Building better connections

On Sunday, two newspapers ran reports that have a vital bearing on the geopolitical future of the country. Writing in the Indian Express, Praveen Swami lamented that a game-changer plan to link India with Afghanistan and Central Asia through the eastern Iranian port of Chah Bahar was in danger of being derailed because of New Delhi’s parsimonious attitude in putting up money at the scale that the ambitious schemes require. In the Times of India, Indrani Bagchi reported that India’s “Act East” slogan was being jeopardised by poor project management of its connectivity projects relating to Myanmar. India, she noted, had unilaterally shifted the deadline of completion of its projects from 2016 to 2019.

For Indian officials, these are really teething problems and New Delhi remains determined to pursue these schemes, if only for the fact that they are vital for India’s emerging geopolitical posture. New Delhi is also aware that should it falter, others, primarily China, are ready to take its place. The idea of developing Chah Bahar has been around ever since India and Iran collaborated in helping the Northern Alliance to take on the Taliban in the late 1990s.

However, the issue has also become entangled with the regional geopolitics as New Delhi has had to move carefully so as not to upset Uncle Sam. The Iranians, too, adept at hardball have sought to tap external investments for their infrastructure and development schemes. Many Indian players had, on the other hand, hoped to tap the Iranian oil riches which were being used by Teheran to subsidise fuel and food for its populace. In 2013, India came up with an offer of $ 100 million for the project, and the Chinese countered with a $75 million credit line to develop the port. This was somewhat strange since China runs the Gwadar port which is 76 kms down the coast, but across the border in Pakistan. Many observers believe that the effort was aimed at undercutting New Delhi.

It was only in October 2014 that New Delhi firmed up its offer and said that it would create a special purpose vehicle to invest $85.2 million to convert the existing berths at the port into a container and a multipurpose terminal. However, the Iranians say that the investments required to exploit the opportunity are much greater, perhaps something up to the tune of $ 500 million and more. This is because there are many vital missing links in the Iranian infrastructure in his region. For example, there is need to link Chah Bahar with Zahedan by a railway line which will then link up to the Iranian national railway system and the northern city of Mehshed. Railways between Iran and Afghanistan need to be built or upgraded along with better roads so that the region can play the role as a kind of an Indian Silk Route to Afghanistan and Central Asia
via Iran.

A major problem in developing connectivity projects has been the lack of higher direction. By virtue of being strategic, these tasks ought to be done in special quick time. But, more often than not, they end up mired in all kinds of problems. At the best of times inter-ministerial and centre-state coordination is poor. The Myanmar projects are led by the Ministry of External Affairs, but there are problems with this model since the Ministry is itself terribly under-manned and its diplomats are not really geared to be project managers.

This is compounded by the lack of specialised construction companies which can be used to run the projects. One would be tempted to call for revitalising companies like the Engineering Projects of India Ltd or the Engineers India Ltd for the job. But if the past is any guide, they end up functioning like typical public sector companies with low levels of efficiency and despatch. However, India does have good private sector engineering companies and the government can create special purpose vehicles by getting into joint ventures with them. As for running the directing the effort, there is no reason why a specialised ministry cannot be created, perhaps as part of the completely restructured MEA. Such imperatives have resulted in Canada’s foreign ministry being called the “Ministry of Foreign Affairs Trade and Development” and the Australian foreign ministry the “Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade.”

To emerge as a powerhouse in its region, India will have to shape its politics as well as its infrastructure. A cursory look at a transportation or communications map will show the advantage that developed countries have in their first mover advantage in creating the world’s infrastructure undersea telegraph and fibre optic cables, pipelines, railroads, airline routes, maritime links all favour them. As a late comer, India needs to put in that extra effort to shape the connectivity paradigm in its neighbourhood. This requires both money and managerial skills. But more important, since the amounts are not significant considering India’s scale, it requires a vision, as well as higher direction.

This is what the Chinese are demonstrating with their Silk Road strategy. Last November, Xi Jinping put down $40 billion for furthering his goals in shaping the future communications and trading links of China with resource rich countries of Africa, as well as the markets of Europe. This is not a challenge where India can afford to fumble and falter.

