international-affairs

The Israel-Palestine War Shows The Moral Bankruptcy Of Global Leaders

The moral bankruptcy of political leaders in the West, starting with Biden, is shocking, though not exactly surprising.

As I contemplate the horrendous dance of death initiated by Hamas, branded as terrorists by Israel and its Western allies cum benefactors, and hailed as freedom fighters by some who support the Palestinian cause—a rather diminishing tribe—what should strike anyone is the proliferation of moral bankruptcy in our times.

On 7 October 2023, as Israel was concluding a festival—Sukkot— the Israeli intelligence was sleeping as soundly as its U.S. counterpart, enabling Hamas to destroy the observation towers across the border. Innocent citizens, some enjoying a night-long music festival, were caught, killed on the spot, or removed across the border as hostages.

Prime Minister Netanyahu’s claim, repeated ad nauseum that he alone could protect Israel, has been blown up. The Times of Israel has reported that Egypt had forewarned Israel of the likelihood of a big attack by Hamas. It seems Netanyahu, heavily dependent on the Jewish far-right, as his party lacks a majority in the Knesset, ignored the warning. The far-right violating the sanctity of Al Aqsa Mosque in East Jerusalem needed the presence of security forces there.

That Egypt had provided advance intelligence has been corroborated in Washington also. The House of Representatives Foreign Affairs Committee head, Michael McCaul, confirmed that there was advance intelligence.

However, for the moment, Israel has united behind Netanyahu, with the Opposition joining the war cabinet. The key question is: Is the cabinet only for conducting war, or will it work for a ceasefire to be followed by negotiations to resolve the root cause of the attack by Hamas?

The killing of innocent civilians or taking them away as hostages by Hamas is reprehensible. The Hamas leadership undoubtedly stands condemned in the court of humanity. However, stopping there without enquiring into the root cause is unpardonable.

In this context, it is necessary to point out that the Western media, in general, have chosen to ignore the root cause, namely, the Occupation by Israel of territories belonging to the State of Palestine as stipulated in the U.N. General Assembly Resolution 181(11) of 1947.

Israel is the only state begotten by U.N. Resolutions and terrorism. Referring to the terrorist attack on King David Hotel (1948), the historian, Prof. Mordechai Golani, says the attack ‘stained our history.’ It was an act of terror.

The U.N. plan was to have two states—Israel and Palestine—with Jerusalem as an international city. Count Folke Bernadotte, the mediator appointed by the U.N.Security Council, was assassinated by a terrorist group—Lehi—whose leader, Yitzhak Shamir, was prime minister (1986-92). Bernadotte had saved at least 20,000 Jews from German concentration camps.

In the 1967 war, Israel captured Palestinian territories, including Gaza and the West Bank. As per U.N. Security Council Resolution 242 (1967), Israel was to vacate these territories.

The English version said, “occupied territories,” leaving it vague, without necessarily implying that Israel had to vacate from all such territories. The French version with the words “des territoires occupies” made it clear that Israel was to vacate from all the occupied territories.

London and Washington used Jesuitical arguments and upheld the English version. However, Israel, supported by Washington, brazenly ignored the Security Council Resolution, causing the 1973 October War. Another U.N.S.C. Resolution 338 (22 October 1973) brought in a ceasefire and urged the implementation of 242.

Israel was in no hurry to comply. The Oslo Accords (1993 and 1995) envisaged a ‘two states’ solution. This solution has not been pursued seriously because Israel, the only state existing, does not want a second state to be born.

Israel has been able to get away with impunity only because of Washington’s support. In short, the root cause of the horrific attack by Hamas and the atrocious response by Israel is the refusal of Israel to abide by U.N.S.C. Resolutions and the agreements it has solemnly signed.

The relations between Israel and the U.S. are worth studying. The recipient of military aid to the tune of $3.3 billion a year—working out to $471 per head for the Jews in Israel—can practically dictate to the donor its policy towards the region. John Joseph Mearsheimer and Stephen Martin Walt, in their book, The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy (2007), have convincingly expounded all this.

President Biden’s repeated statements supporting Israel when it is brazenly violating international law by carpet bombing Gaza might shock us, but it should not surprise us. Washington has sent a task force with two aircraft carriers to the eastern Mediterranean. The purpose, ostensibly, is to deter Iran, Hizballah, Syria or anyone else from lending support to Hamas. Washington claims that without Iran’s assistance Hamas could not have carried out its operations. However, despite desperately searching for it, Washington has not, till now, shown any evidence of Iran’s involvement in Hamas’s attack on Israel.

Israel has given an ultimatum to the Palestinians in the Gaza city to move to the south. The IDF (Israeli Defense Forces) wants to enter the area. But the IDF seem to be acting with hubris; though this is an asymmetric war, the stronger side might not always win.

The United Nations has pointed out, with painful clarity, the gravity of the humanitarian situation. More than 2 million human beings have been deprived of safe water just because they are Palestinians. No humanitarian supplies have been allowed for a week.

Displaying cruelty reminiscent of Shylock, Israel has ordered 1.1 million human beings to vacate the northern half of Gaza as the Israeli military plans to enter there looking for Hamas militants. Netanyahu wants even patients undergoing treatment to shift out. Clearly, he does not care if they die in the process.

The U.N. Secretary General Dr. Antonio Guterres has reminded Israel that it must respect the rules under which wars can be waged. He said:

"Moving more than one million people across a densely populated warzone to a place with no food, water, or accommodation, when the entire territory is under siege, is extremely dangerous–and in some cases, simply not possible. Hospitals in the south of Gaza are already at capacity and will not be able to accept thousands of new patients from the north. The health system is on the brink of collapse. Morgues are overflowing; eleven healthcare staff have been killed while on duty; and there have been 34 attacks on health facilities in the past few days."

Israel is committing genocide. Article 2 of the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide reads:

In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such: (a) Killing members of the group; (b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; (c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; (d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; (e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

Hitler termed the Jews “untermenschen” meaning subhumans. Israel’s Defence Minister Gallant has called the Gazans, ‘human animals”.

The moral bankruptcy of political leaders in the West, starting with Biden, is shocking, though not exactly surprising. However, it is of utmost importance to stop the dance of death initiated by Hamas that Netanyahu wants to continue. He should be stopped at any cost.

This article was published on madrascourier.com

October 17th, 2023 | category:international-affairs |

international-affairs

It’s Essential To De-Escalate The Canada-India Diplomatic Row

It is in the interest of both countries to de-escalate; for that, the two governments should stop talking at each other.

I went to Ottawa as deputy high commissioner in 1982. The high commissioner left, and I was acting high commissioner in 1983-85, during which time the Blue Star Operation (June 1984) and the assassination of Prime Minister Indira Gandhi (October 1984) occurred. Some Sikhs in Toronto distributed sweets after the assassination.

Before the assassination, I was attacked by the Khalistanis in Winnipeg, where I went to call on the premier of the province of Manitoba. Thanks to the RCMP (Royal Canadian Mounted Police) accompanying me, I was not seriously injured. I got eggs on my head, and somebody with a long stick hit me. The RCMP could have handled it better. The Canadian high commissioner was summoned to the Ministry of External Affairs. A few days later, I got a personal letter of regret from the Canadian Prime Minister. I replied, thanking him. The matter ended there.

Let us look at the chronology. During the G20 summit in Delhi (9 and 10 September 2023), Prime Minister Trudeau was not given a formal bilateral meeting with his host. However, they did speak. Trudeau brought up the matter of the likely involvement of an Indian official in the killing of Hardeep Singh Nijjar, a wanted person by India, and presumably asked for India’s cooperation in investigating the matter.

