India wins gold in security
By Rory Medcalf - 15 October 2010 1:31PM
Whatever the mixed reviews of the management side of the 2010 Commonwealth Games in New Delhi, India's security forces deserve praise for their exceptional success in preventing terrorism there.
At the start of the Games, I published a Lowy Institute Perspective explaining the risks and the wider context of terrorism in India. My assessment was that a major attack was unlikely, but that it would very difficult to prevent small attacks on soft targets distant from the Games venues, along the lines of the shootings of two Taiwanese tourists in Old Delhi on 19 September.
Yet preventing more such attacks was precisely what the massive Indian security blanket did. Who knows what scares or near misses we may never hear about, or what plots were thwarted at an early stage. And who knows whether this confirms that, when the military and intelligence powers-that-be in Pakistan do not want to see terrorism in India, suddenly there is a miraculous absence of violence.
Still, it would seem that reform of India's internal security apparatus has come a considerable distance since the disaster of Mumbai in November 2008. In any case, I am delighted if some of the more downbeat elements of my assessment now stand corrected.
India is a prominent target of terrorism — it shares with Israel, the US and its allies the honour of being on Osama Bin Laden's hate list. And it has internal political and security challenges that no other democracy — let alone an authoritarian state — could imagine. The presence of thousands of foreigners in New Delhi for two weeks — many of them from nations previously attacked by jihadis — must have been a tempting target.
India has protected its guests and itself, and on security grounds at least deserves a gold medal.
Friday, October 15, 2010
CHINESE AIR FORCE PLANES REFUEL IN PAKISTAN,IRAN ON WAY TO TURKEY
B.RAMAN
It is learnt that Chinese Air Force planes had re-fueled in Pakistan and Iran last month while on their way to Turkey to participate in a joint air exercise with Turkish Air Force planes. On the way back, they refueled only in Iran. The air exercise preceded the recent visit of Prime Minister Wen Jiabao to Turkey.
2.Turkey’s agreement to hold a joint exercise with the People’s Liberation Army (Air Force) is significant for two reasons. Firstly, Turkey agreed to participate in the exercise and to host Wen despite the considerable unhappiness and anger caused among the religious elements of Turkey last year over the suppression of the Uighurs of Xinjiang by the PLA. The Munich-based World Uighur Congress, which Beijing blamed for the Uighur uprising in Xinjiang last year, enjoys considerable support in Turkey. Secondly, the Obama Administration does not appear to have opposed the joint exercise despite the fact that the planes of the Turkish Air Force that participated in the joint exercise had been given by the US.
3. Some details of the exercise have been carried by the “People’s Daily” of China on the basis of Western and Turkish media reports. The salient points are summarized below:
• Turkish press reports confirmed the unprecedented involvement of PLA ( Air Force) jets in Turkey's annual joint exercises, known as Anatolian Eagle, held over the centre of the country.
• Army Lt. Col. Tamara Parker, a Pentagon spokeswoman, confirmed European press reports of the unusual aerial military exercises involving U.S.-made Turkish jets and Chinese Su-27 fighters that engaged in simulated aerial combat. She said: "The Government of Turkey is committed to the NATO Alliance and the continuation of strong ties to the United States, and Turkey assured us they would take the utmost care related to their possession of U.S. and NATO technologies." However, she did not address the issue of whether the Chinese military might have learned sensitive NATO aerial combat information.
• Jane's Defense Weekly, quoting Turkish diplomatic sources, stated that the exercises involved less-capable U.S.-made F-4s and Chinese Su-27s, but not the more advanced U.S.-made F-16s.
• Ed Timperlake, a former Marine Corps fighter pilot and former Pentagon technology security official, said allowing the Chinese Air Force to exercise with a NATO ally posed security risks. He said: 'The Turkish Air Force helping the PLAAF to see NATO combat tactics and training is a very bad idea. It is deadly serious stuff." He said the exercises and Turkey's warming relations with neighboring Iran should lead the Pentagon to rethink its decision to sell the new F-35 jet to Turkey. Richard Fisher, a specialist on China's military at the International Assessment and Strategy Center, also criticized Turkey's military for conducting aerial exercises with a communist power that posed a threat to U.S. and allied security interests in Asia. "It's not a good thing," he said.Mr. Fisher said Turkey in the late 1990s used Chinese technology to jointly develop short-range B611 missiles.
The Tehran Press TV Online reported that Iran opened its airspace to the Turkish and Chinese jets.
• The daily “Hurriyat” ( of Turkey?) reported that Iran indirectly supported a secret military drill between the Turkish and Chinese Air Forces. Four drill-bound Chinese SU-27 warplanes that took off from bases in China refueled in Iran – the first time the Islamic Republic has ever allowed foreign warplanes to refuel at its airbases, the daily said. The Russian-made SU-27s used by the Chinese Air Force had to refuel in both Pakistan and Iran because of their limited 3,500-kilometer range. Official letters were sent to the two countries prior to the exercise requesting the use of airspace and passage and refueling privileges. The warplanes refueled a second time in Iran on their return to China. The exercise was conducted after two years of deliberations, the report said, adding that its sole purpose was to improve mutual cooperation between the two friendly countries. Washington contacted Ankara ahead of the drill to express concerns over the planned use of F-16 warplanes in a military drill involving China – which the U.S. considers a possible threat. "We expect you to honor the agreement article that requires the exercise of caution regarding the transfer of technology to third countries," the memorandum read. American concerns were taken into consideration and F-16 fighters were replaced by older F-4 models in the exercise.
4.The “China Daily” reported on October 15 that a new Strategic Concept expected to be discussed by a NATO summit to be held in Lisbon next month proposes regular consultations with countries like China and India. The paper said: “However, there is slim hope that China will put on its own agenda the cooperation with the NATO, according to Tao Wenzhao, a professor at the Institute of American Studies of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences. "NATO has been eyeing deeper ties with China for some time, because they are looking for substantial help from China to ease things up in Afghanistan, a nine-year-old war that has required the deployment of 150,000 multinational troops," Tao said. But even if Beijing is supportive of anti-terrorism measures, China remains a country firmly committed to non-alliance. Moreover, it is unlikely China would carry out in-depth cooperation with NATO, an outcome of the cold war, said Tao.”
(15-10-10)
( 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 )
It is learnt that Chinese Air Force planes had re-fueled in Pakistan and Iran last month while on their way to Turkey to participate in a joint air exercise with Turkish Air Force planes. On the way back, they refueled only in Iran. The air exercise preceded the recent visit of Prime Minister Wen Jiabao to Turkey.
2.Turkey’s agreement to hold a joint exercise with the People’s Liberation Army (Air Force) is significant for two reasons. Firstly, Turkey agreed to participate in the exercise and to host Wen despite the considerable unhappiness and anger caused among the religious elements of Turkey last year over the suppression of the Uighurs of Xinjiang by the PLA. The Munich-based World Uighur Congress, which Beijing blamed for the Uighur uprising in Xinjiang last year, enjoys considerable support in Turkey. Secondly, the Obama Administration does not appear to have opposed the joint exercise despite the fact that the planes of the Turkish Air Force that participated in the joint exercise had been given by the US.
3. Some details of the exercise have been carried by the “People’s Daily” of China on the basis of Western and Turkish media reports. The salient points are summarized below:
• Turkish press reports confirmed the unprecedented involvement of PLA ( Air Force) jets in Turkey's annual joint exercises, known as Anatolian Eagle, held over the centre of the country.
• Army Lt. Col. Tamara Parker, a Pentagon spokeswoman, confirmed European press reports of the unusual aerial military exercises involving U.S.-made Turkish jets and Chinese Su-27 fighters that engaged in simulated aerial combat. She said: "The Government of Turkey is committed to the NATO Alliance and the continuation of strong ties to the United States, and Turkey assured us they would take the utmost care related to their possession of U.S. and NATO technologies." However, she did not address the issue of whether the Chinese military might have learned sensitive NATO aerial combat information.
