectual property rights. There is large room for economic cooperation. China and India have more robust economic development than other emerging countries and both are independent”.

Since Doklam, there has been phenomenal global power shift. Hardening protectionist approach, President Trump in a show of economic aggression announced imposition of 25% tariffs on Chinese products for its “unfair economic practices”. China began to feel the heat of tariffs and announced counter tariffs. But being the largest exporter, China will stand to lose in the trade tariff war. In the aftermath of US trade threats, China for the first time in eight years, held trade talks with Japan. Wrapping up trade talks, China and Japan agreed to improve ties with leaders of both countries planning to pay reciprocal visits. They even planned a trilateral summit involving South Korean leaders. During his election campaign, Trump criticised Japan, Vietnam and India for persistent trade deficit and now China has intensified trade talks with all these countries.  US trade threats has brought about a stark change in China’s approach towards India.

Aside, issues of trade, US security observers are now raising alarm over growing Chinese hegemony in the South China Sea (SCS). In the first week of April, as a message to Taiwan and show of support to Russia, China conducted biggest ever Naval exercise in the SCS and surprise live-fire drill near Taiwan Straits. Around the same time, USS Theodore Roosevelt along with 20 F-18 Super Hornet Fighter jets performed landing exercises on their way to Philippines water. US also announced expansion of annual military exercises with Philippines to include Japan and Australia. Newly nominated Pacific Command Chief, Philip Davidson called for fielding and developing strong force posture to “counter Chinese malign influence in the region”. He even warned US of China’s weaponization of space, improving ballistic missile technology and cyber capabilities. Australia expressed similar concerns and willingness to join hands with US. Escalation of trade war, US imposed sanctions on the sale of ZTE manufactured mobile phones for violating US sanctions against North Korea and Iran has flustered China. Interestingly, last year having violated the sanctions, ZTE agreed to punish the concerned employees and agreed to pay $1.2 billion fine. But China backtracked and hence US commerce department announced a ban on the sale of mobiles for seven years.

While nothing much has changed between India and China in the past one year, Trump’s bolder stance on trade issues, North Korea’s coming out of China’s cudgels and reaching out to US has altered the geopolitical game for China. Notwithstanding towering Chinese influence, both Koreas displayed gumption to initiate peace talks. This substantially reduced the invincibility and influence of China in Asia. Europe is too waking up to pervading Chinese presence in the region. Bereft of any other option, smaller countries have grudgingly accepted Chinese rise. But now, the warnings of international agencies of China’s slumping growth rate coupled with high debt levels staring at possibility of financial crisis might be at the root of new game of seeking rapprochement. Also, India’s formidable opposition towards BRI is gaining more prominence with Europe which is seriously reassessing China’s real motives pertaining to global connectivity initiative.

International community is closely observing new found cordiality of Asian giants. Wuhan meeting will offer unique opportunity for leaders to reflect on sticking points and improve strategic communication. India understands that China will not make concessions but there can be possibility of negotiations over issues of conflicting interests. China expects India to endorse its new global status while India is growing wary of increased Chinese penetration into its exclusive spheres of continental and maritime influence. Both countries are grappling for influence in subcontinental region. Sources indicate that Pakistan and Tibet issues might dominate the agenda of talks. Chinese strategist Zhao Gancheng, suggested that Wuhan meeting will seek to “promote economic cooperation between the two largest developing countries amid US driven anti-globalisation trend, and mechanism to safeguard peace and avoid border disputes”. India’s perceived closeness with US and its rising global influence makes New Delhi, an important strategic partner hard to ignore. Endorsing India’s growing stature, Global Times known for its distasteful antipathy carried a conciliatory article saying, “China’s strategic indifference towards India and India’s strategic sensitivity towards China have always existed. These attitudes are rapidly becoming major obstacles towards development of the two countries. The more they develop, the more serious strategic anxiety on the other side and greater the security burden unless positions are addressed, and traditional notions of geopolitical competition are abandoned”. While a constructive diplomatic engagement with China is good, India mustn’t give into Chinese pressure.

@ Copyrights reserved.

Why Make in India?

Tariff wars between US and China are forcing nations to have a relook at globalization. Transformation caused by globalization was meticulous. It contributed towards a seamless and borderless world. With time countries that have managed to smartly put their competitive advantage in manufacturing to advantage emerged as big players in global trade. Steadily, the gap between the countries widened as countries with superior manufacturing abilities began make huge profits through trade emerging as winners of globalization. China, having emerged as a manufacturing giant, started recording huge trade surplus at the behest of countries that lost out in this competitive race. As a damage control or in real terms, countries which have been grappling huge trade deficits in this case-US, resorted to levying new tariffs. This trend which is labelled as protectionist is also regarded as an anathema to free trade and open markets. Currently India is facing similar situation with respect to the bloating trade imbalances with China. Over years, India has turned into dumping yard for cheap Chinese goods which subsequently took a toll on the Indian manufacturing sector. While China openly championed for free markets it closed doors to Indian exports especially in pharmaceutical and service sectors and enthusiastically imported raw materials. This uncompetitive manufacturing sector coupled with skill deficit and the growing burden of trade deficits started hurting Indian economy.

Owing to America’s protectionist approach, China pledged to champion globalization. But China mortified concept of free markets by imposing restrictions on access to its economy. It has been violating the basic predicaments of free trade like Intellectual Property rights and transparency. Free trade espoused by China has been a myth and in course of time turned it into a double-edged sword escalating trade deficits. Trade deficits together with deficit budget began to push economies into a death spiral. US experienced this double-whammy for a decade plunging the growth rate to less than 3%.  India could even hardly take such glum economic scenario.

