INDIA FOUNDATION
mail@indiafoundation.in

Look East Policy: A Post-Independence Construct

India-ASEAN relations today are more strategic than economic in character. India  today eyes ASEAN as a major East Asian entity vital to promote Indian geopolitical interests in the region. The twenty-five years of India’s engagement with ASEAN via thirty dialogue mechanisms has undoubtedly strengthened the mutual attachment. The strategic aspect of India’s ASEAN policy became vivid further under the Act East Policy of the Narendra Modi government which intended to accelerate ‘across-the-board engagement between the two growth poles of Asia’.1 Year 2017 marks the 25th anniversary of India-ASEAN Dialogue Partnership which was initiated in 1992 when the decision was taken to set up a Sectoral Dialogue Partnership between ASEAN and India at the 4th ASEAN Summit in Singapore. In his congratulatory message to the ASEAN Chair Rodrigo Duterte, the Philippine President, Prime Minister Narendra Modi termed Act East Policy as the ‘reflection of the importance we attach to our strategic partnership with ASEAN’.2 Responding to Prime Minister Modi’s message President Duterte noted that ASEAN-India relations have contributed to the maintenance of peace, stability and prosperity in the region.3 Tranquil Southeast Asia is beneficial for India whose trade with ASEAN was $71 billion in the 2016-17 financial year, which accounts for 10.85% of India’s global trade.4 Therefore, security of land and sea route is vital for India for which collaboration with the ASEAN countries is necessary. Today, ASEAN is an important strategic ally of India in East Asia where India wants to expand her footprint as was evident from the statement of former Indian Prime Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh: “Our strategic footprint covers the region bounded by Horn of Africa, West Asia, Central Asia, South-East Asia and beyond.”5

In the context of today’s India-ASEAN strategic relations, it will be interesting to introspect whether the strategic aspect of India’s Act East Policy is a later phenomenon or it has its roots in the past. When did independent India look east? How old is India’s strategic considerations vis-à-vis Southeast Asia? In this case it is pertinent to analyse Jawaharlal Nehru’s Southeast Asia policy.

Nehru Looking East

Contrary to the general perception, India looked (and acted) east immediately after independence.  The centrality of India in the Southeast Asian affairs in the eyes of Nehru is best reflected in his speech at the Constituent Assembly on 8th March, 1949 where he said, “If you have to consider any question concerning South-East Asia, you cannot do so without India.”6

The prime concern of Nehru in Southeast Asia was the communist militancy which was the most common problem in all the decolonized states of Asia during that time, including India. The post-war Southeast Asia was experiencing strong anti-imperialist liberation struggle which got intertwined with the communist revolutionary fervor targeting the nationalist factions within the countries. Nehru disapproved this militancy both in India and Southeast Asia saying, “There are communists, who quite apart from their communism, are at present engaged in creating as much trouble as possible not only in India but much more so in Burma, Malaya etc….”7 Not only Nehru, even his deputy and Home Minister Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel expressed concern with the communist extremist militancy in post war Southeast Asia. In his address to the nation on 15th August 1947, Sardar Patel said, “The condition in Malaya, Indo-China and Burma was disappointing…If the undesirable elements in the country were not put down with a firm hand immediately, they were sure to create the same problem as they found existing in some other Asiatic countries.”8

The two prime objectives of India’s Southeast Asia policy post 1947 have been: first, to liquidate colonialism and second, to thwart any major or medium power domination of the region in the name of filling the vacuum which Nehru termed as cloak for imperialism.9 Nehru believed that the continuation of the colonial rule in Southeast Asia would only promote communist rebellion: “If colonialism continues anywhere in South-East Asia, the natural result will be a growth of communism.”10 In an interview with Earnest K. Lindley, when the interviewer asked Nehru whether the communists’ gains in ‘Burma, Malaya and other areas close to India’ would be a concern for Nehru, the Indian Prime Minister answered in affirmative.11 Both Nehru and Patel, during their visits to Southeast Asia, had condemned communists for their ‘extra territorial character’ and confirmed that the victory of communists in Burma and Malaya would be a matter of concern for Indian government. Nehru even deplored the communists for turning Southeast Asia into ‘one of the great danger spots of the world’ and termed their expansionist and interference policy as ‘danger to peace and freedom’.12

Nehru saw instability arising from the communist rebellion in the non-communist Southeast Asian states as a threat, and so was active in thwarting the scenario from worsening further. In a way Nehru saved entire Southeast Asia from turning communist. This was best witnessed in Nehru’s activeness in liberating Indonesia from Dutch rule for which he even convened a conference in New Delhi in 1949 whose resolution was instrumental in the liberation process. Besides, Indonesia was also a major rice supplier to India coping with severe food crisis in the post war years and thus stable non-communist regime in Indonesia was helpful for Nehru’s India. His Malaya policy was apparently contradictory to his anti-imperialist stance since Nehru preferred the British rule there to continue for longer period in order to suppress communist rebellion and help to handle the Indian migrant affairs in Malaya. Besides, he disapproved of the guerrilla tactic of the Malayan communists as ‘terrorist acts’.13

Burma had occupied a very important part of Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru’s neighbourhood policy, especially in the context of the Indian migrants there who were soon to become the victims of ultra-nationalist policy of the government there as also because of its strategic importance. He was aware of the importance to have a friendly government in Burma, and thus chose to keep a low profile over the anti-Indian policies of the government there. Although expressing displeasure with the Land Acquisition Act 1948 saying that it hits ‘Indian interests in land hard’14, he opined, “Although the attitude of the Burmese Government has been unyielding thus far, we must recognise that they are facing a most difficult situation in their own country. There is rebellion and disorder and they cannot easily take any step which may weaken their position with the general public.”15 Clearly he was not inclined to put the Burmese government in any difficulty internally. Do we find any similarity between this policy with the ongoing Rohingya crisis vis-à-vis Indian policy towards today’s Myanmar?

Traditional China factor

The Statesman (Kolkata edition) published a report on 14th December 2017 with the headline ‘With China on mind, India woos ASEAN nations’. Referring to an invitation extended to the ten ASEAN leaders as chief guests to the Republic Day parade on 26th January 2018 the report read, “Amid growing challenge from China on regional issues, India is pulling out all the stops to accord an unprecedented welcome to leaders of ten ASEAN nations who will be chief guests at the Republic Day parade on 26th January.”16 There is almost unanimous conclusion among the scholars that China is a major factor in India’s current Southeast Asia policy. Eminent scholar S.D. Muni opined that in many subtle and explicit ways India’s Look East Policy has been driven by China’s rise.17 It is opined that China factor played a role behind the India-Southeast Asia collaboration in the security arena in the post Cold War years.18 But is this China factor a post Cold War phenomenon?

Jawaharlal Nehru said in 1952, “Never forget that the basic challenge in Southeast Asia is between India and China. That challenge runs along the spine of Asia.”19 Michael Brecher wrote about Indian and Chinese role in Southeast Asia, “As the two most populous and potentially most powerful states in Asia, they are inevitable rivals for influence in the vast belt of ‘uncommitted’ countries of South-east Asia.”20 Nehru was aware of the challenge emanating from the newly founded People’s Republic of China (PRC). The new Chinese leadership in Beijing had articulated their intention to promote communist movement in Southeast as well as South Asia. Chinese communist leader Liu Shao Chi identified non-communist countries of South and Southeast Asia, India, Burma, the Philippines and Indonesia as ‘semi-colonies’ which were to be ‘freed from the stranglehold of western imperialism’.21 When asked whether post revolution China would turn eyes to Southeast Asia, Nehru evaded direct answer saying that the Chinese were busy with their own problems now and therefore would not do it but he did refer to long perspective of history saying, “it is difficult to say what might happen in future – what a powerful nation may do to develop expansionist tendencies.” New China was certainly a challenge to India’s, or more precisely, Nehru’s leadership aspiration in Southeast Asia. Nehru considered India as the ‘natural leader of Southeast Asia,’22 and was apprehensive regarding the impact of communist triumph in China. He wrote on 6th December 1948, “The victory and consolidation of Chinese Communists is going to have a far reaching results all over South East Asia and ultimately in the world.”23

Since the foundation of Communist China in 1949, India’s external policy has been China oriented, especially in respect of spread of communism in Southeast Asia.24However, Nehru never wanted any direct confrontation with the giant Asian neighbour until the 1962 tragedy occurred. Nehru’s prime objective in Southeast Asia vis-à-vis China was to minimise the impact of the Asian giant especially in the context of communist influence in the region. Nehru’s strategy in Southeast Asia was to enthrone non-communist regimes wherever feasible like Indonesia, Malaya and Burma. Like today’s India, Nehru’s India was also cautious not to push the then Burma to the lap of China given her strategic location bordering China and hostile East Pakistan (today’s Bangladesh), contiguous to insurgency-hit northeast. Thus Nehru wanted an India-friendly regime in Burma which he found in U Nu. Nehru expressed his suspicion about China to Burmese premier U Nu in the following words, “Obviously we cannot be dead sure what China may do in the future.25

Nehru’s main challenge was in Indochina, the only crisis in Southeast Asia that Jawaharlal Nehru did not see being resolved during his lifetime. The Indochina affair put his policy towards communist growth in Southeast Asia and communist China to a litmus test. With camp politics casting shadow over Indochina, Nehru exercised his Panchsheel policy. Nehru extracted Chinese assurance of peaceful co-existence in the joint communiqué during the visit of Chinese premier Chou En-lai to India in 1954 to be applied in resolution of Indochina conflict. This was to commit China to non-interference in Southeast Asia while China found it helpful firstly to resist American presence in her southern borders while resisting India from joining any future regional defence organization.26This strategy was also to assure kingdoms like Cambodia and Laos planning to opt for either camp amidst Vietnam War. Nehru wanted Indochina to stay away from Cold War politics which might increase American presence activating the Chinese. However, Nehru’s Panchsheel strategy failed eventually while the growing rapport between North Vietnam and China forced India to veer away from neutrality and incline towards pro-US South Vietnam in the International Control Commission founded to resolve the crisis. This was the result of the growing deterioration of the India-China relations since 1959 over border issue. While between 1954 and 1959 India voted for Hanoi in 72 per cent of her decisions, since 1959 India ruled against North Vietnam.27

The war of 1962 had a deep and permanent impact on India’s Southeast Asia policy. Post 1962 Southeast Asia policy under Nehru was overtly anti-China in character with Nehru declaring, “There is no non-alignment vis-à-vis China. There is no Panchsheel vis-à-vis China.”28 India now attempted to dissuade Southeast Asia against China. While visiting Thailand in March 1963, Indian Minister of State for External Affairs, Mrs. Lakshmi Menon, said, “The Chinese problem is a common problem. One day it may be your problem in Southeast Asia…”29This is interesting since prior to the war, India cautiously avoided Thailand (and the Philippines) as pro-US countries of Southeast Asia contradicting Nehru’s non-alignment policy. After the war, Nehru ‘discovered’ Thailand in his fresh Southeast Asia policy. Nehru by then realized the futility of his Panchsheel strategy. Not only this, the war itself was an eye-opener for Nehru to see countries like Thailand and Philippines, along with Malaya, siding with India against Chinese aggression while Burma and Indonesia, the countries he invested the most in, opting for neutral policy.

Conclusion

Southeast Asia has traditionally held strategic importance for India. Commenting on strategic importance of Southeast Asia to India, Major Anthony Strachey of the Indian Army compared the region with Nepal and Tibet in 1947 saying like in case of the Himalayan buffers to India, adverse powers in charge of Burma, French Indochina, Siam or East Indies would be detrimental to India.30 The last world war proved this when Japan marched at the gate of British India in the northeast while it occupied Andaman & Nicobar Islands after seizing Southeast Asia. Today’s India is similarly concerned about the growing might of China whose only maritime link to India is via South China Sea. Tranquil Southeast Asia was always beneficial for India both economically as well as strategically. The rice supply from Burma and Indonesia was a big help to India’s food crisis in the early years of independence. For that, stable and friendly regimes were required there for which Nehru worked hard. This was also needed to handle the Indian migrants there. In a way Nehru was in a nation-building mission in Southeast Asia. And there was a latent desire of Nehru to gain India (or him?) the world-wide prestige as he himself admitted in January 1949 in the context of conference on Indonesian independence, “We had recently the conference on Indonesia which has been a great success and which has enhanced the prestige of India all over the world.”.31 Southeast Asian leaders, fighting against communism, also acknowledged Nehru as their guide as was evident from the visit of Burmese and Indonesian leaders to India. Even the outside world acknowledged Nehru as the ‘influential non-communist voice of Asia’.32 Nehru was the bridge between the contending powers interested in post-war Southeast Asia. He never wanted any single power domination in the region and advocated for its tranquility which he found was threatened by South East Asia Treaty Organisation (SEATO) and Indochina crisis. His strategy in Southeast Asia, was to resist communist victory while engaging China in local affairs. The Bandung Conference of 1955 served the purpose well but initiated the downgrading of Nehru’s influence in Southeast Asia as well.

