INTERNATIONAL TERRORISM MONITOR--PAPER NO.674
B.RAMAN
The Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) and the anti-Shia Lashkar-e-Jhangvi (LEJ), which is an affiliate of Al Qaeda, have both claimed responsibility for the murderous attacks through suicide bombers on Shia processions during the holy fasting period at Lahore on September 1, 2010, and Quetta on September 3,2010. The Shia procession in Lahore was a normal one with no political significance. The procession in Quetta was in observance of Al Quds Day on the last Friday of the fasting period. Al Quds is the name of the historic mosque in East Jerusalem, which is under Israeli control since 1967. Ever since Israel occupied East Jerusalem in 1967, Muslims all over the world observe the last Friday of the fasting period as Al Quds Day to remind each other that Al Quds is still under the control of Israel.
2. The call for the observance of the last Friday of the fasting period as Al Quds Day was given by Ayatollah Khomeini in a message issued by him to all the Muslims of the world----Shias as well as Sunnis---in August 1979. He said in his message: " I invite Muslims all over the globe to consecrate the last Friday of the holy month of Ramadan as Al-Quds Day and to proclaim the international solidarity of Muslims in support of the legitimate rights of the Muslim people of Palestine. For many years, I have been notifying the Muslims of the danger posed by the usurper Israel which today has intensified its savage attacks against the Palestinian brothers and sisters, and which, in the south of Lebanon in particular, is continually bombing Palestinian homes in the hope of crushing the Palestinian struggle. I ask all the Muslims of the world and the Muslim governments to join together to sever the hand of this usurper and its supporters. I call on all the Muslims of the world to select as Al-Quds Day the last Friday in the holy month of Ramadan - which is itself a determining period and can also be the determiner of the Palestinian people’s fate - and through a ceremony demonstrating the solidarity of Muslims world-wide, announce their support for the legitimate rights of the Muslim people. I ask God Almighty for the victory of the Muslims over the infidels."
3. Thirty-three people, mostly Shias, died in the explosions in Lahore and 55 in Quetta. Attacks on Shias are not unusual in Pakistan, but the attacks this year have been very virulent. In the past the Sunni extremists used to attack the Shias when they were highlighting their sectarian identity. On September 3, they attacked them even when they were highlighting their solidarity with all Muslims---Sunnis and Shias--- in renewing the pledge of the Islamic world not to rest till Al Quds was liberated from Israeli control.
4. Even though the TTP and the LEJ have projected the attacks on the processions as in reprisal for the murder of a Sunni cleric last year allegedly by the Shias, there is another angle to the anti-Shia attacks this year. The fasting period this year has coincided with the proclaimed end of the US military mission in Iraq. Sunni extremists have always held Iran and the Shias responsible for facilitating the US invasion and occupation of Iraq and accused them of collaborating with the US against Saddam Hussein.Ayman al-Zawahiri, the No 2 of Al Qaeda, had in the past accused Iran of stabbing the Ummah in the back by facilitating the US occupation of Iraq.
5. Al Qaeda, the TTP and the LEJ have a common objective in making Iran pay a price for its collaboration with the US in Iraq. In the Islamic world, anti-Shia feelings are the strongest in Pakistan. The loyalty of the Shias of Pakistan to Iran remains strong. In the past, the LEJ had attacked not only Shia targets, but also Iranian targets. It had killed Iranian diplomats and has allegedly been assisting the Jundullah, the Sunni organisation of Iranian Balochistan, which has been fighting against the Iranian regime.
6. The attacks on Shias observing Al Quds Day in Quetta were meant to punish not only the Shias of Pakistan, but also Iran. Generally, Iranian diplomats join Al Quds Day processions in different cities of Pakistan. One should not be surprised if there were some Iranian diplomats in the Quetta procession.
7. The international community has not taken note of the continuing siege of the Shias of the Kurram Agency in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) by the Afghan and Pakistani Taliban. The Shias call Kurram the Pakistani Gaza and have been repeatedly appealing to the international community to end the siege by the Taliban. They accuse the Pakistan Army and its Chief of the Army Staff, Gen.Ashfaq Pervez Kayani of inaction while pretending to act against the two Talibans.
8. The mutual hostility of the Shias and Sunnis of Pakistan towards each other shows no signs of abating. On the contrary, it has been increasing as seen by recent anti-Shia attacks in Karachi, Lahore and Quetta. ( 4-9-10)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai, and Associate of the Chennai Centre For China Studies. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
Friday, September 3, 2010
Thursday, September 2, 2010
MY THOUGHTS ON THE MAOIST HOSTAGE-TAKING IN BIHAR
B.RAMAN
The Maoists of Bihar kidnapped on August 29,2010, Sub-Inspectors Rupesh Kumar and Abhay Prasad Yadav, Bihar Military Police havildar Ehtesham Khan and BMP ASI Lucas Tete after an encounter in the Kajra police station area the same day, which left eight policemen dead. They reportedly demanded the release of eight Maoists who are in the custody of the local authorities for allegedly having been involved in Maoist acts of violence.
2.Following the alleged absence of any move by the Bihar Government to establish contact with them before the deadline indicated by them for talks on their demand expired, they claim to have killed Sub-Inspector Abhay Prasad Yadav. They have not yet provided proof of their claim, but have promised to return Yadav's dead body to the police. They have further extended the deadline till 10 AM on September 3 and threatened to kill the other hostages if their demand is not met,
3.There is considerable indignation and shock over the claimed execution of S.I. Yadav.All TV news channels are devoting considerable attention to a discussion of the development with the participation of representatives of political parties and some retired bureaucrats.Participating in a debate on CNN-IBN anchored by Shri Rajdeep Sardesai, a leading TV anchor, at 9 PM on September 2, I pointed out that the hostage-takers will be watching the debates on different TV channels and any impression of differences as to how to deal with the situation could make a difficult situation even more difficult. I stressed the importance of everyone talking in a single voice in condemning the hostage-takers. I also stressed the importance of the State Government remaining in touch with the families of the hostages in order to keep them in the picture on the evolving situation and reassure them that everything possible was being done to rescue the hostages.
4.We should not forget that the failure of the Government of the then Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee in December 1999 to remain in touch with the families of the passengers in an Indian Airlines plane hijacked to Kandahar by some terrorists of the Pakistan-backed and Pakistan-based Harkat-ul-Mujahideen led to a surge in protests from the relatives and their public and media supporters. This was one of the factors which forced the Government of Shri Vajpayee to concede the demand of the hijackers for the release of some Pakistani terrorists in the custody of the Government of Jammu & Kashmir (J&K).
5. The Indian TV coverage of the Kandahar hijacking and the Manila TV coverage of a recent hostage-taking incident involving a sacked Filipino police officer on August 23 showed how ill-advised coverage and comments by the participants in the TV discussions could prove counter -productive and lead to a tragedy. There has been considerable criticism in Manila of the TV coverage, with some experts holding it partly responsible for the tragic death of eight of the hostages, who were allegedly killed by the hostage-taker who was losing patience.
6. One has to emphasise the importance of balance in the TV discussions while the hostage-taking situation continues. It would be a good idea for the TV anchors to caution the participants in the beginning of the discussions that the situation is continuing and that they should keep in mind the strong possibility that the hostage-takers will be watching the TV discussions. Leaders of political parties too should caution their media persons deputed to participate in the debates. Retired bureaucrats participating in the debates should also remember that their comments will be closely watched and noted by the hostage-takers.
7. At this stage, when the hostage-taking continues, only some general observations would be in order:
* Firstly, it would be unwise to treat the present incident as an act of desperation of the Maoists. It is more an indicator of their ruthless determination to continue their fight against the Government with no holds barred.
* Secondly, the Maoists' calculation in exploiting the police officers captured during an encounter with the police as hostages has two objectives---to discredit the Government of Bihar in the eyes of the public and to try to drive a wedge between junior and senior police officers and between the police and the political leadership by projecting the senior officers and the political leaders as insensitive to the agony of the relatives.
8. It is important for the crisis managers of the Governments of Bihar and India to keep these factors constantly in view while planning and carrying out their strategy to deal with the situation. Any other comments of a specific nature relating to the handling of the situation would be unwise at this stage.The entire nation should make it clear that it is behind the brave attempts of the security agencies, including the Bihar Police, to rescue the hostages and that it shares the agony of the relatives of the hostages. ( 3-9-10)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai, and Associate of the Chennai Centre For China Studies. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
The Maoists of Bihar kidnapped on August 29,2010, Sub-Inspectors Rupesh Kumar and Abhay Prasad Yadav, Bihar Military Police havildar Ehtesham Khan and BMP ASI Lucas Tete after an encounter in the Kajra police station area the same day, which left eight policemen dead. They reportedly demanded the release of eight Maoists who are in the custody of the local authorities for allegedly having been involved in Maoist acts of violence.
