"To us
all towns are one, all men our kin. |
Home | Whats New | Trans State Nation | One World | Unfolding Consciousness | Comments | Search |
India: an Empire in Denial 60 Years of Independence: India’s Foreign Policy
Challenges Shyam Saran Address at the Institute for South
Asian Studies, Singapore,
"...In the current international landscape,
there is only one country which has a truly global agenda and
also a global reach, which is the United States. However, there
is also a cluster of major powers with strong regional profiles
but increasingly global impact. These include the E.U., Russia,
China, Japan, India, Brazil and South Africa. While U.S.
pre-eminence is unlikely to be reversed in the foreseeable
future, the relative importance of the other major powers is
likely to increase. We are already in a world of what I would
call "asymmetric multipolarity" with the asymmetry progressively
diminishing over a period of time. India has an instinctive
preference for multipolarity and multipolarity globally implies
a multipolar Asia as well and this is a trend which is positive
from India’s standpoint as an emerging power... It is our
perception that the growing globalisation of the world economy,
and the consequent increase in interdependence and
interconnectedness among the major powers, makes it unlikely
that competition and tensions will be allowed to go beyond a
point, since the consequences would be negative for both sides.
On the other hand, there will be issues on which there could
well be coalitions of powers whose interests may be convergent
on specific issues." Comment by
tamilnation.org
Mr.Shayam Saran is right to point out the nature of the
asymmetric multi
lateral world in which we live and India's instinctive preference for multi
polarity. Again Mr.Saran is right to point out that "multipolarity
globally implies a multipolar Asia". But the reverse is not
true. A multipolar Asia does not imply multi polarity globally. The
US may well welcome a multipolar Asia as a way of securing its
own pre-eminence in a unipolar globe -
divide et
impera. In the 19th century, Great Britain secured global
pre-eminence by securing a balance of power amongst the
countries of Europe. And,
Thomas Friedman's reflections in the New York Times
Magazine on March 28, 1999 are not to be dismissed out of hand - "...As the country that benefits most from global
economic integration, we have the responsibility of making sure that
this new system is sustainable.. The hidden hand of the market will
never work without a hidden fist - McDonald's cannot flourish
without McDonnell-Douglas, the designer of the F-15. And the
hidden fist that keeps the world safe for Silicon Valley's
technologies is called the US Army, Air Force, Navy and Marine
Corps....The global system cannot hold together without an activist
and generous American foreign and defense policy. Without America
on duty, there will be no America Online..."
And some fifty years before Friedman,
George Kennan,
Director of Policy Planning of the U.S. Dept. of State sought to set the
stage for US Foreign policy in a
State Department Briefing in 1948 - "...we have about 50% of the world's wealth but only
6.3% of its population. This disparity is particularly great as
between ourselves and the peoples of Asia. In this situation, we
cannot fail to be the object of envy and resentment. Our real
task in the coming period is to devise a pattern of relationships
which will permit us to maintain this position of disparity
without positive detriment to our national security. To do so, we
will have to dispense with all sentimentality and day-dreaming; and
our attention will have to be concentrated everywhere on our
immediate national objectives. .. Said that,
it would have been helpful if
Mr.Saran had also addressed the enduring political reality of the
Fourth World
- nations without states - and their relevance in an 'asymmetric multi
lateral world' populated by states as well as nations without states. "Increasingly, the Fourth World is emerging as a new force in
international politics because in the common defense of their nations, many indigenous
peoples do not accept being mere subjects of international law and state sovereignty and
trusteeship bureaucracies. Instead, they are organizing and exerting their own
participation and policies as
sovereign peoples and nations." -
Bernard Q. Nietschmann
in Fourth World Nations: Conflicts and Alternatives It will be unfortunate if the words
of Bernard Nietschmann
quoted by Dr.Jeff Sluka in
National
Liberation Movements in Global Perspective in 1996, continue to reflect current
political reality - "The Third World has declared a geographic war on the Fourth World. This
global conflict is assisted by First and Second World states" It will be unfortunate because peoples speaking different languages,
tracing their roots to different origins, and living in
relatively well defined and separate geographical areas, will
not somehow 'melt'
away
- even with the 'growing globalisation of the world
economy'. Economic growth is not a panacea. And
resort to genocide or
attempted
assimilation by a dominant ethnie masquerading as a 'civic'
nation, will lead to resistance
and rebellion - and instability, an instability which will
render economic growth a vain dream. We need to pay more careful
attention to the words of
Arundhati Roy in her conversation with Shoma Chaudhury in
March 2007 - "... You don’t have to be a genius to read the signs. We have a growing
middle class, reared on a diet of radical consumerism and aggressive
greed. Unlike industrialising Western countries, which had colonies
from which to plunder resources and generate slave labour to feed
this process, we have to colonise ourselves, our own nether parts.
