Indian Foreign Policy

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 11 Jun 2013 20:35

They have an Indian to talk about this in an article.

This is the key piece

Third, the Indian elite fears that the notion of the country’s rise is a Western construct, which has unrealistically raised expectations for both Indian economic growth and the country’s international commitments. As one senior official with experience in the prime minister’s office said, the West’s labeling of India as a rising power is “a rope to hang ourselves.”

Foreign propaganda cannot be the basis on which India can formulate policies. But social engineering by foreign groups including foreign media needs to be checked inside India.

Western propaganda has given the false image of India in the last 60 years to the rest of the world. That needs to be controlled.

arun · Post by **arun** » 13 Jun 2013 20:37

Wikileaks founder Julian Assange says India turned down his plea for Political Asylum:

India ignored my asylum plea, claims Julian Assange

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 13 Jun 2013 23:46

China is a 'phenomenon', must study its rise, PM tells young IFS officers

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 16 Jun 2013 02:30

abhishek_sharma wrote:India's Feeble Foreign Policy: A Would-Be Great Power Resists Its Own Rise

NYTimes :: A Wider View of India’s Foreign Policy Reveals Clear Strategy

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 16 Jun 2013 02:57

This is psy ops

A competitive media environment could constrain or coerce India’s leaders, preventing them from collaborating more closely with the United States, on the one hand, or forcing India to respond to Pakistani provocations on the other.

Which country which is independent will allow media to dictate its policy? This is direct reference to foreign hand.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 17 Jun 2013 06:43

Austin wrote:China is a 'phenomenon', must study its rise, PM tells young IFS officers

FPPM met 33 IFS probationers of the 2011 batch

The rise of China is a "phenomenon", and budding Indian diplomats must study its chronology, and what goes on in that country, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh is learnt to have told a group of Indian Foreign Service (IFS) probationers.

Singh also told the 33 young IFS officers of the 2011 batch they should realise that although the US was a "declining power", it would "still remain a superpower", several sources present at the interaction on Wednesday told The Indian Express.

Singh, who is believed to have spoken with a lot of candour, stressed on the importance of relationships in the country's neighbourhood.

"While we should work for maintaining peace in the region, we should also be ready for the emergencies that may arise because of the presence of not-so-friendly neighbours," he told the probationers at his Race Course Road residence.

He said global power was shifting eastwards, and "it is upon us to ensure that we do not miss the bus".

The PM congratulated the group — which included 11 women — on their success in a very difficult examination, but underlined that their "education does not end with clearing the UPSC examination", and that the probationers "must continue to learn".

He told them that IFS officers were the carriers of India's message to the world, and they must, therefore, keep themselves updated on developments in the country. Singh added that India's foreign policy was not divorced from its domestic policies, and the probationers must constantly think about how to eradicate the challenges of poverty, illiteracy and unemployment facing the country.

Sources said the PM repeated the famous quote by Victor Hugo that he had used as finance minister in the pathbreaking budget speech of 1991 — "No power on earth can stop an idea whose time has come" — and asked the young officers to project the image of an India that wants to work with the globalised world.

India, Singh said, needed its economy to grow fast, and should aim at a GDP growth rate of 10-12 per cent in the coming years. The nation's energy security was a prerequisite for that, he added, and asked the diplomats to work towards that goal.

The PM stressed the need for maintaining good relationships with Russia, Britain and Japan among others, and asked the probationers to understand the importance of engagement with Africa, where economic diplomacy was important.

The interaction was attended by senior officials including National Security Adviser Shivshankar Menon, Principal Secretary to the PM Pulok Chatterjee, and Dean of the Foreign Service Institute Nengcha Lhouvum.

President Pranab Mukherjee too met the officers. "India's foreign policy must constantly adapt to the changing world. The world recognises the fact that the bulk of global growth is coming from emerging economies, especially China and India, and India has an important place today in all major international fora like G-20," Mukherjee said.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 30 Jun 2013 10:59

Stable Iran & Afghanistan critical to energy sector: Salman Kurshid - Ahmed Ali Fayyaz, The Hindu

External Affairs Minister Salman Khurshid on Saturday said that stability in Afghanistan and Iran was crucial to the Indian energy sector.

In his keynote speech at a three-day conference on ‘Cooperation, Development, Peace and Security in Central Asia’, that began at the University of Kashmir, Mr. Khurshid said India was carefully watching the developments in the embattled region, including the indications of a dialogue after Taliban’s establishing an office at Doha in Qatar.

“We feel and we have said this to our friends, in the U.S. and the European Union, that our collective decision which is very strongly endorsed in Afghanistan that the peace talks must be Afghan-led and Afghan-controlled,” Mr. Khurshid said. “It is not possible for anybody from outside to conjure successful peace architecture for Afghanistan or any other part of the world. I believe that the peace must come from within,” he said.

“Despite repeated invitations, India believes it must restrain itself to a point which is consistent with our philosophy and allows the Afghan people to choose their own destiny,” he asserted.

A stable Afghanistan and Iran, he said, were critical to India’s energy sector as these two countries could provide greater access to the Central Asian region which abounded in hydrocarbon wealth. He sounded optimistic of Iran’s capacity to resolve her nuclear issues crisis with the European Union.

“We are looking at re-energising the national North-South Corridor to connect India with Central Asia and Russia through Iran. We are looking at trans-Afghan routes using Iranian port of Chahabar particularly to get access to Afghanistan, Uzbekistan and Tajikistan. We are looking at a rail link from Kazakhstan to Turkmenistan into Iran,” Mr. Khurshid told an academic and intellectual audience.

The conference has been organised by the Centre for Research in Rural and Industrial Development Chandigarh in collaboration with the Centre of Central Asian Studies (CCAS) University of Kashmir. One-time India’s ambassador to the USSR, I.K. Gujaral, who subsequently became the Prime Minister, had been among the first guest speakers when the CCAS was established in mid-1980s.

