US and South Asia: Policy Continuities and Discontinuities Since 9/11
30 May, 2002 · 762
Report of IPCS Seminar held on 1 May 2002
Speakers:
Asia
Pacific Centre for Strategic Studies,
Hawaii
.
Pakistan
is concerned, the September event and subsequent war against terrorism launched by the
US
was instrumental in restoring their relations. Indeed, there was serious thinking even before the WTC attack to repair US-Pak relations as it was considered “valuable”. The January 12 speech of Gen. Musharraf is significant for dealing with religious radicalism in
Pakistan
; the
US
feels that Musharraf could deliver the goods.
India
and
Pakistan
and deal with them individually. This is going to be a difficult task for
Washington
in the coming years.
India
and
Pakistan
will take shape depends on the following four questions:
US
is going to deal with terrorism unilaterally or multilaterally?
Pakistan
?
India
deal with its minorities, about which the international community is very much concerned?
India
and
Pakistan
will be to deal with their bilateral issues?
China
has been most affected most by the international war on terrorism. The
Shanghai
multilateral cooperation initiative was primarily aimed at countering the increasing
US
hegemony.
China
has been vocal on issues like
US
hegemony and terrorism. There are many factors that influence the choices that
China
makes including the growing socio-economic changes, the WTO membership, in addition to the Xinjing problem. Some of the issues that have influenced the choices
China
has made are:
China
was a power on the move. The spy plane incident, where it demanded apology and got one from the
US
, improved its relations with all its neighbours. But post 9/11
China
has been checkmated.
US
and
China
remains the same-issues such as human rights, WMD proliferation,
Taiwan
and
Tibet
persist.
US
has emerged stronger and united, the
US
presence around
China
is being viewed as encirclement of
China
.
China
consists of one super power and many great powers.
China
for ‘mediating’ between
India
and
Pakistan
Russia
and the
US
.
Pakistan
? Is General Musharraf in a position to rein in the Jehad factories?
India
has a viable economic future this was recognised by the
US
in the second Clinton Administration. But for a long time the
US
tried to keep
India
out of APEC out of concern about how
Pakistan
might react.
Gujarat
carnage the criticism has come from within
India
and the national outpouring in the media.
China
and
India
have the fastest growing energy needs. There is a need to closely monitor the Gwadar port in the background the Sino-Pak relations.
Pearl
Harbour
. The
US
has a unilateralist tendency, which has positive and negative aspects. The positive aspect is that some work gets done on the ground. But the negative aspect is that multilateral organisations like the UN are sidelined.
US
is silent on the way
India
should tackle its security concerns. There are many problems in
South Asia
. But a bulk of
US
attention is spent on
India
and
Pakistan
. The non-traditional threats to security are growing, but in this region both traditional and non-traditional threats to security are present in equal magnitude.
US
is a 225 years old democracy, while the
Westminster
system is more than 600 years old.
India
has spent only 55 years in nation building. It is a pluralistic society different from any other.
India
and
Pakistan
. The larger threat to
India
comes from
China
and not
Pakistan
.
Robert Wirsing, J Mohan Malik and Paul J. Smith
Chairperson’s introductory remarks:
· To the normally asked question, ‘Was/is September 11 an epochal event?’ two replies are possible:
1. It was as significant an event as the end of the Cold War or its initiation; hence it will certainly change the dynamics of world politics.
2. It is a transient phenomenon and part of a gradual evolution in world affairs.
· Terrorism is attracting far greater attention than before. Much concern is also being shown regarding transnational fund transfers and its threat to security. National, regional and international efforts are required to tackle the menace of terrorism. Among these three international understanding and cooperation is very important.
· Indo-US relations are developing on the military side, but the economic aspect of relations is stagnant; it is a green field area to be exploited for strengthening future relations.
Robert Wirsing:
Though the event of September 11 was unexpected, it has not really put Indo-US relations on a new trajectory. That the bilateral relations between the two democracies has assumed a new momentum is a fact. These developments reveal continuity. Even before September 11 many developments were taking place in bilateral relations, which expanded after the event. It is true that Indo-US economic relations are sliding. They should be the bedrock of Indo-US relations in the coming days.
As far as
But the hardest fact is US’ inability to de-couple
How US relations with
1. Whether the
2. How successful Musharraf will be to handle fundamentalism in
3. How successfully will
4. How successful
J Mohan Malik:
Dr. Malik began by mentioning that
· Before 9/11
· China had made 4 key requests (a) UN should have a greater role in Afghanistan; (b) Xinjing problem be recognised as terrorist problem (c) Pakistan must have a role in the post Taliban Afghanistan situation and (d) reduction in US arms transfers to Taiwan. None of this was achieved.
· Chinese calculations probably were that an improvement in the US-Pakistan relations would turn the US away from the pro-India tilt it had adopted happening in the recent past.
· The basis of relations between the
· The
· The international system according to
· Some Chinese scholars give credit to
· The Chinese do feel concerned about Indian purchase of weapon systems from
Paul J. Smith:
In his brief but wide-ranging address Dr. Paul Smith drew attention to the transnational security threats. He started with the presumption that though 9/11 is not an epochal event, it had a deep impact on the psychology of individuals and policies of nations. He pointed out that at the psychological level the eliminated fear of death from the minds of terrorists and transformed infrastructure of war are the most threatening features of the contemporary world.
Dr. Smith classified the transnational challenges to security under five broad categories: transnational crime, transnational terrorism, international migration and human smuggling, transnational diseases and global environmental degradation. He identified four reasons that aggravated the transnational security threats:
1.The eroding state sovereignty due to the pressures of globalisation 2.The unprecedented role acquired by non-state actors due to their financial and technological parity with the states 3.The increasing use of religion in articulating political demands and 4.The linkages established between international criminal activities. The role of increasing communication and economic integration has made these threats severe.
According to Dr. Smith global cooperation, international law and military responses are the three available remedial options. He argued that traditional military responses are not ideal or adequate in managing these transnational threats; the state should rely on cooperation-by creating a sense of common purpose and by sharing vital information and alternative mechanisms like special training to deal with the transnational security threats.
In the discussion, he insisted on the fact that with the end of the cold war the traditional security was unfrozen. He accepted the argument that transnational companies are posing a threat to states, especially the developing and weaker states. Dr. Smith concluded that although there are many positive aspects to globalisation, the transnational security threats are exposing the dark side of globalisation.
Comments /Q&A
· What will happen to Islamic fundamentalism in
· Mindsets need to be changed.
· On the
·
· The events of 9/11 can be compared to
· The
· There is a considerable concern about truly elected and democratic state structures.
· The west has different yardsticks for measuring the success of democracy. Nation building is bloody business. The
· The world should not hyphenate
POPULAR COMMENTARIES