We’ve begun to eat our own limbs....What we’re witnessing is the most successful secessionist struggle
ever waged in independent India — the secession of the middle and
upper classes from the rest of the country. It’s a vertical
secession, not a lateral one. They’re fighting for the right to
merge with the world’s elite somewhere up there in the stratosphere..." An elitist, statist approach will lead to the stratosphere
and lose touch with the ground. And in a country of more than one billion
people, that may prove calamitous for those who seek to govern. Nothing is
static in this world. Shift happens. The
British empire is no more - though it bequeathed parts of its Indian empire
to a government in New Delhi. The Russian empire is no more. Instead we
have Lithuania, Lativia, Estonia, Ukraine, Belaraus, and Georgia amongst
others. India may want to recognise the force of reason
in something which Pramatha Chauduri
said more than 80 years ago in an article titled "Bengali
Patriotism": "...It is not a bad thing to try and weld many into one but to jumble
them all up is dangerous, because the only way we can do that is by force. If you say that
this does not apply to India, the reply is that if self determination is not suited to us,
then it is not suited at all to Europe. No people in Europe are as different, one from
another, as our people. There is not that much difference between England and Holland as
there is between Madras and Bengal. Even France and Germany are not that far apart... Just as there is a difference between the getting together of five
convicts in a jail and between five free men, so the Congress union of the various nations
of India and tomorrow's link between the peoples of a free country will be very different.
Indian patriotism will then be built on the foundation of provincial patriotism,
not
just in words but in reality."
A people's struggle for freedom
from alien rule (whether that alien rule is oppressive or benevolent), is a
nuclear energy and India may need to adopt a more 'principle centred' approach towards
struggles for self determination in the Indian region. The European Union serves
as an example. A myopic approach,
even apart from
anything else, may well encourage the very outside 'pressures' which New Delhi seeks
to control and manage, if not exclude. And, if India can grasp this, then,
the Buddha may have
cause to truly smile." [see also
Tamil Eelam
Struggle for Freedom: Aspects of the International Dimension - A
Power Point Presentation] I am delighted to join you all this morning at
the commemorative event organized by the Institute of South Asian
Studies to mark sixty years of Indian independence. This is a
commendable initiative, one particularly appropriate to Singapore
whose historical ties with us have become even closer in recent
years. Let me express, at the outset, my appreciation to Mr.
Gopinath Pillai, Chairman of ISAS, for organizing this Conference
and to Second Permanent Secretary Bilahari Kausikan, who has been
gracious enough to inaugurate it. 2. Sixty years ago, when India gained
independence, it joined the international community as a polity
fractured by the Partition and as an economy shattered by two
centuries of colonialism. The challenges that it faced were so
fundamental that they would have been daunting for even a seasoned
leadership. Only one which had so determinedly waged an independence
movement over half a century could have assumed the responsibilities
of governance so seamlessly and articulated a coherent national
agenda. It is not my intention to dwell on these domestic challenges
except in so far as they are relevant to the formulation of our
foreign and security policies. 3. There were three major constraints that India
faced on the foreign policy front in its early years. The first was
to undertake the internal political consolidation and the economic
reconstruction of India. The former process occupied the first
decade and the latter is still ongoing. The second, an inevitable
consequence of Partition, was a reduction in India’s size and reach.
