EVENTS

You are here

Events

Title	Date	Author	Time	Event	Body	Research Area	Topics	File attachments	Image
Monday Morning Meeting on America’s Strategic Posture: An Analysis (Report of the US Congressional Commission Released in October 2023)	November 13, 2023			Monday Morning Meeting	On 13 November 2023, Dr. Rajiv Nayan of the Nuclear and Arms Control Centre delivered a talk during the Monday Morning Meeting on ““America’s Strategic Posture”: An Analysis (Report of the US Congressional Commission Released in October 2023)”. The meeting was chaired by Gp. Capt. (Dr.) R K Narang, VM (Retd), Senior Fellow at MP-IDSA. Scholars of the Institute were in attendance. Executive Summary The Report on “America’s Strategic Posture” is intended to provide a bipartisan assessment of the United States strategic posture, and offers a glimpse of its nuclear strategy, even though its recommendations are not binding on the US Government and armed forces. The current report (issued October 2023) is especially significant, as it not only elevates China to the level of a peer competitor, but also envisages a tripolar deterrence scheme where the US and its allies may have to deter (or combat) two nuclear-armed states in the form of China and Russia. The report is also significant because it seems to abandon the US’ diplomatic commitments to nuclear disarmament and arms control, while strongly suggesting a build-up of US nuclear forces and arms in response to perceived threats from the two powers mentioned above. Dr. Rajiv Nayan’s talk shines a light on the evolution of the US’ nuclear doctrine contained within the report, and discusses its implications for regional and global security. Detailed Report The meeting was called to order by the Chair, Gp. Capt. Narang, who introduced the Speaker and delivered short introductory remarks on the topic under discussion. He introduced to the audience the structure of the United States Congressional Commission that drafted the report, the nodal agencies involved in its formulation as well as the wide scope of the commission’s deliberations. He then invited the Speaker to address the audience. Dr. Nayan commenced his talk by providing an overview of the report entitled “America’s Strategic Structure”, the second edition of which was issued in October 2023 after a hiatus of 14 years. He informed the audience that the report aims to provide bipartisan assessments on the US’ long-term strategic posture, and gave a brief overview of the 131 findings and 81 recommendations mentioned in the 2023 report. He then compared the table of contents of both the 2009 and 2023 editions in order to give a bird’s-eye view of the key issues taken up in the report. Dr. Nayan proceeded to give a brief introduction to the rationale of the report, which according to him entailed reviewing existing policy, assessing factors affecting strategic stability and offering non-partisan assessment of the overall scenario. To accomplish this, the Commission adopted a methodology of meetings with US policymakers, allies and partners and non-governmental experts, classified presentations by members of the intelligence community, field trips to classified locations and referencing from public-domain documents issued by the Pentagon and others. Next, the Speaker introduced some of the definitions the study provides in order to clarify the subject. He discussed in some detail the concepts of strategy, strategic posture and strategic stability in particular, and questioned the meanings and significance of these, given that some terms, especially strategic stability are contested in nature. He then moved to the definition of what the report refers to as the “US-led international order”, and how it defines military conflict and disruption by “authoritarian” regimes such as China and Russia as the key external variables impacting US vital interests. The Speaker then discussed the findings of the report, which he assessed as being quite pessimistic in nature. In particular, he called attention to the touting of a “whole-of-government” approach to strategic security, as well as the recognition that major power conflict in today’s era can easily lead to nuclear conflict, which will be a catastrophic outcome. He further noted the report’s recognition that future wars are likely to be very expensive for all parties involved. Next, the Speaker discussed the report’s discussion of Russia’s nuclear modernisation. The report assessed that Russia would retain the world’s largest nuclear arsenal till 2035, and remained pessimistic on bilateral arms control agreements as it blamed Russia for violation of several agreements such as New START. The report also discussed the conventional capabilities of the Russian Armed Forces, and noted their willingness to take huge losses as seen in Ukraine. After Russia, Dr. Nayan discussed the report’s treatment of China. Here he urged the audience to pay particular attention to the upgradation of the China ‘threat’ to that of a ‘peer’, marking a significant escalation. The report assessed China’s nuclear arsenal as on track to achieve quantitative parity with the US by the 2030s, and rated highly, the conventional capacity of the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA). Dr. Nayan also drew attention to the report’s claim that a new nuclear test in China’s Lop Nor testing facility could be in the offing. Thus, the report concluded, the cost of inaction over Taiwan may weigh heavily on the US, as it would become easier for the Chinese to take and keep Taiwan with such nuclear cover as its expanded arsenal could provide. Dr. Nayan also introduced briefly the report’s discussion of “non-peer” nuclear powers such as North Korea and Iran, before introducing the geopolitical outlook. Here he introduced one of the key takeaways of the report, its vision of a “tripolar deterrence” mechanism, by which the US and its allies may have to deter two peer competitors (China and Russia) at the same time, as well as non-peer actors such as North Korea and Iran. This, the report argues, is something the US and its allies are not yet prepared for, and thus there is a need to adjust the US’ strategic posture. The Commission’s majority-proposed solution, as reflected in the report, is to increase the nuclear stockpile across the board while adapting the nuclear doctrine to what is called the “modern triad”. This is envisaged as having a dedicated sea, air and land leg each, which is necessary to “ride-out” (i.e. survive) a pre-emptive enemy strike while “launching under attack” (i.e. firing nuclear weapons before they are destroyed). The commission also recommends in the report that the President be given “low-yield” (i.e. tactical/theatre nuclear weapons) options in case of an attack. After this Dr. Nayan introduced the report’s critical view of the state of nuclear industries in the US, and the recommendation for a top-to-bottom overhaul of said industries in order to prevent technological leakage while preserving optimum performance. He also noted the report’s silence on India and several other countries in the report, as well as the relative de-emphasising of strategic risk reduction and disarmament. He finally offered his own assessment, in which he noted that the report seemed to point to the concern of many lawmakers within the US regarding its vulnerability to strategic surprises (for example, Pearl Harbour, 9/11 and the end of the Cold War), which led to the report’s dismissal of disarmament as a realistic policy, ramping up of a security-centric narrative where peer states again become a core focus, the re-introduction of theatre nuclear weapons, and the provision of doctrinal clarity. After the conclusion of the Speaker’s talk, the Chair made a few remarks in summary and opened the floor for questions. Questions and Answers Mr. Arvind Khare, Research Fellow, Defence Economics and Industry Centre asked whether the US reflection on its role in Afghanistan and Vietnam informed the report’s emphasis on ‘viable opportunities’ to engage US forces, and whether the report had a tutelary function. To the first question, the Speaker replied that the report was not reflecting on Afghanistan and terror in general, as the latter has been completely neglected. To the latter point, he replied that the report is intended not to educate, but to generate debate among the strategic community, while signalling to other countries the US’ vital interests as well. Capt. Anurag Bisen, Research Fellow, Non-Traditional Security Centre, asked whether the report envisaged dismantling the US’ land-based stockpile of obsolete missiles, and whether the US strategy emphasised counter-base or counter-population strikes more. To this the Speaker replied that the current report does not intend to dismantle the triad, but rather to upgrade them. To the latter question, he noted that the report explicitly is against counter-value strikes for its targeting strategy, though in a nuclear conflict it may be difficult to differentiate civilians and military personnel. Ms. Shayesta Nishat Ahmed, Research Analyst, Defence Economics and Industry Centre, inquired about tripolar deterrence and its redressal. The Speaker answered by affirming that the fear of tripolar deterrence (with two peers in China and Russia and a non-peer power such as North Korea and Iran) existed throughout the report, but dismissed Iran’s significance as a nuclear threat, while also denying North Korea’s seriousness in actually seeking nuclear conflict with the US. Thus the focus was more on the peer rivals. With the conclusion of Q&A, the chair gave his closing remarks and brought an end to the meeting. This report was prepared by Dr. Arnab Dasgupta, Research Analyst, East Asia Centre.
