Answer Writing Practice

On what grounds can a member be disqualified from either house of Parliament. (200 Words)

Your View and criticism is welcome.. 

Answer Writing Practice

Que. On what ground MPs of either house be disqualified 

Left Extremism

1. Forest Conservation Act, 1980 has provided fertile ground for the spread of left extremism among tribals living in front areas. Comment

2. Naxalism is not merely a law and order issue. Critically examine.

3. 'Police stick' and 'development carrot' as panacea for millitant extremism. How far do you think 14 point policy has worked in containing the left extremism.

2nd ARC 7th Report questions for discussion

The following questions will be taken up for the discussion on 29 Dec 2013. Please prepare answers referring to the 7th report of 2nd ARC.

CAPACITY BUILDING FOR CONFLICT RESOLUTION

1. The Constitution of India had been drafted by the framers of the Constitution for containing and moderating the conflicts. comment.
2. How linguistic conflict has been resolved after independence. (Ref. India After Gandhi by Ramachandra Guha)
3. Do you consider Mizoram issue as a successful attempt in ethnic and secessionist conflict resolution? Comment.
4. Examine the Assam hindu-muslim conflict of 2012.
5. Examine the conflict resolution of Darjeeling Hills.
6. Lack of responsive and good governance is often responsible for violent conflicts. Comment
7. Make brief notes on the following
• Gorkha National Liberation Front
• Khalistan
• Rajiv Gandhi- Longowal Accord July 1985

India and Maldives Relations

India was one of the first countries to establish diplomatic relations with the Maldives after it gained independence in 1965 and the two settled their maritime border in 1976. India and Maldives share a friendly and close relationship. Today, both nations are members of the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) and signatories to the South Asian Free Trade Agreement (SAFTA). During the first few decades of independence, the bilateral partnership was limited, although the two did sign a comprehensive trade agreement in 1981. However, bilateral relations took their first major step forward following India’s intervention to crush a coup against the Maldivian government in 1988. The Indian armed services quickly restored order in the archipelago and the Indo- Maldivian relationship reached a new high. During the last decade, as India’s interests have expanded further into the Indian Ocean, the geo-strategic importance of the Maldives to India has increased commensurately. Not only has New Delhi remained dedicated to its assistance in the Maldives during bilateral disputes, but it has also evinced a pattern of escalating support. In the past, India’s developmental assistance to the Maldives has been driven by three key priorities; maintenance of cultural and historical relations, trade and economic access, and finally, security interests, including the safeguarding of critical sea lines of communication. As India has increased its development cooperation with the Maldives, it has also strengthened security arrangements, demonstrating growing geostrategic ambitions in the Indian Ocean waters. These changes highlight the complexity of the bilateral relationship as New Delhi recognizes the strategic importance of the island chain while in turn the Maldives realizes its own leverage. Early bilateral development cooperation focused on health infrastructure. In 1986, India agreed to establish and finance entirely a medical complex in the capital of Male.  At present, the hospital provides the most sophisticated tertiary care in the Maldives. India continues to support the institution, and in November 2011, India financed a major renovation of the hospital at a cost of 372.4 million rupees. In 1996, India established in Male the Faculty of Engineering Technology, an institute of technical education. At present, India is also establishing the India-Maldives Friendship Faculty of Hospitality and Tourism Studies as well as a police academy in Male. These projects fall comfortably in line with India’s history of building long-term educational and health infrastructure in the Maldives. Disaster relief and management has been a second key part of Indian assistance to the Maldives. Following the tsunami that hit in December 2004, India was the first country to provide relief. Within 24 hours of the wave’s impact, the Indian Coast Guard and Air Force arrived with relief materials.

During a visit of the newly elected President Nasheed to India in December 2008, India extended a Standby Credit Facility (SCF) of US$ 100 million to the Maldives. Following this, in December 2010, the Export Import Bank of India announced its first Line of Credit (LOC) to the Maldives worth US$ 40 million for the construction of 500 housing units. The LOC has a two percent concessional interest rate with a repayment period of 20 years, putting it in the same interest rate category as loans provided to low income countries by the International Development Association of the World Bank. Although India and the Maldives signed a trade agreement in 1981, bilateral trade is not commensurate with its potential. However, since the early 2000s, Indian exports to the Maldives have been growing exponentially. India remains the Maldives’ third largest trading partner. India imports primarily scrap metals, while Indian exports to the Maldives consist of agricultural and poultry produce, textiles, pharmaceuticals, and a variety of engineering and industrial products. While China has now broken into the top ten in terms of trade volume with the Maldives, it has only risen one place in the ranking since 2007. India’s current exports to Maldives are four times as large as Chinese exports to the Maldives, leaving India with a sizable advantage in influence over the small island state.

Since the early 2000s, major increases in development cooperation have correlated closely with new security agreements. These agreements cover every sector of security, from environmental protection to terrorism. However, while some arrangements on climate change and disaster relief have been signed, Indian defense cooperation has primarily focused on strengthening traditional security agreements. This increase in development cooperation policy, beginning in the early 2000s, but accelerating in 2006-2007, follows increased Chinese presence in the region. While the immediate reason for enhanced defense cooperation is to build military assets in the Maldives to guard against terrorists and pirates, observers also view India's military positioning in the Indian Ocean island nation as a furtherance of its longer-term military deterrence against China. In 2006, rumors reached New Delhi that the Maldives was considering leasing an island to Beijing for a naval base. In response, India signaled that it would continue providing the island’s security, offering Male a state-of-the-art 260-ton fast-attack craft to aid in guarding coastal waters. New Delhi did not waste time in taking initiatives to strengthen defense cooperation with the newly elected democratic government either, positioning two helicopters for better surveillance, setting up new radar systems on all 26 atolls, and training the Maldivian security forces to operate the new equipment. Further, the Maldives being a Muslim country, India is wary about the influence that Pakistan may exert, including the possibility of infiltration by terror cells to launch attacks in India, as has happened in Bangladesh. New Delhi has thus been looking to set up an intelligence base in Male. India is concerned over bases being set up by China in its neighborhood, which have been described as a "string of pearls'' around India's neck that could easily be tightened should the need arise. The geostrategic importance of the nearly 1,200 islands of the Maldives as a “most important interstate,”  underlines the importance for New Delhi of positive bilateral relations with Male.

Success in the Indian Ocean, and consequently the 21st century global economy, will center on increased access to global resources. This access will principally be a response to the strength of bilateral relationships. India’s development cooperation adds a dynamic quality to the strength of the relationship by emphasizing cultural heritage, developing economic engagement, and integrating cooperative security networks. As these imperatives drive India’s development cooperation, New Delhi will do well to maintain its engagement with Male while looking to accommodate the growing interests of states that will lay in the wake of the Indian Navy.

