Modi's Stance on Foreign Policy Remains a Mystery

Little interest has been shown domestically about possible new orientations in foreign policy under a Modi-led NDA government. Modi's single-minded focus on the development agenda has dominated political and media discourse, barring, of course, the 2002 Gujarat riots. The slowdown of the economy, the negative investor sentiment, price rise, corruption, the perceived lack of leadership have been issues of public concern, not foreign policy. 

Economic focus
For our foreign partners who see India's economic rise as opening up enormous prospects for their own economies by way of trade and investment and who are disappointed by India's lacklustre economic performance under UPA II because of slowdown of reforms, indecision and delays in implementation, Modi's economic agenda is alluring. But they are equally interested in assessing the possible differences in foreign policy between a possible Modi-led government and the UPA governments.Modi has been a state leader, with no stint in Delhi, and hence a relatively unknown entity for foreign interlocutors except those who have travelled to Gujarat for business reasons. 

Moreover, because he has been politically boycotted by western countries until recently for human rights reasons, the opportunities to assess him through personal contact have been that much less available.China and Japan, who have received him in their countries, have been wiser in this regard. Modi has not been grilled on foreign policy issues either by the opposition or the media. He has made some stray remarks on foreign affairs, but they should be seen more as obiter dicta rather than a considered judgment. 

His view, for instance, that the Ministry of External Affairs should focus on "trade treaties" rather than strategic issues may fit in with his "development" focus, but would get revised when faced with the reality of India's challenges once in power at the Centre.

If his meaning was that our missions should give priority to commercial/economic work, that would be unexceptionable in the context of economic performance increasingly determining a country's international role and influence. 

The economic argument should not be exaggerated though, as our most severe external challenges are driven not by economics but politics, relating to our territorial integrity, the threats to us from terrorism and religious extremism, the nuclear dangers emanating from nuclear collaboration between China and Pakistan which the West tolerates despite its readiness to take military action to stop proliferation in Pakistan's neighbourhood, and China's attempts to politically and strategically box us in the sub-continent while simultaneously eroding our influence there by its deep incursions into our neighbourhood. 

If China and Pakistan have been hostile to us for decades it is not on account of economic issues. India's role in the Indian Ocean has a major strategic aspect that goes beyond ensuring the safety of the sea lanes of communication for trade flows. 

Status Quo
How much the foreign policy of former Prime Minister Vajpayee, who enjoys an iconic status within and even without the BJP, will guide that of an hypothetical Modi-led government is a pertinent question. If Vajpayee's decision to take a plunge on the nuclear question was an act of strategic defiance, he was also a man of dialogue who made major overtures to US, China and Pakistan.

With a strong nuclear card in his hand, his strategy of building a relationship with the US "as a natural ally" made sense, as did his outreach to China to explore the possibility of resolving the border issue on a political basis. 

His conciliatory approach towards Pakistan, however, seemed based less on a cold power calculus and more on inchoate hopes and sentimentalism.

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh built on Vajpayee's policy on all these fronts, pointing to the essential continuity of our foreign policy under governments of different political complexions. The 'Next Steps in the Strategic Partnership' under Vajpayee led to the nuclear deal under Manmohan Singh; the Special Representatives mechanism with China set up under Vajpayee has been the principal platform for political engagement with China on the vexed border issue under his successor; the obsession to have a dialogue with Pakistan under Vajpayee continued its confusing course after him. 

Is there a major course correction in foreign policy that a Modi-led NDA government would need to make? 

Tough stance
Not really, as our geo-political compulsions, our economic needs and our security calculus dictate our fundamental foreign policy choices, with limited wiggle room available. We need a stable relationship with all power centres. Despite the difficulties of dealing with the US, our economic and people-to-people links with it are of key importance. The US has treated Modi with gross political ineptitude, giving him, if he becomes Prime Minister, room to extract a price for engaging him, though it is clear that his relationship with Obama will be uncomfortable. 

China's Xi Jinping has already indicated his desire to visit India later this year. In visiting the Arunachal border with Tibet and vowing not to yield an inch of Indian territory, Modi has sent an important signal to Beijing. A visit to Tawang before Xi's visit would change our psychological equation with China by boosting national morale.

Towards Pakistan, one hopes, Modi will not be counseled to adopt a soft face in order to attenuate his anti-Muslim image, both at home and abroad. Pakistan will construe this as the "taming" of Modi without cost. Because uncertainties in Afghanistan and religious radicalisation sweeping Pakistan could aggravate India's terrorism problem, the new government should be in no hurry to resume the dialogue with Pakistan even if the bait of MFN is offered as a tactical move. 

