Vivek Issues n Options January 2013

7/30/2019 Vivek Issues n Options January 2013

1/86

Unsustainable Chinese Policies

Disappointed Congress in Gujarat Wake Up Call For Political Class

Indian Navys Plan

and many more .Published By: Vivekananda International Foundation

3, San Martin Marg, Chanakyapuri, New Delhi

110021, [email protected], www.vifindia.org
http://www.vifindia.org/http://www.vifindia.org/


2/86

VIVEK : Issues and Options January2013 Issue: II No: I 2

The Undisputed Vote Ka Saudagar

- A Surya PrakashGMR Contract Termination And

India - Maldives Relations

- Dr N ManoharanNeed To Expedite The Creation Of

An Indian Cyber Command

- Radhakrishna Rao

Acquiring The Heritage Tag Is It

Enough?

- Dr. Anirban Ganguly

Politics of Corruption In Banglades

- Neha Mehta

EVENTS

Interaction With CIISS On Politica

Change Over In China

ARTICLES

ndian Foreign Policy Challenges

- Kanwal SibalPresident Putin In India

- PP Shuklaafeguarding India's Maritime Interests

- Nitin GokhaleObama's Visit To Myanmar: Implications

or India

- Vinod AnandWe, The Living! Need To revise Land Use

Polices

- Dr M N BuchHounding Businesses In Good For Stocks

- Dr. Anantha NageswaranRape, Rage, Reality Check

- Sushant Screen

Contents

3

18

23

28

34

42

62

58

51

70

78

84

46


3/86


Indian Foreign Policy Challenges

- Kanwal Sibal

ndian foreign policy alreadyfaces many challenges. Thesechallenges have not been met

and will continue to confront us inthe future. An understanding ofwhat they are will help to devisefuture approaches. We musttherefore identify what the

existing challenges are. There is acaveat. Future covers anindefinite time span. Are welooking at the near future, mid-term future or the long termperspective? Many exercises ofidentifying issues and challengesin the 20 and 30-year horizons arebeing done by governments andnon-governmental institutions.They are useful in indicatingtrends. But it is impossible topredict the unpredictable.No onecould predict the collapse of theSoviet Union when it occurred,though many wished for it.

The rapidity of Chinas rise at thepace at which it has occurred and

its impact on global affairs was notpredicted with assurance.

The nature and timing of thefinancial crisis that has afflicted

the US and its impact on itsinternational role was notpredicted by observers either,though many were warning thatthe US was living beyond itsmeans.

So soon after the collapse of onesuperpower, the Soviet Union, weare talking about the decline ofanother, United States.

Many alarm bells are being rungthat the Chinese policies areunsustainable and that China isheading for a crisis. Many maywish that to happen so that themuscle-flexing China is cut down

to size and its neighbours feelmore comfortable. But no one canpredict with certainty what liesahead.

The element of innovation andtechnology that can change globalscenarios is unpredictable too.There is a line of thinking that

many of the future challenges thatare linked to energy and foodsecurity, for instance, could be metwith technological breakthroughs.Even the success of nations in

I

* Kanwal Sibal - Member Advisor Board, VIF


4/86


meeting a variety of challengeswill be measured, it is believed, bytheir technological innovativeness.

The nature of conflicts may changewith technological innovation,especially in cyberspace.

With all these caveats anduncertainties let me delve into thesubject of this talk.

A big challenge forIndia is to

maintain coherenceand balance in itsforeign policy. It isaxiomatic thatprotecting andadvancing thecountrys nationalinterest is the goalof its foreign policy.

This is all right asan enunciation of ageneral principle;the problem lies inthe practicalimplementation of such principles.

Defining national interest is not aseasy as it might seem. National

polls are not conducted to define acountrys national interest. Abroad consensus can be built overyears on the essential parametersof such interest. But situationschange and judgments have to bemade. Often wrong and highly

controversial ones are made.Vietnam, Iraq and unleashingIslamic fundamentalism againstthe Soviets are examples in the

American case. India made anerror of judgment, for instance, atSimla in 1972.

In reality, countries do not alwaysact in their national interest. It isno countrys interest, for example,

to have difficultrelations withneighbours, butmany countries do,either because theywant to dominatethem or areinsensitive to theirconcerns. Smallercountries toooverplay their handand provoke theirbigger and strongerneighbours.

The enlightenedinterest of any

country is undermined by tensionsand conflict. Yet, many countrieswillfully pursue policies thatthreaten peace.

If pride makes individualsobstinate and unwilling tocompromise, nations too sufferfrom the loss of face syndrome.

In reality, countries do not

always act in their national

interest. It is no countrys

interest, for example, to have

difficult relations with

neighbours, but many

countries do, either because

they want to dominate them or

are insensitive to their

concerns. Smaller countries too

overplay their hand andprovoke their bigger and

stronger neighbours.


5/86


Is the form of government relevantin properly defining what would bebest in a countrys nationalinterest? In other words, do

democratic systems with publicdebate on policies enable leadersto form a better view of nationalinterest, rather than dictatorial orauthoritative systems where policyformulation is personalized andcan be whimsical?

But we see that even the mostdemocratic countries make hugemistakes in foreign policy choicesand impose costs on themselvesand others.

There is the issue of nationalpower and national interest. Apowerful country will expand thescope of its national interest intune with its ambitions and the

reach of its power. A weakercountry will interpret its nationalinterest more narrowly so as toavoid unnecessary problems.

Globalization and interdependencehas also changed the notions ofnational interest becausecountries know they do not have a

free hand and have to give andtake much more than before.

In some cases, like the EuropeanUnion, national interest has beensubmerged in many ways within alarger community interest. Even

sovereignty has been pooled insome key areas.

National interest is a fluid and

uncertain concept. A big challengefor India is therefore to be able todefine its national interest withdiscernment, realism, objectivityand foresight.

This is not easy as the backdropagainst which analysis and choicesare made keeps changing. A broadnational consensus on what

constitutes the national interest isimportant.

I had earlier spoken of coherenceand balance in foreign policy as acontinuing challenge.

The international scene haschanged a great deal in the last

two decades or so. India hasneeded to adjust its foreign policyaccordingly. During the Cold War,India considered the Soviet Uniona reliable strategic partner, eventhough the term strategic partnerwas not used then.

With a world divided into two

blocs, Indias compass wasnonalignment, with its politicalempathies more with the easternbloc whose rhetoric was friendliertowards the third world.


6/86


Indias relations with the westernbloc were problematic because ofthe wests non-proliferationinjunctions, pro-Pakistani policies

and economic philosophy.

The nature of our relations withthe US has been altered in the lastfew years. Our policies havebecome convergent in many ways.Improved relationswith the US havegiven India moreroom to manoeuvreregionally andinternationally.Strategically, weare being pulledtowards the US.This means thatour relations withthe US allies havebecome better too,as, for example,with Japan, SouthKorea and

Australia.

Simultaneously,our relations with Russia have lostthe centrality of the past. Even asIndias economic growth is

changing its global profile, oureconomic ties with Russia haverelatively shrunk.

Yet Russia is important for thebalance of our foreign policy. A

weak Russia is not good for theglobal system. In fact, the spacevacated by Russia has been filledby China. US political lobbies still

see Russia as a geopolitical threat,as Romneys statements duringthe US presidential electionshowed.

India can do little to boost Russia,except bymaintaining theregularity ofsummit meetings,nurturing thetraditionally closedefence ties thatassure non-disruption ofsupplies at criticalmoments as well asaccess to sensitivetechnologies, andpartnering it inpolitical groupingssuch as the Russia-

India-Chinadialogue and theBRICS where the

west is absent.

The challenge for us is to expand

our economic ties with Russia.Energy cooperation provides anopportunity so far insufficientlyexploited.

The nature of our relations

with the US has been altered

in the last few years. Ourpolicies have become

convergent in many ways.

Improved relations with the

US have given India more

room to manoeuvre regionally

and internationally.

Strategically, we are being

pulled towards the US. This

means that our relations withthe US allies have become

better too, as, for example,

with Japan, South Korea and

Australia.


7/86


India and Russia share the agendaof multipolarity, respect forsovereignty, non-interference inthe internal affairs of countries,

geo-political abuse of the humanrights issues, regime changepolicies, the proclivity to usemilitary means to find solutions tothe highly complex issues.

This agenda puts India at crosspurposes with many policies of thewest. The challenge for India is tomaintain the basics of its positionbut avoid a direct clash with thewest over these issues.

Yet, in terms of markets,investment needs - especially todevelop our poor infrastructure,access to modern technologies inhealth, energy, agriculture,industry, building a knowledge

economy, participating in globalsupply chains, etc., the Indianneeds are much better served bythe west. Our people to peoplerelations with the west are strong.

