Was it simply a matter of dissent after all?

Since Tuesday hell broke loose and the chorus of India turning into a totalitarian state is being echoed by the libtards. On Tuesday, Maharashtra Police with the assistance of other task forces raided houses of nine activists in Delhi, Mumbai, Hyderabad, Faridabad and Goa and arrested five self-proclaimed human rights activists and Maoist ideologues. Ever since, the clamour of dissent of democracy began to gain ground. But was it dissent after all?

On 2^nd January, a day after the bicentenary of the momentous Koregaon Bhima rally in Maharashtra there were widespread protests across the states which soon turned violent. Protesting mobs eventually blocked roads, stalled train services. Commercial activity came to a grinding halt and soon the city of Mumbai was paralysed for six hours. Elsewhere in the state, mobs torched vehicles, burnt public property and murdered a 28-year old. Chief Minister of Maharashtra ordered investigation into this violence. Police probe indicated that Elgar Parishad held a meeting at Shaniwarwada, on Dec 31^st and the provocative speeches eventually led to eruption of violence in the rally. Acting on eight FIRs filed, police arrested Elgar Parishad organiser, Sudhir Dhawale, Antachi Chalwal of Republican Panthers Jati, Delhi-based activist Rona Wilson, of Committee for the Release of Political Prisoners (CRPP), Surendra Gadling of Indian Association of Peoples Lawyers (IAPL), Nagpur University Professor Shoma Sen, Mahesh Raut, a former Prime Ministers Rural Development Fellow (PMRD). Police took them into custody for further investigation under the UAPA Act (Unlawful Activities and Prevention Act) instituted by the UPA-1 regime. All of them charged for inciting riots were found to have links with the banned outfit CPI (Maoist) in 2009.

In the course of investigation, police recovered an email addressed to Comrade Prakash from the laptop of Rona Wilson which revealed Maoist plot to assassinate Prime Minister Modi in a “Rajiv Gandhi type incident”. But Maoist sympathisers soon jumped into fray and retired Justice BG Kolse Patil dubbed the whole incident as government’s attempt “to crush the voices which are opposing them”. Following the cryptic clues provides in the letter, police began to track their ilk from the letter undersigned as R. Aside mulling the strategy for the release of arrested Maoist GN Saibaba and other political prisoners the letter indicated a requirement of Rs 8 crore for procuring M-4 rifles and four lakh rounds of bullets. The unmissable references to Prime Minister Modi caught the attention of police. It read, “Modi led fascist regime is bulldozing its way into the lives of indigenous adivasis. In spite of big defeats like Bihar and West Bengal, Modi has successfully established BJP governments in more than 15 states. If this pace continues then it would mean immense trouble for party on all fronts. Greater suppression of dissent and more brutal form of Mission 2016. Com. Kisan and few others senior comrades have proposed steps for concrete end to Modi-Raj. We are thinking along the lines of another Rajiv Gandhi type incident. It sounds suicidal and there is good chance that we might fail but we feel that party must deliberate over our proposal. Targeting his road shows could be an effective strategy”. In the meanwhile, Police chanced upon another old letter containing a plan to kill Prime Minister Modi, Home Minister Rajnath Singh and BJP Party President Amit Shah. Following a tip off from both these letters, Police intensified crackdown operations and arrested five people. These include-Maoist sympathiser Varavara Rao in Hyderabad, civil liberties activist Gautam Navlakha in Delhi, lawyer-human rights activist Sudha Bharadwaj in Faridabad, and activists Vernon Gonsalves and Arun Ferreria in Mumbai. Varavara Rao, Vernon Gonsalves and Arun Ferreria were taken into custody and shifted to Pune. The Elgar Parishad’s involvement in Koregoan Bhima case and the subsequent assassination plot plan have led to the arrest of these activists. But the opposition and intellectual cabal instead of apprehending insidious plot to assassinate democratically elected leader of government compared it to emergency of 1975.In the process, political parties and their media yes men supported by the libtards successfully subverted nation’s attention from alleged Maoist plot to overthrow democratically elected government.

In a deliberate twist to this whole crackdown exercise on Urban Naxalites, the cabal managed to play a victim card and portrayed the whole exercise as an attempt to throttle dissent. As soon as the news of arrests erupted, supporters of Maoist activists took to twitter and lashed out at Modi. The quick turn of events akin to a meticulously synchronised orchestra gearing up for an extravagant music rendition began to unequivocally condemn the government and police as legions of a fascist regime. The awesome synchrony of the liberal brigade, jholawalas in condemning the Maharashtra police who spearheaded this whole exercise is incredible since the same brigade hailed their phenomenal services few days back for arresting members of Sanatan sanstha.

While there is an overflow of sympathy towards all the alleged activists, a peek into their previous histories shows that of the 10 arrested Maoist activists, seven of them were booked under UAPA even during the UPA regime. For all the desperate attempts to project these activists as honest, innocent and saviours of democracy, all of them have inveterate links with the banned Maoist party. Gautam Navalakha, worked closely with Ghulam Nabi Fai head of Washington based think-tank, Kashmiri American Council (KAC). In 2011, FBI arrested Fai, an American citizen as a message to Pakistan for running the think-tank, funded by ISI. KAC worked towards tilting American policy against India. KAC had roped in Indian leftist thinkers who strongly supported self-determination of Kashmir to build a case against India. KAC was instrumental in carrying out vicious propaganda of human rights violation in Kashmir. Navalakha strongly advocated for referendum in Kashmir and demilitarisation of Indian troops. For all his vicious narratives, Kashmir Chief Minister Abdullah had barred his entry into Kashmir and he was deported him from airport under section 144 of Cpc for inciting violence in 2011. Though widely popular as the editorial consultant of Economic and Political Weekly, he has inimical views towards India.

Twitterati specially contested the arrest of Sudha Bharadwaj, a trade unionist, lawyer and visiting professor for National Law University. But it emerges that she officiates JagLAG (Jagadalpur Legal Aid Group), which offers free legal services to Naxalites. She defended Binayak Sen who was awarded life term imprisonment for helping Naxalites and on charges of sedition. JagLAG petitioned to UN that Bastar is the most highly militarised zone in the World. Varavara Rao, popular as writer and patron of Maoist ideologist was arrested numerous times for its allegiances to the Naxalites. Vernon Gonsalves was arrested in 2007 by Maharashtra ATS for possessing nine detonators and twenty gelatin sticks for planning to launch a terror attack. Arun Ferreira was nabbed several times by police and arrested in 2007 for alleged Maoist links. Former Prime Minister Manmohan Singh called Naxalism as the beiggest threat to India’s internal security. Ironically, Congress party which has lost its entire top brass of politicians to Naxal attacks in Chattisgarh is now standing up for them. At least 27 leaders were reportedly killed in the Darbha Valley attack in 2013 by Naxals.

Above all, it is beyond a common understanding as how a Maoist ideologue can be an apostle of democracy? Maoism and Democracy are antithetical to each other. They are mutually contradictory. How can ideology which endorses, subscribes violence, believes in proletariat dictatorial functioning and plotting to overthrow a democratic government can be democratic? Moreover, how can the intellectual cabal supporting self-determination of states and eventual breakup of India can ever be benign. For all the emphatic talks on liberal values the cabal eulogises and emulates the dictums of Mao who oversaw the worst genocide ever that killed 45 million people in four years. In any case, Indians must be naïve or hallucinating to believe the plan to assassinate head of government as dissent.  

Interestingly, minutes after Gautam Navlakha was taken into police custody, a lobby of lawyers swung into action, forced the Delhi High court for an urgent hearing. The alacrity with which entire lobby regrouped, mobilised and prompted court into immediate action even as aggrieved deprived of legal clout are forced to wait for their turn patiently is simply fascinating. Questioning the legality of the arrest and citing statutory lapses, Court cancelled the transit remand transfer to take him to Pune. The next morning, Romila Thapar filed a plea in Supreme Court which directed the Pune police to keep all the five arrested activists under house arrest till Sep 6^th. In response to the Elgar Parishad case, Justice DY Chandrachud maintained, “Dissent is the safety valve of democracy. If it is not allowed pressure cooker will burst”. By undermining the threat from the members of Elgar Parishad funded by Maoist party as dissent, Supreme Court has dismissed an imminent threat to country’s internal security.