2.Following the alleged absence of any move by the Bihar Government to establish contact with them before the deadline indicated by them for talks on their demand expired, they claim to have killed Sub-Inspector Abhay Prasad Yadav. They have not yet provided proof of their claim, but have promised to return Yadav's dead body to the police. They have further extended the deadline till 10 AM on September 3 and threatened to kill the other hostages if their demand is not met,
3.There is considerable indignation and shock over the claimed execution of S.I. Yadav.All TV news channels are devoting considerable attention to a discussion of the development with the participation of representatives of political parties and some retired bureaucrats.Participating in a debate on CNN-IBN anchored by Shri Rajdeep Sardesai, a leading TV anchor, at 9 PM on September 2, I pointed out that the hostage-takers will be watching the debates on different TV channels and any impression of differences as to how to deal with the situation could make a difficult situation even more difficult. I stressed the importance of everyone talking in a single voice in condemning the hostage-takers. I also stressed the importance of the State Government remaining in touch with the families of the hostages in order to keep them in the picture on the evolving situation and reassure them that everything possible was being done to rescue the hostages.
4.We should not forget that the failure of the Government of the then Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee in December 1999 to remain in touch with the families of the passengers in an Indian Airlines plane hijacked to Kandahar by some terrorists of the Pakistan-backed and Pakistan-based Harkat-ul-Mujahideen led to a surge in protests from the relatives and their public and media supporters. This was one of the factors which forced the Government of Shri Vajpayee to concede the demand of the hijackers for the release of some Pakistani terrorists in the custody of the Government of Jammu & Kashmir (J&K).
5. The Indian TV coverage of the Kandahar hijacking and the Manila TV coverage of a recent hostage-taking incident involving a sacked Filipino police officer on August 23 showed how ill-advised coverage and comments by the participants in the TV discussions could prove counter -productive and lead to a tragedy. There has been considerable criticism in Manila of the TV coverage, with some experts holding it partly responsible for the tragic death of eight of the hostages, who were allegedly killed by the hostage-taker who was losing patience.
6. One has to emphasise the importance of balance in the TV discussions while the hostage-taking situation continues. It would be a good idea for the TV anchors to caution the participants in the beginning of the discussions that the situation is continuing and that they should keep in mind the strong possibility that the hostage-takers will be watching the TV discussions. Leaders of political parties too should caution their media persons deputed to participate in the debates. Retired bureaucrats participating in the debates should also remember that their comments will be closely watched and noted by the hostage-takers.
7. At this stage, when the hostage-taking continues, only some general observations would be in order:
* Firstly, it would be unwise to treat the present incident as an act of desperation of the Maoists. It is more an indicator of their ruthless determination to continue their fight against the Government with no holds barred.
* Secondly, the Maoists' calculation in exploiting the police officers captured during an encounter with the police as hostages has two objectives---to discredit the Government of Bihar in the eyes of the public and to try to drive a wedge between junior and senior police officers and between the police and the political leadership by projecting the senior officers and the political leaders as insensitive to the agony of the relatives.
8. It is important for the crisis managers of the Governments of Bihar and India to keep these factors constantly in view while planning and carrying out their strategy to deal with the situation. Any other comments of a specific nature relating to the handling of the situation would be unwise at this stage.The entire nation should make it clear that it is behind the brave attempts of the security agencies, including the Bihar Police, to rescue the hostages and that it shares the agony of the relatives of the hostages. ( 3-9-10)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai, and Associate of the Chennai Centre For China Studies. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
Wednesday, September 1, 2010
INDIA MISSES AN OPPORTUNITY FOR HUMANITARIAN INTERVENTION IN GILGIT-BALTISTAN
B.RAMAN
The Gilgit-Baltistan (GB) area of Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir (POK) was one of the first and worst to be affected by the floods caused by the recent monsoon and breaches of dams and water reservoirs in Pakistan. The damages spread from there to other parts of Pakistan. The devastation caused by flash floods in GB preceded that in Ladakh and was even worse. Finding that the Pakistan Government was unable and unwilling ----because of the floods in other areas--- to come to the help of the people of GB, local nationalist organizations sent out SOS messages to India and the other members of the international community to help them. These messages started coming in from the second week of August.
2. In a direct appeal to the international community, Mr. Abdul Hamid Khan of the Balawaristan National Front of GB stated as follows: “52 people have died and 160 rendered homeless in the village Qamrah of occupied Gilgit Baltistan region, and 22 have died, 40 rendered homeless in village Talas, 45 died and 70 injured in Giyes of Diamar. Similarly, in Talas 22 people were killed and 40 houses destroyed while in Hotoo, Rondu, Darel, Tangir, Botogah, Khinar, Thor, Hoodoor,Babusar, Gini, Hunza Nagir, Chhamoogardh Colony of Konodas and Skarkooi, Gilgit, Ghowadi Baltistan, Yasen, Gulaper, Isshqaman, Damas, Ginday, Sandhi, Hondoor, Dahrkoot, Mastuj, Booni, Garam Chashma, Yarkhoon in Chitral, and Koli and Pattan in Kohistan over 500 people have lost their lives whereas, more than half a million have become homeless and nearly 50,000 families have completely lost everything, including land, shelter, livestock and all means of living". I had referred to this message in my article dated August 26,2010, titled “SOS from Khyber Pakhtunkwa, Balochistan & Gilgit-Baltistan” at http://www.southasiaanalysis.org/papers40/paper4000.html
3. In a statement disseminated from Skardu, Mr.Manzoor Hussain Parwana, the Chairman of the Gilgit-Baltistan United Movement (GBUM) demanded that the Indian aid coming for relief victims should also be shared with the people of Gilgit Baltistan. He also demanded that the Kargil-Skardu and the Astore-Srinagar roads should be opened immediately to provide relief to the local people. He requested the international community to play a greater role in providing relief to the flood victims of GB. He said: “The region is cut off from the rest of the world for the last 20 days due to flashfloods and landslides. Commodity and food prices have skyrocketed and causing famine like situation. Many villages have been flattened. Lack of medicines has caused endemic diseases in the region. GB is a disputed territory under Pakistani administration. The people of GB have no hope from the Pakistani Government since the country itself is in crisis and the regime lacks the capacity and the will to provide for the millions of flood victims in the rest of the country. While the rulers look towards the international community for help, the relief is coming at much slower pace due to lack of credibility of the Pakistani authorities, who embezzled billions of rupees of relief funds during the 2005 earthquake in Kashmir. Given the circumstances, the international community and especially neighbouring countries have to enhance their direct influence in the relief work."
4. He further said that the current puppet government of GB had failed to repair the road network. “Every village is cut off from the rest and no relief has reached the affectees. Government has resorted to releasing statements in the newspapers and made false claims of improvement in the conditions of the natives. With the closure of the Karakoram Highway (KKH), the Gilgit-Skardu Road, the Ghizer-Chitral road, and the Hunza-China section of the KKH, the prices of food items have increased. Food items, kerosene and gasoline are not available in the markets. The problems will continue to increase as the situation worsens. Pakistani helicopters are only working to evacuate the foreigners and military officials and related loved ones, and have failed to service the poor natives. This is sheer discrimination towards the people of GB. Pakistan has conspired to disrupt traffic on the Kargil-Skardu road and the Astore-Gurez road for all these years. Further, the creation of the Ataabad Lake has obstructed traffic to China for the coming months. Under these circumstances, the Government must make immediate effort to open the Kargil-Skardu road to provide relief to the affected people of Skardu district, Shigar district, Gangche district, Kharmang district, Astore district and Deosai-Gultari district. In the same manner, the Ishkoman road to Tajikistan and Wakhan should be opened to benefit the people of Ghizer district. The road from Astore to Srinagar must be used immediately to supply food and ration to the poor two million people of the region. In this great time of need, the people of GB expect neighbors to play a greater role in rehabilitation."
5. In a statement to the media on August 16, Chief Minister Mehdi Shah of GB said that the situation in GB was worsening due to a breakdown of road network and civic facilities in the region. "It is beyond the capacity of the Gilgit-Baltistan government to cope with the situation." He said that he had requested the Federal Government to provide Rs10 billion for the rehabilitation and compensation of the affected people. According to him, the area had been cut off from the rest of the country for the last one month as the Karakoram Highway, which was the lifeline for the region, was totally damaged. Work for its restoration has been started but it will take a considerable time to restore traffic. Fuel and essential commodities had been running out of stock in the region and the Government was supplying it through the Kaghan-Naran road.
