Indian Foreign Policy

The Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum is a venue to discuss issues pertaining to India's security environment, her strategic outlook on global affairs and as well as the effect of international relations in the Indian Subcontinent. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
Carl_T
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2533
Joined: 24 Dec 2009 02:37
Location: anandasya sagare

Re: Indian Foreign Policy

Post by Carl_T »

sanjaykumar wrote:Korean script obviously is related to Chinese caligraphically. It may be phonetically organised and rational as is Sanskrit. (A perhaps minor nitpick).

I don't think the question is about what it looks like, but its structure.

I don't buy it though, it may well be descended from the Phoenician script like Brahmi script is.
Pulikeshi
BRFite
Posts: 1513
Joined: 31 Oct 2002 12:31
Location: Badami

Re: Indian Foreign Policy

Post by Pulikeshi »

I've heard of this Indian princess story from Korean friends eons ago as well... Did not pay attention.

Can someone in the know tell me which paper these DDM newspaper articles are referring to?

Is it this one: A highly annotated whole-genome sequence of a Korean individual

If so, I do not see any reference to anything distinctly related to India here...
putnanja
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4727
Joined: 26 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: searching for the next al-qaida #3

Re: Indian Foreign Policy

Post by putnanja »

PM aide quits in shake-up - Foreign policy fiasco triggers shuffle
: Shyam Saran, the Prime Minister’s special envoy on climate change and the Indo-US nuclear deal, resigned abruptly today as part of a shake-up in the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO).

Manmohan Singh is upset about the mismanagement of foreign policy within his office following the Afghan fiasco, in which Delhi was caught unawares by the fact that, with US blessings, dialogue has already been going on with the Taliban, sources said.

Neither the Americans, nor Hamid Karzai, the Afghan President, told India about the talks.

Two of those responsible for the mismanagement are now out: the other is M.K. Narayanan, the former national security adviser who has been made governor of Bengal.

The sources said the next to go will be S.K. Lambah, who has been special envoy dealing with Afghanistan and acting as the back channel for negotiations with Pakistan.
...
...
The exit of Narayanan and Saran is vindication of what Menon said in a plain-speaking meeting shortly before retirement as foreign secretary about how he had been hamstrung in the pursuit of the government’s foreign policy objectives by forces pulling in a different direction.

In the new arrangement in the PMO, Menon is expected to take charge of back-channel talks with Pakistan from Lambah while Nirupama Rao, the foreign secretary, will be the official negotiator.
A self-contradictory article. Claims that the the two fired (MKN and Shyam saran) were due to foreign policy fiasco. But in the end, says that Saran wanted to quite due to the new order where his junior in service, SS Menon was now NSA!!

And blaming Shyam Saran and Lambah for not realizing that US was already speaking to Taliban is a bit harsh. The article mentions that it was the US and Afghanistan which kept it secret. It should have been the intelligence community (RAW/MI) that should have discovered it, not the foreign policy special envoys!!

Telegraph is a newpaper close to UPA, so this might be just trying to project the PM in good light.
putnanja
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4727
Joined: 26 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: searching for the next al-qaida #3

Re: Indian Foreign Policy

Post by putnanja »

His PMO space shrunk, n-deal architect Shyam Saran quits
...
But this elevation came with no substantive change in profile. Saran would have continued as the PM’s pointsperson on climate change and advisor on border infrastructure.

Saran had visited areas along the China and Pakistan border and suggested wide-ranging measures for improvement of infrastructure. His was the first comprehensive report on the subject and is in the process of implementation now.

But Saran is said to have signalled that he would like to continue only if he could contribute substantively.

With his work profile not changing much and Environment Minister Jairam Ramesh effectively taking over the principal role on climate change, Saran’s space for maneuver had shrunk.
...
...
Sources close to Saran say his negotiating strategy was being “blown to pieces” by Ramesh who started making announcements on cuts and a climate change legislation without consulting him. These were all concessions which had to be calibrated but their untimely announcements ended up making it difficult for Saran in the negotiating forum.

Menon’s return, of course, meant Saran had to be elevated but despite the PM’s best efforts, his work profile would have made him look a poor second to the NSA. For someone who had authored and implemented some of the key turning points in India’s foreign policy, staying any longer would have only given him diminishing returns.
JE Menon
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7143
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Foreign Policy

Post by JE Menon »

It was interesting how, in the absence of any information initially, the press and broadcast media immediately speculated in a very specific direction about Saran's departure. In fact, it has emerged that the resignation has more to do with his position as PM's climate change envoy and his relationship with Jairam Ramesh who is MoS for Environmental Affairs...
Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12526
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Re: Indian Foreign Policy

Post by Sanku »

JEM, it remains to be seen what the real reason is, as with Indian press, it is safe to assume that some first leaks which are then quickly suppressed are the real reasons.

There is a clear reorientation of FP now. The softest liners would be given a leg up it seems.

I expect that the Babucracy is really going to rise up in arms soon.

Saw this later --- Kanchan Gupta's thinking backs up mine too:
Hari Seldon wrote:Pioneer editor kanchan gupta's tweets:
http://twitter.com/KanchanGupta
More to Saran saga than meets the eye. South Block abuzz that Amriki takeover complete. Two naysayers in PMO, MKN and Saran, forced out.

Saran exit is extremely significant. Shows how helpless is PM and how Amrikis are calling the shots. Cause for alarm.

Let there be no mistake. Amrikis now have us by short and curly courtesy MMS and now his/their doormat SSM. Sellout inevitable.

TIFWIW. Of course.
kshirin
BRFite
Posts: 382
Joined: 18 Sep 2006 19:45

Re: Indian Foreign Policy

Post by kshirin »

Very, very sad day for India.
JE Menon
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7143
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Foreign Policy

Post by JE Menon »

Sanku,

I don't share your interpretation (or Kanchan's) of these developments, but of course you might be closer to the truth than I.

Sometimes, it is simply a mix of everything - including the media's desire to "create news" out of ordinary bureaucratic/political infighting.

An reading of the statements and interview of SSM and SS will show that neither are soft touches on the question of Pakistan. It is important to keep in mind that both are bureaucrats, and must function within certain boundaries.
Malayappan
BRFite
Posts: 462
Joined: 18 Jul 2005 00:11

Re: Indian Foreign Policy

Post by Malayappan »

Agree JEM, but we need to put in a big caveat. In the current set up policy-making is dominated by the unelecteds and unelectables. (Possible for the first time in history, PM, Defence, External Affairs, Finance (Pranabda is stiull effectively the RS type of politician rather than LS where he belongs), are all run by people from the RS). PM by his actions behaves more like a bureaucrat - he has no patience to explain his actions, treats parliament with disdain and when pushed to a corner lies his way out - remember his redlines on the nuclear deal, or his explanations after SeS). In that sense differences in levels of maturity (and therefore contributions to the processes) between a senior bureaucrat and a cabinet minister are getting blurred in this dispensation. So often, thinking and worse, actions seem to be on similar lines (ie between a politician and a bureaucrat). That can dangerous. After all no bureaucrat needs to face an election, nor does our PM (and this part of the cabinet). So other elements of the apparatus need to be hawkish or rather more hawkish than normal.
rsingh
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4451
Joined: 19 Jan 2005 01:05
Location: Pindi
Contact:

Re: Indian Foreign Policy

Post by rsingh »

Watched Kanchan Gupta on NDTV with Burkha. They were discussing Maoist attacks and he was the only guy in panel who had courage to call spade a spade. Respect for him. If this guy tweeted the remarks, there has to be an element of truth in it.
Lilo
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4080
Joined: 23 Jun 2007 09:08

Re: Indian Foreign Policy

Post by Lilo »

Nirupama Rao's keynote speech posting in full though long because of its content.

