Haritha's Musings: September 2015

Tuesday, 29 September 2015

Setting Stage for stead-fast Indo-US Ties

The first India-US Strategic and Commercial Dialogue, a brain child of the Modi-Obama meet at Delhi in 2015 concluded just before Modi’s arrival in the US setting ground for an interaction between leaders of both countries next week in New York. India-US Strategic Dialogue has been in place since 2010, this year it was elevated to accommodate commercial and economic aspects besides the issues of security and global diplomacy. While the Strategic Dialogue earlier too included the economic issues the new format is more on lines of China-US Strategic and Economic Dialogue. But the extent of trade between the India and US is roughly one sixth the size of US and China.

Indian delegation was headed by foreign affairs minister Sushma Swaraj and included Minister of Commerce Nirmala Sitharaman and Minister of Coal Piyush Goyal. American side was represented by US foreign secretary John Kerry, Secretary for Commerce Penny Pritzer and Secretary of Energy Ernst Moinz. The event attended by nearly 400 business leaders from both countries opened on a promising note with Joe Biden, Vice-President of US in his inaugural address indicating that the US wants India to be its best friend (1). He appealed that both democracies should collectively working towards climate change and to rein in extremist forces.

While there has been a greater understanding between the countries on strategic issues the economic front is marred by lack of synergy. Days before beginning of the dialogue several US senators expressed their concerns about section 3(d) of India Patent System that curtails the practices of ever greening of a patent, restrictions in market access, policy towards US agricultural products and crackdown on the NGO’s. Further India’s report card on economic front issued by World Bank was poor with ease of doing business (142^nd), enforcement of contracts (186) and resolving insolvency (136) among 189 countries. US has been quite critical of bad statistics. But Indian delegation struck back with pragmatic statistics that projected a rosy image of the economy. These include India topping the innovative index among the low income group. Elsewhere a study of Morgan Stanley group rated Indian private sector companies as the best in the World (2). Further with the bursting of the stock market bubble in China, India is projected to emerge as the best economy among BRICS. Besides a stable currency, demographic dividend and a robust stock market make India one of best places for investment (3).

A steadfast approach of Modi government resulted in substantial improvement of Macro Economic indicators like GDP, Consumer Price Index, reining on fiscal deficit, balance of payments, stock index. Several Indian Economists are pragmatic at the pace of reforms and opine that a clarity on deregulation, tax regime, dispute resolution will augur foreign investment. India markets largely driven by domestic consumption and thus a lucrative place for foreign investments.

Ministerial level dialogue between the countries wrapped up in Washington on 24^th ended with the release of Joint Statement (4) which briefly elucidates the initiatives and bilateral agreements reached and laid foundations for strengthening of long term relation. Following the conclusion of the dialogue, Sushma Swaraj reflected on six major takeaways. These included- steering high level dialogue, nuclear cooperation, internet governance, combating terrorism, working towards climate change and long term space cooperation (5).

Strategic interests significantly outweighed the commercial aspects in the dialogue process. Both sides believed that intense engagement can be fostered through facilitation of greater interactions between bilateral institutions and people. The US welcomed Indian proposal of conducting regional Pravasi Bharatiya Divas (PBD) at Los Angeles in November 2015.

Strategic and Defense Issues

Significantly the two vibrant democracies of the World envisaged the need to extend the arena of collaboration in new areas and consistently work towards contribute towards peace, security and prosperity under the Joint Strategic Vision for Asia- Pacific and Indian Ocean Region. The US has been highly appreciative of India’s efforts in evacuating its citizens from Yemen and resolved to protect civilians during global crisis. Both countries have decided to train troops in identified six African countries before they are recruited in the UN Peace Keeping Forces.

US has agreed to support India’s membership into the Missile Technology Control Regime and NSG and into other nuclear nonproliferation regimes. Further it was agreed that the bilateral ministerial dialogue would also Japan and would eventually held along the sides of UN General Assembly meetings and consequentially Japan will be part of the 2015 MALABAR naval exercise.

Interestingly both sides have agreed on launching a new high level consultations led by Indian foreign secretary and US deputy secretary for State. While India has proactively pushed through the InterGovernmental Negotiations (IGN) on Security Council reforms on the eve of the 70^th Anniversary of the UN, the tepid response of the US delegation has been a bone of contention. India’s bid for permanent seat in the reformed UN Security Council India received a major boost with the US reaffirming its support.

US appreciated India’s proposal to launch SAARC satellite and both sides in an effort to scale up outer space cooperation are exploring the possibility of renewing US-India Technology Safeguards Agreement for 10 years to facilitate launch of US satellite components on Indian Space vehicles. Currently both countries are sharing technical data on Mars Orbiter Space Security Joint agreement launched in March 2015. The ambit of cooperation is now extended to areas like blue economy, protection of Ocean ecosystem

In line with India’s aspirations of forging ahead into the realm of internet governance, discussions are on to include India in ICANN. A track 1.5 program is convened to further cooperation on internet and cyber issues.

India and the US intend to steadily step up cooperation between their defense industries through “Make in India” program. A ten year Defense Frame Agreement was formally signed by the US and Indian counterparts during Defense Secretary Aston Carter’s visit to India in May 2015. In memory of the victims of the 26/11 and 9/11 both sides resolved to expand partnership in endorsing the Joint Declaration on combating terrorism. Both sides pledged their commitment to restore peace in Afghanistan through high level consultations and they expressed support for the timely implementation of Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) evolved by P5+1 for Iran.

Climate and Clean Energy

In the run up the COP, Paris Conference of Parties under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change in December both sides accentuated the need to work towards mitigating the global climate change. India in a bid to curtail its emissions is keen on adopting embracing clean energy initiatives and actively seeking technological partnership. To foster scientific and academic cooperation in the field of climate change and renewable energy US-India Partnership announced Fulbright Climate Fellowship program. A MoU was signed to tackle wild life trafficking a special mention was made of India’s anti-poaching efforts towards conservation of Tigers.

Combatting Terrorism

The Joint statement on Strategic and Defense cooperation emphatically pondered on enhancing and extending the purview of cooperation to new areas to intensify engagement, a categorical Joint statement on combatting terrorism is the hall mark of this entire dialogue process (6). Sushma Swaraj vehemently reiterated the threat posed by Al-Qaeda, its affiliates, Lashkar –e-Tayyaba, D-company, Haqqani Network, Jaish-E- Mohammad and appealed Pakistan to bring the perpertrators of the terrorism to justice. Both sides have severely condemned the terrorist attacks in Gursdaspur and Udhampur. India appealed to US that it is time to act tough on kinds of terrorism that threaten the peace and stability of entire South Asia. During the discussions India reiterated the need for enhanced cooperation against money laundering, terrorism finance, extradition and mutual legal assistance. Mumbai is included the Strong Cities Network, an initiative under which the local governments are systematically strengthened in building community resilience to counter violent extremism. Progress has been made for MoU between the Indian National Police Academy (Hyderabad) and the New York Police Department. The tough stance of the US towards terrorism does indicate that Washington no longer accepts the Islamabad’s line of argument. But the lack of consistent action and veiled financial support of the US to the Pakistan does raise doubts about its real intentions. Even though US specifically calls for bringing the 26/11 masterminds to justice, Pakistan remains unperturbed under the aegis of China. Accustomed to fanning out despicable claims against India Prime Minister Sharif has set ground to rake up the Kashmir issue at the UN General Assembly. Incidentally China too has raised the issue of recent stand-off in the Burtse area of Ladakh as Indian Army has bulldozed the Chinese observatory hut built 1.5 km inside the Indian side of the LAC. The choreographed dubious claims against India by hostile neighbors at a time when the UNSC reforms are at its pinnacle clearly reflects the sinister motives of anti-India club. It is high time India too ratchets up supports with the US and Japan.

