Vivek Issues n Options February 2013

  • View
    212

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

Text of Vivek Issues n Options February 2013

  • 7/29/2019 Vivek Issues n Options February 2013

    1/75

    India's Pendulum Policy on Pakistan

    Countering New Maoist Tactics India's Indigenous Defence Technology

    India-China Cultural Interface

    and many more .

    Published By: Vivekananda International Foundation3, San Martin Marg, Chanakyapuri, New Delhi 110021, info@vifindia.org, www.vifindia.org

    http://www.vifindia.org/http://www.vifindia.org/
  • 7/29/2019 Vivek Issues n Options February 2013

    2/75

    VIVEK : Issues and Options February 2013 Issue: II No: II 2

    Developing Indias Indigenous

    Defence Technologies: The Case ForInducting Arjun Tanks

    - Radhakrishna Rao

    Taliban And Afghan Peace NoTango After Paris

    - Monish Gulati

    Countering New Tactics Of TheMaoists : Good Intelligence Is TheKey

    - Dr. N Manoharan

    Electronic Voting Machine : New Attack Vector

    - Cmdr. Mukesh Saini

    EVENTS

    Vimarsha: 'Swami Vivekananda OnWomen: Meeting The ContemporaryChallenges'

    ARTICLESBe To Pakistan As Its Posture Warrants

    - Kanwal Sibal

    Dangerously Nave, Naively Dangerous

    - PP Shukla

    nhuman Act At LoC : Need For AnAppropriate Response

    - Brig (retd) Gurmeet Kanwal

    ndia - China Cultural Interface : AnAgenda For Future

    - Brig (retd) Vinod Anand & Dr. Anirban Ganguly

    RBI Relented Under Pressure For A RateCut

    - V Anantha Nageswaran

    ystemic Failure Or Organ Failure?- Dr M N Buch

    ndias Pendulum Policy On Pakistan

    - Sushant Sareen

    Contents

    3

    7

    14

    18

    28

    32

    64

    55

    49

    68

    73

    44

  • 7/29/2019 Vivek Issues n Options February 2013

    3/75

    VIVEK : Issues and Options February 2013 Issue: II No: II 3

    Be To Pakistan As Its Posture Warrants - Kanwal Sibal

    ur international relationsexperts are divided on howto deal with Pakistan, with

    a section always advocatingmoderation in reaction toPakistani provocations and othersfavouring more robust responsesto Pakistani belligerence. Thislack of consensus makes ourPakistan policy look vacillatingand irresolute.

    It is easy to wear the mantle of moderation as the accompanyingvocabulary of peace, engagement,dialogue and restraint soundsmature and wise. Those wantingfirmer treatment of Pakistan slipinto talk of retaliation, force,reprisal, imposing costs, whichsounds aggressive and war-like.Public opinion on the whole ismore indulgent towards doveseven when their judgments areskewed than towards hawkseven when their views aresounder. Dovish views are lessunsettling than hawkish ones in acountry that still lacks self-confidence and is morecomfortable with caution thanwith risk-taking even when

    provoked.

    The complexity of our problemswith Pakistan would justify adegree of prudence in ourreactions. What is less justified isour posture of helplessness. Wesay meekly that we have no choicebut to have a dialogue withPakistan. Some on our sideactually advocate anuninterrupted anduninterruptible dialogue. Suchthinking is pernicious for ourinterests but serves those of Pakistan, which is why its foreign

    minister has made this catchyphraseology her own. She hasthrown it in our face whileberating us for creating tensionsover the recent beheadingincident. She is hoisting us withour own petard!

    We were against negotiations with

    Pakistan with the gun of terrorismpointed at our head. We, therefore,linked resumption of dialogue withPakistans commitment to endterrorism. Politically cornered

    O

    * Kanwal Sibal - Member, VIF Advisory Board, VIF

  • 7/29/2019 Vivek Issues n Options February 2013

    4/75

    VIVEK : Issues and Options February 2013 Issue: II No: II 4

    when Pakistan failed to honour itscommitment, instead of interrupting the dialogue we gaveourselves a way out by agreeing

    that both countries were victims of terrorism, which implied thatterrorist incidents in India werethe handiwork of non-state actorswith no official connivance. Later,we formally delinked dialogue andterrorism and continued ourparleys with Pakistan, despite aspate of terrorist attacks, until the

    enormity of the 2008 Mumbaiterrorist attacksmade such aposition politicallyuntenable. After ashort interregnum,we again resumedthe dialoguebecause our

    decision-makershave convincedthemsel ves that a no -dialogueoption is not available to us.