MP- IDSA Fellows Seminar on “Understanding Nepal’s Foreign Aid and Investment Partnerships with India, China and the US since 2015”	December 05, 2023			Fellows' Seminar	A presentation at the MP-IDSA Fellows Seminar by Mr. Saurav Raj Pant, Visiting Fellow, South Asia Centre, on “Understanding Nepal’s Foreign Aid and Investment Partnerships with India, China and the US since 2015” was held on 5 December 2023. It was chaired by Dr. Ashok K Behuria, Senior Fellow and Coordinator of South Asia Centre, MP-DSA. The Internal Discussants were Dr. Uttam Kumar Sinha, Senior Fellow, Non-Traditional Security Centre, MP-IDSA and Dr. Nihar R. Nayak, Fellow, Non- Traditional Security Centre & Expert on Nepal, MP-IDSA. Executive Summary Nepal's economic relations with India, the United States, and China are multifaceted and driven by trade agreements, Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) deals, and Official Development Assistance (ODA). The above countries play prominent roles as development partners, export destinations, and sources of imports and foreign investments for Nepal. The significant reliance on foreign aid and investment partnerships, constituting a substantial portion of the government budget, underscores its importance for Nepal’s development. To ensure effective utilisation of foreign aid, prioritizing transparency and efficiency, coupled with efforts to improve the investment climate, becomes crucial. The reestablishment of Bilateral Investment Promotion and Protection Agreements (BIPPA) and adopting a multi-alignment approach in foreign policy is imperative to safeguard national interests amid the evolving global dynamics. Detailed Report In his opening remarks, Dr. Ashok K Behuria provided insights into Nepal's relations with India, China, and the United States. These engagements are influenced by historical, cultural, and geographical factors and play a crucial role in shaping Nepal's political and economic landscape. He assessed that ties with India, rooted in affinities, face challenges related to sovereignty and integration. With China, Nepal navigates political implications arising from its expanding role and regional influence. The United States' involvement emphasises democratic principles, impacting internal politics. He iterated that balancing these dynamics is vital for Nepal's foreign policy to safeguard national interests, maintain stability, and contribute to regional dynamics. Mr. Saurav Raj Pant commenced his presentation by providing a brief overview of the strategic importance of Nepal in world politics. In his presentation he delved into the intricate geopolitical dynamics shaping Nepal's foreign affairs, drawing from King Prithvi Narayan Shah's metaphorical characterisation of the nation as a yam between India and China. He underscored that Nepal as a buffer state between two major powers and marked by a relatively lower level of governance efficiency and societal development, garners notable interest from influential power centres. This interest, he claimed, contributes to the thriving foreign aid industry within the country. Mr. Pant explained that Nepal's diplomatic engagements with India, China, and the US span a spectrum of critical domains, including post-earthquake reconstruction in 2015, development partnerships, water resources, power collaboration, defense, trade, COVID assistance, and technical support. He pointed out that the relationships sometimes extend beyond economic and strategic interests, to encompass educational and cultural exchanges that deepen mutual understanding. Furthermore, the Speaker provided a detailed analysis of the annual Official Development Assistance (ODA), Foreign Direct Investment (FDI), and data on exports and imports by India, China, and the United States from the year 2015 onwards through graphic representation. The Speaker also underlined that Nepal’s developmental approach to India and China is characterised by a responsive stance, tailored to Nepal's specific needs. Conversely, the United States employs a comprehensive three-pillar approach, emphasising the reinforcement of institutions and resilience, the promotion of inclusion, and support for federalism. In his analysis, he highlighted that India participates in Nepal's development through the High Impact Community Development Project (HICDP), cultural endeavours, people-to-people interactions, religious connections, and contributions to both small and large-scale infrastructure projects and FDI. He pointed out the Chinese involvement in Nepal encompasses contributions to projects ranging from small to large-scale infrastructure, FDI, and community engagement on a smaller scale. He explained that, the United States is involved in Nepal through extensive social empowerment initiatives, policy advocacy and lobbying at the government level, and limited participation in FDI. Mr. Pant concluded his presentation by emphasising that Nepal and its government must undergo three crucial changes. Firstly, there is a need to adopt an efficient debt management system to utilise loans, aids, and grants for driving productivity in the country. Simultaneously, implementing transparent reporting mechanisms becomes imperative to instill confidence among donors. Secondly, improving the investment climate is pivotal for FDI, requiring a reinvigorated Bilateral Investment Promotion and Protection Agreement (BIPPA) with India and new agreements with China and the U.S. Finally, the adoption of a multi-alignment foreign policy that meets mutual requirements without jeopardizing any interests is paramount for Nepal's diplomatic manoeuvring. Following the presentation, the Chairperson invited the Internal Discussants for comments. Dr. Uttam Kumar Sinha, complimented the Speaker for his meticulous presentation of data and stated the need to analyse foreign aid dynamics in a holistic manner. He provided valuable insights into Nepal's dynamic nature, challenging the perception of it being solely a buffer state due to its strategic orientation. He recommended that the Speaker refine the research topic to enhance focus and depth. Additionally, he suggested exploring pre-2015 data, emphasising the unique aid dynamics of the 1960s in Nepal. He raised concerns about the potential drawbacks of foreign aid, noting that it may create more problems than it resolves. He also questioned the effectiveness of Nepal's political approach in managing and accepting foreign aid, highlighting the need for a rigorous and well-thought-out strategy. Dr. Nihar R. Nayak, initially commented on the discussion, noting a bias towards highlighting the negative aspects of foreign aid without due consideration of the positives. He underlined the superiority of investments over aid, reiterating their developmental orientation. He raised a question about the potential impact of the loss of trade preferences, as Nepal is set to graduate from the Least Developed Country category in 2026. He also questioned the relevance of using Africa as a reference point in the study. He suggested that better methodology and sampling techniques be adopted, which could in turn lead to more in-depth analyses. Additionally, he observed that there was a lack of uniformity in the presented information, underscoring the need for a consistent approach in evaluating the subject matter. During the discussion, the Chairperson, Dr. Ashok Behuria expressed skepticism regarding Chinese aid initiatives and presented arguments favouring India's effectiveness in this regard. He cited China's overseas development projects, which faced scrutiny for high costs and substandard construction. Using the example of the Pokhara airport, he highlighted the risks associated with adopting China's infrastructure-at-any-cost development model. Dr. Behuria inquired about the shifting stances of various political parties regarding foreign aid acceptance or denial. Additionally, he raised concerns about the muted stance of the Nepalese media, pointing out biases between India and China that could strain relations. He also advised the Speaker to focus on enhancing the analysis section of the paper for a more comprehensive understanding. Questions and Comments The floor was opened for comments and questions. The issues discussed included Nepal’s foreign policy orientation with regard to FDI, the politics of aid and issues of accountability as well as the country’s ability to absorb foreign aid. The speaker responded to the comments and queries raised by the attendees. Report prepared by Ms. Sneha M, Research Analyst, South Asia Centre, MP-IDSA.
