Revisiting India’s foreign policy under Modi

Col R Hariharan

[This article includes answers questions raised in a radio interview on August 12, 2015.]

Q: It is about fifteen months since Prime Minister Narendra Modi came to power. During this period foreign relations appear to have been given great importance. What do you think are the changes in India’s foreign policy now?

A: I am no expert on foreign policy; but as a strategic analyst I find that the basic tenets of our foreign policy enunciated after independence still continue to be the same. Our first Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru was a visionary; he evolved the foreign policy to further his holistic vision for India. It emphasized peace and harmonious relations with all countries and India finding its rightful place in the post-colonial world in keeping with its size and geostrategic location. He understood economic and industrial development as the keys to freeing the country from the shackles of colonial dependency and improving the lives of ordinary people. The five-year development plans were fashioned to achieve this.

From Nehru’s time foreign policy became prime minister-centric and has continued so, though the practice of appointing separate minister to look after external affairs came in vogue in 1964.  Under Nehru’s stewardship, India played a leadership role among the newly independent countries of Asia and Africa. He chose to develop close relations with Peoples Republic of China (PRC) which was shunned by the Western powers. He led the non-aligned movement with emphasis on five principles of panch sheel to avoid Cold War contretemps. Probably, China’s aggression in 1962 was a moment of truth to Nehru as much as the nation bringing home the world of real politick in which we exist.

Nehru’s successors were not visionaries of the same order and they were by and large mission-oriented. As a result the country grew more inward looking and foreign policy became means to the ends of political leadership. However, they stuck to the basic principles of our foreign policy as set by Nehru. The end of Cold War and realignment of global strategic alignments have led to changes in India’s priorities in relationship-building, but the basic contours of foreign policy have remained the same.

Prime Minister Modi is perhaps the first prime minister in a long time who has spelt out his vision for India, soon after he assumed office in May 2014. He articulated it in his Independence Day on August 15, 2014. Since then he has fleshed out his vision at various national forums. Its main ingredients include: boosting India’s industrial growth by inviting foreign investment in infrastructure with emphasis on making things in India to increase job opportunities; to upgrade digital infrastructure for timely delivery of services to the people by developing smart cities; improve grass root public services to provide better governance, education, healthcare and clean environment to help maintain social cohesion with gender equity, and lastly to enlarge India’s strategic influence in the Asia-Pacific region in keeping with its growing global economic power.

The prime minister has adopted a personalized style of relationship building with his counterparts in other countries, particularly with China, Japan and the U.S; this seems to have paid handsome dividends. He prioritised India’s neighbouring countries in his foreign visits to leverage on India’s soft power and influence. Though he has visited 25 countries, his priority seems to be the Asia-Pacific region and as a corollary China, Japan and the US have been his favoured destination.  He has departed from India’s traditional low profile foreign policy projection by making foreign interactions well publicized. Modi’s clear and assertive communication has helped him build bridges with the Indian Diaspora wherever he visited. Though Modi’s foreign policy initiatives may not have yielded all the results he desired, he has gained the attention of global leaders who have welcomed his development agenda. This is an important take away after 15 months because given India’s massive and confusing socio-political compulsions; in any case to fulfill Modi’s ambitious agenda would take at least a decade.

Q: Though India might have done well in its external front, there seems to be no progress in our relations with Pakistan. How do you visualize India-Pakistan relations in the future?

A: You are right; there had been really no breakthrough in our relations with Pakistan, though Prime Minister Modi’s invitation to Pakistan Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif for his inauguration and meeting thereafter kindled hopes of improvement in the relationship. But unfortunately, such hopes have been belied. In fact it has worsened with the escalation in ceasefire violations, terrorist infiltrations and attacks triggering of separatist agitations in Jammu and Kashmir, even spilling over to neighbouring Punjab.

The core problem in relationship building with Pakistan is its elected government does not enjoy the freedom to fashion and execute its foreign policy and trade (with India) without the concurrence of the army. During the last year or so Pakistan army has enlarged its ability to influence government policy after it became a guarantor to its survival from terrorist threat by successfully carrying out large scale operations against the Pakistan Taliban (Tehreek e Taliban Pakistan) terrorists. So it is doubtful whether we can expect any change in Pakistan’s attitude to improve its relationship with India in the near future. The first step for it would involve Pakistan government taking firm action against all jihadi groups (patronized by the army) operating against India from Pakistani soil. Pakistan army has a deep seated grudge against the ignominy it suffered after Indian armed forces threw it out of East Pakistan, resulting in the creation of Bangladesh in 1971.Given this background, the future of India-Pakistan relations looks bleak as long Pakistan government continues to remain hostage to Pakistan army. The recent boost to Pakistan’s strategic relationship with China has introduced a new and unpredictable element in the bipartisan relationship with potential to indirectly influence it.

