The biggest diplomatic
challenge in 2021 remains to be dealing with China which New Delhi has been
perforce drawn into. The other challenges are fallouts of Chinese expansionism
and attempts to bully India into a submissive status in the Indo-Pacific region. New
Delhi will have to brace itself this year for containing the coercive diplomacy
of Beijing consisting of flexing its economic as well as military might. The
challenge is compounded by world powers caving into Chinese egregious economic
diplomacy. The latest to be seduced by the Chinese economy is the 27-country
European Union. Last December, both EU and China signed the Comprehensive
Agreement in Invest (CAI).
After seven years and 35
rounds of negotiations the EU and China concluded the agreement on investment.
Germany, which is largely driven by economic interest and has much less of a
world role, pushed this agreement under the leadership of Angela Merkel. Obviously,
Merkel fell for RCEP-Integrated China. The agreement will provide unprecedented
access to the Chinese market for European investors. European companies can
participate in multiple sectors of the Chinese economy. The agreement has to be
approved by the European Parliament and the final text will be signed in early
2022 under the French EU presidency.
The signing of CAI
bespeaks the EU’s priority and perspective on international politics. This is a
major inflection point in world diplomacy. The EU was created to promote a set
of political values across the globe – freedom, cooperation, federalism, human
rights, peace, stability and rule-based world order. The EU member countries,
all practising democracies, were critical of the Chinese political system which
they termed as ‘systematic difference’. The EU objected to the security law
imposed in Hong Kong by authoritarian China, resented the disinformation
emanating from Beijing on Coronavirus, and the violations of human rights
within Chinese territory. The EU was working on a Trans-Atlantic plan to
counter the strategic challenge posed by China.
The NSA-designate of
Biden Administration had said days before the pact was signed between EU and China
“we will be entering into an early consultation with our European partners on
our common concerns about Chinese economic practices”. But both Xi Jinping and
the EU leaders namely Markel had perhaps a better sense of timing to sign up
the agreement, days before Biden assumes Presidency. The immediate implication
of this pact is the impression that EU seems to have given up its intention of
becoming a global geopolitical player. Also, Beijing seems to be saying that
democracies have no stomach for a long-term fight; the so-called democratic
block which was being constituted by the US becomes a non-starter.
What is the implication
of this development on Indian diplomacy? To be sure, New Delhi could not have
prevented the EU from signing the agreement. In fact, even Donald Trump, who was
the main architect of the counter-China policy, signed the Trade-1 Agreement with
Beijing. The important lesson for New Delhi to learn is an axiomatic truth in
international diplomacy, i.e. “even virtuous leaders inevitably must be backed
by the availability of the material power if they are to enjoy enduring
political success”. So, the limitations of national capabilities have to be
overcome.
Read: FOREIGN POLICY IN INDIAN ELECTIONS: A CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF BJP AND CONGRESS MANIFESTOES
To start with, India will
have to offer the market, conduce the investment from abroad, build technological
and productive capacities. Even during the pandemic, the Chinese economy grew more
than those of others whereas Indian economy nosedived into -20% growth. New
Delhi has to catch up with Beijing, which boasts of a five-time higher economy
than that of India. India’s foreign policy and its much-lauded principles have
been bedevilled by its weak economy. The realpolitik theorist Hans J.
Morgenthau had commented, “India’s widespread and chronic poverty prevented it
from pursuing its laudable foreign policy objectives”. The chronic poverty has
considerably reduced but the economic strength is not commensurate with India’s
potentials for world politics.
In addition to a weaker
economy, there are structural and process problems in our foreign policy even under
the present Prime Minister. These problems cut both ways; they have broken the
mould in certain areas, but have gone against our image and interest in others.
Some observers should say that owing to such problems, it is not a happy
moment for India’s foreign policy. On the contrary, foreign policy seems to be
directionless and floundering. The problems are as follows:
One, foreign policy
inputs are coming from some nebulous groups outside South Block. For instance, a
nondescript NGO was behind inviting 23 European MPs to visit Kashmir
immediately after Article 370 was defanged. All those MPs belonged to one
ideological block – right-wing Conservative. Therefore, their endorsement of
the situation in Kashmir somewhat lacked credibility.
Second, the
decision-making on foreign policy is centralised; the Prime Minister takes a
call on each issue and the Finance Minister simply executes. Particularly, with
Modi, this has been the practice. Trump’s visit to Ahmedabad was planned,
designed and choreographed by the PM himself. On the ‘famous’ demonetisation, he
took the sudden momentous decision, even the Finance Minister was not on board and
piled on later. So, all the grand designs on foreign policy emerge out of the
PMO.
Third, Foreign Minister S
Jaishankar, by far a competent career diplomat was hand-picked by Modi. Admittedly,
former Prime Ministers like Indira Gandhi also have hand-picked their Foreign
Ministers. It is so because the PMs perhaps do not want to share the limelight
with the Foreign Ministers. But Jaishankar does not have a grounding in politics.
That is his Achilles’ heel. That is why the FM does not interact with the
public, which he used to do when he was the Foreign Secretary. The Foreign
Minister should not be kept away from the limelight.
Fourth, Modi depends too
much on personal factors, rather than structural ones. He has built a personal rapport with his ‘warmth and charm’ with Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel,
Jair Bolsonaro of Brazil, Shinzo Abe of Japan, Donald Trump whose candidature Modi
undiplomatically had endorsed, and perhaps Boris Johnson of UK. It is another
thing that all these leaders are populist and conservative.
The fifth is the personal
angle translating into Summit diplomacy. The Summitry should be the endpoint
or the last resort of diplomatic exercise, not the start. If the Summit meetings
between the heads of the governments of the two countries did not yield results,
then where does one go! This is what happened between Modi and Jinping in Wuhan
and Mallapuram. Xi Jinping could not be swayed. He has come up in politics the
hard way and is ambitious about making China the world power. In this mission,
he wants to cut India to size to prevent it from being a potential rival in the Indo-Pacific region.
Sixth, the Modi regime
seems to underestimate the impact of domestic policies and politics on our
foreign policy. India’s democracy and stability have played a complementary
role in India’s diplomacy. On the other hand, domestic problems like poverty
in the past and unrest and resentment at present could harm our foreign policy
interest. For instance, the imposition of CAA and NRC have upset our Islamic
neighbours, likewise, at the time of this writing, the ongoing farmers’ agitation
is having an international echo, at least where Indian Diaspora is sizeable. And
worse, we seem to be mixing up the domestic and foreign policy, like the
government picked up a fight with Canadian Prime Minister Trudeau as he
expressed sympathy for the farmers’ issues.
On the brighter side,
Modi has made a radical departure from India’s traditional foreign policy which
was time-worn, reactive, ideologically-driven, and please-all. India now takes
positions and sides on international issues. Even a Chinese State-run newspaper
commented, “India now has a government that would not be scared to offend
others”. Coming from China, this is a big compliment to our new foreign policy.
However, if the problems identified above are addressed, it could be happier
times for India’s foreign policy.
By Dr. D.K. Giri (Prof. International Relations, JIMMC)
Comments
Post a Comment