Modi categorically rejected any suggestion that India was in any way involved. A week before, Canada had asked for a ‘pause’ in the talks to finalise a trade and investment treaty. That was perhaps the first signal from Canada. The Canadian intelligence chief, too, was in India and met his counterparts at the time of the G20. The Canadian left for London from India, presumably to brief the counterpart there.

There is one important incoherence in Canada’s stance. On 18 September 2023, Trudeau at the House of Commons referred to ‘credible allegations’ about the involvement of an agent of the Government of India. However credible an allegation is, the investigation must be completed before anyone is charged. In fact, the word “allegation’ is rather bizarre in the context.

Hours later, the Canadian Foreign minister announced the expulsion of the head of India’s intelligence team in the High Commission holding the rank of Minister. She referred to the ‘allegations’ and added, ‘if proven true, this would be a violation of our sovereignty’. The words, if proven true, speak volumes about Canada’s incoherence in presenting its case.

However, it seems that Canada has more or less convinced the rest of the famous Five Eyes (the intelligence agencies of the U.S., U.K., Australia, and New Zealand) that it has a case. We may guess that the evidence Canada has is electronic as the two men who fired the shots and killed Nijjar near the Guru Nanak Gurdwara in Surrey, of which he was the president, are still uncaught. The third who drove the getaway vehicle is also missing.

The U.K. has stated that this matter won’t hinder the ongoing trade and investment talks. Australia has publicly stated that it had taken up the matter with Indian officials, implying that Canada has a case worth looking into. Washington initially came out with a statement that it was ‘deeply concerned’ and that Canada should carry on with the investigation and bring the perpetrators to justice.

That was put out on 19 September. After it came under criticism, the Biden Administration came out the next day urging India to ‘cooperate’ with Canada in the matter. Incidentally, though Trudeau said he was going to talk to French President Macron, we have yet to hear from Paris.

In short, though Trudeau might not have got as much support from the Five Eyes, the situation is dynamic. After Washington advised India to ‘cooperate’, India has now said that Canada has not shared evidence.

To my mind, Modi could have told Trudeau: We categorically reject the suggestion that we had anything to do with the matter. If you have evidence, do share it.” In such a case, after examining the evidence produced by Canada, India could have, with greater force, asserted its innocence in the matter.

Is Trudeau wise in asking for India’s ‘cooperation’ in investigating the matter? Perhaps not. If he suspects India’s hand, how can he be sure that the evidence shared with India will not be used by the latter to ‘protect’ the perpetrators?

Another important point is that after getting evidence of likely Indian involvement, Canada could have discreetly asked India to transfer the diplomat and continued with the investigation. Obviously, Trudeau, under pressure from the New Democratic Party (NDP), whose support is necessary for him to remain in office, decided to come out formally against India. The Sikhs are a political force to reckon with in Canada. He has acted in haste and might have to repent at leisure.

India, too, has not acted right. It is legitimate for India to demand security for its diplomatic missions other establishments, and for the Indian citizens there. It is incorrect to demand that the propaganda for Khalistan, including holding referenda, should not be permitted and that action should be taken against such Canadians.

We all know that Canada had in 1995 held a second referendum on Quebec’s separation. India should not conflate the Khalistan propaganda matter with the obligation of the host government under the Vienna Convention. The private referenda in Canada have no impact on Punjab, where there is no support for Khalistan. The private referenda get media attention mainly because of India’s drawing attention to them.

If India gets obsessed with the propaganda carried out by the Khalistanis in Canada and elsewhere, they will do more of it to spoil India’s relations with Canada and other countries. India should not fall into the trap set by them.

India needs to review its policy about posting RAW officers holding as high a rank as Minister looking after economic, cultural, and community matters. In the present case, the expelled individual is an IPS officer. One wonders whether any corporate executive will go to an intelligence officer to discuss economic matters. During my time, the highest post held by RAW was counsellor, and they dealt only with consular matters, apart from their intelligence work.

Even in the 1980s, the Khalistanis had worked hard to create a divide between the Sikhs and the Hindus. I remember that a young Indian lady was found murdered in a park in Montreal the day before Independence Day in 1983. The Kanishka airplane tragedy occurred in June 1985, killing 329 aboard. The Khalistanis placed a bomb on the plane. It was an attack on India. I was shocked to read that an Indo-Canadian leader now claims it was an attack on Hindus. The tension between extremists among Hindus and Sikhs, at times leading to violent clashes should not be encouraged by a responsible government.

There is an absurd belief among some in India that by getting tough, Canada can be compelled to surrender and that Trudeau might be unseated. It is wrong to treat this matter as a diplomatic duel between Modi and Trudeau.

India has suspended the issue of visas for ‘security’ reasons. Even E visas have been stopped. What is the security issue with an E visa? This might turn out to be an instance of self-goal. In 2022, there were 80000 tourist arrivals from Canada. All Indians holding Canadian Passports will be inconvenienced, not to speak of the loss of revenue for the hospitality sector in India.

The latest is that India has demanded that Canada should reduce the number of diplomats posted in India. The argument advanced is that there is a convention that there should be a rough parity in the numbers. The argument does not hold water and the 1961 Vienna Convention does not require parity.

The Canadian Pension Fund has invested in the Indian stock market $55 billion, and the two-way trade in goods and services amounts to more than $16 billion. It is not suggested that Canada will start withdrawing from the Indian market tomorrow or the day after.

The moot point is that the current level of economic engagement is far below the potential. As mentioned earlier, Canada has ‘paused’ the talks on trade and investment. Both countries will benefit from such a treaty. Will the talks resume before the present tension is removed? Unlikely.

We do not know now who was behind the killing of Najjar. However, if anybody in Delhi imagines that India can carry out such killings as Israel, the U.S., and Russia do and get away with it, that is a big mistake.

In conclusion, it is in the interest of both countries to de-escalate; for that, the two governments should stop talking at each other through the media.

How about appointing Special Representatives without telling the media? Let the two representatives meet in a neutral venue sans media glare and work out a formula ad-referendum for their respective governments. Should Biden suggest this to Ottawa and Delhi? He could, provided he does not boast about it to the media.

This article was published on madrascourier.com

September 28th, 2023 | category:international-affairs |

domestic-affairs, international-affairs, politics

Deconstructing The Eighteenth Summit Of The G20

The G-20 is one more opportunity to make noise about Modi being a ‘Vishwaguru,’ much needed for the election battle ahead.

The eighteenth summit of the G20, representing 66 per cent of the world’s population, 85 per cent of GDP, 75 per cent of international trade, producing 80 per cent of pollution, organized by the host government with the elaborate choreography of a Wagnerian opera saw a diplomatic coup by India. Pundits, especially in the West, had confidently predicted that this summit might be the first one to end without a declaration. It is evident that India’s diplomats squared the circle on Ukraine. However, reflection shows that the drafting skills of the host alone cannot account for the outcome.

In the last G20 summit in Bali (November 2022), Indonesia, under Western pressure, invited President Zelensky, who spoke of “G19,” implying that Russia should be thrown out of the group. India stood up to the Western pressure, exerted this time as well, to invite Zelensky and earned brownie points from Moscow.

Paragraphs 8 to 14 of the declaration deal with the conundrum of the war between Ukraine (plus NATO) and Russia. There is no change in the positions of G20 states as reflected in their voting at the United Nations General Assembly and United Nations Security Council. All states are bound to respect the UN Charter, which prohibits the use of force for territorial expansion. The use or threat of use of nuclear weapons is ‘inadmissible’. G-20 is not the forum for resolving ‘geopolitical and security issues’. In view of the enormous human suffering, all efforts should be made to have a cease-fire.