To make country self-reliant, Prime Minister Modi introduced the monumental Make in India initiative. While skeptical Indians rue about this flagship initiative, this on long term holds the promise of stabilizing Indian economy and keeps economy rolling. Modi planned to maintain a reserve of $500billion and aimed at receiving foreign investments of $50 to $60 billion to keep Indian economy robust and prosperous. Modi aspires to turn Make in India initiative into a bed rock for Indian economy. The concept of localized manufacturing with foreign investment can generate new jobs, will prompt reskilling, provide impetus for research and development. With the burden of imports gradually tapering, India can use the profits generated as capital. Local manufacturing can reduce the need for currency manipulation which in turn can mitigate currency volatility.

@ Copyrights reserved.

Bharat ki baat-Sab ke saath: A mega start for General Elections 2019

Masterfully mixing his vision for India with right mix of satire, Modi engaged the audience in the close-door interactive session with Indian Diaspora titled “Bharat ki Baat Sabke Saath” held at West Minister Hall, London. Anchored by Prasoon Joshi, who brightened spirits of Diaspora with his eclectic Hindi recitations the question and answer session covered a wide range of issues from governance, administration, Prime Minister pet initiatives, women’s security, and foreign affairs. Coming just a year before elections, the program served as an excellent platform for Modi to reach out to Indians across the globe, who were anxiously grading Modi’s performance. It gave an opportunity for Indian electorate to make right choices for the upcoming elections.

Opening the session by humbly submitting that the honor accorded to him at Royal Palace belongs to the 1.25 billion Indians Modi extolled the power of a democracy where a poor person can rise to highest echelons of power. Ruminating on his early stages of childhood which started on a railway platform, he stated that having lived in poverty, he doesn’t need to read books on poverty. He apprised the audience of his conviction to reach to the last man or “Antodaya” the bedrock of BJP’s ideology. Modi spoke about Jandhan yojana, rural electrification, Ujjwala yojana and Open Defecation Free Projects. Justifying high level of expectations of the middle class from his government, he drew an analogy to a family where parents have high expectations from a hardworking child. They pin their hopes on him. Similarly, people have faith in our government and hence the increasingly aspirational middle class is becoming impatient and expects us to implement new projects.

In his two and half hour long interactive session, Modi patiently responded to all criticisms and masterfully turned every question to effectively communicate with audience. Cognizant of people’s restlessness and the growing frustration of the middle class who felt targeted by the economic reforms, Modi used this event to assure them that his government is committed to build a better India. He said, “Democracy is not any contract or agreement, it is about participative governance” and urged the middle class to be partners in nation-building.  Aside, stressing on the participatory democracy, he impressed upon the audience just as Mahatma Gandhi motivated people to make freedom movement a mass struggle, he is keen on involving people in the long-drawn exercise of working towards development of country. He appreciated the spirit of Indians, who gave up LPG subsidies and railway concessions as their contribution towards betterment of nation.

Modi’s unpretentious submission of, “I am like any common citizen. And I also have drawbacks like normal people do” will go a long way in bursting the myth of Megalomaniac kind of portrayal of the Prime Minister by media. Further, Modi’s authoritative response to a question posed by a Kannadiga on Bhagwan Basaveshwar and his efforts in uniting the society can be a hit with Karnataka electorate who are exasperated by Rahul’s gaffes and inability to even pronounce his name.

In a reply to a question in surgical strikes, Modi commended the Indian Army for executing the mission with 100% precision and said “through surgical strike, our jawans gave befitting reply to those who export terror”. Mincing no words, he added “We believe in peace. But we will not tolerate those who like to export terror. We will give back strong answers and, in the language, they understand. Terrorism will not be accepted”. Reiterating India’s commitment to adhere to righteousness, even towards enemy, Modi clarified that before releasing the news of surgical strikes to India

n press, Indian Army felt morally obligated to inform Pakistan of strikes. Modi’s uncompromising attitude towards national security and tough messaging to Pakistan will go down well with Indian electorate. Incidentally, in the past four years, but for the fake stories planted by media of communal disharmony and discrimination, by and large, there were no major terror incidents or communal clashes. Even the instances of red terror and the insurgency in North East region are largely under control. Modi government can thus take complete credit for upholding national security.

Throughout his interaction, Modi consciously refrained from making any rhetorical references to previous regimes. Cognizant of the fact that four years of his tenure have passed, and people are at the critical juncture of exercising electoral choices, Modi made attempt to win people’s trust. At a time when pressitudes are trying to relaunch Rahul Gandhi before every assembly election as a potential rival, in glorified avatar, Modi through his itemized and subliminal messaging tramped dynast efforts. Modi’s eloquence effectively bulldozed opposition’s incoherence and incompetence. Besides, Modi’s synergistic communication ranging from references to Indian philosophy and unabashed foreign policy approach of being unapologetic about his Israeli visit and fortifying relations with rivals like Saudi Arabia, Iran, Palestine simultaneously captivated audience. Referring to India’s pragmatic policy of diplomatic outreach he said “Neither do we look at countries with raised eyes nor with lowered eyes” and enlightened audience of various foreign policy initiatives too. Pressing home the point that his government is making rapid strides along various fronts, Modi earnestly unveiled campaigning.

To sum up, Modi’s oratory rejuvenated staunch BJP supporters, drew interest of fence-sitters and earned contempt of chronic haters. Increasingly, it is becoming clear that Modi, the master communicator can turn the tide…

@ Copyrights reserved.

India's Engagement with Nordic Countries

Days before assuming power, Prime Minister Narendra Modi, displayed a rare streak of diplomatic ingenuity and initiative of fostering good relations with neighbors by inviting heads of SAARC nations for his swearing-in ceremony. Ever since, he continued the tradition of engaging with different multilateral groups. At the SAARC summit held at Nepal in 2014, to enhance regional cooperation, Modi pledged that India will hoist a communication satellite, barring Pakistan, all other countries hailed the step and by May 2017, scientists at ISRO successfully placed the South Asian Satellite in space. In 2015, India hosted the leaders of 14 Pacific Island nations under the India’s extended Act East Policy at Jaipur. In fact, the Forum for India-Pacific Islands cooperation (FIPIC) was first conceptualized in 2014. Similarly, to provide fresh impetus to Indo-African traditional ties, India held India-African Forum Summit (IAFS) in October 2015 at Delhi. In 2016, India held annual BRICS summit at Goa and invited members of BIMSTEC (Bay of Bengal Initiative for Multi-Sectoral Technical and Economic Cooperation) to participate. This year, India hosted leaders from ten ASEAN (Association of South East Asian) countries for the Republic Day celebrations. Last month, India held the first International Solar Alliance (ISA) summit attended by 23 heads of nations and 10 ministerial representatives at Gurugram.  In a marked shift from symptomatic reluctance and reticence, Modi ushered India into a new realm diversifying relations with various regional stake holders.

