Shift in India’s Approach Towards its Neighbors was Short-lived
The most formidable
obstacle to the South Asian regional integration process has been
pre-occupation of the states with a state-centric approach to security. In the
initial years since South Asian Association of Regional Cooperation (SAARC)
came into existence in 1985, India hesitated to get actively involved in the
regional forum as it believed the group was intended to be a platform for smaller
powers to gang up against India given the initial move for establishing the
South Asian regional grouping was made in January 1980 in the in the context of
the Soviet military intervention in Afghanistan and the US and Pakistani
resolve to resist the intervention.
The Gujral doctrine,
propounded by the former Minster of External Affairs I.K. Gujral in 1996 who
later became Indian Prime Minister, was a response to address an atmosphere of
distrust that characterized India’s relationship with its neighbors for long
starting from India’s unequal treaties with Nepal and Bhutan keeping the
protectorate arrangements of British India intact under Nehru’s leadership to
the evolution of Indira doctrine designed to keep the external powers out of
the South Asian region and compel the neighbors to seek India’s assistance to
resolve their problems onto Rajiv Gandhi’s commitment to follow Indira doctrine
to its conclusion by intervening in Sri Lankan civil war.
The doctrine marked a
departure from India’s earlier obsession with keeping the region within its
orbit of influence to an inclination for non-interference and non-reciprocity.
For instance, India stopped intervening in neighboring states’ foreign policy
decisions that was previously considered crucial to India’s security. For
instance, India did not contest Sri Lanka’s arms purchase from Pakistan. The
principle of non-reciprocity which demanded unilateral positive gesture from
India to maintain neighborly relations irrespective of the capacity of other
small states to reciprocate allowed India to gradually convert existing
treaties with neighbours into free-trade agreements.
However, euphoria
surrounding the Gujral doctrine subsided quickly, as the Chinese footprint in
the region became more pronounced and likelihood of China-Pakistan axis in the
region became palpable to India’s foreign policy makers. New Delhi began to
view regional developments from a military security driven perspective instead
of pushing for regional integration.
The perception and
narrative of Chinese threat has been built around many developments such as
India’s defeat in the 1962 border war which was considered a breach of trust
and violation of the spirit of ‘Panchasheela Agreement’ signed between the two
countries, continuous Chinese supply of arms and nuclear technology to Pakistan
irrespective of India’s concerns, Beijing’s flexing of muscle in its
neighborhood, occupation of Tibet and expansionist territorial claims by
portraying Arunachal Pradesh-an Indian territory as part of China and its
palpable intrigue in its unwillingness to disrupt its ally Rawalpindi’s alleged
connection with religious radical groups for instance, New Delhi’s move to
question Islamabad and seek UN Security Council sanctions against Hizbul
Mujahideen Chief Syed Salahuddin, the mastermind of the Mumbai attacks, was
blocked by Beijing.
India’s Military Strategy and the Region
The lesson that India
learnt since 1962 border war was its lack of conventional military ability to
take on China. India has ever since more focused on developing its military
capacity by modernizing and investing larger portion of its budget towards
defence preparedness.
As per data on arms
transfers released by Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI),
arms imports by India increased by 24% between 2008-12 and 2013-17 periods.
More intriguingly, the data project India as the world’s largest arms importer
accounting for 12% of the total global imports for the period 2013-17. It is
very much clear that India’s defence preparedness is directed more towards
China than Pakistan over which India already enjoys military superiority.
However, what is
glossed over in this strive for military build-up is that India is continuously
bleeding as a result of growing instances of cross-border terrorism and
proxy-wars which cannot be contained let alone wiped out by its increasing
conventional military capacity. Outcomes of a 74-day long military stand-off
between India and China in Doklam located on the strategic tri-junction of
Bhutan, China and India went in favor of India as both China and India not only
agreed to return to their previous position, Beijing stopped its road
construction activities in the area. While this action pointed to India’s
military resolve to insulate the South Asian region from Chinese territorial
incursion, this has also fed into the narrative that India needs to continue to
strengthen and modernize itself militarily not only to avoid a humiliating
defeat of 1962, it would also be able to deter China from making military
inroads into the South Asian region.
India’s Perception of Looming Chinese Threat in the South Asian
Region
India perceived a
greater threat from Chinese foray into the South Asian region than threats
emanating from Pakistan in the form of terrorism and proxy wars. Many Indian
leaders and experts expressed their concerns regarding Chinese inroads into the
region and a parliamentary committee report on external affairs noted “China is
making serious headway in infrastructure projects in our neighborhood…..the
Indian government is committed to advancing its development partnership with
Bhutan and Nepal, as per their priorities”.
