Indo-US Partnership: A Panacea to Chinese Aggression?

Even though American allies in this region are economically sound, they are not in a position to counter China, compared to China's military and diplomatic power. For all these reasons, the focus of US foreign policy experts increasingly turning towards India, as a potential power ti counter Chinese dragon.

-  Keerthiraj

The increasing Chinese military influence in the Asia-Pacific region reaffirmed that no country in this region has enough will power to counter the warmongering dragon. China aggressively achieved enmity with all the countries in its neighbourhood, even challenged US and other major powers, creating a common feeling that no one can do any thing against China. Recently, Chinese leaders warned America to expect a full pledged war if Americans interfered in South and East China seas. Both America and India have their own interests in containing Chinese power. On the one hand, China's aggressive attitude is the question of leadership and strategic balance for America, on the other hand, India has some key national security threats from China.

American allies in the Asia-Pacific region including Philippines, Japan, Australia, Singapore and other countries concerned excessively towards Chinese aggression. Even though American allies in this region are economically sound, they are not in a position to counter China, compared to China's military and diplomatic power. For all these reasons, the focus of US foreign policy experts increasingly turning towards India, as a potential power ti counter Chinese dragon. American policy experts are convinced that, India is growing increasingly confident in international politics is the only available choice to re balance Asia-pacific. The two largest democracies in the world are ready to establish higher levels of diplomatic and military relations. The current national interests of India and America have a lot of similarities. Under the leadership of Prime Minister Narendra Modi, India is slowly moving out of the Non-Aligned policy and exposing itself confidently in the global politics. Still, India is not completely comfortable with US, Delhi policy makers understood it is important to strengthen Washington-Delhi defence contracts in order to maintain the balance in Indo-pacific region.

United States changed its earlier gesture of supporting Pakistan and criticising India. The Indian Army crossed the line of Control and destroyed some terrorist bases in response to Pakistan's back support to terror activities in Indian land. After this incident Pakistan firmly expected America to condemn the act of India. But this expectation of Pakistan met with disillusionment and US just advised both the countries to settle the long term dispute. This is a significant shift of US policy in favour of India and it responded with a 'Politically Correct' statement! Through this incident US convincingly portrayed India instead of Pakistan as the priority of its foreign policy For decades, American the aid to Pakistan proved US can get nothing more than backstabbing by Pakistan. Now it is the time to realise historical values of nations are the pillars of long-standing political friendship and not the short-term selfish political opportunities

The challenge, India facing of today from China is different from the challenges of 1962. China threatened only northern borders of India In 1962 Indo-China war, but Chinese naval power was not so sophisticated. But today, China has a strong naval force, built up in a systematic manner. Strategically, China has occupied Gwadar port in Pakistan, Hambantota in Sri Lanka, Chittagong in Bangladesh and other naval bases in an attempt to surround India. This Chinese tactic of surrounding India and making India vulnerable to attack from all the directions, is popularly known as 'String of Pearls Policy'! In addition to this China is trying to spread its sphere of influence in Indian Ocean, particularly areas, which are considered as India's traditional zone of influence. It is evident that China has supported Pakistan against India continuously. Thus, to counter this offensive neighbourhood, India is in a need of a strong friend like US. There has never been a greater need for mutual cooperation between the United States and India and it is going to be a well deserved  strategic relationship for both the countries.

Increasing relevance of India as an influential force in global politics, has become pretty digest for China. To divert the attention of India China is using Pakistan and creating tensions at the borders of India! China's stand over  over Arunachal Pradesh made Indo-China relations further complicated. India gave shelter to Dalai Lama, despite of China's opposition and other issues added to the tension. India is slowly coming out of 'diplomatic reservedness' and looks more confident than ever. It is not surprising, even if India planned a joint strategic plan with America against China. 

There are some limitations for full pledged diplomatic relations of the US and India. In the past, the differences of opinion between the US and India, as well as the Indian stand over some arrangements of international system, resulted in US sanctions imposed on India. Today, these sanctions are restricting American technology transfer to India and higher level of defence co-operation between these countries. US has to set right some of the paper works regarding this and this process has already begun to develop cooperation with India. As American foreign policy experts keen to develop diplomatic ties with India, Asia-Pacific geopolitics opened new opportunities to contain China and also sting Pakistan for its mischief.