6.The desperate SOS messages from the people and nationalist elements in GB were not noticed in New Delhi. The Government of India did not refer to the plight of the people of GB while announcing its offer of the first instalment of assistance amounting to US $ five million for flood relief in Pakistan. Nor has it made a reference to the plight of the people of GB, Balochistan and Khyber Pakhtunkwa while making its offer of the second instalment of US $ 20 million on August 31. It did not even issue a statement expressing its sympathy and solidarity with the people of GB. During his visit to the flood-affected areas in Ladakh, Prime Minister Dr.Manmohan Singh could have made a statement saying that his heart went out to the people of GB, many of whom are related to people in our Kargil area. Such thoughts never occur to him.
7. We were lethargic, negligent and insensitive in our response. Look at what the Chinese did. They mobilized their disaster relief machinery in Xinjiang and Sichuan. They set up a special facility in the Kashgar area of Xinjiang to rush to the aid of the affected people in Baltistan. They brought in the Chinese Red Cross to oversee the flow of assistance. Relief material in the form of food articles, water purification plants, mineral water bottles and medicines were rushed across to Baltistan. The engineers of the PLA were mobilized and sent into GB to repair the damages caused to the KKH and other roads and to restore electricity which totally failed in the entire GB region.
8 Admitted that we could not have done all this even if we had wanted to. Pakistan permitted the Chinese to do this and was happy to hand over the responsibility for disaster relief in GB to the Chinese. There was panic in Islamabad that taking advantage of the collapse of the administration in GB, India might make a humanitarian intervention of its own on the ground that GB is Indian territory. It urged the Chinese to do a humanitarian intervention in GB. They were happy to do it. We missed an opportunity to make a humanitarian intervention of our own. We did not even open our mouth on the plight of the people of GB.Can we blame Beijing if the people of the area start looking up to China?
9. This may also be read as my comments on the recent article in the “New York Times” by Selig Harrison on Pakistan handing over de facto control of parts of GB to the Chinese. ( 2-9-10)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai, and Associate of the Chennai Centre For China Studies. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
The Gilgit-Baltistan (GB) area of Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir (POK) was one of the first and worst to be affected by the floods caused by the recent monsoon and breaches of dams and water reservoirs in Pakistan. The damages spread from there to other parts of Pakistan. The devastation caused by flash floods in GB preceded that in Ladakh and was even worse. Finding that the Pakistan Government was unable and unwilling ----because of the floods in other areas--- to come to the help of the people of GB, local nationalist organizations sent out SOS messages to India and the other members of the international community to help them. These messages started coming in from the second week of August.
2. In a direct appeal to the international community, Mr. Abdul Hamid Khan of the Balawaristan National Front of GB stated as follows: “52 people have died and 160 rendered homeless in the village Qamrah of occupied Gilgit Baltistan region, and 22 have died, 40 rendered homeless in village Talas, 45 died and 70 injured in Giyes of Diamar. Similarly, in Talas 22 people were killed and 40 houses destroyed while in Hotoo, Rondu, Darel, Tangir, Botogah, Khinar, Thor, Hoodoor,Babusar, Gini, Hunza Nagir, Chhamoogardh Colony of Konodas and Skarkooi, Gilgit, Ghowadi Baltistan, Yasen, Gulaper, Isshqaman, Damas, Ginday, Sandhi, Hondoor, Dahrkoot, Mastuj, Booni, Garam Chashma, Yarkhoon in Chitral, and Koli and Pattan in Kohistan over 500 people have lost their lives whereas, more than half a million have become homeless and nearly 50,000 families have completely lost everything, including land, shelter, livestock and all means of living". I had referred to this message in my article dated August 26,2010, titled “SOS from Khyber Pakhtunkwa, Balochistan & Gilgit-Baltistan” at http://www.southasiaanalysis.org/papers40/paper4000.html
3. In a statement disseminated from Skardu, Mr.Manzoor Hussain Parwana, the Chairman of the Gilgit-Baltistan United Movement (GBUM) demanded that the Indian aid coming for relief victims should also be shared with the people of Gilgit Baltistan. He also demanded that the Kargil-Skardu and the Astore-Srinagar roads should be opened immediately to provide relief to the local people. He requested the international community to play a greater role in providing relief to the flood victims of GB. He said: “The region is cut off from the rest of the world for the last 20 days due to flashfloods and landslides. Commodity and food prices have skyrocketed and causing famine like situation. Many villages have been flattened. Lack of medicines has caused endemic diseases in the region. GB is a disputed territory under Pakistani administration. The people of GB have no hope from the Pakistani Government since the country itself is in crisis and the regime lacks the capacity and the will to provide for the millions of flood victims in the rest of the country. While the rulers look towards the international community for help, the relief is coming at much slower pace due to lack of credibility of the Pakistani authorities, who embezzled billions of rupees of relief funds during the 2005 earthquake in Kashmir. Given the circumstances, the international community and especially neighbouring countries have to enhance their direct influence in the relief work."
4. He further said that the current puppet government of GB had failed to repair the road network. “Every village is cut off from the rest and no relief has reached the affectees. Government has resorted to releasing statements in the newspapers and made false claims of improvement in the conditions of the natives. With the closure of the Karakoram Highway (KKH), the Gilgit-Skardu Road, the Ghizer-Chitral road, and the Hunza-China section of the KKH, the prices of food items have increased. Food items, kerosene and gasoline are not available in the markets. The problems will continue to increase as the situation worsens. Pakistani helicopters are only working to evacuate the foreigners and military officials and related loved ones, and have failed to service the poor natives. This is sheer discrimination towards the people of GB. Pakistan has conspired to disrupt traffic on the Kargil-Skardu road and the Astore-Gurez road for all these years. Further, the creation of the Ataabad Lake has obstructed traffic to China for the coming months. Under these circumstances, the Government must make immediate effort to open the Kargil-Skardu road to provide relief to the affected people of Skardu district, Shigar district, Gangche district, Kharmang district, Astore district and Deosai-Gultari district. In the same manner, the Ishkoman road to Tajikistan and Wakhan should be opened to benefit the people of Ghizer district. The road from Astore to Srinagar must be used immediately to supply food and ration to the poor two million people of the region. In this great time of need, the people of GB expect neighbors to play a greater role in rehabilitation."
5. In a statement to the media on August 16, Chief Minister Mehdi Shah of GB said that the situation in GB was worsening due to a breakdown of road network and civic facilities in the region. "It is beyond the capacity of the Gilgit-Baltistan government to cope with the situation." He said that he had requested the Federal Government to provide Rs10 billion for the rehabilitation and compensation of the affected people. According to him, the area had been cut off from the rest of the country for the last one month as the Karakoram Highway, which was the lifeline for the region, was totally damaged. Work for its restoration has been started but it will take a considerable time to restore traffic. Fuel and essential commodities had been running out of stock in the region and the Government was supplying it through the Kaghan-Naran road.
6.The desperate SOS messages from the people and nationalist elements in GB were not noticed in New Delhi. The Government of India did not refer to the plight of the people of GB while announcing its offer of the first instalment of assistance amounting to US $ five million for flood relief in Pakistan. Nor has it made a reference to the plight of the people of GB, Balochistan and Khyber Pakhtunkwa while making its offer of the second instalment of US $ 20 million on August 31. It did not even issue a statement expressing its sympathy and solidarity with the people of GB. During his visit to the flood-affected areas in Ladakh, Prime Minister Dr.Manmohan Singh could have made a statement saying that his heart went out to the people of GB, many of whom are related to people in our Kargil area. Such thoughts never occur to him.
7. We were lethargic, negligent and insensitive in our response. Look at what the Chinese did. They mobilized their disaster relief machinery in Xinjiang and Sichuan. They set up a special facility in the Kashgar area of Xinjiang to rush to the aid of the affected people in Baltistan. They brought in the Chinese Red Cross to oversee the flow of assistance. Relief material in the form of food articles, water purification plants, mineral water bottles and medicines were rushed across to Baltistan. The engineers of the PLA were mobilized and sent into GB to repair the damages caused to the KKH and other roads and to restore electricity which totally failed in the entire GB region.
8 Admitted that we could not have done all this even if we had wanted to. Pakistan permitted the Chinese to do this and was happy to hand over the responsibility for disaster relief in GB to the Chinese. There was panic in Islamabad that taking advantage of the collapse of the administration in GB, India might make a humanitarian intervention of its own on the ground that GB is Indian territory. It urged the Chinese to do a humanitarian intervention in GB. They were happy to do it. We missed an opportunity to make a humanitarian intervention of our own. We did not even open our mouth on the plight of the people of GB.Can we blame Beijing if the people of the area start looking up to China?