“Perspectives on Foreign Policy for a 21st Century India”

AS DELIVERED:
Address by Foreign Secretary at the 3rd MEA-IISS Seminar
22 February 2010, London
“Perspectives on Foreign Policy for a 21st Century India”

Mr. Adam Ward, Director of Studies,
Distinguished Participants

I am delighted to be here today to open the MEA-IISS Seminar and to speak to such an august gathering of diplomats, scholars and experts. The MEA-IISS Foreign Policy Dialogue has, from modest beginnings, now become a dynamic platform, facilitating wide-ranging exchanges between scholars and experts from India and the UK.

Given the rather broad canvas of the topic that I have been asked to speak on, I have structured my presentation along the following lines. First, a delineation of our foreign policy priorities, and how our approach is shaped by a globalizing world. Thereafter, I shall focus on the three issues – climate change, nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation, and terrorism - which form part of this seminar today. I will conclude with a few remarks on India’s neighbourhood.

Our Republic is sixty years young this year. And, our foreign policy also has a trajectory that covers almost the same period. As the country has grown, so also our foreign policy has evolved and adjusted to the growing demands and challenges posed by rapid economic growth, the situation in our neighbourhood, the realization of our interdependence and integration into global markets, and our consciousness of what India stands for in a changing and often turbulent world as a pluralistic democratic country that has created a successful standard for managing diversity. As far as the last aspect is concerned, some call it the power of the Indian example, of a big country that symbolizes the universal values of inclusiveness, tolerance, and peaceful coexistence. This self image is not new; in fact, from the very early years of the founding of our Republic, there has been awareness that our ability to manage diversity and respect pluralism would as some scholars have noted, be “a source of (India’s) legitimacy in the international system”.

It is a foreign policy truism that our aim is to secure an enabling environment to achieve the overriding domestic goal of all round, socially inclusive development. The corollary to this is that a free and democratic India is a source of stability and a force for moderation in the region. India accounts for more than 70% of the population and more than 80% of the GDP of South Asia. We want to widen our development choices. We have a keen sense of our potential to be a great power by virtue of our population, our resources and our strategic location. A fundamental goal of India’s foreign policy is to create an external environment that promotes the fulfillment of our economic growth targets and ambitions. And, these include three dimensions – capital inflows, access to technology and innovation, as well as the promotion of a free, fair and open world trading system that recognizes the development imperatives of a country like India. This requires a peaceful and stable neighbourhood and external environment, a balanced relationship with the major powers and a durable and equitable multilateral global order.

We close the first decade of this century with the realization that the intersection, and the overlap, between the national and the global is an undeniable reality. Consequently, the challenges before us – be it sustaining economic growth rates, putting in place poverty alleviation strategies, addressing the challenge of climate change, energy security or global security issues, in particular the threat posed by international terrorism, proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, etc – all require collaborative approaches.

That we live in an increasingly inter-dependent world was clearly demonstrated as never before during the global economic and financial crisis of the last year and more. The global financial downturn has seen negative rates of growth, a rising tide of unemployment which is yet to be quelled, rising trends of protectionism in the developed world, particularly, and a welcome introspection about the need to reform global financial institutions and systems of financial regulation and governance. That we are in a period of transition where the rapidly resurgent economies outside the traditional circles of global economic dominance are setting a new pace and direction in regional and international growth and development is an absolute truth.

At the global level, India has worked with our international partners to address the complex challenges to revive the global economy. The 2008 global economic and financial crisis triggered the further evolution of the G20, of which India is a key constituent. At the Pittsburgh Summit, the G-20 was designated as the premier forum for international economic cooperation. We see the G-20 process as a move towards a more representative mechanism to manage global economic and financial issues. The Group has taken some positive steps in this direction, for instance by committing a shift in IMF quota share to dynamic emerging markets and developing countries. Simultaneously, the new global realities require that we revisit and reorganize existing governance models which were put in place over six decades ago. In this regard, a dynamic global political and security order requires the urgent reform of the UN Security Council as well. We see our case for permanent membership of the Security Council as valid and legitimate.

India’s growth in the four years preceding the onset of the global financial crisis was around 9%. In 2008, with the advent of the global financial crisis, India’s growth slowed down to 6.7%. Forecasts for the current year are for a growth rate of 7.75%. Today, India has emerged as the third largest economy in Asia. It is a trillion dollar economy and has joined the ranks of the top ten economies of the world. In a knowledge- and technology-driven world, India has demonstrated certain unique strengths – our IT exports for the current year are poised to touch the $50 billion figure; the December 2009 index of industrial production surged month-on-month by a record 16.8%. Cumulative industrial growth is pegged at around 9%. The most noticeable feature of India’s economic growth is that it is driven primarily by domestic demand.

Yet, we also need to acknowledge that while average growth of around 7% over the past few years has resulted in material difference for India this has not been enough. To abolish poverty in India and to meet our development needs, we need to keep our economy growing at 8-10% every year for the next 20 years. As the literacy levels of our largely young population go up, we will have to ensure that their employment needs are also met which means that we require a rapidly expanding economy and the infrastructural growth of our cities and manufacturing sectors, so that we can reap the advantage of this demographic dividend for our economic growth. This also means that nation building or socio-economic transformation in India would continue to be primary concern of our foreign policy and this is accordingly reflected in our positions on issues such as global trade and climate change.

I will now turn to the three specific issues that are a part of your deliberations. In doing so, I do not in any way wish to influence or set the tone for your discussions. Instead, I will merely share India’s perspective on these issues.

Climate change

Climate change is one of the most important global challenges facing us. For India, it is not merely an environmental issue, but is intrinsically linked with the growth prospects and developmental aspirations of our people. Its impact on the pace of our development is a very clear and continuing concern.

Our developmental imperatives project a general trend of growth in energy consumption in India. We expect that fossil fuels will remain an important element of our commercial energy mix. The emerging paradigm of global action on climate change must, therefore, acknowledge every human’s claim to global carbon space and take account of our differential capacities. Despite 17% of the global population, our own GHG emissions today are currently only 4% of the global total. Even with 8-9% growth per annum, our energy use has been growing at less than 4% per annum. We are concerned that the developed countries tend towards ignoring, implicitly, the huge adaptation challenge that we face with climate change. Today we spend 2% to 2.5% of our GDP on meeting adaptation needs. There is need for stable and predictable financing from the developed countries, and this we believe should not rely on market mechanisms but, rather, on assessed contributions. There is also need for a global mechanism whereby climate friendly technologies can be disseminated to the developing countries.

