It is a timely initiative to bring together important states and principal maritime partners of the Indian Ocean Region for consolidating maritime partnership to ensure peace, security and development.

The Oceans and Seas constitute critical ‘global commons’ for our civilization. The Oceans and Seas have been serving as an important component for economic prosperity throughout history. Over the years, increasing dependence on ocean and seas for effective transportation has resulted in greater concern for ensuring the safety and security of the sea lines of communications.

Indian Ocean has remained at the centre of interest to the major players of the world because of its strategic location and natural resources. Indian Ocean Region has also emerged as the most prominent global economic highway. 66% of the world’s oil shipments, 33% of its bulk cargo and 50% of the world’s container traffic pass through its waters. The oil arteries of the world flow through the Indian Ocean.

It is not only trade and economy, competition among some of the major powers in securing visible and credible presence in the Indian Ocean has shaped the dynamics of the Indian Ocean region. We see growing interests among countries in the region to develop new infrastructures in the Indian Ocean. Countries also seek to build, expand and strengthen their naval infrastructures in the Indian Ocean. Efforts are also to be made for further cementing existing alliances and forming new alliances to ensure safety, security and development of the region. Overlapping territorial claims and disputes have added new dimension to this evolving security scenario.

While we recognise the strategic and economic importance of the Indian Ocean, we must not lose sight of the host of challenges it presents. Countries in Asia and the Pacific are four times more likely to be affected by a natural catastrophe than those in Africa, and 25 times more vulnerable than Europe and North America. The climate change impacts and resultant sea level rise have further enhanced the risks and vulnerabilities of the Indian Ocean countries.

We should also recognise a variety of security threats, posing danger to maritime peace and stability. Piracy continues to remain as one of the most worrisome maritime security challenges to date. Maritime terrorism has also surfaced as an omnipresent global and regional threat. Human trafficking and drug smuggling are the twin issues that have lately re-captured global attention.

As I proceed to call upon the Speakers for their deliberations, let me reiterate that maritime peace, security and stability are essential for our development, progress and prosperity. It however requires strong commitment from all the nations of the Indian Ocean region and beyond towards achieving this shared objective.

Let me thanks the Speakers for their very insightful deliberations, presentations and analyses, highlighting potentials, issues and challenges for maritime cooperation in the Indian Ocean region. Let me summarise their views and add my own perspectives to those.

First, the centre of gravity is being shifted to Asia. International relations are, perhaps, in a state of dynamic transition. The geopolitical game in the Asia-Pacific region is taking a new turn. Focus has been shifted from ‘Asia-Pacific’ to ‘Indo-Pacific’. ‘Rebalancing Asia’ or ’Pivot to Asia’ manifests the changing nature of power matrix in the region. Therefore, the role of the Indian Ocean is critically important in this equation.

Second, strategic equations in the Indian Ocean is increasingly becoming complex with major powers competing each other’s for more prominence and visibility. This presents enormous challenges, so are the opportunities. It is, therefore, crucial for us to understand the character, dimension and magnitude of this competition to appropriately choreograph our respective positions vis-à-vis others.

Third, to adequately harness the potentials of oceans and seas, we need to effectively address the maritime boundary related issues. Bangladesh has been able to amicably resolve its maritime disputes with both of its neighbours-India and Myanmar. This has unleashed tremendous possibilities for all of us toexploit the vast resources that we have in our maritime territory including the hydrocarbon reserves.

Four, Maritime security and freedom of navigation are essential as well for enhanced international trade and economic cooperation. The capacity of regional organisations including Indian Ocean Rim Association (IORA) could be further strengthened to manage security related challenges. A collective security architecture based on mutual trust and partnership may be envisioned in this regard.

Five, Many countries of the Indian Ocean region are the worst victims of climate change. It is an imperative for us to coordinate our resources, synergise our strength and share our best practices into minimizing adversities of climate change, with special focus on adaptation measures.

Six, Capacity building of the Indian Ocean countries is a precondition for better utilization of ocean resources. Capacity has to be built across the academia, research institutions, national regulatory bodies and mechanisms. Due priority should be accorded to the transfer of technology and mobilisation of financial resources among and between the Indian Ocean countries. LDCs and Land Locked countries should be given special preference.

Last but not the least, we need to maintain ocean health by striking a balance between conservation, exploitation and utilisation of marine resources. This would eventually contribute towards building an inclusive, equitable and sustainable society, as envisaged in the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGS) adopted in September 2015.

I am convinced that we must follow the path of cooperation and collaboration, not competition and conflict, in tapping the full potentials of the Indian Ocean. Let me conclude quoting the Prime Minister of Bangladesh, “Blue economy concept has ushered in a new horizon for economic development through utilizing the sea and marine resources at national and international level. History of development of many countries tells us that the countries which utilised the sea and its resources became economically more prosperous than others”.

(This article is the gist of remarks made by Mr. Abul Hassan Mahmood Ali, Hon’ble Foreign Minister, Govt. of Bangladesh as the Chair of the ‘Plenary on Comity’ at the Indian Ocean Conference 2016 at Singapore on 2^nd September, 2016.)

This meeting is made possible by the valuable collaboration by the leading think tanks in Asia. This meeting is very timely, for it allows government policy planners engage in a frank exchange of views on how to ensure stability in the Indian Ocean. The Indo-Pacific region is now the growth center of the global economy. Ensuring open and stable sea in the region is vital for the peace and stability of the region and the entire international community.

For Japan, the Indian Ocean was traditionally important as a sea lane for its energy import, for it transported about 90 percent of the crude oil to Japan. However, today, the Indian Ocean is playing a much important role as a sea of trade for everyone. It is supporting all the trade transportation and value-chains among East Asia, Southeast Asia, South Asia, and the Middle East and Africa, where greater economic growth is expected. At the 6th Tokyo International Conference on African Development (TICAD VI), held in Kenya last weekend, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe announced the “Free and Open India and Pacific Strategy” as Japan’s new diplomatic policy.

The key of the stability and prosperity of the international community is the dynamism created by the synergy between the “two continents” ― Asia, which is recording remarkable growth, and Africa, which is full with potentials ― and two free and open seas – the Pacific and the Indian Oceans. By regarding these continents and seas as an integrated region, Japan intends to open up a new frontier of Japanese diplomacy.

The ASEAN countries, including Singapore where we are today, are located where the two Oceans meet. For this reason, It is important for everyone in this region to share the common goal of strengthening maritime security and connectivity.

However, in recent years in the seas of Asia, we have been witnessing scenes of increasing tensions between States. The international community is seriously concerned. Japan would like to emphasize the importance of observing international laws, including UNCLOS, “Constitution of the Oceans,” and of taking concrete actions and engaging in cooperation based on such laws.

Prime Minister Abe proposed the “Three Principles of the Rule of Law at Sea” at the Shangri-La Dialogue in 2014.

1) States should make and clarify their claims based on international law;

2) States should not use force or coercion in trying to drive their claims, and;

3) States should seek to settle disputes by peaceful means.

I believe, now is the time to thoroughly implement these principles.

These principles have received robust support from many states concerned, including those in Asia. Also at the G7 Ise-Shima Summit held in May, the importance of the three principles was reaffirmed. The G7 Foreign Ministers emphasized, in their Declaration on Maritime

Security in April, that coastal states should refrain from any unilateral actions that would cause permanent physical changes to the marine environment in the area pending delimitation, regardless of whether they are for military or civilian purposes.

In particular, the G7 countries shared serious concerns over any unilateral actions that seek to change the status quo. They emphasized the importance of peaceful resolution of maritime disputes, including through arbitration proceedings.

The ruling issued in the arbitration case between the Philippines and China is legally binding for both countries concerned. Japan hopes that compliance by the two countries with this ruling will lead to peaceful resolution of disputes related to the South China Sea.

In addition, Japan is strongly hoping for the full and effective implementation of the Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea (DOC) and the early establishment of a Code of Conduct in the South China Sea (COC). In light of the increasingly severe security environment, Japan will implement various policy measures under the policy of “Proactive Contribution to Peace.”

Piracy is a critical challenge for all countries that enjoy the benefits of maritime trade. Japan is actively involved in dealing with piracy and armed robbery off the coast of Somalia, in the Gulf of Aden and in the Straits of Malacca and Singapore. Japanese Self-Defense Forces has been conducting antipiracy operations without interruption since 2009. This year marks the 10th anniversary of the conclusion of the ReCAAP. Japan will actively support the activities of the Information Sharing Center, for example by sending successive Executive Directors.

