Monday Morning Meeting on Japan’s Domestic Discourse on Security
August 22, 2022
Titli Basu
1000 hrs
Monday Morning Meeting
Executive Summary
2022 remains a decisive year for Japan due to the publication of Tokyo’s Revised Version of the National Security Strategy later this year. Discourses in Tokyo mainly focus on the resurgence of the Great Power Competition and Japan's counterstrike capability. The region is experiencing an emerging shift in how the Japanese public perceives security. Tokyo’s perception of China and Russia has also witnessed a major shift, with Japan increasing aligning itself with the G7. In the Korean Peninsula, while relations with North Korea have witnessed mounting tensions, relations with Seoul are on an upward trajectory.
India has positioned itself as a priority nation and a crucial node in Japan’s Free and Open Indo-Pacific (FOIP) framework.
Detailed Report
Dr. Prashant Kumar Singh introduced the topic of the Monday Morning Meeting by bringing to light the recent publication of Japan's Defence White Paper. He also discussed the recently issued Defence of Japan 2022 Digest by Japan, which mainly focused on how the world community is currently experiencing its worst crisis since World War II and how Taiwan has evolved into a critical reference point for strategic competition between the US and China.
Dr. Titli Basu was given the floor by the moderator after the brief introduction.
The speaker initially delved into the positive posture of Japan since late Mr. Shinzo Abe’s administration. She also noted that 2022 was a decisive year for Japan due to the publication of Tokyo’s Revised Version of National Security Strategy later this year, discussions on which are still going on. The speaker added that the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) appears to be considering realistic national security options as the strategic environment in the region has changed. She mentioned that the first National Security Strategy of Japan was released in 2013, predating events like the COVID-19 Pandemic, the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the resurgence of QUAD, and the US-China Strategic Competition. It dates back to a period when the Free and Open Indo-Pacific was yet to become a dominant theme in the strategic lexicon.
Dr. Basu went on to discuss the patterns in the literature produced by the top Japanese think tanks and laid out the empirical evidence supporting that literature.
According to her, the main theme was the resurgence of Great Power Competition, which included both the strategic rivalry between the US and China and the US and Russia. Japan is also a participant in this Great Power Competition as a security treaty ally of the United States. She also looked at the prevalent themes in Japanese media. Several issues are appearing in Japanese media, including the discussion about Japan's counterstrike capability, whether to follow the NATO model on nuclear sharing and the topic of doubling defence spending in a 5-year time frame. In this case, Dr. Basu noted that, beneath the surface, there is uncertainty concerning the roadmap and the source of the funding, keeping in mind Japan's fiscal situation.
The region is cautiously watching what kind of Japan they will have to deal with as Japan begins rewiring some of the national security components of its National Security Strategy. This is because the East Asia region, where Japan is located, has multiple dynamics at play, such as contested territorial claims, a toxic history in domestic politics, and a high degree of nationalism.
Dr. Basu further noted that the year 2022 is a particularly challenging year for Japan because of the passing of the Late former Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, one of the key figures at the forefront of the country's national security discussion. Speaking on the unfortunate assassination, the speaker emphasised Abe’s active involvement in influencing the domestic political discourse on Taiwan-related matters. Former PM Abe also advocated a national discussion on nuclear sharing arrangement with the US. This caused waves in domestic politics and prompted the publication of future public opinion polls. About 80% of respondents, according to some polls, believe that there should be a national discussion on nuclear sharing arrangements with the United States. In this regard, Dr. Basu noted that former PM Abe’s assassination is irreparable damage not only to the discussion on national security but across the spectrum.
Speaking about how security experts are approaching the issue, the speaker made the observation that some of the more serious writings are less concerned with whether Japan should have these nuclear sharing agreements and more about whether the current NATO model is the best one to follow or whether they should come up with some sort of arrangement that is more specific to the US-Japan Security Alliance. The lack of a unified command structure and the operational challenges are also prominent topics of discussion.
Moving further, the speaker elaborated on the emerging shift in how the Japanese public perceives security, focusing particularly on how, compared to a decade ago, the public has grown more realistic and informed about security issues. Dr. Basu referenced a Nikkei Asia opinion poll in which almost 74% of the Japanese respondents said that Japan should participate in efforts to stabilise the Taiwan Strait. Additionally, numerous polls from various newspapers across the political spectrum reflect similar viewpoints. The centre-right poll by Yomiuri Shimbun revealed that 70-72 per cent of respondents said Japan should improve its defence capability. Similar findings from the left-leaning paper The Asahi Shimbun revealed that 64-65 per cent of respondents thought Japan should improve its defence capability. The speaker also noted that Prime Minister Kishida’s approval rating was consistently high following his stance on the Russian invasion, indicating that the Japanese public approved of it.
Speaking on Tokyo's China Strategy, the speaker said that the 2013 National Security Strategy document termed Tokyo’s relationship with Beijing as a ‘Mutually Beneficial Relationship based on Common Strategic Interests.’ Japan opposes a Sino-Centric Regional Order. She mentioned the opinions of some of the top researchers in China in this context. For instance, one opinion is that China changed the status quo by becoming stronger, and Japan and US changed the status quo by becoming weaker.
The speaker emphasised the post-pandemic trend of increased discussion on economic security and spoke about Japan's leadership position in this sector due to the presence of a full-time minister for economic security. She made a point to underline that in this situation, economic security does not imply a decoupling from China.
A central tenet of Japan’s China discussion is the Taiwan issue. Wherever he went, whether it was to NATO or the G7, Prime Minister Kishida conveyed the same message: Is ‘Ukraine today may be East Asia tomorrow.’ The subject of Taiwan, the speaker pointed out, had already taken centre stage the year before, as Taiwan was featured in the 2021 Defence White Paper. She added that the LDP's Taiwan Project Group will look for further ways to engage with Taiwan. Additionally, Japanese security experts are considering what operational plans the US-Japan Security Alliance might have as they become increasingly certain that China is determined to reunify Taiwan.
Dr. Basu also underscored the Japanese discourse following the Speaker of the US House of Representatives, Nancy Pelosi’s visit. She spoke of tremendous camaraderie at the political level, but academically, there were concerns about the strategic significance of this visit since some believed it was a pretext for China to escalate and make this a standard practice.
Speaking on Japan’s Russia Policy, Dr. Basu stressed that there is a complete reversal of former PM Abe's Russia Outreach. Japan now aligns with the G7, and Russia regards Japan as an unfriendly country. The effectiveness of economic sanctions is also a topic of discussion within the Japanese strategic community, as well as whether there might be a more effective approach to exert pressure, besides sanctions.
As the presentation drew to a close, the subject of Japan’s threat assessment from North Korea was covered, before moving to Japan’s relations with India. The speaker said that when it comes to North Korea, Pyongyang's advancements in nuclear and missile technology are the biggest worry for the Japanese. She also added that relations with South Korea, which is an important part of the trilateral arrangement that the US has with its Northeast Asian allies in terms of dealing with the Korean peninsula, were good.
The 2013 National Security Strategy released by Japan lists India as a priority nation. She pointed out that there is general agreement in policy documents and the most recent Defence White Paper on the subject of India, that New Delhi is crucial to the FOIP framework and that India is given space in their policy papers.
After the speaker brought her presentation to a close, the moderator thanked her for her insightful remarks and opened the floor to questions and comments from the audience.
Key Takeaways from the Q&A Session
The question-and-answer session brought to light many viewpoints based on a thorough assessment of the matter presented during the discussion. Following are a few of the key points raised during the session:
The conversation explored the connections between the present domestic debates and the government's Taiwan policies. The possibility that Japan would modify its relations with Taiwan in the case of a war between China and the United States.
Numerous discourses on the term 'Strategic Ambiguity' were examined in relation to the One China policy implemented by East Asian nations.