“Of course, it does make Iran very critical. On the other hand, it makes Afghanistan very critical. Therefore, we hope that within our philosophical approach of being friends, we get Afghanistan back to a stable situation. Afghanistan will then become a bridge for us to Central Asia and Iran as well,” Mr. Khurshid said.

“Iran will be able to find a resolution with the European Union on the issue of nuclear energy so that it becomes an important link between India and Central Asia. It will give us far greater access to Central Asia than we have now,” he said.

Speaking on the occasion, Jammu and Kashmir Chief Minister Omar Abdullah said the land-locked Kashmir had been a key trade link between India and Central Asia for centuries.

He appreciated the United Progressive Alliance’s government’s initiative of building an International Airport here but added that it existed only on the papers.

He described Pakistan as a roadblock in trade, tourism and other relationships between Kashmir and the CIS states, saying that “our Western neighbour” was not permitting direct air services between Kashmir and Central Asia.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 03 Jul 2013 22:28

SS!

Exactly what I was saying about stability of Iran and Afghanistan being crucial for India.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 05 Jul 2013 08:37

ramana, yes, of course.

These are the contours of the New Great Game, access to resources, access to trade, extending influence etc. But, while we may be debating and slowly building the road & rail network in Iran to Afghanistan or upgrading Chahbahar for a decade now etc., China has gone far, far ahead in gobbling up the oil&gas fields in CAR even to the discomfort of Russia. See my post in the Oil & Gas thread. Being powerless (like the Tamil saying 'perungaya dabba', i.e. a dabbah where once asafoetida used to be kept and which therefore retains yet the fragrance) and in need of Chinese friendship to the new alliances taking shape in Asia from the West, Russia is allowing the creeping up of Chinese influence through the CIS to its borders. The greedy and hungry China is consuming the CAR resources at a feverish pace.

By the time we are there, we may not have much left of the denuded CAR. After 2014, Afghanistan will fall into Chinese hands (through its proxy Pakistan which will use its proxy Taliban) and we will be denied any access even through Iran. We can only look forward to a backlash to the Chinese 'scorched earth' policy from the people of that region to turn the tide.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 05 Jul 2013 13:30

Significant statements by Salman Kurshid in Singapore - Economic Times

While both sides were determined to resolve these issues, "we are also very clear that it does not help to hasten resolution if you are not ready," Khurshid was quoted as saying.

On South-East Asia, Khurshid said India was not looking for a military base in the region but would focus on deepening strategic ties, even as its Look East policy extends to the Pacific. "The areas we are comfortable with are capacity building, intelligence sharing, exchange of ships, call on each other's ports, joint training and exercises. We are willing to enhance that at the pace at which ASEAN collectively desires it to be done"

Khurshid also expressed his views on India's three aircraft-carrier strategy, saying as a Peninsula, the country needed one carrier on each side, and one as a reserve.

Khurshid suggested India's Look East policy should be extended beyond ASEAN and East-Asian powers of China, Japan and South Korea. "We are actually looking at the Indo Pacific now. Once we are in APEC (Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation Forum), it gives us further opportunity," he said.

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 06 Jul 2013 06:59

http://tribune.com.pk/story/572953/indi ... -khurshid/
India hopes Pakistan would respond to its immediate concerns: Khur shid

When asked whether he sees better ties with Pakistan under Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, when 1999 Kargil War started, Khurshid replied, “The Kargil War is now history, we don’t want to go into that. I think he (Nawaz Sharif), like anyone else, comes with a lot of experience from his time in the opposition.”“ I think that he is showing signs of great statesmanship. He has certainly become a focal point of tremendous amounts of hope in Pakistan. He has given out a good message all around.We are responding to it with an open mind and with a positive attitude and hope that we can move forward rather than look back at what happened in the past,” Khurshid said.On a question on whether Prime Minister Manmohan Singh would be able to visit Pakistan before the end of his tenure, Khursid said that he could not make a statement.“I cannot predict and cannot anticipate anything. But obviously, I think the story would remain incomplete if there wasn’t a face to face meeting between him and Nawaz Sharif. But there has to be a considerable amount of background work done. Once that work is done and we place it before the prime minister, he will make the call,” he said.

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 11 Jul 2013 05:15

MEA wants Bhutan squeezed on development, hydel projects

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 11 Jul 2013 21:50

MEA is the thug face of India. It does its best to drive small nations into big powers arms. And crumble in front of US or toady to UK.

During the mid 80s one minor but highly connected IFS person made Nepal's life hell so they went overboard to PRC. She latter became a high and mighty affsar.

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 13 Jul 2013 09:13

India's Foreign-Policy Fog

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 13 Jul 2013 13:20

Ramanna,I couldn't agree with you more.Have heard it umpteen number of times from regional reps about our MEA diplomutts.

vishvak · Post by **vishvak** » 13 Jul 2013 18:43

ramana wrote:MEA is the thug face of India. It does its best to drive small nations into big powers arms. And crumble in front of US or toady to UK.

During the mid 80s one minor but highly connected IFS person made Nepal's life hell so they went overboard to PRC. She latter became a high and mighty affsar.

Crumble in front of USA and UK and pakis.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 18 Jul 2013 02:02

Chinese expert whines:

India taking advantage of China-Japan spat

Amit, have you seen this article by the Chinese expert in Global Times?

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 18 Jul 2013 02:24

expert whines:

China taking advantage of India-Pakistan spat
Anybody seen this

Rony · Post by **Rony** » 18 Jul 2013 03:30

ramana wrote:Chinese expert whines: Amit, have you seen this article by the Chinese expert in Global Times?

