<p>These are extraordinary times in British politics. In a matter of hours, the same Conservative Party MPs and the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) who had rejected British Prime Minister Theresa May’s Brexit plan came to her rescue and saved her government from falling in a no-confidence motion brought by the Opposition Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn. May’s plan for an amicable divorce from the European Union (EU) was overwhelmingly rejected by the British Parliament, giving her government one of the worst defeats in British political history. This plan, which was aimed at bringing about an orderly departure from the EU on March 29, and setting up a 21-month transition period to negotiate a free trade deal was rejected by 432 to 202 votes. This was a plan which was almost two years in the making with May putting her career on the line. But it was clear that she failed in convincing Parliament that it was the best option for the nation.</p>

<p>Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn quickly came back with a no-confidence vote against May’s government, arguing that May’s “zombie” administration had lost the right to govern. But this time May got back her support base from the rebel Tories and the DUP, winning the vote by a margin of 19. May has responded by underscoring her commitment to “continue to work to deliver on the solemn promise to the people of this country to deliver on the result of the referendum and leave the European Union”.</p>

<p>But the road forward remains as complicated as ever for May and for Britain. After her victory in the no-confidence vote, May had called on MPs to “put self-interest aside” and “act in the national interest”, acknowledging that it “will not be an easy task”. Consensus certainly will not be easy to come by as the British polity remains at its most polarised today. May now has to present a new EU withdrawal plan to Parliament by January 21 ahead of a vote by MPs eight days later. And political confabulations have started in right earnest though without any real sense of direction.</p>

<p>Meanwhile, the rest of the EU is moving ahead with contingency planning. European Commission has underlined that it is “taking this very seriously now as the possibility of a no-deal Brexit is becoming more possible”. French Prime Minister Edouard Philippe has said a no-deal Brexit looks “less and less unlikely” while German Economy Minister Peter Altmeier has warned “everyone in Europe would lose” from the UK leaving without an agreement. Ireland, which has the closest links to the UK of all the EU States, is now solely focused on measures covering key sectors such as health, communications, education, finance, employment and justice.</p>

<p>British economy’s health will be one of the most significant casualties of the present crisis. The International Monetary Fund has made it clear that Brexit without a deal is the “most significant near-term risk to the UK economy”. And in a public letter, more than 170 leading business figures have called for Theresa May and Jeremy Corbyn to back another referendum on withdrawal from the European Union “to stop us crashing out of the EU with no deal at all”.</p>

<p>The open political divide in the UK is causing a sense of bewilderment all around. On the one hand, opposition Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn has refused to negotiate with May unless a no-deal Brexit is ruled out, on the other Conservative Party chairman Brandon Lewis has ruled out discussion on staying in a customs union. Even within May’s Cabinet, there are contending voices and May’s ability to shape a consensus is gravely in doubt. While the Conservatives showed unity over the confidence vote, with all 314 members backing the Prime Minister, the divisions within the party over the way forward with Brexit remain as strong as ever. May has given no indication so far that she will be willing to budge on her “red lines”, thereby ruling out Labour’s demand for a customs union with the EU as there is a fear that such a compromise would lead to further departures from the Cabinet.</p>

<p>In more ways than one, Brexit has been a failed attempt by the Tories to put an end to the internecine warfare within the Party on the issue of the EU. May’s predecessor David Cameron thought that he could end this by winning a referendum on the EU. Instead, he lost and in the process pushed Britain into uncharted waters. For May, the tension between the Parliament as a whole and the Eurosceptics within her own party has been too much to enable her to navigate her way out of this crisis. There is a hardcore group within the Tories for whom a hard Brexit is more important than continuing in the government. And it is this group that will shape May’s future and in more ways than one, the future of Britain. An exercise which was supposed to be an absolute manifestation of a democratic mandate now has become hostage to a few Tory MPs who are hell bent on shaping the trajectory of British political relations with the rest of Europe.</p>

<p>Whatever the outcome of this process, the Britain which will emerge out of this political churn will be one quite distinct in its political complexion than the one we are used to.</p>

<p><em>(This article was originally published on The DNA. Read the <a href="https://www.dnaindia.com/analysis/column-brexit-a-messy-separation-2709878">original article</a>)</em></p>

<p><em>(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)</em></p>

<p>&nbsp;</p>


These are extraordinary times in British politics. In a matter of hours, the same Conservative Party MPs and the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) who had rejected British Prime Minister Theresa May’s Brexit plan came to her rescue and saved her government from falling in a no-confidence motion brought by the Opposition Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn.

These are extraordinary times in British politics. In a matter of hours, the same Conservative Party MPs and the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) who had rejected British Prime Minister Theresa May’s Brexit plan came to her rescue and saved her government from falling in a no-confidence motion brought by the Opposition Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn. May’s plan for an amicable divorce from the European Union (EU) was overwhelmingly rejected by the British Parliament, giving her government one of the worst defeats in British political history. This plan, which was aimed at bringing about an orderly departure from the EU on March 29, and setting up a 21-month transition period to negotiate a free trade deal was rejected by 432 to 202 votes. This was a plan which was almost two years in the making with May putting her career on the line. But it was clear that she failed in convincing Parliament that it was the best option for the nation. Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn quickly came back with a no-confidence vote against May’s government, arguing that May’s “zombie” administration had lost the right to govern. But this time May got back her support base from the rebel Tories and the DUP, winning the vote by a margin of 19. May has responded by underscoring her commitment to “continue to work to deliver on the solemn promise to the people of this country to deliver on the result of the referendum and leave the European Union”. But the road forward remains as complicated as ever for May and for Britain. After her victory in the no-confidence vote, May had called on MPs to “put self-interest aside” and “act in the national interest”, acknowledging that it “will not be an easy task”. Consensus certainly will not be easy to come by as the British polity remains at its most polarised today. May now has to present a new EU withdrawal plan to Parliament by January 21 ahead of a vote by MPs eight days later. And political confabulations have started in right earnest though without any real sense of direction. Meanwhile, the rest of the EU is moving ahead with contingency planning. European Commission has underlined that it is “taking this very seriously now as the possibility of a no-deal Brexit is becoming more possible”. French Prime Minister Edouard Philippe has said a no-deal Brexit looks “less and less unlikely” while German Economy Minister Peter Altmeier has warned “everyone in Europe would lose” from the UK leaving without an agreement. Ireland, which has the closest links to the UK of all the EU States, is now solely focused on measures covering key sectors such as health, communications, education, finance, employment and justice. British economy’s health will be one of the most significant casualties of the present crisis. The International Monetary Fund has made it clear that Brexit without a deal is the “most significant near-term risk to the UK economy”. And in a public letter, more than 170 leading business figures have called for Theresa May and Jeremy Corbyn to back another referendum on withdrawal from the European Union “to stop us crashing out of the EU with no deal at all”. The open political divide in the UK is causing a sense of bewilderment all around. On the one hand, opposition Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn has refused to negotiate with May unless a no-deal Brexit is ruled out, on the other Conservative Party chairman Brandon Lewis has ruled out discussion on staying in a customs union. Even within May’s Cabinet, there are contending voices and May’s ability to shape a consensus is gravely in doubt. While the Conservatives showed unity over the confidence vote, with all 314 members backing the Prime Minister, the divisions within the party over the way forward with Brexit remain as strong as ever. May has given no indication so far that she will be willing to budge on her “red lines”, thereby ruling out Labour’s demand for a customs union with the EU as there is a fear that such a compromise would lead to further departures from the Cabinet. In more ways than one, Brexit has been a failed attempt by the Tories to put an end to the internecine warfare within the Party on the issue of the EU. May’s predecessor David Cameron thought that he could end this by winning a referendum on the EU. Instead, he lost and in the process pushed Britain into uncharted waters. For May, the tension between the Parliament as a whole and the Eurosceptics within her own party has been too much to enable her to navigate her way out of this crisis. There is a hardcore group within the Tories for whom a hard Brexit is more important than continuing in the government. And it is this group that will shape May’s future and in more ways than one, the future of Britain. An exercise which was supposed to be an absolute manifestation of a democratic mandate now has become hostage to a few Tory MPs who are hell bent on shaping the trajectory of British political relations with the rest of Europe. Whatever the outcome of this process, the Britain which will emerge out of this political churn will be one quite distinct in its political complexion than the one we are used to. (This article was originally published on The DNA. Read the original article) (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Brexit: A messy separation