India has been victim of terrorism and naxalism. According to reports over 20,000 people lost their lives to Maoist violence including 2700 security personnel in the last two decades. Around 50 districts labelled as red corridors are infested with Naxalites. In the last three days owing to government’s relentless crackdown efforts violent attacks have abated. Government is now trying to reach out to these regions through several inclusive developmental projects and welfare schemes. References to dangerous precedents of naxal violence is made in the context of crackdown on activists to draw attention to metonymic adage “the pen is mightier than sword”. Not only the foot soldiers who perpetrate the act of violence culpable even the instigating and patronising forces that prompt these people into action should be punished for supposed complicity in the killing of innocent people.

After government's big step of serious crackdown on the Maoists, the intellectual gang is rattled. Interestingly or rather expectedly, the left parties and Congress questioned the high-handedness of government. In the past four years, the break India forces are struggling hard to find their way with the government. With financial conduits choked, their sense of entitlement fizzled out, the gang which is now ignored and became irrelevant is making last ditch effort to wage a nasty war against the government. All the brothers in arms are now regrouping and trying their best to create chaos, unrest in the government. To this end, creating a negative perception towards the government has been their first step in the agenda. Steadily they buttressed this perception through large scale award wapsi, intolerance debates, false stories of alleged alienation of minorities and Dalits, instigated people for reservations, lent support to the protesting mobs irrespective of the agenda. Creating fissures in the diverse Indian society has been another facet of this agenda.
While it unlikely that arrest of urban Naxalites would yield anything conclusive but it will expose the nexus between all the anti-India forces....

@ Copyrights reserved.

Mahathir Mohammed restrains Beijing’s neo-colonial trail in Malaysia

Ever since the launch of the One Belt One Road (OBOR) rebranded as BRI (Belt Road Initiative), China’s predatory economics have accrued immense damage to nations that have embraced the initiative. As opposed to the Beijing’s promise of “win-win situation”, nations slowly succumbed to a new phenomenon called “debt trap diplomacy”. The perilous fall of the nations, which China long defended as a negative propaganda to its global connectivity initiative became unarguably clear when Sri Lanka was compelled to lease out Hambantota port to China for 99-years. Notwithstanding this development, undeterred by the economic perils inflicted by its ambitious project, China which is on a BRI expansion spree started roping in poor and ailing economies headed by autocratic regimes. Majority of the countries under coercion and economic compulsion couldn’t call China’s bluff. Caught in a debt trap, nations explored ways to mitigate the insurmountable mountain of economic exigencies. Rising debt has become major election agenda in Malaysian Parliamentary elections.

Mahathir Mohammed, a nonagenarian, whose served as Prime Minister of Malaysia for 22 appalled by high levels of corruption, fraudulency and flight of funds jumped to contest elections. With outstanding debts touching $290 billion, the politician who has come out of retirement questioned burgeoning Chinese economic foot print in Malaysia.

Till, 2012 Chinese investments in Malaysia were meagre with Singapore topping the list among the ASEAN countries. After inauguration of OBOR, with a single-minded pursuit of expanding maritime and hegemonic presence across the globe Beijing reassessed strategic importance of Malaysia and deepened its economic engagement. Sharp surge in Chinese investments in Malaysia has been an outcome of massive upswing in Sino-Malaysian ties following former premier Najib Razak’s visit to Beijing in 2015. During his visit, Razak signed a string of infrastructure development projects opening flood gates for Chinese investments which increased by a whopping 350% from 2013 to 2017. A scandal prone Razak government battered by fall in commodity prices welcomed Chinese investments. Reciprocating Malaysia’s desire to enhance economic activity, China poured investments into infrastructure, logistics, reclamation, ICT and other sectors. Both countries together green-flagged several projects- $100 billion real estate development project, Forest City, $ 20 billion East Coast Rail Line (ECRL), $10 billion desilting and refurbishing the Melaka Gate Way project, $2 billion Kaula Lingaa International Port development, Kuantan Port Expansion, Robotic Future City, Samalaju Industrial Park steel company and others.

The humongous scale of Chinese investments alarmed economists. Activists questioned Razak government’s rationale towards developing new ports since existing ports are underutilised. Majority of the Chinese investments in Railways and ports are planned to facilitate rapid transit of Chinese exports and imports through Malaysia. Entire strategy behind developing Kuantan Port & its surrounding free zone area and the massive plan to build ECRL has been an attempt to hasten the transit of goods from Kuantan Port to Port Klang. This railway freight line is expected to save the sailing time of one and half day. Razak who argued ECR as a game changer extended fiscal and non-fiscal incentives.

Ambitious futuristic Forest City to be constructed over four artificial islands of Tebrau Strait has become of bone of contention due to strategic, xenophobic and environmental concerns. Reclamation of these islands besides increasing surface area of the region by 14 square kilometres would reduce shoreline distance between Malaysia and Singapore. Also, the avant-garde apartments pegged at price of $250,000, unaffordable for middle class Malaysians found patrons in Chinese buyers who enthusiastically booked apartments. Soon, the palatial real estate complex is bound to turn into a future Chinese town. Environmentalists raised concerns about irreversible damage caused to the natural, diverse ecosystems by reclamation which in turn would affect the livelihoods of fisherman in the region.

Despite objections and apprehensions towards Chinese projects believed to come strings, Razak refused to re-evaluate Beijing’s increasing economic clout in Malaysia. Eventually, Malaysia became integral part of BRI’s One axis and two wings attribute. Axis includes 15 neighbouring countries of China, 24 countries in Africa, Europe and far Asia comprise its eastern wing and seven countries of Latin America and South Pacific make up its western axis.

The lopsided Chinese investments began to exacerbate Malaysian economic crisis and Razak was believed to have siphoned out billions of dollars from 1 MBD (Malaysia Development Berhard). 92-year old Mahathir Mohammed enraged by financial mismanagement of Razak and his family members formed a new party in August 2017 Pakathan Harapan Coalition and contested elections with a promise of reinvestigating Chinese investments. Angered by looming corruption, people unanimously voted for Mahathir, who won by a landslide in both Parliamentary and Provincial elections. In the process he ended six-decade long rule of the Barisan National Coalition Party rule (formed by merger of three right wing and central parties) which has been in power since country’s independence (1959-2018). 

A doctor by profession, Mahathir joined as a member of United Malays National Organisation (UNMO) and entered Parliament in 1964, became cabinet member by 1976 and sworn in as prime minister in 1981. He won five elections handsomely by two-thirds majority. But critics attribute his electoral victories to the absence of a credible opposition, which was effectively decimated under his autocratic regime. His regime characterised by rapid modernisation and economic growth turned the agrarian state turned into a modern industrial economy and Malaysia stormed into the elite category of “Tiger Economies” by 2003. Thanks to the strong financial basics, Malaysia remained unaffected by the financial crisis of 1998. In 1990s allured by the spectacular economic rise of Malaysia and Singapore, authoritarian governments looked as viable alternative to democratic western capitalism in Asia. But soon the financial crisis, turned the tide around and countries like Indonesia, South Korea and Taiwan switched sides and embraced democracy.   

Typical of an autocratic leader, he believed in collective wellbeing as opposed to individual human rights, changed the fortunes of the country making it a shining example of development and progress. Like authoritarian leaders of his ilk, he believed that freedom of speech and innovation don’t go hand in hand. Being unabashed, bold and authoritarian he quickly took control over the judiciary and accumulated powers. Instituting controversial acts, he detained activists, opponents, non-religious persons and censored press. He trampled civil liberties and outrightly opposed West’s economic policies and soon entered “Ten Worst Enemies of the Press” category.

Even after retirement from active politics, he took keen interest in international affairs and remained a strong critic of Malaysian governance. Though he pledged to stay away from politics, he played an active role in anointing successor and was instrumental in appointing Najib Razak as the Prime Minister. Mahathir has been an un-apologetic anti-semitic. He never believed in threat from radical Islamists instead blamed the west for the conflict in the Middle East. For all his contrarian views, democratic countries viewed him with lot of scepticism. He favoured the bhumiputra or sons of soil, the indigenous tribes and ethnic Muslim Malay people but believed that Chinese are determined, hardworking and dynamic, resilient.