Mid Day 17 February 2015

On Sunday, two newspapers ran reports that have a vital bearing on the geopolitical future of the country. Writing in the Indian Express, Praveen Swami lamented that a game-changer plan to link India with Afghanistan and Central Asia through the eastern Iranian port of Chah Bahar was in danger of being derailed because of New Delhi’s parsimonious attitude in putting up money at the scale that the ambitious schemes require. In the Times of India, Indrani Bagchi reported that India’s “Act East” slogan was being jeopardised by poor project management of its connectivity projects relating to Myanmar. India, she noted, had unilaterally shifted the deadline of completion of its projects from 2016 to 2019. - See more at: http://www.mid-day.com/articles/building-better-connections/15994199#sthash.6HECVEyT.dpuf

The importance of the budget for the country's defence

The Modi Government’s first real annual Budget is perhaps its most important test after flunking the Delhi Assembly examination. 

Businessmen will be watching it to gauge the intentions and determination of the Government to create a pro-business atmosphere in the country. But equally it will be eagerly watched by the armed forces community. 

Acquisitions are important, but there is equal need for reorganising the command and control of the armed forces to emphasise integrated functioning 

Requirements 

This is because it will provide the signal as to the extent to which the Government is committed towards accelerating their delayed modernisation. 

The three services have their big-ticket wish list – Rafale for the IAF, seed money for the Army’s mountain corps, the helicopters, missiles and submarines for the Navy. 

But they also have equally urgent requirements for plugging gaps and consolidating existing holdings. 

The problem as the Rs 2,29,000 crore interim defence budget of July 2014 reveals is that – 39 per cent is spent on pay and allowances, 11 per cent on maintaining existing holdings, another 9 per cent on miscellaneous things like housing and transportation. 

Only Rs 94,588 crore (41 per cent) is available for new acquisitions. Even this is misleading as the capital budget contains money that must be paid out for past acquisitions, besides the needs of the DRDO and ongoing constructions in Indian factories and yards such as the new INS Viraat, for whom a sum of Rs 1,200 crore were appropriated. 

The two big projects, going head to head as it were, are the Air Force’s Rafale multi-role fighter whose estimates are Rs 120,000 crore, and the Army’s mountain corps which also requires a like amount, if you take into account its ancillary requirement of a division worth of medical and engineering troops. 

These are heady sums, and even if broken up into yearly installments, they could distort defence acquisitions since they would leave little or no money for other equally critical needs such as artillery guns for the Army, the replacement of light utility helicopters, minesweepers for the Navy, and so on. 

The Government’s headaches will be compounded by the fact that the Army’s mountain corps has already been raised. 

The Army skimmed off personnel from its 300 plus battalions, which are usually about 900 strong, and whose pay and allowances have already been budgeted for. 

Their equipment came from the war wastage reserves (WWR). So while the WWR now stands at alarmingly low levels, the Indian Army does have an addition corps which has added an important element in the order of battle in the country’s northern border. 

In the past five years, the ITBP which polices the border has been reporting a sharp increase of Chinese patrolling and presence along 14 or so points on the LAC that defines the Sino-Indian border where Chinese claims and ours overlap. 

Tight budget: According to the latest figures only Rs 94,588 crore (41 per cent) is available for new defence acquisitions

Further, the Chinese presence is not only more insistent, it is now often leavened by locals who demand that the Indian side go back to their side of the border. 

Two recent manifestations of changed behaviour were the Chinese encampment in the Depsang Plains which stoked off a crisis in April-May 2013 and the massing of troops in the Churmur area at the junction of Himachal Pradesh and Ladakh during Xi Jinping’s official visit to India last September. 

Deterrence 

Actually, the Army will increase its strength by nearly 90,000 in the coming years taking its strength up to 1.26 million. 

This is not a good sign since this will require a significant enhancement of the Army’s budget in the coming years, with a comparative pressure on the capital needs of the IAF and the Indian Navy, as well, indeed, on the modernisation requirements of the Army itself. 

