Northeast- An Indian colony?

Indians are obsessed about maps. Wherever they go they make sure that world maps show India's territory in its entirety. That includes whole of Jammu and Kashmir, 37% of which is with Pakistan and 20% with China, and whole of state of Arunachal Pradesh which is claimed by China. The moment Google or any major website or search engine shows any change ,like showing Arunachal in China, Indian's go ballistic. They go out of the way to change the " error". Sometimes even Indian websites , officials, schools make these same mistakes and invite the wrath of the hypernationalist Indian media. They become subject of scrutiny and national debate. Their patriotism is doubted. How could they give away part of the sacred soil of India?. Never mind if some of this soil is not with us anyway. This hyper reaction is owing to lack of understanding of Indian history correctly and living in fantasized world rather than in real world. Indians fail to understand ground reality. As much as it is true that Pakistan cannot take our part of Kashmir it is equally true that India cannot take away what is theirs. But still whole of Kashmir continues to be shown in India's map. What for?.
   Now let's take the whole of northeast for example. The Indians are very sensitive about this region. So much is their love for northeast that they have kept most part of it under military occupation since independence symbolised by the draconian armed forces special powers act which gives sweeping powers to the army. If that is not enough India has done everything possible to separate this region and its people from the rest of the country and fester sepratiism their. The infrastructure in northeast is worst than in Sub Saharan Africa. Connectivity and communication between northeast and rest of country is non existent. This is especially true of easternmost States like Manipur, Nagaland, Tripura, Mizoram and Arunachal Pradesh. Human rights violations are rampant. Add to that millions of Bangladeshis and north indians migrate to this region changing the demographics of northeast completely. As a consequence northeast is the most least developed region in India. Threat of China looms large. Projects are halted, even critical border roads, due to environmental concerns. This all in a region that historically was never a part of India. This might sound unpatriotic but is a reality only an ardent student of Indian history will acknowledge.
  Let's take a look back in the past. Indian subcontinent stretching from Baluchistan to Dhaka was one entity only thrice before the partition of the country. The first was under the Maurya empire. The second under mughals and third under British. In neighter of these periods was whole of northeast under Indian rule prevalent at that time. The Ashokan empire never extended up to northeast although in the west it went beyond Afghanistan. The Mughals tried to take Assam several times but never went beyond Dhaka. As far as the British were concerned Assam was occupied but rest of of northeast only remained princely states with high degrees of autonomy. When India became independent it used all methods including point blank coercion to get the princely states of Northeast to accede to India. Hence the lingering dispute. If India were to claim British India's empire as its legacy then Nepal, Bhutan, Tibet and Burma all can be claimed by India today as its unalienable part. Will we do that?.
    The reality is that northeast is ours because we annexed it in similar way as China did with Tibet or Xinjiang.  But India needs to create its own lasting legacy in Northeast by integrating it with the rest of the union. We need to make northeasterners as much a part of India as rest of us are. For this we need to welcome the people of northeast into rest of the country. Racist attacks on them in the rest of India must stop and culprits must be brought to justice. Infrastructure and communication in Northeast must be improved. Roads, railways and highways need to be developed. Private sector investments need to be encouraged. International airports need to be built. Pending projects need to be fast tracked. This will create millions of jobs and wean people away from insurgency. Also a favorable opinion of India will get created. The draconian AfSPA can be removed once situation becomes normal. One of the ways of doing so is to declare Northeast as a " Special Economic Zone." This will go a long way in developing the region through Indian and foreign investment. Attract tourism. This will open up the region to the rest of the country and globe. It will improve infrastructure and create jobs. Hydropower potential of northeast can be explored further. Dams can be built. Power can be genrated . Hospitals and schools need to be built. The problem of illegal immigration via Bangladesh need to be tackled.Ultimately every human being wants food, clothing, shelter, health and education. India will do well to remember that Northeast was called a" Jewel in the crown" of British India. It can continue to be crown of modern independent India if we implement sensible policies. If we separate their will be separatism.
 