Threat or chance?
http://www.globaltimes.cn/content/79671 ... ecYS9LqmSo

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 18 Jul 2013 22:13

SSridhar wrote:The Telegraph reports, linked here, speak of the CCS taking a decision on the mountain strike corps only after assessing 'diplomatic ramifications' of such a China-specific unit. It comes as a shock to me because I was under the impression it was a done deal already.

Unless significant progress has been made in the latest and the 16th round of talks between the two Special Representatives, SS Menon & Jeichi, that general public are unaware of and that demands a new look at the Chinese, I am unable to understand or appreciate this concern for 'diplomatic ramifications', if indeed it were true.

All that we know are the following: the new aggressiveness in the PLA that resulted in multiple incidents in the last couple of months (Depsang, Chumar, airspace violation, building a road inside Indian territory which has later been denied by the IA), the firm stand by the Chinese Foreign Ministry that the PLA was all the time on its own territory, the demands to dismantle even the rag-tag and minor infrastructure that ITBP put up in these sectors, and the tough talk by the top General who calls himself 'a dove in heart but a hawk in claws' on what India should expect from the Chinese.

What would these signal to a normal nation-state that still has the functioning twin unmentionables in their proper place ? That the threat is here and is real. What would such a normal nation state do considering past history including the most inimical action of transferring nuclear weapons, design and delivery platforms to an unfriendly neighbour to target and target only that nation state ? What would a normal nation-state do when it is made claustrophobic by surrounding it with an intention of robbing its influence in its own region and confine it to within its own borders ? What would a normal nation-state do when such a country is ceded and leased portions of captured land, captured from the common enemy, by the second enemy state and tens of thousands of soldiers are placed there by the first enemy state threatening the common enemy and the occupational army is casually explained away as simply 'workers' or 'relief providers' ?

What does a normal nation-state do when this country constantly stands in the way of its membership in powerful fora, bodies or vetoes engagements by international financial agencies in its developmental projects etc ?

And, here we are when these and much more have happened, debating whether it would be diplomatically prudent to offend our enemy. We are the most capable innovators in the whole world in inventing reasons to procrastinate, postpone and delay taking decisions that should have been taken years back.

Historically the MEA was given the Cabinet decision as a fait accompli. Its only in NDA time they got to speak and delay and suggest diplomatic ramifications nonsense.
PVNR and before never allowed the MEA into the group of secretaries that planned the policy decisions. They were allowed to come and tell their story but were not part of the decision makers.

It is possible the story could be a self serving plant to bolster the MEA image after having failed miserably in their efforts of appeasement with PRC. The key part is how they addressed 'diplomatic ramifications' of the decision and enabled it to be taken and thus are valuable.
It begs the question why are we at this stage if they were so effective?

---
Yep it is a plant. Look at commerical names being written in a news report!!!! Once the plane has the C designation to the US forces it doesn't have its commercial name attached any longer.
No body gos to war in Lockeheed Martin F-16s. Its in USAF's F-16s.

And the headline is only one small part of the story rest is all fluff and doesnt go with the story headline.

One more DDM to be ignored.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 23 Jul 2013 23:55

abhishek_sharma wrote:MEA wants Bhutan squeezed on development, hydel projects

http://www.dailypioneer.com/columnists/ ... riend.html

Op-Ed Pioneer.

Handle with care, Bhutan is a friend

Wednesday, 24 July 2013 | Ashok K Mehta | in Edit
12345 0

A country which India has taken for granted, requires special consideration to prevent it from becoming a ‘Nepal'. To begin with, let’s take Thimphu out of the unwritten reciprocity clause

India’s coercive diplomacy in Bhutan has presumably worked to stem the overtures made by the latter towards China and the latent but unprecedented anti-India sentiment whipped up by the withdrawal of subsidy on cooking gas and kerosene, which was restored last week.

The regime change following the second multi-party election has produced a landslide victory for Prime Minister-designate Tshering Tobgay who has pledged to preserve the special relation with India. For Bhutan, India had employed a carrot-but-no-stick policy so far in maintaining their genuinely special relations. The dramatic transformation of Bhutan from an absolute monarchy to a constitutional monarchy and then a multi-party democracy has been compressed into all of five years, creating problems and irritants for its seven lakh people. In my numerous travels across Bhutan, one heard in the early nineties of ‘population rebalancing’ that democracy could not take root in a country with less than one million people and that it would spell disaster. The prophets of doom have been proved wrong.

Bhutan’s national strategy comprises keeping the population balance in favour of the local Drukpas to avoid a ‘Sikkim’; being unabashedly pro-India (the King would say we have put all our eggs in India’s basket); keep a distance from China (no trade or diplomatic ties, only an office in Beijing); negotiate its border dispute with China in consultation with India, and enjoy the fruits of water power to achieve a high per capita income leading to Gross National Happiness.

The drivers of change in Bhutan were the assimilation of Sikkim in the Union of India in 1974; the movement for restoration of democracy in Nepal and the violence perpetrated by Bhupalese dissident groups in 1990; the 2000 palace massacre and the Maoist-spurred jan andolan in 2006 in Nepal. Historically, India has preferred regime stability to democracy in Bhutan. Relations with Thimphu were framed according to the Treaty of Perpetual Peace and Friendship Between the Government of India and Government of Bhutan in 1949 which is derived from the Treaty of Punakha in 1910. Article 2 of the Punakha treaty on guidance and advice of the British Government was retained by India, though intuitively in 2007 New Delhi, unilaterally, altered ‘guidance’ to ‘cooperation’. Lately though the buzz in Thimphu is: Bhutan is India-locked and why should it refer to New Delhi for its external relations?