India Japan Relations by Luv Sharma

The great bronze statute of Lord Buddha in Todaji Temple in the capital city of Nara stands testimony to a relationship that has grown stronger with each passing moment. Indo-Japan ties have their roots in & owe their genesis to  the introduction of Buddhism in Japan in 6th Century CE. Tenjiku is what India is referred to in Japan.From 16th century when Japanese established political contact with the Portuguese colonies in India to the Meiji era when first direct political exchange started between the two nations till the co-operation extended to the INA by the Japanese , India & Japan have only added more force , vitality and vigour to their bilateral relationship thereby working hand in hand & benefiting from each others' strengths while simultaneously re-enforcing & building upon their mutual relationship in economic, defence, political and cultural fields & performing a vita lgeostrategic role in maintaining peace and stability in South Asia.

India & japan's cooperation has many facets covering various aspects of bilateral relationship.Historically economic ties with Japan were very well established.After the destruction from World War 2 that ravaged Japan India came forward with its iron ore to boost recovery.Japan started giving Yen loans to India in 1956 to aid India in its economic development after its independence.During Cold war era relations between India and Japan suffered as India followed a Non-Alignment policy which leaned towards Soviet Union and Japan on the other hand was a US ally.Though after 1980s efforts made to rejvenate the bilateral ties bore fruit with the signing of the iconic joint venture agreement between Maruti Udyog ltd. & Suzuki of Japan in 1982 .The agreement gave birth to Maruti Suzuki which has now transformed itself

into one of the largest and successful automobile manufacturing company in India.

Currently both countries are engaged in various economically beneficial activites strengthening each others' economies in the process.India remains the highest recipient of Official Development Aid(ODA)from Japan.Since the unvieling of a global and strategic partnership in 2006 economic ties have gathered momentum.The commencement of CEPA(Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement)in August 2011 has added new dimension to existing economic relations between both countries.The agreement's importance could be gauged by the facts that it was the first time India signed a bilateral agreement with an industrialised nation & it was also the first truly comprehensive agreement concluded by India , given the wide range of issues it addressed.Economic partnershipbetween India and Japan is critical in providing a strategic balance to the East Asian Summit countries in face of steadily increasing economic influence of China.Furthering action to address this concern both india and japan have forged an alliance to jointly develop rare earth minerals to reduce dependence on China

Civil nuclear energy is another field where both countries are trying to converge together for helping each other in peaceful use of nuclear energy.Various joint statements by India and Japan have mandated and stressed upon civil nuclear energy agreement .However the pace of negotiations is slow esp after the fukushima disaster in Japan many anti-nuclear protests have happened in Japan demanding a complete ban on the use of nuclear energy and shutting down of nuclear reactors.So it is seen unethical by some sections of non-proliferation enthusiasts in Japan to sell other countries a technology which it is not intending to use ie, nuclear energyBoth countries can address safety concerns of the protestors by assuring them that adequate safety measures will be followed.Apparently Boiling Water Reactors were being used in fukushima.India has already modified its Boiling Water Reactors that are in use currently.Japan has endorsed India's candidature for 4 major multilateral export control regimes ie NSG, Missile Technology Control Regime, The Australia Group and the Wassenaar Arrangement.Japan has only learned from the recent disaster that struck its fukushima reactor and India can benefit by suitably restructuring its safety needs in accordance withinternational guidelines issued after the incident.India is energy deficient and the peaceful use of nuclear energy in civil sector would exterminate many of its problems most importantly the ever deepening power crisis

Advance technology commerce is another area where India can hugely benefit by Japanese technological briliance and sheer ingenuity.Some examples of projects where Japanese are contributing actively both in terms of technology and finance are viz., Western Freight Corridor, Delhi-Mumbai Industrial Corridor & Bangalore Metro Rail Project.

Its a known fact that Japan has a pacifist constitution meaning it has no offensive systems in terms of warfare but it has Asia's largest Naval fleet, conventional subs coupled with helicopters carrying destroyers and advanced Ballistic missile systems in the world.India on the other hand is world's largest arms importer and is desperately in need for developing its indigenous weapon evelopment and manufacturing capabilites.Japan and India can help each other here by working jointly to innovate new technologies and defence systems. Stable bilateral ties are almost always formed on the bedrock of security collaboration and cooperation.Case in point being that of China whose purely economic relationships with many countries like India, japan is constantly rigged with tensions and striations.Both the countries being energy deficient in terms of oil have to import oil form persian gulf region so securing the maritime trade routes have become a priority for both India and Japan.India and Japan have understood the above fact as they hold joint navsl exercises two improve their maritime cooperation and strengthen the information sharing systems to be able to work in a more structured manner if and when situation demands.

India can use Japan's Heavy Manufacturing industry Base while on the other hand India's services lead industry can help each other out.In this sense the economies of both the nations are complimentary to each other with India's Human capital & Japan's financial & technological prowess.Japan can help India in its infrastructural development.

Engagement at political level too has reached new heights .Current level of political engagement includes an annual level Prime Ministerial Summit & several pther yearly Ministerial dialogues including a strategic dialogue between Foriegn Ministers , a security dialogue between the Defence Ministers and so on.The recent visit of Emperor Akihito marked an historic chapter in bilateral ties between India and Japan.As he became the fjrst emperor from Japan to visit India.The visit signals intent of the japanese govt to take the bilateral relationship to whole new level with increasing engagement in not only political but every other facet of the relationship.

Though people to people engagement is on the lower side as only 500 Indian students in are their in Japan compared to 80,000 from China.

A nurturing and strengthening of the bilateral relationship between India and Japan will not only prove beneficial to both the countries and its people but also provide a much needed stability in South Asia.A rising Asia is not only a necessity for Asian countries but also for the whole world which can only be achieved with two of its vital nations engaging each other at every level of mutual cooperation.So that China's increasing footprint in the South Asian region & its ever increasing economic clout poses a threat to the regional stability and can create a political imbalance which can be countered verily by Indo-Japan mutual cooperation.

Assignment for December 2013

The below listed questions need to be answered them by 29 Dec 2013 as comments under this post. Any confusions or doubts can be taken up as group discussion. 