The nature of the debates surrounding pre-emptive strikes and Japan's direct involvement were discussed.
A connection was made between the potential fall of Taiwan and the consequences for Japan.
Avoid excessively securitising India's connection with Japan.
Possibility of India becoming Japan's most significant economic partner was explored.
Inability to effectively counter Chinese expansionism with substantial measures without economic decoupling.
It was observed that by remaining silent about the economic blockade, we are encouraging China to engage in similar acts in the future, despite the fact that the semiconductor industry may be affected.
The discussion delved into the possibility of interpretation of Japanese counterattack capabilities as a credible second-strike capability.
Changes in Japan's perception of the threat posed by China during the previous decade were examined, along with corresponding changes in the terminology used to define the threat and security situation.
Domestic discourse on nuclear sharing with the USA.
Identification of Africa as a growing strategic security concern for Japan within domestic discourse.
The Report was prepared by Ms. Esha Banerjee, Intern, East Asia Centre, MP-IDSA.
East Asia
Report: Talk by Dr. Bilveer Singh on "The Islamic State and South East Asia- the State of Play"
July 15, 2022
1000 hrs
Talk
The interaction was held on 15 July 2022 and the session was chaired by the Director-General, Ambassador Sujan Chinoy. Deputy Director-General Maj. Gen. (Dr.) Bipin Bakshi (Retd.) and research faculty from the institute were also present. The topic for discussion was “ASEAN-India Partnership in an Era of Rising China”, and the speaker was Professor (Dr.) Bilveer Singh from Department of Political Science, National University of Singapore.
Executive Summary:
The interaction was useful in understanding Southeast Asian perspectives of India, particularly Singapore. The region of Indo-Pacific is poised for large-scale development and growth but will also face challenges due to geopolitical rivalry. The ASEAN nations are vulnerable and fear getting caught between China and the US. States such as Singapore invest heavily in areas of human resource development, research and innovation, finance and emerging technologies, to maintain its leadership role in the region. The influence of China, economic and military, is too pervasive for Southeast Asian states to successfully resist.
Detailed Report:
The session began with Ambassador Chinoy’s welcome remarks addressed to Dr. Singh, and his introduction to the audience. Dr. Singh has studied comparative politics, aadicalisation and counter-terrorism, security policy of Indonesia, and Singapore’s foreign policy. Ambassador Chinoy outlined the relationship between India and ASEAN, and highlighted the deep historical and cultural linkages between the two regions. India and Southeast Asia have interacted with each other’s states and peoples since centuries and in a number of ways including trade and business, spirituality and religion, and politics and diplomacy. It also has had influences from China, which had been the other large civilisation in the proximity, and the Gulf region, from where Islamic influence came by the way of trade. Amidst all these external influences, Southeast Asian nations have developed a distinct identity and culture, and hold their own political worldview.
Ambassador Chinoy posed some questions for the speaker and the audience such as tackling of China, and India’s options in that regard, the focus on trade or defence in its relations with Southeast Asia, India’s role and approach to the South China Sea issue etc. Dr. Singh acknowledged the deep footprints of India in the culture and society of Southeast Asia. He started to explain the current scenario of China’s relations with the region. Countries like Singapore have felt the pressure from China in context to their engagements with the US. Even as ASEAN wishes to remain neutral in this power struggle between the two superpowers, it becomes increasingly vulnerable. China’s growing naval capacities and frequent incursion into the maritime territories of ASEAN nations is well-known. It has ramped up insecurities among these ASEAN nations that are also claimant states in the South China Sea dispute such as Vietnam, the Philippines, Indonesia, Malaysia and Brunei.
The situation in Singapore is particularly intensifying. The racial undertones in the Singaporean society may be becoming more explicit with increasing tensions among large powers outside the country. Singapore’s relations with Taiwan are also a matter of concern and could potentially become a flashpoint for crisis in the region. Given the geopolitical push and pull faced by Singapore, its relations with India are of significance. India’s vast experience in counter-terrorism can be a major area of cooperation with Southeast Asia. Trade relations between the two sides are already strong but have much more potential. India’s increasing participation in the security dynamics of the region through the Quad, and bilateral cooperation will help maintain balance of power in the Indo-Pacific, as it may be becoming less stable.
The audience also had some questions on the subject of discussion. In response to a query about whether China may attack Taiwan, Dr. Singh clarified that such a turn of events is unlikely although not entirely unthinkable. A lot may depend upon the internal politics of Taiwan and which party may come to power. Some factions in Taiwan may be more receptive to Beijing’s influence than others. However, Taiwan’s economy is highly dependent on China which limits its strategic maneuverability to a large extent. In response to a query on demographics of Singapore, Dr. Singh replied that a majority Chinese population has been the convention and the elite may not be in favour of changing or diluting that despite no constitutional obligation. Dr. Singh believed that to counter Chinese influence, it is important for countries in the region to radically upgrade defence cooperation and joint military training. ASEAN states like Singapore will continue to hedge among large powers in the region to ensure a vibrant economy and reliable security. The role of the US in that regard becomes important but it is unclear how much can Washington commit to the region in the face of changing and unstable politics in its own domestic landscape.
The report was prepared by Mr. Akash Sahu, Research Analyst, Southeast Asia and Oceania Centre, MP-IDSA.
Monday Morning Meeting on Role of Financial Regulation as an Instrument of Comprehensive National Power
September 05, 2022
1000 hrs
Monday Morning Meeting
Mr. Pradeep S. Gautam, Former Research Fellow, Manohar Parrikar Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses (MP-IDSA), spoke on “Role of Financial Regulation as an Instrument of Comprehensive National Power” at the Monday Morning Meeting held on 5 September 2022. The session was chaired by Col. (Dr.) D.P.K. Pillay, Research Fellow, Ambassador Sujan R. Chinoy, Director General, MP-IDSA, Maj. Gen. (Dr.) Bipin Bakshi (Retd.), Deputy Director General, MP-IDSA, and scholars of the institute were in attendance.
Executive Summary
Comprehensive National Power (CNP) can be understood as the ability of a country to achieve its national objectives. Viewed as such, it is a function of its economy, polity, military, etc. On the one hand, thinkers like Michael Porter define CNP as the capacity of the country to mobilise resources, including economic resources, human capital, government spending, and international resources. All the above capacities mobilise economic resources and play a pivotal role in determining the CNP of a country. On the other hand, financial regulations facilitating the protection of private property and the rule of law have historically enhanced economic prosperity and hence are crucial for long-term growth in CNP.
Detailed Report
After briefly introducing the topic, the chair invited Mr. Gautam to deliver his remarks. The speaker began by underlining the definition of CNP. Following this, he discussed the significance behind India’s Income Tax department’s logo, which says “Kosh Mulo Dandah.” Taken from Arthashastra, it means treasury or taxation is the backbone of administration or state power.
Mr. Gautam shed light on how some of the economic policies formulated in the post-independence era failed to fully align with India’s national goals of rapid capital accumulation. Then he discussed the relationship between state power and symbols of economic prosperity by taking certain examples. He retraced the developments during the Mughal era, where he emphasised that until Aurangzeb’s reign, the dynastic rule was considered powerful due to the credibility attached to the currency – gold and silver coins. Till Aurangzeb’s time, Mughal gold coins enjoyed higher status and were accepted at par by the East India Company and kings of South India. Post that period, there was a rapid decline in the quality of Mughal gold coins and Mughal power.
Delving into this issue further, Mr. Gautam argued that autocratic and authoritative rulers are at times followed by rapid state power decline. The reason for the same is found in the autocrats’ unchecked powers to tax and wage wars. This undermined private property, led to wastage and loss of capital, and eventually, capital flight. He highlighted this by pointing out how Kautilya’s Arthashastra equated a tax collector’s role to a honeybee that extracts nectar and pollinates the flowers. Further emphasising the point, he moved to discuss the workings of pre-industrial Europe. First, strong autocratic tendencies in Spain led to capital shifting to Amsterdam and then pre-industrial England, which provided better protection to private property and where the power of the monarch was kept in check. England, being based on common law, also provided better legal protection to creditors.
