Focus on the Kyrgyz Elections

by Uddipan Mukherjee

In late February this year, there were elections in the Central Asian Republic of Tajikistan. But there was hardly any coverage by the international media. The reasons were obvious. Nobody expected anyone else to win apart from the party headed by the President Emomali Rahmon. Moreover, media was engrossed in the elections of Iraq, Ukraine and Afghanistan.

Interestingly, seven months later when elections are to be held in the neighbouring country of Kyrgyzstan, there is considerable brouhaha. International media seems to have its job cut out with regard to coverage of the event. Paradoxically, anybody hardly noted the elections in the same country in July 2009. Again, the probable reason was that the results were presumably anticipated. As expected, Kurmanbek Bakiyev and his coterie ‘manipulated’ the elections to remain seated in power.

However, demonstrations at Naryn in February 2010 hinted that the political atmosphere in Kyrgyzstan had started to boil. The April upsurge at Talas and then in Bishkek and other areas finally forced Bakiyev to flee to Belarus. By now, these are all well known events.

It is also accepted at large that Kurmanbek Bakiyev was under the influence of alcohol and very much driven by his son Maxim and his brother Janysh. 12 hour power cuts in Kyrgyzstan with alleged reports that it was being sold to neighbours at the behest of Maxim generated enough outrage to finally topple the government. Amusingly, this was the very structure which had entrenched itself after displacing Akayev in the so-called ‘Tulip Revolution’ in March 2005.

The thing that needs to be deciphered though, at this juncture, is the reason behind the ethnic unrest in Kyrgyzstan in June 2010 which shook the very foundations of the fledgling ‘interim government’ led by Rosa Otunbayeva.

Quite naturally, the interim government squarely blamed Maxim Bakiyev behind the ethnic disturbances. According to them, it was financially funded by the Bakiyevs and physically abetted by Islamist Fundamentalists.

However, the government does not have any cogent proof to corroborate its arguments.

There is no doubt that the southern cities of Osh and Jalal-abad are traditional strongholds of the Bakiyev family. And these were the cities where the ethnic disturbances mostly took place. It is also a fact that Kyrgyzstan shares borders with Tajikistan and Uzbekistan in its southern areas where the biggest post-Soviet Central Asian terrorist group: Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (IMU) is assumed to be active.

Moreover, an apparently peaceful Islamic organisation called Hizb ut-Tahrir (HuT) reportedly has close links with the IMU. The final aim of both the parties is to overthrow secular governments and establish a caliphate in Central Asia. Interestingly, HuT has more members in south Kyrgyzstan than in the north.

Very recently, Usmon Odil, who replaced the late Tahir Yuldashev as chief of the IMU, has called for jihad against those responsible for killing Uzbeks in southern Kyrgyzstan. In a video, Odil said: “This is a blood-soaked tragedy, one of a series of sordid plots against Muslims, organised by a government of heretics. May Allah have Muslims make the right decision and be able to take the path of jihad.”

These words of Usmon are supposed to be more of rhetoric than portraying reality. IMU has been pushed to a sort of operational bankruptcy in Afghanistan. Hence it needs new fertile grounds to rejuvenate its cadres. Presently, it does not pose as an ominous military threat though for an already unbalanced Kyrgyzstan, a minor perturbation may be enough.

Also the above data do not necessarily indicate that the Islamist Fundamentalists were the actual perpetrators of the June disturbances. Rather it shows that unrest generally creates greener pastures for jihadi activism. At the same time, Bakiyev and his group are not to be exonerated from being assumed as masterminds behind the pogrom. There is a straightforward logic substantiating their involvement; i.e. turmoil in the country could have dislodged Otunbayeva’s government and somehow saved the Bakiyevs.

Plainly speaking, a proper and neutral fact finding analysis needs to be carried out to unravel the mystery. With elections round the corner on October 10 and campaigning in full flow, there are high chances that the ongoing investigations into the June disturbances would contain political colour.

In fact, the decision to imprison human rights activist Azimzhan Askarov for life was met with protests both inside as well as outside Kyrgyzstan. A local court in the village of Nooken near Jalal-abad had sentenced him and seven other ethnic Uzbeks guilty of murdering Myktybek Sulaimanov in June during violent clashes between Uzbeks and Kyrgyz in the village of Bazar-Korgon.

This is definite a pointer that in South Kyrgyzstan, the authority may be skewed against the Uzbeks. In fact, the Mayor of Osh, Melis Myrzakmatov appears to be a man with doubtful credentials. Though he was appointed Mayor in January 2009 during the Bakiyev-era, he quickly changed his political colour when the latter was losing ground.

Independent researches have hinted that the mobs during the carnage were well organised and it is quite likely that they were covertly being aided by the authorities, especially in Osh. In fact, the statement passed by the Mayor that he wants to ‘work exclusively for his Kyrgyz nation’ further complicate matters.

Incidentally, the violence in June has created a power vacuum in southern Kyrgyzstan. The position of the interim government is quite fragile there. Melis Myrzakmatov is acting as a power broker. In this scenario, to expect anything meaningful in terms of bringing the actual ‘June criminals’ to book is not logical as people like Myrzakmatov might be wielding enough political clout to camouflage the hooligans.

In sum, the parliamentary elections shall be an ‘acid test’ for Otunbayeva’s government. It did pass the June referendum with honours. But the elections in the next month may pose formidable problems for her government.

A couple of things have to be watched out for. Obviously, it needs to be seen which party comes out victorious. A record 29 political parties are fighting it out for 120 parliamentary seats. Interestingly, despite the April ouster of Kurmanbek Bakiyev, a number of parties are being led by his former officials. For instance, “Atazhurt” is led by former emergency minister Kamychbek Tashiyev and “Butun Kyrgyzstan” is being led by former security secretaries Adakham Madumarov and Miroslav Niyazov.

Another thing of importance is to see which political arrangement can provide maximum stability to Kyrgyzstan. Moreover, if the country further descends into chaos, then what shall be the role of multigovernment organisations like OSCE and SCO in general and Russia and America in particular?