India had a strategy vis-à-vis Southeast Asia under Prime Minister Nehru which continued even after that. Nehru’s India tried to resist Southeast Asia from pursuing camp politics and follow a non-aligned policy based on Panchsheel strategy which was close to the later ASEAN Treaty of Amity and Cooperation or the Zone of Peace Freedom and Neutrality (ZOPFAN), 1971 which expressed ASEAN’s desire to keep power tussle outside the region. Presumably, Nehru wanted Southeast Asia to balance between contending powers like China and USA. Today, India acknowledges the centrality of ASEAN in the Asia-Pacific security architecture harmonizing ‘larger interests of the world beyond it’, according to Indian minister Gen. VK Singh.33 The omni-enmeshment strategy of the group embracing all the regional and extra-regional powers, including India, within its expanded fold like ASEAN Regional Forum, East Asia Summit and ASEAN Defence Ministers’ Meeting Plus has put it at the centre of the East Asian geopolitics today. During Nehru’s time Southeast Asia was unable to handle its affairs and India under Nehru was in action to set the house in order. Today, when India-ASEAN relations officially turn twenty-five, we see India more as a partner in the ASEAN led missions in East Asia. Besides, Nehru’s Look/Act East strategy was more diplomatic and non-military in character while today India expands her strategic collaboration through joint exercises and port visits. The only consistency in India’s Southeast Asia policy has been the China factor. The China factor remains equally relevant today as it was during Nehru period. India today is partnering with ASEAN to engage China to contain her, as did Nehru. Later ASEAN policy towards China in post-Cold War years reflected this wisdom.

References:

1  Manish Anand, ‘Act East: India’s ASEAN Journey’, Public Diplomacy, Ministry of External Affairs, Government of India, November 10, 2014, http://www.mea.gov.in/in-focus article.htm?24216Act+East+Indias+ ASEAN+Journey (accessed on 12.12.2017)

2  Ministry of External Affairs, Government of India,‘Celebrating 25 Years of ASEAN-India DialoguePartnership’, January 28, 2017, para3,http://mea.gov.in/press releases.htm?dtl/27970Celebrating_25_years_of_ the_ASEANIndia_Dialogue_Partnership (accessed on 12.12.2017)

3  Ibid

4  Ministry of External Affairs, Government of India,‘15th ASEAN-India Summit and 12th East Asia Summit in Manila, the Philippines (November 4, 2017), para6, http://www.mea.gov.in/press-releases.htm?dtl/29102/15th_ASEANIndia_Summit_and_12th_East_Asia_Summit_in_Manila_Philippines_November_14_2017 (accessed on 12.12.2017)

5  Cited in Subhadeep Bhattacharya, Understanding South China Sea Geopolitics, New Delhi, Pentagon Press, 2017, p.214

6  Jawaharlal Nehru, Indian Foreign Policy: Selected Speeches, September 1946-April 1961, New Delhi, The Publication Division, Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, Govt. of India, 1961, p.22

7   Jawaharlal Nehru, Letters to Chief Ministers 1947-64, Vol. 1.(1947-49), New Delhi, Jawaharlal Nehru Memorial Fund,  1985,p.143

8 Cited in Subhadeep Bhattacharya, Looking East Since 1947: India’s Southeast Asia Policy, New Delhi, KW Publishers Pvt. Ltd., 2016, p.7

9 V.P. Dutt, India’s Foreign Policy, New Delhi, Vani Educational Books, 1985, p.254

10Jawaharlal Nehru, Letters to Chief Ministers, 1947-1964, Vol 1, op cit, p.222

11S. Gopal, Selected Works of Jawaharlal Nehru, Second Series, Volume Seven, New Delhi, Jawaharlal Nehru Memorial Fund, 1988, p.616

12 Werner Levi, Free India in Asia, Minneapolis, University of Minnesota Press, 1952,pp.101, 102

13  Nehru’s  cable to V.K. Krishna Menon, July 24, 1948, S. Gopal (ed), Selected Works of Jawaharlal Nehru, Second Series, Volume Seven, New Delhi, Jawaharlal Nehru Memorial Fund, 1988, p.651

14  Jawaharlal Nehru, Letters to Chief Ministers, 1947-1964, Vol 1, op cit, p.235

15 Ibid

16 The Statesman,‘With China on mind, India woos ASEAN nations’, 14.12.2017, p.3

17 S.D. Muni,‘India’s Look East Policy: Strategic Dimension’, ISAS Working Paper, No.121, 1 February, 2011, https://www.files.ethz.ch/isn/126612/ISAS_Working_Paper_121-_Email-_India’s_’look-east’_policy_the_strategic_dimension_01022011145800.pdf  (accessed on 19.08.2017), p.23

18 Balveer Singh, ‘Southeast Asia’s Rising Engagement of India’, Southeast Asia-India Defence Relations in Changing Regional Security Landscape, IDSA, Monograph Series No.4, 2011, p.16

19 Cited in Subhadeep Bhattacharya (2016), op cit, p.6

20 Michael Brecher, Nehru: A Political Biography, New Delhi, Oxford University Press, 2011, p.589

21 D.R. Sardesai,‘India and Southeast Asia’, B.R. Nanda (ed), Indian Foreign Policy: The Nehru Years, Delhi, Vikas Publishing House Pvt Ltd, 1976, p.85

22 Jawaharlal Nehru, Guidelines for the session of the United Nations General Assembly, September 12, 1948, Selected Speeches of Jawaharlal Nehru, Second Series, Volume Seven, 1948,  op cit, p.611

23 Jawaharlal Nehru, Letters to Chief Ministers, Volume 1 (1947-1949), New Delhi, Jawaharlal Nehru Memorial Fund, 1985, p.232

24 D.R. Sardesai, India’s Foreign Policy towards Cambodia, Laos, Cambodia and Vietnam from 1947-1964, Barkley, California University Press, 1968, p.33

25 Sarvepalli Gopal, Jawaharlal Nehru: A Biography, Volume Two-1947-1956, New Delhi, Oxford University Press, p.190

26 Subhadeep Bhattacharya (2016), op cit, p.20

27 Ibid, pp.21, 22

28 Cited in Asis Kumar Majumdar, Southeast Asia in India’s Foreign Policy: Study of India’s Relations with Southeast Asian Countries from 1962-1982, Calcutta, Noya Prokash, 1982, p.70

29 Cited in ibid, p.72

30 Ton That Thien, op cit, p.67

31 Jawaharlal Nehru, Letters to Chief Ministers, 1947-1964, Vol. 1 (1947-1949) op cit,  p.270, emphasis added

32 The New York Times, 29th August 1950, cited in Karunakar Gupta, Indian Foreign Policy : In Defence of National Interest, Calcutta, The World Press Private Ltd., 1956, p.5

33 The Statesman,‘Asean central to region’s security architecture: India’, 07.08.2017, p.1

 

(Subhadeep Bhattacharya is a Researcher at Netaji Institute for Asian Studies (NIAS), Kolkata.)

(This article is carried in the print edition of January-February 2018 issue of India Foundation Journal.)

India in the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) – Need for Caution

Introduction

Regional Comprehensive Economic Cooperation Partnership (RCEP) is an initiative of economic cooperation among 10-member ASEAN countries and six Free Trade Agreement (FTA) partners of ASEAN. A broader Asian regional free trade area was contemplated and East Asia Vision Group (EAVG) recommended the establishment of an East Asian Free Trade Area (EAFTA) to the leaders of ASEAN+3 while Japan proposed Comprehensive Economic Partnership for East Asia (CEPEA) based on East Asia Summit framework. In November 2011, ASEAN proposed its own model for an ASEAN centric regional FTA – the RCEP. RECP was conceived as a competitor for TPP agreement. However, TPP agreement faces deadlock and put under backburner and RCEP is receiving more global attention.

The countries participating in the RCEP also signed a number of bilateral FTAs with other member countries. Since there are a number of cross-country FTAs signed between members, the outcome of RECP may not be substantial. But RCEP is expected to improve efficient functioning of the production networks of the region. Also, the coverage of the RCEP should be substantial compared to FTA+1 for sustainable benefit from the agreement.

RCEP negotiations cover trade in goods, trade in services, investment, economic and technical cooperation, intellectual property, competition, dispute settlement, e-commerce, and other issues.

RCEP negotiations will follow eight principles: (1) consistency with the WTO; (2) significant improvements over the existing ASEAN+1 FTAs; (3) facilitation of trade and investment; (4) flexibility (e.g., special and differential treatment) to the least developed asean Member States (AMSs); (5) continuation of existing FTAs; (6) open accession clause; (7) technical assistance and capacity building to the developing and least-developed countries; and (8) parallel negotiation. RCEP negotiations were launched in November 2012, and 18 rounds of negotiation have been held, along with six ministerial meetings and three inter-sessional meetings. But there is limited progress as members have disagreements on the tariff reduction on goods, liberalisation of services and investment framework.

Economic and Trade Profile of ASEAN+6 Countries

Table-1 provides the economic and trade profile of ASEAN countries and its six FTA partners. In terms of land area China, Australia and India are the large economies where China, India and Indonesia are the most populous countries in the group. In terms of GDP size, China is by far the largest economy with 11 trillion US $ in 2015 followed by India which is a 2.9 trillion economy. Australia got the highest per capita income followed by New Zealand and Japan. India and China are the fastest growing economies among bigger countries. FDI inflows into China is way high with 133 billion US$ followed by India at 44 billion US$ in 2015. Trade GDP ratio is highest in Singapore as trade is almost three times the GDP of Singapore.

 

 

Table 1 : Economic and Trade Profile of ASEAN+6 Countries, 2016

Indicators Brunei Cambodia Indonesia Laos Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Vietnam Australia China India Japan Korea New Zealand
Land Area(m)km2 5270 176520 1811570 230800 328550 653080 298170 707 510890 310070 7682300 9326410 2973193 364485 96920 264537
Population (million) 0.423 15.578 257.564 6.802 30.331 53.897 100.699 5.604 67.959 93.448 24.309 1382.323 1326.802 126.324 50.504 4.565
GDP Millions Current US$ 12930 18050 861934 12585 296284 62601 292449 292734 395168 193241 1270596 11382057 2274998 4919661 1392963 180583
GDP Per Capita, Current $ 30,553 1159 3346 1850 9768 1161 2904 52239 5815 2068 52268 8234 1715 38945 27581 39556
Real GDP Growth yony % -0.55 7.04 4.79 7.56 4.97 7.29 5.90 2.01 2.83 6.68 2.40 6.70 7.30 1.0 2.70 3.20
Current A/C Balance (%GDP) 13.26 -9.38 ( e ) -2.02 -18.08 7.78 ( e) -7.30 2.82 20.12 8.08 0.47 – 2.96 (2015) -1.06 (2015) 3.09 (2015) 7.68 (2015) -2.92 (2015)
Exchange Rate ($) 1.375 4067.75 13389.4 8147.91 12.17 ( e) 1162.615 45.503 1.375 34.248 21697.60 1.345 6.644 67.195 108.793 1160.270 1.437
FDI inflows(M$) 173.24 1700.97 15508.16 1219.82 11121.50 2824.0 5234.03 (j) 65262.40 (j) 10844.64 11800.0 48190.25 133700.0 44485 11388.41 10826.60 2291.63
FDI outflows (M$) 507.94 47.46 6249.62 1.13 9899.50 – 5601.94 (j) 35485.04 (j) 7776.24 1100.0 6011.70 183100.0 5120.27 145242.43 27274.20 -43.86
Personal Remittances (%GDP) – 2.20 1.10 0.74 – 5.11 10.05 – 1.33 – – – 3.10 (2015) 0.09 (2015) 0.48 (2015) –
Trade Balance (%GDP) 8.28(e) -7.77 (e ) 0.83 (e ) -5.86 ( e) 7.78 (e ) -2.10 -5.85 27.32 11.38 ( e) 1.59 (e ) -0.75 2.19 -3.49 0.82 7.38 0.55
Trade Balance (% imports) 24.60(e)

 

 -10.12 ( e) 4.38 (e ) -17.48 (e ) 12.17 ( e) -9.50 -19.63 17.96 19.50 ( e) 1.82 ( e) -3.73 12.81 -15.57 5.25 20.50 2.09
Trade (% of GDP) 84.90 126.95 37.39   128.08 42.79 64.90 318.42 126.59 176.77 39.95 37.06 39.81 35.59 83.71 55.01

Source: UNCTAD & World Bank

 

Trade by ASEAN+6 Countries       

Singapore is the dominant country in the ASEAN region with regard to international trade. Singapore is having an export of 346 billion US$ and imports worth 296 billion US$ with a trade surplus of 46 billion US$. Thailand, Malaysia, Vietnam and Indonesia are the other important ASEAN countries having larger trade share in the region. With regard to services also Singapore plays a dominant role.