(This article was published in Central Chronicle News paper on 18 January 2017)

      KEERTHIRAJ (prof.keerthiraj@gmail.com)

      

International Relations and Political Science

Alliance University, Bengaluru

NEPAL REGIME CHANGE: NEW HOPE IN INDO-NEPAL TIES

We can’t neglect the role of neighboring countries in the success of Indian foreign policy. Specially, a Nepali government more interested towards China, always be a prime danger for India’s regional interest and security.

-          Keerthiraj

(Assistant Professor in Alliance University)

The Himalayan country Nepal is once again going through political transition. Pushpa Kamal Dahal, popularly known as Prachanda was elected as the Prime Minister of Nepal, replacing Khadga Prasad Oli.  This is for the second time Prachanda will be serving as the Prime Minister of Nepal. A new ray of hope emerged in India- Nepal relations with this change in the politics of Nepali politics. Since last year, India and Nepal diplomatic relations has been in a state of confusion and decline. But newly elected Nepali PM Prachanda took some rational decisions to correct the mistakes of past and sent special envoys to India and China.

India and Nepal are more than just neighboring countries. They have much reason to remain as close allies and this is proved by history. Since decades, India’s concern and commitments towards Nepali defense elevated Indo-Nepal relations to higher levels. Of course Nepal is a landlocked country, but in a true sense it is Indian land locked country as it shares most of the boundaries with India. On the other hand, Himalayan mountain range including the great Mount Everest separates Nepal from China. Even during crises times India was there with Nepal like an elder brother. When Nepal suffered a continuous Maoist war since 1996, only Indian interference convinced Maoist party and other national parties to end the war with 12 points agreement in 2004. But everything went wrong when Nepal adopted a new constitution on 19th September 2015. Nepal government and the new constitution neglected the protests of Madeshi, Tharu and other ethnical communities living in border areas. India also raised serious concerns about these ethnic issues.

Madeshi community has a distinct cultural identity and it is clear that they are excluded by Nepali mainstream society. Madeshis’ hope about new constitution perished like a moth! Boundary lines of Madeshi provinces, citizenship problems of Madeshis left unaddressed.  New constitution of Nepal became deaf and dumb to the problems of Madeshi community. The supreme text of the nation remains silent regarding political and cultural hegemony of mainstream Nepali society over their own people living in border areas. Nepali political elites also sidelined the major demand of this oppressed community. Naturally India backed the movement of Madeshis and advised the government of Nepal to rectify the mistakes of new constitution. This moral responsibility of India was intentionally misinterpreted and misunderstood by Nepal leaders. Then Nepali Prime Minister Khadga Prasad Oli chose China for his first foreign visit, it became crystal clear that both symbolically and practically Nepal avoided India.

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi openly condemned new Nepali constitution. And a series of statements by Indian Ministry of External affairs backed the opinion of Modi. Later days witnessed dark period of Indo-Nepal relations including an Indian blockade against Nepal, Chinese hold over Nepal etc. While unofficial Indian blockade against Nepal continued, Nepal faced an earthquake. During this natural disaster, again India extended helping hands to Nepal in the name of ‘Operation Maitri’.  Unfortunately, some considered this humanitarian effort by India as an attempt to establish hegemony in Nepal. Even Nepali government held the same view and disrespected moral interest of India.

Indian diplomats and strategy experts worried when a traditional ally of India continuously lurching towards China. We can’t neglect the role of neighboring countries in the success of Indian foreign policy. Specially, a Nepali government more interested towards China, always be a prime danger for India’s regional interest and security. No one can deny the possibility of China using Nepal to achieve domination in South Asia. We should remember China already has doors to South Asian politics through Pakistan. 2014 China (an observer in SAARC) tried to push its interest to be a permanent member state in SAARC through Nepal!

Recent political developments in Nepal removed Khadga Prasad Oli from power and established Pushpa Kamal Dahal (Prachanda) as Prime Minister. Newly elected PM of Nepal sent Deputy PM Bimalendra Nidhi as a special envoy to India. This is tactical step taken by Prachanda to reestablish lost relations of India and Nepal. During his visit to India Nidhi expressed Prachanda’s view that development of Nepal is not possible without Indian cooperation and a positive response from Indian PM Modi shows Indo- Nepal Relations are back on track. Nidhi, himself is a Madeshi assured to respect India’s concerns towards Madeshi problems.