1. Identify the major obstacles in the smooth functioning of Parliamentary democracy in India.(250 Words)

2. “while economic growth is an important boon for enhancing living conditions, its reach depends greatly on what we do with the fruits of growth.” Comment. (250 Words)

3.Discuss the major extra constitutional factors influencing the working of federal polity in India. (250 words)

4.How does depreciating Rupee affect the CAD and Fiscal deficit? Explain. (250 Words)

5.Highlight the nature of the land reforms still needed in the country.(250 Words)

6.How is agricultural price policy is determined in India? Does the process take note of agricultural subsidies? (200  Words)

7. What do you understand by the term ‘Rule of Law’? How does the constitution of India seeks to establish it?

India and Japan Relations

The relationship between India and Japan is centuries old. During the reign of emperor Kemmei,

Japan first came into contact with India. According to one source, Korea in the year 552 AD

paid tribute to Japan in the form of an image of Buddha and a copy of Buddhist scriptures.

Buddhism was thus introduced in Japan. Several Indian Buddhist monks subsequently visited

Japan and brought the two countries together. Although India was under the colonial rule of Britain, Japan viewed with importance India’s role in accelerating the process of its industrialisation. In the meantime, Japanese people developed deep appreciation for Indian nationalism and the Indian leaders

came to value Japan’s industrial progress as a source of inspiration for the colonial peoples of

Asia. During the Indian freedom struggle, the Indian National Congress was critical of several Japanese

policies, including aggression against Manchuria Province of China. But when the Japanese forces

defeated the Western colonial powers during the Second World War, it brought cheers to many

subject colonial peoples, including Indians. However, the Japanese connection of some Indian

nationalist groups, especially the members of Ghadar Party and the Indian National Army under

Subhash Chandra Bose were meant to help India achieve independence. A real watershed in the

 relations between Japan and India came after the end of the Second World War. Japan was a defeated

nation. It was under American military occupation and several Japanese were to be tried for their war

crimes. Jawaharlal Nehru looked with warmth to the post-war Japan devastated by the atom

bombs and under foreign occupation at a time when India itself was able to overthrow the  

foreign rule. At the moment of Japan’s struggle for survival in the immediate postwar period, 

India offered to supply Japan with iron ore, which was so vital in the reconstruction of Japan. 

Nehru also refused to participate in the San Francisco Conference to sign a US-sponsored Peace 

Treaty with Japan and decided to forego claiming reparation against Japan. The emergence of the 

Communist China in 1949, the onset of the Korean War in 1950 and the Communist/Nationalist 

 upsurge in Indochina brought Cold War into Asia. As Japan’s foreign policy came to be 

influenced by its alliance relations with the US and the 1954 US-Japan Mutual Security Treaty, India followed a policy of non-alignment. The political divergences of an aligned Japan and non-aligned India were rather too many. To

cite a few examples, India and Japan held different views on the Korean and Vietnam wars; and

to India’s utter surprise, Japan did not even support liberation of Goa from the Portuguese

colonial rule.

The growing Indo-US political differences and strategic divergences affected India’s relations

with Japan, since the latter’s foreign policy was conditioned by the western, especially American,

views on world affairs. Even then some Japanese appeared to have appreciated and regarded

India’s non-aligned foreign policy postures and its role in the developing world, since Japan

could have followed such a policy but for the compulsion generated by the US influence over

post-war Japan.

Japan, in fact, viewed India as a rising Asian power and a better alternative

model of a developing country than China, despite the political differences on international affairs.

The 1962 military humiliation by China of India, however, seemed to have brought some

disappointment to Japan and India fell low in the Japanese foreign policy priorities. What was worrisome is the fact that Japan maintained neutrality during the Sino-Indian War of 1962, although the US positively responded to the Indian requests for help. Moreover, at the time of 1965 Indo-Pakistan war, Japan cut off aid and credits to India. As geopolitical developments in the early 1970s culminated in India’s political proximity to the erstwhile Soviet Union in strategic matters, Japan’s political distance from India got widened further. Japan did not support the liberation of Bangladesh nor did it endorse India’s peaceful nuclear explosion.

While political differences persisted, there was not much of a meaningful interaction between the

two countries in the economic field. Post-war Japan soon began to focus on its economic

reconstruction and development and was increasingly successful. This was a time when the Indian

economy was stagnating. The economic policy of India focusing on the import substitution strategy

disillusioned and discouraged the Japanese from engaging in more positive economic relations

with India. The trade relations were minimal. Although India became one of the first and the largest recipient of Japan’s Official Development Assistance (ODA), the assistance was suspended for years until the mid-1980s when prime minister Rajiv Gandhi visited Japan in the midst of a global political transformation. The end of the Cold War brought some positive movement in the interactions between

the Indian and the Japanese leaders, but the Pokharan II nuclear tests created tremendous tension

between Japan and India. By the time India emerged as a declared nuclear weapon power in

May 1998, Japan and India were on the verge of reshaping their political, security and economic

relations. The improved performance in the economic area was viewed as miniscule compared

to the potentialities. After all, if viewed from the Japanese side, the share of Indo-Japanese trade

remained less than 1 per cent of its total trade activities

But the harsh and strong Japanese reaction to the Indian nuclear tests in 1998 almost froze the

bilateral relationship for quite some time. However, by early 1999, Taro Nakayama, former

foreign minister visited India and handed over letter from the Japanese prime minister to the

Indian prime minister. It heralded a new period of relationship between the two countries with the

resumption of high-level exchanges. The visit of the Indian defence minister to Japan in 2000 was

path-breaking. The conduct of joint exercises by the Indian and the Japanese Navy indicates that

the two countries have decided to forge closer political, security and economic ties deep into the

21th Century.

As India and the US are increasingly coming together, the likelihood of closer Japan-India relations

also rises. The importance of the Persian Gulf, Indian Ocean and the stability in the Asia Pacific

region to both Japan and India is increasingly being realised. Japan today views India as a rising

power of Asia. The nature and intensity of Japan-India relations in the 21st Century will be

crucial to the maintenance of peace and stability in the world in general and Asia in particular.

Indo - Sri Lanka Relations by Luv Sharma

India pursued a policy of non-alignment, intended to guide Cold War

geostrategic struggles away from its borders.With the terms of the 1987 Indo-Sri Lankan Accord (ISLA), India sought to gain Sri Lanka’s allegiance as a way to eliminate the USA’s strategic presence in Sri Lanka.Under the ISLA, Sri Lanka had to scrap the American contract for the Trincomalee oil storage facilities, and remove the Voice of America outlet with which the USA broadcast radio messages into Soviet-friendly territory and transmitted intelligence reports. This geostrategic thinking

reflected the Indian policy-makers’ aim to push the USA’s Cold War meddling a safe distance from India’s borders. During the 1980s and early 1990s India’s strategy to avoid the Cold War power struggle eclipsed efforts to support Sri Lanka’s peace and stability. 

