INTERNATIONAL TERRORISM MONITOR--PAPER NO. 640
B.RAMAN
Unidentified elements had planted three improvised explosive devices (IEDs) of low sophistication outside a stadium in Bangalore where an IPL cricket match between Mumbai Indians and Royal Challengers, Bangalore, was played on the afternoon of April 17,2010 All the three IEDs would appear to have been planted in the open space outside the stadium after the anti-explosive sanitisation of the inside of the stadium as well as outside had been done thrice by the police.
2. Two of the IEDs exploded before the match was to start. According to some reports, they had been timed to explode after the start of the match, but both exploded prematurely. These reports do not carry adequate conviction because when an IED is planted outside a stadium it is timed to explode as the people are entering the stadium before the start of the match in order to cause casualties and panic. The fact that all the IEDs were planted outside the stadium would indicate that the perpetrators had timed them to explode as the spectators were entering the stadium and not after they had entered. While two of the IEDs exploded near two of the entrances, the the third failed to explode and was detected and defused.
3. It is likely that the IEDs were planted after the third anti-exoposive sanitisation of the day had been completed. This would indicate the possibility that the perpetrators had mingled with the spectators gathering outside before entering the stadium and evaded being noticed by the police as they planted the IEDs. The police would appear to have been confident of the effectiveness of the sanitisation inside the stadium. Moreover, all the spectators and others entering the stadium had to pass through IED detectors at the gates in order to prevent IEDs being smuggled in. The police were so confident that nobody would be able to smuggle in an IED inside the sanitised stadium that they allowed the match to go ahead as scheduled after a delay of one hour during which they did another sanitisation.
4. Sanitisation inside an enclosed space like a hall or a room or even a stadium can be effective, but there are problems in maintaining the effective state of sanitisation in an open space outside a hall or a room or a stadium. The terrorists had taken advantage of this to plant the IEDs unnoticed after the third sanitisation had been completed. The need for a tighter watch on people gathering outside the stadium after the final sanitisation has been done has to be kept in view during the remaining IPL matches. This would require much larger manpower. The Government should make this available to the police.
5. The two explosions injured 17 persons--- nine of them policemen. It would be unwise to presume that the perpetrators did not want to cause fatalities and that they wanted to cause only nervousness and panic among the foreign players and officials participating in the IPL tournament. The low casualties could be attributed to the lack of powerful explosive material with the terrorists and their inadequate expertise in assembling the devices.
6. Local Muslims belonging to the Indian Mujahideen ought to be the primary suspects. The IM had carried out serial explosions in Uttar Pradesh, Jaipur, Bangalore, Ahmedabad and Delhi in 2007-08 and tried unsuccessfully to carry out explosions in Surat. While the explosions were quite lethal in UP, Jaipur, Ahmedabad and Delhi, they were not that lethal in Bangalore and Surat due to the inadequate assembling expertise of the perpetrators at these two places. This would indicate that the IM has well-trained experts in IEDs as well as untrained or inadequately trained perpetrators. Like the Bangalore blasts of July,2008, those of April 17,2010, would appear to have been carried out by inadequately trained perpetrators----most probably locals. ( 18-4-2010)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
Saturday, April 17, 2010
BEIJING WANTS REINCARNATION OF A DALAI LAMA IN CHINESE COLOURS
B.RAMAN
(Text of an E-mail interview given by me to a journalist writing for " Avvenire" , a Catholic journal of Italy )
Question:Since the end of the Olympic Games silence has fallen about the situation in Tibet. What is really happening today?
Answer:The violation of the human rights of the Tibetans continues.There is a systematic attempt to suppress their devotion to and reverence for His Holiness, the Dalai Lama. It is a crime even to have in one's possession a picture of His Holiness. To intimidate the population and to prevent any new uprisings against Beijing, arrests of Tibetans suspected of sympathy for His Holiness and being critical of the policies of Beijing are made periodically under the pretext of a campaign against splittism.Despite this, Tibetan defiance continues.
Question:How China is “colonizing” Tibet?
Answer: The policy of settling a large number of Han Chinese in Tibet and other Tibetan-inhabited areas and exercising economic pressure on the Tibetans to seek their livelihood in other parts of China in order to reduce the proportion of ethnic Tibetans in the Tibetan homeland continues. The People's Liberation Army (PLA) continues to have a strong presence in Tibet and its requirements for the defence of Tibet are given priority over the requirements of the Tibetans for their livelihood. A conference on Tibet called the Tibet Work Forum held in Beijing in January,2010, under the auspices of the Chinese Government and the Chinese Communist Party recognised for the first time that most of the development in Tibet till now has been infrastructure related and that, as a result, while the urban areas have developed, there has not been adequate development in the rural areas. Since most of the Han settlers live in the urban areas, it will not be incorrect to say that they have been the main beneficiaries of whatever development has taken place in Tibet. Visitors to Tibet, who praise the development in Tibet under Chinese rule, do not study and analyse which sections of the population have been the beneficiaries of the development that has taken place.Separate Data relating to the development of the Han and Tibetan sections of the population are not available for an objective statistical study. The Tibetans allege that it is the Han settlers, who have been the major beneficiaries of the development and not the native Tibetans.While the world has recognised Tibet as an integral part of China, it has not been insisting that China should follow a policy of Tibet for the Tibetans giving priority to the economic, social and spiritual needs of the Tibetans first.
Question:Is the Chinese regime controlling the monasteries?
Answer:Yes it is.The Ministry of Public Security, which is the internal security agency, keeps a tight control over the functioning of the monasteries and other places of worship. Periodically, when the PLA apprehends unrest on important anniversaries such as the anniversary of the Chinese occupation of Tibet, the anniversary of the flight of His Holiness to India, the anniversary of the 2008 uprising etc preventive arrests of Buddhist monks are made.There are severe restrictions on the Buddhist monks taking out religious processions and on monks of different monasteries meeting each other.
Question:Are the monks free, right now, or not? And, if yes, what “kind” of freedom are they allowed? Is this freedom increasing or decreasing compared to the past or not?
Answer:The monasteries are allowed to hold their regular prayers and the people are allowed to visit the monasteries for prayers and for seeking the spiritual guidance of the monks, but any reference to His Holiness the Dalai Lama and to his teachings on such occasions is a crime punishable with imprisonment. One can officiate as a monk only with the prior persomission of the Ministry of Public Security. The monks have the "freedom" to perform their spiritual tasks in accordance with their religion provided such performance does not violate the directives of the Ministry and disturb law and order. Tibetan Buddhism in Chinese Colours and prayers to Buddha in accordance with the requirements of the Chinese Communist Party and the directives of the Ministry of Public Security are the norms.The "freedom" allowed to the monks continues to be subject to severe restrictions.
Question:Is Tibetan Buddhism under some threat in these days or not?
Answer:It is. Apart from imposing and enforcing severe restrictions on the monasteries and monks, the Chinese have sought to undermine the influence of His Holiness the Dalai Lama over the Tibetan people and increase the influence of the Panchen Lama appointed by the Communist Party.The Chinese are determined to ensure that the reincarnation of His Holiness, when he dies, will take place as laid down by the party and the Government and that God and the people will have no say in determining who is the reincarnation of His Holiness and hence should succeed His Holiness. After having imposed Tibetan Buddhism in Chinese colours on the Tibetan people, the Chinese are getting ready to impose a Dalai Lama in Chinese colours on the Tibetan people.The Chinese are seeking to create a new Buddhism in Tibet, which would totally break with the beliefs and traditions of the Tibetan Buddhism. Buddhism yes, Tibetan Buddhism No----that is the Chinese objective.
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. He is also associated with the Chennai Centre For China Studies. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
(Text of an E-mail interview given by me to a journalist writing for " Avvenire" , a Catholic journal of Italy )
Question:Since the end of the Olympic Games silence has fallen about the situation in Tibet. What is really happening today?
Answer:The violation of the human rights of the Tibetans continues.There is a systematic attempt to suppress their devotion to and reverence for His Holiness, the Dalai Lama. It is a crime even to have in one's possession a picture of His Holiness. To intimidate the population and to prevent any new uprisings against Beijing, arrests of Tibetans suspected of sympathy for His Holiness and being critical of the policies of Beijing are made periodically under the pretext of a campaign against splittism.Despite this, Tibetan defiance continues.
Question:How China is “colonizing” Tibet?
Answer: The policy of settling a large number of Han Chinese in Tibet and other Tibetan-inhabited areas and exercising economic pressure on the Tibetans to seek their livelihood in other parts of China in order to reduce the proportion of ethnic Tibetans in the Tibetan homeland continues. The People's Liberation Army (PLA) continues to have a strong presence in Tibet and its requirements for the defence of Tibet are given priority over the requirements of the Tibetans for their livelihood. A conference on Tibet called the Tibet Work Forum held in Beijing in January,2010, under the auspices of the Chinese Government and the Chinese Communist Party recognised for the first time that most of the development in Tibet till now has been infrastructure related and that, as a result, while the urban areas have developed, there has not been adequate development in the rural areas. Since most of the Han settlers live in the urban areas, it will not be incorrect to say that they have been the main beneficiaries of whatever development has taken place in Tibet. Visitors to Tibet, who praise the development in Tibet under Chinese rule, do not study and analyse which sections of the population have been the beneficiaries of the development that has taken place.Separate Data relating to the development of the Han and Tibetan sections of the population are not available for an objective statistical study. The Tibetans allege that it is the Han settlers, who have been the major beneficiaries of the development and not the native Tibetans.While the world has recognised Tibet as an integral part of China, it has not been insisting that China should follow a policy of Tibet for the Tibetans giving priority to the economic, social and spiritual needs of the Tibetans first.
Question:Is the Chinese regime controlling the monasteries?
Answer:Yes it is.The Ministry of Public Security, which is the internal security agency, keeps a tight control over the functioning of the monasteries and other places of worship. Periodically, when the PLA apprehends unrest on important anniversaries such as the anniversary of the Chinese occupation of Tibet, the anniversary of the flight of His Holiness to India, the anniversary of the 2008 uprising etc preventive arrests of Buddhist monks are made.There are severe restrictions on the Buddhist monks taking out religious processions and on monks of different monasteries meeting each other.
Question:Are the monks free, right now, or not? And, if yes, what “kind” of freedom are they allowed? Is this freedom increasing or decreasing compared to the past or not?
