INTERNATIONAL TERRORISM MONITOR---PAPER NO. 676
B.RAMAN
India took 19 years to prevail over the Naga and Mizo insurgents, 14 years over the Khalistani terrorists in Punjab and about 10 years plus over Al Ummah of Tamil Nadu. It has been fighting against left-wing extremists in different incarnations for nearly 40 years with no end in sight, against different terrorist groups in Jammu and Kashmir (J&K) for 21 years and against indigenous and Pakistan-sponsored jihadi terrorist organizations in hinterland India outside J&K for 17 years.
2. The UK took about 35 years to prevail over terrorism in Northern Ireland and Sri Lanka 26 years to vanquish the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE).
3. Israel has been fighting against West Asian terrorist groups for 43 years and the US against Al Qaeda for 12 years plus and against the Taliban for nine years. The Russians have been fighting against the Chechens for 15 years. Pakistan has been fighting against the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) for three years now.
4. As I have been repeatedly saying, once terrorism or insurgency makes its appearance it takes years to prevail over it. One should not, therefore, be surprised that the end of the fighting against Al Qaeda and the Afghan Taliban is not yet in sight even nine years after the beginning of the sustained campaign against them under the US leadership in the Af-Pak region after the 9/11 terrorist strikes in the US Homeland. In my assessment, it will take at least another eight to10 years for the international community to prevail over Al Qaeda and tame the Afghan Taliban.
5.The US-led campaign against the Al Qaeda brand of terrorism has had many tactical successes in eliminating a large number of its important leaders, in preventing many planned acts of terrorism and in thwarting an accretion in their capacity. It has kept Al Qaeda on the run to escape from the unrelenting drone ( unmanned planes) strikes in North and South Waziristan in Pakistan. It has prevented Al Qaeda and its affiliates from disrupting maritime trade, from threatening the world with weapons of mass destruction material and from turning the Internet into a weapon of mass disruption. These successes have come as a result of constant refining of the physical security techniques, US investments and innovations in the use of science and technology against global terrorism and making counter-terrorism an exercise in global partnership.
6. However, despite these tactical successes, Al Qaeda and its affiliated organizations have maintained a capability for repeatedly taking the international community by surprise as seen since 9/11 in Bali, Mombasa, Casablanca, Istanbul, Madrid, London, Sharm-el-Sheikh, Jakarta, twice in Mumbai and Islamabad. Al Qaeda has become a two-headed monster--- an insurgent organizations which seeks to overthrow Governments in Islamic countries such as Pakistan, Afghanistan, Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Iraq, Algeria and Indonesia and a ruthless terrorist organization which seeks to keep the non-Muslim world bleeding.
7.It continues to pose a joint threat to the Islamic as well as non-Islamic countries. Unless the Islamic and non-Islamic countries join hands in countering it, a strategic neutralization of Al Qaeda will remain a distant goal. There is unfortunately an ambivalence in the attitude of the Islamic world to Al Qaeda. They want to protect themselves against it by whatever means possible, but are reluctant to co-operate sincerely with the non-Islamic world in neutralizing it. Al Qaeda is dangerous for the stability of the Islamic world, but its activities against the non-Islamic world are understandable. That seems to be their attitude, which could prove suicidal.
8.How to prevail over Al Qaeda and its affiliates-----with the co-operation of the Islamic world, if possible, and without it if the worst comes to the worst? That is the question facing all of us whether in India, the US or the rest of the world suffering the global jihadi depredations. In this endeavour, our primary aim should be the neutralization of Al Qaeda. Its neutralization will not eliminate global jihadi terrorism. It could make it less virulent and hopefully more manageable.
9. The recent indicators of the resurgence of Al Qaeda and its allied elements in Iraq show that the international community still does not have an answer as to how to deal effectively with global jihadi terrorism---- which has had a large geographical spread with the Af-Pak region, Yemen, Somalia and North Africa serving as its epi-centres. Unless there is a co-ordinated fight against the terrorists operating from all these areas, we will be fighting and fighting endlessly.
10. Al Qaeda has not only had a geographic spread. It has also had an ethnic spread by exploiting the feelings of Islamic solidarity and the victim complex of the Muslims of the world. By projecting the counter-terrorism campaigns of different countries as a war against Islam and not a fight against terrorism, it has been able to draw the support of Muslims belonging to different ethnic groups and of different nationalities. The international community has not been able to use effectively its soft power to convince the Muslim communities in different countries-----particularly the Muslim youth---- that it has been waging a counter-terrorism and not a counter-Islam campaign.
11. The over-focus on the use of hard power---- the heavily armed security forces and the civilian security agencies --- and the inability to use soft power to counter the ideological campaign of Al Qaeda, the Talibans and other allied organizations have resulted in a situation in which the word and example of the jihadists have a greater appeal in the Islamic world than the word and example of the States trying vainly till now to counter the terrorists.
12. The international community has not been able to isolate Al Qaeda and expose its pernicious ideology as likely to be detrimental to the interests of the Muslims themselves. The result: more and more jihadi organizations are joining the bandwagon of Al Qaeda and placing their cadres----many of them more volunteers to serve the perceived Islamic cause than recruits to act as Al Qaeda’s cannon-fodder---- at its disposal for being used in its fight against so-called infidels and apostates.
13. The fight against Al Qaeda and its associates has come to be seen as a war of attrition and not simultaneously as a campaign of decontamination too. The objectives of the war of attrition are the neutralization of the leadership, stopping the flow of funds and destroying their capabilities. These objectives are important, but they alone are not sufficient. Simultaneously, there has to be an intelligently waged decontamination campaign against pernicious ideas that seek to drive a wedge between Muslims and non-Muslims.
14. In this decontamination campaign, elements of soft power such as the radio, the TV, the print media and the Internet are important. This campaign has to be waged with the help of Muslims of different ethnic groups and different nationalities. The fight against Al Qaeda and the Talibans cannot be won unless Muslims---particularly the youth---are persuaded to play a leading role in it.
15. The Muslim youth cannot be weaned away from the attraction of Al Qaeda unless and until its sense of anger over what it perceives as the injustices being committed against the Muslim community are taken note of and addressed where legitimate and possible. Closing our eyes and ears to their anger is proving counter-productive.
16. Anger is nothing unusual. It has always been there, but in the past the anger was due to feelings of poverty and deprivation and social discrimination. Now, the anger is increasingly due to the counter-terrorism methods adopted after 9/11----- profiling, special checks of Muslims, disproportionate use of force, air strikes in populated areas etc . There is a perception encouraged and exploited by Al Qaeda and its affiliates that Islam and Muslims as a religious group are targeted in the name of counter-terrorism. The feeling that what is being waged is not a counter-terrorism, but a counter-Islam campaign is spreading. Unwise measures such as banning the wearing of burqa by Muslim girls attending schools in countries such as France, not permitting the construction of minarets in some countries are strengthening this feeling.
17. How to convince the Muslim youth that we are seeking to counter terrorism and not Islam? That is a question which needs the serious attention of policy-makers and non-governmental experts.
18.In the months after 9/11, there was a recognition that the counter-terrorism campaign must be holistic paying equal attention to security measures and to rising the level of education and economic well-being of Muslims. Measures for reforming the madrasas and for making modern education easily affordable for Muslims received considerable attention.
19.Counter-terrorism as being waged today is no longer holistic. The need for the reform of the madrasas is no longer emphasized. Spread of modern education is receiving less attention and less funding than improving the communications infrastructure in areas affected by terrorism. Just because many of the cadres of Al Qaeda and its affiliates come from an affluent and educated background such measures are no longer receiving the required attention.
20.The time has come for us to go back to comprehensive counter-terrorism. ( 11-9-10)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai, and Associate of the Chennai Centre For China Studies. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
Friday, September 10, 2010
USE OF SRI LANKA BY LET FOR OPERATIONS AGAINST INDIA
INTERNATIONAL TERRORISM MONITOR---PAPER NO. 675
B.RAMAN
On September 7,2010, the Anti-Terrorism Squad (ATS) of the Maharashtra Police arrested Mirza Himayat Baig,who allegedly is the head of the Lashkar-e-Toiba (LET) in Maharashtra, on a charge of masterminding the explosion at the German Bakery in Pune on February 13 last. According to the ATS, Shaikh Lalbaba Mohammed Hussain alias Bilal of Nashik was one of his accomplices.
2. Quoting Mr. Rakesh Maria, the head of the ATS, “The Hindu” of Chennai reported as follows on September 10:”Himayat Beg received one-to-one training in bomb-making in Colombo in 2008 from an absconding LET operative…Baig was called to Colombo by Fayyaz Qazi, a wanted LET operative, in March 2008. Accordingly, he traveled from Aurangabad (in Maharashtra) to Hyderabad and then to Chennai. From Chennai, he flew to Colombo. He was trained in Colombo for 15 days by Qazi himself and another operative whom Baig didn’t know. He was also trained on how to communicate with them. After he returned from Colombo, he was sent Rs.2.5 lakhs for changing his identity.”
3. “ The Hindu” also said in its report: “ Amid speculation about the choice of Colombo as a centre for training, Mr.Maria said the Sri Lankan city was chosen only as a meeting point and there was no other significance to it. Ruling out the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) or any other connection, he said: “There seems to be only two reasons for choosing Colombo—the access to the country is easy as there is a visa on arrival facility.”
4. In its report, the Press Trust of India has described Fayyaz Qazi as an activist of the Students’ Islamic Movement of India (SIMI), who was wanted in connection with a case of 2006 involving the recovery of some arms in Aurangabad.
5.The use of Sri Lanka as a meeting point by the LET had earlier once come to notice. In December 2002, the Tamil Nadu Police claimed to have unearthed a new organisation, apparently inspired and controlled by jihadi elements in Saudi Arabia, called the Muslim Defence Force (MDF). Published reports about the Tamil Nadu Police's detection indicated as follows:
* One Abu Hamsa, alias Abdul Bari, an Indian Muslim living in Saudi Arabia and associated with the LET, and one Abu Omar, a Pakistani Muslim working there, had together formed the MDF after the Gujarat riots. They had also met a Muslim leader from Tamil Nadu who had gone to Saudi Arabia on haj pilgrimage.
* On his return to Tamil Nadu, this leader held a clandestine meeting at Tenkasi in Tiruvelveli district, which was attended by about 30 Muslims. At this meeting, plans for organising MDF activities in India were discussed.
* Subsequently, two of those, who had attended the Tenkasi meeting, went to Sri Lanka (the Eastern Province?), where they were to have another meeting with Abu Hamsa, but he did not turn up from Saudi Arabia. They, therefore, returned to Tamil Nadu without meeting him.
* Abu Hamsa alias Abdul Bari was wanted in connection with an explosion in Andhra Pradesh. He had given instructions to his contacts in Tamil Nadu to organise the activities of the MDF and also to float another organisation called New Vision to propagate Islam amongst the so-called backward classes of the Hindu community and recruit them for jihad.
* The associates of Abu Hamsa in Tamil Nadu were instructed to form an elite force to establish hide-outs and protect jihadi terrorists visiting Tamil Nadu and to recruit youth for training in jihad at an undisclosed destination in the Gulf.
* Amongst those arrested by the Tamil Nadu police during their investigation into the activities of the MDF was Noohu Thambi Hamid Bakri, described as a suspected sympathiser of the LET. He was the principal of the Ayesha Siddique Arabic College for Women at Kayalpattinam and also the President of the All-India Tauhid Jamath Federation. He also used to be associated with an organisation called the Kayal Islamic Defence Force, which is now believed to be dormant.
* It was Hamid Bakri, accompanied by one Zakkaria, who had met Abu Hamsa in Saudi Arabia and subsequently gone to Sri Lanka for another meeting, which did not materialise. In November, 2002, Zakkaria was allegedly in receipt of Rs.1,50,000 from Abu Hamsa in Saudi Arabia through hawala.