There was not only a disruption of many of its historical
connectivities but an adversarial relationship with Pakistan which
arose from the circumstances of the Partition. The third constraint
was the structural rigidity in the international system emanating
from the Cold War which significantly circumscribed India’s freedom
to exercise choices as it set about the task of nation building.
Non-alignment was a response to this reality. Six decades later,
each one of these factors has in some measure, changed to our
advantage, leading to a more optimistic vision for India’s future.
4. Let me now focus on India’s political and
economic achievements since Independence and what these portend for
the future. Our consolidation as a national polity has been
impressive and no one really doubts India’s stability today. This is
important to state because that was not how international opinion
always perceived us. In the 1960s, for example, there was a
considerable body of analyses that predicted very alarming scenarios
arising out of the growth of regionalism. Our ability to reconcile
competing demands was also questioned, particularly during times of
economic difficulties. But today, there is a broad appreciation that
the Indian political ethos is accommodative of diversity and
respectful of federalism. Indeed, the inherently pluralistic culture
of India has actually provided the basis for the working of complex
coalitions at both central and state levels. 5. Similarly, internal contradictions and
differences – not unnatural in a large, varied and democratic
society – have often been misinterpreted. Observers unused to the
complexity of our socio-political matrix sometimes tend to believe
that this negatively affects the efficiency of our development
process. But if there is one lesson out of the last sixty years, it
is that the culture of debate that accompanies decision-making is
central to the management of the Indian political process. In many
ways, the world is revisiting the debates of ‘democracy versus
development’ and ‘pluralism versus homogeneity.’ India is
increasingly recognized for its successes in simultaneously building
an open society and an open economy. That, in itself, has
significant repercussions, as much for India as for the world. 6. This recognition may not have been as strongly
endorsed as it is today if India’s political achievements were not
matched by its economic success. An audience in Singapore needs no
convincing of the merits of our reforms, initiated 15 years ago. But
even more skeptical quarters have now come to accept that the
unleashing of energies in India and growth of our aspirations has
the most profound consequences for the global economy. The changes
in India itself are visible for all to see. A sustained 9% growth
rate is manifesting itself in growing incomes and rising demand.
Poverty levels in the last decade alone have declined significantly
in both urban and rural areas. Contrary to many expectations, Indian
business has proven its competitiveness as our economy integrates
with the world. 7. Against this backdrop, how does India see the
current global landscape from its own vantage point and what is its
perspective regarding its own role in Asia and the world? In the current international landscape, there is only one
country which has a truly global agenda and also a global reach,
which is the United States. However, there is also a cluster of
major powers with strong regional profiles but increasingly
global impact. These include the E.U., Russia, China, Japan,
India, Brazil and South Africa. While U.S. pre-eminence is
unlikely to be reversed in the foreseeable future, the relative
importance of the other major powers is likely to increase. We
are already in a world of what I would call "asymmetric
multipolarity" with the asymmetry progressively diminishing over
a period of time. India has an instinctive preference for
multipolarity and multipolarity globally implies a multipolar
Asia as well and this is a trend which is positive from India’s
standpoint as an emerging power. There is unlikely to be confrontation among the major
powers, even though there may be areas of competition and even
tension among them. It is our perception that the growing
globalisation of the world economy, and the consequent increase
in interdependence and interconnectedness among the major
powers, makes it unlikely that competition and tensions will be
allowed to go beyond a point, since the consequences would be
negative for both sides. On the other hand, there will be issues
on which there could well be coalitions of powers whose
interests may be convergent on specific issues. Examples of this
are the six-party talks on Korea and the P-5 + 1 initiative with
respect of Iran’s nuclear issue. In this loosely structured
concert of powers, India finds greater space for the pursuit of
its foreign policy objectives. The international agenda today is dominated, as never
before, by a number of significant cross-cutting issues that are