In fact, the needs of the growingIndian economy are such that wecannot avoid doing business even

with an adversary like China. Notsurprisingly, China has thereforeemerged as Indias biggest tradepartner in goods.

The challenge for India is tosuccessfully play on all geo-

political chess boards and optimizewhat it can extract from others forits own development. This meansIndia should preserve it

independence of judgment andaction as much as possible even asit conducts itself as a good andreliable partner wherepartnerships have been formed.

The US rhetoric about itsrelationship with India being adefining one in the 21st century isheady. India-US relations havecertainly achieved a degree ofbalance and maturity, with rapidexpansion of bilateral andmultilateral engagement.Contentious issues between themhave receded into the background.

The US robustly affirms itsstrategic partnership with India,

presenting India with thechallenge of leveraging its newstrategic ties with that country,while maintaining its strategicautonomy.

It has to be borne in mind,however, that in maintaining itsglobal supremacy, but with

declining means, the US needs toco-opt partners outside the Euro-

Atlantic bloc, and India stands outas an obvious one because of itssize, human resources, expanding


8/86


economic base, reasonable militarystrength and democratic polity.

Even with regard to its new policy

of rebalancing towards Asia,intended without being openlystated to put constraints onChinas ambitions, the US seesIndia as a lynchpin. Theassumption is that India alone isbig enough in Asia to counterChina and that India has concernsabout Chinas rise for its ownsecurity, given outstanding borderdifferences and Chinese policies inIndias neighbourhood.

Some political elements in the USfind Indias ambivalence towardsthe west and its unwillingness toendorse western policies as thelingering malaise of nonalignment.They see Indias desire to preserve

its strategic autonomy as asmokescreen for its nostalgia fornonalignment.

This is, to my mind, a misreadingof reality. By strategic autonomyIndia means friendly ties andmutually beneficial relations withall countries, with its own

legitimate- not purely selfish-interests primarily in mind.

It is in this spirit that India hasstrategic partnerships with avariety of countries. The idea is todevelop the basis of long term

relationships to mutualadvantage, create trust and avoidany policy that hurts thelegitimate interests of the other

partner.

The US has interests spread allover the world by virtue of it beinga global power. It cannot expectIndia to support its policieseverywhere. The US would wantto fit India in the globalarchitecture of its policies. Indiahas no such global architecture inwhich it wants to fit the US. Itcannot easily fit the US even intothe regional architecture of itspolicies, whether this relates toPakistan, Chinas territorialclaims on India, the post DalaiLama phase in Tibet, Iran, etc.

The challenge for Indias foreign

policy in the years ahead is to becourted by all and to succumb tono one. Even if India cannot lead,it must not be led.

India has, in fact, shown greatresilience, despite its economicand military weakness, to try andstand on its own feet strategically

in international affairs. Even bigEuropean powers, which have inthe past ruled many parts of theworld, do not have strategicautonomy today despite thecollapse of the Soviet Union and


9/86


communism as an ideology. Theywillingly subordinate themselvesto the US.

By choosing strategic self-reliance,India has to cope with challengeslargely on its own. This requiresthat India avoids getting intosituations it cannot handle, in themain, on its own. It does not haveallies to shore up its positions.

The west has never supportedIndia so far on issues of core

concern to it, whether political,military or technological. It hasnow removed certain technologicaldisabilities on India but far fromfully.

The developing countries haventsupported India either onPakistan, China or nuclear related

issues.

This explains why the Indianforeign policy tends to be cautiousand reticent in taking partisanpositions on highly divisive issues.

There are pressures on India to bemore forthright, not sit on the

fence, be willing to incur costs inupholding the international orderand not be a free-loader. India willhave to resist such pressures inthe years ahead, because many ofthese arise from the aggressive,dominating habits that the west

has not been able to shed, whichdrives its efforts to shape theworld according to its valueswhich it considers universal.

Indias challenge is not to besimply co-opted into the existinginternational order that iscontrolled by the west. It mustfind its due place in it in its ownright and be in a position tochange the rules rather thansimply adhere to the existing ones.

Reform of the internationalinstitutions is, therefore, veryimportant and Indias discourse onthis is legitimate. India shouldhave a greater say in theseinstitutions. Getting a permanentseat in the Security Council willremain a challenge as resistanceto this will not go away soon.

Self-esteem and confidence arereflected in Indias claim to apermanent seat. India is notbegging; it is claiming. Indiashould pursue this quest, if only toremind that the existinginternational institutions thatuphold the present world order are

no longer representative of theinternational community.

We have to carefully weigh theChina factor in seekingredistribution of power at theglobal level. The gap between


10/86


India and China has grown so bigthat in any re-ordering of theworld order China can gain more.With Chinas world view, its sense

of itself, its historical grievancesand its territorially expansionistpolicies, India, which has seriousdifferences with China, cannot becomfortable with a more powerfulChina within the internationalsystem.

China has becometoo powerfuleconomically andfinancially and toointegrated with theglobal economy tobe contained in theway the SovietUnion was and theway Russia is stillbeing pressured bythe west. The USpivot towards Asiais not intended toactively confront China; it is tocaution it against anyadventurism.

The US-China relationship ismuch more intensive than the US-

India relationship. We should notpay much attention to thedemocracy rhetoric. Chinabecoming more democratic is noguarantee against a more muscledChinese foreign policy.

The US and its democratic allieshave muscled foreign policies too,as they are using their force inmany parts of the world at great

human cost. Political and moraljustification for military action canalways be found, with globallypowerful media helping torationalize such action.

Democracy is no insurance againstthe use of military means to

achieve nationalends.

Nationalism can bea powerful driverin foreign policy. Amore democraticbut nationalistChina will not beany less of aproblem for others.

Unfortunately,China has made itclear that it does

not intend to solve the borderissue with India; it says it wants itto remain dormant and leave it tothe next generation to resolve it.But then, as we have seen in the

latest maps on Chinese passports,China is establishing its claims ininsidious ways. These actionsreveal the longer-term strategyChina has in mind.

Unfortunately, China hasmade it clear that it does notintend to solve the border issuewith India; it says it wants itto remain dormant and leave itto the next generation toresolve it. But then, as we haveseen in the latest maps onChinese passports, China isestablishing its claims ininsidious ways. These actions

reveal the longer-term strategyChina has in mind.


11/86


It is clear that Tibet has notreconciled with Chinas rule. DalaiLamas succession can revivetensions between India and China.

India has to make sure thatBhutan does not yield to Chinasblandishments. Chinas risingprofile in Sri Lanka and Nepal is acause of concern. The China-Pakistan axis remains a graveproblem.

India has todevelop itseconomic andmilitary muscle tocounter the Chinathreat. There is noother way. This is abig challenge for usahead, even as weengage China asothers do.

India cannot risk aconfrontation withChina; its strategyshould be to dissuade China fromtaking the risk of confrontingIndia with visible and independentstrategic strength.

India has to find the right balancebetween engaging China andhedging against it.

Some would say that a criticalforeign policy challengeconfronting India is the

maintenance of friendly ties withits neighbours. India, it is claimed,cannot rise to its potential if it isembroiled in conflicts or tensions

with its neighbours. India hassupposedly failed in this regard.

Having good relations withneighbours is not a unilateralexercise; it is a reciprocal one. IfIndia should have good relationswith its neighbours, then it is

equally incumbenton the neighboursto have goodrelations withIndia. No one canargue that Indiasconduct alone isdeficient.

India should, ofcourse, try to do its

best to win over theneighbours, but ifthe neighbours seeit in their interest

to balance a much larger India bydrawing in external powers, andprevent their national identitiesfrom being overwhelmed by Indiascivilisational and cultural pull by

emphasing differences with Indiaand stoking anti-Indian nationalsentiments, there is little Indiacan do. This challenge will not goaway.

India should, of course, try to

do its best to win over theneighbours, but if theneighbours see it in theirinterest to balance a muchlarger India by drawing inexternal powers, and preventtheir national identities frombeing overwhelmed by Indiascivilisational and cultural pullby emphasing differences withIndia and stoking anti-Indiannational sentiments, there islittle India can do. Thischallenge will not go away.


12/86


The argument that India, as thebigger country, should be moregenerous with its neighbours isfallacious. Big countries like China

and the US do not believe in themerits of this approach. Vietnamand Cuba come to mind.

Indias economic growth will be ofkey importance for tying ourneighbours economically to theIndian market. It will beimportant to give stakes to a crosssection of people in ourneighbouring countries in thevarious sectors of our economy. Inthis context, the strengthening ofSAARC should be a priority.

Our improved relations with theUS have excluded one externalfactor that in the past complicatedour relations with our neighbours.

China, however, remains aproblem in this regard.

Pakistan remains a perennialproblem. While some aspects ofour relations with that country areimproving, as for example, in thetrade area, larger questions aboutthe rise of Islamic radicalism there

and fears that Pakistan couldbecome a failing state are beingdebated.

