Each year in South and West Asia over 3 million children--about one-third of the global total--die before the age of five. On average, 83 of every 1,000 children born do not reach age 5, a figure that rises to 235 per 1000 in Afghanistan.
There are 115,000 victims of cyber crime every day in India.
EWI Board Member Kanwal Sibal has written an article for the Daily Mail on India’s evolving relations with Russia and China. He also considers related implications for India-U.S. relations.
Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's back-to-back visits to Russia and China from October 20 to 24 reflect the evolution of India's external relations in a world with shifting power balances.
The challenges lie in consolidating relations with tried and trusted friends with declining power, while forging understandings with adversaries with rising influence who seek to advance their interests through tactical overtures of friendship.
Russia
Russia remains a vital strategic partner of India. The long-term geopolitical interests of both are compatible. Russia is not interfering in sub-continental affairs, where it recognises India's primacy.
On principles that should govern international relations such as respect for sovereignty and non-interference in the internal affairs of countries, combating international terrorism without double standards, and opposition to regime change policies, India and Russia have shared views.
Russia is India's principal defence partner, offering over the years platforms and technologies that have fortified our defence capabilites, whether it is the aircraft carrier Vikramaditya, the leased nuclear propelled submarine Chakra, technical assistance for Arihant, licensed manufacture of front-line combat equipment such as the Sukhoi 30 MKI aircraft and T90 tanks, the joint development of the potent supersonic missile Brahmos, or co-developing the fifth generation fighter aircraft and a multi-role transport aircraft.
Russia's politically significant role in India's civilan nuclear sector is epitomised by the construction of two 1000 MW nuclear power plants at Kudankulam, honouring a commitment made prior to its Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) membership.
The techno-commercial negotiations for building two additional reactors at Kudankulam have been completed, but the contract's finalisation awaits resolution of issues raised by India's nuclear liability legislation.
With China our territorial disputes endure. China has strengthened its military infrastructure on our frontiers, forcing India to belatedly raise additional forces and allocate enhanced infrastructure expenditure on its side. China seeks substantial territorial concessions by India, not simply an agreement on border adjustment, which makes settlement a distant prospect.
Vladimir Putin (right) will need reassuring that India's increasing ties with the US will not come at Russia's expense
Vladimir Putin (right) will need reassuring that India's increasing ties with the US will not come at Russia's expense
The confidence-building border measures that China backs are intended to prevent military incidents that would distract it from dealing with far bigger challenges in the east presented by US and Japan constraining China's regional dominance and its naval power expansion.
China
China interferes actively in our region, feeding fears of Indian hegemony amongst our smaller neighbours and preventing India from raising its global profile by consolidating its regional base. Pakistan, which has been fully complicit in this, receives Chinese political and military backing for pursuing its confrontational policies towards India.
China is Pakistan's principal defence partner. By transferring nuclear weapon and missile technology to Pakistan, China has profoundly damaged India's security.
In the civilian nuclear field, as a counter to India-Russia nuclear ties, before joining the NSG, China "grandfathered" its supposed commitment to supply two nuclear reactors to Pakistan. It then decided to supply two additional reactors on the same pretext, this time as a riposte to the India-US nuclear deal.
PM Manmohan Singh will hope for a positive agreement on border security when he visits China this month
PM Manmohan Singh will hope for a positive agreement on border security when he visits China this month
China is aiding in the construction of plutonium reactors in Pakistan to enable it to build smaller warheads for tactical nuclear weapons.
Despite political closeness, India's economic relationship with Russia remains modest, with two-way bilateral trade at only $11 billion plus last year. The target of $20 billion by 2015 seems unachievable. Several business promotion efforts have failed to boost economic exchanges.
India is proposing Russian investments in the Delhi-Mumbai industrial corridor, while the expanded energy partnership with Russia that India has long sought remains unrealised. In contrast, despite serious political differences, India-China trade relations have flourished, expanding to nearly $70 billion in 2012, making China India's largest trading partner in goods despite the damage done to our manufacturing sector in the process and security concerns emanating from China's huge penetration of our power and telecom sectors.