Commerce and Innovation

In a remarkable move both sides agreed to set up Innovation forum by 2016 to promote a culture of innovation, entrepreneurship and help in creating of sister hubs. Both countries announced collaboration of private sector led- Confederation of Indian Industries (CII) and the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) to kindle and scale up innovation, increase bilateral trade and investment, support advancement of small and medium scale establishments (SME). US promised to assist India in skill training programs for 400 million people over the next decade.

Both countries will be working together for removal of barriers that restrict participation in global supply chains and for sustained implementation of trade facilitation measures. US has agreed to India’s request of supporting development and evaluation of Massive Open Online Courses and Distance Education Learning. India and US has agreed to support the efforts of the Harvard University and the IIM, Ahmedabad to develop cluster map. India has agreed to ratify the WTO’s Trade Facilitation Agreement (TFA) (7). The US expressed its keen interest to work together with Indian Ministry of Urban Development on Smart Solutions for Smart Cities Reverse Trade Mission. Further a MoU in field of Mental Health, tradition medicine towards capacity building. A new working group on Agricultural Biotechnology has been developed to promote agricultural science and technology research.

Nirmala Sitharaman apprised the US delegation of the Totalisation Agreement under which Indian IT companies paid $22.5 billion from 2011-15 to the US treasury in the form of taxes, a sum which has to go back to workers. Reiterating that the US economy is currently benefitting not only from invaluable technology expertise of the workers but also from their huge tax deposits. In turn the workers are entitled to the retirement benefits. This issue is on the top of the agenda of Commerce minister and sough fruitful engagement of both parties to resolve the issue.

The dialogue progress diligently structured the path ahead for India’s strategic and defense cooperation. It is time India makes an incremental leap forward in catapulting its economy to new heights whereby large trading block could hardly afford to miss its engagement. The way forward for India to emerge as a global leader is to push hard on its economic reforms.

@ Copyrights reserved.

Wednesday, 23 September 2015

Prime Minister Modi's visit to Ireland and the US

With Prime Minister Narendra Modi embarking on his foreign visit to Ireland and the US from 23^rd to 29^th September India’s aspirations of reaching new global order gets refurbished. Modi will be first Prime Minister of India after Jawaharlal Nehru to visit Ireland en route the US. Jawaharlal Nehru visited Ireland in 1949 and 1956 (1). The day long trip to Dublin is expected to rejuvenate the trade and bilateral relations between the two nations that enjoy good relations. Modi might visit Ahakista village, the site where Air India plane Kanishka crashed on June 23^rd 1985 following the explosion of the bomb implanted onboard. A memorial plaque will be installed at the site in the memory of the deceased.

Modi will have delegation level talks with Irish Toaiseach (Prime Minister) Endy Kennedy on issues of common interest and bilateral agreements in fields of education, agriculture, science and technology will also feature in these talks. The volume of trade between India and Ireland which was worth Euro 430 million in 2010 now stands at 650 million. Ireland is home for sizeable skilled Indian Diaspora and a choicest destination of Indian students for higher education. Modi’s visit to Ireland will be an opportunity to connect up to the dynamic Indian society and inspire the entrepreneurs to invest in India.

Modi’s US visit the second after becoming prime minister is going to be his third summit interaction with President Obama in less than year speaks volumes of evolving Indo-US relations. The complex geopolitical matrix is tipped to undergo incredible changes during this week with the US playing the host for all these consequential events. President Xi Jinping has touched down in Seattle on September 22^nd and is expected to sign an agreement to resolve the cyber challenges much on lines of the US and Soviet Union’s military cooperation during the cold war. This event is believed to be shadowed by the visit of Pope Francis to the US during the same time. Even before this hustle and bustle could settle down Narendra Modi is going to reach the Eastern Coast of the US where he would address the UN Sustainable Development Summit for the formal adoption of post-2015 developmental goals on 25^th of September. Building further upon the eight Millennium Developmental Goals (MDG), the sustainable developmental goals (SDG) will channelize global action on poverty eradication, promotion of prosperity, well-being for all, protecting environment and addressing climate change. On the eve of the 70^th anniversary of the UN, India is going to raise the tax avoidance and tax evasion issue. India is likely to seek global cooperation for ensuring transparency in financial issues and curtailing the illicit financial flows by 2030 (2).

Modi will attend the summit on the UN Peace Keeping hosted by President Obama and co-hosted by Nawaz Sharif. India has been one of the largest contributors of UN Peace Keeping Forces and till now around 180,000 Indian troops have participated in several UN global missions. Currently 7,690 troops have been deployed in several conflict regions like South Sudan, East Timor, Congo, Lebanon and Golan Heights. Modi is likely to rise the issue of allowing the countries contributing towards peace keeping forces to be involved at all stages and in all aspects of the mission planning so that all the efforts in restoring peace in a region can be fully coordinated. Further he would appeal for stringent action against those attacking the peace keeping forces (3). In a bid to push India’s candidacy for a permanent seat in the UN Security Council along the sidelines of the UN General Assembly Summit Modi will host the G-4 Summit in New York. Apart from India G-4 comprises of Germany, Japan and Brazil. G-4 includes the member countries who support each other’s bids for a permanent seat in the UNSC. Though the members over a period of time have reached a position on par with the P5, their elevation into the elite club has been objected by their rival countries who have united together as UfC. The counter movement against the collective bids of the G-4 include a group of 13 core countries. Nick named as coffee club, it was founded by the Italian Ambassador Francesco Paolo Fulci along with Pakistan, Mexico and Egypt in 1995 (4).

The G-4 summit is held to culminate India’s lead to push forward a text in the UN General Assembly seeking future negotiations on UN reforms and the expansion of the Security Council. Earlier G-4 summits were attended by the ministers of foreign affairs of the respective countries. But this year, Modi in consultation with Prime Minister Abe has elevated it to a meet of heads of the state. Aside meeting several heads of state in New York, to build on the ground work laid during his previous visit Modi will be hosting a working dinner for the CEOs of the Fortune-500 companies deliberating about investment opportunities in India.

Meanwhile, back in India there is hullabaloo regarding Modi’s foreign visits and reports now corroborated the government’s stance that there has been a perceptible increase in FDI from the countries visited by Prime Minister. Data from Industrial Policy and Planning has registered 48% increase in inflows after the launch of Make in India project between Oct 2014 and April 2015 over the last year. India has received $19.78 billion in FDI from countries Modi visited last year accounting for two-thirds of total FDI received in the fiscal year 2014-15 (5). Further Pew research Centre too observed a jump in the approval ratings of Modi leadership for his efforts towards economic reforms (6).