Not only had India advised regulating the pace of democracy but had also turned a Nelson’s eye during the population rebalancing (some call it downsizing Nepalese) in 1990-19991 when around 1,00,000 Bhutanese of Nepalese origin were allegedly systematically pushed out of the country. In the early eighties, Drukpas were in a minority with Nepalese comprising around 53 per cent of the population. Their expulsion, for which anti-national elements (read: Dissident Bhupanese and Nepalese) were responsible, according to the Bhutan Government, involved the bloodshed at Samchi on September 21, 1990. The King of Nepal though did not protest against the mistreatment of the Bhupalese.

A number of spoken agreements are in place, especially the King’s commitment to becoming a part of India’s security architecture. The defence of Bhutan is a key component of the unwritten portion of the 1949 treaty. The Royal Bhutanese Army played a crucial role in assisting the remnants of the Indian army evacuating from Towang and Sela in 1962. The 1,000 member strong Indian Military Training and Assistance Team was deployed in Bhutan in 1962 and has detachments in Ha, Thimphu and in the east for training of the RBA and other Bhutanese military units. Defence cooperation is of such exemplary order that in 2003 the two Armies launched a joint operation to flush out Bodo and Ulfa insurgents numbering about 3,000 in 10 major camps. Admittedly, the King prevaricated due to the blowback he feared from military operations.

Project Dantak of the Border Roads Organisation has done sterling work in connecting Bhutan with roads and bridges that others would shy away from constructing in difficult and complex terrain. The BRO has lost 100 lives in the battle for connectivity. Dantak is a household word spreading goodwill and increasing GNH.

The complex border dispute is a legacy of history. After 28 years and 19 rounds of border talks, the last in 2010, China offered a package deal — it would trade 900 sqkm of territory in the north for 400 sqkm in the west in Chumbi valley. The Chinese are employing familiar encroachment tactics using graziers to establish claim over the strategic Dolam plateau, Sinchula and Draman in Chumbi valley which is a dagger targeting the Siliguri corridor. Sinchula is the tri-junction where India, Bhutan and China’s borders meet and any adjustment in border alignment would become a trilateral, not a bilateral, issue. This is where coordination of external relations for national interest comes into play.

At the heart of relations is the mutual benefit enjoyed by the two countries on the use of hydro power — simply ‘water gold’. Bhutan’s current level of prosperity has trebled its per capita income from $600 in 2005 to $2,200, the second highest in South Asia after Maldives. Three power projects worth nearly 2,000 megawatts are on stream and another 10 projects are expected in a decade’s time to produce 10,000 megawatt of Bhutan’s capacity of 30,000 megawatts. India buys back cheap electricity — approximately `2 a unit —allowing sufficient electricity for Bhutan’s own domestic consumption. Soon, Bhutan could become the Laos of South East Asia, a net provider of power to the region. This will further boost GNH, the mantra of prosperity which Bhutan advocates at home and abroad.

How will democracy affect the royals and the elite? The vision of the Kings, especially the Fourth, who abdicated in favour of the present constitutional monarch will help adjust to ground reality, though the Constitution protects their privileges.

No one expects royalty in Bhutan to go the Nepal way. New Delhi has to brace up to changing Bhutan as it seeks greater autonomy. Mr Topgay admitted he was fully cognisant of India’s sensibilities and interests and will not undermine them.

A country India has taken for granted requires ‘special handling’ to prevent it from becoming a ‘Nepal’, however unlikely that may be. To start with, take Thimphu out of the unwritten reciprocity clause.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 24 Jul 2013 14:37

Ok this is big, it appears that the Gunga Din Amartya babu, was responsible for wrecking the Nalanda project and pushing out Kalam, chalk one more Indian interest project down the drain due to MEA.

Kalam’s letter damning Amartya Sen out in public

He chose not to create a public controversy even while writing to Krishna on July 4 that he was upset by the way the project was being handled and hence he could not remain associated with it any longer. He wrote how sad he was at everything going wrong in reviving a great seat of learning in Buddhist philosophy and statecraft. Revival of the first residential international educational institution which flourished between 5th and 12th centuries near Patna is in controversies even before it starts any academic courses.

The letter reads: “Having (been) involved in various academic and administrative proceedings of Nalanda University since August 2007, I believe that the candidates to be selected/appointed to the post of chancellor and vice-chancellor should be of extraordinary intellect with academic and management expertise. Both have to personally involve themselves full-time in Bihar so that a robust and strong international institution is built.”

The ministry of external affairs had taken over the project since it was conceptualised as an international university involving the 16 ASEAN countries like China, Japan, Australia, Korea and Thailand, even while Dr Kalam kept insisting that it should better be handled by the human resources development ministry as it has the required experience in the field of education.

The government tried to suppress Dr Kalam’s damning letter as it was taken on record in the governing board meeting of the university but not made public until a Patna journalist wrote to him to know the truth.

Dr Kalam felt frustrated with the people at the helm of affairs and his resignation was a rebuff to prof Amartya Sen and his protégé Dr Gopa Sabharwal, who was brought in as the vice-chancellor designate, without Kalam’s knowledge. Being chairman of the governing board, Sen’s position is equivalent to chancellor’s (the university officially has none as yet). Neither Sen nor Sabharwal could inspire the confidence of Kalam.

Lilo · Post by **Lilo** » 24 Jul 2013 15:00

Sanku ji
y no quoting the rest of the nice stuff on Nobel Laureate Amty Sen from the article?

Kalam’s letter damning Amartya Sen out in public
Government had tried to suppress the July 2011 letter to Krishna
GN BUREAU | NEW DELHI | JUNE 19 2012

Former president APJ Abdul Kalam’s last July letter to foreign minister SM Krishna kept under wraps has come into public domain, slamming Nobel laureate economist Amartya Sen for forcing him out of his brainchild project of the Nalanda University in Bihar, as its first visitor.