Talk by Dr. Nicolas J.A. Buchoud on The UN SDGs at the Halfway Mark: Prospects & Challenges	October 06, 2023			Talk	Dr. Nicolas J.A. Buchoud, Think7 Consultant and Advisor to the Dean and CEO of Asian Development Bank Institute (ADBI), gave a talk at the Manohar Parrikar Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses, New Delhi, on 6 October 2023 and shared his perspective on "The UN SDGs at the Halfway Mark: Prospects & Challenges". The Session was chaired by the Director General, MP-IDSA, Ambassador Sujan R. Chinoy. Scholars of the Institute participated in the discussion. Executive Summary Dr. Buchoud emphasised the importance of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and called for enhanced collaboration between states. He acknowledged the challenges of macroeconomic and monetary factors affecting states’ efforts in achieving SDGs. Dr. Buchoud commended India's comprehensive efforts for its G20 Presidency and called India a role model for finding innovative solutions to various challenges of SDGs. Detailed Report Ambassador Sujan R. Chinoy introduced Dr. Nicolas J.A. Buchoud by highlighting all his important professional associations. Ambassador Chinoy, in his opening remarks, pointed out that Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) have not even become successful in achieving 10 to 12% of their set objectives past the halfway mark in 2023. Ambassador Chinoy mentioned that the COVID-19 Pandemic and the ongoing war in Ukraine have further created challenges for global food, fuel, fertilizers and finance that have hampered the success of SDGs. In his remarks, Ambassador Chinoy underscored that the developed states have failed in their commitments to provide the required finances to the developing states of the Global South. This has further deprived these states of achieving SDGs and their own nationally determined goals and objectives. With some of these initial remarks Ambassador Sujan R. Chinoy, called upon Dr. Nicolas J.A. Buchoud to deliver his talk. Dr. Nicolas J.A. Buchoud thanked Ambassador Chinoy and started his talk by highlighting the importance of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Dr. Buchoud mentioned that there is a need for upgrading active collaboration and dialogue between G7 and G20 to address various issues of SDGs. He highlighted that the motto ‘Think globally, act locally’ remains very relevant for states in meeting their SDGs as many solutions to these global issues could be found locally at community, municipality and at regional levels. Dr. Buchoud in his talk acknowledged that there are a number of macroeconomic and monetary factors that are seriously affecting SDGs and international affairs as a whole. He pointed out that the issue of economic desynchronisation is not only at a global level but many developed Western states are witnessing the impact of economic desynchronisation within their states that hampers their efforts to meet SDGs. He brought out that though billions of dollars have been poured into the countries’ economies in the form of relief packages, no substantial progress has been made by these states in achieving SDGs. Dr. Buchoud mentioned that the world presently is in an extremely volatile time period. The global links of interdependency post-Cold war have accelerated global urban development, but these linkages of interdependency have also created global challenges of governance for states. The moment these global linkages of interdependency get disrupted, these create equally difficult problematic situations for global order. He highlighted that analysing the current global order and states' divide within the UN, there remain some serious doubts about whether the existing framework of UN would be able to deliver on Agenda 2030 in the next 6-7 years. He acknowledged that though there are several constraints within the existing system, attempts to review these challenges need to be done in a careful manner. Dr. Buchoud mentioned that in this global think tanks can play an important and constructive role. Highlighting India’s success of its G20 Presidency, Dr. Buchoud mentioned that India under its presidency managed to ensure consensus among states on various issues despite these states' global differences. This serves as a positive example of what could still be achieved on SDGs. Dr. Buchoud mentioned that the transformation of the global financial architecture is not an abstract phenomenon but it is something that is really happening. He pointed out that as the G20 Presidency in coming years moves to most of the countries of the Global South, these countries have a fair chance to shed a different light on development issues that are of primary concern to them. He pointed out that the African Union's entry into G20 is a positive sign. Many of these African countries have very strong recommendations about development and governance models that have been ignored by other countries in the past. African Union entry to G20 under the Indian Presidency offers many new opportunities to almost 50 African states to address these emerging challenges. In his concluding remarks, Dr. Buchoud mentioned that the way in which India had prepared for and delivered its G20 Presidency has been far more comprehensive than has been analysed by most observers. Secondly, India since its independence, has emerged as a role model for development. India’s ability to craft significant innovation can become a guiding principle for addressing various challenges of SDGs. Finally, Dr. Buchoud mentioned that the efforts put forward by India under its G20 Presidency need to be taken forward and further refined, as these carry the seeds of possible transformations for the global future. Questions and Comments Ambassador Sujan R. Chinoy raised three critical comments for the Speaker to respond to: Firstly, Ambassador Chinoy mentioned that the United Nations has become quite redundant and incapable of efficiently addressing global issues of war, peace, growth and prosperity. Secondly, he asked the Speaker to comment on the competing notions of what constitutes progress and development. Ambassador Chinoy mentioned that the assessment of the emerging global system suggests that there is no uniform code to which all the global states could collectively agree. Thirdly, Ambassador Chinoy raised the issue of ‘Climate Finance’. He highlighted that under the preoccupation of post-COVID recovery and the Ukraine-Russia War, Western states seemed fatigued on the issues of climate finance. Ambassador Chinoy further mentioned that if he takes all these three factors into account, he does not see any of the SDGs successfully being achieved within the existing timeframe. He also questioned the Speaker regarding the UN’s rationality while setting its aspirations for these SDGs in 2015, being fully aware of the existing political, economic and other ideological differences among 193 countries of the world. Lastly, Ambassador Chinoy asked the Speaker if these Bretton Woods Institutions have any ‘Plan B’ if they failed to meet their 'Agenda 2030'. Col. (Dr.) D.P.K. Pillay commented on the issue of the revival of coal-based plants in the European countries post-Ukraine War and asked the Speaker about their calls for green agenda and climate change. Col. Pillay also mentioned that the Global South needs adequate finances to meet their SDG targets for which the West needs to fulfil their commitments. Dr. Uttam Kumar Sinha mentioned that the extent of these SDGs may be too vast and it may take another 56-60 years to achieve these, but the positive aspect of these SDGs is that they have started shaping the global growth models of states and made those more inclusive. Ms. Ruchita Beri asked Dr. Buchoud about the impact of COVID and the Ukraine War on meeting the objectives of SDGs. She questioned whether the Western world is ready to fulfil their financial obligations committed to African countries in the past. Comdt. Manoranjan Srivastava also highlighted the issue of climate finance. He mentioned that India by 2030 requires almost 2.5 billion dollars to meet its climate obligations. He highlighted that the global ocean ecosystem has become vulnerable to the impacts of global warming and the earth has reached its tipping points, that cannot be reversed in the near future. Dr. Adil Rasheed asked the Speaker if the global economic problems that have emerged post-COVID-19 Pandemic and the anomalies’ amongst states created by these, could be used as an excuse to get out of the 2030 deadline set for meeting SDGs. Dr. Nicolas J.A. Buchoud gave a detailed explanation to all the questions and the comments raised and the talk ended with a formal note of thanks from the Director General. Report prepared by Mr. Bipandeep Sharma, Research Analyst, NTS Centre, MP-IDSA, New Delhi.