<p>Indian foreign policy is in a sweet spot these days. Wooed by major powers of all hues, it can afford to work with everyone, even if at times the pulls and pressures seem contradictory.&nbsp;</p>

<p>This was reflected at the G20 where New Delhi managed to pull off two seemingly contradictory trilaterals. Modi met with United States President Donald Trump and Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe (Japan, America and India, christened JAI) to underscore India’s firm commitment to make the Indo-Pacific a region for shared economic growth, prosperity and security.&nbsp;</p>

<p>The Indo-Pacific construct is now at the centre of strategic jockeying in the region and the three nations have been trying to define the exact scope of their engagement. Modi had explained India’s stand on the strategic Indo-Pacific region in his keynote address at the Shangri La Dialogue in Singapore in June.</p>

<p>&nbsp;“India does not see the Indo-Pacific Region as a strategy or as a club of limited members. Nor as a grouping that seeks to dominate,” he had said. But China’s rapid rise and the challenge it is posing to geopolitical stability is at the heart of the evolution of the Indo-Pacific and the trilateral in Argentina reinforced the desire of the three states to take it forward. Hours after the ‘JAI’ trilateral, Modi joined Chinese president Xi Jinping and Russian President Vladimir Putin for another trilateral – the ‘RIC’ - the second among the three countries after a gap of 12 years. The underlying rationale for this trilateral was quite different as the three nations discussed enhancing mutual cooperation at international forums. According to the Ministry of External Affairs, “They agreed on the importance of reform and strengthening of multilateral institutions that had benefitted the world, including the United Nations, WTO and well-established as well as new global financial institutions.”</p>

<p>While China is the one driving ‘JAI,’ it is the Trump Administration’s challenge to the global economic order that is largely behind India’s outreach to China and Russia. The fact that New Delhi managed to pull this off is a tribute to Modi’s astute investment in managing major power relations over the last few years. This is a period of fluid partnerships and Indian diplomacy will have to be nimble enough if her interests are to be preserved. Modi’s engagements at the G-20 underline that New Delhi is capable of managing this fluidity. India’s defence diplomacy is also being shaped by this reality.<br />
<br />
By the end of this year, India would have held military exercises with all P5 countries - US, Russia, China, France and the UK. So on one hand, there is the proposed military exercise with Russia and China, on the other 'Cope India’ between the Indian and US air forces has been restarted after a gap of nine years, showcasing “US and India’s efforts and commitment to a free and open Indo-Pacific region.”India and Russia conducted Indo-Russia Joint Military Exercise-Indra 2018 in Madhya Pradesh last week while Indo-UK Konkan naval exercise is currently underway, off Goa, which is focusing on Anti-Air warfare, Anti-Surface Warfare, Anti-Submarine Warfare, Visit Board Search and Seizure (VBSS) and Seamanship Evolutions.&nbsp;</p>

<p>The Japanese Air Self Defence Force (JASDF) is in India for a bilateral air exercise “SHINYUU Maitri-18” with the Indian Air Force (IAF). Defence minister Nirmala Sitharaman is visiting the US Indo-Pacific Command in Hawaii to chart the course for the first ever India-US tri-service military exercise off the Bay of Bengal in May-June, 2019. At the same time, the armies of India and China will be resuming their annual bilateral military exercise ‘Hand in Hand’ in December.<br />
<br />
India’s defence diplomacy has become truly ‘multivector’ and it is aimed at enhancing her strategic partnerships. It is a sign of India’s growing global profile that most powers want to engage with India on military and defence issues. The more partnerships India has, the better leverage it will have within diplomacy. But it is also important to recognise the challenges that come with this. Ultimately, India will have to enhance military interoperability with like-minded countries and that’s unlikely to happen if New Delhi will continue to keep its eggs in multiple baskets. It is good to be in a position where everyone wants to befriend us, but Indian policymakers should be aware of the fundamental challenge: which of these countries would come for help in face of an existential challenge?</p>

<p><em>(This article was originally published on DNA. Read the <a href="https://www.dnaindia.com/analysis/column-india-s-profile-is-attracting-engagement-on-military-issues-2692655">original article</a>)</em></p>

<p><em>(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)</em></p>


Indian foreign policy is in a sweet spot these days. Wooed by major powers of all hues, it can afford to work with everyone, even if at times the pulls and pressures seem contradictory.

Indian foreign policy is in a sweet spot these days. Wooed by major powers of all hues, it can afford to work with everyone, even if at times the pulls and pressures seem contradictory. This was reflected at the G20 where New Delhi managed to pull off two seemingly contradictory trilaterals. Modi met with United States President Donald Trump and Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe (Japan, America and India, christened JAI) to underscore India’s firm commitment to make the Indo-Pacific a region for shared economic growth, prosperity and security. The Indo-Pacific construct is now at the centre of strategic jockeying in the region and the three nations have been trying to define the exact scope of their engagement. Modi had explained India’s stand on the strategic Indo-Pacific region in his keynote address at the Shangri La Dialogue in Singapore in June. “India does not see the Indo-Pacific Region as a strategy or as a club of limited members. Nor as a grouping that seeks to dominate,” he had said. But China’s rapid rise and the challenge it is posing to geopolitical stability is at the heart of the evolution of the Indo-Pacific and the trilateral in Argentina reinforced the desire of the three states to take it forward. Hours after the ‘JAI’ trilateral, Modi joined Chinese president Xi Jinping and Russian President Vladimir Putin for another trilateral – the ‘RIC’ - the second among the three countries after a gap of 12 years. The underlying rationale for this trilateral was quite different as the three nations discussed enhancing mutual cooperation at international forums. According to the Ministry of External Affairs, “They agreed on the importance of reform and strengthening of multilateral institutions that had benefitted the world, including the United Nations, WTO and well-established as well as new global financial institutions.” While China is the one driving ‘JAI,’ it is the Trump Administration’s challenge to the global economic order that is largely behind India’s outreach to China and Russia. The fact that New Delhi managed to pull this off is a tribute to Modi’s astute investment in managing major power relations over the last few years. This is a period of fluid partnerships and Indian diplomacy will have to be nimble enough if her interests are to be preserved. Modi’s engagements at the G-20 underline that New Delhi is capable of managing this fluidity. India’s defence diplomacy is also being shaped by this reality. By the end of this year, India would have held military exercises with all P5 countries - US, Russia, China, France and the UK. So on one hand, there is the proposed military exercise with Russia and China, on the other 'Cope India’ between the Indian and US air forces has been restarted after a gap of nine years, showcasing “US and India’s efforts and commitment to a free and open Indo-Pacific region.”India and Russia conducted Indo-Russia Joint Military Exercise-Indra 2018 in Madhya Pradesh last week while Indo-UK Konkan naval exercise is currently underway, off Goa, which is focusing on Anti-Air warfare, Anti-Surface Warfare, Anti-Submarine Warfare, Visit Board Search and Seizure (VBSS) and Seamanship Evolutions. The Japanese Air Self Defence Force (JASDF) is in India for a bilateral air exercise “SHINYUU Maitri-18” with the Indian Air Force (IAF). Defence minister Nirmala Sitharaman is visiting the US Indo-Pacific Command in Hawaii to chart the course for the first ever India-US tri-service military exercise off the Bay of Bengal in May-June, 2019. At the same time, the armies of India and China will be resuming their annual bilateral military exercise ‘Hand in Hand’ in December. India’s defence diplomacy has become truly ‘multivector’ and it is aimed at enhancing her strategic partnerships. It is a sign of India’s growing global profile that most powers want to engage with India on military and defence issues. The more partnerships India has, the better leverage it will have within diplomacy. But it is also important to recognise the challenges that come with this. Ultimately, India will have to enhance military interoperability with like-minded countries and that’s unlikely to happen if New Delhi will continue to keep its eggs in multiple baskets. It is good to be in a position where everyone wants to befriend us, but Indian policymakers should be aware of the fundamental challenge: which of these countries would come for help in face of an existential challenge? (This article was originally published on DNA. Read the original article) (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