Whether or not a Modi-led government changes the course of our foreign policy, because of the perception that he is strong and decisive leader will be a foreign policy force-multiplier in itself.

Photo Credit: Al Jazeera English

Afghanistan’s social and political development is at a critical juncture—as NATO troops withdraw this year and elections are to occur next month. In Afghanistan Reconnected: Linking Energy Supplies to Consumers in Asia, EWI Fellow Danila Bochkarev proposes that a trans-Afghan “energy bridge” could ease the transition by bringing new investment and trading opportunities to Afghanistan.

Investing in connecting the rapidly industrialized-South Asia with the resource-rich Central Asia will raise Afghanistan’s living standards across the board, Bochkarev argues. Local and regional businesses will grow and new revenues will be generated. The energy-bridge approach will reconnect Afghanistan with its neighbors and help Kabul promote joint undertakings, including interconnections with Central Asia’s electricity grids and power generation projects. 

“Examples demonstrate that the benefits of the cross-border cooperation may outweigh political disagreements and intra-state disputes, especially if there is sufficient political will and a readily available framework for cooperation,” Bochkarev explained. “In recent years, energy cooperation in various conflict environments helped secure vibrant trade relations and significantly reduced existing tensions. This was the case in the Barents Sea region, the South Caucasus and in relations between Turkey and Iraqi Kurdistan.”

Afghanistan Reconnected illustrates how this energy infrastructure would strengthen economic, political and social ties between Central Asia and South Asia and contribute to a more stable Afghanistan for years to come.

Click here for the full report: Afghanistan Reconnected 

_

Read an opinion piece on the report, on The Hill's Congress Blog.  

This is Davos week, the annual summit of the World Economic Forum (WEF). My first visit to Davos was in January 1993 as part of the delegation accompanying the then prime minister, Mian Nawaz Sharif. The WEF was then not that strict about allowing non-members to take part in its events.

This year the Pakistani PM was to grace the Pakistan Lunch, now counted as a significant traditional event in the Davos calendar. Unfortunately the Davos trip was cancelled at the last minute due to the vicious terrorist attack at Bannu. The disappointment notwithstanding, the prime intention being to project Pakistan, the traditional Pakistan Lunch at Davos will take place as scheduled.

Almost 50 Pakistanis will join the record 200 WEF members in the Steigenberger Belvedere. A panel of eminent experts, including Dr Ishrat Husain, will debate ‘Pakistan Vision 2025’.

Little did I know in 1993 that in a few months momentous changes would start taking place in Pakistan, most crises man-made. Terrorists are holding governance hostage, and the PM’s cancellation of the Davos trip has thrown this up. Rip Van Winkle woke up 20 years later to find the world to be a better place, but Pakistan is worse off than it was in 1993.

The tragedy is that the country was then set to break the shackles of nationalisation and emerge as a potent economic force. The most important thing for us today is not to let the future of our children become hostage to the vicious mindset of the terrorists.

Only a handful of Pakistani businessmen visit Davos regularly. In contrast over 125 Indian businessmen come as WEF members. In keeping with its exclusive nature the WEF only caters to the top companies of the world; the fee for being a corporate member is high. Husain Dawood, Atif Bukhari, Sultan Allana, Nauman Dar, and Arif Naqvi – Mian Mansha having dropped out—cannot shoulder the burden of projecting Pakistan by themselves. Emulating their Indian counterparts, our elite Pakistani community must use this unique opportunity in greater numbers. What one gets in networking in a week at Davos may not be possible in several years. The government may like to give tax rebates amounting to 50 percent of the WEF membership, annual summit and regional summit fees as an incentive.

The programme pillars for this year’s annual summit are: (1) achieving inclusive growth; (2) embracing disruptive innovation; (3) meeting society’s new expectations; and most importantly (4) sustaining a world of nine billion people. The WEF ‘Global Risks 2014 Report’ highlights these risks and seeks to understand how these are interconnected.

The gap between the incomes of the richest and the poorest needs to be tackled and the disparities in income and wealth have to be addressed. That is the risk most likely to cause global damage in the coming decade.

Compiled by contributions from 700 global experts, the report details ten risks that are “global risks of highest concern” for 2014: (1) fiscal crises in key economies; (2) structurally high unemployment/underemployment; (3) water crises; (4) severe income disparity; (5) failure of climate change mitigation and adaptation; (6) greater incidence of extreme weather events; (7) global governance failure; (8) food crises; (9) failure of a major financial mechanism/institution; and (10) profound political and social instability.