Q: How about India’s relations with China? Can we expect any major improvement in India-China relations in the near future?

We must be realistic in our expectations regarding China. Resolving the hardy perennials bugging India-China relations – China’s illegal occupation of Indian territory, large Chinese claims on Indian territory in the Northeast and finalizing a mutually acceptable demarcation of India-China boundary (as China has refused to accept Mc Mahon Line as the boundary) may take a long time. Though the two sides have nominated special representatives to discuss the issues, China does not seem to have an urge to bring them to a closure in the near future. Though modalities to avoid accidental intrusions and conflict have been worked out between the two countries, there had been no real progress on these issues. So avoidance of conflict, rather than resolving disputes once for all seems to be the agreed flavour of the parleys between the two countries.

However, fortunately China’s President Xi Jinping and Prime Minister Modi are focusing on realising their dreams of benefiting their people through peaceful and harmonious relationship. Realising that there was no point in waiting for the resolution of their long standing disputes, both leaders have focused on building a strong economic, trade and commercial relationship by pooling their resources and geographical advantages for mutual benefit. China has reciprocated Modi’s invitation to invest in infrastructure and manufacturing industries in India. India has shown its readiness to join the BCIM (Bangladesh-China-India-Myanmar) corridor project linking India and China, though India has not made up its mind on joining China’s ambitious ‘Belt and Road’ initiative in linking China to Central and South Asia as well as the 21^st Century Maritime Silk Road to access Indian Ocean.

At the strategic level, there are both positive and negative developments. India has joined two international economic initiatives close to China’s heart – the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) and the New Bank launched by the Brazil-Russia-India-China-South Africa (BRICS) grouping. India has also joined the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO), started by China originally as an instrument of regional anti-terrorism cooperation, now evolving its own regional strategic dynamics. At the same time, India cannot afford to ignore China’s mega entry in Af-Pak region practically elbowing out India from the scene. Coupled with the whittling down of American presence and China’s massive aid of $46 billion aid to Pakistan (much more than the Marshall’s Plan outlay for post-war Europe), we can expect China to play increasingly an assertive role to further its strategic interests on our Western borders. This could emerge as a major, as yet unfathomed, factor in India-China relations in the coming years.

Q: With the rapid spread of Islamic State (ISIS)-spearheaded jihadi terrorism the world over, why India is not joining the global war on terror? Don’t you think it would be in India’s interest to do so?

Firstly, I would not use the Western coinage “global war on terror” to describe the operations of the U.S. and its Western and Gulf allies are carrying out in Iraq and Syria and elsewhere. There are a number of factors preventing India from joining the war against ISIS. The role of those carrying out the operations is suspect as their strategic objective is change of regimes in the Arab world which do not toe their line; as a result an arc of instability from Libya, Egypt, Syria, Iraq and Yemen has been created rendering at least a million refugees. The resulting instability has been exploited by ISIS, which is a clone of Al Qaeda. This war has been made more complex by its Sunni-Shia sectarian conflict of interest involving Saudi Arabia on side and Iran on the other. India has a huge Shia population, next only to Iran, and India’s role has to take this aspect into reckoning. There is an economic aspect also relevant to India. The conflict has affected Indian expatriates working in these countries and further escalation of the war or spread of destabilization would only increase the plight of nearly two million strong Indian-workforce in this region. 

There is no strategic context for India’s participation in this war, particularly when India has to safeguard its national security from Pakistan-based partners of Al Qaeda terrorists. In any case, India will have to deal with ISIS threat which could loom large at our own gates as when ISIS takes over the client groups of Al Qaeda in Pakistan. Moreover, militarily speaking, India does not have enough troops to spare for such a resource consuming counter-terrorism operation. Indian involvement could also worsen the operational capability of our armed forces at home, particularly when they are already reeling from shortage of weapons and armaments. Our first priority to should be to protect our own national interest; only then we should consider other requirements.