The Black Sea Grain Export arrangement should be revived. In that context, the Memorandum of Understanding between Russia and the U.N. Secretary-General on the lifting of Western sanctions in respect of food and fertilizer exports from Russia should be implemented.

There is no mention of Russia as the invader, which was there in the Bali declaration. We know that Russia suspended participation in the Black Sea Grain Export arrangement because the West did not lift the sanctions. In terms of the language, Russia has gained, and Ukraine has expressed its displeasure with the declaration, saying ‘stronger’ was called for.

Here, there is a factor that most commentators have ignored. In July 2023, Ukraine announced it would export grain without Russia’s cooperation. Russia responded by destroying the port facilities in Odessa port. Ukraine then tried to export to Romania through its ports on the Danube River.

Russia bombed those ports immediately before the G20 started. Ukraine finds itself in a situation of having to stop using the Romanian option. Ukraine hoped that NATO would respond if Russia violated Romania’s territorial integrity. Even after a part of a Russian missile fell into Romania twice, NATO has not taken note of it, though Poland said that Russia had violated the boundary of a NATO member-state.

In short, NATO, or rather President Biden standing for re-election, does not want a direct war with Russia. Therefore, if the Western sanctions on Russia’s export of grain and fertilizer are lifted, Ukraine can restart exports. However, we can understand that Ukraine had to protest for political reasons.

For two reasons, the West conceded more than Russia in terms of language. First, the West has assessed that Modi will get re-elected next year and, therefore, does not want to displease him. Second, if there is no joint declaration, the G-20 gets weakened, and the BRICS and the SCO (Shanghai Cooperation Council) might gain. The U.S. had once sought membership of the SCO in vain. The West is keen to promote the G20, though it realizes that the Global South might, through the G20, seek a change in the international order dominated by the West.

An important decision taken in Delhi was to accept the 55-member African Union as a full member. In June 2023, India, as chair, wrote seeking concurrence from others. In December 2022, Washington and Tokyo announced their support for the A.U., which had applied formally. The impression given by the mainstream Indian media that Modi ‘discovered’ Africa is rather amusing.

We know more about the menu at the 9th September dinner hosted by the President of Bharat – an important terminological change from ‘India’ – than about the discussions at the summit as the media was kept out. The White House had difficulty explaining to the American press why it could not meet the President in Delhi.

Ironically, a huge International Media Centre was there as part of the Bharat Mandapam constructed for the G20 at Rupees 3600 crore, as divulged by the External Affairs Minister of Lekhi. The total expenditure, as given by her, is Rs. 4254.75 crores. We need to wait for the CAG (Comptroller and Auditor General) for the total.

The Delhi streets have Modi’s face everywhere. A writer had calculated that President Biden could have seen Modi’s face every 50 meters on his way from the airport to Hotel Maurya Sheraton. Will a Right to Know petition will inform us of the total amount spent on placing the face in many places?

President Xi Jinping and President Putin did not attend. Xi Jinping sent Prime Minister Li Qiang. Putin had the courtesy to phone Modi and say he was not coming. Foreign Minister Lavrov represented Russia.

There is much speculation about Xi Jinping’s decision. Perhaps he wanted to send a message to India. China is concerned about India getting closer to Washington. The recent visit to Taiwan by the retired chiefs of the army, air force, and navy to Taiwan might have ruffled China’s feathers. Probably, Xi Jinping did not want to discuss with Modi the eyeball-to-eyeball confrontation along the so-called Line of Actual Control. Essentially, China wants a ‘unipolar’ Asia led by it and sees India as the main obstacle.

With 83 paragraphs and 44 annexed documents, the Delhi Declaration must be the longest G20 declaration. We do not know whether all the projects mentioned will be implemented. The G-20 has no permanent secretariat, and it is for the rotating chair to monitor the progress of implementation.

The summit provided opportunities for bilateral meetings. Modi had many, including one with Biden. One important announcement was establishing connectivity from India to Europe through the Gulf. India, the U.S., Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Israel, and the E.U. have taken the decision. Within 60 days, officials are to work out the details.

This project is a counter to China’s Belt and Road Initiative, to which India has taken objection because of the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor going through India’s territory under Pakistan’s occupation. It is worth noting that Italy has decided to get out of the agreement signed with China in this regard and that Italian Prime Minister Melloni was thinking of going to China to convey the decision formally. There is a report that she did convey the decision to China’s Prime Minister Li Qiang in Delhi.

Modi handed over the presidential gavel to Brazil’s President Lula da Silva. However, Modi announced that there should be another meeting in cyberspace before Brazil takes over formally in December 2023. That is one more opportunity to make noise domestically about Modi being a ‘Vishwaguru’ at the ‘historic’ G-20, much needed for the election battle ahead.

This article was published on madrascourier.com

September 21st, 2023 | category:domestic-affairs, international-affairs, politics |

domestic-affairs, international-affairs, politics

Mr Modi: Embracing The US Can Prove To Be Asphyxiating

A deeper defence dependence with the U.S. will constrain India’s options. Such a move will be foolhardy.

India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s ‘state visit’ to the United States of America from 21 to 23 of June is by all accounts a study in glitz and glamour engineered by the Biden Administration with the First Lady Jill Biden playing a leading role. The Friends of BJP in America exerted their utmost by marching up and down in the cities and by shouting “Modi! Modi!” even when he addressed the Joint Session of the Congress. The media coverage in India was non-stop and irritatingly repetitive. The U.S. media took more notice of Modi this time than during his previous visits.

Modi’s last two visits were in September 2019 and September 2021. In 2019, Modi’s supporters in America had arranged for a rally in Houston, Texas, with President Trump in attendance. Violating protocol, Modi exhorted the audience to vote for Trump again in 2020. President Biden does no longer hold it against Modi. It seems Washington has assessed Modi is going to be re-elected in 2024 and therefore, it is prudent to invest in him.

All successful summits are pre-cooked. Washington sent its senior officials including the Secretary of State, Secretary of Defence, and National Security Advisor, to Delhi prior to the visit. It appears that Washington has worked harder than Delhi to complete the cooking on time.

There was no matter of importance that the two principals had to discuss and resolve differences — if any. That done, they could focus on praising each other, propounding their aspirations, and projecting their world view as they wanted to be projected.

The joint statement — of 6466 words in 58 paragraphs — is one of the longest of its kind. The previous one in June 2016, when Modi was hosted by Obama, had 3771 words. The one issued on President Macron’s visit in 2022 December was only 3254 words.

The joint statement is a study in soaring rhetoric. The two nations ostensibly are “among the closest partners in the world.” The pointed reference to the growing number of Indo-American voters is evident when it says, “The U.S.-India Comprehensive Global and Strategic Partnership is anchored in a new level of trust and mutual understanding and enriched by the warm bonds of family and friendship that inextricably link our countries together.” (Italics added.) Modi has emphasised time and again that he had discarded the hesitations in the past.

Leaving aside the rhetoric, let us look at the concrete items announced in the joint statement.

First: NASA and ISRO will develop a strategic framework for human spaceflight cooperation by the end of 2023.

Second: a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) has been signed on a Semiconductor Supply Chain and Innovation Partnership. Micron Technology will invest up to $825 million to build a new semiconductor assembly and test facility in India at a cost of $2.75 billion, with India bearing the rest of the cost.