He chose not to create a public controversy even while writing to Krishna on July 4 that he was upset by the way the project was being handled and hence he could not remain associated with it any longer. He wrote how sad he was at everything going wrong in reviving a great seat of learning in Buddhist philosophy and statecraft. Revival of the first residential international educational institution which flourished between 5th and 12th centuries near Patna is in controversies even before it starts any academic courses.

The letter reads: “Having (been) involved in various academic and administrative proceedings of Nalanda University since August 2007, I believe that the candidates to be selected/appointed to the post of chancellor and vice-chancellor should be of extraordinary intellect with academic and management expertise. Both have to personally involve themselves full-time in Bihar so that a robust and strong international institution is built.”

The ministry of external affairs had taken over the project since it was conceptualised as an international university involving the 16 ASEAN countries like China, Japan, Australia, Korea and Thailand, even while Dr Kalam kept insisting that it should better be handled by the human resources development ministry as it has the required experience in the field of education.

The government tried to suppress Dr Kalam’s damning letter as it was taken on record in the governing board meeting of the university but not made public until a Patna journalist wrote to him to know the truth.

Dr Kalam felt frustrated with the people at the helm of affairs and his resignation was a rebuff to prof Amartya Sen and his protégé Dr Gopa Sabharwal, who was brought in as the vice-chancellor designate, without Kalam’s knowledge. Being chairman of the governing board, Sen’s position is equivalent to chancellor’s (the university officially has none as yet). Neither Sen nor Sabharwal could inspire the confidence of Kalam.

This letter dated July 4, 2011 was in possession of Sanjay Singh, Secretary (East), MEA when he came to attend the Governing Board meeting at Patna on July 6 & 7, 2011. He read it to the Board in the first hour of the meeting, as the minutes of the proceedings indicate. But its mention was completely suppressed while interacting with the press. The matter was concealed for more than two months when an e-mail from Patna-based journalist K.K. Singh to Dr. Kalam brought the issue to light in mid-September.

Kalam and Sen represent the opposite ends of the spectrum. While Kalam is rooted in the Indian traditions and has worked for India's self-reliance in defence sector, Sen is one of the “runaway” success stories in academics abroad.

With a mind besotted with Oxford, Cambridge and Harvard, Sen viewed Nalanda University through that prism, while Kalam felt sad at finding no efforts to re-enact the glory of ancient Nalanda University in which students from all over East Asia came and had the tutelage of Arya Dev, Silabhadra, Dharmapala, Santarakshita and Chandragomin who spent their lives here.

The academics say the fault lies in the government for entrusting the task of reviving the university to Amartya Sen as a testimony of India’s obsequiousnessdespite Kalam repeatedly warning the Indians against it.

Kalam’s letter is also an indictment of Sabharwal, just a sociology reader from Lady Sri Ram College of Delhi University, who was made the rector/vice-chancellor designate by Sen despite protest that she has nothing to do with the Buddhist studies for which the university is to be set up and was running it while sitting in Delhi.

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 25 Jul 2013 08:53

China, Nepal agree to deepen military ties

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 28 Jul 2013 08:34

India Offers Vietnam Credit for Military Ware - Sandeep Dikshit, The Hindu

In a first, India has offered a $ 100 million credit line to Vietnam to purchase military equipment. It will be used for purchasing four patrol boats.

The credit line was agreed upon around the time India once again expressed its resolve to remain involved in oil exploration activity in the Phu Kanh basin of the South China Sea. {The patrol boats would help secure the oil exploration area} Vietnam says it is within its rights to invite India to explore for oil in this area.

But China claims that this basin is within the “nine dotted line” or its zone of influence.

The credit line is likely to be finalised by the time the General Secretary of the Communist Party of Vietnam visits India towards the end of the year.

Vietnam and India have long enjoyed strategic ties that include cooperation in the civil nuclear sector, training slots for Vietnamese military officers and frequent exchange of visits.

But this is one rare occasion when India is offering a defence-related credit line so far upfield.

Usually, near neighbours squarely in India’s zone of direct influence have been the beneficiaries of New Delhi’s credit lines for the defence sector. For example, Mauritius, whose air force and navy have Indian defence hardware, was given credit lines to buy Indian patrol boats and Dhruv helicopters.

India has wanted to expand its defence ties with Vietnam into military hardware and one of the top most items on the Vietnamese wish-list is the Brahmos missile, jointly produced with Russia, which, however, has close ties with both Vietnam and China and would not want to antagonise either.

Sources in the government wanted the credit line to be seen from the context of the overall drive to improve ties with South East Asian nations of whom Vietnam’s close ties with India predate the Cold War. {The patrol boats are not offensive equipment and therefore not directed against any particular country}

There has been a heavy two-way traffic of high level visitors between the two countries that has led to a $ 45 million credit line for a 200 MW hydel project built by BHEL, offer of export of the Param supercomputer and a breakthrough for the Indian corporate sector though its Vietnamese counterparts have struggled.

The sources pointed out that India was beefing up security ties with all countries beyond its eastern flank as one of the vital components of its Look East policy.

India and navies of some South East Asian countries have for long conducted the Milan series of naval exercises.

The Indian Navy also conducts coordinated patrols with Thailand and holds joint exercises with Singapore and Japan.

Let me add. While Vietnamese military personnel are trained in various facilities in India, the Vietnamese Navy has also been supplied with spare parts for their Russian origin naval assets by India. Through a bilateral agreement signed in September, 2011, India also agreed to train Vietnamese naval personnel to operate its Kilo class submarines which are being inducted by the Vietnamese Navy from Russia. On Oct 12, 2011, during his visit to India, the Vietnamese President, Truong Tan Sang, signed six agreements including an agreement to promote oil exploration in South China Sea along with a slew of pacts, including an extradition treaty, to deepen trade, security and strategic ties between the two countries. Indian Prime Minister, Man Mohan Singh said “India and Vietnam are maritime neighbours. We face common security challenges from terrorism, piracy and natural disasters. We believe that it is important to ensure the safety and security of the vital sea lanes of communication. We have agreed to continue and strengthen our exchanges in these fields”. In the field of security cooperation, the two countries instituted a mechanism of a biennial dialogue on security issues between Ministry of Home Affairs and its Vietnamese counterpart.