not amenable to national or regional solutions. They require
global responses and this itself would limit the scope for
competitive behaviour among major states. These cross-cutting
issues include terrorism, drug-trafficking, international crime,
global pandemics, environment to name a few. The participation
of large developing countries like India and China would be
imperative in seeking solutions to such issues, even as
multilateral institutions and multilateral approaches become
essential tools in confronting these challenges. India will be
increasingly engaged in playing a leading role both in the
creation of such global institutions and in the fashioning of
global approaches. While the current global landscape is characterized by the
emergence of a number of major powers, there is unmistakably a
shift in the center of gravity of global economy towards Asia
and with that the relative weight of Asia in global affairs. The
most obvious manifestation of this is of course the emergence of
both India and China as two dynamic, continental sized
economies, but also the continued expansion and maturation of
ASEAN economies, and the resumption of growth in Japan. How Asia
will manage this historic transformation will be critical to the
prospects for peace and prosperity both in our region and the
world. There is little doubt that India’s energies will be
focused to a considerable extent, in managing this
transformation and participating in the creation of new
political, security and economic architectures in our region.
Recent trends indicate that development will, in the future,
be increasingly knowledge-driven and technology-driven.
Countries that demonstrate strengths in innovation, in knowledge
creation and applications and have the demographic profile to
sustain growth over a period of time, will emerge in the front
ranks of the world in the next 30 to 50 years. India has
demonstrated strengths in this regard. It has a large and
growing corps of skilled and technical qualified manpower. IT is
an example. At the same time, it has a young population which
will ensure sustained growth over the next several decades. As technology and communications continue to shrink the
global neighbourhood and interaction among countries and peoples
grow in quantum leaps, the ability to handle and reconcile
diversities of ethnicity, religion, culture and language, is
what will distinguish successful societies. There will be a
natural tendency for plural democracies to seek proximity and
confront the intolerance and hostility generated in societies
unable to adapt to rapidly shifting winds of change. India is an
example of a successful, plural democracy, which has by and
large, been able to accommodate immense diversity within a
liberal political order. It is, therefore, well-positioned to
adapt to a more interconnected world. 8. In articulating an appropriate foreign policy
for the next couple of decades, it is the parameters detailed above
which would be the most relevant. There will be certain significant
elements of continuity. The objective of India’s foreign policy has
long been to expand its strategic space and strengthen the autonomy
of its decision - making. As a large and populous country, and heir
to a rich and ancient civilization, India has always had a sense of
its place in the world. The experience of colonial domination only
strengthened the zealousness with which its people safeguarded their
newly won independence. Non-aligned foreign policy was an expression
of this ethos and remains so today. What has changed is the context
in which this objective is sought to be pursued. 9. In terms of the parameters I have spelt out,
the contours of India’s current foreign policy begin to emerge with
a certain clarity. Divested of the bipolarity of the Cold War and
the rigidities of East-West confrontation, international relations
today offers India the opportunity to simultaneously pursue closer
engagement with the all the major powers; strengthening of relations
with one does not inevitably lead to diminishing returns on some
other front. It is possible today to think of flexible and shifting
coalitions of major powers to deal with a varied set of challenges.
For example, India is part of an India-Brazil-South Africa
arrangement called IBSA. It is a member of a Russia-China-India
trilateral and an observer at the Shanghai Corporation Organization,
even as it is comfortable pursuing a closer consultative
relationship in the quadrilateral format with the US, Japan and
Australia. India works together with the EU on issues of energy and
environment, but it is also willing to cooperate with the U.S.,
China, Japan, Australia and South Korea under the Asia-Pacific Clean
Development Partnership. India’s foreign policy is becoming
expansive, with an unprecedented degree of regional and global
engagement. The rapidity with which the country is becoming enmeshed
in a variety of regional and global networks is truly astonishing.