[Col R Hariharan, a retired MI specialist on South Asia, is associated with the Chennai Centre for China Studies and the South Asia Analysis Group. E-mail: haridirect@gmail.com Blog: http://col.hariharan.info ] 

Written on August 15, 2014

Sri Lanka elections: tumbling skeletons and bumbling politicians

Col R Hariharan

With a week to go before Sri Lanka people elect a new parliament, former president Mahinda Rajapaksa predicted the United Peoples Freedom Alliance (UPFA), which had fielded him, to win “up to” 117 seats. However, a pre-election survey showed only 27.5 percent voters preferred him over his bête noir and prime minister Ranil Wickremesinghe, leader of the rival United National Front for Good Governance (UNFGG), who led the survey with a hefty near 40 percent preference. 

The secret of Rajapaksa’s confidence may not be solely due to the good luck charm - an elephant hair bracelet – he is seen wearing these days.  Nor it can be astrological prediction that let him down badly in the presidential poll.

The survey conducted by the Centre for Policy Analysis end July showed Tamil and Muslim minority voters who handed him a defeat in the presidential election continue to be firm supporters of Wickremesinghe. However, it must be consoling for the former president to know that he remained the favourite of Sinhala voters with 36 percent support, while Wickremesinghe trailed him with 31.9 percent support.

Probably it was the Sinhala voter-support and the impressive line-up of UPFA leaders including some of the senior stalwarts of the Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP), who turned up in his support on the stage with him probably encouraged Rajapaksa’s optimism at the press conference. Their support for him, despite their leader President Maithripala Sirisena’s dénouement of Rajapaksa, was probably heartwarming for the former president. He was so sure of UPFA getting a majority that he dismissed the idea of forming a national government as suggested by the United National Party (UNP) leader Wickremesinghe. Rajapaksa said it only showed the lack of confidence of his opponent.

The UPFA election manifesto for a change seems to be more voter friendly than in the past with the coalition opening the social media network to welcome interactive feedback from the voters. It is a welcome change from the days when Rajapaksa remained the sole fountainhead of wisdom of the coalition (has it changed?).

Despite Rajapaksa’s confidence the odds do not seem to favour him. His problems are more serious than Wickremesinghe’s. Rajapaksa is contesting an election when he is out of office for the first time after he became president in 2005. Now he has neither favours to trade for political support nor powers to command the official machinery that aided his election campaigns in the past.

Government officials openly canvassed in support of Rajapaksa in his heydays. When he contested the presidential poll for the second time, the then army commander appeared on the TV in his support! But the electoral environment has changed now. 

Police and election commission have remained neutral as far as possible. Army commander Lt Gen Crisanthe De Silva has issued a series of orders to prevent service personnel from engaging in political activities during the election lest they are lured by political parties canvassing for their support. The restrictions on service personnel include even to expressing their views in the social media network or allowing the use of army video footage for political propaganda. 

Army Headquarters has warned that punitive action would be taken against those contravening the orders. These orders could hurt Rajapaksa more than his opponents, as his military victory against the Tamil Tigers in 2009 had earned him more admirers among armed forces and their families than his opponents.

A second aspect is the continuing internal squabbles between Rajapaksa loyalists and anti-Rajapaksa factions that have paralysed the internal party apparatus. The convening of the SLFP central committee meeting has been suspended till after the election through a court order!  This has produced an anachronistic situation with the two factions openly working against each other rather than focusing on winning the election! Former president Chandrika Kumaratunga as well as President Sirisena have continued to remain in SLFP despite their stout opposition to Rajapaksa’s candidature. And they seem to be doing their bit to undermine the party support to Rajapaksa.

Ms Kumaratunga had been more direct in her attack on Rajapaksa; she has accused him of spreading racism and using religion to achieve political ends. Though Sirisena has said he would remain neutral, he has repeatedly appealed to the people for carrying forward the changes ushered in January 8 with the defeat of Rajapaksa and vote for corruption free government. 

In fact, at the farewell ministerial meeting of the cabinet, Sirisena told the outgoing cabinet that he was looking forward to work with them again to carry forward his January 8 agenda clearly hinting his support to the United National Party (UNP) led coalition.     

President Sirisena has continued to be firmly opposed to appointing Rajapaksa as prime minister even if the UPFA wins a majority and chooses him as the prime ministerial candidate. So we can expect “UPFA and SLFP Logjam-II” to be enacted even if Rajapaksa turns defeat into victory.