There is little that India can do tohelp Pakistan fight its owninternal demons. India is, in fact,

the reason why these demons existin the first place. Unless Pakistanradically changes its attitude toIndia, ceases to whip up religious

sentiments against us that feedthe jihadi groups, the problem ofradicalism in Pakistan cannot besuccessfully controlled.

India should continue toencourage more economic andpeople to people ties withPakistan, but should also be clear-sighted about the serious obstaclesin normalizing relations with thatcountry.

We should shed the belief thatconcessions will make Pakistanmore amenable.

India does not need to re-assurePakistan about its intentions or

make Pakistan trust us. Thereverse is needed: it is Pakistanthat needs to make the requisiteeffort to convince India that it hasabandoned the use of terrorism asa state policy.

Do we have a stake in Pakistanssurvival as a united country, or

should we encourage the break-upof the country? As long asPakistan is adversarial, we haveno stakes in Pakistans territorialintegrity. It would be ironical forIndia to be supportive ofPakistans geographical health


13/86


when it wants to slice away a partof the Indian territory.

We should not, however, actively

seek to de-stabilize Pakistan, asmanaging a fragmented Pakistanwould raise its own problems.

On the other hand, a broken upPakistan loses value for theChinese. Even a chronicallyunstable Pakistan loses value. It isunlikely that the Chinese willwant to rescue Pakistan with

economic largesse. In that context,disarray in Pakistan is notunhelpful to us.

Obversely, we cannot have aviable Central Asia and even

Afghan policy if Pakistan remainsunstable. If this whole region is tobe integrated economically, with

energy and trade connectivity, thegeo-political key is in Pakistanshands.

The US is backing the project tolink Central Asia with South Asia,with TAPI symbolizing this vision,but the USs ability today to bendPakistan to its will has suffered

erosion.

Stability in Afghanistan andcontainment of the Taliban threatthere in a regional context isanother challenge that will

acquire sharper contours post2014.

The west is looking for a

compromise with the Taliban,believing it can live with anIslamized Afghanistan so long asit is not anti-west. The backingwhich the Muslim Brotherhood isreceiving from the west in the

Arab world would indicate thatpractical, realpolitik deals can bemade with Islamic radicalism andrationalized. Such a scenario is notin our interest, but the means wehave to forestall this are limited.

We have, therefore, a multifoldchallenge in Afghanistan, ofretaining our presence andinfluence in that country, creatinginternal support for us there thatcan be used to counter the Taliban

and the revival of the radicalforces there that can threaten oursecurity directly with Pakistanisupport.

Lack of direct access toAfghanistan exposes the lack of acredible Indian policy towardsCentral Asia. We have to

galvanize Iran to cooperate withus for an alternative access to

Afghanistan trough Chabahar.

The Iranian nuclear issue hasserious implications for Indiashould there be recourse by the


14/86


west to take military actionagainst that country. The de-stabilization of the Gulf regionwhich will occur as a result would

be very costly for India, as Indiahas huge energy, manpower andfinancial interests in the region.India would have to steer clear ofthe rising Shia-Sunni conflict inthe Muslimworld.

Indias Look Eastpolicy is nowfacing newchallenges withthe erstwhileequation betweenChina and Eastand Southeast

Asia disturbed by Chinas muscle-flexing in the South China Sea.

India has concerns about thefreedom of passage through theinternational waters, butotherwise Indias priorities andconcerns are in the Indian Oceanarea. However, for geo-politicalreasons, India would need to comecloser to those countries targeted

by Chinese claims, though withoutgetting directly embroiled in theterritorial disputes.

In the Indian Ocean area, Indiashould try to maintain its

dominant status as a littoral stateas much as possible, knowing,however, that at some stageChinese presence in these waters

will increase, as is portended byChinas active search for portfacilities in this area.

Indias declaredopenness oncooperation withChina on maritimeissues should bebased on thelegitimacy of notonly Chinaspresence in theIndian Ocean butalso Indias maritimepresence close toChinas shores.

India would need to give priority

to its relations with Myanmar,now that the latter wants to loosenthe Chinese grip over the country.Myanmar is of key importance tocreate east-west connectivity inthis region from which India canbenefit greatly. Our challenge is toimplement our infrastructureprojects in Myanmar without

inordinate delays.

As a part of our Look East policy,keeping the Chinese dimension inview and bilateral benefits thatcan accrue to us, India would need

India has concerns about thefreedom of passage through theinternational waters, butotherwise Indias priorities andconcerns are in the Indian

Ocean area. However, for geo-political reasons, India wouldneed to come closer to thosecountries targeted by Chineseclaims, though without gettingdirectly embroiled in theterritorial disputes.


15/86


to boost its relations with Japan,including mobilizing Japans cloutin the ADB to finance the east-west corridors in Asia. Our

increasing strategic engagementwith Japan is a welcome move.

Beyond all these challenges, thereare those of energy, food securityand of climate change.

The energy issue is not one offoreign policy alone, but it has astrong external dimension for us

because of our hugedependence onenergy imports.

Our diplomacy willneed to facilitateinvestment inhydrocarbon fieldsabroad as a part of

our energy securitydrive, besidesworking on avoidance of conflict inareas which are our biggest sourceof oil and gas. We have a sharedinterest with the US in this, butthe US policies in the Gulf region,driven by the Israeli and theIranian factors, are not in line

with our interests as they keep thearea on the boil.

Energy, of course, is one areawhere technology can achieve suchbreakthroughs as can change theglobal energy scenario.

Climate change issues, in whichenergy use and environmentalconcerns intersect with issues ofcompetitivity and market openings

for western technologies willbecome a source of increasingexternal pressure on India in theyears ahead.

The water issue in South Asia-Tibet region looms ahead. Apartfrom countering Pakistans cynicalmanipulation of the water issue tosustain its negative postures

towards India,securing Chinesecooperation in

transparenthandling of theTibetan dimensionwill be a challenge.

In the competition

for access tonatural resources,

China is already far ahead of Indiabecause of greater financialresources at its disposal and itsability to organize a coordinatednational effort to that end whichour system does not permit.

A new Indian approach that goesbeyond relying on the privatesector to make economicallyrational decisions from theirperspective would be needed, but

The water issue in South Asia-Tibet region looms ahead.

Apart from counteringPakistans cynicalmanipulation of the waterissue to sustain its negativepostures towards India,securing Chinese cooperationin transparent handling of theTibetan dimension will be achallenge.


16/86


that implies a different way ofeconomic governance.

At the end of it all, the internal

and the external cannot becompartmentalized in anycountry. Success or failure athome will mean success or failureabroad.

The economy is the building blockof a successful foreign policy, asrequired resources then becomeavailable to erect defenses at home

and to pursue interests abroad.

While it may not be a foreignpolicy issue per se, theestablishment of an indigenousdefence manufacturing base isvital for acting independently onthe world stage. No country thatcannot independently defend itself

can reach big power status.

Our external dependence on armsand technology supplies limits theoptions available to our foreignpolicy.

In conclusion, it can be said thatIndia faces unique geo-political

challenges that will continue toexist in the years ahead.

It has two strategically hostileneighbours, China and Pakistan.Both are strategic partnersagainst India. China has

transferred nuclear and missiletechnology to Pakistan toneutralize India strategically.

Both have claims on Indiaterritory. India is the only countryof magnitude and importance inthe world whose borders arecontested, with a Line of Controlin J&K with Pakistan and theLine of Actual Control with China.This is an unstable situationinherently whatever the agreedCBMs.

The challenge for India is toengage with both constructivelyand yet be prepared to confrontthem if necessary. India needs toavoid a two-front situation but itcannot make any undueconcessions to either adversary.

India cannot expect backing fromexternal powers on its borderdifferences with China andPakistan. In fact, the US isresponsible for drawing the LOCin J&K from NJ9842 to theKarakoram Pass arbitrarily. Weshould demand redress and areturn to legality on this issue

from the US.

The US supports Chinasterritorial integrity but has notextended such support to Indiasterritorial integrity. We should


17/86


engage the US on this point as astrategic partner.

India gets better understanding on

the terrorism issue it is faced with,but the west is unable andunwilling to sanction Pakistanadequately because it needsPakistan for ensuring an orderlywithdrawal from Afghanistan,besides the need to engagePakistan as a major Islamic andnuclear-armed country.

This explains why despite thewests willingness to use militarymeans to combat proliferationelsewhere, Pakistans rapidlyexpanding nuclear arsenal is beingcountenanced, adding to threats toIndias security. The signs ofrevival of the agenda to limitproliferation in South Asia,

excluding the Chinese factor, haveto be scotched by us.