The project will create 20,000 jobs. Another US company Lam Research plans to train 60,000 Indian engineers in semiconductors. Applied Materials, yet another U.S. company, will invest $400 million. All told, the total works out to $3.15 billion out of which India will invest $1.9 billion.

Third: two task forces were created to work together on telecommunications including 5G and 6G, and digital inclusion.

Fourth: a joint Indo-U.S. Quantum Coordination Mechanism has been established.

Fifth: the U.S. National Science Foundation and the Indian Department of Science and Technology will cooperate on 35 research projects.

Sixth: the leaders welcomed Google’s plans to invest $10 billion in the India Digitization Fund. By doing this, Modi has paved the way to turn India into Google’s digital colony.

An observation is called for. In some cases, a firm decision has been taken at the government level whereas in other cases, the two leaders are encouraging the U.S. investors for decisions already taken or yet to be taken.

The most important MoU is the one between General Electric and Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd (HAL) for the manufacture of GE F-414 jet engines in India.

Two things are worthy of notice. This shows the beginning of the end of the technology denying policy towards India. This technology has not been shared with any other country so far.

The second point to note is that the joint venture is with the HAL, much maligned in the media for incompetence and non-delivery when Modi compelled the French company selling the Rafael aircraft to join up with the Ambani company with no competence in the matter. Perhaps, the US might have insisted on HAL as partner. Perhaps Modi has learnt from his mistake?

Incidentally, Adani was not invited to the White House banquet. Once again, we might conclude that Modi can learn.

Coming to the political part of the joint statement, we see that Modi has given away nothing of importance. The reference to Ukraine avoids any criticism of Russia. The call for respect for international law, U N Charter and territorial integrity and sovereignty is not linked with any specific reference to Ukraine.

On Security Council reform, Biden supports India’s bid for a permanent seat and specifically supported India’s candidature for a non-permanent seat for the 2028-29 term.

The formulation on Quad as “a global good” avoids any reference to China. Washington would have welcomed an anti-China formulation; the formulation on the Indo-Pacific also avoids any direct reference to China.

Paragraph 36 says that the two countries “reaffirm and embrace their shared values of freedom, democracy, human rights, inclusion, pluralism and equal opportunities for all citizens.”

In this context, we need to note that seventy-five members of the Congress wrote to Biden on 20 June – one day before Modi’s arrival. The initiative for writing the letter was taken by Senator Chris Van Hollen and Congresswoman Pramila Jayapal, both Democrats. It said that there have been “independent, credible reports” that reflect “troubling signs in India toward the shrinking of political space, the rise of religious intolerance, the targeting of civil society organizations and journalists, and growing restrictions on press freedoms and internet access.” Biden was urged to take up the matter with Modi.

Biden did not bring up the matter during the official talks. Obviously, the claim in the joint statement about advancing “the aspirations of our people for a bright and prosperous future grounded in respect for human rights, and shared principles of democracy, freedom, and the rule of law” is not to be taken seriously as pointed out by American commentators. For example, in an article in Foreign Affairs (June 16, 2023) by Professor Daniel Markey says:

“If making democratic values the cornerstone of the U.S.-Indian relationship has always been a dubious strategy, today it is clearly doomed—because the very notion of common values has itself come to look fanciful. Ever since Narendra Modi became the Indian prime minister nine years ago, India’s status as a democracy has become increasingly suspect.”

The “world’s largest democracy” has seen an upsurge in violence directed at its Muslim minority, often whipped up by prominent politicians. It is trying to strip citizenship from millions of Muslim residents. It is muzzling the press and silencing opposition figures. The Biden administration, having cast itself as a vocal champion of democratic ideals, therefore finds itself on shaky ground whenever it characterizes the United States’ partnership with India as one of shared values.”

The TIME magazine (24 June, 2023) carries an article by Knox Thames under the caption: The Biden-Modi Meeting Was a Failure for Democracy.

Modi answered a question on treatment of minorities, specifically, Muslims, from Sabrina Siddique, a journalist working for the Wall Street Journal by using disingenuous rhetoric. Contrary to the usual practice, no follow-up question was permitted. Even agreeing to the joint press conference was treated by Biden as a generous concession by the media-averse Modi.

Modi repeatedly referred to India being the fifth largest economy; conveniently, he left out the fact that India accounts for the largest number of poor human beings too.

It will be naïve to believe that Biden honestly believes that he sees Modi as a credible collaborator for promoting democracy and human rights. It does not matter for Biden as he does not care about India’s democracy. He cares about American interests.

Clearly, by hosting an event that could help boost Modi’s popularity in an election year, Biden and the U.S. administration are using India as a pawn to negate Chinese influence on the geopolitical chess board.

Furthermore, by deepening the defence relationship, Biden hopes he might succeed in reducing India’s dependence on Russia for arms — at least over a span of 5 to 10 years.

However, it will not be in India’s interest to have a tight embrace with the U.S. Such an embrace can prove to be asphyxiating. It is better to shake hands rather than embrace. A deeper defence dependence with the U.S. will constrain India’s options. Such a move will be foolhardy.

This article was published on madrascourier.com

June 30th, 2023 | category:domestic-affairs, international-affairs, politics |

international-affairs

Sudan: The Unfolding Tragedy

Is Sudan cursed with a series of civil wars & brutal dictatorships?

As one contemplates the ongoing tragedy in Sudan, it is difficult not to raise at least two questions: What is wrong with the political DNA of this country that, since independence in 1956, its people should have been cursed with a series of civil wars, brutal dictatorships, interspersed with brief democratic governance? Can we describe the unfolding unscripted tragedy as a civil war?

Sudan Descending Into A State Of Nature

At the time of writing, at least 528 human beings have been killed by air strikes and artillery. This is the figure given by the Sudanese Health Ministry; the actual might be more as it is difficult to collect the facts. Hospitals are running short of doctors, medicines, and power. The price of daily necessities has shot up.

Those who can afford it have been fleeing to neighbouring countries, such as Chad and Egypt. Hiring a car to cross the border can cost as much as $40,000. An Indian family back home has recounted how security forces looted all their belongings, including money and a car.

In short, Sudan has descended into the Hobbesian ‘state of nature’ in many parts of this vast country of 1.88 million square km. The WHO (World Health Organization) has estimated that one-third of the 46 million population needs humanitarian assistance. Obviously, it is increasingly difficult to distribute such assistance in the chaos enveloping Sudan.

The West, Saudi Arabia, the UAE and many others have evacuated their diplomats and some of their nationals. Since foreign embassies are closed, many Sudanese cannot cross the border as their passports are with the embassies.

The ongoing crisis broke out on 15 April 2023 when the tension between the regular military, SAF (Sudanese Armed Forces) headed by General Abdel Fattah al Burhan, and the RSF (Rapid Support Forces) led by General Mohammed Hamdan Dagalo, generally known as Hemedti, spilt over into the street endangering the civilian population and even the diplomatic corps. The RSF likely fired the opening shots.

Who Is Hemedti?

General Dagalo was born sometime between 1973 and 1975, and his uncle Juma Dagalo was chief of the Rezeigat tribe, originally hailing from Chad. Leaving school while in the third grade, he got into camel trading and later joined the infamous armed gang known as Janjaweed, meaning ‘devil on a horse’ in the local language.

It gained support from the Libyan ruler Gaddafi who had plans to expand into Chad and Sudan. For that purpose, he formed the Islamic Legion imitating the Foreign Legion of France. Gaddafi eventually gave up, but Janjaweed carried on committing pillage, rape, and killing in Darfur.