According to the speaker, a financial and legal innovation also facilitated this shift in the form of limited liability joint stock companies. These limited liability companies helped mitigate risk inherently involved in international trade and exploration in that era. However, he also said that religion might also have a role in this shift as Spain being predominantly catholic, did not promote charging interest on capital. This might have further led the capital flight to Amsterdam and England and led to the growth of the banking sector in those protestant countries which do not have such strong ideological baggage.
While addressing the audience, the speaker explained that the world is currently in an advanced stage of financialisation, and there is scope for capital accumulation to begin in relatively underdeveloped markets like India.
Financial regulations facilitating better creditor protection and private property may facilitate this capital accumulation. Under the current Indian Government, legislations like the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Act have tried to give better creditor protection and resolve disputes relatively speedily. This is a significant improvement from the era where laws and institutions like Sick Industrial Companies Act and Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction largely prevented the dissolution of non-profitable businesses, locking creditors in long disputes and capital in unproductive ventures.
Finally, the speaker emphasised the need for a global financial center in India to further accelerate capital accumulation. He laid out key features which may make a successful global financial centre: -
a) Whether it is a vibrant, livable city
b) Whether the tax structure is reasonable
c) Whether it is open to receiving and taking out capital and making profits
d) Whether the city is a hub of economic activities and serves a domestic market
After the speaker concluded his presentation, the chair opened the floor for a question-and-answer session.
Some crucial themes were raised by the audience, including how conflicts are also an important reason why capital moves from one place to another. The Director General highlighted Benjamin Franklin’s quote about the certainty of death and taxes. He further raised issues regarding how CNP is calculated and the subjectivity involved. Furthermore, the role of immigration, individual nation-states’ policies concerning this issue, and their collective impact on their CNP were also deliberated.
Finally, the pace of the Indian economy, stability of the existing business model, the correlation between a country’s military might and its ability to tax a multi-national corporation, the feasibility of setting up an international financial centre in India, and its perception of being an attractive centre of financial capital were some of the other critical issues discussed during the meeting.
This report was prepared by Ms. Saman Ayesha Kidwai, Research Analyst, Counter-Terrorism Centre, MP-IDSA.
Monday Morning Meeting on Assessing India's Non-Permanent Membership at the UN Security Council
August 29, 2022
1000 hrs
Monday Morning Meeting
Dr. Rajeesh Kumar, Associate Fellow, Manohar Parrikar Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses (MP-IDSA), spoke on "Assessing India's Non-Permanent Membership at the UN Security Council” at the Monday Morning Meeting held on 29 August 2022. The session was chaired by Ms. Ruchita Beri, Senior Research Associate, MP-IDSA. Ambassador Sujan R. Chinoy, Director General, MP-IDSA, Maj. Gen. (Dr.) Bipin Bakshi (Retd.), Deputy Director General, MP-IDSA, and scholars of the Institute were in attendance.
Executive Summary
The discussion centred on two issues. The first is India's presidency of the United Nations Security Council (UNSC), and how India contributed to expanding the UNSC agenda. The second theme emphasised was India's voting response in the United Nations Security Council on a variety of issues, including peacekeeping, terrorism, peace and security, and conflicts in Afghanistan, the Middle East, and Africa.
Detailed Report
The speaker focused much of his remarks on India's one-and-a-half-year tenure (India joined the UNSC in January 2021) as a non-permanent member of the United Nations Security Council (UNSC). He highlighted that India's membership comes at a time of rising tensions between superpowers within and outside the Security Council, posing a significant challenge to India. The speaker emphasised the significance of India's performance in the UNSC by offering an outline of India's previous UNSC terms.
For the 2021–22 UNSC term, India's primary objective in the UNSC was to implement a new orientation for a reformed multilateral system. This approach was guided by Prime Minister Modi's five ‘S’s- samman (respect), samvad (dialogue), sahyog (cooperation), shanti (peace), and samriddhi (prosperity). India had also identified five priorities for the term: seeking responsible and inclusive solutions, result-oriented measures to counter international terrorism, reforming multilateralism to reflect contemporary realities of global politics, streamlining peacekeeping operations, and technology with a human touch.
India held three signature events after it acceded to the UNSC presidency in August 2021. The open debate on maritime security was followed by debates on peacekeeping operations and counterterrorism. Prime Minister Narendra Modi presided over the high-level discussion on maritime security, making him the first Indian Prime Minister to do so. It was the first standalone discussion on maritime security in the UNSC and the meeting adopted the first presidential statement on this issue. During the discussion, India also proposed five principles for discussion.
The open debate on counterterrorism was chaired by India’s External Affairs Minister, Dr. S. Jaishankar. The Minister reiterated that counter-terrorism is a priority for India, which has been the victim of major terror attacks. He also emphasised the need for the early adoption of a UN Comprehensive Convention on International Terrorism for future global counter-terrorism efforts. The open debate on peacekeeping produced a presidential statement and a resolution on accountability for crimes against peacekeepers. The statement recognised the role of technology in peacekeeping and proposed using operationally proven cost-effective, and environment-friendly technologies.
Dr. Kumar added that an important issue that coincided with the Indian presidency was the Taliban's takeover of Afghanistan. As Council President, India organised a briefing, released two press statements condemning the terrorist attacks, and introduced a resolution to address the Afghan problem. Resolution 2593 was passed, according to which, Afghan territory should not be used to threaten or attack any country, to house or train terrorists, or to support a terrorist organisation. India has also urged for an inclusive regime that represents all sections of Afghan society.
Ukraine was another important issue which came to the UNSC during India’s current stint. Dr. Kumar argued that India’s approach to the Ukrainian crisis showed its independent and neutral foreign policy. Since February 2022, the UNSC convened 13 meetings on the Ukraine issue and in all these meetings India has consistently called for restraint on all sides. On February 25, when the UN Security Council considered a draft resolution tabled by Albania and the US, demanding Russia's immediate and unconditional withdrawal from Ukraine, India, along with China and the United Arab Emirates, abstained. India called for an immediate de-escalation of violence and hostility and requested the opposing parties to return to the path of diplomacy. On February 27, India again abstained from voting on a UNSC resolution to refer the Ukraine crisis to the General Assembly. Later in March, India, along with 12 other UN Security Council members, abstained on a resolution by Russia on the humanitarian crisis in Ukraine. On August 24, Russia called for a procedural vote on whether to allow Ukraine’s President to address the UNSC, via video conferencing. At the procedural vote, India once again abstained.
Dr. Kumar noted that 88 UN resolutions have been enacted since 2021, with India voting in favour of 81 of them. In other words, as a non-permanent member of the UNSC, India backed more than 90% of the resolution. In 2021, 57 resolutions were passed, with India supporting 54 of them. Two proposed resolutions were not adopted by the Council. One was on Bosnia and Herzegovina, in which India abstained, and the other was on climate and security, in which India voted against. In 2022, 31 resolutions were adopted, 27 of which India supported, and 5 of which India did not support. Almost half of the resolutions during the term were related to Africa (42 resolutions) and India has supported 40 out of these 42 and abstained from two that were related to conflicts in Sudan and South Sudan. On Ukraine, four resolutions were adopted where India supported one and abstained from the remaining three resolutions.