• Jane's Defense Weekly, quoting Turkish diplomatic sources, stated that the exercises involved less-capable U.S.-made F-4s and Chinese Su-27s, but not the more advanced U.S.-made F-16s.
• Ed Timperlake, a former Marine Corps fighter pilot and former Pentagon technology security official, said allowing the Chinese Air Force to exercise with a NATO ally posed security risks. He said: 'The Turkish Air Force helping the PLAAF to see NATO combat tactics and training is a very bad idea. It is deadly serious stuff." He said the exercises and Turkey's warming relations with neighboring Iran should lead the Pentagon to rethink its decision to sell the new F-35 jet to Turkey. Richard Fisher, a specialist on China's military at the International Assessment and Strategy Center, also criticized Turkey's military for conducting aerial exercises with a communist power that posed a threat to U.S. and allied security interests in Asia. "It's not a good thing," he said.Mr. Fisher said Turkey in the late 1990s used Chinese technology to jointly develop short-range B611 missiles.
The Tehran Press TV Online reported that Iran opened its airspace to the Turkish and Chinese jets.
• The daily “Hurriyat” ( of Turkey?) reported that Iran indirectly supported a secret military drill between the Turkish and Chinese Air Forces. Four drill-bound Chinese SU-27 warplanes that took off from bases in China refueled in Iran – the first time the Islamic Republic has ever allowed foreign warplanes to refuel at its airbases, the daily said. The Russian-made SU-27s used by the Chinese Air Force had to refuel in both Pakistan and Iran because of their limited 3,500-kilometer range. Official letters were sent to the two countries prior to the exercise requesting the use of airspace and passage and refueling privileges. The warplanes refueled a second time in Iran on their return to China. The exercise was conducted after two years of deliberations, the report said, adding that its sole purpose was to improve mutual cooperation between the two friendly countries. Washington contacted Ankara ahead of the drill to express concerns over the planned use of F-16 warplanes in a military drill involving China – which the U.S. considers a possible threat. "We expect you to honor the agreement article that requires the exercise of caution regarding the transfer of technology to third countries," the memorandum read. American concerns were taken into consideration and F-16 fighters were replaced by older F-4 models in the exercise.
4.The “China Daily” reported on October 15 that a new Strategic Concept expected to be discussed by a NATO summit to be held in Lisbon next month proposes regular consultations with countries like China and India. The paper said: “However, there is slim hope that China will put on its own agenda the cooperation with the NATO, according to Tao Wenzhao, a professor at the Institute of American Studies of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences. "NATO has been eyeing deeper ties with China for some time, because they are looking for substantial help from China to ease things up in Afghanistan, a nine-year-old war that has required the deployment of 150,000 multinational troops," Tao said. But even if Beijing is supportive of anti-terrorism measures, China remains a country firmly committed to non-alliance. Moreover, it is unlikely China would carry out in-depth cooperation with NATO, an outcome of the cold war, said Tao.”
(15-10-10)
( 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 )
Thursday, October 14, 2010
CHINESE ATTITUDE TO US: TRUST-DISTRUST SYNDROME
B.RAMAN
President Barack Obama has made another overture of likely strategic significance to China, which could be a new landmark in moves to strengthen the strategic partnership between the two countries. This step has been taken despite the differences between the US and China on tactical issues such as the continued US sales of arms to Taiwan, US contacts with His Holiness the Dalai Lama, open expression of US concerns over China's naval assertiveness in the South China Sea and the US demand for the release of Liu Xiaobo, who has been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.
2. The new overture relates to possible Sino-US co-operation in manned spaceflights. An agreement in principle to initiate exploratory talks on this subject had been reached during Obama's visit to China in November,2009. According to the "Global Times" of China (October 15,2010), in pursuance of this agreement, an eight-member team of the US National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) headed by Charles Bolden, its chief who is designated as Administrator,is visiting China from October 16 for talks with their Chinese counterparts. The Chinese are taking the US team on a visit to their space establishments which handle manned flights.
3.According to the "Global Times",some Congressional members including Frank Wolf and John Culberson, both Republicans, have cautioned Bolden that space-exploration cooperation with China has not been approved by the Congress and that bills authorizing NASA research have placed strict limitations on such cooperation with China. In a letter replying to their objection to his proposed visit, Bolden is reported to have stated as follows: "The visit is intended to be introductory in nature and will not include consideration of any specific proposals for human space-flight cooperation or new cooperation in any other areas of NASA's activities.I have also been invited to conduct site visits to Chinese human spaceflight facilities that were not offered to my predecessors."
4. The "Global Times" has quoted Hu Yumin, a senior researcher at the China Arms Control and Disarmament Association, as stating as follows:"Although it has been impossible for the two sides to work out any substantive agreements, the visit could pave the way for possible future cooperation.The US, a leader in space technology, possibly conceives cooperation with China as helpful to addressing obstacles in future US space projects.Many scientists in both countries have longed for cooperation between China and the US. Bolden's trip will not only cement bilateral cooperation but also increase trust between the two countries."
5. One has been seeing a trust-distrust syndrome in Sino-US relations since the beginning of this year. The People's Liberation Army (PLA), particularly the new generation of younger officers who are rising to positions of senior leadership in the military hierarchy, continues to show signs of distrust of the US. This is particularly so in the Navy. In other segments of the Chinese strategic community such as the Foreign Office, the various economic ministries and scientific establishments the distrust of the US is not that pronounced. In fact, these non-military elements in the strategic community seem to be keen to keep the present level of co-operation with the US and even increase it. ( 15-10-10)
( 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 )
President Barack Obama has made another overture of likely strategic significance to China, which could be a new landmark in moves to strengthen the strategic partnership between the two countries. This step has been taken despite the differences between the US and China on tactical issues such as the continued US sales of arms to Taiwan, US contacts with His Holiness the Dalai Lama, open expression of US concerns over China's naval assertiveness in the South China Sea and the US demand for the release of Liu Xiaobo, who has been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.
2. The new overture relates to possible Sino-US co-operation in manned spaceflights. An agreement in principle to initiate exploratory talks on this subject had been reached during Obama's visit to China in November,2009. According to the "Global Times" of China (October 15,2010), in pursuance of this agreement, an eight-member team of the US National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) headed by Charles Bolden, its chief who is designated as Administrator,is visiting China from October 16 for talks with their Chinese counterparts. The Chinese are taking the US team on a visit to their space establishments which handle manned flights.
3.According to the "Global Times",some Congressional members including Frank Wolf and John Culberson, both Republicans, have cautioned Bolden that space-exploration cooperation with China has not been approved by the Congress and that bills authorizing NASA research have placed strict limitations on such cooperation with China. In a letter replying to their objection to his proposed visit, Bolden is reported to have stated as follows: "The visit is intended to be introductory in nature and will not include consideration of any specific proposals for human space-flight cooperation or new cooperation in any other areas of NASA's activities.I have also been invited to conduct site visits to Chinese human spaceflight facilities that were not offered to my predecessors."
4. The "Global Times" has quoted Hu Yumin, a senior researcher at the China Arms Control and Disarmament Association, as stating as follows:"Although it has been impossible for the two sides to work out any substantive agreements, the visit could pave the way for possible future cooperation.The US, a leader in space technology, possibly conceives cooperation with China as helpful to addressing obstacles in future US space projects.Many scientists in both countries have longed for cooperation between China and the US. Bolden's trip will not only cement bilateral cooperation but also increase trust between the two countries."