But more damaging to Rajapaksa are the skeletons tumbling out of the cupboards locked up during his regime. The latest allegation relates to the suspected murder of Sri Lanka’s rugby star Wasim Thajudeen whose body was found burnt inside his car in a Colombo suburb on May 17, 2012. Though at that time, the police closed the case as accidental death, Minister Dr Rajitha Senaratne had alleged that three Special Task Force (STF) personnel attached to Presidential Security Division at that time were involved in the murder. So the charred body was exhumed after the CID obtained a court order for further investigations as they considered it a murder. Evidently, there were a number of lapses in the earlier police investigation as many pieces of evidence were not considered.  The CID conducting the investigations for the second time said Thajudeen was attacked with a sharp object in the neck and beaten with a blunt object.  

There were scenes of low comedy as bumbling politicians from both UPFA and UNF camps traded threats and insults freely. When SLFP spokesman Dilan Perera took out four bottles of poison and invited the UNFGG members to drink them, UNP’s Harin Fernando retaliated by brandishing two cans of poison at a news conference and said Dilan Perera was welcome to drink them. Rival group of gangsters fired shots at an election meeting of the UNFGG in the early stages of the campaign. But overall probably there were less violent incidents this time perhaps due to greater vigilance and shorter gestation period for the election process.   

Ranil Wickremesinghe heading the UNFGG has not started counting the seats he would win; but he must be beaming at the survey results. He has entered the election fray under a cloud of corruption surrounding the Central Bank bond issue. How much it would affect the chances of the UNFGG, particularly with his emphasis on clean governance, remains the big question. As the pre-poll survey was conducted end July, generally swing votes can be expected to make all the difference between defeat and victory. So it is to be seen whether he would continue to retain the support base that helped him to engineer the defeat of Rajapaksa in the presidential poll.

The UNFGG manifesto like all election manifestos in Sri Lanka is tall on talk and full of promises. Whether it can deliver them particularly when the economy is cash strapped is the moot point; this applies to all political parties. But the most disappointing was the Tamil National Alliance(TNA) manifesto. It started with the traditional ‘manifesto focus’ on the history of Tamil struggle for equity that had been repeated many times, rather than bringing up front the burning issues of Tamils which have been tucked towards the end. How much it would impress the impatient younger generation of voters who are tired of pedantic style of politics and its ponderous ways remains to be seen. But the TNA’s advantage is it enjoys the support of Global Tamil Forum (GTF), perhaps the largest Tamil Diaspora body.

There are two other dark horses challenging the political free run TNA had been enjoying in the North and East. The ‘Crusaders for Democracy’ a new outfit formed of former cadres of the LTTE is contesting the election as an independent group focusing on the grievances of Tamils in the post war scene. It was cobbled by Vithyatharan, former editor of Uthayan, Jaffna Tamil daily, and political wheeler-dealer after the TNA refused to field any former LTTE cadres as its candidate. The entry of rehabilitated Tiger cadres in the political arena is a welcome sign that Tamils are at last coming to terms with the political reality of Sri Lanka after 2009.  But TNA’s bigger challenge could be from veteran Tamil politician GajendraKumar Ponnambalam-led Tamil National People’s Front (TNPF).

The UPFA campaign, de facto led by Rajapaksa, seems to have learnt a few things from his defeat in the presidential election as acknowledged by Dr Dayan Jayatilleka, the coalition’s foreign policy advisor, when he met the foreign correspondents at an interaction. He said “the foreign policy of the UPFA will be a series of concentric circles, the closest circle being the immediate neighbourhood. Specific mention has been made about India in the foreign policy segment of the UPFA manifesto. Good relations with India is axiomatic. Good relations with India will be a corner stone of the UPFA’s foreign policy.” On relations with other countries he said "the first circle in the series of concentric circles will be South Asia; the second will be Asia; the third will be Euro-Asia, the fourth will be the Global South and finally the world.”

Dayan’s foreign policy construct is logical; he had always valued India’s special status in Sri Lanka’s foreign policy firmament. But in the past, Rajapaksa had shown neither the patience nor the interest in such a nuanced approach to policy making. Can he change his style of work? Let us wait for the election results for the question to become relevant.

(Col R Hariharan, a retired Military Intelligence specialist on South Asia, served with the Indian Peace Keeping Force in Sri Lanka as Head of Intelligence. He is associated with the Chennai Centre for China Studies and the South Asia Analysis Group. E-Mail: haridirect@gmail.com   Blog: http://col.hariharan.info )  

Sri Lanka security perspectives: July 2015

Col R Hariharan                                                              

Election scene heats up

A total of 6151 candidates from 21 registered political parties and 201 independent groups will be contesting for 196 district seats in the parliamentary elections to be held on August 17, 2015. The United Peoples Freedom Alliance (UPFA), the United National Front for Good Governance (UNFGG) newly formed by Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe-led United National Party (UNP) and the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP) are contesting all 22 electoral districts.