Since 2014 the focus of Indian foreign policy is its neighborhood.  Even though in Sri Lanka and Bangladesh, India’s foreign policy achieved notable success, Nepal remained as an exception since last year. Now once again with the leadership of Prachanda, there is an attempt to reestablish this prime relation. Prachanda will serve as the PM of Nepal for the next 9 months. After that Sher Bahaddur Deuba will succeed Prachanda according to the coalition compromises. Fortunately, even Sher Bahaddur Deuba expressed his views in favor of better indo- Nepal relations. These developments ignited a new hope in the relations of these two South Asian traditional partners.

 KEERTHIRAJ (krj492@gmail.com)

·   Currently serving as an Assistant Professor for International Relations and Political Science at Alliance University, Bangalore. 

      (This article was published in Central Chronicle newspaper on 3 September 2016)

BHAGAT SINGH: A FORGOTTEN POLITICAL THINKER

Bhagat Singh, a well-remembered revolutionary. But his struggle was not mere anti-colonial or anti-British, his aim was to free the human kind from the chains of exploitation and mental slavery.

- Keerthiraj

Bhagat Singh along with Rajguru and Sukhdev were hanged to death on 23^rd March 1931. Every year 23^rd March is observed as Martyrs’ day in honour of these revolutionary heroes. Present day India is well aware of heroic rebel activities of Bhagat Singh. But most of the other talents and messages given by the great hero, were forgotten! Today human kind needs Bhagat singh’s values. Otherwise we are going to pay high price for ignoring Bhagat Singh. It is not about remembering a day, but a bad memory can cost a lot in our future. Bhagat was not only a revolutionary, but also a great political thinker, who thought and wrote about Socialism, religion, caste, untouchability and other social issues of contemporary South Asia.

Today India is in an intellectual turmoil. Fake socialism and self-declared intellectuals are busy in leading India towards wrong directions. A proper study on Bhagat’s writings can be a panacea to most of the confusions and problems faced by Indian subcontinent. Those writings revealed Bhagat in different shades. At once as a political thinker of modern India, as a great teacher of revolution, as a sensitive journalist, who cared about the system. Bhagat’s struggle was not mere anti-colonial or anti-British, his aim was to free the human kind from the chains of exploitation and mental slavery. For example in 1928 Bhagat wrote two articles in a magazine called ‘Keerthi’. First article ‘Achoot Ka Saval’ speaks about the problems of untouchability, and the second article ‘Sampradayik Dange Aur Unka Ilaj’ deals with communal violence and possible solutions. Recent studies and researches on Bhagat’s writings, proved him as a mature political thinker. Professor Chaman Lal, an expert in Bhagat Singh studies, tried to show light on mature political thoughts of Bhagat. Most of the letters written by Bhagat were lost and some of them intentionally suppressed! Bhagat Singh was not a blind revolutionary, he had supreme ideals within him. Here I wish to mention about four selected letters, which I think interesting.

Two letters written by Bhagat in 1931, regarding the case of Mr. Harikrishnan. Harikrishnan was a young revolutionary, who was facing charges that he attempted to kill the governor of Punjab. Harikrishnan’s father, one among rich and influential personalities of that time, tried to save his son from the punishment. Defence lawyer tried to save Harikrishnan by arguing that his client had no intension to kill the governor and he only wanted to warn! But this move from the defence lawyer was severely criticized by Bhagat Singh. According to Bhagat every statement given by revolutionaries must be supportive to the goal of revolutionary activity. Statement by Harikrishnan’s defence lawyer acted in such a way that whole idea of revolution failed. Bhagat Singh suggested an alternative argument in the case, aim of revolutionary is not to kill an individual, but there is no other way to overcome the problems of the exploitative system. Individual losses are inevitable in the way towards liberation. Bhagat wanted not only bombs and guns but also defence arguments, and even the death of revolutionary should become the tools of revolution.