5. One has been seeing a trust-distrust syndrome in Sino-US relations since the beginning of this year. The People's Liberation Army (PLA), particularly the new generation of younger officers who are rising to positions of senior leadership in the military hierarchy, continues to show signs of distrust of the US. This is particularly so in the Navy. In other segments of the Chinese strategic community such as the Foreign Office, the various economic ministries and scientific establishments the distrust of the US is not that pronounced. In fact, these non-military elements in the strategic community seem to be keen to keep the present level of co-operation with the US and even increase it. ( 15-10-10)
( 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 )
Wednesday, October 13, 2010
OBAMA’S VISIT TO INDIA: HOW TO GET ROUND SPEED-BREAKERS
B.RAMAN
President Barack Obama will be visiting India in November. During his stay , apart from holding talks with Prime Minister Dr.Manmohan Singh and other Indian leaders, he is expected to address a joint session of the Indian Parliament and possibly visit Mumbai. This would be the sixth visit by a US President to India since it became independent in 1947. The previous visits were of Dwight Eisenhower in 1959, Richard Nixon in 1969, Jimmy Carter in 1978, Bill Clinton in 2000 and George Bush in 2006.
2. Obama’s predecessor George Bush visited Afghanistan, India and Pakistan in March 2006. During his stay in India, there was a terrorist attack in Karachi in which an American diplomat posted in the US Consulate was killed. Despite this, Bush went ahead with his visit to Islamabad. His decision to stick to his itinerary despite the Karachi incident spoke highly of the confidence of the US Secret Service in its ability to protect him.
3. During the visit of Bill Clinton in March 2000, no public announcement was made about a visit to Pakistan. He did visit Islamabad for a few hours from a Gulf country before flying back to Washington DC. On the eve of his arrival in New Delhi (March 20,2000), 15-17 terrorists , dressed in army fatigues, entered the village of Chattisinghpora, located in the Anantnag district, ordered all of the Sikh men and boys to assemble at the village gurudwara, and systematically shot and killed 34 of them. Many others were injured.
4. White House officials have been quoted as saying that Obama does not intend visiting Pakistan, but one should not be surprised if after visiting India, Obama makes a quick visit to Pakistan as Clinton did. Indian security agencies should be alert to the possibility of a mass casualty terrorist strike, possibly in J&K, during his visit to embarrass him and the Indian leaders.
5. The forthcoming visit of Obama to India has not given rise to the same excitement and the same kind of expectations as the visit of Bush had done. Since Obama assumed office in January last year, Indo-US relations have lost some of the élan that they had acquired under Bush. During the presidency of Bush, Indo-US relations were rich in symbolism and protocol as well as in substance. Bush and his Secretary of State, MS.Condoleezza Rice, made no secret of their desire to help India emerge as a big Asian power on par with China.
6.Commenting on the visit of Bush to the three countries the “Dawn” of Karachi wrote as follows on March 11,2006: “THE recent visit of President Bush to Afghanistan, India and Pakistan has brought home the point once again that India is and likely to remain for a long time the centrepiece of the US policy towards South Asia. In contrast, Pakistan, despite its services in the war on terror, seems to have lost its earlier pre-eminent position in US foreign policy calculations. The fact that India is a well-established democracy is a source of great strength to its strategic ties with the US which under President Bush has made the promotion of democracy one of the salient features of its foreign policy. Their joint cooperation in combating nuclear proliferation and terrorism is another link bringing the two countries closer together as is the prospect of mutually beneficial cooperation in the fields of economics, commerce, defence and civil nuclear technology. Above all, it is the prospect of the emergence of India as a major power in the 21st century and as a counterweight to China on its southern periphery that is acting like a magnet in attracting US policymakers towards India. Thus, the growing Indo-US strategic relationship neatly dovetails the strategic objectives of a global hegemon and an aspiring regional hegemon.” The “Dawn” was not wide off the mark in its assessment.
7. Under Bush, Indo-US relations were marked by a breath-taking flow of new ideas on how India and the US can work together. To mention some of them--- Indo-US civilian nuclear co-operation, strategic partnership, joint army, air force and naval exercises, Indian naval escort for US warships moving between the Pacific and the Gulf during the Iraq military conflict, co-operation in counter-terrorism and cyber security, joint humanitarian missions to help the victims of the tsunami of December 2004 in the Maldives, Sri Lanka and Indonesia, a concert of democracies consisting of India, the US, Japan and Australia and so on.
8. While the Bush Administration was not enthusiastic about any Indian strategic role in Afghanistan and about a Look West Policy by the Indian Navy lest it add to the concerns of Pakistan, fear of adverse reactions from China was not an inhibiting factor in respect of ideas for Indo-US co-operation in areas to the East of India. Bush and his aides did not try to project China as having a legitimate role in South Asia.
9. The enthusiastic ideas of the Bush Administration relating to Indo-US co-operation were a refreshing departure from the hesitant policies of the Clinton Administration which for the first time, much to the unhappiness of India, brought in the idea of a Chinese strategic role in South Asia during Clinton’s visit to China in June-July 1998. Under Obama, the high symbolism and protocol of the Bush administration have remained, but the substance of the relations has been diluted much to the chagrin of India. Indo-US relations are back to the hesitant days of Clinton. Chinese sensitivies are once again a determining factor influencing policy-making towards South Asia in Washington DC. The reference to the role that China could play in South Asia during Obama’s visit to China in November 2009 showed a reversion back to the days of Bill Clinton.
10. The 22 months of the Obama Administration have been marked by a paucity of ideas as to what India and the US can do together. Apart from the Joint Counter-Terrorism Initiative launched by the two countries during the visit of the Indian Prime Minister to the US in November 2009, there has been hardly any new idea which could be called Obama’s own and over which India could feel excited. Even the Joint Counter-Terrorism Initiative has had an indifferent start due to the disappointing experience of Indian officials relating to the interrogation of David Coleman Headley, of the Chicago cell of the Lashkar-e-Toiba (LET). The pressure exercised by the US on Pakistan to act against Hafiz Mohammad Sayeed, the Amir of the Jamaat-ud-Dawa, and to vigorously prosecute the Pakistan-based conspirators of the Mumbai 26/11 terrorist strikes has been half-hearted and has not produced results to the satisfaction of India. All US Administrations, including that of Bush, have been soft towards Pakistan and have avoided acting against it for sponsoring terrorism against India. The Obama Administration has been particularly so. Its priority is to nudge Pakistan to act against Al Qaeda, the Afghan and Pakistani Talibans and the associates of Al Qaeda posing a threat to US nationals and interests in Afghanistan, in the US homeland and elsewhere. Action against Pakistani Punjabi terrorists posing a threat to Indian nationals and interests, whether in India or in Afghanistan, has a lesser priority.
11.Even more than the Bush Administration, the Obama Administration has been sensitive to Pakistani concerns over India’s presence in Afghanistan to assist the Hamid Karzai Government in matters like medicare, improvement of governance and education, road construction etc. In contrast, the Obama Administration has shown very little concern over the Chinese presence and role in Afghanistan. On the contrary, it has been encouraging China to play its due role as an important regional player by assisting the Governments of both Afghanistan and Pakistan in dealing with terrorism. Richard Holbrooke, Obama’s special envoy on Af-Pak policy, was reported to have visited China to urge a more active role by Beijing in strengthening Pakistan’s counter-terrorism capacity.
12. The reported induction of a large number of Chinese troops into the Gilgit-Baltistan area of Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir (POK) from Xinjiang has hardly elicited any criticism from the Obama Administration. Even Washington’s opposition to Chinese moves to supply two nuclear power stations to Pakistan in disregard of the restrictions of the Nuclear Suppliers Group has been pro forma and half-hearted. Media reports that the Obama Administration might be linking its support for India’s permanent membership of the UN Security Council to forward movement on the Kashmir issue are not encouraging from the point of view of Indo-US relations.
13. The change in the US public stance on the dispute over the South China Sea islands between China and some ASEAN countries has a pointer for India. China has always been contending that it is a bilateral issue in which third parties have no locus standi, The US had not challenged this Chinese stance in the past, but now it has started saying that the US has a locus standi because the territorial dispute affects regional peace and security and freedom of navigation. It has been accepting till now the Indian stance that the Kashmir issue has to be handled bilaterally by India and Pakistan and that third parties have no role in the matter. Pakistani and even some US analysts have been arguing that the settlement of the Kashmir issue should be of legitimate interest to the US because the so-called dispute has implications for regional peace and security. India cannot take for granted continued US silence and neutrality on the Kashmir issue.