India’s profile is attracting engagement on military issues

<p>As the Brexit negotiations head towards an endgame, there is turmoil all around. British politics is on knife’s edge with the future of Prime Minister Theresa May and in some ways the entire Conservative Party on the line. The Opposition, too, is struggling to put its own house in order and even the European Union is facing disunity within its ranks despite pretensions of a united front.&nbsp;</p>

<p>Last week, an agreement on the withdrawal deal was reached in principle by May and the European Union (EU) which included a £39 billion “divorce bill” and the controversial customs “backstop” which keeps the UK temporarily in the EU customs union so as to prevent the return of manned customs posts at the Irish border. However, the joint political declaration on future relations which is to be confirmed on Sunday is only temporary. It will be the 21-month transition period after Britain leaves the EU on March 29, 2019, that would see the finalisation of the binding agreement. And this has led to challenges from all sides.</p>

<p>May is struggling to finalise a Brexit deal to be agreed at this Sunday’s summit of European leaders even as she is under pressure from her own MPs not to cede any further ground in negotiations. For the time being, her threat is that she has managed to get the best possible deal from the EU and that it’s either this deal or no deal and, therefore, no Brexit that has secured her position. But there is a demand for more clarity on all sides of the British Parliament about the exact terms of UK’s future engagement with the EU if at all the Parliament is to support the deal.&nbsp;</p>

<p>Despite a number of resignations from her cabinet and backroom manoeuvring to topple her from No 10 Downing Street, May looks stronger today than she looked last week and that’s a tribute to her own political skills and quite an accomplishment under the present circumstances. Yet her critics remain unrelenting. One of her strongest detractors, Jacob Rees-Mogg, has made a case that the time has come for May’s detractors to push for a confidence vote in May or face the spectacle of her leading the Tories into the next election. But he has accepted that he doesn’t have the required threshold of 48 letters needed to trigger a contest for Tory leadership. Opinion polls are also underscoring that support for May is growing among the British populace which is looking for a speedy resolution of this crisis. &nbsp;</p>

<p>On the other side, the EU had to complete the text on future ties with the UK on Tuesday but several member states have raised objection, leading to a delay. Countries have highlighted several issues such as UK access to the EU single market, access to UK waters for EU boats as well as Gibraltar. Spain, which is worried about the future status of Gibraltar, has warned it will reject the draft Brexit withdrawal deal without a clarification of the text on future talks on the status of Gibraltar. France has raised concerns about fishing rights and nations as the Netherlands and Denmark, remain concerned about the potential competitive advantage to UK businesses over the European without the UK being tied to strict environmental regulations.</p>

<p>Despite these concerns, Brussels would be hoping that when it would come to the crunch on Sunday, all 27 member nations of the EU would sign up to the Brexit deal so as to avoid a situation where there is a no deal and further uncertainty haunts the region. And in some ways, it is in EU’s interest that the British Prime Minister gets her plan approved by the British Parliament. A domestic political crisis in the UK is not in EU’s interest at this critical juncture. May also wants to demonstrate that she is fighting hard to secure British interests. So in a way, both May and the EU are sailing in the same boat.&nbsp;</p>

<p>As Britain struggles with its future relationship with the EU, its outreach to nations like India has been growing in order to seek out new avenues for economic relationships. British officials have been signalling that Brexit could augur well for trade ties between India and the EU as the two nations would find it easier to conclude a free trade pact without the involvement of the entire panoply of EU member states.&nbsp;</p>

<p>The economic relationship between the UK and India certainly remains a robust one. While the two nations can look forward to a potential FTA, the negotiations can only proceed once the UK has put its own house in order. India will also be looking for concessions on Indian skilled labour accessing UK markets.&nbsp;</p>

<p>The challenge for the UK at the moment is to sort out its own internal deliberations on the future of its trajectory with the EU. New Delhi will assess its own future with the UK in light of the choices London makes with Brussels.</p>

<p><em>(This article was originally published on DNA. Read the <a href="https://www.dnaindia.com/analysis/column-brexit-a-challenge-for-uk-an-opportunity-for-india-2688308">original article</a>)</em></p>

<p><em>(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)</em><br />
&nbsp;</p>


As the Brexit negotiations head towards an endgame, there is turmoil all around. British politics is on knife’s edge with the future of Prime Minister Theresa May and in some ways the entire Conservative Party on the line.

As the Brexit negotiations head towards an endgame, there is turmoil all around. British politics is on knife’s edge with the future of Prime Minister Theresa May and in some ways the entire Conservative Party on the line. The Opposition, too, is struggling to put its own house in order and even the European Union is facing disunity within its ranks despite pretensions of a united front. Last week, an agreement on the withdrawal deal was reached in principle by May and the European Union (EU) which included a £39 billion “divorce bill” and the controversial customs “backstop” which keeps the UK temporarily in the EU customs union so as to prevent the return of manned customs posts at the Irish border. However, the joint political declaration on future relations which is to be confirmed on Sunday is only temporary. It will be the 21-month transition period after Britain leaves the EU on March 29, 2019, that would see the finalisation of the binding agreement. And this has led to challenges from all sides. May is struggling to finalise a Brexit deal to be agreed at this Sunday’s summit of European leaders even as she is under pressure from her own MPs not to cede any further ground in negotiations. For the time being, her threat is that she has managed to get the best possible deal from the EU and that it’s either this deal or no deal and, therefore, no Brexit that has secured her position. But there is a demand for more clarity on all sides of the British Parliament about the exact terms of UK’s future engagement with the EU if at all the Parliament is to support the deal. Despite a number of resignations from her cabinet and backroom manoeuvring to topple her from No 10 Downing Street, May looks stronger today than she looked last week and that’s a tribute to her own political skills and quite an accomplishment under the present circumstances. Yet her critics remain unrelenting. One of her strongest detractors, Jacob Rees-Mogg, has made a case that the time has come for May’s detractors to push for a confidence vote in May or face the spectacle of her leading the Tories into the next election. But he has accepted that he doesn’t have the required threshold of 48 letters needed to trigger a contest for Tory leadership. Opinion polls are also underscoring that support for May is growing among the British populace which is looking for a speedy resolution of this crisis. On the other side, the EU had to complete the text on future ties with the UK on Tuesday but several member states have raised objection, leading to a delay. Countries have highlighted several issues such as UK access to the EU single market, access to UK waters for EU boats as well as Gibraltar. Spain, which is worried about the future status of Gibraltar, has warned it will reject the draft Brexit withdrawal deal without a clarification of the text on future talks on the status of Gibraltar. France has raised concerns about fishing rights and nations as the Netherlands and Denmark, remain concerned about the potential competitive advantage to UK businesses over the European without the UK being tied to strict environmental regulations. Despite these concerns, Brussels would be hoping that when it would come to the crunch on Sunday, all 27 member nations of the EU would sign up to the Brexit deal so as to avoid a situation where there is a no deal and further uncertainty haunts the region. And in some ways, it is in EU’s interest that the British Prime Minister gets her plan approved by the British Parliament. A domestic political crisis in the UK is not in EU’s interest at this critical juncture. May also wants to demonstrate that she is fighting hard to secure British interests. So in a way, both May and the EU are sailing in the same boat. As Britain struggles with its future relationship with the EU, its outreach to nations like India has been growing in order to seek out new avenues for economic relationships. British officials have been signalling that Brexit could augur well for trade ties between India and the EU as the two nations would find it easier to conclude a free trade pact without the involvement of the entire panoply of EU member states. The economic relationship between the UK and India certainly remains a robust one. While the two nations can look forward to a potential FTA, the negotiations can only proceed once the UK has put its own house in order. India will also be looking for concessions on Indian skilled labour accessing UK markets. The challenge for the UK at the moment is to sort out its own internal deliberations on the future of its trajectory with the EU. New Delhi will assess its own future with the UK in light of the choices London makes with Brussels. (This article was originally published on DNA. Read the original article) (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Brexit: A challenge for UK, an opportunity for India