General Omar al Bashir, who staged a coup and took over Sudan in 1989, used Janjaweed to put down the rebellion in Darfur. In 2003, Al Bashir established the RSF (Rapid Support Forces) with Hemeti as its head. The Janjaweed got official status.

The current strength of the RSF is about 100,000. The RSF had access to government funds. Hemedti got into gold mining- Sudan is rich in gold- and other businesses. He started selling gold in Dubai and developed links with the UAE.

He sent men and even children to fight on behalf of the UAE in Yemen, where Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman started chasing the mirage of military victory over the Houthis in 2015. The RSF paid more to its officers and men than the IAF.

The RSF in charge of border control got $5 million from the European Union through the UN‘s OHCHR (Office of High Commissioner for Human Rights). The EU Commission has tried to justify itself by saying that the intention was to prevent or reduce the migration of refugees into the European Union. The fact is that the EU funded Hemedti after the International Criminal Court convicted him.

The Short-Lived Collaboration Between SAF & RSF

Faced with popular agitation against Al Bashir that started in 2018 as part of the Arab Spring, the SAF and RSF decided to remove him from power and arrested him. They took power, and later, as the Sudanese continued to demand an end to military rule, the RSF carried out a massacre on 3 June 2019.

It was worse than the Jallianwala Bagh (1919), with women and men being raped. The grim toll was 100 at least, and many bodies were thrown into the Nile. The Physicians for Human Rights based in Boston has given an authoritative account at https://phr.org/our-work/resources/chaos-and-fire-an-analysis-of-sudans-june-3-2019-khartoum-massacre/

The African Union met on 6th June 2019 and suspended Sudan’s membership to be resumed only after a civilian government had been established. The suspension was held till a civilian government headed by Abdallah Hamdok took office in September 2019.Unfortunately, the military struck again in October 2021.

Prime Minister Abdallah Hamdok refused to support the coup and resigned. The military has postponed the holding of the general election from 2022 to July 2023. Obviously, a peacefully and fairly held general election is not in the interest of the military.

Meanwhile, the question of the induction of the RSF into the SAF came up. Obviously, the RSF demanded more than the SAF was prepared to give. It is that dispute that caused the current conflict between the two, presumably started by the RSF.

Who Can Mediate?

Ideally, Egypt should be able to mediate between the SAF and RSF, arrange a cease-fire, and hold an election, preferably supervised by the African Union. However, Egypt is facing a dilemma. It supports SAF, but the RSF is supported by the UAE, to whom Egypt, in serious economic difficulties, is beholden.

We might recall that El Sisi had the financial support of the UAE when he carried out the coup in July 2013 when as Defence Minister, he arranged for the kidnapping of the democratically elected President Morsi.

The US Secretary of State Blinken has been in touch with both sides and even succeeded in arranging for a cease-fire that did not last. Cease-fire has been declared more than once.

The United Kingdom, the former colonial power, has evacuated its diplomats and some nationals. It does not seem to have engaged in any mediation.

The UAE and Saudi Arabia might not fully qualify as mediators as the RSF is their client. The RSF has sent thousands of fighters, some even children, to Yemen, where till now the Saudi Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman has been chasing the mirage of military victory.

The African Union, or Sudan’s neighbors, is best placed to mediate. In this context, we need to watch closely the efforts underway by IGAD (Intergovernmental Authority for Development). The IGAD’s members are Djibouti, Ethiopia, Kenya, Somalia, Sudan, Uganda, Eritrea, and South Sudan.

The AU amended the charter of IGAD in 1995. Sudan is the current chair of IGAD. Ethiopia has taken the lead, and the SAF and RSF have been invited to a summit meeting in South Sudan. It is not yet clear whether the two belligerents have accepted the invitation.

In this context, we need to examine Ethiopia’s credentials as a mediator. By building a big dam, called the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam, using the waters of the Nile, Ethiopia is already in a serious dispute with Sudan and Egypt as they argue that they would be deprived of water. There are territorial disputes between Ethiopia and Sudan in the context of the recently concluded military action by the Ethiopian Government against the rebels in Tigray.

However, we should not write off Ethiopia as a mediator. The AU is based in Addis Ababa. The Addis Ababa agreement of 2005 paved the way for the separation of South Sudan, ending two civil wars that cost more than 2 million human lives.

India’s Concerns

There are about 4000 Indians in Sudan. That includes the Hakki Pikki tribe from Karnataka. About 31 of that tribe are in Sudan selling traditional Indian medicines.

The Twitter exchange between senior Congress leader Siddaramaiah and External Affairs Minister Dr Jaishankar exemplifies avoidable unpleasantness. Siddaramaiah tweeted, asking the Ministry of External Affairs and others to safely bring back the 31 members of the tribe from Sudan.

Minister Jaishankar retorted that he was “appalled” that anyone should think of politicizing the issue. Siddaramaiah retorted that since the Minister is busy getting appalled, he should tell who should be approached.

Was New Delhi less than prompt in responding to the crisis on 15th April? On 20th April 2023, the Chief Minister of Kerala sent a letter to the Prime Minister, who chaired a meeting the next day, six days after the media reported the crisis.

The media reported that “the PM instructed all relevant officials to remain vigilant, closely monitor the developments and continuously evaluate the safety of Indians in Sudan and extend all possible assistance, the PMO said… He also directed officials to prepare evacuation plans to account for the rapidly shifting security landscape and the viability of various options.”

I am afraid that I must take the report with a pinch of salt. I would be ‘appalled’, to borrow the words of Dr Jaishankar, if the MEA had been waiting for P.M.’s instructions and that too from a meeting held after six days. Some in the media are working overtime to project the impression that nothing moves unless the Prime Mover, to borrow a term from Aristotle, moves first.

There is a second matter that appalled me. A young man from Kottayam requested the Embassy in Khartoum to include his pregnant wife, a Sudanese, in the list for evacuation. The Embassy refused on the ground that she did not have a visa.

Dear reader, permit me to reminisce. In August 1990, I, as Joint Secretary (Gulf) was in our Embassy in Kuwait, accompanying External Affairs Minister I.K. Gujral. Hiding in the mission was a Menon from Kerala with an American passport. He wanted to come to India on the plane of the Minister.

Obviously, he had reason to fear that his American passport might come in the way at the airport. In ten minutes, the Embassy issued him a temporary Indian passport valid for seven days to be surrendered to the Gulf Division of the Ministry.

Emergencies require lateral thinking. It was sad to see that Dr Shashi Tharoor had to spend his time asking the Ministry to do what was obvious. It is singularly appropriate that considering the election in Karnataka, the Government have announced “Operation Kaveri”. The evacuation of over 176,000 from Kuwait and Iraq in 1990-91 remained nameless!

Going back to the question about ‘civil war,’ it is wrong to use that phrase. In Sudan, two armies are at war to monopolize the political power they have been sharing. As regards the DNA question, it is painfully clear that wherever the military has removed a dictator in response to popular agitation, the military does its worst to hold on to power, as we see in Egypt too.

This article was published on madrascourier.com

May 15th, 2023 | category:international-affairs |

international-affairs

SRI LANKA: QUESTIONS AND LESSONS

Obviously, we start: How and why has Sri Lanka fallen from the status of ‘middle-income country’ as classified by the World Bank in 2018? The fall occurred in a space of three years, within two years of Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s taking over the presidency with its vast executive powers.

