New India's Global Role

By M.K. Rasgotra, The Tribune (Special Supplement), September 24, 
2005

http://www.tribuneindia.com/2005/specials/tribune_125/main9.htm

Since the end of the Cold War, the world order has been in a state 
of dynamic transition. With unprecedented military, economic and 
technological preponderance, the US dominates the scene. Europe is 
reunited, at peace and engaged in consolidating its political unity 
and economic integration. NATO, a remnant of the old order, without 
a security role in Europe, has found something to do in the heart of 
Asia in Afghanistan.

European military meddling in Asian countries (as part of a NATO 
force) could revive bitter memories of the oppressive imperial era 
and hinder the process of reconciliation between pacific Europe and 
a resurgent Asia.

economic power is another dramatic development of the last decade. A 
new role, as a major regional military and economic power, also 
beckons India to make its contribution in the making of a new Asian 
equilibrium of peace and security. Russia with its vast Asian 
stretch, and Japan, the world's second largest economy and a 
military power of note are equally significant players in the 
unfolding Asian drama.

Stress on stability

The centre of gravity of world power and international focus have, 
therefore, shifted from the Euro-Atlantic region to Asia which, 
regrettably, is also the scene of several issues of discord. It is 
here in Asia that the questions of peace and security will be 
decided by the equations and interactions in the next quarter 
century among these five powers — China, India, Japan, Russia and 
the US. The foreign policies of all these powers are undergoing 
changes in varying measures. Hence the tectonic shift in the USA's 
India policy and Beijing's unwonted expression of desire for 
improved relations with India. It is a time — and a world of 
uncertainties and contests for influence and supremacy and 
surprises. The task before the statesmen of the 21st century is one 
of forging working partnerships to create a stable equilibrium of 
peace and cooperation in which none of the five powers mentioned 
above feels trapped in an environment of hostility; none is 
threatened with exclusion and none feels emboldened to walk into a 
seeming vacuum causing a clash of interests with another power.

China abuts on India and its sub-Himalayan neighbours, and India is 
not likely to enjoy the luxury of watching the scene in aloofness. 
Both countries need peace and stability: both need cooperation of 
the other three powers for trade, technology transfer and arms and 
each will determine its own priorities and decide which power or 
combination of powers will best help advance its economic, political 
and security interests. The nature and scope of the relations of 
China, Japan, Russia and the US with India's neighbours, especially 
China's relations with Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nepal and Myanmar will 
largely determine India's priorities.

Foreign policy begins with neighbours, and as Kautilya teaches us, 
difficulties are inherent in relations between neighbours. Kautilya 
also observes that a great power loses stature if it remains bogged 
down in neighbourhood entanglements, which in a sense has been the 
story of India since Indira Gandhi's demise. Circumstances are now 
ripe for India to pull away from the mire of South Asian 
controversies, and play its due role on the larger world stage. 
Pakistan's foreign policy began with its invasion of Kashmir within 
weeks of its birth.

In its dealings with India ever since it has relied on the use of 
force with the support, alternatingly, of the US and China. The US 
has finally veered away from that course, but China's commitment to 
Pakistan seems to have deepened because of their shared objective to 
keep India strategically locked in South Asia. Washington's current 
perception of India's place and role in the world provides a firm 
base for vastly expanded cooperation between the two countries. 
Pakistan will also remain important in American calculations, but we 
need not lose sleep over the nature and extent of their dealings.

India should tend its own relationship with Pakistan with care, 
patience and perseverance. Considering that India cannot give up 
Kashmir and Pakistan cannot forcibly take it, Pakistan's pointless 
agitation and jehadi terrorism should be expected to continue by 
fits and starts. Nevertheless, the current peace dialogue must 
proceed to a settlement of the problem on the basis of a large 
measure of autonomy for the Kashmir Valley as well as "Azad Kashmir" 
and the northern areas under Pakistan's control.

Bangladesh's antagonistic posture receives encouragement from both 
Pakistan and China. India should deal firmly with its provocations 
on the border, its sheltering and nurturing of Indian insurgents and 
its undeclared policy of encouraging its surplus population to 
infiltrate and settle down in neighbouring Indian states. This 
policy poses a serious future security threat to our sensitive 
Northeastern region. There should be a parallel conciliatory 
approach also. Bangladesh is a functioning two-party democracy, and 
we must at all times cultivate both parties. In matters of trade and 
development cooperation also India needs to be a good deal more 
accommodative of Bangladesh's needs.

Nepal is in the grip of a crisis threatening the country's unity and 
integrity. The King's perseverance in his present policy of 
marginalising the pro-democracy parties accompanied by the failure 
of the Royal Army to suppress the Maoist rebellion has pitted the 
monarchy against a threat to its own survival. Dangers lurk in this 
situation for India and efforts must continue to bring the King and 
the pro-democracy parties together for restoration of democracy in 
Nepal.

Having got rid of the Rana anarchy, the people of Nepal are unlikely 
to submit to the autocratic rule of the Shah dynasty. India must 
also find ways of exerting pressure on the Maoists to give up 
violence and seek redress of their complaints through democratic 
processes.

The progress of the SAARC has been obstructed by Pakistan's support 
for jehad in Kashmir and its negative policy of making trade and 
economic cooperation with India contingent on a Kashmir solution. 
India need neither be in the driving seat of SAARC nor mourn its 
slow demise. Instead, we should invest every possible bilateral 
effort - political, military and economic - in strengthening our 
links with willing neighbours, namely, Bhutan, Sri Lanka and 
Maldives.