The political turmoil in the Arabworld, with the MuslimBrotherhood gaining politicalpower in many countries, issteering the Islamic world awayfrom secularism. The growth of

influence of Saudi Arabia andQatar as well as an increasinglyIslamized Turkey is not likely toencourage more liberal andmodernist thinking in ourneighbourhood in the mid-term.

The disturbance of the existingbalance between Shias and Sunnisin our neighbourhood can havenegative repercussions for us, even

internally. We have to remainwatchful of these developments inthe years ahead.

Upgrading the militaryinfrastructure in the north quicklyand accelerating our navalstrength in the Indian Ocean arethe challenges ahead.

The priority of priorities is toimprove governance at homebecause the strength of ourexternal limbs depends on thestrength and depth of our roots inthe ground.

Finally, if there is any truth in thedictum that more things change

the more they remain the same,then it would seem that the futureforeign policy challenges for Indiawill remain the same in a differentform: protection of ourindependence and sovereignty,friendship with all and enmitywith none and a peacefulenvironment in which we can

economically grow and meet ourinternal challenges.

Back to Contents


18/86


President Putin In India

- Prabhat P Shukla

he thirteenth Indo-RussianSummit was a fleeting affair,with President Putin

spending less than twenty-fourhours in Delhi. It came as thestakes in the extendedneighbourhood are growing higher

Afghanistan, Iran, and the

broader West Asian region are allin a state of flux that has seriousimplications for both India andRussia. Similar stakes are in playin the East, and once more, asIndia seeks to step up itsengagement in the Asia-PacificRegion, there are implications forour interface with Russia here too.

The bilaterals are reasonably well-known, and there are seriousattempts ongoing at all levels tofind ways to deepen theengagement, and to find solutionsto issues that have dominated thediscourse over the past few yearsthe Vikramaditya, the nuclearliability, the low levels of trade

and investment, etc. So, too, arethe benefits of the cooperation,whether it is INS Chakra, orBrahmos, or diplomatic support onkey issues like permanent

membership of the UN SecurityCouncil, which we take for grantedfrom a country like Russia.There are also problematic issuesthat need to be addressed, andwere discussed in some detail.

Apart from the issues of ourdefence cooperation, there were

the nuclear liability question, andthat of the 2G license for theSistema-majority owned SSTL. Onthese, there is nothing in thepublic domain, but the Russianpress commentaries havesuggested that the nuclearliability issue could be resolved byraising the cost of the projects,

thus building in some element ofprotection in the event that thesupplier has to pay compensation.On the Sistema issue, there doesnot seem to have been muchprogress.

Where there was welcomeprogress, it was on the purchase of

LNG from Russia. This is an issuethat has long been discussed,including at the highest levels.However, while there had been noprogress so far, we seem to have

T

* PP Shukla, Joint Director, VIF


19/86


made the breakthrough. Of course,there is a better way to take thisforward to higher levels: thiswould involve a four-way swap

arrangement, involving thePersian Gulf suppliers, and theirbuyers in East Asia [South Korea,Japan], India and Russia. Theswap arrangement would involvethe Gulf suppliers diverting theirsupplies to East

Asia to India; inreturn, Russia

would make goodthe diverteddeliveries andsupply to East Asia.

All four partieswould gain fromreducedtransportationcosts, and that

would be welcomein these times,when all majoreconomies arefacing difficultchallenges.

Another noteworthy outcome ofthe visit was the reference to thediscussions between India and theEurasian Economic Commissionon a possible ComprehensiveEconomic Cooperation Agreement.There has been one such studydone between India and Russia in2007, but that was never seriously

pursued. Now that Russia hasformed the Customs Union withBelarus and Kazakhstan, it is agood time to launch another such

examination. Hopefully, this canprovide answers to the currentslow growth of economic relationsbetween India and Russia.

However, there is insufficientattention beingpaid to the regionalissues that affect

both India andRussia, and onwhich there is notenough dialogue atthe official level,and which do notget sufficientattention amongcommentators. And

it is important tounderstand theseissues from the

Russianperspective. Thatway, we shall not

face any surprises in what ourfriends in Moscow do, and they, inturn, will understand how we inNew Delhi are looking at thingsand deciding on policy choices.

Without doubt, the mostimportant is Afghanistan and theimpending pull-out/thinning out ofthe ISAF in 2014. From our

However, there is insufficientattention being paid to theregional issues that affect bothIndia and Russia, and onwhich there is not enoughdialogue at the official level,and which do not get sufficientattention amongcommentators. And it isimportant to understand theseissues from the Russianperspective. That way, we shallnot face any surprises in what

our friends in Moscow do, andthey, in turn, will understandhow we in New Delhi arelooking at things and decidingon policy choices.


20/86


perspective, things do not lookvery reassuring: recent reports ofthe activities of the High PeaceCouncil suggest that a serious

effort is in hand to pave the wayfor the Taliban to return to atleast some share in power inKabul, with Pakistan beingaccepted as the major arbiter. Theaccepted view is that the US isagreeable to such a dispensation,as is NATO. China, of course, willback Pakistan. Alone among the

major powers, then, Russia couldbe expected to show someunderstanding of the Indian fearsover such a plan.

Regrettably, we are not seeingenough engagement between Indiaand Russia on this issue, eventhough both countries share

similar approaches. Indeed, wehad collaborated in the 1990s atime when Russia under Yeltsinhad not fully recovered from thetrauma of the destruction of theUSSR in order to blunt theTaliban offensive inside

Afghanistan. Today, what we areseeing is Pakistani service chiefsvisiting Russia, the DG ISI inMoscow, and the PakistanPresident offering Russia access tothe warm waters on his own visit.There is a real risk of our beingisolated, all the more so becausewe are also seeking to put distance

between ourselves and Iran theother country that might beexpected to share our concernsover the plans for post-2014

Afghanistan. This remains true,notwithstanding the high-levelbilateral contacts we havemaintained with Iran over theyears.

The second issue of concern flowsfrom the Iran situation, and therelated one of Syrias future.

During the Putin visit, the twosides found agreement on Iransright to peaceful uses of, andresearch in, nuclear energy, whilecalling for all issues to be settledby peaceful means only. On Syria,too, there is common ground interms of the UN Resolutions and acall to all sides to seek a peaceful

settlement. But, of course, therewill be no peaceful settlement,that is the one thing all sides areagreed upon. But, more important,shorn of this kind of fudge, thereare clear differences between Indiaand Russia on how to approachboth Iran and Syria. It isinstructive to compare what wehave said in the current JointStatement, and what the Russianssaid with the Chinese when Putinvisited Beijing in June 2012. TheRussian-Chinese statementcontained a more forthrightexpression of support for Syrian


21/86


independence and territorialintegrity; it also spoke bluntlyagainst foreign interference andsaid that the two countries were

resolutely opposed the attempt toresolve the Syrian crisis by way offoreign armed intervention andimposition of regime change.

This would suggest that theRussian position on Syria did notget the full endorsement fromIndia that it got from the Chinese.

The lastsubstantive issuerelating to theimmediateneighbourhood isthat of the so-calledNew Silk Roadstrategy for Southand Central Asia.

The Russians havetheir own approachto the region, andthey arethemselves keen to develop tiesbetween the two regions. They callit CASA, and are keen to begin byselling surplus electricity fromTajikistan to Pakistan. They havea quadrilateral of their own themselves, Afghanistan, Pakistanand Tajikistan which has beenpushing this project for severalyears now. It was under thisrubric that President Putin was tovisit Pakistan earlier in October

last year. These transport andother linkages have been much incontention ever since the break-upof the Soviet Union, and are

invested with heavy geo-strategicsignificance. Both India andRussia will need to tread carefully,and be willing to engage eachother in an open and honestdialogue to remove any potentialfor misunderstanding in any ofthese projects.

There is also theemerging situationin the Asia-PacificRegion. Americaand some of theother key membersin the region havebeen promoting theidea of a Concert of

Democracies tostabilise futuredevelopments inthe area. Much of

this is driven by concerns over howChina will evolve as it grows botheconomically and militarily. Here,Russia is not considered a majoractor by any of the other leadingactors; neither is it a potentialpartner, nor is it seen as being inthe Chinese camp. However, Indiais very much in the reckoning ofalmost all the drivers of such apolicy. However, we need torecognise that Russia sees China

This would suggest that theRussian position on Syria didnot get the full endorsementfrom India that it got from theChinese.

The last substantive issue

relating to the immediate

neighbourhood is that of the

so-called New Silk Road

strategy for South and CentralAsia.


22/86


at least in the short term as animportant partner in thedifficulties it is facing with theWest in general and America in

particular. It will therefore not besympathetic to any combinedeffort that will have China as itsobjective. Equally, if it has seriousfrictions with any country in theregion, it is Japan; and Japan isobviously an essential componentof any strategy involving thedemocracies of the region.