The Origins of the Crisis

To my mind the media and pundits, by and large, with a few honorable exceptions, have failed to diagnose the predicament of the island nation. The media in general have repeated ad nauseum that Sri Lanka has been facing the “worst economic crisis since independence in 1948.” Accounting for the crisis, it has been said that Sri Lanka has been living beyond its means for decades and that the crisis was in the making for decades.

That argument does not add up to a full explanation of the genesis of the crisis.

Let us look at a World Bank graph:

In 1997 Sri Lanka, in World Bank’s reckoning, moved up from ‘low income’ to ‘lower middle income’, and in 2018 it moved higher to ‘upper income’. The World Bank assessment published in July 2019 expressed reasonable optimism about Sri Lanka’s further progress. However, in July 2021, the World Bank downgraded Sri Lanka to ‘lower middle income’.

Why? The only tenable explanation is Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s election as President in November 2019. In short, President Rajapaksa’s misgovernance and its disastrous impact on the economy compelled the World Bank to downgrade Sri Lanka and to send out red signals, signals that were willfully and culpably ignored by him.

I was Deputy High Commissioner for India from 1979 to 1982. I have seldom come across a better civil service in my numerous postings. Obviously, the political leadership was not making use of the civil service.

Why? Following Gotabaya’s victory in 2019, within two days he appointed elder brother Mahinda as Prime Minister. The SLPP (Sri Lanka People’s Party) of the Rajapaksa’s swept the polls and Mahinda continued as Prime Minister. In all there were 4 from the family in the government.

In short, the Sri Lankan voter replaced democracy with a brotherocracy, unwittingly or wittingly. Why and how? The Rajapaksas sailed to victory on a wave of fear and hatred. The majority Sinhala community was brainwashed into believing that the Tamils cannot be trusted and the LTTE (Lanka Tigers of Tamil Elam) might resurrect itself; and that the Muslims cannot be trusted and should be held in check, especially after the horrendous attack on Easter Day in 2019. In short, an ugly majoritarian agenda was presented to the gullible Sinhalese, and they bought it.

The Rajapaksa family held the major portfolios as defence, finance, economic policy& plan implementation, to name only a few. Inevitably, the brotherocracy created the economic crisis by hair-brained policies. For example, it was decided to switch over to organic farming overnight. Not because, the government wanted to promote organic farming. The real reason was that the treasury had no funds to import fertilizer. Agricultural production came down, and without foreign exchange to import shortages spread.

A key question arises. Could Gotabaya have applied course correction on time? Yes. Sri Lanka could have approached the IMF, before the economy collapsed. The Central Bank governor advised that course. Gotabaya rejected it on the flimsy ground that such a step would mean admitting openly that his policies were wrong.

Lord Acton said: Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. We may add a rider: Power isolates, and absolute power isolates itself absolutely.

The lesson to be learnt by the voter in Sri Lanka and elsewhere, wherever there is democracy, is that the voter should vote intelligently. In the 1932 general election, Hitler emerged as the head of the single largest party in the Parliament. In 2016 America voted Trump as president and he did his worst to succeed himself by resorting to mob violence to change the election results. Democracy implies an intelligent and vigilant electorate.

THE WAY FORWARD FOR SRI LANKA

Though Ranil Wickremasinghe has used or rather abused his executive powers by unleashing unnecessary violence on protesters who had announced their plan to leave the site in front of the presidential secretariat (15th July) and in other ways, I hold that it is in the best interest of Sri Lanka that the protests should be suspended. Wickremasinghe should be given the time to negotiate with the IMF, World Bank, Asian Development Bank, and friendly donor countries to put an end to shortages. This might take a month or two.

Once the shortages are ended, election for the parliament and presidency should be held as neither the president nor the parliament has legitimacy even though going by the letter of the law, they both hold positions legally. The full restoration of the economy will take years and only a government that is trusted by the people can accomplish that task if there is good will on the part of the international community.

Talking about good will, President Biden has signally failed to act. He has been generous to a fault in sending money to Ukraine. Is it the case that an Asian country does not count?

The G-20 meeting in Bali was futile as the West tried to embarrass Russia who walked out. That was an occasion for G20 to discuss the plight of Sri Lankan people. One wonders why India that has provided so much assistance to Sri Lanka did not think of bringing up the matter.

China’s behavior has been rather perplexing. Why has China chosen to be so unhelpful? We note that President Xi Jinping has sent a warm message to Wickremasinghe, and we need to carefully watch the next move by China. Will it agree to rescheduling of debt, a requirement for the IMF to agree to EFF (Extended Fund Facility)?

Meanwhile, there are reports of a research ship, Yuan Wang5, currently in the Indian Ocean, going to berth at Humbantota. Though Sri Lanka has officially denied the report, the official spokesperson of the Ministry of External Affairs has said that India would “ all necessary measures” to protect “ India’s security and economic interests.” Let us watch.

Sri Lanka’s Road ahead is rather rough. Apart from the political infirmities already pointed out, the debt stands at more than $51 billion, that works out to $2272 per head. Let contrast this figure with the per capita income of $3699 estimated for 2022, with an inflation rate of more than 50% in July 2022.

The point to emphasis is that the IMF will agree to EFF only if there is political stability, and it is confident that it is dealing with a government that is willing and able to implement clearly unpopular reforms including reducing or removing government subsidies on daily necessities. How can tourism revive if there is shortage of petrol? Even now it is not too late for Wickremesinghe to constitute an all-party government with a good dosage of eminent non-party individuals. Will he rise up to the occasion?

Featured image courtesy: Sri Lanka Flag Vectors by Vecteezy

December 26th, 2022 | category:international-affairs |

international-affairs

‘They should have asked students to get out of Ukraine weeks ago’

'An ambassador may not be sure whether there would be a war next month, but prudence requires him to take action to see to it that people leave early.'

'Because once the war starts, it will be very difficult to move out.'

The government calls it Operation Ganga -- evacuating Indian students stranded in the war zone in Ukraine.

The prime minister claimed at an election rally in UP that the evacuation was possible only because of 'India's rising power'.

But many in India may not remember that 32 years ago, in 1990, the Indian government conducted one of the largest evacuations ever -- of over 170,000 citizens from Kuwait.

Ambassador K P Fabian was then the joint secretary of the Gulf division at the ministry of external affairs.

In contrast, the Narendra Damodardas Modi government has scrambled to evacuate thousands of Indian students from Ukraine, which is currently under attack from Russia, even sending four central ministers to supervise the exercise.

"I would say it was an error of judgment; India did not anticipate a full-fledged war. In such matters, what is required is prudence," Ambassador Fabian tells Rediff.com's Shobha Warrier about the delay in undertaking Operation Ganga.

How did India conduct such a large evacuation process so efficiently in 1990?

We could manage it because there was synergy between the central government, the state governments, and civil society.

I will give you an example. Indians were in their thousands in Jordan, and when I went to one place, I was told that they were not getting bottled water to drink.

I made a phone call to the Indian Women's Association in Abu Dhabi, the head of which was the wife of the Indian ambassador there.

In less than one hour, a truck load of bottled water came.

This is what I call civil society co-operation. If I had asked Delhi, there will be the bureaucratic issue of first getting a financial sanction to place an order for water.

You know how time consuming it can be when people needed water to drink.

What I want to say is that India as a whole acted with more synergy then.

We also had the freedom to take decisions as we were on the ground.

We also had decided in the beginning itself that we would not charge any money from our nationals.

But this government took that decision only much later, after many students had been fleeced by the airlines.

What I want to say is, decision-making was smoother and faster though we did not have the advantage of e-mails or mobile phones or the Internet.

You mean, centralisation of decision-making should not be there in times like these?