Experts on Security
Affairs furnished a geopolitical theory on Chinese foray into the region known
as ‘String of Pearls’ strategy in academic literature. While Beijing uses
catchphrases like ‘One Belt One Road’, Silk Road and Maritime Silk Road project
to emphasize its economic thrust and regional necessity, India perceives a
threat of ‘encirclement’ in the Chinese move. The Chinese project has already
taken off in the form of construction of roads, railways and air ports in
landlocked Nepal to creation of ports, bridges and airport facilities in
Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and the Maldives.
What makes India’s
concerns look more genuine is roads, railways, bridges and ports can be used
for dual purposes – civil and military. There may be ulterior military
objectives underlying Chinese mega connectivity project which cannot be denied
only on the basis of official declarations from Beijing. These threats are
getting more pronounced when India, under Modi’s leadership and in line with
his ‘neighborhood first’ policy, played a leading role in the deliberations of
the 18th SAARC Summit held at Kathmandu on November 26-27, 2015 to strengthen
the regional integration process, his proposals for having three agreements on
road, rail and power (electricity) connectivity not only invited tough
resistance from Pakistan as was expected, most of his unilateral gestures were
viewed with skepticism in the region. Moreover, the South Asian countries
including Pakistan, Nepal, Sri Lanka and the Maldives expressed their
willingness to induct China from an ‘observer’ status since 2007 to full
membership in SAARC.
India’s Non-Military Response to Chinese Threat Perceptions
Due to its
long-standing political and cultural penetration in the neighborhood, India
believed it could manipulate internal political and cultural conditions within
neighbors to foster its influence and undercut nascent Chinese foray into the
region.
It kept anchoring
certain political parties to maintain its dominance in the region, increased
the amount of aid and extended lines of credit and quickly responded to
humanitarian disasters in the region such as Tsunami affected South Asian
countries – Maldives and Sri Lanka in 2006, earthquake affected Pakistan in
2005 and Nepal in 2015, relief assistance for Rohingya refugees to mitigate
humanitarian crisis in Bangladesh 2017.
However, the nature of
the assistance that India extended to its neighbors was bilateral and driven
more by India’s concerns related to Chinese growing investment and influence in
the region than any desire for removing the barriers to regional integration.
The South Asian Neighbors’ Security Perception
The neighbors while
perceived threat to their sovereignty and territorial integrity from India’s
neighborhood policy for long and many times took the form of resentment and
statements suggesting India not to interfere in their internal affairs, China,
a relatively new player in the region has not been viewed from this
perspective.
As a result, the small
South Asian countries either used the Chinese card to dissuade India from
embarking on a robust regional policy or they allowed China a bigger role in
the economic development and modernization of the countries. China’s mega
connectivity project ‘OBOR’ received warm welcome from the small states as they
saw a huge development potential from the initiative and some expressed their
willingness to see China as a full member of SAARC.
While such pro-China
gestures in the neighborhood is not seen favourably by India, small states are
hard-pressed to walk a cautious path given India’s deep economic, political and
cultural penetration in the region much before China’s entry. The Sri Lankan
leadership, for instance, quickly responded to India’s security concerns on
Chinese maritime strategy around Hambantota port facilities and made it clear
that Beijing would limit its activities to commercial development of the port
and no maritime strategies would be allowed.
When the Indian Prime
Minister Modi made a visit to Nepal in May 2018, he received warm welcome from
the communist leadership there despite recent history of animosity arising out
of Nepalese accusations of India’s political interference in Nepal in the
process of new Constitution-making and the irritant of economic blockade.
Despite Bangladeshi regime’s invitation to China for infrastructural
development, it turned to the Indian government for putting pressure on the
government of Myanmar to take back Rohingyas in order to defuse the
humanitarian crisis.
India’s Fixation with Chinese Threat is more Imaginary than Real
Notwithstanding the
Doklam standoff, a war or direct military confrontations between the two
countries is unlikely given the shifts in regional and global power
configurations since 1962. The outcomes of the stand-off indicated India’s
ability to project its power in the neighborhood cannot be challenged without
serious risks.