<p>Prime Minister Narendra Modi is in Singapore this week to attend the East Asia Summit, ASEAN-India informal meet and the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) Summit. The Indian prime minister became the first head of government to deliver an address at the Singapore Fintech Festival, one of the largest events on financial technology, where he launched APIX, a banking technology designed to reach two billion people worldwide who are still without bank accounts.&nbsp;</p>

<p>PM Modi underlined the growing digitisation of the Indian economy and showcased India’s role in the shaping of global financial technologies which are not merely disruptive but also inclusive.</p>

<p>It is, however, the geopolitics and geo-economics of the changing Indo-Pacific which will be the focus of most of Modi’s engagements at various levels. The RCEP, accounting for almost 40 per cent of global trade, remains an important grouping for the 16 members — the 10-member ASEAN plus India, China, Japan, South Korea, Australia and New Zealand. It is a rather ambitious undertaking and despite repeated calls for an early conclusion, it remains mired in multiple issues which are thorny in nature. Though progress on the negotiations has been slow since they began in 2013, the Trump administration’s protectionist policies have given the negotiations a new momentum. It is now being hoped that the pact may now be concluded next year. India too has found it difficult to generate a domestic consensus on RCEP and it is likely that tough decisions on tariff reductions will now be taken only after elections next year, though Commerce Minister Suresh Prabhu underscored that New Delhi was “very happy that India’s concerns have been taken on board, and... country will benefit from it.”</p>

<p>The East Asia Summit will be India exploring wide-ranging issues pertaining to smart cities, IT, communication, maritime cooperation and terrorism with 17 other participating leaders. EAS has now emerged as the most critical multilateral framework in the Indo-Pacific where multiple stakeholders engage each other annually. The East Asia Summit, which includes India, China, Japan, South Korea, Australia, New Zealand, the US and Russia apart from the 10 ASEAN member states, also gives India an opportunity to underline its credentials as an important stakeholder in regional developments.</p>

<p>PM Modi will also participate in the ASEAN India Bilateral Summit where progress in the goals set in the Delhi Declaration of the ASEAN India Commemorative Summit will be discussed. Addressing last year’s ASEAN-India Summit in Manila, Modi underscored India’s relationship with ASEAN is a key pillar of its foreign policy. Referring to India’s Act East Policy, he had underlined that “its centrality in the regional security architecture of the Indo-Pacific region is evident”. In a symbolic move, all 10 ASEAN heads of State were invited to be guests of honour for this year’s Republic Day function. Targeting China, Modi had also assured ASEAN of “steady support towards achieving a rules-based regional security architecture that best attests to the region’s interests and its peaceful development.”</p>

<p>India has repeatedly underscored the centrality of the ASEAN in its Indo-Pacific vision. In his keynote address at the Shangri La Dialogue earlier this year too, Modi had suggested that India will promote a democratic and rules-based international order in the Indo-Pacific with ASEAN at its heart, that allows free access to common spaces and is not limited to a ‘club of limited members.’</p>

<p>It is in this context, it is interesting that despite suggestions that nothing much has been happening on the Quad front, the third meeting of Quad countries — India, the US, Japan and Australia — at the joint secretary-level will also take place in Singapore. It is clear that these four nations do not want to let go of the momentum that is gradually building up. There may be little substance in the engagement at the moment but all four states remain keen to leverage it in some form.</p>

<p>The Indo-Pacific region is now central to global politics and economics, and recent days have merely reinforced the trends that have been emerging for some time. China is the most important player in the region, and Beijing is now more confident than ever of projecting regional and global power. In this, China has had the good fortune of having an administration in the US that lacks seriousness of purpose and is unable to communicate effectively its priorities for the region. This makes this period of transition very significant for countries like India that have a stake in the long-term stability of the region. As China’s profile grows, there is a new opportunity for India in the region. Unlike in the past, New Delhi is no longer diffident about engaging with other regional players if it helps to further Indian interests in maintaining a stable balance of power in the region.</p>

<p><em>(This article was originally published on DNA. Read the <a href="https://www.dnaindia.com/analysis/column-asean-furthering-india-s-interests-in-indo-pacific-2685730">original article</a>)</em></p>

<p><em>(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)</em><br />
&nbsp;</p>


Prime Minister Narendra Modi is in Singapore this week to attend the East Asia Summit, ASEAN-India informal meet and the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) Summit.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi is in Singapore this week to attend the East Asia Summit, ASEAN-India informal meet and the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) Summit. The Indian prime minister became the first head of government to deliver an address at the Singapore Fintech Festival, one of the largest events on financial technology, where he launched APIX, a banking technology designed to reach two billion people worldwide who are still without bank accounts. PM Modi underlined the growing digitisation of the Indian economy and showcased India’s role in the shaping of global financial technologies which are not merely disruptive but also inclusive. It is, however, the geopolitics and geo-economics of the changing Indo-Pacific which will be the focus of most of Modi’s engagements at various levels. The RCEP, accounting for almost 40 per cent of global trade, remains an important grouping for the 16 members — the 10-member ASEAN plus India, China, Japan, South Korea, Australia and New Zealand. It is a rather ambitious undertaking and despite repeated calls for an early conclusion, it remains mired in multiple issues which are thorny in nature. Though progress on the negotiations has been slow since they began in 2013, the Trump administration’s protectionist policies have given the negotiations a new momentum. It is now being hoped that the pact may now be concluded next year. India too has found it difficult to generate a domestic consensus on RCEP and it is likely that tough decisions on tariff reductions will now be taken only after elections next year, though Commerce Minister Suresh Prabhu underscored that New Delhi was “very happy that India’s concerns have been taken on board, and... country will benefit from it.” The East Asia Summit will be India exploring wide-ranging issues pertaining to smart cities, IT, communication, maritime cooperation and terrorism with 17 other participating leaders. EAS has now emerged as the most critical multilateral framework in the Indo-Pacific where multiple stakeholders engage each other annually. The East Asia Summit, which includes India, China, Japan, South Korea, Australia, New Zealand, the US and Russia apart from the 10 ASEAN member states, also gives India an opportunity to underline its credentials as an important stakeholder in regional developments. PM Modi will also participate in the ASEAN India Bilateral Summit where progress in the goals set in the Delhi Declaration of the ASEAN India Commemorative Summit will be discussed. Addressing last year’s ASEAN-India Summit in Manila, Modi underscored India’s relationship with ASEAN is a key pillar of its foreign policy. Referring to India’s Act East Policy, he had underlined that “its centrality in the regional security architecture of the Indo-Pacific region is evident”. In a symbolic move, all 10 ASEAN heads of State were invited to be guests of honour for this year’s Republic Day function. Targeting China, Modi had also assured ASEAN of “steady support towards achieving a rules-based regional security architecture that best attests to the region’s interests and its peaceful development.” India has repeatedly underscored the centrality of the ASEAN in its Indo-Pacific vision. In his keynote address at the Shangri La Dialogue earlier this year too, Modi had suggested that India will promote a democratic and rules-based international order in the Indo-Pacific with ASEAN at its heart, that allows free access to common spaces and is not limited to a ‘club of limited members.’ It is in this context, it is interesting that despite suggestions that nothing much has been happening on the Quad front, the third meeting of Quad countries — India, the US, Japan and Australia — at the joint secretary-level will also take place in Singapore. It is clear that these four nations do not want to let go of the momentum that is gradually building up. There may be little substance in the engagement at the moment but all four states remain keen to leverage it in some form. The Indo-Pacific region is now central to global politics and economics, and recent days have merely reinforced the trends that have been emerging for some time. China is the most important player in the region, and Beijing is now more confident than ever of projecting regional and global power. In this, China has had the good fortune of having an administration in the US that lacks seriousness of purpose and is unable to communicate effectively its priorities for the region. This makes this period of transition very significant for countries like India that have a stake in the long-term stability of the region. As China’s profile grows, there is a new opportunity for India in the region. Unlike in the past, New Delhi is no longer diffident about engaging with other regional players if it helps to further Indian interests in maintaining a stable balance of power in the region. (This article was originally published on DNA. Read the original article) (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Furthering India’s interests in Indo-Pacific region