Answer:The monasteries are allowed to hold their regular prayers and the people are allowed to visit the monasteries for prayers and for seeking the spiritual guidance of the monks, but any reference to His Holiness the Dalai Lama and to his teachings on such occasions is a crime punishable with imprisonment. One can officiate as a monk only with the prior persomission of the Ministry of Public Security. The monks have the "freedom" to perform their spiritual tasks in accordance with their religion provided such performance does not violate the directives of the Ministry and disturb law and order. Tibetan Buddhism in Chinese Colours and prayers to Buddha in accordance with the requirements of the Chinese Communist Party and the directives of the Ministry of Public Security are the norms.The "freedom" allowed to the monks continues to be subject to severe restrictions.
Question:Is Tibetan Buddhism under some threat in these days or not?
Answer:It is. Apart from imposing and enforcing severe restrictions on the monasteries and monks, the Chinese have sought to undermine the influence of His Holiness the Dalai Lama over the Tibetan people and increase the influence of the Panchen Lama appointed by the Communist Party.The Chinese are determined to ensure that the reincarnation of His Holiness, when he dies, will take place as laid down by the party and the Government and that God and the people will have no say in determining who is the reincarnation of His Holiness and hence should succeed His Holiness. After having imposed Tibetan Buddhism in Chinese colours on the Tibetan people, the Chinese are getting ready to impose a Dalai Lama in Chinese colours on the Tibetan people.The Chinese are seeking to create a new Buddhism in Tibet, which would totally break with the beliefs and traditions of the Tibetan Buddhism. Buddhism yes, Tibetan Buddhism No----that is the Chinese objective.
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. He is also associated with the Chennai Centre For China Studies. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
Thursday, April 15, 2010
BENAZIR'S ASSASSINATION:UN REPORT BLASTS PAK INTELLIGENCE
B.RAMAN
The report submitted by the three-member commission appointed by the UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon to enquire into the circumstances that led to the assassination of Mrs.Benazir Bhutto at Rawalpindi on December 27,2007, was released to the public on April 15,2010. The Commission was headed by Chilean U.N. Ambassador Heraldo Munoz and included former Indonesian Attorney General Marzuki Darusman, and Ireland’s former Deputy Police Commissioner, Peter Fitzgerald, who conducted an enquiry in 2005 that linked Syrian authorities to the assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri.
2.President Asif Ali Zardari, who had requested for the appointment of the Commission, had sought a 15-day delay in the release of the report on the ground that some of the world leaders, who had cautioned Benazir, of likely threats to her life had not been interviewed by the Commission. While the Commission agreed to the delay it did not accept the contention of Zardari that the report was incomplete because it had not interviewed all those who had cautioned Benazir.
3.Before the report was released to the public, the "Nation" of Pakistan (April 7) had reported that Zardari had sought a further delay in the release of the report----if possible till June--- but his request was not accepted by the Secretary-General. No convincing explanation was given by the Government as to why it was repeatedly pressing for a delay in the release of the report.
4. The reasons become obvious as one reads the report released on April 15. The Commission has not only blamed the previous Government of Gen. Pervez Musharraf for failing to provide effective security to her despite its being known that she faced a serious threat, but it has also condemned the Pakistani intelligence agencies for preventing an effective investigation into the assassination. It has not named any intelligence agency in particular, but it is evident that it was having the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) in mind.
5. One expected the Commission to provide answers to the following questions:
Was effective security provided to Benazir after she returned to Pakistan from her political exile? If not, who was responsible for the failure?
What was the role of Rehman Malik, the present Interior Minister and a close confidante of Zardari, who had been nominated by Zardari as her security officer on behalf of the Pakistan People's Party? He was responsible for liaison on behalf of the party with the officials of the Musharraf Government who were co-ordinating the security arrangements. It was alleged immediately after her assassination that Rehman Mallik was nowhere near the scene when she was killed by a suicide bomber. After attending the meeting addressed by her, he had allegedly gone home without accompanying her till her house as he was expected to. He became aware of her assassination from the TV channels.
Who was responsible for the assassination?
How thorough has been the investigation into her assassination?
6. The Commission has blamed the officials of the Musharraf Government for failing to protect her and the intelligence and investigative agencies for the failure to properly investigate the assassination. To quote from the report:
"A range of government officials failed profoundly in their efforts first to protect Ms. Bhutto, and second to investigate with vigor all those responsible for her murder, not only in the execution of the attack, but also in its conception, planning and financing."
"The suicide bombing that killed Bhutto could have been prevented."
"Bhutto faced threats from a number of sources, including al Qaeda, the Taliban and local Islamic militants and potentially from Pakistan's ruling establishment. Two months before her death, she wrote a letter to Musharraf that identified three people she considered threats to her safety. But Pakistan's investigation failed to investigate Mehsud, al Qaeda or other organizations that might have been involved.Investigators also dismissed the possibility of involvement by elements of the establishment, including the three persons identified by Ms. Bhutto as threats to her in her 16 October 2007 letter to General Musharraf."
"Police failed to preserve evidence at the scene of the bombing.The investigation suffered from a lack of commitment to identify and bring all of the perpetrators to justice. In particular, the pervasive reach of Pakistan's intelligence agencies left police unsure of how vigorously they ought to pursue actions, which they knew, as professionals, they should have taken."
"This pervasive involvement of intelligence agencies in diverse spheres, which is an open secret, has undermined the rule of law, distorted civilian-military relations and weakened some political and law enforcement institutions.At the same time, it has contributed to wide-spread public distrust in those institutions and fed a generalized political culture that thrives on competing conspiracy theories."
7.The U.N. Commission's chairman, Heraldo Munoz, was even more devastating in the comments made by him at a press conference in the UN headquarters after the release of the report. He said:
"It is clear that warnings were passed on, on various occasions, and Ms. Bhutto received also information in this regard from outside Pakistan.Nevertheless, what we have found is that the passing of information was not accompanied by commensurate measures to protect her, particularly given the fact that an assassination attempt had been made against her the very day she returned to Karachi."
"There was little to no focus placed on investigating those further up the hierarchy in the planning, the financing and the execution of the assassination,." The Pakistani Government "failed in its primary responsibility to provide protection" to Bhutto on the day of her death, despite clear warnings of threats to her life.
8.Munoz refrained from directly accusing Musharraf, but he said a new, proper investigation into Bhutto's death needs to look at not only the possible involvement of al-Qaeda, Mehsud and the Taliban but also the Pakistani establishment, including the military, intelligence agencies and the country's business elite. "The criminal investigation of the assassination … must include a focus on those who might have been involved," Munoz said. "It should follow all leads and explore all reasonable hypotheses."
9. The Commission has refrained from stating who was or who might have been responsible for the assassination on the ground that it was not its task to investigate the assassination. It interpreted its task as restricted to finding out why the assassination took place and was the investigation proceeding on right lines. On both counts, it has given highly negative findings. Its negative findings on the failure to provide her with effective physical security point the accusing finger at the Musharraf Government. Its equally negative findings indicating a post-assassination cover-up point the accusing finger at the Government of Musharraf as well as Zardari. Its damning criticism of the intelligence agencies relates to their functioning under Musharraf as well as Zardari.
10. I have not yet read the full text of the report. The extracts available so far are silent on the role of Rehman Mallik as Benazir's security liaison officer appointed by her party.
11. Were Zardari's repeated attempts to delay the release of the report made at the instance of the ISI? At a time when the administration of President Barack Obama has been giving one certificate of good conduct after another to the ISI, the UN Commission's observations should be highly embarrassiing. However, one should not expect any change in the attitude of the Obama Administration.Obama's main concern now is for the Democrats to do well in the Congressional elections due later this year and for him to win a second term.For that he should be able to disengage the US troops from Afghanistan. For that the co-operation of the present senior officials of the Pakistani Army and the ISI are necessary. Their culpability in the assassination of Benazir and for the failure to investigate her assassination would not be allowed by Obama to come in the way of these objectives. His re-election is more important to him than holding the Pakistani Army and the ISI accountable for their role in the case. ( 16-4-2010)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
The report submitted by the three-member commission appointed by the UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon to enquire into the circumstances that led to the assassination of Mrs.Benazir Bhutto at Rawalpindi on December 27,2007, was released to the public on April 15,2010. The Commission was headed by Chilean U.N. Ambassador Heraldo Munoz and included former Indonesian Attorney General Marzuki Darusman, and Ireland’s former Deputy Police Commissioner, Peter Fitzgerald, who conducted an enquiry in 2005 that linked Syrian authorities to the assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri.
2.President Asif Ali Zardari, who had requested for the appointment of the Commission, had sought a 15-day delay in the release of the report on the ground that some of the world leaders, who had cautioned Benazir, of likely threats to her life had not been interviewed by the Commission. While the Commission agreed to the delay it did not accept the contention of Zardari that the report was incomplete because it had not interviewed all those who had cautioned Benazir.
3.Before the report was released to the public, the "Nation" of Pakistan (April 7) had reported that Zardari had sought a further delay in the release of the report----if possible till June--- but his request was not accepted by the Secretary-General. No convincing explanation was given by the Government as to why it was repeatedly pressing for a delay in the release of the report.
4. The reasons become obvious as one reads the report released on April 15. The Commission has not only blamed the previous Government of Gen. Pervez Musharraf for failing to provide effective security to her despite its being known that she faced a serious threat, but it has also condemned the Pakistani intelligence agencies for preventing an effective investigation into the assassination. It has not named any intelligence agency in particular, but it is evident that it was having the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) in mind.
5. One expected the Commission to provide answers to the following questions:
Was effective security provided to Benazir after she returned to Pakistan from her political exile? If not, who was responsible for the failure?
What was the role of Rehman Malik, the present Interior Minister and a close confidante of Zardari, who had been nominated by Zardari as her security officer on behalf of the Pakistan People's Party? He was responsible for liaison on behalf of the party with the officials of the Musharraf Government who were co-ordinating the security arrangements. It was alleged immediately after her assassination that Rehman Mallik was nowhere near the scene when she was killed by a suicide bomber. After attending the meeting addressed by her, he had allegedly gone home without accompanying her till her house as he was expected to. He became aware of her assassination from the TV channels.
Who was responsible for the assassination?
How thorough has been the investigation into her assassination?