Though Mahathir hasn’t ever been an anti-Chinese rebel, he fulfilled his election promise of reviewing Chinese investments within days after taking charge as the oldest Prime Minister. On his five-day visit to China on August 19^th he cancelled two projects. Alluding to critical analysis of economists who warned about Chinese investments Mahathir announced cancellation of $20 billion ECRL, 85% of it funded Chinese soft loans from Exim Bank of China with interest rate of 3.5% and the rest funded through Islamic Bonds of Malaysia and $2.3 billion Trans Sabah Gas Pipeline (TSGP). It is unclear whether these projects are under the ambit of OBOR, but investigations indicate that annual loan amount of these projects exceeded net Chinese investments into Malaysia. Aside, economic investments Malaysia is now worried about the huge influx of Chinese. A rising wave of Chinese population is generating fresh pangs of Xenophobia in Malaysia.

At Beijing, speaking to press about the cancelled projects, Mahathir said, “It’s all about pouring in too much money which we cannot afford, we cannot repay and also because we don’t need these projects for Malaysia at this moment. With that debt if we are not careful we can become bankrupt.” Though some amount of money is already paid towards these projects, Mahathir believed that it was in Malaysia’s best interests to abandon them. Mahathir unequivocally expressed his concerns over the projects to President Xi and even added, “We should remember that the level of development of countries are not all the same. We don’t want a situation where there is a new version of Colonialism happening because poor countries are unable to compete with rich countries, therefore we need free trade”. Mahathir’s strong pitched statements, are a wake-up call to countries flooded with Chinese investments forcing them to review, reinvestigate and reassess the economic viability of Chinese-led projects.

China which is facing a trade war with the US, not keen on ruffling feathers with Malaysia, its largest trading partner in ASEAN hasn’t issued any statement condemning Mahathir’s audacity. Mahathir adopted an assertive approach towards the South China Sea (SCS) issue and strongly objected to the militarisation of reclaimed islands of SCS.  He added, “we are all for ships, even war ships passing through, but not stationed here. It is warning to everyone. Don’t create tension unnecessarily”. In the joint statement, he sought to strengthen ties with China and urged China to join hands against “unilateralism and protectionism”.

Having been an adept politician, Mahathir conscientiously judged the growing concerns of number of countries whose economies are in irreversible tail spin due to Chinese loan repayments. With every passing day, list of countries plummeting debt abyss is expanding. Mahathir who is alarmed by these developments chose to stem Malaysia’s spiral descent into debt trap sought to rescue it with corrective steps by suspending extraneous projects.

Further, cash-strapped Malaysia, aiming to resurrect its economic ties is believed to relaunch “Look East Policy”. Inconsonance with this paradigm, Mahathir made his first state visit to Japan, its closest financial ally and is expected to revive the East Asia Economic Caucus (EAEC). Given, Malaysia’s good relations with Japan, Strategists opine that India must seize this opportunity to initiative trilateral connectivity projects with Japan as the lead partner. With ASEAN embracing the concept of Indo-Pacific solidarity, India must make vigorous attempts under Act East policy to broaden its engagement.

Interestingly, Mahathir who has been butt of stinging criticism for being a vengeful authoritarian is now looked upon as a new leader by his ASEAN counterparts. His temerity to stand up to Chinese hegemony and suspend projects is taken note off globally. Inadvertently, Mahathir’s bold stance towards Chinese investments over fears of bankruptcy added heft to dubiety of OBOR.

@ Copyrights reserved.

Atal Bihari Vajpayee’s path breaking Foreign Policy

Atal Bihari Vajpayee, the first non-Congress Prime Minister to complete full term laid a strong foundation for Indian foreign policy. Akin to his natural attributes of being a natural strategist, consensus-builder, democrat, optimist he not only run a minority government, undeterred by the compulsions of coalition he took bold foreign policy decisions and laid ground for India’s elevation in global arena. Vajpayee’s strategic vision towards India has steadily evolved over years right from his formative years of political career as the external affairs minister in Morarji Desai’s cabinet in 1977. By delivering UNGA address in Hindi for the first time, he not only created mark for himself but effectively carved a unique civilizational identity for India at the international forum. Having deeply imbibed the sacrosanct belief of India’s exceptionalism which is at the root of Hindu nationalism, expounded RSS stalwarts Vinay Savarkar and M.S.Golwalkar he steadfastly upheld national interests. His approach is also influenced by Bharatiya Jan Sangh’s (BJS) agenda of enhancing India’s military and economic capabilities.

Being a pragmatic leader, considering the geopolitical realities and strategic need to engage with Northern neighbour, China, Vajpayee, in February 1979 travelled to China in response to invitation from Chinese foreign minister Huang Hua. Aside apprising them of the initiatives taken by India for building a climate of confidence, he called for restoration of Indo-China bilateral ties, reinforced the need for non-interference in internal affairs, expressed concerns at the construction of Karakoram Highway and clarified that India will not object to normal Sino-Pakistan ties. With the outbreak of Sino-Vietnam, Vajpayee cut short his visit. Upon his return to India, addressing Parliament Vajpayee urged, “Fighting should end immediately and as a first step, Chinese forces should withdraw from Vietnam”. Further he expressed India’s solidarity to the brave soldiers Republic of Vietnam. Vajpayee always had a clear vision about geopolitics and never dilly-dallied in calling a spade a spade.

In the six years of his Prime Ministership, Vajpayee assiduously pursued a pragmatic foreign policy raising above distorted ideological perspectives. Undeterred by punishing Western sanctions and pressure, Vajpayee within days of assuming charge as Prime Minister expedited highly secretive “Operation Shakti” culminating in the explosion of three thermonuclear bombs in May 1998. Months after India’s nuclear test, with China’s technological imports Pakistan conducted six nuclear tests. Allaying fears of the West worried of highly volatile South Asia’s nuclear environment, Vajpayee announced a voluntary moratorium on nuclear testing and pledged “no first use” (NFU). Internationally hyphenation of India and Pakistan has been the theme. US subscribed to the policy and imposed sanctions on India and Pakistan. India for once became global “pariah”.

To resurrect fragile bilateral ties with Pakistan, in a big diplomatic push Vajpayee launched a bus service, Sada-e-Sarhad to Lahore from Delhi in February 1999. He travelled in the bus to Lahore carrying message of peace. In a bid to normalise relations, Vajpayee and his Pakistani counterpart Nawaz Sharif signed Lahore Declaration warranting unauthorised use of nuclear weapons. In response to India’s offer of friendship, to avenge India’s occupation of Siachen Glacier in 1984, Pakistan infiltrated India and stealthily set up camps in Kargil-Dras sector and a full-fledged war erupted in May 1999. Inspiring and extending rock solid support to Armed forces, despite repeated provocations Vajpayee prevailed upon the forces not to cross the LoC (Line of Control). Indian forces dominated all the three arenas of the war zone within no time. Convinced of India’s restraint of not crossing the LoC, Clinton called Nawaz Sharif to Washington and exhorted him to withdraw Pakistan forces unconditionally. Vajpayee’s strategic brilliance ensured that for the first time America supported India. India’s biggest diplomatic win during Kargil war eventually catalysed America’s tilt towards India. Except France which steadfastly endorsed India’s compulsion to be nuclear weapons state, all other major countries strictly denounced India’s nuclear tests. Indeed, it later emerged that Vajpayee in his personal communication to Clinton mentioned of China’s growing strategic heft as the principal reason behind India’s expeditious nuclear weapons testing. Throughout the challenging phase of sanctions, Indian opposition which is now singing praises of Vajpayee after his death, had lashed out at Vajpayee for his nuclear adventurism.