6.In my article of September 4,2007, titled JIHADI TERRORISM IN SOUTH INDIA: EXTERNAL MOTIVATORS -INTERNATIONAL TERRORISM MONITOR--PAPER NO. 271 available at http://www.southasiaanalysis.org/papers24/paper2356.html , I had written as follows: “ It should be evident that for some years now there have been indicators of the cladestine creation of a jihadi web in Mumbai, south India and possibly in the Eastern Province of Sri Lanka, with the SIMI and the LET playing an active role in this matter, either in tandem or separately of each other. It is also evident that much of the inspiration and financial support for this came from Indian and Pakistani jihadi activists in Saudi Arabia and other Gulf countries. Important breakthroughs in connection with identifying the various strands of this web had been made by the police of Mumbai, Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka and Tamil Nadu, but no attempt would appear to have been made for a co-ordinated effort to investigate and neutralise this web.” (10-9-10)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai, and Associate of the Chennai Centre For China Studies. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
B.RAMAN
On September 7,2010, the Anti-Terrorism Squad (ATS) of the Maharashtra Police arrested Mirza Himayat Baig,who allegedly is the head of the Lashkar-e-Toiba (LET) in Maharashtra, on a charge of masterminding the explosion at the German Bakery in Pune on February 13 last. According to the ATS, Shaikh Lalbaba Mohammed Hussain alias Bilal of Nashik was one of his accomplices.
2. Quoting Mr. Rakesh Maria, the head of the ATS, “The Hindu” of Chennai reported as follows on September 10:”Himayat Beg received one-to-one training in bomb-making in Colombo in 2008 from an absconding LET operative…Baig was called to Colombo by Fayyaz Qazi, a wanted LET operative, in March 2008. Accordingly, he traveled from Aurangabad (in Maharashtra) to Hyderabad and then to Chennai. From Chennai, he flew to Colombo. He was trained in Colombo for 15 days by Qazi himself and another operative whom Baig didn’t know. He was also trained on how to communicate with them. After he returned from Colombo, he was sent Rs.2.5 lakhs for changing his identity.”
3. “ The Hindu” also said in its report: “ Amid speculation about the choice of Colombo as a centre for training, Mr.Maria said the Sri Lankan city was chosen only as a meeting point and there was no other significance to it. Ruling out the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) or any other connection, he said: “There seems to be only two reasons for choosing Colombo—the access to the country is easy as there is a visa on arrival facility.”
4. In its report, the Press Trust of India has described Fayyaz Qazi as an activist of the Students’ Islamic Movement of India (SIMI), who was wanted in connection with a case of 2006 involving the recovery of some arms in Aurangabad.
5.The use of Sri Lanka as a meeting point by the LET had earlier once come to notice. In December 2002, the Tamil Nadu Police claimed to have unearthed a new organisation, apparently inspired and controlled by jihadi elements in Saudi Arabia, called the Muslim Defence Force (MDF). Published reports about the Tamil Nadu Police's detection indicated as follows:
* One Abu Hamsa, alias Abdul Bari, an Indian Muslim living in Saudi Arabia and associated with the LET, and one Abu Omar, a Pakistani Muslim working there, had together formed the MDF after the Gujarat riots. They had also met a Muslim leader from Tamil Nadu who had gone to Saudi Arabia on haj pilgrimage.
* On his return to Tamil Nadu, this leader held a clandestine meeting at Tenkasi in Tiruvelveli district, which was attended by about 30 Muslims. At this meeting, plans for organising MDF activities in India were discussed.
* Subsequently, two of those, who had attended the Tenkasi meeting, went to Sri Lanka (the Eastern Province?), where they were to have another meeting with Abu Hamsa, but he did not turn up from Saudi Arabia. They, therefore, returned to Tamil Nadu without meeting him.
* Abu Hamsa alias Abdul Bari was wanted in connection with an explosion in Andhra Pradesh. He had given instructions to his contacts in Tamil Nadu to organise the activities of the MDF and also to float another organisation called New Vision to propagate Islam amongst the so-called backward classes of the Hindu community and recruit them for jihad.
* The associates of Abu Hamsa in Tamil Nadu were instructed to form an elite force to establish hide-outs and protect jihadi terrorists visiting Tamil Nadu and to recruit youth for training in jihad at an undisclosed destination in the Gulf.
* Amongst those arrested by the Tamil Nadu police during their investigation into the activities of the MDF was Noohu Thambi Hamid Bakri, described as a suspected sympathiser of the LET. He was the principal of the Ayesha Siddique Arabic College for Women at Kayalpattinam and also the President of the All-India Tauhid Jamath Federation. He also used to be associated with an organisation called the Kayal Islamic Defence Force, which is now believed to be dormant.
* It was Hamid Bakri, accompanied by one Zakkaria, who had met Abu Hamsa in Saudi Arabia and subsequently gone to Sri Lanka for another meeting, which did not materialise. In November, 2002, Zakkaria was allegedly in receipt of Rs.1,50,000 from Abu Hamsa in Saudi Arabia through hawala.
6.In my article of September 4,2007, titled JIHADI TERRORISM IN SOUTH INDIA: EXTERNAL MOTIVATORS -INTERNATIONAL TERRORISM MONITOR--PAPER NO. 271 available at http://www.southasiaanalysis.org/papers24/paper2356.html , I had written as follows: “ It should be evident that for some years now there have been indicators of the cladestine creation of a jihadi web in Mumbai, south India and possibly in the Eastern Province of Sri Lanka, with the SIMI and the LET playing an active role in this matter, either in tandem or separately of each other. It is also evident that much of the inspiration and financial support for this came from Indian and Pakistani jihadi activists in Saudi Arabia and other Gulf countries. Important breakthroughs in connection with identifying the various strands of this web had been made by the police of Mumbai, Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka and Tamil Nadu, but no attempt would appear to have been made for a co-ordinated effort to investigate and neutralise this web.” (10-9-10)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai, and Associate of the Chennai Centre For China Studies. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
CHINA STRATEGIC NEWS: SEPTEMBER 10,2010
B.RAMAN
CHINESE COPTERS FOR PAK FLOOD RELIEF
Mr.Liu Jian, the Chinese Ambassador to Pakistan, said on September 9,2010, that China would offer more assistance to flood-hit Pakistan as the country was still facing difficulties. China had announced on September 6 another instalment of humanitarian assistance to Pakistan amounting to 200 million yuan (29.4 million U.S. dollars). China had earlier given 120 million yuan (17.6 million U.S. dollars).Thus, the total Chinese assistance to Pakistan has come to US $ 47 million.The Ambassador said that a Chinese medical team would soon arrive in Pakistan and that Chinese helicopters would also take part in Pakistan's relief operations. A 55-member Chinese search and rescue team has been working for two weeks in Thatta in Sindh. It has set up a mobile hospital.
----XINHUA IN “CHINA DAILY” of September 10
MY COMMENTS (a). The Swiss Government announced on September 8 its decision to gift 10 second-hand Aloutte helicopters to Pakistan for flood relief. Pakistan has reportedly given a written undertaking not to arm the helicopters and to use them only for search and rescue. The Alouettes are not subject to the Swiss law governing arms exports. The helicopters will be flown by Pakistani crew.
(b). The US 26th Marine Expeditionary Unit, based at Camp Lejeune, North Carolina, has deployed 19 helicopters (CH 53E) for relief operations in Pakistan. Two more are to join. Six of these helicopters operate out of the Pano Aqil airbase. The copters are flown by American crew with a Pakistani officer on board.
( c ). During a visit to the flood-affected Hunza area in Gilgit-Baltistan in January last after an artificial lake formed by a landslide burst, Mr.Nawaz Sharif, the leader of the Pakistan Muslim League (PML), suggested to the Government that it should seek the humanitarian assistance of China and Switzerland, which had experience in disaster relief work in high altitudes.
(d). India has so far pledged a sum of US $ 25 million in two instalments for flood relief in Pakistan. Since Pakistan was reluctant to accept them directly, they are being given to the UN agencies engaged in flood relief in Pakistan.
NORTH KOREA ON THE BRINK OF COLLAPSE?
That is the interesting theme of discussion in a “People’s Forum” of the Party-owned “People’s Daily” dated September 10. May be seen at http://www.peopleforum.cn/viewthread.php?tid=36617&extra=page%3D1
US-CHINA: MOVES TO RESUME MILITARY-MILITARY RELATIONSHIP
Mr.John Hamre, President of the Washington-based Centre For Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), who had served as the US Deputy Defence Secretary under President Bill Clinton, is on a visit to China to attend a symposium at the invitation of the China Institute of Contemporary International Relations. He called on Gen.Ma Xiaotian, Deputy Chief of the General Staff of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA), on September 2 . Gen.Ma reportedly told Mr.Hamre: "A sound and stable China-U.S. military relationship is good for bilateral strategic trust and regional peace and stability. China has always attached great importance to developing military ties with the United States and has made efforts in this regard." According to the “People’s Daily” of September 3, Gen.Ma told Mr.Hamre that both sides should respect each other's core interests and major concerns. Both sides should also properly handle differences and sensitive issues. Mr.Hamre said China's prosperity contributed to the world, adding that the PLA's development is "logical." He added that it was necessary for the two militaries to maintain candid communication to keep stable military relations. He also met another senior Chinese General, Xu Caihou, on September 6. The “People’s Daily” of September 3 commented on these meetings as follows: “ The meetings between the Chinese Generals and Hamre are a rare occurrence as China cut off some military exchange programs with the United States after Pentagon decided in January to sell a nearly 6.4-billion-U.S.-dollar arms package to Taiwan, an inalienable part of China. Subsequently, none of the high-level military visits outlined in the China-U.S. communique signed in November last year when U.S. President Barack Obama visited China have been possible for the past eight months. Those planned visits included trips to Beijing by U.S. defense chief Robert Gates and Chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff Mike Mullen. A visit to Washington by Chief of General Staff of the Chinese PLA Chen Bingde was also suspended. On the same day Ma held talks with Hamre, the Chinese foreign ministry said U.S. Deputy National Security Adviser Thomas Donilon and U.S. National Economic Council Chairman Larry Summers will visit China this week. Donilon and Summers are also scheduled to meet with Chinese General Xu during their stay in Beijing. "Those U.S. officials' talks with Chinese military leaders reflect the fact the two countries want to keep channels open for defense talks, even though their official military exchanges have stalled," Yang Yi, a strategic expert at China's National Defense University, told Xinhua. "The suspension of military exchanges does not tally with the state of China-U.S. exchanges in other fields," said Zhu Feng, an international studies professor at Peking University.”
Mr.Larry Summers and Mr.Thomas Donilon called on President Hu Jintao on September 8.
The Agence France press (AFP) reported on September 10 as follows:”China may host US Defence Secretary Robert Gates for talks later this year after having cancelled an earlier visit over US arms sales to Taiwan, the Pentagon said on Thursday (September 9). Beijing had rebuffed the Defence Secretary in June, despite an expected visit, but now appears ready to issue another invitation, Pentagon press secretary Geoff Morrell told a news conference. "So if it (an invitation) is being extended again, as it appears to be, we're going to certainly look for the possibility of trying to schedule that before the end of the year," Morrell said. With the Chinese and US Presidents due to meet "early next year," it was crucial to make progress as both leaders have called for bolstering military-to-military relations, he said. But he added that the visit was not "engagement for the sake of engagement." "What we are looking for is a resumption of productive, transparent, military-to-military engagement so that we can both gain a better understanding of what our ambitions are, what our intentions are when it comes to our military budgets, how we operate, where we operate, and so forth," Morrell said. Despite misgivings expressed by Beijing, the US military planned to go ahead with joint military exercises with South Korea in the Yellow Sea, he said. "It's not an affront to the Chinese. It's not meant to send a message to the Chinese. It's meant to send a message to the North Koreans about their behavior," he said of the planned exercises involving the USS George Washington aircraft carrier. The United States maintained "the right to operate in any and all international waters, respecting, of course, territorial boundaries," he said.The Pentagon's comments came a day after Chinese President Hu Jintao extolled "fresh progress" in China-US ties as he met a White House delegation that held talks on thorny issues including North Korea, Iran and trade.” ( Summers and Donilon)
MY COMMENTS: It will be important for India to see what effect this US-China fence-mending exercise has on the Indo-US discussions on China during the visit of President Barack Obama to New Delhi in November. Mr.Obama may not want any shadow to be cast on Mr.Gates’ visit to China by his discussions in New Delhi. Mr.Gates’ discussions with the Chinese leaders on Iran, North Korea and the Af-Pak region would be more important to the US than Mr.Obama’s discussions with Indian leaders on China. So far as China is concerned, any significant outcome is unlikely during Mr.Obama’s visit to New Delhi.