6. The Commission has blamed the officials of the Musharraf Government for failing to protect her and the intelligence and investigative agencies for the failure to properly investigate the assassination. To quote from the report:
"A range of government officials failed profoundly in their efforts first to protect Ms. Bhutto, and second to investigate with vigor all those responsible for her murder, not only in the execution of the attack, but also in its conception, planning and financing."
"The suicide bombing that killed Bhutto could have been prevented."
"Bhutto faced threats from a number of sources, including al Qaeda, the Taliban and local Islamic militants and potentially from Pakistan's ruling establishment. Two months before her death, she wrote a letter to Musharraf that identified three people she considered threats to her safety. But Pakistan's investigation failed to investigate Mehsud, al Qaeda or other organizations that might have been involved.Investigators also dismissed the possibility of involvement by elements of the establishment, including the three persons identified by Ms. Bhutto as threats to her in her 16 October 2007 letter to General Musharraf."
"Police failed to preserve evidence at the scene of the bombing.The investigation suffered from a lack of commitment to identify and bring all of the perpetrators to justice. In particular, the pervasive reach of Pakistan's intelligence agencies left police unsure of how vigorously they ought to pursue actions, which they knew, as professionals, they should have taken."
"This pervasive involvement of intelligence agencies in diverse spheres, which is an open secret, has undermined the rule of law, distorted civilian-military relations and weakened some political and law enforcement institutions.At the same time, it has contributed to wide-spread public distrust in those institutions and fed a generalized political culture that thrives on competing conspiracy theories."
7.The U.N. Commission's chairman, Heraldo Munoz, was even more devastating in the comments made by him at a press conference in the UN headquarters after the release of the report. He said:
"It is clear that warnings were passed on, on various occasions, and Ms. Bhutto received also information in this regard from outside Pakistan.Nevertheless, what we have found is that the passing of information was not accompanied by commensurate measures to protect her, particularly given the fact that an assassination attempt had been made against her the very day she returned to Karachi."
"There was little to no focus placed on investigating those further up the hierarchy in the planning, the financing and the execution of the assassination,." The Pakistani Government "failed in its primary responsibility to provide protection" to Bhutto on the day of her death, despite clear warnings of threats to her life.
8.Munoz refrained from directly accusing Musharraf, but he said a new, proper investigation into Bhutto's death needs to look at not only the possible involvement of al-Qaeda, Mehsud and the Taliban but also the Pakistani establishment, including the military, intelligence agencies and the country's business elite. "The criminal investigation of the assassination … must include a focus on those who might have been involved," Munoz said. "It should follow all leads and explore all reasonable hypotheses."
9. The Commission has refrained from stating who was or who might have been responsible for the assassination on the ground that it was not its task to investigate the assassination. It interpreted its task as restricted to finding out why the assassination took place and was the investigation proceeding on right lines. On both counts, it has given highly negative findings. Its negative findings on the failure to provide her with effective physical security point the accusing finger at the Musharraf Government. Its equally negative findings indicating a post-assassination cover-up point the accusing finger at the Government of Musharraf as well as Zardari. Its damning criticism of the intelligence agencies relates to their functioning under Musharraf as well as Zardari.
10. I have not yet read the full text of the report. The extracts available so far are silent on the role of Rehman Mallik as Benazir's security liaison officer appointed by her party.
11. Were Zardari's repeated attempts to delay the release of the report made at the instance of the ISI? At a time when the administration of President Barack Obama has been giving one certificate of good conduct after another to the ISI, the UN Commission's observations should be highly embarrassiing. However, one should not expect any change in the attitude of the Obama Administration.Obama's main concern now is for the Democrats to do well in the Congressional elections due later this year and for him to win a second term.For that he should be able to disengage the US troops from Afghanistan. For that the co-operation of the present senior officials of the Pakistani Army and the ISI are necessary. Their culpability in the assassination of Benazir and for the failure to investigate her assassination would not be allowed by Obama to come in the way of these objectives. His re-election is more important to him than holding the Pakistani Army and the ISI accountable for their role in the case. ( 16-4-2010)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
Wednesday, April 14, 2010
JIHADI THREAT TO CHINA
The International Counter-Terrorism Institute of Herzliya, Israel, has brought out a detailed study of jihadi threat to China. It is available at
http://www.ict.org.il/Portals/0/Internet%20Monitoring%20Group/JWMG_Turkistan_China.pdf
http://www.ict.org.il/Portals/0/Internet%20Monitoring%20Group/JWMG_Turkistan_China.pdf
Tuesday, April 13, 2010
WHAT I CAUTIONED ABOUT OBAMA BEFORE HE BECAME THE PRESIDENT
B.RAMAN
There has been a gradual disenchantment with President Barack Obama in India ever since he became the President in January 2009. Despite all the visuals of Obama in the company of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and his statements and remarks relating to India made by him or on his behalf by his officials during Dr.Manmohan Singh’s much-hyped State visit to Washington DC in November last year and during his current visit for the Nuclear Security Summit, Obama’s actions in matters of interest and concern to India have been either unhelpful or detrimental to India. His positive vibrations for Pakistan have come out clearly on many occasions----the latest being after his one-to-meeting with Prime Minister Yousef Raza Gilani of Pakistan in the margins of the Nuclear Security Summit. Whatever little I have studied of Obama since he first indicated his Presidential aspirations has strengthened my misgivings about him and created a suspicion in my mind that as a political leader he is as insincere as Richard Nixon though not as crude because he successfully hides his insincerity and as naïve as Jimmy Carter. I am giving below extracts from my articles on Obama written before he became the President for whatever they are worth.
Having an Obama In Its Future--- Good Or Bad For Us (India)? ( http://www.southasiaanalysis.org/papers30/paper2905.html ) Written on October 30,2008)
By B. Raman
The world has seen made-in-the-Internet scholars, made-in-the-Internet stock-brokers, made-in-the-Internet lovers and even made-in-the-Internet terrorists.
If Senator Barack Obama is elected the President of the United States on November 4, the US and the rest of the world will be seeing for the first time a made-in-the-Internet President.
The way his advisers and entourage have effectively used the Internet to make him known to the people, to collect funds for him and to project him as a right-thinking person, who will take the US into a brave new world, will form the theme of many likely best-sellers if he wins the elections, as he seems destined to do.
Large sections of the American people are in a state of guilt----- over having suppressed the Blacks for so many years, over having supported President Bush and his Neo Conservatives in their Iraq adventure under the pretext of removing non-existent weapons of mass destruction, and over so many other perceived wrongs of the Bush Administration.
What better way of ridding themselves of their gnawing sense of guilt than to vote for a candidate, who is an Afro-American and who promises to rid the US of the legacies of the Bush administration. Just by casting their vote for him on November 4, they would in one stroke be able to get rid of all their guilt feelings and start a new life as Americans. So they think. As they stand before the voting machine, it will be their hour of the confessional ---- that they were wrong in having supported Bush.
His advisers and entourage have skillfully exploited the widely prevalent mood of guilt in the US to project him as a transformational figure (to quote Colin Powell) the like of which comes but rarely. Vote for Obama and vote for all that that is good and great in the US.
The liberals---- in the civil society, in the media, among the opinion-makers--- have made Obama seem a cult figure. For them, it will be blasphemous to ask questions about his past, to find out who he really is.
Had a white been the Democratic candidate like Senator John McCain, the Republican candidate, they would not have had the least qualms in researching into his past and in dissecting every inch of him.
How can one do it for a transformational, cult figure? Cult figures have to be accepted as such without questions. How can one do that for a Black, who is on the threshold of history by being the first Black to become the President of the US? To question his past and his credentials would be racist. So the American voters have been told.
Can anyone in the US or in the rest of the world assert that he knows Obama well ---- his past and his present and what he will be in future? Future is the child of the past.
Obama is a mix of two vintages. The old pre-2006 vintage and the new post-2006 one. All his admirers know Obama of the new vintage. How many know Obama of the old vintage?
Very few. There is no desire to find out either.
Obama of the new vintage has nothing but the highest words of praise for India and Indians. He wants to continue with Bush’s policy of promoting a strategic relationship with India.
What about Obama of the old vintage? Cautious and reserved in exuding any warmth for India and the Indians lest his Pakistani friends and constituents misunderstand.
It is said that as a student he had more Pakistani friends than Indians. He felt more comfortable in the company of the Pakistanis than Indians. It was his choice and nobody could grudge it.
It was at the invitation of one of his Pakistani friends that he visited Islamabad, Karachi and Hyderabad (Sind) in the 1980s. Nobody can hold that against him.
As an Indian, one will be but human if one felt troubled that he did not disclose this till he became the Presidential candidate. He disclosed this----as if in passing--- when it was alleged that he did not understand the Islamic world and its divisions. He mentioned his visit to Pakistan to show that he knew about the divisions in Islam, about the Shia-Sunni differences.
Why did he keep mum on his visit to Pakistan till this question was raised? Has he disclosed all the details regarding his Pakistan visit? Was it as innocuous as made out by him----to respond to the invitation of a Pakistani friend or was there something more to it?
One would have expected the US journalists to have gone into this, to have quizzed him on it. But, they didn’t.
As I read about Obama’s visit to Pakistan in the 1980s, I could not help thinking of dozens of things. Of the Afghan jihad against communism. Of the fascination of many Afro-Americans for the jihad. Of the visits of a stream of Afro-Americans to Pakistan to feel the greatness of the jihad. Of their fascination for Abdullah Azzam, who came to Pakistan in the 1980s and started teaching in the International Islamic University in Islamabad. Of the frequent visits of Cat Stevens, the pop singer, to Pakistan and of his fascination for Islam and the on-going jihad. Of his conversion to Islam.
One might think that I am morbid in entertaining such thoughts and questions in my mind. But morbidity is understandable when one has a feeling that one has not been told the whole story, but only a part of it.
It is the right of the Americans to decide who should be their President. It is my right to worry about the implications of their decision for the rest of the world, including India.
Obama: Dangers of Indo-Pak Re-Hyphenation ( http://www.southasiaanalysis.org/papers30/paper2916.html ) From my article of November 5,2008)
His (Obama’s) pronouncements on India and Pakistan, which were music to the ears of people in India in the initial months of the campaign, became jarring during the closing days of the campaign. In the initial months of his campaign, he praised India and supported the initiatives taken by the Bush administration in relation to India. He was very critical of Pakistan’s inadequate co-operation with the US in the war against Al Qaeda. He also criticized the Bush Administration for giving to Pakistan weapons, which it could use only against India and not against Al Qaeda, under the pretext of strengthening its counter-terrorism capability. He hardly spoke of Indo-Pakistan issues.