Former president Mahinda Rajapaksa out manoeuvred President Maithripala Sirisena (also chief of the Sri Lanka Freedom Party –SLFP), to secure UPFA nomination to contest the parliamentary election. But Rajapaksa loyalists celebrating his nomination were shocked when Sirisena addressing the nation said that he was against Rajapaksa and predicted he would lose in the general election.

Explaining his opposition to the nomination, Sirisena in a detailed statement on July 14 said irrespective of the party that comes to power, he wanted those who could carry his pledges forward to be elected.  However, the President said he would remain neutral at the general election and would not back former President Mahinda Rajapaksa. He said that he was against Rajapaksa and that there were many seniors he could appoint as Prime Minister in the event the SLFP won the election.

Though the UPFA coalition was divided between pro and anti Rajapaksa factions, it managed to put up a candidate list that reflected the differences between the two camps. However, even if the UPFA wins a majority, in all likelihood Sirisena in his capacity as President would not appoint Rajapaksa as Prime Minister as indicated in his statement.

However, Rajapaksa had tried to play down the differences and maintained that the UPFA was not divided at all. He said he did not form his own party to contest the election because he was not prepared to abandon the SLFP for personal gain. He said he came forward to contest “at the request of the majority of my party and the UPFA and most importantly the people of this country.”

Showing his readiness to accommodate fresh, Rajapaksa said “during the last few months we have started to look at things in a fresh manner and there would be new ideas which are essential for the development of the nation which we will adopt during the next five years.”

On Sri Lanka’s relations with China, Rajapaksa said “not only China, we will work to improve our relations with all our friends including the West.” On minorities, the former president said “a special charter will be floated to get opinions and ideas to improve harmony among all communities from the grass root level with special programmes.”

The UPFA released its election manifesto on June 28. Based on the theme “Assurance for Future” the manifesto describes how the UPFA government would implement plans and programmes for socio-economic development of the country during the next five years.

The UNP has formed UNFGG coalition with dissidents from the UPFA who felt betrayed after it nominated Rajapaksa as a candidate. The coalition now includes the rightwing Jathika Hela Urumaya (JHU), the Sri Lanka Muslim Congress (SLMC) and its rival the All Ceylon Makkal Congress (ACMC) and the Tamil People’s Alliance (TPA). The coalition is contesting on the same plank of corruption free governance it had used successfully in the presidential election.

The Tamil National Alliance (TNA) is contesting in the northern and eastern provinces on its own. It has the support of the Global Tamil Forum (GTF), the largest Diaspora Tamil body. However, the TNA is likely to extend support to the UNFGG in other areas.

Election prospects of the rival coalitions appar to be wide open. However, it seems certain that President would not nominate Rajapaksa as Prime Minister even if the UPFA wins a majority. According to a media report, Sirisena is likely to nominate the UPFA general secretary Susil Premajayantha for the post.

Electoral violations

In a major incident of election violence, one woman was killed and 12 others hospitalized when unidentified persons opened fire on a group of UNP supporters carrying out election campaign in a Colombo suburb on July 31, 2015. Finance Minister Ravi Karunanayake had just left the venue when the fire was opened. Sri Lanka’s election watchdog Peoples Action for Free and Fair Elections (PAFFREL) had received complaints relating to 511 electoral and general law violations till July 27, 2015. These included 35 relating to acts of violence while 41 related to electoral and general law violations.

Miscellaneous

NPC: Northern Provincial Council chief minister CV Wigneswaran in a statement has said that he would not engage in any political propaganda supporting the TNA candidates. Instead he would take a neutral stance. Explaining his stand the chief minister said although the TNA chose him as the chief minister, “it is not ethical for me to support them at the forthcoming general elections.” He said “those elected by the people should work with dedication and also upholding unity. I believe that priority should be given to the progress and well being of the people than the parties.”

Arrest of former LTTE cadre: Tamil Nadu police have arrested a former LTTE cadre Krishnakumar carrying 75 cyanide capsules, four global positioning systems, seven mobile phones and Indian and Sri Lankan currency in Uchipulli coast in Tiruchi district in Tamil Nadu. Two local Tamils who brought him from Madurai bus stand in a car to Uchipulli have also been arrested. According police sources the former LTTE cadre was brought for his clandestine return to Jaffna by sea. The report of the arrest has set off fresh speculation of reviving LTTE activity in Sri Lanka.