India's foreign policy and diplomacy must increasingly look at the 
world beyond South Asia where the closest possible working 
relationship with the US would appear to be India's best bet. There 
is growing convergence of their political, economic and security 
interests in the regions surrounding India. The United States is 
expected to maintain its supremacy in the foreseeable future, and 
that rules out the viability of a "China-India-Russia Strategic 
Triangle", for in varying degrees each country is dependent on the 
US for technology, trade and other support.

Nuclear plans

India needs Washington's active support to enhance its nuclear 
energy resource, be rid of the NPT regime constraints and find its 
way into the Nuclear Suppliers Group as a responsible nuclear-weapon 
power. And since there is no unilateral bounty — gifting in 
international relations, we must also be meticulously attentive to 
US interests and willing to meet its expectations of reciprocal 
cooperation.

Nothing should be allowed to diminish our time-tested relationship 
with Russia which is bound to be dominant in the sensitive and oil 
and gas-rich Central Asia. There is scope of considerably enlarged 
relationship with Russia in energy, trade, science and technology.

We should want the best possible relationship with China, but its 
nuclear and other military support for Pakistan places a ceiling of 
sorts on Sino-Indian relations. While we should put the 1962 war 
behind us, and freeze the border issue if that is what China wants, 
in our on-going dialogue with this great neighbour, we must squarely 
ask why China shows such insensitivity to India's political 
interests and security concerns in its immediate sub-Himalayan 
neighbourhood. China's puzzling policy of settling Muslims along 
Tibet's borders with India cannot be a source of confidence and 
comfort to India.

Japan, the world's second economic power, is apprehensive of China's 
rise and what it spells for the future of its own economic and 
security interests. Many Japanese see a Chinese strategic design 
behind nuclear weapons reaching North Korea from Pakistan in return 
for Chinese missiles. Japan's new interest in a closer economic and 
political relationship with India is a welcome development to which 
India must respond constructively. We need Japanese investments and 
technology and an overall, expanding political relationship to 
facilitate cooperation in these areas.

The EU-India relationship is flourishing into a "strategic 
partnership" , satisfactory to both parties. From among the major 
European countries, trade and economic links with France should be 
strengthened in the areas of agriculture, vocational education, 
water management, arms supplies and technology transfer. France has 
given us valuable support on critical political and security issues. 
It is India's most likely collaborator in nuclear energy generation 
in the years to come.

Our neglect of South-East Asia since independence has allowed 
China's dominance in the region's economy and politics. The region's 
countries look to India for diversification of their political, 
cultural and economic links but India's "Look East" policy has yet 
to acquire substance. The region can be an important source of 
energy supplies and vastly expanded trade for India.

In a globalised world, India's foreign policy will have to focus 
increasingly on economic objectives, trade enhancement and 
attracting foreign investment and advanced technologies to enable 
the country to achieve a steady growth of eight to 10 per cent of 
the GDP per annum. But diplomatic salesmanship abroad has to be 
reinforced by measures at home to liberalise the economy, reform and 
rationalise labour laws, and remove bureaucratic corruption and 
hurdles.

It is a common complaint abroad that an investment proposal requires 
clearances at 52 separate points, with delays and demands for bribes 
at almost every point. Several new areas now form the subject of 
complex international negotiations — environment, women's rights and 
other social issues, HIV/AIDS and drugs, disaster management 
cooperation etc.

Diplomatic inputs

It is necessary to re-equip the Ministry of External Affairs and 
enhance its capabilities for these new tasks. The MEA needs a 
stronger economic policy wing, a Science and Technology Directorate, 
and much closer coordination than what now exists with the 
ministries of Defence, Commerce, Finance and the sundry departments 
dealing with energy security. Its inert Policy Planning 
establishment is in need of refurbishing.

All this will give the MEA the versatility it needs in the changed 
world. At the moment, it is without adequate qualified personnel, 
expertise and the resources needed for proper cultivation of India's 
political, cultural and economic relations with African and Latin 
American Countries. The government must concentrate efforts and 
resources for the achievement of the larger objectives of policy. 
The four year-long campaign for permanent membership of the UN 
Security Council has only detracted from Indiaimage as a rising 
world power.

As India's economic and military strength grows and acquires greater 
visibility, the world, even the USA and China, will want India in 
the UNSC. Policy-makers are often confronted with difficult choices 
between different sets of interests and objectives.

Inevitably these days, a great deal of diplomacy covering a variety 
of issues is conducted at the summit level. Perhaps, the Prime 
Minister should have a Foreign Policy Advisory Group of his own to 
collate and coordinate inputs from concerned ministries and 
departments on any given issue.

The overarching objective of Indian diplomacy now should be to 
project India as a resurgent and self-reliant country capable of 
safeguarding its interests and willing to play its proper role for 
peace, security and stability in Asia and the world.

The transformation of India into one of the world's leading 
economies, a responsible nuclear-weapon power with demonstrated 
scientific and technological competence and a stable democracy is a 
truly phenomenal achievement of our time. This wonder of diversity 
and dynamism as a development model for democracies in the Third 
World needs portrayal on the world stage in language and behaviour 
characterised by modesty, dignity and restraint.

— The writer is a former Foreign Secretary, Government of India. 








--
This is ZESTGlobal. Post articles on international affairs to 
[email protected]

If you got this mail as a forward, subscribe to ZESTGlobal by sending a blank 
mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] OR, if you have a Yahoo! ID, by visiting 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ZESTGlobal/join/ 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ZESTGlobal/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 



Reply via email to