Disasters relief is another important issue. In the cases of the disappearance of the Malaysia Airlines and Air Asia aircraft in 2014, Japan immediately dispatched vessels and aircraft of the Self-Defense Forces to conduct search and rescue activities. Based on these experiences, we stress the importance of further strengthening international cooperation in HA/DR activities in Asia. To respond to increasing sea-related challenges, countries need to work together.

Japan will make best use of multilateral and trilateral dialogues, such as Japan-India-US and Japan-Australia-US dialogues, and welcomes US active engagement in this region. Japan also spares no effort to support coastal States in Asia, by providing seamless assistance through a combination of various measures, including ODA, defense equipment cooperation and capacity building assistance. For the economic prosperity of the Indian Ocean, it is critically important to enhance connectivity from East Asia through South Asia to the Middle East and Africa region.

From this viewpoint, Prime Minister Abe announced the “Partnership for Quality Infrastructure” in May 2015 and the “Expanded Partnership for Quality Infrastructure Initiative” in May 2016.

Japan will steadily implement these initiatives in accordance with the G7 Ise-Shima Principles for Promoting Quality Infrastructure Investment, which underline;

1) economic efficiency in view of life-cycle cost;

2) safety and resilience

3) job creation and capacity building;

4) consideration for social and environmental impact, and;

5) alignment with economic and development strategies.

I would like to conclude my remarks by stressing the following:

The key to prosperity of the international community is to unlock the dynamism created by the synergy between “two continents” — Asia and Africa –, and two free and open seas ― the Pacific and the Indian Oceans. To this end, ensuring the maritime security and stability based on the rule of law, as well as further cooperation among us is essential. Japan will make every possible effort and cooperate with all the countries concerned to achieve this common goal of our future.

(This article is the gist of remarks made by Mr. Nobuo Kishi, Hon’ble State Minister for Foreign Affairs, Govt. of Japan at the Indian Ocean Conference 2016 at Singapore on 2^nd September, 2016.)

Thank you, it’s a pleasure to be here with so many of my distinguished colleagues from around the region. I have to congratulate Ram Madhav and the India Foundation, as well as RSIS and organizing partners from Bangladesh and Sri Lanka, for bringing together such a stellar group of people. In fact, looking through the list of today’s speakers and panelists, it really makes me wonder if there’s anyone left running things back in our capitals.

Today, I’ll talk about why the United States supports greater economic connectivity in the Indian Ocean region, some recent developments, and then some areas for future work.

My country has long recognized the strategic significance of the Indian Ocean. Well over one hundred years ago, Admiral Alfred Mahan – one of the most important American strategists of the nineteenth century – said that the destiny of the world will be decided on the waters of the Indian Ocean.

The question we then face is – How will we write that destiny? Will it be a story of friendly cooperation and mutual benefit, or one of adversarial competition and unnecessary conflict? A story where many millions of people are lifted out of poverty, or one where millions are condemned to suffer the consequences of our inaction? Starkly different outcomes, and we believe that only a strong, transparent, rules-based architecture can bring about the peace and prosperity that all will benefit from.

That means a system where all countries pursue their territorial claims in accordance with international law. It also means a system that engenders greater cooperation on natural disasters, maritime security, and mitigating the effects of climate change. And it means a system that enhances regional economic connectivity across the entire Indian Ocean region, and in particular South Asia, so that goods and services can move at faster speeds, in greater numbers, and at lower costs.

The statistics show just how much needs to be done: South Asia is one of the least economically integrated regions in the world, with less than six percent of its total trade and less than one percent of its investment flows occurring within the region.

Compare that to North America, where over 50 percent of total exports are sold within the region – or Europe, where the same figure has averaged more than 70 percent over the last 20 years – and you can see what is possible. Indeed, one look outside of this building’s windows shows what can be accomplished when a country decides that its future will be built on trade and commerce.

So we know what better economic connectivity can do for the countries of South Asia and the entire Indo-Pacific. And the United States also has a stake in the region’s success – not only because we seek to strengthen our business ties, whether it’s trade in consumer goods, financial services, technology, energy, or education – but also because we know that prosperity is linked to security and stability. This is the basis behind President Obama’s rebalance to Asia and the Joint Strategic Vision that the United States and India put forward last year, showing that our leaders recognize how much more can be accomplished when we work in partnership.

And, as my colleague Rear Admiral Gabrielson rightly pointed out in the last panel, the stability of the Indo-Pacific and the safety of its sea lanes are vital U.S. interests. Twenty five percent of the world’s traded goods and seaborne oil crosses the Strait of Malacca, visible from Singapore’s skyscrapers. That means that one-quarter of the global economy is dependent on the security of a stretch of ocean which, at its narrowest, is only one-and-a-half miles wide.

I think that covers the “why”, but we’re really here to talk about the “how”. Greater connectivity requires infrastructure, and infrastructure requires investment: $2.5 trillion over the next ten years in South Asia alone, according to the World Bank. Roughly speaking, one-third for transport, another third to electricity, and the last third to critical services like water, sanitation, and telecommunications.

It’s a tall order, but with smart investments from the right stakeholders, it can be fulfilled. Asian powers like Japan, India, and China are stepping up, and international financial institutions like the World Bank and the Asian Development Bank have been working on this challenge for decades. Public-private partnerships are also increasingly filling in the gaps.

But greater economic connectivity will take more than just the new hardware of roads, rails, and ports. It will also require better infrastructure “software” – meaning improved regulatory frameworks, more capable institutions, and better-networked businesses and people.

That’s where we think the United States government can add value, and that’s where we’ve focused our efforts. We see ourselves as a convener and a partner. We can help identify projects that have multiplier effects, bring all stakeholders to the table, support and catalyze the early stages of development, and provide the necessary technical support to make sure it gets done right.

Through an initiative we call the Indo-Pacific Economic Corridor, or IPEC, we’re helping create new energy linkages, open up trade and transport corridors, streamline customs procedures and border crossings, and connect entrepreneurs and businesses throughout South Asia and beyond.

On energy alone, there is tremendous potential for expanded trade within South Asia. One example is the 500 megawatt energy link between India and Bangladesh; the U.S. conducted the initial feasibility study that showed the viability of the line, and it’s now being expanded to 1000 megawatts. It’s a true proof-of-concept for what can be accomplished when a multi-stakeholder project is pursued with transparency, quality, and good-faith cooperation.

While relatively modest, IPEC projects like these are emblematic of the vision we are working to build – a vision of a connected Indo-Pacific, of a region that is at the epicenter of global trade and commerce, a region that has lifted hundreds of millions of people out of poverty and drives economic growth in Asia, Africa, and the Americas.

And we see the region embracing this vision.

Through its Act East policy, India is improving relations with its neighbors and overcoming long-standing disagreements.

Bangladesh has been a willing partner, and together with India has peacefully resolved age-old land and maritime border disputes, which will allow for greater investment and the freer, faster, and cheaper movement of goods, services, and people.

Burma’s democratic transition has created new opportunities for investment, and it is working with Bangladesh and India to open up trade corridors into Southeast Asia. Just a week ago, India and Burma signed agreements to complete the Kaladan Multi-Modal Transit Transport project and the trilateral highway to Thailand, which will have a profound impact on the movement of goods and services between South and Southeast Asia.

Sri Lanka has the potential to become a global transit and commercial hub: ninety percent of the oil destined for China and Japan, and seventy percent of all Indian Ocean maritime traffic, pass within 12 miles of Sri Lanka’s southern coastline.

Colombo is already among the top 15 ports in the world for trans-shipment traffic, and top 30 for total container volume. It is now seeking a partner from the Indian subcontinent to finish a mega-terminal that will accommodate the world’s largest container vessels.

And better regional economic connectivity also begets closer cooperation on other cross-cutting issues like maritime security, natural disasters, trafficking and piracy, and environmental protection. These are problems that affect all of our countries, and we can most effectively address them when we recognize our common interests and work together toward common goals.

The United States also believes that harnessing the economic benefits of the ocean – including fisheries, tourism, energy, and transportation –requires responsible investments in sustainability and environmental protection. To put it simply, if we want these resources to last, we have to take care of them. And that requires cooperation, because we all share the same ocean.