However, the $100 billion target set for 2015 is unlikely to be achieved because the trade deficit - likely to reach $40 billion this year - is becoming unsustainable.
Strategy
Improved India-US ties impact our relations with both Russia and China. Russia's primary concern would be the erosion of its dominant position as our defence partner as we increase our acquisitions of US defence equipment, as this affects political equations.
India will need to continually reassure Russia concretely that its expanded strategic ties with the US would not be at Russia's expense. China closely monitors US arms sales to India, viewing them as integral to the American strategy to create a security ring around China. With China under an arms embargo by the West, Russia has been China's principal arms supplier, with the potential sale of Russia's Su 35 combat aircraft to China under discussion.
Russia's concerns about Chinese reverse engineering are pitted against its need to export to sustain its domestic defence industry, besides solidifying strategic understandings with China as a consequence of western geopolitical and economic pressures on it.
More...
India and Russia to settle issues over Kudankulam nuclear project
India may lease second nuclear submarine from Russia
Omar says India can no longer be a silent victim
Russia has also supplied RD-93 engines to power the JF-17 fighter aircraft, a China-Pakistan joint venture.
Our triple challenge is to avoid entanglement in Russia-US tensions, manage to our advantage US-China strategic competition and attenuate the negatives for us of increased Russia-China collaboration.
The PM's Moscow visit for the 14th summit meeting will be successful if it delivers the Kudankulam 3 and 4 contract. The deliverable from the China visit will be the Border Defence Cooperation Agreement, valuable for avoiding incidents, not solving their cause.
Our challenge, then, is to build a larger edifice of relations with Russia on existing strong political and security foundations, whereas with China it is ensuring the safety of the impressive edifice that is rising on foundations that are not only weak but can shift.
The writer is a former Foreign Secretary
Ikram Sehgal,EWI board member and defense and political analyst, writes about deficient anti-terrorism policies in Pakistan in The News International.
Consider the theatrics of the absurd by some political clerics at the killing of the terrorist responsible for slaughtering thousands of innocent Pakistanis. It is sad that the fundamentally moderate Jamaat-e-Islami should label the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan chief Hakeemullah Mehsud a "shaheed!"
To safeguard their fiefdoms, politicians and clerics often turn to appeasement of militants. The army did well by immediately reacting to what could potentially erode the morale of its rank and file. And so did PM Mian Nawaz Sharif. Burying 15 years of self-created bad blood with the army by a maiden visit to the GHQ soon after the JI leader’s outrageous remarks, he rightly called the army’s martyrs as “our benefactors.”
Appeasement should never be an option. The militants have the blood of too many innocents on their hands. A brutal minority cannot be allowed to dictate to the ‘great silent majority’ through the barrel of a gun under any circumstances. The not-so-squeamish should see the ghastly video of this so-called ‘shaheed’ murdering one of the ISI heroes of the Afghan war, Col (ret.) Sultan Amir Tarar, nom de guerre: "Col Imam," in cold blood.
With the civil society breaking down because of blatant injustice and discrimination, insurgency and terrorism have become endemic in South Asia. After two decades of horrendous strife Sri Lanka successfully crushed the Tamil insurgency that had terrorised the island. The RAW-trained Tamil Tigers (LTTE) ultimately turned with a vengeance on the Indian peace-keeping force (IPKF) which had landed (by forcible self-invitation) to relieve them from the besieging Sri Lankan Army. How tragically ironic that in return for the bulletproof jacket he had personally presented LTTE Supremo Prabhakaran with, Rajiv Gandhi got a garland of explosives.
More than a dozen insurgencies are eclipsed by the largest terrorist group in the world operating across a broad swath of territory in India. Collecting government revenues from more than 70 districts operating in 17 Indian states, PM Manmohan Singh calls the Naxalites an existential threat to India. Nepal has seen its share of Maoist terrorism. RAW-crafted incidents aside, Bangladesh faces intermittent terrorism of the jehadi-kind.