In fact, it should never be there! Yes, certainly not during times like these.

What we require is lateral thinking in problem solving.

I remember one morning, when I was in Amman, the Air India manager came with a long face to breakfast because the Air India crew refused to fly because the passengers reached there very late the previous evening.

They walked out because by the time the flight reached Delhi, they would have been on duty for many hours!

So, the Air India manager had to take care of all the passengers including old people, women with babies, etc.

He wanted me to talk to the civil aviation secretary, foreign secretary, etc, I agreed to think it over.

I concluded that nobody in Delhi would be able to solve the problem.

Instead, I decided to make use of the media. I requested a journalist to write about the exemplary work the Air India crew had been doing.

When the news praising their dedication came out, they had no other choice but stop being rigid about extra working hours!

In 1990, more than 170,000 people were evacuated. How challenging was the entire process?

The challenging part was we could send the flights only to Amman as there was an embargo to fly to Kuwait or Iraq because of UN sanctions.

So, Indians from Kuwait and Iraq had to reach Jordan by road to catch the flight.

Our embassies in Kuwait and Iraq worked with the local community, and it was the community that organised buses to Jordan.

There was perfect co-ordination between the community and the embassies.

In today's scenario, I do not know whether it is there. I am told that the embassy had not mobilised the local community.

Though there is no big Indian community there, there are industrialists in Ukraine.

For example, war is happening in Kharkiv, but there is no consulate there.

So, you have to depend on the Indian community or an Indian company there.

India also had a proper plan for evacuation after Kuwait was invaded.

We tried to see whether it could be resolved through negotiations.

(Then external affairs minister) I K Gujral went to Washington, but came back knowing that the Americans wanted the war.

So, we knew if there was going to be a war, we had to evacuate our people before America started the war to expel Iraq from Kuwait.

And we started the evacuation then itself; we did not wait for the United States coalition to attack Iraq.

What is known as Operation Desert Storm of bombing Iraq started in February 1991 and we started the evacuation process in August 1990 completed much before Desert Storm.

Countries like the US asked its citizens to vacate Ukraine much earlier. Do you think India should have asked the students to come back earlier?

I would say it was an error of judgment; India did not anticipate a full-fledged war.

In such matters, what is required is prudence. If war clouds are gathering, there will be war though you cannot say when.

An ambassador or a joint secretary might not be sure whether there would be a war next month, but prudence requires him or her to take action to see to it that people leave early.

Because once the war starts, it will be very difficult to move out.

What they should have done was, they should have asked the students there to get out of Ukraine weeks ago.

They (the students) need not have come to India. Some students might have chosen to wait around in neighbouring countries.

It was also not important to bring them all back to India. What is important was to get them out of Ukraine. They could go to Poland, they could go to Germany...

If you are a student, once you reach Warsaw, you may find that you have a friend there, or another good friend or a cousin in another European country.

The GOI should have shown this sort of prudence.

Another thing is, if you check the language of the first advisory, it was quite vague.

An advisory should not say, 'You should consider the pros and cons'... 'Don't stay unless it is absolutely necessary', etc.

An advisory should be very clear; like, 'You should leave immediately.' The language is very important to convey the message.

This article is an interview with Rediff.com's Shobha Warrier. It was originally published on Rediff.com.

Image Courtesy: Rediff.com

March 08th, 2022 | category:international-affairs |

international-affairs

The Ukraine Crisis & Operation Ganga

The Operation Ganga started too late & has a conceptual weakness.

The tragic death of Naveen, 21, from Karnataka has focused national attention on the plight of the Indian students held up in Ukraine where the Russian military is meeting resistance, perhaps unexpected, from Ukrainian military and the civilians armed by President Zelensky. It appears Naveen, who went out to buy essentials, got caught in the cross fire. His parents are anxiously waiting for his mortal remains.

The key question is: who are the men responsible for the Ukraine crisis?

Three men are responsible for the war that has killed hundreds of human beings and compelled over 600,000 people to flee their country, not to speak of the threat of a nuclear war after Putin put his nuclear weapons on high alert.

If Presidents Putin, Biden, and Zelensky had behaved responsibly the course of history might have taken a different turn. Putin is right in demanding that no NATO missiles should be deployed in Ukraine. He has taken the same stand as Kennedy took in 1962. The crucial difference is that Kennedy and Khrushchev had the wisdom and diplomatic skills to negotiate their way out of a crisis that could have led to a nuclear war. President Zelensky seems to more interested in projecting his heroism than in seeking a conditional cease-fire to be followed up by serious negotiations.

Let’s focus on the plight of the Indian students. There were about 19,000 of them in Ukraine, most of them studying medicine. That tens of thousands of young Indians have to go out to study medicine shows a serious policy failure on the part of successive governments in India. When I was Deputy Secretary, way back in the early 1970s, Malaysia offered to fully fund the establishment of a medical college anywhere in India provided they got 50 seats. I recommended the proposal to our Ministry of Education. They shot it down saying there was no ‘provision’ for permitting a foreign government to fund a college in return for a certain number of seats for their nationals.

As regards Ukraine, it seems there was no contingency plan with the Embassies in Ukraine and in the neighbouring countries. Perhaps, Ministry of External Affairs had not sent out the instructions? Considering that India has carried out evacuations in the past, including the one in 1990 when over 176,000 Indians were airlifted from Jordan, it is surprising that no contingency plans were made. In 1990, the Ministry had a plan to evacuate the entire Indian community from the Gulf in case, for any reason, their stay became unsafe. We thought that if Iraq invaded Saudi Arabia, the Indian community there should be evacuated. In the case of Ukraine, it seems the government was taken in by surprise. The correct approach is to be prudent and act in good time. Even the first advisory from the Embassy could have been worded better.

The Operation Ganga started too late and has a conceptual weakness. It is aimed at bringing every Indian student to India as Prime Minister Modi has explained. What is important is to take them out of Ukraine. It does not matter whether they stayed in the neighbouring countries or came back all the way to India.

Another question is whether the Indian community was mobilised in Ukraine and the neighbouring countries. We have not come across reports of such mobilisation. In 1990, it was possible to arrange for a truck load of bottled water to be supplied to Indians held up in Amman by making a single phone call to the president (Ambassador’s wife) of the Indian Women’s Association in Abu Dhabi.

The control room in MEA works 24/7 with a total strength of about 100, so that, at any given time, there are 20 personnel headed by a Director level officer. The Embassies in Ukraine and neighbouring countries too have been strengthened up to a point.

At present we have about 3,000 students in Kharkiv and Sumy. Both are close to Russia. When the war started, the Russian military was able to prevail and India had requested Russia to arrange for safe passage of Indians. But, soon, the military situation changed quickly to the disadvantage of Russia. We can only hope Russia will cooperate if it regains control of the area.

The dispatch of Ministers was not necessary. Our Ambassadors are capable of handling the matter. Moreover, it is unfair to impose on them the extra burden of looking after a minister. Is it part of public relations to have dispatched the ministers? Even the deployment of IAF is more a publicity stunt as Air India has enough capacity.

Let us hope that, sooner rather than later, the three presidents would have the good sense to arrive at a conditional cease-fire to be followed by negotiations. It will be in the interest of Ukraine to have the negotiations within the framework of OSCE (Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe) rather sit opposite Russia.

This article was written by K.P. Fabian for madrascourier.com, where it first appeared.

