Modi has not yet expressed his thinking on India’s foreign relations. His focus and that of those opposing him or tracking his national rise has been on internal politics and development issues.
His sundry remarks that the External Affairs Ministry should focus on “trade treaties” rather than on strategic issues and the states should be given a greater role in promoting ties with select foreign countries need not be taken as his definitive thinking.
Modi can change our psychological equation with China, boosting in the process our relations with Asean and Japan.
Our most severe external challenges are driven not by economics but politics, relating to territory, terrorism, religious extremism, nuclear blackmail, constraining our strategic options and boxing us in the sub-continent while eroding our influence there. Loosening the Centre’s control over foreign policy will cause confusion in its conduct and open our polity to more manipulation by outside interests.
Modi’s critique that India has “failed to give leadership to the SAARC grouping on economic issues” stems from the oft-expressed view that we should link the smaller economies of our neighbours to our much larger economy and create dependency bonds that would act a cushion against their adversarial politics. Pakistan’s prevarications on MFN, Sri Lanka delaying the Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement and Nepal still resisting cooperation on water resources reflect the limits of such a policy.
How much a Modi-led NDA will follow or depart from Vajpayee-led NDA’s foreign policy is an important question. Modi will not be working on a clean slate and any notable departure from Vajpayee’s legacy will be queried. The considerable continuity in our foreign policy under the NDA and UPA governments adds to the complexities.
Vajpayee called the US a “natural ally” and reached out to it strategically. The seeds of the India-US nuclear deal were laid during his time, US intervention in Afghanistan was supported and even the logic of US withdrawal from the ABM Treaty was acknowledged.
…UPA’s cardinal mistake in delinking dialogue from terrorism and equating ourselves with Pakistan as victims of terrorism needs correction.
He made significant overtures to China too, agreeing to a Chinese-desired formulation on Tibet against a formulation on Sikkim that we sought. The Special Representatives mechanism and the drafting work on the political guidelines for resolving the border issue was initiated under his watch.
Vajpayee made several dramatic overtures towards Pakistan too, indicating a keen desire to achieve some breakthrough through generously offered dialogues. With our other neighbours, he grappled the pluses and minuses of our relations just as the UPA governments did. The Russia relationship was nurtured by him with regular summit level meetings and defence tie-ups. The Look East policy was pursued energetically. With Iran a strategic partnership was established.
If our foreign policy choices are conditioned by geo-political and other realities major changes in policy under Modi would appear unfeasible, but not a course correction in areas where the UPA has fumbled.
We have been supine in reacting to China’s provocations, ceding it strategic space and letting it outflank us diplomatically by proposing concepts like the BCIM corridor and the Indo-Pacific maritime silk route, even as its disinclination to resolve the border issue is patent and the consolidation of its influence in our neighbourhood continues apace. Should he become PM, Modi’s recent vow on Arunachal Pradesh soil not to yield an inch of our territory and decrying China’s expansionism would need consolidation with a visit to Tawang. Modi can change our psychological equation with China, boosting in the process our relations with Asean and Japan.
Modi has wisely refrained from reacting personally to US’s shabby conduct in cancelling his US visa.
With Pakistan, the diplomatic ground we have yielded unilaterally cannot be fully regained, but UPA’s cardinal mistake in delinking dialogue from terrorism and equating ourselves with Pakistan as victims of terrorism needs correction. No self-defeating anxiety either to resume the dialogue or visit Islamabad should be shown. The impression that our soft posture towards Pakistan has been US driven needs to be removed. Modi could well receive advice that to soften his “anti-Muslim” image he should reach out to Pakistan early, but this would be inadvisable as the Pakistanis would then size him up as one more Indian politician at a loss to find an answer to India’s Pakistan problem.
Modi has wisely refrained from reacting personally to US’s shabby conduct in cancelling his US visa. Its politically short-sighted obstinacy even now not to clarify the visa issue should not be too easily overlooked. While allowing our multi-faceted relationship with the US to grow normally, Modi will make India’s hand stronger in dealing with the US if, contrary to the advice he may receive, he showed no desire to visit the US till Obama is in power.
Modi should review our handling of water and enclaves issues with Bangladesh and that of human rights involving Sri Lanka.
The last word for the next five years may be Modi’s, but the first critical word will be said by the electorate in the coming elections.
No comments:
Post a Comment