As a country vulnerable to and already suffering from the impacts of climate change, India has an important stake in the success of the on-going multilateral negotiations under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. We are aware of our responsibilities as citizens of the globe and have participated in the negotiations in a constructive manner. It is in this spirit that we conveyed our voluntary mitigation obligations to the UNFCCC in January this year. We were of course disappointed that an agreed programme of action mandated by the Bali Roadmap could not be achieved at Copenhagen. The Copenhagen Accord was perhaps the best that could be managed under the circumstances. It is a political document that can serve the purpose of contributing to the negotiations on the Kyoto Protocol and on Long Term Cooperation. It can complement these core international agreements but cannot be a substitute for them. Our collective effort should now be to bring the significant points of convergence reflected in the Accord into the larger multilateral process under the UNFCCC in order to ensure a balanced, comprehensive and above all, an equitable outcome, at the Mexico Conference by end-2010.

Nationally, we have adopted an ambitious Action Plan on Climate Change, which is not merely mitigation oriented, but is located within a larger perspective of sustainable development. Prime Minister has set up a high level Council on Climate Change to coordinate national action for assessment, adaptation and mitigation of climate change. Our announcement of the voluntary domestic target of reducing the energy intensity of our GDP growth, excluding emissions from the Agricultural sector, by 20-25% by 2020 in comparison to the level achieved in 2005 reflects India’s seriousness in addressing the issue of climate change with commitment and focus, even as it seeks to meet the challenges of economic and social development and poverty eradication.

Till date, the global energy market has been susceptible to non-market considerations which give energy issues an unpredictable and strategic edge. We believe that these vulnerabilities are best addressed through a participatory global energy model and by pursuing a truly open, transparent, competitive and globally integrated energy market. The reality as we know is quite the reverse. Therefore, we visualise that, as a developing country, an emissions reduction strategy to be comprehensive has to embrace both conservation and efficiency. With a large and rising demand for energy, we assess nuclear technologies to be a viable long-term solution in helping us correct the skew in our energy mix. The underlying determinant in this calculus is the environmental dimension and the associated costs of large-scale deployment of traditional carbon fuels, particularly coal. In this regard, nuclear power generation, despite its high entry level costs, provides a way out, particularly in relation to the wider issues of global warming and climate change.

Nuclear disarmament & non-proliferation

I am aware that concerns are voiced over the possible proliferation dimension in the use of nuclear energy. This should, however, not deter us from pursuing the development of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes. India is fully cognizant of the safety and security implications arising from the expansion of the peaceful uses of nuclear energy. We must instead work together with our partners to help reduce the risk of nuclear proliferation.

The challenges of nuclear terrorism and nuclear security have to be addressed. We have been affected by clandestine nuclear proliferation in our neighbourhood. We are naturally concerned about the possibility of nuclear terrorism. We have, therefore, taken the lead at the UN General Assembly on an effective law-based international response including on WMD terrorism. India has joined the Russia-U.S. led Global Initiative to Combat Nuclear Terrorism. We believe that the Nuclear Security Summit in April 2010 hosted by President Obama will be an important milestone in our efforts to build international cooperation to prevent nuclear terrorism.

The constructive and forward-looking approach that was adopted towards India in September 2008 by the NSG has enabled full international civil nuclear cooperation with India as also our nuclear energy cooperation agreements with major partners including the United States, Russia, France and the UK. These constitute not only a long overdue recognition of India’s standing as a country with advanced nuclear technology and responsible behaviour but have also opened up significant opportunities for technical collaboration. I believe that this change would also serve as an important step towards strengthening international partnerships to ensure that advanced nuclear technologies are only utilized for peaceful purposes.

You are well aware of India’s long-standing commitment to global, non-discriminatory and verifiable nuclear disarmament. As early as 1988, our then Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi presented one of the most comprehensive proposals to achieve a nuclear weapon free world to the UN General Assembly. In 2006, India tabled a Working Paper on nuclear disarmament to the UNGA. We feel encouraged by some recent positive steps. President Obama’s administration has signaled US willingness to reduce the role of nuclear weapons in its nuclear strategy and to work towards a nuclear weapon free world. The renewed debate underway on this issue harmonizes with our long held positions.

We have identified some initiatives that I believe could be explored further as building blocks of a new global, verifiable nuclear disarmament framework. These include: a global agreement on ‘no-first-use’ of nuclear-weapons and non-use against non-nuclear weapon states; measures to reduce nuclear danger through de-alerting, reducing salience of nuclear weapons in security doctrines and preventing unintentional or accidental use; a Nuclear Weapons Convention prohibiting development, production, stockpiling and use of nuclear weapons and on their destruction etc..

We hope that we can achieve progress in the Conference on Disarmament. We will support the emerging consensus in the CD to adopt a programme of work. Last year, we supported the work plan including commencement of negotiations on the multilateral FMCT. On this latter issue, which we see as an important non-proliferation measure, India has had a consistent position – we are willing to negotiate a multilateral, non-discriminatory, effectively and internationally verifiable FMCT.

Terrorism

Terrorism poses an existential threat to the civilized world. It is a pivotal security challenge for India and in our neighbourhood. Terrorists have sought to undermine our sovereignty, security and economic progress, aided and abetted by forces beyond our borders. Our embassy in Kabul has faced vicious suicide bomb attacks twice, in 2008 and 2009. The Mumbai attacks of November 2008 and the more recent outrage in Pune, have once again demonstrated the barbaric face of terrorism. Terror groups implacably opposed to India continue to recruit, train and plot attacks from safe havens across our borders.

Open democratic societies such as India face particular challenges in combating the threat of terrorism. The United Kingdom is also familiar with this debate. We are acting nationally to address this through legal, institutional and administrative measures. We have recently amended the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act 1967 to reinforce the legal and punitive provisions, including financing aspects of terrorism. The National Investigation Agency (NIA) has been established as a federal body for investigation and prosecution in respect of terrorist acts with all-India jurisdiction. Regional hubs have been created for the National Security Guards. The National Multi Agency Centre (MAC) has been strengthened and made functional round the clock.

At the same time, it is clear that the threat from terrorism cannot be dealt with through national efforts alone. Global outreach and linkages among terror networks are now quite evident and they are becoming more active. The global nature of the threat has been recognized widely. Global efforts to tackle the problem also need to be intensified. Terrorism needs to be countered collectively and expeditiously. It is time that the international community works towards early adoption of a Comprehensive Convention on International Terrorism that was tabled at the UN over a decade ago in 1996. We must act jointly and with determination to meet the challenges posed by terrorism and to defend the values of pluralism, peaceful co-existence and the rule of law.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

Let me turn to our neighbourhood. From India’s perspective, the goal of ushering in a peaceful, stable and prosperous neighbourhood is predicated on enabling each of our neighbors to pursue the shared objective of the development of our peoples. We do not see this as a zero sum game but as a cooperative endeavor, requiring collaboration rather than confrontation, so as to enable each of our neighbours to grow. We do not see this as a compulsion but as a natural choice voluntarily made; a corollary of the inter-dependent world we live in. We believe that our strengths place us in a unique position to actively support the socio- economic development in our region.