President Bill Clinton’s strategic visit of March 2000 to South Asia turned out to be a new milestone for Indo-US relations. Clinton who first visited Pakistan to negotiate with Pakistan over emergence of Taliban travelled to India as well. After President Carter’s visit to India in 1978, Clinton was the first US president to visit India after a gap of 22 years. The military rule and termination of democracy in Pakistan as opposed to continuous flow of democratic credentials in India generated a favourable opinion of India. Both countries signed comprehensive document: “India relations-A vision for 21^st century”. Reciprocating Clinton’s visit, Vajpayee visited US in September 2000 and addressed the joint session of Congress. He remarked that, “American people have shown that democracy and individual liberty provide the conditions in which knowledge progresses, science discovers, innovation occurs enterprise thrives and ultimately people advance. Just as American lesson has been an experience in what people can achieve in a democratic framework, India has been laboratory of a democratic process rising to meet the strongest challenges that can be flung at it”. He even added, “we both cherish, preserve and promote human rights such as freedom of speech, political choice and religious beliefs. These are the universal values that form the foundation of more tolerant and compassionate societies, a more non-violent world free from tensions and fear”. Stressing the need for dialogue between two democracies he termed India and US as “natural allies” and should work together closely for international peace, progress and security in the 21^st century. Vajpayee coined the term “natural allies” used to best describe the similarities between India and the US. His speech resonated well with American policies and soon Vice-President Al Gore echoed that the World’s two largest democracies should work together. Vajpayee’s pledge of nuclear restraint (NFU), ban on nuclear tests made a formidable impact on the US administration. After Vajpayee’s fervent push, external affairs minister Jaswant Singh held series of long negotiations with his counterpart Strobe Talbott to consolidate ties with the US. Through persistent engagement and negotiations through interlocutors, Vajpayee managed to communicate to American that its policy of hyphenating India and Pakistan is flawed. In the process, India apprised America of its strategic compulsions and impending security threats from two neighbours China and Pakistan which are nuclear armed countries as well. Vajpayee’s significant policy shift, not getting swayed away by unwarranted American consternation has become mainstay of Indian foreign policy.

Despite Pakistan’s surreptitious attempts to inflict damage to India, Vajpayee made renewed efforts to engage with the western neighbour for larger peace and stability of the region. After ignominy of Kargil war defeat, Pakistan’s ISI in collaboration with Afghan Taliban hijacked IC-814 Indian Airlines flight from Kathmandu to Delhi carrying 176 passengers to secure release of dreaded Pakistani terrorists Masood Azhar and two others in December 1999. Again, in July 2001, to give peace a chance, Vajpayee and President of Pakistan Pervez Musharraf met in Agra to resolve the Kashmir issue. But the Agra summit collapsed. In December 2001, Pakistan terrorist outfits LeT and JeM launched attacks on Indian parliament. Enraged by covert attacks, India readied troops to retaliate, but was bogged down China’s reluctance to act against Pakistan. India’s restraint, amidst Pakistan’s punitive actions changed international perception of India. Terrorism soon become another fulcrum of Indo-US strategic cooperation. Regardless of Pakistan’s relentless efforts to destabilise India, against all odds, Vajpayee opted for normalisation of ties with Pakistan and desired friendship for he believed that we can change friends but not neighbours. On his trip to Kashmir in 2003, Vajpayee resumed Lahore bus service suspended after 2001 Parliament attacks and extended hand of friendship to Pakistan. He travelled to Islamabad in 2004. Both countries signed an agreement whereby Pakistan has “promised not to allow any territory under its control against India”. Characteristic of Pakistan double-speak and subterfuge, it backtracked. Despite, Vajpayee’s generosity and immense diplomatic investment, Pakistan core agenda of anti-Indianism remains unchanged and continues to threaten bilateral peace.

Cognizant of importance of “a good neighbourhood policy” Vajpayee visited China in 2003 and instituted a dialogue process between “Special Representatives” of both countries to resolve outstanding border issue. In the process, India accepted Tibetan Autonomous region as part of China and China recognised Sikkim as integral part of India. Vajpayee even travelled to Indonesia and Vietnam. He strengthened ties with longstanding friend Russia, started the annual summits and elevated Indo-Russian ties to strategic partnership.

Interestingly after painstakingly building relations with US, in lieu of national interests after much consideration Vajpayee declined to send troops to Iraq. Despite the unprecedented pressure aftermath nuclear tests and international censure, Vajpayee made audacious efforts to impress upon the World that India is a responsible nuclear power. Reconciliation with US and his genuine conviction to earn the trust of overbearing global power, US has made it easy for his successors to strike a civil nuclear deal. Vajpayee has infused new life to the Indo-US relations that has become cornerstone of India’s contemporary foreign policy. His successors, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and Narendra Modi divested Indian foreign policy from binaries and assiduously strengthened ties with America. Vajpayee’s pragmatic approach, realism and unflinching commitment to uphold national interests even during globally and economically challenging times will be an exemplar for generations to come.

@ Copyrights reserved.

Revival of Khalistan Movement

On August 12^th pro-Khalistan forces met at Trafalgar Square, London to back non-binding referendum-2020. The event organised by Sikhs for Justice (SFJ) bolstered the idea is working towards garnering support of Sikhs living across 20 countries to “liberate Punjab from Indian occupation”. The website created under the same name recommends employing two radical methods for self determination or independence. First one being, “unilaterally declaring independence from India” or secession from the parent country unilaterally and secondly “dissolution of India as a nation state resulting in the creation of several small states”. Legally, it is exploring doctrines like Montevideo Convection applicable to Israel and Uti Possidetis Juris of Kosovo for gaining international recognition and seeking justification for the movement. Besides, it has charted out various options to explore the possibility of carving out a new state for Sikhs.

Essentially, the organisation is weighing all options like the internal and external self-determination. Effectively, building a strong case for self-determination, the organisation invoked the “1984 Sikh genocide during which over 30,000 people were systematically exterminated the period of three days. This includes the systematic campaign of terrorism unleashed by the Indian state through its paramilitary forces and police during the period of 1984 and 1996”.  Besides it argues as per the definition of Supreme Court of Canada, internal self-determination is “a people’s pursuit of its political, economic, social and cultural development within the frame work of existing state” is acceptable. While the call for self-determination is grievous distraction for the integrity of sovereign country, the second option of advocating “disintegration” of India is deeply disturbing and dangerous. Drawing parallels to the dissolution of Yugoslavia into smaller countries like Republic of Macedonia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Montenegro, Serbia and Kosovo, the organisation hasn’t shirked away from mooting such a fate for India. It is presaging spurt of such independence movements within India by various states living harmoniously under the Indian flag. By brazenly encouraging separate state demands, it is suggesting that by collectively working towards independence from Indian states can aspire to get Universal acceptance as well.

It doesn’t take a rocket science to decipher that this dangerous ideation is implanted by Pakistani Islamists who repeatedly invoke Ghawza-e-Hind, referenced in Hadees (sayings of Mohammed Prophet) a final Jihad to completely invade India. Given the robust Military-Masjid nexus in Pakistan the doctrine has become cornerstone for Rawalpindi’s policy towards India. But Pakistan’s jihadist ideology of conquering India suffered a massive setback after its humiliating defeat in 1970 Indo-Bangladesh war and surrender of 93,000 Pakistani soldiers. Taken, aback by this utter loss of face in conventional warfare against India, General Zia-ul-Haq championed a new doctrine of “bleeding India by thousand cuts”. Ever since, Pakistan began to wage proxy war against India by cultivating terrorists, its prized strategic assets. Pakistan began to perpetrate insurgency in Kashmir and Punjab, the border states of India. In the process touched raw nerve of Sikhs who silently aspired for an independent homeland Khalistan (Land of the Pure) comprising regions ruled by earlier Sikh rulers.

The idea of separate homeland for Sikhs can be traced to Divide and Rule policy of British who midwifed Pakistan based on religion from India. Days after passage of Lahore Resolution, Dr. Vir Singh Bhatti who coined the term Khalistan overwhelmed by concerns of Sikhs who might be left homeless between the Hindu India and Muslim Pakistan fervently desired for a designated land for Sikhs. His imagined theocratic state would include the current state of Punjab, regions in Pakistani Punjab including Lahore, Shimla Hills to be reigned by Maharaja of Patiala. But by early 1940’s Sikhs weren’t the dominant majority in Punjab. Soon, Sikhs called for territorialisation of Sikhs and Akali Dal passed a resolution to this effect in 1946. But tormented by the brutal partition and unprecedented bloodshed Indian government rejected the demand for yet another religion-based partition.  

Instead in 1966, government of India under the Punjab State Reorganisation Act approved creation of Punjab on linguistic basis. Punjab province was trifurcated into Punjab, Haryana and transferred certain regions to Himachal Pradesh. But the staunch advocates of Khalistan movement who remained dissatisfied to the core having moved out of India began to popularise the demand for an independent Khalistan.  Akali Dal party having lost elections, to position itself as leader of Sikh politics passed Anandpur Sahib resolution in 1973 for autonomy of Punjab. Around the same time, Jagjit Singh Chouhan who espoused the idea of Khalistan having moved to UK relaunched the movement and raised Khalistan flag at Birmingham. He started the Khalistan National Council giving a massive boost to regrouping of Sikhs. Pakistan-backed Chauhan declared his intention to run a parallel Sikh Home Rule from Nankana Sahib in Pakistan, the birth place of Guru Nanak Dev and released albums, stamps of Khalistan Movement.