<p>The Modi government is demonstrating an unusual, though welcome, urgency in pursuing a revamp of the national security apparatus. Under the chairmanship of the National Security Adviser, the Strategic Policy Group (SPG) has been revived to assist the National Security Council in moving forward with a long-term strategic defence review.<br />
<br />
The SPG, whose members include the NITI Aayog vice chairman, the cabinet secretary, the three military chiefs, the Reserve Bank of India governor, the foreign secretary, home secretary, finance secretary and the defence secretary, will now be the central instrumentality for inter-ministerial coordination and integration of inputs in forming national security policies. It was set up by the AB Vajpayee government in 1999 but was earlier headed by the Cabinet Secretary. Now the power shifts to the NSA, making an already powerful office even more potent.<br />
<br />
The NSA is now joined by three deputies at the National Security Council Secretariat (NSCS) with responsibilities spanning across three distinct domains. RN Ravi, a former head of the Joint Intelligence Committee, was recently appointed the third deputy national security adviser, joining former RAW chief Rajinder Khanna and former ambassador to Russia Pankaj Saran at the NSCS.</p>

<p>These changes come months after the Narendra Modi government decided to establish an overarching defence planning committee (DPC) —comprising the chairman of the chiefs of staff committee, three service chiefs, the defence, expenditure and foreign secretaries — under the national security adviser to enhance India’s ability to do some long-term strategising. The Prime Minister recently also gave the go-ahead for the formation of the three tri-services agencies—for cyber, space, and special operations across the three armed forces.</p>

<p>This revamp comes at a time when Indian national security planning stands at a crossroads. The silo-driven approach to national security has resulted in the lack of an integrated view. The three services, as well as the civilian and defence agencies, are often seen to be working at cross-purposes. Such an ad hoc approach has meant that more often than not, issues like threat perception and force structure are not managed via a centralised and authoritative overview. Instead, individual services tend to be driving the agenda at their own levels.</p>

<p>The headlines on Indian defence policy often tend to be completely divorced from the ground reality. India’s $250-billion military modernisation programme is often talked about. But even as New Delhi remains keen on acquiring significant weapons platforms, there have been persistent doubts about its ability to harness these resources in service of a long-term strategy. Indeed, the absence of an Indian “grand strategy” that sets out political objectives for Indian power projection—and then ensures military, economic, intelligence and educational development—coordinated toward these objectives, has been a perennial topic of discussion within Indian strategic circles.</p>

<p>India’s defence reform campaign has existed nearly as long as the current system itself. This drive focuses on extending resource integration and coordination throughout defence policymaking. Effective defence planning and force structuring is a function of an institutional framework that allows for a clear delineation of political goals, efficient mobilisation of resources and effective use of these resources for developing instrumentalities of state power. At a time when advances in technology are revolutionizing warfare, India is still debating the need to move towards leaner force structures.&nbsp;</p>

<p>India needs to cut the flab on an urgent basis as over half of the annual defence budget going to meet salary and pension requirements is clearly not sustainable. The priorities of India’s ‘Make In India’ initiative and cumbersome defence procurement process will also have to be brought in sync with each other.</p>

<p>India’s status as the world’s largest arms importer hardly does justice to its ambitions to emerge as a defence manufacturing hub. The debate on integration, both among the services headquarters, and between the services and the ministry of defence, also continues unabated and should be concluded. The central challenge in defence planning remains the issue of uncertainty. Effective defence planning tends to put a premium on assuring future strategic and operational adaptiveness.&nbsp;</p>

<p>In the Indian context, a transformative shift in mindset, structures and processes is needed. Rapidly evolving security environment, as well as a near permanent pressure on scarce resources, underscores the need for strategic defence planning.</p>

<p>Though rather late in its term, the Modi government has begun a process of streamlining national security planning. It is not perfect but the fact that changes are being made underlines the fact that policymakers recognise the gravity of the challenge they face. It can only be hoped that the drumbeat of impending elections would not take away the focus from the critical area. After all, governments may come and go but the imperatives of national security will remain.<br />
&nbsp;</p>

<p><em>(This article was originally published on DNA. Read the <a href="https://www.dnaindia.com/analysis/column-modi-govt-streamlining-national-security-planning-2676086">original article</a>)</em></p>

<p><em>(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)</em><br />
&nbsp;</p>

<p>&nbsp;</p>


The Modi government is demonstrating an unusual, though welcome, urgency in pursuing a revamp of the national security apparatus. Under the chairmanship of the National Security Adviser, the Strategic Policy Group (SPG) has been revived to assist the National Security Council in moving forward with a long-term strategic defence review.

The Modi government is demonstrating an unusual, though welcome, urgency in pursuing a revamp of the national security apparatus. Under the chairmanship of the National Security Adviser, the Strategic Policy Group (SPG) has been revived to assist the National Security Council in moving forward with a long-term strategic defence review. The SPG, whose members include the NITI Aayog vice chairman, the cabinet secretary, the three military chiefs, the Reserve Bank of India governor, the foreign secretary, home secretary, finance secretary and the defence secretary, will now be the central instrumentality for inter-ministerial coordination and integration of inputs in forming national security policies. It was set up by the AB Vajpayee government in 1999 but was earlier headed by the Cabinet Secretary. Now the power shifts to the NSA, making an already powerful office even more potent. The NSA is now joined by three deputies at the National Security Council Secretariat (NSCS) with responsibilities spanning across three distinct domains. RN Ravi, a former head of the Joint Intelligence Committee, was recently appointed the third deputy national security adviser, joining former RAW chief Rajinder Khanna and former ambassador to Russia Pankaj Saran at the NSCS. These changes come months after the Narendra Modi government decided to establish an overarching defence planning committee (DPC) —comprising the chairman of the chiefs of staff committee, three service chiefs, the defence, expenditure and foreign secretaries — under the national security adviser to enhance India’s ability to do some long-term strategising. The Prime Minister recently also gave the go-ahead for the formation of the three tri-services agencies—for cyber, space, and special operations across the three armed forces. This revamp comes at a time when Indian national security planning stands at a crossroads. The silo-driven approach to national security has resulted in the lack of an integrated view. The three services, as well as the civilian and defence agencies, are often seen to be working at cross-purposes. Such an ad hoc approach has meant that more often than not, issues like threat perception and force structure are not managed via a centralised and authoritative overview. Instead, individual services tend to be driving the agenda at their own levels. The headlines on Indian defence policy often tend to be completely divorced from the ground reality. India’s $250-billion military modernisation programme is often talked about. But even as New Delhi remains keen on acquiring significant weapons platforms, there have been persistent doubts about its ability to harness these resources in service of a long-term strategy. Indeed, the absence of an Indian “grand strategy” that sets out political objectives for Indian power projection—and then ensures military, economic, intelligence and educational development—coordinated toward these objectives, has been a perennial topic of discussion within Indian strategic circles. India’s defence reform campaign has existed nearly as long as the current system itself. This drive focuses on extending resource integration and coordination throughout defence policymaking. Effective defence planning and force structuring is a function of an institutional framework that allows for a clear delineation of political goals, efficient mobilisation of resources and effective use of these resources for developing instrumentalities of state power. At a time when advances in technology are revolutionizing warfare, India is still debating the need to move towards leaner force structures. India needs to cut the flab on an urgent basis as over half of the annual defence budget going to meet salary and pension requirements is clearly not sustainable. The priorities of India’s ‘Make In India’ initiative and cumbersome defence procurement process will also have to be brought in sync with each other. India’s status as the world’s largest arms importer hardly does justice to its ambitions to emerge as a defence manufacturing hub. The debate on integration, both among the services headquarters, and between the services and the ministry of defence, also continues unabated and should be concluded. The central challenge in defence planning remains the issue of uncertainty. Effective defence planning tends to put a premium on assuring future strategic and operational adaptiveness. In the Indian context, a transformative shift in mindset, structures and processes is needed. Rapidly evolving security environment, as well as a near permanent pressure on scarce resources, underscores the need for strategic defence planning. Though rather late in its term, the Modi government has begun a process of streamlining national security planning. It is not perfect but the fact that changes are being made underlines the fact that policymakers recognise the gravity of the challenge they face. It can only be hoped that the drumbeat of impending elections would not take away the focus from the critical area. After all, governments may come and go but the imperatives of national security will remain. (This article was originally published on DNA. Read the original article) (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Modi government streamlining national security planning