Read more from the link below

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B55HMwMMvIHpZUZxWEQyREdYTHM/edit?usp=drive_web

India - Pakistan International Relations By Ashutosh Aditya

India - Pakistan relations

For any country, in the way of development, needs cordial relations with its neighbors in political, social and global issues to create a healthy environment for development. Pakistan, one of the most important neighbor of India was once homogeneous political unit with India before independence and the struggle for freedom was fought collectively. India’s relations with Pakistan are the most complex of its ties with its neighbors and can be understand by following historical events :

Historical background :

Before independence, India was a single unit in its composition i.e. Hindus and Muslims were living together and the struggle for freedom was fought collectively against British Empire. Indian national congress & Muslim league were two groups among various others who fought for freedom. During this struggle many differences of opinion were emerged among the elites of Muslim league and Indian national congress. Muslim league wanted to club all Muslim dominations to create separate country i.e Pakistan, but INC was against it. Finally, when India got freedom, many small states, provinces & princely states joined independent ‘India as Union of States’ except Hyderabad, Junagarh & Kashmir. Pakistan was separated from India and became a Muslim country. Pakistan was in greed of assimilating these 03 states who didn’t join India, but couldn’t succeed. Junagarh & Hyderabad joined India and Kashmir accepted Indian sovereignty. Thus the Islamic country Pakistan failed in its intention to enlarge its political boundary. This bitterness travelled along with the time and still existing in terms of Pakistan’s approach towards India in all international spheres. Four wars with India, terrorism & Ceasefire violation along the boundary of Kashmir & Gujrat depicts clear bitterness and bad intention of Pakistan against India.

Issues in bilateral relations with India & Pakistan:

We can categorize bilateral relations with India & Pakistan in three ways

1.      Difference in world views

2.      Dispute Over Kashmir

3.      Nuclear Confrontation

Difference in world views

India and Pakistan, as two core countries of South Asia had different worldviews that determined their foreign policies.

India’s world Views

1.   During the early years after independence, the Indian worldview had been dominated by concerns about building a regional identity of the post-colonial   nations of Asia.

2.      One of the important aspects of this policy was opposition to the extra regional intervention in South Asia. India sought to keep the South Asian issues within the ambit of South Asian countries.

3.    Opposition to the entry of Cold War alliances in Asia and eventual path of non-alignment is part of this worldview.

4.    The period from 1947 to 1971 saw two trends in India’s approach towards South Asia. One was the trend that was initiated by Nehru. It focused on regionalism as the dominant theme. The second emerged during the Lal Bahadur Shastri years. This came in the aftermath of the 1962 war and the need for resetting the Indian worldview keeping in mind its capabilities. Shastri was to stress on bilateralism as the key to foreign policy, especially in relationto South Asian countries.

Pakistan’s world views

1.      Pakistan’s perception of its role emerged from the realisation of two simultaneous forces—the geopolitics of the country that was divided between East and West Pakistan and the Islamic worldview. The former placed Pakistan firmly in the South Asian regional state system while the latter brought it close to the Islamic world of West Asia.

2.      Pakistan thus saw itself as a nation with two distinct identities and roles, that of a South Asian power and that of an Islamic West Asian power that was to eventually emerge as an important country of the Organisation of Islamic Conference.

3.   One of the dominant security concerns that Pakistan sought to address right from its inception is that of fear of India. The problem of Pakistan’s foreign and defence policy revolved around this central theme of Indian domination and safeguards that were to be instituted to counter this threat.

4.     Pakistan’s attempts to establish linkages with the Islamic world, with China and participate in the military alliances of the United States can be understood within this security concern of Pakistan. These links provided an opportunity for Pakistan to counteract India’s desire to dominate in what India considered its sphere of influence.

Dispute Over Kashmir

This fundamental diversity in the views of India and Pakistan manifests on the issue of Kashmir, an issue that has come to be identified by Pakistan as the core of the bilateral divide. 

1.     Kashmir, like Junagadh and Hyderabad, opted to decide its future as to whether to join India or to merge with Pakistan.

2.   In case of Hyderabad and Junagadh, the Indian government took steps to ensure that the wishes of the overwhelming local Hindu populace were respected and hastened the process of merger of these two states in the Indian Union.

3.      Kashmir had a peculiar problem. Ithad distinct distribution patterns of its population, with the Ladakh area being predominantly Buddhist, the Jammu region Hindu and the Kashmir valley Muslim. Pakistan sought to force the pace of the decision making on Kashmir by permitting the ‘irregular army’ to enter Kashmir.

4.      Maharaja Hari Singh, realising the potential problems, signed the Instrument of Accession with India, thus merging the state of Jammu and Kashmir with the Indian Union.

The first Indo-Pakistan war that followed the merger of Kashmir into India left the state partitioned. India took the matter to the United Nations and agreed to hold a plebiscite in Kashmir to ascertain the wishes of the Kashmiris. According to the cease-fire resolution adopted by the UN Security Council, the plebiscite was conditional upon the withdrawal of Pakistani troops from Kashmir and the restoration of the situation to the pre 1947 position. This condition was never met by Pakistan and the plebiscite also never came to be conducted.

Kashmir has seen a tumultuous history since the first war of 1948. The new government formed by Sheikh Abdullah, a Kashmiri leader of long standing, came to be dismissed in 1953. Sheikh Abdullah was relieved of his post as his party the National Conference refused to accept the accession to India as final and vaguely talked of the final settlement of the state of Kashmir in the future. Sheikh Abdullah was brought back to head the government in Kashmir in 1975 after he and Indira Gandhi signed an agreement. Now Sheikh Abdullah had given up the earlier separatist demand and had accepted Kashmir to be legitimately a part of India. In 1965, India and Pakistan fought a war over Kashmir. This war, as the Pakistani Air Marshal Asghar Khan put it, was a war to solve the problem once and for all. The Tashkent Conference (1966) also failed to provide any results. Though, the 1971 war was more a war about the future of East Pakistan and the creation of Bangladesh, it had a definite aspect of Kashmir about it.

The Simla Agreement of 1972 formalised the emergent situation on Kashmir. The agreement sought to establish some basic principles of Indo-Pakistan interaction. The Agreement specifically refers to bilateralism and acceptance of durable peace as the framework of resolving future India-Pakistan problems. On the very vital issue of Kashmir the agreement states: ‘In Jammu and Kashmir the line of actual control resulting from the cease fire of 17 December 1971, shall be respected by both sides without prejudice to the recognised position of either side. Neither side shall seek to alter it unilaterally irrespective of mutual differences and legal interpretations. Both sides further undertake to refrain from the threat or the use of force in violation of this line’.