Table 2 :Merchandise trade and services by ASEAN and its FTA Partners, 2015 (Million US $)

  Merchandise Services
Countries Exports Imports Balance Exports Imports Balance
Brunei 6,353 3,229 3,124 577 ( e ) 2,225 ( e ) – 1,648 ( e )
Cambodia 8,542 12,615 -4,073 3,943 ( e) 1,907 ( e) 2.36 ( e)
Indonesia 150,366 142,695 7,672 21,891 ( e ) 30,384 ( e) -8,493 ( e)
Laos 2,769 5,233 -2,464 810  (e) 566 (e ) 244 ( e)
Malaysia 199,158 176,011 23,147 34,844 ( e) 40,044 ( e) -5,200 ( e)
Myanmar 11,429 16,885 -5,456 4,212

(2014)

 2,602

(2014)

 1,609

(2014)
Philippines 58,827 70,153 -11,326 28,167 23,924 4,244
Singapore 346,638 296,745 49,893 139,611 143,469 -3,858
Thailand 214,352 202,654 11,698 60,543 ( e) 50,779 ( e) 9,864 ( e)
Vietnam 162,107 166,103 -3,996 11,200  (e ) 15,501 (e ) -4,300 ( e)
Australia 190,271 196,150 (e ) -5,879 53941 56532 -2,590
China 2098,161 1587,431 510,730 208,488 453,014 -244,526
India 264,020 359,065 -95,045 161,845 (e ) 133,710 (e ) 28,135 (e )
Japan 644,933 606,927 38,006 173,821 184,710 28,135
Korea 495,426 406,192 89,234 92,828 110,436 -17,608
New Zealand 33,699 36,067 -2,368 14,886 (e ) 11,967 (e ) 2,919 (e )

Source: Extracted from WITS, World Bank

With regard to FTA partners of ASEAN, China enjoys a dominant position with a trade surplus of 510 billion US$. Japan, Korea and India are the other prominent countries with large trade performance. China’s trade performance is very large and other countries shares are much smaller in relative terms.

Top 5 Trade Partners of  India ASEAN+6 Countries

Table 3 gives the top five exports and import partners of ASEAN countries and its six FTA partners. With regard to Brunei, the top export and import partners are primarily from the Asian region with Japan as the major export destination and whereas Malaysia is the largest import partner.  For almost all countries, China is the largest import partner. For Indonesia, Myanmar, Singapore, Australia, Korea and New Zealand, China is the largest export and import partner. The table shows that for most of the ASEAN plus countries a large proportion of trade is happening among themselves.

Table 3 :Top 5 Trade Partners of ASEAN Plus economies for the year 2016.

Brunei (2015)

 

 Top 5 Export Partners Japan Rep. of Korea India Thailand Other Asia
Top 5 Import Partners Malaysia Singapore China US Korea
Cambodia Top 5 Export Partners US UK Germany Japan Canada
Top 5 Import Partners China Thailand Vietnam Other Asia Singapore
Indonesia (2016)

 

 Top 5 Export Partners China US Japan Singapore India
Top 5 Import Partners China Singapore Japan Thailand US
Laos Top 5 Export Partners Thailand China Vietnam India Japan
Top 5 Import Partners          
Malaysia

 

 Top 5 Export Partners Singapore China US Japan Thailand
Top 5 Import Partners China Singapore Japan US Thailand
Myanmar Top 5 Export Partners China Thailand India Singapore Japan
Top 5 Import Partners China Singapore Thailand Japan India
Philippines

 

 Top 5 Export Partners Japan US Hong Kong China Singapore
Top 5 Import Partners China Japan US Thailand Korea
Singapore Top 5 Export Partners China Hong Kong Malaysia Indonesia US
Top 5 Import Partners China Malaysia US Other Asia Japan
Thailand (2015) Top 5 Export Partners US China Japan Hong Kong Malaysia
Top 5 Import Partners China Japan US Malaysia UAE
Vietnam (2015) Top 5 Export Partners US China Japan Korea Hong Kong
Top 5 Import Partners China Korea Japan Other Asia Thailand
Australia

 

 Top 5 Export Partners China Japan Korea US India
Top 5 Import Partners China US Japan Thailand Germany
China Top 5 Export Partners US Hong Kong Japan Korea Germany
Top 5 Import Partners Korea Japan Other Asia US Unspecified
India

 

 Top 5 Export Partners US UAE Hong Kong China UK
Top 5 Import Partners China US UAE Saudi Switzerland
Japan Top 5 Export Partners US China Korea Other Asia Hong Kong
Top 5 Import Partners China US Australia Korea Other Asia
Korea

 

 Top 5 Export Partners China US Hong Kong Vietnam Japan
Top 5 Import Partners China Japan US Germany Other Asia
New Zealand Top 5 Export Partners China Australia US Japan Korea
Top 5 Import Partners China Australia US Japan Germany

Source: Extracted from WITS, World Bank

 

ASEAN PLUS Export Share

The table shows the intra-regional export share of ASEAN six countries. China, Japan and Korea are the largest trade partners of Australia. China is having larger export share with Japan. China, Japan, India and Singapore are the important export destinations of Indonesia. India does not enjoy large export share with the ASEAN plus region. For Japan, China if the large export market followed by Korea. More than one-fourth of Korea’s export is going to China only. For Malaysia, China and Singapore are the important trade partners followed by Japan. For New Zealand, Australia and China are important while Singapore is having larger export share with China and Malaysia. China and Japan are the important export destinations for Thailand whereas China, Japan and Korea are important for Vietnam.

Table 4 :Export Share of ASEAN Plus Countries for the year 2015

  Exporting Nations
  AUS BRU CHN INDO IND JPN CAM KOR LAO MYAN MAL NZ SIN THA VIET
AUS 0.00 3.49 1.77 2.46 1.23 2.06 1.03 2.06 0.11 0.05 3.60 15.98 3.32 4.56 1.79
BRN 0.02 0.00 0.06 0.06 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.05 0.00 0.01 0.34 0.01 0.22 0.05 0.02
CHN 32.49 1.52 0.00 10.01 3.62 17.49 4.75 26.03 34.82 39.61 13.02 18.32 13.76 11.05 10.23
IDN 1.99 1.62 1.51 0.00 1.09 1.85 0.17 1.49 0.01 1.24 3.73 1.72 8.18 3.65 1.76
IND 4.23 9.06 2.56 7.80 0.00 1.30 0.12 2.28 1.11 8.31 4.06 1.35 3.06 2.47 1.52
JPN 15.88 36.35 5.97 11.98 1.71 0.00 6.69 4.86 1.66 3.99 9.46 6.29 4.39 9.37 8.70
KHM 0.02 0.00 0.17 0.29 0.05 0.05 0.00 0.12 0.58 0.00 0.12 0.02 0.28 2.31 1.48
KOR 7.08 15.63 4.46 5.10 1.37 7.04 1.61 0.00 0.21 2.40 3.23 3.32 4.18 1.91 5.50
LAO 0.01 0.00 0.05 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.06 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.02 1.98 0.32
MMR 0.06 0.00 0.42 0.41 0.33 0.17 0.02 0.13 0.01 0.00 0.39 0.06 0.71 1.95 0.23
MYS 1.82 4.62 1.93 5.07 1.85 1.92 1.57 1.47 0.20 1.52 0.00 1.99 10.89 4.75 2.21
NZL 3.33 5.23 0.22 0.29 0.12 0.34 0.07 0.24 0.02 0.01 0.51 0.00 0.50 0.62 0.20
PHL 0.62 0.39 1.17 2.61 0.49 1.52 0.20 1.58 0.08 0.10 1.69 1.36 1.85 2.80 1.24
SGP 2.71 3.50 2.28 8.40 2.95 3.18 0.69 2.85 0.19 5.50 13.91 1.71 0.00 4.07 2.01
THA 1.73 8.64 1.68 3.66 1.18 4.48 4.05 1.21 33.77 27.54 5.70 1.63 3.97 0.00 1.96
VNM 1.39 0.74 2.90 1.82 2.03 2.01 2.17 5.27 18.02 0.52 2.23 1.10 3.50 4.16 0.00
WLD 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00

Source: Computed based on data extracted from WITS

ASEAN PLUS IMPORT SHARE

Australia’s imports are coming mainly from China and Japan. Malaysia is the largest import partner of Brunei. China’s largest import partner from the region are Korea and Japan. India imports substantially from China. Indonesia imports large share from China, Singapore, Japan, Korea and Malaysia. One-fourth of the Japanese imports are coming from China. Imports from China are dominant in ASEAN countries and the FTA partners of ASEAN.

Table 5 :Import Share of ASEAN Plus Economies for the year 2015

  Importing Nations
  AUS BRN CHN IDN IND JPN KHM KOR LAO MMR MYS NZL SGP THA VNM
AUS 0.00 1.36 4.79 3.38 2.41 5.56 0.29 3.77 0.37 0.34 2.55 11.91 1.08 2.11 1.22
BRN 0.15 0.00 0.01 0.09 0.16 0.37 0.00 0.22 0.00 0.00 0.08 1.01 0.05 0.36 0.03
CHN 23.22 10.43 0.00 20.63 15.77 25.67 36.95 20.68 18.88 38.05 18.87 19.66 14.20 20.52 29.82
IDN 2.11 2.67 1.29 0.00 3.56 3.16 3.16 2.03 0.23 3.47 4.53 1.75 4.84 3.28 1.65
IND 1.80 1.13 0.87 1.92 0.00 0.78 1.07 0.97 0.38 2.80 2.21 1.15 1.94 1.31 1.60
JPN 7.42 7.41 9.30 9.30 2.47 0.00 3.98 10.51 1.91 9.08 7.82 6.57 6.27 15.61 8.55
KHM 0.06 0.00 0.04 0.01 0.01 0.15 0.00 0.05 0.01 0.00 0.09 0.03 0.05 0.32 0.57
KOR 5.47 9.06 11.36 5.91 3.35 4.29 4.33 0.00 1.28 2.44 4.52 3.70 6.14 3.52 16.64
LAO 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.00 0.04 0.02 0.19 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.73 0.35
MMR 0.02 0.01 0.35 0.11 0.26 0.14 0.03 0.12 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.01 0.04 1.78 0.03
MYS 3.71 21.13 3.47 5.98 2.45 3.44 1.76 1.97 0.32 3.13 0.00 3.35 11.14 5.95 2.52
NZL 2.87 0.15 0.43 0.45 0.14 0.38 0.04 0.28 0.04 0.10 0.44 0.00 0.24 0.30 0.23
PHL 0.28 0.26 1.23 0.48 0.13 1.42 0.09 0.74 0.02 0.12 0.95 0.26 1.53 1.18 0.54
SGP 3.49 14.00 1.80 12.64 1.89 1.26 4.74 1.82 0.21 21.65 11.98 3.47 0.00 3.60 3.64
THA 5.12 3.75 2.42 5.67 1.45 3.27 14.70 1.11 58.82 11.58 6.09 4.16 2.62 0.00 4.99
VNM 1.68 1.18 1.94 2.22 0.69 2.42 8.72 2.25 13.94 1.59 2.75 1.17 1.21 2.02 0.00
WLD 100.00 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

Source: Computed based on data extracted from WITS

India’s trade with ASEAN PLUS Countries

India’s exports to ASEAN increased from U.S. $ 10.41 billion in 2005-06 to US$ 25.20 billion in 2015-16 and imports over the same period quadrupled from US$ 10.81 billion in 2005-06 to US$ 39.84 billion. This reflects a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of about 9.2 percent in exports to the ASEAN region and close to 14 percent per annum growth in imports during 2005-06 to 2015-16. Concomitantly, India’s trade deficit with the ASEAN surged from US$ 0.5 billion in 2005-06 to US$ 14.6 billion. In terms of market share, the share of imports in India’s total imports from ASEAN went up from 7.3 percent in 2005-06 to 10.5 percent in 2015-16, over the same period share of exports to ASEAN in India’s total exports fell from 10.1 percent to 9.6 percent. With regard to India’s trade with individual countries of the region, India runs in to trade deficit with major countries of Southeast Asia. With regard to ASEAN plus countries, India has a trade deficit of 88 billion US$ of which China alone accounts for 52 billion US$. India also has trade deficits with Australia (6.15Bn. US$), Indonesia (11 Bn. US$), Korea (9.48 Bn. US$),Japan (5.10 Bn. US$), Malaysia (4.67 Bn. US$). India got trade surplus with Vietnam (2.68 Bn. US$) and a marginal trade surplus with Cambodia, Philippines and Singapore.

