The Civil Services Forum had the pleasure of interviewing Mr Prakash Shah, an eminent and senior diplomat from India who has served as the Under-Secretary-General UN and as the UN Secretary-General's Special Envoy for Iraq. Ambassador Shah also served as India's ambassador and the Permanent Representative to the UN in New York and Geneva. He has been the Secretary to three Indian Prime Ministers, as well the Energy Advisor to the Government of India.
Read on, as he elaborates on challenges and opportunities with regard to Himalayan geo-strategic relations.
1. The Sino-Indian standoff at Pangong Tso and Galwan Valley escalated in an unpredictable manner. In your opinion, if it were to transform into a hot war, what could the circumstances entail for both the countries? Further, is there a probability of American intervention to India’s detriment in the aforementioned scenario?
“The Chinese premeditated attack on Indian forces at the LAC in Galwan Valley has excited the attention of practically all Indians, at a time when India was totally pre-occupied with the COVID-19 crisis.
We should surely not return to the mindset of 1950s, of Nehruvian Hindi-Chini bhai bhai and non-alignment, during which he surrendered Aksai-Chin, and over 78,000 kilometres of Indian territory to China. We may not be as powerful as China in the Himalayas militarily, and any full-scale war would be to our disadvantage. But the Chinese must have realized that India is much stronger militarily in 2020 than it was in 1962. An India-China war would lead to massive losses to both sides even though Chinese may come out to be victorious. The question is that at a time when China is in trouble domestically with its own population, has internal economic problems which they are able to hide, as political problems with the rest of the world on Hong Kong and Taiwan issues, has alienated its neighbours is ASEAN by claiming sovereignty over South China seas, is at logger headers with USA on trade issues, and is considered by many in Australia and Europe of having a hand in the release of COVID-19 virus throughout the world, I am not sure that a strong start against China by the government of Mr Modi will not make China think twice before forcing India to a war.
Our most desirable response would be to continue negotiations on LAC at the military levels to return to status quo on the border. We should also find that China is vulnerable at the bilateral level. China needs markets and realizes that India is the biggest domestic market in the world. Reducing trade with China on an all India basis would be the best response we can give them. They have a trade surplus with India of over 50 billion USD and the government policy of boycotting Chinese goods is the right run for all Indians to follow. It is a difficult policy to follow as some corporate leaders believe. But it is the job of a democratic government elected by the people of India to take difficult decisions which are in India’s national interests.
We must also take into account the need for water, which China needs, to continue to be the largest manufacturer of micro chips in the coming years. It has built several dams on rivers in China and those which flow via Tibet to India to Pakistan. Its acquisition of Aksai-Chin in the 1950s should also be seen in that context by India in deciding its response.”
2. What, possibly, could be the way forward in solving the Lipulekh-Limpiyadhura-Kalapani conundrum between India and Nepal? What do the stances of both the countries seek to convey, specifically whence Nepal seems increasingly partisan?
“The conundrum with Nepal after its action to take over unilaterally some of the Indian territories should be seen in the context of Nepal having a full-scale communist government, led by a communist Prime Minister, supported by China. We have always seen Nepal as an extension of India. The entry of Nepalese into India is an open issue, they work and study in India as if they are Indian citizens and they find along with the Indian army in Indian wars. Surely, we must have a fair amount of Nepalese leadership and political parties on our side, and they should be activated to get the Nepalese government to have boundary negotiations with us. Being a small neighbor and heavily dependent on India till recently, we need to leave them alone for some time while we are involved with China on the border issue. Whether we have a difference with a larger neighbour like China or a smaller neighbour like Nepal, I am a great believer in negotiations to solve our differences.”
3. What would you say it is that makes China maintain a publicly neutral stance till date in the Indo-Nepal conflict, when it makes no efforts to hide its aggressive territorial claims on neighbours?
“Nepal could not have taken up a border issue with India without support from China and has clearly chosen this time because of India’s involvement with the COVID-19 crisis. China’s aggressive posture against India is another reason. China would clearly like to see how Nepal’s problems with India would be resolved before they announce clearly that they support Nepal in all respects.”
4. Taking into consideration the strained situation of Indian diplomacy, how may India assert its dominance in the Himalayan geo-strategic and geo-economic relations during and, more importantly, after the COVID-19 pandemic?