Tibet- A Lost cause

For an Indian it might be impossible to spot a difference between a Tibetan and a Chinese, but ask a Tibetan and he will spot a Han from a mile. And there are millions to spot in Lhasa. The current Han Chinese population in Tibet autonomous  region is approximately 7 million. Every year at least 50000 Han Chinese are added to Tibet's ever growing population. The communist party in Beijing has permanently altered the demographics of Tibet and Lhasa. The land of snows has been emasculated by China for the last six and half decades and more.. Although history says that China occupied Tibet in 1950 the reality is that historically speaking the relationship between China and Tibet was always such that China could claim its sovereignty over Tibet any time. Whenever the central government in China was strong Tibet was under Chinese control and when central government in Beijing became weak Tibet gained more autonomy. There are numerous instances in history of Chinese army repealing Invasions by Indian kingdoms of Tibet the latest being the invasion of Tibet by Sikhs in 18th century a period in which Tibetans claim they were independent. The reality is that Tibet lost its independence the day it gave up its sword and adopted religion as its only weapon. A weak border is a unbearable temptation for an expansionist country and China is also an opportunist nation. It was quick to establish a patron and priest relationship with Tibet and the rest is history. Even when the British Indian empire invaded Tibet in 1904 under the command of Francis younghusband it was the qing empires army that tried to repeal the invasion albeit unsuccessfully. The biggest strategic mistake that Tibet did was that during the period between 1914 and  1950 it became inward looking and isolated from the rest of the world. Tibet refused to even allow itself to be used as a coducit for men and material transfer during the second world war,a decision which would earned it alliance of United States and a say in world affairs. Worst still Tibet even prohibited entry of foreigners into Lhasa for the fear of outside world. It did not make any attempt at building a modern army, a fact which was related to its international isolation. At the time of the Han invasion of Tibet the strength of Tibetan army was 8000 troops as opposed to a million strong peoples liberation army of communist China. Tibet became an easy prey. Another geopolitical mistake made by Tibet an leaders was the flight of His Holiness the Dalia Lama to India. History is replete with examples that freedom cannot be won if country's main leadership is located outside its territory.The entire kashag, as the Tibetan government is called fled to india with the consequence that today the government in exile is recognized by no one not even its host country. Great leaders like Nelson Mandela, Martin Luther king fought their struggles not from another but by staying with their people. Leaders like Gandhi, Nehru, Mandela And king were always prepared to make the ultimate sacrifice for their country a facet which is probably absent in Dalai Lama. The day Dalai Lama fled, Tibetan people became leaderless and had no one to rally around for their struggle against a powerful foe.
     As far as Tibet's neighbour India was concerned Tibet was a colonial legacy. Jawaharlal Nehru did not consider Tibet to be India's problem and made every effort at international forums to postpone the discussion on the Tibet question. For him relationship with China was more important than India's national security interests. He even refused a seat at the UNSC and favoured it to China. It seems he was more worried about Chinese national interest than India's. In such and environment Tibet had no chance at surviving as an independent nation.
     In the 21 St century China has begun rapid infrastructure development in Tibet. Although India worries that this development is aimed at itself the reality is that infrastructure development of Tibet is to integrate Tibet with the rest of China. India is secondary. The same policies are being applied to another minority region of China, xinxiang. Ever since Hu Jintao too power of CPC the Chinese have begun to concentrate on the economic development of their interior regions.
 In such a scenario India too needs to build up its border infrastructure not just as a force against China but to integrate these regions with the rest of the country. Take a leaf out of Chinese books. If you separate their will be separatism and India knows that from its experience in northeast.
 As Napoleon once said " let China sleep. If she awakes the world will be sorry".  Tibet certainly has found that out.

Looking South

Russia- Pakistan relations. - A new beginning
    As Russia continues to be battered with western sanctions over Ukraine it continues to get isolated from the west. It is therefore looking towards Asia for new partners and allies. This explains it's recent multi billion dollar gas deal with China. Now it has opened a new chapter in its foreign policy by courting Pakistan. Russia has lifted its arms embargo that it had imposed on Pakistan during the cold war. It continued with the embargo even after the cold war cause it did not want to offend India. More over there was no real need to do so. But after the recent crisis in Ukraine geopolitics has changed. Russia desperately needs to find new partners and markets. So the sale of weapons to Pakistan. But what does this means for India which would be alarmed by this new turn of events? And what significance does this have for Pakistan? What are other Russian motives for courting Pakistan? Let us examine the last question first. Russia is planning longterm. After the NATO withdrawal from Afghanistan the Russians want to play a bigger role in that country. For this they need the support of Pakistan as it enjoys a long border with Afghanistan. Russia already has made central Asia as its backyard. It also has Iran as its ally. It only needs Pakistan on board to complete its encirclement of Afghanistan. Moreover the European market for its gas and defence goods may get closed if relations turn hostile over Ukraine. So Russia can open a new market in Pakistan. It can sell gas to energy starved Pakistan and weapons as well to go with it. Good relations with Pakistan can also help it in tackling its security issues in Dagestan. So Pakistan can be a good partner.
          From Pakistani viewpoint it can get access too cheap Russian gas and hi tech defence goods. So alongside US, Europe and China it can now access Russian technology. This means it can get on par with India on conventional front too.Also a new partner which is a friend of its traditional rival India is good news.
  From Indian perspective it has to be a wait and watch approach. Prima facie India will look at this new alliance warily. But it need not be all that bad. International relations is not a zero sum game and not all partnership's need be bad for ones interest.On Afghanistan india too wants to play a bigger role and Pakistani cooperation will be an added bonus. Plus if Pakistan can secure Russian gas so can India. A Russia Pakistan India pipeline coming via central Asia can be thought of. An arc of cooperation between south and central Asia including Iran, Russia and China can be created. India should remember that it is too big a country to be ignored by Russia. So there need not be any insecurity. As far as weapons sales are concerned one must wait to see what weapons Russia sales. India should have no objections to sale by Russia of non lethal or defensive weapons to Pakistan.  Russia is an all weather ally of India and it will remain so.
    But as they say in politics" there are no permanent friends or enemies".
          