All of this argues for an open andcandid dialogue with Russia, sothat each side understands theothers concerns, and red lines.This has not been happening sofar, and the truth is that where we

are willing for a substantiveconversation, they are not; Chinais an example. On the contrary,where they seek a frank dialogue,

we tend to hold back; Afghanistanis an illustration. And yet, it is theinterests of both sides to keep up aregular conversation. Both Indiaand Russia face the problem ofisolation; we have a tradition offriendship and trust that fewother major powers have, and itneeds to be maintained and

nurtured.

Back to Contents


23/86


Safeguarding Indias Maritime Interests

- Nitin Gokhale

n July, days before he retired,

the then Navy Chief, Admiral

Nirmal Verma, commissioned

a Naval Air Station at Campbell

Bay on Great Nicobar Island,

christening it INS Baaz, thereby

signaling India's intentions to

keep a close watch on the newdevelopments unfolding in East

and South East Asia. On 3rd

December, 24 hours before

celebrating Navy Day, Admiral

Verma's successor, Admiral DK

Joshi announced that the Indian

Navy is practicing to operate in

the South China Sea to protect itseconomic assets.

Speaking to reporters in NewDelhi, Admiral Joshi toldreporters that, "Where ourcountry's interests are involved,we will protect them and we willintervene."

The Eastern Naval Command -which looks at India's eastern seaboard and is likely to play a keyrole when the Navy is deployed in

the South China Sea - is also beingstrengthened.

That the Indian Navy wasstrengthening its Eastern Fleetand was looking to expand itscooperation with key countries inEast and South East Asia like

Vietnam, Japan, South Korea,Philippines and Indonesia, is wellknown. But no Navy Chief or forthat matter any seniorgovernment official in recentmemory had spelt out India'splans to counter China in theSouth China Sea, in such a clearmanner.

The declaration that the IndianNaval ships could be deployed inthe South China Sea if need becomes days after the Chinese statemedia announced that thesouthern Hainan province, whichadministers the South China Sea,approved laws giving its police theright to search vessels that pass

through the waters. Also, thePhilippines, Vietnam, Taiwan andIndia protested against a map onthe new Chinese passport thatdepicts disputed areas as

I

* Nitin GokhaleVisiting Fellow, VIF


24/86


belonging to China. ThePhilippines also issued astatement saying it wants Beijingto "clarify its reported plans to

interdict ships that enter what itconsiders its territory in the SouthChina Sea."

Admiral D K Joshi said thatIndia's Oil and Natural GasCorporation (ONGC) has 4 oilexploration blocks off the coast of

Vietnam. "If required we willintervene to protect (them)," hesaid and added that it is thenavy's duty to protect India'ssovereign assets. India, the

Admiral said, had two basicconcerns- "freedom of navigationin international waters andprotection of our internal assets."

It is in this context that INS Baaz,

the southernmost air station of theIndian armed forces, becomes animportant springboard for India'sforays further east.

In July, Admiral Nirmal Vermahad said: "The archipelago,separated as it is by more than650 nm from our mainland, offers

a vital geostrategic advantage toIndia. Not only do they provide theNation with a commandingpresence in the Bay of Bengal, theIslands also serve as our windowinto East and South East Asia.

He had added: They also sitastride some of the busiestshipping lanes of the IndianOcean, most carrying strategic

cargo for the East Asianeconomies.

Emphasizing upon the strategiclocation of INS Baaz, Admiral

Verma had reminded thosegathered that INS Baaz overlooksthe Strait of Malacca, while alsodominating the six-degreechannel.

Since July 2012, India has clearlysignaled its intention to increaseits involvement East of theMalacca Straits by deployingfrontline warships as a part ofIndia's 'Look East' Policy. The fourIndian Navy ships, Rana,Shivalik, Karmukh and Shakti,

under the command of RearAdmiral P Ajit Kumar, FlagOfficer Commanding EasternFleet were on an operationaldeployment to the South ChinaSea and the North West Pacific.Earlier in the deployment, thefirst bi-lateral maritime exercisebetween India and Japan 'JIMEX

12' (Japan India MaritimeExercise) was conducted,coinciding with thecommemoration of 60 years ofdiplomatic relations between Indiaand Japan.


25/86


The Navy's long-term MaritimeCapabilities Perspective Plan infact has identified a mix of twomajor roles for the force: One, the

traditional blue water operationalcapability and two, a plan toeffectively counter threats closerto the coast.

According to the report of theStanding Committee on Defence,tabled in Parliament in the lastweek of April, the Navy's short-term plan has the followingobjectives:

Augmentairbornemaritimesurveillance,strike, anti-submarinewarfare and

air defencecapabilitythrough induction of shore-based aircraft, integralhelicopters, carrier basedaircraft, space based AIS andUAVs, along with suitableweapons and sensors.

Develop ASW (anti-submarine warfare)capability through inductionof suitable platforms,weapons and sensors.

Build adequate standoffcapability for sea lift and

expeditionary operations toachieve desired powerprojection force levels,influence events ashore, and

undertake MilitaryOperations Other Than War. Induct assets and develop

suitable infrastructure toaugment forces available forLow Intensity MaritimeOperations (LIMO),protection of off- shore assetsand Coastal Security

framework. Induct force

multipliers likesatellite based

globalcommunications,

reconnaissance andnetwork enabledplatforms to

achieve Battle-Space dominancecapability and

perform network centricoperations.

Induct state-of-the-artequipment and specialisedplatforms for Special Forcesto enhance niche capabilitiesto conduct MaritimeIntervention Operations andother envisaged roles.

Develop supportinfrastructure in islandterritories to support theplanned force levels as well

The Navy's long-term Maritime

Capabilities Perspective Plan

in fact has identified a mix of

two major roles for the force:

One, the traditional blue water

operational capability and two,

a plan to effectively counter

threats closer to the coast.


26/86


as support infrastructure forships/submarines/aircrafts atports and airbases.

Given the extensive planspresented to the Parliament, it isevident now that the Indian Navyis in the middle of its mostambitious expansion plan in thepast three decades. Senior officerspoint out that the Indian Navy'sperspective-planning in terms of'force-levels' is now driven by aconceptual shiftfrom 'numbers' ofplatforms - that is,from the old 'bean-counting'philosophy - to onethat concentrateson 'capabilities'.

According to its

near-term plans,the Indian Navyhas plans to become a three BattleCarrier Groups force by 2020. Butgiven the delay and cost overrunsin both the aircraft carrierbuilding programmes, the Navymay find itself operating the 1960svintage INS Viraat.

While it's most prestigiousacquisition-Russian AircraftCarrier Admiral Gorshkov, to berenamed INS Vikramaditya - isunlikely to be inducted into the

fleet until late 2013, one morecarrier being built indigenously isway behind its original schedule.

Currently, India operates a loneAircraft Carrier, INS Viraat, aBritish-built 1960s vintage shipthat is on an extended lease of lifethanks to the Navy's innovativeengineers and planners.

Vikramaditya, once when --inducted, will give India the muchneeded edge in its maritime

capabilities since itwill come with thelatest MiG-29 Kseries of aircraft.Indian Naval

Aviators arealready hard atwork trainingthemselves on the

planes but awayfrom the ship.

Defence Minister AK Antony infact told the Naval Commandersconference earlier in 2012 that:"India's strategic location in theIndian Ocean and the professionalcapability of our Navy bestows

upon us a natural ability to play aleading role in ensuring peace andstability in the Indian OceanRegion."

Little wonder that the US wantsIndia and especially the Indian

Defence Minister AK Antony infact told the NavalCommanders conferenceearlier in 2012 that: "India'sstrategic location in the IndianOcean and the professionalcapability of our Navy bestowsupon us a natural ability toplay a leading role in ensuringpeace and stability in theIndian Ocean Region."


27/86


Navy to play a major role in itsquest to form new and lastingregional alliances in Asia. Byclearly signaling India's intention

to boldly deploy in South ChinaSea, India may have added a newdimension to the emerging

maritime rivalry in Asia. How willBeijing react?

Back to Contents


28/86


Obama's Visit To Myanmar: Implications

For India

- Vinod Anand

resident Barack Obamasvisit to Myanmar lastmonth was recognition of

measures taken by the currentregime towards opening up ofMyanmar. The visit has largelybeen viewed as a part of the Asia

Pacific pivot announced by theUS President in November, 2011.Further, the US was also aware ofsignificant inroads being made bythe European countriesparticularly Germany, UK andFrance in Myanmar and therefore,did not want to be left behind,especially in the era of economic

downturn

The visit took place despite thefact that there was a lack ofconsensus in Washington on theMyanmar policy with resistancefrom human rights groups as wellas from the nuclear nonproliferation lobby given the

revelations of North Koreasupplying some missile relatedmaterial to Myanmar.