In a couple weeks, Secretary Kerry will host the Our Ocean conference in Washington, with a focus on marine protected areas, sustainable fisheries, marine pollution, and climate-related impacts on the ocean. The future of the blue economy depends on how we address these issues together, and inaction is no longer an option. President Obama took the lead last week when he created the world’s largest ecologically protected area in the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands, declaring that “it is in the public interest to preserve the marine environment” – and we know that it is in the global interest too.

We also share an interest in seeing organizations like the Indian Ocean Rim Association strengthened, to help build consensus on pressing regional challenges. IORA presents an opportunity for the Indian Ocean region to craft its own identity – to set its own priorities, build its own connections, set its own peaceful and transparent norms, and strengthen its own common voice – just as other regional organizations have done before.

To conclude, we’ll continue to strengthen and expand our work to promote regional connectivity in the Indo-Pacific, and we believe that it can create fair, broad, and sustainable growth, underpinning the region’s prosperity, security and stability. The United States has an unwavering commitment to this region’s success because, in the words of President Obama, “in an interconnected world, we all rise and fall together.”

(This article is the gist of remarks made by Nisha Desai Biswal, Assistant Secretary, Bureau of South and Central Asian Affairs, USA at the Indian Ocean Conference 2016 at Singapore on 2^nd September, 2016.)

Ocean and sea are growing in importance in a globalized economy
• They provide the trading route and enhance globalized economy’s activities; multi-purposes for communications among nations and continents.
• Fishing activities expanding, disputes over territorial waters and exclusive economic zones add to ever complexity of nations’ quarrels.
• Natural resources — water beds contain rich reserves of oil, ing, and other minerals resources.
• Old rivalries, territorial disputes, counter terrorism, humanitarian assistance as well as disaster relief, and maritime energy security all require creation of regionalcooperation mechanism; and multilateral forum such as this one is an important step in the right direction.
• The above factors, hence, attract multinational interests in attempts to formulate globalized or regional cooperation framworks to ensure orderly and fair access among all interested parties

Indian Ocean has always been important in East-West trading system; it becomes more so in recent decades as world-wide interactions and communications have grossly multiplied:
• Estimated 80% of the world’s oil transactions sail through the Indian Ocean, the Malacca Strait and the South China Sea to reach Northeast Asia, China proper and the west coast of Canada and the United States. Total volumes of annual trade passage, including oil amounts to about $5.3 trillions at present.
• As India and perhaps other South Asia countries adopt a “Look East” policy, efforts to protect the sea lanes become much more important to them.
• Indian Navy has begun to operate in the Western Pacific especially in cooperation with the military exercises of the U.S. and Japan. Secure safe passage through the South China Sea becomes a necessity for security reason.
• In short, the Indian Ocean in junction with the rising status of India are geostrategically important for global trade, maritime safety, and many aspects of regional security consideration.

Moreover, Asia — including Northeast Asia, Southeast Asia and South Asia — has emerged as perhaps the most vital economic region in global economy; put together, their aggregate GDP now surpasses other global regions. The combined GDP of the ASEAN and India stands at US$4.5 trillions. Their aggregate annual trade figures amount to US$3 trillion. And the future prospects for further growth and favorable demographic trend look very promising for this region to sustain its importance in trade and security, among others.

These factors motivate Taiwan’s new government as well as the private business sectors to make plans for what is knownas the “Southbound” initiatives following the general election early this year.

Foreign trade and fishing industries are crucial aspects of Taiwan economy. Its business sectors have already actively invested in and traded with the ASEAN countries for almost half-a-century. Total investments in the ASEAN countries in the last two decades are estimated in excess of US$45 billion.

In recent years, more companies begin to target the Indian Ocean rim countries for investment and trade, especially India.

The recently elected Democratic Progressive Party administration under President Dr. Tsai Ing-wen leadership maps out a comprehensive plan to deepen and broaden economic connectivity with ASEAN, South Asia, Australia, and N.Z.

The plan charts out an overall strategy of fostering linkages with 18 countries in this region. The new initiatives emphasize Southbound links in such sectors as textiles, shoes, medical care, education, internet technology, ICT supply chains, petrochemical, financial services, green agriculture and exchanges of human resources, for instances.

In conclusion, both official and private sectors have recently revitalized their great interests in all aspects of dialogue and broad economic relationship in regard to subject matters being addressed to in this Indian Ocean Conference.

(This article is the gist of the remarks made by Dr Hung Mao Tien, Chairman of the Board, Institute for National Policy Research, Taiwan at the Indian Ocean Conference at Singapore on 2nd September, 2016.)

In the wake of India’s newly re-imagined policy towards the neighbouring Country, conducting precision strikes across the Line of Control (LoC), reviewing the ‘Most Favoured Nation’ status tag, and organising high-level meets to discuss withdrawal from the Indus Waters Treaty, China has taken a step by blocking tributary of the Yarlung Zangbo River (a tributary of Brahmaputra) to facilitate work on of its expensive hydropower projects in Tibet on September 30, 2016. The 4.95-billion-yuan project ($740 million) can store up to 295 million cubic meters of water.

China’s dam-building agenda has created apprehension within India about the risk of flash floods and landslides affecting millions downstream. In 2013, India complained to China about its expensive hydropower projects announced in the Brahmaputra region citing ‘irreparable damage’ to the Indian basin and also the impact it would have on the physical land and surrounding regions. China only assured that these projects would not have a negative impact. South Asia is one of the regions to be adversely affected by China’s proposed diversion of waters from the Tibetan plateau which is the ‘Principal Asian watershed and source of ten major rivers.[1] Tibet water travel to almost eleven countries and are said to bring fresh water to over 85% of Asian population, approximately 50% of world’s population.[2] South Asia is mainly concerned with Brahmaputra, Indus, Sutlej, Arun andKarnali whose water is life line for more than one billion people living downstream.

Climate change, depleting aquifers, rapid population growth and urbanisation are placing pressure on scarce water resources within the two countries of China and India. China’s increasing water scarcity is a complex web of pollution, energy, urbanisation and climate change. With high rates of population growth and urban development, China has an insatiable demand for energy, food and water. Water scarcity threatens the supply of all three of these needs. The Chinese Government must meet the water demands of its rapidly increasing urban population and its industrial sector without compromising agricultural production and food security. Therefore, it is presently toying with massive inter-basin and inter-river water transfer projects.

[1] Claude Arpi, Born in Sin: The Panchsheel Agreement : the Sacrifice of Tibet, Mittal Publication, New Delhi, (1st edn., 2004) at 173.
[1] Bharat Verma, Threat From China, Lancer Publishers & Distributors, New Delhi, (2013).

For South Asia and more particularly for India, the enormity of the scheme and its closeness to the Indian border cannot be ignored. If it is accomplished, it will have ominous consequences for millions of people downstream.[1] These also raise the larger question about the cumulative impact of massive dam-building projects across the entire Himalayan region and the consequences of such intensive interventions in a region that is ecologically fragile. The dangers of water accumulation behind dams could also induce devastating artificial earthquakes. The creation of a huge artificial lake on the Tibetan plateau inundating vast areas of virgin forest within the canyon and beyond, home to  rare species of flora and fauna within the canyon which is at stake.

In the geo-dynamically active Himalayas, earthquakes are an ever-present danger with a recorded history going back to the 13th century. A sobering reminder is the devastating earthquake of 1950 in Assam in which the Brahmaputra Valley suffered the most damage.[2] A vast and densely populated region of North-east India that depends on water from Brahmaputra and its tributaries  feels  agitated over China’s ambitious efforts to redraw its water map. China’s reported plan to divert the Brahmaputra from its upper reaches is  seen as a direct affront to India and a violation of international norms of sharing river waters. Once the construction of dam is complete, the control on the water of Brahmaputra would be in the hands of China. As the Brahmaputra is the lifeline of North East India, the life and environment in the region  would be adversely affected by this development.