Army leaders see this as inescapable since the two principal threats to the country come from over the land borders with Pakistan and China. 

In the past, the armed forces were told that they needed to maintain a deterrence posture with Pakistan, which included the possibility of launching a war into Pakistani territory. 

In the case of China, the instructions were to plan a purely defensive battle along the mountain frontier. 

Bureaucracy 

With the PLA modernisation and force accretions in Tibet, the Indian Army cannot undertake its tasks in a purely defensive deployment. 

Equally important is the fact that over the years, coordination between Pakistan and China has, if anything, been intensifying. 

During the 1965 and 1971 wars, the Chinese did not intervene on Pakistan’s behalf. But they made some pretty scary threats to do so. 

The issue confronting military planners now is: What if the next time around, China does indeed intervene? 

The Chinese are masters of timing and it is difficult to forget their 1975 operation to eject the South Vietnamese forces and occupy the Paracel Islands during the closing phase of the war that unified Vietnam, ironically with Chinese help. 

The problem is not that the armed forces demands are excessive, but the challenge of meeting them in a manner which does not deflect India from its goal of long-term economic growth, which at the present juncture requires massive investments in infrastructure and manufacturing industries. 

The way to go is to sharply tighten the management of our armed forces, which means cutting waste and needless redundancies. 

The first step here is to enforce the concept of an integrated military where acquisitions planning can be standardised and prioritised. 

Priority: Finance Minister Arun Jaitley must make India's defence funding a priority in his Budget 

Acquisitions are important, but there is equal need for reorganising the command and control of the armed forces to emphasise integrated functioning. 

The second is to create an expert civilian bureaucracy which can undertake the task instead of the inexpert one at present which exercises power by emphasising procedure over subject specialisation. 

These are tasks that cannot be left to the armed forces leadership or the Ministry of Defence. It is something that Prime Minister Modi and his colleagues in the Cabinet Committee on Security need to sort out urgently. 

Mail Today Februrary 16, 2015

Delhi gives AAP a second chance

In Indian politics, you have heard of a simple majority, a two-third victory, or a three-fourth sweep. But surely you have never heard of a nine-tenths tsunami.

The Aam Aadmi Party’s victory in 67 out of 70 Delhi Assembly seats has simply blown the established parties like the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and the Congress out of the water. 

It has inflicted by far the most crushing defeat to its opposition in independent India’s electoral history. 

AAP supporters celebrate the party's victory in the Delhi Assembly polls in New Delhi 

At least when the Janata Party swept the Congress out from every seat in an arc from Gujarat to Orissa in the post-Emergency election of 1977, the Congress managed to retain some ‘izzat’ by sweeping the poll in Andhra, Karnataka and Kerala. 

But the BJP and Congress have been left with no comfort in the Delhi Assembly 2015 poll outcome. 

In terms of political geography, defeat in a state which returns just seven members of Parliament, may not appear too devastating. But Delhi is a slice of India, peopled as it is by lakhs of Punjabis, Biharis, Uttar Pradesh-wallahs, South Indians, Bengalis, North-easterners, Christians, Muslims and so on. And the victory in Delhi is comprehensive, it has cut across caste, class, religion and ethnic divides and incorporated every demographic — from the old to the first-time voter. 

The angst 

Remarkably, it has been done by turning Modi’s own formula against him. It was Modi and the BJP which was able to harness middle-class angst at the UPA’s non-performance to get a 7/7 verdict in the 2014 Lok Sabha election in Delhi. In 2009, Manmohan Singh’s UPA had written on the expectations of the same middle class to get a 7/7 victory. 

Modi’s strategy lay in harnessing the “neo” middle class — poor people, who aspired for middle class status in terms of income and assets. This time around, Kejriwal has ridden to his crushing victory, harnessing the aspirations of the “neo” and the continuing angst of the actual middle classes who thought that the BJP’s victory of 2014 would set a new course for the country. 