The greatest threat to peace and stability in our region emanates from the shelter terrorists find in the border of Afghanistan-Pakistan and in Pakistan itself. The recent international approaches to Afghanistan, in particular the London Conference last month, are focusing on security and reintegration, development, governance and regional and international cooperation. The issue of reintegration should be tackled with prudence, the benefit of hindsight, foresight and caution. We believe that any integration process in Afghanistan should be Afghan-led, and should include only those who abjure violence, give up armed struggle and terrorism and are willing to abide by the values of democracy, pluralism and human rights as enshrined in the Afghan Constitution.

For the Afghan Government to take greater ownership of security, it is imperative that Afghan National Security Forces (ANSF) are properly trained and equipped. Similarly, in order to stengthen governance and institution-building, priority should be accorded to building adequate capacity to deliver on developmental objectives. It is self-evident that for this process to be enduring, Afghan ownership should go hand in hand with Afghan leadership.

Afghanistan is centrally placed to emerge as a trade, transportation and energy hub connecting Central and South Asia. The international community must work together to realize this potential. Growing economic interdependence would complement efforts to promote peace and prosperity in the region.

India is an important neighbour of Afghanistan and we share undeniably close ties that have endured through the centuries into present times. Our focus there is on development activity with the aim to build indigenous Afghan capacities and institutions. This will enable an effective state system to improve the delivery of goods and services to Afghan people. Our assistance, now over US$ 1.3 billion, is spread over a large number of provinces in Afghanistan. In addition to several small and medium development projects, India has built the Zaranj-Delaram road and the power transmission line from Pul-e-Khumri to Kabul. We are also constructing Afghanistan's new Parliament building, a symbol of our common commitment to pluralism and democracy. At the recent London Conference, we have announced new initiatives in the agriculture sector and in institutional capacity building.

Our relationship with Pakistan is complex. Out of our desire for peaceful and good-neighbourly relations with Pakistan, we have repeatedly taken initiatives in the past to improve the relationship. You are aware that the dark forces of terrorism sought to erase the good that stemmed from such well-intentioned initiatives. We are now making another attempt of dialogue with Pakistan. However, calls of jihad, hostility and aggression continue to be made openly against India. This reflects the real and tangible difficulties that we face in dealing with Pakistan. If the process of normalization that we desire with Pakistan, is to be sustained and taken forward, effective action against such groups by the Government of Pakistan is an absolute must.

Under pressure and faced with the threat of terrorism in its own country, Pakistan has initiated some steps to fight this scourge. But these steps are selective. Distinctions between Taliban, Al Qaeda and terrorist outfits such as LeT are now meaningless, since they are now in effect fused both operationally and ideologically. We have consistently maintained that Pakistan should bring the perpetrators of the Mumbai terrorist attack to justice expeditiously and in a transparent manner. It should act decisively to dismantle the infrastructure of terrorism on its territory.

As I said previously, India is making another sincere attempt to initiate dialogue with Pakistan. I have invited my counterpart, the Foreign Secretary of Pakistan to Delhi for discussions later this week. We hope we can build, in a graduated manner, better communication and a serious and responsive dialogue to address issues of concern between our two countries.

With Sri Lanka our political relations are close, trade and investment have increased exponentially, and there is broad-based engagement across all sectors of bilateral cooperation. We view the conclusion of the military operations against the LTTE as providing an opportunity to finally achieve a lasting political settlement acceptable to all communities, including the Tamils, within a united Sri Lanka.

Our relations with Bangladesh have acquired further substance and scope in recent months, particularly after the very successful visit of Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina to India in January this year. Our security related cooperation has developed positively as also our cooperation in infrastructural development in Bangladesh, for which we have announced a US $ 1 billion concessional Line of Credit.

It is a universally held truth that India’s economic growth has a positive impact on our region. Today, with sustained high economic growth rates over the past decade, India is in a better position to offer a significant stake to our neighbours in our own prosperity and growth. We have made unilateral gestures and extended economic concessions such as the facility of duty free access to Indian market for imports from Bangladesh, Nepal, Bhutan and Sri Lanka. We have put forward proposals multilaterally within the framework of the SAARC or the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation where we have assumed asymmetric responsibilities.

Turning to our extended neighbourhood, it is evident that with the rapid rise of China and India, the global and regional situation is being re-defined. There is much that is said about China’s rise and its implications for India. There is both competition and collaboration in the dynamic equilibrium of our relationship with China. Both our countries have always thought in civilizational time-frames. Even as we are discussing the unresolved boundary question, we have ensured that there is peace and tranquility in our border areas. China has emerged as India’s largest trading partner. We are consulting each other on global issues such as multilateral trade negotiations, climate change, and in the G-20, etc.

In the decade ahead, India will have to, as one writer noted recently, provide itself with “the widest possible field of vision” when it comes to China. This will entail not only a multi-dimensional approach to developing relations with China but also creating our menu of strategic options to ensure that we are able to protect and promote our interests effectively in our region.

Key elements in the India-China relationship like imbalances in bilateral trade, the unresolved boundary question, our dialogue on water resources with regard to the trans-border rivers like the Brahmaputra and the Sutlej point to the complex and evolving nature of our dialogue. The rapid growth of our economies has engendered a search for resources by both countries in third countries and regions across the globe. In some cases we have developed patterns of collaboration with the Chinese, in others, we have been in competition. This is the reality of the relationship. In our own region, which remains geo-politically unstable, China has an enduring strategic relationship with Pakistan, and a growing presence in other neighbouring countries. We are conscious of these leverages that China has developed in our region and realize fully that our relations with China cannot be uni-dimensional, or seen through a narrow prism. Our own relations with our South Asian neighbours acquire crucial importance in this scenario. Our economic strength and increased commitment to the economic development of our neighbourhood in South Asia, sustained dialogue at the leadership level, security-related dialogue especially as it relates to better border management, cooperation in health, education and environment-related sectors, and creating the infrastructure for better intra-regional connectivity and transportation, together with the attraction of India’s soft power are all factors that can be, and are being, mobilized in this context.

With Japan, we are developing the foundations of “strategic global partnership” with a strong economic and strategic content. Recent years have seen a qualitative shift in relations with defence dialogue and security cooperation emerging as important aspects of our relations. Our relations with the United States are in a new and transformative phase, with convergences in foreign policy priorities, and shared approaches to some of the most complex regional and global challenges of our times – from countering terrorism to working together for energy security, mitigating the impact of climate change to maritime security, nuclear security and safeguarding the global commons to name a few areas. With Russia, our strategic partnership has been continuously strengthened, and our multi-faceted relations span a number of sectors including defence, nuclear energy, space research, science and technology and hydrocarbons. Our ties with France have been further enhanced through regular summit-level meetings and the triad of cooperation in the civil nuclear, defence and space sectors. The India-Brazil-South Africa (IBSA) and the Russia-India-China (RIC) cooperation forums have also helped us engage more closely with these countries in forging ties of dialogue and cooperation on economic and development-related issues.

India’s engagement with the ASEAN has grown manifold over the past decade and half and is set to get a fillip with the conclusion of the ASEAN-India Trade in Goods Agreement.