14. The Obama Administration has had differences with Beijing over issues such as the sale of US arms to Taiwan, the meeting of Obama with his Holiness the Dalai Lama in the White House and the Chinese naval assertiveness in the South and East China Seas and the extension of the Chinese naval interests to the Indian Ocean region. Despite this, it looks upon China as capable of playing a benign role in South Asia, including Afghanistan. Indian concerns over the increasing Chinese strategic presence in South Asia were understood and appreciated by the Bush Administration, but not by the Obama Administration.
15. Thus, India has every reason to be disappointed with the policies of the Obama Adminstration. Despite this, we should not relent in our efforts to strengthen India’s economic and strategic relations with the US. Indian policy-makers should be realistic enough to realise that there would be limits to US support for India in matters having an impact on our bilateral disputes with China and Pakistan. This is an unpleasant reality to which we must adjust ourselves. Is it possible to develop the strategic partnership despite this unpleasant reality? If so, how to do it? That is a challenge to Indian and US policy-makers.
16.The amazing lead of the US in science and technology is constantly expanding. Neither its Western allies nor the old communist empire headed by the erstwhile USSR nor the newly-emerging powers such as China or India have been able to catch up with the US in this field. Nor will they be ever able to. Neither China nor India will ever be able to make the kind of financial and intellectual investments in S&T that the US has been making. When countries such as China or India seek a strategic partnership with the US, an important motivating factor is the hope of benefiting from the gains made by the US in S&T. Their hopes remain unfulfilled because of the reluctance of the US to share these gains. While there is no limit to the US generosity when it comes to sharing its economic wealth with the rest of the world, it has been the most reluctant to share the advances made by it in S&T. This is one of the reasons for the tardy progress in its strategic partnerships with China or India or other countries. How to break the US inhibitions in sharing at least some of its technologies with India is a question that needs attention.
17.`Of its military power, the USA's naval strength has been the most important component. India is attracted by its naval power. China is overawed by it. India is hoping to emerge as the most important naval power after the US in the Indian Ocean region. It would like to prevent the emergence of China as an important naval power in the same region. Both these objectives would require the benevolent support of the US. There is a greater admiration and goodwill for the US in the Indian Navy than in the Indian Army or Air Force. This is natural and is likely to continue. The Indian Navy needs the US Navy as a helper in capacity-building, as a collaborator in maintaining the freedom of the seas in the Indian Ocean region and as a facilitator in the rise of India as a benign power.
18. Indian policy-makers and public opinion would welcome Indo-US naval co-operation. Similarly, US policy-makers and public opinion would be comfortable with naval co-operation with India, but might not like to get involved with India in its territorial conflicts with China and Pakistan. Navy-Navy ties have to be an important pillar of the Indo-US strategic infrastructure. In working out its policies in this regard, the US faces a dilemma arising from the question: How to help the Indian Navy in maintaining a primacy vis-a-vis China in the Indian Ocean region while ensuring that the newly-acquired strength of the Indian Navy would not be used against Pakistan? This explains the ambivalence in the US policies---- encouraging Indian naval activism in the waters to the East of India, while discouraging it in the waters to the West lest they cause concern to Pakistan. This ambivalence will continue and act as a speed-breaker in the development of Indo-US strategic partnership.
19. In the acquisition of economic power, China is more than a decade ahead of India, which is unlikely to catch up with China in the short and medium terms. The Chinese lead is due to two reasons. Firstly, it opened up its economy 13 years ahead of India in 1978. It realised the importance of the US market and the purchasing power of the US consumers for the growth of its manufacturing sector. China would not have succeeded in developing as rapidly as it did but for its knack of siphoning benefits from the US market. The role of the US market and the US consumers in making possible the Chinese economic miracle has not been adequately realised in India. India is still not paying the required attention to the US market, the US consumers and US businessmen. It thinks it can achieve the same results as China by depending on its own increasingly prosperous consumers. Its hopes are likely to be belied. India's lead over China in the services and the IT sectors will be short-lived. The manufacturing sector needs greater attention and it should be able to compete with China in the US market.
20.The US will ultimately need both China and India to maintain its economic prosperity. For US economic policy-makers, China is a bird in hand. India is only a bird in the bush. How to create a mutual dependence between the US and Indian economies similar to the mutual dependence between the US and Chinese economies? Is it wise to have such dependence at all? These are important questions to be examined by Indian policy-makers and analysts.
21. Indian soft power, which is growing, is not a copy-cat of American soft power. India has sought to learn from the positive points in the US soft power without blindly aping it. The evolution of the Indian soft power owed more to the Indian ethos and culture than to the American influence. China, which has only recently realised the importance of soft power, is seeking to ape the US and other countries of the West. Its admiration for the US soft power is considerable and influences its policy. In determining the present and future directions of the Indo-US strategic partnership, one has been seeing the role of a new component of soft power, which is a common heritage of India and the US----that is, the soft power of the growing Indo-American community in the US. No other immigrant community in the US----not even from Europe or South America----- has played such an important role as the Indo-American community in acting as a catalyst for closer bilateral relations between the US and the country of origin of the immigrants. One saw in the case of the Jewish community in the US the role which a diaspora can play as an element of soft power. One is seeing it now in the case of the diaspora of Indian origin. This soft power can add strength to the Indo-US strategic partnership and should be valued and nourished by the two Governments. ( 14-10-10)
( 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 )
President Barack Obama will be visiting India in November. During his stay , apart from holding talks with Prime Minister Dr.Manmohan Singh and other Indian leaders, he is expected to address a joint session of the Indian Parliament and possibly visit Mumbai. This would be the sixth visit by a US President to India since it became independent in 1947. The previous visits were of Dwight Eisenhower in 1959, Richard Nixon in 1969, Jimmy Carter in 1978, Bill Clinton in 2000 and George Bush in 2006.
2. Obama’s predecessor George Bush visited Afghanistan, India and Pakistan in March 2006. During his stay in India, there was a terrorist attack in Karachi in which an American diplomat posted in the US Consulate was killed. Despite this, Bush went ahead with his visit to Islamabad. His decision to stick to his itinerary despite the Karachi incident spoke highly of the confidence of the US Secret Service in its ability to protect him.
3. During the visit of Bill Clinton in March 2000, no public announcement was made about a visit to Pakistan. He did visit Islamabad for a few hours from a Gulf country before flying back to Washington DC. On the eve of his arrival in New Delhi (March 20,2000), 15-17 terrorists , dressed in army fatigues, entered the village of Chattisinghpora, located in the Anantnag district, ordered all of the Sikh men and boys to assemble at the village gurudwara, and systematically shot and killed 34 of them. Many others were injured.
4. White House officials have been quoted as saying that Obama does not intend visiting Pakistan, but one should not be surprised if after visiting India, Obama makes a quick visit to Pakistan as Clinton did. Indian security agencies should be alert to the possibility of a mass casualty terrorist strike, possibly in J&K, during his visit to embarrass him and the Indian leaders.
5. The forthcoming visit of Obama to India has not given rise to the same excitement and the same kind of expectations as the visit of Bush had done. Since Obama assumed office in January last year, Indo-US relations have lost some of the élan that they had acquired under Bush. During the presidency of Bush, Indo-US relations were rich in symbolism and protocol as well as in substance. Bush and his Secretary of State, MS.Condoleezza Rice, made no secret of their desire to help India emerge as a big Asian power on par with China.