Another letter written by Bhagat Singh to his father. During Bhagat’s jail days, his father, Sardar Kishan singh sent a written request to the tribunal to save his son from death sentence and argued that his son is innocent and he has no role in Saunder’s murder. When Bhagat heard this attempt by his father, Bhagat criticized his father very harshly in a letter. In that letter it is very clear that Bhagat had no intention to offer defence in the court. Bhagat wanted his death and sacrifice should become inspiration to further revolution. In spite of great respect towards his father’s contribution to Indian freedom movement, Bhagat consider the request letter sent by his father as a worst type of weakness crueller than back stabbing. Thus Bhagat shows a great integrity in his ideals, even though he had chances to escape from punishment.

The most interesting, at least for me is the letter by Bhagat to another great revolutionary Sukhdev. Comrade Sukhdev was waiting for the judgement of the tribunal and he was quite sure that punishment would be life sentence. The very idea that spending his life time in jail was irritating to Sukhdev. So Sukhdev wrote to Bhagat, He is ready to death sentence or immediate release. But in case of Life sentence, it is better to suicide. As a response Bhagat wrote a letter to Sukhdev. This letter by Bhagat is a must read to everyone. In this letter Bhagat realises his friend that only throwing bomb is not revolution. But accepting punishment and sufferings are also the major part of revolution and real meaning of revolution lies in it.

Bhagat not only wrote about revolution, his writings on Marxism, Anarchism, Atheism and other social issues are also serious attempts to review political and social issues of South Asia. It is regrettable that we and our education system narrowed the personality of Bhagat to a mere young rebel.

  

 KEERTHIRAJ (krj492@gmail.com)

·   Currently serving as a Faculty for International Relations and Political Science at Alliance University, Bangalore. 

      (This article was published in Central Chronicle on 23 March 2016)

POWER POLITICS BEHIND INDO-CHINA MARITIME CONFLICT

India has also started forming counter-strategy against the “String of Pearls policy”. India’s counter is based on Chanakya’s principle of ‘The enemy's enemy is our friend’

- Keerthiraj

At the very outset, Asia's two giant neighbors, India and China have maintained peaceful diplomatic relations in pursuit of their economic and trade policies in the global level. This cautious politics played by both the countries made us to feel like everything is right between these two Asian giants. However, political and military strategists of both the countries agreed that the real situation is entirely different than this seemingly plausible politics. Indo-China war of 1962, still haunting both the countries like cinder covered with ash. In addition, growing role and influence of the two Asian giant neighbors in world politics may lead to a clash of interest in Asian continent.

There are already a huge problem of border disputes between India and China. Ranging from Arunachal Pradesh up to Aksai Chin created a tug of war between India and China. In addition to these traditional issues, the latest developments maritime politics is gaining more importance. Rising interests of both the countries in South China Sea and Indian Ocean made these two countries potential competitors in indo-pacific region. China is claiming its authority over South China Sea based on a map, belongs to nationalist China of early 1940s! China is currently busy with installing missiles in the disputed Woody Island. China seized these disputed islands from South Vietnam in 1974. Again, in 1988, the Chinese navy sunk three Vietnamese boats and 70 men killed in a clash over the islands. It is nothing but a clear attempt to show Chinese dominance over the South China Sea.

Vietnam and other small East Asian countries are in direct confrontation with Chinese intensions in South China Sea. In this struggle against China, United States of America and its regional allies such as Australia, Japan, South Korea and Philippines back Vietnam. Strategic interests of United Sates of in the region and the international liberal values ​​like freedom of navigation etc. pulled US into this region. India's foreign policy in favour of free and open navigation in South China Sea, in a way supplements American policy. Naturally China felt annoyed by this posture taken by India. This conflict of interests proved India and China have the potential to be enemies. On the other hand, India's investment in Vietnam’s oil deposits, as well as Indian Navy’s tie-ups with the US, Japan and Vietnam’s naval forces to maintain regional interest will be hard for China to push around. Furthermore, India enjoys a traditional moral influence over this region. Moreover, recent trends suggests, East Asian countries are ready to consider India as a strong regional Big Brother and seeking to reduce the influence of China.

During the war of 1962, China achieved a decisive victory over India. Most of the strategic thinkers opine, even though China was in a decisive position, People’s Liberation Army of China (PLA) never rushed to conquer India, because by that time China did not had a strong navy and Indian Navy enjoyed supreme position in Indian Ocean! So the war was limited to Indo-China borders in North. But, today's situation is much more different than that of 1962. At present China established naval bases and ports at Gwadar in Pakistan, Chittagong of Bangladesh, Hambantota of Sri Lanka and China is in a dominant position to control many other naval bases. In a way China surrounded India with the help of these naval bases. Foreign policy analysts named it as "String of Pearls policy”! If any armed conflict happened between India and China, definitely China will use these naval bases against India and to sting India from different ways. Political analyst Prem Shekhar rightly renamed “String of Pearls policy” as “String of Stings policy”!