India's response to Unrest in Libya

India’s Response to Unrest in Libya

As news of violence in Libya becomes regular feature and becomes a talking point in every household in India the response from the Indian government to ruthless crackdown by Libyan government is disappointing, though along expected lines, to say the least. Taking sides has never been India’s forte and this was well reflected in the soft condemnation by the government. Rather than supporting the aspirations of the people and sending a strong signal to Gaddafi the Indian government is once again appearing to be sitting on the fence. In war between right and wrong one cannot afford to be neutral. The reality in Libya today is that there is no popular support for Gaddafi and despite his military backing him and the ongoing crackdown his days in power are numbered.

In such a scenario the western nations have decided to put their bets on the people and are contemplating strong actions against Gaddafi. The question before India is whether it will support a dictator whose future is fickle or people who would like to have a government that is in consonance with the one we have? The western countries have played their cards very smartly. The US deliberately remained hesitant to take a strong action till its nationals were not evacuated. Once that was done it got a UN resolution imposing sanctions on Libya through the UNSC and is now preparing to establish a “no fly zone”. It has frozen assets worth $37 n belonging to the Libyan government. The US has moved its warships towards the Mediterranean Sea a position from where it could intervene militarily whenever necessary. Sadly the Indian government, in the first place, has been very slow to evacuate its nationals. A country that can’t protect its own citizens can hardly be expected to stand up for the rights of foreign citizens. So what is impeding India?

First is the irrational fear of been seen as conspiring with the west against a Muslim country. This is unwarranted since many Arab nations are themselves facing popular uprisings. More Over Libya is on the verge of being isolated as many Arab nations are US allies. Second is the self-created problem of protecting the lives of Indian nationals in Libya. With thousands still stranded India fears that its nationals will be harmed if it takes a strong position. Third is the traditional Indian mindset of the need to follow an independent foreign policy. That is fine in theory but independent policy does not mean always opposing the west or supporting some developing countries. Last but not the least the fear that India will lose out on future investments in Libya, particularly in the oil sector. What India forgets is that Libya sits atop vast oil reserves and they have better chance of being explored if a democratic government comes to the fore. If Gaddafi continues in power despite opposition it will owing  to the support of countries like Russia and China in UNSC and not because of India. Therefore China not India will be the most beneficiary if Gaddafi remains in power. The people of Libya will remember who supported them in their hour of need and who sat on the fence. So the rationale of supporting the people whose government is most likely to come to power makes sense even in national interest. Although India supported the UNSC sanctions on Libya it is not going to support the proposal for “no fly zone”. This may have its own logic since sanctions and “no fly zones” can be counter- productive. The need of the hour is to ensure that the International pressure is sustained and Gaddafi gets isolated. The onus of leading the international pressure is on the democratic countries and it is here that India seems to be hesitating. The question is not whether India will be on the side of the west but whether it will be on the side of democracy.

India believes in the policy of non interference. However it is important to understand that supporting legitimate aspirations of people is not interference in internal affairs of other countries. It is a moral duty that India needs to uphold, if it wants to earn respect in the world and climb up the ladder of the great power status. When freedom is threatened and justice is denied India cannot and should not be non-aligned.

This is not to say that India should know tow the west. It should take positions based on its interests. India should therefore have issued a strong statement demanding Gaddafi’s ouster and establishment of democratic government but equally issuing general statement opposing the use of outside force to do so. Supporting the Libyan people will nullify any opposition from other Muslim countries. This will also go down well with the west whose support is crucial if India is to become a permanent member of UNSC. Supporting the positions of countries that lack democratic credentials like Russia and China shows India in poor light. Whatever may be the case realism suggests that India must come strongly in support of Libyan people.