The answers to these questions are very crucial to predict the future of Kyrgyzstan. Will it survive the present crisis? The key to this query lies in the success of the ‘new democratic process’ and how the present as well as the future government(s) tackle the ethnic crisis.

published in Diplomatic Courier 
http://www.diplomaticourier.org/kmitan/articleback.php?newsid=571

Why India must focus on Africa

by Uddipan Mukherjee and Indira Mukherjee

One hundred and seventeen years back, a scraggy gentleman commenced his professional career in Africa. Though he carried on with his vocation, the gentleman could not remain apathetic to the plight of Indians residing in the continent’s southernmost region. In a letter to the Natal Advertiser, he asked: “Is this Christian-like, is this fair play, is this justice, is this civilization?”

It hardly requires any authoritative scholarship to discern the identity of the gentleman. Yes, Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi left an indelible imprint in South Africa. His efforts against racial discrimination in South Africa are beyond praise. While sculpting a history of modernity, the ‘tallness’ of this man simply cannot be ignored. He was the first perceivable and visible link between India and Africa.

Six decades have gone by, sixty three years to be precise; and the time has necessarily not come but surely gone past: the time to seize the opportunity to emulate Gandhi in order to weave a bond between the two (sub) continents.

India’s Foreign Policy

When an analysis of Indian Foreign Policy is carried out, one is a bit bewildered that it lacks a coherent framework. Arguments may be posited that foreign policy needs to be dynamical and cannot be subsumed in an overarching theory. No doubt, yes. However, it does not imply that a nation-state must not possess a set direction and consistent ideology. Twists and turns depending on the context are tactical moves but not strategic shifts in any manner.

India though, does have a loose set of doctrines as far as foreign policy is concerned. And that ideology was proclaimed by none other than Gandhi’s most favoured disciple; Jawaharlal Nehru. Successive Indian governments, whether the centrist-Congress or the socialist-Morarji or even the so-called ‘reactionary’ right wing have more or less followed it over the years without completely dismantling it. The lofty ideals of Non-Alignment gave India emotional and ethical space in the world podium undoubtedly, but snatched away from it the weaponry of Realpolitik. Our leaders kept on receiving adulations (or did they?) from outside and as an ‘insider’ we felt the pangs of being left behind.

The germane question is in a post-1991 and more so in a post 9/11 world, what is the viable formula for a developing nation’s foreign policy? With a hegemonic America, a resurgent Russia, a ‘rising’ China and a ‘belligerent’ Pakistan lurking around, the Indian policy makers have their work cut out. In this scenario, in which direction should India move to generate maximum benefit to its masses without compromising on its core principle of ‘live and let live’?

A feasible solution which India has hopefully at last started to implement is the ‘soft diplomacy’. India is ‘infiltrating’ countries like Afghanistan and Bangladesh; but not with a target to subjugate or exploit. India’s sole aim is to permeate the socio-cultural and economic matrix of a country without blowing the trumpets.

Indian software, Bollywood films, our technical know-how and English-speaking workforce and a mammoth manpower are by every means intimidating. Instead of us being cowed down by Chinese forays into Africa or Central Asia or its alliance with ASEAN or even its flirtations in our immediate neighbourhood; India needs to pump up its own muscles since its tendons are strong enough.

In this aspect, one thing is noteworthy. Some analysts view that anyone advocating India to be pro-active in Africa or Latin America or for that matter Central Asia is necessarily ‘hawkish’ in stance and an ‘emulationist’ in principle. To them, if one suggests India to be pro-active, then the person is basically asking South Block to follow China’s footsteps. And since India is not ‘strong enough’ as China is, no point in imitating the dragon. However, even such commentators are not averse to India making inroads into regions of present Chinese dominance.

Actually, we need to appreciate the fact that China is indeed a ‘rising’ power and our relations with that country are far from normal; the recent development in Gilgit-Baltistan is a case in point. Hence if we can counter China, then it would be to our benefit.

So, there is no harm in framing a China-focused foreign policy and that does not make us ‘hawkish’.

Rather it is a security imperative. Even Lord Meghnad Desai seems to be wary of China when he says: “The Great Game is alive again. In the 19th century, it was Russia looking for a salt water port. Now it is China and China seems to be winning the Great Game.”

Among other things, China has spread its tentacles in Africa in a big manner and India simply cannot afford to miss the bus.

The African Pie?

The ‘Scramble for Africa’ began during the period of New Imperialism (in the late nineteenth century). It led to the economic subjugation and political domination over the continent. Though most African colonies were faithful to the European powers during the two world wars but after 1945, they started to throw off the yoke of foreign powers and gradually emerged victorious.

Thus, it is no surprise that in 2010, 17 African nations celebrate 50 years of their independence. The ‘dark continent’ is now on the path to modernity and globalization. From the Aswan dam to Kalahari Desert, Africa can be viewed as a tapestry of different cultures. From the geo-strategic and geo-economic perspective, there has been a significant rise in the importance of Africa owing to its location, oil deposits, mineral wealth, booming market and rich bio-diversity.

Viewed through the prism of History, trade links between India and Africa were restricted mostly to the countries in the ‘Horn of Africa’. In the 6th Century A.D., Indian ships flocked to the Ethiopian ports to trade in silk and spices.

India’s Recent Inroads into Africa

In recent years, most of the focus has been on trade, investment and economic relations. Indo-African trade has reached $35 billion and the target is to double it by 2014.

India launched the “Focus Africa” programme under the EXIM (Export-Import) Policy 2002-07, thus providing financial assistance to various inter-regional trade promotion schemes. As a result, members of India Inc. have made substantial investments in Africa.

In the Defence sector, India assists countries like Nigeria, Zambia and Botswana through training. Co-operation in health care, agriculture, mining, hydrocarbon sectors are also on the rise. Interestingly, Nigeria is the largest African crude oil supplier to India. Recently, a $200 million project to lay a pipeline from Khartoum to Port Sudan on the Red sea was also completed by India. Also in recognition of India’s growing role as an industrial and economic power, last year Egypt offered India to set up an ‘India Zone’ along the Suez Canal development area.