Dr. Kumar also stated that India's voting history demonstrates that the country has always opted to be part of the democratic majority, assisting in the adoption of broadly acceptable decisions and resolutions. It has only used abstentions to express its reservations regarding a specific issue. India has endeavoured to prioritise a political approach to crisis resolution through dialogue and negotiation. Finally, as a non-permanent member of the UNSC, India has always demonstrated maturity, flexibility, principles, and pragmatism. So India's approach, together with its presidency and working responses on various issues, demonstrated some level of maturity in the UNSC, and India also pushed for its permanent membership in the UNSC.
Comments and Questions
Ms. Ruchita Beri asked the speaker about the current and future relevance of the UN Security Council as the global body dealing with international security. Ambassador Sujan Chinoy, during the discussion, explicated the archaic and undemocratic nature of the UNSC. There have also been concerns raised about UN Security Council reforms, India's position on women, peace, and the security agenda, and the draft resolution that linked climate change to global security challenges.
The discussion ended with a vote of thanks by the Chair.
The report was prepared by Ms. Bulbul Prakash, Intern, ALACUN Centre, MP-IDSA.
Monday Morning Meeting on "Japan’s Domestic Discourse on Security”
August 23, 2022
1000 hrs
Monday Morning Meeting
Dr. Titli Basu, Associate Fellow, Manohar Parrikar IDSA, will speak on "Japan’s Domestic Discourse on Security” at the Monday Morning Meeting which will be held on 22 August 2022 at 10 AM. The venue is Auditorium, Second Floor.
Dr. Prashant Kumar Singh, Associate Fellow, Manohar Parrikar IDSA, will be the moderator.
Ms. Esha Banerji, Intern, will be the rapporteur.
Talk by The Hon. Kevin Rudd, President Asia Society Policy Institute and former PM Australia
August 24, 2022
1100 hrs
Eminent Persons' Lecture Series
On 24 August 2022, the Manohar Parrikar Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses (MP-IDSA) hosted the Honourable Kevin Rudd, President, Asia Society Policy Institute and former Prime Minister of Australia for a Lecture on the topic “China’s Internal Drivers and External Orientation”. Director General, MP-IDSA, Ambassador Sujan R. Chinoy delivered the welcome remarks and enriched the discussion with his insightful comments on the subject by moderating a lively Q&A session. The discussion was followed by the launch of the Hon. Mr. Rudd’s new book The Avoidable War: The Dangers of a Catastrophic Conflict Between the US and Xi Jinping's China.
Executive Summary
In the last few decades, the international community has witnessed China’s dramatic rise. However, increase in Chinese economic and military capabilities has been disruptive due to China’s inability to accommodate the interests and aspirations of other powers. Further, China under Xi Jinping’s leadership has discarded its previous policy of “hide your strength and bide your time” and has grown increasingly assertive and provocative in its policy approach. Expecting that the international community will have to deal with Xi Jinping’s China for the foreseeable future, the Hon. Kevin Rudd delivered a comprehensive lecture on President Xi’s ideological worldview, present state of Chinese economy and the possible outcome of the 20th Party Congress.
Detailed Report
The session began with welcome remarks by Ambassador Sujan R. Chinoy. He welcomed the attendees and the key speaker, the Hon. Kevin Rudd by sharing anecdotes’ on their long association, as well as informing the audience of Mr. Rudd’s vast knowledge and expertise as a seasoned China watcher. Setting the tone of the discussion he opined that China’s rise has been phenomenal but disruptive on account of its own inability to accommodate the sensitivities of others. Highlighting the West’s response, he observed that the liberal democratic order is reacting strongly to Chinese hubris and the growing contestation between the United States (US) and China has raised the spectre of a looming conflict. He cautioned that a perceived decline in US power could lead to a miscalculation in Beijing. Towards the end of his remarks Ambassador Chinoy briefly elaborated on the pressing questions which persist regarding the Chinese dream of reunification with Taiwan and the possibility of China using force. He emphasised that a rules based international order is a prerequisite for peace and stability in the Indo-Pacific. With these comments he invited the Hon. Kevin Rudd to deliver his address.
Hon. Mr. Rudd at the outset of his lecture identified three broad themes that constituted his presentation; first, the Chinese President Xi Jinping’s ideological worldview, second, current standing and future trajectory of the Chinese economy and lastly, the possible policy orientation that is likely to emerge from the 20th Party Congress in terms of China’s future leadership structure. Elaborating on the first aspect of his presentation he observed that Xi’s worldview can be defined in ten concentric circles indicating his most core interests to those which are not central but significant.
First, is to stay in power. Hon. Mr. Rudd underscored this intent as central to Xi’s actions. He contended that the decision-making in Beijing is guided by the motive to keep the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) in power with Xi as the leader of the party.
Second, is growing the economy. He observed that growing the economy is significant in two respects, first is because of the social contract between the CCP and the Chinese people, whereby the population will continue to surrender their political rights to the party in exchange for economic growth, rising living standards and increasing employment opportunities. The second reason is that economic growth is fundamental to China’s aggregate national ambition of national wealth and power. In Beijing’s perception a strong economy will increase China’s capacity to invest in its military capabilities and other leverages of international power.
Third, is to maintain and sustain national unity at all costs. According to the Hon. Mr. Rudd this underpins China’s strategy towards Tibet, Xinjiang, Hong Kong and Taiwan. Also, these are not just matters of fundamental national security interests to CCP, but in view of the series of invasions that China suffered in the past, national unity is perceived to be important to mitigate future threats. He added that the case of Taiwan is ideologically important as the reunification would symbolise completion of Chinese revolution.
Fourth, is ensuring environmental sustainability. The issue has gained considerable attention in recent times owing to a series of factors like intense public reaction to air pollution in China’s major cities. This in turn has also resulted in a different appraisal of the importance of reining in China’s carbon emissions. Further, scientific conclusions and physical observations of now extreme weather events across China have also concerned policymakers. The Hon. Mr. Rudd observed that focus on environmental sustainability could make China’s economic objective become partly subjective to China’s environmental objective and this issue is now a part of the internal debate.
Fifth, is the strategy under Xi Jinping towards China’s neighbouring states. As China shares land borders with 14 states, Beijing expends considerable attention towards managing ties with them and in the Chinese world view its neighbours should be economically dependent on China, which in turn ensures foreign policy compliance towards China. In the words of the Hon. Mr. Rudd “this is quite a deep axiom in terms on Chinese strategic policy and has its own category of consideration within Chinese foreign policy conceptual universe”.
Sixth, is modernisation of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) and turning it into a fully modernised, integrated and information systems driven military which is capable of both fighting and winning wars. The Hon. Mr. Rudd claimed this policy decision to be a considerable revolution within the Chinese military establishment.
Seventh, is pushing the US out of East Asia, West-Pacific and beyond the first island chain as Beijing considers the US’ forward presence to be a direct threat to China’s ability to take Taiwan. To this end, a central element of Chinese military strategy in East Asia and West Pacific is to ultimately fracture the US traditional alliance structure.
Eighth is that China is striving to extend a parallel sphere of influence in its continental periphery to the West through Eurasia. The major objective of the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), Maritime Silk Road (MSR) and other related initiatives is to extend Chinese influence throughout Eurasia including Western Europe and transform the region into a zone of economic opportunity for China, while creating economic dependencies on China. Two major bases of this strategy are first to induce high levels of foreign policy compliance in the long run and fundamentally re-engineer US-Russia / China-Russia relations.
Ninth is to get the rest of the developing world (Africa, Latin America, Asia) especially with whom China shares economic partnerships to support Chinese foreign policy interests in multilateral institutions.
And tenth, is to re-engineer the rules based international order through various means. In this context the Hon. Mr. Rudd offered two instances, first within international institutions China is causing its financial and personal footprint to become much more pronounced as an actor than it was in the past. Second, China is seeking to change the international system in a normative sense whereby in institutions of multilateral governance, Beijing is trying to replace notions of universal human rights of the individual with sovereign rights of the state.