India has also started forming counter-strategy against the “String of Pearls policy”. India’s counter is based on Chanakya’s principle of ‘The enemy's enemy is our friend’(Mandala theory of Chanakya) Indian diplomacy is already successful in gaining the confidence of anti-China powers like Japan, Australia, Vietnam and other countries, which have disputes with China. Even though India can’t expect a direct help from US against China, we should remember US interests are also largely anti-China!  In addition to all this, the most advanced indigenous ballistic missile submarine 'INS Arihant' joined the family of Indian Navy. This lethal submarine created horrors in the minds of anti-Indian naval forces! It carries 12 indigenous K15 Sagarika missiles with a range of 435 miles or four nuclear tipped ballistic missiles with a range of 2,200 miles. 'INS Arihant' is really going be a Hantak (destroyer) of Ari (enemy) and the protector of India’s maritime security.

  

 KEERTHIRAJ (keerthiraj886@gmail.com)

·   Currently serving as a Faculty for International Relations and Political Science at Alliance University, Bangalore. 

      (This article was published in Central Chronicle on 2 March 2016)

JNU ROW AND THE SURROUNDING FARCE

These kinds of farces are major deathblow for the movements of really depressed classes. This intrigue of illegitimating the genuine revolutions, is really dishonesty not just to the nation but also to the society.

- KEERTHIRAJ

“Every child, at birth, is the universal man. But, as it grows, we turn it into ‘a petty man’. It should be the function of the education to turn it again into the original ‘universal man’ ”. These lines are the translation of the worldview given by Great Kannada poet and Thinker Kuppalli Venkatappa Puttappa, popularly known by the pen name Kuvempu. These enlightening lines of Kuvempu are not only applicable for Indian context, but also to the all social, religious, political and cultural institutions and personalities involved in it all over the world. Academic field is also not an exception. Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) issue and the debate surrounded over that issue is nothing but an example to turn the universal man into ‘a petty man’. Recent arguments and the drastic turnovers in this debate are completely misguiding and misleading common man and ignoring the real vicious circle of this problem. India’s Self-proclaimed intellectuals dangerously, neglecting the crucial and probable threat to country's internal as well as external security.

Image Source: en.wikipedia.org

The JNU controversy slowly, if not turned, at least showcased into as a between Left wing and Right wing people. With this farce, basic questions of both the Left and Right remained unanswered! Yes, it is our first mistake to see this issue with the light of ‘Marxist’ Left ideologies. The very purpose of this attempt is a betrayal not only to the nation, but to the society too. Fundamental question here is what made these people to raise anti-India slogans? India provided not only food and shelter, but also constitution, rights and also universities like JNU with the freedom to protest! However, what instigated the group to raise anti-India Declaration? On the other hand, one more argument considered these anti-India slogans are mere false accusation. Further complicating the issue is the attack on JNU students and journalists in the premises of the Court. Some ABVP student leaders resigned from their positions, expressing their dissatisfaction with the mismanagement of the whole issue by Central government. These internal developments are posing threat to the national integrity and defense, more than external enemies. This incident is a serious challenge for Indian consciousness.

Public debates are busy with blaming universities and some others accusing it as a plot of saffronisation. No one questioned or at least thought why these universities are becoming the producers of such disputes? Nowhere, we can find illiterate people disturbing the social peace, but the problems are created by so called learned people, who read extensively from Marx to Amartya Sen, Ambedkar to Vivekananda, Mahatma Gandhi to Netaji. These agitations achieved only social barriers rather than social emancipation. Famous philosopher and statesman Edmund Burke opined, “Those who don't know history are doomed to repeat it.” Unfortunately we are repeating historical mistakes again and again. Yes, even if you believe all our universities and students are influenced by left-wing Marxist ideology, they can’t defend these irrational activities. This shows they are not even comfortable and fit into the domain of Marxism.