After the power-packed summits in the East Coast, Modi will travel to West Coast a first by an Indian Prime Minister after a span of more than 30 years. Morarji Desai was the last Indian Prime Minister to visit the Bay Area in 1978 to receive award at University of California, Berkeley and Indira Gandhi visited Los Angeles in 1982. Having launched the 100 smart cities program, Modi is now in West Coast to explore various innovative ideas to spear head efforts to quadruple renewable energy capacity to 175 Gw besides the 100 Gw of solar energy. To give power to the dreams of clean energy to a nation heavily dependent on coal for power generation Modi would first visit Tesla’s Fremont Plant. Modi would explore the possibilities of bringing home the hall mark technology of “ Power Hall” a home battery charged by solar power to augur clean India initiative (7). Modi will meet the Indian-born CEO’s Satya Nadella, Sundar Pichai and Shantanu Narayen besides the CEO of Apple- Cook. Prime Minister will also participate in the roundtable on renewable energy conducted by Precourt institute for Energy of Stanford University in collaboration with US Commerce Department.

Modi will witness the 15hour long Hackathon or the software coding session at Googleplex where 200 software engineers from Tech Mahindra office in Noida and 200 engineers at Google’s Mountain view base will design relevant software for Digital India and Skill India initiatives. Hackathon is a part of the Code for India mission wherein tech experts can volunteer for various empowerment missions. Aside discussions at Google office would include the possibility of deploying balloon technology to provide internet service to rural India (8). This will be followed by the much awaited Q&A Town Hall with Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg at Menlo Park and the India-US Startup Konnect, where 30 Indian start-ups will illustrate their ideas to Venture Capitalists (VCs).

Prime Minister will then sign off from the two day long jam-packed trip to the Silicon Valley by addressing the 19,000 Indian expats at SAP Centre organized by Indian American Group.

A day before Modi’s weeklong visit to the US, Indian Cabinet has cleared $2.5 billion worth deal towards the purchase of Apache Helicopters. Modi is scheduled to meet President Obama on Sep 28^th opening up vistas for enhanced Indo-US ties. Unlike Modi’s first visit to US that witnessed exhilarated responses of Indian expats in their adopted country, this visit has sparked a cult of protests that brought to fore disparities of the Indian diaspora. As Prime Minister heads to the US divesting India of its imbued defensive approach and to usher into an era of pragmatic multilateralism stakes are really high.

@ Copyrights reserved.

Monday, 21 September 2015

Nepal Promulgates New Constitution

The long drawn process of developing a new constitution for Nepal has ended officially. Nepal reached the historical moment with the new constitution scheduled to be promulgated on 20^th September 2015 by the President Ram Baran Yadav making it a federal, secular, democratic republic. For the past 65 year the mountain country has gone through periods of intense turmoil, unrest and armed struggle. The new constitution seventh one in line is believed to embody certain provisions from the previous six constitutions (since 1959) would also incorporate the ideals of various political parties.

Just days before voting on various clauses of the new Constitution, incidents of violence rocked the country. The simmering revolt brewed by the marginalised communities of Nepal comprising of Madheris, Janajatis and Tharus rocked the Terai region resulting in shut of the region for three weeks. As per their contention, the new constitution failed to accommodate their legitimate demands of true federalism leading to effectively disfranchise them. To quell the rebellion, Armed forces were called in resulting in the death of 40 people.

Nepal’s tryst with democracy began with the revolution in 1951 steered to liberate the nation from the autocratic rule of Ranas (1). The revolution spurred into action by two political parties- The Prajaparishad Party and the Nepali Congress and the leaders who spearheaded the cause were executed by Ranas. King Tribhuvan of the Shah Dynasty in the meanwhile fled to New Delhi and triumphantly returned back to fill in the vacuum created by the overthrowing of the Ranas. A quasi-constitutional system was in vogue under the regime of King Tribhuvan. The Monarch assisted by the leaders of the fledging parties as per the Interim Government of Nepal Act 1951 governed the land. Subsequently a new working constitution was adopted in 1959 (2). From 1955 the King’s son Mahendra slowly began to exercise greater control over the governance issues undermining the authority of the Cabinet. Nepali Congress under the leadership of Koirala won the elections in 1959. King Mahendra declaring the Parliamentary democracy a failure carried out a coup in the following year. He indicated that Panchayat System would govern Nepal and promulgated another constitution in December, 1960. Prime Minister and other cabinet ministers were then arrested and a party-less Panchayat system prevailed in Nepal for 30 years.

The Panchayat system had representatives from villages that constituted the Rashtriya Panchayat (National Parliament). But it constitutionalised absolute power of the King who had supreme authority over the Cabinet and Parliament. King Birendra succeeded his father in 1972. Amidst protests against his regime in 1980 he conducted a National referendum to decide whether Nepal should continue with Panchayat System or the Multiparty government. Panchayat system won narrowly and Birendra promised to appoint a Prime Minister selected by the Rashtriya Panchayat. By 1990 Nepali Congress with support of the Left parties launched a democratic agitation or Jana Andolan demanding the introduction of multiparty system. Finally King Birendra stepped down under pressure and in the first ever elections conducted in 1991 Nepali Congress formed an elected government. A new constitution was promulgated in 1990 facilitating the participation of multiple parties and curtailing the supreme authority of the King. In 1992, nation plunged into chaos owing to the economic crisis and escalating prices. The situation was soon brought under control through Operation Romeo and Operation Kilo Sera II. This repression soon resulted in radicalisation with people increasingly turning to Maoist parties for support.

Parliamentary elections were held in 1994 and 1997 and local election were held in 1992 and 1997. But unfortunately democratic system could never be consolidated due to Maoist insurgencies and undue interventions of the Royal Clan. From 1996 Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) started Nepalese Civil War against the government to replace the parliamentary monarchy with Maoist revolutionary strategy. Sudden turn of events changed the fate of Nepal in 2001 with Prince Dipendra killing 9 members of the Royal family including King Birendra. He later occupied the throne for few days and following his death King Gyanendra (brother of King Birendra) took over. The new successor impeached the existing government and reappointed a new government in its place. Consequently country became very unstable and by 2005 King Gyanendra took over the executive powers and imposed a state of emergency ordering the arrest of all political leaders. By 2006, the rebellion against his regime intensified signifying the rise of Jan Andolan-II.

In January 2007, a seven party coalition assumed the control of the government and deposed the King marking the end of 240 year old Monarchy and declaring Nepal as Federal Republic. Governance was carried along the framework of Interim Constitution 2007. Following the elections in 2008 Maoist parties came to power and assigned the charge of framing a permanent constitution to a Constituent Assembly.

As per terms of the interim constitution a new constitution must be promulgated by May 2010 but was extended by a year due to various disagreements. But when the constitution was not ready even by May 2012, the Prime Minister dissolved the Constituent Assembly as its tenure expired and constituted a Second Nepalese Constituent Assembly was elected in 2013. This too has failed to deliver the constitution by the first one year dead-line and further contentions on various issues and disastrous earthquake in April and May delayed its promulgation. Finally the constitution was passed on September 16^th 2015. Out of the 598 members, 507 voted in favour, 66 abstained and 25 voted against it.