But as the campaign reached its culmination, he started speaking of the Kashmir issue in a language, which reminded one of the language of the past from the officials of the Clinton Administration. Obama’s entourage and Gen. David H.Petraeus, former Commander of the Multi-National Force in Iraq, who took over as the Commander of the US Central Command on October 31 and is presently on a visit to Pakistan and Afghanistan, have one thing in common---- they listen a lot to the assessments and recommendations of Ahmed Rashid, the Pakistani analyst, who has written extensively on the Taliban and the war against terrorism. In fact, Petraeus has reportedly nominated Ahmed Rashid and Shuja Nawaz, the author of the recently published book on the Pakistan Army called “Crossed Swords”, as members of a brains trust to advise him on a new strategy towards Afghanistan and Pakistan.
Ahmed Rashid has been arguing for some months now that the Pakistan Army cannot be expected to co-operate wholeheartedly with the US Armed Forces in the war against Al Qaeda and the Taliban unless there is a forward movement in settling the Kashmir issue and India is pressured to cut down its presence in Afghanistan. There were not many takers for his arguments in the Bush Administration. But they have already started influencing the thinking of many who are close to Obama.
Will he exercise pressure on India on the Kashmir issue and its role in Afghanistan after he takes over or will he let his pre-election remarks remain without follow up action? This is a question which should worry Indian policy-makers.
Obama’s policy towards China is also likely to be different from that of the Bush Administration. He will continue to strengthen the US’ strategic relations with India, the foundations for which were laid by Bush and Rice, but the sensitivities of China and Pakistan could once again become inhibiting factors in determining the pace and extent of the relationship. He is unlikely to subscribe to the wisdom of building up India as a counter to China. That was the unstated wisdom behind the policies of the Bush Administration towards India.
Obama was supportive of the Indo-US Civilian nuclear co-operation Agreement. Many of the non-governmental experts, who were critical of the agreement, have a greater audience for their views in the Democratic Party than in the Republican Party. They would try to see that the Hyde Act is observed in letter and spirit in the implementation of the agreement. If their views prevail, one could see a slow-down in Indo-US co-operation in nuclear matters.
Under Bush, Indo-US relations developed like never before because he was a great admirer of India and was convinced of the need to encourage the emergence of India as a major Asian power on par with China. Obama has so far not given any indication of a similar admiration and conviction.
Barring John F.Kennedy, other Democratic Presidents were not very positive towards India. They always thought of India tactically and not strategically. Many major initiatives towards India came from Republican Presidents, who held office after Richard Nixon, whose dislike of India---- and particularly Indira Gandhi--- was well-known. There was a new page in Indo-US relations under Bush. This was facilitated by the decline in the influence of some Washington-based think tanks and their academics on policy-making. With the return of a Democrat to the White House, these old academic warriors are already coming out of their eight-year-long hibernation and will try to influence the new President in his thinking and policies. Their views are no different from those of the like of Ahmed Rashid.
We should not hesitate to make it clear to the new administration that while we are as keen as before to strengthen our strategic relations with the US, this cannot be at the expense of our vital national interests in matters like Kashmir and Afghanistan.
From My Article of November 7,2008 http://www.southasiaanalysis.org/papers30/paper2917.html
In the history of Indo-American relations since India became independent in 1947, there have been more instances of meddling by Democrats than by Republicans. Democrats seem to think that they understand sub-continental affairs better than anybody in the US and find it difficult to resist the urge to meddle. That is why Indian security agencies feel uncomfortable when the White House has a Democrat as incumbent. They say that if one draws a graph of terrorism in J&K, one would find that it tends to go up when a Democrat is the President.
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. He is also associated with the Chennai Centre For China Studies. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
There has been a gradual disenchantment with President Barack Obama in India ever since he became the President in January 2009. Despite all the visuals of Obama in the company of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and his statements and remarks relating to India made by him or on his behalf by his officials during Dr.Manmohan Singh’s much-hyped State visit to Washington DC in November last year and during his current visit for the Nuclear Security Summit, Obama’s actions in matters of interest and concern to India have been either unhelpful or detrimental to India. His positive vibrations for Pakistan have come out clearly on many occasions----the latest being after his one-to-meeting with Prime Minister Yousef Raza Gilani of Pakistan in the margins of the Nuclear Security Summit. Whatever little I have studied of Obama since he first indicated his Presidential aspirations has strengthened my misgivings about him and created a suspicion in my mind that as a political leader he is as insincere as Richard Nixon though not as crude because he successfully hides his insincerity and as naïve as Jimmy Carter. I am giving below extracts from my articles on Obama written before he became the President for whatever they are worth.
Having an Obama In Its Future--- Good Or Bad For Us (India)? ( http://www.southasiaanalysis.org/papers30/paper2905.html ) Written on October 30,2008)
By B. Raman
The world has seen made-in-the-Internet scholars, made-in-the-Internet stock-brokers, made-in-the-Internet lovers and even made-in-the-Internet terrorists.
If Senator Barack Obama is elected the President of the United States on November 4, the US and the rest of the world will be seeing for the first time a made-in-the-Internet President.
The way his advisers and entourage have effectively used the Internet to make him known to the people, to collect funds for him and to project him as a right-thinking person, who will take the US into a brave new world, will form the theme of many likely best-sellers if he wins the elections, as he seems destined to do.
Large sections of the American people are in a state of guilt----- over having suppressed the Blacks for so many years, over having supported President Bush and his Neo Conservatives in their Iraq adventure under the pretext of removing non-existent weapons of mass destruction, and over so many other perceived wrongs of the Bush Administration.
What better way of ridding themselves of their gnawing sense of guilt than to vote for a candidate, who is an Afro-American and who promises to rid the US of the legacies of the Bush administration. Just by casting their vote for him on November 4, they would in one stroke be able to get rid of all their guilt feelings and start a new life as Americans. So they think. As they stand before the voting machine, it will be their hour of the confessional ---- that they were wrong in having supported Bush.
His advisers and entourage have skillfully exploited the widely prevalent mood of guilt in the US to project him as a transformational figure (to quote Colin Powell) the like of which comes but rarely. Vote for Obama and vote for all that that is good and great in the US.
The liberals---- in the civil society, in the media, among the opinion-makers--- have made Obama seem a cult figure. For them, it will be blasphemous to ask questions about his past, to find out who he really is.
Had a white been the Democratic candidate like Senator John McCain, the Republican candidate, they would not have had the least qualms in researching into his past and in dissecting every inch of him.
How can one do it for a transformational, cult figure? Cult figures have to be accepted as such without questions. How can one do that for a Black, who is on the threshold of history by being the first Black to become the President of the US? To question his past and his credentials would be racist. So the American voters have been told.
Can anyone in the US or in the rest of the world assert that he knows Obama well ---- his past and his present and what he will be in future? Future is the child of the past.
Obama is a mix of two vintages. The old pre-2006 vintage and the new post-2006 one. All his admirers know Obama of the new vintage. How many know Obama of the old vintage?
Very few. There is no desire to find out either.
Obama of the new vintage has nothing but the highest words of praise for India and Indians. He wants to continue with Bush’s policy of promoting a strategic relationship with India.
What about Obama of the old vintage? Cautious and reserved in exuding any warmth for India and the Indians lest his Pakistani friends and constituents misunderstand.
It is said that as a student he had more Pakistani friends than Indians. He felt more comfortable in the company of the Pakistanis than Indians. It was his choice and nobody could grudge it.
It was at the invitation of one of his Pakistani friends that he visited Islamabad, Karachi and Hyderabad (Sind) in the 1980s. Nobody can hold that against him.
As an Indian, one will be but human if one felt troubled that he did not disclose this till he became the Presidential candidate. He disclosed this----as if in passing--- when it was alleged that he did not understand the Islamic world and its divisions. He mentioned his visit to Pakistan to show that he knew about the divisions in Islam, about the Shia-Sunni differences.
Why did he keep mum on his visit to Pakistan till this question was raised? Has he disclosed all the details regarding his Pakistan visit? Was it as innocuous as made out by him----to respond to the invitation of a Pakistani friend or was there something more to it?
One would have expected the US journalists to have gone into this, to have quizzed him on it. But, they didn’t.
As I read about Obama’s visit to Pakistan in the 1980s, I could not help thinking of dozens of things. Of the Afghan jihad against communism. Of the fascination of many Afro-Americans for the jihad. Of the visits of a stream of Afro-Americans to Pakistan to feel the greatness of the jihad. Of their fascination for Abdullah Azzam, who came to Pakistan in the 1980s and started teaching in the International Islamic University in Islamabad. Of the frequent visits of Cat Stevens, the pop singer, to Pakistan and of his fascination for Islam and the on-going jihad. Of his conversion to Islam.
One might think that I am morbid in entertaining such thoughts and questions in my mind. But morbidity is understandable when one has a feeling that one has not been told the whole story, but only a part of it.
It is the right of the Americans to decide who should be their President. It is my right to worry about the implications of their decision for the rest of the world, including India.
Obama: Dangers of Indo-Pak Re-Hyphenation ( http://www.southasiaanalysis.org/papers30/paper2916.html ) From my article of November 5,2008)
His (Obama’s) pronouncements on India and Pakistan, which were music to the ears of people in India in the initial months of the campaign, became jarring during the closing days of the campaign. In the initial months of his campaign, he praised India and supported the initiatives taken by the Bush administration in relation to India. He was very critical of Pakistan’s inadequate co-operation with the US in the war against Al Qaeda. He also criticized the Bush Administration for giving to Pakistan weapons, which it could use only against India and not against Al Qaeda, under the pretext of strengthening its counter-terrorism capability. He hardly spoke of Indo-Pakistan issues.
But as the campaign reached its culmination, he started speaking of the Kashmir issue in a language, which reminded one of the language of the past from the officials of the Clinton Administration. Obama’s entourage and Gen. David H.Petraeus, former Commander of the Multi-National Force in Iraq, who took over as the Commander of the US Central Command on October 31 and is presently on a visit to Pakistan and Afghanistan, have one thing in common---- they listen a lot to the assessments and recommendations of Ahmed Rashid, the Pakistani analyst, who has written extensively on the Taliban and the war against terrorism. In fact, Petraeus has reportedly nominated Ahmed Rashid and Shuja Nawaz, the author of the recently published book on the Pakistan Army called “Crossed Swords”, as members of a brains trust to advise him on a new strategy towards Afghanistan and Pakistan.