9. This may also be read as my comments on the recent article in the “New York Times” by Selig Harrison on Pakistan handing over de facto control of parts of GB to the Chinese. ( 2-9-10)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai, and Associate of the Chennai Centre For China Studies. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
Tuesday, August 31, 2010
A CHINESE CALL FOR NAVAL TRUST-BUILDING IN ASIA
B.RAMAN
At a time when there is already concern over the increasing assertiveness of the Chinese Navy in the South and East China Seas, the first port call by two ships of the Chinese Navy in Myanmar while on their way back from anti-piracy patrols in the Gulf has aroused considerable interest and some concern in the neighbouring countries.
2.China has a long history of army-army cooperation with Myanmar, including a militaery supply relationship. It has also been helping Myanmar in building an oil/gas terminal at Kyaukpu off the Arakan coast. The new port, when completed, will place three modern ports at the disposal of China----the other two being Gwadar on the Mekran coast of Pakistan and Hambantota in Sri Lanka. The Bangladesh Government is interested in securing Chinese assistance for the modernisation of the Chittagong port.
3.Till now, the Chinese authorities and the Governments of Sri Lanka, Myanmar and Bangladesh have projected these ports as purely commercial ventures with no naval significance. Only Pakistan makes no secret of the significance of Gwadar for the navies of Pakistan and China. It hopes that a modern naval base at Gwadar will give the Pakistan Navy a strategic depth by reducing its dependence on the Karachi port, which is vulnerable to attacks by the Indian Navy. It is prepared to offer the proposed naval base at Gwadar to the Chinese Navy for use by its naval ships visiting the Indian Ocean and the Gulf.
4.Some retired Chinese naval officers are of the view that a viable Indian Ocean fleet for their navy would require forward bases in this area. How to acquire such bases without adding to the alarm of the US, which is already talking of the Chinese assertiveness in the Indian Ocean area as Admiral Mike Mullen, Chairman, US Joint Chiefs of Staff, did during his recent visit to New Delhi? The Chinese have not yet openly reacted to his comments though they reacted quickly and vehemently to the comments of Mrs.Hillary Clinton, the US Secretary of State, on the Chinese naval assertiveness in the South China Sea at the recent Asean Regional Forum meeting at Hanoi.
5.The US view of the Chinese intentions in the Indian Ocean are still confused despite the lucid remarks of Admiral Mullen. While he was clear and forthcoming, Ms.Michele Flournoy, the US Under-Secretary of Defence, was not that forthcoming during her visit to Delhi in the third week of August to prepare for the forthcoming visit of Shri A.K.Antony, our Defence Minister, to the US. She avoided any reference to the Chinese activities in the Indian Ocean area.
6.Her remarks could be interpreted as discouraging any Indian expectation of major Indo-US naval co-operation against Chinese forays into the Indian Ocean as one of the possible results of the forthcoming visit of President Barack Obama to New Delhi coming November. She reportedly told the Indian media on August 10: " There has been tremendous progress in the number of joint exercises, but the need is to make them meaningful so that they are reflective of the real world situation....The exercises must prepare both sides to jointly undertake counter-piracy operations, humanitarian assistance and disaster relief. We also have to respond to maritime security and freedom of navigation against those contesting the accepted rules of the world. We will have to work to prevent that. We have to be prepared in terms of capability."
7.The visit of the two Chinese naval ships to the Yangon port in Myanmar must have been under preparation for some time and could not have been the Chinese way of reacting to the pronouncements of US officials while visiting New Delhi. At the same time, the port call in Myanmar proclaims openly the beginning of Chinese activism, if not assertiveness, in the Indian Ocean region.
8.The Chinese have taken note of the speculation in India and elsewhere as to what the port visit portends. Is it an innocent halt while returning home from the Gulf or does it have a strategic significance? Is it meant to convey a message to the US and the Indian Navies that China has core interests in the Indian Ocean too as it has in the South and East China Seas? This subject should figure in the agenda of the forthcoming talks with Mr.Obama when he visits New Delhi.
9.To calm any frenzied speculation over the Chinese intention, the Party-owned "Global Times", in an editoriial on September 1, has proposed a naval trust-building exercise among the Asian navies. The text of the editorial is annexed.
10.This may pleae be read in continuation of my article dated July 24,2010, titled MONITORING CHINA'S NAVAL ASSERTIVENESS at
http://www.southasiaanalysis.org/%5Cpapers40%5Cpaper3944.html and article dated August 10,2010, titled "CHINA: A Wake-Up Call for Vietnam & India" at http://www.southasiaanalysis.org/%5Cpapers40%5Cpaper3974.html (1-9-10)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai, and Associate of the Chennai Centre For China Studies. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
ANNEXURE ( Editorial carried by the "Global Times" on September 1,2010)
Asian navies should trust each other
The Chinese navy's first-ever port call to Myanmar on Sunday (August 29) has triggered plenty of noise and speculation in India.
The Indian press aligns Myanmar with Pakistan, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka, where they believe China has helped build port facilities, and conclude that the neighboring giant is aimed at building a "string of pearls" for greater space on the Indian Ocean - long considered India's backyard.
Just like the strong reactions from Japan when China's warships made their way through the first island chain into the Pacific Ocean, every step the fledgling power makes to test its wings has been met with suspicion.
The biggest fear, as some foreign strategists asserted, is that China may flex its muscles from one ocean to another, and eventually become a frightening superpower cruising around the world's blue waters.
What a grand picture these strategists are drawing. Some amateur military "experts" will jump into the air over the slightest mention of such an ambitious plan.
The reality of the situation is much less exciting than their fantasies.
Only two escort ships back from their missions to protect Chinese trade fleets from piracy in waters off the Somali coast visited Myanmar. On the way home, the escort group made port calls to Egypt, Italy and Greece.
Conspiracy theories aside, China's navy has been growing stronger over the past few years, and has been reaching places it has never reached before.
Not surprisingly, Japan, South Korea, India and some Southeast Asian countries are concerned.
These countries should be more concerned about the US, the only real super power, which could cause trouble by stoking feelings of discontent.
China has to pay attention to the concerns arising naturally from its neighbors in Asia.
A stronger Chinese navy does not necessarily mean a threat, but an additional peace-keeping force, as is shown in the gulf of Aden.
The fear aimed at the Chinese navy is a dangerous result of neighboring countries' suspicion and mistrust over China's rise.
The process to resolve this mistrust is the same process to resolve the "China threat" theory.
A lack of communications has built up this mistrust and misjudgment.
The Chinese government may try to establish a communication mechanism between navies in Asia.
Only through the better exchange of ideas and explanations can the other countries fully understand the Chinese navy's willingness to cooperate instead of compete.
Asia's navies should not repeat history in the Atlantic Ocean where world powers tried to use their naval powers to conquer each other.
At a time when there is already concern over the increasing assertiveness of the Chinese Navy in the South and East China Seas, the first port call by two ships of the Chinese Navy in Myanmar while on their way back from anti-piracy patrols in the Gulf has aroused considerable interest and some concern in the neighbouring countries.
2.China has a long history of army-army cooperation with Myanmar, including a militaery supply relationship. It has also been helping Myanmar in building an oil/gas terminal at Kyaukpu off the Arakan coast. The new port, when completed, will place three modern ports at the disposal of China----the other two being Gwadar on the Mekran coast of Pakistan and Hambantota in Sri Lanka. The Bangladesh Government is interested in securing Chinese assistance for the modernisation of the Chittagong port.
3.Till now, the Chinese authorities and the Governments of Sri Lanka, Myanmar and Bangladesh have projected these ports as purely commercial ventures with no naval significance. Only Pakistan makes no secret of the significance of Gwadar for the navies of Pakistan and China. It hopes that a modern naval base at Gwadar will give the Pakistan Navy a strategic depth by reducing its dependence on the Karachi port, which is vulnerable to attacks by the Indian Navy. It is prepared to offer the proposed naval base at Gwadar to the Chinese Navy for use by its naval ships visiting the Indian Ocean and the Gulf.
4.Some retired Chinese naval officers are of the view that a viable Indian Ocean fleet for their navy would require forward bases in this area. How to acquire such bases without adding to the alarm of the US, which is already talking of the Chinese assertiveness in the Indian Ocean area as Admiral Mike Mullen, Chairman, US Joint Chiefs of Staff, did during his recent visit to New Delhi? The Chinese have not yet openly reacted to his comments though they reacted quickly and vehemently to the comments of Mrs.Hillary Clinton, the US Secretary of State, on the Chinese naval assertiveness in the South China Sea at the recent Asean Regional Forum meeting at Hanoi.