On the second aspect of his presentation that is current standing of the Chinese economy, the Hon. Mr. Rudd observed that the future performance of the domestic economy is the Achilles’ heel of Xi Jinping’s strategic vision and his ideological worldview. Because Xi, in a bid to restructure state-market relations, reined in the absolute operational freedom enjoyed by the Chinese private sector, which in turn has impacted China’s economic growth. Further, the adverse impact of the ideologically driven economic policies has been compounded by COVID induced economic slowdown and shrinking workforce. Therefore, assumptions about large-scale expansion of the Chinese economy in the future appear weak.
Talking about the possible outcomes of the 20th Party Congress, the Hon. Mr. Rudd informed that the economic policies emerging from the event will be important to note. He contended that Xi Jinping will be re-appointed as there is no alternative in sight. However, the real question is whether following his reappointment Xi will have the same political mandate to effectively re-engineer China’s economic strategy for the next ten to fifteen years.
The Hon. Mr. Rudd concluded his remarks by stating that the international community will be dealing with China for a long time and therefore it is necessary to understand Xi’s worldview and its implications domestically and worldwide.
Following The Hon. Mr. Rudd’s address, Ambassador Chinoy thanked him for the presentation and made a few observations. He opined that President Xi Jinping appears to be an amalgamation of a number of strands from Chinese history for when it comes to the expansion of China’s Blue Water Navy and maritime power, he is taking a page out of the book of the Ming Dynasty. Similarly, as the expansionism and belligerence on borders is a Qing dynasty mindset, the desire to make China, a very modern country resemble the thinking that Republican China had under Sun Yat Sen. Further, Xi also adopted Mao’s principles in reining in the private sectors and co-existing with the bourgeoise for a particular purpose packed within the four corners of the party tenets. Therefore, in his own way Xi Jinping has learnt a lot from history.
The Hon. Mr. Rudd concurred with Ambassador Chinoy’s observations and affirmed that Xi Jinping like his predecessors is an amalgam of Chinese classical and modern history because China has a highly literate culture which is deeply informed by historical tradition but interpreted through the lenses of a modern Marxist Leninist party. Further, the sweeping changes that Xi has instituted reflect different elements of the Chinese systems before him.
Q& A Session
During the discussion a number of questions were raised. Dr. Sanjaya Baru, Distinguished Fellow at the United Services Institute (USI) queried whether present concerns in the West about China’s rise have been triggered by Xi Jinping’s assertive policies and if not, why did the international community get China wrong in the past? Prof. K. P. Vijayalakshmi, Member of the MP-IDSA Executive Council, asked about Xi Jinping’s vulnerabilities and whether the US House of Representatives (HoR) Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s visit would encourage other countries to send delegations. Lastly, Lt. Gen. (Dr.) Rakesh Sharma, Member of the MP-IDSA Executive Council, asked whether the social contract between the CCP and Chinese citizens is unchangeable. Further, one of the participants commented on the lack of professionalism in the PLA and raised doubt about China’s capability to take over Taiwan.
The Hon. Mr. Rudd responded to the questions and the comments. He reflected that Australia had started noting changes in China’s international behaviour during Chinese President Jiang Zemin’s second term, however, China’s international behaviour has undergone drastic change under President Xi. Therefore, at present it is important to reflect on the imperfections of the previous analyses and embrace the new reality. On the question of President Xi Jinping’s vulnerabilities and the international community’s standing on Taiwan, he observed that as a dialectician Xi has an acute sense of action and reaction. He added that the US and other countries who have diplomatically recognised China should fully honour the symbolism of the one-China policy. Pondering on the issue of social contract, the Hon. Mr. Rudd contended that the tacit understanding has began to fracture because of the economic slowdown and also because of the constraints on people’s private lives. Lastly, agreeing with one of the participant’s comments on the PLA’s lack of professionalism, he added that the PLA’s senior military officials have a certain degree of caution and conservatism about fighting wars.
The discussion was followed by launch of the Hon. Mr. Rudd’s new book The Avoidable War: The Dangers of a CatastrophicConflict Between the US and Xi Jinping's China.
The report was prepared by Ms. Mayuri Banerjee, Research Analyst, East Asia Centre, MP-IDSA.
Monday Morning Meeting on The Recent Tashkent International Conference on Afghanistan
August 01, 2022
1000 hrs
Monday Morning Meeting
Mr. Vishal Chandra, Research Fellow, Manohar Parrikar IDSA spoke on ‘The Recent Tashkent International Conference on Afghanistan’ at the Monday Morning Meeting held on 1 August 2022 at 10 AM. The meeting was moderated by Dr. Ashok K. Behuria, Senior Fellow, MP-IDSA.
Ambassador Sujan R. Chinoy, Director General, MP-IDSA, Maj.Gen. (Dr.) Bipin Bakshi (Retd.), Deputy Director General, MP-IDSA and the scholars of the Institute participated in the meeting.
Executive Summary
During the meeting, the speaker shared his observations as a participant in the Tashkent International Conference on ‘Afghanistan: Security and Economic Development’ held on 26 July 2022. He highlighted the key observations made by the special representatives/speakers from various participant countries, including the Taliban delegation from Afghanistan, and international organisations.
Most of the speakers emphasised the need for continued humanitarian assistance to the Afghan people and unfreezing of Afghan reserves, and called upon the Taliban to form an inclusive government, restore secondary education for girls and respect the rights of all Afghan citizens, create a conducive environment for trade and investment, and to not allow terrorist groups to operate from the Afghan soil.
Highlighting the achievements of the Taliban interim government, the Taliban representative pointed to the general amnesty announced for members of the previous regime and efforts made for the return of Afghans from exile.
Detailed Report
The Monday Morning Meeting began with moderator Dr. Ashok K. Behuria providing an overview of the current geo-strategic situation in the region since the return of the Taliban to power in Afghanistan. He stressed that the ethnic divisions that emerged in the Taliban were due to the distrust by the minority ethnic groups (Hazaras, Uzbeks and Tajiks) of the Pashtun dominant nature of the Taliban. Though the representation of ethnic minorities is visible in the state apparatus, their presence and powers are limited. He gave the example of the current Taliban Chief of Staff, Qari Fasihuddin Fitrat, being an ethnic Tajik. The claim of the Taliban as an inclusive and sole power in Afghanistan is also being questioned.
In continuation to the moderator’s remarks, Mr. Vishal Chandra began his presentation by highlighting the increased tension in northern parts of the country and along Afghanistan’s borders, with Pakistan on the Durand Line in the east, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan in the north, and Iran in the west. He added that there have been skirmishes between the Taliban and the Pakistani forces in the east and the Iranian forces in the west.
Elaborating on Uzbekistan’s initiative to bring participants from more than 20 countries and various regional and international organisations (UN & its various agencies including UNAMA, the EU, ECO, SCO and the OIC) together to discuss the issue of Afghan stability and regional connectivity, the speaker stated that the current conference was projected as the logical continuation of the previous two High-Level Tashkent Conferences: ‘Afghanistan: Peace Process, Security Cooperation and Regional Connectivity’, held in March 2018, and ‘Central and South Asia: Regional Connectivity. Challenges and Opportunities’, held in July 2021. He added that Uzbekistan has had a history of taking initiatives on the Afghan issue, be it the ‘Six-Plus-Two’ grouping in the late 1990s, comprising Afghanistan’s six immediate neighbours plus Russia and the US, or the ‘Six-Plus-Three’ grouping a decade later, with the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) added to it.
According to Mr. Chandra, the stated goal of the July 26 Tashkent Conference on Afghanistan was to establish a solidary and effective international dialogue on the Afghan issue, to assist in the formation of a common position on issues of regional stability and international terrorism, and build a constructive dialogue with the neighbouring countries and the current authorities of Afghanistan. He added that the conference was projected as an integral part of a systemic effort of Uzbekistan to ensure security and stability in the Central Asian region and turn Afghanistan into a peaceful country free from terrorism.