Ahmed Rashid has been arguing for some months now that the Pakistan Army cannot be expected to co-operate wholeheartedly with the US Armed Forces in the war against Al Qaeda and the Taliban unless there is a forward movement in settling the Kashmir issue and India is pressured to cut down its presence in Afghanistan. There were not many takers for his arguments in the Bush Administration. But they have already started influencing the thinking of many who are close to Obama.
Will he exercise pressure on India on the Kashmir issue and its role in Afghanistan after he takes over or will he let his pre-election remarks remain without follow up action? This is a question which should worry Indian policy-makers.
Obama’s policy towards China is also likely to be different from that of the Bush Administration. He will continue to strengthen the US’ strategic relations with India, the foundations for which were laid by Bush and Rice, but the sensitivities of China and Pakistan could once again become inhibiting factors in determining the pace and extent of the relationship. He is unlikely to subscribe to the wisdom of building up India as a counter to China. That was the unstated wisdom behind the policies of the Bush Administration towards India.
Obama was supportive of the Indo-US Civilian nuclear co-operation Agreement. Many of the non-governmental experts, who were critical of the agreement, have a greater audience for their views in the Democratic Party than in the Republican Party. They would try to see that the Hyde Act is observed in letter and spirit in the implementation of the agreement. If their views prevail, one could see a slow-down in Indo-US co-operation in nuclear matters.
Under Bush, Indo-US relations developed like never before because he was a great admirer of India and was convinced of the need to encourage the emergence of India as a major Asian power on par with China. Obama has so far not given any indication of a similar admiration and conviction.
Barring John F.Kennedy, other Democratic Presidents were not very positive towards India. They always thought of India tactically and not strategically. Many major initiatives towards India came from Republican Presidents, who held office after Richard Nixon, whose dislike of India---- and particularly Indira Gandhi--- was well-known. There was a new page in Indo-US relations under Bush. This was facilitated by the decline in the influence of some Washington-based think tanks and their academics on policy-making. With the return of a Democrat to the White House, these old academic warriors are already coming out of their eight-year-long hibernation and will try to influence the new President in his thinking and policies. Their views are no different from those of the like of Ahmed Rashid.
We should not hesitate to make it clear to the new administration that while we are as keen as before to strengthen our strategic relations with the US, this cannot be at the expense of our vital national interests in matters like Kashmir and Afghanistan.
From My Article of November 7,2008 http://www.southasiaanalysis.org/papers30/paper2917.html
In the history of Indo-American relations since India became independent in 1947, there have been more instances of meddling by Democrats than by Republicans. Democrats seem to think that they understand sub-continental affairs better than anybody in the US and find it difficult to resist the urge to meddle. That is why Indian security agencies feel uncomfortable when the White House has a Democrat as incumbent. They say that if one draws a graph of terrorism in J&K, one would find that it tends to go up when a Democrat is the President.
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. He is also associated with the Chennai Centre For China Studies. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
Monday, April 12, 2010
HOW TO COUNTER THE ISLAMIC BOMB-MAKERS & THE ISLAMIC BOMB-SEEKERS?
B.RAMAN
How to counter the Islamic bomb-makers and the Islamic bomb-seekers?
2. That is the question that should have been addressed by the Nuclear Security Summit convened by President Barack Obama and being held in Washington DC on April 12 and 13, 2010. Our Prime Minister Dr.Manmohan Singh, Yousef Raza Gilani, the Prime Minister of Pakistan, and President Hu Jintao of China are among the 37 Heads of State or Government attending the summit. Ten other countries are also attending, but not at the Head of State or Government level.
3. Under his policy of making overtures to the Islamic world, Obama has refrained from posing the main issue in all its stark reality. The stark reality is that a catastrophic threat to the lives and property of the non-Muslims of the world as well as large sections of the Muslims themselves comes from two pernicious ideas born in the mosques and madrasas of Pakistan and disseminated across the Ummah by Islamic fundamentalist elements.
4. The first pernicious idea is that of the Islamic bomb, which was first propounded by the late Zulfiquar Ali Bhutto. He was not a fundamentalist himself, but found it necessary to project Pakistan's quest for nuclear weapon capability as meant to protect the Islamic States from the nuclear capability of non-Islamic States---particularly India and Israel. He did not say that the States of India and Israel had an atomic bomb and hence the State of Pakistan should also have one to protect itself. He said that the Hindu and the Jewish religions had an atomic bomb and hence Islam should also have one.
5. He projected the image of an Islamic bomb in order to get funds for Pakistan's clandestine nuclear programme from Saudi Arabia, Libya and Iran. His idea of an Islamic bomb developed by Pakistan as a trustee and guardian of the Islamic world was readily borrowed by the Islamic parties of Pakistan, which project Pakistan's nuclear weapons and expertise as acquired on behalf of the entire Islamic world.
6. Many Pakistani nuclear scientists close to the Islamic parties subscribed to this idea of an Islamic bomb. A.Q.Khan, the Pakistani nuclear scientist, was one of them. For him and the scientists associated with him, his selling the uranium enrichment technology and equipment and nuclear weapon designs obtained from China to Iran and Libya was not an act of proliferation. It was an act of Islamic solidarity. Even though the Pakistan Government, under US pressure, took some action against him for his acts of proliferation to Iran and Libya, many in Pakistan in the civil society as a whole as well as in the Government and the nuclear scientists’ community do not believe that A.Q.Khan did anything wrong by helping his co-religionists in other States acquire a nuclear weapon capability.
7.Bhutto and others who followed him in Pakistan saw the Islamic bomb as meant to protect Pakistan and other Islamic States and to deter attacks on them by non-Muslim States. Osama bin Laden borrowed the concept of the Islamic bomb from the Pakistanis and expanded it further to project it as meant to protect the religion of Islam from threats from other religions----particularly Christianity and Judaism. He spoke of the religious right and obligation of the Muslims to acquire a nuclear weapon capability and use it if necessary to protect Islam. This was the second pernicious idea born in Pakistani madrasas such as the Binori madrasa of Karachi which bin Laden made his own.
8. Thus, from the concept of a deterrence available to a state to deter attacks on it by other nuclear weapon states, the atomic bomb became, in the eyes of bin Laden, not only a deterrent, but also an offensive weapon of jihad to impose the will of Islam on non-Muslims---particularly the Christians and the Jewish people.
9. This enlarged concept of the atomic bomb as a jihadi non-State weapon and not a State weapon found its supporters in Pakistan's nuclear scientists' community, who were inclined to help Al Qaeda and bin Laden in their quest for this capability. Sultan Bashiruddin Ahmed and Abdul Majid, retired Pakistani nuclear scientists, constituted a new breed of lone wolf proliferators to jihadi non-State actors.
10. Ever since Al Qaeda embarked on its quest for nuclear material and weapons capability, the concept of the nuclear weapon as a deterrent has lost it meaning. It may deter other States, but it does not deter jihadi non-State actors such as Al Qaeda. A nuclear State may be able to deter another nuclear State through threats of massive retaliation, but such threats will have no meaning or impact in the case of jihadi non-State actors. Fears of large casualties and environment damage act as a restraining factor in the case of nuclear weapon States. No such restraining factor will operate in the case of jihadi non-State actors. They are indifferent to the likely catastrophic consequences of their acts of nuclear terrorism. They will use an actual act of nuclear terrorism or the threat of an act of nuclear terrorism as a weapon of intimidation against non-Muslims. How to deal with this?
11. The only effective way of preventing Al Qaeda from acquiring a nuclear weapon or dirty bomb capability is by neutralising it beyond recovery and, till it is destroyed, by preventing it from acquiring the capability. Pakistan is the only State where it can acquire the material and the capability. It has a reservoir of support and sympathy in Pakistan. Otherwise, bin Laden and Ayman Al-Zawahiri, his No.2, might have been killed or captured by now. The pre-9/11 contacts of Sultan Bashiruddin Ahmed and Abdul Majid with bin Laden were an indication of the attraction of Al Qaeda and bin Laden to some members of the Pakistani nuclear scientists’ community.
12. Physical security of nuclear establishments in order to prevent nuclear material from getting into the hands of Al Qaeda and its associates is the first essential step for preventing nuclear terrorism. Another equally important step is the identification of pro-Al Qaeda elements in Pakistan’s military, intelligence and nuclear establishments and action to weed them out. Instead of discussing these measures in specific terms, the agenda of the Nuclear Summit seeks to evade a decision on the action that needs to be taken in and against Pakistan. This is not the way to ensure nuclear security. ( 12-4-10)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
How to counter the Islamic bomb-makers and the Islamic bomb-seekers?
2. That is the question that should have been addressed by the Nuclear Security Summit convened by President Barack Obama and being held in Washington DC on April 12 and 13, 2010. Our Prime Minister Dr.Manmohan Singh, Yousef Raza Gilani, the Prime Minister of Pakistan, and President Hu Jintao of China are among the 37 Heads of State or Government attending the summit. Ten other countries are also attending, but not at the Head of State or Government level.
3. Under his policy of making overtures to the Islamic world, Obama has refrained from posing the main issue in all its stark reality. The stark reality is that a catastrophic threat to the lives and property of the non-Muslims of the world as well as large sections of the Muslims themselves comes from two pernicious ideas born in the mosques and madrasas of Pakistan and disseminated across the Ummah by Islamic fundamentalist elements.
4. The first pernicious idea is that of the Islamic bomb, which was first propounded by the late Zulfiquar Ali Bhutto. He was not a fundamentalist himself, but found it necessary to project Pakistan's quest for nuclear weapon capability as meant to protect the Islamic States from the nuclear capability of non-Islamic States---particularly India and Israel. He did not say that the States of India and Israel had an atomic bomb and hence the State of Pakistan should also have one to protect itself. He said that the Hindu and the Jewish religions had an atomic bomb and hence Islam should also have one.
5. He projected the image of an Islamic bomb in order to get funds for Pakistan's clandestine nuclear programme from Saudi Arabia, Libya and Iran. His idea of an Islamic bomb developed by Pakistan as a trustee and guardian of the Islamic world was readily borrowed by the Islamic parties of Pakistan, which project Pakistan's nuclear weapons and expertise as acquired on behalf of the entire Islamic world.