Table 6 : India’s Trade with ASEAN Plus Economies

Partner Name Export Value (Million $) Import Value (Million $) Trade Balance (Millions $)
ASEAN plus FTA partners 47710.76 135805.34 -88,094.58
Australia 3252.81 9411.87 -6,159.05
Brunei 30.39 607.78 -577.39
China 9576.58 61604.43 -52,027.85
Indonesia 2868.88 13902.02 -11,033.14
Japan 4529.72 9635.16 -5,105.44
Cambodia 145.35 42.99 102.36
Korea, Rep. 3609.63 13087.66 -9,478.02
Lao PDR 51.26 142.95 -91.69
Myanmar 859.97 1016.30 -156.33
Malaysia 4892.06 9559.92 -4,667.86
New Zealand 313.90 549.84 -235.94
Philippines 1304.35 518.19 786.16
Singapore 7805.08 7395.99 409.09
Thailand 3113.56 5650.14 -2,536.58
Vietnam 5357.21 2680.09 2,677.12
World 264,381.00 390,744.73 -126,363.73

Source: Data extracted from WITS

Impact of India ASEAN Plus FTA – Smart Simulation Analysis

The economic impact of proposed India-ASEAN plus Free Trade Agreement is analysed using World Integrated Trade Solutions (WITS) tool. WITS is a data extraction and tariff simulation software using databases maintained by UNSD COMTRADE, UNCTAD TRAINS, and WTO IDB/CTS. The SMART simulation model of the WITS allows users to estimate the partial equilibrium impact of tariff reductions for a single market at a time. WITS simulation is largely used to simulate the impact of preferential trade agreements. This simulation involves two aspects. First, a database has to be extracted to conduct simulation exercise. Secondly, simulation parameters are defined to get the impact of a tariff cut arising out of a Free Trade Agreement (FTA).

The simulation exercise for the study used bilateral trade data between India and ASEAN plus countries for the year 2015. India is cutting tariff and the beneficiary Countries are ASEAN and its five FTA partners. Tariff cut is done across the board and all products are affected by that. Since the attempt is to understand the impact of FTA, the new tariff rate is kept at zero percent. There arise five results from the simulation exercise. They are total trade effect, export effect on partners, effect on average duty, welfare effect and tariff revenue effect.

When India initiates100 percent tariff cut against ASEAN plus countries as part of the Free Trade Agreement, they gain access to theIndian market and the exports to India will increase substantially. Table-7 provideschanges in the exports of10-member ASEAN countries and five FTA partners of ASEANdue to 100 percent tariff reduction by India. The biggest trade gains are arising to countries against which the tariff cuts are effected by India. China gains most with an increase of 13.52 billion (22.49 percent), followed by Malaysia, a (4.74 billion $), Korea (3.36 billion $), Thailand (2.19 billion) and Japan (2.18 billion US$). The countries which are losing most from India ASEAN plus FTA is Indonesia (2.77 billion), US (532 million), Germany (523 million), Italy (180 million). Interestingly, Indonesia which is an FTA partner is losing out asubstantial trade to other members of the ASEAN plus group.

Table 7 :Major Gainers from India ASEAN Plus FTA – Smart Simulation

Partner Name Product Code Exports Before in 1000 USD Exports After in 1000 USD Export Change in Revenue in 1000 USD Percentage Change in Exports
China  Total 60,120,801 73,642,347 13,521,546 22.49
Malaysia  Total 9,493,390 14,228,497 4,735,107 49.88
Korea, Rep.  Total 12,878,505 16,233,598 3,355,093 26.05
Thailand  Total 5,417,513 7,608,380 2,190,867 40.44
Japan  Total 9,367,973 11,543,881 2,175,907 23.23
Vietnam  Total 2,536,126 3,882,464 1,346,338 53.09
Singapore  Total 7,380,912 8,577,367 1,196,456 16.21
Australia  Total 9,243,673 10,284,401 1,040,728 11.26
Philippines  Total 505,562.5 620,169.3 114,606.9 22.67
New Zealand  Total 544.125.6 626,297.8 82,172.12 15.10
Brunei  Total 607,783.4 608,538.4 755.072 0.12

Source: Calculated based on WITS SMART simulations

Table 8 :Major Losers from India ASEAN Plus FTA – Smart Simulation

Partner Name Product Code Exports Before in 1000 USD Exports After in 1000 USD Export Change in Revenue in 1000 USD Percentage Change in Exports
Indonesia  Total 13553819 10786291 -2,767,528 -20.42
United States  Total 19628746 19096118 -532,628 -2.71
Germany  Total 11332232 10808555 -523,677 -4.62
Italy  Total 3967955 3787745 -180,210 -4.54
Taiwan, China  Total 3523306 3352020 -171,286 -4.86
Switzerland  Total 21075113 20914464 -160650 -0.76
United Kingdom  Total 5311658 5155350 -156308 -2.94
United Arab Emirates  Total 20265670 20133665 -132005 -0.65
France  Total 3122004 3004414 -117591 -3.77
Saudi Arabia  Total 21348540 21253981 -94559.5 -0.44
Russian Federation  Total 4514333 4425048 -89285 -1.98

Source: Calculated based on WITS SMART simulations

 

The simulations show that India’s imports will increase by 23.58 billion if theFTA is signed with ASEAN plus countries. Because of the elimination of tariffs with ASEAN plus countries, there will be a reduction in customs duty to the tune of 19.3 billion US dollars. Because of the reduction in tariff and the consequent reduction in prices, there will be a consumer surplus to the tune of 1.92 billion US$.

Table 9 :Trade, Revenue and Welfare effect of India-BIMSTEC FTA

Market View of India-ASEAN PLUS FTA
Imports Imports Tariff Tariff Tariff  
Before

($ ‘000)

 Change In Revenue ($ ‘000) New Revenue ($ ‘000) Change in Revenue

($ ‘000)

 Consumer Surplus

($ ‘000)
377535382

 

 23,581,967.25

 

 40,965,439.83

 

 21,623,485.41

 

 -19,341,954.42

 

 1,915,040.615

 
Revenue Impact of India-ASEAN PLUS FTA
Revenue Effect ($ ‘000) Trade Total Effect ($ ‘000) Trade Value

($ ‘000)

 Old Weighted Rate (%) New Weighted Rate (%)  
-12147512.13

 

 23,581,967.25

 

 377,535,382

 

 10.85

 

 5.39

 

  
Welfare Impact from India-ASEAN PLUS FTA
Trade Total Effect ($ ‘000) Welfare ($ ‘000) Old Weighted Rate (%) New Weighted Rate (%)    
23,581,967.25

 

 2,224,771.425

 

 5.39

 

 10.85

 

    
Trade creation from India –ASEAN PLUS FTA
Trade

Total Effect ($ ‘000)

 Trade

Diversion Effect ($ ‘000)

 Trade Creation

Effect ($ ‘000)

 Price

Effect

 Old Simple Duty Rate (%) New Simple Duty Rate (%)
23,581,967.25

 

 0.097

 

 23,581,967.25

 

 0

 

 10.85

 

 5.39

 

Source: Calculated based on WITS SMART simulations

The total trade effect of India ASEAN plus FTA is 23.58 billion US $ of which the trade creation effect is 12.58 billion US$ and the trade diversion effect is only 79 US$the total welfare effect is to the tune of 2.22 billion US$. This showed that the India ASEAN plus is a highly trade creation FTA with no trade diversion and substantial welfare improvement.

 

Conclusion

The simulation exercise showed that India’s import from ASEAN plus countries will substantially increase if the FTA comes into existence. China which enjoys a huge trade surplus with India will further improve its trade performance and increase the trade balance. India’s advantage will be primarily in the services sector and it is better to complete the comprehensive trade agreement which includes trade, services and investment. Also, protection of sensitive product categories with higher Rules of Origin (RoO) support is necessary. India’s experiences with the existing FTAs is not very encouraging. India should ensure its concerns addressed before signing the FTA. Already China is pressurising ASEAN to go ahead with the agreement without India. This kind of Chinese hegemony should be resisted and an institutional framework should be created for the success of RCEP.

References

A Blueprint for Growth ASEAN Economic Community 2015: Progress and Key Achievements http://www.asean.org/storage/images/2015/November/media-summary-ABIS/AEC%202015%20 Progress%20and%20Key%20Achievements_04.11.2015.pdf

ASEAN Integration Report 2015 http://www.asean.org/storage/images/2015/November/media-summary-ABIS/ASEAN%20 Integration%20Report%202015.pdf

ASEAN Community in Figures – Special Edition 2014: A Closer Look at Trade Performance and Dependency, and Investment http://www.asean.org/storage/images/resources/2014/Oct/ACIF%20Special%20Edition%202014_ web.pdf

ASEAN International Merchandise Trade Statistics Yearbook 2014 http://www.asean.org/storage/images/2015/March1/asean_publication/Preview%20IMTS%2012-032015%202.pdf

ASEAN Investment Report 2015 Infrastructure Investment and Connectivityhttp://www.asean.org/storage/images/2015/November/asean-investment-report/ASEAN%20 Investment%20Report%202015.pdf

David Scott, India’s ‘Extended Neighbourhood’ Concept: Power Projection for a Rising Power, India Review 8, No. 2 (2009), accessed June 11, 2017, doi: 10.1080/14736480902901038. 5. For a broad overview of India’s engagement with East and Southeast Asia, see Harsh V Pant, Indian Foreign Policy: An Overview (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2016), pp. 137-148.

Das, Sanchita Basu The Future of Trade Diplomacy in East Asia, PERSPECTIVE, RESEARCHERS AT ISEAS – YUSOF ISHAK INSTITUTE ANALYSE CURRENT EVENTS, Singapore, 14 February 2017,

Deeparghya Mukherjee, “India-ASEAN economic linkages: Challenges and Way Forward,” Ideas for India, 10 March 2016, accessed June 21, 2017, http://www.ideasforindia.in/article.aspx? article_id=1593.

 

(Dr. B.P. Sarath Chandran is an Associate Professor at
VVM’s Shree Damodar College of Commerce & Economics, Margao, Goa.)

 

(This article is carried in the print edition of January-February 2018 issue of India Foundation Journal.)

North East Development Summit


GUTE-URLS

Wordpress is loading infos from indianexpress

Please wait for API server guteurls.de to collect data from
indianexpress.com/article/busine...

India Ideas Conclave 2017, Goa

Tamil Nadu Young Thinkers Meet 2017

The second edition of the Tamil Nadu Young Thinkers Meet (TNYTM) was organized by Tamil Nadu Young Thinkers Forum (TNYTF) in association with India Foundation and Indic Academy at Puducherry on 7th and 8th October 2017. Over 50 participants from various parts of Tamil Nadu came together for a candid exchange of ideas on a wide spectrum of topics such as the importance of Tamil culture, the need for academic rigour, foreign policy, understanding social exploitation & integration, spirituality and development, the role of media in enabling quality public discourse, and the significance of Jammu and Kashmir to the rest of India.

The speakers included Dr. Kiran Bedi, Lieutenant Governor of Puducherry; Shri Ila Ganesan, Member of Parliament, Rajya Sabha; Prof. Makarand R. Paranjape, Jawaharlal Nehru University; Prof. P. Puneeth, Associate Professor, Jawaharlal Nehru University; Dr. David Frawley, Author and Columnist; Shri Hari Kiran V, Founder, Indic Academy; Shri Abhijeet Iyer Mitra, Senior Research Fellow, Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies; Shri Anand Ranganathan, Consulting Editor and Columnist, News Laundry; Ms. Aarti Tikoo Singh, Senior Assistant Editor, Times of India and Shri Ma Venkatesan, Author and Historian. Rohini Manohar of Chennai Yoga Studio conducted a calming yoga session. As a part of the guest talk series, Prof Madhusudhanan Kalaichelvan, Associate Professor at the Mohammed Sathak AJ Academy of Architecture spoke on the need to enhance public participation to conserve temples. Dr. Rohini Rau spoke on how much India has enabled her to pursue her goals as a doctor cum sailor.

The participants at the Meet were young thinkers between the ages of 25 and 40 years, from varied professional backgrounds such as IT, social studies, law, sports, education, media, cybersecurity, medicine, social entrepreneurship, government etc. There was also representation from socio-spiritual organizations and grass-root leaders from the subaltern communities in Tamil Nadu. It was a gathering of young minds engaging on thought-provoking topics of relevance not just to Tamil Nadu but to the entire nation. The Meet enabled participants to develop a holistic perspective to understand these topics. The group had the opportunity to not only listen to experts and practitioners from the field but also to interact with them via open, healthy and forthright discussions.

(This article is carried in the print edition of November-December 2017 issue of India Foundation Journal.)

UNCLOS: Solutions for Managing the Maritime Global Commons

Maritime issues have emerged as one of the most important security issues in the Indo-Pacific, driving major powers to strategically adjust their policies towards the region. During the past decade, maritime disputes have escalated to the point where the regional order is being affected and the risk of subsequent armed conflict cannot be entirely ruled out.