5.The US view of the Chinese intentions in the Indian Ocean are still confused despite the lucid remarks of Admiral Mullen. While he was clear and forthcoming, Ms.Michele Flournoy, the US Under-Secretary of Defence, was not that forthcoming during her visit to Delhi in the third week of August to prepare for the forthcoming visit of Shri A.K.Antony, our Defence Minister, to the US. She avoided any reference to the Chinese activities in the Indian Ocean area.
6.Her remarks could be interpreted as discouraging any Indian expectation of major Indo-US naval co-operation against Chinese forays into the Indian Ocean as one of the possible results of the forthcoming visit of President Barack Obama to New Delhi coming November. She reportedly told the Indian media on August 10: " There has been tremendous progress in the number of joint exercises, but the need is to make them meaningful so that they are reflective of the real world situation....The exercises must prepare both sides to jointly undertake counter-piracy operations, humanitarian assistance and disaster relief. We also have to respond to maritime security and freedom of navigation against those contesting the accepted rules of the world. We will have to work to prevent that. We have to be prepared in terms of capability."
7.The visit of the two Chinese naval ships to the Yangon port in Myanmar must have been under preparation for some time and could not have been the Chinese way of reacting to the pronouncements of US officials while visiting New Delhi. At the same time, the port call in Myanmar proclaims openly the beginning of Chinese activism, if not assertiveness, in the Indian Ocean region.
8.The Chinese have taken note of the speculation in India and elsewhere as to what the port visit portends. Is it an innocent halt while returning home from the Gulf or does it have a strategic significance? Is it meant to convey a message to the US and the Indian Navies that China has core interests in the Indian Ocean too as it has in the South and East China Seas? This subject should figure in the agenda of the forthcoming talks with Mr.Obama when he visits New Delhi.
9.To calm any frenzied speculation over the Chinese intention, the Party-owned "Global Times", in an editoriial on September 1, has proposed a naval trust-building exercise among the Asian navies. The text of the editorial is annexed.
10.This may pleae be read in continuation of my article dated July 24,2010, titled MONITORING CHINA'S NAVAL ASSERTIVENESS at
http://www.southasiaanalysis.org/%5Cpapers40%5Cpaper3944.html and article dated August 10,2010, titled "CHINA: A Wake-Up Call for Vietnam & India" at http://www.southasiaanalysis.org/%5Cpapers40%5Cpaper3974.html (1-9-10)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai, and Associate of the Chennai Centre For China Studies. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
ANNEXURE ( Editorial carried by the "Global Times" on September 1,2010)
Asian navies should trust each other
The Chinese navy's first-ever port call to Myanmar on Sunday (August 29) has triggered plenty of noise and speculation in India.
The Indian press aligns Myanmar with Pakistan, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka, where they believe China has helped build port facilities, and conclude that the neighboring giant is aimed at building a "string of pearls" for greater space on the Indian Ocean - long considered India's backyard.
Just like the strong reactions from Japan when China's warships made their way through the first island chain into the Pacific Ocean, every step the fledgling power makes to test its wings has been met with suspicion.
The biggest fear, as some foreign strategists asserted, is that China may flex its muscles from one ocean to another, and eventually become a frightening superpower cruising around the world's blue waters.
What a grand picture these strategists are drawing. Some amateur military "experts" will jump into the air over the slightest mention of such an ambitious plan.
The reality of the situation is much less exciting than their fantasies.
Only two escort ships back from their missions to protect Chinese trade fleets from piracy in waters off the Somali coast visited Myanmar. On the way home, the escort group made port calls to Egypt, Italy and Greece.
Conspiracy theories aside, China's navy has been growing stronger over the past few years, and has been reaching places it has never reached before.
Not surprisingly, Japan, South Korea, India and some Southeast Asian countries are concerned.
These countries should be more concerned about the US, the only real super power, which could cause trouble by stoking feelings of discontent.
China has to pay attention to the concerns arising naturally from its neighbors in Asia.
A stronger Chinese navy does not necessarily mean a threat, but an additional peace-keeping force, as is shown in the gulf of Aden.
The fear aimed at the Chinese navy is a dangerous result of neighboring countries' suspicion and mistrust over China's rise.
The process to resolve this mistrust is the same process to resolve the "China threat" theory.
A lack of communications has built up this mistrust and misjudgment.
The Chinese government may try to establish a communication mechanism between navies in Asia.
Only through the better exchange of ideas and explanations can the other countries fully understand the Chinese navy's willingness to cooperate instead of compete.
Asia's navies should not repeat history in the Atlantic Ocean where world powers tried to use their naval powers to conquer each other.
VISIT OF KIM JONG-IL TO CHINA---AN ASSESSMENT
B.RAMAN
Kim Jong-il, General Secretary of the Workers' Party of Korea and Chairman of North Korea’s National Defense Commission, visited China from August 26 to 30,2010. This is his second visit to China this year. He had earlier visited China in May last. Underlining the significance of the visit, the "China Daily" said in an article: "Never before has Kim paid two visits abroad within a year."
2. The visit by train was first detected by the South Korean intelligence and reported by the South Korean media. Western news agencies picked up news of the visit from the South Korean media. The Chinese and North Korean authorities and the Government/party controlled media of the two countries maintained silence on the visit till the morning of August 30. On the morning of August 30, the Chinese media for the first time commented on the reports carried by the South Korean and Western media on the visit without confirming that he was in China. The confirmation came later that day on the Chinese Central TV after he had returned to North Korea. The TV reported that President Hu Jintao had met Kim Jong-il in Changchun, the capital of the Jilin province, on August 27. It carried visuals of the meeting between the two leaders and a report on a banquet hosted by Mr.Hu in honour of the North Korean leader.
3. Kim's visit was confined to Jilin and Heilongjiang, where he visited several agricultural and industrial establishments---- reportedly in order to learn from the Chinese experience in the modernisation of its economy. In this connection, the Chinese media referred to a visit earlier made by him ----without saying when--- to Vietnam to learn from its experience in modernisation. Kim visited a food processing factory, a high-speed train factory and an elementary school in Jilin where his father, the late Kim Sung-Il, had studied in the 1920s.
4. The "China Daily" reported on August 31 that during the talks with Kim President Hu emphasized that it was a basic experience of China's reform over the past three decades that economic development called for self-dependence but cannot be achieved without cooperating with the outside world. Hu reportedly said:”This is the inevitable path of the times that accelerates the development of a country.” According to Piao Jianyi, chief of the Center of Korean Peninsula Studies at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, Kim indicated that North Korea's development will be closely connected with cooperation with China. Piao was of the view that a major party meeting next month in Pyongyang might take important decisions concerning development, probably by drawing inspiration from China's experience.
5. Chinese analysts feel that an important objective of the visit was probably to brief the Chinese leadership on North Korean plans for launching a drive for the modernisation of the North Korean economy. Would that drive be as ambitious as that of China? Would North Korea open up to the outside world---particularly to the West--- as significantly as China had done post-1978? Or would the expected North Korean modernisation and opening-up be in North Korean colours----more gradual with continuing suspicion of the outside world? The answers to these questions are not yet available. They are unlikely to be available in adequate measure even after the coming party meeting next month. North Korea's evolution into a modern economy would most probably come about slowly and almost imperceptibly. There are no indications as yet that its leadership has overcome its paranoia of the West----particularly the US.
6. The second objective was to brief the Chinese leaders about what Kim called "the rising generation" and to reassure Beijing that the expected generational changes would not affect North Korean bonds with China. Kim was quoted as having stated as follows at the banquet hosted by President Hu: "With the international situation remaining complicated, it is our important historical mission to hand over to the rising generation the baton of the traditional friendship passed over by the revolutionary forerunners of the two countries as a precious asset so as to carry it forward through generations."
7. This strengthened speculation that at the party meeting next month Kim might officially indicate his plans for his succession which might involve the elevation of his youngest Swiss-educated son (27 years old) Kim Jong-Un. Why did Kim feel the need to reassure the Chinese that the "rising generation" will be as close to China as the present generation and the preceding one of his father? Was his visit to the Chinese school which his father had attended meant to emphasise the close links of his family with China and calm possible Chinese misgivings about the impact of the Swiss upbringing of Kim Jong-Un on future North Korean policies?