Instead, they found the party setting a backward course, characterised by anti-modernity and obscurantism. The venerable Indian Science Congress was made to hear a lecture on ancient flying machines; bizzare schemes of ‘ghar wapsi’ were unveiled to convert the country’s minorities. 

Attacks on churches, mean-minded efforts to unmake the Christmas holiday, and a suspicious rise in what appeared to be deliberate efforts to promote communal anger increased the apprehension of the people. 

Sometimes, distance lends clarity to the vision. Perhaps it was this that persuaded US President Barack Obama to observe that “India will succeed so long as it is not splintered along the lines of religious faith… so long as it's not splintered along any lines.” 

If the BJP’s vanity is punctured, the Congress’s is confronted with oblivion. This was the party that ran the state for the past 15 years. The bustling Delhi of today is the Delhi of Sheila Dikshit. But the stench of corruption undid the Congress hold, beginning with the Commonwealth Games and 2G scandals. 

The clock begins ticking now for the AAP, whose cure could well be worse than the current disease of corruption and misgovernance that afflicts the city. 

The people of the city have given AAP a second chance. Now it is up to the party to build on this and reach out to its destiny, which could be national. 

Rebuke

But that same clock is also ticking for the BJP. It can take comfort from the fact that it has largely retained its vote share, and that the AAP vote-share gain was equal to the Congress’s loss. 

But the reality is that the result is a rebuke to Modi. What the people of Delhi have told him is that they are not interested in the politics of animus and hostility towards people of other faiths. That they are for modernity — education, good jobs and progress. 

They are determined to go forward, not be dragged back to the dark ages. 

Mail Today February 10, 2015

Budget has to deliver on reforms

After an astonishing and uninterrupted run, the Bharatiya Janata Party has begun to feel the heat. The Delhi election has, for the first time in the past eight months, put pressure on the party leadership. Equally, the Government is getting a measure of just how humongous a task they face as they begin to craft what needs to be the defining Union Budget of their tenure. 

If the BJP stumbles in either endeavour, it could mark the beginning of “normal” politics in the country and, perhaps, another period of political wrangling which will prevent the Government from undertaking the deep restructuring and reform of the Governmental system, ranging from modifying labour laws, improving education, easing rules of doing business, transforming the Ministry of Defence, reforming the tax administration of the country and so on. 

The BJP Government headed by Narendra Modi is not weak, but it has a certain fragility based on the fact that power and responsibility rest on the shoulders of one man. So far that man has shown himself to be a superman of sorts, gaining the first ever majority for the party in the Lok Sabha in 30 years, capturing the state assemblies in Congress strongholds of Maharashtra and Haryana, and setting a scorching pace in the country’s foreign relations with major powers like the United States and China. 

Ordinances 

But, what the people want of him, and indeed expect, is an economic revolution that will change their lives and those of their children. 

To this end, Modi’s actions, so far, add up to several IOUs, and a number of promises in the form of temporary measures pushed through in the form of ordinances. 

There are, in addition, a number of administrative steps, the so-called low hanging fruit which have been plucked. 

Barracked by the Opposition in the Upper House, the Modi Government has brought in some nine ordinances already. 

These are related to the land acquisition bill, the coal mines bill to enable e-auctions, the insurance bill to increase the cap in the insurance sector to 49 per cent, the quicker arbitration bill to make it mandatory for judges dealing with commercial cases to settle the cases in nine months, the e-rickshaw ordinance to allow e-carts and e-rickshaws to ply on Delhi’s roads, the mines and minerals development regulation to do away with mining leases and increase the lease period from 30 years to 50 years, to merge schemes for PIOs and OCIs and provide lifetime visas for them and finally an ordinance to increase FDI to 100 per cent in pharma and medical equipment sector. 

Many of these are indicative of the direction the Government has set. But, as President Pranab Mukherjee noted in a speech last month, ordinances are not the way to get to the destination. 

There are other areas which are very important, but equally problematic for the new Government such as the Goods & Services Tax (GST) and the labour reforms bill. 

Some BJP states oppose the former or want in a shape which will make it virtually meaningless. 