Considering the strategic significance of Andaman & Nicobar Islands and their proximity to countries of Southeast Asia, India Foundation organised a three-day conference in Port Blair on “UNCLOS: Solutions for Managing the Maritime Global Commons” on 4-6 October, 2017. The Conference highlighted the importance of rule based international order especially in the maritime domain.  The conference witnessed participation from 14 Countries. It was inaugurated by Shri Jagdish Mukhi, Lt Governor, Andaman& Nicobar Islands. Shri M. J. Akbar, Minister of State for External Affairs delivered the Inaugural Address and Vice Admiral Vinay Badhwar, Chief Hydrographer to Government of India delivered the special address in the inaugural session. Ambassadors, diplomats, a former ITLOS judge, experts from academia and Think Tanks attended the conference.

Shri M. J. Akbar highlighted the importance of freedom of navigation in sea and importance of rule based order like UNCLOS in 21st Century. He said that seas must be a shared space for prosperity because conflict for resources will ultimately lead to conflict in the region. This century will be energised by new ideas and new technological innovations. He said that India was going to be a major player regarding technology. He also explained as to why India is also emerging as a naval power. He pointed out that 21st Century was going to be the era of seas, skies & space and not of land. Seas, skies and space have no boundaries. He said that we need to shift our focus from land based approach to sea based strategic thinking because if we see India from land based map then we only look at its size but if we see India from sea then we realize the potential of its outreach with various other continents. India’s outreach through seas to the outer world is significantly different from its territorial size. India’s reach extends from Gulf of Aden in west to Malacca Strait in east and it encompasses far bigger outreach in terms of strategic space.

Shri Jagdish Mukhi, Lt. Governor, Andaman & Nicobar Islands, was the Chief Guest in the inaugural session. He stated that United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) is widely referred to as the ‘Constitution of the Oceans’. It sets out the legal framework within which all activities in the oceans and seas must be carried out, including conservation and sustainable use of the oceans and their resources. He highlighted how UNCLOS also sets forth the legal framework for the sustainable development of the oceans and seas which aims at balancing the rights and obligations of coastal States with those of other States. He also pointed out that abiding all the International laws and decisions of International Tribunals by each country of the world is very essential for global peace. He expressed hope that the maturity exhibited by the littoral states in the Bay of Bengal will also be exhibited by all modern nation states, especially to resolve the outstanding maritime disputes in Indo-Pacific region. He said, “The international community must renew and intensify its efforts to strengthen capacity building with a view to protecting oceans and providing an opportunity for all States to use their resources peacefully, equitably and sustainably for generations to come. To that end, an increased awareness and understanding of the inter-linkages between global legal and policy frameworks and how they can support national and local frameworks, and addressing capacity-needs is also essential. Effective cooperation and coordination, as well as partnerships across all levels and sectors will be critical in that regard. Such cooperation can also be facilitated and stimulated by global-level dialogue and experience-sharing across regions.”

Vice Admiral Vinay Badhwar, Chief Hydro-grapher, Govt. of India, emphasised the relevance of UNCLOS and its continuing vitality in today’s era. He stressed that in today’s time the warfare between traditional States vs States has been intruded by non-State actors which has also threatened the maritime trade and international commerce in the important sea lanes of communications.

Shri Ram Madhav, Director, India Foundation, chaired the session in which keynote address was delivered by Dr. C. Raja Mohan. Shri Madhav said, “All nations must abide by the law of the sea. Just as constitution of land must be understood by citizens in order for it to be better implemented, similarly Law of the Seas must also be understood by people.” He added, “In last few years specially, India has started looking eastwards in its foreign policy approach as is evident in the “Act East” policy. Seaward or ocean-ward thinking in the strategic thought process of Indian minds has started. India as a country has always reiterated its commitment on freedom of navigation and over-flights in the shared space of seas. So in this context UNCLOS becomes very important and thus UNCLOS needs to be strictly adhered by all nations in the region. At a time when global power axis is shifting from Pacific-Atlantic to Indo-Pacific region, the countries in the Indo-Pacific region also need to have a greater say in the evolution and modification of UNCLOS based on present day regional order.”

Dr C Raja Mohan, Director, Carnegie India, in his keynote address spoke of the centrality that the islands of the region will occupy when India realises its maritime destiny. He touched upon the intangibility of the connection between law and power, tensions in the South China Sea, and freedom of navigation. He spoke of the vast expanse that international law has been able to occupy in the last century. He spoke of the enduring tension between law and power, potential pathway to rules based order and concluded by focussing on creating a cooperative framework in the Bay of Bengal.

Dr. Martin Ney, Ambassador of Germany to India, participated in the panel discussion on the ‘Enduring legitimacy of UNCLOS and its Continuing Vitality in 21st Century’, and reiterated that UNCLOS continues to be valid as the all-encompassing reference point concerning any activity in maritime areas, as the single most important source of legitimacy. Ambassador Dr. Ney said, “This concept of UNCLOS being a legal order is still valid today. However, it does need to be upheld and defended. The UN General Assembly Resolution on the Law of the Sea stipulates that: “The convention sets out the legal framework within which all activities in the oceans and seas must be carried out.” Even though we have seen challenges to this notion in recent years, we have to ask: If we were not to accept this convention to be the central framework for all activities, what would be alternatives? I know of none.” Supporting the Tribunal’s award in the South China Sea arbitration, Ambassador Dr. Ney pointed out, “I think that the award of the Tribunal is an excellent example to show the continued legitimacy of UNCLOS and that the Tribunal accomplished a great deal to support its continuing relevance in the 21st century… Any claim saying that mentioned issues concerning the South China Sea only concern adjacent countries and not more distant parties are simply false. Why do they concern all state parties to UNCLOS?  Because what is at stake is also the freedom of the high sea. Trading nations like India and Germany have a huge stake in keeping shipping lines open.”

Mr Ton Sinh Thanh, Ambassador of Vietnam to India, underscored the importance of the South China Sea in terms of its strategic location and natural resources. He noted two types of disputes in the South China Sea at present which are territorial disputes over islands and disputes over maritime boundary, and they are related to each other. He pointed out that The Hague Tribunal’s verdict over the Philippines’ lawsuit against China is a foundation to solve not only issues between the Philippines and China but also disputes between parties with sovereign claims in the South China Sea. Ambassador Thanh said that the South China Sea situation remains complicated and the only solution to this problem is peaceful negotiation in line with international law, especially the UNCLOS. He urged parties with sovereign claims in the South China Sea to avoid complicating the situation by not altering the status quo of this area and respecting the Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the Sea. Ambassador Thanh also stressed the role of the collective strength of regional nations and powerful countries in the world, including India.

Vice Admiral, Bimal Verma, AVSM, Commander-in-Chief, Andaman & Nicobar Command, Indian Navy, spoke in the valedictory session of the conference. He focussed on the terrorism threats in the maritime domain, ways to promote stability across the Indo-Pacific region, increasing free and fair trade and strengthening energy linkages. He suggested that there is a need to enhance understanding of the crucial maritime issues of freedom of navigation, good order at sea and the legitimate use of the maritime global commons.

Delivering the valedictory address Dr Harsha De Silva articulated the vision of the Sri Lankan government pertaining to the seas and the laws of the sea. He spoke of the opportunities that lie in the ocean for the growth of Sri Lanka and also the region at large. He spoke of the significance of the security of the seas to keep the inter and intra-regional trade going. GDPs of the countries like Bangladesh, Vietnam and Sri Lanka are on an upswing, there is economic transformation in the region along with infra structural development owing to the growing trade in the region. He concluded with an appeal to all the stakeholders of the region to commit themselves to strengthen UNCLOS and work for the development and prosperity of the region.

(This article is carried in the print edition of November-December 2017 issue of India Foundation Journal.)

Centennial Commemoration of the Battle of Haifa

Many battles have been fought but there are some battles that have changed the course of history and human destiny. One such battle was the Battle of Haifa fought on the slopes of the sacred Mount Carmel in present day Israel on 23 September 1918. In the wake of the 100 Years of the Battle of Haifa, the Centennial Commemoration was organised by India Foundation in association with Nehru Memorial Museum and Library (NMML) and Indian War Veterans Association on 20 September 2017 at NMML, New Delhi.

The Battle of Haifa was a great victory for Indian Cavalry (then in British Imperial Service), led by the Indian Officers, who displayed unmatched valour, courage and devotion to duty. The Indian troops faced opposing camps of Ottoman empire in large numbers and the victory of the Indian troops subsequently led to the demise of the mighty Ottoman Empire. It also saved the life of Abdul Baha, the spiritual head of the Baha’is, whose message was that of universal brotherhood and equality.

In the commemoration speakers gave insights of the history of the Battle of Haifa and also shared the information about the officers of the Indian troops who fought the battle. Recently during the visit of Prime Minister Narender Modi to Israel, he paid homage to the Indian heroes of the war.

Shri Ram Madhav, National General Secretary of the BJP and Director, India Foundation, in his inaugural address said, “Battle of Haifa is an epitome of a war to achieve peace and restore the natural stability.” He also remembered the unmatched valour of the Indian officers in the troop who laid down their lives to free Abdul Baha and bring victory to the Bahai Community. He stressed on the peace centric element of the war and said “History should not be about fighting in wars and wining it but it should be more about the peace centric element of the war.” He also reminded that the battle of Haifa is considered to be a landmark battle not only because of its outcome but also because it was the last true cavalry charge in the annals of history as thereafter aircraft, tanks and armoured cars had made their appearance in the battle field, leaving no role for horsed cavalry.

Maj. Chandrakant Singh, VrC, Secretary, Indian War Veterans Association, shared significant facts about the battle. He said, “Before the occurrence of the Battle of Haifa, India already had its footprints in sands of time in the Middle East.” He shared glimpses of temples found in those areas. He recalled the role of Sir Pratap Singh who was a part of the battle of Haifa and how he took the responsibility of funding the war requirements of the Indian troops. An unintended though important consequence of the battle of Haifa was the induction of Indians as officers in the British Indian Army.

Brig M S Jodha, Gp. Cdr, NCC, Tejpur, opined that the outcome of the battle of Haifa laid the foundation for the freedom struggle amongst the Indians against the British. He showcased the aggressiveness and strategy with which the Indian troops fought the battle of Haifa. He said “The Jodhpur and Mysore lancers coordinated in an exemplary manner to attack the position acquired in defence by the Ottoman Empire.” Brig M S Jodha gave a brief account on the state of the battlefield. He said “You had steep tracks, Keshon River which run parallel to Mount Carmel but nothing could stop the Indian troops from sealing the victory.”

Col Bhawani Singh, former Commandant, President’s Body Guard and 61 Cavalry (successor to the Jodhpur Lancers), observed that no more remarkable cavalry action of its scale was fought in the whole course of the campaign. He remarked, “In Palestine, the Jodhpur Lancers demonstrated a regiment being officered entirely by Indians and it was equal to if not better than any other regiment of any army in the world.” He also mentioned the role of different Indian officers in the war and how they administered the troops.

Shri Bhaskar Rao, Addl DG, Karnataka Armed Forces, said “Mysore Lancers were positioned behind the Jodhpur Lancers while the Indian troops were attacking the armoured troops of the Ottoman Empire.” He added, “Mysore raised its own cavalry which was equally strong when compared to the other regiments.”

Shri Wajahat Habibullah, former Chief Information Commissioner and former Chairperson, National Commission for Minorities, said “Huge coordination amongst the troops fighting for the same cause was the major reason behind the victory of the forces in the battle of Haifa.” He also said that it was the Indian Officers that played very significant role giving the command and controlling the major coordination of the troops.

Ms Nazneen Rowhani, President, Bahai Association, in her address narrated who Abdul Baha was and how the Mysore Lancers rescued him. She said, “There was an intelligence report about the threat on the life of Abdul Baha and the Mysore Lancers were given the charge of rescuing Abdul Baha.” She added that Abdul Baha praised the Indian Army and said “For two hundred years seven sovereign powers of the world tried to rescue Palestine from the hands of the Turks but the Indian Cavalry rescued the place so speedily and the quickness exhibited by the Indian Troops was breathtaking.”

Chief Guest of the programme, Shri Gajendra Singh Shekhawat, Union Minister of State for Ministry of Agriculture & Farmers Welfare, in his valedictory address observed that the history of many battles not only the Battle of Haifa remains untouched by the young brigade of our country and that we need to put in more efforts to recognise the history and veterans of the war. He stated “War is not won only because of the weapons and artilleries you have, but instead by bravery and valour.”

(This article is carried in the print edition of November-December 2017 issue of India Foundation Journal.)

Smart Border Management Conference 2017

The 2nd edition of the conference on ‘Smart Border Management’ was organised by India Foundation in partnership with FICCI at the FICCI auditorium on 18-19 September 2017. The conference brought various stakeholders together on a common platform to address the fundamental challenge of border management: How to enhance trans-border movement of peoples, goods and ideas while simultaneously restricting all forms of illegal activities across the borders?

Mr. Kiren Rijiju, Minister of State for Home Affairs, Government of India, in his inaugural address underlined the need for enhanced coordination and collaboration among diverse government agencies and stakeholders besides adoption of technology and change in the mindset for stepping up India’s border management system. With respect to mindsets, the Minister said that other countries encourage civilian settlements in border areas and promote trade and commerce there. These areas are well connected by surface communication means and have all amenities as available in the hinterland. India, on the other hand has isolated its border areas and restricted civilian movement and commerce. He said it was imperative to develop our border areas and promote commercial activity in all such areas.