Besides India which in talks with the Chinese leadership raised the construction of a dam on the river Brahmaputra many times, Thailand, Laos, Vietnam and Cambodia had expressed similar concerns over eight dams being built on the Mekong River. China’s accelerating programme of damming every major river flowing from the Tibetan plateau  would trigger environmental

The Leader of Opposition in the Rajya Sabha, Mr. Jaswant Singh, speaking on the Motion of Thanks to the President’s Address, March 5, 2008 said, “Sir, it is about the External Affairs Minister again. It is a very intriguing thing. I should not really be raising it until the discussion takes place on his statement. There is just one rather concise but intriguing sentence that the honorable Prime Minister made during his visit to the People’s Republic of China. This is exactly what it says, “PM also took up the issue of trans-border rivers.” I would like to caution you, Sir, that the question of Brahmaputra and the great bend of the Brahmaputra before it debouches into Assam in the North East is a serious situation. “Sir, I have obtained for myself maps from the Space Research Organization and they show that this gorge of the Yarlung Tsangpo and thereafter the Namca Barwa Mountain, has drop of 2,000 meters. It is a narrow gorge, and 2,000 metres in a distance of 15 km, which gives an enormous resource intimate to the people of China. I know there are plans to build a dam there. I would like to know what the response of the People’s Republic of China is about that.”

Nimmi Kurian, Downstream concerns on the Brahmaputra, The Hindu (November 3, 2015), available at http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/columns/downstream-concerns-on-the-brahmaputra/article7834154.ece (last visited on October 13, 2016).

imbalance, natural disasters, degrade fragile ecologies, and divert vital water supplies. China’s vast thirst for power and water, its control over the sources of the rivers and its ever-growing political clout make it a singular target of criticism and suspicion. Although China has said  that it was constructing the dam to produce power, there are fears about hidden agendas  associated with it. China has assured India that nothing would be done that would affect India’s interest. India’s official narrative has largely tended to downplay many of these concerns with official pronouncements that India “trusts China”

In 2013, Beijing and New Delhi had signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU), recognising that trans-boundary rivers are an important asset  for the development agendas of all riparian countries. Both countries agreed to strengthen communication and strategic trust. China had agreed to provide more hydrological information to India at the start of the flood season. The international community’s attention needs to be attracted and India needs a totally different tactic to tackle the situation and maintain  goodwill. Only a combination of bilateral co-operation and strong leadership with demand- and supply-side management can influence the future and reduce the potential for a Sino-Indian water conflict.

~ The author is a Research Assistant in Law at the Indian Institute of Legal Studies, Siliguri, West Bengal.

All India, Press Trust of India, India to take up with China blocking of Brahmaputra River,  NDTV, (October 7, 2016), available at http://www.ndtv.com/india-news/india-to-take-up-with-china-blocking-of-brahmaputra-tributary-1471221 (last visited on October 12, 2016).

The World Health Organization (WHO) has declared Sri Lanka to be Malaria-free by certifying that the life-threatening disease which long affected the island nation has been completely eliminated. The announcement was made at the 69^th session of WHO Regional Committee for South East Asia held in Colombo this month (September2016). ‘Sri Lanka’s achievement is truly remarkable. In the mid-20th century it was among the most malaria-affected countries, but now it is malaria-free’, noted WHO Regional Director, Dr. Poonam Khetrapal Singh.

Sri Lanka and Malaria

“Malaria, the bane of the Island and protean in its forms, claimed about the usual number of victims, especially in less advanced provinces. The mortality large as it is, is not the only evil. Every death represents many attacks, meaning an incalculable amount of suffering and racial deterioration and sapping of life and vigour of the people” – Census of Ceylon, 1901

Malaria had been thesubject of attention from early colonial times and has found references in the literature as ‘agues and fevers’ until thetwentieth century when it came to be popularly called as Malaria. It came to recognition as a killer disease in 1934-35 when it affected many parts of the country and caused an estimated death toll of around 1,00,000 people within the space of 8 months. That translates to 1.5% of total population of Sri Lanka i.e., 5.5 million during that time. Sri Lanka’s fight against malaria completed 100 years in 2011. It launched Anti-Malaria Campaign (AMC) in 1911 and since then, it has been responsible for the control of the disease in the country. Currently, it is a specialised campaign run by Ministry of Health, Sri Lanka. The main objectives of this programme were to eliminate indigenous P. falciparum malaria transmission by the end 2012 and indigenous P. vivax malaria transmission by 2014; to maintain zero mortality from malaria and to prevent reintroduction of malaria into the country. As a result, since October 2012 the indigenous cases were down to zero. But the road to malaria elimination was tough and unique and therefore can serve as amodelfor other nations who are still grappling with the disease including India.

After three decades of thefight against malaria since 1934 epidemic, the number of cases were down to just 17 in 1963 with zero mortality. But Sri Lanka failed to sustain control measures due to lack of funds or funds being directed to other programmes which led to resurgence of malaria epidemic in various parts of the country. The number of malaria cases recorded in 1967 and 1968 was 3,466 and 4, 40,644 respectively.

It is only after theresurgence of malaria in the 1960s and 1970s that Sri Lanka realised the complexities in controlling the disease and adjusted its strategies tobecome highly effective. It started focusing on targeting parasite along with conventional methods of DDT application for killing the mosquito. Mobile malaria clinics were also set up in order to diagnose people in the early stages to prevent further transmission. Effective surveillance, implementing epidemic preparedness and response strategies were part of the campaign that brought down cases to less than 1000 by the year 2006. It required government’s will to control the epidemic outbreaks even during the decades’ long conflict during the 1990s and 2000s.

India and Malaria

In India too, malaria is a serious health problem in various parts of the country. The malaria-affected regions are evenly distributed across India and about 95% population resides in malaria endemic areas.Further, 80% of malaria are reported from areas where only 20% of thepopulationresides, namely tribal, hilly, difficult and inaccessible areas. Despite all challenges, India has made progress in tackling malaria by reducing the number of cases from 2 million in 2000 to 882,000 in 2013. India aims to eliminate malaria completely by 2030 through National Framework for Malaria Elimination (NFME) in India 2016-2030 which was developed after extensive consultations with officials from the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare’s National Vector Borne Disease Control Programme(NVBDCP), experts from the Indian Council of Medical Research, WHO and representatives from civil society institutions.This is in line with WHO’s recently developed Global Technical Strategy for Malaria 2016-2030which advocates global acceleration of malaria elimination efforts by 2030. On similar lines, the Asia Pacific Leaders Malaria Alliance (APLMA), of which India is a member, has set a target for malaria elimination in all countries of Asia Pacific by 2030. The Prime Minister of India, Shri Narendra Modi was among the 18 leaders, who endorsed the APLMA Malaria Elimination Roadmap at the ASEAN summit held in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia in November 2015.

Image Source: http://nvbdcp.gov.in/malaria3.html

These statistics show how India’s performance has improved in controlling malaria, especially in the last decade. In the last five years, malaria deaths were reduced to less than 1000,though the scenario is far from elimination. The specific strategies that are adopted under the new framework include considering district as a unit of planning and implementation, focussing on high transmission areas and adopting aspecial strategy for elimination of P.vivax cases.

What India can learn from its neighbour?

India contributes to 70% of the total malaria cases in the South East Asia region of which Sri Lanka now contributes zero. Therefore, the success story of Sri Lanka is worth having a look. One of the major challenges in malaria control according to Health Ministry is insecticide resistance. The extensive usage of insecticides, particularly DDT, under the Vector control programme controlled malaria to a great extent but helped vectors develop resistance. In this regard, Sri Lanka adopted an unorthodox strategy to hunt down on parasites to the last extent possible. The Sri Lanka story tells us that malaria elimination was absolutely a prioritised issue backed up with strong political will. During the times of ethnic conflict, government convinced the LTTE to co-operate with malaria control measures so that last mile delivery of healthcarewas ensured. India too finally gained political commitment after the PM endorsed APLMA roadmap. Mobile malaria clinics were one of the success symbols of Sri Lanka’s anti-malaria campaign. Considering India’s vast territory, it is often difficult to implement mobile measures during population movement between states and union territories. However, these must be implementedin high transmission areas or in least accessible areas.

Malaria is not just a serious health issue, it adversely affects socio-economic conditions of the communities. Hence, India should really accelerate its measures to eliminate the disease as soon as possible. India should prioritise the issue and spend aconsiderable proportion of the country’s overall expenditure on health. India too hopefully learns from its neighbour invoking health diplomacy and get rid of this deadly disease in the coming years.

The author is a Young India Fellow (2016-17) from Ashoka University and an Intern at India Foundation. The views expressed are his own.