JAPAN CAUTIONED BY BEIJING
China warned Japan on September 9 that their relationship could suffer if Tokyo mishandled the dispute over a Chinese fishing boat seized by the Japanese Coast Guard (JCG) in waters off the Diaoyu Islands. "The Diaoyu Islands are China's inseparable territory, and Japan applying its domestic law to the Chinese fishing boat operating in this area is absurd, illegal and invalid," Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Jiang Yu said at a regular news conference. "China will never accept that," she stressed. Jiang said China had also sent "a fishery law enforcement ship" to the area "to safeguard order and protect the safety of fishermen and their assets". She did not elaborate. The JCG on Thursday (September 9) handed over 41-year-old Chinese captain Zhan Qixiong to prosecutors who will decide whether to charge him, spokesman Masahiro Ichijo said. The captain has been in custody since his arrest on Wednesday (September 8), after two Japanese patrol boats intercepted his boat near the islands on Tuesday ( September 7). No one was injured. The captain was arrested on suspicion of "obstructing officers on duty", and faces a possible jail sentence of up to three years or a fine of up to 500,000 yen ($6,200).But the JCG also said the captain could be released in a couple of days if he acknowledged the allegation and paid the fine. Japanese officials were also questioning the ship's 14 crew members who have been kept on the boat because they did not have visas, the JCG said.
MY COMMENTS: The Japanese Navy has been increasingly assertive in the East China Sea since April last. Please see my article of April 27,2010, titled “Chinese Navy’s Power Projection” at http://www.southasiaanalysis.org/papers38/paper3780.html (10-9-10)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai, and Associate of the Chennai Centre For China Studies. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
CHINESE COPTERS FOR PAK FLOOD RELIEF
Mr.Liu Jian, the Chinese Ambassador to Pakistan, said on September 9,2010, that China would offer more assistance to flood-hit Pakistan as the country was still facing difficulties. China had announced on September 6 another instalment of humanitarian assistance to Pakistan amounting to 200 million yuan (29.4 million U.S. dollars). China had earlier given 120 million yuan (17.6 million U.S. dollars).Thus, the total Chinese assistance to Pakistan has come to US $ 47 million.The Ambassador said that a Chinese medical team would soon arrive in Pakistan and that Chinese helicopters would also take part in Pakistan's relief operations. A 55-member Chinese search and rescue team has been working for two weeks in Thatta in Sindh. It has set up a mobile hospital.
----XINHUA IN “CHINA DAILY” of September 10
MY COMMENTS (a). The Swiss Government announced on September 8 its decision to gift 10 second-hand Aloutte helicopters to Pakistan for flood relief. Pakistan has reportedly given a written undertaking not to arm the helicopters and to use them only for search and rescue. The Alouettes are not subject to the Swiss law governing arms exports. The helicopters will be flown by Pakistani crew.
(b). The US 26th Marine Expeditionary Unit, based at Camp Lejeune, North Carolina, has deployed 19 helicopters (CH 53E) for relief operations in Pakistan. Two more are to join. Six of these helicopters operate out of the Pano Aqil airbase. The copters are flown by American crew with a Pakistani officer on board.
( c ). During a visit to the flood-affected Hunza area in Gilgit-Baltistan in January last after an artificial lake formed by a landslide burst, Mr.Nawaz Sharif, the leader of the Pakistan Muslim League (PML), suggested to the Government that it should seek the humanitarian assistance of China and Switzerland, which had experience in disaster relief work in high altitudes.
(d). India has so far pledged a sum of US $ 25 million in two instalments for flood relief in Pakistan. Since Pakistan was reluctant to accept them directly, they are being given to the UN agencies engaged in flood relief in Pakistan.
NORTH KOREA ON THE BRINK OF COLLAPSE?
That is the interesting theme of discussion in a “People’s Forum” of the Party-owned “People’s Daily” dated September 10. May be seen at http://www.peopleforum.cn/viewthread.php?tid=36617&extra=page%3D1
US-CHINA: MOVES TO RESUME MILITARY-MILITARY RELATIONSHIP
Mr.John Hamre, President of the Washington-based Centre For Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), who had served as the US Deputy Defence Secretary under President Bill Clinton, is on a visit to China to attend a symposium at the invitation of the China Institute of Contemporary International Relations. He called on Gen.Ma Xiaotian, Deputy Chief of the General Staff of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA), on September 2 . Gen.Ma reportedly told Mr.Hamre: "A sound and stable China-U.S. military relationship is good for bilateral strategic trust and regional peace and stability. China has always attached great importance to developing military ties with the United States and has made efforts in this regard." According to the “People’s Daily” of September 3, Gen.Ma told Mr.Hamre that both sides should respect each other's core interests and major concerns. Both sides should also properly handle differences and sensitive issues. Mr.Hamre said China's prosperity contributed to the world, adding that the PLA's development is "logical." He added that it was necessary for the two militaries to maintain candid communication to keep stable military relations. He also met another senior Chinese General, Xu Caihou, on September 6. The “People’s Daily” of September 3 commented on these meetings as follows: “ The meetings between the Chinese Generals and Hamre are a rare occurrence as China cut off some military exchange programs with the United States after Pentagon decided in January to sell a nearly 6.4-billion-U.S.-dollar arms package to Taiwan, an inalienable part of China. Subsequently, none of the high-level military visits outlined in the China-U.S. communique signed in November last year when U.S. President Barack Obama visited China have been possible for the past eight months. Those planned visits included trips to Beijing by U.S. defense chief Robert Gates and Chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff Mike Mullen. A visit to Washington by Chief of General Staff of the Chinese PLA Chen Bingde was also suspended. On the same day Ma held talks with Hamre, the Chinese foreign ministry said U.S. Deputy National Security Adviser Thomas Donilon and U.S. National Economic Council Chairman Larry Summers will visit China this week. Donilon and Summers are also scheduled to meet with Chinese General Xu during their stay in Beijing. "Those U.S. officials' talks with Chinese military leaders reflect the fact the two countries want to keep channels open for defense talks, even though their official military exchanges have stalled," Yang Yi, a strategic expert at China's National Defense University, told Xinhua. "The suspension of military exchanges does not tally with the state of China-U.S. exchanges in other fields," said Zhu Feng, an international studies professor at Peking University.”
Mr.Larry Summers and Mr.Thomas Donilon called on President Hu Jintao on September 8.
The Agence France press (AFP) reported on September 10 as follows:”China may host US Defence Secretary Robert Gates for talks later this year after having cancelled an earlier visit over US arms sales to Taiwan, the Pentagon said on Thursday (September 9). Beijing had rebuffed the Defence Secretary in June, despite an expected visit, but now appears ready to issue another invitation, Pentagon press secretary Geoff Morrell told a news conference. "So if it (an invitation) is being extended again, as it appears to be, we're going to certainly look for the possibility of trying to schedule that before the end of the year," Morrell said. With the Chinese and US Presidents due to meet "early next year," it was crucial to make progress as both leaders have called for bolstering military-to-military relations, he said. But he added that the visit was not "engagement for the sake of engagement." "What we are looking for is a resumption of productive, transparent, military-to-military engagement so that we can both gain a better understanding of what our ambitions are, what our intentions are when it comes to our military budgets, how we operate, where we operate, and so forth," Morrell said. Despite misgivings expressed by Beijing, the US military planned to go ahead with joint military exercises with South Korea in the Yellow Sea, he said. "It's not an affront to the Chinese. It's not meant to send a message to the Chinese. It's meant to send a message to the North Koreans about their behavior," he said of the planned exercises involving the USS George Washington aircraft carrier. The United States maintained "the right to operate in any and all international waters, respecting, of course, territorial boundaries," he said.The Pentagon's comments came a day after Chinese President Hu Jintao extolled "fresh progress" in China-US ties as he met a White House delegation that held talks on thorny issues including North Korea, Iran and trade.” ( Summers and Donilon)
MY COMMENTS: It will be important for India to see what effect this US-China fence-mending exercise has on the Indo-US discussions on China during the visit of President Barack Obama to New Delhi in November. Mr.Obama may not want any shadow to be cast on Mr.Gates’ visit to China by his discussions in New Delhi. Mr.Gates’ discussions with the Chinese leaders on Iran, North Korea and the Af-Pak region would be more important to the US than Mr.Obama’s discussions with Indian leaders on China. So far as China is concerned, any significant outcome is unlikely during Mr.Obama’s visit to New Delhi.
JAPAN CAUTIONED BY BEIJING
China warned Japan on September 9 that their relationship could suffer if Tokyo mishandled the dispute over a Chinese fishing boat seized by the Japanese Coast Guard (JCG) in waters off the Diaoyu Islands. "The Diaoyu Islands are China's inseparable territory, and Japan applying its domestic law to the Chinese fishing boat operating in this area is absurd, illegal and invalid," Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Jiang Yu said at a regular news conference. "China will never accept that," she stressed. Jiang said China had also sent "a fishery law enforcement ship" to the area "to safeguard order and protect the safety of fishermen and their assets". She did not elaborate. The JCG on Thursday (September 9) handed over 41-year-old Chinese captain Zhan Qixiong to prosecutors who will decide whether to charge him, spokesman Masahiro Ichijo said. The captain has been in custody since his arrest on Wednesday (September 8), after two Japanese patrol boats intercepted his boat near the islands on Tuesday ( September 7). No one was injured. The captain was arrested on suspicion of "obstructing officers on duty", and faces a possible jail sentence of up to three years or a fine of up to 500,000 yen ($6,200).But the JCG also said the captain could be released in a couple of days if he acknowledged the allegation and paid the fine. Japanese officials were also questioning the ship's 14 crew members who have been kept on the boat because they did not have visas, the JCG said.
MY COMMENTS: The Japanese Navy has been increasingly assertive in the East China Sea since April last. Please see my article of April 27,2010, titled “Chinese Navy’s Power Projection” at http://www.southasiaanalysis.org/papers38/paper3780.html (10-9-10)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai, and Associate of the Chennai Centre For China Studies. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
Thursday, September 9, 2010
BURNING OF HOLY KORAN COULD ADD TO HOME-GROWN TERRORISM IN US
B.RAMAN
President Barack Obama, Gen.David Petraeus, the US Commander in Afghanistan, and other American leaders have rightly condemned the proposed burning of the Holy Koran by Pastor Terry Jones, who leads a congregation of about 50 followers in the city of Gainesville, Florida, on 9/11 coinciding with the ninth anniversary of the 9/11 terrorist strikes in the US homeland.
2. There is still considerable anger in sizable sections of the US population over the 9/11 terrorist strikes by Al Qaeda and over the subsequent terrorist attacks on US citizens and troops in the Af-Pak region. There have also been attempts and thwarted attempts to indulge in acts of terrorism in the US itself, the latest being the unsuccessful attempt to blow up an American plane over Detroit on Christmas Day last year and in Time Square in New York on May 1 last.
3. The anti-US activities of the Yemen-based Anwar al-Awlaki , a US citizen of Yemeni origin, who has been described as a made-in-the-US bin Laden, have added to the concerns of Americans and their sense of unease and discomfort in their relations with Muslims. Al-Awlaki's sermons, while he was still in the US, were allegedly attended by three of the 9/11 hijackers. He reportedly met secretly with at least two of the hijackers in San Diego, and one hijacker moved from there to Falls Church, Virginia, as al-Awlaki moved. His sermons were also allegedly attended by Major Nidal Malik Hasan, a psychiatrist in the US Army, who killed 13 persons in a shooting incident on November 5, 2009, at Fort Hood— an important military base located just outside Killeen, Texas. The "Christmas Day bomber" Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab had allegedly met al-Awlaki during his training by Al Qaeda in Yemen. In March 2010, al Awlaki said in a videotape reportedly delivered to CNN that jihad against the US was obligatory for all Muslims.