Mr. Rijiju said that the engagement of multiple agencies in border management was resulting in delay of implementation of policies and adoption of technology. He cited an example where the tedious tender process and other formalities caused unwarranted delay in installing a full body scanner and emphasised the need to address such issues immediately. He said that the government is working towards improving security and infrastructure in border areas and along the coast and that national security cannot be compromised at any cost. Towards this, the government is working towards strengthening marine police to secure India’s long coastal borders. He added that to make India’s border management system robust, secure and well-guarded, it was essential to have seamless coordination between policy makers and defence and security agencies.

Mr. Rijiju informed the audience that for sealing the India-Pakistan border, a smart technology aided fence will be in position by December 2018. He also highlighted the fact that India believes that borders were not for dividing people but for bringing them together and engaging in trade and commercial activities for bringing prosperity.

On the occasion, the Minister released the FICCI-PwC Report ‘Smart Border Management – Indian Coastal & Maritime Security’.

Dr. Subhash Bhamre, Minister of State for Defence, Government of India, said that varying challenges were posed by each border state in India. The major challenges in border security were cross-border terrorism, insurgency, infiltration, narcotics, separatists’ movement and smuggling. There was a need for coordinated and concerted efforts to strengthen policing and guarding of border areas while developing infrastructure. He added that power of technology was needed to be leveraged for effective border management system.

Speaking about Comprehensive Integrated Border Management System (CIBMS), which has been deployed by the Government of India on a pilot basis on select terrains to boost India’s security systems, Mr. K. K. Sharma, Director General, Border Security Force (BSF), said that the main components of the system were virtual fencing, command and control system, response mechanism, power backup, maintenance and training. He added that with the adoption of CIBMS, India was looking at moving towards network-centric surveillance from human-centric to counter the limitations of human resource. He added that adoption of advanced technology and reduced human resource intervention was needed to strengthen India’s defence systems.

Mr.Rajan Luthra, Co-Chair, FICCI Committee on Homeland Security & Head, Special Projects, Chairman’s Office, Reliance Industries Ltd., said that smart borders on one hand should allow seamless movement of authorised people and goods, while on the other, minimise cross border security challenges using innovation and technology enablement. Adoption of advanced technologies for border control and surveillance, and the development of integrated systems for capture and exchange of data will facilitate enhanced effectiveness of the operational agencies with enhanced security. He added that over the long term, smart border management will also have to incorporate systems that digitally monitor patterns of activity through and around
border areas to root out organised crime and anti-national events.

In his theme presentation, Mr.Dhiraj Mathur, Partner & Leader, Aerospace and Defence, PwC India, said that the FICCI-PwC report elucidates the present status of various programmes that have been undertaken by the government, both in the hinterland and in coastal states. It highlights the efforts required for enhancing costal and maritime security with support from industry, especially on the technology, infrastructure and capacity building fronts, and for building an integrated and collaborative coastal and maritime security management framework.

In his special address on ‘Countering Transnational Organised Crime through Effective Border Management,’ Mr. Sergey Kapinos, Representative – The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) Regional Office for South Asia, said that UNODC is formulating an action plan for 2018 – 21 which will spell out the threat assessment of transnational organised crime in South Asia. The details of the plan will be shared with countries of the region to enable them to take effective and timely measures for putting in place an integrated border management system.

Transnational organised crime manifests in many forms, including trafficking in drugs, firearms and even persons. At the same time, organised crime groups exploit human mobility to smuggle migrants and undermine financial systems through money laundering. The vast sums of money involved can compromise legitimate economies and directly impact public processes by ‘buying’ elections through corruption. It yields high profits for its culprits and results in high risks for individuals who fall victim to it. Every year, countless individuals lose their lives at the hand of criminals involved in organised crime, succumbing to drug-related health problems or injuries inflicted by firearms, or losing their lives as a result of the unscrupulous methods and motives of human traffickers and smugglers of migrants.

Mr.Kapinos said integrated border management needs to be developed as an integral part of the overall national security system in close coordination with neighbouring countries as improving security unilaterally will amount to nothing if not implemented in cooperation with border States. Organised crime has diversified, gone global and reached macro – economic proportions: illicit goods may be sourced from one continent, trafficked across another, and marketed in a third. Transnational organised crime can permeate government agencies and institutions, fuelling corruption, infiltrating business and politics, and hindering economic and social development. And it is undermining governance and democracy by empowering those who operate outside the law.

Mr. Ram Madhav, National General Secretary, Bharatiya Janta Party, while addressing the valedictory session of the conference said that the Government is working towards upgrading the capabilities of security agencies and developing physical infrastructure along with adopting technology for effective management of Indian borders. He said that several border posts of India were still not accessible for maintaining a vigil on the border, but in the next three to four years, the government was committed to connect each border post with a motorable road. Emphasising the importance of having good diplomatic relations with neighbouring countries to combat cross-border terrorism, Mr. Madhav said that recent example was the diffusing of Doklam situation where India was able to secure its interests without resorting to armed conflict. On the Rohingya issue, Mr. Madhav said that India was dealing with the situation from both the security and humanitarian angle.

Mr. Madhav urged FICCI and India Foundation to assist the government in strengthening relations with neighbouring countries by engaging with them on the economic front. He pointed out that it was expected that by 2025, the Indian Ocean Region would emerge as a strong economic power offering immense opportunities to the private sector. However, this would give rise to security concerns. To address such issues, India was upgrading its naval capabilities.

Dr. Sanjaya Baru, Secretary General, FICCI, said that FICCI had been engaging with ASEAN and BIMSTEC and other neighbouring regions of India and would continue to strengthen ties with them. While the government is building and maintaining progressive diplomatic relations, the private sector was doing its bits to assist the government in this regard.

Maj. Gen Dhruv C. Katoch, Director, India Foundation, said that the two day conference had productive deliberations. The actionable points and outcome would be documented and presented to respective ministries and agencies for consideration and implementation.

(This article is carried in the print edition of November-December 2017 issue of India Foundation Journal.)

Indian Ocean Conference 2017

The second Indian Ocean Conference was organised at Colombo on 31st August and 1st September 2017 by India Foundation in association with S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies, Singapore and National Institute of Fundamental Studies, Colombo

31st August 2017

Pre-Conference Symposia on
Peace, Progress and Prosperity

Symposium on Peace

The symposium on peace was chaired by Vice Admiral Shekhar Sinha, Former C-in-C, Western Naval Command. The speakers were: Mr Rahul Roy Chaudhury, Senior Fellow for South Asia, IISS, London, UK; Mr Frederic Grare, Charge de Mission Asia, Ministry Foreign Affairs, France and Mr Phil Midland, Captain, U.S Navy (Retd.), USA.

Setting the tone for the conference, this session covered the various aspects of maintaining peace in the Indian Ocean Region (IOR) and was concluded with a consensus amongst the experts that the need of the hour was for the littoral nations to unite with each other against the external factors to fight the menace of piracy, climate change, and cyber terror for peace, progress and prosperity of the region.

Symposium on Progress

The symposium was chaired by Mr. G Parthasarthy, former Ambassador. The speakers  were Mr. Hardeep Singh Puri, Chairman RIS, India; Dr. Patrick French, Dean of School of Arts and Sciences, Ahmedabad, India; Dr. Wang Pu Qu, Dean, Institute of State Governance Studies, Peking University, China and Dr. Jivanta Schottli, Research Fellow, ISAS, Singapore.

The session focused on the varying degrees of development that could be found in the Indian Ocean countries and how most of them are developing states. Mr. Puri termed democracy, respect for rule of law, and connectivity that respects sentiments of local population as the substantive areas that need attention. Dr. Patrick French began by stating the historical role of the Indian Ocean. He reiterated the importance of the region in global history and spoke at length about the cultural linkages that existed amongst the countries in the region. Dr Jivanta Schottli spoke from a South Asian perspective, and problematised the singular conception of progress and development as enshrined in the western model of liberalism. The last speaker Dr. Wang Pu Qu talked of the vision of China, of its role in the region and conveyed the belief of the Chinese premier, Xi Jingping in working towards peace and development.

Mr. G Parthasarathy summing up the session expressed his faith in the realisation of the dream of having an Indian Ocean Region that is a site for all that the three keywords in the theme of the conference.

Symposium on Prosperity

The symposium was chaired by Mr. Ashok Kantha, Director, Institute of Chinese Studies and the speakers were Mr. Sanjeev Sanyal, Mr. Abdullah Salem Hamad Al Harthi, Mr. Ashish Chauhan and Ms. Mariana Jiang.

Mr. Kantha quoted that 80 percent of trade traffic through the Indian Ocean is destined for other regions and that intra IOR trade is only 20 percent. Quoting the number he raised a question of how a truly multilateral cooperation could be created in the IOR. Mr. Sanjeev Sanyal presented a vivid history of the Indian Ocean while Mr. Abdullah Salem Hamad Al Harthi went on to present the Omani view of the Indian Ocean region by placing the Sultanate of Oman within the strategic geography of the Indian Ocean. Mr. Ashish Chauhan emphasised on the role of technology in the development of the region where as Ms. Mariana Jiang presented her views on how China will interact with the IOR.

Inaugural Session

The inaugural session of the second edition of the Indian Ocean Conference was addressed by H.E Mr Vincent Meriton, Vice President, Seychelles; Mr. Ranil Wickremesinghe, Prime Minister, Sri Lanka; Dr Vivian Balakrishnan, Minister of Foreign Affairs, Singapore and Smt Sushma Swaraj, External Affairs Minister, India.

Extending gratitude towards India and Sri Lanka, Mr. Vincent Meriton emphasised the importance of conferences like the Indian Ocean Conference, as it presents an opportunity to discuss both problems and solutions facing the IOR. He recognised the fact that when it comes to the IOR, the states form a natural region which is not immune to challenges and must therefore, forge efforts to come together for development. Recognising the importance of the theme ‘Peace, Progress and Prosperity’, he reiterated the need for the countries of the region to counter organised crimes like piracy, cross-border terrorism etc. He also appealed to the countries to contain their territorial disputes in order to enhance peaceful coexistence of states in the region and also build an environment of progress and prosperity in terms of economic diversification of resources, sustainable development, investment and industrial growth, food security in the region, etc

Prime Minister of Sri Lanka Mr. Ranil Wickremesinghe thanked the collaborators who made the Indian Ocean Conference 2017 possible. He greeted all on the optimistic note that Indian Ocean is destined to design the future of the world and that Sri Lanka is determined to play a decisive role in the future of this region. He lauded the Indian government for actively working on regional connectivity in the Indian Ocean, which he said, is also vital for Sri Lanka, both politically and economically. The Prime Minister emphasised the need for sustainable use of the resources in Indian Ocean for the development of all. He also reiterated the commitment of Sri Lanka to cooperate and collaborate with all the members in the region for furthering the prosperity and the security of the region.

Dr Vivian Balakrishnan explained the contextual relevance of the budding economy of Singapore by pointing out that it is essential for the development of culture and commerce in the Indian Ocean Region. If one traces the historical trajectories, peace prevailed for most part of the earlier centuries which also exhibit the primordial signs of globalisation in Asia. Raising opposition to immigration, restriction to trade and exchanges, etc. are a consequence of this increased competition. Dr. Balakrishnan thus advocated the need for a diagnosis of these occurrences along with determining solutions to the problems. For instance, skill development among people, utilization of human resources, promotion of the idea of inclusive sustainable growth, etc., can reinstate the level of growth among the states of IOR.

Smt Sushma Swaraj said that the Indian Ocean is one of the busiest and most critical maritime transportation links in the world. Almost a hundred thousand ships a year pass through these waters, carrying about half of the world’s container shipments, one-third of the world’s bulk cargo traffic and two-thirds of the oil shipments. She enunciated Prime Minister’s vision for the IOR and referred to the concept of SAGAR – “Security and Growth for All in the Region”coined by the Prime Minister of India in March 2015. She went on to term it to be a clear, high-level articulation of India’s vision for the Indian Ocean. She talked of the emergence of the ‘Blue Economy’ as a promising new pillar of prosperity in the region, with immense economic and employment potential and spoke of India’s role in it. She concluded her remarks by mentioning some of India’s contributions to disaster relief work. Indian ships were involved in the safe evacuation of over 2,000 Indian expatriates and over 1,300 foreign nationals from Yemen in April 2015. India carried out rescue missions in Libya, Lebanon and Somalia. India has been the “first responder” to calls of assistance.