Influenced by Anand Sahib resolution Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale spurred dormant Khalistan movement and favoured Khalsa movement or orthodox Sikhism, instigated Sikhs to kill Hindus. He was instrumental in killing of Lala Jagat Narain founder of Hindu Samachar for criticising Bhindranwale. Bhindranwale’s secessionist ideas resonated well with small and marginal farmers majority of them who were affiliated to All India Sikh Student Federation (AISSF) leading to emergence of militant Sikh cult. Bhindrawale’s militancy received a shot in arm after Congress extended support to him to counter the growing influence of Akali Dal in Punjab. Indeed, in early 1980s both Bhindranwale and Harcharan Singh Longowal, President of Akali Dal unequivocally demanded for a separate state and launched Dharma Yudh Morcha. They eventually set up respective camps in the Golden temple. Under political duress of being labelled as separatist party, Akali Dal retreated from the Golden temple. To evacuate Bhindranwale and his supporters who stashed armoury and weapons, Congress launched the Operation Blue Star to crush the secessionist movement. Sikhs later heavily criticised Prime Minister Indira Gandhi for excess use of force that led to heavy loss of life. Antagonised Sikh avenged Blue Star by assassinating Indira Gandhi. This triggered mass killings of ordinary Sikhs Delhi and other cities. The inhuman wave of killings intensified a sense of alienation among Sikh Diaspora who have migrated to Canada and other Western countries. Secessionists eventually capitalised on this anger and alienation. Canada become hub of Sikh extremism. Sikh separatists in Canada planted two bombs in Air India flights. While one exploded in Tokyo airport killing the luggage handlers, the other one exploded mid-air over Atlantic killing all the 329 passengers on board. After the Kanishka bomb blast Sikh separatism received international attention. Barbaric killings of innocent citizens in bomb explosions created fissures in Khalistan movement with people opposing violent activities leaving the groups. Meanwhile, rampant killings, rapes, massacres became a regular affair in Punjab. Chief Minister of Punjab Beant Singh with the help of K.P.S. Gill crackdown the violence with iron hand and restored normalcy by 1993.

In late 1970’s General Haq started according special hospitality to Sikhs pilgrims to Pakistan and even met them. Sikh rebels who are banned entry into India after the Operation Blue star established firm relations with political leaders. Inter Service Intelligence (ISI) financed and organised training camps for Khalistan organisations like Babbar Khalsa International (BKI) founded by Talwinder Singh Parmar and International Sikh Youth Foundation (ISYF). Though Pakistan refutes charges of involvement in Khalistan movement levelled by India, in an interview, Lt Gen. Hamid Gul, former of Inter Service Intelligence (ISI) admitted having sold weapons to Sikh separatists. Ever since, Pakistan’s involvement in Khalistan Movement there has been a sharp surge in Sikh militancy. After India signed friendship treaty with Russia, irked by India’s growing closeness to Russia, US and UK sought to use the Sikh-card to foment trouble, turned blind eye to rising secessionist activities in their countries that fuelled anti-India sentiments. Post-cold war west’s interest in Khalistan movement totally subsided. But Pakistan whose “national ideology is nothing except anti-Indianism” hasn’t refrained from plotting and reviving the Khalistan movement. ISI blatantly supported Khalistan movement to turn away India’s attention from Pakistani fomented insurgency in Kashmir. Since shutdown of Punjab will close supply lines to Kashmir, Kashmiri insurgents can intensify anti-India attacks. Kashmir is the real target of Pakistan and ISI used every dirty trick to separate Kashmir from India.

After ruthless combing operations against separatist organisations in Punjab, the top brass of BKl, Khalistan Zindabad Force moved to Pakistan. Some settled in Canada, US and other Western countries. India cognizant of ISI tacit support to Khalistan leaders post Mumbai attacks, submitted a dossier containing the list of five separatists, sheltered in Pakistan, prominent among them Lakbir Singh Rode of ISYF operating from Lahore. These pro-Khalistan groups developed strong relations with Islamists and anti-India forces. ISI has been playing a phenomenal role in creating a common front between the Khalistan forces and Kashmiri jihadi groups. This camaraderie was on display when leaders from both groups carried out protests during Prime Minister Modi’s visit to UK this March and earlier in 2015.

By mid-1990s ISYF is reported to have interacted with Salafist parent body of LeT, Markaze-Dawat-Wal-Irshad and subsequently strengthened ties with LeT. ISYF and LeT have set up joint office outside Nankana Sahib in Pakistan. While there is brief respite in Sikh militancy after 1993 when India banned most of the Khalistan groups like the ISFY, Khalistan Commando Force, Khalistan Liberation Force, BKI, Khalistan Zindabad Force, Bhindranwale Tiger Force all these groups thrived in Pakistan with support of ISI and Sikh Diaspora. Since 2007, there has been slow revival of this militancy with Punjab experiencing spurt in kidnappings, bombings, abductions and sectarian clashes. Emulating the pattern of 1970s when separatist forces incited anti-India passions among the scores of unemployed Sikhs migrated to Western lands, ISI used unemployed Punjabi youth to launch attacks in India. ISI in collusion with Khalistan forces began peddling drugs, arms, weapons into Punjab. Separatist forces strongly believed secession of Punjab from India can alone render true justice for “Operation Blue Star”. Though Police have foiled multiple attempts of these groups in 2010 to kill politicians, the movement hasn’t died down completely. Khalistan Tiger Force Chief Jagat Singh Tara who was arrested in Thailand in January 2015 confirmed the role of ISI in assassination of Punjab Chief Minister Beant Singh and revealed the details of a syndicate operating in Thailand.

Sikh militants have set up modules in US, UK, Thailand, Italy, Canada and Germany with the help of ISI. Fresh details about the revival of the Khalistan movement emerged after police busted a module in Punjab carrying out the Referendum 2020 campaign on social media and even planning to arrange meeting between like-minded people during IPL matches. NIA investigations of killing of RSS Worker, Christian Priest Father Sultan Masih in 2017 besides five other murders in 2017 and 2016 indicate that they were planned in Pakistan, funded by groups in Canada, Italy and UK. Militant groups engaged some local youth to murder Hindu leaders to create unrest and destabilise states law and order situation.

Though the impact of the pro-Khalistan forces in London was effectively drowned by loud drums and display of solidarity of Pro-India groups, the message is loud and clear. A popular observation of Pakistan is “weaker it gets, stronger it will adopt to Islamic vocabulary”. Facing tough scrutiny from FATF and unsure of financial relief from IMF, Pakistan is bound to intensify its nefarious activities against India. Worryingly, UK is steadily becoming a hot bed for anti-Indian activities with Pakistan Diaspora increasingly emerging as the most influential group in the UK parliament. Over years ISI funded think-tanks Justice Foundation and Kashmir American Council have escalated Kashmir issue in British Parliament and managed to influence Pakistani-Origin politicians in British Parliament. Telegraph has carried out an article titled, “Pakistani spies in the house of parliament” condemning Baroness Sayeeda Warsi for attending the conferences hosted by the Justice Foundation. In the snap elections of 2017 to UK parliament, 12 Pakistani Origin members, nine from Labour party and three of conservative party got elected. After Sadiq Khan’s win in the London mayoral elections and Sajid Javid’s appointment as the home secretary after the resignation of Amber Rudd Pakistani influence in UK received a big boost. It is no brainer that Pakistani origin parliamentarians will not be reluctant to be part of ISI’s game-plan. More over a call for balkanising India and splitting Kashmir, Punjab and Nagaland by legislator Lord Nazir Ahmed at the pro-Khalistan and anti-India protests suffice to say Pakistani leaders buy ISI’s anti-Indianism. Aside the support from leftist Green Party of UK, Pakistani Labour party MP has openly sympathised with the demand of Khalistanis.