References

1. National Framework For Malaria Elimination In India (2016-2030) http://www.nvbdcp.gov.in/Doc/National-framework-for-malaria-elimination-in-India-2016%E2%80%932030.pdf
2. National Vector Borne Disease Control Programme (NVBDCP)http://nvbdcp.gov.in/malaria3.html
3. http://www.malariacampaign.gov.lk/precentation/MalariaInSriLanka.aspx
4. http://www.searo.who.int/mediacentre/releases/2016/1631/en/
5. Abeyasinghe et al., Malaria Control and Elimination in Sri Lanka: Documenting Progress and Success Factors in a Conflict Setting
6. India drives down malaria rates, sets sights on eliminationhttp://www.who.int/features/2015/india-programme-end-malaria/en/
7. http://www.who.int/malaria/publications/country-profiles/profile_ind_en.pdf?ua=1
8. http://www.who.int/malaria/publications/country-profiles/profile_lka_en.pdf?ua=1

A year back, in September 2015, Nepal’s new Constitution was welcomed with hope and jubilation. As September turned into October, this jubilation and hope soon turned into despair. Now one year since, Nepal has witnessed a series of protests, a border blockade and seen two different prime ministers. As we enter October 2016, what remains of the hope and jubilation that initially greeted the Constitution? Following the lows of early 2016, where is Nepal on its journey to establish a national consensus? Are India-Nepal relations on the road to recovery? In tackling these questions, the commentary takes a look at the recent developments and considers possible future course of events.

The road towards drawing up the new Constitution lasted eight years. When it was finally implemented on 20 September 2015, the reception was not on expected lines. While a section of the Nepali population along with China was thrilled, the Madhesis in the Terai and the Indian Government were not that welcoming. Coming just on the heels of the April 2015 earthquake, the Madhesi lead protests and border blockade was the last thing Nepal needed, at a time when focus on implementing the Constitution and providing earthquake relief should have been a primary goal. Ties with its long-standing partner India were also a casualty of the ten-month long period of turmoil.

As we mark one year since the adoption of the new Constitution, Nepal is on the slow but steady road to recovery. When the Madhesi agitation was initially called off in February, there ensued an atmosphere of positivity. This period saw some progress including three Constitutional amendments; key issues relating to citizenship and division of provinces were not settled though. The protests lead by Madhesis and Janajatis which rocked Kathmandu in May 2016, appeared to be a sign that agitating groups had joined hands to pressurise the government.

The protests in Kathmandu never materialised and failed to have an impact like the border blockade. This second round of protests failed due to the choice of location. The Madhesis had hoped that joining with the Janajatis and taking the agitation to the capital city might have a greater impact. However, unlike the previous protests and border blockade, this protest did not impact the flow of basic supplies. The protesters as a result had a smaller bargaining power.

More positive signs about a national consensus have emerged after Pushpa Kamal Dalal (Prachanda) took over as the Prime Minister. Firstly Prachanda’s government has the support of the Madhesi parties in the national parliament. He became the Prime Minister based on his promise to come up to a national compromise on the Constitution. As a result Prachanda is obliged to work towards a national consensus that is acceptable to all.

Two months into his tenure, all indications point towards a constructive dialogue to iron out differences. The government has already taken steps to appoint a commission, which will probe into the atrocities committed by the police during the protests. A proper compensation package is also being worked out for the families of those killed and the injured during the protests. While these measures would not resolve the crisis, they are small but important steps in addressing the trust deficit. Giving paramount importance to dialogue with the Madhesis, Prachanda’s decided to skip the UNGeneral Assemblymeeting, in order to focus on discussions regarding the Constitution.

While these are highly positive signs, it is important to exercise cautious optimism. The dialogue process has been painfully slow. Considering the crucial phase that Nepal is going through, a quicker consensus would help in strengthening confidence in the new system. Importantly the current dialogue is only an informal dialogue, the formal talks have to still begin. Finally, there is the pressing question if the Constitutional amendments can actually be passed. Any Constitutional amendment requires two-thirds support in the parliament. Prachanda’s party is the third largest party in the house. One cannot help but question if the government can actually garner the support to pass the amendments.

Given Nepal’s location and its diplomatic history, the constitutional crisis had significant international ramifications. The most crucial one was its impact on India-Nepal relations. Since India is a very close ally and an indispensible trade partner, good relations with India is an important factor in Nepal’s experiment with democracy becoming a success. The last one-year has been a torrid time for India-Nepal relations. What started off with India’s cold response to the Constitution, snowballed into India being accused of starting an unofficial border blockade. The rocky times in the relations was largely due to India’s mishandling of the situation and former Prime Minister K.P. Oli’s hostile stand vis-à-vis India.

Under Prachanda significant progress has been made to mend fences. His recent state visit to India proved to be very successful with India agreeing to step up assistance. Indications have also emerged that India is more open to the Constitution and throwing its weight behind the dialogue. Like the process of building a national consensus, mending India-Nepal relations is also going to be long drawn process. The damage done over the last one year cannot be rectified in the span of a few months.

The last one-year has been a turbulent one for Nepal. It has witnessed a border blockade, seen two Prime Ministers in office and witnessed ties with a crucial neighbor nosedive. In the two months since Prachanda has taken office, Nepal seems to be flying in calmer skies. An informal dialogue has already commenced, in the hope of coming up to a consensus. This period has also witnessed a marked improvement in India-Nepal ties. At this point in time, it would be prudent to exercise a cautious optimism. Over the next few months, once more progress is made in the dialogue, a lot of the jubilation and hope that one saw in September 2015, would begin to re-emerge.

The author is a academic associate at Indian Institute of Management, Ahmedabad. The views represented are his own and does not represent the views of the organization he represents.

Now that the Uniform Civil Code (UCC) debate is once more upon us it is time that  those of us committed to the idea of an UCC think about what should be our strategy to achieve that objective.

It is important to note right at the beginning that the UCC was inserted as a Directive Principle of State Policy (Article 44) at the time of the formation of the Constitution. It was then perceived to be a strongly liberal and modernist provision in the Constitution. Till the 1970s the provisions regarding UCC was right on top of the agenda of the leftists and liberals. Even during the 1980s the UCC was the demand of the leftists and liberals who perceived it to be a panacea for all ills arising out of traditional backwardness and religiosity.

The entire fiasco of the Muslim Women’s (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986 and the Shah Bano judgement arose out of the perception of the liberal intelligentsia that the key to the modernisation of Indian society was the modernisation of personal laws. The liberal intelligentsia in the sequence of incidents came up against the whirlwind of Islamic fundamentalism which in the 1980’s was  emerging as a key opponent to modernism. That specific incident and the craven surrender of a supposedly liberal and modernist government to the threat of violence by Islamic fundamentalists resounded all over the world. In global politics that surrender was followed by the issuance of a fatwa against Salman Rushdie and resurgence of Islamic fundamentalism as an ideology and a method of governance.

In the face of this resurgence it was surprising that instead of confronting this completely illiberal resistance to liberalism and modernisation, the liberals in fact switched over to supporting the Islamic fundamentalist position in relation to the UCC. In fact so complete was the switchover that the liberals,  during this high noon of Islamic fundamentalism, actually started equating the UCC with manifestation of religious majoritarianism in India .This resulted in a strange situation where only the nationalists were left with supporting the UCC. In fact  this issue had become so radioactive that when the NDA government was formed, it was widely perceived to have put the issue of implementation of the UCC on the backburner. Large parts of the liberal intelligentsia thought that  this was a positive development.

It seems that the country is going through another discussion in relation to the UCC. This discussion would mean that besides the nationalists there would be different voices which would have a  role in deciding the trajectory of the UCC debate. The rest of the present article would consist of broadly discussing  the  positions of different groups of people who  could be expected to be a part of this  debate.

The first would be the liberals. As mentioned before, the liberals have continuously prevaricated about their actual standing in relation to the UCC. While in the first 40 years of independence, UCC was a major objective in their manifesto to make India a modern state, in the subsequent 27 years they have treated the UCC as an  exercise in majoritrianism. It seems that there is again a turn in the liberal position where there seems to be an increasing section which now realises that the first proposition was possibly the correct position considering the way Islamic fundamentalism subsequently evolved. It can be expected that sections of the liberals would be more forthcoming and helpful in the formation of the UCC now than they were at any time in the last 30 years.