<p>Earlier this month, north-eastern Asia and northern Pacific Ocean drew global attention as Russian forces geared up for their biggest war games – Vostok 18 - since the end of the Cold War. This exercise took place from September 11 to September 17 at five ground testing areas and four aerial testing areas over the Sea of Japan and the Bering and Okhotsk seas.</p>

<p>Russia claimed that up to 300,000 troops (a third of the country’s armed forces), 1000 aircraft, 36,000 tanks and armoured vehicles were involved even as 3200 Chinese troops, 900 tanks and armoured vehicles, as well as troops from Mongolia, joined them in this endeavour. This raised the stakes even higher for the rest of the world.</p>

<p>This exercise was not merely a show of strength to the West but it also symbolised Russia’s growing rapprochement with China. These two countries which were once adversaries are now emerging as close partners. Border disputes between the two ended in 2004. As dissatisfaction with American policy has grown in Moscow and Beijing, a closer partnership is now looking enticing. The Trump Administration has declared these two nations as ‘strategic competitors.</p>

<p>Russia’s decision to sell latest the military technology (like S-400 surface to air missiles and SU-35 fighter jets) to China and an invitation to participate in its largest military drill underlines that it no longer sees China as a threat. For a long time, China’s expansionist motive particularly in the Siberian region was perceived as a threat by Russian leaders but this seems to have been relegated to the background. This is also a message to the West that if it continues to target Russia, then its engagement with China is only going to increase.&nbsp;</p>

<p>The timing of these exercises coincided with the Eastern Economic Forum in Vladivostok which saw participation not only from the Chinese President Xi Jinping but also from a few of the closest partners of the US such as Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe and South Korean Prime Minister Lee Nak-yeon.&nbsp;</p>

<p>Another interesting aspect of this exercise was that it was not a Sino-Russian joint military exercise. It was China that joined Russia in its largest military endeavour since the end of the Cold War though differences still exist between the two. China is still reluctant to increase investment in Russia and China also prefers the West when it comes to making investments or getting good education for Chinese youth. So this tactical shift in its behaviour can reverse itself very easily. For China, there is much to learn from Russia’s operational experience in war fighting. Though China’s military modernisation is leaving Russia far behind, its real time operational experience is rather limited. Russia’s experience in the Syrian conflict where it has sharpened its informational warfare and combined armed warfare techniques is something that Chinese military generals are eyeing with great interest.</p>

<p>The exercises highlight the growing divide between Russia and China on the one hand, and the US on the other. India has important stakes with all the&nbsp;three powers involved. India’s relationship with the US has improved dramatically in recent decades. Though India is trying to diversify its defence requirements yet it remains dependent on Russia for its needs. The recent sanctions via CAATSA (Countering American Adversaries through Sanctions Act) by the US has the potential to further deteriorate its relations with Russia. Russia is very important for India in terms of nuclear security, cyber security, its intelligence needs as well as for securing crucial defence equipment such as S-400 anti-aircraft weapon systems.&nbsp;</p>

<p>China, meanwhile, has emerged as one of the biggest foreign policy challenges for India in recent times. Sino-Indian differences straddle various domains from growing trade deficit to border and water disputes. Pakistan continues to be a challenge to Sino-Indian relations. Though the Wuhan summit has tried to bridge the gap between the two countries, structural challenges continue to shape the divergent trajectory in Sino-Indian relations.&nbsp;</p>

<p>The fact that Sino-Russian relationship has grown to this extent where the two are now participating in joint military exercises underscores the rapidly evolving nature of this relationship and a fluid global strategic environment. Both are now more unified than ever in posing a challenge to the US-led global order. For India, this poses a real challenge. New Delhi has long maintained that it needs a close relationship with Moscow so that the Beijing-Moscow relationship could be dented. But India’s Russia outreach seems to have had a rather insignificant impact so far on the Russia-China dynamic.</p>

<p>Russia is also reaching out to Pakistan despite Indian reservations and is changing its tune on the Afghanistan issue. It is now a strong votary of negotiating with the Taliban and has given short shrift to Indian reservations in this regard. Russia has been at the forefront of advising India not to challenge China’s ambitious Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). Given the challenge China poses to India on multiple fronts, this growing Sino-Russian collusion should ideally be at the top of the agenda when the Russian President visits India next month.</p>

<p>Global politics is evolving rapidly and great-power politics is back with a vengeance. History did not end in 1991 as Francis Fukuyama would have liked us to believe. Instead, it seems to have been a lull in a never-ending contest between major powers.&nbsp;<br />
<br />
<em>(The article is co-authored by Pallav Agarwal who is a Research Intern at Observer Research Foundation, New Delhi.)</em></p>

<p><em>(This article was first published on The DNA. Read the <a href="https://www.dnaindia.com/analysis/column-how-russia-china-ties-affect-india-2667372">original article</a>.)</em></p>

<p><em>(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)</em></p>


Earlier this month, north-eastern Asia and northern Pacific Ocean drew global attention as Russian forces geared up for their biggest war games – Vostok 18 - since the end of the Cold War.