From the political perspective thevisit has had a significant impact.Firstly, this has reinforced thecommitment of President TheinSein and the reformers who are

flagging the benefits that havebeen received post opening up ofthe polity and economy. Thegovernment was quick to releaseanother set of political activistsprior to the visit; such tools maybe used again for greaterconcessions from the US and theWest.

Secondly, the separate meetingsthat President Obama had withPresident Thein Sein, Aung SuuKyi, as well as the parliamentspeaker U Swe Mann is indicativeof the broad based approach thatthe US is following to support thereforms.

A major advantage gained inMyanmar was for civil rightsgroups, political activists andhuman rights agencies given that

P

* Vinod AnandSenior Fellow, VIF


29/86


the space for information andactivism has considerably openedup by the Obama visit.

From the Indian perspective, thereis a hope that the course ofreforms would be progressive eventhough they may occur at arelatively gradual pace. There is ageneral belief that the core ofresistance from the military islikely to continue and they need tobe pushed by the internationalcommunity in the right direction.India has continued with a broadbased and balanced relationshipwith the political leadership aswas evident from the highlysuccessful visit of Aung Suu Kyi tothe country in November 2012.The military in Myanmar was alsoengaged through the visit of theChairman Chiefs of StaffCommittee, Air Chief MarshalNorman Browne to Myanmar inthe same month.

Myanmars recent political andeconomic reforms seem to havebeen driven by Naypyidaws desire

to reduce its overdependence onChina.

With the U.S. and the Westernnations engaging Myanmar, thestrong influence of China inMyanmar is likely to be impacted.

Due to Chinas imposing presenceand its exploitation of Myanmarsresources against the popular will,there has been considerable public

opposition to the Chinese projects.Last year, construction ofMyitstone dam was suspended bythe President, Thein Sein. Theopposition against the projectbrought together conservationists,environmentalists, Kachinactivists and the politicalopposition. Popular opinion has

been building up against some ofthe other Chinese sponsoredprojects in Myanmar. Recently,there have been protests against acopper mining project in Monywa,Sagaing Division, jointlyundertaken by China and amilitary sponsored local company.

An enquiry commission headed by

Suu Kyi has been appointed toinvestigate the issue.

Chinas larger interests are likelyto be certainly affected, but towhat degree and extent is notclear so far. Firstly, China maylose its sole beneficiary andbenefactor relationship, but onlyto become the most preferredpartner. Subsequent developmentswould also be dictated by whatstand the next governing duo inChina, Xi and Li take to ensureprimacy in Myanmar.


30/86


Meanwhile, Myanmars leadershiphas been attempting to balance itsemerging relationship with theU.S. and China. President Thein

Sein visited a trade fair in Chinain September 2012 and Soe Win,the Deputy Commander of theBurmese army headed a militarydelegation to Beijing forstrengthening military andcultural ties before the Obamavisit.

Secondly, the linksbetween Yunnanprovince of Chinaand Myanmar arewell establishedand are thus likelyto be sustained.

Thirdly, the U.S.has not lifted

sanctions on tradein jade and relateditems, a crucialcomponent of tradewith China; thustrade relations with

Yunnan/China are not likely to beimpacted.

Fourthly, entry of major globalenergy players in Myanmar maybe a setback for Chinesecompanies as increasedcompetition would prevent greateroff-takes for Beijing.

In addition, the US offer to theMyanmar army to participate inthe Cobra Gold Joint exercises inThailand in 2013 is also being

seen with much wariness inBeijing. These exercises have nowexpanded from a bilateral U.S.-Thai format to a multilateral onewith many American allies such asSouth Korea participating in thesame.

On the whole, however, Beijing islikely to remainwary of the USattempting to makean imprint in itsbackyard and inother parts ofSouth East Asia.

Additionally,increased

engagement withthe U.S. and theWest could also beuseful to Myanmarto extract more

developmental and economic aidas well as trade and economicconcessions from China. Beijingwould have to tread cautiously tokeep Myanmar in its sphere ofinfluence by adjusting its policiesto suit the new circumstances.

Meanwhile, Myanmarsleadership has beenattempting to balance itsemerging relationship with theU.S. and China. PresidentThein Sein visited a trade fairin China in September 2012and Soe Win, the DeputyCommander of the Burmesearmy headed a military

delegation to Beijing forstrengthening military andcultural ties before the Obamavisit.


31/86


From the security point of view,Indian concerns are mainlyrelated to, firstly, the influence ofthe PLA through military largesse

to the Tatmadaw (Myanmararmed forces) and sanctuariesoffered to the North East militantgroups in Myanmar and theongoing conflict in Kachin areas.The U.S. President was nonprescriptive during his visit on theethnic issues and only highlightedchallenges faced by

the country. Indianeeds to furtherstrengthen its ownequation with theMyanmargovernment inorder to curtailanti-Indiaactivities by some

of the Myanmarbased rebel groups.

In the militaryfield, India is ramping upcooperation with high level visitsby the Defence Minister, Mr A K

Antony, in January, 2013 and theChairman Chiefs of StaffCommittee and Chief of the AirStaff, ACM Norman Browne whovisited Myanmar inin November2012. The Myanmar army islooking for hardware and there issome scope for India to provideitems such as transport aircraft,

helicopters and so on, as well asexpand training and capacitybuilding.

Balancing the Chinese influenceoff the Myanmar seaboard withthe entry of the U.S. is also likelyand could be seen to be beneficialfrom the perspective of maritimeinterests of the country. However,this will continue to be a contestedzone in the long term as China isunlikely to give a free run to

others in the area,which it sees ascritical to itsenergy security.

Opening of theMyanmar economypresents a goodopportunity forIndia to strengthen

its trade andeconomic relationsbesides increasing

venues for Indian investments inresource rich Myanmar. Hopefully,Myanmars engagement with thewest would lead to someprogressive reforms in governancesupported by the US and the

Western institutions including thenon government sector, aidagencies and business groups.Entry of international agenciessuch as the World Bank, IMF,

ADB and others is likely to lead to

Balancing the Chineseinfluence off the Myanmarseaboard with the entry of theU.S. is also likely and could beseen to be beneficial from theperspective of maritimeinterests of the country.However, this will continue tobe a contested zone in the longterm as China is unlikely togive a free run to others in thearea, which it sees as critical toits energy security.


32/86


expansion of the economy,particularly in terms of effectiveregulations for investment andconduct of business. Moreover, the

unlocking of Myanmars resourcesparticularly oil and gas could beseen as beneficial to India givenits dependence on West Asia sofar. These factors indicate thatsupport to transformation by Mr.Obama during the visit mayprovide an indirect impetus toIndian plans of

economicengagement withMyanmar,particularly toboost bilateraltrade planned toincrease from thepaltry USD1070.88 million in

2010-11 to overUSD 5 billion by2015.

Myanmar being the land route toSouth East Asia is the lynchpin ofIndias Look East Policy (LEP). Inaddition, the Chennai-Dawei sea

corridor is seen as another growthhighway for the LEP. With theopening of Myanmars economy,the LEP is likely to get a boost.This apart, the overalldevelopment of infrastructures

including the railway and roadnetwork, ports and transportationis seen to be beneficial for the LEPand the prospects are likely to be

enhanced. In this, it is Indias owninefficiencies in projectimplementation that is of concernfor New Delhi and how it will beable to get its act together remainsto be seen.

There is a need to explore thescope for jointIndia China

infrastructureprojects inMyanmar toinclude oil and gas,transportation bothroad and rail andconstruction ofdams. Indian andChinese companiesare presentlyengaged in theShwe gas and

pipeline projects which mayprovide a model for the future.GAIL and ONGC Videsh Ltd. owna 30% share in the A1 fields andintend to acquire a share in the A2 fields which could be jointlyexploited along with other majorssuch as Daewoo Corporation.

India also has a large number ofprojects in the pipeline inMyanmar, many of which are

There is a need to explore thescope for joint India China

infrastructure projects in

Myanmar to include oil and

gas, transportation both road

and rail and construction of

dams. Indian and Chinese

companies are presently

engaged in the Shwe gas and

pipeline projects which mayprovide a model for the future.


33/86


languishing due to lack of impetusand of tardy implementation.These include upgradation andresurfacing of Tamu-Kalewa-

Kalemyo road; construction andupgradation of the Rhi-TiddimRoad; Kaladan MultimodalTransport Project and high speeddata link in 32 Myanmar cities.ONGC Videsh Ltd. (OVL), GAILand ESSAR are also working inthe energy sector in Myanmar. M/sRITES is developing the rail

transportation system and issupplying railway coaches andlocos. Tamanthi and ShwezayeHydro-Electric Power projects arealso in the pipeline.