15th South Asia Conference - Achieving Regional Economic Integration in South Asia (December 14-15, 2023)	December 14, 2023 to December 15, 2023			Conference	Concept Note CONCEPT NOTE The process of globalisation has integrated production and supply chains as well as markets around the world. Trade and economic relations have a logic of their own, with geo-economics often transcending geopolitics. In a globalized world, strategic choices are often subject to economic considerations. Closer economic integration also provides stability among adversaries in a world in flux. Regional economic integration in sub-geographies has generally led to an improved and stable strategic architecture. Regional integration plays a crucial role in overcoming divisions that impede the flow of goods, services, capital, people, and ideas among countries. These divisions, often caused by geographical limitations, inadequate infrastructure, and inefficient policies, hinder economic growth, particularly in developing nations. By integrating markets for goods and services, regional integration enables countries to surmount these barriers, facilitating the flow of trade, capital, energy, people, and ideas. This process can be facilitated through the establishment of common physical and institutional infrastructure. Different regions across the world have adopted various institutional forms of cooperation, with different levels of policy commitments and shared sovereignty, prioritizing different aspects of regional integration. Regional integration can yield substantial economic gains for participating countries. It improves market efficiency, enables cost-sharing for public goods and large infrastructure projects, fosters cooperative decision-making, acts as a catalyst for reforms, and serves as a building block for global integration. Additionally, regional integration offers non-economic benefits such as peace and security. In different regions around the world, regional integration efforts have been shaped by unique circumstances, challenges, and motivations, which have influenced the outcomes and levels of success achieved by the respective organizations. In North America, the United States played a leading role and contributed to the successful establishment of organizations like USMCA (earlier NAFTA), promoting economic cooperation among member countries. On the other hand, South America witnessed the creation of MERCOSUR, also known as the Southern Common Market, initially comprising Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay, and Uruguay. In the 1990s, MERCOSURproved successful in enhancing trade within the group. However, Brazil's currency devaluation in 1999 and Argentina's financial crisis in 2001 impacted on regional integration. The bloc faced challenges in later years when trying to open up to other markets. Moreover, trade disputes and tensions arose between the two largest economies in the bloc. This also shows that intra-regional trade and economic frictions can thwart a region’s consensus and smooth interface with the rest of the world even after achieving a common market. An example is the UK, which eventually exited the EU through BREXIT. In Southeast Asia, the establishment of ASEAN in 1967 by five nations was in response to curbing the spread of communism. Following the 1997 Asian financial crisis that originated in Thailand, ASEAN members took significant steps to further integrate their economies and foster cooperation among member states. It also resulted in economic integration in the wider region, with a rising economy such as China’s, through currency swap arrangements under the Chiang Mai Initiative. ASEAN has seen a steady rise in its own integration with the Chinese economy since then. Additionally, China's strong ties with its diaspora in Southeast Asian countries also contributed to improved relationships, increased trade, and enhanced commerce. The establishment of ASEAN further facilitated China-ASEAN integration. While China may have intentions to exert influence in neighboring countries, its success largely depends on the acceptance and cooperation of these nations. In some cases, regional integration can be triggered by a domino effect, exemplified by the enlargement of the European Union (EU) to include several East and Central European countries after the demise of the Soviet Union. These erstwhile communist economies anticipated economic benefits by joining the EU. The latter, through the expansion, created newer and more competitive centers of manufacturing for their union. China has been successful in fostering integration with neighboring countries. Japan, ROK, Singapore, Hong Kong and even Taiwan have played a key role in fostering the economic rise of China, by integrating their manufacturing centers and supply chains with the Chinese economy. They have taken full advantage of the labour cost arbitrage in China and the latter’s hub and spokes connectivity with markets around the world. China has benefitted by absorbing technologies and capital. In South Asia, the situation is different. Achieving regional integration has been particularly challenging compared to other regions due to unique historical and geopolitical circumstances. South Asia has a shared history, both civilizational and colonial, but does not necessarily have a shared identity. Religious and linguistic differences act as a drag on regional integration. In the past, efforts to achieve economic integration in South Asia were made through SAPTA (South Asian Preferential Trade Agreement) and later through SAFTA (South Asian Free Trade Area). However, these initiatives resulted only in limited success in fostering regional economic integration. Unlike some other regions, South Asia lacks a consensus on emerging threats and challenges. Unlike China, South Asia does not have some of the world’s most developed and dynamic economies on its periphery. The partition of the Indian subcontinent in 1947 after gaining independence from British rule left behind contested borders, further complicating integration efforts. Besides, the quest for national identity post-colonization has, at times, posed challenges to fostering a shared regional identity that facilitates integration. Moreover, the rise of China has acted as a magnet for many of the smaller South Asian economies whose trade with China has outpaced their traditional trade with India. South Asia today has multiple choices. Apart from India and China as economic partners, the US has also stepped up its efforts to engage the region through the economic lens and not just through a security lens. Given the logic of geography and India’s rise as the world’s fifth largest economy and the fastest growing of all, regional economic integration in South Asia suggests India as the fulcrum. Given the limitations of SAARC, South Asia has witnessed the emergence of new regional initiatives driven by India's Act East Policy. These initiatives, which include the Bay of Bengal Initiative for Multi-Sectoral Technical and Economic Cooperation (BIMSTEC), the Indian Ocean Rim Association (IORA), Bangladesh-China-India-Myanmar (BCIM) Economic Corridor and the BBIN (Bangladesh-Bhutan-India-Nepal transport agreement), are aimed at fostering cohesiveness among member states and achieving prosperity in the region. In this context, the Manohar Parrikar Institute for Defence Studies & Analyses (MP-IDSA) intends to host the 15th South Asia Conference titled, “Prospects of Regional Economic Integration in South Asia” on 14-15 December 2023. A cross-section of experts, analysts, and policymakers will be invited to discuss these issues and recommend the way forward. The Conference: The conference seeks to discuss among others the following questions: What is the current state of regional economic integration? Role of connectivityin promoting regional economic integration and its current status Tariff, Non-tariff and Technical barriers to trade Economic Partnership Agreements in South Asia Banking and fiscal policies in the region Digital Public Infrastructure (DPI) in India and beyond Trade Settlement in Indian Rupee / Regional currencies / UPI/DPI Financial Crisis and Regional Response / Regional crisis management / Impact on Regional Integration Sub-regional integration – Including and excluding India Afghanistan and Myanmar as gateways to promote regional integration beyond South Asia Participation in the conference is by invitation only. To participate, please contact the conference coordinator. Conference Programme CONFERENCE PROGRAMME Contact us Dr. Anand Kumar Co-ordinator, 15th South Asia Conference Associate Fellow, South Asia Centre Manohar Parrikar Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses New Delhi-110010 Tel (O): +91 11-26717983 Email: anandkmrai@gmail.com, anand_rai@hotmail.com	South Asia	South Asia Conference		system/files/15th-SAC-webinar-poster-copy.jpg