This trend towards more intense engagement with a globalised world
is likely to continue in the coming years. 10. Operating at all these levels naturally
require an integrated vision. A pre-requisite for a multi-polar
world, for example, will have to be a multi-polar Asia. Independence
of thought and action will remain a dominant feature of India’s
diplomacy into the future. Even when we were much weaker, India was
chary of being used by other powers. There is no cause for that to
change. Our approach remains to translate the achievements of one
relationship into gains in another. The record of the last few years
would bear this out. 11. The transformation in India’s ties with the
United States in recent years should be seen in this context. The US
is India’s largest trade, technology and investment partner, a home
to a successful Indian community and a large student body. Its value
to India lies particularly in its ability to shape global sentiment
on a wide range of issues. Our civilian nuclear energy understanding
is an appropriate example. Other countries have leveraged their
relationship with the US to accelerate their growth and there is no
reason why India should not do so. Stronger Indo-US ties not only
bring benefits to the two partners but contribute to regional and
global stability. They have also strengthened our hand in building
many other relationships across the world. 12. Our relationship with China has also expanded
noticeably during this very period. While our bilateral trade has
grown exponentially, the real story is the rapid broad-basing of our
interaction. Today, the two countries have established a commendable
record of exchanges in the political, security, economic and
cultural spheres. It is not always appreciated how much India and
China have in common. The world should expect to see us work together
on the many areas where our interests converge. I would stress that
the rise of China is a positive development in so far as India is
concerned. It encourages by example the growth of Indian
aspirations. Structurally, it compels the international system to
change at the very time when India too wishes to alter the status
quo to its advantage. Both Indian and Chinese leaders have
emphasized that there is enough room in Asia and the world for both
India and China to grow and that there is no fundamental conflict of
interest between the two. 13. Prime Minister Abe’s recent visit to India
has highlighted the change in India-Japan relations. This has been a
long time in coming. It is apparent that Japan now sees value in
going beyond those regions of Asia with which it had historical
familiarity. The scale of the economic partnership under
contemplation is impressive. We also share a vital interest in
ensuring security of maritime trade. 14. We have longstanding ties with Russia and
nations of the European Union which too have expanded along the
lines of our other major relationships. Russia remains a key
security partner, one with whom we also share strong political
interests. The engagement with Europe, of course, is dominated much
more by economic cooperation and the presence of a large Indian
community. 15. While our global engagement is expanding, it
is also true that this expansion is increasingly weighted in the
direction of Asia, particularly South-East Asia and the Far East.
All major indices e.g. growth of trade, investment, transport and
communications, point to India’s economic resurgence becoming an
integral component of the Asian growth story. India has now accepted
that its economic destiny is now firmly linked to its fuller
integration in the global economy. However, global integration will
come increasingly through greater connectivity and enmeshing with
the dynamic economies of South East Asia and East Asia. This is
precisely what is happening. There has been a steady evolution in
India’s Look East Policy – from a sectoral to a full dialogue
partner with ASEAN and the imminent prospect of an India-ASEAN Free
Trade Agreement. The East Asia Summit is an even broader canvas on
which such integration could be pursued. 16. India also believes that is cannot make a
true success of its economic integration with Asia, unless it is
able to realize such integration within South Asia itself. A
fractured South Asia would inevitably inhibit the larger process of
integration with the dynamic economies of South East Asia and East
Asia. Therefore, a major preoccupation of India’s foreign policy is
the pursuit of a peaceful neighbourhood in South Asia based on
shared prosperity. 17. As with India’s domestic prospects, the
outlook for the region too has improved as a result of economic
transformation. India’s emergence as a motor of economic growth has
opened up opportunities for all our neighbours. Already, its impact
is making itself felt on their economies. Those among them who
leveraged these possibilities to advance their interests have been
well rewarded. Sri Lanka, for example, has emerged as a major
logistical hub for peninsular India. It is also benefiting both as
an important investment and tourism destination for a more
prosperous India. In the north, Bhutan has significantly raised its
per capita income as a result of energy exports to India. In the
case of Myanmar, infrastructure projects have opened up new avenues
of cooperation which benefit both countries. Even with our other
neighbours, the expansion of our bilateral trade – including those
routed through third countries – has been noteworthy. Above all,
business communities across South Asia are increasingly aware that
this is a win-win situation and not a zero sum game. The challenge
that we face is to overcome entrenched suspicions and to raise
cooperation to a higher level. India will clearly have to take the
lead in providing incentives to overcome the old mindsets and our
approach at the SAARC Summit in New Delhi in April 2007 was
reassuring on that score. 18. Our relations with Pakistan deserve a special
mention as they have been the most intractable of our diplomatic
problems. Many of you perhaps would be surprised to learn how normal
our relationship has become since 2004 despite our continuing
differences on major issues. Sentiments of civil society have been
very much a driving force in this normalization process. Governments
have responded by creating a more helpful enabling environment.