Sikhs for Justice (SFY), campaigning for referendum 2020 initiated in Canada worked hand-in-glove with ISI handler Lt Colonel Shahid Mehmood Malhi known as Chaudary Sahib who launched “Operation Express” on June 6^th spearheading protests in London. Indeed, even Referendum2020 website is operated and developed from Pakistan. August 12^th London Declaration is managed by Paramjit Singh Pamma, member of banned BKI is wanted for Pro-Khalistan activities. Indian government requested British government to ban the demonstration. UK has turned down India's request indicating that every group has right to protest. At this juncture, it is imperative to understand Pakistani Muslim community is steadily gaining strength in UK. Over the years, a formidable alliance is shaping up between the Islamists and Liberals in UK. Labour Party which is on a rise in Britain practically squashed the threats of rising radicalism, rapid proliferation of mosques, subsequent increase in indoctrination campaigns and growing threat of grooming gangs across the UK at its own peril. Despite the reports of UK turning to be a hub of radical Islam, Britain seems to have turned deaf ear to it. Emboldened by UK's inaction, Pakistan is now intensifying anti-Indian activities in UK as well with its proxies and cohorts. While the pro-Khalistan is just a mere beginning, it is a subtle warning. India must now intensify its intelligence and under-cover operations to unearth clandestine activities of ISI agents of Pakistan. Besides, it is time India walks its talk on Baluchistan and prepares ground for unravelling Pakistan.

@ Copyrights reserved.

A tribute to "Atal" leader

Pioneer of coalition politics, stalwart, statesman, visionary, poet, Bharat Ratna Sri Atal Bihari Vajpayee breathed his last today after prolonged illness. He was one of the few last surviving pre-independence era leaders who has made a tremendous impact on Indian polity and the first non-Congress prime minister to complete full term. One of the founders of erstwhile Jan Sangh, he was arrested in 1942 during the Quit India Movement, he was elected to Parliament in 1957. Ever since he was elected to Lok Sabha ten times and twice to Rajya Sabha.

A mesmerising orator who had all the time in the World, to carefully articulate his message with right usage of words would forever be remembered for his amazing prosaic and poetic dictions. His chaste Hindi brewed with poetic analogies on the floor of the parliaments during the debates always received special appreciation and mention even from unexpected corners.

Even now, people would remember and reminisce his iconic lecture in the Parliament when his 13-day government lost the no confidence motion just by a single vote. He made a mark as the first foreign affairs minister of India to address the UNGA in Hindi. His soul stirring speeches from the time of emergency gradually paved way for his steady rise in politics.

During his prime ministership by majestically conducting six nuclear tests under Operation Shakti in 1998, he put India in the category of a responsible nuclear power. While he made every effort to reach out to Pakistan through Lahore declaration, Aman ki asha and the bus trip, Islamabad reciprocated his overt friendly gestures through nasty and clandestine intrusions leading to the Kargil war 1999. NDA I headed by Vajpayee laid foundation for a stable and strong India. He stabilised, strengthened economy, unveiled telecom revolution, and prioritised infrastructure development. Undeterred by western sanctions post Pokhran nuclear tests, when India was considered a pariah nation, he liberalised economy further and welcomed foreign investments. On the other hand, he even championed for antoyadaya or reaching out to the last man.

His characteristic political wit, humour, gentle satire and spontaneous subtle sarcasm has won him accolades even from his political rivals. Current crop of Indian politicians must imbibe this rare attribute to enhance the fragrance of political harmony in a parliamentary democracy like ours.

While the results of his efforts couldn't be realised in his tenure, UPA regime reaped rich benefits from these initiatives who brazenly gobbled the fruits of his meticulous planning and vision. Unfortunately, Indian electorate failed to appreciate the sincere efforts of Vajpayee, who suffered massive electoral drubbing. The catch phrase of "Vibrant India" failed to win over the hearts and minds of Indian electorate.

Under his regime even liberals thrived well who openly remarked him as the right politician in a wrong party. Currently, all his sharpest political critiques are reaping praise on the stalwart and appropriating his political legacy. The long illustrious political career of Vajpayee will be remembered for posterity for his commitment, sincerity and virtuosity. India will truly miss the tallest leader in the Post-independence era....

Submitting resignation after losing the trust vote

Om Shanti !!!!!

@ Copyrights reserved.

China’s Muscular Policy towards Taiwan Part-II

China’s Initial Charm Strategy

President Hu Jintao of China unveiled Taiwan charm strategy and initiated cross-Strait economic agreements for eventual economic integration of Taiwan with President Ma Ying-jeou of KMT. Hu wanted to create economic reliance that would favour reunification. But China’s Economic Cooperation Frame Work Agreement (ECFA) failed to enthuse Taiwan as the expected GDP rise from such an agreement was less than 2%. In a bid to woo, Taiwan, China allowed it to ink Free Trade Agreements (FTA)s with Singapore and New Zealand. Beijing didn’t object to Taiwan’s participation as an observer at World Health Assembly.  But taken aback by Taiwan’s tepid response to economic integration Beijing tightened Cross-Strait ties and prevailed on Ma to expedite Cross-Strait Service Trade Agreement (CSSTA) in 2014. Suspicious of Chinese intentions, students’ unions and civic society launched protests termed as Sunflower Movement, for passing the bill without a clause by clause review. Giving in to the agitations by students, KMT halted economic integration. Subsequently in 2016 elections, DPP backed by students emerged victorious wining both presidency and legislature elections for the first time.

President Tsai, unlike KMT refuses to be dictated and rejected the 1992 consensus. It is believed that in 1992, semi-government representatives from PRC and ROC met at Hong Kong and agreed that there is one China but maintained different interpretations of what “one China” means. Interestingly, such agreement was acknowledged publicly retroactively after several years. Indeed, Shin Chin of KMT coined the meet as “1992 consensus”. Interestingly, Taiwanese version published on public domain states, “Both sides of Taiwan Strait agree that there is only one China. However, the two sides of the Strait have different opinions as to the meaning of ‘one China’. To Peking, ‘one China’ means “PRC”, with Taiwan to become “Special Administrative region” after unification. Taipei, on the other hand considers, ‘one China’ to mean ROC founded in 1911 and with de jure sovereignty over all of China. The ROC however, currently, has jurisdiction over Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu. Taiwan is part of China and the Chinese mainland is part of China as well”. Suffice to say, while this is no consensus by any logic, Tsai bats for formal independence and backs referendum in island’s sovereignty. Tsai’s refusal to 1992 consensus frustrates Beijing which is keen on unification. This is huge blow to CCP which is striving hard to turn people’s attention away from the slow economic growth, burgeoning debt,  ageing population, growing negative perception towards BRI (Belt Road Initiative). Besides, Xi in his acceptance speech as President vowed to “defeat separatist attempts for Taiwan independence”. Reinforcing that he wouldn’t allow any force to separate any part of Chinese territory from China, called it “China Dream”.

After Beijing’s rapprochement efforts under the pro-China KMT regime failed, China embarked on a new strategy of isolating Taiwan internationally, plotted schemes to debilitate Taiwan’s semi-conductor industry, inflicting blows on economy, luring Taiwanese intellectuals orchestrating a brain-drain, creating social unrest, carried out campaign to undermine democratic institutions and containing Taiwan’s identity. With no compunction to win hears and minds of Taiwanese, Beijing abandoned soft approach.

Lebanonization of Taiwan

In December 2016 Tsai made a congratulatory phone call to President Trump and alarmed by Trump’s remarks on “One China policy” Beijing intensified coercive measures. Global Times in an editorial subsequently warned that China might “Lebanonise” Taiwan. Among slew of options, Beijing even employed the “triad gang” or the “underground front” who spied on leaders and threatened anti-Beijing elements. These groups were planted in Taiwan and Hong Kong. Mass arrests of students participating in the pro-democracy protests revealed that triad gangs who had close links with CCP have stirred up violence during the Sun Flower movement and Occupy Central. These gangs were found to involve in mobilising gangsters to disrupt rallies, carrying out organised crimes and stoking violence to undermine the democratic institutions. CCP has always maintained good contacts with Nationalists (pro-Beijing leaders) in Taiwan. CCP’s frontier group, China Unification Promotion Party (CUPP) led by Chang An-le who was head of the Bamboo Union and served jail sentence in America relocated to Taiwan in 2013. He establihe shed ties with the pro-China groups and State Council’s Taiwan Affairs Office (TAO). CUPP and its affiliates joined the protests on pension reforms, legalisation of same sex-marriages. It even entered electoral fray in 2016 and performed very poorly as expected. But their objective is not winning elections but to gain legitimacy. Contesting elections is an attempt to mask real identity of CUPP as a crime organisation and to portray it as socially relevant responsible group. Also, CUPP actively promoted leaders and pro-Beijing narratives by participating in the democratic process of elections. In fact, this strategy of mainstreaming crime was a common practice in communist countries like Russia. China’s all-weather friend Pakistan took out a leaf from this strategy and allowed terrorists to contest in recently held elections. By objectively blurring the line between the criminal activity and the political agitation, Beijing made it exceedingly difficult for the Taiwan law enforcing agencies to act of these motivated miscreants. These groups are co-opting other players who are keen on unification.