After Tora Bora in 2002 the Al-Qaeda hierarchy went to ground in South Waziristan protected by an outer core of Mehsud tribal mercenaries. Their presence on our soil made us the ground zero of terrorism. The army went into Fata in 2003 without the requisite numbers, equipment, training, logistics, etc. Al-Qaeda turned its guns into Pakistan and created the TTP. We have only ourselves to blame for giving this menace the time and the space on our lands to prosper. Far worse, we actively collaborated with others in fighting their proxy wars on (and from) our soil.
The CIA drone strike that took out the TTP chief derailed the "peace talks," the soft-sell mechanism for countering terrorism. This was further complicated by him being replaced by the outright murderer Mullah Fazlullah. That Fazlullah had ‘guest’ status in Afghanistan after being run out of Swat by the army was never a secret. However, the capture by US Special Forces of Deputy Latif Mehsud being escorted by National Directorate of Security (NDS) agents on his way to meet Karzai in Kabul really exposed the Afghan government's double-dealing.
Afghan intelligence (with help and guidance from RAW) has been supporting the TTP’s terrorist activities and helping kill Pakistanis while posing as holier-than-thou and condemning the insurgents fighting the civil war as Pakistan-supported terrorists. Karzai’s loud protests to the U.S. for not releasing his "guest" only underscored the Afghan regime’s perfidy. It was only Latif Mehsud who could give Hakeemullah’s exact whereabouts to the Americans. With a U.S. $5 million bounty on his head, the Americans finally had a shot and they took it. Good for them.
Sophisticated psychological warfare must make the population aware of the dangers posed by terrorists. Unless accompanied by socio-economic measures, it can backfire. Terrorism can be multi-layered; issues in Pakistan include conflict of ideologies, whose brand of Islam is right and how to impose this brand on others.
U.S. intelligence failures leading to 9/11 prompted security becoming tighter, making laws stricter and highly pro-active. Providing against ‘clear and present danger’, the fail-safe line dividing rule of law from criminality can be crossed sometimes. However, one cannot agree that the only way to counter terror is by terror.
Foreign exchange meant for charity must be scrutinised for terrorist funding while processing through scheduled banks, not through FE dealers and "hawalas." Without adequate resources, or even a technological base, third world countries like Pakistan tend to react to terrorist threats rather than pre-empt them. Electronic forensics and technologies must be developed to anticipate possible future threats. NADRA’s electronic identification process has indeed been an unimaginable ‘giant leap forward’ for Pakistan—a success story beyond compare.
The National Counter Terrorism Authority (Nacta) in Pakistan is mandated to “coordinate counter terrorism and counter extremism efforts evaluating the nature and magnitude of the terrorist threat; and to present strategic policy options to the government for consideration/implementation after scientifically studying the phenomenon of extremism and terrorism in historic and professional perspective.”
A well-equipped, well-trained and well-led counterterrorism force (CTF) can isolate and destroy the terrorists’ potential to spread destruction and grief, utilizing any resources for operations, wherever and whenever necessary. Induct only the very best without any political interference or manoeuvring. Beware of the evil nexus between corruption, organised crime and terrorism. Politicians and powerful people on the criminal payroll will always be averse to the CTF becoming effective.
The touchstone of success lies in being fair to all—without fear or favor. If any community is discriminated against because of their lineage or political leanings, the battle will be lost. Urban guerrilla warfare cannot be sustained without the support of the people. Conversely no counter-campaign can succeed without the support of the people.
We have to re-think our electoral process. Our present bankrupt version will never allow democracy to function at the grassroots level. Without participation of all the stakeholders the moral basis of a democratic society is eroded. The vested interests of the PML-N and the PPP in Punjab and Sindh notwithstanding, despite Imran Khan’s passion for real grassroots democracy, even the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf model in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa has discrepancies deliberately tilting for feudalism.
An insurgent may be wrong but he believes his cause is just, his motives are unselfish and his actions target combatants. From time to time insurgents do use terrorism as a weapon of war. A terrorist uses a cause to justify his motives; the difference is that he mostly targets non-combatants with maximum prejudice.
The mindset of a terrorist is that of a murderer, callous and brutal. To terrorise the population the new TTP chief Fazlullah had video-taped the beheadings of the unfortunate in public during his reign in Swat. The commitment, will and determination of the ‘great silent majority’ to fight this murderous criminal mindset can only be encouraged by giving them participation with power at the grassroots level.