Earlier this month, north-eastern Asia and northern Pacific Ocean drew global attention as Russian forces geared up for their biggest war games – Vostok 18 - since the end of the Cold War. This exercise took place from September 11 to September 17 at five ground testing areas and four aerial testing areas over the Sea of Japan and the Bering and Okhotsk seas. Russia claimed that up to 300,000 troops (a third of the country’s armed forces), 1000 aircraft, 36,000 tanks and armoured vehicles were involved even as 3200 Chinese troops, 900 tanks and armoured vehicles, as well as troops from Mongolia, joined them in this endeavour. This raised the stakes even higher for the rest of the world. This exercise was not merely a show of strength to the West but it also symbolised Russia’s growing rapprochement with China. These two countries which were once adversaries are now emerging as close partners. Border disputes between the two ended in 2004. As dissatisfaction with American policy has grown in Moscow and Beijing, a closer partnership is now looking enticing. The Trump Administration has declared these two nations as ‘strategic competitors. Russia’s decision to sell latest the military technology (like S-400 surface to air missiles and SU-35 fighter jets) to China and an invitation to participate in its largest military drill underlines that it no longer sees China as a threat. For a long time, China’s expansionist motive particularly in the Siberian region was perceived as a threat by Russian leaders but this seems to have been relegated to the background. This is also a message to the West that if it continues to target Russia, then its engagement with China is only going to increase. The timing of these exercises coincided with the Eastern Economic Forum in Vladivostok which saw participation not only from the Chinese President Xi Jinping but also from a few of the closest partners of the US such as Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe and South Korean Prime Minister Lee Nak-yeon. Another interesting aspect of this exercise was that it was not a Sino-Russian joint military exercise. It was China that joined Russia in its largest military endeavour since the end of the Cold War though differences still exist between the two. China is still reluctant to increase investment in Russia and China also prefers the West when it comes to making investments or getting good education for Chinese youth. So this tactical shift in its behaviour can reverse itself very easily. For China, there is much to learn from Russia’s operational experience in war fighting. Though China’s military modernisation is leaving Russia far behind, its real time operational experience is rather limited. Russia’s experience in the Syrian conflict where it has sharpened its informational warfare and combined armed warfare techniques is something that Chinese military generals are eyeing with great interest. The exercises highlight the growing divide between Russia and China on the one hand, and the US on the other. India has important stakes with all the three powers involved. India’s relationship with the US has improved dramatically in recent decades. Though India is trying to diversify its defence requirements yet it remains dependent on Russia for its needs. The recent sanctions via CAATSA (Countering American Adversaries through Sanctions Act) by the US has the potential to further deteriorate its relations with Russia. Russia is very important for India in terms of nuclear security, cyber security, its intelligence needs as well as for securing crucial defence equipment such as S-400 anti-aircraft weapon systems. China, meanwhile, has emerged as one of the biggest foreign policy challenges for India in recent times. Sino-Indian differences straddle various domains from growing trade deficit to border and water disputes. Pakistan continues to be a challenge to Sino-Indian relations. Though the Wuhan summit has tried to bridge the gap between the two countries, structural challenges continue to shape the divergent trajectory in Sino-Indian relations. The fact that Sino-Russian relationship has grown to this extent where the two are now participating in joint military exercises underscores the rapidly evolving nature of this relationship and a fluid global strategic environment. Both are now more unified than ever in posing a challenge to the US-led global order. For India, this poses a real challenge. New Delhi has long maintained that it needs a close relationship with Moscow so that the Beijing-Moscow relationship could be dented. But India’s Russia outreach seems to have had a rather insignificant impact so far on the Russia-China dynamic. Russia is also reaching out to Pakistan despite Indian reservations and is changing its tune on the Afghanistan issue. It is now a strong votary of negotiating with the Taliban and has given short shrift to Indian reservations in this regard. Russia has been at the forefront of advising India not to challenge China’s ambitious Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). Given the challenge China poses to India on multiple fronts, this growing Sino-Russian collusion should ideally be at the top of the agenda when the Russian President visits India next month. Global politics is evolving rapidly and great-power politics is back with a vengeance. History did not end in 1991 as Francis Fukuyama would have liked us to believe. Instead, it seems to have been a lull in a never-ending contest between major powers. (The article is co-authored by Pallav Agarwal who is a Research Intern at Observer Research Foundation, New Delhi.) (This article was first published on The DNA. Read the original article.) (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Opinion: How Russia-China ties affect India

<p>Prime Minister Narendra Modi and the US President Donald Trump have a crowded agenda when they meet later today. From economics and trade to defence and regional security, multiple issues will vie for their attention. But one issue where the two leaders would be hoping for a strong convergence of views would be counterterrorism. It is a priority for both leaders and they have indicated that they remain committed to robust counter terror policies. Modi has already underscored this in the US when, while addressing a gathering of Indian-Americans in Virginia, he said that India&rsquo;s surgical strikes on terror launch pads across the LoC last year after the Uri attack were proof that the nation can stand up in its own defense when needed. He also underlined the challenge that India has faced in communicating India&rsquo;s terrorism challenge with the West, when he sarcastically argued that &ldquo;When India talked of terrorism 20 years back, many in the world said it was a law and order problem and didn&rsquo;t understand it. Now terrorists have explained terrorism to them so we don&rsquo;t have to.&rdquo;</p>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="row">
<div class="article-blockquote">
<div class="col-sm-10 col-sm-offset-1 blockquote-content quoteshare">
<blockquote>
<h5>Trump administration is also discussing various tough options vis-&agrave;-vis Pakistan such as expanding U.S. drone strikes, redirecting or withholding some aid to Pakistan and perhaps eventually downgrading Pakistan&#39;s status as a major non-NATO ally.</h5>
</blockquote>
</div>

<div class="col-sm-1 blockquote-content">
<div class="share-blockquote"><a class="twitter popup" href="http://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=Trump administration is also discussing various tough options vis-?-vis Pakistan such as expanding U.S. drone strikes, redirecting or withholding some aid to Pakistan and perhaps eventually downgrading Pakistan's status as a major non-NATO ally." target="_blank"><i class="fa fa-share">&nbsp;</i></a></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqquoteclosemark">&times;</a></div>
</div>
</div>

<p>India-US ties have been growing in recent years and counterterrorism has been an area where significant convergence has been achieved, at times with great difficulty. For long where India viewed Pakistan as the epicentre of terrorism, Washington remained reluctant to put pressure on what it argued was a close ally in its &lsquo;war against terrorism.&rsquo; Even in the early years of Barack Obama, the US tried to make Pakistan into strategic partner in counterterrorism. But it failed spectacularly. By the end of Obama Administration, senior officials were openly calling for tougher actions against Pakistan. Donald Trump&rsquo;s rhetoric during the Presidential campaign was very tough but since coming to office, his administration is yet to evolve a cohesive counter terror approach. Though both India and the US agree on the need for zero-tolerance against terror, no meaningful progress can happen without seriously tackling Pakistan&#39;s role in supporting terror groups. India has taken a tough stand on Pakistan&rsquo;s support for terrorism by underscoring its concerns in various international fora about terrorism emanating from Pakistan. Modi would like to make India&rsquo;s case once again when he meets Trump at a time when the Trump administration is also discussing various tough options vis-&agrave;-vis Pakistan such as expanding U.S. drone strikes, redirecting or withholding some aid to Pakistan and perhaps eventually downgrading Pakistan&#39;s status as a major non-NATO ally.</p>

<p>American policy makers have been particularly concerned the Haqqani&#39;s presence in Pakistan, a group which was designated as a terrorist organization as far back as in 2012. Admiral Mike Mullen, then the top US military officer, told the US Congress in 2011 that the Haqqani network was a &quot;veritable arm&quot; of the ISI. The Haqqani network has used its sanctuaries in Pakistan to mount high-profile attacks in Afghanistan against American interests. Therefore, in its first formal high-level exchange between the US and Pakistan under the Donald Trump administration, the US national Security Advisor H.R. McMaster conveyed a strong message to Pakistani officials that there is an urgent &ldquo;need to confront terrorism in all its forms&rdquo;. He was categorical in his assessment of Pakistani complicity in destabilizing Afghanistan when he underscored that &ldquo;as all of us have hoped for many, many years, we have hoped that Pakistani leaders will understand that it is in their interest to go after these groups less selectively than they have in the past and the best way to pursue their interests in Afghanistan and elsewhere is through diplomacy, not through the use of proxies that engage in violence.&rdquo;</p>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="row">
<div class="article-blockquote">
<div class="col-sm-10 col-sm-offset-1 blockquote-content quoteshare">
<blockquote>
<h5>In an acknowledgment that US-backed forces are not winning and Taliban militants are resurgent, the Trump Administration is again poised to deploy thousands more troops in Afghanistan.</h5>
</blockquote>
</div>

<div class="col-sm-1 blockquote-content">
<div class="share-blockquote"><a class="twitter popup" href="http://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=In an acknowledgment that US-backed forces are not winning and Taliban militants are resurgent, the Trump Administration is again poised to deploy thousands more troops in Afghanistan." target="_blank"><i class="fa fa-share">&nbsp;</i></a></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqquoteclosemark">&times;</a></div>
</div>
</div>

<p>But there is no clarity yet on what form a new Afghanistan policy will take under the Trump administration. Though there have been calls by military commanders for adding &ldquo;several thousand&rdquo; troops to the 8,400 US forces already in Afghanistan so as to break the stalemate with the Taliban, a decision on the troop level is yet to come. Trump also consented to the dropping of the GBU-43/B massive ordnance air blast (MOAB) bomb, nicknamed the &ldquo;mother of all bombs&rdquo;, on a network of fortified underground tunnels that the Islamic State (IS) had been using to stage attacks on Afghan government forces in Nangarhar province, near the Pakistan border. &nbsp;In an acknowledgment that US-backed forces are not winning and Taliban militants are resurgent, the Trump Administration is again poised to deploy thousands more troops in Afghanistan. And the Pentagon, in a report to the US Congress last week, explicitly accused elements of Pakistan&#39;s government of supporting Afghanistan-focused militant groups, including the Taliban and Haqqani Network, who it said retained &quot;freedom of action&quot; within Pakistan. It called Pakistan &quot;the most influential external actor affecting Afghan stability.&quot;</p>