6. Many Pakistani nuclear scientists close to the Islamic parties subscribed to this idea of an Islamic bomb. A.Q.Khan, the Pakistani nuclear scientist, was one of them. For him and the scientists associated with him, his selling the uranium enrichment technology and equipment and nuclear weapon designs obtained from China to Iran and Libya was not an act of proliferation. It was an act of Islamic solidarity. Even though the Pakistan Government, under US pressure, took some action against him for his acts of proliferation to Iran and Libya, many in Pakistan in the civil society as a whole as well as in the Government and the nuclear scientists’ community do not believe that A.Q.Khan did anything wrong by helping his co-religionists in other States acquire a nuclear weapon capability.
7.Bhutto and others who followed him in Pakistan saw the Islamic bomb as meant to protect Pakistan and other Islamic States and to deter attacks on them by non-Muslim States. Osama bin Laden borrowed the concept of the Islamic bomb from the Pakistanis and expanded it further to project it as meant to protect the religion of Islam from threats from other religions----particularly Christianity and Judaism. He spoke of the religious right and obligation of the Muslims to acquire a nuclear weapon capability and use it if necessary to protect Islam. This was the second pernicious idea born in Pakistani madrasas such as the Binori madrasa of Karachi which bin Laden made his own.
8. Thus, from the concept of a deterrence available to a state to deter attacks on it by other nuclear weapon states, the atomic bomb became, in the eyes of bin Laden, not only a deterrent, but also an offensive weapon of jihad to impose the will of Islam on non-Muslims---particularly the Christians and the Jewish people.
9. This enlarged concept of the atomic bomb as a jihadi non-State weapon and not a State weapon found its supporters in Pakistan's nuclear scientists' community, who were inclined to help Al Qaeda and bin Laden in their quest for this capability. Sultan Bashiruddin Ahmed and Abdul Majid, retired Pakistani nuclear scientists, constituted a new breed of lone wolf proliferators to jihadi non-State actors.
10. Ever since Al Qaeda embarked on its quest for nuclear material and weapons capability, the concept of the nuclear weapon as a deterrent has lost it meaning. It may deter other States, but it does not deter jihadi non-State actors such as Al Qaeda. A nuclear State may be able to deter another nuclear State through threats of massive retaliation, but such threats will have no meaning or impact in the case of jihadi non-State actors. Fears of large casualties and environment damage act as a restraining factor in the case of nuclear weapon States. No such restraining factor will operate in the case of jihadi non-State actors. They are indifferent to the likely catastrophic consequences of their acts of nuclear terrorism. They will use an actual act of nuclear terrorism or the threat of an act of nuclear terrorism as a weapon of intimidation against non-Muslims. How to deal with this?
11. The only effective way of preventing Al Qaeda from acquiring a nuclear weapon or dirty bomb capability is by neutralising it beyond recovery and, till it is destroyed, by preventing it from acquiring the capability. Pakistan is the only State where it can acquire the material and the capability. It has a reservoir of support and sympathy in Pakistan. Otherwise, bin Laden and Ayman Al-Zawahiri, his No.2, might have been killed or captured by now. The pre-9/11 contacts of Sultan Bashiruddin Ahmed and Abdul Majid with bin Laden were an indication of the attraction of Al Qaeda and bin Laden to some members of the Pakistani nuclear scientists’ community.
12. Physical security of nuclear establishments in order to prevent nuclear material from getting into the hands of Al Qaeda and its associates is the first essential step for preventing nuclear terrorism. Another equally important step is the identification of pro-Al Qaeda elements in Pakistan’s military, intelligence and nuclear establishments and action to weed them out. Instead of discussing these measures in specific terms, the agenda of the Nuclear Summit seeks to evade a decision on the action that needs to be taken in and against Pakistan. This is not the way to ensure nuclear security. ( 12-4-10)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
CHINESE INROADS INTO SRI LANKA
B.RAMAN
INTRODUCTION
Sri Lanka has a right to develop close relations with China and Pakistan. India cannot legitimately oppose it.
At the same time, the Government of India has a duty to take note of the various aspects of the relations, which could be detrimental to our national security and evolve an appropriate policy response.
The policy response could be either actively countering their influence in Sri Lanka or actively promoting our interests in Sri Lanka or a mix of both.
Another response could be in the form of a mix of incentives and disincentives---- incentives to make it worthwhile for Sri Lanka to have closer relations with India than with China or Pakistan and disincentives if it is insensitive to India’s concerns and interests.
A good incentive could be by making the huge Indian market easily accessible to the goods and services of Sri Lanka, by making it worthwhile for Sri Lankan students to study in India, by sharing our IT expertise with Sri Lanka, by encouraging networking between the corporate worlds of the two countries etc
A strong disincentive could be by using our traditional pressure points in Sri Lanka such as the dependence of Sri Lanka’s tourism economy on Indian tourists, the goodwill for India in large sections of SL society etc
Unfortunately, we are yet to work out a comprehensive and workable policy response.
We are worried over the increasing Chinese influence and its implications for India’s security, but we do not articulate our concerns. We pretend as if Indian and Chinese interests will never clash in Sri Lanka and we try to give an impression that we can take it in our stride.
Our policy response, if at all there is any, is ad hoc and not strategic with the immediate and long-term interests influencing the response.
China’s policy, on the other hand, caters to its interests of today as well as its likely interests of tomorrow and the day after. There is nothing ad hoc about it.
China is not a South Asian power, but has acquired a robust South Asian presence through its carefully-cultivated relations with Pakistan, Sri Lanka, the Maldives, Bangladesh and Nepal.
China is not an Indian Ocean power, but it is seeking to acquire a robust Indian Ocean presence through its relations with Myanmar, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Maldives, Mauritius & Seychelles.
India is a South Asian and Indian Ocean power, but its South Asian and Indian Ocean influence is being eroded by the increasing inroads of China at the expense of India.
This presentation will focus essentially on China and not on Pakistan.The threat to us from Pakistan through Sri Lanka is more tactical than strategic, more subversive than military, more political than economic. China is a dragon, but Pakistan is still only a pinprick.
We should be alert to the possibility of China and Pakistan acting in tandem in Sri Lanka and the Maldives to undermine the Indian influence, but there is as yet no evidence of this possibility becoming a reality, but it could in the long-term.Our policy response should nip this bud before it starts blooming.Beyond this caution, I will not say anything else on Pakistan in this presentation.
General Observations & Quotes
Under President Mahinda Rajapaksa, Chinese presence and influence in Sri Lanka have increased.He has visited China thrice since assuming office. Increase in bilateral interactions and exchange of visits.Sri Lanka opened a consulate—its second one in China—in Chengdu, where Pakistan already has an active Consulate.The Chengdu Military Region coordinates China’s military strategy in South Asia.
“China and Sri Lanka are long standing friends. China never deserted Sri Lanka in its times of distress”---Rajapaksa in April 2008 while inaugurating the construction of Sri Lanka’s National Theatre of Performing Arts to be built with Chinese assistance.
“The friendly relationship between the two countries has stood long test and the two countries are tested friends. Sri Lanka has always firmly stood by and will never change its stance on one-China policy”—Rajapaksa on September 4,2009, while receiving a delegation of the Chinese Communist Party.
“The Chinese Government endeavors to develop its friendship and cooperation with Sri Lanka on the basis of the Five Principles of Peaceful Co-Existence. Chinese enterprises are contracted to build the Hambantota port. Any vicious distortion of the normal business deal holds no water. Social stability, economic development and ethnic reconciliation of Sir Lanka serve the shared aspiration and fundamental interest of the Sri Lankan people. We sincerely hope this goal can be achieved at an early date” ---.Chinese Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Ma Zhaoxu at his regular press conference on May 12, 2009.
“Sri Lanka’s traditional donors, namely, the United States, Canada and the European Union, had receded into a very distant corner to be replaced by countries in the East. The new donors are neighbors; they are rich; and they conduct themselves differently. Asians don’t go around teaching each other how to behave.There are ways we deal with each other — perhaps a quiet chat, but not wagging the finger. Chinese assistance has grown fivefold in the last year to nearly $1 billion, eclipsing Sri Lanka’s longtime biggest donor, Japan” ---Palitha Kohona, Sri Lankan Foreign Secretary as quoted by the “New York Times” dated March 9,2008
Bilateral Trade
Trade between the two countries has doubled over the last 5 years from US$ 660 million to US$ 1.13 billion, making China the second largest exporter to Sri Lanka and the 13th largest export destination for Sri Lanka’s exports.
"We have paid far too much attention to the export markets in the US and now we need to move towards the Asian giant China. We have had an over dependence in the US market for our exports for too long," Prof. A. D. V. De S. Indraratna, President, Sri Lanka Economic Association.
Sri Lanka exports coconut fiber products, natural rubber, tea, spices, precious and semi-precious stones and ready made garments to China. There has been a significant increase of Sri Lankan exports to China since 2000, mainly due to the bulky export of mineral sands as zicronium ores , coir fiber and electrical components etc. The exports of mineral sands rose from Rs. 10 million in 2001 to Rs. 226 million in 2008. Only 0.45 per cent of Sri Lanka’s total exports go to China, but 12 per cent of its total imports come from China.
Project Assistance—Hambantota Port
The foundation for the construction of a modern port with Chinese assistance at Hambantota in southern Sri Lanka was formally laid in October,2007. The construction actually started in January,2008.
It is a 15-year project to be completed in stages. The entire project is estimated to cost US $ one billion. The present Chinese commitment is for the construction of the first stage only, which is estimated to cost US $ 360 million. China has agreed to give 85 per cent of this amount at concessional interest. The balance is being contributed by the Government of Sri Lanka.
The first stage of the 15-year (2008-2023) project is expected to be completed by the end of 2010. This stage envisages the construction of a 1000-metre jetty, which will enable the harbour to function as an industrial port for the import and export of industrial chemicals, fuel and heavy machinery. By 2023, Hambantota is projected to have a liquefied natural gas refinery, aviation fuel storage facilities, three separate docks giving the port a transshipment capacity and dry docks for ship repair and construction. The project also envisages that when completed the port will serve as a base for bunkering and refueling.
The draught (depth) of the new harbour will be 16 metres against 15 metres in Colombo. A 230 metre passage-entrance channel will be created at the breakwater which is 988 metres long on the west end and 311 metres long on the east end.