Writing in The Telegraph, EWI Board Member Kanwal Sibal discusses Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's visit to China. Sibal warns that India's eagerness to project only the positive aspects of the bilateral relationship hinders progress dealing with challenging issues.
We have a tendency to overstate the positives of our relations with China and downplay the negatives. This creates the impression that our ties are better than they actually are, and that the problems are either not as bad as they are made out to be or are more manageable than is thought. Since our most difficult relationship is with China, we have to be very careful in how we project it. It should be as close to reality as diplomacy permits so that the public at home is not misled or encouraged to be complacent, and observers abroad are not confused about where we stand.
China is set to acquire the status of tomorrow’s Number Two power. How India, the only large Asian country that can potentially challenge China’s dominance, develops its relations with it has a bearing on international equations in the years ahead. China’s phenomenal rise is causing concern in its neighborhood and beyond. Those watchful or threatened would want to apprehend as clearly as possible what the Indian perspective is for seriously exploring the possibility of forging greater understandings in common interest. If we behave as if the threat from China is either exaggerated or that we can cope with China’s rise and the expanding economic and military gap between the two countries largely on our own, then we will be unable to work out optimal partnerships needed to handle the challenges ahead.
It is debatable whether Manmohan Singh needed to go to China so soon after the Chinese premier’s May visit to India. Barring compelling reasons, such high-level visits are normally spaced out sufficiently to extract maximum results. Intensified top-level parleying between countries with known bilateral problems ordinarily indicates rapprochement dynamics at work. With mounting China-Japan tensions, rising Southeast Asian concerns about China’s conduct and growing US-China geopolitical rivalry, India releases pressure on China by visibly boosting its own engagement with it and allowing it to tactically present a more constructive and conciliatory face, just as we have been doing this by increasingly engaging Pakistan and softening our stand on its terrorist affiliations just when it had begun to be cornered on this issue by the West.
The calendar and content of our engagement with China should, of course, be determined foremost by our national interest and not the agenda of others, consistent with our strategic autonomy. But our initiatives should strengthen our position vis-à-vis China, rather than the reverse. We have to carefully watch China’s conduct towards Japan and its assertiveness in the South China Sea, and draw lessons from it for our own differences with China. China has multiple objectives in hiking up its engagement of India. With the forthcoming visit of the Japanese royal couple and Prime Minister Abe to India in mind, it would want to pre-empt, to the extent possible, a deepening of the India-Japan strategic embrace at China’s cost. By indicating a willingness to stabilize the military situation with India in spite of enduring territorial differences, it is trying to insinuate that Japan, not China, is primarily responsible for territorial tensions over the Senkakus by choosing to activate the dispute rather than seeking stabilizing arrangements. Beyond this, China’s moves towards India are tactically aimed at unbalancing the United States of America’s “re-balancing” towards Asia in which India is being cast in a central role.
That the Chinese clubbed our prime minister’s visit with those of the prime ministers of Russia and Outer Mongolia shows the mounting hubris of China as a “great power”, which can now command the visits of world leaders to its capital in clusters. While our prime minister was received at all the required levels and some extra personal attention was undoubtedly paid to him, the subtle way in which India has also been made to accept a reduced status should not be overlooked. Professional diplomats are prone to highlight gestures made “beyond strict protocol requirements” as signals of the high regard in which a country and its leader are held by the host. Barring immediate satisfaction that such gestures bring, they are often superficial, focused on atmospherics, without necessarily denoting any change in core calculations. In this connection, it is pertinent that while Presidents Obama and Putin are our prime minister’s direct interlocutors, with China it is the Chinese premier. Apparently, the Chinese premier is the interlocutor of the German chancellor and the British premier too, which makes this anomaly less galling diplomatically.