8. The third objective was to discuss with the Chinese leadership a possible return of North Korea to the six-party talks on its nuclear programme and the sequel to the sinking of a South Korean naval ship allegedly by North Korea in March last. The Xinhua news agency reported that Kim told Hu that North Korea remained committed to the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula, and that it "is not willing to see tensions on the peninsula." According to Xinhua, Kim said he wished to maintain close communication and coordination with China in pushing for an early resumption of the Six-Party Talks to ease the tension on the Korean Peninsula, and to maintain peace and stability there. It quoted Hu as telling Kim that maintaining peace and stability on the peninsula accorded with the common aspiration of the people, and China respected and supported positive efforts made by North Korea to ease the situation. The North Korean Central News Agency (KCNA), however, made no mention of the remarks attributed to Kim by Xinhua.
9. Despite these remarks, Chinese analysts are not optimistic about the chances of an early resumption of the Six-Party talks. The “China Daily” has quoted Zhang Liangui, Professor of international strategic research at the Central Party School, as saying as follows: "The US and the DRPK have different expectations on the talks. While the US seeks denuclearization of the peninsula, the DPRK wants to get the UN sanctions on it lifted.”
10. Chinese analysts described as a surprise Kim’s leaving Pyongyang for China when former US President Jimmy Carter was visiting the North Korean capital to secure the release of an American, Aijalon Mahli Gomes, who was sentenced in April to eight years in jail for entering the country illegally. Lü Chao, Director of the North and South Korea Research Center at the Liaoning Academy of Social Sciences, said in an interview: "Carter has a good reputation in North Korea. Kim has met him before. But perhaps Kim missed this meeting on purpose to show his toughness and send a message that it will not bow to US pressure after a series of military drills between the US and South Korea."
11. Two interesting editorials carried by the Party-owned “Global Times” on the visit on August 30 and 31 are annexed. ( 31-8-10)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai, and Associate of the Chennai Centre For China Studies. E-Mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
ANNEXURE (“ Global Times” editorials)
North Korea's reform and opening-up ( published on August 31,2010)
The fact that North Korean leader Kim Jong-il visited China last week was finally confirmed by the two governments Monday.
Although foreign media continues to speculate about Kim's "succession plan" and whether he brought his son along, there are signs that the North Korean leader is showing an increasing interest in the economy.
In his two visits within about a three-month span, Kim visited a number of cities that are on the frontier of China's booming market economy.
Earlier, he also visited Vietnam, and inspected Russian cities that were undergoing social transformations.
This points to North Korea having a strong interest in opening up and developing its economy. In fact, the country has made several experimental attempts in the past decade or two, including setting up a special economic zone and conducting currency reform.
It is hard to imagine that any country wants to stay poor and isolated. The international community should not marginalize North Korea out of prejudice.
China's rising economy is taking place just across a river from North Korea. There is no reason the North Korean leadership is not willing to learn from China.
Kim Jong-il's latest visit shows his attention to the economy has been growing.
The outside world complains that North Korea has shut itself in. But, they may think otherwise when they consider the existence of a South Korea-US alliance, and the fact that the media in South Korea, the US and Japan have been openly discussing how to overthrow the North's rule.
The West always sees North Korea as one of the world's major threats. But how could a country like North Korea be strong enough to launch a "suicide attack" against them?
Living in the shadows of South Korea, Japan and the US, North Korea has to wrap itself up tighter in order to fend off military threats, and threats of political and cultural infiltration.
North Korea's opening-up will help relieve tensions in Northeast Asia. But, the knot does not only lie on the North's side. Other countries in this region must redouble their efforts to untangle the knot.
These three nations should not bully North Korea any more. China should also try hard to pull North Korea out of its international turmoil.
If the US does not cooperate, South Korea and Japan will have to reconsider their roles. Do they really want to be trapped in a knot made tighter by the US?
China-North Korea's stable relationship ( published on August 30,2010)
North Korean leader Kim Jong-il has become a hot topic in international news media over the past few days, as they speculate about Kim's "secret" trip to northeastern China, and his political mission.
With anonymous sources saying that Kim met with Chinese President Hu Jintao, and Kim likely asked Beijing to concur with North Korea's long-anticipated leadership change, Western media has also been trying to illustrate a "special" relationship between the two countries.
Actually, in today's China, the media seldom uses the word "special" to describe the two countries' relations. It does not necessarily mean China is deliberately shunning the long historical ties the two countries share.
Beijing has long made it clear that it aims to keep the peace on the Korean Peninsula via a normal China-North Korea relationship.
North Korea has become a marginalized member of Northeast Asia. When China, South Korea and Japan compete with each other and become further involved with each other's economies, the North is like a forgotten island.
Many in China have begun to complain that the isolated North Korea brings too much trouble for China in international relations, and the two countries' relationship should not go back to a "special" status.
However, as a result of historical and geopolitical reasons, the current China-North Korea relationship is not a simple one. This also explains why Kim Jong-il visits China frequently.
Every coin has two sides. The China-North Korea relationship gives other interested countries too much hope of bringing North Korea back to the negotiation table over the North's nuclear weapons program.
The other countries unrealistically expect China has a strong hand to teach its little brother a lesson when it gets naughty.
Perhaps they do not know that North Korea has a strong mind to make its own decisions. Also, China's diplomatic principle is to not interfere with another country's internal affairs.
However, North Korea is an active variable in Northeast Asia, and keeping a stable relationship with it will give China an edge in taking the initiative in international affairs in this region.
The seeming trouble made by North Korea is actually a reflection of Cold War mentalities that separate the Korean Peninsula into the North and the South, and the US has a big part in the region's confusion.
China is not a passive player in Northeast Asia. A stable relationship with North Korea does not mean China has to be an enemy of Japan, South Korea or the US.
As long as China carefully balances international relations in this region, the China-North Korea relationship will not become a negative factor, but a positive boost toward Northeast Asia's peace and prosperity.
China will continue to encourage and help North Korea open up to the world, which will be conducive to the peace in Northeast Asia.
Kim Jong-il, General Secretary of the Workers' Party of Korea and Chairman of North Korea’s National Defense Commission, visited China from August 26 to 30,2010. This is his second visit to China this year. He had earlier visited China in May last. Underlining the significance of the visit, the "China Daily" said in an article: "Never before has Kim paid two visits abroad within a year."
2. The visit by train was first detected by the South Korean intelligence and reported by the South Korean media. Western news agencies picked up news of the visit from the South Korean media. The Chinese and North Korean authorities and the Government/party controlled media of the two countries maintained silence on the visit till the morning of August 30. On the morning of August 30, the Chinese media for the first time commented on the reports carried by the South Korean and Western media on the visit without confirming that he was in China. The confirmation came later that day on the Chinese Central TV after he had returned to North Korea. The TV reported that President Hu Jintao had met Kim Jong-il in Changchun, the capital of the Jilin province, on August 27. It carried visuals of the meeting between the two leaders and a report on a banquet hosted by Mr.Hu in honour of the North Korean leader.
3. Kim's visit was confined to Jilin and Heilongjiang, where he visited several agricultural and industrial establishments---- reportedly in order to learn from the Chinese experience in the modernisation of its economy. In this connection, the Chinese media referred to a visit earlier made by him ----without saying when--- to Vietnam to learn from its experience in modernisation. Kim visited a food processing factory, a high-speed train factory and an elementary school in Jilin where his father, the late Kim Sung-Il, had studied in the 1920s.
4. The "China Daily" reported on August 31 that during the talks with Kim President Hu emphasized that it was a basic experience of China's reform over the past three decades that economic development called for self-dependence but cannot be achieved without cooperating with the outside world. Hu reportedly said:”This is the inevitable path of the times that accelerates the development of a country.” According to Piao Jianyi, chief of the Center of Korean Peninsula Studies at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, Kim indicated that North Korea's development will be closely connected with cooperation with China. Piao was of the view that a major party meeting next month in Pyongyang might take important decisions concerning development, probably by drawing inspiration from China's experience.
5. Chinese analysts feel that an important objective of the visit was probably to brief the Chinese leadership on North Korean plans for launching a drive for the modernisation of the North Korean economy. Would that drive be as ambitious as that of China? Would North Korea open up to the outside world---particularly to the West--- as significantly as China had done post-1978? Or would the expected North Korean modernisation and opening-up be in North Korean colours----more gradual with continuing suspicion of the outside world? The answers to these questions are not yet available. They are unlikely to be available in adequate measure even after the coming party meeting next month. North Korea's evolution into a modern economy would most probably come about slowly and almost imperceptibly. There are no indications as yet that its leadership has overcome its paranoia of the West----particularly the US.