Support by Pakistan for terrorism directed against India has long
been a particular obstacle to improved ties. The commitment made in
January 2004 to desist must be honoured if we are to progress.
There, however, seems to be a growing awareness in both countries in
recent years that our futures are closely inter-linked and that the
present impasse helps neither country. On the Indian side, our Prime
Minister has underlined our complete flexibility, short of
contemplating territorial changes. There has been a serious search
for a solution underway for some time now. Since a middle ground
does not exist, political ingenuity has to create one. A lowering of
tensions is obviously the basic pre-requisite to do so, followed by
as broad-based engagement as possible. We now have to see how
purposefully the two countries can move down a road that has never
been taken. A dilution in external interests that have perpetuated
the differences in South Asia would also be greatly helpful in that
context. 19. Some thoughts about our nuclear policy would
also be appropriate. Over the last six decades, an India that was a
vocal exponent of disarmament was compelled by circumstances to
emerge as a nuclear weapon state. The challenge that we will now
face is to fashion diplomacy more appropriate to our present
strategic posture, while simultaneously pursuing disarmament goals
and participating in international nuclear commerce and technology
initiatives. 20. A few remarks about our relations with
Singapore. An India that envisages in the opportunities that are
offered by the changing global scenario the realisation of its
aspirations naturally will pursue vigorously cooperation with other
economically resurgent societies. As you would have gathered, our
world view contemplates both concentric circles of interest and a
multi-polar global architecture. Singapore is located in one of the
inner circles, and is clearly a priority relationship for India. It
is among our top five trade and investment partners. Our privileged
relationship is reflected in the Comprehensive Economic Cooperation
Agreement (CECA), a framework agreed upon in June 2005. Its results
are no mere statistics. Singapore is the favoured location for
Indian businesses seeking a global footprint and more than 2600 of
them have set up offices there. Most of our large banks have their
presence as well and the air connectivity between our two countries
is particularly strong. At the Indian end, Singaporean companies
have moved beyond financial investment to assume project execution
responsibilities. We have strong political and security convergences
and are establishing effective institutional linkages to advance
them. Above all, as multi-ethnic and plural societies, we have a
natural bonding that can only gain further significance as India
globalises. 21. What kind of India the world would see in the
next six decades? It would be an India largely focused in raising
the quality of life of its people. This will be the basis on which
our external engagements would be judged. India’s response to the
forces of globalization will also be watched closely. We have the
cultural strengths and the self-assurance to meet the world on our
terms. What augurs well is that India, as a cross-roads culture, has
never seen the world in adversarial terms. If the past is a guide at
all, the world could learn much from South East Asia’s long
tradition of interaction with India. That tradition has been very
much one of an exchange of ideas, people and commerce. Therefore,
one can safely predict that interests of this region would be well
served by a more prosperous, confident and active India. I thank you for your attention and would be glad
to answer questions.
|