“First of all, let me say that I do not agree with your statement that our diplomacy is ‘strained’. Since PM Modi has been elected, our diplomatic standing in the world has gone up tremendously. Mr Modi is always in the front row at all international gatherings, unlike Dr Manmohan Singh. India is a member of the quadrangular group along with Japan, Australia and USA. We have been invited by the US President, the G7+5 meeting in the US later this year. We have made several proposals on international issues such as International Yoga Day, Paris Climate Agreement, Terrorist & Nuclear Agreement with USA and have convinced the world to sideline Pakistan on terrorism issues. Seeing our success in diplomacy, China has been afraid of India’s rise as a democratic rival to communist China, and has tried to encircle us through money and assistance to Nepal, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka and Pakistan. On the border issues, we have to deal with China through our usual diplomatic maturity as a leading and evolving economy.”
5. It is established that India had won the unanimous support of all the 55 countries in Asia-Pacific Group in support of its bid for a non-permanent seat in UNSC (including Pakistan, Nepal and China) in June, 2019. Would it be safe to assume that the mala fide exercise of powers by the triad is solely responsible for the downward trajectory in India’s diplomacy, or are there other factors at play?
“We won the support of 181 countries for a 2 year non-permanent seat, both because we are popular in the UN and were contesting an Asian seat. We have difficulty getting a permanent seat with veto in the Security Council, because no permanent member wants us to get the veto power, which the 5 claimed for themselves when they passed the UN Charter in 1946. I think we should become stronger and more powerful so that we are invited to become a permanent member than our asking for a permanent seat.”
6. On the economic front, India is facing a contraction in its GDP, and wishes to lure foreign investors through earning policy credibility. Under these conditions, what may a war with China warrant?
“We were recording one of the highest levels of growth in our GDP until we were hit by the COVID-19 crisis. All countries hit by the crisis will suffer from similar economic problems. What we must recognize is that every crisis is an opportunity and the nation will have to make some sacrifices to benefit from the opportunity. Actually, the Chinese virus and popularity of India has opened up opportunities for Japanese, American and European companies to increase their investments in India as they withdraw from China.”
7. India’s backing out of the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP)—a Free Trade Agreement (FTA)—in a region that seems the least affected by COVID and likely to see trade volumes in the future appears as if a faux pas. What are your views on the same?
“In retrospect, the COVID-19 crisis has justified the government’s decision not to sign the Regional Trade Agreement (RTA) as we would have found it difficult to boycott Chinese goods as a member of this Asian free-trade agreement which includes China.”
8. Recently, the UN Secretariat held a meeting of what it calls the “6+2+1” group on regional efforts to support peace in Afghanistan. Considering the prevalent Indo-Afghan relations, how could the exclusion of India affect the two countries? What could the result of this move be for South-Asian politics? Moreover, what may be the ulterior motives of the global body behind this manoeuvre?
“The UN had excluded us when Taliban first made the government in Afghanistan in the 1990s. I was Ambassador of India to the UN at that time. I am not surprised that they kept us out this time also, because Pakistan and its influence on Taliban are more important to the USA and NATO than India, and they require Pakistan’s assistance to get their troops out. Remember that we did not send any troops to Afghanistan and our own only bilateral economic partners of Afghanistan without sharing a boundary with them.”
9. Under the 2007 India-Bhutan Friendship Treaty, the two sides have agreed to “cooperate closely with each other on issues relating to their national interests. Neither Government shall allow the use of its territory for activities harmful to the national security and interest of the other.” How far could India depend on the buffer state as to safeguard its strategic interests in the region?
“Bhutan is a buffer state between China and India. It is ruled by a monarchy and therefore unlikely to adopt a communist government in the near future. I have a lot of faith in Bhutan that it will continue to stay away from Chinese influence.”
10. Please provide your final comments on the topic.
“India is my country as much as it is yours. In any conflict, whether it is with Pakistan or China, I support India fully. I would appeal to you to remember that in any dispute with an enemy country, a true nationalist does not support the enemy, whatever hatred you have for the government. Remember that 55 percent of our people voted this government for a second 5-year stint. No government is 100 percent perfect but we cannot call ourselves a democracy if we do not honour a democratic vote.
Foreign policy has not really entered the political space in a national election in any large democratic country. Foreign policy is generally bipartisan and any conflict with any country is something in which the people have supported India against our enemy. The least the bureaucrats in our country expect is that foreign policy in war time should have all the parties support.”
Comments