The Government hopes that as a refueling location Hambantota will have many advantages over the Colombo port or ports in South India. The construction has been undertaken by a consortium of Chinese companies headed by the China Harbour Engineering Company and the Sino Hydro Corporation.
The project doesn’t have a separate consultant. The Sri Lanka Port Authority (SLPA) is functioning as the client-cum-consultant while the China Harbour Engineering Co Ltd is the contractor. In September,2008,there were 328 Sri Lankans and 235 Chinese working at the site-engineers, administrative personnel and others. The present number is not known.
The first stage due to be ready by end 2010 will allow three
ships to berth. The final stage, for which there is no offer of funding yet from China, is planned to accommodate more than 30 ships, which is the present capacity at Colombo.
Reliable reports say that while the Sri Lankan authorities want Hambantota to emerge as a modern port with better facilities and efficiency than any of the ports in South India, they do not want the present importance of the Colombo port to be reduced. Colombo presently has the reputation of being the most modern and most efficient port in South Asia. They want this reputation to be maintained. There is no proposal at present to set up container yards and cater to container ships at Hambantota.
The present Chinese interest is in the use of the docking and refueling facilities that would come up in Hambantota for their commercial and naval ships. There is no proposal at present for a Chinese naval base at Hambantota.
New Container Terminal at Colombo
Chinese port operator China Merchants Holdings (International) is negotiating with the Sri Lankan authorities a contract for the construction of a new container terminal at Colombo. The company has bid for the contract jointly with a Sri Lankan company Aitken Spence.
Maththala Airport--Hambantota
On November 27,2009, Rajapaksa inaugurated the construction of Sri Lanka's second international airport at Maththala in Hambantota.
The new airport will be constructed on a plot of 2,000 hectares in Hambantota district at a cost of US$ 190 million. The Government of the People's Republic of China will provide financial assistance for the project with a soft loan through its Ex-Im Bank.. According to the Ports and Aviation Ministry, the construction of the airport will be completed in two phases. All basic facilities including runways, taxiways and parking facilities will be completed in the first phase to be completed by 2011. All other airport and aviation related facilities will be completed in the second phase. These include servicing and repairing centre for aircraft, hotels, pilot training centre, maintenance hub, private jet parking, and technical training centers. The Government hopes to commission the airport by the end of 2011 and land the first flight by December 2011.
Other Projects with Chinese Assistance
The construction of the Colombo--Katunayake Expressway.( US $ 248 million)
Improvement of the railways---US $ 100 million to be given by China’s Ex-Im Bank. Agreement signed on March 10,2010.
Norochcholai Coal Power Plant (US$855 million)
A flood protection system for Colombo suburbs of Kotte, Dehiwela-Mount Lavinia, Maharagama, Kesbewa and Moratuwa. ( US $ 59 million) To be given by China Construction Bank.
National Theatre of Performing Arts in Colombo ( US $ 21 million)
Sri Lanka's investment promotion agency, the Board of Investment, announced in July,2009, it has signed a deal with China's Huichen Investment to manage a special economic zone dedicated to Chinese investors. Huichen will invest US $28 million in the zone in Mirigama, north of Colombo, to improve infrastructure in the first phase over three years.The company, a conglomerate that specialises in infrastructure development and does coal and iron ore mining, will also market the zone and attract Chinese investors.
More than 50 per cent of the funding received by Sri Lanka from abroad for construction and development projects since Rajapaksa came to power came from China.
"Since 2007, Sri Lanka has been trying to launch a communication satellite. China has agreed to provide financial and technical assistance," Executive Director of the Institute of Policy Studies, Dr. Saman Kelegama was quoted as saying in November 2009. In May 2009, Priyantha Kariyapperuma, Director-General of the Telecommunications Regulatory Commission, had said that the Government had begun work on a space programme hoping to launch two communication satellites. "The University of Surrey specializes in satellite technology having created about 35 satellites. They have made a presentation to President Mahinda Rajapakse and have entered into an agreement to transfer technology and knowledge to our universities," he told the Island Financial Review. Kariyapperuma said a consortium of vice chancellors from universities with engineering faculties had been formed for this purpose. He said the Government planned to launch two communication satellites—a lower earth orbit satellite used mainly for images and a geo stationary communication satellite. The two satellites will be used not only for communication purposes but also for disaster management, agriculture planning, irrigation planning, town/urban planning and coastal conservation. He said the low earth orbiting satellite could be financed with domestic funds particularly from the Telecommunication Development Fund. The private sector would also be called to contribute to the development of the two satellites.
Chinese Project Assistance—Some Features
All except a thermal power plant in Sinhalese majority areas.
The Chinese have agreed to consider project proposals from the Tamil areas in future, including a proposal for improvement of road communications in the Jaffna peninsula.
Projects of Concern from India’s security point of view
Hambantota Port: Though at present there is no talk of a naval base, it could emerge ultimately to cater to the requirements of Chinese oil & gas tankers and anti-piracy patrols.
Communications satellite with Chinese assistance could be used for the collection of TECHINT about India’s nuclear and space establishments in South India.
Other Chinese Assistance
One million U.S. dollars in humanitarian aid to help internally displaced persons.
Technical assistance for demining operations in the Northern and Eastern Provinces .
China’s humanitarian assistance is meagre. Its assistance focuses on areas which could benefit its strategic goals.
Chinese Military Equipment Supplied for Use Against LTTE
Jian-7 fighter jets, anti-aircraft guns and JY-11 3D air surveillance radars .Average military supplies to Sri Lanka estimated at US $ 100 million per annum.
Exploration of Oil & Gas
The policy of the Rajapaksa Government is whatever benefit is offered to India, an equal benefit will be offered to China. It offered one block each without bids in the Gulf of Mannar area to India and China for exploration.
India’s Response
No public articulation of Indian concerns.
It is not known whether there has been any private articulation through diplomatic channels and, if so, how strong & effective.
With the SL Government having subdued the Tamils with Indian, Chinese and Pakistani assistance, India no longer has this pressure point in Sri Lanka.
Economic pressure may still work because of the large flow of Indian tourists to Sri Lanka and their contribution to the Sri Lankan economy.
The present Government in New Delhi will be disinclined to use economic pressure or engage in a robust response to counter the growing influence of China in Sri Lanka.
One sees no prospect of reversing the gradual erosion of the Indian influence and the growth of the Chinese influence.
India should not keep its economic presence confined only to the Tamil areas. It should be active in the Sinhalese areas too.
India should vigorously exploit its advantages vis-à-vis China---huge Indian market next door to SL, our mastery of the English language, India’s robust corporate sector which should compete against the Chinese companies
• The private sector can compensate for the lack of Indian Government activism in Sri Lanka. The SL Govt. first approached an Indian company for the Hambantota project. When the response was negative, they approached China.When they invited bids for a new container terminal at Colombo, no Indian company responded. Only a Chinese company did.
( The presenter is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India,New Delhi, and Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. Also associated with the Chennai Centre For China Studies. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com Paper presented on April 12,2010, at a seminar on Sri Lanka jointly organised by the Indian Centre for South Asian Studies and the Centre For Asia Studies, both of Chennai.)
INTRODUCTION
Sri Lanka has a right to develop close relations with China and Pakistan. India cannot legitimately oppose it.
At the same time, the Government of India has a duty to take note of the various aspects of the relations, which could be detrimental to our national security and evolve an appropriate policy response.
The policy response could be either actively countering their influence in Sri Lanka or actively promoting our interests in Sri Lanka or a mix of both.
Another response could be in the form of a mix of incentives and disincentives---- incentives to make it worthwhile for Sri Lanka to have closer relations with India than with China or Pakistan and disincentives if it is insensitive to India’s concerns and interests.
A good incentive could be by making the huge Indian market easily accessible to the goods and services of Sri Lanka, by making it worthwhile for Sri Lankan students to study in India, by sharing our IT expertise with Sri Lanka, by encouraging networking between the corporate worlds of the two countries etc
A strong disincentive could be by using our traditional pressure points in Sri Lanka such as the dependence of Sri Lanka’s tourism economy on Indian tourists, the goodwill for India in large sections of SL society etc
Unfortunately, we are yet to work out a comprehensive and workable policy response.
We are worried over the increasing Chinese influence and its implications for India’s security, but we do not articulate our concerns. We pretend as if Indian and Chinese interests will never clash in Sri Lanka and we try to give an impression that we can take it in our stride.
Our policy response, if at all there is any, is ad hoc and not strategic with the immediate and long-term interests influencing the response.
China’s policy, on the other hand, caters to its interests of today as well as its likely interests of tomorrow and the day after. There is nothing ad hoc about it.
China is not a South Asian power, but has acquired a robust South Asian presence through its carefully-cultivated relations with Pakistan, Sri Lanka, the Maldives, Bangladesh and Nepal.
China is not an Indian Ocean power, but it is seeking to acquire a robust Indian Ocean presence through its relations with Myanmar, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Maldives, Mauritius & Seychelles.
India is a South Asian and Indian Ocean power, but its South Asian and Indian Ocean influence is being eroded by the increasing inroads of China at the expense of India.
This presentation will focus essentially on China and not on Pakistan.The threat to us from Pakistan through Sri Lanka is more tactical than strategic, more subversive than military, more political than economic. China is a dragon, but Pakistan is still only a pinprick.
We should be alert to the possibility of China and Pakistan acting in tandem in Sri Lanka and the Maldives to undermine the Indian influence, but there is as yet no evidence of this possibility becoming a reality, but it could in the long-term.Our policy response should nip this bud before it starts blooming.Beyond this caution, I will not say anything else on Pakistan in this presentation.
General Observations & Quotes
Under President Mahinda Rajapaksa, Chinese presence and influence in Sri Lanka have increased.He has visited China thrice since assuming office. Increase in bilateral interactions and exchange of visits.Sri Lanka opened a consulate—its second one in China—in Chengdu, where Pakistan already has an active Consulate.The Chengdu Military Region coordinates China’s military strategy in South Asia.
“China and Sri Lanka are long standing friends. China never deserted Sri Lanka in its times of distress”---Rajapaksa in April 2008 while inaugurating the construction of Sri Lanka’s National Theatre of Performing Arts to be built with Chinese assistance.
“The friendly relationship between the two countries has stood long test and the two countries are tested friends. Sri Lanka has always firmly stood by and will never change its stance on one-China policy”—Rajapaksa on September 4,2009, while receiving a delegation of the Chinese Communist Party.