6. The second objective was to brief the Chinese leaders about what Kim called "the rising generation" and to reassure Beijing that the expected generational changes would not affect North Korean bonds with China. Kim was quoted as having stated as follows at the banquet hosted by President Hu: "With the international situation remaining complicated, it is our important historical mission to hand over to the rising generation the baton of the traditional friendship passed over by the revolutionary forerunners of the two countries as a precious asset so as to carry it forward through generations."
7. This strengthened speculation that at the party meeting next month Kim might officially indicate his plans for his succession which might involve the elevation of his youngest Swiss-educated son (27 years old) Kim Jong-Un. Why did Kim feel the need to reassure the Chinese that the "rising generation" will be as close to China as the present generation and the preceding one of his father? Was his visit to the Chinese school which his father had attended meant to emphasise the close links of his family with China and calm possible Chinese misgivings about the impact of the Swiss upbringing of Kim Jong-Un on future North Korean policies?
8. The third objective was to discuss with the Chinese leadership a possible return of North Korea to the six-party talks on its nuclear programme and the sequel to the sinking of a South Korean naval ship allegedly by North Korea in March last. The Xinhua news agency reported that Kim told Hu that North Korea remained committed to the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula, and that it "is not willing to see tensions on the peninsula." According to Xinhua, Kim said he wished to maintain close communication and coordination with China in pushing for an early resumption of the Six-Party Talks to ease the tension on the Korean Peninsula, and to maintain peace and stability there. It quoted Hu as telling Kim that maintaining peace and stability on the peninsula accorded with the common aspiration of the people, and China respected and supported positive efforts made by North Korea to ease the situation. The North Korean Central News Agency (KCNA), however, made no mention of the remarks attributed to Kim by Xinhua.
9. Despite these remarks, Chinese analysts are not optimistic about the chances of an early resumption of the Six-Party talks. The “China Daily” has quoted Zhang Liangui, Professor of international strategic research at the Central Party School, as saying as follows: "The US and the DRPK have different expectations on the talks. While the US seeks denuclearization of the peninsula, the DPRK wants to get the UN sanctions on it lifted.”
10. Chinese analysts described as a surprise Kim’s leaving Pyongyang for China when former US President Jimmy Carter was visiting the North Korean capital to secure the release of an American, Aijalon Mahli Gomes, who was sentenced in April to eight years in jail for entering the country illegally. Lü Chao, Director of the North and South Korea Research Center at the Liaoning Academy of Social Sciences, said in an interview: "Carter has a good reputation in North Korea. Kim has met him before. But perhaps Kim missed this meeting on purpose to show his toughness and send a message that it will not bow to US pressure after a series of military drills between the US and South Korea."
11. Two interesting editorials carried by the Party-owned “Global Times” on the visit on August 30 and 31 are annexed. ( 31-8-10)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai, and Associate of the Chennai Centre For China Studies. E-Mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
ANNEXURE (“ Global Times” editorials)
North Korea's reform and opening-up ( published on August 31,2010)
The fact that North Korean leader Kim Jong-il visited China last week was finally confirmed by the two governments Monday.
Although foreign media continues to speculate about Kim's "succession plan" and whether he brought his son along, there are signs that the North Korean leader is showing an increasing interest in the economy.
In his two visits within about a three-month span, Kim visited a number of cities that are on the frontier of China's booming market economy.
Earlier, he also visited Vietnam, and inspected Russian cities that were undergoing social transformations.
This points to North Korea having a strong interest in opening up and developing its economy. In fact, the country has made several experimental attempts in the past decade or two, including setting up a special economic zone and conducting currency reform.
It is hard to imagine that any country wants to stay poor and isolated. The international community should not marginalize North Korea out of prejudice.
China's rising economy is taking place just across a river from North Korea. There is no reason the North Korean leadership is not willing to learn from China.
Kim Jong-il's latest visit shows his attention to the economy has been growing.
The outside world complains that North Korea has shut itself in. But, they may think otherwise when they consider the existence of a South Korea-US alliance, and the fact that the media in South Korea, the US and Japan have been openly discussing how to overthrow the North's rule.
The West always sees North Korea as one of the world's major threats. But how could a country like North Korea be strong enough to launch a "suicide attack" against them?
Living in the shadows of South Korea, Japan and the US, North Korea has to wrap itself up tighter in order to fend off military threats, and threats of political and cultural infiltration.
North Korea's opening-up will help relieve tensions in Northeast Asia. But, the knot does not only lie on the North's side. Other countries in this region must redouble their efforts to untangle the knot.
These three nations should not bully North Korea any more. China should also try hard to pull North Korea out of its international turmoil.
If the US does not cooperate, South Korea and Japan will have to reconsider their roles. Do they really want to be trapped in a knot made tighter by the US?
China-North Korea's stable relationship ( published on August 30,2010)
North Korean leader Kim Jong-il has become a hot topic in international news media over the past few days, as they speculate about Kim's "secret" trip to northeastern China, and his political mission.
With anonymous sources saying that Kim met with Chinese President Hu Jintao, and Kim likely asked Beijing to concur with North Korea's long-anticipated leadership change, Western media has also been trying to illustrate a "special" relationship between the two countries.
Actually, in today's China, the media seldom uses the word "special" to describe the two countries' relations. It does not necessarily mean China is deliberately shunning the long historical ties the two countries share.
Beijing has long made it clear that it aims to keep the peace on the Korean Peninsula via a normal China-North Korea relationship.
North Korea has become a marginalized member of Northeast Asia. When China, South Korea and Japan compete with each other and become further involved with each other's economies, the North is like a forgotten island.
Many in China have begun to complain that the isolated North Korea brings too much trouble for China in international relations, and the two countries' relationship should not go back to a "special" status.
However, as a result of historical and geopolitical reasons, the current China-North Korea relationship is not a simple one. This also explains why Kim Jong-il visits China frequently.
Every coin has two sides. The China-North Korea relationship gives other interested countries too much hope of bringing North Korea back to the negotiation table over the North's nuclear weapons program.
The other countries unrealistically expect China has a strong hand to teach its little brother a lesson when it gets naughty.
Perhaps they do not know that North Korea has a strong mind to make its own decisions. Also, China's diplomatic principle is to not interfere with another country's internal affairs.
However, North Korea is an active variable in Northeast Asia, and keeping a stable relationship with it will give China an edge in taking the initiative in international affairs in this region.
The seeming trouble made by North Korea is actually a reflection of Cold War mentalities that separate the Korean Peninsula into the North and the South, and the US has a big part in the region's confusion.
China is not a passive player in Northeast Asia. A stable relationship with North Korea does not mean China has to be an enemy of Japan, South Korea or the US.
As long as China carefully balances international relations in this region, the China-North Korea relationship will not become a negative factor, but a positive boost toward Northeast Asia's peace and prosperity.
China will continue to encourage and help North Korea open up to the world, which will be conducive to the peace in Northeast Asia.
Monday, August 30, 2010
CHINESE NAVAL SHIPS MAKE PORT CALL IN MYANMAR FOR THE FIRST TIME
B.RAMAN
The Government-controlled Xinhua news agency of China disseminated the following news on August 30,2010:
"The 5th Escort Task group of the Chinese People's Liberation Army (PLA)- Navy, made up of two warships -- "Guanhzhou" and "Caohu" --- made a friendly call at Myanmar Yangon's Thilawa Port Sunday (August 29 ) afternoon.
"It was also the first time for Chinese naval warship to have called at Myanmar port.
"The five-day mission is aimed at promoting friendly relationships between the two armed forces of the two countries and exchange between the two navies.
"A grand ceremony was launched to welcome the Chinese warships amid rain, attended by Major Han Sein, Commander of Myanmar Navy Dockyard Base, Chinese Ambassador to Myanmar Ye Dabo and other embassy officials as well as representatives of Chinese companies, teachers and students based in Myanmar and local Chinese residents totaling about 200.
"After the ceremony, the warships were open to the visitors for viewing.
"During the call, the Chinese PLA escort task group will launch a series of exchanges with the Myanmar navy.
"Myanmar is the fourth country that the 5th Chinese PLA escort task group called on after completing its escort missions in Gulf of Aden and the waters off Somali coast.
"Prior to Myanmar, the escort task group had called on Egypt, Italy and Greece."
My comment: Why the two ships did not make a port call in Sri Lanka?
The Government-controlled Xinhua news agency of China disseminated the following news on August 30,2010:
"The 5th Escort Task group of the Chinese People's Liberation Army (PLA)- Navy, made up of two warships -- "Guanhzhou" and "Caohu" --- made a friendly call at Myanmar Yangon's Thilawa Port Sunday (August 29 ) afternoon.