The Simla Agreement sought to create a new framework of interaction for India and Pakistan and freeze the issue of Kashmir along the Line of Control indefinitely. One understands from the writings of Indian leaders involved in the making of this agreement that there was an implicit understanding of converting the LOC into a boundary in the eventual future. It is in this context that the return of Sheikh Abdullah became significant. Now India had a Kashmiri leader, heading a Kashmiri party the National Conference, taking the position that Kashmir is part of India. This was tantamount to a plebiscite. This was the test of the right to self-determination that the Kashmiris had been promised by the plebiscite. India could now talk of political legitimacy for the accession of Kashmir to India.

Several developments appear to complicate the problem in Kashmir in the 1980s. Global Islamic resurgence came to be a force to reckon with. The growth of fundamentalist Islamic groups and the spread in their activity had become a matter of concern even for the United States. Pakistan was in a unique position in those days. Given its relatively liberal Islamic posture and the possibility of emergent democratic governments in Pakistan led it to retain a relatively close relationship with United States. On the other hand, it had excellent relations with the core Islamic world. It had an excellent access to the new Afghan government of Taliban and also to other radical Islamic organisations. Pakistan thus appears to have benefited from the then international situation.

The post-1975 developments on Kashmir constitute the beginning of an entirely new chapter in its history. Adverse reactions to Sheikh Abdullah rule started in the late 1970s. Partly it was a product of the growing divide between the ruling class in Kashmir and the common populace that remained deprived of the fruits of development that the state sought to create. Partly, it was the product of resultant frustration that came to be created in the minds of the Kashmiri about the utility of Indian rule. One of the significant popular level movements came in the form of the Jammu & Kashmir Liberation Front (JKLF). As an organisation that had strong Pakistani connections, the JKLF demanded the right to self-determination for the Kashmiris to join Pakistan.

The 1980s saw two significant developments that had their impact on the developments in Kashmir. One was the Soviet intervention in Afghanistan that led to the massive arms supply by the United States to the Afghan rebels (Mujahideen) situated in Pakistan. Second was the change in Pakistani strategy regarding Kashmir. The American arms supply to the Afghans had a spillover effect in Kashmir. This was linked to the change in Pakistani tactics in terms of shifting from direct conflict to insurgency.

Infiltration and insurgency has been a long pattern in Pakistani strategy on Kashmir. Prior to the 1965 war Pakistan had used this approach with little success. The failure to solve the problem

through the use of force in 1965 and 1971 had led to a change in strategy. Now infiltration took the shape of low intensity conflict. Efforts to paralyse the local law and order situation and create uncertainty in the region came to be the tactics of the day. The large scale exit of the Kashmiri pundits from the valley was part of this protracted strategy.

This Pakistani strategy was buttressed with a new clarion call of human rights violation. In the early 1990s, concern about violation of human rights had suddenly acquired newly found acceptance. In Bosnia, Chechnya and elsewhere, the world appeared to have suddenly become sensitive to human rights. In Kashmir too, the old paradigm of self-determination was fast replaced by the new paradigm of human rights violation. Suddenly the situation in Kashmir came to be analysed almost entirely along the human dimension. Demands came to be made by the Organisation of Islamic Conference (OIC), followed by the European powers for an on-the spot survey of violation of human rights by the Indian forces. The Indian government was persuaded enough to create a National Human Rights Commission of its own to monitor the problem. It took several years for the international community to acknowledge that terrorist outfits also violate human rights and that the responsibility of violation cannot be that of the Government alone.

In 1999 India and Pakistan came into conflict over an intrusion by Pakistan into Kargil. Was the crossing of the LOC by the Mujahideens, and the Pakistani troops a logical culmination of the ongoing approach taken on Kashmir? Did it represent an assessment by Pakistan that time was ripe to exert direct force by crossing the LOC and force India to resolve the Kashmir problem? Several explanations may be given for this Pakistani adventurism. One, that Pakistan must have assessed the time as being ripe for such an action to achieve its goal about accession of Kashmir. The political uncertainty in India and the obvious lack of consensus across the political spectrum in India would have also been one of the considerations. Two, this assessment must have been a military and intelligence assessment based on the active participation of the militant outfits. It was quite likely that the civil government was pulled into this decision after it was in place. If this be true it confirms the pattern of Pakistani politics that is dominated by competing interests of the army, the civilian representative elite, the intelligence units and the Islamic groups. The Pakistani premier’s constant disclaim about the involvement of Government in the Kargil action may not be entirely true. Such actions cannot take place without the knowledge and participation of the government (and that includes the army). But his statement may also indicate the truth that he has very little control over the Pakistan army and militant groups in Kargil. History shows that the creators of such groups eventually cease to control them as they tend to have a momentum oftheir own.

Having committed itself in Kargil, Pakistan appeared to have taken on more than it could digest. The international public opinion has shifted away from Pakistan. Its old and trusted ally China took a neutral position and advised restraint and dialogue. The Pakistani premier was not able to move the United States either. The US visit of premier Sharif proved counter productive. The Americans asked Pakistan to withdraw its troops to the LOC and begin a dialogue with India. Eventually, India did manage to push back the Pakistani infiltration.

Wars with Pakistan

Indo-Pakistani War of 1947

This is also called the First Kashmir War. The war started in October 1947 when it was feared by the Pakistan that Maharajah of the princely state of Kashmir and Jammu might accede to India as choice was given to him on the matter to accede to any of the newly independent nations. Tribal forces from Pakistan attacked and occupied the princely state, resulting in Maharajah signing the Agreement to the accession of the princely state to India. The United Nations was invited by India to mediate the quarrel resulting in the UN Security Council passing Resolution 47 on 21 April 1948. The war ended in December 1948 with the Line of Control dividing Kashmir into territories administered by Pakistan (northern and western areas) and India (southern, central and northeastern areas).

Indo-Pakistani War of 1965

This war started following Pakistan's Operation Gibraltar, which was designed to infiltrate forces into Jammu and Kashmir to precipitate an insurgency against rule by India. India retaliated by launching an attack on Pakistan. The five-week war caused thousands of casualties on both sides and was witness to the largest tank battle in military history since World War II. The outcome of this war was a strategic stalemate with some small tactical victories. However, most neutral assessments agree that India had the upper hand over Pakistan when ceasefire was declared.  The war concluded after diplomatic intervention by the Soviet Union and USA and the subsequent issuance of the Tashkent Declaration.