On the other hand, powerful Sangh Parivar entities, which include the country’s largest trade union, the Bharatiya Mazdoor Sangh oppose any efforts to reform the labour laws which have become an albatross around the country’s neck. 

Signals 

Delhi may not be a full fledged state, but its election holds considerable significance. The city is, after all, the national capital. 

It is also the home of a significant proportion of well-off people and elites who shape national opinion and policy in a range of issues. 

The BJP’s primary opponent in the election Arvind Kejriwal of Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) has sharply posed the issues and has made it clear that a Government headed by his party would oppose multi-brand FDI in retail, labour reforms and the land acquisition steps outlined by the BJP. 

Were he to win, he could cause considerable dissonance with the Union Government, as well as send the wrong kind of signals to potential investors in the country. 

BJP president Amit Shah (left) has upended the BJP's organisation and brought in a maverick former police officer, Kiran Bedi (right), to counter the appeal of the AAP's Arvind Kejriwal

Of course, victory—or defeat—in the elections will have an intrinsic significance for the BJP as well. 

It has put in an enormous effort to win the poll. It has upended its party organisation and brought in a maverick former police officer, Kiran Bedi, to counter the appeal of Kejriwal. 

The Prime Minister’s principal lieutenant has headed the campaign committee which has seen bigwigs like Arun Jaitley lead the charge, with help from Modi himself.

Corruption 

The Modi Government’s dynamism centred around his ambitious plans to trigger the much-needed manufacturing revolution in India, has led to the temporary eclipse of several important issues that were bothering the country in the past few years. 

Primary among these is that of corruption. In Modi’s scheme of things the issue does not have the kind of salience it gained in the 2010-2014 period. 

But the BJP should not forget that it played a major role in undermining the credibility of the United Progressive Alliance Government. 

Modi believes that his centralised governance and his pre-eminence in the Government makes it immune to charges of corruption. 

As he famously declared “Na khaoonga, na khaaney doonga” (I will neither be corrupt, not permit anyone else to be so). But people in the country are far from being rid of the huge amount of corruption they face in their daily lives. 

The Lokpal envisaged by Kejriwal and Anna Hazare was, of course, over the top and not a viable solution. But people, especially the poor, do want the Government to rid them of the petty and debilitating corruption they face from Government officials at all levels in their everyday lives. 

And no matter what Modi says, that aspect of corruption has not even been dented or seriously challenged by his Government. 

Mail Today February 5, 2015

The Congress is a threat to Rahul and Sonia Gandhi, not the BJP

There was a time, not so long ago, when people spoke of the "Lotus" wilting. Today the focus is on the shrivelling of the "Hand". The run up to the 2014 general election and its shock outcome showed up the spreading rot, even though it was clear that it had set in from the time Prime Minister Manmohan Singh gave the Congress a victory in the 2009 general elections, and the Gandhis decided that he needed to be marginalised.

However, the effort to check Singh, combined with the eruption of a number of scandals, beginning with those associated with the 2010 Commonwealth Games, and the 2G allocation, eventually paralysed decision-making in the party.

High Command

The pattern of the disease was that it began with the periphery - Andhra Pradesh, Maharashtra and so on - and moved towards the centre. Now it has hit home at the high command, through the revelation of a letter written last November by former loyalist and Union Minister for environment and forests, Jayanthi Natarajan to Sonia Gandhi, complaining about the way she was made to take decisions by Sonia and Rahul, in the period when she was the minister between July 2011 to December 2013.

During the 2014 general elections, Narendra Modi had charged that a "Jayanthi tax" (presumably bribes) had been levied on companies to obtain environmental clearances. With the new government in place, there was talk of CBI looking into some of the cases. In her letter to Sonia, she said that she had been given "specific input" on certain projects by Sonia and Rahul or by their aides. For the first time, a specific allegation is being made against Rahul and therefore has implications for the future of the party. If what she eventually decided fell within rules, it will be fine, but if not, it would open up Natarajan, as well as Sonia and Rahul to legal action. If there is actual proof that Rahul was party to a strategy of "shaking down" corporates, using the device of environmental clearances, he could get entangled in a Chakravyuh, much like his father was in the case of Bofors.