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 28 Jul 2013 19:41

Shaping the Emerging World: India and the Multilateral Order

First chapter (PDF)

Contents

Part I. Introduction

1. A Hesitant Rule Shaper?
Waheguru Pal Singh Sidhu, Pratap Bhanu Mehta, and Bruce Jones

Part II. Perspectives on Multilateralism

2. The Changing Dynamics of India’s Multilateralism
C. Raja Mohan

3. India and Multilateralism: A Practitioner’s Perspective
Shyam Saran

4. India as a Regional Power
Srinath Raghavan

Part III. Domestic and Regional Drivers

5. The Economic Imperative for India’s Multilateralism
Sanjaya Baru

6. What in the World Is India Able to Do? India’s State Capacity for Multilateralism
Tanvi Madan

7. India’s Regional Disputes
Kanti Bajpai

8. From an Ocean of Peace to a Sea of Friends
Iskander Luke Rehman

9. Dilemmas of Sovereignty and Order: India and the UN Security Council
David M. Malone and Rohan Mukherjee

10. India and UN Peacekeeping: The Weight of History and a Lack of Strategy
Richard Gowan and Sushant K. Singh

11. From Defensive to Pragmatic Multilateralism and Back: India’s Approach to Multilateral Arms Control and Disarmament
Rajesh Rajagopalan

12. Security in Cyberspace: India’s Multilateral Efforts
Sandeep Bhardwaj

13. India and International Financial Institutions and Arrangements
Devesh Kapur

14. Of Maps and Compasses: India in Multilateral Climate Negotiations
Navroz K. Dubash

15. India’s Energy, Food, and Water Security: International Cooperation for Domestic Capacity
Arunabha Ghosh and David Steven

16. India and International Norms: R2P, Genocide Prevention, Human Rights, and Democracy
Nitin Pai

17. From Pluralism to Multilateralism? G-20, IBSA, BRICS, and BASIC
Christophe Jaffrelot and Waheguru Pal Singh Sidhu

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 28 Jul 2013 20:12

^ Looks like a fairly comprehensive analysis, at least from the ToC.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 30 Jul 2013 07:30

India to step up military cooperation with Myanmar - Rajat Pandit, ToI

As part of the overall policy to counter China's strategic moves in the region, India now plans to assist Myanmar in building offshore-patrol vessels (OPVs) as well as further ramp up military training for Myanmarese armed forces.

The measures to bolster bilateral military ties were discussed in the talks between visiting Myanmar Navy chief Vice Admiral Thura Thet Swe and Navy chief Admiral D K Joshi, Army chief General Bikram Singh and defence secretary R K Mathur, among others, on Monday.

"Myanmar is one of our closest neighbours. We share a land border as well as maritime border with them," said Admiral Joshi, adding the Indian Navy was looking forward to take the "existing excellent relations to the next level".

Sources said India has agreed "in principle" to Myanmar's request for assistance in building OPVs, which are likely to be constructed at an Indian shipyard, as well as almost doubling the number of vacancies for training Myanmarese Navy officers and sailors from the existing around 50. Similar will be the case for soldiers and air force personnel, with plans also afoot to train Myanmarese pilots to fly the Russian-origin Mi-35 attack helicopters, as part the overall "capacity building and enhancement" plan.

There is, however, worry in the Indian defence establishment that "not enough" is being done swiftly to meet the long-pending requirements of Myanmar, the only ASEAN country which with India shares borders.

India has supplied some military hardware and software to Myanmar, which ranges from four Islander maritime patrol aircraft and naval gun-boats to 105mm light artillery guns, mortars, grenade-launchers and rifles. But Myanmar has asked for much more, including radars, sensors and sonars for its naval frigates and corvettes.

It was only in the late-1990s that India undertook a hard-nosed strategic U-turn in its policy towards Myanmar, after several years of supporting Suu Kyi's democratic movement, when it found China had assiduously forged deep links with the country to step into the vacuum.

Since then, India has got some help from Myanmar to flush out Indian insurgent groups operating from its soil. Incidentally, warships from India and Myanmar also conducted a joint exercise and coordinated patrol in the Bay of Bengal for the first time in March this year.

Myanmar's importance for India can be gauged from the fact that defence minister A K Antony, foreign minister Salman Khurshid and IAF chief Air Chief Marshal N A K Browne, who is the chairman of the chiefs of staff committee, among others, have all visited Myanmar since last November.

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh had himself visited Myanmar in May 2012, the first such top-level visit from India in 25 years, to lay the foundation for greater bilateral economic cooperation. The two countries had then inked a dozen MoUs, from an air services agreement and border area development pact to a joint trade & investment forum and extension of a $500-million line of credit to Naypyitaw.

For completeness, let me add. A part of the Asian Highway Project proposed and implemented by the United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and Pacific (UNESCAP), known as the Trilateral Highway, connects the land-locked north-eastern states of India with Thailand through Myanmar. Through an agreement with Myanmar signed in April 2008, India is also implementing the Kaladan Multi-modal Transport linking Kolkatta with the Sittwe port in Arakan followed by a river and highway transport linking with NH54 in Mizoram. Apart from these infrastructure projects, India is also involved in the Tamanthi and Shwezaye hydropower projects as well as the development of Myanmar's offshore Shwe oil and natural gas fields

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 30 Jul 2013 12:32

Salman Kurshid Uvacha on Indian Foreign Policy - The Hindu

The government has to carefully weigh Pakistan’s offer to resume talks and take a suitable decision in the light of events of the recent past, External Affairs Minister Salman Khurshid said on Monday.

