India needs to change its foreign policy to be a global power
THE 21st century arrived only eight years ago. There is no zero sum game in global power. If one rises the other falls.
Many political analysts say that this century will be a century for Asia as the two giants, China and India, are emerging as global powers. Bush's foreign policy was ostensibly based on the neoconservative idea that the US's role in the world was to spread freedom and democracy by military means, if necessary. The flawed policy has failed.
The US will remain as dominant power during the century but it will not be able to force any issue unilaterally. Many say the power of the US has peaked when it attacked Iraq in 2003. We live in a non-polar world because the US cannot do what it wants and at the same time other powers cannot do anything without the US. It is a volatile world because the balance of power is in transition. This transition from unipolar to multipolar world creates instability and conflict around the world.
India emerging as a global power
Some of India's vital statistics are enumerated below
India is the second largest populous country (nearly 1.1 billion) in the world and seventh largest in geographical area. It is 23 times larger than Bangladesh. There are almost 1,000 people for every square mile of area nationwide, much denser than China. India is likely to overtake China in the 21st century as the world's most populous country.
India is strategically located in South Asia and shares border with almost all countries in South Asia. It is located in the middle of South Asia and the ocean that hugs it bears its name, Indian Ocean, which reaches out from the sands of Egypt to the Straits of Malacca.
It is a nuclear power with a range of missiles to carry nuclear weapons far and wide. It is reported it has 35-40 nuclear bombs. It is said to be investing money to improve the range and mobility of its missile systems for delivering nuclear warheads.
Under the US-India nuclear deal, it will receive nuclear fuel and technology and will be much more capable to enlarge its nuclear arsenal. According to the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, the India's Defence Ministry has earmarked US$ 2 billion annually to build 300 to 400 weapons over the next 5 to 7 years.
India has large army (1.3 million) and possesses conventional sophisticated weapons.
It has a strong military presence in the Indian Ocean and its naval bases in far off islands, Andaman and Lakshadeep and Nicobar, are getting stronger day by day, to meet future challenges on the sea.
India has also undertaken a number of naval and air projects including military reconnaissance centre in the Maldives and Sri Lanka. In 2005, India has begun constructing a 37,500-tonne aircraft carrier that will fly MiG-29 fighters, joining only with navies of big powers in such capabilities. It also plans to lease two nuclear submarines from Russia. The US has openly discussed the sale of naval vessels, combat aircraft, patrol aircraft and helicopters to India.
India's GDP ($1.3 trillion) is the second largest among 147 developing countries. It is the seventh largest exporter of food grains in the world.
India has become a hot market for investment. When foreign money managers look at the country's vast pool of young English-speaking people, they are attracted by it. Since deregulation of economy in 1991, privatization has become a priority and investors have been investing.
Some economists believe India has become a better longer-term growth prospect for foreign investment. India's top universities are better, its young engineers and software writers more globally savvy, its media more capable of producing content for the world, its population younger, and its banks more developed. India has an overall advantage over China in the long run..
India's positive image
India's rising economic power coupled with influence in other field has not been unnoticed by big powers because it is likely to shift the geographic distribution of global power in Asia and force a restructuring of Western-dominated international bodies, right up to the UN.
Recent visits of leaders from the US, China, France, Germany and Russia has demonstrated to recognize this very reality. The new Secretary General of the UN Ban Ki-moon has appointed a senior retired Indian diplomat as his Chief of Staff, acknowledging India's meaningful role in global affairs.
India's strategic dimension is gaining greater weight with the US. The National Security Strategy document, released by President Bush in September 2002, spoke about building a strategic relationship with India in a global context.
Both the US and India have a convergence of interests in the Asia-Pacific area, such as combating terrorism, preventing proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and delivery systems, ensuring the security of sea-lanes, securing access to the energy resources and markets in the region and managing consequences of instability from conflicts and failed states.
The US-India nuclear deal, once it is approved by the US Congress, will come into effect. It has got the green signal from IAEA and 45-member Nuclear Suppliers Group that included China. The deal is bound to contribute to India's military strength in sophisticated weapons.
What are the factors that may impede India to achieve its goal?
There are many reasons but some are described below
First, India needs to cultivate and promote relations with its neighbours in South Asia so that a shared or common security perception exists among all the South Asian countries. The fact is that currently, some of the countries in South Asia perceive security threats as arising from within the region.. That means India has to come first in resolving bilateral issues with pragmatism and common sense to remove mistrust and suspicion among countries in South Asia.
Second, India's continued Kashmir policy needs to be revised. The policy was enunciated by Nehru in the 50s and does not fit in the context of India's emerging as global power. India has adjusted its foreign policy with regard to the US and so also it calls for policy change in Kashmir dispute.
Third, India's policy toward Afghanistan needs to be adjusted in the context of current security environment. Currently India wants Afghanistan within its sphere of influence and so far has been successful with the Karzai government. But Pakistan appears to be reluctant to accept in strategic terms that position because it does not want to be sandwiched between India and Afghanistan that is under India's sphere of influence.. The subtext of the continuing war in Afghanistan is related to which countryIndia or Pakistan-- will hold influence in the events of Afghanistan.
Fourth, there is a perception that US-India close relationship is a counter-weight to China's rise as a great power. China and India face contested land borders in the West and in the East.. In November 2006, Chinese Ambassador to India reiterated his country's claim to Arunachal Pradesh but India's Foreign Minister Pranab Mukherjee rejected the claim, saying it was an "integral part of India."
India and China should sit down and talk on the long territorial disputes that have soured relations for decades. Furthermore, the unwillingness of India to conclude FTA with China demonstrates a degree of tension between the two nations, with lingering memories of the brief 1962 war in which China soundly defeated India.
So long the perception of rivalry between China and India continues among other countries in Asia, India will find it difficult to be understood of its role in the region by some countries in Asia.
India has to impress on other countries that India's relations with the US is not to contain China in Asia-Pacific region and maintain a policy of equidistance between the US and China.
Conclusion
Although India's rise power cannot be stalled, its foreign policy has come under close scrutiny. As noted in the above paragraphs, policy with regard to Kashmir dispute and Afghanistan needs to be revisited and adjusted accordingly so that the vision of India being a major player in world affairs is being achieved.
Comments