6.Commenting on the visit of Bush to the three countries the “Dawn” of Karachi wrote as follows on March 11,2006: “THE recent visit of President Bush to Afghanistan, India and Pakistan has brought home the point once again that India is and likely to remain for a long time the centrepiece of the US policy towards South Asia. In contrast, Pakistan, despite its services in the war on terror, seems to have lost its earlier pre-eminent position in US foreign policy calculations. The fact that India is a well-established democracy is a source of great strength to its strategic ties with the US which under President Bush has made the promotion of democracy one of the salient features of its foreign policy. Their joint cooperation in combating nuclear proliferation and terrorism is another link bringing the two countries closer together as is the prospect of mutually beneficial cooperation in the fields of economics, commerce, defence and civil nuclear technology. Above all, it is the prospect of the emergence of India as a major power in the 21st century and as a counterweight to China on its southern periphery that is acting like a magnet in attracting US policymakers towards India. Thus, the growing Indo-US strategic relationship neatly dovetails the strategic objectives of a global hegemon and an aspiring regional hegemon.” The “Dawn” was not wide off the mark in its assessment.
7. Under Bush, Indo-US relations were marked by a breath-taking flow of new ideas on how India and the US can work together. To mention some of them--- Indo-US civilian nuclear co-operation, strategic partnership, joint army, air force and naval exercises, Indian naval escort for US warships moving between the Pacific and the Gulf during the Iraq military conflict, co-operation in counter-terrorism and cyber security, joint humanitarian missions to help the victims of the tsunami of December 2004 in the Maldives, Sri Lanka and Indonesia, a concert of democracies consisting of India, the US, Japan and Australia and so on.
8. While the Bush Administration was not enthusiastic about any Indian strategic role in Afghanistan and about a Look West Policy by the Indian Navy lest it add to the concerns of Pakistan, fear of adverse reactions from China was not an inhibiting factor in respect of ideas for Indo-US co-operation in areas to the East of India. Bush and his aides did not try to project China as having a legitimate role in South Asia.
9. The enthusiastic ideas of the Bush Administration relating to Indo-US co-operation were a refreshing departure from the hesitant policies of the Clinton Administration which for the first time, much to the unhappiness of India, brought in the idea of a Chinese strategic role in South Asia during Clinton’s visit to China in June-July 1998. Under Obama, the high symbolism and protocol of the Bush administration have remained, but the substance of the relations has been diluted much to the chagrin of India. Indo-US relations are back to the hesitant days of Clinton. Chinese sensitivies are once again a determining factor influencing policy-making towards South Asia in Washington DC. The reference to the role that China could play in South Asia during Obama’s visit to China in November 2009 showed a reversion back to the days of Bill Clinton.
10. The 22 months of the Obama Administration have been marked by a paucity of ideas as to what India and the US can do together. Apart from the Joint Counter-Terrorism Initiative launched by the two countries during the visit of the Indian Prime Minister to the US in November 2009, there has been hardly any new idea which could be called Obama’s own and over which India could feel excited. Even the Joint Counter-Terrorism Initiative has had an indifferent start due to the disappointing experience of Indian officials relating to the interrogation of David Coleman Headley, of the Chicago cell of the Lashkar-e-Toiba (LET). The pressure exercised by the US on Pakistan to act against Hafiz Mohammad Sayeed, the Amir of the Jamaat-ud-Dawa, and to vigorously prosecute the Pakistan-based conspirators of the Mumbai 26/11 terrorist strikes has been half-hearted and has not produced results to the satisfaction of India. All US Administrations, including that of Bush, have been soft towards Pakistan and have avoided acting against it for sponsoring terrorism against India. The Obama Administration has been particularly so. Its priority is to nudge Pakistan to act against Al Qaeda, the Afghan and Pakistani Talibans and the associates of Al Qaeda posing a threat to US nationals and interests in Afghanistan, in the US homeland and elsewhere. Action against Pakistani Punjabi terrorists posing a threat to Indian nationals and interests, whether in India or in Afghanistan, has a lesser priority.
11.Even more than the Bush Administration, the Obama Administration has been sensitive to Pakistani concerns over India’s presence in Afghanistan to assist the Hamid Karzai Government in matters like medicare, improvement of governance and education, road construction etc. In contrast, the Obama Administration has shown very little concern over the Chinese presence and role in Afghanistan. On the contrary, it has been encouraging China to play its due role as an important regional player by assisting the Governments of both Afghanistan and Pakistan in dealing with terrorism. Richard Holbrooke, Obama’s special envoy on Af-Pak policy, was reported to have visited China to urge a more active role by Beijing in strengthening Pakistan’s counter-terrorism capacity.
12. The reported induction of a large number of Chinese troops into the Gilgit-Baltistan area of Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir (POK) from Xinjiang has hardly elicited any criticism from the Obama Administration. Even Washington’s opposition to Chinese moves to supply two nuclear power stations to Pakistan in disregard of the restrictions of the Nuclear Suppliers Group has been pro forma and half-hearted. Media reports that the Obama Administration might be linking its support for India’s permanent membership of the UN Security Council to forward movement on the Kashmir issue are not encouraging from the point of view of Indo-US relations.
13. The change in the US public stance on the dispute over the South China Sea islands between China and some ASEAN countries has a pointer for India. China has always been contending that it is a bilateral issue in which third parties have no locus standi, The US had not challenged this Chinese stance in the past, but now it has started saying that the US has a locus standi because the territorial dispute affects regional peace and security and freedom of navigation. It has been accepting till now the Indian stance that the Kashmir issue has to be handled bilaterally by India and Pakistan and that third parties have no role in the matter. Pakistani and even some US analysts have been arguing that the settlement of the Kashmir issue should be of legitimate interest to the US because the so-called dispute has implications for regional peace and security. India cannot take for granted continued US silence and neutrality on the Kashmir issue.
14. The Obama Administration has had differences with Beijing over issues such as the sale of US arms to Taiwan, the meeting of Obama with his Holiness the Dalai Lama in the White House and the Chinese naval assertiveness in the South and East China Seas and the extension of the Chinese naval interests to the Indian Ocean region. Despite this, it looks upon China as capable of playing a benign role in South Asia, including Afghanistan. Indian concerns over the increasing Chinese strategic presence in South Asia were understood and appreciated by the Bush Administration, but not by the Obama Administration.
15. Thus, India has every reason to be disappointed with the policies of the Obama Adminstration. Despite this, we should not relent in our efforts to strengthen India’s economic and strategic relations with the US. Indian policy-makers should be realistic enough to realise that there would be limits to US support for India in matters having an impact on our bilateral disputes with China and Pakistan. This is an unpleasant reality to which we must adjust ourselves. Is it possible to develop the strategic partnership despite this unpleasant reality? If so, how to do it? That is a challenge to Indian and US policy-makers.
16.The amazing lead of the US in science and technology is constantly expanding. Neither its Western allies nor the old communist empire headed by the erstwhile USSR nor the newly-emerging powers such as China or India have been able to catch up with the US in this field. Nor will they be ever able to. Neither China nor India will ever be able to make the kind of financial and intellectual investments in S&T that the US has been making. When countries such as China or India seek a strategic partnership with the US, an important motivating factor is the hope of benefiting from the gains made by the US in S&T. Their hopes remain unfulfilled because of the reluctance of the US to share these gains. While there is no limit to the US generosity when it comes to sharing its economic wealth with the rest of the world, it has been the most reluctant to share the advances made by it in S&T. This is one of the reasons for the tardy progress in its strategic partnerships with China or India or other countries. How to break the US inhibitions in sharing at least some of its technologies with India is a question that needs attention.
17.`Of its military power, the USA's naval strength has been the most important component. India is attracted by its naval power. China is overawed by it. India is hoping to emerge as the most important naval power after the US in the Indian Ocean region. It would like to prevent the emergence of China as an important naval power in the same region. Both these objectives would require the benevolent support of the US. There is a greater admiration and goodwill for the US in the Indian Navy than in the Indian Army or Air Force. This is natural and is likely to continue. The Indian Navy needs the US Navy as a helper in capacity-building, as a collaborator in maintaining the freedom of the seas in the Indian Ocean region and as a facilitator in the rise of India as a benign power.
