Shangri-La takeaway

KC Singh

Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s recent eastern foray was shrewdly constructed around his keynote address at the Shangri-la Dialogue, held jointly by the Singapore government and the British think-tank, IISS, since 2002. It is now a premier forum for defence ministers to cogitate on geo-strategic developments in East Asia, the Pacific, etc. Perhaps not coincidently, the US renamed its Pacific Command — one of the 10 global unified commands — the Indo-Pacific Command. The phrase had already crept into US and Indian diplomatic parlance. 

The speech, significantly, articulates India’s Asia vision, as the simultaneous rise of China and India and the creeping US withdrawal are spelling uncertainty. But equally important was to engage a democratic and most populous Muslim country, Indonesia, and Malaysia, where veteran leader Mahathir is the surprise winner and is restoring democratic norms. Singapore meeting took place as the US and the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) prepare to meet in Singapore on June 12. The future of the Korean peninsula hung in balance as Modi completed his tour.

Modi’s speech was reasoned and non-rhetorical. India seeks, he said, a multi-polar global order resting on a new Asian security order that is open, rules-based and fair. He allayed the concern of the 10 ASEAN members that their centrality to the evolving structure would be displaced. For instance, the premier security dialogue — Asean Regional Forum (ARF) — has 10 members of the organisation plus China, Republic of Korea and Japan, besides Australia, India and New Zealand, US, Russia, etc. He captured in one speech India’s rebalancing over the past few months with “informal summits” with leaders of Russia and China. Russian President Vladimir Putin too seeks a multi-polar world, Modi said, adding that talks with President Xi Jinping were cementing an understanding that stable Sino-Indian relations were essential for global peace and progress. In reality, while on free and fair global trade as well as climate change, India and China are on the same page, but on India’s demand for a rules-based approach to global commons the Chinese will scowl. But he immediately added that India was also nursing assiduously a global strategic partnership with the US. This is the new template of what is being called “multi-alignment” or neo-nonalignment. 

A large part of the address emphasises maritime linkages and India as bridging the Indian and Pacific oceans, from the US to Africa. This is ambitious, but then, visions cannot be self-constrained. They will get shaped by national endeavour interacting with geopolitics; at the core of that has to be a blue-water navy. The US’ rise as a predominant global power was anticipated by Theodore Roosevelt (President from 1901-1909), who created a strong navy and the Panama Canal, allowing US ships manoeuvrability between the Atlantic and the Pacific, well before the two great wars. 

Globalisation was argued as a positive force. However, that axiom is no longer universally accepted in the West, where it has led to de-industrialisation as China created cheaper supply lines for the broadest range of consumer products  at competitive rates. India needs access to the services sector, but more than that, it must move up the supply chain of software business. China is way ahead as a cyber power, going by its network size and broadband penetration, enhanced capabilities in operating systems and central processing units, 

e-commerce and online markets, etc. This has happened because personal liberty issues do not constrain the development of algorithm-based solutions and data mining in China. Thus, even where artificial-intelligence capability is concerned, China is the main competitor to the US. The Economist bemoans that even in the West with plentiful data “privacy rules designed for the landline phone, post-box and filing cabinet urgently need to be strengthened for the age of smartphone, e-mail and cloud computing”.

In India, the Supreme Court has yet to lay the redlines in the Aadhaar case. The inadvertent confession by a senior executive of Paytm that data was shared at the behest of the Prime Minister’s Office shows lax data protection. 

Two interesting points stand out in Modi’s lecture. One, that when nations “stand on the side of principles” they earn global respect. The target was clearly China. Two, “when they embrace diversity at home, they seek an inclusive world outside”. While the target again could have been China or Myanmar, or even Thailand, run now by a military junta, even India could benefit by his advice. To start with, he needs to unfollow on Twitter those bhakts who routinely deride Indian secularism and diversity. He needs to speak up against bigotry and jingoism or when a group thrashes someone who cannot name India’s Prime Minister. Since when was ignorance a crime?

This gap between what Modi preaches and practices was brought to the fore at Singapore’s Nanyang Technological University where he was apparently in a freewheeling question and answer session. Rendering an answer into English, the interpreter apparently kept reading material about a question not yet asked. If the aim was to show PM as a scholar-statesman, the result was the opposite. The moral is that Modi is most effective when he is himself. As his popularity flags, as would of any leader in the fifth year in power, theatre becomes counterproductive. 

India wants questions answered honestly. Kairana electoral loss and the farmers’ boycott of cities signals rural distress no longer ignorable as mere road-kill to economic growth. Karnataka cannot be drowned in tears like a kindergarten child whose toffee was snatched. Tuticorin cannot be absolved by shutting down belatedly Vedanta’s plant. Even The Economist, votary of free enterprise, bemoans the company’s stand that “fake activists” are targeting it. It sharply concludes that the owner “having refined and reprocessed metals for so long, he will now have to do a similar job on his company’s reputation”. 

PM Modi’s outreach to Indonesia and Malaysia signals that democracies of Asia are converging to defend against China’s predatory territorial aggression. Without abandoning an embrace with the US, Modi has rebalanced relations with Russia, and to some extent China. There were no hugs and none were required. Geopolitics and diplomacy is best conducted by calibrated public acts and intensive private preparation. 

The writer is a former Secretary, Ministry of External Affairs