 Before any of this it must get its own people back!

The myth of decline of the American power

On 4th October 1957 the Soviet Union launched into space the first earth orbiting satellite called Sputnik.The then Soviet leader Nikita Krushev, grinning from ear to ear, proclaimed that an eclipse had covered the United States.The commie went on to prophecies that the Soviet Union would bury the United States.The US did not comment.12 years later Neill Armstrong,an American astronaut,became the first man to land on moon.22 years later there was no Soviet Union.But the American dream continued unabated.Despite  grand declarations of people like Krushev ,that the American power was a thing of past ,the US won the space race and successfully rose like a phoenix from the ashes of the Vietnam war to bury the great red army in the sands of Afghanistan and emerge as the sole superpower in 1991. 

  Post 9/11 and after its inability to achieve decisive victory in either Iraq or Afghanistan led many scholars to question American military power. The Global financial crisis only added teeth to their arguments that USA is no longer the preeminent power but in fact is on the decline along with her European allies. While there may be some merit in the first part of the argument ,(after all the threats in 21st century comprises of Non state actors which can challenge even the best equipped state) the second part represents gross underestimation of the resolve of the American people as well as misunderstanding about the reasons for the growth and prosperity of United States.

 The most common mistake that people make is to have a euro-centric view of America. When people say that the West is declining they hyphenate US with Europe. although there are cultural, religious and ideological similarities between the two the differences in their history,growth and psyche is very palpable. The European countries achieved prosperity through capturing and looting the Asian and African countries.The Industrial revolution would not have been a success if the European traders did not have easy access to cheap raw materials from Asia and Africa. Sheer military power made Europe what it was and this led to the devastation in form of bloody wars across the continent.On the other hand the United States became prosperous owing to its innovative culture,education system that encourages creativity,the entrepreneurial mindset of its people and above all its ability to absorb cultures,religion's,nationalities from across the globe and mould them into one United States of America. Nowhere i am saying that Europe did not possess some of these traits but without the colonies Europe was a tiger without claws. Many scholars criticises the American Imperial hegemony and associate the American growth to its military dominance across the globe. These critics will do well to understand that even before the US acquired her only colony in Philippines in 1898 she had one of the top four GDP in the world. American wealth did not come through looting but through her own ability to innovate and create. Talent is nothing without opportunity and US became that land of opportunity.

  In the 21st century the US is facing multiple challenges in a form that it has never faced before. Today the threat to US is not from conquering states but from failed ones. It is true that the US has not been able to respond adequately to these challenges but the battle has just began. As far as the global financial crisis is concerned it is not the first time the US is facing such economic crisis. The US economy is such that from time to time it has undergone periods of glut. This was true of the great panic of 1837 and of the great depression of 1929. From each of these crisis the US emerged as stronger and powerful country just when everyone had written it off. This is due to the fact that the fundamentals of US as a country remain strong.

 It's education system continues to attract millions of students from abroad. The number of illegal immigrants in US as of 2010 were about 11 million showing people across the globe still chase the American dream. The political leaders ,scholars and others who regularly accuse the US of different crimes send their children to study in US. People criticised the high handed policies of George Bush and held rallies and mass protests across the US.While no one would justify those policies one bit ,but the interesting question is would such rallies or demonstrations be ever allowed in countries like China or Russia? Rule of law, freedom to choose, commitment to protect the lives of its citizens anywhere and anytime  is what makes America the country it is.Indians who criticise the US counter terror policies as being amoral and unethical are actually jelous that their own government does not have the guts to do what America does for its citizens. Some scholars in India talk about the need to have common Asian front particularly East Asian front including India against the west and US. What they fail to understand is the America has more allies in Asia than in Europe. It is no wonder then that East Asian summit decided that it would remain incomplete without Russia and America participating. There was never a third world trade union that India thought it was leading during the cold war and today there no such Asian brotherhood that some in India wants to embrace. This is not to mean that US is the perfect country in the world. Far from it. Every country has skeleton in its cupboard and US is no exception. The racial discrimination against the blacks, Women, Iraq war and Vietnam war being cases in point.The US still needs to learn a lot from the world but the good thing is that it is aware of this fact. One of the strengths of the American people is that they are downright pragmatic and tend to live in real world.The American leadership has realised that it no longer is the only indispensable country in the world. Other powers are rising and it is necessary to engage and work with them if global stability and prosperity is to be achieved.