 

Special Plenary

The Special Plenary session of the Conference was addressed by Mr Tofail Ahmed, Minister for Commerce, Bangladesh; Mr Tilak Marapana, Minister of Foreign Affairs, Sri Lanka; Mr Premdut Koonjoo, Minister of Ocean Economy, Marine Resources, Fishing and Shipping, Mauritius; Mr Iwao Horii, Parliamentary Vice Minister for Foreign Affairs, Japan and Mr To Anh Dzung, Assistant Minister of Foreign Affairs, Vietnam.

Mr. Ahmed highlighted the important link between the collective and the individual. He said, “Collective progress and development depends on individual development and prosperity”.  Instating ideas for achieving international peace, the Sri Lankan Minister of Foreign Affairs Mr Tilak Marapana suggested the need for identifying mutual challenges to development in IOR and responding to it with unity via public-private-partnership. The minister from Mauritius spoke about the threats facing the IOR and Mauritius contribution in the development of this region since the country is heavily reliant on the Ocean for its survival.

Celebrating the second time participation of Japan in the Indian Ocean Conference, the Minister from Japan highlighted the relevance of the venue of the Second Indian Ocean Conference by spelling out the relevance of Sri Lanka in the region. He further spoke of the significance of the values of democracy, freedom and rule of law in bringing prosperity to the region. The Minister from Vietnam spoke of threats to peace such as civil violence, transnational organised crime, poverty – all that can lead to catastrophic consequences.

1st September 2016

Conference Keynote Session

The Keynote Session was chaired by Mr. Prasad Kariyawasam, Foreign Secretary, Sri Lanka and Keynote address was delivered by Mr. S. Jaishankar, Foreign Secretary, India.The session in general focused on reviving the ethos of the Indian Ocean Region. Both the Foreign Secretaries went on to discuss the Challenges in the Indian Ocean: piracy, radicalisation and terrorism in the Ocean littorals, and climate change.

Foreign Secretary of India Dr Jaishankar spelt out the four important areas that India shall focus on in its bid to strengthen the ties of Indian Ocean Region:

  1. a) Hinterland cooperation
  2. b) Maritime cooperation and support
  3. c) South Asia to South east Asia connections
  4. d) Assuming more responsibility – SAGAR vision

Plenary I – Peace

The first plenary session on peace was addressed by Ms Frances Adamson, Foreign Secretary of Australia; Ms Ina Lepel, Director General for Asia and Pacific Foreign Office, Germany and Ms Alice Wells, Acting Assistant Secretary of State, USA.

Analysing the expeditious competition amongst greater number of successful societies in the Indo-Pacific region than in the 20th century, Ms. Adamson assessed that the investments made by nation-states in strengthening their economies and developing their military forces have multiplied. She stressed on the importance of the freedom of sea-water navigation lanes, enhancing engagement vis-à-vis energy and oil transportation, developing Confidence Building Measures (CBMs) in the region, etc. to not only improve the relations within IORA but also accentuate the ties with the global economic order.

Extending gratitude towards India Foundation and the Government of Sri Lanka for inviting a German perspective to the platform, Mr. Lepel stated that despite being a consistent contributor in the region, the German position is overlooked by the nation-states in IOR. She spoke of Germany’s interest in the IOR and that the European states have encouraged the ideals of ‘peace, progress and prosperity’ throughout the globe. In conclusion, Ms Lepel said that greater bilateral, regional and multilateral engagements amongst states in these regions would enhance the pre-eminence of the socio-economic and security ties of the participating countries as well.

Reaffirming the positive assistance of America in IOR, Ms. Wells reiterated the importance of this region as a carrier of regional and international trade. Taking examples from Prime Minister Modi’s ‘Act East Policy’ and ‘Neighbourhood First Policy’, Ms. Wells exclaims the importance of realising regional priorities. The Acting Assistant Secretary of State proclaimed US’ desire to support the endeavour of improvement and peaceful development of region in terms of political, economic, cultural and social footing.

Plenary II – Peace

The second plenary on Peace was addressed by Mr Md Shahidul Haque, Foreign Secretary, Bangladesh; Mr Cho Byung Jae, Chancellor, Korea National Diplomatic Academy, South Korea and Dr Siswo Promono, Director General, Policy Analysis and Development Agency, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Indonesia.

Speaking for Bangladesh, Mr Haque expressed the relevance and meaning of peace for the country, which he stated was all about cooperation, building alliances for sustainable development. Further, in the light of the visionary leadership of the Prime minister of Bangladesh, Mr. Haque stated that the country is committed to work towards peace and prosperity of the region. During the course of his speech he spoke of the 2030 development agenda and reiterated Bangladesh’s commitment towards maintaining freedom of navigation in over flight and overseas and bays and also the importance that the country attaches to human security when it speaks of security as a discourse.

Mr. Jae began his address by firmly emphasising upon the relevance of the Indian Ocean for South Asia. He spoke of how the Indian Ocean laid foundation for Korean fisheries, the importance of the IOR for Korea’s global exports and imports, the movement of the global community away from Asia Pacific to Indo Pacific amongst other issues that he touched upon. Dr. Promono speaking of the history of the Indian Ocean region said that war and peace have long been part of the history of Indian Ocean, and touched upon the existence of economic ties since time immemorial and the 2000 years of connectivity and culture, to mention a few. He went on to speak on how from the very beginning the Indian Ocean has been open for navigation and trade and that is very good for the community of the region. In conclusion, the speaker made an appeal to the countries in the region to work towards enhancing the peace building measures and cooperating with each other to address the non-traditional security threats.

Plenary III – Peace

The third session on Peace was addressed by Admiral Jayantha Perera, Former Chief of Naval Staff, Sri Lanka and Maj Gen James S Hartsell, Mobilisation Assistant to the commander, US Pacific Command, USA.

The session highlighted on the importance of the IOR from the perspective of trade and security, laying emphasis on the rule based international system as the primary reason for peace and progress in the region.

Plenary IV – Progress

The session on Progress was chaired by Ambassador Ong Keng Yong, Executive Director, S Rajaratnam School of International Studies, Singapore. The speakers were: Mr Tan Sri Rastam Mohd Isa, Chairman and Chief Executive, Institute of Strategic and International Studies (ISIS), Malaysia; Ms Ayesha Siddiqa, Author, Pakistan and Dr Phongsavath Boupha, Former Minister of Presidential Office, Laos.

Ambassador Ong was of the opinion that the history and culture of a region must be used to improve and modify ties among states. The subjects of a state should be better connected through social media which runs beyond the world of academia. To instil a better sense of identity or belongingness amongst the population of the region, he highlighted the need for higher multilateral and bilateral engagements among the states of the region.

Mr. Isa began his speech with the widely accepted comment for the evening that Progress, which can be secured by Peace in the region is and would be the component of leading Prosperity into the region. The speaker delivered on the possibility of creating a common parliament and a better designed inclusive forum, like that of EU, in order to achieve progress via adopting innovative and transformative policies of collaboration and cooperation among the IOR states.

Ms Ayesha Siddiqa stressed that South Asia is a region that would need the IOR at large to solve numerous issues on poverty, development, food shortage, overall economic development, serious natural calamity, climate change, piracy and other shared problems. She spoke of the increasing global competition and the fact that there is greater need to explore the numerous resources of the sea and harness it for the benefit of people.

Dr Boupha restated the relevance of Indian Ocean – the third largest body of water bounded by Asia, through which 50% regional trade passes through. IOR encompasses 32 countries in all which share historical, economical and cultural relations. The former minister of Laos made an analysis, suggesting that the shift in the development of growth and competition towards the Asian continent, if utilised aptly, can contribute towards peace, progress and prosperity in the region.

Plenary V – Prosperity

The session on Prosperity was addressed by Shri Baijayant Jay Panda, Member of Parliament, India; Mr Ajmal Ahmady, Advisor to President, Afghanistan; Ms Sheikh Noora Bint Khalifa Al Khalifa, Entrepreneur, Bahrain and Mr Ruan Zongze, Executive Vice President, China Institute of International Studies, China.

Mr. Panda, tracing the trajectory of globalisation, said that the leading powers that brought globalization about were not looking at a zero sum game arrangement. He spoke of the vast and tremendous range of the IOR, which reflect immense potential of those states that have been lagging behind on this range in the region. The five issues that he highlighted in his address were: connectivity, identity, disputes, terrorism and climate and further stated that trade is interlinked to all these issues. Mr. Panda emphasised the need to build an “Indian Ocean Brand” to achieve the target of a better future.

Mr. Ahmady expressed the concerns that plague Afghanistan. He spoke of the many challenges that the country faces including insufficient growth rate and the structural imbalances that hamper the development. Ms. Sheikha’s address to the conference was primarily focused upon the relevance of ‘blue economy’ in the exchanges between the east and the west. She spoke of the relevance of the deep waters for the countries of the region and also expressed concerns about the need to ensure maritime security, as it is an important factor for the coastal states in the region. She also lauded India for actively engaging with the countries in the region.

Dr. Zongze traced the historical connection of China with the IOR. He spoke of the ties between China and the region in the spheres of history, culture, religion, trade and economics. Further, Dr Zongze argued the case for China being a country of the IOR, contrary to the perception otherwise.

Valedictory Session

Addressing the Valedictory Session of the two days Conference in Colombo, Sri Lankan President Mr. Sirisena said that Indian Ocean plays a vital role in the international economy, international security, sharing of new technology and modern naval activities while facilitating the strengthening of bilateral economic and trade relations between almost all countries in the world.

Talking of peace in the region he said that peace among different nations, reconciliation among nations, brotherhood and security at international level are of paramount importance and reiterated the Sri Lankan government’s commitment to peace. He went on to recall Prime Minister Sirimavo Bandaranaike’s proposal to the United Nations General Assembly to declare the Indian Ocean as a zone of peace. He spoke of Sri Lanka’s geographic location in the center of the ocean to be of strategic importance to the region and described it as a focal point that can promote and strengthen the sharing of modern technology, trade and maritime navigation.

(This article is carried in the print edition of November-December 2017 issue of India Foundation Journal.)

Economic & Strategic Importance of the Indian Ocean

Singapore is the Southern-most tip of continental Asia, one and a half degrees north of equator. And if you try to connect the Indian Ocean to the Pacific Ocean, chances are you will pass by Singapore. So the Indian Ocean is an area of major interest to us.

Singapore had the privilege of hosting the inaugural Indian Ocean Conference in 2016, which was well-received, with participants from 22 countries attending. The theme of the inaugural Indian Ocean Conference (IOC) was “Comity, Culture and Commerce”. The theme of IOC-2017 is “Peace, Progress and Prosperity.”

Peace

It is remarkable that the Indian Ocean, which has been a stage for the exchange of knowledge, culture and religion across the enormous diversity of all our states, for the past 4,000 years, has been marked by peace. If you think about the Pacific or Atlantic Oceans, even the Mediterranean Sea, what makes the Indian Ocean outstanding over the past 4,000 years is the remarkable presence of peace in almost its entire history. And perhaps we should ask ourselves, why is it that the Indian Ocean was an area of peace for so many years? Why is it that we could have merchants from many independent states coming from a very wide diversity of ethnic and cultural backgrounds being able to transact, travel, exchange and trade peacefully?

If you think about it, the first wave of globalisation was conducted in this part of the world. The early civilisations in ancient Egypt, Sumer and Indus Valley arguably owe much of their prosperity to the trade in the Indian Ocean.  Over time, we saw increasingly complex trade routes linking the East African coast to the Arabian Peninsula, South Asia, Southeast Asia and South China. In the 13th and 14th century, this thriving trade was witnessed by chroniclers such as Marco Polo and Ibn Battuta.

Arab merchants facilitated the widespread and peaceful adoption of an authentic and tolerant form of Islam in Southeast Asia.  In fact, Islam in Southeast Asia was achieved through trade and persuasion but never through the sword.  The point here is that continued prosperity in the Indian Ocean is contingent on the Indian Ocean remaining peaceful. Therefore, the converse is that if the stability in the Indian Ocean comes under threat, so does our prosperity.  For a small trading nation like Singapore where trade is three and a half times our GDP, this is an existential issue.

Progress

We all know that trade in the Indian Ocean helped to vastly improve the quality of life of all those who participated in it.  While the fabled overland Silk Route was far more famous, when you think about it, far more people benefitted from the maritime trade in the Indian Ocean.

With seaborne trade, you could trade in bulk goods including cotton cloth, foodstuffs, timber, which could not be loaded onto camels or mules.  So for instance, we see wood, or timber, being shipped from Africa to the Arabian Peninsula, where timber is scarce but needed for the construction of buildings.  Sri Lanka provided high quality peppers and spices that were valued the world over.

This was a form of democratisation of trade.  For the first time, the mass market consumer benefitted from global trade, and it was not just a question of luxury goods such as silks for the elites which were more commonly transported via the overland Silk Road.

Even today, sea transport is still the most cost-effective way to transport goods.  The United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) estimates that roughly 80 per cent of global trade by volume and 70 per cent by value is transported by sea – and we know that a huge proportion of that flows through the Indian Ocean. And this is also why the 1982 United Nations Conventions on the Law of the Sea, or UNCLOS for short, is of such crucial importance for those of us bordering the Indian Ocean.