18. Indian policy-makers and public opinion would welcome Indo-US naval co-operation. Similarly, US policy-makers and public opinion would be comfortable with naval co-operation with India, but might not like to get involved with India in its territorial conflicts with China and Pakistan. Navy-Navy ties have to be an important pillar of the Indo-US strategic infrastructure. In working out its policies in this regard, the US faces a dilemma arising from the question: How to help the Indian Navy in maintaining a primacy vis-a-vis China in the Indian Ocean region while ensuring that the newly-acquired strength of the Indian Navy would not be used against Pakistan? This explains the ambivalence in the US policies---- encouraging Indian naval activism in the waters to the East of India, while discouraging it in the waters to the West lest they cause concern to Pakistan. This ambivalence will continue and act as a speed-breaker in the development of Indo-US strategic partnership.
19. In the acquisition of economic power, China is more than a decade ahead of India, which is unlikely to catch up with China in the short and medium terms. The Chinese lead is due to two reasons. Firstly, it opened up its economy 13 years ahead of India in 1978. It realised the importance of the US market and the purchasing power of the US consumers for the growth of its manufacturing sector. China would not have succeeded in developing as rapidly as it did but for its knack of siphoning benefits from the US market. The role of the US market and the US consumers in making possible the Chinese economic miracle has not been adequately realised in India. India is still not paying the required attention to the US market, the US consumers and US businessmen. It thinks it can achieve the same results as China by depending on its own increasingly prosperous consumers. Its hopes are likely to be belied. India's lead over China in the services and the IT sectors will be short-lived. The manufacturing sector needs greater attention and it should be able to compete with China in the US market.
20.The US will ultimately need both China and India to maintain its economic prosperity. For US economic policy-makers, China is a bird in hand. India is only a bird in the bush. How to create a mutual dependence between the US and Indian economies similar to the mutual dependence between the US and Chinese economies? Is it wise to have such dependence at all? These are important questions to be examined by Indian policy-makers and analysts.
21. Indian soft power, which is growing, is not a copy-cat of American soft power. India has sought to learn from the positive points in the US soft power without blindly aping it. The evolution of the Indian soft power owed more to the Indian ethos and culture than to the American influence. China, which has only recently realised the importance of soft power, is seeking to ape the US and other countries of the West. Its admiration for the US soft power is considerable and influences its policy. In determining the present and future directions of the Indo-US strategic partnership, one has been seeing the role of a new component of soft power, which is a common heritage of India and the US----that is, the soft power of the growing Indo-American community in the US. No other immigrant community in the US----not even from Europe or South America----- has played such an important role as the Indo-American community in acting as a catalyst for closer bilateral relations between the US and the country of origin of the immigrants. One saw in the case of the Jewish community in the US the role which a diaspora can play as an element of soft power. One is seeing it now in the case of the diaspora of Indian origin. This soft power can add strength to the Indo-US strategic partnership and should be valued and nourished by the two Governments. ( 14-10-10)
( 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 )
Tuesday, October 12, 2010
PAKISTAN: THE DANGER SIGNALS
B.RAMAN
More people were killed and more material damage was caused by the quake in Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir (POK) and some parts of the North-West Frontier Province ( now called Khyber Pakhtunkwa ) in 2005 than by the recent floods, but the fatalities and damages were confined to a small geographic area.Moreover, there was no long-term damage to Pakistan's economy. Gen.Pervez Musharraf, who was then in power, got over the initial bungling in disaster management and ensured that the Army and the civil administration worked together in dealing with the disaster. He did not have to worry much about the impact of the quake on the morale of the army since very few families of serving soldiers were affected.
2.The disaster caused by the recent floods in Pakistan was spread over a large geographic area extending right across Pakistan. It has caused severe damage to Pakistan's agricultural economy. Many of the strategically important and sensitive areas of Pakistan were affected----particularly in Punjab and in Khyber Pakhtunkwa. Those are the areas from which both the Pakistan Army and the so-called Pashtun and Punjabi Talibans make their recruitment.
3. The disaster has affected the Army and the Talibans in different ways. In the Army, the families of many soldiers have been affected. Their land holdings have been rendered unfit for cultivation for some months. The families need all the assistance they could get from the family members to put the land back to cultivation. Difficulties in obtaining leave have created pockets of unhappiness in the lower ranks of the Army. This unhappiness is directed against the senior military and political leadership. Fotunately, desertion rates and instances of unauthorised absence from duty have not gone up. At least, not yet, but they could as the soldiers face increasing pressure from the families to come home on leave to rapair the flood damages to the family land holdings.
4. Gen.Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, the Chief of the Army Staff (COAS), who used to be viewed as the soldiers' General has lost some of his shine. His recent stoppage of logistic supplies to the NATO troops in Afghanistan in retaliation for the deaths of two para-military soldiers in a NATO helicopter raid into Pakistani border areas was an attempt to regain his shine as the soldiers’ General. The soldiers, whose families have been affected by the floods, are unhappy with him for two reasons. Firstly, for failing to attend to their problems. Secondly, for failing to force the civil administration to help their families. The Army was active in rescue missions at the height of the floods thereby winning the praise of many civilians, but its role in rehabilitation measures has been very limited. Moreover, the Army is blamed for the inadequacies of the civilian adminstration. "Musharraf would have handled the situation differently", is the comment one often comes across among the lower ranks of the Army.
5. This seeping unhappiness is not only likely to affect its counter-insurgency performance, but it would also add to the sympathy for the Talibans in the lower ranks, thereby possibly sowing the seeds for the Talibanisation of the Army. Osama bin Laden, who has come out with an audio message on the flood situation, has sensed the jihadi opportunities in the country as a whole and in the army in particular as a result of the floods.
6. The impact of the floods on the jihadi organisations has been of a different character. They have stepped up the assistance for putting the rural economy back on its feet----- in the form of seeds and fertilisers and contribution of voluntary labour by their cadres and humanitarian workers to bring the damaged land holdings back under cultivation. They have allowed or even encouraged their trained jihadis to go back to their villages to help their families in coping with the situation. Hence, the drop in recruitment and in the number of terrorist attacks by these organisations since the floods. They are prepared to accept a slowing-down of their jihad in the interest of keeping up the morale of their cadres and winning more support from the rural areas.
7. The political leadership has failed to evaluate the strategic consequences of the floods from the point of view of damage to the rural agricultural economy and the fight against extremism and terrorism. There has been very little co-ordination between the Army and the civilian administration in dealing with the situation. The likely impact of the floods on military morale has not been properly analysed and corrective action has not been taken. The Government of Pakistan and its international backers have been behaving as if all that was needed was more and more money. Financial assistance has been plenty, but this assistance has not addressed the problems of the rural families, which are the mainstay of the Army as well as the Talibans.
8. The result: A situation which could lead to greater instability in Pakistan and provide a more fertile soil than in the past for the spread of jihadi terrorism. An unhappy soldier class could become a new factor in Pakistan's future woes. (13-10-10)
( 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 )
More people were killed and more material damage was caused by the quake in Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir (POK) and some parts of the North-West Frontier Province ( now called Khyber Pakhtunkwa ) in 2005 than by the recent floods, but the fatalities and damages were confined to a small geographic area.Moreover, there was no long-term damage to Pakistan's economy. Gen.Pervez Musharraf, who was then in power, got over the initial bungling in disaster management and ensured that the Army and the civil administration worked together in dealing with the disaster. He did not have to worry much about the impact of the quake on the morale of the army since very few families of serving soldiers were affected.
2.The disaster caused by the recent floods in Pakistan was spread over a large geographic area extending right across Pakistan. It has caused severe damage to Pakistan's agricultural economy. Many of the strategically important and sensitive areas of Pakistan were affected----particularly in Punjab and in Khyber Pakhtunkwa. Those are the areas from which both the Pakistan Army and the so-called Pashtun and Punjabi Talibans make their recruitment.
