 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Paper no. 1892
26.07. 2006
INDIA’S FOREIGN POLICY (2006) STANDS COMMUNISED AND COMMUNALISED: An Analysis
By Dr. Subhash Kapila
Introductory Background
On the emergence of the Congress Government in 2004 with its survivability resting on the Indian Communist Parties grouping, this author in a paper: “India’s New Government and its Foreign Policy Options” (SAAG Paper No. 1049 dated 07.06.2004 had made the following observations:
- “India’s foreign policies cannot be made captive to the delusional non alignment gladiators or India’s Communist Parties who have never been known for their objectivity or to India’s minority Indian Muslim vote banks where every issue is viewed in a Pan-Islamic context.”
- “Regrettably, the new Indian Government led by the Congress Party and through its flip flop and ill-considered statements has given indications that it is all set to undo the foreign policy gains of India in the last eight years.”
In November 2005, sensing that India’s major Communist Party, the CPI (M) was trying to steer away India’s foreign policy from the traditional moorings of national security and economic security determinants, this author penned an analysis entitled: “India: Foreign Policy Under Leftists Siege” (SAAG Paper No. 1603 dated 08.11.2005).
This paper highlighted that India’s Leftist Parties view India’s foreign policy through the “Chinese Prism” and not through the “Indian Prism” of our national interests. It was also illustrated as to how the Communist Parties had started besieging India’s foreign policies towards USA, West Asia, Nepal, Bangladesh and Pakistan besides opposing FDI and FII in vital sectors of the Indian economy.
Two years down the line from the inception of the Congress Government in power with an over reliance on the Communist Parties support for survival, India's foreign policy in 2006 stands “Communised” and also “Communalised”.
India’s Foreign Policy (2006) Stands Communised
Nepal: India’s most significant strategic loss in 2006 as a result of India’s communised foreign policy will be the likely loss of Nepal to the Maoists. India’s institutionalised foreign policy processes were set aside and Comrade Sitaram Yechuri emerged as the pointsman of India’s Nepal policy.
The result is that the Nepalese Maoists, to suit the Indian Communists political interests, have secured a back-door entry into Nepal’s political dynamics. Short of the revaluation of India’s Nepal policy or a military coup in Nepal it looks like that the Maoists regime will emerge in Kathmandu shortly.
India’s communised foreign policy has resulted in the likelihood of loss of Nepal as a “buffer state” between India and China. The Maoist regime will bring China on India’s doorstep, sitting astride the Gangetic Plains of the Indian heartland for more than 1800 km.
West Asia: The Communist Parties pressed for a re-evaluation of India’s policy towards the region. The PLO was revalued and the strategic partnership with Israel stood de-valued.
A spin-off this change in India’s de-valuation of Israel in its West Asia foreign policy was that Israel moved ahead to examine a relationship with Pakistan, which stands analysed in yet another foreign policy paper by this author.
USA: The Communist Parties have been vociferous and loud in criticizing India’s evolving strategic partnership with USA. They have been demanding the scrapping of the Indo-US nuclear deal and also the Defence Cooperation Agreement.
The most disturbing development of India’s communised foreign policy was that during President Bush’s visit, India’s Communist Parties mobilized Indian Muslim masses in thousands for anti-USA demonstrations.
Equally disturbing was the use of India’s Communist Parties by Iran for raising a chorus against India’s stand on Iran’s referral to the UN on the nuclear issue.
India’s Foreign Policy 2006 Stands Communalised
The hallmark of India’s foreign policies under all Congress Governments (with the exception of late PM Narasimha Rao) was a communalised approach with reference to Indian Muslim sensitivities and Pan-Islamic linkages. India’s foreign policies towards West Asia reflected this communalised approach. The late Congress PM Narasimha Rao and the BJP’s eight years in power brought a balance in this warped communalised approach. Corrections were made to bring Israel as the focal point in India’s West Asia policies and this was at a time when the Indo-US strategic partnership had not taken off. It was determined by India's strategic interests
A balanced West Asian approach brought the dividend of forging a strong strategic partnership with Israel. It was significantly visible when within twenty four hours Israel provided India’s critical military requirements for the Kargil War.
In 2006, we find the Indian Government becoming highly critical of Israel over its counter-terrorism operations in Gaza and Lebanon under way. Have any of the Islamic West Asian countries ever condemned Pakistan for the use of religious terrorism against India? Israel has the right to strike at the roots of terrorism wherever they may be and which inflict terrible human losses on a tiny nation. India could learn counter-terrorism responses from Israel.
Further, the Indian Muslims intense hatred of the United States conditioned by Pan-Islamic determinations cannot and should not determine Indian foreign policy approaches to West Asia. The United States has done no wrong to the Indian Muslims. On what ground do they oppose USA? And if the grounds are basically Pan-Islamic in nature, is the Indian Government correct in reflecting the Pan-Islamic sentiments of Indian Muslims in its foreign policies?
Concluding Observations
Concluding, this author would like to revert to his first quoted paper above (SAAG Paper No. 1049 dated 06.07.2004) and highlight some vital ingredients of any successful foreign policy:
- “Foreign policies of nations do not function in a vacuum insulated by delusional moral and ideological obsessions.”
- “Foreign policies, perforce, have to take into account the prevailing regional and international strategic realities with which a nation has to strike workable equations based on one’s own existing power attributes and strategic utility to the key global powers.”
- “Foreign policies of a nation need bi-partisan support, as the country’s national interests do not change with a change of political power”.
The global strategic reality is that the United States is the world’s predominant power. India has no choice but to strike workable equations with it in the strategic, political, economic and energy fields. There are also growing strategic convergences between India and the United States arising out of a mutuality of national interests. The same is not found elsewhere.
However, India’s Communist Parties and Indian Muslims have adopted visible anti-United States attitudes. The former, for reasons determined by its China linkages and the latter by its Pan-Islamic linkages.
The critical question is that can the present Indian Government and India be led once again into the international wilderness by a communised and communalised Indian foreign policy?
(The author is an International Relations and Strategic Affairs analyst. He is the Consultant, Strategic Affairs with South Asia Analysis Group. Email:drsubhashkapila@yahoo.com)
Home | Papers | Notes | Forum | Search | Feedback | Links
Copyright © South Asia Analysis Group
All rights reserved. Permission is given to refer this on-line document for use in research papers and articles, provided the source and the author's name are acknowledged. Copies may not be duplicated for commercial purposes.