4. The US Homeland has been targeted not only by Al Qaeda, but also by the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan, which is believed to have had a hand in the conspiracy to carry out the unsuccessful terrorist strike in New York in May last. It has threatened more terrorist strikes in the US Homeland.
5. One cannot, therefore, blame large sections of the US population if their distrust of the Muslims remains high. This distrust---and the resulting resentment---has been further aggravated by the ill-advised attempts to construct near Ground Zero in New York what has been called the Cordoba House project --- a 15-story community center that would include a performance-art center, gym, swimming pool, and a mosque. Imam Faisal Abdul Rauf, a Muslim cleric, who inspired the project, has projected it as intended to foster better relations between the West and Muslims.
6. How insensitive and uncaring Muslims can be to the feelings of others not belonging to their religion is evident from the way they are trying to go ahead with the project unmindful of the protests against it and the concerns over its implications for peace and harmony in the US.
7. For large sections of Muslims---not only in the US, but also in the rest of the world---their feelings and sensitivities have to have primacy over those of others. They have a right to feel hurt and concerned, but not others.
8. The self-centred attitude of the Muslims and their unwillingness to take note of the sensitivities of others have created a feeling of revulsion against their community all over the world. Some express it openly. Many don’t.
9. Pastor Terry Jones’ threat to burn a copy of the Holy Koran is a reflection of this revulsion and the anger against the Muslims. No right-thinking person and no Government can support his plans. It could not only act as a red rag to the Al Qaeda/Taliban bulls and result in more terrorist attacks on US nationals and troops in the Af-Pak region, but could also drive more US Muslims into the arms of these organizations and result in an aggravation of the threat of home-grown terrorism in the US.
10. The US Government should find ways of stopping his threatened act by persuasion or, if necessary, by invoking the law. At the same time, it is important to stop the Cordoba House project too, which would definitely add salt to the wounds of hundreds of thousands of non-Muslim Americans. The attempt of the Muslim sponsors of this project to project it as an initiative to heal the wounds and foster Muslim-non-Muslim harmony will not carry conviction. It will be seen as one more attempt by the Muslims to flaunt their right to do what they want unmindful of the feelings and sensitivities of others. (8-9-10)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai, and Associate of the Chennai Centre For China Studies. E-Mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
President Barack Obama, Gen.David Petraeus, the US Commander in Afghanistan, and other American leaders have rightly condemned the proposed burning of the Holy Koran by Pastor Terry Jones, who leads a congregation of about 50 followers in the city of Gainesville, Florida, on 9/11 coinciding with the ninth anniversary of the 9/11 terrorist strikes in the US homeland.
2. There is still considerable anger in sizable sections of the US population over the 9/11 terrorist strikes by Al Qaeda and over the subsequent terrorist attacks on US citizens and troops in the Af-Pak region. There have also been attempts and thwarted attempts to indulge in acts of terrorism in the US itself, the latest being the unsuccessful attempt to blow up an American plane over Detroit on Christmas Day last year and in Time Square in New York on May 1 last.
3. The anti-US activities of the Yemen-based Anwar al-Awlaki , a US citizen of Yemeni origin, who has been described as a made-in-the-US bin Laden, have added to the concerns of Americans and their sense of unease and discomfort in their relations with Muslims. Al-Awlaki's sermons, while he was still in the US, were allegedly attended by three of the 9/11 hijackers. He reportedly met secretly with at least two of the hijackers in San Diego, and one hijacker moved from there to Falls Church, Virginia, as al-Awlaki moved. His sermons were also allegedly attended by Major Nidal Malik Hasan, a psychiatrist in the US Army, who killed 13 persons in a shooting incident on November 5, 2009, at Fort Hood— an important military base located just outside Killeen, Texas. The "Christmas Day bomber" Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab had allegedly met al-Awlaki during his training by Al Qaeda in Yemen. In March 2010, al Awlaki said in a videotape reportedly delivered to CNN that jihad against the US was obligatory for all Muslims.
4. The US Homeland has been targeted not only by Al Qaeda, but also by the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan, which is believed to have had a hand in the conspiracy to carry out the unsuccessful terrorist strike in New York in May last. It has threatened more terrorist strikes in the US Homeland.
5. One cannot, therefore, blame large sections of the US population if their distrust of the Muslims remains high. This distrust---and the resulting resentment---has been further aggravated by the ill-advised attempts to construct near Ground Zero in New York what has been called the Cordoba House project --- a 15-story community center that would include a performance-art center, gym, swimming pool, and a mosque. Imam Faisal Abdul Rauf, a Muslim cleric, who inspired the project, has projected it as intended to foster better relations between the West and Muslims.
6. How insensitive and uncaring Muslims can be to the feelings of others not belonging to their religion is evident from the way they are trying to go ahead with the project unmindful of the protests against it and the concerns over its implications for peace and harmony in the US.
7. For large sections of Muslims---not only in the US, but also in the rest of the world---their feelings and sensitivities have to have primacy over those of others. They have a right to feel hurt and concerned, but not others.
8. The self-centred attitude of the Muslims and their unwillingness to take note of the sensitivities of others have created a feeling of revulsion against their community all over the world. Some express it openly. Many don’t.
9. Pastor Terry Jones’ threat to burn a copy of the Holy Koran is a reflection of this revulsion and the anger against the Muslims. No right-thinking person and no Government can support his plans. It could not only act as a red rag to the Al Qaeda/Taliban bulls and result in more terrorist attacks on US nationals and troops in the Af-Pak region, but could also drive more US Muslims into the arms of these organizations and result in an aggravation of the threat of home-grown terrorism in the US.
10. The US Government should find ways of stopping his threatened act by persuasion or, if necessary, by invoking the law. At the same time, it is important to stop the Cordoba House project too, which would definitely add salt to the wounds of hundreds of thousands of non-Muslim Americans. The attempt of the Muslim sponsors of this project to project it as an initiative to heal the wounds and foster Muslim-non-Muslim harmony will not carry conviction. It will be seen as one more attempt by the Muslims to flaunt their right to do what they want unmindful of the feelings and sensitivities of others. (8-9-10)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai, and Associate of the Chennai Centre For China Studies. E-Mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
Wednesday, September 8, 2010
ONE INDIA & ONE CHINA
B.RAMAN
The strong economic relations between India and China and their co-operation in multilateral fora such as the recent Copenhagen summit on climate change should not blind one to the fact that the trust and comfort level between the two Governments and their people remains unsatisfactory. Unless this improves, any talk of a strategic co-operation or partnership between the two countries would remain wishful-thinking.
2. There are many security-related issues which call for co-operation between India and China bilaterally and for a joint leadership role by them multilaterally. Maritime counter-terrorism and anti-piracy measures are two examples of such issues crying out for India and China to join hands in countering these evils. But we will not be able to do so unless the trust and comfort level improves.
3. Five issues or perceptions are standing in the way of a better trust and comfort level. The first is the pending border dispute. Chinese leaders and analysts often quote Deng Xiao-Ping's advice to keep this issue aside till a favourable moment arrives for finding a mutually acceptable solution. Delay suits China because the trans-border status quo presently favours it and it has developed its military capability in such a manner as to be able to use it should China decide that the time has come to impose its will in the eastern sector. Indians suspect----with valid reason---- that the Chinese preference for keeping the issue prolonged is motivated by the desire to give itself time for the further strengthening of its military capability in Tibet. India's interest will be served by a quick resolution of the dispute, which has not been forthcoming.
4. The second is the failure of the Chinese to reach an agreement with the Dalai Lama on the demands of the Tibetan people. India has recognised Tibet as an integral part of China in the expectation that the international acceptance of the One China principle will pave the way for the return of the Dalai Lama and his Tibetan followers to Tibet with honour and dignity so that they can take their due to place in the local society. India is the cradle of Buddhism, which spread to Tibet and the rest of China from India. It is natural that as admirers of this great religion and its Tibetan leader, Indians feel disappointed by the failure of the Chinese Government and Communist Party to follow up the integration of Tibet with the rest of China by restoring the honour and dignity of the Dalai Lama and his followers.
5. The third is what many Indians see as the double standards followed by China with regard to Jammu & Kashmir. China expected India to recognise Tibet as an integral part of China and accept the One China principle. India did so without reservation. Indians are greatly disappointed that China has not reciprocated by recognising Jammu and Kashmir as an integral part of India and by accepting the One India principle, which is as precious to India as the One China principle is to China.
6. The fourth is what many Indians see as China's attempts to build up Pakistan not only as a time-tested friend, but also as a welcome strategic surrogate against India. China's nuclear and military supply relationship with Pakistan and its support to Pakistan in its disputes with India are seen by many in India as a malign exploitation of Pakistan's differences with India to serve China's own interests.
7. The fifth is China's reluctance to support India's permanent membership of the UN Security Council. India under Jawaharlal Nehru played an active role in canvassing for the People's Republic of China to be given its due place as a permanent member of the Security Council. In an historic act of ingratitude, China has failed to reciprocate India's gesture and has done everything possible to keep India out.
8. Unless there is a change in the policies of the Chinese Government on these issues, the trust and comfort level will continue to be low and there is a limit beyond which the relations between the two countries cannot improve.
9.The time has come for India to re-examine its policies with regard to China. The improvement in economic relations has benefited China more than India. If one analyses purely on the basis of trade exchanges, both countries have benefited, but the adverse balance of trade in China’s favour and India’s dependence on raw material exports for keeping up the steady surge in bilateral trade dilute the significance of the surge in trade.
10. Other parameters of the bilateral economic relations tilt strongly in favour of China. The liberal opening-up of the Indian construction sector to Chinese construction companies has led to a situation where next to African countries, India has become a major dumping ground for Chinese engineers and semi-skilled workers to the detriment of the interests of Indian engineers and semi-skilled workers. Our opening up the doors to sensitive sectors such as telecommunications to Chinese private companies ---- private in name, but State-sponsored in reality --- has added to the major security concerns of our security agencies.
11. Unfortunately, we do not have a debate in India either in the Parliament or outside on the background of the Chinese companies, which have been entering India in large numbers and on the threats that this could pose to our national interests. Unchecked and inadequately monitored Chinese economic intrusions should be of as great a concern as unchecked and inadequately monitored Chinese troop intrusions into Indian territory across the border.
12. Our recognition of Tibet as an integral part of China and our acceptance of the one China policy of Beijing without a quid pro quo from Beijing in the form of acceptance of J&K as an integral part of India and of the One India policy have proved counter-productive. In our anxiety to avoid adding to the tensions and distrust between the two countries, we have let Beijing dictate what should be the nature of our interactions with His Holiness the Dalai Lama and the Tibetan refugees. We avoid open interactions with His Holiness and are not even prepared to associate him with the project to revive the Nalanda University.
13. Our hopes that closing our eyes to the worrisome aspects of the economic relations and imposing restrictions on our relationship with His Holiness could contribute to a change of Chinese policies have been repeatedly belied. China has taken advantage of the lack of assertiveness on our part to advance what it regards as its core interests in the region with total disregard for our core interests.
14. Better relations with China on mutually and equally advantageous terms and not on terms which favour China alone, but not India should be our policy. A clear message in non-provocative language has to go to Beijing that India has been disillusioned by the self-centred policies of Beijing and its lack of reciprocity in respecting our core interests. Strategic relations have to be a two-way traffic and based on quid pro quo. For China, they are a one-way traffic benefiting only its core interests. We should no longer accept this.
15. China has taken a major lead over us in building up its strategic strengths, strategic presence and strategic alliances. Its economic and military strengths and its building-up its military-related infrastructure in Tibet have given it a confidence that it can impose its will on India ----through subterfuge so long as it is possible, through open action if and when it becomes necessary.
16. We are lagging behind China in all these fields. Neutralising the advantages which China has acquired for itself should be the main objective of our future policies. Expediting the completion of our infrastructure projects in the border areas and adding to our China-specific military strengths in a time-bound manner should be an immediate objective of our policy-makers.