Indo-Pakistani War of 1971

The war was unique in that it did not involve the issue of Kashmir, but was rather precipitated by the crisis created by the political battle between Sheikh Mujib, Leader of East Pakistan and Yahya-Bhutto, leaders of West Pakistan brewing in erstwhile East Pakistan culminating in the declaration of Independence of Bangladesh from the state system of Pakistan. Following Operation Searchlight and the 1971 Bangladesh atrocities, about 10 million Bengalis in East Pakistan took refuge in neighbouring India. India intervened in the ongoing Bangladesh liberation movement.  After a large scale pre-emptive strike by Pakistan, full-scale hostilities between the two countries commenced. Within two weeks of intense fighting, Pakistani forces in East Pakistan surrendered to the joint command of Indian and Bangladeshi forces following which the People's Republic of Bangladesh was created. This war saw the highest number of casualties in any of the India-Pakistan conflicts, as well as the largest number of prisoners of war since the Second World War after the surrender of more than 90,000 Pakistani military and civilians.

Indo-Pakistani War of 1999

Commonly known as Kargil War, this conflict between the two countries was mostly limited. During early 1999, Pakistani troops along with Kashmiri insurgents infiltrated across the Line of Control (LoC) and occupied Indian territory mostly in the Kargil district. India responded by launching a major military and diplomatic offensive to drive out the Pakistani infiltrators. Fearing large-scale escalation in military conflict, the international community, led by the United States, increased diplomatic pressure on Pakistan to withdraw forces from Indian territory. By the end of July 1999, organized hostilities in the Kargil district had ceased.

Nuclear Confrontation

In 1998, India conducted a nuclear Test and shortly after Pakistan too demonstrated that it possessed the nuclear bomb. South Asia suddenly became a sensitive zone on account of these two antagonistic states. Pakistan’s new nuclear deterrence made India hesitant in retaliating against its support to the secessionist movement.

This nuclear blackmail continued with the infiltration in Kargil. This was a challenging period for India and the American scholars argued that South Asia was literally on a short fuse.

The nuclear conflict between both countries is of passive strategic nature with nuclear doctrine of Pakistan stating a first strike policy, although the strike would only be initiated if and only if, the Pakistan Armed Forces are unable to halt an invasion (as for example in1971 war) or a nuclear strike is launched against Pakistan while India has a declared policy of no first use.

Breief details of wars between India & Pakistan is as following :

·    Pokhran-I (Smiling Buddha): On 18 May 1974 India detonated an 8 Kiloton nuclear device at Pokhran Test Range becoming the first nation to become nuclear capable outside the five permanent members of United Nations Security Council as well as dragging Pakistan along with it into a nuclear arms race with the Pakistani prime minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto swearing to reciprocate India. The Pakistan Atomic Energy Commission Chairman Munir Ahmed Khan said that the test would force Pakistan to test its own nuclear bomb.

·       Kirana-I: In 1980s a series of 24 different cold tests were conducted by Pakistan Atomic Energy Commission led by chairman Munir Ahmad Khan under extreme secrecy. The tunnels at Kirana Hills, Sargodha, are reported to have been bored after the Chagai nuclear test sites, it is widely believed that the tunnels were constructed sometime between 1979 and 1983. As in Chagai, the tunnels at Kirana Hills had been bored and then sealed and this task was also undertaken by PAEC's DTD. Later due to excessive US intelligence and satellite focus on the Kirana Hills site, it was abandoned and nuclear weapons testing was shifted to the Kala Chitta Range.

·   Pokhran-II (Operation Shakti): On 11 May 1998 India detonated another 5 nuclear devices at Pokhran Test Range. With jubilation and large scale approval from the Indian society came International sanctions as a reaction to this test. The most vehement reaction of all coming from Pakistan. Great ire was raised in Pakistan, which issued a severe statement claiming that India was instigating a nuclear arms race in the region. Pakistan vowed to match India's nuclear capability with statements like, "We are in a headlong arms race on the subcontinent."

·      Cagey-I: (Youm-e-Takbir) Within half a month of Pokhran-II, on 28 May 1998 Pakistan detonated 5 nuclear devices to reciprocate India in the nuclear arms race. Pakistani public, like the Indian, reacted with a celebration and heightened sense of nationalism for responding to India in kind and becoming the only Muslim nuclear power. The day was later given the title Youm-e-Takbir to further proclaim such.

·   Chagai-II: Two days later, on 30 May 1998, Pakistan detonated a 6th nuclear device completing its own series of underground tests with this being the last test the two nations have carried out to date.

In spite of the many contentious issues, India and Pakistan have made major strides in reducing the "trust deficit” over the past few years. Bilateral dialogue was resumed after the two Prime Ministers met on the sidelines of SAARC Summit in Thimpu in April 2010 and reaffirmed the importance of carrying forward with the dialogue process with a view to resolving peacefully all outstanding issues. Subsequent regular exchanges between the two countries, including at the highest level, have kept the discussions active on Counter Terrorism, Humanitarian issues, Commerce and Trade, Sir Creek and Siachen, Peace and Security including Confidence building Measures and Jammu & Kashmir. The second round of the resumed dialogue is nearing completion and the two sides have expressed satisfaction on progress made so far.

India has welcomed Pakistan’s efforts to normalize trade relations by moving from positive to negative lists and their eventual elimination. India in turn has allowed foreign direct investment from Pakistan and is ready to formalize new visa regime with Pakistan.

Prime Minister met with the President of Pakistan during his pilgrimage tour to India in April 2012 and reiterated their willingness to find practical and pragmatic solutions to all outstanding issues through constructive and result oriented engagement. They reaffirmed that people are at the heart of the relationship between the two countries and that people to people contacts and cultural exchanges should be promoted.

Sino- Indo Relations

Above the clouds high in Himalayas the old Silk Road climbs through 14000 ft to the Nathu la Pass where two immense nations meet. It’s here that India comes face to face with China. 40yrs age India fought a frontier war with China finally opens for trade and they both race to the top of the world.

In the past few years, Sino-Indian relations have expanded considerable in all areas. Institutional framework for mutual cooperation has also been developed. However, from time to time, misunderstanding and lack of mutual trust manifest despite massive increase in Sino-Indian trade and economic relationship. The challenge for the India in the next few years will be to manage the complex relationship with China while protecting its national interest.