The border defense cooperation agreement was the most significant outcome of the prime minister’s visit. As this is by no means a breakthrough agreement, the question remains whether we were right in being maneuvered into going to Beijing at this stage to boost the accord’s intrinsic importance, especially in the context of China’s provocative conduct on our own border and elsewhere. If the 1993, 1996, 2005 and 2012 agreements on maintaining peace and tranquility on the border through confidence-building measures and other mechanisms have not worked as intended, a new agreement, which, in many ways, is a watered-down version of the key earlier ones, may not yield better results. The expanding power gap with China has forced us into a position where a solution to the border issue has become less pressing than ensuring that China does not use its increased muscle to make incremental territorial incursions into our side. This accords with the Chinese strategy of not resolving the core issue and maintaining status quo as China can disturb it periodically at will and keep us under pressure.
Unsurprisingly, the joint statement issued during the prime minister’s visit repeats, therefore, the empty formulation that the “Special Representatives, who have been charged with exploring a framework of settlement of the India-China boundary question, were encouraged by the two leaders to continue their efforts in that direction”. If, after 10 years and 16 rounds of discussions, all that the two leaders could do is to “encourage” the special representatives, it indicates the wide gap that still remains to be bridged.
The memorandum of understanding signed during the visit on strengthening cooperation on trans-border rivers is a step in the right direction as it draws China into expert-level discussions on our concerns about Chinese dam-building plans on rivers flowing from Tibet to India. Whether China will move beyond data sharing and emergency management, and will concede any right to India to interfere with its plans is seriously open to question, given the implications of this, inter alia, for China’s relations with other lower riparian countries in Asia.
The joint statement notes that the exchange of visits by the prime ministers of the two countries “within the same calendar year was the first since 1954 and has great significance”. This is mystifying because the first such double exchange failed to resolve mounting differences over the border issue that culminated in a military conflict in 1962, and this second double exchange has not opened up any perspective of a resolution of these differences. Our eagerness to improve our relationship with China and project it positively in spite of Chinese provocations, which we tolerate and find ways to reconcile with, hugely handicaps our dealings with the challenges posed by that country.
This study submits twelve major recommendations to the private sector, governments and other stakeholders—especially the financial sector—for the purpose of improving the reliability, robustness, resilience and security of the world’s undersea communications cable infrastructure.
In practical terms, these twelve recommendations are offered as challenges to individuals. These will be the ones who will need to make the difference when a difference is called for. The senior leaders and subject matter experts of equipment suppliers, network operators and service providers; the leaders and participants of the industry’s fora; researchers; consultants in small firms; government policy makers and staff employees; IT specialists in financial firms; and many others—all are strongly urged to include this report in their dialogue and to do so speedily, as the improvement opportunities described have important benefits to many throughout the world—and the consequences, many downsides.
It is encouraging that at the time of this report dispatch, a number of private sector interests have indicated their willingness to take the next steps suggested for several recommendations. Each of the recommendations should be considered and acted upon with urgency proportional to the vital role that international communications networks and services will play in the future. The critical priority for implementation is clear. Without reliable international communications networks and services, public welfare is endangered, economic stability is at risk, other critical sectors are exposed, and nation-state security is threatened. The implementation of this report’s recommendations will significantly reduce these and other risks. Each of the twelve recommendations is both challenging and achievable. The intent of the ROGUCCI process from the beginning has been to improve the world’s communications. Successful implementation of each recommendation will significantly improve the reliability and robustness of communications services for the citizens around the world. However, each will require skill, resolve and genuine partnership among government entities, stakeholders and the private sector.
This study strongly urges the private sector, governments and other stakeholders to chart and embark on a new course of policy and practice that forcefully advocates highly available, highly reliable, highly robust, highly resilient and highly secure international communications infrastructure.
Click here to download the complete publication from the IEEE web site
In a recent visit to Myanmar, Former Finnish President Martti Ahtisaari, an EWI board member, along with fellow global leaders Jimmy Carter and Gro Harlem Brundtland, praised the ceasefire in Myanmar as an important first step in the country’s tentative peace process.
The three members of The Elders also called for a more “comprehensive resolution” to Myanmar’s “ethnic conflicts” that would include increased political dialogue.
“It’s the beginning of a peace process … It doesn’t come overnight. [But] it is very difficult to address [the concerns of ethnic groups] if they can’t actually stop the fighting,” says Ahtisaari.