Indian firms have invested around $3 billion in Ethiopia, Kenya, Mozambique and Madagascar to produce wide variety of food and bio-fuel crops. Indian government also provides cheap lines of credit to these countries.

Furthermore, in 2009, India signed a civilian nuclear deal to trade in Uranium and build nuclear power plants with Namibia.

In July 2010, an Indian delegation participated in the 15th summit of the African Union (AU), which is an association of 53 African countries. Emphasis was laid on various aspects of the decisions taken in the India-Africa Forum Summit (IAFS) of 2008.

But is India doing enough? Is it not falling back in the race vis-à-vis China?

In 2009, China emerged as the largest trading partner of Africa, with bilateral trade touching $ 90 bn. The forum on China-Africa Cooperation was initiated way back in 2000. China is also involved in multiple infrastructural projects like dams, bridges, roads etc often in exchange of future mineral rights. It also constantly provides African countries with ‘soft loans’ and economic packages. Thus, the Chinese footprint is deeply and clearly visible on the African soil.

China is a permanent member of the UN Security Council whereas India is still struggling to be one. At present, India is all set to contest the post of a non-permanent member in January 2011. Thus, it becomes imperative to garner the support of AU. Possibly, this was the raison d’etre for Vice President Hamid Ansari’s visit to Zambia, Malawi, Botswana, Mauritius and Mozambique early this year.

Recommendations

India and Africa, both being members of the Commonwealth, the tri-continental India-Brazil-South Africa (IBSA) and NAM, can also try to improve their relations through these associations. In an effort to boost trade ties, India can plan to provide duty-free access to products from African countries. It can also work on double taxation avoidance mechanism with member countries. Also, in the wake of piracy attacks in the Gulf of Aden, Indian Navy has a scope to play a bigger role.

It will also be praiseworthy, if India can hold regular summit level meetings with African nations. India can also set up more consulate offices in AU countries. Organizing Indo-African games would be an innovative idea as well. Increasing contact with the Indian Diaspora in Africa would be a welcome step as they can play a large role in strengthening bilateral ties. Also, significant efforts should be made to increase ground contacts i.e. Indian officials in Africa should be appropriately trained in local languages.

Another area which can be strengthened is Indian Technical and Economic Co-operation Programme (ITEC) which aims to develop human resource through various trainings and workshops in target countries. On another front, the Indian sponsored Pan-African e-Network (in partnership with the AU) which links 53 countries through tele-medicine, education and governance, plays a crucial role in developing skills and resources that are critical for Africa’s growth.

India has emerged as the largest contributor to UN mandated operations in Africa, with a cumulative effort totaling more than 30,000 personnel. Its operations are spread across Congo, Somalia, Sudan, Sierra Leone etc. UN has also expressed satisfaction with India's performance and role in these missions. Events like the latest developments in Congo in August this year where three of its officers were killed by rebels, should not discourage India in any manner.

India has to convince Africa of its long term commitments in the continent which are unlike the ‘short term’ Chinese interests. There are rising fears in Africa of China's aggressive economic policy which threatens to take over its resources and means of production. The Chinese supply of arms to local elite, involvement in regional conflicts and its record of human rights violation could also boomerang in the long run.

India and Africa can share a symbiotic relationship. And the onus is on India to convince the Africans.

As Sunil Bharti Mittal aptly points out in an interview: “I believe the next decade is going to belong to Africa. India and China are driving the economy but where will it all move next? Africa is the next continent.”

Indira Mukherjee writes for Indian Policy
this article has been submitted for publication to Uday India

India and Bangladesh: Worthy of Credit

by Uddipan Mukherjee and Rajeev Sharma

published by the South Asia Analysis Group

http://www.southasiaanalysis.org/papers41/paper4032.html



It seems that New Delhi has finally come out of its diplomatic cocoon, at least as far as its immediate eastern neighbour is concerned. A $1 billion credit outflow accorded to Bangladesh, interestingly; is the highest that both countries may contemplate thus far.




Though analysts may argue that such disbursal of funds by the ‘big neighbour’ was already in the pipeline as per the Joint Communique signed by Sheikh Hasina and Dr Manmohan Singh in January this year when the former paid a visit to New Delhi, her first ever after coming back to authority in 2009. Nevertheless, Indian Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee’s rendezvous with Hasina at Gano Bhaban on August 8 merit attention. It gave a practical shape to diplomatic formalities and provided meaty substance to dry rhetoric. It was a reality, a rather fruitful one for both the nations and not a chimera.



There is no gainsaying the fact that Bangladesh holds both geo-strategic and concomitantly geo-economic significance for India. If New Delhi needs to permanently strengthen its strategic hold in South Asia, then forging amiable relations with the countries in its backyard is an imperative. More so, when India has to tread cautiously with belligerent states lurking around; with China and its Pakistani proxy deserving an obvious mention in this regard.



On the other hand, Dhaka has to be pragmatic. Fomenting Islamic Fundamentalism and churning anti-India tirade at the behest of countries which are separated from it geographically, linguistically as well as ethnographically would imply a further detachment from reality. Moreover, acting as a satellite state of ‘upstart’ regional powers is sure to lead Bangladesh to yet another ‘failed state’ for the worse and destabilise it at best.



However, if the two countries can maneuver their ties in the present manner, then their diplomatic boat would not be rudderless; at least in the foreseeable future.



The Hasina Era



Ever since Sheikh Hasina won the parliamentary elections in Bangladesh on December 28, 2008 and assumed office as Prime Minister on January 6, 2009 for the second time (her first tenure was from 1996 to 2001), new vistas have opened up in Indo-Bangla relations. Actually, bilateral relations between New Delhi and Dhaka had touched rock bottom during the second tenure of the then Prime Minister Khaleda Zia (2001-06). It was no clandestine affair that during Khaleda’s period, Islamic Fundamentalists found a new haven in Bangladesh in a post 9/11 world.