Myanmar is an ASEAN member country with which we share a border of more than 1640 kms. We have advocated engagement with Myanmar since it is a close neighbour of ours. It is important for India to ensure a peaceful periphery with Myanmar. We strongly believe that any political reform process in Myanmar should be peaceful and not cause instability within that country or on our borders with it. We have urged the Government of Myanmar to take forward the process of national reconciliation and political reform and broad-base it to include all sections of society, including the more than 18 ethnic groups in the country.

On the security architecture for the region, there is a need to evolve a balanced, open and inclusive framework for Asian countries and major non-Asian players to interact and cooperate to address traditional and non-traditional security challenges. The ASEAN Regional Forum has provided a useful model for such cooperation based on dialogue and consensus in diverse areas such as counter terrorism, trans-national crimes, maritime security, disaster relief, pandemics and nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament. India is also a member of the Conference on Interaction and Confidence Building Measures in Asia (CICA). We have also partnered with the international community in deploying an Indian naval presence for anti-piracy escort operations to ensure maritime security in the Gulf of Aden.

Before I finish, let me say a few words about our relations with the UK. The UK is an important interlocutor for us in the bilateral, EU, G8 and global contexts and our multi-faceted bilateral relationship has intensified specially since its upgradation to strategic partnership in 2004. Our engagement is most wide-ranging including high-level visits, parliamentary and official-level exchanges, business interaction and cultural interchanges. President Pratibha Patil was on a State visit to the UK from 27-29 October 2009. There have been regular exchanges of visits at the Prime Minister-level. Institutional linkages have continued through regular FOCs, JWG and India-UK Round Table. Our trade and investment partnerships are both-ways and expanding rapidly. India is the second largest source of students to UK with about 31,000 students. Science & technology is a focus area for our two countries. On 11 February 2010, we signed a Joint Declaration on civil nuclear cooperation which will give a new dimension to our already multi-dimensional and vibrant ties.

Once again I want to say how delighted I am to be with you this morning and to be given the privilege to be a part of your deliberations. I have no doubt that the MEA-IISS relationship will scale greater heights in times to come which is a tribute to your vision and long-term perspective about the need for the world to engage India more closely, to forge understandings, and to promote more inclusive dialogue with key stakeholders on both sides. I wish the deliberations of the seminar success
Link
Last edited by Rahul M on 23 Feb 2010 14:02, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: don't change font size.
Jarita
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2654
Joined: 30 Oct 2009 22:27
Location: Andromeda

Re: Indian Foreign Policy

Post by Jarita »

rsingh wrote:Watched Kanchan Gupta on NDTV with Burkha. They were discussing Maoist attacks and he was the only guy in panel who had courage to call spade a spade. Respect for him. If this guy tweeted the remarks, there has to be an element of truth in it.

Can you send link
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 60273
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Foreign Policy

Post by ramana »

In the tradition and seniority bound babucracy it was matter of time that Saranji had to quit after SSM was chosen to be NSA. However the interesting thing is SSji pointing to Jairam Ramesh as his reason to quite.

BTW, how many know which state JR is elected to Rajya Sabha from and has he visited it even once?
shukla
BRFite
Posts: 1727
Joined: 17 Aug 2009 20:50
Location: Land of Oz!

Re: Indian Foreign Policy

Post by shukla »

Changing dynamics of India's geopolitics and preparing for effectively countering Chinese threat..
Indian defense planners, meanwhile, are preparing a military doctrine that envisions fighting China and Pakistan at the same time.

China is already making its presence felt in the Indian Ocean region, where it could come into conflict with Indian maritime interests, an Indian Navy official said. China has established a military base in the Coco islands, leased from neighboring Myanmar; is helping build the Gwadar Pasni port in Pakistan; has established good relations with several African states and has some leverage with Iran, the official added.

China's feverish military modernization is the most destabilizing factor for Indian national security, the official said.

The annual Indian Defence Ministry report of 2009-10 describes what it views as China's growing threat to the region: "China's stated objectives, in their White Paper of National Defence in 2008, of developing strategic missile and space-based assets and of rapidly enhancing its blue-water navy to conduct operations in distant waters, as well as the systematic upgrading of infrastructure, reconnaissance and surveillance, quick response and operational capabilities in the border areas, will have an effect on the overall military environment in the neighborhood of India."

http://defensenews.com/story.php?i=4518235&c=FEA&s=SPE

PREPARING FOR CHINA
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 60273
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Foreign Policy

Post by ramana »

[quote="Malayappan"]India seeks a new direction

This article makes a lot of assumptions and assertions about Indian Foreign policy. Might be useful to summarize and de-construct them.
Carl_T
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2533
Joined: 24 Dec 2009 02:37
Location: anandasya sagare

Re: Indian Foreign Policy

Post by Carl_T »

Which ones? His idea that one of the hidden agendas of the war in Afgh was expansion into central Asia seems like a stretch. Appears he was a diplomat though.
SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 25382
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Indian Foreign Policy

Post by SSridhar »

ramana wrote:
This article makes a lot of assumptions and assertions about Indian Foreign policy. Might be useful to summarize and de-construct them.
MKB is characterizing the perceived isolation of India at the London Conference on Afghanistan as a failure of Indian diplomacy. In his opinion, India thought too much of herself due to its involvement in Afghanistan's rebuild and the self-assumed strategic partner of the US. India also did not see the coming of 'reconciliation' and the inclusion of Taliban in political settlement.

I do not quite buy these arguments. First of all, India has been diligently working through Hamid Karzai and it was Hamid Karzai who setup the 'Reconciliation Committee'. It is inconceivable that GoI was unaware of the meetings in KSA between the representatives of Karzai, Taliban and the Saudis or other reported contacts between the Americans and the Taliban representatives. Moreover, the American & NATO thinking has been becoming clear for quite sometime now regarding withdrawal of troops. India must also be aware of the fact that the vast sections of Afghanis do not favour the brutal and oppressive regime of the Taliban. India does not and cannot find fault with the Reconciliation Process started by Hamid Karzai and his elected representatives. The Indian stand on 'good' and 'bad' Taliban has to be seen in the context of Pakistani definitions of these terms. Again, if India has a different opinion and for valid reasons, so be it. Why should India's stand of not going along with the herd be taken as a failure of Indian foreign policy ?

MKB also feels that India bet on a wrong horse, Dr. Abdullah Abdullah, on US urging rather than Ahmed Karzai.

I do not agree with that either. Dr. Abdullah Abdullah has been a close friend of India and had been a confidante of Ahmed Shah Masoud. Hamid Karzai had also been a great friend of India. In the end, India would not have had a reason to be disappointed with either of them. The US in fact thrust Ghani who had to bite the dust. It was ultimately the superior marshalling capabilities of Hamid Karzai (getting Rashid Dostum's support etc.) that made the difference, in the treacherous and fragmented Afghan polity.

MKB's contention is that an offended Karzai is tilting to Pakistan.