That the party has been going downhill for a while has not been a secret. There is little point repeating the handling of the post-Rajasekhara Reddy Andhra Pradesh and the Telangana issue, or that of dealing with another Congress strong-hold Maharashtra. The consequence of this was apparent in the disastrous showing of the Congress party in both the two states.

Resignations

Last year as the elections approached, the pace intensified. In March 2014 in Rajasthan, Bhanwar Lal Sharma, a six-term MLA from Sardarshahar, resigned from the party. Sharma attacked Rahul Gandhi as a leader who has been forced on the party. Equally damaging was the defection of Colonel Sonaram Chaudhry, a long-term MLA and MP who quit the party and was fielded from his home constituency and won from Barmer on a BJP ticket. The process intensified across the country where long-serving Congressmen abandoned the party and sought tickets with the BJP which welcomed most with open arms. The result was that the party crashed to its lowest ever showing. Following the defeat, process became more acute.

TH Mustafa, a senior Congress leader belonging to the party's Kerala unit, attacked Rahul Gandhi as a "joker" and said that the party should know that "being a prime minister is not child's play." He wanted Priyanka to become the party leader instead. However, Mustafa was merely suspended and returned to the party later. In July 2014 it was the turn of former MP and Sanjay Gandhi loyalist, Gufran Azam to criticise Rahul, accusing him of destroying both the Youth Congress and the party. "We are tired of hearing people addressing the Congress vice president as 'Pappu' and 'Munna' and feel ashamed," he added. Azam was expelled from the party in October 2014. Then it was the turn of GK Vasan, son of late GK Moopanaar, who split away from the party in November 2014, in a repeat of 1996 when the latter had formed the Tamil Manila Congress. Several senior leaders, some of them former legislators joined him in a new version of the TMC.

Political Failure

All this suggests that the party is in a free-fall. We could see more top-level leaders making the calculation about their own political future and taking a decision to cut their losses. For example, how long will someone like Jyotiraditya Scindia and Sachin Pilot hang on? They, especially the former, could easily float a regional formation and retain influence in his strongholds of Gwalior and Guna. As for the BJP, it does not now face much of a threat from the Congress party. So, it will decide when and how to press the button. Of course, it is clear that former ministers are vulnerable, if there are indications that they took illegal decisions because of pressure from the Gandhis, as are the latter themselves.

Mail Today February 1, 2015

Unsettling game of border settlement

Even before the hype over US President Barack Obama’s visit has died down, the Modi government is on the move to enhance its ties with China. External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj’s ongoing visit is an important part of this effort, especially as she is accompanied by the new Foreign Secretary S Jaishankar, who had done a full three-year term as ambassador to China till 2013.

 

Sushma Swaraj, in a first for an Indian leader, explicitly declared that ‘my government is committed to exploring an early settlement’. Pic/PTI

Ms Swaraj was in China to work out the preliminaries of Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s May 2015 visit, which is expected to even the keel of the Sino-Indian relations that have been tilted by US President Obama’s recent visit to India. In her remarks in Beijing, the EAM, for the first time for an Indian leader, explicitly declared that “my government is committed to exploring an early settlement”. She buttressed this with the remark that her government, “had the political will to think out of the box” on this issue. As part of this effort, the National Security Adviser Ajit Doval, who is also India’s Special Representative (SR) and pointsman for Sino-Indian border negotiations, would visit China between now and the PM’s planned visit for the 18th round of talks with his Chinese counterpart, State Councillor Yang Jichei.

The Chinese have been signalling that they want an early settlement ever since Xi Jinping said in a statement in March 2013 in Durban that “China and India should improve and make good use of the mechanism of Special Representatives to strive for a fair, rational solution framework acceptable to both sides as soon as possible.”

Subsequently, Chinese leaders Li Keqiang in May 2013 in New Delhi and Foreign Minister Wang Yi, who was in New Delhi in June 2014 have also emphasised the point that the Chinese are ready for a border settlement.