Asked about India’s response to the new Pakistan government’s purported recent offer for talks, Mr. Khurshid said no opening had been refused in the past. However, the latest one would have to be taken up carefully after addressing people’s hurt over soldiers being beheaded by Pakistan’s Army earlier this year.

Simultaneously, the government would also have to consider that the events happened before the present Pakistan government came in.

The Minister was interacting with about 200 bureaucrats, academicians, scholars, prominent citizens and ex-service personnel here as part of his Ministry’s Public Policy outreach.

“Engaged aloofness” earned goodwill

Mr. Khurshid said India’s soft diplomacy and deliberate “engaged aloofness” had earned it enormous stature, goodwill and good relations globally that far outweighs China’s economic muscle although some views dispute it.

“Everyone wants us on their side”, be it for trade, geopolitics or climate change; over 100 countries would support the quest for a permanent UN Security Council seat, Mr. Khurshid said. He regretted that citizens had largely lost sight of the policy and urged them to be critical and also appreciate the foreign policies that were adopted in extreme challenges but in national interest.

In the give-and-take in its neighbourhood, the country must also learn to sometimes give more than it gets, he said.

The interaction spanned the government’s posture on the Arctic Treaty, conflicts with Pakistan and China, refusing asylum to U.S. NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden and smoothening visas for Africans to foreign policy education and diplomacy through medical tourism.

Comparison with China

Referring to constant comparisons with China, Mr. Khurshid said India had achieved in Africa and South East Asia or Central Asia what Chinese investments and large monetary presence may not have. No Chinese foray can match the conquest that songs from Raj Kapoor’s films, Shah Rukh Khan’s dialogues and even the samosa have made. Countries were at ease with Indian teams.

“Today we have a stature because of which we can speak with the U.S. and Iran and neither feels worried about it.” So also with old ally Russia.

Solutions to many problems are complicated and challenging: in rebuilding Afghanistan, “we don’t have an exit mentality. India cannot look or walk away but remain” in an Afghan-led role there; Sri Lanka where India wants a level field for all Sri Lankans, or in Bangladesh.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 03 Aug 2013 11:19

GRSE Launches First Indian Warship for Mauritius - The Hindu

Senior officials of the Marutian government launched an Offshore Patrol Vessel (OPV) built by the Garden Reach Shipbuilders and Engineers (GRSE) for the Mauritius Coast Guard here on Friday.

The OPV christened CGS Barracuda is the first defence export order for a warship being built in India, claimed the officials of the GRSE- a defence public service undertaking.

“This is a very significant development and puts India in the league of countries exporting warship. We are confident that more countries will approach us with orders for building warships {There is a credit line opened for Vietnam to buy 4 OPVs; Myanmar needs OPVs} ,” Rear Admiral (Retd) A.K.Verma, Chairman & Managing Director of GRSE told The Hindu .

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 06 Aug 2013 08:40

Building Bridges Into Hostile Terrains With Healthcare - Business Line

Naveen Talwar was to go to Kabul about a month ago, to participate in an out-patient screening and surgical camp.

It was cancelled because of a blast in Kabul, and it now stands rescheduled for September, says Talwar, director-orthopeadics, Rockland group of hospitals.

Doctors from different hospitals are taken to regions like Iraq, Afghanistan, UAE and Kazakhastan, to expose Indian medical skills in places that are not accessible, says Vinay Aggarwal, of Shinon Collaborative Consultancy, a healthcare company.

But it’s not just Indian doctors, says Ashok Mahajan, of Rotary’s International Polio Initiative. If required, religious leaders from Uttar Pradesh are willing to go to Pakistan to help spread awareness on polio vaccination, says Mahajan, heading Rotary’s Muslim Ulema Committee (UP).

From help with polio to running a hospital in Afghanistan to screening patients in Iraq – Indian skills in healthcare are building bridges into hitherto untapped regions, becoming good-will ambassadors for India’s medical expertise.

Unlike the United States or the United Kingdom, familiar with Indian doctors and nurses - in Kazakhastan, “they had heard of Indian pharma but not Indian hospitals,” says Aggarwal, who defines his job as a “medical tour operator.”

Through a tie-up with the Kazakhastan Health Ministry, Shinon brings doctors to train in India, besides undertaking “masterclass sessions” in Kazakhastan with Indian specialists, he says.

It is expensive initially to take doctors across, but after hospitals realise the benefits in training, exposure and brand building, they foot their part of the bill, he says.

Shinon helped staff of the Afghanistan hospital with a team of Indian doctors and administrative staff, and spends about $ 30,000 per month, supporting this team. It also gets 15 percent of the revenues made by the hospital, he added. Shinon’s revenues last year were Rs 1.5 crore, he said.

Medical tourism

Government provides free healthcare in several of these countries, but the wait-list is about six months, he says.

People from Kazakhastan go to South Korea, three times more expensive than India; from Afghanistan, they go to Pakistan, less expensive than India; and from Iraq, they go to Jordan or Turkey. India is 20 percent less expensive and has better success rates, he points out.

Shinon looks to bring these patients to India on the promise of less expensive, good-quality treatment.

Countries have different requirements, he explains. In Kabul and Baghdad, for instance, the camps see blast and mine injuries. They are screened, those requiring surgeries are sent to India. Patients pick up their own tabs, he adds.

The camps are in designated safe or “green zones”, but there are near misses, like being caught in a cross-fire or missing a blast by minutes, he admits.