3. The disaster has affected the Army and the Talibans in different ways. In the Army, the families of many soldiers have been affected. Their land holdings have been rendered unfit for cultivation for some months. The families need all the assistance they could get from the family members to put the land back to cultivation. Difficulties in obtaining leave have created pockets of unhappiness in the lower ranks of the Army. This unhappiness is directed against the senior military and political leadership. Fotunately, desertion rates and instances of unauthorised absence from duty have not gone up. At least, not yet, but they could as the soldiers face increasing pressure from the families to come home on leave to rapair the flood damages to the family land holdings.
4. Gen.Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, the Chief of the Army Staff (COAS), who used to be viewed as the soldiers' General has lost some of his shine. His recent stoppage of logistic supplies to the NATO troops in Afghanistan in retaliation for the deaths of two para-military soldiers in a NATO helicopter raid into Pakistani border areas was an attempt to regain his shine as the soldiers’ General. The soldiers, whose families have been affected by the floods, are unhappy with him for two reasons. Firstly, for failing to attend to their problems. Secondly, for failing to force the civil administration to help their families. The Army was active in rescue missions at the height of the floods thereby winning the praise of many civilians, but its role in rehabilitation measures has been very limited. Moreover, the Army is blamed for the inadequacies of the civilian adminstration. "Musharraf would have handled the situation differently", is the comment one often comes across among the lower ranks of the Army.
5. This seeping unhappiness is not only likely to affect its counter-insurgency performance, but it would also add to the sympathy for the Talibans in the lower ranks, thereby possibly sowing the seeds for the Talibanisation of the Army. Osama bin Laden, who has come out with an audio message on the flood situation, has sensed the jihadi opportunities in the country as a whole and in the army in particular as a result of the floods.
6. The impact of the floods on the jihadi organisations has been of a different character. They have stepped up the assistance for putting the rural economy back on its feet----- in the form of seeds and fertilisers and contribution of voluntary labour by their cadres and humanitarian workers to bring the damaged land holdings back under cultivation. They have allowed or even encouraged their trained jihadis to go back to their villages to help their families in coping with the situation. Hence, the drop in recruitment and in the number of terrorist attacks by these organisations since the floods. They are prepared to accept a slowing-down of their jihad in the interest of keeping up the morale of their cadres and winning more support from the rural areas.
7. The political leadership has failed to evaluate the strategic consequences of the floods from the point of view of damage to the rural agricultural economy and the fight against extremism and terrorism. There has been very little co-ordination between the Army and the civilian administration in dealing with the situation. The likely impact of the floods on military morale has not been properly analysed and corrective action has not been taken. The Government of Pakistan and its international backers have been behaving as if all that was needed was more and more money. Financial assistance has been plenty, but this assistance has not addressed the problems of the rural families, which are the mainstay of the Army as well as the Talibans.
8. The result: A situation which could lead to greater instability in Pakistan and provide a more fertile soil than in the past for the spread of jihadi terrorism. An unhappy soldier class could become a new factor in Pakistan's future woes. (13-10-10)
( 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 )
Monday, October 11, 2010
OBAMA'S GESTURE TO CHINA ON EVE OF INDIAN VISIT
B.RAMAN
On the eve of his forthcoming visit to India next month, President Barack Obama has made an important gesture to China. Even while supporting the award of the Nobel Peace Prize to Chinese political dissident Liu Xiaobo and calling for his release from detention, Obama has initiated what appears to be the first step towards the possible lifting of the arms embargo imposed on China after the Tiananmen Square revolt by protesting students in 1989.
2. In a letter dated October 8,2010, to the two Houses of the Congress, he has called upon the Congress to lift the ban on the sale of C-130 cargo aircraft to China. He has said that it would be in the "the national interest of the United States" to terminate the suspension. Should the proposal be accepted by the Congress, this would be the first time since 1989 that the US would be selling military-related equipment to China. In his letter, Obama said that C-130 cargo aircraft would be deployed to deal with oil spills in the sea.
3.Even if the suspension is removed, each sale has to be approved by the Congress on a case-by-case basis. The C-130 cargo aircraft - also known as the Lockheed C-130 Hercules - is a four-engine turboprop military transport aircraft designed and built in the 1950s. Capable of using improvised runways , the C-130 was originally designed as a troop, medical evacuation and cargo transport aircraft. It is used by the US-led NATO troops in Afghanistan. Before the arms embargo was imposed in 1989, the US had exported to China Black Hawk helicopters and other military-related equipment .
4.It is not clear whether Obama's letter to the Congress came in the wake of any Chinese request for the aircraft as a quid pro quo for China resuming military-military relationship with the US which was suspended earlier this year by China in protest against a proposal of the Obama Administration to sell more arms to Taiwan.
5.It is, however, significant that Obama's letter coincided with the resumption of the military-military relationship between the two countries. Mr.Robert Gates,US Defence Secretary, presently in Hanoi to attend a meeting of the Defence Ministers of the ASEAN countries and their dialogue partners convened by Vietnam, met on October 11 Liang Guanglie, his Chinese counterpart.
6.Guan Youfei, deputy director of the external affairs office of China's Ministry of Defense, told reporters in Hanoi that Gates had accepted an invitation to visit China next year. This visit was scheduled for this year,but was cancelled by Beijing because of the suspension of the military-military relations earlier this year.
7. The Chinese Defence Minister was quoted as saying that it was important for the US and China to respect and care for each other's core interests and major concerns, continuously consolidate strategic mutual trust, decrease suspicion and misjudgment, and properly settle differences and sensitive issues in order to keep bilateral military ties a developing story in a continuous and stable way. The Chinese media quoted Yuan Peng, Director of the Institute of American Studies at the China Institute of Contemporary International Relations, as saying as follows:"The meeting between Liang and Gates can be viewed as the official resumption of military relations between Beijing and Washington following almost a year-long standoff. Their meeting will pave the way for the US-China Defense Consultative Talks and the re-establishment of a communication mechanism between the two countries." (12-10-10)
( 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 )
On the eve of his forthcoming visit to India next month, President Barack Obama has made an important gesture to China. Even while supporting the award of the Nobel Peace Prize to Chinese political dissident Liu Xiaobo and calling for his release from detention, Obama has initiated what appears to be the first step towards the possible lifting of the arms embargo imposed on China after the Tiananmen Square revolt by protesting students in 1989.
2. In a letter dated October 8,2010, to the two Houses of the Congress, he has called upon the Congress to lift the ban on the sale of C-130 cargo aircraft to China. He has said that it would be in the "the national interest of the United States" to terminate the suspension. Should the proposal be accepted by the Congress, this would be the first time since 1989 that the US would be selling military-related equipment to China. In his letter, Obama said that C-130 cargo aircraft would be deployed to deal with oil spills in the sea.
3.Even if the suspension is removed, each sale has to be approved by the Congress on a case-by-case basis. The C-130 cargo aircraft - also known as the Lockheed C-130 Hercules - is a four-engine turboprop military transport aircraft designed and built in the 1950s. Capable of using improvised runways , the C-130 was originally designed as a troop, medical evacuation and cargo transport aircraft. It is used by the US-led NATO troops in Afghanistan. Before the arms embargo was imposed in 1989, the US had exported to China Black Hawk helicopters and other military-related equipment .
4.It is not clear whether Obama's letter to the Congress came in the wake of any Chinese request for the aircraft as a quid pro quo for China resuming military-military relationship with the US which was suspended earlier this year by China in protest against a proposal of the Obama Administration to sell more arms to Taiwan.
5.It is, however, significant that Obama's letter coincided with the resumption of the military-military relationship between the two countries. Mr.Robert Gates,US Defence Secretary, presently in Hanoi to attend a meeting of the Defence Ministers of the ASEAN countries and their dialogue partners convened by Vietnam, met on October 11 Liang Guanglie, his Chinese counterpart.