The second would be the feminists. The feminists are also in a dilemma and along with the liberals  have also gone through the long arc of first backing and then dissociating themselves from the UCC. At  first  the UCC was seen as an emancipatory legislation. Subsequently, it was perceived to be a majoritarian attempt to dominate the feminist discourse. The argument  put forward was that societies and especially minority communities had to reform from within and women’s rights had to be contextualised in terms of the culture of the minority group. This resulted in the anomalous position whereby feminist groups would promote radical gender equality amongst the majority community while supporting open discrimination as long as the same was practised by the religious minority. However it seems also that this time some of the feminist groups may be willing to come out and support a UCC or a legislation which would  have a similar objective.

The third group would be Muslim women’s groups who have been agitating for equality within Muslim law. Needless to say  how far this group would be willing to support a UCC is something which needs to be tested. This is  especially relevant considering that the attempt of the traditionalists would be to paint the UCC as a majoritarian project.

The fourth group would be the Muslim traditionalists who may be divided into two groups; the first completely rejecting any intervention in the personal law of Muslims and the second, who would like to carve out an exception for Muslim law but also, would   accept incorporation of progressive elements within the law. Historically the latter group has been more powerful politically and the former more powerful socially within the Muslim community.

There would also be various different groups from within various religious minorities and even from within the religious Hindu majority who would be opposed to a UCC on the ground that the same would possibly destroy the sanctity of personal law as well as the distinctiveness of various groups and their ancient practises . The arguments would possibly be made on the grounds of plurality. It is surmised that the whole overwhelming objection would come from traditional elements within such groups who would perceive the UCC as a threat to their control of the lives of the members of their groups. Needless to say that during the last attempt to legislate a Hindu code there was great resistance from the Hindu community itself.

The broad question Constitutional question at the centre of the debate would be as to whether equality is an absolute value or as the Supreme Court has said numerously, existence of equality can only be amongst equals, and that all communities are different.

Broadly there seems to be two possible methods to deal with the issue of incorporating greater egalitarianism within various personal laws. The first is the UCC and the second is a judicial process.

If we adopt the first, then it is very important that the nationalists would need to create a broad coalition to bring on-board various groups, described above, in different compositions. This would also mean taking on board the concerns of the  different groups. If the UCC is to succeed, under no circumstances can the UCC  have the flavour of being partial to any religious group. This would mean that the process of evolution of the UCC would ensure a constant conflict between those who perceive the society as an aspirational, uniform entity and those who perceive  society to be an association of various groups. Under the circumstances any concession to any group would result in other groups perceiving that they were being discriminated against. More than consensus on the idea of UCC which itself is debatable, there would be even greater conflict on what would be the actual provisions of the UCC. Even if all groups were to actually agree to an UCC, it would be very difficult to get them to agree to a draft bill acceptable to all.

It is therefore suggested that a better way may be to approach personal laws through the prism of  civil liberties legislation in the area of personal law. The strategy of the said Bill would be to do away with any inequality to any individual in any  of the different personal law. It would be a statute which would strictly be based on Constitutional values. This would also effectively  mean that the law would ensure that specific exceptions in personal law which create inequalities are either done away with or are equalised. For example in a divorce all grounds which are available to a Hindu male should be available to a Hindu female, and similarly the same would be applicable to divorce and polygamy in Muslim law and tribal customs. This would ensure that specific groups  would not be able to make an argument that the law is skewed towards the agenda of any of the  groups while bringing personal laws in consonance with the Constitution.

The other option is to bring in this radical equality through judicial interpretation where the Courts can make personal laws subject to fundamental rights, which as of now, they are not. The Courts can also apply  fundamental rights to all personal laws, especially the Right to Equality. The Right to Equality is fundamental to our Constitution and there can be very little objection in granting equal status to all persons within specific groups. No one can justify heavenly ordained discrimination because it would  go against the principles on which the State is governed, namely  the Constitution of India. If there is one agreement amongst all the above groups it is about the primacy of the Constitution. However this is a strategy which requires strong judicial will and whether the judiciary  would be able or willing to take such a strong stand after the fiasco of Shah Bano remains to be seen.

The present government, committed to the new aspirational Indian, is obligated to ensure that no person is discriminated against. Equality before law of every person in society regardless of his/her individual background is the key to create a modern state and economy. Multiplicity of laws and legal regimes in relation to property holding, individual relationships and property rights are fetters on social and economic progress.  Social, political, religious and personal discrimination is anathema to the ethos of the egalitarian and emancipatory vision of the Constitution and on that ground alone,discriminatory personal laws have no place in the legal regime. However India having a storied history and an ancient civilisation, personal laws are tied with prickly sensitivities. This is specially so because they have served as the basis of the old colonial policy of ‘divide and rule’ and have been deeply politicised .Therefore, the initiation of the debate  on UCC is  to be greatly appreciated because it is the first step towards confronting an issue which is clearly holding back Indian society from growing into an egalitarian and modern one.

The author is an advocate at Supreme Court of India. The views expressed are his own.

The Indus Water Treaty (IWT) is under the scanner, unlike several times earlier, due to the deteriorating  political and diplomatic ties between India and Pakistan—exemplified by the recent Uri attack in September. The only difference now is the strong stand of the present government in terms of security and strategy that has opened new avenues for talks on the reconsideration of this six-decade long treaty . The impetus is further emphasised by the deferring of the meeting of the Permanent Indus Commission There was  speculation of even suspension of the treaty, with the Ministry of External Affairs spokesperson, Vikas Swarup cryptically hinting, “For any such treaty to work, it is important there must be mutual trust and cooperation. It can’t be a one-sided affair.”

Acknowledging the gravity of any reconsideration of the treaty, numerous opinions and debates have been thrown up which  suggests various improvisations and additions which could be incorporated in the Treaty. Abrogation of the treaty is another radical idea floated, extrapolating the “offensive defence” strategy. Through the article, we explore some significant and diverse approaches to the reconsideration of the treaty, and also discuss  possible ramifications.

Historical Background

IWT, signed on September 1960, is a “treaty between the government of India and the government of Pakistan concerning the most complete and satisfactory utilisation of the waters of the Indus system of rivers.” ^[1] It is considered as one of the most successful stories of water diplomacy, as even amidst military stand-offs and the wars of 1965, 1971 and 1999—when the atmosphere of enmity and distrust had reached the peak—both the countries abided by the bilateral commitments. The World Bank played a crucial role by acting as a broker and a mediator during the decade long negotiations leading to the signing of the Treaty.

The water-sharing treaty called for the division of the rivers into two categories, the ‘eastern rivers’ and ‘western rivers’, with the former comprising of the  Beas, Ravi and Sutlej rivers allocated to India and the latter comprising  Indus, Chenab and Jhelum rivers allocated to Pakistan. The treaty imposed certain restrictions on India which include severe limitations with regards to the building of ‘storages’ on the western rivers, and the extension of irrigational development in India. It also institutionalised a Permanent Indus Commission (PIC) to ensure the implementation of the provisions of the treaty, exchange and evaluation of data on water usage, works impinging on the water flows, drainage, storage, etc. of the Indus system and deliberate on issues which may arise incidental to the treaty’s functioning. ^[3] Further various provisions for dispute resolution are stated, specifically the appointment of  a Neutral Expert (NE) if ‘difference’ of matter occurs between the governments of the two countries.

Dissatisfaction among Stakeholders

The treaty specifies the sharing of the waters of the western rivers of Indus according to the 80% – 20% rule, wherein 80% goes to Pakistan and 20% to India. This has been an issue of contention, where both the countries have expressed dissatisfaction. India says 20% is a meagre amount quantitatively, while Pakistan uses a historical argument that territories which fell into India after Partition had always used less than 10% of the waters and thus, the treaty is generous to India.^[2]  Further, ’ndia’s dissatisfaction arises from the stalling of its projects on the western rivers by Pakistan, due to the ambiguous meanings of words used in the document such as ‘storage’ and ‘run of river’—both of which point to the circular argument of India not being allowed to build storages on the western rivers, and since any run of the river project would have some unavoidable storage, it creates vicissitudes.

