Round The World

New Delhi, 29 December 2009

India In S Asia 2009

BLUNDERS, GLORY & OPPORTUNITIES

By Monish Tourangbam

Research Scholar, School of International Studies, JNU

The Mumbai terror attacks coming at the fag end of 2008 continued to hog the limelight in the beginning of 2009 and cast a sour note on India-Pakistan relations. The dots leading to Pakistan cast a shadow on the fragile relationship. New Delhi, acting on the evidence available continued to make demands to Islamabad, which as expected, was reluctant to act and continued to provide mere lip services. As such, the Manmohan Singh Administration early in the year was faced with the fallout of a major national security crisis that raised serious questions on the maritime security of the country and the preparedness of the UPA government to pre-empt and act against terror attacks.

The composite dialogue process came to a halt as New Delhi demanded credible actions against the perpetrators of the crime and Islamabad continued to evade such a process with its own sets of justifications citing lack of evidence. Instead, the Pakistan government was bent upon trying to gain brownie points against its Indian counterpart as was evident during the Sharm-el-Sheikh Non-Aligned Movement Summit. India fell into the trap to some extent by acquiescing to a joint statement that contained references to the “Balochistan factor”. Accusing India of trying to foment instability on its soil has been a well-intended strategy of the Pakistani establishment as well as an effort to place the RAW at the same pedestal as the notorious Pakistan’s ISI, accused of masterminding a sinister network of anti-India groups.

The insincerity of the Pakistani government was exposed when a reprieve was granted to the Jamad-ud-Dawa (JuD) Chief Hafiz Saeed. The list of accusations is quite long against him for anti-India activities; accused in the 2001 Indian Parliament attack and the 2006 Mumbai train bombings. But the pile of evidence handed over to the Pakistani side has fallen on deaf ears and the Islamabad continues to cite lack of evidence. Moreover, the “split-personality” antics employed by the lone survivor of the Mumbai attackers; Ajmal Kasab makes a mockery of the whole process of ensuring justice to the many innocents who lost their lives on that fateful event.

Even when their house is under the threat of a serious break-up, the Pakistani establishment often seems intent on accusing India of the wrong-doing. When insurgents attacked some of the most fortified places in Lahore, analysts commented that it could not have been carried out without the help of the South Punjab militants. But, Pakistan’s Punjabi militant groups like the Jaish-e-Muhammad and Laskar-e-Jhangvi have hardly been characterized as enemy of the State and found support in view of their anti-India activities. India has nothing to gain from a destabilized neighbor run over by fanatic militants but the Pakistani establishment has to be honest to itself and to New Delhi in tackling the root of terrorism, because the monster has just begun to threaten the creator.

Besides, the all-too predominant Pakistan factor, India faces other equally pressing challenges in its neighbouring areas. The year started with good news from Bangladesh with the Sheikh Hasina-led Awami League coming out victorious. The victory was seen as a disdain for the religious radicalization of politics and encouraging for India since the Awami League was credited with favouring inter-community harmony within Bangladesh and regional and international cooperation.  But the jubilation was mixed with a sense of cautious optimism since the democratic process in Bangladesh has been marred with chaotic spells of inter-party rivalry, ideological religiosity and military authoritarianism. And, these fears unraveled in the form of the mutiny that rattled the country even before the new Prime Minister could hardly settle.

The situation in neighboring Nepal has not been encouraging either. After the Maoist won the elections and ended years of civil-war, the Nepal polity was hoped to change for the better. But subsequent events in the country belied all hopes of reconciliation. Wrangling for political power among the intransigent parties continues and the promised installation of the Nepali Constitution remains a far-fetched dream. Economic and security issues stare the new republic in the face3, already caught in the midst of violent strikes.

Such incidents emphasize that democracy is not just about holding elections but more about painstakingly establishing the norms associated with a democratic polity like consensus, dialogue, rule of law and separation of the civilian and the military apparatuses. The “Big-brother” syndrome will always hinder India’s relations with its smaller neighbours but as the major power in South Asia, it is New Delhi’s responsibility to create a “zone of peace” based on liberal democracy.

To the South, a massive military offensive by the Sri Lankan government has eliminated the LTTE, putting an end to a civil-war that divided the country. Sri Lankan operations against the Tamil Tigers and the resultant humanitarian crisis were widely criticized in South India with the political parties competing to gain mileage. But, as the events have unfolded, the military option is hardly the answer and there is a more complex political process to assimilate the Tamils, put a moral end to the humanitarian crisis and assure the ethnic Tamils of their place under the sun.

As such, the process is hardly from over and a longer and a more complicated battle awaits President Rajapaksa and his successors if another round of civil war is to be averted. New Delhi raised its concerns regarding the humanitarian crisis and is supportive of the rehabilitation programme and the ramification of the root cause of the long-drawn conflict. The continuation of the refugee problem is also of India’s concern and it should definitely be pro-active in supporting a political solution to the Sri Lankan ethnic issues.

China and the United States are undoubted factors in India’s South Asia policy. China and India have a disputed border and even fought a war over the issue. As two growing powers, India-China relations are determined by competition, wherever possible and cooperation when inevitable.

India and the US have developed their relations by leaps and bounds since the Cold War years.  But differences still persist on principles and the mode of implementation, be it the issue of combating terrorism or climate change. The economically woven relationship between the US and China has been a matter of concern for India. The Chinese trade surplus vis-à-vis the US is seen to be increasingly affecting the latter’s policies in the South Asian region. In their own ways, the Chinese and American establishments try to dispel Indian suspicions regarding this. But, it is not becoming of a major country like India to be reactive in this case. It should develop its own diplomatic mechanism to increase its influence among its neighbours and beyond.

Thus, the Manmohan Singh Administration has had to tackle a wide plethora of issues in the year that went by and the plate will be no less full in the coming year, with a visit from the US President already on the cards. In the final analysis, the Singh Administration should not sulk at past blunders or boast of past glories, but look towards capitalizing on the future of opportunities which are bound to come its way. ---INFA

(Copyright, India News and Feature Alliance)