India and China proposed creating a business model called chindia based on COIN (Cooperation & Innovation) in four areas (Energy, Health, Infrastructure, Knowledge intensive industries)

Background

• India was
• The second non-communist state to recognize PRC in 1949
• the 16^th state to establish diplomatic relations with PRC in 1950
• 1954: eight year agreement on Tibet  - Panchsheel
• 1962: War
• 1960s-70s: Sino-Indian relations deteriorated  because
• War
• Sino-Pakistani relations improved
• Sino-Russian relations deteriorated
• 1967: Nathu La incident; Chola incident
• 1976: Restored ambassadorial relations
• 1979: External Affairs minister AB Vajpayee’s visit to China
• 1988: Rajiv Gandhi’s visit to China
• Agreed to develop and expand bilateral relations in all fields
• Establish a Joint Working Group on Boundary and Joint Economic Group
• Mid-1990s: relations started improving
• 1992: President E Venkararaman visited China. This was the first Head of State level visit from India to China
• 1996: Pres Jaing Zemin’s visit to India <first HoS visit>
• 2003: Declaration on Principles for Relations and Comprehensive Cooperation signed
• First comprehensive document on development of bilateral relations signed at the highest level between India and China
• 2008: ‘A Shared Vision for the 21^st century of the Republic of India and the PRC’
• 2011: Year of India-China exchange

Major Outstanding Issues

Issue	India’s Concern	China’s concern
Boundary
Visa Policy	China giving stapled visa to residents of Kashmir
Trade	China accused of dumping goods in India.	India imposing ban on investment of certain Chinese companies
Dams	China building dams on the Brahmaputra river
Tibet		India’s asylum to Dalai Lama
Geopolitics	String of pearls; Relations with Pak – China’s presence in PoK, China’s policy on J&K, nuclear relationship with Pakistan	India’s growing relationship with US
Defence Cooperation
Competition in South Asia

India – China Economic Relations

So far the economic relations with China have primarily been guided by the logic of economies. However, in years to come, issues like continued trade imbalance and competition for depleting resources are likely to create friction in economic relationship.

In next 5-10 years, china will continue to be India’s single largest trading partner of Trade and is unlikely that any major change in pattern of trade i.e. India continues to be exporting raw material and importing finished capital goods, machinery and components from China.

• The two countries resumed trade officially in 1978
• 1984: signed the MFN agreement
• China is India’s largest trading partner. Accounted for a share of 9.09% in India’s international trade during 2009-10
• 10.69 % of India’s total imports were from China in 2009-10 (largest)
• China is the third highest destination for India’s export accounting for 6.5% of the total
• In 2009-10 total trade crossed $60 bn mark to reach $61.7 bn.
• India’s exports: Iron ore, other raw materials and cotton
• India’s imports: finished goods, mainly machinery. There is a growing demand for Chinese telecom and power equipments.
• Set a target of reaching $100 bn trade by 2015
• India has a trade deficit of over $20 bn with China
• Addressing the deficit problem
• India has  been pressing China to provide better market access for Indian pharmaceutical and IT companies which have struggled to penetrate the Chinese market
• India is pushing for reduction of restrictions on agri-products imposed by China so that India could export more agri-products to it
• In his December 2010 visit to India Wen Jiabao said that China understands India’s concerns on the question of market access and would try to find ways of resolving them
• Indian companies in China
• Manufacturing: pharma, autocomponents, laminated tubes, refractories
• IT and ITES: IT education, software solutions
• Banking
• Ranbaxy, Orchid Pharma, Dr Reddy, Aurobindo Pharma, NIIT, Infosys, Suzlon, SBI, PNB etc
• Chinese Companies in India
• Power generation, machinery and infrastructure construction, electronics, IT and Hardware manufacturing
• Sinosteel, Shougang, China Dongfang Internations, Sinohydro, Huawei, TCL, Haier,
• Infrastructure
• Still-well highway

Border dispute

• China’s claim in two regions
• Aksai Chin
• Tawang, Arunachal Pradesh
• These two regions are strategically important for China to control the restive populations of Xingjian and Tibet and integrate them
• The Macartney-Macdonald Line proposed during British times is almost the same as the present Line of Actual Control
• The northern boundary between India and Tibet was never clearly demarcated
• The McMahon Line forms the eastern border with China
• British India and China gained a common border in 1826 after the British annexation of Assam and the Treaty of Yandabo
• 1913-14: representatives of Britain and Tibet (and Myanmar or China?) attended a conference in Shimla and drew up an agreement concerning Tibet’s status and borders
• McMahon Line was drawn
• China objected to the proposed Sino-Tibet boundary and repudiated the agreement
• East-West swap
• Zhou Enlai had proposed that China relinquish its claim to most of India’s northeast in exchange for India’s abandonment of its claim to Aksai Chin.
• 1962: War
• In recent times, India China boundary has been one of the most peaceful borders in the world
• A solution to the question is not due to lack of effort; instead it arises from the difficulty of the question itself
• CBMs are in place to ensure peace in border areas
• Special Representatives (SRs) talks are conducted on the border question

Defence exchanges

• Recently defence exchanges were stalled after an Indian army officer was denied visa (?)

Dalai Lama

• Sought refuge in Dharmsala in 1959

Mangement of transborder rivers

• Many of our northern and north eastern rivers arise in the highlands of Tibet
• Dams: Zang-mu
• India has sought assurances from China that it will take no action to negatively affect the flow of rivers into India
• China has assured that the projects on Brahmaputra are run-of-the-river projects

Pakistan-China relations and effect on India

• China’s growing relations with Pakistan are of concern to India
• China has been the main supplier of weapons systems and air and naval combat craft to Pak
• China is co-producing K8 trainer aircraft and JF17 fighter aircraft in Pak
• Supplied Pakistan with M-11 SRBM
• <It is alleged that the technology to make nuclear bombs was also supplied by China>
• Civil nuclear cooperation
• Development of road, rail and gas pipeline infrastructure through the Gilgit-Baltistan region as well as port facilities in Gwadar
• India believes that a stable and prosperous Pakistan is in India’s interest. It does not view bilateral relationships as zero-sum games
• But there are some genuine concerns
• China’s role in POK
• China’s J&K policy
• Sino-Pak security and nuclear relationship

The Way forward

• when it comes to the relationship between these two big Asian giants, a lot of what happens in this relationship will impact the situation in our region and particularly when it comes to the economic strength the rising economic strength of both these countries the world certainly is watching and assessing the impact of this relationship.
• Media has caused a lot of frenzy in the relations of the two countries
• Media should keep quiet a bit so that India-China can solve their problems amicably
• Chindia
• China-India global joint action
• In a high level meeting in November 2010, CCP politbureau member Zhou Yong Kang outlined some areas for further development of Sino-Indian relations in order to consolidate their strategic cooperative partnership:
• Promoting political trust by maintaining high-level visits between governments, parties, parliaments and militaries.
• Greater cooperation in trade and economy that should include reducing protectionism.
• Greater people-to-people exchanges in a wide swathe of areas.
• Strengthening international cooperation and friendly consultations on controversial issues and disagreements in exchanges.
• Developing Synergy
• Tagore was for close relationship between the two countries
• S&T exchanges should be strengthened
• MoU on Green Technology; exchange of hydrological data
• India-China have a role to play in the security architectures for Asia
• Issues of maritime security, issues concerning global commerce in the region, issue of terrorism, having peaceful periphery are common concerns

Are India-China rivals?