Mr. Chandra shared the details of the discussions held during the Plenary Session.
Plenary Session
The plenary session began with Acting Foreign Minister of Uzbekistan Vladimir Norov delivering the inaugural remarks and President’s Special Representative Abdulaziz Kamilov reading out President Shavkat Mirziyoyev’s address, followed by speeches of special representatives/ heads of delegations from the participating countries and regional and international organisations.
The Taliban Acting Foreign Minister Amir Khan Muttaqi led a large delegation comprising senior officials from the finance, interior and foreign ministries, the Afghan Central Bank, Afghan National Power Utility (or DABS) and the Afghan Railways. No other Afghan group participated in the conference.
Among the key participants were UN Secretary-General’s Deputy Special Representative Markus Potzel, OIC Secretary General’s Special Envoy Tarig Ali Bakhreet, Secretary General of ECO Khusrav Noziri, EU Special Envoy Tomas Niklasson, Chinese Special Envoy Yue Xiaoyong, US Special Representative Thomas West, US Special Envoy for Afghan Women, Girls, and Human Rights Rina Amiri, Russian Special Representative Zamir Kabulov, Pakistan’s Special Representative Mohammad Sadiq, Iranian Special Envoy Hassan Kazemi-Qomi, Qatar Foreign Minister’s Special Envoy Mutlaq Bin Majed Al Qahtani, Kazakh Foreign Ministry’s Ambassador-at-Large Talgat Kaliyev, Kyrgyz President’s Special Representative Taalatbek Masadykov, Turkmenistan’s Deputy Foreign Minister Vepa Khadzhiev, Tajikistan’s National Coordinator for Afghanistan Vafo Niyatbekzoda, British Prime Minister’s Special Representative Nigel Casey, and Director of SCO RATS Ruslan Mirzaev. The American delegation also included officials from the Treasury Department and the State Department. India was represented by Ambassador Manish Prabhat.
In President Mirziyoyev’s message, it was stated that without stability on the other bank of Amu Darya (Afghanistan), it is impossible to achieve security and stable development in the entire Central Asian region. He expressed hope that the international community will not repeat the mistakes of the 1990s as the international isolation of Afghanistan will inevitably lead to further deterioration of the humanitarian situation in the country.
Many participants emphasised the history of Afghanistan and said that unless a broad-based government that represents the ethnic and linguistic diversity of the country is formed, it will be difficult to establish a sustainable political order and security in the country.
The US Special Representative Thomas West stated that the US remains the largest donor to Afghanistan, including after August 2021. He informed that the US Government is closely working with the stakeholders and has not imposed any new sanctions on Afghanistan in the last 11 months. He also said that the dialogue is going on with the Taliban officials for unfreezing of Afghan Central Bank reserves.
Key Observations Made by Conference Speakers
Isolating or abandoning Afghanistan and its people will prove counter-productive. The international community must continue to provide humanitarian assistance to the Afghan people.
Humanitarian aid and assistance while critical to the stability of Afghanistan is not a long-term solution. The resumption of trade and investment is critical to the revival of the Afghan economy.
Representatives from Russia, China, Pakistan, Iran and other regional countries called for unfreezing of Afghan central bank reserves.
Taliban must form an inclusive government, representing the social diversity of the country, and put an end to arbitrary detentions and extra-judicial killings.
Taliban must allow girls to attend secondary schools. The exclusion of half of the country’s workforce, the Afghan women, will only make it difficult for the donor countries to justify the grant of aid and assistance.
Taliban need to create a conducive environment for the return of all Afghans and the resumption of the much-needed international investment.
Taliban must sever their ties with regional and global terrorist groups, including al-Qaeda. The increased activity of Islamic State Khorasan (ISK) is an issue of grave concern.
Response to the situation in Afghanistan has to be collective and sustainable, keeping in view the larger interest of all sections of the Afghan population.
Key Points Made by Taliban Interim Foreign Minister
During the short period of 11 months, the Taliban Government has managed to establish security and provide basic services to the people. Corruption has been completely rooted out.
The Taliban leadership has laid the ground for a culture of tolerance and acceptance by declaring a general amnesty for all political and military opposition. Thousands of officials from the previous regime are working in the government departments.
About 100,000 youth have been recruited into the army and 180,000 into the police.
A contact group has been established to facilitate the return of officials of the previous administration.
The government has successfully reopened universities and schools across the country and has announced 7,000 new vacancies in the education sector.
Women continue to work in education, health and other government departments.
The government is committed to not allowing any terrorist group, including Daesh or the Islamic State Khorasan (ISK), to use Afghan soil against any other country.
The government stands ready to establish positive relations with all the countries in the framework of mutual respect and legitimate bilateral interests.
The US must unconditionally release all reserves of the Afghan Central Bank and the international community must begin official engagement with the ‘Islamic Emirate’.
Afghanistan is the closest and cheapest trade route between Central and South Asia. It is time to invest in Afghanistan’s stability.
The delivery of humanitarian assistance has been completely transparent and the government budget for the first time completely relies on the revenue generated from within the country.
At the end of the plenary session, Muttaqi once again responded to the points raised by various speakers. Some of the key points made by him are:
Afghanistan’s budget is extremely transparent and for the first time it is fully reliant on state revenues and not on any external source.
The Taliban Government will continue to make progress on security and human rights issues.
The Taliban Government has banned narcotics but no country or organisation has come forward to help the government with alternative livelihoods for the affected Afghan people.
About 18,000 Daesh militants were released from Pul-e-Charkhi prison when the Taliban entered Kabul. The Taliban security forces have since made good progress against them.
The Taliban Government has not only announced an amnesty for all but also retained thousands of employees from the previous regime.
Any support for the Resistance Front is support for the destabilisation of Afghanistan.
Afghanistan is the Heart of Asia and if it is peaceful then Asia is peaceful.
Political issues should not be linked to aid and assistance for the Afghan people.
Mr. Chandra highlighted what transpired during the Parallel Sessions held at the Conference.
Parallel Sessions
After the plenary session, the conference was divided into parallel sessions on Uzbekistan’s humanitarian and proposed infrastructure projects on Afghanistan. Mr. Chandra attended the session on humanitarian projects. The entire focus of that session was on (i) Termez Educational Centre for the Training of Afghan Citizens, and (ii) Termez Cargo Centre (upgraded to the status of an International Multi-Functional Transport & Logistics Hub for Humanitarian Assistance), both established by the Uzbekistan Government. Various short and long-term courses are offered to the Afghan citizens at the Termez Training Centre. The Termez Logistics Hub is being used by the UN and its agencies to send humanitarian assistance to Afghanistan.
The focus of the parallel session on infrastructure was on the Uzbekistan-proposed 700-km Trans-Afghanistan Railway Project (connecting Uzbekistan to Pakistan, via Afghanistan) and the 500-kV Surkhan-Pul-e-Khumri Power Transmission Project in northern Afghanistan. However, there was not much clarity about the funding of these two projects.
Questions and Comments
Ambassador Sujan R. Chinoy, congratulated the speaker for his participation in such an important event. He pointed out the reasons for Uzbekistan facilitating such regional and global events. Uzbekistan has a sense of its relevance and importance in the region. It has the largest population and the biggest economy in Central Asia and also has stable relations with its neighbours. Uzbekistan has a record of working well with all in the region.
The US seems to be ready to give some concession to the Taliban in exchange for certain US demands. He stressed that the Taliban regime will be there and is not going anywhere soon. There will be differences among various groups within the regime, creating space for others to step in. Taliban will have issues on its border as it identifies itself with the nation and that translates into boundaries. The same boundaries that the Taliban earlier transgressed would now be the ones they would protect and would not want other elements to do what they did in the past. The Islamic State and its Khorasan affiliate would be a concern for the Taliban. India has to engage with the region and with the stakeholders.