Begum Zia’s second tenure was virtually a proxy of Islamabad and the ISI. In fact the latter was never more powerful in that country than in those five years. This was also the time when the ‘Chinese Dragon’ could spout fire in Bangladesh.



Apart from ‘political fate’, Pakistan and China would surely blame both Hasina and to a large extent Pranab Mukherjee for the present heightened bonhomie between the two nations which does not augur well for either of them.



In fact, such is the level of synergy and proximity between Sheikh Hasina and Mukherjee that when the latter took over as the Indian Finance Minister, Hasina set aside all protocol and rang him up to congratulate him.



The Hasina government didn’t belie Indian expectations and this unprecedented line of credit by India has to be interpreted in that light. It took firm action against anti-India terrorist outfits on its soil and ordered a heavy clampdown over those groups in the last couple of years. That kind of action has led to the arrest of over a dozen suspected Islamic militants belonging to outfits like Lashkar-e-Toiba (LeT). Incidentally, the LeT, Harkat-ul-Mujahideen (HuM), Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM) and Harkat-ul-Jihad-e-Islami (HuJI) are among the 15 foreign terror groups who were active or may be still covertly operating in Bangladesh since 1991.



The Deal



Scrutinising the Indo-Bangla one billion US dollar deal more closely, one finds that India’s diplomatic acumen was at its recent best. For instance, the main terms and conditions of the credit line agreement, inter alia, include a low fixed rate of interest of 1.75 per cent per annum. It necessarily reflects India’s magnanimity on one hand and supposedly a reverberation of the "Gujral Doctrine" in our foreign policy portfolio on the other. The said principle notes that India should stop ‘calculating’ relationships with its immediate neighbours based purely on a precept of ‘mutual reciprocity’. Rather India should shower benefits so as to generate goodwill among the masses of the concerned country.



However, a half percent commitment fee per annum on unutilised credit after 12 months from the date of approval of the contract adds a ‘business colour’ to the whole programme of apparent largesse. Nonetheless, a 20 years' repayment period including a grace period of five years is by all means a superlative rapprochement scenario for the two countries.



While finally formalising this deal in Dhaka last month, Mukherjee emphatically declared that "this one-billion-dollar line of credit is the largest ever amount given by India to any country." He also meant business through the assertion that "I am confident that this credit line will be the stepping stone for a shared destiny and will transform our bilateral engagement."



India’s Soft Diplomacy



India definitely has taken a page out of America’s diplomatic notebook (not the "Counter Insurgency" notebook though). If New Delhi is seriously keen to establish a ‘Pax Indica’ in her neighbourhood and firmly proclaim its dominance vis-à-vis China, then these kinds of diplomatic maneuvers are essential. They say: ‘when you cannot defeat them, just buy them’. And in Bangladesh’s case, they are ready to be coaxed and molycoddled. There is no rationale for a cassus belli.



Interestingly, India has enlisted a set of 14 projects, primarily infrastructural, under this rubric of Line of Credit. And though it has not set deadlines on any of them, a commitment fee per annum itself is a countervailing measure against procrastination. Furthermore, the envisaged projects shall be an augmentation of Bangladesh’s roadways, railways, port facilities and inland water system, among others.



It is evidently clear that post 9/11, India has embarked on a spirited path of ‘soft diplomacy’ in South Asia. Afghanistan was first and now Bangladesh. In the former, India has put in almost a similar amount but in a phased manner whereas in this case, it seems to be in a hurry. Actually, India is better prepared now than it was in Afghanistan and hence the results. It has been reported that India’s soft diplomacy in the ‘land of the Buzkashi’ has earned it goodwill amongst the ordinary populace. And consequently Islamabad fears marginalisation in Kabul much more now than before.



Former Minister of State for External Affairs Shashi Tharoor opines that India’s greatest asset in Afghanistan is its exhibition of ‘soft power’. Indian films and soap operas enthral the plebian in ‘the land of Abdali’. Scholastically speaking, this may be interpreted as a sort of ‘invasion’ on the "superstructure" as per Gramscian scheme of things.



And for Bangladesh, this cultural syncretism is evidently clear and does not need to be stressed further upon.



Thus New Delhi’s endeavour is exactly in that direction: to extract goodwill and respect from the citizenry of its immediate eastern neighbour. And with a friendly regime enthroned in Dhaka, life is much easier for South Block. Moreover, the fulcrum of bilateral relations between the two countries, at present is undeniably our ‘cold headed’ politician ‘Pranab-da’ under whose guidance and philosophisation, the engines of economy, trade, commerce, energy et al. is expected to run smooth without periodic lubrication.



Other Developments



To add, very recently, on September 8 2010, India and Bangladesh finalized a railway link agreement to improve connectivity. The link will reduce the distance between Agartala and Kolkata via Guwahati from an arduous 1200 km to just 519 km.



There is also the proposed 13 km long Akhaurah-Agartala railway link, 5.4 km of which would be in the Indian territory. It is to be financed by India. This was agreed upon during the last visit of Sheikh Hasina in January 2010.



Role of the Army



Somewhat surprisingly, Bangladesh Army also deserves encomiums regarding the present harmonious relations between the two countries. It had a major role to play in subduing Islamic Fundamentalism during the Caretaker Government (CG) period of 2007 to January 2009. And the most significant thing it has done is to implant, not only in the psyche of its own people but also in the minds of its neighbours; that a coup d’etat might not be a distinct possibility whenever there is a political turmoil; quite unlike that in Pakistan.



The way present Hasina government could handle the upsurge of the Bangladesh Rifles (BDR) in Feb 2009; barely a month after her re-incarnation, bespeaks the covert as well as overt support provided by the Army.



Contentious Issues



Though India and the Hasina government (present as well as past) have taken positive steps to ensure that the problematic bilateral issues are resolved; few things still remain unsolved.