17.Re-fashioning our economic relations with China in order to rid them of elements which are to the exclusive advantage of China should receive equal priority. There is a need for a re-think on our Tibet-related policies without reversing our recognition of Tibet as an integral part of China. We have to be more assertive in pursuing an One India policy as a quid pro quo for our accepting the One China policy.
18. India should do everything possible to avoid a confrontational situation with China, but should be prepared for it if China seeks to create a confrontational situation at a time of its choosing. We should pay more attention to the China-specific dimensions of our strategic relations with the US, Japan, Vietnam and South Korea.
19. In our interactions with US policy-makers and non-governmental strategic experts, we have been over-focusing on Pakistan and terrorism. China should receive greater attention from now onwards. A greater focus on the thinking and respective concerns of India and the US with regard to China should be an objective of the forthcoming talks when President Barack Obama visits New Delhi in November.
20. Signals from the Obama Administration are confusing. It has not hesitated to express openly its determination to counter the Chinese designs in the South China Sea and to maintain the primacy of the US Navy in the Pacific as well as the Indian Ocean. It is taking interest in the talks of His Holiness the Dalai Lama with the Chinese Government and party. At the same time, it does not seem to view with the same concern as India China’s developing relations with Pakistan and the possibility of Pakistan becoming China’s strategic surrogate in Afghanistan too. After having taken a strong stand on the right of the US Naval ships to visit and hold exercises in the Yellow Sea, it is showing signs of being responsive to Chinese sensitivities over the question of US aircraft-carriers visiting the Yellow Sea.
21.It still looks upon China as an useful intermediary in relation to North Korea and Myanmar. It has greater confidence in Beijing’s ability to influence the military junta in Myanmar than in the Indian ability. It has a low opinion of the Indian ability to influence Governments, policies and events in the Asian region. Under these circumstances, it is unlikely to be enthusiastic to any idea of an India-US understanding on China. Despite this, we should not fight shy of turning the primary focus of the talks with Mr.Obama on China. We do not need strategic alliances in relation to Pakistan. We are capable of taking care of Pakistan with our own means. We would need strategic alliances in relation to China. Hence the importance of free and frank talks with Mr.Obama on this.(9-9-10)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai, and Associate of the Chennai Centre For China Studies. E—mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
The strong economic relations between India and China and their co-operation in multilateral fora such as the recent Copenhagen summit on climate change should not blind one to the fact that the trust and comfort level between the two Governments and their people remains unsatisfactory. Unless this improves, any talk of a strategic co-operation or partnership between the two countries would remain wishful-thinking.
2. There are many security-related issues which call for co-operation between India and China bilaterally and for a joint leadership role by them multilaterally. Maritime counter-terrorism and anti-piracy measures are two examples of such issues crying out for India and China to join hands in countering these evils. But we will not be able to do so unless the trust and comfort level improves.
3. Five issues or perceptions are standing in the way of a better trust and comfort level. The first is the pending border dispute. Chinese leaders and analysts often quote Deng Xiao-Ping's advice to keep this issue aside till a favourable moment arrives for finding a mutually acceptable solution. Delay suits China because the trans-border status quo presently favours it and it has developed its military capability in such a manner as to be able to use it should China decide that the time has come to impose its will in the eastern sector. Indians suspect----with valid reason---- that the Chinese preference for keeping the issue prolonged is motivated by the desire to give itself time for the further strengthening of its military capability in Tibet. India's interest will be served by a quick resolution of the dispute, which has not been forthcoming.
4. The second is the failure of the Chinese to reach an agreement with the Dalai Lama on the demands of the Tibetan people. India has recognised Tibet as an integral part of China in the expectation that the international acceptance of the One China principle will pave the way for the return of the Dalai Lama and his Tibetan followers to Tibet with honour and dignity so that they can take their due to place in the local society. India is the cradle of Buddhism, which spread to Tibet and the rest of China from India. It is natural that as admirers of this great religion and its Tibetan leader, Indians feel disappointed by the failure of the Chinese Government and Communist Party to follow up the integration of Tibet with the rest of China by restoring the honour and dignity of the Dalai Lama and his followers.
5. The third is what many Indians see as the double standards followed by China with regard to Jammu & Kashmir. China expected India to recognise Tibet as an integral part of China and accept the One China principle. India did so without reservation. Indians are greatly disappointed that China has not reciprocated by recognising Jammu and Kashmir as an integral part of India and by accepting the One India principle, which is as precious to India as the One China principle is to China.
6. The fourth is what many Indians see as China's attempts to build up Pakistan not only as a time-tested friend, but also as a welcome strategic surrogate against India. China's nuclear and military supply relationship with Pakistan and its support to Pakistan in its disputes with India are seen by many in India as a malign exploitation of Pakistan's differences with India to serve China's own interests.
7. The fifth is China's reluctance to support India's permanent membership of the UN Security Council. India under Jawaharlal Nehru played an active role in canvassing for the People's Republic of China to be given its due place as a permanent member of the Security Council. In an historic act of ingratitude, China has failed to reciprocate India's gesture and has done everything possible to keep India out.
8. Unless there is a change in the policies of the Chinese Government on these issues, the trust and comfort level will continue to be low and there is a limit beyond which the relations between the two countries cannot improve.
9.The time has come for India to re-examine its policies with regard to China. The improvement in economic relations has benefited China more than India. If one analyses purely on the basis of trade exchanges, both countries have benefited, but the adverse balance of trade in China’s favour and India’s dependence on raw material exports for keeping up the steady surge in bilateral trade dilute the significance of the surge in trade.
10. Other parameters of the bilateral economic relations tilt strongly in favour of China. The liberal opening-up of the Indian construction sector to Chinese construction companies has led to a situation where next to African countries, India has become a major dumping ground for Chinese engineers and semi-skilled workers to the detriment of the interests of Indian engineers and semi-skilled workers. Our opening up the doors to sensitive sectors such as telecommunications to Chinese private companies ---- private in name, but State-sponsored in reality --- has added to the major security concerns of our security agencies.
11. Unfortunately, we do not have a debate in India either in the Parliament or outside on the background of the Chinese companies, which have been entering India in large numbers and on the threats that this could pose to our national interests. Unchecked and inadequately monitored Chinese economic intrusions should be of as great a concern as unchecked and inadequately monitored Chinese troop intrusions into Indian territory across the border.
12. Our recognition of Tibet as an integral part of China and our acceptance of the one China policy of Beijing without a quid pro quo from Beijing in the form of acceptance of J&K as an integral part of India and of the One India policy have proved counter-productive. In our anxiety to avoid adding to the tensions and distrust between the two countries, we have let Beijing dictate what should be the nature of our interactions with His Holiness the Dalai Lama and the Tibetan refugees. We avoid open interactions with His Holiness and are not even prepared to associate him with the project to revive the Nalanda University.
13. Our hopes that closing our eyes to the worrisome aspects of the economic relations and imposing restrictions on our relationship with His Holiness could contribute to a change of Chinese policies have been repeatedly belied. China has taken advantage of the lack of assertiveness on our part to advance what it regards as its core interests in the region with total disregard for our core interests.
14. Better relations with China on mutually and equally advantageous terms and not on terms which favour China alone, but not India should be our policy. A clear message in non-provocative language has to go to Beijing that India has been disillusioned by the self-centred policies of Beijing and its lack of reciprocity in respecting our core interests. Strategic relations have to be a two-way traffic and based on quid pro quo. For China, they are a one-way traffic benefiting only its core interests. We should no longer accept this.
15. China has taken a major lead over us in building up its strategic strengths, strategic presence and strategic alliances. Its economic and military strengths and its building-up its military-related infrastructure in Tibet have given it a confidence that it can impose its will on India ----through subterfuge so long as it is possible, through open action if and when it becomes necessary.
16. We are lagging behind China in all these fields. Neutralising the advantages which China has acquired for itself should be the main objective of our future policies. Expediting the completion of our infrastructure projects in the border areas and adding to our China-specific military strengths in a time-bound manner should be an immediate objective of our policy-makers.
17.Re-fashioning our economic relations with China in order to rid them of elements which are to the exclusive advantage of China should receive equal priority. There is a need for a re-think on our Tibet-related policies without reversing our recognition of Tibet as an integral part of China. We have to be more assertive in pursuing an One India policy as a quid pro quo for our accepting the One China policy.
18. India should do everything possible to avoid a confrontational situation with China, but should be prepared for it if China seeks to create a confrontational situation at a time of its choosing. We should pay more attention to the China-specific dimensions of our strategic relations with the US, Japan, Vietnam and South Korea.
19. In our interactions with US policy-makers and non-governmental strategic experts, we have been over-focusing on Pakistan and terrorism. China should receive greater attention from now onwards. A greater focus on the thinking and respective concerns of India and the US with regard to China should be an objective of the forthcoming talks when President Barack Obama visits New Delhi in November.
20. Signals from the Obama Administration are confusing. It has not hesitated to express openly its determination to counter the Chinese designs in the South China Sea and to maintain the primacy of the US Navy in the Pacific as well as the Indian Ocean. It is taking interest in the talks of His Holiness the Dalai Lama with the Chinese Government and party. At the same time, it does not seem to view with the same concern as India China’s developing relations with Pakistan and the possibility of Pakistan becoming China’s strategic surrogate in Afghanistan too. After having taken a strong stand on the right of the US Naval ships to visit and hold exercises in the Yellow Sea, it is showing signs of being responsive to Chinese sensitivities over the question of US aircraft-carriers visiting the Yellow Sea.
21.It still looks upon China as an useful intermediary in relation to North Korea and Myanmar. It has greater confidence in Beijing’s ability to influence the military junta in Myanmar than in the Indian ability. It has a low opinion of the Indian ability to influence Governments, policies and events in the Asian region. Under these circumstances, it is unlikely to be enthusiastic to any idea of an India-US understanding on China. Despite this, we should not fight shy of turning the primary focus of the talks with Mr.Obama on China. We do not need strategic alliances in relation to Pakistan. We are capable of taking care of Pakistan with our own means. We would need strategic alliances in relation to China. Hence the importance of free and frank talks with Mr.Obama on this.(9-9-10)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai, and Associate of the Chennai Centre For China Studies. E—mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
Sunday, September 5, 2010
ANOTHER DEBATE ON "SAFFRON TERROR" BY BARKHA DUTT
B.RAMAN
There was another debate on the issue of "Saffron Terror" organised by Ms.Barkha Dutt on NDTV under the "We The People" programme on the evening of September 5. I liked the format of the programme, which was different from the usual format of the "We the People" programmes on Sunday. The number of patrticipants was less and the debate was well-focussed. It was more like a brain-storming on the subject than a no-holds barred debating contest.
2. I wanted to record the following observations with reference to some of the points made during the discussions. I have made these observations many times before in my books and articles and during my participation in seminars. Despite that, I thought it was worth repeating them since there seems to be a lot of inadequate knowledge and appreciation of them:
* Firstly, During the 1980s, many Muslims from all over the world were motivated by the intelligence agencies of the US, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia to go to Afghanistan and wage a jihad against the Soviet troops there. They could not succeed in motivating members of the Indian Muslim community outside Jammu & Kashmir to go to Afghanistan and join the anti-Soviet jihad.
* Secondly, a few Indian Muslims from outside J&K motivated by the Jamaat-e-Islami (JEI) of Pakistan did go to Pakistan for being trained in camps run by the JEI with funding by the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI). The JEI and the ISI instructed them to wage a jihad against the Government of India and to operate jointly with the Khalistanis. On their return to India, they failed to motivate the members of the Indian Muslim community to start a jihad. Their appeals for action were spurned by the Indian Muslim community in hinterland India.
* Thirdly, according to the then President Najibullah of Afghanistan, many angry Kashmiris did go to Pakistan for training in the camps set up by the JEI. From there, they were taken to Afghanistan for gaining experience in waging a jihad. Some of these motivated Kashmiris became the initial hard core of the Hizbul Mujahideen and the J&K Liberation Front.