This is again untenable, IMO. It is axiomatic that unless Pakistan stops interfering in Afghanistan, that country will not see peace and development. Afghanistan cannot realitically tilt towards India at the cost of its relationship with Pakistan. This cannot be a zero-sum game for that country. For example, in his recent trip to Pakistan, Karzai has accepted the offer of arms and ammunition but has decided to consult 'others' before accepting the PA's offer of training the ANA. This is prudent Afghan foreign policy, not a tilt. Similarly, Karzai has been demanding that Mullah Barather and the other members of the Quetta Shura be extradited to Afghanistan rather then being tried in Pakistan as they were Afghan citizens and theur crimes have been committed on that soil. The Afghan Intelligence Chief, Amarullah Saleh, has never minced words in pointing fingers at Pakistan. Nor for that matter, even Karzai.

MKB says that India put all its eggs in the US basket and needed to revive its regional policies.

This is a lesson that India has to learn, if it already has not learnt it. The US is the most unreliable partner as it simply doesn't care for anybody else in its practice of statecraft and realpolitik. It is ruthless and arrogant in that respect. India has to strike a very fine balance while dealing with the US and should never completely trust it. Also, India-Russia-China which had earlier issued a joint statement (May, 2009) as part of SCO calling for a regional solution and not to distinguish between good & bad Taliban, should come together. . Later, in October 2009, the foreign ministers of the RIC triangle of Russia, India and China met in Bangalore and demanded a greater say for themselves in the resolution of the Afghan problem. India is about to have intense discussions with Iran shortly. The Russian PM, Vladimir Putin, is already in India. We must throw a spanner in the US works or at least threaten them with that. The US would understand nothing less than threats to its interests. That way, India would have also shown that it has come of age in diplomacy consistent with its growing stature and its legitimate interests in Afghanistan.
vera_k
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4482
Joined: 20 Nov 2006 13:45

Re: Indian Foreign Policy

Post by vera_k »

I just hope some Afghan scientists are being hosted at BARC and Kalpakkam.
csharma
BRFite
Posts: 695
Joined: 12 Jul 1999 11:31

Re: Indian Foreign Policy

Post by csharma »

Sridhar, great post. Lalit Mansingh and Rajiv Sikri are recommending the renewal of India Iran Russia axis on Afghanistan. They differ on whether China should be involved.

US is certain to frown upon any IIR initiative because it will reduce Iran isolation and also it will be at odds at what it is seeking in Afghanistan.
Rony
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3513
Joined: 14 Jul 2006 23:29

Re: Indian Foreign Policy

Post by Rony »

Kanti Bajpai: India's growth in power calls for a rethink of strategic policies
Since the the end of the Cold War, the Indian strategic community has vigorously debated its international policies. Three broad perspectives are contending for dominance: internationalism, liberalism, and realism.

Internationalists argue that international politics can be co-operative and that a relentless commitment to negotiations, international institutions and morally informed diplomacy can trump competition and violence. Internationalists oppose alliances and want India to champion the cause of the weak and poor.

Liberals see in globalisation the means of lifting India into a first-rank power. For them, economic strength and interdependence will promote co-operation and peace. To reap the benefits of globalisation, India must align with the United States and jettison its leadership of the developing countries.

Realists insist that the world is a competitive place, co-operation is fleeting, and military power and violence are the staples of international relations. For India to be a great power, it must be a first-rate military power above all. Realists see the US as an unreliable, waning force. India must therefore look after itself.

Internationalists suggest that nuclear proliferation in the end can only be ensured through verifiable global disarmament. Liberals would support arms control measures such as nuclear reductions, a test ban, and a fissile material cutoff. Realists oppose disarmament and want no limits on India's growing nuclear arsenal.

Internationalists would promote negotiations with Pakistan towards a regional solution of Afghanistan's troubles and bilateral deals with Islamabad on Kashmir, terrorism and other differences. Liberals would support a regional accord on Afghanistan and a bilateral deal with Pakistan, but would put regional trade and energy at the heart of any long-term solution. Realists would have India put troops into Afghanistan if necessary and use force against a terror-exporting Pakistan.

In the past decade, Indian policies have inclined towards liberalism, but as the country's power grows one can expect an intensifying debate over its international relations.
A_Gupta
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13537
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31
Contact:

Re: Indian Foreign Policy

Post by A_Gupta »

A Key Finding
One key finding that I found somewhat surprising is that rapprochement is primarily about diplomacy, not economic interdependence. In most cases, it is the former that leads to the latter.
Hari Seldon
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9374
Joined: 27 Jul 2009 12:47
Location: University of Trantor

Re: Indian Foreign Policy

Post by Hari Seldon »

Shyam Saran: Premature power
India has to leverage its ‘swing’ status, engage with all and align with none
Good read, IMHO.
RamaY
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17249
Joined: 10 Aug 2006 21:11
Location: http://bharata-bhuti.blogspot.com/

Re: Indian Foreign Policy

Post by RamaY »

csharma wrote:Sridhar, great post. Lalit Mansingh and Rajiv Sikri are recommending the renewal of India Iran Russia axis on Afghanistan. They differ on whether China should be involved.

US is certain to frown upon any IIR initiative because it will reduce Iran isolation and also it will be at odds at what it is seeking in Afghanistan.
More than anything India must have an Indan-policy vis-a-vis Afghanistan. What it wants in Afghanistan, and how far it is willing to go to achieve that goal. The key objective of all these strategies must be Indian-interests; not some I-too-wanna-play type strategies.

Only then India can look for other players who has a congruent vision. Every other player who doesn't fit into Indian interests is a potential competitor.

India must do something to hurt the common enemy of India as well as Afghanistan. How can India ask Afghanista, the minority partner, to achieve Indian objectives?

JMT
Hari Seldon
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9374
Joined: 27 Jul 2009 12:47
Location: University of Trantor

Re: Indian Foreign Policy

Post by Hari Seldon »

^^^IOW, India needs its netaship to take seriously some seedy ads for this hot new product doing the rounds of the corridors of power of late....
Spiagra - vi agra for the spine
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21537
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Foreign Policy

Post by Philip »

The fundamental flaw in India's Af-Pak foreign plicy is that the mandarins of the MEA have not yet understood the prime motivator for US actions there,that "oil" is at the root of the problem,or rather the "oil route" from Central ASia through Af-Pak,as the US has invested over $150 billion in the Kashgan Kazahk Caspian Sea oil platform with not a drop yet to have flowed out!

The very same reason saw the Taliban-Unocal talsk in Texas last time round when the Talibs ruled the Afghan roost.The same attempt is being made now,"give the Talibs some power in Kabul and get our pipeline through".Buy off Karzai and tribes and keep rent-boy Pak happy with new toys to dismember India with.As for India,with our man Singh in charge,"what we worry"?

Poor MEA,it is the PMO that rules the foreign policy roost these days (and the US that rules the PMO) and like headless chickens they run round in circles from capital to capital (London to Riyadh to Washington) simply to find that India has been "shut out" of Aghanistan in the US's scheme of things!
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 60273
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Foreign Policy

Post by ramana »

Philip, Oil is only one aspect.

It goes back to unfinished business of Mackinder. WWI &WWII interrupted this.Control of Central Asia is must if one wants to continue thier dominance. Oil is a bonus.
kshirin
BRFite
Posts: 382
Joined: 18 Sep 2006 19:45

Re: Indian Foreign Policy

Post by kshirin »

ramana wrote:Philip, Oil is only one aspect.