How much progress can beachieved in this direction willdepend on the trust that eachcountry, India and China, canrepose on the other and afavourable equation that can beworked out by the enterprises inwhat the Chinese term as, win-win, agreements.

India-West joint projects also havemajor prospects in the fieldsindicated above. Some initiative

will have to be taken by the Indianindustry as well as such bodies asthe CII which has a programme ofcooperation Union of MyanmarFederation of Chambers of

Commerce and Industry(UMFCCI). Indo-US/EU BusinessCouncils and similar organizationsmay act as a catalyst for this

purpose. A joint initiative will payrich dividends in this direction.

Further, with Myanmar slated tochair the ASEAN Summit of 2014,it would also make efforts to movepositively on the path ofdemocracy and further politicaland economic reforms.

Finally, the domestic reform inMyanmar and its reconciliationwith the U.S. and the West isexpected to open up manyeconomic and strategicopportunities for Myanmar. Indiais well positioned to cement itsgrowing economic and strategicengagement with Myanmar both

on bilateral and multilateral basis.Myanmars steps in balancing itsrelationship with China need to besupported. For India, Myanmarwill remain a strategic land bridgefor engagement of South East

Asian nations. Improving regionalconnectivity and integration ofregional economies would serve

the interests of both Myanmar andIndia well.

Back to Contents


34/86


We, The Living! Need To Revise Land Use

Policies

- Dr. M N Buch

In Delhi along the Yamuna Rivera stretch of 371 hectares, that is,approximately 927 acres, has comeunder cremation ground, samadhi,etc., of people perceived as theleaders of the nation. Theseinclude Mahatma Gandhi,

Jawaharlal Nehru, Lal BahadurShastri, Indira Gandhi, RajivGandhi and now IK Gujral. Allthese seemed to merit cremationat new sites, reserved individuallyfor each, instead of at NigambodhGhat, also on the Yamuna Riverbut meant for ordinary mortalswhom Yamaraj has taken away

from the world. Over 900 acres ofland, therefore, now standsassigned to people who are nolonger living and who do not haveany use for the land. A samadhifor Mahatma Gandhi one canunderstand because he was trulyunique as not only the person wholaunched our movement for

independence but also as one whounited this nation as has neverbeen done before. The whole ofIndia is his, whether or not wecommemorate his memory through

brick and mortar, by assignmentof land or by any other means thatthis nation chooses. No one else,not even Jawaharlal Nehru, comesanywhere near the stature ofMahatma Gandhi. The irony, ofcourse, is that this ascetic, this

man who genuinely lived and diedfor India and who had no desirefor anything material, is stillhonoured not by our practicingwhat he has taught us but ratherby creating monuments in hismemory. He who did not own asquare inch of land when he wasalive now virtually finds himself

the owner of a huge chunk of landin Delhi.

Morarji Desai, Rajendra Prasad,Vallabhbhai Patel and GulzarilalNanda fortunately decided to dieotherwise than in Delhi and it is tothe credit of these leaders, theirfollowers and the cities in which

they cast aside their mortal coilthat they have not transferredland to them in death which theydid not aspire for in life. Of course,we have a contrast in Tamil Nadu

* Dr. M N Buch Visiting Fellow, VIF


35/86


where, first, the AnnadoraiMemorial swallowed up asubstantial portion of the MarinaBeach in Madras, to be followed by

the M.G. RamachandranMemorial and no doubt withadvance reservation for thepresent leaders in that State. Theonly parallel one can think of isthe Pharaohs of ancient Egyptwho, when they died, were buriedin what are virtual undergroundcities in which the dead

symbolically still live. These citiesof the dead, these necropolises, arecovered by pyramids, themselvesbuilt by slave labour, many ofwhom died in building monumentsto the dead. Of course no onehonoured them with a pyramid.

Are we in modern India trying toemulate the ancient Egyptians in

assigning large areas of land tothe dead, not because they maycome alive but because we cannotthink of any other, more sensiblemethod of perpetuating theirmemory?

In India we have two methods ofdisposing of the dead. The vastmajority of the population beingHindu, cremation is the preferredmethod. Normally, the funeralpyre is used, though besides thepyre we also see the emergence ofelectric crematoria which providean advanced, scientific and

technological method of quicklyreducing the body to ashes, withminimum pollution. Whether it isthe funeral pyre or the electric

crematorium, cremation does notcall for much space and the sameplatform on which the pyre is litcan be re-used after the remainsare removed. In terms of use ofland there is nothing moreeconomic than cremation. Thesecond method is burial, becauseboth Christians and Muslims bury

their dead. I suppose this isbecause the followers of bothreligions believe in the Day ofJudgment for which purpose thebody is resurrected, which wouldnot be possible if it had beencremated and reduced to ash.Even here there is an anomalybecause whilst the Christian

invocation at burial is ashes toashes and dust to dust, meaningthat the body will go back to itsconstituent elements, in Islam theinvocation is Supurd-e-khak.This means that you are consignedto the earth, to the dust fromwhich you have been created. Ifyou are reduced to dust, or to ashby burial do you have a betterchance of resurrection than if youare reduced to ashes throughcremation? If the Almighty canreconstitute a persons body fromdust, why not from the ashes ofcremation? In Islam a burial


36/86


ground as such has no sanctityand, for example, in Saudi Arabiait is considered legitimate after acertain period, say twenty years,

to recycle the burial ground.Christians, however, consider acemetery to be hallowed ground,which means that burial is finaland the land cannot be recycled.Christian cemeteries are wellmaintained but they are by nomeans a necropolis of thePharaonic variety.

Hindus seem torevel inperpetuating thememory ofdeparted powerfulpoliticians bymonuments whichare no less than thesamadhis of saints.This seems to be acomplete waste oftime and moneybecause it takes aPrince Siddhartha to live on as theBuddha, or the Enlightened One.No monument can enhance hisglory, nor lack of monumentretract from it. Our politicians arelike the thousands of princes andkings whose memory is obliteratedby time. None of them will be aSiddhartha and, therefore, thenecropolis built for them on the

Yamuna River front will not delay

by a moment the day of forgetting.What we need, therefore, is tocelebrate not the memory but theforgetting of the person in

question because that is thereality of the kaal chakra.

We do not stop at building a city ofthe dead at the spot of cremation.We go much further and wereserve the houses once occupiedby these celebrities as monuments

to be preserved, butnot used by thosewho are living andare entitled to ahouse of thiscategory. Thehouse at TeesJanuary Marg,known as BirlaHouse, is where theMahatma wasassassinated. Henever wanted amonument tohimself but we

have converted Birla House into amonument in memory of theMahatmas martyrdom. I havealready said that MahatmaGandhi is unique and, therefore, amonument to him does not reallycall for any comment. Teen MurtiHouse, once the residence of theBritish Commander-in-Chief ofIndia, the second most powerfulperson in British India, was

Our politicians are like the

thousands of princes and kingswhose memory is obliteratedby time. None of them will be aSiddhartha and, therefore, thenecropolis built for them on the

Yamuna River front will notdelay by a moment the day offorgetting. What we need,therefore, is to celebrate notthe memory but the forgetting

of the person in questionbecause that is the reality ofthe kaal chakra.


37/86


rightly taken over as the residenceof the Prime Minister, the mostpowerful man in India, byJawaharlal Nehru. After his death

his successor did not occupy thehouse, in sharp contrast with thepractice in Britain where 10,Downing Street is the officialresidence of the Prime Minister.The incumbent Prime Ministervacates the house prior to the newPrime Minister being sworn in sothat his successor comes straight

from Buckingham Palace to 10,Downing Street and begins histenancy. Teen Murti Housebecame the Nehru Memorial, alibrary and a major centre foracademic studies and, therefore,one can perhaps overlook its nolonger being the official residenceof the Prime Minister. But look at

what has followed. Indira Gandhiwas shot at the boundary between1, Safdarjang Road and 1, AkbarRoad and both houses have nowbeen pulled out of the official pooland have become a monument tothe memory of Indira Gandhi. Thishas happened to the house onJanpath occupied by Lal BahadurShastri as Prime Minister. BabuJagjivan Rams official residence isalso reserved in his memory. 7,Race Course Road is the PrimeMinisters residence and I amamazed that on the death of RajivGandhi at Sriperumbudur that

whole complex of houses has notbeen converted into his memorial.Perhaps this is because he was notin power when he died, nor was

the Congress Party. All thesehouses have been built withexchequer funds, duly voted uponas part of a grant of the CentralPublic Works Department. Whenthe grants are discussed, thegovernment has to give

justification for every itemincluded in the budget and I am

absolutely certain that when thesebungalows were built in Britishdays the construction must havebeen justified as being necessaryfor housing senior officers andMembers of the Council, theBritish equivalents of ourministers. Therefore, when thesebungalows are converted into

monuments, the purpose for whichthey were erected is defeated,which means that in a way theapproval of the Parliament fortheir construction is bypassed andperverted. This is a clear misuse ofpublic funds and the legitimacy oftheir conversion becomes highlysuspect and open to objection.