For instance, the proper fencing of the 4096 km long land boundary is yet to be fruitfully achieved. It is one of the perennial problems that India, especially the province of West Bengal, faces with regard to illegal migrants from Bangladesh. The decision to settle the matter was reportedly taken at the highest political level in India on the eve of Sheikh Hasina’s visit to New Delhi. But Manmohan Singh said that small disagreements cannot be allowed to come in the way of a dynamic relationship.



During the Home Secretary level talks in Dhaka (Dec 2009), India had offered a comprehensive agreement to Bangladesh --demarcating the remaining 6.1 km of the 4096 km long boundary, plus settling the matter of adverse possessions and enclaves. Factually speaking, India holds as many as 111 enclaves within Bangladeshi territory amounting to some 17,000 acres of land while Bangladesh holds some 51 enclaves amounting to about 7000 acres in India.



India has now agreed in principle to cede control over its enclaves, even though the difference is about 10,000 acres in Bangladesh’s favour. In other words, once the negotiations are complete, the Indian enclaves in Bangladesh’s territory would be absorbed in Bangladesh and vice-versa.



The Balance of Trade is skewed towards India which Bangladesh laments. Only 1 per cent of India’s imports are from Bangladesh whereas around 20 per cent of Bangladesh’s imports come from India. Closer economic ties between the two countries can offset this huge trade imbalance which can be addressed through greater Indian investment. Bangladesh Government has evinced keen interest in reconsidering investment proposals of the Indian business conglomerate TATA in this regard.



India Trade Fair (ITF) and North East India Trade and Investment Conclave were organised in the Feb 24-28, 2010 in Dhaka. The initiative was intended to attract Indian investment in Bangladesh and it helped the entrepreneurs to explore opportunities.



Bangladesh welcomed the position of the Government of India on reduction of a number of items from India’s negative list. The Joint Communiqué issued after the Bangladesh Prime Minister’s visit indicated that India would encourage import from Bangladesh. There are also indications that India would take steps expeditiously for removal of tariff and non-tariff barriers and port restrictions faced by Bangladeshi exporters. Bangladesh, on the other hand, has agreed to the Indian request for introducing ‘Border Haats’ (haat in Bengali means market).



Another facilitation that India has offered to Bangladesh is connectivity to Nepal and Bhutan through its territory. Trucks from Bhutan and Nepal would enter 200 m into Zero point at Banglabandha-Phulbari land customs station. This would boost trade activities for Bangladesh.



On the other hand, Bangladesh agreed to the Indian proposal to facilitate movement of containerized cargoes by rail and water. In the last week of February 2010, an Indian team visited Bangladesh to discuss the possibility of movement of container cargoes through railways and waterways. A joint group of customs meeting was held in New Delhi and various steps were taken for entry of Bangladeshi products to India.



Another problem zone for the two countries is with distribution of river waters. Interactions between the two countries are being held regularly under various institutional mechanisms. The 37th Joint Rivers Commission (JRC) meeting was held in New Delhi in March 2010 and it will continue to be held regularly to reach broader understanding on the water related issues for greater welfare of both the peoples. A mechanism has been set in motion to facilitate an understanding on sharing of waters of Teesta and other common rivers.



On the Tipaimukh dam issue, which has generated controversies in Bangladesh, India has made it abundantly clear that it would refrain from doing anything that might harm the interests of the other party.



Conclusion



A common thread of pluralistic culture runs between the two countries and their peoples. Both the countries share the legacy of the visionary Rabindra Nath Tagore. Naturally, Bangladesh has expressed a desire to establish a Cultural Center in New Delhi to promote and showcase its cultural heritage.



Importantly, Bangladesh has conveyed support to India’s candidature for permanent membership of the UN Security Council as and when the reform of UN Security Council takes place.



Thus, it may be inferred that the present camaraderie between the two nation-states is expected to herald a new era of bilateral relations. In that venture, keeping in mind China’s ominous forays into Chittagong, and Pakistan’s latent presence through a religious and cultural jihad; India has embarked on the right path of Realpolitik, albeit in a benevolent and apparently libertarian manner.



Hasina’s second innings has made Indo-Bangla relations creditworthy (pun intended). And if soft loan diplomacy is the food of love and cooperation, bring it on. Keeping an eye on China, India needs to replicate its Bangladesh model of soft loan diplomacy in its near abroad, with a laser beam focus on neighbours like Bhutan, Myanmar and Vietnam.


Rajeev Sharma is a New Delhi-based journalist-author and commentator on foreign policy, international relations, terrorism and security issues. He can be reached at
bhootnath004@yahoo.com.

The Political Flood

by Uddipan Mukherjee and Rajeev Sharma

Published in The Centre for Land Warfare Studies (CLAWS)

http://www.claws.in/index.php?action=master&task=643&u_id=136


Wall Street Journal’s August 16 report that the Inter-Services Intelligence (popularly known by its acronym ISI) has displaced India from the position of Pakistan’s top ‘enemy’; was vindicated in barely two weeks by the string of blasts in major cities of that country, Lahore included. In fact, Pakistan suffered innumerable casualties in 2009 by the rampant ‘fidayeen’ attacks spearheaded by the Tehrik-i-Taliban. Nevertheless, the civil-military authority of the ‘land of the Quaid’ had appeared overtly insouciant with regard to the perceived threat from that angle.


A military operation in Waziristan, a melee in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and the US pressures to act against the Taliban Shura nestled in Quetta notwithstanding, the Pakistani military had showcased its strength in its eastern sector last year, citing the decades-long psychoneurotic threat from its ‘childhood enemy’.

The rationale behind such a demeanour was hardly unknown to the world. However, it is ironical that even divine disasters are utilised by the pachyderm power brokers to further their own interests.

Unprecedented floods have wreaked havoc to shatter the economy of the country. Yet, the response as against aid appeals so far is not upto expectations. As the Daily Telegraph, London, pointed in an editorial, that even the Gulf States appear indifferent to the suffering of fellow Muslims in Pakistan, while the offer of help from China, Pakistan’s all-weather friend is paltry.

