Need for national strategy

Gurbachan Jagat

AS we celebrate our 75th year of Independence, let us look back a bit. India, as we know it, did not exist. As many as 565 princely states and thousands of semi-autonomous zamindari estates and jagirs existed in the subcontinent at the time of the British withdrawal. Myanmar or Burma, as it was then known, was part of the British Indian Empire till as late as 1937. It was annexed after the three Anglo-Burmese wars in the 19th century and became a separately administered colony only in 1937. A roving glimpse of its history prior to the annexation will show you a Burmese kingdom continuously at war with the regions of Assam, Manipur, etc. The prime reason for the British to annex it was probably to protect the Indian Empire.

Similarly, the history of northern India will show you glimpses of Rajputana, the Sikh Empire, Dogra and Pahari kingdoms, the fall of the Mughals and the coming of the British. The North and the old region of Punjab have historically been a route for the armies crossing the Khyber Pass and Hindukush mountains during their invasions of India. It has also been the region from where defeated armies exited after their misplaced adventures. The objective of this article is not to give a history lesson, but a sober reminder that ours (like the history of mankind) is a history of war and the coming and going of empires, of being oppressed and subjugated and finding that occasional breath of freedom. Freedom which we have enjoyed for 75 years but which sits on a fragile peace — borne not out of the weakness of our enemies, but our strength built on the struggle of our forefathers. Peace maintained by the quiet men and women who stand fast on our long borders. Peace which will last only as long as our vigil and strength, which cannot just be measured by the size of a nation’s army. If that were the case, Babur would have never won at Panipat where he was outnumbered probably three to one. Nor for that matter could a tiny island nation called Great Britain have conquered most of the then known world.

However, in the last two years, Covid and its attendant problems have kept the focus on internal affairs, and rightly so. The other major focus has been the spate of elections. The national and regional parties have been engaged in the pursuit of power. The focus of our main party seems to be on ‘conquering’ Bharat with a ruthless, well-oiled election machinery. Again, to an extent, this is right because elections must be fought and power obtained to exercise for the common good.

However, somewhat lost in this maze is the required focus on relations with our neighbours and other important players in the international field. The world is in turmoil and a great churning is taking place. The epidemic forced all nations to first combat the disease and its immediate destructive economic impact. Having dealt with it, now they are dealing with the aftermath. Central banks are trying to rectify the impact of the massive Quantitative Easing (printing money, in laymen terms) and the resultant inflation. The modern global economy was a fragile beast even before the epidemic struck, governed by complex treaties, supply routes and trade pacts. The epidemic has put this entire fragile network to a major stress test. Most nations have become more closed and protective. They have also realised their dependence for critical supplies which they were denied during the epidemic. The rush for self-sustainability is on — this loosely translates as securing access to raw materials, trade routes and resources critical to the economy. Whether the war in Ukraine has been a direct result of this or part of a larger game, time will tell. But, what in all this apparent chaos are we doing to strengthen our vigil? The only apparent major initiative has been to bring back our students from Ukraine and that too was a belated response.

Let us have a look at our neighbourhood and our policy towards it. The ideal way is to live in peace and evolve policies of trade and economy for mutual benefit. We have mostly smaller nations in our neighbourhood with the exception of China and Pakistan. Sri Lanka, Nepal, Bangladesh, Myanmar, Bhutan and Maldives are smaller, but we must treat them equally and not behave like a ‘Big Brother’ or a bully. Over the years, we have tended to treat them without the requisite amount of respect. In the case of Bangladesh, we behave as if we had bestowed freedom upon them and they thereby owe us eternal gratitude. We thought nothing of them till we realised that their economy was doing better than ours. Today, we have a more or less friendly government in Bangladesh, but we must nurture people-to-people ties and not depend on a single political figure or party.

The story with Sri Lanka is the same and we even sent our armed forces there and, in the process, succeeded in alienating both the Sinhalese and the Tamils. Today, we have a strong Chinese presence in Sri Lanka, as also in Nepal and Myanmar. We thought that Nepal was a Hindu state and as such a part of our jagir. Today, there is much turmoil in Nepal but neither the left nor the right appear to be with us. In Myanmar, we keep on hedging our bets between the people and the army dictator. A traditional partner in trade with our North-East, today it is a sanctuary for insurgents. It is clear that we have not evolved a strategic long-term policy for our neighbourhood that would envision common and special features for each country. This strategy should have included measures for defence, trade, tourism, cultural exchange, etc; long-term policies can always be tweaked if contingencies demand. We are not part of any major defence arrangements. The question arises as to whether we are isolated in our own neighbourhood and even our one firm ally Bhutan seems to be slipping away under Chinese pressure. It is noteworthy that during the Chinese aggression in Ladakh, none of our neighbours spoke for us.

Coming to Pakistan, it is clear that no government since 1947 has seriously tried to engage in an effort to bridge the chasm, though the Pakistan army and its Generals have made this well-nigh impossible,. Things have become even more complicated with the arrival of the Chinese on the scene.

From Nehru’s ‘Hindi Chini Bhai Bhai’ to Vajpayee’s Lahore visit, to Modi’s unannounced visit to Pakistan, to Manmohan Singh’s initiative — all have been in vain. We have believed in photo-ops and not substantial engagement. We fought the Chinese in ’62 and thereafter they sliced off large tracts of land in Ladakh or the N-E with impunity, and we are told that these areas were already under Chinese occupation. If so, what have you done to take them back? Talks between Generals can only lead to a temporary ceasefire at best, not political solutions. Such affairs are the result of painstaking work by diplomats and talks between statesmen. Again, in the case of China, we have a one-sided economic relationship: minimum exports from our side, maximum imports from China. We have not paid the requisite attention to our economy and the battle still rages between the public and private sectors and now a third player, ‘crony capitalism’. And what did China do? I remember talking to a senior communist leader a long time ago about the chances of China going to war against the West or us. His answer was emphatic — not for three or four decades till they have an economy matching that of the US, and also the armed forces. He was spot-on. As a result of this long-term strategic policy, their economy and military might almost rivals that of the Americans.

Over the last few years, we have tried to cosy up to the Americans to counter the Chinese in the Indian Ocean areas. We became a member of Quad, neither a military nor economic grouping. Again, the absence of any significant condemnation of the Chinese aggression in Ladakh is notable. In the meantime, China and Russia have sealed a historic alliance. Pakistan is already a very close partner with the Chinese — where does that leave us? To begin with, after Independence, our voice was heard in international forums, and we were among the founders of the Non-Aligned Movement and Panchsheel. With the passage of time, we lost our way. We were making our armed forces almost fully dependent on the Russians, and trying to cosy up to the Americans. We had a long-standing relationship with Iran but one call from the Americans, and the cheapest oil available to us and a port giving us access to Central Asia was gone. Did this serve our interests, was our strategic goal overlooked, did we even have one?

Where do we stand with Ukraine? We neither support nor oppose either the West or Russia. The Russian bear-hug in the form of military equipment and the American embrace in military and economic terms both render us helpless. Why has our foreign policy made us blind, deaf and dumb? Why are we unable to stand up on our legs and defend and promote our legitimate interests? This is so because we are in the habit of standing between two stools. We have for long depended on aid for both our armed forces and the economy. We do not have an industrial base for our armed forces.

Countries are run by men of vision who lay strong foundations for the build-up of infrastructure. It will take years and years to become self-sufficient and till then, we must have a strategy to sustain us and friends to help us — do we have either?

— The writer is ex-chairman of UPSC, former Manipur Governor and served as J&K DGP

Join Whatsapp Channel of The Tribune for latest updates.