These pro-Beijing groups have access to sophisticated weapons. Taiwan authorities once recovered huge cache of arms routed to Taiwan via Philippines and Hong Kong. Beijing has been cultivating non-state actors to destabilise civil society in Taiwan and making desperate attempts to tear the “democratic fire wall” of Taiwan. Beijing is making every attempt to disrupt the normal democratic functioning and challenging the political parties which are striving hard to create a special identity for Taiwan. In yet another case of intimidating Taiwan’s civil society, China charged Lee Ming-cheh, a human rights activist from Taiwan who entered mainland China from Macau with “subversion of state power”. Since his detention, China hasn’t produced any evidence for his purported crimes and denied any contact with family members. While his wife has carried out a campaign to free her husband and even testified before US House of Representatives Committee. As of now there hasn’t been any progress in this case so far.

Diplomatic Coercion

In 2016 China officially snapped official channels of communication with Taiwan. On the diplomatic front, China is making every attempt to isolate Taiwan globally. With a promise of bountiful investments China is forcing Taiwan’s allies to accept “One China policy” and severe ties with Taipei. In the past 18 years, 14 countries deserted Taiwan. Since 2016, China has intensified its anti-Taiwan campaign and as a result, the last of the few friends were forced to leave Taiwan’s tent. Sao Tome and Principe disregarding the 20-year friendship treaty with Taiwan called off ties and entered Chinese orbit in 2016. Panama, Dominic Republic and Burkina Faso soon adopted a similar line. Taiwan is now left with 18 allies many of them poor and impoverished nations in Pacific and Latin America. Worryingly even Taiwan’s ally Vatican City is now making formidable attempts to build ties with China. Last week China urged US not to allow the stop-over of President Tsai in US on her way to Belize and Paraguay. President Tsai’s stop- over in US comes at the height of US-China trade tariff war. While the US hasn’t responded to China’s request it would be interesting to see how US will use its informal ties with Taiwan to hedge China.

Tourism as political tool

Retaliating Tsai’s refusal to endorse “One China Policy”, Beijing imposed restrictions on travel to Taiwan. As many as 3.4 million mainland Chinese tourists visited Taiwan in 2015, each spending an average of US$232 per day and total tourism revenue of US$788 million constituted to around 1 per cent of Taiwan’s economy. After Beijing’s effective South Korean tourism ban, it began to use tourism as political tool against Taiwan. Since 2016, there has been perceptible drop in mainland Chinese visitors to island affecting the economy. To make up for fall in numbers Taiwan started wooing Muslims of China and visitors from South East Asian countries by introducing visa-free entry. In the meanwhile, boosting ties with Taiwan, Trump administration passed Taiwan Travel Act in February allowing reciprocal high-level visits between both countries.

Succumbing to China’s growing clout, Taiwan was denied invitation to attend the World Health Assembly (WHA) in 2017 and 2018. Taiwan has attended WHA for nine years as observer of World Health Organisation (WHO). It was barred from attending International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) triennial assembly and Interpol Annual meetings. Despite Taiwan’s appeals, ICAO snubbed Taiwan under pressure and remained a mute spectator making Taiwan’s isolation complete. In contravention to the agreed principles regarding the operation of air routes over cross-straits, undermining the safety and security of Taiwan, China is operating flights on restricted routes. PLA troops are now flying in these routes snooping over Taiwan.

Simulating Invasion

China’s largest carrier, Liaoning inaugurated in 2017 circumnavigated the island and military aircrafts circled island several times. In response to increased movement of US vessels in Pacific and its announcement to grant Taiwan license to buy sensitive technology for building submarines Beijing launched biggest ever exercise which included live-fire drills. Subsequently China strengthened military presence close to Taiwan and conducted six-day long live fire drill in East China Sea last month simulating an invasion against Taiwan.

Intellectual Thefts

Intensifying its intimidatory tactics against Taiwan, China opened yet another front. It began to lure business men with potential investments and talent promising high position and perks accelerating brain-drain. To counter China’s attempts to poach talent, Taiwan has unveiled “four directions and eight strategies approach” like increasing remuneration for academics, innovative growth to negate the impact of “31 measures” of China. Taiwan manufactures two-thirds of World’s semi-conductors. Though China is the largest manufacturer of mobiles, its imports Chips worth $260 billion from Taiwan. With Trump administration restricting Chinese investments in America and imposing strict restrictions on the export of technology to China, Beijing has now resorted to intellectual thefts. Poaching the employees working at Taiwanese chip manufacturing companies, China is stealing “production, trade and design secrets”. Though Taiwan caught China indulging in such acts, it couldn’t pursue the cases legally because of the difficulty in collecting evidences. This is not the first of episode of China’s is found indulging in industrial espionage. American companies in Silicon Valley are now troubled by the increased instances of such thefts master-minded by China.

Under China’s pressure, East Asia Olympic committee has revoked the decision to hold youth games at Taichung, Taiwan. Taiwan has reported spent over $22 million towards preparation for the event. Disconcerted over country’s decision to rename Sports team from Chinese Taipei to Taiwan, China influenced representatives from South Korea, Macau, China, Hong Kong, North Korea, Mongolia, Guam, Japan and Taiwan to vote against Taichung. Except Japan all other countries towed Beijing’s line.

Undeterred by China’s continued coercion, Taiwan having strengthened its resolve is exploring new possibilities of building ties with other countries. To circumvent global isolation, Taiwan unveiled New South Bound Policy to engage with ASEAN countries, South Asian countries, Australia and New Zealand. It is actively participating in multilateral organisations. Unbending Taiwan has launched Ketagalan forum, for Asia-Pacific Security Dialogue stressing the need for rules based international order and for promoting peace and security in the region. It established Yushan Forum to serve as platform for exchange of youth representatives, NGOs working in the region.  Besides, Taiwan is rigorously strengthening its military might. Years of democratization has infused a new identity among Taiwanese people. The percentage of the population taking pride in Taiwanese identity has increased to 55% as against 4% who consider themselves Chinese. China’s coercive strategies fostered unity among Taiwanese, emboldened their resolve impelling them to uphold democratic values.

Certainly, at the core of entire issue is firstly the ambiguous interpretation and understanding of “One China policy”. The entire scramble is intensely complicated by the resolute pledge of President Xi of terming reunification of Taiwan with main land as integral to vision 2049. Emboldened by a steady economic rise and burgeoning diplomatic clout, China having launched a psychological warfare is unrepentantly escalating military presence in Taiwan Straits. Invariably, Taiwan is now becoming an issue of contention between China and US. Unfortunately, under Obama’s watch China brazenly infringed the median line and the reluctant president even turned down Taiwan’s plea for sale of F-16s. President Trump hasn’t shied away from taking China head on and announced even second round of tariffs today. Given, Trump’s unforgiving approach, Taiwan might be a flash point between China and America. Nonetheless, will countries call China’s bluff for being a global bully? Can the global bodies impose sanctions on economically powerful countries for subverting rules-based order? Else, China’s unbated authoritarianism will resoundingly prove that rules and regulations are for countries with poor global clout…..

@ Copyrights reserved.

Beijing’s resolute One China Policy and deteriorating Cross-Straits Relations Part-I

At a time when India, struggles to call Mission Impossible-Fall Out’s bluff for carrying out wrong map of India and calling “Indian state of Jammu and Kashmir” as “India- controlled Kashmir”, China threatens 44 international airlines to fall in line and honour its “One China Policy”. It is unfortunate that Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) hasn’t raised serious objections to the movie which has churned out 56 crores from Indian markets in its first week of opening despite depicting Kashmir wrongly. After mere four cuts, a disclaimer and some voice over modifications, CBFC has allowed screening of the movie in India and hasn’t bothered to press the producers to incorporate all these relevant changes in the international version of movie screened across the World. The easy-going attitude of India towards ill portrayal and negative propaganda, often perceived as sign of weakness is in sharp contrast to China’s authoritarianism that tolerates no non-sense. A cogent argument on art form or an act of fiction be exempted from such tough scrutiny is beyond the scope of this article. But this issue inadvertently compels us to capitulate China’s assiduous and vigorous attempts of strangulating the independent identity of Taiwan, a renegade province of China.