Does all this underscore the image deficit, if not international pariah status, of Pakistan? It is tempting to reply in the affirmative. But how will that description fit a country, which is regularly hailed as the frontline ally in the ‘global war on terror’?

A time comes in every nation’s life when it has to confront reality and the floods have merely hastened that denouement for Pakistan. The international community has refused to share the entire flood burden as it did earlier on so many occasions. For Pakistan’s government though, all that aid was Zakat, and hence nothing out of the ordinary.

The apposite answer to the above stated query is that Islamabad’s continued dalliance with the ISI-created terror outfits even as it received billions of dollars in aid to fight the very menace of terrorism itself; is in essence the raison d’etre of the changed ‘global view’ toward Pakistan. Things have reached such an impasse that British Prime Minister David Cameron asked Pakistan to stop looking ‘both ways’. His remarks, according to a British daily, carried the endorsement of the White House.

The Daily Telegraph, which is in the forefront of the global media campaign for Pakistan, has not helped her cause either. Its correspondent, Dean Nelson, reported from Islamabad that more than £300 million in foreign aid for the victims of 2005 earthquake was misused by the Zardari government. The dispatch went on to say that ‘officials now feared that the alleged diversion of funds will deter donors from showering further aid’.

So, Pakistan’s desperation, if any, at ‘image make over’ makes perfect sense but not its reported readiness to give up its paranoia about India as its ‘number one’ enemy. Is one to construe that what the Americans failed to achieve in multiple visits, the flood fury did in a matter of weeks, and nixed Rawalpinidi (the general headquarters of the army) in conjuring up fears of an Indian attack?

Theorisations aside, India is central to Pakistani policies. The Army chief Kayani has made this unequivocally clear on more than one occasion. Interestingly, before taking up the present job, he headed the ISI, which has made this famous ‘India is not our main threat’ disclosure to the Wall Street Journal (WSJ). Even Gen. Athar Abbas, the chief Pakistan military spokesman, said he wasn't aware of ISI’s recent assessment pertaining to the threat (or the lack of it) from across the eastern side of Indus.

Incidentally, the deluge as well as the ‘renewed blasts’ demand a roll back of the army’s traditional policy of hostility towards India; at least in public. And the ‘story’ in the American economic daily simply bears an insignia to that. In fact, as if in resonance with the said report, President Zardari, on the occasion of ‘Defence Day’, expressed fears of an ‘existential threat’ to Pakistan due to ‘terrorism’ and ‘natural disaster’. And it is a matter of further bemusement that Zardari passed such a statement on a day which the Pakistanis commemorate as their defence of Lahore from the Indians in 1965!

On the other hand, the WSJ report must have come as a big relief to the US lawmakers, who have been told by the Congressional Research Service that “the American interests are primarily focused on Pakistan’s ability to control its territory to prevent it from being used as a haven for anti-American terrorists, and prevent inter-state conflict with India that would be regionally destabilising”.

Any how, who will check if the civil-military administration of Pakistan is actually in tune with the afore-mentioned media reports? Will the Americans do it? It remains a matter of speculation because the US relishes its stakes in the sub-continent not only as a ‘friend’ but also as a seller of goods and services through a uniquely American-esque multi-speak. Indians can check and hit the high octave but will the West at all bother about their Pakistani bogey? After all, India has no Haqqani network to drive out!

And what if the flood-induced discontent threatens the very fundamentals of the military establishment and political system of Pakistan? No guesses. It would definitely mean a re-establishment of India as Pakistan’s ‘enemy number one’.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Rajeev Sharma is a senior journalist-cum-author based in New Delhi. He writes in several global media outlets.

Ominous Projects

Yahoo NewsSun, Sep 5 03:59 PM


Comment: Do we still need a rationale in boosting up our defence wherewithal keeping in mind the Chinese threat perception? Moreover, let us fix our stand point regarding POK and Gilgit-Baltistan.
=======================================================================
While India has independently confirmed that the presence of Chinese troops in Gilgit and Baltistan is a bit exaggerated in terms of numbers, the real concern here is on the number of projects and works China has undertaken in those areas and in Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir (PoK). And the footprint is only growing larger.

At last count, South Block had noticed at least 17 confirmed projects in PoK and Gilgit-Baltistan.

These constitute more than half the Chinese projects in areas under Pakistan's control, making it a cause of major concern because of the disputed status of the areas. At present, according to government inputs, 122 Chinese companies are active in Pakistan, and most of them are also involved in projects in PoK and Gilgit-Baltistan areas.

China, sources said, has suddenly increased its involvement in almost every key sector, and has virtually taken upon itself the responsibility of building basic infrastructure in these areas. The list of projects range from providing mobile connectivity services to building power projects, highways and rail links.

Karakoram Highway upgradation: The China Road and Bridge Corporation has taken up this project and will give preferential credit of $327 million through its Exim Bank in what is a $491-million project. Two other MoUs on double-laning of the Karakoram Highway as well as widening of the Jaglot-Skardu road have also been signed.

Pakistan-China rail link: This is a 750 km-long rail link between Havelian and the Khunjerab Pass along the Karakoram Highway. While feasibility studies are on for this project, Pakistan and China have agreed to establish a joint venture between Pakistan Railways and Dongfang Electric Corporation to initially run only freight trains on this route.

Jhelum Bridge: Pakistan has awarded a Rs 1.2 billion contract to a Chinese state company for constructing a major bridge on River Jhelum at Dhangali in Mirpur District.

Five bailey bridges on Gilgit-Skardu Road: Xinjiang Road and Bridge Construction Company of China is replacing five existing bailey bridges on the 167-km long, strategically important Gilgit-Skardu road.

Mining: A Chinese company called MCC Resources Development Company Ltd has been allowed to start a mineral exploration exercise in these areas. The Gilgit-Baltistan government has given a reconnaissance licence to the company. Pakistan Surpass Mining Company, which is subsidiary of China's Xinjiang Surpass Mining Company Ltd, has submitted a $6 million investment proposal for mining in those areas. It plans to set up a hydropower station and Molybdenum processing plant in Chupurshan Valley.