Report of Monday Morning Meeting on Recent Coups in Africa’s Sahel Region: Trends and Challenges	October 30, 2023			Monday Morning Meeting	Dr. Abhishek Mishra, Associate Fellow, Manohar Parrikar Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses, made a presentation on “Recent Coups in Africa’s Sahel Region: Trends and Challenges” at the Monday Morning Meeting held on 30 October 2023. The Session was moderated by Dr. Rajeesh Kumar, Associate Fellow, MP-IDSA. Scholars of the Institute were in attendance. Executive Summary The recent spate of coups in West Africa and the Sahel, notably in Mali, Burkina Faso, and Niger, has raised significant concerns regarding political stability in the Sahel region. Driven by socio-political grievances and security challenges, military interventions have disrupted democratic governance. Burkina Faso experienced a coup amid economic challenges and rising extremist violence, while Niger and Gabon also faced coups, citing dissatisfaction with the government's handling of security threats. The international community has strongly condemned these actions, emphasising the urgent need for a return to democratic principles. Regional organisations, such as the African Union and the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) play a pivotal role in mediating and restoring stability to the region. Their efforts are crucial in addressing the complex socio-political and security issues that have led to these unsettling developments. Detailed Report The presentation commenced with Dr. Rajeesh Kumar delivering opening remarks, providing a foundation for examination of recurring coups in Africa. Dr. Rajeesh mentioned the historical depth of this phenomenon, spanning from 1946 to 2020, with over 300 instances documented. The focus of the discussion, led by Dr. Abhishek Mishra, was on unravelling the intricacies and understanding the root causes of these coups. The presentation proceeded with Dr. Abhishek providing an overview of the research methods employed, with particular emphasis on the utilization of descriptive and analytical approaches in addition to using both primary and secondary sources. Transitioning to the theme, he highlighted three distinct waves of coups in Africa. The first wave (1960s-1970s) was characterised by the overthrow of leaders whose political visions conflicted with the interests of major colonial powers. The second wave (1990-2001) is examined in terms of failures in the 1980s, reduced violence involving mid-level officers, and the impact of evolving democratic norms at the regional and continental level. The ongoing third wave (2020 onwards) is marked by diverse motivations, ranging from unconstitutional Presidential term limit extensions and anti-colonial sentiments, with a spotlight on country-specific manifestations. Subsequently, he provided analysis on factors propelling coups in the Sahel, identifying perennially weak states, overdependence on aid, and electoral governance shortcomings as pivotal drivers over the past three decades. A comprehensive overview of recent coups from January 2020 to August 2023 was presented, incorporating statistics on attempted and successful coups, notable incidents (e.g., Niger in July, Gabon in August 2023), and the resultant implications for the region. Dr. Abhishek further explored the Sahel region, revealing a landscape fraught with intricate challenges influenced by structural, governance, and external dynamics. The collapse of Libya intensified military involvement, fostering discontent and challenges to elected leaders. Cold War-era neocolonialism deepened reliance on external aid. Governance systems, a legacy of colonialism, often lack true democratic principles, consolidating power within group of elites and particular communities. While certain nations successfully transitioned to functioning democracies like Ghana, Mauritius, Cote d’Ivoire, unmet youth aspirations persist. Military coups, orchestrated by well-trained officers, lack economic direction and ideological foundations, with citizen’s support for military overthrow reflecting dissatisfaction rather than endorsement of military rule. Democratic regression, evident in superficial democracies and declining satisfaction, underscore governance hurdles. Recommendations emphasise regional collaboration, institutional investment, and local governance focus. Strained state-society relations necessitate inclusivity efforts and resolution of historical grievances. Discrepancies between legality and legitimacy, driven by foreign interference, impede effective governance. France's role, rooted in colonial history, faces scrutiny amid growing decolonial sentiments and regional tensions. Insecurity, exemplified by the failure of Operation Barkhane, further complicates the region's landscape. In his exploration of the Sahel region, Dr. Abhishek highlighted the intricacies surrounding Operation Barkhane, France's initiative in 2013 to curb Islamist violence. While initially successful against insurgencies, France's recent withdrawal, commencing on 15 August 2022, has raised concerns about potential destabilisation and power vacuums in the region. The "Francafrique" system, characterising France's relationship with African nations, came under scrutiny for inconsistencies and double standards in promoting Western values, contributing to tensions. Immigration and visa issues further strained relations between France, Africa, and Europe, complicating diplomatic dynamics. Amidst these complexities, Russia's role in the region received attention, with Dr. Abhishek urging caution against media hype. Despite Russia's deep pockets, limitations to its influence in certain African countries were noted. The heightened violence following the withdrawal of Operation Barkhane and the United Nations Multinational Integrated Stabilisation Mission in Mali (MINUSMA) brought attention to security challenges, notably attributed to groups like Jamaá Nusrat ul-Islam wa-al Muslimin (JNIM) and the Islamic State in the Greater Sahara (ISGS). Dr. Abhishek advocated a political and diplomatic resolution to the crisis, emphasising the temporary nature of sanctions and the need for a bottom-up governance-focused approach. Improved coordination among international organisations, revisiting peace deals, and cautious dialogue with militants were underscored as essential elements for a sustainable resolution. The potential for African Union and ECOWAS intervention was acknowledged, particularly in preventing political transitions through diplomatic means. The assessment of countries susceptible to coups, including Cameroon, Republic of Congo, and Equatorial Guinea, highlighted concerns about dissatisfaction with long-serving leaders and the potential for power shifts in these regions. *Questions and Comments* During the Q&A session the scholars raised a number of thought-provoking inquiries, ranging from the implications of foreign intervention, specifically dissecting the aftermath of French involvement in African nations, to a deep dive into the role of social media in shaping post-coup leadership. The motivations behind unconstitutional power extensions took centre stage, prompting discussions on whether civilian governments or military leaders were more prone to such actions. Scrutiny extended to the effectiveness of regional blocks and the African Union in curbing coups, prompting a collective call for a re-evaluation of existing sanctions and conditions. Dr. Abhishek Mishra addressed the questions posed by the scholars. On the issue of instability in Francophone West Africa, he noted that successive coups haven't directly led to instability, explaining the uniqueness of each country's situation. Coup prevention emerged as a priority, particularly in cases where leaders attempt third terms, leading to concentrated power. Regarding democracy, Dr. Mishra stressed the need to revisit the social contract and build institutions for sustained trust between civilians and leaders. From India's perspective, the instability poses a limited threat to investments, but the country continues to seek new markets, as Indian embassies in these regions continue to operate despite the instability. The coup phenomenon is more pronounced in Francophone West African countries due to France's historical legacy. Mishra highlighted challenges in weak states, with citizens blaming leaders for unfulfilled promises, emphasising the necessity of inclusive approaches to state-building, bringing in diverse communities for sustainable development. The report has been prepared by Mohanasakthivel J., Research Analyst, ALACUN Centre, MP-IDSA.
