Tuesday, March 28, 2006

Can India be far-sighted when its neighbourhood is in flames?

In response to my previous post, Nitin felt that an Indian expeditionary force cannot project power and resolve, when our political establishment hasn't shown the fortitude to deal firmly with our neighbours' provocations. This is a valid point of view and I want to address it here.

I believe it is a cost-benefit calculation that has prevented GoI from alienating our neighbours any more than we absolutely have to. The cost of living next to a sworn enemy is felt across decades, not months, particularly when there are other powerful and inimical neighbours who will exploit that opportunity to bleed India. For example, the cost of punishing Bangladesh in a military engagement is miniscule compared to the cost of preventing the exponential growth of Chinese influence in Dhaka and the resulting instability in India's North East. The same argument holds for Nepal too. India will have to live with our neighbours playing China off us. We, however, don't have to lose the opportunity to return the favour with China's southern neighbours.

India can ensure the sustained good behaviour of our smaller neighbours if we can make them pay a price for their transgressions, in their dealings with the rest of the world. For example, if Bangladesh's apparel and jute export quota to the West is conditional upon its moderation of anti-India behaviour (a condition that India insists upon, and only too happily fills the shortfall with Indian exports), the new economic reality may force Bangladesh to rethink its provocations against India. A similar trade-off is apparent in India's offer for logistical support to the US Navy in the Indian Ocean rim. It may have staved off a US push to have berthing facilities at Trincomalee - a situation that would not have been under our control, but would have been right under our noses.

The question is - what can bring the West to see India's point of view? That's where I see the value of an Indian expeditonary force that is capable of addressing the West's security concerns away from its shores. The very fact that the GoI seriously considered troops to Iraq before turning down the request (and rightly so), was a demonstration of intent to play a larger role in the world.

Maverick,

I have compiled some postings from various fora on what an Indian expeditionary force would look like. I'll post those here later for discussion.

2 Comments:

At 4:16 PM, Blogger maverick said...

interestedonlooker,

I think GOI generally tries to avoid giving the impression that India is a big country that is pushing other small countries around. That may be sometimes seen in lay press as a lack of toughness on part of the Government.

We are looking at severe state failure in Bangladesh, Nepal and Maldives. A nightmare scenario would be if there are simultaneous crises in two places and placing a strain on our deployment skills.

 
At 9:28 AM, Blogger maverick said...

Nitin,

I don't feel the situation is here yet.

I would caution about being too enthusiastic about deploying the X-Force (eXpeditionary Force). I think the X Force is a very serious resource, given the costs of deployment, it should be put into action only when there is a justifiable need.

For example, should a situation akin to the one in Sikkim (1974-75) arise, where the assasination of a head of local head of state and a takeover of government by hostiles is imminent - then that to my mind would be a justifiable cause worthy of an X-Force deployment.

I can't imagine putting the X-Force for some random rioting, or bombings here and there. The countries should be able to sort that out on their own but if need be a smaller footprint force could be kept at ready to provide emergent situations support.

I would also be keen to create stronger ties between the MHA and its counterparts in other parts of South Asia.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home