Salient Features of the New Constitution

The premise of the new constitution is based on concept of federalism, secularism and absolute sovereignty. Nepal is multi-ethnic and people speak at least 100 different languages. Further the society is stratified into upper-lower castes, indigenous origin-non indigenous origin, highlanders-lowlanders and hence highly polarised. The new Constitution consciously aims at curtailing dominance of any particular community and strives to provide equal representation to all communities. Through proportional representation of women, disabled, sexual minorities and other neglected groups in elected bodies the new draft brings about inclusivity (3).

Of the Legislative- Parliament with 275 seats- 165 seats will be directly elected. One seat will belong to each of the 75 districts and remaining 90 seats will be divided based on population. The remaining 110 seats will be proportionately represented by women, the Janajati and Madhesi ethnic groups and marginalised communities from various parties. Constitution enshrines various fundamental rights which include social, economic and cultural rights. Specific commissions are instituted for various minorities and marginalised communities. Nepal will now have a Parliamentary form of government with President elected by the Legislative-Parliament, National Assembly and provincial Legislative body. Prime Minister will be elected by Legislative-Parliament by simple majority. The constitutional council will nominate chief justice, head and members of constitutional commissions. Judicial Commission will nominate judges of Supreme Court, high court and district courts.

All the clauses of constitution except for issues related to sovereignty are amendable making it highly flexible. Necessary changes can be incorporated within the new draft with two-thirds of majority.

The momentous 66 years of Nepal’s journey towards in becoming a federal democratic republic has been widely appreciated by several countries.

Issues of Contention

The new constitution divides the country into seven states whose final boundaries are yet to be demarcated. Demarcation of new provinces might result in delineation of ethnically close communities. This issue is severely protested by indigenous Tharus community who are unhappy at the prospect of sharing the provinces with hill districts who might eventually dominate them (3).

Nepal is highly patriarchal society and the new constitution as claimed by the Women’s group indicates that a single Nepali woman cann’t pass on her citizenship to the offspring. If a Nepali woman marries a foreigner, their children will not be considered Nepali citizens. But a Nepali man’s child will be a Nepali irrespective of his wife’s nationality. This issue is met with severe opposition by the Madheshi’s who live in the Terai region along the Indo-Nepalese border. In these communities cross border marriages are quite common and such an act would be highly discriminatory. Nepal traditionally has been a Hindu country (the status was withheld nine years ago). But the new draft declares the state secular ordaining it with the responsibility of protecting religious sites and respecting the beliefs of the majority but the pro-Hindu groups are highly disappointed.

Bright Spots

Certain sections of people are highly elated at the prospect of promulgation of new constitution as it significantly ends the years of instability and chaos paving way for a better future. The new draft provides special quotas for low caste Dalits, indigenous groups and women in constitutional bodies. It also allows active participation of sexual minorities in states working apparatus.

Indian Interests

Any unrest in the Terai region that shares an extensive border with India will have negative implications on India’s security leading to influx of anti-Indian elements through the porous borders (5). Besides any destabilisation in Nepal can increase influx into India in the form of migration, illicit trafficking and would open up the possibility of extremists gaining entry into the Indian Territory. India certainly realises the importance of a stable Nepal and hence strongly supported the process of constitution-making and offered technical assistance. Indian foreign secretary has travelled to Nepal as a special envoy to attend the inauguration of the new Constitution. He congratulated the nation for unveiling a new consitition that would mark beginning of a new era and appealed to Nepalese leaders to address the concerns of the agitating communities. In 2005 the Lashkar terrorists after planting bombs in the Indian Institute of Science fled India through Nepal and reached Pakistan. The anti- Indian elements from Pakistan have been gaining entry into India along the Indo-Nepalese border. In 2006 several Indian Mujahedeen commanders and LeT operatives were arrested along the border by the RAW with the cooperation of Nepal authorities. Besides Indian leadership is strongly convinced of the fact that a strong, stable and peaceful neighbourhood can alone bolsters India’s efforts in safe guarding its borders.

@ Copyrights reserved.

Sunday, 20 September 2015

Muscle Flexing: Mascot of Chinese Military Parade

Nearly a week after the grand military parade of China that evoked hegemonic posturing, almost all the popular newspapers and international magazines carried articles countering the popular international perceptions. These customised articulated series of open Ed columns mostly penned by academicians and diplomats of China carried out calibrated validation of President Xi’s regime intentions of celebrating the 70^th anniversary of the World War II. A massive intellectual drive was unleashed to reach out to the international audience in a bid to allay fears about its combative ostentatiousness. The orchestrated bickering of Chinese intellectuals in fact imminently hints that it might be one of its newest strategies to divert attention from an extensive series of military exercises and transgressions into LAC after the mega show. While China outwardly downplays its growing clout and interprets it as a manifestation of the media (West) but Beijing’s belligerent foreign policy in reality speaks volumes of its domineering zealot (1).

China, during the war of resistance against invading Japan lost 20 million people. The World War II believed to have started with Nazis invading Poland has commenced two years earlier in China with gory incidents of the “Rape of the Nanking” or “Nanjing Massacre” in December 1937 as the Imperial Japanese Army perpetrated widespread rape and loot (2). The war which lasted for eight years was the longest and bloodiest wherein China suffered severe losses with all the major cities taken over by the Japanese Army. Consequently the local national government was forced to move inland. Almost entire country has suffered the brutalities of the war and it is a grim reminder of the torture and excesses faced by the people. Chinese over a period of time internalised the brutalities that tend to consciously tear the psyche of the people. Nostalgia of the “century of the humiliation” suffered by Chinese plagued the relations between the two countries. Resentments piled up over the years is now taking a toll on its relations more so with Japan recently espousing its proactive militarisation program. As national sentiments preloaded with bad memories haunt Chinese every year, their attitudes towards Japan might naturally be overwhelmed with bitterness. Hence China has every reason to recapitulate the nationalist sentiments by celebrating the 70^th anniversary of World War II.

China’s massive military parade marking celebrations on September 3^rdsignalling its resurgence and venting out its frustration against Japan is justified. But the unprecedented display of weapons and the goose-stepping of its troops in tandem caught international attention. Above all its reinforced commitment of working towards global peace elicited an intangible apprehension among several countries. China’s quibbles for territorial claims be it sea or land and its insatiable thirst to extend its influence speaks volumes of its dubious intentions. Its unquenchable appetite to accumulate and continuously upgrade its weapons is threatening financially weaker nations in its vicinity.