Written on July 31, 2015   

(Col R Hariharan, a retired Military Intelligence specialist on South Asia, served with the Indian Peace Keeping Force in Sri Lanka as Head of Intelligence. He is associated with the Chennai Centre for China Studies and the South Asia Analysis Group. E-Mail: colhari@yahoo.com   Blog: http://col.hariharan.info)  

Courtesy: South Asia Security Trends, Vol 9 No 7 August 2015 www.security-risks.com

China’s continuing woes in Sri Lanka

Col R Hariharan

Even in the midst of all political gerrymandering going on in Sri Lanka as election fever is heating up, China must be one country praying (but do Communist nations pray?) for former president Mahinda Rajapaksa’s successful return as prime minister after the country elects a new parliament on August 17, 2015. When the people elected President Maithripala Sirisena in preference to Rajapaksa in the presidential poll last January, they also derailed China’s strategic gravy train that chugged along smoothly in Sri Lanka during 

Rajapaksa’s second term as president.

President Sirisena the new incumbent froze all China-aided mega projects notably the $1.4 billion Colombo Port City Project signed up during Rajapaksa-rule, pending their review for procedural lapses and corruption investigation. However, since then both the countries have tried to understand, if not redress, each other’s concerns also on the twin issues of high cost of Chinese loans and financial viability of the mega projects. There was a lot of billing and cooing about their friendship when President Sirisena and foreign minister Mangala Samaraweera visited Beijing, probably kindling hopes of China to repair its relations with Sri Lanka.

Probably China became more optimistic about regaining its position of primacy in the island nation after former president Mahinda Rajapaksa, China’s favourite Sri Lankan was chosen by the United Peoples Freedom Alliance (UPFA) coalition to contest the parliament election. There were also other indications of Sri Lanka warming up to China.

Sri Lanka President had inaugurated on June 7, 2015 the construction work on the China funded Matara-Hambantota expressway which provides a link to the Colombo-Matara expressway via Galle funded by the Chinese. China’s Ambassador to Colombo had expressed satisfaction over the commencement of the work on the project, which would create job opportunities for the people, in an interview to the DailyFT, Colombo.[i] China’s exim bank had funded the $180 million Galle-Matara expressway.[ii] Phase 2 of the Hambantota port project has been inaugurated; on completion it would increase the port capacity to handle 12 ships at a time from two at present.[iii] 

On the defence front also there had been no let up in China-Sri Lanka cooperation. Special Forces and commandos of China and Sri Lanka army have just concluded the three-week long exercise “Silk Route 2015” to hone up their special operations skills.[iv] Last month, a Chinese military delegation headed by a Major General has carried out a review of the ongoing Chinese funded auditorium complex in Sri Lanka Military Academy at Diyatalawa.[v]

China also appears to have realized the need for relationship building with people at the grass root level. Two Chinese companies - the China Communications Construction Company Colombo Port City Project Company and the China Harbor Sri Lanka Area Company donated $14,400 towards constructing four wells to provide clean drinking water to  the people in war-torn in Puthukkudiyiruppu in northern Sri Lanka the Xinhua reported.[vi]

So, China was probably not amused to hear  Minister for Justice Wijayadasa Rajapakshe’s announcement on June 20, 2015 that the Colombo port reclamation project would be allowed to progress only after revising the contract signed by the previous government.[vii] Addressing the press, the minister said the government decision was to prevent any negative impact on Sri Lanka and other neighbouring countries, especially India, before resuming work on the Colombo project; this indicated Colombo’s positive response to India’s concerns expressed during Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s maiden visit to Sri Lanka in May 2015.

If there was any doubt India was influencing the decision, the minister’s rationale for the decision cleared it. He said “as of the agreements, the outright ownership of over 350 acres of land had been given to the Chinese Company. This is totally against the Lands Ordinance of the country. If the project had been carried out as of that agreement, the Sri Lankans may need a visa to enter that land and obtain permission to use the air space over that land. We would not let that happen. President Maithripala Sirisena during his visit to China talked to the Chinese President over the matter. We will only carry forward this project after permanently rectifying its loopholes.”

India which accounts for nearly 70 percent of the Port’s traffic had pointed out its strategic concerns at China gaining sovereign control over a large part of the reclaimed land very close to the port.  The U.S. which had been getting cosy with the Sirisena government also probably had similar strategic concerns.

