Monday, October 24, 2016

Is India getting pulled in China centric arms race?

THE FOLLOWING ANALYSIS APPEARED IN FREE PRESS JOURNAL ON 22 OCTOBER, 2016

http://www.freepressjournal.in/analysis/is-china-being-a-responsible-nation-state-parjanya-bhatt/959862

In the recent past, India has accelerated defence assets acquisition. Latest media reports suggest that India has agreed to purchase its second Akula Class nuclear submarine at a cost of $ 2 bn from Russia, in a deal that was signed on the sidelines of the recently concluded BRICS summit in Goa. This will be India’s third nuclear submarine with INS Chakra and the new INS Arihant. This comes on the heels of the recently signed deal with France for 36 Rafael fighter jets. Obviously, these assets go well beyond any threat perception emanating from Pakistan.

While, this may sound alarm bells in Pakistan, but under the prevailing geopolitical and regional security circumstances, India is forced to acquire these expensive armaments and it is not alone in this frantic defence assets acquisition race. Analysis of the larger geopolitical power game emerging in South Asia and South East Asia reveal that the entire region is becoming prey to a wild arms race, where India, China and Pakistan - the three nuclear neighbours are suspicious of each other and caught in a vicious circle of outdoing each other.
The growing military presence of China in the Indian Ocean under the excuse of securing its own Sea Lanes of Communications and thereby, trade, which is seen by Indian analysts as a String of Pearls to bind India, gives a clear picture of how China is playing its outsized ambition of becoming a ‘great power’. It is also China’s counter-strategy to balance America’s Pivot to the East.

India’s defence preparedness, on the other hand, is aimed at protecting her economic interests and countering military threats from the Red army. It is, however, perceived as a threat by Pakistan which boosts her arsenal with help from the Chinese. Pakistan has traditionally relied on American support to satiate her defence needs, but Beijing has taken over Washington in defence supplies to Islamabad. Every time India acted aggressively, China has diplomatically stood with Pakistan. However Beijing has never come to Pakistan’s rescue during its military conflicts with India. It has, however, lethally armed Rawalpindi over the years.

In the post-surgical strike scenario, if China starts to worry about India’s more muscular approach threatening her multi-billion dollar investment in China-Pakistan-Economic-Corridor (CPEC), Beijing may not hesitate to offer Islamabad tangible military help. China has not only shed her aloof posture, but has become active on the international platform giving tough competition to the established Western economic and military powers.

According to media reports, Pakistan imports about 63% of its armaments from China. According to research carried out by Stockholm based research institute SIPRI, Pakistan consumes about 35% of China’s arms supplies followed by Bangladesh at 20%, making Beijing the world’s third largest arms supplier. In August earlier this year, China agreed to supply Pakistan eight diesel electric submarines at a cost of $5 bn. These submarines are likely to have capabilities to fire nuclear missiles. This trend is dangerous not only from the conventional war point of view but more importantly because the three nuclear countries are adjacent to each other with the first two having colluded against India.

Pakistan is China’s pawn to keep a check on India’s western flank and simultaneously prepare to choke New Delhi on its eastern front. India’s arms acquisition is justified for two reasons, one, its Air Force and Navy are short of technology and required number of equipment and two, China’s gigantic military build-up.

There has been a meteoric increase in China’s defence spending. According to defence consultancy HIS Jane’s report published earlier this year, because of heightened tensions in the South China Sea, China has accelerated its defence preparedness. Beijing’s annual defence budget is $146 bn and is expected to rise by 5% annually crossing $233 bn by 2020. In contrast, India’s defence budget is meagre $51 bn. However, the Modi government has plans to spend Rs. 50,000 – 60,000 in the current fiscal on new defence deals.

India has enough capabilities to thwart any misadventure from Pakistan and keep China at bay, but looking at China’s mammoth investment to match the American military power, Beijing has raised the stakes for everyone in the region – especially for India.

The situation emerging in South and South East Asia with China and India as key players, is akin to the Cold War arms scenario between the US and USSR. It is for New Delhi to choose whether it wants to become a strong economic power making it a credible military force, or a lethal military power with a weak economy. India certainly cannot afford to be another Soviet Union.

Wednesday, February 17, 2016

JNU Row: Is it time for Chanakya's rebirth?