Moreover, the document is highly technical in terms of the language used and the connotations attached with it, when juxtaposed with other treaties such as India’s treaty with Nepal on Mahakali River and India’s treaty with Bangladesh on Ganges River. The technicalities of the document lead to the multiple interpretations by the engineers, which are then translated into weapons in the political arena. Thus, a simplified version with specific and unambiguous content should be crafted.

Another important stakeholder in this treaty is the state of Jammu & Kashmir, whose needs are not sufficiently catered to. Not enough has been done in terms of providing irrigation facilities, hydroelectric power and navigation to the state through development of infrastructural projects.

Western Rivers’ Utilisation

According to the treaty, India is restricted to use the western rivers only for the purposes of “domestic”, “non-consumptive use” and build storages of capacity of 3.6 million acre feet(MAF), but till date India has not build any such storage. India is allowed to irrigate up to 9.1 lakh acres of land using water from the western rivers, with an additional 4.3 lakh acres allowed if India shares more water with Pakistan. But currently, India uses these rivers to irrigate only 8 lakh acres of land. Furthermore, analysts have estimated that within the treaty specification, the western rivers can yield to India 18,600 MW of hydropower.  India is presently generating only 3,034 MW from these rivers, with another projects to generate another 8,372 MW   in the pipeline. ^[4] It could be well argued that India should maximise its use of the western rivers through construction of hydel projects,  expediting the construction of dams such as Tulbul River Project, Pakal-Dol, Sawalkot and Bursar. Pakistan might raise objections as earlier seen during the development of projects such as Kishanganga and Baglihar, but a review of the treaty on these lines could definitely be considered, besides the alternative of implementing them under the ambits of the present treaty. Further, Ramaswamy R. Iyer, a water policy expert proposes the idea of “integrated” and “holistic” sharing of the waters of each of the rivers, but this might lead to future disputes as it would change the status quo.

Reconsideration from the lens of Climate Change

As the treaty was finalised in 1960, it lacks the climate change element. Recent studies reveal that Himalayan glaciers would continue to retreat drastically as a result of change in climatic conditions. This would have significant effect on flow patterns of Himalayan Rivers including those of the Indus system. In the short term, the water flow might increase with the formation of glacial lakes but the long term impact would be a decrease in river flow pattern. Also, the increasing frequency of flash floods and Glacial Lake Outburst Floods (GLOFs) are a cause of concern and both the large riparian countries, India and Pakistan—and also China—should cooperate on issues such as disaster management and early warning systems. ^[5] Therefore, there is an urgent need for reconsideration of the treaty from the lens of climate change.

Alternative of Abrogation

In the wake of reconsideration of the IWT, there are views expressed in favour of complete abrogation of the treaty as well. “The IWT has become an albatross around India’s neck. If India wishes to dissuade Pakistan from continuing with its proxy war, it must link the IWT’s future to Islamabad honouring its anti-terror commitment, or else the treaty collapses”, argues Brahma Chellaney, professor at the Centre for Policy Research. But, this is easier said than done. India unilaterally abrogating the treaty would not only earn a bad international image, but also would be a cause of worry for neighbours—Nepal and Bangladesh with whom India has similar water sharing agreements. Where the IWT to be abrogated, it would be difficult to rework such a treaty, despite whosoever the mediator might be this time. Since, Pakistan regularly  violates ceasefire agreement on a daily basis and dishonouring the commitment of acting against terror, it would become even more difficult to conduct  talks in future between the two countries.

Conclusion

Since the present government has extensively engaged with its neighbours under the ‘Neighbourhood First’ policy and has carved a niche foreign policy, abrogation would certainly not be a considered  option. Reconsideration through renegotiation would be a better alternative as a part of the multi-pronged response to the recurrent terror attacks which India faces from Pakistan. The proposed constitution of an inter-ministerial commission to study the intricacies of the treaty and recommend amendments would a substantive initiative undertaken by Prime Minister Narendra Modi. This decision however should be implemented diligently whilst consulting all the stakeholders, and also  to incorporate concerns raised by the Sustainable Development Goals. This would not only improvise India’s stature immensely at the global level, but also implicitly act as a handle to mend Pakistan’s behaviour, if used wisely.

The authors wrote this article with inputs from contributions from Jerin Jose. All the three are Young India Fellows (2016-2017) from Ashoka University.

Works Cited

[1]Bilateral Document on Indus Water Treaty, Ministry of External Affairs, India. 1960.

[2]Ramaswamy R. Iyer. Indus Treaty: A Different View. Economic and Political Weekly, Vol. 40, No. 29. 2005.

[3]Gautam Sen. Deactivating the Permanent Indus Waters Commission. Indian Defense Review.  2016.

[4]Charu Sudan Kasturi. Delhi dips toe but Indus treaty afloat. Telegraph India.  2016.

[5]The Indus Equation, Strategic Foresight Group. 2011.

Religion and religious practices often dictate lifestyles, choices and forms of representation. Clearly, all religious practices across history and in the geographical spread have adapted themselves to local customs and traditions and have enriched themselves by a syncretic effort to unite. Islam has been no exception in how it lends an identity to a practising Muslim. But true to the concept of adaptation and universal appeal, Islam in Egypt, Myanmar, India, Afghanistan, Malaysia and many other places has been different in practice. However, noted scholars and theorists have pointed out to the recent but proliferating phenomenon among Muslims across the world to imitate the Arabs.

It is as if a stamp of approval from the Arab world and practices of Arabic Islam is what is needed to guarantee the Muslims their sense of identity. The concept of purity in the version of Islam followed in the Arab world is what seems to threaten the plurality that any universal religion advocates. In this article, i wish to contextualise this argument within the Indian frame of reference.

Symbols code the world around us. Culture is symbolically coded. The society we inhabit is symbolically represented. In that respect, the logo of an organisation is a powerful introduction and marker of its intent and identity. It carries a strong message elaborating on its vision and mission. The symbols embedded in a logo are carefully picked to appeal to and inspire its immediate audience.

University logos are no different in their symbolic signatures and socio-political gesticulations. A university logo is expected to be a well thought out manifestation of the learning goals of the institution it represents. It might be intriguing to look at the website of the Aligarh Muslim University (AMU). The logo of AMU is a stark image of a ‘date palm tree’. The palm tree is  at the centre of the logo with a crescent moon and a book adorning the sides.

What could a palm tree signify in the logo of one of the highest citadels of Muslim learning in India? It is noteworthy that AMU has no more than a few countable ornamental palm trees in its campus. What was, then, the inspiration behind this choice? Dr SS Gupta, in his book titled Muslim Politics, while commenting on the misplaced symbolism in the AMU notes, “If one looks to the institutional song and flag of Aligarh Muslim University there is hardly anything which is rooted to Indian tradition and culture. The university Tarana (song) does not contain a single word in praise of India but it glorifies such things as the evening of Egypt and the mornings of Shiraz.”

Further research reveals that except AMU, Jamia Millia Islamia University and Annamalai University, no other university in India has date palm on its logo. In fact, even in one of the most reputed universities in Islamic studies, International Islamic University, in Malaysia, date palm tree does not figure in its logo. Neither does it find mention in the national symbols of Pakistan,  Bangladesh,  Iraq, or Iran. In fact, the only place where palm trees have been prominently used are in the institutions of the Arab world – on the national emblem of Saudi Arabia, on the currency notes of the country and, of course, on university logos in universities like the King Saud University, the King Khalid University and the Al Imam Islamic University – to  name a few.

The reason why palm trees figure as symbols or logos in the Arab world is by the nature of their ubiquity in these coastal geographies which informs the usage of the plant as a logo. Similarly, to some extent, Annamalai University’s usage of the palm trees stands justified. Therefore, it needs to be noted that the selection of palm tree as a logo has mostly to do with geography.

Saudi date palm’s entry in Indian educational psyche is an interesting topic of sociological inquiry. The usage of the Arab world logos, symptomatic of the growing cultural consciousness of the Arabic world not just in India but also world wide marks a definite shift in the worldview of Muslims. But it must be understood that this has not been a watertight and a recent shift from history in India but has been a gradual move. Muslim intelligentsia from its rootedness in Indic awareness to its looking up to the Arab world for some kind of glorified acceptance is a phenomenon that needs intellectual enquiry. It is an assertion of some lacunae in the Indic conception of Islam, a suggestion towards a cultural inferiority complex and a conscious effort to move away from something which is less Islamic to something which is more Islamic, therefore, purer and better.