India is not only a
nuclear power, it has developed its conventional military capacities and naval
presence to an extent which may not be to the proportion of projecting its
power beyond the region but can defend the region. The Indo-US strategic
relationship, India’s naval cooperation with Japan and Australia in the Indian
Ocean along with the US can go a long way in tearing apart the ‘String of
Pearls’ strategy of China. China’s foray into the South Asian region is of
comparatively recent origin, while India has already deep socio-political and
economic penetration into the region.
India enjoys a
geostrategically better location to project its power in its immediate
neighborhood and in the Indian Ocean than China. Perhaps, for all these
reasons, India’s neighbors while resent its interference in their internal
affairs, they remain vigilant to India’s security concerns and allow China a
role limited to infrastructure development. Apart from this, the large volume
of trade between India and China precludes the possibility of armed
confrontation because that would not only sabotage existing trade and
investment, prospects for trade relations would get suspended for an indefinite
period.
China, which is
predominantly an export-driven economy, has not only flooded the South Asian
markets with cheap products, it has moved a large amount of capital in the
shape of concessional loans to the South Asian countries for infrastructural
project. The flip side of these projects is that when loans accrue without
timely repayments these turn into debt-burden for the South Asian countries.
The projects ensure
not only the Chinese companies are engaged in the infrastructure development
works; all the raw materials and products necessary for the works are imported
from China. When a South Asian country expresses its inability to repay loans,
attempts were made to acquire land on lease as the Sri Lankan experience
exemplifies. The Sirisena government of Sri Lanka leased out land to China for
99 years, under debt pressure, for the development of Hambantota port which
aroused resentment from different quarters of the country. Pakistan, Nepal and
the Maldives, on a few occasions, objected to the terms, conditions, negligence
of local economy and modus-operandi of the projects. While the Chinese projects
involve a huge amount of movement of capital, these may backfire in the
long-run.
On the other hand,
India’s aid to the South Asian countries is of lesser amount but they are
targeted towards sectors like housing and railways with greater impact on local
population.
According a World Bank
report, around 5 million South Asian migrant workers in India sent more than
$7.5 billion back to their home in the form of remittances in 2014; in the same
year only 20 thousand South Asian workers in China sent a meager amount of $107
million back home. These statistics drive home the point that India’s economy
and that of the South Asian neighbors is more organically inter-linked due to
socio-cultural and geographical reasons than their economic linkages with the
China’s export driven economy. Due to stronger economic linkages, India’s
growth has a ripple effect on the South Asian countries.
For all these reasons,
India should engage with its neighbors as a confident power and play a major
role in the regional integration process instead of looking at the region from
a security perspective. Many a times, its neighborhood policies largely
dictated by a security perspective has led it to meddle in the internal affairs
of the countries much to their chagrin.
South Asia: A Region of Hope and Despair
South Asia remains a
region hope because it is the fastest growing region and shows prospects of
further growth as findings of a recently released World Bank report indicated.
Notwithstanding this optimistic note, the Bank’s chief economist for South Asia
Martin Rama observed “the acceleration of growth that we see in the region is
not necessarily that all countries are doing much better…..but given the size
of India, India’s bouncing back is driving the growth”.
What this statement
implied is as the negative fall outs of Demonetization and Goods and Services
Tax (GST) policies in India gradually settled, it induced the regional growth
to the top of the order given India’s size, population and remittances that
migrant population of the South Asian countries generated. The average growth
rate of other South Asian countries were below 6 per cent.
Despite registering
robust growth rate, India is still facing serious challenges from all the
non-conventional threats that affect others in the region. The primary reasons
for this have been uneven distribution of resources within India and lack of
regional and sub-regional integration within South Asia. Even achievement of a
modest level of regional integration has the possibility of not only inducing
growth rates, it can steer the South Asian economies towards inclusive growth
by opening up larger market, keeping the rates of products low and providing
different access points to avail health and education services. So far as the
regional integration is concerned, South Asia provides a gloomy picture as it
is one of the least integrated regions with intraregional trade accounting for
only around 5% per cent of total South Asian trade.
India and its
neighbors are fixated on state-centric or conventional threat perceptions as
they see the source of threats to their sovereignty and territorial integrity
only in powerful nations or in perceived aggressive moves of neighboring or
external powers within the South Asian region. It is no gainsaying the fact
that the region is home to many non-conventional threats like terrorism,
poverty, illiteracy, unemployment, underdevelopment and illicit trafficking of
people and drugs to name a few which can only be addressed through a
non-conventional security perspective, regional integration and cooperative
participation of extra-regional players in the regional attempts at handling
these issues.
No comments:
Post a Comment