Maj. Gen. (Dr.) Bipin Bakshi, (Retd.) stated that Europe particularly is not interested in the happenings in Afghanistan. The reasons for this are, firstly, they do not want to recognise the legitimacy of the Taliban and, secondly, there is pre-occupation with the Ukrainian refugees. The Central Asian nations, including Uzbekistan, are discussing the idea of connectivity from Central Asia to South Asia. This is of importance to India in the long run, particularly projects like the TAPI (Turkmenistan–Afghanistan–Pakistan–India) gas pipeline.
Mr. Vishal Chandra, the speaker, gave detailed and insightful replies in response to comments and questions received from the participants of the meeting.
The Report was prepared by Mr. Afroz Khan, Research Assistant, MP-IDSA.
South Asia
Webinar on 1 August 2022 at 1500 hours: “Future of Nuclear Disarmament Under the Shadow of Ukraine Crisis”
August 01, 2022
1500 hrs
Other
The Indian Pugwash Society (IPS) and the Manohar Parrikar Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses (MP-IDSA) are jointly organising a virtual discussion on “Future of Nuclear Disarmament Under the Shadow of Ukraine Crisis” on 1 August 2022 at 1500 hours.
Amb. Sujan R. Chinoy, Convenor, Indian Pugwash Society and Director General, MP-IDSA will moderate the webinar.
PROGRAMME
1500-1505 hrs: Opening Remarks by Amb Sujan R. Chinoy, Convenor, IPS
1505-1520 hrs: Remarks by Amb. Sheel Kant Sharma
1520-1535 hrs: Remarks by Prof. Amitabh Mattoo
1535-1550 hrs: Remarks by Amb. D.B. Venkatesh Varma
1550-1605 hrs: Remarks by Dr. Rajiv Nayan
1605-1630 hrs: Q&A session
Talk by Dr Jean Baptiste Jeangène Vilmer on Chinese Influence Operations, Presentation of the IRSEM Report
July 22, 2022
1400 to 1500 hrs
Talk
On 22 July 2022 Manohar Parrikar Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses (MP-IDSA) organised a talk by Dr. Jean Baptiste Jeangène Vilmer, Director, Institute of Strategic Research of the Ecole Militaire (IRSEM) on Chinese Influence Operations. Ambassador Sujan R. Chinoy, Director General, MP-IDSA chaired the session and delivered the welcome remarks. Dr. Vilmer’s talk was followed by signing the Letter of Intent (LoI) between MP-IDSA and IRSEM.
Executive Summary
In recent years Chinese influence operations have emerged as a major threat. Beijing’s clandestine operations have become tougher and more sophisticated. It is noteworthy that Chinese influence operation techniques are increasingly becoming similar to ones used by Russia. Further, China like Russia has shown considerable willingness to interfere in the internal affairs of other countries by manipulating elections, amplifying socio-political divergences and running misinformation and psychological warfare campaigns against governments, individuals and businesses. In this context Dr. Vilmer delivered a talk on scope, techniques, targets and impact of Chinese influence operations around the world.
Detailed Report
The session began with welcome remarks by Ambassador Chinoy. He stated that Dr. Vilmer’s visit was emblematic of the deepening ties and cooperation between India and France and was in order with the high-level visits recently exchanged between the two countries. Reflecting briefly on the basis of India-France bilateral ties, he opined that the partnership is rooted in mutual trust, commitment to international law, vision for a multipolar world and effective multilateralism. These factors will be critical drivers for the deepening of bilateral ties. Ambassador Chinoy highlighted the prominence of defence ties in India-France relations and expressed appreciation for France’s commitment to ‘Make in India’ and participation in India’s efforts to achieve self-reliance in the defence sector. Describing the convergence of interest between India and France, he observed that the most important facet of the bilateral relationship is emerging in the Indo-Pacific and in view of France’s long tradition of engagement with the region, India recognises French interests in the region as well. He welcomed France’s interest in QUAD, its interest in IPEF and Indo-Pacific Partnership for Maritime Domain Awareness Initiative and expressed that these endeavours are likely to draw France closer to the emerging cooperation matrix that is currently evident in the Indo-Pacific. Considering the increasing cooperation between India and France at the international stage, Ambassador Chinoy observed that this is the right time to step up cooperation between two institutions by signing the Letter of Intent (LoI).
With regard to China’s influence operations, Ambassador Chinoy opined that these influence operations are not new and having dealt with China closely India has best understood the Chinese. He observed that Europe’s policies towards China are not entirely in line with the way India sees China and that explains the different approaches India and Europe adopted towards the Ukraine crisis. Also, Europe has woken up late to the threat of Chinese operations. Elaborating briefly on functioning of Chinese influence operations, Ambassador Chinoy contented that many countries including India are reeling under the challenges of China’s three-warfare strategy. Thereafter, he invited Dr. Vilmer to present the IRSEM report to the audience.
Dr. Vilmer, at the outset of his talk, concurred with Ambassador Chinoy’s observation about Europe being late in its awareness regarding the threat of Chinese influence operations. He added that Europe’s internal division with respect to viewing China is also a major problem to tackle at the institutional level of the European Union. Referring to the report he explained that the research is premised on the idea of ‘Russification’ of Chinese influence operations. In recent years, China like Russia has showed increasing willingness to coerce and infiltrate countries to fulfil its political and geo-strategic objectives and its influence operation techniques are becoming very similar to those employed by Moscow. According to Dr. Vilmer this recent trend is a shift from China’s earlier emphasis on soft-power projection. However, Beijing now appears to be standing at a Machiavellian turn where the CCP is more inclined to evoke fear (threat) than love (persuasion).
Elaborating on different aspects of the report, Dr. Vilmer informed the audience that it focuses on the evolution of Chinese influence operations and covers the whole spectrum of influence in terms of soft power, sharp power and some elements of hard power. He highlighted that the report constitutes of four parts; the first deals with concepts in Chinese influence operations like the United Front, Three-Warfares Strategy and Active Measures. It is noteworthy, that Beijing imported the third concept from the Soviet doctrine of influence operations. The second part of the report deals with actors implementing Chinese influence operations and they involve individuals or groups from within the Party, State, the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) and public private companies. These actors are involved largely in collection of data and setting the targets for influence operations. Dr. Vilmer observed that for now most of the influence operations are directed against Taiwan, Hong-Kong and other countries in Chinese periphery. Part three of the report discusses the actions implemented by Beijing in its influence operations abroad. The actions primarily intend to captivate foreign audience by projecting a positive image of China and then attempt to infiltrate and coerce. Finally, the report focuses on case studies, situations and offers instances of influence operations in different countries. In the concluding section the report examines the extent of Russianisation of Chinese influence operations and how effective Chinese endeavours have been.
Towards the end of his presentation Dr. Vilmer, while comparing the Russian and Chinese influence operations, noted the similarities and differences between the two countries. He contended that Chinese military has publicly acknowledged drawing inspiration from Russia and that China is using trolls, fake accounts and bots the same way as Russia does. Moreover, Beijing, emulating Russian techniques, is interfering in local elections in Taiwan, Australia and Canada. It is using sensitive regions like Hong Kong and Taiwan as a testing ground for its influence operations. Both, Russia and China are moving closer to political radicals in a bid to amplify socio-political divergences in target societies. With regard to divergences Dr. Vilmer pointed out that while China possesses more strategic levers than Russia to attain its political objectives, Russian influence operations are far more sophisticated and advanced.
Following Dr. Vilmer’s presentation, the floor was opened for question and answers.