“The Chinese Government endeavors to develop its friendship and cooperation with Sri Lanka on the basis of the Five Principles of Peaceful Co-Existence. Chinese enterprises are contracted to build the Hambantota port. Any vicious distortion of the normal business deal holds no water. Social stability, economic development and ethnic reconciliation of Sir Lanka serve the shared aspiration and fundamental interest of the Sri Lankan people. We sincerely hope this goal can be achieved at an early date” ---.Chinese Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Ma Zhaoxu at his regular press conference on May 12, 2009.
“Sri Lanka’s traditional donors, namely, the United States, Canada and the European Union, had receded into a very distant corner to be replaced by countries in the East. The new donors are neighbors; they are rich; and they conduct themselves differently. Asians don’t go around teaching each other how to behave.There are ways we deal with each other — perhaps a quiet chat, but not wagging the finger. Chinese assistance has grown fivefold in the last year to nearly $1 billion, eclipsing Sri Lanka’s longtime biggest donor, Japan” ---Palitha Kohona, Sri Lankan Foreign Secretary as quoted by the “New York Times” dated March 9,2008
Bilateral Trade
Trade between the two countries has doubled over the last 5 years from US$ 660 million to US$ 1.13 billion, making China the second largest exporter to Sri Lanka and the 13th largest export destination for Sri Lanka’s exports.
"We have paid far too much attention to the export markets in the US and now we need to move towards the Asian giant China. We have had an over dependence in the US market for our exports for too long," Prof. A. D. V. De S. Indraratna, President, Sri Lanka Economic Association.
Sri Lanka exports coconut fiber products, natural rubber, tea, spices, precious and semi-precious stones and ready made garments to China. There has been a significant increase of Sri Lankan exports to China since 2000, mainly due to the bulky export of mineral sands as zicronium ores , coir fiber and electrical components etc. The exports of mineral sands rose from Rs. 10 million in 2001 to Rs. 226 million in 2008. Only 0.45 per cent of Sri Lanka’s total exports go to China, but 12 per cent of its total imports come from China.
Project Assistance—Hambantota Port
The foundation for the construction of a modern port with Chinese assistance at Hambantota in southern Sri Lanka was formally laid in October,2007. The construction actually started in January,2008.
It is a 15-year project to be completed in stages. The entire project is estimated to cost US $ one billion. The present Chinese commitment is for the construction of the first stage only, which is estimated to cost US $ 360 million. China has agreed to give 85 per cent of this amount at concessional interest. The balance is being contributed by the Government of Sri Lanka.
The first stage of the 15-year (2008-2023) project is expected to be completed by the end of 2010. This stage envisages the construction of a 1000-metre jetty, which will enable the harbour to function as an industrial port for the import and export of industrial chemicals, fuel and heavy machinery. By 2023, Hambantota is projected to have a liquefied natural gas refinery, aviation fuel storage facilities, three separate docks giving the port a transshipment capacity and dry docks for ship repair and construction. The project also envisages that when completed the port will serve as a base for bunkering and refueling.
The draught (depth) of the new harbour will be 16 metres against 15 metres in Colombo. A 230 metre passage-entrance channel will be created at the breakwater which is 988 metres long on the west end and 311 metres long on the east end.
The Government hopes that as a refueling location Hambantota will have many advantages over the Colombo port or ports in South India. The construction has been undertaken by a consortium of Chinese companies headed by the China Harbour Engineering Company and the Sino Hydro Corporation.
The project doesn’t have a separate consultant. The Sri Lanka Port Authority (SLPA) is functioning as the client-cum-consultant while the China Harbour Engineering Co Ltd is the contractor. In September,2008,there were 328 Sri Lankans and 235 Chinese working at the site-engineers, administrative personnel and others. The present number is not known.
The first stage due to be ready by end 2010 will allow three
ships to berth. The final stage, for which there is no offer of funding yet from China, is planned to accommodate more than 30 ships, which is the present capacity at Colombo.
Reliable reports say that while the Sri Lankan authorities want Hambantota to emerge as a modern port with better facilities and efficiency than any of the ports in South India, they do not want the present importance of the Colombo port to be reduced. Colombo presently has the reputation of being the most modern and most efficient port in South Asia. They want this reputation to be maintained. There is no proposal at present to set up container yards and cater to container ships at Hambantota.
The present Chinese interest is in the use of the docking and refueling facilities that would come up in Hambantota for their commercial and naval ships. There is no proposal at present for a Chinese naval base at Hambantota.
New Container Terminal at Colombo
Chinese port operator China Merchants Holdings (International) is negotiating with the Sri Lankan authorities a contract for the construction of a new container terminal at Colombo. The company has bid for the contract jointly with a Sri Lankan company Aitken Spence.
Maththala Airport--Hambantota
On November 27,2009, Rajapaksa inaugurated the construction of Sri Lanka's second international airport at Maththala in Hambantota.
The new airport will be constructed on a plot of 2,000 hectares in Hambantota district at a cost of US$ 190 million. The Government of the People's Republic of China will provide financial assistance for the project with a soft loan through its Ex-Im Bank.. According to the Ports and Aviation Ministry, the construction of the airport will be completed in two phases. All basic facilities including runways, taxiways and parking facilities will be completed in the first phase to be completed by 2011. All other airport and aviation related facilities will be completed in the second phase. These include servicing and repairing centre for aircraft, hotels, pilot training centre, maintenance hub, private jet parking, and technical training centers. The Government hopes to commission the airport by the end of 2011 and land the first flight by December 2011.
Other Projects with Chinese Assistance
The construction of the Colombo--Katunayake Expressway.( US $ 248 million)
Improvement of the railways---US $ 100 million to be given by China’s Ex-Im Bank. Agreement signed on March 10,2010.
Norochcholai Coal Power Plant (US$855 million)
A flood protection system for Colombo suburbs of Kotte, Dehiwela-Mount Lavinia, Maharagama, Kesbewa and Moratuwa. ( US $ 59 million) To be given by China Construction Bank.
National Theatre of Performing Arts in Colombo ( US $ 21 million)
Sri Lanka's investment promotion agency, the Board of Investment, announced in July,2009, it has signed a deal with China's Huichen Investment to manage a special economic zone dedicated to Chinese investors. Huichen will invest US $28 million in the zone in Mirigama, north of Colombo, to improve infrastructure in the first phase over three years.The company, a conglomerate that specialises in infrastructure development and does coal and iron ore mining, will also market the zone and attract Chinese investors.
More than 50 per cent of the funding received by Sri Lanka from abroad for construction and development projects since Rajapaksa came to power came from China.
"Since 2007, Sri Lanka has been trying to launch a communication satellite. China has agreed to provide financial and technical assistance," Executive Director of the Institute of Policy Studies, Dr. Saman Kelegama was quoted as saying in November 2009. In May 2009, Priyantha Kariyapperuma, Director-General of the Telecommunications Regulatory Commission, had said that the Government had begun work on a space programme hoping to launch two communication satellites. "The University of Surrey specializes in satellite technology having created about 35 satellites. They have made a presentation to President Mahinda Rajapakse and have entered into an agreement to transfer technology and knowledge to our universities," he told the Island Financial Review. Kariyapperuma said a consortium of vice chancellors from universities with engineering faculties had been formed for this purpose. He said the Government planned to launch two communication satellites—a lower earth orbit satellite used mainly for images and a geo stationary communication satellite. The two satellites will be used not only for communication purposes but also for disaster management, agriculture planning, irrigation planning, town/urban planning and coastal conservation. He said the low earth orbiting satellite could be financed with domestic funds particularly from the Telecommunication Development Fund. The private sector would also be called to contribute to the development of the two satellites.
Chinese Project Assistance—Some Features
All except a thermal power plant in Sinhalese majority areas.
The Chinese have agreed to consider project proposals from the Tamil areas in future, including a proposal for improvement of road communications in the Jaffna peninsula.
Projects of Concern from India’s security point of view
Hambantota Port: Though at present there is no talk of a naval base, it could emerge ultimately to cater to the requirements of Chinese oil & gas tankers and anti-piracy patrols.
Communications satellite with Chinese assistance could be used for the collection of TECHINT about India’s nuclear and space establishments in South India.
Other Chinese Assistance
One million U.S. dollars in humanitarian aid to help internally displaced persons.
Technical assistance for demining operations in the Northern and Eastern Provinces .
China’s humanitarian assistance is meagre. Its assistance focuses on areas which could benefit its strategic goals.
Chinese Military Equipment Supplied for Use Against LTTE
Jian-7 fighter jets, anti-aircraft guns and JY-11 3D air surveillance radars .Average military supplies to Sri Lanka estimated at US $ 100 million per annum.
Exploration of Oil & Gas
The policy of the Rajapaksa Government is whatever benefit is offered to India, an equal benefit will be offered to China. It offered one block each without bids in the Gulf of Mannar area to India and China for exploration.
India’s Response
No public articulation of Indian concerns.
It is not known whether there has been any private articulation through diplomatic channels and, if so, how strong & effective.
With the SL Government having subdued the Tamils with Indian, Chinese and Pakistani assistance, India no longer has this pressure point in Sri Lanka.
Economic pressure may still work because of the large flow of Indian tourists to Sri Lanka and their contribution to the Sri Lankan economy.
The present Government in New Delhi will be disinclined to use economic pressure or engage in a robust response to counter the growing influence of China in Sri Lanka.
One sees no prospect of reversing the gradual erosion of the Indian influence and the growth of the Chinese influence.
India should not keep its economic presence confined only to the Tamil areas. It should be active in the Sinhalese areas too.
India should vigorously exploit its advantages vis-à-vis China---huge Indian market next door to SL, our mastery of the English language, India’s robust corporate sector which should compete against the Chinese companies
• The private sector can compensate for the lack of Indian Government activism in Sri Lanka. The SL Govt. first approached an Indian company for the Hambantota project. When the response was negative, they approached China.When they invited bids for a new container terminal at Colombo, no Indian company responded. Only a Chinese company did.
( The presenter is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India,New Delhi, and Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. Also associated with the Chennai Centre For China Studies. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com Paper presented on April 12,2010, at a seminar on Sri Lanka jointly organised by the Indian Centre for South Asian Studies and the Centre For Asia Studies, both of Chennai.)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)