<p>The Trump administration is under pressure to put more pressure on Pakistan and to curtail Pakistan&rsquo;s ability to create mischief in Afghanistan. New Delhi will have to ensure that Washington takes a holistic view of the Pakistan problem and unlike in the past when India&rsquo;s concerns with regard to Pakistan were given a shirt shift, this time a new approach is evolved in consultation with India.&nbsp;</p>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="row">
<div class="article-blockquote">
<div class="col-sm-10 col-sm-offset-1 blockquote-content quoteshare">
<blockquote>
<h5>For a robust Indo-US partnership on counter-terrorism, India and the US will have to be on the same page. A partial view of the terrorism problem will not help India. But it will also not help American foreign policy priorities.</h5>
</blockquote>
</div>

<div class="col-sm-1 blockquote-content">
<div class="share-blockquote"><a class="twitter popup" href="http://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=For a robust Indo-US partnership on counter-terrorism, India and the US will have to be on the same page. A partial view of the terrorism problem will not help India. But it will also not help American foreign policy priorities." target="_blank"><i class="fa fa-share">&nbsp;</i></a></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqquoteclosemark">&times;</a></div>
</div>
</div>

<p>It is clear that Pakistan will be watched carefully by the Trump administration in how it follows through on its commitments. Washington views the strengthening of Afghan security forces and political institutions as key to the long-term stabilization of Afghanistan. For that Pakistan&rsquo;s role will have to re-evaluated. In light of Pakistan&rsquo;s continuing destabilising behaviour in across the LoC, Modi will have to ensure that Trump gets a sense as to what is at stake. For a robust Indo-US partnership on counter-terrorism, India and the US will have to be on the same page. A partial view of the terrorism problem will not help India. But it will also not help American foreign policy priorities.&nbsp;</p>

<p>&nbsp;</p>


Modi will have to ensure that Trump gets a sense as to what is at stake as far terrorism is concerned in South Asia

Prime Minister Narendra Modi and the US President Donald Trump have a crowded agenda when they meet later today. From economics and trade to defence and regional security, multiple issues will vie for their attention. But one issue where the two leaders would be hoping for a strong convergence of views would be counterterrorism. It is a priority for both leaders and they have indicated that they remain committed to robust counter terror policies. Modi has already underscored this in the US when, while addressing a gathering of Indian-Americans in Virginia, he said that India’s surgical strikes on terror launch pads across the LoC last year after the Uri attack were proof that the nation can stand up in its own defense when needed. He also underlined the challenge that India has faced in communicating India’s terrorism challenge with the West, when he sarcastically argued that “When India talked of terrorism 20 years back, many in the world said it was a law and order problem and didn’t understand it. Now terrorists have explained terrorism to them so we don’t have to.” Trump administration is also discussing various tough options vis-à-vis Pakistan such as expanding U.S. drone strikes, redirecting or withholding some aid to Pakistan and perhaps eventually downgrading Pakistan's status as a major non-NATO ally. × India-US ties have been growing in recent years and counterterrorism has been an area where significant convergence has been achieved, at times with great difficulty. For long where India viewed Pakistan as the epicentre of terrorism, Washington remained reluctant to put pressure on what it argued was a close ally in its ‘war against terrorism.’ Even in the early years of Barack Obama, the US tried to make Pakistan into strategic partner in counterterrorism. But it failed spectacularly. By the end of Obama Administration, senior officials were openly calling for tougher actions against Pakistan. Donald Trump’s rhetoric during the Presidential campaign was very tough but since coming to office, his administration is yet to evolve a cohesive counter terror approach. Though both India and the US agree on the need for zero-tolerance against terror, no meaningful progress can happen without seriously tackling Pakistan's role in supporting terror groups. India has taken a tough stand on Pakistan’s support for terrorism by underscoring its concerns in various international fora about terrorism emanating from Pakistan. Modi would like to make India’s case once again when he meets Trump at a time when the Trump administration is also discussing various tough options vis-à-vis Pakistan such as expanding U.S. drone strikes, redirecting or withholding some aid to Pakistan and perhaps eventually downgrading Pakistan's status as a major non-NATO ally. American policy makers have been particularly concerned the Haqqani's presence in Pakistan, a group which was designated as a terrorist organization as far back as in 2012. Admiral Mike Mullen, then the top US military officer, told the US Congress in 2011 that the Haqqani network was a "veritable arm" of the ISI. The Haqqani network has used its sanctuaries in Pakistan to mount high-profile attacks in Afghanistan against American interests. Therefore, in its first formal high-level exchange between the US and Pakistan under the Donald Trump administration, the US national Security Advisor H.R. McMaster conveyed a strong message to Pakistani officials that there is an urgent “need to confront terrorism in all its forms”. He was categorical in his assessment of Pakistani complicity in destabilizing Afghanistan when he underscored that “as all of us have hoped for many, many years, we have hoped that Pakistani leaders will understand that it is in their interest to go after these groups less selectively than they have in the past and the best way to pursue their interests in Afghanistan and elsewhere is through diplomacy, not through the use of proxies that engage in violence.” In an acknowledgment that US-backed forces are not winning and Taliban militants are resurgent, the Trump Administration is again poised to deploy thousands more troops in Afghanistan. × But there is no clarity yet on what form a new Afghanistan policy will take under the Trump administration. Though there have been calls by military commanders for adding “several thousand” troops to the 8,400 US forces already in Afghanistan so as to break the stalemate with the Taliban, a decision on the troop level is yet to come. Trump also consented to the dropping of the GBU-43/B massive ordnance air blast (MOAB) bomb, nicknamed the “mother of all bombs”, on a network of fortified underground tunnels that the Islamic State (IS) had been using to stage attacks on Afghan government forces in Nangarhar province, near the Pakistan border. In an acknowledgment that US-backed forces are not winning and Taliban militants are resurgent, the Trump Administration is again poised to deploy thousands more troops in Afghanistan. And the Pentagon, in a report to the US Congress last week, explicitly accused elements of Pakistan's government of supporting Afghanistan-focused militant groups, including the Taliban and Haqqani Network, who it said retained "freedom of action" within Pakistan. It called Pakistan "the most influential external actor affecting Afghan stability." The Trump administration is under pressure to put more pressure on Pakistan and to curtail Pakistan’s ability to create mischief in Afghanistan. New Delhi will have to ensure that Washington takes a holistic view of the Pakistan problem and unlike in the past when India’s concerns with regard to Pakistan were given a shirt shift, this time a new approach is evolved in consultation with India. For a robust Indo-US partnership on counter-terrorism, India and the US will have to be on the same page. A partial view of the terrorism problem will not help India. But it will also not help American foreign policy priorities. × It is clear that Pakistan will be watched carefully by the Trump administration in how it follows through on its commitments. Washington views the strengthening of Afghan security forces and political institutions as key to the long-term stabilization of Afghanistan. For that Pakistan’s role will have to re-evaluated. In light of Pakistan’s continuing destabilising behaviour in across the LoC, Modi will have to ensure that Trump gets a sense as to what is at stake. For a robust Indo-US partnership on counter-terrorism, India and the US will have to be on the same page. A partial view of the terrorism problem will not help India. But it will also not help American foreign policy priorities.

The counter-terror endgame in South Asia starts with Modi meeting Trump

Author

Zee News Rajasthan

Editor

Harsh V Pant

Home

Live Tv

Latest

World

India

Business

Entertainment

Sports

Opinions

Videos

Photos

Gravitas

Lifestyle

Science

Tech

Rajasthan News in Hindi: In-depth coverage of Rajasthan Crime, Political News, Education, Rajasthan Weather Update and Latest Rajasthan News on Zee News Rajasthan.