    Between not having a dialogueand a composite dialogue coveringall contentious issues, there isconsiderable space for talking toeach other, but we have straight-

    jacketed ourselves into astructured dialogue that, in fact,reduces the centrality of terrorismand allows Pakistan to put in allelements of its political agendawhere it wants territorial and

    other concessions from us,whether it is Kashmir, Siachen,Sir Creek or the Tulbul project. Infact, this composite dialogue

    exposes us to Pakistani demandsthat we cannot satisfy, with theresult that even Pakistanipeaceniks express theirdisappointment at Indias rigidity,especially on Siachen.

    What this superficial formula of an uninterrupted anduninterruptable dialogue meansis that even if another Mumbai-

    like attack takesplace, Indiashands must remaintied and thedialogue mustcontinue, ruling outany retaliatoryaction.

    The perspective of such adraconian restraint on Indiaprovides no incentive to Pakistanto take any step to weed outterrorists targetting India, as anyfuture attack would neither mean

    an end to bilateral engagementnor retaliation. Pakistan will thusretain the freedom to keep Indiaunder pressure with the threat of terrorism- as China does by notsettling the border issue- and

    The perspective of such adraconian restraint on Indiaprovides no incentive toPakistan to take any step toweed out terrorists targettingIndia, as any future attackwould neither mean an end tobilateral engagement nor

    retaliation.

  • 7/29/2019 Vivek Issues n Options February 2013

    5/75

    VIVEK : Issues and Options February 2013 Issue: II No: II 5

    compel India to temporize, buyoff Pakistani hostility withfriendly gestures, including nottaking advantage of its increasing

    internal difficulties andinternational isolation. What cansuit Pakistani strategy better?

    Some diehard apologists of Pakistan in India claim that thereis a change in the Pakistanimindset towards India and none inIndias mindset towards Pakistan.Pakistan has supposedly movedaway from communal hostilitytowards India to national hostility.Why the latter, even if true,should re-assure us more is notclear. By the same logic, anationalist but more politicallyopen China would be better for itsneighbours than the existingauthoritarian version. Facts,moreover, would suggest thatPakistan is becoming morecommunal or sectarian incharacter by becoming moreintolerant towards the Shias andother minorities, that religiosity insociety is increasing andextremism is on the rise.

    It can hardly be that the internalmayhem being caused by thespread of extremist ideologies inPakistan implies a more tolerant

    religious attitude towards India.Our policies towards Pakistan inthe last eight years both under theNDA and the UPA governments

    show, on the contrary, how far ourattitudes towards Pakistan havechanged.

    In any case, if the Pakistanimindset towards India haschanged, in what positive way hasit expressed itself? On Kashmir,Pakistan has reverted to the UNresolutions as a solution, onSiachen it feels wronged, and onSir Creek it rejects internationalprinciples. It will not permitTulbul and will obstruct anypower project in J&K, it iscreating a new water issue despitethe generous Indus Waters Treaty,it is expanding its nuclear arsenalby distorting the intent andpurpose of the India-US nucleardeal and it is treating ourterrorism concerns with contempt.If it has moved away from itsirrational position of not tradingwith India and giving us MFNtreatment [which it still has notdone, despite assurances to thateffect], we do not need to feelgrateful. Pakistan will benefitfrom this as well as the visaagreement more than we will,though any progress in these areasshould be welcomed by us.

  • 7/29/2019 Vivek Issues n Options February 2013

    6/75

    VIVEK : Issues and Options February 2013 Issue: II No: II 6

    We should treat Pakistan as afriend when it is friendly and as afoe when it is inimical. We should

    be doves or hawks as the situationdemands.

    Back to Contents

  • 7/29/2019 Vivek Issues n Options February 2013

    7/75

    VIVEK : Issues and Options February 2013 Issue: II No: II 7

    Dealing With The Neighbour From Hell

    Dangerously Nave, Naively Dangerous

    - PP Shukla

    here has been a veritablebarrage of opinion,hectoring and outright

    abuse from the pro-Pakistansegments of our media activists inthe print media over the recentflare-up along parts of the LOC.This requires a substantive andfact-based debate, and an answerto some of the arguments putforward by the pro-Pakistanelements that have written andspoken so passionately on thesubject in recent days.

    The essence of the arguments put

    forward by the supporters of theGovernment policy may besummed up in three principallines of reasoning. The first is thatthere is a change inside Pakistan,and this is driven by a realisationthat hostility towards India hasnot paid, so it is time to look at thealternative and to improve ties

    with India. The second line of argument is that if India takes atough stand towards Pakistan, itwill weaken the moderates, thosewho want good relations with

    India. The third line is that thisPrime Ministers policy is actuallyvery wise, and is an example of profound