The reality is that US remains the only country capable of projecting power across the globe. It still remains the worlds largest market and largest economy.It is militarily superior to any country. The U.S spent more on defence in 2003 than the next 15-20 big spenders. It still leads the world in Technological and Research fields. U.S spends 3 times more than six other powers combined on R&D. It still posses the only Blue water navy in the world and is superior to any other nations in case of nuclear weapons. This too with only 3.5% of defence spending of GDP. Even demographics favour the US. While dealing with a country like US one should not jump to conclusions regarding its decline. After all it is still the land of the free and the home of the brave.

Arab Intifadah

Terrorism, fundamentalism,coups,sporaidic revovlts,sectarian strifes and other bloody events have always been the face of Middle East in general and the Arab world in particular.That in a sense has been the tragedy that has plagued the Arab world since the withdrawal of colonial powers.Violence is so normal in this part of the world that a blast or sucide bombings or assasinations are dismissed as daily events and a part of day to day Arab life.Infact if there is no violence or killings on a particular day then it becomes a "breaking news".
The Arab world has been ruled by despots who treat the nation as their personal fiefdoms and the national property as their personal  property.They continue in power for decades.This is true of Saleh of Yemen,Mubarak of Egypt,Ben ali of Tunisia,Gaddafi of Libya ,and other countries like Syria,Jordan ,Oman or Qatar.These grandpas of middle east dont have a retirement age and the national income is their income.But what was sad was that the common Arabs were an absorbing lot(like we Indians) and did little to change the situation.Until december 4 2010. When ordinary Tunisians woke up from their slumber and decided to change their country's future little did they realised that they were starting an intifadah that would engulf the Arab world.
It is not that regime change had never taken place in Middle east. Infact the region is replete with examples where a dictator is overthrown  eighter by military or by a  extremist party(both claiming to have popular  support of course)only to be replaced by another bloodthirsty monster who then ruled the nation for decades before the same process repeats itself.It is said that history  repeats itself and this cannot be more true than in midlle east.If this is so then why so much importance to the current uprisings in the Arab world? What is different now?
The difference is  that the persons bringing about this change are not militias, militarymen or any one party affilated to the military. It is the common Arabs that have decided to change the destiny of their region.The people on the streets are not armymen,gun totting mujahadeens but students,workers,middle class people who have taken it upon themselves to be the change they wish to see.The fire that one indviual set to himself in Tunisia has spread throughout the region and is giving nightmares to leaders in Egypt,Yemen and Jordan.Anger at years of reppression,corruption,nepotism,inflation and poverty is boiling down on the steets of the Arab world.However it is important for the protesters to keep the fire burning. Unlike Tunisia other Arab leaders will not go down without fighting.Moreever the army and police which have been the bastions of these rulers might not side with the protesters unlike in Tunisia.Moreever it is also important that power vaccum should not result in fundamentalist hijacking the agenda and attempt  usurping power.
One must also look at the role of the major powers like EU, China,US and India during these tumultous times.The western powers prticularly the US has a vested interest in ensuring status qou in the region as the current rulers were serving the US interests.It is interesting to note that when there were protests in Iran against the regime the US openly supported the protesters as the Iranian regime was anti-US.Although the US has publicily stated that it suppots the aspirations of the people yet no  meaningful support like in case of Iran is seen as yet.Egypt is a major US ally and it would like President Mubarak to stay in power.These double standards does not look well for a country that calls human rights as a cornerstone of its foreign policy.Human rights are not available only to American citizens but to the world in general.
Last but not the least the Arab Intifadah has shown the growing importance of  Media in general and Social media in particular.It is no wonder then that some thinkers are calling this revolution as the "Twitter Revolution".Social networking sites like Facebook,Twitter have played a crucial role in disemmineting information across the world.This means that a person sitting in one corner of Yemen or Egypt can express his opnions or give his suggestions to another person sitting in remote corner od Tunisia or any other part of the world.Following the protests in Egypt the government ordered a shutdown of the internet and jammed mobile services.But this could not prevent the information from spreading in other parts of the region.Overwhelming support to the uprising has been possible due to Social media.
Our India as always has not made any statement.But one can hardly complain since our father of the nation told us that "silence is golden".Hope he would have also said that "it is a sin to remain silent when you must protest".But thats not our style.At the time of writing, protests are raging in Egypt.Curfew has been imposed in many cities. But the days of President Mubarak are numbered and the sacking of his cabinet is the first sign of it.You can kill people but you cannot kill their ideas.This time around,the Arabs are not going to be fooled by cosmetic changes.Hope the youth in the Arab world sustains this fight against tyranny and are able to bring about real and meaningful change in the region that will help it to realise its full potential.My Blog