Before the recession, the buzzword was ‘globalisation’, which is now believed to be an unstable system prone to be disrupted by political tensions—leading to financial turmoil. Nations must not adopt a do-it-alone policy; coordinated policy responses were deemed essential. Environmental risks such as water crises, extreme weather events, natural catastrophes, man-made environmental catastrophes and climate change present another cluster in the interconnections map.

Among interlinked risks climate change is of pivotal importance. This displays by far the strongest linkages and is both a key economic risk in itself and a multiplier of other risks, such as extreme weather events, and water and food crises.

There is a dire warning of a ‘lost’ generation of young people coming of age in the 2000s lacking both jobs and, in some cases, adequate skills for work, thereby fuelling pent-up frustration. Unemployed youngsters also remain vulnerable to being sucked into criminal or extremist movements. The social upheaval could have catastrophic results as seen in some parts of the world recently.

Technology is a significant aspect of the employment landscape for young people—where the private sector can guide curriculum and training programme design by communicating about projected skills needs. Establishing partnerships with the education sector businesses can improve apprenticeship opportunities. Educational and civil society organisations can also prioritise entrepreneurship education, soft skills and earlier delivery of sector-relevant and professional skills in schools, all of which promote employability.

The increasing reliance on the internet to carry out essential tasks and the massive expansion of devices connected to it increases the risk of systematic failure even more. Recent revelations on government surveillance have dampened the international community’s willingness to work together to build governance models to address this weakness. The effect could be a ‘balkanisation’ of the internet, or ‘cybergeddon’ where hackers enjoy overwhelming superiority and massive disruption becomes an everyday occurrence.

While each risk holds potential for failure globally, their interconnected nature force-multiplies their catastrophic potential. To address and adapt to the ever-changing global ‘risks’, stakeholders must unite and take collaborative multi-stakeholder action. Businesses, governments and civil society can improve how they approach risk by taking steps such as opening lines of communication with each other to build trust, systematically learning from others’ experiences and finding ways to encourage long-term thinking.

President Hassan Rouhani of Iran is here in Davos and, though they will not meet, so is Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu. The presidents of half a dozen Latin American countries are joined by the Brazilian president. US Secretary of State John Kerry will represent the US. Davos highlights a wide range of disparate subjects, debated and discussed by eminent experts during the week. 

The Pakistani PM will miss a unique opportunity to clarify the world’s misconceptions about Pakistan. Actors Matt Damon and Goldie Hawn are chairing sessions on arts and culture. Other sessions concentrate on science, medicine, environment, etc. For me the ‘Partnering Against Corruption Initiative’ (PACI) panel organised by Elaine Dezenski was most important. We cannot fight terrorism without eliminating its nexus with corruption and organised crime. 

A number of geopolitical initiatives were launched during the WEF Summit in the 1990s, including the Israel-Palestine dialogue between Yasser Arafat and Shimon Peres. During the last decade participation from the private sector has increased in contrast to the public sector. The number of participant heads of state and government dropped from an average of over 60 to little more than a dozen, signalling a significant shift of emphasis of the WEF to its original economic mandate. 

Networking to create positive perceptions and taking advantage of it is, both as a country and commercially, is what the ‘Davos challenge’ is all about.

Photo Credit: World Economic Forum (2011)
 

"The fine line between crime and democratic aspirations has disappeared, leading to anarchy," Sehgal says. "Effective steps must be taken to contain this anarchy from spreading."

Read the full article in The News International.

Read the original article in The News International, or see below. 

A mindset is a set of assumptions that everyone develops throughout their lives and become so established that people or groups continue to adopt or accept prior behaviours, choices, or tools of those within the same mindset without question. As an incident of a person's philosophy of life mindset can be powerful, having the ability to control, persuade and even hold us back from doing or achieving things in life.

The ‘Cold War mindset’ was prevalent in both the US and the USSR. This included absolute trust in the two-player game theory, the integrity of command chain, control of nuclear materials, and the ‘mutual assured destruction’ (MAD) theory of both in the case of war. Many consider that this mindset usefully created ‘détente’, serving to prevent an attack by either country. Power groups that fail to review or revise their mindsets with sufficient regularity cannot hold power indefinitely.

A single mindset is unlikely to possess the flexibility and adaptability needed to address all future events. For example, the variations in mindset between the Democratic and Republican parties in the US (and within the two parties themselves) have made that country more able to challenge assumptions than Russia’s Kremlin with its more static bureaucracy.

How is mindset influenced in a progressive organisation? People’s behaviours can be changed in one of two ways – either forced through management decree or one can change their thinking to result in new desired behaviours. Both approaches have been used by different leaders at different times. While altering mindsets is more effective at sustaining change over the long term, it does take additional time and effort to properly effect the change. Once done, a person’s mindset can lead them to take actions (behaviours) necessary to foster momentum and a critical mass of commitment throughout the organisation. 