Image courtesy: pixabay.com

March 05th, 2022 | category:international-affairs |

international-affairs, politics

How China Outsmarted The U.S. At The World Health Assembly

It is now clear that the President of the United States, Donald Trump, has sustained a major diplomatic defeat at the hands of the Chinese President, Xi Jinping. What happened at the 73rd session of the World Health Assembly, the 194-member decision making body of the World Health Organisation (W.H.O.), held virtually on 18 – 19 May 2020, has to be seen from two angles.

First, in the context of President Trump’s unsuccessful attempt at finding a scapegoat as he rightly stands charged rightly for his monumental failure to deal with the contagion and his fear, not entirely unfounded, that he might not get re-elected in November this year. Second, from a more historically relevant perspective of a rising China and a declining U.S.

What is striking is that Trump had good cards, even a few trumps. However, despite having had a weaker hand, Xi Jinping, finessed to perfection in diplomatic bridge, trumped Donald Trump.

The U.S. accuses China of not being transparent – or prompt – in transmitting information on the developing situation. Furthermore, the U.S. also accuses the W.H.O. of being China’s “puppet.” Had China and the W.H.O. acted right, the U.S. argues, the contagion could have been contained before it became a pandemic.

That the U.S. case is strong will be seen from the annotated timeline below:
 

8 December 2019

Cases of pneumonia of unknown aetiology detected in Wuhan, a city of 11 million.
 

30 December 2019

Dr. Li Wenliang who raised the alarm on social media was rebuked and, later, silenced by the Mayor.
 

31 December 2019

China formally informs the W.H.O. of cases of pneumonia of unknown aetiology. China added that “there was no evidence of human-to-human transmission.” Instead of digging deeper into the question of such transmission, the W.H.O. remains unconcerned and uncurious, a dereliction of its responsibilities.
 

13 January 2020

The first case of infection outside China recorded in Thailand.
 

14 January 2020

The W.H.O. tweets that there was “no clear evidence” of human-to-human transmission. This was the height of irresponsibility as there was a case in Thailand. What did the W.H.O mean by “clear”? The current entry on the W.H.O. website for 14 January 2020 is disingenuous:

The WHO’s technical lead for the response noted in a press briefing there may have been limited human-to-human transmission of the coronavirus (in the 41 confirmed cases), mainly through family members, and that there was a risk of a possible wider outbreak. The lead also said that human-to-human transmission would not be surprising given our experience with SARS, MERS and other respiratory pathogens.

 

18 January 2020

The Mayor of Wuhan hosts a banquet for 40,000 families and the virus goes viral. His reason for silencing the young doctor is clear.
 

20 January 2020

Beijing wakes up and sends Dr. Zhong Nanshan, 83, virologist, to Wuhan. He goes on national television saying there is clear danger of an epidemic, confirming human-to-human transmission.
  Didn’t the W.H.O. Representative in China report this to the Director General in Geneva?
 

22 January 2020

Lockdown begins in Wuhan. The W.H.O. Emergency Committee meets for two days and decides to meet again after 10 days to consider whether a global public emergency should be declared. This is deplorable abdication of responsibility.
 

28 January 2020

The W.H.O. Director General visits Beijing. Was he seeking permission before declaring an emergency?
 

30 January 2020

The W.H.O. declares a global emergency. (It should have declared a pandemic.) Furthermore, the W.H.O. declares there should be no ban on travel to and from China. This is criminal irresponsibility.
 

11 March 2020

The W.H.O. declares a pandemic. By then, the Hubei province had 67,773 cases and 3,046 deaths; the total for China was 80,955 cases and 3,162 deaths. Was it necessary to wait for the death toll to cross 3,000?

To go back to the diplomatic showdown, all that U.S. had to do was to put out a clear timeline. Instead, Secretary Pompeo stated that he had “enormous evidence” proving China’s culpability. The more he repeated it, without sharing the evidence, the less credible he sounded.

Donald Trump also repeated charges against China, threatened to stop paying the contribution to W.H.O., and wanted an investigation into its handling of the matter. His threat to cut funding enormously weakened his case. We did not hear much from the professional diplomats as the Secretary and the President spoke all the time.

Watching the diplomatic bungling by Washington, Xi Jinping planned his moves. On day one of the Assembly, he addressed the gathering and offered $ 2 billion to support the developing countries, including the ones in Africa, to deal with the contagion. Trump on his part wrote a harsh letter to the Director-General of the W.H.O., giving an ultimatum: Put your house in order or the U.S. might walk out. It was a rambling letter, with hardly any professional input. If he had a case, Trump should have addressed the Assembly.

Trump’s attack on the W.H.O. had an unintended, but easily anticipatable consequence. We do not know for sure, but it is possible that the European Union resorted to Machiavellian tactics. It came out with a draft resolution that called for a “plan for an evaluation, to be conducted in consultation with Member States at the earliest appropriate moment, on lessons learnt from the international health response to COVID-19, addressing the long-term consequences on health, in order to assess, in line with the statement made by G20 leaders, gaps in pandemic preparedness with a view to establishing a global initiative on pandemic preparedness and response capitalizing on existing structures and programmes to align priorities in global preparedness.”

Australia came out in strong support of Trump’s stand and consulted with the EU and stiffened the language by adding the words, “an impartial, independent and comprehensive evaluation including using existing mechanisms, as appropriate, to review experience gained and lessons learned from the WHO-coordinated international health response to COVID-19.”

China initially opposed the draft resolution, but it joined the growing number of supporters and extracted drafting changes. The word “impartial” is missing from the text as proposed by the Chair and was unanimously adopted. There will be no inquisition into the role of the Director-General as the Assembly “requested” him to conduct the evaluation.

Coming to Taiwan’s request for restoring its observer status, 15 microstates wrote to the W.H.O. proposing discussion on Taiwan’s request. Even before the General Committee was to consider it, realising the lack of support, Taiwan withdrew its request. Everyone noted that though Pompeo had publicly supported Taiwan, Washington did not extend formal support, one more indication of Beijing’s growing diplomatic clout.

In short, Xi Jinping’s victory was complete, and he can address the party congress with enhanced self-confidence, unlike Trump who finds that his rival, Joe Biden, has more support right now.

Coming to the larger question, the United States had seen an adversary in U.S.S.R. even before World War II ended in Europe. Such a perception was partly responsible for the ill-begotten Cold War. When it ended, it was said in U.S. that Japan had won the Cold War, implying that Japan was the new economic adversary. For many years, even before Trump came into office, there had developed a consensus among the U.S. think tanks that China was the new adversary. Incidentally, China could not have risen so fast but for the Nixon visit in 1972.

Coming to China, the Middle Kingdom is convinced of its superiority over the rest of the world. Under Xi Jinping, China has not been reticent about its plans to co-equal U.S. and later to overtake it. Hence, the basic ingredients of confrontation between the two remain. The probability of them dividing the world into two zones is slim, though it cannot be ruled out.

There is a big difference between the Cold War days and now. The Soviet Union had, and its successor Russia, has a MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction) relationship with the U.S. Trump is trying to change that and gain superiority, but his chances of success are slim.

Moreover, there is a difference in the new world order. while the Soviet Union was never an economic rival or threat to the U.S., China is.

In conclusion, both U.S. and China know that economically they are Siamese twins. We might see varying degrees of cooperation and confrontation in the future. China is unlikely to have a MAD relationship with U.S. in the near future. But madness on either side could end up destroying the world as we know it.

  The above article written by Ambassador K.P. Fabian was initially published on Madras Courier Credits:- https://madrascourier.com/opinion/how-china-outsmarted-the-u-s-at-the-world-health-assembly/

May 26th, 2020 | category:international-affairs, politics |