Various articles authored by the Chinese intellectuals indicated that organisation of a grand military parade as President Xi’s way of showcasing his political authority. They opined that an average Chinese was impressed by the rapid advances their country made in military technology (3). But the series of the events like the stock market crash, Xi’s attempts to contain the damage by devaluation of Renminbi and pumping of $4 trillion into the markets (4) and the tragic explosion in Tianjin chemical factory that killed 160 people exposed the inherent vulnerabilities of the country. These incidents has shook the confidence of people in Xi’s regime. The parade is thus believed to be an attempt made by Xi to assert his control over the bad spate of economy. Moreover two and half years hence when President Xi assumed charges, he escalated anti-corruption drive instituting tough punishments against corrupt comrades turning them into bitter enemies. The recent downturn of events for Chinese economy was a shot in arm for the embittered bureaucracy seething with anger towards Xi. Attributing political vulnerability of Xi as the trigger for a grand military parade, intellectual coterie of China have tried to down played China’s muscle flexing. But the views elicited by these academicians are too lame to be believed.

China over the past few decades with its enviable double digit growth rate steadily emerged as the second largest economy of the World. Subsequently with its superfluous production, superior marketing networks and extensive infrastructure successfully extended its foot hold across different nations in the World. It is now a top trading partner for over 60 countries. Further with generous offers of building infrastructure in the South Asian countries and by extending financial bounties it has invariably roped in smaller nations into its fold. All the South Asian nations are part of the One Belt, One Road strategy of China. With its deep pockets, it loomed largely over countries in the Indian Ocean Region and made strategic gains. The steady economic progression has been commensurate with arm build-up and developing expertise in military technology.

Ironically its confessions during powerful parade of China’s peaceful rise to the World falls woefully short of its claims. Besides its abominable acts of human rights suppression in the Xinjiang province and the Tibetan region the constant skirmishes with India, Vietnam are just few instances that speak volumes of the spiteful resurgence of China. The undeterred and frenetic land reclamation of shoals, islets, reefs has turned the countries abutting South China Sea region hostile and made them apprehensive of China’s intentions. All these smaller nations are now turning to bigger allies for protection and military help. To gain international approval for its “nine-dashed line doctrine” which essentially seeks claims over 90% of the South China Sea it smartly nurtured an intellectual think-tank too. China exercises its claims over the Senakaku islands thus augmenting tensions with Japan.

Moreover assurances of peace by China elicits disbelief in India. It scepticism is genuine and recently China’s People Liberation Army (PLA) army transgressed into India on Sep 11^th. The PLA troops sneaked 1.5 km inside the Indian border from the Line of Actual Control (LAC) in the Burtse high altitude region in Ladakh and constructed a watch tower. This region lies in the Despang valley at an altitude of 17,000 ft and has been site of intense stand-offs as the PLA can keep watch on the activities on the Indian side. Similarly India can overlook the Karakoram highway that links the PoK (Pakistan Occupied Kashmir) with China. Tensions built up across the border as Indian army demolished the watch tower constructed by the PLA on the Indian side. While it was agreed by both sides that no constructions should come up in the disputed region, regular transgression and stand-offs have become a common misadventure. The last major stand-off lasted for 21 days during Premier Li Keqiang’s visit to India in 2013. Similar stand-offs occurred during President’s Xi visit to India in September 2014. The tension at the LAC has been defused by flag meetings between both sides. The countries share 4000km of LAC and China now claims 90,000 sqkm of the Arunachal Pradesh territory besides the 38,000km in the Jammu Kashmir region (5). While China has settled border disputes with Russia and Myanmar peacefully the Indo-China war of 1962 and repeated transgressions asserts its combative attitude towards India. As a matter of fact, despite the face-off’s China denies any such event and like Pakistan continues to blame India of “misleading and provoking public opinion”.

However hard Chinese media and its intellectual vouch China’s rectitude undeniably its bellicosity is threatening the harmony of the South East Asia. In the latest development top Chinese Admiral in a defense conference says that “the South China Sea as the name indicates, is a sea area that belongs to China” (6). The region which is resource rich is claimed by five other countries- Vietnam, Philippines, Malaysia, Brunei and Taiwan.

@ Copyrights reserved.

Saturday, 19 September 2015

China’s Military Parade Commemorating World War II

Historic tales of China ruled the roost as resplendent China celebrated the Victory day with great pomp and aggrandisement. World Wars, their precedence and history, have been foundations for the existing geopolitical alignments. Especially World War II played a major role in reshaping future course of several nations. Some historians believe the war unfolded with Japan invading Manchuria in 1931 and reached a cusp with the Sino-Japanese wars in 1937 and Western forces declared way in 1939. Finally surrender of Japan on the afternoon of August 15^th1945 marked the end of the longest war fought in the modern days. Japan signed the document of surrender on September 2^nd 1945. Both these days are of immense significance and are commemorated as V-J Day (Victory over Japan). China recognises September 3^rd as the Victory of War of resistance against Japan and celebrates the event annually. But the unprecedented scale of weapons display and a massive military parade instantly caught attention of coterie of nations. While the second war has restored peace and fostered mutual co-existence between European nations territorial disputes continue to simmer in Asia. The hostilities of the yesteryears refuse to die down.

Even after 70 years of the war, China and Japan are beleaguered by bellicosity. On August 15^th as has been the practice, Japan Prime Minister Shizo Abe has expressed deep remorse for the suffering meted out during the war. China rebuked Japan for its insufficient apology, for the brutal excesses committed during the 8 year long war referred to as “The war of resistance against Japanese Aggression” or the “World Anti-Fascist war” (1937-1945). Meanwhile the recent defence assertiveness of Japan stoked up tensions between the nations. Ever since ascent of Xi Jingping to the highest authoritarian seat in 2012, the President has effectively harnessed history to stoke Chinese nationalism. Obstinately, China chose 70^th anniversary of the V-J Day, to showcase its muscle power with formidable display of military strength portending its resurgence. The pageant featured 200 aircrafts, 27 phalanxes, indigenous and conventional nuclear missiles system, and 12,000 troops. The ostentatious showdown reflected China’s ambitions to incarnate itself as cornerstone of Asia. The event intended to celebrate the defeat of Japan in a way brought out glaring parities within Asian continent to fore. Strategic analysts opine that the colossal parade helped to effectively cull down brewing dissidence caused by plummeting of its stock markets (1) and hushed up concerns of environmentalists following the massive explosions in Tianjin that killed more than 150 people.

China often falls back to the cliché of keeping the past alive. It has been very unapologetic about Japan and its horrific crimes of 1930sand 1940s, and spelt out its denouncements more stridently. While Mao Zedong wasn’t vociferous towards Japanese aggression, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) leadership after him effectively nurtured anti-Japanese sentiment to stoke nationalism (2). War veterans of Taiwan (which was ruled by China till 18950) opined that Chinese obsession proffers them to project Japan’s imperialist past. Since China makes desperate attempts to deter Japan by clambering to past and inordinately the World is forced to dissect China’s history marred with several inglorious events.