Sust Dry Port: A joint venture named Pak-China Sust Port Company is managing the Sust dry port, 200 km from Gilgit on the Karakoram Highway. Opened four years ago, the Chinese side is the principal stakeholder in the JV.

Mobile communication links: China Mobile is providing mobile services in PoK and certain areas of Gilgit-Baltistan. The company has major plans to set up more towers and expand coverage.

Diamer-Bhasha Dam: China is said to have agreed to finance this $11.3-billion 4500-MW project. Also, it has agreed to provide the services of the China Three Gorges Project Corporation for the construction of the dam. Sinihydro has show interest in the development of the project.

Magla dam raising project: A joint venture comprising China International Water and Electric Corporation and some Pakistan companies have almost completed this project. Once operational, the average annual water availability for irrigation will increase by near 3 million acre feet.

Neelum-Jhelum hydro-power project: China Gezhouba Water and Power Corporation, which was part of the Three Gorges project, has formed a consortium and taken up this 969 MW project too in Muzaffarabad district. Keen on completing this project before the Kishengaga project on the Indian side, Pakistan has obtained a commitment from the consortium that the work will be finished in eight years. Meanwhile, it has raised objections and gone for arbitration with India on the Kishenganga project under Indus Waters Treaty provisions.

Besides these, China has taken up at least four other hydropower projects in these areas-Bhunji project in Gilgit-Baltistan, Kohala project (1100 MW), Naltar project and then smaller projects in places like Phendar, Harpo and Yurlbo.

Already, China has provided a soft loan of $300 million to Pakistan for reconstruction and rehabilitation works in the areas as follow-up on relief for the earthquake. Following the recent floods, it has taken up the task to get the Karakoram Highway back on track. Many of its military personnel are there for relief work and it has so far given aid of $9 million which is likely to increase.

====================================================================

Plan for It

by Uddipan Mukherjee


The Dragon Surfaces

The Chinese have certain compulsions, especially the domestic demand for energy and the sustainment of the export-oriented economy. Consequent fallout of that is the extension of its role in the world arena; in the form of  devising oil and gas pipelines cutting through the Central Asian topography, the forays into the Dark Continent and the creation of naval zones ranging spatially from the Hainan Island to the Gulf of Aden.

String of "Pearls"

The so-called ‘String of Pearls’ has surely spread its tentacles far and wide and the stance adopted by the PRC in the anti-piracy maneuvers off the Somali coast adduce further proof of its covetous glances. Hence it becomes contextually relevant to evaluate the current growth of the PLA Navy (PLAN) as a vital arm of the Chinese Army. The allusion of the Indian counterpart becomes pertinent too as it reminisces a bitter border struggle with the former in 1962.


When the “Commander-in-Chief” Hu Jintao inspected the PLA in 2009, there were, inter alia, some significant implications. First, it was timely as the event marked the sixtieth anniversary of the triumph of Communism. Second, after China successfully hosted the Olympics barely a year ago, the showcase of military strength was another feather to its ‘red cap’. It was an indication of the juggernaut of the Dragon which the world, and Asia and Japan in particular needed to note. Third, the choice of the locale was not merely coincidental that about two decades back, Tienanmen Square was witness to a ruthless suppression of a student-intellectual movement which could have shaped up as an urban insurgency if not tamed forthrightly.


Incidentally the PLAN had already exhibited its might in April the same year in Qingdao, headquarters of its Northern Sea Fleet. In that venue, probably for the first time, PLAN came up with its public demonstration of nuclear-powered submarine fleet.

The afore-mentioned ostentatiousness was no surprise element whatsoever. After all, this is what Mao Zedong had always dreamt of. His era comprising the Great Leap Forward (1958-61), Project 596 (first testing of nuclear weapon in 1964) and the detonation of Hydrogen Bomb (1967) was the harbinger to the present exhibition of military musculature by his country. Moreover, Deng Xiaoping’s paradigm shift in economic policy adopted over three decades ago has bestowed China with the necessary prestige as well as financial faculty to embark on the road to soldiery.

Why a solid PLAN?

To get the facts straight, China depends and naturally so, on maritime transportation for 90 per cent of its imports and exports. In 2007, the China Daily asserted that economic transactions across the sea accounted for nearly 10 per cent of its Gross Domestic Product (GDP). Furthermore, PRC aims to become the largest shipbuilder in the globe by 2015. To compound these, the Chinese oil demand has reached close to 8.5 billion barrels per day and at present, 40 per cent of China’s oil comes by sea. Also, it imports one-third of its oil from the African continent and hence that necessarily makes Gulf of Aden an important area to command.


Adding to these, China’s trade with the European Union is through the Red Sea and the Indian Ocean Region (IOR). Interestingly for India, 40 per cent of the vessels transiting the Indian Ocean are Chinese. This is a pointer to the fact that in case of a skirmish with its northern neighbour, India may exercise the privilege to go for a blockade of the Chinese ships. And this is no mere hypothetical scenario. In the light of churlish political posturing of PRC with regard to Gilgit-Baltistan and an undiplomatic visa-regime, the Indian state seriously needs to upgrade its military machinery vis-à-vis China.


In fact, to obviate such bellicose circumstances, PRC has by choice gone for strategic littoral locations starting from the facilities at the Hainan Island and thereafter touching the Woody Island east of Vietnam, Sittwe in Myanmar, Chittagong in Bangladesh and meandering through Hambantota (Sri Lanka) and Gwadar (Pakistan) has augmented its Sea Lines of Communications (SLOCs) upto the Strait of Hormuz.

And though the PLAN’s recent presence at the Gulf of Aden has been logically to negate the circumnavigation of Chinese vessels around the Cape of Good Hope, it does not conceptually belie the physical extension of the ‘String of Pearls’. Furthermore, security of the SLOCs around the Horn of Africa is imperative for Chinese economic interests and more so when about one-fifth of over thousand Chinese commercial vessels were molested by the Somali buccaneers in 2008 itself.