Report of Monday Morning Meeting on Presidential Election in the Maldives: Implications for India	October 09, 2023			Monday Morning Meeting	Executive Summary Maldives, an archipelago in South Asia, recently concluded its fourth presidential election under the multiparty system, resulting in Mohamed Muizzu of the Progressive Alliance securing a decisive victory with roughly 54% of the ballots. The outcome of this election holds significance for Maldivian Foreign Policy and the broader Indian Ocean Region. While outgoing President Solih pursued a pro-Indian foreign policy, President-elect Muizzu may be inclined more towards China. Nevertheless, continuing collaboration with India is likely on the horizon to fulfil his commitment to advancing the country's economic development. Detailed Report In his opening remarks, Dr. Anand Kumar offered a brief overview of the recent Maldivian Presidential Election and its implications for India. He detailed that the first round of election took place on 9 September 2023, followed by a second runoff on 30 September as no candidate secured the mandatory 50% vote in the first round. He assessed that corruption, governance, defence and security, sovereignty, and the presence of Indian troops in the country were some of the key election issues. Finally, he outlined how President-elect Mohamed Muizzu’s victory could potentially lead to shifts in foreign policy, aligning more closely with China while potentially distancing from India. Dr. Gulbin Sultana began her presentation by concisely explaining the two-phase presidential polls in Maldives. She explained that in the fourth presidential elections, Mohamed Muizzu, representing the Progressive Alliance, a coalition comprising the Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM) and the People's National Congress (PNC), emerged victorious over the incumbent, Mohammed Ibrahim Solih of the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP). She highlighted how Muizzu's win has sparked interest in its implications for the country's foreign policy. However, she underlined that the newly elected president will face the delicate task of balancing domestic priorities with the ongoing geopolitical competition between India and China to expand its sphere of influence. Dr. Sultana delved into the backdrop of previous presidential elections and their corresponding policies. Under President Yameen's leadership from 2013 to 2018, the Maldives strengthened ties with China by joining its Belt and Road Initiative. His successor, Ibrahim Solih from MDP, pursued an "India First" policy, enhancing developmental security and defence connections with India while avoiding projects conflicting with Indian interests initiated by the Chinese government. In terms of development, she highlighted India's involvement in over 50 community development projects and the initiation of the Greater Male Connectivity Project. On the defence front, India's ongoing initiatives encompass the construction of a naval harbour at UthuruThila Falhu, hydrographic surveys, supplying a Dornier aircraft and offering a US$ 50 million Credit Line for defence purposes. Nonetheless, she detailed how the Progressive Alliance opposed the deepening of bilateral ties by spearheading an "India Out" campaign based on disinformation. Politicising the issue, “India Out” campaigners accused both India and the MDP government of undermining Maldives sovereignty. Furthermore, the speaker mentioned the factors contributing to the current election outcome. Dr. Sultana claimed that the tilt of Solih’s administration towards India was not the only contributing factor. She highlighted the internal split within the MDP stemming from party differences, President Solih's inability to fulfil promises made during his tenure, and concerns related to the nation's sovereignty and strategic autonomy were additional elements that contributed to his poor performance in the elections. The discussion encompassed various aspects, including the election promises articulated by the newly elected president. The speaker noted that the president-elect had strongly emphasised fostering economic development, addressing the issue of servicing the country's debt, and recognising the significance of large-scale projects for the nation's economy. In terms of foreign policy, he expressed intentions to enhance relations with multiple countries, Nevertheless, the speaker assessed that the country's stability may face challenges due to the economic challenges posed by the pandemic and its over-reliance on imports. Additionally, the speaker highlighted that while it is expected that Muizzu's Presidency will result in increased Chinese involvement in the region, it is unlikely that the foreign policy will entirely revert to the 2013-2018 period under Abdullah Yameen, considering economic factors and the new administration's priorities for the next five years. Regarding the future of India-Maldives relations, Dr. Sultana anticipated their continuity despite the new president's intentions to remove foreign military personnel from Maldivian soil. She enumerated India's engagement with the Maldives, which has significantly expanded, spanning development initiatives and financial support. In essence, she anticipated that the diplomatic dialogues between the Maldives and India are expected to endure due to shared interests and ongoing projects. Questions and Comments The floor was opened for questions and comments. The remarks and inquiries underscored the potential resurgence of Islamic radicalism, the new president’s ability to balance relations with major powers like India, China, Japan and the US, as well as the prospect of a formal defence and security agreement between India and the Maldives. Lastly, the discussion centred on India's neighbourhood policy and underscored the significance of effective engagement and the timely execution of projects to enhance India's standing in the region. Report prepared by Sneha M, Research Analyst, South Asia Centre, MP-IDSA.
Report of Monday Morning Meeting: Emerging Dynamics in the Indo-Pacific	November 06, 2023			Monday Morning Meeting	A delegation from The Centre for Naval Analyses (CNA), Arlington, Virginia, participated in the Monday Morning Meeting held on 6 November 2023 at 1000h in Room No. 005. Mr. Robert Hein, Senior Executive and Director, Policy and Plans, U.S. Navy Pacific Fleet, and Dr. Satu Limaye, Senior Advisor, CNA, spoke on “Emerging Dynamics in the Indo-Pacific”. Ambassador Sujan R. Chinoy, Director General, Manohar Parrikar Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses, chaired the Session. Other members of the delegation, Mr. Dean Vaughn, Staff Member, Policy and Plans, US Navy Pacific Fleet and Ms. Tamara Hemphill, Acting Director, Indo-Pacific Security Affairs, CNA, along with the scholars from MP-IDSA, enriched the discussion. Executive Summary The Asia-Pacific paradigm was relevant from 1945 till the end of the century. However, today, the Indo-Pacific is a far more representative and democratic framework consisting of large swaths of geography where people aspire for peace, stability and progress. Therefore, the Asia-Pacific was a China-centric concept, while the Indo-Pacific is more democratic. The US’ approach towards China has changed from cooperation to competition. The US erroneously thought of transforming China into a responsible global partner through cooperation. Chinese belligerent actions in the region contributed to the growth of the US partnerships and alliances in the Indo-Pacific region. The