Along with several other countries China invited Indian contingent to join the parade. The invitation put India in a tight spot. In May President Pranab Mukherjee participated in 70^thanniversary celebrations of World War II at Russia where Indian military contingent was part of the parade. It would seem churlish to skip Chinese parade. Having strengthened bilateral relations with Japan to checkmate China’s muscle-flexing, India wasn’t keen on participating in the event focussed on denouncing Japanese past. But India’s participation is befitting for its invaluable contribution in the World War II. Indian heeding to appeals of Chinese nationalist leader Chiang-Kai Shek joined hands to fight Japanese forces in Japan (3). Around 60,000 trained in Ramgarh (Bihar) during the last two years of the war under American supervision. US forces established air bases in India and ferried supplies to Chinese forces. Kaushik Roy in his article titled “Expansion and deployment of India of the Indian Army during world war II” explained pivotal role played by the Indian army in turning around the fortunes of the British forces which were war-shy. Madhusree Mukerjee, a researcher and author in “Churchill’s secret war: the British Empire and ravaging of India during the world war II” goes on to explain how enormous amounts supplies like timber, iron and steel, woollen clothing, leather goods have been diverted to war from India. According to The Oxford Encyclopaedia of Economic History a whopping 35% of India’s annual cotton, 196.7 million tonnes of coal, 6 million tonnes of iron ore, and 1.12 million tonnes of steel were supplied by India. The travails undergone by India due to war are indescribable while nearly 3 million people died of starvation in Bengal famines tonnes of food grains were grotesquely diverted to Britain (4). Over 2.6 million Indian troops participated in war, besides 14 million workers worked round clock to prepare war supplies. Around 24,338 soldiers lost their lives, 64, 354 were wounded and 11, 754 were missing. India has suffered greatest losses in terms of personnel and material supplies among the allies. But pathetically, India’s role in the World war is unappreciated. After the war while claims over wealth and territories were equally distributed among the allies India was forced to shell out $24 million towards UN Relief and Rehabilitation Administration. India can legitimately claim its share of repute for participating in the World war and can participate in the event.

India on its part has taken right decision in maintaining low profile at the event and was represented for Minister of State for External Affairs, V. K. Singh. The list of the leaders of the state attended and the jumbo sized contingents of certain countries is reflective of China’s diplomatic ties. Of the 51 countries to which China extended out invitations, two countries Japan and Philippines, the two countries which are embroiled with past and present territorial disputes turned down invites. Troops from as many as 17 countries too joined the parade. Besides the two heads of state Vladimir Putin and Park Geun-hye of South Korea, the rest of them are from small countries. In total 30 countries have sent their leaders which prominently include- leaders of the SCO, Cambodia, Loas, Egypt, Vietnam, Myanmar, South Africa, Pakistan, Venzuela, Sudan and 19 countries are represented by state officials in the event beset at Beijing’s Tiananmen Square.

China flaunted modern weaponry to spread message of peace marking 70 years of the Victory over Japan. The event is markedly conspicuous by the absence of the heads of the state from most of the South East Asian countries that are wary of the growing Chinese clout. China awed the World with a stupendous display of a conglomeration of its advanced and automated weaponry enamoured by majestic parade of its armed troops.

President Xi Jinping delivered a pragmatic message of proclaiming peace. While commemorating triumph over the imperialist forces he pledged that China would “never seek hegemony or expansion. It will never inflict its past suffering on any nation claim”. He also announced to down size its army of 300,000 troops (which turns out be 13% cut of the army). But interestingly he refrained from mentioning the time frame of cutting down of troops. While China is out to flout its muscle power, countries are now grudgingly appealing China to analyse its past.

Though World is not looking at China through the eyes of West more precisely the US, the undeterred aggressive land reclamation program in South China Sea and territorial disputes with Japan in East China Sea have made Asian countries hostile (except for Pakistan which considers China it’s all weather-friend).

@ Copyrights reserved.

Tuesday, 15 September 2015

U.S. Report Endorsing Pakistan’s Nuclear Posturing

While the high level diplomatic talks between India and Pakistan were jeopardized by intemperate last minute posturing of Pakistan, it is a great relief that the DG-level talks between BSF and Pakistan rangers slated from September 10^th to 12^th have begun on a pragmatic note in New Delhi. The talks which resumed after one and half years have in the past helped to evolve a pact laden with a set of confidence building measures. This pact fostered amity between the two forces and helped in quick repatriation of the villagers who accidentally strayed across Indo-Pakistan border to their homelands instead of a custodial arrest. So far India returned 15 villagers and Pakistan sent back 23 citizens who crossed the borders. But since 2013 there has been resurgence in hostilities and even the regular exchange of festivities have stopped. Amidst escalating tensions the talks have begun and agenda is believed to include a discussion on the non-clearance of Sarkanda grass on the Pakistani side of International Border (IB), illegal intrusion of Pakistani boats, sniper attacks targeting the civilians, smuggling of narcotics, pumping of counterfeit currency.

Meanwhile two US think-tanks The Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and The Stimson Centre together released a report titled: “A normal nuclear Pakistan” a fortnight ago (1). The report authored by Toby Dalton and Michael Kripon quite characteristic of the US double speak, justified its infallibility towards Pakistan and postulated subtle rationalisations for normalisation Pakistan’s nuclear arena. Drawing parallels to the Indo-US civil nuclear agreement, the authors appealed to the US to consider Pakistan for a similar kind of treaty paving way for its eventual entry into global nuclear regime. Authors plead the US administration to extend concessions to Pakistan and seriously contemplate on helping it become “a normal nuclear state” on par with India. This intimidating explanation logically strengthens India’s doubts of the US double standards. It is intriguing as how the report chooses to ignore malefaction of Pakistan and its alarming pace of vertical proliferation of nuclear arms.

Despite being identified as the aggressor in Indo-Pak of 1948, 1965, 1971 and 1999 Pakistan seems to have floored the defence analysts of the US by invoking the apprehensions of being over ridden by a bigger country- India. With its obsessive paranoia of India as the enemy, Pakistan has embarked on a race of outcompeting India in nuclear weapons production. Post 1998 India shifted gears and focussed on building conventional military capabilities while Pakistan was relentlessly engrossed in bomb-building. While Pakistan blames India for the nuclear build-up in the region, international community must raise a toast to India for maintaining peace in the region despite unequivocal provocations from belligerent Pakistan and a nuclear weapon state China. Seeking a waiver of all the brutal terrorist activities funded by it to organisations like Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) that carried the gruesome Mumbai blasts, it assures that it conducted massive a clamp down operations against extremist groups. But alas! Counter terrorism operations were directed against Tehreek-e- Taliban Pakistan (TTP) that targets the military. It is now a known fact that LeT works in collusion with Pakistan’s military and intelligence services and expectedly so, in spite of concrete evidence furnished by India stating its direct involvement in the Mumbai blasts no legal action has been taken. Pakistan in fact revels in patronising the scourge of terrorism and considers extremist groups as real assets of state. But tactfully complains of being victims of terrorism (read as Pakistani Taliban) and for not getting enough credit for containing some extremist groups.

Till now the popular deterrence theory holds that possession of nuclear weapons would deter nuclear exchanges and other conventional military threats. Nuclear weapons are reckoned as long term fixed assets of state since they checkmate the aggression of rivals. Observers World over feel that repeated provocations by Pakistan coupled with sustained toleration of sponsored extremist activities might inadvertently educe India into a battle with its neighbour. Principally nuclear states behave responsibly and try to avoid evade situations that can spark a war. But the combative nuclear posturing of Pakistan indicates that it is not a normal state. Envisaging a framework for mainstreaming Pakistan’s nuclear program is dangerously preposterous and illogical.