6.Guan Youfei, deputy director of the external affairs office of China's Ministry of Defense, told reporters in Hanoi that Gates had accepted an invitation to visit China next year. This visit was scheduled for this year,but was cancelled by Beijing because of the suspension of the military-military relations earlier this year.
7. The Chinese Defence Minister was quoted as saying that it was important for the US and China to respect and care for each other's core interests and major concerns, continuously consolidate strategic mutual trust, decrease suspicion and misjudgment, and properly settle differences and sensitive issues in order to keep bilateral military ties a developing story in a continuous and stable way. The Chinese media quoted Yuan Peng, Director of the Institute of American Studies at the China Institute of Contemporary International Relations, as saying as follows:"The meeting between Liang and Gates can be viewed as the official resumption of military relations between Beijing and Washington following almost a year-long standoff. Their meeting will pave the way for the US-China Defense Consultative Talks and the re-establishment of a communication mechanism between the two countries." (12-10-10)
( 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 )
NO STABILITY IN TIBET--XINJIANG WITHOUT PAKISTAN, SAYS CHINESE WRITER
B.RAMAN
An article published on October 12,2010, by the Chinese Communist Party-controlled "Global Times" has questioned the reported description of Pakistan as a cancer by President Barack Obama. It has instead described Pakistan as a pearl and highlighted the Chinese affection for Pakistan.
2. The article says: "Because Pakistan has strong defense science and technology, China feels very safe and peaceful in its frontier regions like Xinjiang and Tibet. There will be absolutely no stability in Xinjiang and Tibet without the solid brotherhood of Pakistan. Pakistan is at the crossroads of the legendary Silk Road between China and the West. I understand that Obama has his own agendas in Afghanistan. But I believe that any military policies and actions taking place in this region must serve the interests of the national security, national unity, social stability, economic development and regional cooperation among the three countries: Pakistan, China and Afghanistan."
3.The article has been written by Li Xiguang, a Professor at the Tsinghua University. Extracts from the article are annexed. (12-10-2010)
( 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 )
ANNEXURE
( "Global Times" of October 12,2010)
Sino-Pakistani links stay solid in all weathers
By Li Xiguang
US President Barack Obama was quoted recently as telling a secret meeting in the Oval Office, "We need to make clear to people that the cancer is in Pakistan."
But in the eyes of the Chinese people, Pakistan is a pearl. The Chinese people treasure the great friendship between the two countries.
In 1991, 20 years after the Pakistani army lost the war and Bangladesh, with Indian support, became an independent nation, I was on the road to Mohenjodaro and Kandarara with the late Pakistani archaeologist Husaan Dani reporting the great Pakistan civilization and its impact on China.
Almost another 20 years had passed when I went back to Pakistan early this year, where I felt overwhelmingly that many Pakistani people love China more than Chinese love their own country. Pakistan has proved to be China's closest friend and the only political and military ally to stay consistent in all weathers.
China owes its opening-up to the outside world to Pakistan.
As a leader in the Islamic world, Pakistan helped connect China to the Arab countries and the rest of the Islamic world. For example, after the Urumqi riots in 2009, Pakistani government made great efforts in explaining to the rest of the Islamic world the Chinese viewpoint on the riots.
In 1971, Pakistan helped make the arrangements for Henry Kissinger's secret visit to China and Nixon's subsequent trip.
In 1987 when I was a journalist, I reported the visit by Abdus Salam, the father of Pakistan nuclear science. During Salam's visit, he met Deng Xiaoping. During the meeting Deng Xiaoping expressed his full support of Salam's idea of strengthening the scientific and technological ties among the third world countries.
Deng told Salam that scientists from the third world countries should feel self-confident and proud in serving their own countries with their scientific achievements.
I am always proud of the Pakistani scientists' achievements. I deeply admire Pakistani scientist and engineers for their hard work and talents in developing their country's science and technology.
Like China, Pakistan is a developing country. But its people and the government give full support to its science and technology program even though people live in poverty.
Because Pakistan has strong defense science and technology, China feels very safe and peaceful in its frontier regions like Xinjiang and Tibet. There will be absolutely no stability in Xinjiang and Tibet without the solid brotherhood of Pakistan.
Pakistan is at the crossroads of the legendary Silk Road between China and the West. I understand that Obama has his own agendas in Afghanistan.
But I believe that any military policies and actions taking place in this region must serve the interests of the national security, national unity, social stability, economic development and regional cooperation among the three countries: Pakistan, China and Afghanistan.
The author is a professor at Tsinghua University and author of the coming book Intellectual dialogues of Tibet. xiguang@tsinghua.edu.cn
An article published on October 12,2010, by the Chinese Communist Party-controlled "Global Times" has questioned the reported description of Pakistan as a cancer by President Barack Obama. It has instead described Pakistan as a pearl and highlighted the Chinese affection for Pakistan.
2. The article says: "Because Pakistan has strong defense science and technology, China feels very safe and peaceful in its frontier regions like Xinjiang and Tibet. There will be absolutely no stability in Xinjiang and Tibet without the solid brotherhood of Pakistan. Pakistan is at the crossroads of the legendary Silk Road between China and the West. I understand that Obama has his own agendas in Afghanistan. But I believe that any military policies and actions taking place in this region must serve the interests of the national security, national unity, social stability, economic development and regional cooperation among the three countries: Pakistan, China and Afghanistan."
3.The article has been written by Li Xiguang, a Professor at the Tsinghua University. Extracts from the article are annexed. (12-10-2010)
( 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 )
ANNEXURE
( "Global Times" of October 12,2010)
Sino-Pakistani links stay solid in all weathers
By Li Xiguang
US President Barack Obama was quoted recently as telling a secret meeting in the Oval Office, "We need to make clear to people that the cancer is in Pakistan."
But in the eyes of the Chinese people, Pakistan is a pearl. The Chinese people treasure the great friendship between the two countries.
In 1991, 20 years after the Pakistani army lost the war and Bangladesh, with Indian support, became an independent nation, I was on the road to Mohenjodaro and Kandarara with the late Pakistani archaeologist Husaan Dani reporting the great Pakistan civilization and its impact on China.
Almost another 20 years had passed when I went back to Pakistan early this year, where I felt overwhelmingly that many Pakistani people love China more than Chinese love their own country. Pakistan has proved to be China's closest friend and the only political and military ally to stay consistent in all weathers.
China owes its opening-up to the outside world to Pakistan.
As a leader in the Islamic world, Pakistan helped connect China to the Arab countries and the rest of the Islamic world. For example, after the Urumqi riots in 2009, Pakistani government made great efforts in explaining to the rest of the Islamic world the Chinese viewpoint on the riots.
In 1971, Pakistan helped make the arrangements for Henry Kissinger's secret visit to China and Nixon's subsequent trip.
In 1987 when I was a journalist, I reported the visit by Abdus Salam, the father of Pakistan nuclear science. During Salam's visit, he met Deng Xiaoping. During the meeting Deng Xiaoping expressed his full support of Salam's idea of strengthening the scientific and technological ties among the third world countries.
Deng told Salam that scientists from the third world countries should feel self-confident and proud in serving their own countries with their scientific achievements.
I am always proud of the Pakistani scientists' achievements. I deeply admire Pakistani scientist and engineers for their hard work and talents in developing their country's science and technology.
Like China, Pakistan is a developing country. But its people and the government give full support to its science and technology program even though people live in poverty.
Because Pakistan has strong defense science and technology, China feels very safe and peaceful in its frontier regions like Xinjiang and Tibet. There will be absolutely no stability in Xinjiang and Tibet without the solid brotherhood of Pakistan.
Pakistan is at the crossroads of the legendary Silk Road between China and the West. I understand that Obama has his own agendas in Afghanistan.
But I believe that any military policies and actions taking place in this region must serve the interests of the national security, national unity, social stability, economic development and regional cooperation among the three countries: Pakistan, China and Afghanistan.
The author is a professor at Tsinghua University and author of the coming book Intellectual dialogues of Tibet. xiguang@tsinghua.edu.cn
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)