Though President Sirisena’s government had assured the Chinese about Sri Lanka’s ever lasing friendship with China, the fractures in their relations would take time to heal because Sri Lanka would like to dilute its dependence upon China.

Sri Lanka’s external affairs minister Mangala Samaraweera on a visit to Japan touched upon this aspect in an interview to the Japanese news channel NHK on June 18, 2015.[viii] He said the defeated President Rajapaksa had promoted a foreign policy that relied on China whereas his government was trying to follow a balanced policy with all countries including China.  Though China had overtaken Japan as the biggest source of assistance in 2009, the Chinese aid led to rampant corruption under the previous government. He said the Colombo Port city project may not have followed the appropriate procedures and was being reviewed.  And the project is still limping.

Another reason could be to negotiate cheaper loans to get out of the high interest Chinese debts. In fact, the Central Bank Governor Arjuna Mahendran has recently said that the government was in the process of reviewing the Hambantota hub project and trying to improve the existing harbor and airport facility in Colombo would be a better option for reasons for economy.

Even if Rajapaksa comes back to power as empowered prime minister, he may not be able to put the clock back on Sri Lanka-China relations to the same cosy level it used to be. This was indicated by Rajapaksa in his first ever question and answer session on the Facebook page on July 23, 2015, while answering a pointed question on China. Asked whether he would improve relations with China if elected as Prime Minister, Rajapaksa said: “not only China, we will work to improve our relations with all our friends including the West.”[ix]

There is no doubt Prime Minister Modi’s initiative to build a win-win relationship with Sri Lanka had created a favourable climate for Sirisena government to balance its relations with China. So much would depend upon how India follows up on the promises made during Modi’s Sri Lanka visit. As of now the signs are favourable; but jn the past, India had not covered itself with glory on timely delivery of its promises.

China would never give up on Sri Lanka as it has too big a strategic stake in Indian Ocean and South Asia. Sri Lanka is an important pivot for China’s power projection in Indian Ocean as well as  an irreplaceable investment destination for the success of President Xi Jinping’s pet project - the 20^th Century Maritime route. Last but not least, Sri Lanka is the vanguard for India’s peninsular defence and power projection in Indian Ocean.

The writing on the wall is clear: India simply cannot afford to take it easy on the work in progress in building win-win relations with Sri Lanka, whosoever comes to power in the island nation. 

(Col. R Hariharan, a retired Military Intelligence officer, is associated with the South Asia Analysis Group, and the Chennai Centre for China Studies. E-mail:colhari@yahoo.com Website: www.col.hariharan.info )

Courtesy: Chennai Centre for China Studies C3S Paper No. 0148/2015 dated August 1, 2015

http://www.c3sindia.org/india/5146

END NOTES

---

[i] DailyFT, Colombo, July 6, 2015 http://www.ft.lk/article/441835/China-happy-with-extension-of-Southern-Expressway--says-a-big-socioeconomic-boost

[ii] Global Times, June 7, 2015 http://www.globaltimes.cn/world/central-south-asia/index10.html#list

[iii] Daily News, Colombo, http://www.dailynews.lk/?q=business/hambantota-port-second-stage-water-filling-saturday#sthash.RZRUHzax.

[iv] June 22, 2015 http://adaderana.lk/

[v] Chinese military delegation reviews Diyatalawa project, June 18, 2015 http://adaderana.lk/

[vi]China donates to provide clean water for northern Sri Lanka June 18, 2015 www.xinhua.org/english/

[vii] Daily News, Colombo, July 20, 2015 http://www.dailynews.lk/?q=local/colombo-port-city-contract-agreements-be-revised

[viii] FM: Sri Lanka to dilute dependence on China, NHK World Jun. 19, 2015 http://www3.nhk.or.jp/nhkworld/english/news/20150619_09.html

[ix] UPFA is not divided at all –Mahinda, July 23 2015 www.adaderana.lk/23-7-15

How Mulla Omar’s death strengthens ISIS to target India?

His exit as a nominal head would further weaken Taliban’s dwindling support. We can expect more of their cadres defect to the Islamic State in the coming months.

COL R HARIHARAN @colhari2 | POLITICS | 4-minute read | 30-07-2015

Mulla Omar, the elusive Taliban leader who virtually led the Afghanistan government from 1996-2001, is dead. Abdul Hassib Seddiqi, the spokesman of Afghanistan’s National Directorate of Security confirmed that the Taliban leader died in a Karachi hospital in April 2013.