Committed to the new paradigm of collective engagement, Modi has embarked on a five-day trination tour on April 17^th making his first stopover at Sweden. Modi was received at Arlanda airport, Stockholm by Prime Minister Stephen Lofven, who extended a ceremonial welcome. In a rare display of effusive warmth and hospitality both prime ministers traveled together in the same vehicle from airport to hotel. The bilateral visit to Sweden for attending the first ever India-Nordic Summit has been first by an Indian prime minister in the past three decades. For long, India eschewed from a robust diplomatic engagement with Nordic countries -Denmark, Iceland, Norway, Finland, and Sweden that have a unique international identity. Having achieved sustainable development and progress by lapping up innovative technologies, these countries have been the top most democracies in terms of freedom, gender equality, rated as best societies in terms of human development index (HDI). Four out of these five countries are among the top least corrupt countries of the World. They have several socio-political and economic lessons to offer to developing countries like India. Nordics are extolled for good governance, promoting peace and for upholding universal human values. These countries have excelled in renewable energy generation, developing environmental friendly technologies, emerging as shining examples of post modernization. Moreover, Nordics are among the top ten happiest countries of the World. Though India established diplomatic relations with Nordics shortly after independence misunderstandings marred bilateral ties.

Till date, Sweden reminds India of the Bofors arms scandal and the dubious business dealings, similarly India’s ties with Denmark nose-dived in 1995, after a citizen of Denmark, Kim Davey was found to be involved in the arms dropping in Puralia, West Bengal. Duplicitous attitude of Denmark hindered the extradition process soaring the relationship. Efforts by successive Indian governments failed to bring back Davey for prosecution in India. More recently, the case of Indian child taken into government custody in Norway affected bilateral ties. Even now, India and Nordic countries have minor difference over interpretation of towards human rights, terrorism, and corruption.

To break ice and nurture friendly relations with the Nordics, India made the first move. In October 2014, President Pranab Mukherjee visited Norway and Finland and signed several agreements which included nuclear energy cooperation with Finland. Mukherjee visited Sweden in May 2015, laying ground for firm cooperation between two countries. In all, he signed six agreements-cooperation in sustainable development, MSME enterprises, visa exemption for diplomatic passport holders, collaboration in polar and ocean research, cooperation in ageing research and pharmacovigilance. After a slump in economic growth in Europe, export-oriented Nordic countries began slowly shifting their focus towards high-demand Asian markets. In the past decade, Nordics cultivated extensive trade and investment links with China. With India now projected as the fastest growing economy, Sweden reposed great enthusiasm in building friendly ties with India.

Reciprocating Indian President’s visit, Swedish Prime Minister Stephen Lofven, accompanied by a large business delegation made a visit to India in February 2016 for “Make in India”, week at Mumbai to deepen investments in India.  Subsequently, India and Sweden Business Leaders Round Table Conference was created and held first meeting in November 2016. Lofven’s visit gave a big boost to defence cooperation whereby the India-Swedish Joint Working Group resolved to promote Make In India in defence sector. India is the 19^th largest export market for Sweden and third largest trading partner. Indian companies like Aditya Birla, Wipro and Bharat Forge made big investments in Sweden. Over 170 Swedish companies have invested $1.4 billion since 2000 in sectors of automobile industry, industrial machinery, electrical equipment, mechanical and metallurgical industries. Of them, five firms- Ikea, Tetra Pak, Haldex, Astra Zeneca and Ericsson are partners of Make in India Bilateral trade stands at $1.78 billion.

Both countries established diplomatic ties in 1949 and currently have institutional mechanism for inter-governmental functioning the areas of economic, industrial and scientific cooperation and have joint working groups on digital technologies and economy, sustainable development and environment. Modi held bilateral talks with his Swedish counterpart and in the Joint Action plan both countries agreed to work together on international issues of mutual concern, climate change, Agenda 2030, human rights gender equality, humanitarian issues and international trade. Firmed out their commitment to foster ties in the fields of innovation, trade and investment, smart cities and next generation transport, smart sustainable and renewable energy, women’s skill development and empowerment, defence, space and science and health and life sciences. Sweden a front runner in defence manufacturing expressed willingness to supply defence equipment. With the experiences of Bofors scandal looming large, for decades India largely shied away from making any defence deals with Sweden. But with countries having agreed to share classified information, the chances of Saab AB delivering Gripen fighter jets have brightened. Kick starting Indo-Swedish partnership, Sweden pledged 50 million kroner towards smart cities and sustainability projects.

After the conclusion of bilateral talks, Lofven remarked, “India has emerged as a global power. No important global conversation is complete without the voice of India”. Undoubtedly, all other Nordic leaders share the same view and hence expressed great interest in holding first ever joint historic summit with India. The only other instance Nordics held similar summit was with President Obama in 2016. Equipped with complementary advantages and unique strengths, India and Nordic partnership holds promise for boosting economic growth and investment. As now, cumulative trade with Nordic countries is around $ 5.3 billion and their cumulative investment totaled to $2.5 billion.

India’s outreach with Nordic countries will be a special way of connecting with North European countries whose commonalities are embellished with different international approaches. Of them-Sweden, Finland, and Denmark are part of European Union. Iceland, Norway and Denmark are members of NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organisation). Sweden and Finland stayed away from the muddles of Cold war. By and large, Nordics are known to be peace-mongers and have reputation of facilitating peace processes. 