* Fourthly, while the phenomenon of the radicalisation of some sections of the Indian Muslims had started in J&K even before the demolition of the Babri Masjid, this phenomenon started in the Muslim community outside J&K in hinterland India only after the demolition. The demolition of the masjid was the initial trigger for acts of terrorism by some indigenous Muslims belonging to organisations such as the Students' Islamic Movement of India (SIMI) and Al Ummah of Tamil Nadu. Many young Indian Muslims were also driven into the arms of Dawood Ibrahim. Thus, anger among some sections of young Indian Muslims in hinterland India over the Babri Masjid demolition played an important role in the emergence of jihadi terrorism in hinterland India. This was the main motivating anger during the 1990s.Many of the major acts of terrorism during this period such as the Mumbai blasts of March 1993, the Coimbatore blasts of February 1998 and other incidents such as explosions in trains were attributable to the anger caused by the Babri Masjid demolition.
* Fifthly, after 9/11, not a single Indian Muslim living in India went to Afghanistan to join Al Qaeda's jihad against the Americans. However, some Indian Muslims based abroad did join Al Qaeda, but this was not due to their anger against the Government of India, but due to their anger against the US for its invasion and occupation of Iraq. The jihad in Iraq against the Americans waged by Al Qaeda attracted a large number of foreign Muslims, but Indian Muslims kept away from Iraq's Al Qaeda.
* Sixthly, post-2000, the anger among sections of Indian Muslim youth in hinterland India over the demolition of the Babri Masjid started subsiding, but a new cause of anger made its appearance. This was due to the perception that the Indian criminal justice system--- the police, the lawyer community and the judiciary--- was unfair to the Muslims. This new anger had two consequences. It led to some of these Muslims helping Pakistani/Bangladeshi organisations such as the Lashkar-e-Toiba, the Harkat-ul-Jihad-al-Islami (HUJI) and the Jaish-e-Mohammad (JEM). At the same time it also led to the phenomenon of Indian Mujahideen.
* Seventhly, the phenomenon of some Hindus taking to anti-Muslim reprisal terrorism was the outcome of what is perceived by them as the soft policy of the Government of India towards Pakistan and towards those members of the Indian Muslim community who were indulging in terrorism. The anger over the allegedly soft policy made its appearance not only among some Hindu religious elements, but also among sections of the security bureaucracy belonging to the Hindu religion. The two felt attracted to each other and joned hands in starting reprisal terrorism against soft targets in the Muslim community.
* Eighthly, the emerging phenomenon of Hindu reprisal terrorism merits serious attention because of its negative implications for communal harmony and because of the emergence of a seeming alliance between some religious elements and some in the security bureaucracy. If we don't stop this, we may go the way of Pakistan.
* Ninthly,Counter-terrorism has two aspects----operational and psychological.The operational aspect relates to strengthening our preventive,investigative and intervention capabilities.The psychological aspect relates to prompt and effective action to identify and address causes for anger in any community. Equal attention should be paid to both these aspects. ( 6-9-10)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai, and Associate of the Chennai Centre For China Studies. E-Mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
There was another debate on the issue of "Saffron Terror" organised by Ms.Barkha Dutt on NDTV under the "We The People" programme on the evening of September 5. I liked the format of the programme, which was different from the usual format of the "We the People" programmes on Sunday. The number of patrticipants was less and the debate was well-focussed. It was more like a brain-storming on the subject than a no-holds barred debating contest.
2. I wanted to record the following observations with reference to some of the points made during the discussions. I have made these observations many times before in my books and articles and during my participation in seminars. Despite that, I thought it was worth repeating them since there seems to be a lot of inadequate knowledge and appreciation of them:
* Firstly, During the 1980s, many Muslims from all over the world were motivated by the intelligence agencies of the US, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia to go to Afghanistan and wage a jihad against the Soviet troops there. They could not succeed in motivating members of the Indian Muslim community outside Jammu & Kashmir to go to Afghanistan and join the anti-Soviet jihad.
* Secondly, a few Indian Muslims from outside J&K motivated by the Jamaat-e-Islami (JEI) of Pakistan did go to Pakistan for being trained in camps run by the JEI with funding by the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI). The JEI and the ISI instructed them to wage a jihad against the Government of India and to operate jointly with the Khalistanis. On their return to India, they failed to motivate the members of the Indian Muslim community to start a jihad. Their appeals for action were spurned by the Indian Muslim community in hinterland India.
* Thirdly, according to the then President Najibullah of Afghanistan, many angry Kashmiris did go to Pakistan for training in the camps set up by the JEI. From there, they were taken to Afghanistan for gaining experience in waging a jihad. Some of these motivated Kashmiris became the initial hard core of the Hizbul Mujahideen and the J&K Liberation Front.
* Fourthly, while the phenomenon of the radicalisation of some sections of the Indian Muslims had started in J&K even before the demolition of the Babri Masjid, this phenomenon started in the Muslim community outside J&K in hinterland India only after the demolition. The demolition of the masjid was the initial trigger for acts of terrorism by some indigenous Muslims belonging to organisations such as the Students' Islamic Movement of India (SIMI) and Al Ummah of Tamil Nadu. Many young Indian Muslims were also driven into the arms of Dawood Ibrahim. Thus, anger among some sections of young Indian Muslims in hinterland India over the Babri Masjid demolition played an important role in the emergence of jihadi terrorism in hinterland India. This was the main motivating anger during the 1990s.Many of the major acts of terrorism during this period such as the Mumbai blasts of March 1993, the Coimbatore blasts of February 1998 and other incidents such as explosions in trains were attributable to the anger caused by the Babri Masjid demolition.
* Fifthly, after 9/11, not a single Indian Muslim living in India went to Afghanistan to join Al Qaeda's jihad against the Americans. However, some Indian Muslims based abroad did join Al Qaeda, but this was not due to their anger against the Government of India, but due to their anger against the US for its invasion and occupation of Iraq. The jihad in Iraq against the Americans waged by Al Qaeda attracted a large number of foreign Muslims, but Indian Muslims kept away from Iraq's Al Qaeda.
* Sixthly, post-2000, the anger among sections of Indian Muslim youth in hinterland India over the demolition of the Babri Masjid started subsiding, but a new cause of anger made its appearance. This was due to the perception that the Indian criminal justice system--- the police, the lawyer community and the judiciary--- was unfair to the Muslims. This new anger had two consequences. It led to some of these Muslims helping Pakistani/Bangladeshi organisations such as the Lashkar-e-Toiba, the Harkat-ul-Jihad-al-Islami (HUJI) and the Jaish-e-Mohammad (JEM). At the same time it also led to the phenomenon of Indian Mujahideen.
* Seventhly, the phenomenon of some Hindus taking to anti-Muslim reprisal terrorism was the outcome of what is perceived by them as the soft policy of the Government of India towards Pakistan and towards those members of the Indian Muslim community who were indulging in terrorism. The anger over the allegedly soft policy made its appearance not only among some Hindu religious elements, but also among sections of the security bureaucracy belonging to the Hindu religion. The two felt attracted to each other and joned hands in starting reprisal terrorism against soft targets in the Muslim community.
* Eighthly, the emerging phenomenon of Hindu reprisal terrorism merits serious attention because of its negative implications for communal harmony and because of the emergence of a seeming alliance between some religious elements and some in the security bureaucracy. If we don't stop this, we may go the way of Pakistan.
* Ninthly,Counter-terrorism has two aspects----operational and psychological.The operational aspect relates to strengthening our preventive,investigative and intervention capabilities.The psychological aspect relates to prompt and effective action to identify and address causes for anger in any community. Equal attention should be paid to both these aspects. ( 6-9-10)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai, and Associate of the Chennai Centre For China Studies. E-Mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
Saturday, September 4, 2010
CHINA CORRECTS DIPLOMATIC FAUX PAS, BUT MAINTAINS PRESENCE IN GILGIT-BALTISTAN
B.RAMAN
On August 27,2010,the “New York Times” carried an article by Selig Harrison, former correspondent of the ”Washington Post” in New Delhi who now works in a Washington-based think tank, stating inter alia as follows: “While the world focuses on the flood-ravaged Indus River valley, a quiet geopolitical crisis is unfolding in the Himalayan borderlands of northern Pakistan, where Islamabad is handing over de facto control of the strategic Gilgit-Baltistan region in the northwest corner of disputed Kashmir to China. The entire Pakistan-occupied western portion of Kashmir stretching from Gilgit in the north to Azad (Free) Kashmir in the south is closed to the world, in contrast to the media access that India permits in the eastern part, where it is combating a Pakistan-backed insurgency. But reports from a variety of foreign intelligence sources, Pakistani journalists and Pakistani human rights workers reveal two important new developments in Gilgit-Baltistan: a simmering rebellion against Pakistani rule and the influx of an estimated 7,000 to 11,000 soldiers of the People’s Liberation Army.” ( http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/27/op...20china&st=cse)
2. The report caused considerable concern and sensation in India. The Government of India, while expressing its concern if the report is true, ordered a verification of it by its agencies. A strong denial of the report came from the Pakistani Embassy in Beijing. On September 1, the party-controlled “Global Times” reported as follows in an article written by one by Wang Zhaokun : “A senior Pakistani official Tuesday (August 31) denied recent reports that Chinese troops are stationed in the area of Pakistan-controlled Kashmir to build a high-speed rail and road there. "The story is not true," Masood Khan, ambassador of Pakistan to China, told the Global Times. "It is totally fabricated." Khan said there are no Chinese troops in the area, but a humanitarian team from China is currently there to help local Pakistanis who suffered during the ravage of the country's most devastating floods in history.”
3.In keeping with the practice followed by official and media sources in China, the article referred to the region mentioned by Selig Harrison in his article as “Pakistan-controlled Kashmir”. The practice followed till now by Chinese Government officials, journalists and columnists has been to describe Jammu and Kashmir as “Indian-controlled Kashmir”, the so-called Azad Kashmir as “Pakistan-controlled Kashmir” and Gilgit-Baltistan as the “ Gilgit-Baltistan region” of “Pakistan-controlled Kashmir”.
4.In what was feared by analysts in India as a major departure from this practice, on the night of September 1,2010, the Government-controlled Xinhua news agency disseminated the following report:
China refutes reports of sending troops to Pakistan
BEIJING, Sept. 1 (Xinhua) -- China on Wednesday rejected reports of the presence of over 11,000 Chinese troops in northern Pakistan, saying that such "groundless reports" were made with "ulterior motives."
"We believe the attempts of some people to fabricate stories to provoke China-Pakistan or China-India relations are doomed to fail," said Foreign Ministry spokesperson Jiang Yu in a statement.
The comment came in response to recent reports of some American and Indian press that China had deployed more than 10,000 troops in the Gilgit-Baltistan region of Pakistan.
5. The next day, during the regular briefing of Bejing-based journalists, including some from India, Jiang Yu reportedly used the expression “northern Pakistan” while referring to Gilgit Baltistan in the context of the article of Selig Harrison. However, this did not find mention in a transcript of the media briefing carried by the web sites of many Chinese diplomatic missions abroad. The text of the relevant extracts from the media briefing transcript is given below:
Q: Can you brief us on the latest developments of China’s assistance to Pakistan’s flood-stricken areas?
A: As Pakistan's close neighbor and all-weather friend, China empathizes with Pakistan for its severe natural disaster. The Chinese Government has offered several installments of humanitarian relief supplies worth more than RMB 100 million. The Chinese People's Liberation Army, the Red Cross Society of China, local governments and Chinese enterprises provided different forms of assistance as well. An international relief team sent by the Chinese Government has arrived in the hardest-hit southern part of Pakistan and set up a mobile hospital which is in operation now.
China has provided sincere and timely assistance to Pakistan without any strings attached. We will continue to offer support as much as we can to Pakistan based on its needs, with a view to helping the Pakistani Government and people to overcome difficulties and rebuild homes.
Q: According to reports, China recently refused to grant a visa to Lieutenant General Jaswal, head of Indian Army’s Northern Command, and the Indian side said the refusal was about the Kashmir issue. Do you have any comment? What’s China’s position over the Kashmir issue? And what’s China’s visa policy towards residents of the Indian-held Kashmir region?
A: Relevant media reports are inconsistent with the facts, as is checked with relevant authorities.