In Pakistan we are confronted with an extremist mindset that is extremely barbaric in nature. It kills and maims without remorse – children, the elderly and womenfolk are fair game. This enemy aims to destroy the very foundations of this country. It does not recognise the constitution of Pakistan or the values of democracy or the laws of the land. One of its aims is to introduce Shariah law in Pakistan based on its obscurantist interpretations of Islam. 

What to talk of battling terrorism, understanding the mindset of the terrorist is easier said than done. Our failure to make much headway is mainly because we provided the breeding ground of extremism through various policies. These were compounded by increasing income disparities, rampant corruption and a denial of opportunities to the common man for education and socio-economic advancement. Without pragmatic steps to address these problems an adverse mindset momentum will continue to gain ground, a time may come when even military operations become futile and counterproductive.

Terrorism must be placed in a proper perspective. To quote Stratfor Global Intelligence, “terror attacks are a tactic used by a variety of militant groups for a variety of ends, mainly to produce a psychological impact that far outweighs the actual physical damage caused by the attack itself”. A wide variety of militant groups and individuals seek to use violence as a means of influencing a government – either theirs or someone else's. But if people live their lives in a constant state of fear, those who seek to terrorise will win. 

Denying would-be terrorists this multiplication effect of fear and anxiety prevents them from accomplishing their greater goals. People must assume the proper mindset, take basic security measures and practise relaxed awareness to counter terror. The media has a major role to play in not exacerbating mass fear and anxiety. This will dispel paranoia and prevent robbing people of the joy of life.

A few years ago the people in Pakistan were deeply divided over the Taliban, some wrongly viewed these militants as fellow Muslims and sons of the soil simply yearning for Islamic law. Many did not want direct military action to be taken against them. 

With thousands of Taliban atrocities plus the many suicide attacks, bombings and other incidents of terror, a slow but sure change in perception has become visible. Now most feel that the Taliban threat will have to be stopped for the good of the country and the lives they now lead. Despite this, many Pakistanis still blame the US and the war in Afghanistan for their current troubles.

What triggers a terrorist mindset? It could be poverty, social underdevelopment, a quest for political empowerment and justice. The explanation that is more disturbing is not religion but ideology motivating the militants into such deadly missions like suicide bombings.

Change is the window through which the future can enter our lives. In today’s era of globalisation the country’s future depends upon on how well we manage to keep abreast of the changes in various fields viz economy, science, technology, medicine, etc. Without such awareness of the achievements of counterparts or rivals, the country will be left behind. Rather than lamenting the disgrace World War II heaped upon Japan as a consequence of its defeat, the Japanese people managed to change their mindset from defeatism to that of transforming Japan into an economic powerhouse.

One must be acutely aware of one important aspect of human behaviour – no one will change what they are doing until they change their mindset. A change in mindset is vital for progress and leadership plays the most vital role in this aspect. Strong leadership and good governance must be provided by leaders to explain and forcefully drive home the reasons and the need to change. They must be able to convince the people to accept such change and progress wherein their salvation lies. Continuous campaigns and explanations are required to consolidate the minds of the people to be able to change mindsets.

It may be difficult but everyone has the ability to change their core inner beliefs upon which they base their view of themselves and of the world. It is true that most people find changing even one small belief extremely difficult, let alone a whole range of self-supporting beliefs based on negative pre-conditioning. Only a tool for change will enable us to rapidly install new thought patterns and positive mindsets, based on proven success models. 

Our mindset regarding certain aspects of our lives is malleable and based on our choice of the meaning we give to things, mainly a positive mindset. Empowered by positive thinking together with an attitude of joyous expectance of only the best, we put ourselves in the correct frame of mind to propel ourselves into proper action while anticipating and expecting successful outcomes. 

Often external events and circumstances seem to rush in to assist with our intended result. The knowledge that our positive mindset can translate into a world of difference, regardless of the goal we should seek, is priceless.

The EastWest Institute convened “Afghanistan Reconnected,” an Abu Dhabi Process Meeting on Afghanistan’s investment potentials, in New Delhi at the Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry’s (FICCI) Federation House, on November 19-20, 2013. The conference addressed key challenges and opportunities for investment in Afghanistan after the 2014 withdrawal of international forces. High-level representatives, including Afghanistan’s Finance Minister Dr. Hazrat Omar Zakhilwal and India’s former Foreign Minister Kanwal Sibal, as well as additional participants from India, Afghanistan, Pakistan, U.A.E., Turkey, the United States, the EU, Central Asia, Iran and China, attended.

For full report click here.