In the Joint Summit, India and Nordics agreed to strengthen cooperation and work together for shared common ideals like climate change, environment, innovation, sustainable goals. All of them reiterated the need for greater engagement to drive growth employing the novel innovation approach of Nordics. Amidst burgeoning protectionist measures in global trade, leaders stressed the need for a rule-based multilateral trading system which is open and inclusive. Leaders indirectly took at dig at China for flouting rules- based international system, human rights, and rule of law.  Indeed, Nordics initially raised their concerns of flagrant denigration of human rights and freedom of expression with China. Imposing trade sanctions and halting exports from Nordics, Beijing forced them into silence. Tellingly, in the joint statement, Nordics joined India calling for upholding international conventions and rules. Nordics reaffirmed the need for reforms in UNSC and extended complete support for India’s permanent membership to UNSC and its admission into the prestigious nuclear regime, Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG).

After the summit, Modi met Nordic prime ministers separately.

Finland a traditional friend of India is known to be repository of modern technology. Finnish goods have high demand in Indian markets. Over 100 Finnish companies have operations in India.  Modi with his Finnish counterpart Juha Sipila reviewed cooperation between two countries in the areas of trade, culture, textiles, air services, science and technology, investments, avoidance of double taxation environment, renewable energy, nuclear and radiation safety.

Modi and Iceland Prime Minister Katrin Jakobsdottoir, viewed signing of MoU for establishment of Hindi Chair at the University of Iceland. Several Icelandic companies like Greenline Software, Actavis Pharmaceutical, Promens have a large presence in India.

First official contact between India and Norway was on February 21^st1947. Cordial Indo-Norwegian are rooted to shared values of democracy, rule of law and human rights. Joint working groups between these countries exist in fields of fisheries, education, environment, hydrocarbons and maritime law. Key areas of Norwegian investments have been Shipbuilding, IT industry, clean energy, hydropower. Modi and Norwegian Prime Minister Erna Solberg held brief talks.

Unlike his predecessors, Modi nonchalantly overlooking impediments posed by Denmark judicial system for extraditing Kim Davey conducted bilateral talks with Danish Prime Minister Lars Lokke Rasmussen. Both countries signed four MoUs on sustainable and smart urban development, animal husbandry and dairying, food safety and agriculture research. Reports now emerge that Prime Minister Rasmussen in an exclusive conversation with Wion raised hopes of resolving Puralia Arms Drop case. He assured, “Director general of prosecution is looking into it…we have to start the case in legal track and restart cooperation”.

With the US and China donning competitive protectionist approach, Nordics, strong proponents of open and inclusive society are looking forward to deepening trade and investment ties with India. Modi’s fervent invitation for investments will go down well with Nordics. Against the background of growing Chinese presence, India is excessively focused on nurturing inherited good relations. Modi’s effervescent diplomatic outreach to Nordics is admirable.

@ Copyrights reserved.

China’s Polar Ambitions: Power play at Antacrtic and Arctic regions

President Xi has inaugurated the annual Boao Forum popular as Asia’s Davos on April 10^th against the backdrop of US-China trade tariff wars. Allaying fears of escalation of trade war whose reverberations could have an impact on other economies as well, in line with theme of the Forum, “An open and innovative Asia for a world of greater prosperity” Xi promised to increase market access, open financial and insurance sectors, lower import tariffs and strengthen the IPR protection. At the face of it, countries welcomed these assurances but were little skeptical. Managing Director of IMF Christina Lagarde, who attended the forum, urged China to stop the OBOR (One Belt One Road) and warned partners of the potential risks of this colossal global connectivity initiative.  While the initiative can provide much needed infrastructure financing to countries, she added “these ventures can also lead to problematic increase in debt, potentially limiting other spending as debt service rises and creating balance of payment challenges”. Last year, Centre for Global Development warned that eight countries part of OBOR, an infrastructure initiative in which China is estimated to invest $8 trillion across Asia, Africa and Europe. The countries Pakistan, Laos, Mongolia, Maldives, Djibouti, Montenegro, Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan are now placed in the high-risk category of debt distress. While a tenuous report of OBOR or New Silk Route is alarming, China is preparing to add yet another dimension to OBOR, making it one belt one road one circle. China made no secret of its plans of expanding OBOR to Arctic Circle is launching the Polar Silk Route. President Xi inaugurated OBOR in 2013 is now no longer balking from expanding its presence in new arenas like deep sea, outer space, polar regions. Breaching every possible frontier China has now jumped into the fray bearing no holds. Reiterating China’s stake as “upcoming polar region power”, an announcement, President Xi made on his to visit to Australia in 2014, China officially incorporated Arctic in its official vision for maritime cooperation last year.

Power Play in Antarctic

Motivated by economic and strategic interests, China is investing heavily to explore and exploit the resources in the polar regions. China Daily once reported that Xi expressed continued interest in cooperating with Australia and other nations, to know and protect Antarctica. China observers maintained that while Chinese officials deliberately avoided making any references about their interests in exploiting polar resources, Chinese language material audaciously campaign that Chinese investments in Antarctica are intended for tapping the rich mineral resources. To this end, China held 40^th Antarctica Treaty Consultative Meeting in Beijing (ATCM) in Beijing last year which was attended by representatives from 42 countries. Though China hasn’t issued a White paper on its activities and plans for Antarctica, in less than 10 years China vigorously expanded its infrastructure in the region. As a result, China emerged as one of the very few countries that has influential position both Arctic and Antarctic council.