US seeks a principled engagement with China rather than G2 to stabilise the relationship. There is a distinct change in the US approach towards multilateralism. There is a preference for minilateralism and functional multilateralism in high technology, green energy and critical minerals, among others. The US relies on India to realise concepts like the Free and Open Indo-Pacific. Detailed Report Ambassador Sujan R. Chinoy set the context for discussions. He said that the Indo-Pacific region is of great relevance to India and the United States (US). However, earlier, Asia-Pacific has been in vogue. The Post-World War II Japanese economic growth, the emergence of the Asian tigers, and the consistent high Chinese economic growth facilitated by the US gave rise to the concept of the Asia-Pacific. Going beyond financial calculations, the physical presence of the US was an essential factor in shaping the Asia-Pacific concept. Washington also invested heavily in the region. The US’ interests spanned across the political, military and economic domains. Thus, the Asia-Pacific was relevant from 1945 till the end of the century. However, today, Indo-Pacific is a far more representative and democratic framework consisting of large swaths of geography where people aspire for peace, stability and progress. Therefore, Asia-Pacific was a China-centric concept, while Indo-Pacific is more democratic. Amb. Chinoy stated that the US is not an extra-regional player but has a physical presence, and an economic and strategic role in the Indo-Pacific. The US presence in the region was one of the most important reasons for the economic rise of Asia. Amb. Chinoy further stated that if China was championing the cause of multipolarity at the international level, the same should also be the case in Asia. Speaking about the Quad, Amb. Chinoy held that India attached great importance to the Quad, which is not a military partnership. There is an added advantage of having a multilateral Malabar exercise. He ended his introductory remarks by asking whether the Quad or Malabar could transform into an alliance in the future. He answered the question in affirmation and commented that China would determine the future of the Quad. With these remarks, Ambassador Chinoy invited Mr. Robert Hein to make his presentation. Mr. Robert Hein spoke about the US Free and Open Indo-Pacific concept, and changing dynamics in the region vis-à-vis China. He said that the US emphasised a Free and Open Indo-Pacific so that there would be unimpeded regional trade leading to the region's economic development. Every country has a right to protect the integrity of their respective territorial waters. Talking about a radical change in regional security dynamics, the Speaker informed the audience how the US approach towards China changed from one of cooperation to competition. The US erroneously thought of transforming China into a responsible global partner through cooperation. However, China continued the unabashed militarisation of the South China Sea. Beijing started putting conditions on every form of cooperation to reduce competition. Mr. Hein, further affirmed that Chinese belligerent action in the region contributed to the growth of the US partnerships and alliances in the Indo-Pacific region. He corroborated his claim by giving the example of the Philippines. Manila wanted to do away with the US forces from its territory. However, Chinese bellicose behaviour in the South China Sea forced the Philippines to renew a bilateral agreement with the US. Further, the Quad has grown enormously due to China’s maligned behaviour. Mr. Hein complained that China had cut off all communication with the US, which was a bad sign for any bilateral relationship. Talking about India-US relations, the Speaker observed that the relationship was in good shape and growing well in multiple areas including defence, technology, new practices and procedures. The US relies on India to realise concepts like the Free and Open Indo-Pacific. He also spoke about the US vision of a thousand-ship navy being realised with the help of its partners and allies as a collective endeavour. He cautioned the audience that the conflict over Taiwan would be a great blow to the global economy and may lead to another great depression. Dr. Satu Limaye agreed with the previous Speaker that China had done an excellent job in strengthening the US alliances. He held the India-US Partnership in good stead and said the US alliances were becoming more critical. Regarding de-risking and decoupling from China, Dr. Limaye remarked that the picture was more precise and the US was weighing its dependencies with China about trade, investment and high technology. Simultaneously, the US sought a principled engagement with China rather than G2 to stabilise the relationship. Dr. Limaye touched upon the economic aspect of the US-China relationship. He observed a shift in China’s economic relations with the region, especially with the US, Japan and Europe. On the one hand, China is trying to diversify ties as a part of broader decoupling. On the other hand, the US has increased interactions with its allies and partners in the economic domain. Initiatives like the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework were helping the regional economic order to become more multilateral, open and engaged. The Speaker noted a distinct change in the US approach towards multilateralism. Rather than focusing on the big regional multilateral initiatives like the East Asia Summit, the US focused on initiatives such as the Chip 4 Alliance, Quad and Critical Mineral Partnership. Thus, there is a preference for minilateralism and functional multilateralism in high technology, green energy and critical minerals, among others. Amb. Chinoy observed that there was no need for the US to have a thousand-ship navy due to its technological superiority over China. He noted that India was not a member of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) as there was a moratorium on expanding the grouping. Regarding China’s Malacca Dilemma, Amb. Chinoy commented that all countries depend on the Malacca Strait for their trade and energy needs. Amb. Chinoy also raised a few questions regarding the US’s reaction in case China attempts to forcefully seek reunification with Taiwan. He also inquired about the US position in case China threatened the Philippines’ sovereignty over its island territories. In response to the observations raised by Amb. Chinoy and MP-IDSA scholars, Mr. Hein stated that China would not commit to any adventure over Taiwan because President Xi lacks confidence in his armed forces. Additionally, he has several domestic issues that would deter him from taking Taiwan by force. The US has allies and partners in the region, thus preventing China from doing a misadventure over Taiwan. Talking about the role of domestic politics in decision-making vis-à-vis a contingency in the region, the Speaker further said that in a war-like situation, the US would unite and respond to the situation wholeheartedly. Regarding Freedom of Navigation Operations (FONOPs), the Speaker said that the US does it against friends and adversaries alike and will continue to do so in accordance with International Law. Mr. Hein said that the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) was important for the US. Following a rich and insightful discussion, Amb. Chinoy brought the meeting to a close. Report is prepared by Mr. Niranjan Chandrashekhar Oak, Research Analyst, Nuclear and Arms Control Centre.