The Kashmir issue is an issue left over by history between India and Pakistan. As a neighboring country and friend to both India and Pakistan, China always holds that the Kashmir issue should be properly handled through dialogue and consultation between India and Pakistan.
China’s visa policy towards the residents of Indian-held Kashmir is consistent and remains unchanged.
6. Under the heading “China Withdraws Reference to Gilgit-Baltistan as “northern Pakistan”, the correspondent of “The Hindu” of Chennai in Bejing reported as follows on September 5: “ A day after India voiced concerns to China over its reference to the disputed Gilgit-Baltistan region as a “ northern part of Pakistan”, the Chinese Government withdrew its statement from its official Xinhua agency as well as from the Foreign Ministry’s web site…..On Saturday ( September 4) the statement appeared to have been removed from the Xinhua’s web site. The link to the statement, headlined “China refutes reports of sending troops to Pakistan”, did not open. The Chinese Foreign Ministry, which in a regular briefing on Thursday (September 2) had repeated the reference to Gilgit-Baltistan as “ a northern part of Pakistan” in response to a question on the presence of Chinese troops, deleted records of both the question and its response from its official transcript, which was posted on its website on Friday (September 3) “
7. “The Hindu” correspondent further reported: “ On Friday (September 3) morning, Indian Ambassador to China, S.Jaishankar, had conveyed New Delhi’s concerns over China’s recent moves in Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir in talks with Chinese Vice Foreign Minister Zhang Zhijun. In the talks, Mr.Jaishankar raised questions over the presence of Chinese troops in POK and protested China’s reference to the disputed region as a part of northern Pakistan. Mr.Zhang assured Indian officials that the troops were stationed there only for flood relief work and to provide humanitarian assistance.”
8. The Chinese reference to northern Pakistan could have been the result of the use of a similar expression by Selig Harrison, who had referred to Gilgit-Baltistan as “Himalayan borderlands of northern Pakistan.” It is likely that after the Indian Ambassador protested, the Chinese Foreign Office realized the diplomatic and legal implications of their referring to Gilgit-Baltistan as “ northern Pakistan” and deleted their statement from the web sites of Xinhua and the Foreign Office. But, they could have just deleted the reference to “northern Pakistan” and substituted in its place the name of the area as “Gilgit-Baltistan” and let the modified statement remain on the web sites. Why they deleted the entire statement? A satisfactory answer to this question is not available. However, it is evident that the Chinese, while sticking to the decisions to issue stapled visas to resident of J&K and to assist Pakistan in the development of its infrastructure in Gilgit-Baltistan, are at the same time keen that this issue should not seriously damage China’s relations with India. In this connection, reference is invited to my article dated August 30,2010, titled “Chinese Government, Media Play Down New Friction With India” at http://www.southasiaanalysis.org/papers41/paper4008.html
9. As regards Beijing’s contention that their troops were present in the Gilgit-Baltistan region only for humanitarian relief work, the Chinese have made two humanitarian interventions in the area this year. The first was in January last. On January 4, a landslide created a huge artificial lake in the Hunza area, which subsequently burst submerging a large number of villages in the Gojal Tehsil. About 22 KMs of the Karakoram Highway were submerged under water totally disrupting road communications with Xinjiang in China and with the rest of Gilgit-Baltistan. The Pakistan Army was able to go to the assistance of the affected villages only in the downstream area. It was not able to reach the affected villages in the upstream area for want of helicopters. The Pakistan Government appealed to the Chinese for assistance. Workers of the Chinese Red Cross and engineers of the People’s Liberation Army entered the Hunza area for relief. The Xinhua reported as follows: “On January 19, at the request of the Pakistani government, the Chinese side made special arrangements to open the Kunjirap border and facilitate the purchase of relief goods from China and its clearance. The China Road and Bridge Corporation, which is conducting the project of upgradation of the Karakoram Highway, has also provided engineering consultations and equipment to help the Pakistani side to deal with the problem.” The second humanitarian intervention at the request of Islamabad was made after the recent floods. In this connection, reference is invited to my article dated September 2 and titled “INDIA MISSES AN OPPORTUNITY FOR HUMANITARIAN INTERVENTION IN GILGIT-BALTISTAN” at http://www.southasiaanalysis.org/papers41/paper4016.html.
10. Reliable source reports say that the Chinese civilian and military personnel, who entered Gilgit-Baltistan for humanitarian relief work are still in the area, but no figures regarding their number are available. The sources say that their number will be in hundreds and not in thousands. Selig Harrison’s information about the presence of over 7,000 Chinese troops is not independently corroborated. There is also no information to indicate that the construction of the railway line from Xinjiang through Gilgit-Baltistan has started. A pre-feasibility study of the project has been done and a fesibility study is to be undertaken.
11. The “Gilgit-Baltistan Tribune” reported as follows on July 10,2010, on the eve of President Asif Ali Zardari’s visit to China: “The proposal for a rail link between landlocked Xinjiang in China’s far west and the Arabian Sea through Pakistan has been under discussion for some years. Chinese companies have apparently completed a pre-feasibility study on a rail project that must cross one of the most challenging terrains in the world. If the two sides take the political decision to go ahead with the project during Zardari’s visit, a consortium of Chinese companies is likely to be constituted to explore in detail the engineering and financial aspects of the project. While the technical aspects of the trans-Karakoram rail link are daunting, there is no denying the Chinese audacity in embracing projects that are grand in conception, challenging in their execution, and consequential in their impact. During the 1970s, long before China had become rich, the People’s Liberation Army had built at great cost the Karakoram highway between Xinjiang and northern Pakistan. The self-assurance of Chinese engineers and the geopolitical ambition of Beijing’s security establishment have grown manifold since. While India’s objections have not had much impact on either China or Pakistan, other developments have cast a shadow over some of the trans-Karakoram projects. The unstable terrain of the Karakorams demands costly upkeep of the highway, repeatedly damaged by landslides and formation of temporary lakes. At the political level, China has been concerned about growing links between Islamist and separatist movements in the Xinjiang province on the one hand and the terrorist safe havens in Pakistan and Afghanistan on the other. As a result, China had to often shut down the Karakoram highway. In recent months, Beijing has been pressing Islamabad to crack down hard on anti-Chinese extremist groups taking shelter on Pakistani soil.”
12. In this connection, please refer to my article on Zardari’s visit of July 11,2010, titled “PAKISTAN AS CHINA’S FORCE-MULTIPLIER AGAINST INDIA” at http://www.southasiaanalysis.org/papers40/paper3918.html . In that article, I had assessed the Chinese involvement in infrastructure development in Gilgit-Baltistan as follows:
“Any Indian expectation that as part of the assurance of Prime Minister Wen of caring for India’s core interests and major concerns, China would reverse its policy of helping Pakistan in the development of its railway and road infrastructure in the Gilgit-Baltistan area bordering Xinjiang, which de jure is part of India’s Jammu and Kashmir, and developing the hydro-electric potential in the Gilgit-Baltistan area was belied when the two countries announced the formal signing of more agreements relating to Gilgit-Baltistan during Mr.Zardari’s stay in Beijing. Under Memoranda of Understanding signed by officials of the two Governments during the visit, China will build the 165-km long Jaglot-Skardu road and the 135-km long Thakot-Sazin road. The projects would cost Pakistani Rs 45 billion with 15 per cent financing by Pakistan and 85 per cent by China. Under another MoU to be jointly executed by Chinese company Datang and Norwegian company EBT, 500 MW electricity would be produced through wind power. It is not known whether this will also be in the Gilgit-Baltistan area.
“ Mr.Zardari and the officials accompanying him repeatedly indicated that the Chinese have agreed in principle to co-operate with Pakistan in the construction of a railway line connecting Pakistan with Xinjiang via Gilgit-Baltistan. Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Qin Gang told reporters in response to a question that cooperation for the construction of a railway link between the two countries was for mutual benefit and not directed against any third party. It would appear that details of the project such as arrangements for financing and the alignment of the railway line are yet to be worked out. Mr.Zardari proposed that the Pakistan and China Railways should form a joint consortium for the timely execution of this project.
“ Mr.Zardari once again took up with the Chinese the pending Pakistani proposals for the upgradation of the Gwadar port, the construction of an oil refinery and an airport in Gwadar and the construction of oil/gas pipelines from Gwadar to Xinjiang. While the Chinese have readily responded in a positive manner to various proposals for projects in the Gilgit-Baltistan area, they are still hesitant regarding new projects in the Balochistan area. While they do not anticipate any security problems in the Gilgit-Baltistan area, they are still worried about the security situation in Balochistan.
“ Mr.Zardari’s disappointment over the Chinese hesitation in the Balochistan area became evident in his reported remarks to Prime Minister Wen that Pakistan desired that “China should take maximum benefits from the Gwadar Port.” From this it is evident that while Pakistan is keen for the quick implementation of the Gwadar-related projects, security considerations still inhibit the Chinese response.
“ The agreement in principle for the upgradation of the Karakoram Highway was reportedly reached more than 10 years ago. The Chinese agreed to meet the cost of upgradation on their side and Pakistan on its side. While the Chinese carried out the upgradation on their side ahead of time, the Pakistanis could not find the money for the upgradation on their side. As a result, the execution of the project was delayed and the Chinese ultimately agreed to give a soft loan to Pakistan for this purpose.
“. Pakistan has reached a similar deal wit Iran in respect of the Iran-Pakistan gas pipeline. While Iran will finance and construct the pipeline on its side, Pakistan has agreed to do so on its side, but it does not have the money. Will the Chinese give the money and help in the pipeline construction in return for a supply of part of the gas from Iran? This is a question which Pakistan has repeatedly raised with Beijing. China has been reluctant so far. According to reliable sources, Mr. Zardari raised this issue once again in Beijing, but there was no positive response from the Chinese.”
13.That position remains unchanged. ( 5-9-10)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director,Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai and Associate of the Chennai Centre For China Studies. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
On August 27,2010,the “New York Times” carried an article by Selig Harrison, former correspondent of the ”Washington Post” in New Delhi who now works in a Washington-based think tank, stating inter alia as follows: “While the world focuses on the flood-ravaged Indus River valley, a quiet geopolitical crisis is unfolding in the Himalayan borderlands of northern Pakistan, where Islamabad is handing over de facto control of the strategic Gilgit-Baltistan region in the northwest corner of disputed Kashmir to China. The entire Pakistan-occupied western portion of Kashmir stretching from Gilgit in the north to Azad (Free) Kashmir in the south is closed to the world, in contrast to the media access that India permits in the eastern part, where it is combating a Pakistan-backed insurgency. But reports from a variety of foreign intelligence sources, Pakistani journalists and Pakistani human rights workers reveal two important new developments in Gilgit-Baltistan: a simmering rebellion against Pakistani rule and the influx of an estimated 7,000 to 11,000 soldiers of the People’s Liberation Army.” ( http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/27/op...20china&st=cse)
2. The report caused considerable concern and sensation in India. The Government of India, while expressing its concern if the report is true, ordered a verification of it by its agencies. A strong denial of the report came from the Pakistani Embassy in Beijing. On September 1, the party-controlled “Global Times” reported as follows in an article written by one by Wang Zhaokun : “A senior Pakistani official Tuesday (August 31) denied recent reports that Chinese troops are stationed in the area of Pakistan-controlled Kashmir to build a high-speed rail and road there. "The story is not true," Masood Khan, ambassador of Pakistan to China, told the Global Times. "It is totally fabricated." Khan said there are no Chinese troops in the area, but a humanitarian team from China is currently there to help local Pakistanis who suffered during the ravage of the country's most devastating floods in history.”
3.In keeping with the practice followed by official and media sources in China, the article referred to the region mentioned by Selig Harrison in his article as “Pakistan-controlled Kashmir”. The practice followed till now by Chinese Government officials, journalists and columnists has been to describe Jammu and Kashmir as “Indian-controlled Kashmir”, the so-called Azad Kashmir as “Pakistan-controlled Kashmir” and Gilgit-Baltistan as the “ Gilgit-Baltistan region” of “Pakistan-controlled Kashmir”.