As of now, China has four research stations in Antarctic, two field camps, three air fields and set to unveil the fifth base in Ross region area close to American station. It has second largest number of people working in Antarctic. China is considerably expanding its logistic capabilities in the Antarctic mostly around resource rich regions. Though it hasn’t made any formal territorial claims to the region, three Chinese bases lie in the Antarctic territorial claim of Australia. It is steadily working towards obtaining Antarctica resource rights, governance rights for peaceful exploitation. China is mulling to possess the Antarctic Special Managed Area (ASMA) an area designated for environmental protection to be under the state access or in other terms, it wants to control a part of Antarctic and Southern Ocean.

Unlike its Antarctic aspirations, China has given wings to its Arctic ambitions and released a white paper to reflect its growing interests in Arctic region. China’s Arctic strategy is tailored to further foreign trade and energy security. Almost 90% of global trade is sea-borne and 70% of China’s energy imports travel by sea. To meet it growing energy requirements and an edge in maritime trade, China has strengthened shipping industry and now the gigantic shipping behemoth of China, COSCO, has third largest container ship fleet. Fretful of the Malacca dilemma, China constantly made efforts to explore an alternate route to strengthen energy security.  Further, the pirate infested west African coast had turned the shipping along Suez Canal perilous. Passage through Arctic besides, significantly reducing the distances between China and Europe obviated the twin obstacles of pirate menace and Malaccan dilemma.

Arctic Ambitions

China, has been a forerunner in orchestrating alternate strategies to stay ahead of the curve in consonance with changing global scenarios. China which is extremely ambitious has been slowly working towards attaining its strategic and military goals of invariably stretching its boundaries to the maximum. After the stealth expansion in South China sea, initially under the pretext of protecting its southern coastline, it began controlling the shipping lanes and now it has developed all the geographical features in the SCS into military bases. Global warming is causing faster depletion of thick layers of ice in the Arctic circle and Climatologists now predict that by 2050, Arctic might become amenable for shipping. Taking a lead from these estimations, Chinese shipping companies are surveying the region to assess accessibility for profitable shipping. Aside, offering an alternative shipping route, the lure of natural gas reserves and rare earth minerals in Artic has been an enticing factor for China. US Geological Survey estimates that Arctic region holds 30% of world’s natural gas reserves and 13% of oil.

Building an Arctic Policy

China has been meticulously working out Arctic strategy since 1990’s. In 1994, China bought an icebreaker from Ukraine to navigate along the major shipping routes in Arctic. China obtained membership in International Arctic Science Committee in 1996 and since 1999 it has organized scientific expeditions in Arctic with its research vessel, Xue Long. In 2004, China built Arctic Yellow River Station in Spitsbergen Archipelago and conducted a week long first Arctic Science Summit in Asia in 2005. By 2017, China completed eight scientific expeditions in Arctic Ocean.

In 2013, first Chinese container ship transited the North Sea Route to reach Rotterdam from Dalian in less than a month’s time as against 45 days along the regular Suez Canal route. In the same year China has become one of the 13 countries with observer status to the Arctic Council which includes 8 permanent members. Permanent members include-US, Russia, Canada, Norway, Finland, Sweden, Iceland, and Denmark (Greenland and Faroe Islands). By 2014, China devised a stratagem of promoting OBOR by eulogizing, Ming Dynasty navigator Zheng He and his seven voyages to Western seas. President Xi eventually peddled the narrative that Zheng He’s fleet passed through Arctic seas and discovered Greenland and Iceland. To push this anecdotal theory, China sought a cover under the theory of “1421: the year China discovered the World” a book written by British submarine commander, Gevin Menzies. China even intensified its diplomacy with Arctic nations. In April 2016, Xi visited Finland, the current Chairman of Arctic Council enroute his visit to Washington for a summit meet with Trump becoming the first President to visit Nordic countries in 22 years.  Within months, the first China-Finland Iron Silk Road began operating. Both countries are now jointly building China’s second ship breaker which will be ready by 2019. Xi made a brief stopover at Alaska while going back to Beijing from US clinching a crucial agreement for supply of LNG. Around the same time, Chinese delegation visited Iceland, the upcoming chairman of council. Months later, Norwegian President made his first visit to China after their relations soured over awarding Nobel Peace prize to Liu Xioabo in 2010. Not satisfied with this high level diplomatic lobbying, in January this year, China began to prop up the campaign of asserting itself as “near Arctic state” and released a white paper subsequently citing its interest in “peace, stability, and sustainable development”, a rhetoric which it has pushed along for its ambitious OBOR.

To pursue its Arctic goals, China befriended Greenland which is economically weak and has great territorial presence in the Arctic circle. China is making huge investments and planning to set up permanent research station for satellite monitoring in Greenland. Denmark controls Greenland. Danish authorities concerned of the China’s dubious reputation of late has stopped China from making any investments in Greenland. But if Greenland attains independence China will leave no stone unturned to establish formidable influence over the country.

All the eight Arctic states have territorial claims to the region and states outside Arctic region don’t have territorial sovereignty in Arctic, but they have rights to conduct scientific research, navigation, overflight, fishing and laying submarine cables and pipelines. States party to Spitsbergen treaty (which includes India, China) enjoy liberty of access and entry to specific areas of Arctic, right under conditions of equality, can do scientific research, carry out production and commercial activities like hunting, fishing and mining.

During cold war, this region had been a theatre of power projection between the superpowers-US and Soviet Union. From 2012, Russia has started refurbishing military bases in Arctic along the north Scandinavian coastline into North Atlantic. To bolster its strategic interests in the 21 million sq kilometer Arctic Circle China partnered with Russia which has territorial claims to huge tracts of land in the region. China is investing in Russian natural gas projects in Yamal Peninsula which is progressing at a quicker pace. Russia indeed sent first shipment of LNG to India through the Arctic waters along Bering Strait in March. China National Petroleum Corporation holds 20% stakes in the project owned up Russian Oil Giant Novatek and invested 9.9% finances. This route took two weeks less compared to the shipping route to East Asia. Enthused by this success, Russia is now starting production from Yamal LNG-2. Yamal in the local parlance meant, “end of the world” where temperatures hover around -50C making exploitation of oil extremely challenging. China is providing the technical expertise and finances to Russia which is facing severe financial crunch ever the Crimean annexation of 2014. China, a Permanent member of UNSC, in its quest for seeking parity with US, wants to enter the new sphere of Artic region, previously inaccessible to China to play a bigger role in global and regional issues. With old players retreating, Beijing is intent on filling that vacuum to play a leading role.