Virupaksha · Post by **Virupaksha** » 06 Aug 2013 12:31

SSridhar wrote:Salman Kurshid Uvacha on Indian Foreign Policy - The Hindu

“Engaged aloofness” earned goodwill

Mr. Khurshid said India’s soft diplomacy and deliberate “engaged aloofness” had earned it enormous stature, goodwill and good relations globally that far outweighs China’s economic muscle although some views dispute it.

“Everyone wants us on their side”, be it for trade, geopolitics or climate change; over 100 countries would support the quest for a permanent UN Security Council seat, Mr. Khurshid said. He regretted that citizens had largely lost sight of the policy and urged them to be critical and also appreciate the foreign policies that were adopted in extreme challenges but in national interest.

In the give-and-take in its neighbourhood, the country must also learn to sometimes give more than it gets, he said.

The interaction spanned the government’s posture on the Arctic Treaty, conflicts with Pakistan and China, refusing asylum to U.S. NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden and smoothening visas for Africans to foreign policy education and diplomacy through medical tourism.

Engaged aloofness is short for I dont ask for anything, I dont get anything. All I will do is exchange pleasantries. When all there is exchanging mithais, there will be tremendous amount of goodwill.

It is at the point where interests are at stake, it will come out whether they are friends.

I believe Indian elite seems to be confusing goodwill with interests. In Sama dana danda bheda, sama is only 1/4th tool in arsenal. By itself it has no use. Goodwill is a tool to pursue your interests.

prahaar · Post by **prahaar** » 06 Aug 2013 12:40

Today our troops in J&K have tasted the fruits of our foreign policy. When two be-headings went unpunished, five more troops have been killed today. I am waiting for acne-like comments from the scholarly Honorable Foreign Minister.

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 06 Aug 2013 14:35

So what shall we do?

Virupaksha · Post by **Virupaksha** » 06 Aug 2013 14:56

shyamd wrote:So what shall we do?

How about undoing the Gujral doctrine?

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 06 Aug 2013 17:19

Would you know about it even if they did?

prahaar · Post by **prahaar** » 06 Aug 2013 17:49

Shyamdji, if you know about some GOI foreign policy successes with Pakistan please let me know. All I can see is non-performance when it comes to Pakistan. In 9 years of the current dispensation, please list ONE positive outcome with respect to Pakistan. I can list N number of public failures, sometimes retribution also has to be public (even between nations).

Saddam could have been poisoned secretly and buried without any news, same with OBL (Pakistan would have actually loved that). People also need to see that the government is responsive. If you feel you have something to contribute/rebut against my statement, I am all ears, ready to be corrected.

As a response to your question, I would like to understand, what is the entity that "we" in your question referring to.

Virupaksha · Post by **Virupaksha** » 06 Aug 2013 18:11

shyamd wrote:Would you know about it even if they did?

Would people like Raman had whined until 3 months ago?? So we know that they didnt do it 3 months ago.

Are you saying that they did??

I am long past the phase where I give benefit of doubt to MMS and Sonia. When every one was baiting them during 26/11, I said I am okay that an failure occured during their regime and I was more interested in seeing how they make sure the next doesnt happen. And they have failed spectacularly to even try. Their spokepersons(Yes, Diggyraja, I see him as their voice) who said saffron terror did it, was my last straw in giving benefit of doubt.

How about taking away Pakistan's MFN status? How about killing dawood?

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 06 Aug 2013 19:18

prahaar wrote:Shyamdji, if you know about some GOI foreign policy successes with Pakistan please let me know. All I can see is non-performance when it comes to Pakistan. In 9 years of the current dispensation, please list ONE positive outcome with respect to Pakistan. I can list N number of public failures, sometimes retribution also has to be public (even between nations).

They were struggling to get aid prior to the arab unrest. More recently they were about a few months away from bankruptcy. Can you imagine if we went to war - their friends would have lined up to bail them out. Their F16's now need sign off by a US guy sitting on their base for every flight. Everything their AF does these days is under tight US controls. One of the victories of our diplomacy.

Saddam could have been poisoned secretly and buried without any news, same with OBL (Pakistan would have actually loved that). People also need to see that the government is responsive. If you feel you have something to contribute/rebut against my statement, I am all ears, ready to be corrected.

Situations are different. Can't really compare the two. What has the US done since they and ISAF are losing troops every other day to ISI perfidy?

As a response to your question, I would like to understand, what is the entity that "we" in your question referring to.

GoI and its entities.

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 06 Aug 2013 19:29

Virupaksha wrote: Would people like Raman had whined until 3 months ago?? So we know that they didnt do it 3 months ago.

What we are doing and not doing - even some serving individuals dont know and get angry when they find out that they weren't told. No one wants to talk about what we are doing.

Are you saying that they did??

Not saying anything. I am saying even if they did something no one would believe it.

I am long past the phase where I give benefit of doubt to MMS and Sonia. When every one was baiting them during 26/11, I said I am okay that an failure occured during their regime and I was more interested in seeing how they make sure the next doesnt happen. And they have failed spectacularly to even try. Their spokepersons(Yes, Diggyraja, I see him as their voice) who said saffron terror did it, was my last straw in giving benefit of doubt.

Diggy Raja has nothing to do with what we are actually doing in TSP - Diggy is talking just for local info consumption and vote banks. Fortunately, such idiots have nothing to do with foreign policy.

Terror attacks can happen anywhere in any country - even the most secure like Israel (a tiny country with tiny borders in comparison with the size of Indian borders). Securing a country is not as easy as people think despite all the money and technology available.

How about taking away Pakistan's MFN status? How about killing dawood?

To achieve what exactly? You kill dawood - someone else replaces him. Takeaway MFN and what leverage do you have? You fall straight into the TSPA's plans which is to have as little leverage with India as possible.