It goes back to unfinished business of Mackinder. WWI &WWII interrupted this.Control of Central Asia is must if one wants to continue thier dominance. Oil is a bonus.
China realises this, its strategic acquisition of assets all over Central Asia (and South East and West Asia and everywhere) could pave the way for it to become a Eurasian power, so proving Mackinder right, quite unexpectedly for Mackinder. Meanwhile, the US has been fixating on Russia as their rival in Eurasia, truly missing the picture. China will also aim at energy security and reducing dependence on maritime routes, and the salience of its currency vis-a-vis the petrodollar.
Stan_Savljevic
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3522
Joined: 21 Apr 2006 15:40

Re: Indian Foreign Policy

Post by Stan_Savljevic »

abhishek_sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9664
Joined: 19 Nov 2009 03:27

Re: Indian Foreign Policy

Post by abhishek_sharma »

Video of Foreign Secretary Mrs. Nirupama Rao's speech at Wilson Center on March 15, 2010

http://www.wilsoncenter.org/index.cfm?f ... _id=604074
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 60273
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Foreign Policy

Post by ramana »

A Life In Diplomacy

Book review, Telegraph, 2 April 2010
A LIFE IN DIPLOMACY


Jagat Mehta (right) greeting the US deputy secretary of state, New Delhi, 1977

The Tryst Betrayed: Reflections on Diplomacy and Development By Jagat S. Mehta, Penguin, Rs 550

Jagat Singh Mehta’s autobiography covers an eventful and rewarding career spanning the worlds of diplomacy, academics and social service. Mehta was a cerebral foreign secretary. After retiring from foreign service, he was a visiting professor at the University of Texas in Austin for 15 years. He has written extensively on diplomacy and, more recently, has devoted himself to social service for the cause of education and rural development. He was awarded the Padma Bhushan by the president of India in 2002.

Jagat Mehta joined the Indian foreign service in August 1947, just a few days after India’s entry into the comity of independent nations. His first appointment was as private secretary to the secretary-general of the external affairs ministry, Sir Girija Shankar Bajpai. The full contribution of this formidable official to India’s foreign policy in the early post-Independence years remains to be chronicled. Mehta recalls that the “PM invariably came to Sir Girija’s room on his way in and out of the Secretariat and seldom summoned him except for meetings… They would exchange drafted replies. More than once I heard the PM say, ‘Your draft expresses my thoughts better; let yours go as from PM to Sir B.N. Rau [ambassador at the UN]’”

Nehru and Bajpai shared a deep mutual respect for each other’s abilities even though their personalities could hardly have been more different. Elegant simplicity marked Pandit Nehru’s style. On the other hand, Sir Girija Shankar Bajpai, KCSI, KBE, CIE, was a grandee of the British raj. Fastidiously dressed in Savile Row suits, he was a connoisseur of fine food and wines and an expert on rare carpets. Jagat Mehta informs us that during the raj, the “best room in the Secretariat — in the south-west corner (which gets the sun from two sides in the winter and was cooler in the summer) and nearest to the Viceregal Lodge — was earmarked for the Foreign Secretary”. Not wishing to disturb the occupant of this room, Nehru moved into another room at the end of the corridor. Bajpai, “more finicky about prestige, the location and size of his office”, had no such inhibition and became the first Indian occupant of the coveted room.

Mehta was posted in the Eastern Division from 1957 to 1961 and led the Indian delegation in the border talks with China in 1960. He subsequently served as chargé d’affaires in Beijing from 1963 to 1966, during the Cultural Revolution. He was thus intimately connected with India-China relations during a critical and tumultuous period. His finest hour in Beijing came in September 1965, during the Indo-Pakistan war. Summoned to the foreign ministry in the middle of the night on September 16, Mehta was handed the famous ultimatum demanding the return of allegedly abducted sheep and yaks, and the demolition of bunkers allegedly built across the Sikkim border within three days. A second ultimatum was served on September 19. Mehta kept his cool and conveyed to New Delhi before the expiry of the second ultimatum that, in his judgment, the Chinese would not violate the border. Lal Bahadur Shastri commended him for his professional judgment.

Mehta was appointed foreign secretary in 1976, during the Emergency. In the following year, Indira Gandhi lost the general elections. For the first time since Independence, a non-Congress government — the hastily assembled Janata coalition under Morarji Desai — took over the reins of government, giving rise to speculation about a shift in India’s foreign policy and a possible tilt towards the western powers. Mehta lost no time in advocating basic continuity in foreign policy. Immediately after the swearing-in ceremony of the new prime minister, Morarji Desai, Mehta managed to buttonhole him at the Rashtrapati Bhavan itself, in order to press this recommendation. However, Desai’s initial comments about “genuine non-alignment” served only to fuel speculation about a policy shift. Fortunately, the new foreign minister, Atal Bihari Vajpayee, was a true statesman. On Mehta’s advice, Vajpayee renewed an invitation to his Soviet counterpart, Andrei Gromyko, to visit India at an early date. The Soviet foreign minister arrived post-haste and went away fully reassured that there would be no weakening of established Indo-Soviet ties.

Diplomatic historians will find many interesting nuggets of information in Jagat Mehta’s latest book, complementing the material offered in his earlier analytical work, Negotiating for India. However, some of Mehta’s observations about India’s foreign policy are certain to be questioned. Did India really violate the principle of non-intervention in Goa, as Mehta alleges? The principle of non-intervention applies to territories of foreign states, not to a part of our own territory under foreign occupation. Freeing Goa from Portuguese colonial rule and reuniting it with the rest of India cannot be condemned as a violation of the principle of non-intervention. Similarly, is it a fair assessment that during the Cold War, “non-alignment accustomed us to a kind of blackmail leverage — presuming on the West and leaning towards the East”? Did India lean against the West or was it the West that leaned against India? The historical record shows that in the immediate post-Independence years (1947-53), India’s ties with the West were far more substantial than those with the Soviet bloc, in every sphere. This began to change in 1953 as a result of a number of developments including, in particular, the Anglo-American decision to induct Pakistan into the Western alliance system. Even so, India’s policy was to develop parallel ties with both superpowers. We ‘leaned’ towards the Soviet Union only after the Nixon administration ‘tilted’ strongly towards Pakistan (and China) in 1971.

Mehta must be well aware that these views will be strongly contested. During his years in service as well as after retirement, he has not hesitated to express an unpopular opinion and for this, he deserves our respect.

CHANDRASHEKHAR DASGUPTA
A_Gupta
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13537
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31
Contact:

Re: Indian Foreign Policy

Post by A_Gupta »

SSridhar wrote:
This article makes a lot of assumptions and assertions about Indian Foreign policy. Might be useful to summarize and de-construct them.

MKB is characterizing the perceived isolation of India at the London Conference on Afghanistan as a failure of Indian diplomacy. In his opinion, India thought too much of herself due to its involvement in Afghanistan's rebuild and the self-assumed strategic partner of the US. India also did not see the coming of 'reconciliation' and the inclusion of Taliban in political settlement.