Pakistan has now come up with a doctrine of the “full spectrum deterrence” or “a new nuclear black mail strategy”, to counter India with weapons like Nasr (Hatf-9). Nasr is the most dangerous nuclear missile head in South Asia capable of carrying multiple missiles with a range of 60 km. It is a “low-yield battle field deterrent” and aimed at targeting the mechanised military brigades designed to tackle the “Cold start” doctrine of India (2). Pakistan is now seriously contemplating on commissioning more number of these tactical nuclear weapons to counter Indian forces engaged in the battle triggered by the actions of the extremist groups.

Over the past few decades, military leadership of Pakistan has been attributing its massive conventional and nuclear weapons build up to New Delhi. It threatened of an “open-ended” nuclear war race in South Asia if India is granted a place in Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) by passing its candidature. It argued that a place for India in the elite group will “embolden it to develop nuclear arsenal and would turn down offers of disarmament from Pakistan”. But the ground realities suggest otherwise. India in order to clinch a civil nuclear agreement with the US separated its civil and defence nuclear utilities in 2005, welcomed the inspection of the officials of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Upon satisfactory audit of the facilities the US and India signed the agreement in 2008. India with its impeccable record of net contributions to the peace and stability deserves to be elevated in the global nuclear order. Unlike the sporadic growth progression of Pakistan, India’s economic progress, offers immense scope for nuclear trade. Moreover India contemplates on diverting its fissile material for nuclear power generation from existing 4.5 MW to 20 MW offering great potential for nuclear trade. While India could conduct nuclear trade with the NSG states its full membership to NSG hasn’t received a complete nod. Unrelenting diplomatic pressures mounted by Pakistan has scuttled India’s chances of entering into four international nuclear forums. Civil nuclear agreement has come at a cost of India foregoing nuclear testing, accepting moratorium on production of fissile material for building nuclear war heads.

Post 2005 Pakistan urged US to have a “criteria based approach” and consider its membership for NSG. Since partition in 1947, Pakistan has been competing with India whose economy is 9 times of it in terms of developing conventional military capabilities. Indian economy strengthened over decades and congruently its defence spending has also increased. While India’s defence budgetary allowance is 2.4% of the GDP and military expenditure is 13.2% of budgetary expenditure, it is whopping 4.5% and 25% of total government expenditure by Pakistan. Seeking parity with India, Pakistan has been effectively milking the US and obtained $40 billion so far as military and economic aid. Now with a pretext of its inability to finance conventional military weapons Pakistan is rapidly developing nuclear warheads.

While India has an immense potential in the nuclear arena, it has diverted a huge of chunk of its Plutonium reserves for power generation and the highly enriched Uranium (HEU) of weapons grade for naval propulsion. Pakistan has now four production reactors at Khushab that produces 20 -25 kg of plutonium per year and constructs about 14 to 27 nuclear weapons an year while India with its available fissile material manages to produce 2-5 weapons. Presently the nuclear stock piles of India are in the range of 50 to 110 while that of Pakistan are 110 to 120 nuclear weapons. Both China and Pakistan overwhelmed by full spectrum deterrence are accumulating stocks of tactical nuclear weapons like the ballistic missiles, and Multiple Independently targetable re-entry vehicles (MIRV). With these interminable levels of production Pakistan has long surpassed India in its weapons bounty. In the next 10 years its nuclear arsenal will be twice the size of India’s possessing third largest nuclear arsenals after the US and Russia. Intriguingly, Pakistan’s military leadership complains of threats from India. If possession of over hundred weapons can’t make them secure, any number of arsenal can never make Pakistan confident. Consequently weapon proliferation will continue unabatedly indicating that its deterrence is not fixed but relative.

Strategic decisions in Pakistan are made by the military and the intelligence services unlike the civilian, democratically elected authority in India. With its ruthless obsession of proliferating weapons, conventional and counter terrorism operations will suffer, adversely affecting the internal security. Even socio-economic development will be put on a back burner. Consequently a weak state will breed contempt would become safe haven for militants. Unlike the strategic weapons which are secure under responsible authorities, the huge scale of tactical weapons deployed in the areas near border are not safe and secure and there is every possibility of these weapons falling into hands of extremist groups. Unlike Indian leadership which values economic growth Pakistan’s compelling drive has been to launch punitive actions on India.

It is very startling as how the US which fiercely called for international sanctions on Iran that lasted for over decade and half for building nuclear weapons failed to censure Pakistan for its enormous nuclear stock piling. At a time when President Obama has successfully garnered support to push the nuclear agreement with Iran in the Congress, isn’t it the time to ostensibly reprimand Pakistan? The dubious assurances of Pakistan to restore peace in Afghanistan by fostering peace talks with the Taliban and Afghan government have miserably failed. The stymied Afghan President too should bank on Iran rather than Pakistan to rehabilitate Afghanistan (3).

Nuclear Proliferation Treaty (NPT) came into existence in 1968 stratifying the global order into Nuclear Weapons States (NPW) and Non- Nuclear Weapons States (NNWS). NPW includes the big five (USA, Russia, UK, France and China) who completed testing of nuclear devices and entered the treaty by 1970. They are now engaged in rapidly expanding strategic deterrence. Other countries that joined treaty became late comers or NNWS. India, Pakistan, Israel didn’t sign the treaty, openly tested and declared possession of nuclear weapons are treated as outliers. North Korea withdrew from the treaty in 2003. India by signing of the civil nuclear deal entered the global nuclear order and since late recognition of nuclear status is not permitted under existing NPT rules India is now strongly contemplating on gaining entry into the elite club of NSG. The US formally asserted that India meets all requirements, for full membership while China refrained from divulging any opinion. Certain countries voiced concerns that India should be party to CTBT too. If India gains entry into NSG it is widely believed that it might veto Pakistan’s entry. But with Pakistan becoming a burgeoning hub of extremist activities and with its past record of leakage of nuclear technology by A.Q Khan to Libya, North Korea and Libya is normalisation of Islamabad justified? Moreover with Pakistan going head on full throttle with full spectrum deterrence, countries are worried that Rawalpindi would end up using nuclear weapons for non-existential threats bringing down the nuclear threshold. Besides India with its no first use doctrine and the absolute civilian control of the weapons countries are assured of the effective enforcement of deterrence.

Despite the insidious attitude of Pakistan the report appeals to help Pakistan to become normal state. It recommends Pakistan to fulfil five conditions for its nuclear normalisation. These are: shift from the full spectrum deterrence to strategic deterrence, limit production of tactical weapons or short range delivery weapons, become amenable to talks on the fissile material cut off treaty (FMCT), delineate civil and military nuclear programs and finally sign the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT). But Pakistan wielding to any these conditions is next to impossible as their military leadership firmly believes that nuclear weapons are matter of national survival. Further the recent US-Pakistan joint statement indicates that President Obama clearly favours integration of the Pakistan to the global nuclear order (4). Reassured of Washington’s consent the National Command Authority (NCA) of Pakistan began making unauthenticated claims that India has fissile material enough for 2000 warheads (5).