Concerns

Already, China’s aggressive maritime expansion in the Indo-Pacific region, rapid militarization of the man-made islands in the South China Sea are raising concerns among the smaller countries in the region. Unraveling of a Polar Silk Route should be worrisome. Smartly, calibrating the effects of global warming on the Arctic region, which is the most underdeveloped region on the globe currently, China is stitching friendship with all stake holders to buttress its influence. Besides the burgeoning Sino-Russian cooperation in Arctic region may result in both countries controlling the eastern and western gateways to Arctic impacting the trade routes within both Pacific and Atlantic regions.

China having meticulously monopolizing control over shipping routes along South China Sea (Pacific Ocean) is now eyeing to control the Atlantic, which has been the exclusive domain of the Western countries. Over the past few decades, China has been clandestinely strengthening its dominance and while the West is caught unaware. As of now, West has an upper hand in the Arctic Council with four of the member countries being democratic nations and other being members of NATO. As of now, while China’s Artic document is peppered with words similar to those in OBOR-“win-win situation”, “cooperation” and “respect”. It is no secret that China has global ambitions and its Arctic policy is a vehicle for building a Sino-centric world. In a classic case of devil reciting scriptures, China promised to abide by International rules-based order in its Artic policy document. But its vehement refusal to abide by UNCLOS based rules in SCS belies its commitment towards the norms set by the Arctic littorals for the region. While commercial shipping in Arctic region can be a possible by 2040 at the earliest, China’s overtures and heightened diplomatic activity clearly reflects its intentions of exploiting the region for its gains. China pledged to work towards environment and ecosystem protection, respect the jurisdiction enjoyed by Arctic states, culture of indigenous people and uphold UNCLOS. Intriguingly, China has ruthlessly infringed aforementioned objectives under the OBOR. Despite a long history of perfidy to its credit, China promises to uphold all the international norms in its official Arctic policy. Perhaps, time alone can throw light on China’s subversive strategy !!!!

@ Copyrights reserved.

Nepal Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli seeks readjustment of ties with India

Amidst speculations of Modi’s “neighborhood first policy” failing in effectively garnering friendship of immediate neighbors, Nepalese Prime Minister Khadge Prasad Sharma Oli, adhering to the tradition of making first official foreign trip, was in New Delhi, on three-day visit from April 6^th to 8^th. His visit comes a day after Maldives snubbed India by asking New Delhi to take back a helicopter operating from the Addu atoll. Around the same time, having won local elections, opposition parties supported by Mahinda Rajapaksha, former President of Sri Lanka, initiated a no-confidence motion against the current India-friendly Ranil Wickramasinghe’s government. Both these events further raised serious doubts about dwindling India’s influence in the neighborhood. 

Oli has taken over as 27^th Prime Minister of Nepal for the second time in February this year.  Oli, known to be pro-Chinese leader of the Communist Party of Nepal Unified Marxists Leninists (CPN-UML) joined hands with Pushpa Kamal Dahal (Prachanda) of Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist Centre) and other 13 parties to fight in Parliamentary elections held in December last year. The leftist coalition combined swept elections clinching close to two-thirds majority, annihilating the dominance of the right-wing party Nepali Congress (NC) of Sher Bahadur Deuba. The left alliance of Nepal for long has been pro-Chinese and Oli effectively stitched an alliance with various leftist groups that thrived on the anti-India sentiment. Days after taking over as Prime Minister, Oli indicated his authoritarian ambitions by removing a Supreme Court judge, Parajuli much against the solidarity of his fellow judges. He brought investigative agencies under his control and appointed his trusted loyalists to key positions. Indicating that Supreme Court judges have connections with NGOs or political parties, he is intent on scuttling independence of judiciary.  Armed with brute majority the left coalition is already invoked fears of plunging country into a dictatorial mode. But by and large, nations hailed the elections for an overwhelming majority can end Nepal’s long travails of political instability. Additionally, Constitution has introduced new provisions wherein parties are barred from raising no-confidence motion against less than two years old government.  Indian sentiment had always played an immense role in Nepali elections. Massive defeat of Nepali Congress, perceived to be pro-Indian has been a big blow to India’s foreign policy. Unperturbed by the results, Indian delegation headed by Minister for External Affairs, Sushma Swaraj visited Nepal to congratulate the new dispensation and held talks with leftist coalition leaders expressing India’s willingness to work with new government. Towards, the end she met leaders of Nepali Congress.

The 14-month long Madhesis agitation which led to blockade of the Indo-Nepalese border not only crippled the transit of essential goods and services but also generated intense backlash against India. This agitation has critically undone Indian good will of rushing services within hours after Nepal was struck by massive earthquake in 2014 and fomented anti-Indian sentiment. At the height of agitation, Oli, in 2015, has turned to China and signed 10 MoUs including the landmark transit and transportation agreement. This included extension of railway line from China through Tibet to reduce dependence of the land-locked Himalayan country on India. With the agitation halting the Nepali trade through the Kolkata port 1000km from Nepal, Nepal approached China to use the Tianjin port 3000km away. Lately, Nepal broke Indian monopoly on internet services and teamed up Chinese services. From January, Chinese cyber companies have begun their operations in Nepal. Thus, Nepal steadily drifted towards China. For long, Tibet has served as an outer boundary while Nepal constituted the inner boundary between India and China. With Nepal slowly closing into China by signing OBOR in May 2017, New Delhi began to feel the heat. Growing Chinese penetration into Nepal, a country with which India shares porous borders can be a pernicious threat to India. Also, several rivers originating from Nepal flow down into Ganga have huge consequences in terms of ecology and hydrothermal potential for India. Chinese burgeoning influence is now posing a formidable threat to centuries old Indo-Nepalese ties built on interdependence, trust, and friendship.