I do not quite buy these arguments.
I don't buy them either, because India saw the writing on the wall long before the London Conference.
The item below dates from Oct 7, 2009, while the London Conference was Jan 28, 2010 or so.

http://ajaishukla.blogspot.com/2009/10/ ... -with.html
(original source: Business Standard)
India announces foreign policy change: supports Afghan reconciliation with Taliban

India's Foreign Secretary, Nirupama Rao made the surprise announcement at a seminar in New Delhi on 7th Oct.
It is very easy for anyone to invent stories if all the facts are not taken into account. To quote a person with pen-name ondelette:
As I wrote in my longer response, you are missing too many events to put together any chains of causality. The choice of your events is also quite far from random. So you are not looking at reality, you are looking at a contrived sequence. If I have a sequence of fractions, 1, 1/2, 1/3, 1/4,... and I say what is the sum? And you say, let's look at the partial sum formed by 1, 1/4,1/9,..., I say, but you won't get the correct picture of the sum by looking at that. And you say, but those are facts, .... and I say, but that isn't the sequence, and you say, but that's a sequence and it happened. We can argue all day, but the simple fact is that the sum of the whole sequence diverges while the subsequence you've extracted sums to pi squared over six.
Paul
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3801
Joined: 25 Jun 1999 11:31

Re: Indian Foreign Policy

Post by Paul »

I think of Jagat Mehta as the original WKK.

His daughter married the turncoat Raja of Mahmudabad, a strong propent of Pakistan. He went to Pakistan but came back as he did not want to his privileges and luxurious lifestyle in India.
Rony
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3513
Joined: 14 Jul 2006 23:29

Re: Indian Foreign Policy

Post by Rony »

Think Tanks In India's Democracy
India has the second largest number of think tanks in the world after the United States.
SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 25382
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Indian Foreign Policy

Post by SSridhar »

Rony wrote:Think Tanks In India's Democracy
India has the second largest number of think tanks in the world after the United States.
Oh. . . that is not surprising, is it ? We are philosophers par excellence and argumentative. We think a lot, but seldom have we taken any decisive action.
sum
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10205
Joined: 08 May 2007 17:04
Location: (IT-vity && DRDO) nagar

Re: Indian Foreign Policy

Post by sum »

Rony wrote:Think Tanks In India's Democracy
India has the second largest number of think tanks in the world after the United States.
But, wasn't the constant :(( :(( on BR that we didnt have enough think-tanks and scholars doing work on foreign affairs etc?
svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14222
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: Indian Foreign Policy

Post by svinayak »

sum wrote:
But, wasn't the constant :(( :(( on BR that we didnt have enough think-tanks and scholars doing work on foreign affairs etc?
Do you think thes thinktanks matter. Quality and national interest matters
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 60273
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Foreign Policy

Post by ramana »

Shashi Tharoor interacts with media in mangalore

LINK

I dont know whether to :rotfl: or :x at the PTI reporter's DDMitis...

Press Trust Of India
Mangalore, April 06, 2010
First Published: 23:20 IST(6/4/2010)
Last Updated: 23:22 IST(6/4/2010)

In remarks that may stoke another controversy, Minister of State for External Affairs Shashi Tharoor on Tuesday said foreign policy debates in Parliament and the media seem to be obsessed with short-lived aspects about Pakistan.

"Our foreign policy debates in Parliament and the media seem obsessed with Pakistan or with ephemera, or worse ephemera about Pakistan," he said during the annual convocation of Mangalore University here while underlining the need for improving study of international affairs.

"There is little appetite for in-depth discussion about say, the merits of participating in Non-aligned Movement or the Conference of Democrats or the importance we should give to such bodies as SAARC or the Indian Ocean Rim Conference", he observed.

Speaking on 'Why foreign policy matters' he said foreign policy no longer remained merely foreign. "It affects right here where you live".

Tharoor said his ministry was ready to collaborate with education policy makers on the changes to be brought in teaching international relations in educational institutes.

He said India cannot be oblivious to developments taking place abroad. What happens in North America or North Africa - from protectionist policies to deforestation and desertification to the fight against AIDS - can affect lives of people in this country, he said.

Tharoor's comments against Government's austerity measures and immigration policy had triggered controversies earlier.
What he is saying is the truth and why should there be a controversy?
BTW MEA has done the maximum damage to the area studies centers program(~24 centers located all over India) that V. Krishna Menon started by not utilizing the expertise nor develop any skills in those centers. So much so many are now defunct and most likely closed down.
Kati
BRFite
Posts: 1909
Joined: 27 Jun 1999 11:31
Location: The planet Earth

Re: Indian Foreign Policy

Post by Kati »

Can't find any other suitable thread. So posting it here. From The telegraph, April 7, 2010.


Taiwan office

The ambassador of Taiwan to India, Wenchyi Ong, met chief minister Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee at Writers’ on Tuesday. “We said we want to set up an office here. We will make a formal application,” Ong said.
csharma
BRFite
Posts: 695
Joined: 12 Jul 1999 11:31

Re: Indian Foreign Policy

Post by csharma »

This I believe is a significant article in that it tries to explain what MMS is trying to do. Since MMS govt is receiving a lot of flak even within the Congress recently for his foreign policy, this article might be a way for MMS to communicate his ideas.

There is talk of covert action.

Rising Above The Region

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/home ... 767725.cms
Away from the din and fury of parliamentary politics, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh is writing a new strategic doctrine for India. That doctrine can be compressed into four words: rising above the region. The theory is simple: to realise its full geopolitical and economic potential, India must rise above local problems and deal with global issues.

The prime minister does not want a failed neighbouring state to distract attention from the three crucial issues India must confront this decade. These are, first, settling the border issue with China and striking up a pan-Asian economic partnership in an arc curving up from the Middle East to China through to East Asia and Japan. Second, deepening ties with the United States so that by 2020, when the US, China and India account for nearly 60 per cent of global GDP, New Delhi has strong partners in the West as well as the East.
Talks and terrorism were controversially delinked at Sharm el-Sheikh. Talks and counterterrorism therefore also stand delinked. While the prime minister negotiates with the Pakistani government
with a velvet glove, the home minister will not feel constrained to use an iron fist to deal with terrorism directed against India.
sum
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10205
Joined: 08 May 2007 17:04
Location: (IT-vity && DRDO) nagar

Re: Indian Foreign Policy

Post by sum »

Thanks for the article, csharma-ji.

Am hoping and praying that what is written about MMS is true. Love this staement the best:
Meanwhile, a pincer movement against terrorist groups custom-made to strike India, led by the notorious Hafiz Saeed using both covert operations and back-channel talks is crucial if all the bits and pieces of the prime minister's doctrine have to fall into place. Talks and terrorism were controversially delinked at Sharm el-Sheikh. Talks and counterterrorism therefore also stand delinked. While the prime minister negotiates with the Pakistani government with a velvet glove, the home minister will not feel constrained to use an iron fist to deal with terrorism directed against India.
MMS and covert action in the same sentence gives rise to lot of hope. Hope that this also doesnt remain a wet dream like many other such items have.
Post Reply