• Neither of the two countries have a luxury of seeing each other in purely antagonistic terms
• The view that India and China are rivals is a over generalisation as well as an over simplification of a complex relationship which encompasses so many diverse issues
• Proposition of competition and rivalries should not be exaggerated in a manner that it overshadows our genuine attempts to manage and transact a rationally determined relationship between India and China
• The reality is that both our countries have worked hard over the last two decades to enhance dialogue in a number of fields and we must maintain and build on that trend.
• At the same time, it is true that divergences persist, and that there is no denying the fact that we have a disputed border.

Positives	Negatives
‘Copenhagen Spirit’: exemplary cooperation witnessed between India and China during the Copenhagen climate change summit	China’s angst over Dalai Lama’s visit to AP in 2009
Peaceful borders	Stapled visa issue cropped up in 2009
Huge trade	Huge trade deficit for India
Multilateral cooperation: BRICS, BASIC, SCO, G20	Defence ties were stalled
Cultural cooperation
Student Exchange
In Sept 2011, India-China held their first even Strategic and Economic Dialogue

Cultural Relations

• 1988: Agreement on Cultural Cooperation
• Provides for an executive cultural exchange programme (CEP)
• Latest CEP signed in 2010
• Provides for cooperation in a gamut of cultural fields including exchanges of visits of performing artists, officials, writers etc
• 2003: Centre for Indian Studies inaugurated in Peking University
• 2008: 70^th anniversary of Indian Medical Mission to China
• Chindia organised Joint Medical Mission to commemorate the event
• 2010: Festival of India in China
• India’s stall at World Expo
• Structure adjacent to White Horse Temple
• Inaugurated by Patil

Indian Diaspora in China

• About 39000 people
• HK has a larger Indian presence
• Mainly students

	Binders/Opportunities	Separators/Challenges
Economy	Huge trade. Both are very large economies. Growth contributing to global recovery	<list out all major outstanding issues>
Int Fora	WTO – Doha round; Climate Change. At the world level fora, India-China cooperation is quite evident.	At local fora and regional stability, India China are at divergence
	BRICS; BASIC
Overall cooperation	Both stand to gain a lot

Premier Wen Jiabao’s visit to India

• India-China to increase bilateral trade to $100 bn by 2015.
• India’s main concern is the huge trade deficit it has in trade with China
• It has asked China to open up its IT and services sector
• They agreed to a strategic economic dialogue to enhance macroeconomic policy coordination and address challenges in economic development and  cooperation
• CEO’s forum shall also be created and greater cooperation between the banking regulators of the two countries
• Political Developments
• Stapled visa for residents of J&K issue was discussed. Wen proposed that the officials of the two countries should hold consultations.
• India did not mention Tibet and One China in the joint statement.
• Strategic
• Agreement to work together against piracy in the Gulf of Aden
• Assessment
• Incremental progress was made
• We have areas of difference (border, stapled visa) and cooperation (climate change)

March, 2012

India-China agree to undertake joint operations against pirates and sharing technological knowhow on seabed research.

Joint operation against pirates seeks to involve the Coast Guards, the navies and air forces in action against pirates.

The proposal to share technological knowhow on seabed research is aimed at dousing India’s apprehensions after Beijing was permitted by the International Seabed Authority to explore in south-west Indian Ocean.

Chinese foreign policy: String of pearls theory

• The term ‘string of pearls’ is used to describes the manifestation of China’s rising geopolitical influence through efforts to increase access to ports and airfields, develop special diplomatic relationships and modernize military forces that extend from the South China Sea through the Strait of Malacca, across the Indian Ocean, and on to the Arabian Gulf.
• This strategy started in 1980s and its basic aim was to give China increased energy security with refuelling stations throughout the world.
•  It has also helped China project its political and military influences further.
• Some of the recent additions to the pearl have been the Hambantota port in Sri Lanka and Gwadar Naval Base in Pakistan
• Karakoram Highway, connecting China’s Xinjiang region with Pakistan’s north, can also be seen as one of the pearls
• The implication has been that it has caused great concerns for security in India, though China has tried to project it as a purely economic and maritime security venture.
• Though India has officially denied it, the string of pearls strategy may influence  its relations with its neighbours  in the following ways
• Myanmar
• India shares a 1600 km border with it. It also serves as a gateway for India to ASEAN and SE Asia
• Bilateral trade between China and Myanmar reached $2.9 bn in 2009 making China the second largest trade partner of Myanmar (after Thailand)
• The two countries have also agreed to build an oil pipeline and a gas pipeline
• Bangladesh

China-Africa Relations

In 1956, Egypt became the first African nation to establish diplomatic relations with the PRC. As of 2010, only 5 of 54 African nations maintain diplomatic relations with Taiwan.

From 1980s economic cooperation with Africa has assumed greater importance for China.

Relations have been institutionalized through the Forum on China-Africa Cooperation (FOCAC). Important milestones have been the ministerial conferences in 2000,2003, 2009 and the ‘China’s Africa Year’ in 2006.

China’s relations with Africa cover all facets – political, defence, economic and other areas of cooperation. It has helped Chinese Navy to become more assertive in the Western Indian Ocean.

Economic Relations

China-Africa Trade: valued at $10 bn in 2000. $107 bn in 2008

Over 1600 Chinese companies have investment of operational presence on the African continent.

Seven special economic zones have been set up by China in five African countries.

Issues

Critics: rise of Chinese neo-colonialism. It economic policy damages Africa’s development, delays industrialization, ruins local industry and does not transfer technology. It supports dictatorships, corruption and a violation of human rights.

Supporters: China largely doesn’t interfere in the internal affairs of the countries. It has contributed to the enhancement of Africa’s importance in world affairs as well as to rise in prices of African commodities and growth of Africa’s GDP.

India

Though India has had historically a stronger relation with Africa, in recent years, the gap between India’s and China’s profile in Africa has been widening to India’s disadvantage.

India should closely monitor China’s activities in Africa and intensify and broaden its cooperation with African countries selectively.