Why do we indulge in such futileexercises? If the answer were to bein only one word, it would besycophancy. Because those closeto the departed person or relatedto him are in power or are likely to


38/86


come to power, flatterers andsycophants hasten to gain favourby commemorating the memory ofthe departed in such a way that

the heirs and successors feelpleased and, in this state of beingpleased, they might throw a crumbor two to the flatterers. TheSanatan Dharma in its purestform is not idolatrous orpolytheistic and there is belief inone God, by whatever name He isknown. The ultimate goal of every

human being of theSanatan faith is toachieve a state inwhich one can beabsorbedpermanently intothe God-head orBrahmatma.However, because

the SanatanDharam gives thefreedom of choice toselect ones ownpath to salvation, this hasmanifested itself in sects in whichthe Lord is worshipped in manyforms, including devis and devtas,who are symbolised by idols. Inthe course of practice, the basictenet of there being only one Godis forgotten, the symbolism ofdifferent forms of God is lost sightof, and ritual becomes allimportant and, therefore, theartificial discipline imposed by

ritual ultimately replaces thedivinity of God by the artificialsanctity of idols. When the idolachieves an identity of its own we

become idol worshippers and,therefore, slaves of empty ritual,which overtakes that which issacred. This calamity seems tohave overtaken us as a people. Thetrue worth of our leaders isforgotten, invoking their name hasbecome a ritual, being sycophanticto them has become worship and

the balance thatshould exist insociety isdisturbed. If ritualbecomes moreimportant thanreligion, then weshall certainlybelieve that the

idol of Ganeshdrinks milk and,therefore, we insiston feeding milk to

an idol. Our cupidity is fed byunscrupulous priests who convinceus that the idol is actuallydrinking the milk. That piece ofstone then become more importantthan Ganesh himself. That isprecisely what is happening to usas a people when we build cities ofthe dead for departed leaders, afew of whom have been nationbuilders but the rest of whom haveonly been powerful politicians, a

The Sanatan Dharma in its

purest form is not idolatrous or

polytheistic and there is belief

in one God, by whatever name

He is known. The ultimate goal

of every human being of the

Sanatan faith is to achieve a

state in which one can be

absorbed permanently into theGod-head or Brahmatma.


39/86


few being good in government andthe rest being no better thanPindaris. Regardless of this westill build monuments, reserve

huge stretches of land for theirremains and convert houses forthe living into mausoleums for thedead. I find this absolutelysickening.

Let us come to the living. Aboutforty percent of the population ofevery city in India consists of thevery poor who have come in searchof a job and who cannot findshelter for themselves. These arethe squatters or encroachers who,on the failure of administratorsand planners to accommodatethem, have used their nativeintelligence to build some sort ofshelter on unoccupied pieces ofland. In Bombay and Calcuttathey have converted wholepavements into shanty towns andthe self built homes of the poorhave gifted to Bombay what ittouts to be the largest slum in

Asia at Dharavi. Anythingbetween thirty to forty percent ofevery major town is eithersquatter colonies or unauthorisedcolonies. These people are lookedupon as criminals because theyhave encroached on governmentland, dirty as they live in slumswhich have no services, intriguersbecause they try every tactic

under the sun to retain thefoothold that they haveestablished in the city andpotential crooks because every

theft in the city is attributed toslum dwellers. The authorities,the middle class, the affluent alllook upon squatters as people whohave no right to shelter and forwhose eviction the bulldozer wascreated.

These squatters are the very

people who provide the city almostits entire unskilled work force, its

construction workers,

maintenance personnel who keep

the buildings and services in good

repair, most of its craftsmen,

almost all the domestic servants

and without whom the city would

simply not function. These are

living people who keep the cities

functioning and yet they are

denied the very thing that we

lavish on the dead, that is, a right

to living space and shelter. This is

a completely skewed approach to

city planning and development.

The dead who have no need

become masters of acres of land

and the living, who need it the

most, do not have access even to

that much piece of land on which


40/86


we can put the point of a needle.

The Constitution mandates justice

and equality, equal protection of

laws and a social order which

promotes welfare. Under Article39, the State is directed to secure

that the ownership and control of

the material resources of the

community are so distributed as

best to sub-serve the common

good. It also mandates that

operation of the

economic system

must not result in

the concentration

of wealth and

means of

production to the

common detriment.

A system which

concentrates land

and housing in the

dead to the detriment of the living

can hardly promote welfare. The

very act of setting aside in

perpetuity large parcels of land for

memorials for a few people hits

both at the principle of equality

and promotion of welfare.

The reservation of 927 acres ofland along the Yamuna Riverfront, including Rajghat, is an

affront to the Constitution anddirectly aimed at the commonman. Shivaji Park at Dadar inBombay is meant for the citizens

of Dadar, Matunga and perhaps apart of Mahim. This is a place forrecreation, for future SachinTendulkars to fine hone theircricket skills, for the elderly towalk morning and evening and forthe citizens of the area to givetheir lungs a chance to breathe inthis open space. Not an inch of it is

meant formemorials. If theShiv Sena is soconcerned about

Maharashtriansand Bombay, itshould comeforward andremove whatever

has been erectedthere in the nameof Bal Thackerayand gift the park

back to the citizens of Bombay,free of all encumbrances. But thenwe should remember that ourpriority is monuments to the deadand not land for the citizens. Ithas been argued that the YamunaRiver front has been saved byreserving 927 acres as amonument to the dead, but it isnot a monument to all the dead. Itis a monument to certain leadersonly and though it is claimed that

A system which concentrates

land and housing in the dead

to the detriment of the living

can hardly promote welfare.

The very act of setting aside in

perpetuity large parcels of land

for memorials for a few people

hits both at the principle of

equality and promotion ofwelfare.


41/86


the Yamuna River front has beenbeautified thereby, the factremains that this is not a publicpark open to every citizen of Delhi.

It is very much a closed andregulated monument to the dead,a new necropolis with restrictedaccess. The lawns of the Central

Vista along Rajpath are meant forthe living because peoplecongregate there in the eveningand during the holidays. Rajghatand its surroundings is not a place

for normal public access and,therefore, it can only be defined asa necropolis. Therefore, the title ofthis paper: We, the Living! Do wenot have some rights? I am not fora minute suggesting that we build

housing along the Yamuna Riverfront but just to give you an idea ofthe scale of this stretch of land, wecould have accommodated

approximately 50,000 houses onthis much land and accommodateda population of about two and ahalf lakh people. In the scales

justice we have half a dozenleaders who have now deceased,occupying this much of land, onthe other side would be two and ahalf lakh people, none of whom is

given legal access to even one inchof land. In whose favour is thebalance tilted? That is our realtragedy!!

Back to Contents


42/86


Hounding Businesses Is Good For Stocks

- Dr. V Anantha Nageswaran

rom the United States in

North America to Pakistan

in South Asia, the great

disconnect between financial

markets and the macro economy is

back with a vengeance. It was the

case in 2007 and five years later,

we are precisely in the samesituation. Investors have displayed

a myopic streak that is

extraordinary and beyond any

attempt at rational explanations.

In the US, the National

Federation of Independent

Businesses (NFIB) reported one of

the biggest slumps in confidence

among small businesses in

November. This was despite the

NFIB excluding the effect of

hurricane Sandy. The survey

respondents several thousands

of them have collectively

concluded that the outlook for

their businesses in the next six

months is dismal. The sub-index

measuring this sentiment plunged

from two in October to -35 in

November. The Chief Economist of

the NFIB writes that it is unlikely

to be a merry Christmas for many

small businesses. The Federal

Reserve Bank of Chicago publishes

an index of national activity. Thatindex is heading towards recession

levels. Third, orders for durable

goods (capital goods) in the US are

no longer growing but contracting.

US stock investors cannot be

bothered nor are investment

banks that are back to egging on

investors to buy stocks at these

levels painting a rosier 2013.

This situation is not peculiar to

the United States. It is a global

phenomenon. The reason for that

too is the United States monetary

policy. The world operates on a de

facto US dollar standard. The US

sets monetary and exchange rate

policies for the rest of the world.

F

* Dr. V. Anantha Nageswaran Visiting Fellow, VIF


43/86


On 12 December 2012, the Federal

Reserve decided to purchase 45

billion dollars of longer dated US

Treasuries every month on top of

the 40 billion dollars of agency andmortgage backed securities it is

already buying. The rationale for

pumping so much cash directly

into the economy is elusive except

to Mr. Bernanke and his dovish

colleagues. The yield

Vivek Issues n Options January 2013

Documents

Transcript of Vivek Issues n Options January 2013