Oli served as prime minister for a year between 2015-16 when the blockade was underway after the new constitution was amended. Defiant Oli refused to make amendments in the constitution to accommodate demands of Madhesis as a result, Prachanda withdrew support allegedly at the behest of India after which his regime has collapsed. Now, he is back in power with a sweeping majority and understandably, he might not have taken Indian role during the Madhesis agitation and subsequent loss of Prime Ministerial position kindly. Besides his affiliations to communist parties amply levitate him towards China.

Independent India as inheritors of the British legacy, largely believed South Asia to be its sphere of influence. The British ably defended paramountcy in the region by offering subsidies and refraining from interfering in the internal affairs of the protectorates. In return, smaller kingdoms pledged loyalty and never succumbed to rival powers. Independent India faltered in realigning itself to new realities got inadvertently drawn into domestic politics. This has typically been the case with Nepal. Though India and Nepal are closely connected by religion, culture and language, power asymmetry began to creep into what should have been a “special relationship”. Indo-Nepal friendship treaty of 1950, allowed free movement of people and goods between two nations and collaboration in foreign policy and defense related issues. The deep interdependence and connectivity, instead of building trust, bred resentment. Afflicted by “small country syndrome” Nepal felt intimidated and insecure and negative narratives began to feed into Indo-Nepalese bilateral relations. India has cared little to address Nepal’s insecurities which eventually snow balled into “anti-India sentiments”. Besides, India’s inability to deliver projects on time has severely exacerbated the fissures. Sandwiched between two big Asian giants, Nepal began switch sides from India and drifted towards China to “stand up” against India. While Nepal’s political dispensation has been highly critical of India’s interference in Nepal’s internal affairs, it is widely believed that China from behind the scenes managed to bring various left-wing parties in Nepal to fight jointly in the elections.

Oli’s visit to India comes at a time China’s forays into south Asian counties are at hilt and Indo-Nepalese relations mired in clouds of mistrust.  Besides, Pakistani Prime Minister Shahid Khaqan Abbasi’s visit to Kathmandu in March after the new regime took charge added more fuel to India’s apprehensions. Setting the tone for his visit, days ahead of India trip, Oli announced in the Nepal parliament that he will not sign any agreement with India that would, “go against national interests of Nepal”. “We want to maintain dignified relationship with India while desisting anything that would be disgraceful to the nation”. So, essentially the visit has been an attempt to reset ties and bridge the trust deficit. India on its part, rolled out red carpet welcome to Oli who was received by home minister Rajnath Singh at the airport.

Both the prime ministers held talks and reviewed the entire spectrum of multifaceted bilateral ties and resolved to work together to take the relationship to “newer heights on the basis of equality, mutual trust, respect and benefit”.  The two prime ministers have inaugurated the Integrated Check Post at Birgunj, Nepal and hoped that its early operationalization will enhance greater movement of goods and people. They witnessed the ground-breaking ceremony of Motihari-Amelkhunj cross border petroleum pipeline at Motihari, India. Build at a cost of 200 crores, the 69-km pipeline will deliver 2 million tonnes per annum of petroleum products to Nepal. To impart new dynamism into the relationship, both countries signed three agreements. India-Nepal: New Partnership in Agriculture, Expanding Rail Linkages: Connecting Raxaul in India to Kathmandu in Nepal, Connectivity between India and Nepal through inland waterways. This electric rail line might eventually pave way for a seamless connectivity with the Chinese built Shigatse-Khatmandu line. India has promised to complete the construction of two rail lines-Jayanagar-Bijalpura-Bardidas and Jogbani-Biratnagar in Nepal by this year. Plans for building three more rail lines is on books. In tune with Himalayan country’s new slogan of “Samriddha Nepal, sukhi Nepali”, to boost land-locked Nepal’s economic rejuvenation and reduce dependency on India, countries have given new thrust to energy, connectivity and transit issues.

During Oli’s visit India expressed willingness to walk extra mile to bridge the trust deficit. But Oli in his speech at a civic reception in New Delhi said, “Relations with neighbors differ from that of others. Good neighborliness demands harmonious co-existence forever. And trust is the cementing factor. It derives its strength from the observance of such fundamental principles as equality, justice, mutual respect and benefit as well as non-interference. As friendly neighbors, our two countries need to be aware of, and respect for, each other’s concerns and sensitivities. Nepal has not allowed its land to be used against the sovereign interests of India. We are firm in our resolve to maintain this position. And it is natural that we expect similar assurance from India”.  With respect to 2015 blockade he said “we need to ensure that bilateral as well as regional connectivity and transit agreements run smoothly without interruption at all times. Recourse to obstacles in the movement of goods, services and people should have no place in today’s interconnected World and in interconnected neighborhood”. Clearly Oli has pinned blame on India for the agitation and its aftermath. The tenor of his speech indicates that Nepalese leadership is still mistrustful of India. It is unfortunate that India’s generosity towards Nepal is shrouded by intimidation and suspicion. While, Nepal is entitled to bemoan power asymmetry, by drawing closer to China, a much bigger neighbor than India, isn’t Nepal at a bigger risk of surrendering its national interests?

@ Copyrights reserved.

Historic Indo-Israel Flight: An outcome of Modi’s proactive Link West Policy

Two days back, the Saudi King in making, Mohammed bin Salman Al Saud in an interview to the The Atlantic, said “Israelis have right to their own land”. He added, “I believe that each people, anywhere has right to have their own land. But we have to have a peace agreement to assure stability for everyone and to have normal relations”. This statement from the defacto ruler of country which has essential refused to even recognize the statehood of Israel is truly massive. The sudden U-turn and an overt warm tone signaled Saudi Arabia’s massive shift in foreign policy. Saudi Arabia which considers Israel as its enemy and oppressor of Palestinians still don’t have formal diplomatic relations with the Jewish Republic. In his interview, he announced that both countries would benefit by establishment of official relationships. He opined, “Israel is a big economy compared to their size and it’s a growing economy and of course there are a lot of interests we share with Israel- and if there is peace, there would be a lot of interest between Israel and the Gulf Cooperation Council countries and countries like Egypt and Jordan”.