4.In what was feared by analysts in India as a major departure from this practice, on the night of September 1,2010, the Government-controlled Xinhua news agency disseminated the following report:
China refutes reports of sending troops to Pakistan
BEIJING, Sept. 1 (Xinhua) -- China on Wednesday rejected reports of the presence of over 11,000 Chinese troops in northern Pakistan, saying that such "groundless reports" were made with "ulterior motives."
"We believe the attempts of some people to fabricate stories to provoke China-Pakistan or China-India relations are doomed to fail," said Foreign Ministry spokesperson Jiang Yu in a statement.
The comment came in response to recent reports of some American and Indian press that China had deployed more than 10,000 troops in the Gilgit-Baltistan region of Pakistan.
5. The next day, during the regular briefing of Bejing-based journalists, including some from India, Jiang Yu reportedly used the expression “northern Pakistan” while referring to Gilgit Baltistan in the context of the article of Selig Harrison. However, this did not find mention in a transcript of the media briefing carried by the web sites of many Chinese diplomatic missions abroad. The text of the relevant extracts from the media briefing transcript is given below:
Q: Can you brief us on the latest developments of China’s assistance to Pakistan’s flood-stricken areas?
A: As Pakistan's close neighbor and all-weather friend, China empathizes with Pakistan for its severe natural disaster. The Chinese Government has offered several installments of humanitarian relief supplies worth more than RMB 100 million. The Chinese People's Liberation Army, the Red Cross Society of China, local governments and Chinese enterprises provided different forms of assistance as well. An international relief team sent by the Chinese Government has arrived in the hardest-hit southern part of Pakistan and set up a mobile hospital which is in operation now.
China has provided sincere and timely assistance to Pakistan without any strings attached. We will continue to offer support as much as we can to Pakistan based on its needs, with a view to helping the Pakistani Government and people to overcome difficulties and rebuild homes.
Q: According to reports, China recently refused to grant a visa to Lieutenant General Jaswal, head of Indian Army’s Northern Command, and the Indian side said the refusal was about the Kashmir issue. Do you have any comment? What’s China’s position over the Kashmir issue? And what’s China’s visa policy towards residents of the Indian-held Kashmir region?
A: Relevant media reports are inconsistent with the facts, as is checked with relevant authorities.
The Kashmir issue is an issue left over by history between India and Pakistan. As a neighboring country and friend to both India and Pakistan, China always holds that the Kashmir issue should be properly handled through dialogue and consultation between India and Pakistan.
China’s visa policy towards the residents of Indian-held Kashmir is consistent and remains unchanged.
6. Under the heading “China Withdraws Reference to Gilgit-Baltistan as “northern Pakistan”, the correspondent of “The Hindu” of Chennai in Bejing reported as follows on September 5: “ A day after India voiced concerns to China over its reference to the disputed Gilgit-Baltistan region as a “ northern part of Pakistan”, the Chinese Government withdrew its statement from its official Xinhua agency as well as from the Foreign Ministry’s web site…..On Saturday ( September 4) the statement appeared to have been removed from the Xinhua’s web site. The link to the statement, headlined “China refutes reports of sending troops to Pakistan”, did not open. The Chinese Foreign Ministry, which in a regular briefing on Thursday (September 2) had repeated the reference to Gilgit-Baltistan as “ a northern part of Pakistan” in response to a question on the presence of Chinese troops, deleted records of both the question and its response from its official transcript, which was posted on its website on Friday (September 3) “
7. “The Hindu” correspondent further reported: “ On Friday (September 3) morning, Indian Ambassador to China, S.Jaishankar, had conveyed New Delhi’s concerns over China’s recent moves in Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir in talks with Chinese Vice Foreign Minister Zhang Zhijun. In the talks, Mr.Jaishankar raised questions over the presence of Chinese troops in POK and protested China’s reference to the disputed region as a part of northern Pakistan. Mr.Zhang assured Indian officials that the troops were stationed there only for flood relief work and to provide humanitarian assistance.”
8. The Chinese reference to northern Pakistan could have been the result of the use of a similar expression by Selig Harrison, who had referred to Gilgit-Baltistan as “Himalayan borderlands of northern Pakistan.” It is likely that after the Indian Ambassador protested, the Chinese Foreign Office realized the diplomatic and legal implications of their referring to Gilgit-Baltistan as “ northern Pakistan” and deleted their statement from the web sites of Xinhua and the Foreign Office. But, they could have just deleted the reference to “northern Pakistan” and substituted in its place the name of the area as “Gilgit-Baltistan” and let the modified statement remain on the web sites. Why they deleted the entire statement? A satisfactory answer to this question is not available. However, it is evident that the Chinese, while sticking to the decisions to issue stapled visas to resident of J&K and to assist Pakistan in the development of its infrastructure in Gilgit-Baltistan, are at the same time keen that this issue should not seriously damage China’s relations with India. In this connection, reference is invited to my article dated August 30,2010, titled “Chinese Government, Media Play Down New Friction With India” at http://www.southasiaanalysis.org/papers41/paper4008.html
9. As regards Beijing’s contention that their troops were present in the Gilgit-Baltistan region only for humanitarian relief work, the Chinese have made two humanitarian interventions in the area this year. The first was in January last. On January 4, a landslide created a huge artificial lake in the Hunza area, which subsequently burst submerging a large number of villages in the Gojal Tehsil. About 22 KMs of the Karakoram Highway were submerged under water totally disrupting road communications with Xinjiang in China and with the rest of Gilgit-Baltistan. The Pakistan Army was able to go to the assistance of the affected villages only in the downstream area. It was not able to reach the affected villages in the upstream area for want of helicopters. The Pakistan Government appealed to the Chinese for assistance. Workers of the Chinese Red Cross and engineers of the People’s Liberation Army entered the Hunza area for relief. The Xinhua reported as follows: “On January 19, at the request of the Pakistani government, the Chinese side made special arrangements to open the Kunjirap border and facilitate the purchase of relief goods from China and its clearance. The China Road and Bridge Corporation, which is conducting the project of upgradation of the Karakoram Highway, has also provided engineering consultations and equipment to help the Pakistani side to deal with the problem.” The second humanitarian intervention at the request of Islamabad was made after the recent floods. In this connection, reference is invited to my article dated September 2 and titled “INDIA MISSES AN OPPORTUNITY FOR HUMANITARIAN INTERVENTION IN GILGIT-BALTISTAN” at http://www.southasiaanalysis.org/papers41/paper4016.html.
10. Reliable source reports say that the Chinese civilian and military personnel, who entered Gilgit-Baltistan for humanitarian relief work are still in the area, but no figures regarding their number are available. The sources say that their number will be in hundreds and not in thousands. Selig Harrison’s information about the presence of over 7,000 Chinese troops is not independently corroborated. There is also no information to indicate that the construction of the railway line from Xinjiang through Gilgit-Baltistan has started. A pre-feasibility study of the project has been done and a fesibility study is to be undertaken.
11. The “Gilgit-Baltistan Tribune” reported as follows on July 10,2010, on the eve of President Asif Ali Zardari’s visit to China: “The proposal for a rail link between landlocked Xinjiang in China’s far west and the Arabian Sea through Pakistan has been under discussion for some years. Chinese companies have apparently completed a pre-feasibility study on a rail project that must cross one of the most challenging terrains in the world. If the two sides take the political decision to go ahead with the project during Zardari’s visit, a consortium of Chinese companies is likely to be constituted to explore in detail the engineering and financial aspects of the project. While the technical aspects of the trans-Karakoram rail link are daunting, there is no denying the Chinese audacity in embracing projects that are grand in conception, challenging in their execution, and consequential in their impact. During the 1970s, long before China had become rich, the People’s Liberation Army had built at great cost the Karakoram highway between Xinjiang and northern Pakistan. The self-assurance of Chinese engineers and the geopolitical ambition of Beijing’s security establishment have grown manifold since. While India’s objections have not had much impact on either China or Pakistan, other developments have cast a shadow over some of the trans-Karakoram projects. The unstable terrain of the Karakorams demands costly upkeep of the highway, repeatedly damaged by landslides and formation of temporary lakes. At the political level, China has been concerned about growing links between Islamist and separatist movements in the Xinjiang province on the one hand and the terrorist safe havens in Pakistan and Afghanistan on the other. As a result, China had to often shut down the Karakoram highway. In recent months, Beijing has been pressing Islamabad to crack down hard on anti-Chinese extremist groups taking shelter on Pakistani soil.”
12. In this connection, please refer to my article on Zardari’s visit of July 11,2010, titled “PAKISTAN AS CHINA’S FORCE-MULTIPLIER AGAINST INDIA” at http://www.southasiaanalysis.org/papers40/paper3918.html . In that article, I had assessed the Chinese involvement in infrastructure development in Gilgit-Baltistan as follows:
“Any Indian expectation that as part of the assurance of Prime Minister Wen of caring for India’s core interests and major concerns, China would reverse its policy of helping Pakistan in the development of its railway and road infrastructure in the Gilgit-Baltistan area bordering Xinjiang, which de jure is part of India’s Jammu and Kashmir, and developing the hydro-electric potential in the Gilgit-Baltistan area was belied when the two countries announced the formal signing of more agreements relating to Gilgit-Baltistan during Mr.Zardari’s stay in Beijing. Under Memoranda of Understanding signed by officials of the two Governments during the visit, China will build the 165-km long Jaglot-Skardu road and the 135-km long Thakot-Sazin road. The projects would cost Pakistani Rs 45 billion with 15 per cent financing by Pakistan and 85 per cent by China. Under another MoU to be jointly executed by Chinese company Datang and Norwegian company EBT, 500 MW electricity would be produced through wind power. It is not known whether this will also be in the Gilgit-Baltistan area.
“ Mr.Zardari and the officials accompanying him repeatedly indicated that the Chinese have agreed in principle to co-operate with Pakistan in the construction of a railway line connecting Pakistan with Xinjiang via Gilgit-Baltistan. Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Qin Gang told reporters in response to a question that cooperation for the construction of a railway link between the two countries was for mutual benefit and not directed against any third party. It would appear that details of the project such as arrangements for financing and the alignment of the railway line are yet to be worked out. Mr.Zardari proposed that the Pakistan and China Railways should form a joint consortium for the timely execution of this project.
“ Mr.Zardari once again took up with the Chinese the pending Pakistani proposals for the upgradation of the Gwadar port, the construction of an oil refinery and an airport in Gwadar and the construction of oil/gas pipelines from Gwadar to Xinjiang. While the Chinese have readily responded in a positive manner to various proposals for projects in the Gilgit-Baltistan area, they are still hesitant regarding new projects in the Balochistan area. While they do not anticipate any security problems in the Gilgit-Baltistan area, they are still worried about the security situation in Balochistan.
“ Mr.Zardari’s disappointment over the Chinese hesitation in the Balochistan area became evident in his reported remarks to Prime Minister Wen that Pakistan desired that “China should take maximum benefits from the Gwadar Port.” From this it is evident that while Pakistan is keen for the quick implementation of the Gwadar-related projects, security considerations still inhibit the Chinese response.
“ The agreement in principle for the upgradation of the Karakoram Highway was reportedly reached more than 10 years ago. The Chinese agreed to meet the cost of upgradation on their side and Pakistan on its side. While the Chinese carried out the upgradation on their side ahead of time, the Pakistanis could not find the money for the upgradation on their side. As a result, the execution of the project was delayed and the Chinese ultimately agreed to give a soft loan to Pakistan for this purpose.
“. Pakistan has reached a similar deal wit Iran in respect of the Iran-Pakistan gas pipeline. While Iran will finance and construct the pipeline on its side, Pakistan has agreed to do so on its side, but it does not have the money. Will the Chinese give the money and help in the pipeline construction in return for a supply of part of the gas from Iran? This is a question which Pakistan has repeatedly raised with Beijing. China has been reluctant so far. According to reliable sources, Mr. Zardari raised this issue once again in Beijing, but there was no positive response from the Chinese.”
13.That position remains unchanged. ( 5-9-10)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director,Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai and Associate of the Chennai Centre For China Studies. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)