No one in the Indian side has made any public comment on the nature of the settlement, but the Chinese have not been so shy. In May 2013, in an oped in The Hindu, former Chinese ambassador Wei Wei noted that the two sides had arrived at an 18-point consensus document on the border settlement through the dialogue between their SRs who had been appointed in 2003. Wang Yi was more direct when he said during his June 2014 visit that “Through years of negotiation, we have come to an agreement on the basics of a boundary agreement, and we are prepared to reach a final settlement.”

Prime Minister Modi had initially held back in appointing his new NSA as the Special Representative for the border talks. This post had been held concurrently by previous NSAs beginning with the first, Brajesh Mishra. However, on November 26, Modi did nominate Doval, thus setting the stage for a resumed dialogue, which could yield results quickly, provided we can cut through the fog of changing Chinese positions.

At the time of Doval’s appointment, the Chinese official spokeswoman Hua Chunying had repeated the formulation that the Chinese were keen “to push forward the settlement of the problem based on the principles and consensus reached by both sides in previous talks.” However, she also referred to the border as being 2,000-km long, as the Chinese officials have been doing since 2010 when they started calling Arunachal Pradesh as “Southern Tibet”.

Given that the Indian border with China can be divided into roughly four segments 1700 km in the West, 640 km in the Central sector and 1,100 km in the east, and the 225-km border in Sikkim which has been settled, it is not clear where the 2,000-km figure comes from. It can either exclude the McMahon Line or the Sino-Indian border in J&K. Whatever be the case, the 2,000-km figure touted by the Chinese seriously undermines their claims of wanting to negotiate seriously.

In recent years, the Chinese have been making an emphatic demand for the Tawang area of Arunachal Pradesh during the SR talks. However, the Indian representatives have made it clear that this is simply not on the table and that they were willing to arrive at a fair and reasonable settlement within the bounds of the 2005 agreement on the Political Parameters and Guiding Principles of a Border Settlement, which more or less hinted that the two sides would swap their claims.

Besides the border, the two sides are eager to set the terms for enhancing their economic engagement. During Xi’s visit, the Chinese offered $20 billion worth of investment and expressed a desire to finance and participate in a high-speed rail project in India. They also said they wanted to be part of the smart cities initiative of the PM. In addition, they have sought to rope India into their Silk Route-related One-Belt One-Road initiative. However, while India is game for the Bangladesh-China-India-Myanmar (BICM) corridor, it is a bit cautious about the One-Belt One-Road initiative, especially its maritime component, which has seen Chinese military forays into the Indian Ocean. During the last round of the SR talks, the Chinese had proposed a maritime dialogue. India would like to get a better understanding of the Maritime Silk Road plan before committing itself to it.

What the Modi government is signalling to the Chinese is that it does not view its relations with regard to the US and China as a zero-sum game. By raising the qualitative threshold of India’s relations with these and other powers, he is seeking to maximise India’s gains. Whether he can indeed do so depends vitally on his ability to get the Indian economy on a fast-growth track.

Mid Day February 3, 2015

Ms Swaraj was in China to work out the preliminaries of Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s May 2015 visit, which is expected to even the keel of the Sino-Indian relations that have been tilted by US President Obama’s recent visit to India. In her remarks in Beijing, the EAM, for the first time for an Indian leader, explicitly declared that “my government is committed to exploring an early settlement”. She buttressed this with the remark that her government, “had the political will to think out of the box” on this issue. As part of this effort, the National Security Adviser Ajit Doval, who is also India’s Special Representative (SR) and pointsman for Sino-Indian border negotiations, would visit China between now and the PM’s planned visit for the 18th round of talks with his Chinese counterpart, State Councillor Yang Jichei. - See more at: http://www.mid-day.com/articles/unsettling-game-of-border-settlement/15960168#sthash.zNpeyHPB.dpuf