The number of students and professors responsible for this controversy do not even form one percentage of total student community. But the situation is portraying this group as the representatives of whole academic community. These kinds of farces are major deathblow for the movements of really depressed classes. This intrigue of illegitimating the genuine revolutions, is really dishonesty not just to the nation but also to the society. Students have the right to protest against the injustices.  Every class, race, and each individual has provided with equal space to protest in Indian democracy. However, the misuse of this freedom represents a fool sitting on the wrong end of the branch of a tree and cutting the branch he was sitting on!

  

      

KEERTHIRAJ (krj492@gmail.com)

·       Currently serving as a Faculty for International Relations and Political Science at Alliance University, Bangalore. 

      (This article was published in Central Chronicle newspaper on 24 February 2016)

A SPECTER HAUNTING SIACHEN

We should look into the broad political dynamics of South Asian politics for a clear picture about Siachen problem. Demilitarization of this may be a direct invitation to China to attack this land.

- KEERTHIRAJ

Whole India mourned the death of brave warrior Hanumanthappa Koppada and his 9 associates in Siachen avalanche. Meanwhile the debate of demilitarizing Siachen glacier reopened with new rigor. Siachen is not only world’s highest battlefield but also the most dangerous one. To date Siachen avalanche swallowed the lives of more than 2000 Indian and Pakistani soldiers and also caused permanent disability to some soldiers. Each moment spending in Siachen is nothing more than losing your lifespan slowly!

Image Source: indianexpress.com

When United Nations declared ceasefire for Indo-Pak war in 1949, Pakistan already occupied one third of Kashmir and named that region as Azad Kashmir (Free Kashmir) and India considered the same area Pakistan occupied Kashmir (POK). Then based on NJ9842 ceasefire line was identified. Later, the Simla Agreement of 1972, the Ceasefire line became the Line of Control (LOC). Twelve years later in 1984 Indian army received intelligence information that Pakistani army was planning to capture Saltoro ridge and it provoked Indian army to conquer this mountain range in advance. Pakistan's army has expressed deep dissatisfaction about this attempt of Indian army. Since then, Siachen is victimizing both Indian and Pakistani soldiers without discrimination. On the other hand demand for demilitarizing Siachen is also not a new phenomenon.

Two military powers of South India, instead of contributing towards regional stability, suffering huge losses because of Siachen issue made both India and Pakistan to suffer huge losses. According to the military strategic experts of both countries, this region can hardly relevant for strategic aspirations of both India and Pakistan. The huge resources being spent by both the countries on this area is sheer waste of money and time. Thus, according to most of the strategic experts demilitarizing the area is a better option and profitable for both the sides. First debate in this regard initiated during Rajiv Gandhi regime for the first time. In 1997, Inder Gill, a prominent General of the Indian army in his article, opined that both the countries wasting their precious resources on this strategically irrelevant region. He further suggested India should withdraw army immediately and unilaterally without expecting anything from Pakistani side! In 2012, Pakistani General Kayani also expressed his willingness to demilitarize this area, after 130 Pakistani soldiers were killed in a natural casualty. History proves, it is not the first time demilitarization of Siachen debate has emerged. 

However, because of some obvious reasons, India is not ready to give up its control over the Siachen area. Indian army is not ready to lose its hold over the area, which it conquered after facing enormous losses. Undoubtedly, the root of Siachen problem is traditional rivalry between India and Pakistan. It is evident that Pakistan showed so much of interest to capture Siachen, even during Kargil war. Withdrawal of Indian army directly provides an opportunity to Pakistan to establish links with Chinese dominated Aksai Chin. According to India's retired Maj Gen Dhruv Katoch, Director of the Indian Army’s think tank Centre for Land Warfare Studies (CLAWS) Dhruv Katoch, we should look into the broad political dynamics of South Asian politics. Further, major General Dhruv warned, demilitarization of this area is a direct invitation to China to attack this land. Even if Pakistan showed interest to withdraw its army, but India learnt so many lessons from history and it is difficult to trust Pakistan. India has to take a middle path, instead of demilitarizing Siachen, we should think about modernizing our defense and new plans to standardize operations of our soldiers.  

        KEERTHIRAJ (krj492@gmail.com)

·   Currently serving as a Faculty for International Relations and Political Science at Alliance University, Bangalore. 

     

   (This article was published in Central Chronicle newspaper on 17 February 2016)