Q&A
During the Q&A session various issues were raised through questions and comments. With regard to the scope of Chinese influence operations the scholars queried about the extent to which certain European leaders and industries have been compromised by China’s clandestine activities and the functioning of Chinese influence operations in South Asia in terms of debt diplomacy. Dr. Vilmer affirmed that certain European leaders and industries have been compromised and Serbia and Hungary are two soft underbellies of Europe where Chinese influence is strong. However, there is an increasing backlash against China from other European countries like France and Sweden and this hostility is likely to increase in the foreseeable future. He added that the economic lever continues to be one of the most powerful instruments of influence although the issue of debt diplomacy needs to be studied in further detail. Other questions pertained to symbols of Chinese soft power, indoctrination of Chinese students prior to their arrival in western countries, role of Chinese economic interests in directing influence operations, Beijing’s assistance to Russia in building its firewall system and safeguards that can be undertaken to prevent undesirable interference by China. Dr. Vilmer responded briefly to each of the questions. He expressed that it is difficult to understand whether the Chinese students are indoctrinated or being coerced to act in a certain way. He also observed that China mostly uses its economic power to influence decisions of foreign governments and that China and Russia are collaborating on multiple fronts in the cyber domain. On the issue of safeguards Dr.Vilmer noted knowledge building and planned decoupling from China as two important measures to mitigate the threat from Chinese influence operations.
The Report has been prepared by Ms. Mayuri Banerjee, Research Analyst, East Asia Centre.
Monday Morning Meeting on Changing Security Dynamics in the Arctic
July 25, 2022
1000 hrs
Monday Morning Meeting
Mr. Bipandeep Sharma, Research Analyst, Non-Traditional Security Centre, Manohar Parrikar Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses, spoke on the “Changing Security Dynamics in the Arctic” at the Monday Morning Meeting held on 25 July 2022. The meeting was chaired by Dr. Uttam Kumar Sinha, Centre Coordinator, Non-Traditional Security Centre, MP-IDSA. Ambassador Sujan R. Chinoy, Director General, MP-IDSA, Maj. Gen. (Dr.) Bipin Bakshi (Retd.), Deputy Director General, MP-IDSA, and the scholars of the institute participated in the meeting.
Executive Summary
The Arctic region remains globally connected in an environmental and geopolitical context. In the backdrop of the Ukraine crisis, the Arctic region is witnessing intense rivalry with high probability of militarisation. The focus of the states in the region has once again shifted towards high politics and the traditional notions of security. The space for cooperation that emerged in the Arctic region post-1987 Mikhail Gorbachev’s Murmansk speech, has started thawing as is the sea-ice extent. According to climate scientists, the Arctic is warming at a rate four times the average normal. This emerging interplay of science and complex geopolitics makes the Arctic a high risk and vulnerable region. The ‘Science Diplomacy’ and ‘Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam’ as highlighted in India’s Arctic Policy (March 2022) could become an important guiding principle for this region.
Detailed Report
Dr. Sinha introduced the Arctic as a crisis and submitted two words in describing the region: antithesis and bellwether. The current securitisation in the Arctic is antithetical to the very foundation of Arctic as a zone of peace that Mikhail Gorbachev articulated in Murmansk in 1987. A series of policy initiations referred to as the Murmansk initiatives was launched such as nuclear weapons free zone in Northern Europe, restrictions in naval exercises in the Arctic Seas, development of transboundary cooperation on resource development, scientific exploration, indigenous people and environment protections. As a bellwether, the signs of what are happening in the Arctic region in terms of warming and its impact on the snow, ice and permafrost along with oceanographic and atmospheric changes are quite ominous for the global climate systems. Clearly what happens in the Arctic does not stay there. It also brings in a very noticeable conundrum. The more the Arctic becomes sea-ice free greater the economic and commercial attraction be it oil and gas and mineral resources extraction or the shipping lanes. Concluding his remarks, Dr. Sinha observed that a classic ‘security dilemma’ has emerged in the Arctic in which states take measures to improve security prompting other states to respond with their own security measures. What we are witnessing is a risky situation that can lead to unintended outcomes. The Arctic Council is going through a severely critical time. The interdisciplinary outlook that the Arctic Council has stood for is being tested by the interplay of the geopolitical and the geo-economics.
Mr. Bipandeep Sharma began by geographically defining the Arctic region. He then highlighted its salience from three broad perspectives: science, geo-economics and geopolitics. ‘Science’ is what makes the Arctic globally connected. Referring to the scientific argument made by India, the presenter stated the monsoon in India is directly connected with the melting of sea ice in the Arctic region. From a geo-economic context, the Arctic region accounts for abundant natural resources including oil and natural gas, as well as mineral wealth. The resource attraction has led the Arctic states to make territorial claims in the region beyond their allocated national jurisdictions.
Territorial claims as observed in the presentation are governed by the United Nations Laws of the Sea (UNCLOS). Briefly commenting on its provisions as well as the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf (CLCS), Mr. Sharma said that a signatory state can make its claim in an area beyond 200 nautical miles of its designated Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) if it is successful in justifying (through scientific and technical data) before the CLCS that the area beyond its designated EEZ is an extension of its continental shelf. These claims before CLCS can be made only within 10 years of ratification of UNCLOS by a signatory state. The presentation also highlighted the importance of the new Arctic shipping routes that add to both the economic as well as strategic aspects of the region.
The presenter’s key argument was that the Arctic region is witnessing worrying militarisation. Like the chair, he also emphasized Gorbachev's Murmansk speech and the call for making the Arctic a ‘Zone of Peace'. On the Arctic Council, the speaker noted that such institution building was part of the post-Cold War peace dividends which saw a period of de-securitisation. Despite geopolitical differences, the Arctic Council remained intact but now has been challenged by the Ukraine crisis and the expansion of NATO membership.
India’s position in the Arctic, as explained, is cautious and well calculated. India has maintained independent bilateral relations with Russia and with all the Nordic Countries. In conclusion, Mr. Sharma asserted the changing Arctic needs cooperation rather than conflict, and ‘Science Diplomacy’ could play an important role to bring back cooperation in the region. ‘Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam’ as mentioned in India’s Arctic Policy could become a guiding principle in the region in near future.
Discussion, Comments and Questions
After this comprehensive presentation, Dr. Sinha made his remarks and invited Ambassador Chinoy and Maj. Gen. (Dr.) Bipin Bakshi to make their comments. The floor was later opened to the panelists and participants for their questions and comments.
Ambassador Chinoy thanked the speaker and pointed out that there are three major planks on which the geo-politics of Arctic revolves: climate change, geo-economics and geo-strategic. These factors shall have a major impact on India’s growing engagement in the Arctic. He also commented on the major power contestation between the USA and China. Furthermore, he gave his insights on the Antarctic Treaty and the Sea Lines of Communications (SLOCs). He also commented on broad challenges like the militarisation of the Arctic region.
Maj. Gen. (Dr.) Bipin Bakshi, (Retd.), thanked the speaker and commented on building institutional cooperation between think-tanks and academia on Arctic related issues. He highlighted that in this MP-IDSA can play a pioneer role.
Dr. Anand Kumar, Associate Fellow, South Asia, MP-IDSA, commented on the concerns of climate change and exploitation of resources in the Arctic region.
Dr. Adil Rasheed, Research Fellow, Counter Terrorism Centre, MP-IDSA, brought up the concerns of climate change and its effects on how Russia views the Arctic region. He also made remarks about China and Russia's cooperation and their approach to Arctic geopolitics.
Richa Kumaria, Research Intern, Non-Traditional Security Centre, MP-IDSA, raised a question on the role of the China in the Arctic region.
Dr. Sinha and Mr. Bipandeep Sharma gave a detailed explanation to the comments and questions raised by the participants.
Report prepared by Mr. Pintu Kumar Mahla, Research Intern, Non-Traditional Security Centre, MP-IDSA, New Delhi.