Ms Swaraj was in China to work out the preliminaries of Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s May 2015 visit, which is expected to even the keel of the Sino-Indian relations that have been tilted by US President Obama’s recent visit to India. In her remarks in Beijing, the EAM, for the first time for an Indian leader, explicitly declared that “my government is committed to exploring an early settlement”. She buttressed this with the remark that her government, “had the political will to think out of the box” on this issue. As part of this effort, the National Security Adviser Ajit Doval, who is also India’s Special Representative (SR) and pointsman for Sino-Indian border negotiations, would visit China between now and the PM’s planned visit for the 18th round of talks with his Chinese counterpart, State Councillor Yang Jichei.
The Chinese have been signalling that they want an early settlement ever since Xi Jinping said in a statement in March 2013 in Durban that “China and India should improve and make good use of the mechanism of Special Representatives to strive for a fair, rational solution framework acceptable to both sides as soon as possible.”
Subsequently, Chinese leaders Li Keqiang in May 2013 in New Delhi and Foreign Minister Wang Yi, who was in New Delhi in June 2014 have also emphasised the point that the Chinese are ready for a border settlement.
No one in the Indian side has made any public comment on the nature of the settlement, but the Chinese have not been so shy. In May 2013, in an oped in The Hindu, former Chinese ambassador Wei Wei noted that the two sides had arrived at an 18-point consensus document on the border settlement through the dialogue between their SRs who had been appointed in 2003. Wang Yi was more direct when he said during his June 2014 visit that “Through years of negotiation, we have come to an agreement on the basics of a boundary agreement, and we are prepared to reach a final settlement.”
Prime Minister Modi had initially held back in appointing his new NSA as the Special Representative for the border talks. This post had been held concurrently by previous NSAs beginning with the first, Brajesh Mishra. However, on November 26, Modi did nominate Doval, thus setting the stage for a resumed dialogue, which could yield results quickly, provided we can cut through the fog of changing Chinese positions.
At the time of Doval’s appointment, the Chinese official spokeswoman Hua Chunying had repeated the formulation that the Chinese were keen “to push forward the settlement of the problem based on the principles and consensus reached by both sides in previous talks.” However, she also referred to the border as being 2,000-km long, as the Chinese officials have been doing since 2010 when they started calling Arunachal Pradesh as “Southern Tibet”.
Given that the Indian border with China can be divided into roughly four segments 1700 km in the West, 640 km in the Central sector and 1,100 km in the east, and the 225-km border in Sikkim which has been settled, it is not clear where the 2,000-km figure comes from. It can either exclude the McMahon Line or the Sino-Indian border in J&K. Whatever be the case, the 2,000-km figure touted by the Chinese seriously undermines their claims of wanting to negotiate seriously.
In recent years, the Chinese have been making an emphatic demand for the Tawang area of Arunachal Pradesh during the SR talks. However, the Indian representatives have made it clear that this is simply not on the table and that they were willing to arrive at a fair and reasonable settlement within the bounds of the 2005 agreement on the Political Parameters and Guiding Principles of a Border Settlement, which more or less hinted that the two sides would swap their claims.
Besides the border, the two sides are eager to set the terms for enhancing their economic engagement. During Xi’s visit, the Chinese offered $20 billion worth of investment and expressed a desire to finance and participate in a high-speed rail project in India. They also said they wanted to be part of the smart cities initiative of the PM. In addition, they have sought to rope India into their Silk Route-related One-Belt One-Road initiative. However, while India is game for the Bangladesh-China-India-Myanmar (BICM) corridor, it is a bit cautious about the One-Belt One-Road initiative, especially its maritime component, which has seen Chinese military forays into the Indian Ocean. During the last round of the SR talks, the Chinese had proposed a maritime dialogue. India would like to get a better understanding of the Maritime Silk Road plan before committing itself to it.
What the Modi government is signalling to the Chinese is that it does not view its relations with regard to the US and China as a zero-sum game. By raising the qualitative threshold of India’s relations with these and other powers, he is seeking to maximise India’s gains. Whether he can indeed do so depends vitally on his ability to get the Indian economy on a fast-growth track.
- See more at: http://www.mid-day.com/articles/unsettling-game-of-border-settlement/15960168#sthash.zNpeyHPB.dpuf