The opening up of trade and economies helped to raise the standard of living for all of us.  And because this was a democratised form of trade of commodities, it benefited everyone. It provided a catalyst for the exchange of ideas and technologies, development of infrastructure, and increased prosperity for all of us.

Prosperity

We are now in a new age of uncertainty. You can think of the changing relativities amongst superpowers, or the changing trade patterns. But there is one other factor, and that is what some people have called the Industrial Revolution 4.0.

There is a sense in many countries that middle class wages are stagnating.  There is anxiety about job losses because jobs may become obsolete.  The problem is you see it in the political arena.  You see a rising tide of protectionism and anti-immigration sentiment worldwide – and this happens in all our societies and the tone of political debate reflects this.

Unfortunately, free and open trade has very often been blamed for this anxiety.  But the reality is that we are living through a technological revolution.

There has been near simultaneous advances in pervasive computing, mobile and broadband communications, Artificial Intelligence, robotics, 3D printing, and additive manufacturing and Augmented Reality, in addition to further revolutions in nanotechnology and genomics. All this has completely transformed the way value is created and the way the fruits of these values are distributed. That is why there is this angst and anxiety in our societies.

We need to make the right diagnosis. We need that to come up with the right solution.  In Singapore we believe in making sure that our people are equipped with the right skills, with the tools and knowledge that they need. And therefore it is in a sense a new way of focussing and transforming our education and our training systems. This is the only way to close the gap between a skills mismatch and a jobs mismatch.  If we can do so effectively across the Indian Ocean, then we will be able to ride on the historical advantages of the Indian Ocean as an ocean of peace and as a medium which has transmitted ideas, which has facilitated trade, and which has uplifted all our societies.

Inclusive and sustainable growth is not a zero-sum game.  No nation today can succeed in the age of disruption by erecting walls or barriers, protectionism, or insulation. Instead, we need to go back to the ancient philosophy of the Indian Ocean which is to embrace our interdependence as well as an open and inclusive regional architecture, and eschew attempts at domination. Instead we should focus on interdependence, win-win collaboration and the exchange of ideas, tools and technologies in a fair and just way. So if we can achieve globalisation in this difficult environment, it will give us a chance to leapfrog many other parts of the world. I hope, with some reasonable optimism, that we will be the most vibrant and dynamic economic space in the world in decades to come.

The region has a demographic dividend that has not yet been fully harvested. If you look at the Indian Ocean compared to the Pacific or even the Atlantic, we have a significantly younger population hungry for knowledge, able to utilise the latest digital tools and they deserve our support. All of us must commit to creating this future for them when there will be a new golden age for a new middle class equipped with the necessary knowledge, skills, tools and relationships.

*This article is a summary of the address delivered by Dr. Vivian Balakrishnan,

Minister of Foreign Affairs, Singapore on 31st August, 2017 at the 2nd Indian Ocean Conference at

Colombo, Sri Lanka organized by India Foundation.

 (This article is carried in the print edition of November-December 2017 issue of India Foundation Journal.)

IOR: Upholding the Rule of Law

The 21st Century is an era led by the Indo-Pacific region. Last year, Prime Minister Abe introduced the “Free and Open Indo-Pacific Strategy.” Japan believes that a key to stability and prosperity of the international community is dynamism which will be generated by combining the “Two Continents,” Asia and Africa, and the “Two Oceans,” the Indian and Pacific Oceans. Toward this goal, the governments and peoples of all countries in the region must continue to make efforts.

Upholding Order Based on Universal Values

First, in order to bring prosperity to the Indo-Pacific Ocean, we must stand for values shared in Asia, such as freedom, democracy and the rule of law. We must stand firm against attempts to challenge those values and spirit.

The North Korea issue is the utmost priority which requires firm actions of the international community. Since January last year, North Korea has conducted two nuclear tests and launched nearly 40 ballistic missiles. North Korea has been continuing provocative actions, including the intolerable launch of a ballistic missile which flew over the Japanese territory.These actions by North Korea are totally unacceptable as they constitute unprecedented serious and grave threats against the security of the international community. Moreover, the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction from North Korea is a serious factor of instability for our region.

The international community must put maximum pressure on North Korea to force it to take concrete action, towards realizing the verifiable denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula. Japan continues to strongly demand North Korea to refrain from provocative actions, including nuclear tests and ballistic missile launches, and to comply with the Security Council resolutions. Another challenge is the growing threats to the rule of law in the Indo-Pacific region. Whether at sea or on land, we observe unilateral attempts to change the status quo by force without respecting dialogue and international law. On the South China Sea issue, in particular, it is essential to pursue peaceful settlement of disputes based on international law, including the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, and demilitarization of disputed features.

To realize free and open Indo-Pacific region based on the rule of law, it is important for all countries in this region to have serious concerns and raise voice against all activities that violate the rule of law.

Enhancing Regional Connectivity

The second important point is enhancing the regional connectivity in a free, open and transparent manner. In order to fully unleash the potential of this region, it is vitally important to connect Japan, Southeast and Southwest Asia by land and ocean. It is to lay a foundation for further smooth flows of people and goods. Japan’s cooperation is not just building roads, railways and ports with its high technology. We also support improvement of cross-border customs procedures and development of areas around economic corridors including Special Economic Zones. In this way, we realize “vibrant and effective connectivity” whereby infrastructure is better utilized.

In particular, Sri Lanka, situated in a strategic point in the Indian Ocean, has huge potential. Japan is ready to cooperate for further development of the Port of Colombo through partnership between the government and private companies that have world-class logistics networks. If progress is made in the construction of the light metro system and the improvement of the environment for private-sector investment, Colombo will become more attractive as a commercial center.

Through Public-Private Partnership, Japan will extend its utmost support to help Sri Lanka become a hub of the Indian Ocean which is truly export-competitive. In order to realize regional connectivity, we need sustainable development based on free and open rules. Development which is inconsistent with the principles of fairness and transparency and lacks economic efficiency or sound finances brings no benefit to the local community. Development based on unfair or non-transparent procedures and fiscally unsound development will leave an enormous burden for future generations and bring no benefits to local communities. It is the people of Sri Lanka who best understand this. Actions that prevent the development and prosperity of Asia must never be accepted.

Capacity Building Assistance

Third, for this purpose, Japan will provide capacity building assistance to the countries in this region. Capacity building to improve the maritime law enforcement capability is particularly important. Japan spares no effort to support coastal states in Asia. To resolve the root causes of piracy, armed robbery at sea, illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing (IUU fishing), maritime crimes and terrorism, Japan will provide seamless support for the countries’ efforts to protect seas. Japan will do it through a combination of various measures, including ODA, defense equipment cooperation, and capacity building assistance.

Japan will work to enhance maritime capability of Sri Lanka by providing two patrol ships through ODA, as well as implementing joint training of maritime law enforcement agencies together with India. With the cooperation of all countries concerned, “Free and Open Indio-Pacific Ocean” will surely be realized.

We, as citizens of the Indo-Pacific region, possess the potential of becoming a role model of the world. The key to unleashing the potential is freedom, democracy and the rule of law. Japan will work together with the international community to champion these important values.

* This article is a summary of the address delivered by Mr. Iwao Horii,

Parliamentary Vice-Minister for Foreign Affairs, Government of Japan on 31st August, 2017, at

the 2nd Indian Ocean Conference at Colombo, Sri Lanka organized by India Foundation.

(This article is carried in the print edition of November-December 2017 issue of India Foundation Journal.)

USA’s Vision for Indian Ocean

A long-standing facet of U.S. foreign policy is that the United States is – and will continue to be – an Indo-Pacific power. For more than seven decades, we have embraced the responsibilities this distinction requires across this vast expanse, from the shores of East Africa to the western coast of the Americas. This will not change in the decades to come.

America’s connection to this dynamic region is not new; more than two centuries ago, ships from New England sailed along trade routes in the Indian Ocean carrying spices, tea, and even ice between Boston and Kolkata. Fast forwarding to today, USA’s partnerships and shared strategic interests in this region remain as compelling as ever. I want to share USA’s vision for the Indian Ocean, as well as the precepts guiding U.S. engagement and diplomacy.

First, we must have a common vision for the Indian Ocean that enhances economic growth, transparent development, and regional integration. Regional initiatives that prioritize accountability, open markets, and delivery of tangible benefits to citizens of the region will be the most sustainable.

Second, countries must be able to effectively counter security threats in the Indian Ocean as well as respond to humanitarian and environmental disasters. Through joint capacity building and exercises, we can share the security burden in this increasingly complex region.

Finally, we must support a principled regional architecture that unites us to support international standards, including freedom of navigation and the peaceful resolution of disputes. All nations have the right to freely fly, sail, and operate wherever international law allows.

Let’s start with the economic imperatives. The Indian Ocean is at the fulcrum of global trade and commerce, with nearly half of the world’s 90,000 commercial vessels and two thirds of global oil trade traveling through its sea lanes. The region boasts some of the fastest-growing economies on Earth, and is home to a quarter of the world’s population, 500 million of whom still lack access to reliable power. Bolstering economic integration will lead to sustainable and inclusive growth. For example, if South and Southeast Asia reduced non-tariff barriers by 50 percent — an ambitious but attainable goal — increased intra-region trade would net $568 billion in increased GDP by 2030.

Already, American companies operate across the region, supplying everything from bottled drinks to airplane parts. In India alone, over 600 American companies have contributed to a 500 percent increase in FDI over the past two years. The United States plans to deliver over $600 million dollars of investment into Nepal’s transportation and energy sectors, yet another sign that its commercial ties to the Indian Ocean are growing deeper by the day.

USA is partnering with South Asian countries to develop legal and regulatory regimes that encourage transparent FDI, build resilient energy infrastructure, and connect budding entrepreneurs with the resources they need to develop their ideas. As President Trump and Prime Minister Modi underscored during their June summit, both India and the United States are committed to bolstering regional economic connectivity through transparent infrastructure development and responsible debt financing practices.

The U.S. is building partnerships through the Safe Ocean Network to combat illegal, unreported, and unregulated fishing, an issue threatening maritime economies around the world. This initiative encourages coordinated action to detect violations, enforce laws, and prosecute those engaged in illegal activities. More than 40 partners from around the world have joined the Safe
Ocean Network, and we welcome every nation here to join.

In South Asia, USA’s regional partners are doing their part. India is forging stronger trade and infrastructure ties with its neighbors through its Act East policy. In one example, Bangladesh, India, and Nepal are implementing a Motor Vehicle Agreement to allow free movement of goods and people across their borders. USA also commends progress in BIMSTEC and hope agreements on electricity grid connectivity and transport can be finalized before the next BIMSTEC Summit.

While the region offers unprecedented opportunity, it is also confronting a myriad of security challenges, including terrorism, transnational crime, trafficking-in-persons, and illicit drugs. To combat these challenges, the United States has sought to improve intelligence-sharing among regional partners and improve capacity-building in areas like community policing, counter-narcotics, aviation security, and forensics analysis. There is also a critical need to expand engagement on maritime domain awareness. In the increasingly crowded maritime environment, the sharing of reliable information is the foundation for greater cooperation.

US is also expanding its navy-to-navy relationship with Sri Lanka. With Bangladesh, US values its continued engagement through regular exercises like the Southeast Asia Cooperation and Training series. US hopes that one day in the not too distant future, all the navies of this region can jointly participate in exercises and coordinate maritime activities to build collective capacity and uphold international standards.

In order to realize our shared goal of an Indian Ocean region that is open, principled, and resilient, we will need a robust regional framework for bilateral and multilateral cooperation — one in which all states have a say and are invested in decision-making and outcomes. Regional partners must adhere to a common vision that:

  • Respects international law as reflected in the Law of the Sea Convention;
  • Supports an economic, political, and social linkages between South and East Asia;
  • Develops the region’s humanitarian and disaster relief capacity through maritime exercises involving all Indian Ocean partners; and
  • Encourages Indian Ocean economies to embrace visa liberalization, competitive markets, and accessible medical and educational facilities.

Last Month, President Trump proclaimed that the United States is “committed to pursuing our shared objectives for peace and security in South Asia and the broader Indo-Pacific region.”

This vision builds upon the Indian Ocean principles the President and Prime Minister Modi announced in June. US desire for a common vision signifies its enduring commitment to this region and our shared goals of promoting peace, security, freedom of navigation, and a sustainable and open architecture across the Indian Ocean. US invites every nation in the region to join in this common endeavor. And, through our collective leadership, we can be a model for the rest of the world.

*This article is a summary of  the address delivered by Ms. Alice G. Wells,
Acting Assistant Secretary of State for South and Central Asian Affairs, USA on 1st September, 2017 at the 2nd Indian Ocean Conference at Colombo, Sri Lanka organised by India Foundation.

(This article is carried in the print edition of November-December 2017 issue of India Foundation Journal.)

Explide
Drag