Hence, it needs to be appreciated that this process of symbolism, by virtue of its nature in being representative, has   to undergo a process of discovery and analysis. While somewhere geography has played a role, at other places cultural and social tendencies have informed the selection of a logo or a symbol. It  has not been created at random by just anyone but has come from some top Muslim intellectuals or cultural stalwarts signifying something else than the apparent.

This self-identification with Arabs is not limited to logos and symbols. The growing trend of keeping a beard, wearing skull caps and longer kurtas – shorter pyjama by men and hijab by women, using Arabic-enriched local language in conversation and to mimic Arabic pronunciations and opposing Indian traditions and customs have been the result of a phenomenon that many scholars have called Arabisation. It must be noted that this process is being consciously and consistently linked with Islamic revivalism.

Capturing this trend, historian Irfan Habib has tried to theorise the phenomenon and has called this as the “Ashrafisation of Indian Muslims” (something similar to Sanskritisation in the Hindu context). The psychological fear and cultural insecurity among minority Muslims to be considered as Azlafs (lower Muslims) by Ashrafs( ‘puritan’ Arabs) has pushed the Indian Muslims  to silently disown their identity markers and adopt those of their Arab counterparts. This process of shunning of an existential reality and donning a new one is a mark of appropriation of a culturally alien world order, affected by strict regimentation – imported from the religious culture of Arabs. Gradually, it has become aspirational and desirable to sound, dress, pray and behave like an Arab.

The process of Arabisation and Islamic revivalism seeping in the symbolic traditions of the Muslim Universities in Delhi and Aligarh is informed by a memory that is manufactured and totally disconnected with reality. This is a memory that was gradually cultivated over generations after Shah Walliulah Dehlawi, a reputed Ulema in the second half of the eighteenth century AD, sowed the first seeds of Wahhabism in India. He, thereby, laid the ideological foundation for Arabisation of Muslims in India. Over time, this has dealt a suicidal blow to the local character of Islam in the Indian subcontinent. The flavour of Islam in India has been substituted by a more centralised and a more utopian vision of how pan-Islamism should look like in its tone and tenor. Globally, there has been a race to replace any ‘mutations’ with a ‘purer’ version of Islam.  This has affected various cultural practices in various sects of Muslims around the world.

It should be a matter of introspection for Indian Islamic scholars and Muslim intelligentsia to figure out if it is culturally viable to distance oneself from the Ganga-Jamuni tehjeeb like syncretism and pluralism of Islam in India.  We need to reflect on the larger implications of giving mention to a regimented idea of Islamic symbolism that finds resonance only in the history, culture and lifestyle of Saudi Arabia.  We also need to reflect on this totalitarianism to appropriate Islam within a specific geopolitical-scape mixing their articulations with local symbols in such a way that the mere entry of a local trait becomes a point of cultural conflict. How do we explain the psyche which emanates from Saudi Arabia and marches against the syncretic tradition of Indian Islam? How do we explain a systemic correction of Ramzan to Ramadan and Khuda Hafiz to Allah Hafiz?

In a typical poetic, Shakespearean way one may ask , “What’s in a name” and scuttle away from the questions around the logo. But if a logo were to represent the collective dreams and ideals of a group of people, then it is time to ensure that these symbols represent the collective aspirations of the same group.

Shoaib Daniyal, in an article in Scroll, points out – “Twisting the pronunciation of Ramzan does not serve any explicit theological purpose, but it does serve as a rather prominent cultural marker, signalling a significant change in the way Indian Muslims – specifically Urdu-speaking Muslims – look at their culture.” Is this longing for Saudi culture and aspiration for Saudi brand of Islam merely a reflection of an inferiority complex of local Muslims? Or is this an off-shoot of a larger plot in the wake of the recent geopolitical conflict and/or civilisational war? In any case, should there be no nationalistic challenge from within the community against this external co-option of our culture?

The author is a Senior Research Fellow & Project Head at India Foundation. The views expressed are his own.

Book Review:

‘Half Lion – How P.V. Narsimha Rao Transformed India’

Author: Vinay Sitapati

Publisher: Penguin Books Limited

Price: Rs.699/-

Book Review by: Jayraj Pandya

In a nation obsessed with the utopian vision presented by its founding Prime Minister and carried forward by his dynasty by being in power for all but five years till 1991, it is a highly improbable task to tinker with the status quo let alone bring about a transformation. It requires a man with the audacity of a lion, dwarfed as a mouse but equipped with the shrewdness of a fox, to achieve this improbability. The man who finally achieved this feat was none other than – Pamulaparti Venkata (PV) Narsimha Rao. At the age of 70, and with the intention to retire from active politics and become the head of a Hindu Monastery, Rao was presented with an invaluable opportunity to transform the nation. This book charts the journey of this man, from his origins in rural Andhra to the Prime Minister’s Office.

Half Lion is an  attempt by its author Vinay Sitapati to put forward an honest account of PV Narasimha Rao’s life. For the most part, the author does not get lured into a trap of making it a hagiography. With an extremely dramatic chapter to begin with (the author uses his journalistic experience to excellent use)  he describes the immediate events post the former Prime Minister’s death. Throughout the book, the author consistently weaves a narrative highlighting the apathy shown by the country’s grand old party for their first non-family Prime Minister to have completed a full term in office. (Late Lal Bahadur Shastry passed away within eighteen months of taking over as Prime Minister). With an access to Rao’s private papers, the author literally brings to life, several unknown facets of his subject’s life.

Rao’s tenure as the PM has been adequately documented and gets regularly featured in media stories but several critical aspects of his life have been mystifyingly neglected. The fact that PV, during his tenure as the Chief Minister of Andhra Pradesh was a devout socialist and tenuously pursued the cause of land reforms in his state, gives an illustration as to how markedly  he moved away from his economic thought-process when he became the Prime Minister.

Possessing an acute sense of understanding  the need of the hour was a precious gift Rao had.
When the country needed to deliver a message in 1994, despite opposition, Rao sent Atal Bihari Vajpayee as the Head of the Delegation to the United Nations Human Rights Commission meeting in Geneva which gave out  subtle but clear messages that the country was united on the Kashmor question and that he  put national interest  above everything else.

This book  brings out  the ability of Rao to adapt to circumstances. Gauging the fact that the newly elected young Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi was not too supportive of the old guard, Rao made the most of the opportunities given to him. It was during his tenure as the  Minister for Human Resources Development that the New Education Policy was framed in  1986.

Moreover,  Rao realigned his thought process in order to acclimatise to the post Cold War World where free markets shall acquire the center stage based on his understanding of its benefits acquired during his several trips to the United States. His ability to adapt to technology, that too learning complex languages including coding at his age, was a perfect example of his open-mindedness.The book magnifies the most pertinent quality of the former Prime Minister- his reticence. His ability to keep a low profile and conform  as an underwhelming achiever gave him the enviable tag of  Ajatshatru (One whose enemy is not born). Various accounts from his political life also confirm the most famous quote associated with him i.e.- “Not taking a decision is also a decision”.

However there were a few areas which deserved a more elaborate description in the book but are  missing. The limited references to his family seem a deliberate attempt to keep the nature and behaviour of the family man Rao under  wraps.

Moreover, the author who is extremely deft at describing the political struggles of a minority government that Rao ran for a complete tenure of five years, is short of talking about the major allegations levelled against him including the Harshad Mehta scam as well as the JMM imbroglio.

Someone with access to the personal papers of such an compulsive reader and writer, could have surely written more about the these aspects of Rao’s life.  Or maybe it is the case what a renowned journalist was famously told by PV himself stands true to the T, “Let me take a few secrets to my grave.”

Notwithstanding these limited shortcomings, Half Lion is an outstanding attempt to give a balanced account of the PV Narasimha Rao, who many consider to be the best Congress PM India ever had.

In the conclusion, I would like to mention the most remarkable feature which I felt about the book. Just like the man himself, drawing inference from Hindu scriptures, the author drew a brilliant analogy of the name of the protagonist (Narsimha) with its actual meaning (sixth Avatar of  Vishnu) and then with its English translation (Half Lion), literally brought to life his personality- ‘Audacity of a lion warped with the charm of a dead Fish.’

Reviewer serves as an Assistant Private Secretary to a Minister of State, Govt. of India. The views expressed here are his own.