China has so far chaperoned Pakistan’s odyssey into the nuclear arena but with the US too giving into the Faustian bargaining of the Rawalpindi overlords, India might witness unprecedented ceasefire violations and intransigent infiltrations bids. The most debilitating account of the report has been its nonchalant account of Pakistan despite nurturing anti-India terrorists.

Friday, 11 September 2015

India’s Engagement with Pacific Islands

India scripted new era in diplomatic engagement by hosting the second Forum for India-Pacific Islands Cooperation (FIPIC) at Jaipur on August 21 and 22^nd. Pacific Islands are believed to have great significance for India conventionally for the huge wealth of unexplored natural resources, strategic location and to counteract the growing Chinese influence. Beyond these apparent comprehensible advantages, under the extended “Act East Policy”, building strong ties with these islands will help India fathom the extent of the diversity and complexity inherent to these islands. Though the islands are very small they have huge Economic Exclusive Zones (EEZ) offering a plethora of possibilities for bilateral cooperation especially towards development of Blue Economy.

The inter-governmental group of Pacific region formed in 1971 as the “South Pacific forum” to promote regional cooperation between the independent countries of Pacific islands later encompassed regions of the Oceania following which the name changed to “Pacific Island Forum” (PIF) in 1999 (1). This has attained an official observer status in the UN. PIF wanted to diversify its relations with other major powers of the World other than Australia and New Zealand, the two large neighbours and major donors to the forum. The broader mission of the forum has been to act as a supportive platform that strives to enhance the economic-social well being of the islands in the region by fostering inter-governmental cooperation between the countries. After formation of PIF there has been steady increase in the cooperation between the nations and a free trade agreement has been reached among the nations except Palau and Marshall Islands. Following a coup in Fiji in 2009 the forum unequivocally decided to suspend it indefinitely till democracy has been restored. The suspension was lifted when the general elections were conducted in September 2014. The forum has 17 dialogue partners which include: India, US, Japan, Canada, Cuba, Thailand, Indonesia, EU, UK, China and others. The first annual summit of the FIPIC was held in Suva, Fiji in November 2014 (2) where Modi addressed the heads of states of all the 14 island countries marking the genesis of FIPIC. Modi visited Fiji in November 2014, while returning from G-20 summit held in Australia. During his bilateral talks he indicated that India intends to enhance its engagement with the 14 island nations and proposed that FIPIC be held annually and expressed his desire to host them the following year (3).After two days of Modi’s visit to Fiji, President Xi Xinping of China set foot in Suva and met representatives of the 14 nations.

Due to geographical proximity previously this forum was largely dominated by Australia and New Zealand the two major countries in this region. The member countries in this region belong to three distinct sub-regions- Micronesia, Melanesia and Polynesia. Micronesia includes Palau, The Federated States of Micronesia (FSM), the Marshall Islands, Kiribati and Nauru where the US exerts its control ever since they have become its territories. Melanesia covers Fiji, Papua New Guinea (PNG), Solomon Islands and Vanuatu and through its Melanesia Spearhead group it has made considerable progress than its peers. Polynesia comprises of independent countries of Samoa, Tonga, Tuvalu, Niue and Cook Islands which are close to New Zealand and they were its former colonies. Pacific Ocean covering 33% of the earth’s surface encompasses 41 sovereign states and 22 non-independent territories are highly solicited by the bigger economies for their strategic locations. Indeed Pacific Ocean region home to number of countries has become ground for intense rivalries too (4).

Till now India has been complacent managing its geographical and strategic interests limited to the Indian Ocean region. FIPIC is indeed the first ever spirited effort by India to enhance its diplomatic engagement with the Pacific Ocean nations. During the first FIPIC summit Prime Minister Modi has chartered out future course of engagement which included setting up of $1 million special fund for adapting climate change in terms of developing clean energy and for establishing trade office in India. Besides Pan Pacific Islands E-network was spear headed to close in physical distances and improve the digital connectivity. India has also announced VISA upon arrival to all the 14 nations, expressed willingness to provide training to diplomats, agreed on “space cooperation” and increased Grant-in-Aid from $125,000 to 200,000 to each of the country towards community projects of their choice.

During the second FIPIC, India displayed a resolve to strengthen the ties by announcing a slew of projects. Accordingly India will set up an Institute for Sustainable Coastal and Ocean Research and a network of marine biology research stations. These efforts will culminate into organising an international conference on “Ocean Economy and Pacific Island Countries” in 2016. India has offered direct Navy support and capacity building for Ocean surveillance, hydrographic surveys and for strengthening security of EEZs, agreed to train personnel and help in disaster management, natural calamities, and in development of human resources & applications of space technology. Apart from the existing scholarships, India will now offer two scholarships for college education in the country for each of the 13 countries (Fiji already has 33). India will set up an information technology laboratory in each of the countries, start FIPIC trade centre in Delhi and allow market access to the Small Island Developing nations. New Delhi is ready to set up a Pharmaceutical plant and distribution centre in the Pacific Islands region and offered line of credit for this project. India will now provide gratis visa to the nationals of Pacific Islands.

While all the promises and projects are high on paper it is time that India should henceforth surge ahead in delivering the promised within the delegated time frame. India unlike China despite of its vast investments enjoys huge good will among the island nations. It is time that India evolves special mechanism to honour projects to be implemented abroad on a faster pace. Indian diplomatic representation in these islands is very weak and entire region is reached by small non-resident Indian missions. To strengthen bilateral relations and cooperation it is essential to establish diplomatic presence in each of the countries. India should now seriously contemplate on commissioning special envoys to these countries. India has a special friendship with Fiji efforts should be nurture these relations into closer ties with other nations in the region as well (5).

The “blue economy” of the Pacific islands is looming under the threat of the global warming and extreme weather conditions. The islands being far flung and spread out in the Pacific Ocean communication is challenging. India can extend its supports in the field of telecommunications, digital connectivity, space applications, climate change, food processing, tele-medicine, fisheries and solar energy and make a significant impact in this region. India’s bilateral trade with the 14 countries in $300 million of which $200 million is India’s exports and $100 million is its imports. Modi’s initiative comes at a time when China has overtaken Australia and New Zealand as the largest donor for the developmental projects in this region (6). Engagement with islands which are spread across a region that accounts to 20% of the globe will be highly significant for India. As seasoned diplomats remarked, engagement with Pacific region is highly personality driven and hence closer engagement is prescribed for substantial results.

@ Copyrights reserved.

Haritha's Musings

Tuesday, 29 September 2015

Setting Stage for stead-fast Indo-US Ties

Wednesday, 23 September 2015

Prime Minister Modi's visit to Ireland and the US

Monday, 21 September 2015

Nepal Promulgates New Constitution

Sunday, 20 September 2015

Muscle Flexing: Mascot of Chinese Military Parade

Saturday, 19 September 2015

China’s Military Parade Commemorating World War II

Tuesday, 15 September 2015

U.S. Report Endorsing Pakistan’s Nuclear Posturing

Friday, 11 September 2015

India’s Engagement with Pacific Islands

About Me

Labels

Labels