As the standoff between the JNU students and the Modi government continues, it should be amply made clear that the sloganeering by student mobs on the university campus and at the press club by Prof. S A R Gilani – making a martyr out of Afzal Guru, demanding destruction and division of India was in no way an expression of dissent. It was just short of being anti-national. By acting against rebel students, neither the BJP is proving its nationalism, as claimed by many, nor are the students by quoting the constitutional rights able to justify their hateful slogans. The government action may appear harsh, but was necessary, as for too long many groups have been harbouring and expressing these sentiments.

No doubt the right to dissent will have to be safeguarded from the politics of opportunism of Congress, AAP, the Left and the BJP too, but the opposition should have acted maturely before it sent emissaries like Rahul Gandhi and Sitaram Yetury to show solidarity towards the students who were part of alleged anti-national sloganeering. However, the opposition seem to have realised that its support to the protesting students was unnecessary, as a result of which, no politicians have come out in support of students from Jadavpur University and Aligarh Muslim University who have shown solidarity with the JNU students and their awful rant.

University campuses where students and professors are suppose to have intellectual intercourse and develop theories and ideas to make the society a better place for citizens, have unfortunately turned into a place for those who are against the government administration and in many cases against the upper class. Politicisation of Rohith Wemula’s death and JNU protest is the finest example of this. In May 2014, security authorities had arrested Delhi University Prof. Saibaba for his alleged Naxal links and recruiting JNU student for his so called revolutionary activities in Chhatisgarh. The student was associated with the Democratic Students’ Union (DSU), the same group which is currently in the news for anti- India and pro-Pakistan sloganeering. S A R Geelani, the former professor of the Delhi University, who was narrowly acquitted by the Supreme Court for his alleged role in the 2001 Parliament attack case had arranged an ghaibana janaza — funeral prayers in absentia for terrorist Afzal Guru – a week after the latter’s hanging in 2013. This was shameful.

Over the years these elements have gained strength only because past central administrations never invoked the legal system to deal with them. The left wing student group celebrated the killing of 76 CRPF security personnel in 2010 in Dantewada. The then Congress government did not act. Embarrassment at its best. Now, when the government has decided to deal with the miscreants – this awful lot is not only dividing the society on political lines, but painting all those who favour legal action with the same brush of ‘Bhakts’, Khakhi chaddis and ultra-nationalists. Their anger is justified as for the first time a government has decided to act firmly against them.

One should realize that the Sangh Parivar’s Hindu majoritarian nationalism is a mirage, Congress’ minority appeasement has miserably failed and has created more problems than it has provided solutions. And, the world has witnessed the ugly fall of Leftist ideology the world over. But would these groups who ask for Azadi give a clarification on their definition of freedom and nationalism? It is not about the so called (original) nationalists (the Congress), ultra-nationalists (BJP) and anti-nationals, nor is it between the students and the government. It is for the Indian society to think that what kind of ideas we allow the university campuses to harbor and propagate.

It was King Dhananda who did not allow Guru Chanakya to build university in Patliputra and subverted free flow of ideas. Later, Chanakya was forced to fight the might of the Nanda dynasty with his knowledge and army of students. Today, fortunately, no professor has the capabilities and nationalistic vision that of Chanakya. Even if by mistake, Chanakya is referred to in the present context, a section of the society would out rightly reject it saying, India is still ruled by the Brahminical ideals. But in reality, Jai Bheem is politically more lucrative than what Babasaheb preached and what he gave us through his contribution to the Constitution. More than the protection of liberal ideas and their demand for uncontrolled freedom of speech, it is about the safety of national interest – especially from within the country. During the reign of Chandragupta Maurya, Chanakya fought for the unification of smaller states as all smaller states lacked political unity and consciousness. Today it is about various political philosophies, which are at loggerheads, including upper caste – lower caste divide.

The Hindu dharma has clearly made a distinction between Shashtra (knowledge) and shastra (weapon). The protection of Shashtra (here understand as democratic ideals) is possible only by allowing free exchange of ideas and vibrant role of the universities. But the JNU and press club incidents have forced the government to invoke shastra (here understand as law). Chanakya gave weapons to his students as Dhanananda was blind to the military march of Alexander towards India. In contrast to this, Prof. Geelani and Prof. Saiaba have invoked anti-national feelings among students over crucial security issues like Kashmir and Maoism. How can any state tolerate such activities? Has the time come for Chanakya’s rebirth? The answer depends on our so called intellectuals who either believe in anti-administration rant or just return awards. An intellectual does neither. He is just busy building a strong nation.

My Goddess Saraswati still has a Vina (an Indian classical musical instrument – a symbol peace) and a book (a symbol of knowledge) in her hands. Don’t force her to become Mahishasur Mardini.