"It was also the first time for Chinese naval warship to have called at Myanmar port.
"The five-day mission is aimed at promoting friendly relationships between the two armed forces of the two countries and exchange between the two navies.
"A grand ceremony was launched to welcome the Chinese warships amid rain, attended by Major Han Sein, Commander of Myanmar Navy Dockyard Base, Chinese Ambassador to Myanmar Ye Dabo and other embassy officials as well as representatives of Chinese companies, teachers and students based in Myanmar and local Chinese residents totaling about 200.
"After the ceremony, the warships were open to the visitors for viewing.
"During the call, the Chinese PLA escort task group will launch a series of exchanges with the Myanmar navy.
"Myanmar is the fourth country that the 5th Chinese PLA escort task group called on after completing its escort missions in Gulf of Aden and the waters off Somali coast.
"Prior to Myanmar, the escort task group had called on Egypt, Italy and Greece."
My comment: Why the two ships did not make a port call in Sri Lanka?
Sunday, August 29, 2010
OBAMA ADMINISTRATION TURNS FOCUS ON TIBET
B.RAMAN
The administration of President Barack Obama has called for a substantive dialogue without pre-conditions between His Holiness the Dalai Lama and Beijing on the Tibetan issue and called upon the Government of Nepal to honour its past commitment to allow the Tibetans the freedom of travel to India through Nepal.
2. Its annual report on Tibet submitted to the Congress on August 19 says inter alia: “Encouraging substantive dialogue between Beijing and the Dalai Lana is an important foreign policy objective of the United States. We continue to encourage representatives of the PRC and the Dalai Lama to hold direct and substantive discussions aimed at the resolution of difference, without precondition..... The US government believes that the Dalai Lama can be a constructive partner for China as it deals with the difficult challenge of continuing tensions in Tibetan areas. His views are widely reflected within Tibetan society, and he commands the respect of the vast majority of Tibetans. His consistent advocacy on non-violence is an important principle for making progress toward a lasting solution....China's engagement with the Dalai Lama or his representatives to resolve problems facing Tibetans is in the interests of both the Chinese government and the Tibetan people. Failure to address these problems will lead to greater tensions inside China and will be an impediment to China's social and economic development.”
3. The report has been submitted under the Tibet Policy Act 2002, enacted by the Congress during the George Bush Administration. The Act calls upon the Government to submit an annual report to the Congress on the negotiations between His Holiness and the Chinese authorities on the future of Tibet. The report should have been submitted in March last, but the Obama Administration delayed its submission, possibly because of its expectation that China would support strong action against North Korea for sinking a South Korean naval ship in March. The Obama Administration's unhappiness with Beijing's reluctance to support action against North Korea was earlier reflected in its decision to come out openly against the Chinese assertiveness in the South China Sea and is now manifested in its decision to submit its delayed report on Tibet to the Congress and to use strong language in the report.
4. The report expresses Washington's disappointment with the lack of progress in the talks and adds: “We hope that another round will be scheduled soon and will include discussion that will lead to solutions to the problems that Tibet and its people face. We continue to urge both sides to engage in substantive dialogue and hope to see a tenth round of dialogue that will lead to positive movement on questions related to Tibetans’ lives and livelihood.”
5.Beijing has been consistently refusing to discuss with the emissaries of His Holiness deputed for these talks the future of Tibet and other Tibetan-inhabited regions. It has been insisting that these talks should be restricted to discussing the future of His Holiness to which His Holiness is not agreeable.
6. The Nepalese media reported on August 19 that during a meeting with the Nepalese Home Minister, Mr.Bhim Rawal, the previous day at Kathmandu, Mr.Atul Keshap, US acting Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for South and Central Asian Affairs, who was on a visit to Nepal, called upon the Nepal Government to honour its commitment of 1989 under an informal agreement to allow free passage for Tibetan refugees wanting to travel to India. The 1989 agreement, which was brokered by the UN, allows fleeing Tibetans free passage to Dharamsala in India through Nepal. Under Chinese pressure, the Government of Nepal has set up new security posts along the border with Tibet to prevent Tibetan refugees from crossing over into Nepal for going to Dharamsala. In June, the Nepalese border security authorities were reported to have handed over to the Chinese authorities three Tibetans who had crossed over into Nepal from Tibet. China has reportedly been funding the expenditure on the new border posts and has been pressing the Government to suppress anti-Chinese activities by the Tibetan refugees living in Nepal.
7.The Chinese have not yet reacted to these actions by the Obama Administration. During the forthcoming visit of President Obama to India in November, an exchange of views on the progress of the talks between His Holiness and Beijing should be on the agenda. The Government of India should take the initiative in proposing the inclusion of this item on the agenda. His Holiness should also be invited to any reception hosted by our President in honour of President Obama. (30-8-10)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai, and Associate of the Chennai Centre For China Studies. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
The administration of President Barack Obama has called for a substantive dialogue without pre-conditions between His Holiness the Dalai Lama and Beijing on the Tibetan issue and called upon the Government of Nepal to honour its past commitment to allow the Tibetans the freedom of travel to India through Nepal.
2. Its annual report on Tibet submitted to the Congress on August 19 says inter alia: “Encouraging substantive dialogue between Beijing and the Dalai Lana is an important foreign policy objective of the United States. We continue to encourage representatives of the PRC and the Dalai Lama to hold direct and substantive discussions aimed at the resolution of difference, without precondition..... The US government believes that the Dalai Lama can be a constructive partner for China as it deals with the difficult challenge of continuing tensions in Tibetan areas. His views are widely reflected within Tibetan society, and he commands the respect of the vast majority of Tibetans. His consistent advocacy on non-violence is an important principle for making progress toward a lasting solution....China's engagement with the Dalai Lama or his representatives to resolve problems facing Tibetans is in the interests of both the Chinese government and the Tibetan people. Failure to address these problems will lead to greater tensions inside China and will be an impediment to China's social and economic development.”
3. The report has been submitted under the Tibet Policy Act 2002, enacted by the Congress during the George Bush Administration. The Act calls upon the Government to submit an annual report to the Congress on the negotiations between His Holiness and the Chinese authorities on the future of Tibet. The report should have been submitted in March last, but the Obama Administration delayed its submission, possibly because of its expectation that China would support strong action against North Korea for sinking a South Korean naval ship in March. The Obama Administration's unhappiness with Beijing's reluctance to support action against North Korea was earlier reflected in its decision to come out openly against the Chinese assertiveness in the South China Sea and is now manifested in its decision to submit its delayed report on Tibet to the Congress and to use strong language in the report.
4. The report expresses Washington's disappointment with the lack of progress in the talks and adds: “We hope that another round will be scheduled soon and will include discussion that will lead to solutions to the problems that Tibet and its people face. We continue to urge both sides to engage in substantive dialogue and hope to see a tenth round of dialogue that will lead to positive movement on questions related to Tibetans’ lives and livelihood.”
5.Beijing has been consistently refusing to discuss with the emissaries of His Holiness deputed for these talks the future of Tibet and other Tibetan-inhabited regions. It has been insisting that these talks should be restricted to discussing the future of His Holiness to which His Holiness is not agreeable.
6. The Nepalese media reported on August 19 that during a meeting with the Nepalese Home Minister, Mr.Bhim Rawal, the previous day at Kathmandu, Mr.Atul Keshap, US acting Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for South and Central Asian Affairs, who was on a visit to Nepal, called upon the Nepal Government to honour its commitment of 1989 under an informal agreement to allow free passage for Tibetan refugees wanting to travel to India. The 1989 agreement, which was brokered by the UN, allows fleeing Tibetans free passage to Dharamsala in India through Nepal. Under Chinese pressure, the Government of Nepal has set up new security posts along the border with Tibet to prevent Tibetan refugees from crossing over into Nepal for going to Dharamsala. In June, the Nepalese border security authorities were reported to have handed over to the Chinese authorities three Tibetans who had crossed over into Nepal from Tibet. China has reportedly been funding the expenditure on the new border posts and has been pressing the Government to suppress anti-Chinese activities by the Tibetan refugees living in Nepal.
7.The Chinese have not yet reacted to these actions by the Obama Administration. During the forthcoming visit of President Obama to India in November, an exchange of views on the progress of the talks between His Holiness and Beijing should be on the agenda. The Government of India should take the initiative in proposing the inclusion of this item on the agenda. His Holiness should also be invited to any reception hosted by our President in honour of President Obama. (30-8-10)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai, and Associate of the Chennai Centre For China Studies. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)