In first week of July, there was a sudden surge of outrage when Indian government acceding to China’s demand instructed Indian Airlines to change Taiwan’s name to Chinese Taipei. Strategists castigated New Delhi for bending backwards to appease China. But soon all other International Airlines including the American airlines- Delta, United and American airlines fell in line by the set deadline of July 25^th.  This is just one classical example of how China is trying to muzzle the independent existence of Taiwan.

Coercing Foreign Companies

Earlier in May, China has pulled up cloth retailer Gap, for showing Chinese map with its territories- Taiwan, Tibet and the Nine-dashed line of South China Sea (SCS). Gap was forced to issue apology for failing to respect the sovereignty and territorial integrity of China. In January, China closed Marriot’s website for a week for showing Tibet, Hong Kong, Taiwan and Macau as countries in online survey. To protect its business interests in China, Marriot even now carries a message, “we never any separatist organisation that harms China’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. We apologise profoundly for any behaviour that will cause misunderstanding about the above stance”.  Mercedes-Benz was forced to delete an Instagram post that carried a quote of the Dalai-Lama, “Look at the situation from all angles, and you will become more open”. Chinese Communist Party (CCP) considers Dalai-Lama as a political agitator and terms him “wolf in monk’s clothing” and Chinese people share similar sentiment. Within hours of the posting the Instagram message an angry wave of outrage flooded the Mercedes account. Mercedes immediately took to Weibo, Chinese microblogging channel to issue a lengthy apology saying, “in light of this, we will immediately take measures to deepen our understanding of Chinese values and culture, including our overseas colleagues, to ensure this won’t happen again”. A week ago, Google announced plans to launch a new censored search engine that complied with Chinese ideology.

Of late, China is pursuing a muscular “One-China Policy” and coercion has become its favourite tool to impose strict adherence to Chinese rules and laws on foreign companies. Clearly at a time, when the world is busy with North Korea denuclearisation, sham elections games of Pakistan, Islamabad’s IMF bailout plans, sinking Iraqi Rial and trade tariff wars between China and US, simmering crisis in Taiwan Straits has escaped global attention.

Stifling Democracy in Hong Kong

China’s attempts to stifle democracy, free speech has reached a new crescendo after President Xi Jinping assumed charge. The tremors of such aggressive efforts to assert control over autonomous regions like Tibet and Xinjiang reached threatening proportions in his regime. Since transfer of sovereignty to China, Hong Kong began to feel the heat of Chinese authoritarianism which escalated in 2012 with the election of Chief executive in CY Leung. After China refused to introduce Universal Suffrage and thrusted a restrictive democracy, pro-democrats launched sit-in protests famously termed as Umbrella Movement in 2014 rocked Hong Kong. Beijing crushed the democratic movement with iron hand. Undeterred students the launched “Occupy Central”. But Beijing refused to give in and barred pro-democracy candidates from contesting in legislative council and intervened in Hong Kong court’s decision to remove pro-democratic leaders for taking oath improperly. In some cases, it prevailed on universities to bar students who participated in these protests from universities. Recently, it influenced the courts to hand over seven years jail sentence to all the pro-democracy, pro-independence leaders. In 2017, several business leaders mysteriously disappeared showed up in Chinese custody. Eventually, China placed a pro-Beijing Chief Executive in Hongkong and strangulated democratic movement.

Chinese Dream

Within a month of taking over as President Xi gave a clarion call of “the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation” and announced two centennial goals. First to build a “moderately prosperous society” and second, making China “fully developed, rich and powerful nation”. Above all Xi infused a new enthusiasm and adroitly adopted a muscular vision to reclaim past greatness.  To realise these goals, Xi believed that CCP should take over the territories of greater China which includes Tibet, Xinjiang, Hongkong and China. He urged Chinese not to forget “Century of humiliation” and vowed to reinstate the civilizational credence of being centre of Universe or the “Middle Kingdom” meaning lying in the space between the heaven and earth. Xi tightened control over political discourse and called for ideological conformity and brought about unprecedented changes through reshuffling of bureaucracy, reorganising military and taking strictest action against graft. Simultaneously, in a bid to protect the country from maritime conflict, Xi stressed the need for controlling the seas within “first island chain” that runs through Japan, Taiwan, Philippines and South China Sea. Overpowered by the indomitable will of realising Chinese Dream, Xi ratcheted pressure campaign against Taiwan. Instead of trying to win hearts of Taiwanese for a prospective reunification, China employed coercion.

Republic of China (ROC), Taiwan

Ever since Tsai-Ing wen of Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) became President of Taiwan in 2016, China intensified diplomatic strangulation. From 1949 Taiwan, a renegade province of China has been a self-governing political entity. Chiang Kai-shek of Kuomintang (KMT) after losing the civil war to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) led by Mao Zedong, exiled to Taiwan in 1949. He ruled over Taiwan, called it Republic of China (ROC) until his death in 1975. Chiang insisted that his government represented the Chinese of the island and mainland. The West and other Communist countries for long, countries heeded Chiang’s claims and refused to recognise PRC. Taiwan currently a home to 23 million people was annexed in 1600s by Qing Dynasty who ceded this island to Japanese after their defeat at Sino-Japan war of 1895. The island remained under Japanese control till the end of World War-II 1945 when Tokyo was convincingly defeated by allied powers. Japan handed over Taiwan to military forces of ROC led by Chiang. In recognition of victory over the Axis forces in 1945, ROC joined UN as the founding member.

Cross-Straits Relations

After Outer Mongolia gaining independence in 1961 and Albania’s UN General Assembly resolution 1668, that called for replacing ROC with PRC at UNSC won two-thirds vote, ROC lost its diplomatic heft. In 1971, General Assembly Resolution 2758 moved by Albania garnered support from Communist countries and NAM countries following which PRC was recognised as sole legal China and PRC became permanent member of UNSC. Subsequently, Taiwan was forced to join multilateral organisation under the name of “Chinese Taipei”.  In the meanwhile, exploiting the rift in the communist bloc, President Nixon reached out to China secretly. Soon, he officially formalised ties with China and recognised “One-China policy”. In 1979, Washington stated, “the United States of America acknowledges the Chinese position that there is, but one China and Taiwan is part of China”.  ROC then mobilised its diaspora which in turn pushed Congress to pass the “Taiwan Relations Act” signed by President Jimmy Carter. TRA states, “the United States will make available such defense articles and defense services in such quantity as may be necessary to enable Taiwan to maintain a sufficient self-defense capabilities”. By and large, relations between the two Chinas characterised by tension and instability and are distinctly defined by the term “Cross-Straits relations”. Even after the civil war of 1949, both PRC and ROC clashed with each other frequently. First Cross-straits crisis ended in Formosa resolution of 1955 after PRC annexed Yijiangshan and Tachen Islands. In a second crisis, PRC started shelling in Kinmen and Matsu Islands to “liberate” Taiwan from KMT rule. In 1995 and 1996 as a warning to ROC from deviating the “One-China policy” and intimidate the electoral process, PRC began firing missiles across the Taiwan Straits.

Against US strategic ambiguity, China began to strengthen relations with third-world countries, participated in various international movements against super powers. By 1982, US reduced its arms sales to Taiwan but refused to formally accept the sovereignty of China over Taiwan. Reflecting its position on Taiwan, US issued three communiques and six assurances. Though America agreed to officially abrogate relations with Taiwan, it maintained cultural, commerical and economic interactions with Taiwan through the American Institute in Taiwan (AIT), which serves as non-official US embassy and issues visas.

Chiang ruled over Taiwan under a martial law after his death, successors continued the repressive rule till 1987. But the island gradually embraced democracy, by conducting first legislative elections in 1992 and Presidential elections in 1996. The nationalists or the Kuomintang historically upheld the policy of “one China Policy” loathed independence of island. As a result, it soon lost the support of youngsters who are unwilling for closer ties with mainland China to other parties. DPP, which vociferously batted for independent Taiwanese identity and called for de jure independence of Taiwan from mainland China. Soon it stormed into power as its ideology was in sync with the aspirations of younger generation. DPP remained in power from 2000-2008. But lost elections after its President Chen Shui-bian was convicted on charges of corruption, KMT again came back to power.

@ Copyrights reserved.