Omar’s refusal to hand over his close associate Osama bin Laden to the U.S. after the al Qaeda’s 9/11 terrorist attacks resulted in theU.S-led war on terror to end the Taliban rule in Afghanistan. Since then the 53-year old one-eyed leader was never seen in public, particularly after a U.S. bounty of $ 10 million on his head was announced.  He was reported to have fled to Pakistan to form the Quetta Shura – Taliban’s leadership council in exile – and later to Karachi.

Though reports of his death had appeared in Afghanistan a few times in the past, they were never confirmed. Even recently, Afghan sources close to the Afghan government CEO Dr Abdulla Abdulla had reported his death in Pakistan in 2013.  The Afghan government seems to have decided to confirm Omar’s death now perhaps to thwart the Tehreek-e-Taliban Afghanistan (Afghan Taliban)’s effort to boost its image by publishing Mulla Omar’s biography in April 2015.  The biography spoke of battlefield achievements of Omar “the leader of the Islamic Emirate” in detail; it said he was continuing the jihadi activities in the face of “regular tracking by the enemy.”

Taliban watchers considered the publication of the biography as an  attempt to prevent defections from the organization to the Islamic State (ISIS) which has made rapid inroads into Taliban’s home ground. Once hailed as a charismatic leader, it is doubtful whether Omar still retained his charisma after years of absence from the public view. Even if he was alive, there is no certainty he would be able to face the sophisticated onslaught of ISIS, which is rewriting the idiom of jihadi warfare.

Mulla Omar’s exit even as a nominal head would further weaken Taliban’s dwindling popular support, though it had tried to assert its strength with a series of terrorist attacks in Afghanistan.  We can expect more Taliban cadres to defect to the ISIS in the coming months. This could increase its capability to strike not only in Pak-Af region but in India as well. So India cannot afford to ignore even minor acts of symbolism like waving of ISIS flags seen recently in Kashmir valley. 

We will have to look at them in the context of Pakistan army showing increasing belligerence towards India keeping alive confrontations along the Line of control in Jammu and Kashmir and the recent Gurdaspur terrorist attack in Punjab.

An ISIS recruitment document recovered in Pakistan tribal region and brought to public attention by American Media Institute on July 28, 2015 is of great relevance to India’s national security. The 32-page Urdu-language document titled “A Brief History of the Islamic State Caliphate (ISC), The Caliphate According to the Prophet,” seeks to unite all factions of the Pakistani and Afghan Taliban into a single army of terror.  It urges all the jihadi groups to recognize the ISIS leader as the sole ruler of the world’s Muslims under a “caliphate.” The document chillingly enjoins all to “accept the fact that this caliphate will survive and prosper until it takes over the entire world and beheads every last person that rebels against Allah." It proclaims, "This is the bitter truth, swallow it.” This clearly indicates ISIS’ strategic goal to emerge as the sole arbiter of Muslim Ummah.

India would be the logical target for the ISIS as “striking in India would magnify the Islamic State’s stature and threaten the stability of the region” as stated by Bruce Riedel, a senior fellow with the Brookings Institution in his comments on the document.

The ISIS threat to India is now exacerbated with a new strategic equation emerging in this region after the recent Afghanistan-China-Pakistan trilateral strategic talks. The first ever formal talks between the Afghan government and the Taliban representatives, hosted by Pakistan at Murree on July 7, 2015 with the blessings of the Pakistan army, is its visible manifestation. A second round of formal talks originally scheduled to be held in Urumqi in Xinjiang will now be held in Murree. Though the talks are held without a ceasefire in place in Afghanistan, as both Afghan President Ghani and the Taliban seem to be keen to sue for peace we can expect some progress to be made in the near future.

The presence of representatives from China and the U.S. at the talks indicates U.S. acquiescence to the trilateral strategic realignment which excludes India. While India would welcome any effort to bring peace in Afghanistan, it cannot be at the cost of India's regional interests. Though the U.S. intention might be to build a solid front against the ISIS’ entry in the region, in real terms it means India cannot count upon even nominal U.S. support in Af-Pak region when it confronts strategic challenges to its security. This could be the reality when India confronts the ISIS threat emanating from Af-Pak region. It is time political pundits bury their hatchets to come to term with the strategic realities of South Asia.

#ISIS, #Taliban, #Terrorism, #Mullah Omar

Courtesy: India Today Opinion portal DailyO.in    http://www.dailyo.in/politics/mullah-omar-terrorism-taliban-isis-afghanistan-pakistan-tehreek-e-taliban-kashmir/story/1/5349.html