New Indian Government Faces
Huge Foreign Policy Tasks
By
J N Dixit
NEW
DELHI: Manifestos and vision statements of major political parties
have been put in the public domain in weeks gone by. Domestic,
economic and political issues are inevitably matters of higher
priority than foreign policy when the country is in election mode.
Even
otherwise, the focus in foreign policy in recent years has been
on issues like managing India’s and Pakistan’s nuclear
weaponisation, countering cross-border terrorism, coping with
the processes of globalization, some of which adversely affect
India, and so on.
Structuring
relations with the US and other global power centers, bringing
back Indo-Pak relations on track, formulating our response to
developments in Afghanistan and Iraq have been other issues of
active interest. In the process we have not taken note of an emerging
trend of political instabilities and structural uncertainties
affecting practically all the countries in our immediate neighborhood.
The
Congress Agenda on Foreign Policy states that it will allocate
the highest priority to nurturing and expanding relations between
India and its neighbors in all respects. The document containing
the agenda proceeds to state that the Congress, if it comes to
power, will strengthen and expand the activities of SAARC to make
it an effective regional organization. The NDA agenda expresses
similar intentions.
This
vision for regional stability is realizable only if minimal levels
of internal cohesion and domestic harmony exist in the countries
of the SAARC region, and in countries like Afghanistan and Myanmar
which abutt on South Asia. (These two countries are also a bridge
for India to Southeast Asia and to West and Central Asia.) Ground
realities, however, pose a challenge. Each country in the SAARC
region is going through a particularly critical phase of internal
political churning.
In
Sri Lanka, the elections, completed in April, have resulted in
President Kumaratunga’s party winning a larger number of
seats than Ranil Wickremesinghe’s. But her party has not
got an absolute majority. She will, therefore, have to forge an
alliance with other Sinhala parties to acquire political stability
for her government. They in turn will demand that peace negotiations
with the Tamils, led by the LTTE, should be subject to what can
only be described as some fundamental Sinhalese prejudices.
Also,
Muslims of the country who previously identified themselves with
the Tamil community, because they were Tamil speaking, have over
the last decade started claiming a separate ethno-religious identity.
Matters are compounded further by a split in the LTTE, with the
cadres belonging to the eastern provinces of Amparai and Batticaloa
breaking away from the main group led by Prabhakaran. Though Prabhakaran’s
cadres have militarily started the process of defeating the eastern
cadres, bitterness and mutual suspicion now characterize attitudes
of the eastern Tamils towards the Tamils of Jaffna.
A
significant development is the emergence of a separate political
party of Buddhist monks with a ‘‘Sinhala First Approach’’
in their domestic political agenda. The discontinuation of purposeful
negotiations between the Tamils and the Sinhalese could have critical
ramifications for Tamil Nadu politics.
In
Nepal, terrorist violence by the Maoist groups continues unabated.
The political leadership is becoming progressively irrelevant.
King Gyanendra has failed to establish a meaningful understanding
with political parties to move back to democracy through elections.
It is interesting that he emphasizes stability rather than achieving
stability through democratic processes. The Maoists are gunning
for him as well as the political parties.
The
army is getting incrementally involved in giving security to the
king, moving away from its institutional role of ensuring national
defence. The police forces are no match for the Maoists. The political
situation in Nepal could have a fallout in north Bengal, Bihar
and northeastern UP.
It
could also have ramifications in Bhutan, which still has a large
Nepalese population. Bhutan itself is subject to domestic political
pressures. The problem of Nepalese exiled from Bhutan still remains
unresolved and is a cause for tension with Nepal. Separatist terrorist
elements from the Northeast had established bases in Bhutan. While
the king took decisive action last winter, the Bhutanese government
has to remain alert to possible trouble from these groups.
The
situation in Bangladesh is no different. Time has described
Bangladesh as one of the most dangerous countries in Asia. Even
if one makes allowances for the magazine’s penchant for
pontificating about Asian governments and peoples, the fact remains
that the internal law and order situation in Bangladesh is worrisome.
There are reliable reports that the Bangladesh government has
conveyed to diplomatic missions in Dhaka that it cannot guarantee
their full security against criminal elements.
Extremist
Islamic political groups are incrementally dominating Bangladesh’s
politics and they have made inroads into the armed forces and
administrative services of Bangladesh. Political processes have
become fractious and tense. In such a situation whichever party
is in power can resort to the bogey of excessive Indian influence,
thus generating tensions in bilateral relations.
Though
the peace process is on with Pakistan, President Musharraf is
subject to intense, pernicious pressure by religious extremists
and terrorist groups within his own country. His cooperation with
the US in countering terrorism and apparent willingness to talk
to India on Kashmir are anathema to certain groups. Levels of
terrorism in Jammu and Kashmir remain a matter of concern for
India.
Moving
on to the extended neighborhood., the ruling military council
in Myanmar is not yet fully convinced about a full return to democracy.
The situation in Afghanistan remains uncertain despite adoption
of a constitution and the planned transition from an interim to
permanent government based on an electoral process.
India
is more stable and cohesive in comparative terms primarily because
of its people’s commitment to and faith in democracy. Whatever
the results of the general elections, whichever government comes
to power in New Delhi will have to cope with a very complex and
tense neighborhood. - Indian Express