To begin with, on 26 December 2008, PRC disbursed two fleet destroyers Wuhan and Haikou toward the Gulf of Aden and continued to replace fleets periodically. Recently, on 04 March 2010, missile destroyer Guangzhou and supply ship Weishanhu joined the missile frigate Chaohu at the same venue to supplant the last deployment. Weishanhu is PLAN’s largest supply ship and a Fuchi-class 23,000-tonne vessel. It can carry onboard over hundred crew members and is replete with 37 mm guns. Expectedly enough, PRC perceives these anti-piracy operations as nice opportunities to prepare for any future “Taiwan Crisis”.


A critical component embedded with the present formation is the Satellite Tracking and Communication System. PLAN’s Control Centre monitors all relevant Chinese merchant ships through a Ship Movement Tracking System (SMTS). Hence, video-based communications with the PRC Shanghai Maritime Safety Administration is the order of the day. A web-based IP communication network has also been developed to allow the crew members maintain contacts with mainland China.


The obvious advantage of SMTS is that real time directives emanating from the civilian authorities in Beijing can pass onto the theatre directly and ipso facto, the civilian-military symbiotic relationship would continue undiminished.

The Concerns

The above factual-analysis might go down as hawkish if some more light is not thrown on it. Though China is a party, along with India and Russia, to the Shared Awareness and Deconfliction (SHADE) programme of anti-piracy in the Gulf of Aden, it advocates a ‘patrol zone-division’ concept of managing the nautical territories. That is, PLAN is not very eager to work in unison with multinational agencies, rather is a votary of separate areas being carved out for respective nation-states. It is not averse to intelligence-sharing though.


What does this attitude of the PLAN indicate? Is it coyness in coming into contact with much more developed navies of NATO and the US, or a sense of loss of esteem in working under the command of seemingly inferior navies like Pakistan or is it an overt proclamation of its prowess as an independent naval power? Andrew S. Erickson in a paper at the Strategic Studies Institute suggests a “Cold War” type mentality in such an approach of the PLAN. Whatever be the real motive of the PLAN, it certainly does not resonate with the lofty claims of a Harmonious World as propounded by the New Diplomacy of China.

Missile?

On 16 August 2010, the U.S. Defense Department released its annual assessment of China’s military. The report expressed concerns over the lack of transparency in PRC’s military growth. However, China’s defence ministry was dismissive of these allegations. Admiral Mike Mullen, Chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, complained that China’s suspension of military-to-military contacts with the US made it even harder for Washington to assess Beijing’s ‘real’ intentions. Beijing cut off military ties with Washington earlier this year to protest a $6.4 billion US arms sale to Taiwan; viewed as a direct transgression into PRC’s “One China Policy”.

India, Wake Up

It goes beyond sermons that India must bolster its navy, not only to thwart any Pakistani policy of sea-denial in the Arabian Sea region, but to actually counter both the covert as well as overt Chinese threat perceptions. The INS Kadamba (Project Seabird) in the province of Karnataka assumes fundamental significance in this regard. The base has a sea front of over 26 km and a total area of over 45 sq km. Reportedly; the deep-water port can easily house the entire Western Fleet of the Indian Navy. Hence, it needs to be expedited in ‘Stalinist style’ because when completed is set to be the largest in Asia.


According to India’s former Navy Chief Admiral Arun Prakash, “the Indian navy of 2020 will essentially be a three dimensional force (aka Varuna’s Trident), built around the core of two aircraft carrier task forces and closely networked through a dedicated communications satellite”.

Project Seabird Shipment Facility

2020 is fast approaching and one can only hope that his vision materializes, even if not in entirety. Nevertheless, as of now, Russia has assured that it will keep to the time period specified in the contract for the retrofit of the Admiral Gorshkov aircraft carrier for the Indian Navy. A statement from the Indian government's security committee states that it would allocate $2.3 billion to retrofit the ship. The initial refit agreement of $750 million went up by an additional $1.5 billion. In line with the contract, the aircraft carrier will be handed over to India by 2012.

Admiral Gorshkov

Admiral Gorshkov is a modified Kiev-class aircraft carrier, originally named Baku. The ship was laid down in 1978 at the Nikolayev South shipyard in Ukraine, launched in 1982, and commissioned with the Soviet Navy in 1987.


According to a February 2010 report published by the NTI, the Indian Navy currently operates 16 submarines based at Vishakhapatnam and Mumbai. The backbone of the fleet is formed by ten Kilo-class Type 877EM - or Sindhugosh-class - units that are being progressively retrofitted to accommodate the Klub/3M-54E Alfa cruise missile system. In addition to its fleet of diesel-electric submarines, India is also in the process of developing an indigenously built nuclear-submarine capability. It is noteworthy that PLAN already has a fleet of six active nuclear capable submarines.


Procrastination has been synonymous with indigenous defence development in India. Likewise, the Advanced Technology Vessel (ATV) submarine, work on which began in the 1970s, is yet to come out from the cobwebs of logistical complexities. However, in July 2009 India launched its first ATV submarine, the INS Arihant,,at the Ship Building Centre in Vishakapatnam. However, the vessel will undergo at least two years of extensive sea trials before being commissioned into the Indian Navy


As per an August 12 report of Ria Novosti, INS Sindhurakshak is being upgraded under a direct contract between the Zvezdochka shipyard and the Indian defense ministry, signed on June 4, 2010. The upgradation program, which includes a complete overhaul of the submarine, as well as improved control systems, sonar, electronic warfare systems, and an integrated weapon control system, is set to cost around $80 million.

Conclusion

There is probably no gainsaying the fact that the Indian Navy appears to be leaning toward Russia in its development paradigm. However, that should not deter us from pursuing our goals of a defence “Autarchy”. Actually, the writing is clearly on the wall. As the lethal PLAN cruises ahead, the Indian Navy hardly can afford to schlep. And if that happens, then no homilies can safeguard India’s strategic interests in a futuristic mode.

a part of this paper has been submitted for publication to "geopolitics"