MBS, as he is popularly known, since his elevation took many strategists by surprise by his rather unusual reforms. The latest remarks of MBS on Israel inadvertently reminded US administration’s indirect role in heralding the coming together of Saudi Arabia and Israel. Indeed, President Trump’s son-in-law and adviser Jared Kushner in charge of Israel-Palestine issue is now widely believed to have played a crucial role in bringing about some change in Saudi’s approach towards Israel. Middle East lately has become iconic hub for dramatic shift in geopolitical strategies. Jordan and Egypt having shorn off animosity have thus warmed up to Israel. With Iranian expansion on rise in Middle East, countries have decidedly kept old rivalries away and inching closer to forging new relations for shared interests. In fact, these tangible new changes aptly be reflected in Saudi Arabia granting permission for Indian Airlines passenger flights to fly over its domestic air space. Till now, Indo-Israel flights used to take the circuitous route over the Red Sea, Gulf of Aden to avoid entering countries like Saudi Arabia, UAE, Iran, Pakistan and Afghanistan which don’t recognize Israel. Official approval from Saudi Arabia has cut short the journey by 2hrs 10 min.

On March 23^rd, AI 139 flew maiden flight from Delhi that landed at the Ben Gurion airport Tel Aviv flying over Saudi Arabia. It has been a historic moment for India. This couldn’t have been a reality but for the meticulous diplomatic maneuvering of both India and Israel prime ministers and of course Saudi Arabia. Prime Minister Modi’s West Asian policy deserves all the credit for making this historic flight a possibility. Interestingly, Indian Airlines alone was given permission to fly over Saudi Arabia while Israeli Air lines, El AI is denied the access and had to operate along its old route. Welcoming this iconic development, Saudi official said, “We have to be very cautious. This is really a first step-a very important one…I hope with times we have more normal reaction with our neighbor in the region. India has played a very important bridge (by introducing the flight over Saudi space) not only between India and us but also between Israel and other countries in the region”. Saudi Arabia besides thanking India for its initiative acknowledged New Delhi’s crucial role in fostering relations between nations in the region. The flight AI 139 from Delhi, avoiding Pakistan and Afghanistan, first travelled to Mumbai and from there it flew over Oman, Saudi Arabia and Jordan.

The only other instance, when Saudi Arabia opened its airspace for Israel was to US Air Force One of President Trump who visited Riyadh in May last year. India getting that rare distinction and trust is a matter to reckon with.

India’s renewed engagement with West Asian countries coupled with regular high-level visits is yielding results.  Be it Jordanian and Israeli helicopters guiding and guarding Prime Minister Modi’s convoy on his visit to Palestine or deportation of Dawood Ibrahim’s aide Mansoor Mohammed Farooq alias Farooq Takla, a wanted terrorist in Mumbai blasts of 1993 by UAE. All these latest developments distinctly endorse success of Modi’s “Link West Policy”. Though Opposition ruthlessly derided Modi government’s supreme efforts in finding a logical end to the missing case of 39 Indians in Mosul, Iraq, retrieval of bodies, ascertaining their identities through DNA tests couldn’t have been possible but for the cooperation of the Iraq government. All the above clearly underscores the success of India’s west Asia diplomacy. Needless to say, direct flights between India and Israel will go a long way in enhancing economic activity and people to people connect. It gives much need fillip to Indo-Israel bilateral ties.

Some diplomats claim that the spade work for the direct flight between both countries is almost two years old, when President Obama along with Permanent five managed to successfully conclude Iran nuclear agreement. Saudi Arabia and Israel strongly protested the deal for failing Iran pay price for its nuclear ambitions and presaged Tehran will be emboldened. Both countries believed Iran would be a greater threat and began to reach out to each other. Around the same time, India revved up its ties with both Israel and Saudi Arabia and this triangular mutual amiability made way eventual roll of direct flight between India and Israel.

Besides Iran, other unifying factors have been Syrian unrest and Islamic state.  Saudi Arabia having initially supported Islamic terror is now feeling the heat of them same is looking forward to collaborating with Israel which is deeply concerned about Islamic extremism. Saudi Arabia’s interest in India is two-fold-growing Indian economy aside offering better opportunities for investments and new businesses is tipped to become third largest consumer of Oil. Moreover, with the US, the largest consumer of oil now turning into exporter of oil and European economy slowing down making Asian countries-India and China most favored markets for oil exports. Saudi Arabia is now increasingly convinced of the need for diversifying the economy instead of relying completely on Petrodollars. To bring in such a transformation, traditional policies must be replaced with more investor-friendly institutions like its neighbor UAE, which has become synonymous to development and progress. Threatened by radical Islamism, determined MBS is ushering country onto a reformist track. The sale of Armaco for liquidating assets, arrest of Saudi Princes and Royal elite over corruption, introducing new reforms like allowing women to drive cars, opening cinema theatres and stadiums have been part of the huge exercise towards creating investment friendly environment.

Now by opening airspace, Saudi has indicated that it values Indian friendship and interested in doing business. India’s approach of staying away from the sectarian conflicts in the Middle East despite its economic dependence on the region and focusing on the tacit strategic autonomy of maintaining friendly ties with warrying countries like Israel, Saudi Arabia and Iran in the region all at the same time is now paying off. Direct flight between India and Israel, facilitated by Saudi Arabia which was even unthinkable is a reality. Thanks to the Modi’s doctrine of advancing India’s economic and strategic interests uncompromisingly, India pulled off an impossibility.

@ Copyrights reserved.