Talk on the theme "Tanzania’s Foreign Policy and India-Tanzania Relations"	October 04, 2023			Talk	Mr. Avit A. Chami, India-Africa Security Fellow, spoke on “Tanzania’s Foreign Policy and India-Tanzania Relations” at a Roundtable held at the Manohar Parrikar Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses, New Delhi on 4 October 2023. The Director General, Ambassador Sujan R. Chinoy chaired the meeting and scholars of the Institute attended the meeting. Executive Summary Mr. Avit A. Chami's presentation highlighted the deep historical and cultural connections between India and Tanzania, showcasing Tanzania's economic indicators, political landscape under President Samia Suluhu Hassan, and its reliance on agriculture and strategic trade networks. Chami outlined potential areas for collaboration, spanning healthcare, defence, education, and trade, while emphasising the thriving Indian community in Tanzania. The presentation underscored the bilateral commitment to strengthening ties, acknowledging challenges, and outlining government measures to fortify the relationship. Overall, it emerged that the India-Tanzania relationship is positioned for mutual growth, promising a bright future ahead as both nations are among the fastest-growing economies globally and in Africa. Detailed Report The Director General, Ambassador Sujan R. Chinoy introduced the Speaker and emphasised the critical role Tanzania plays in India's diplomatic and economic engagement. Drawing attention to Tanzania's political stability, demographic advantages, and its function as a gateway to landlocked African nations, he highlighted its potential as an economic powerhouse in Africa. The country's abundant biodiversity and its status as an Indian Ocean littoral state add to its significance in India's Indian Ocean strategy. He underscored that the visit by the Indian Chief of the Army Staff, along with prior high-level interactions, reflects a clear commitment to strengthening ties between the two nations. Mr. Avit A. Chami's presentation commenced with expressions of gratitude towards the Institute and the participants. In his presentation he delved into the deep historical and cultural connections between Tanzania and India. Mr. Chami highlighted Tanzania's strategic position on the East African Coast, setting the foundation for a broader discussion on the relationship between the two nations. Transitioning into the economic and cultural aspects, Mr. Chami emphasised the democratic leadership under President Dr. Samia Suluhu Hassan. He also showcased key economic indicators, including a GDP of $85 billion and a 5.7% growth rate, attributed to sectors like agriculture, tourism, mining, manufacturing, trade, and transit. The cultural diversity of Tanzania, with 120 tribes practicing various religions, and the prominence of Kiswahili as the national language were also highlighted. Talking about notable attractions, such as UNESCO Heritage Sites, pristine beaches in Zanzibar, and wildlife safaris, the Speaker painted a vivid picture of Tanzania's allure. Shifting focus to Tanzania's political landscape, Mr. Avit A. Chami delved into the democratic framework characterised by regular general elections occurring every five years. He explained the prevailing leadership structure, underscoring the central role played by the ruling Chama Cha Mapinduzi party. Mr. Chami elucidated on the prominent figures guiding the government, with President Hassan making history as the first female president. Assisting President Samia in steering the nation are Vice President Dr. Philip Isdor Mpango and Prime Minister Kassim Majaliwa, collectively forming an effective leadership team. In addition, Mr. Chami, highlighted agriculture as the backbone of Tanzania's economy and emphasised the pivotal role of trade, notably through the Port of Dar es Salaam. India is a major trading partner, receiving 22 percent of Tanzanian exports, while China dominates as the leading source for imports, particularly agricultural products, and clothing. Mr. Chami underscored Tanzania's limited industrial activities but noted its appeal for foreign direct investment (FDI), with China leading, followed by the USA, and India ranking as the third-largest source of FDI for the country. This succinct overview portrayed Tanzania's economic reliance on agriculture, a robust trade network, and strategic foreign investments. Building upon the foundational insights, Mr. Chami provided a more in-depth exploration of Tanzania's foreign policy, emphasising the significant influence of President Julius Nyerere. The trajectory of this policy, which initially centered on open diplomacy and anti-colonialism post-independence in 1961, underwent a transformative shift in 2001, towards economic diplomacy, prioritising foreign direct investment and fostering global partnerships. Over the years, Tanzania actively participated in regional and international initiatives, contributing notably to anti-colonial struggles in Africa and cultivating diplomatic ties, notably with India. The ongoing phase involves a meticulous review process, addressing pressing issues such as climate change and maritime security. Tanzania's commitment to global cooperation, technology, and investment, underscored by its dedication to human rights and equality, is evident. Actively engaging in diverse multilateral organisations, Tanzania positions itself as a significant player in the dynamic landscape of international relations. In its global engagement, India holds a distinctive position for Tanzania, with a relationship dating back to the 1960s rooted in a historical connection spanning 2,000 years through the Indian diaspora. Originating from trade facilitated by monsoons, this enduring connection is exemplified by the harmoniously integrated Indian community, known as Wahindi, an integral part of Tanzanian society akin to a tribe. Centered around the Indian Ocean, the connection is characterised by shared cultures, histories, and culinary traditions. Established in 1961, official diplomatic ties have fostered development cooperation, defense collaboration, economic partnerships, and strong people-to-people relations. The educational exchange has seen Tanzanian students benefit from Indian institutions, with the notable milestone of an IIT Madras branch in Zanzibar poised to enhance technological and educational capacities in the region. Mr. Chami also delved into potential areas for collaboration between India and Tanzania, emphasising the robust partnership already established across diverse sectors. In healthcare, Indian hospitals collaborate with Tanzanian counterparts in joint programs, specifically addressing critical issues such as health and sanitation. The pharmaceutical industry plays a significant role, contributing vaccines and medicines to bolster Tanzania's healthcare. Over two decades of support, including the Lines of Credit program, has seen India enhance water infrastructure in more than fifty Tanzanian cities. The longstanding defence and security cooperation, spanning six decades, encompasses joint exercises, maritime collaboration, and the exchange of military ties. This collaboration extends to personnel exchanges, with defence colleges facilitating knowledge sharing and training. Overall, the multifaceted collaboration exemplifies a comprehensive and mutually beneficial relationship between India and Tanzania. Furthermore, the collaboration between India and Tanzania has yielded notable achievements, particularly in defence and security. The Indian Navy's support along the eastern coast has been crucial, with recent joint defence cooperation meetings paving the way for a strategic five-year development roadmap. While current defence trade appears modest, the intent is to deepen cooperation in this sector. In terms of economic and trade ties, both nations share a healthy relationship. India continues to be a prominent market for Tanzanian agricultural products such as cashew nuts, pigeon peas, spices, avocados, and other commodities, constituting 22 per cent of Tanzanian exports. The introduction of direct flights between Dar es Salaam and Mumbai further facilitates business and people-to-people connections. In the midst of tough competition, India engages in trade amounting to $6.5 billion, navigating the challenges posed by the formidable market presence of China. Cultural integration is evident in shared activities like International Yoga Day, Kabaddi Day, and the blending of Bollywood and Bongowood in film industries. The Indian diaspora of over 60,000 in Tanzania actively contributes to business and cultural exchanges, while Tanzanians in India, primarily students, add to the dynamic intercultural landscape. The collaborative spirit is fostering a deepening bond between the two nations. Finally, Mr. Chami painted a vibrant picture of the thriving Indian community in Tanzania. Over the years, it has flourished, enjoying robust support from both the government and the local community. What sets the Indians apart is their reputation for reliability, distinguishing them from other foreign groups. Unlike some, they steer clear of selling counterfeit products, establishing a strong bond with consumers. Indian-owned hospitals play a crucial role in providing affordable and dependable healthcare, further strengthening community ties. Despite amicable relations, challenges persist, including limited awareness and competition from China, affecting the trade balance. The government has implemented measures to fortify ties with India, facilitating direct flights and introducing visa-on-arrival for Indians. The initiative to conduct trade in local currencies aims to streamline business even further. Future prospects extend across diverse sectors such as agriculture, extractives, tourism, and infrastructure. The overarching objective is to expand Indian influence beyond existing domains. In conclusion, India and Tanzania, both among the fastest-growing economies globally and in Africa respectively, are poised to reap the rewards of mutual growth, promising a bright future ahead. The Q/A Session Ms. Ruchita Beri, consultant at MP-IDSA's Africa, Latin America, Caribbean & UN (ALACUN) Centre, contributed valuable insights by posing questions and making remarks that delved into crucial aspects of Tanzanian foreign policy and the India-Tanzania relationship. Her inquiries explored the ongoing foreign policy review, the significance of core issues like blue economy and the Tanzanian diaspora, and India's broader relevance in Africa. Ms. Beri's remarks highlighted the depth of the India-Tanzania relationship, particularly in water management, and acknowledged the remarkable 84% implementation rate of India's development assistance. Dr. Abhishek Mishra, Associate Fellow at the ALACUN Centre, joined the discussion, expressing appreciation and raising pertinent questions and remarks. Dr. Mishra emphasised the strategic ties between India and Tanzania, recognising their significance due to proximity, religious ties, and evolving defence relations. He commended the recent Mini Defence Expo, suggesting its replication in other African countries. Dr. Mishra's inquiries into challenges faced by Indian companies in Tanzania, including land leasing issues, and the competitive dynamics with China winning tenders, highlighted key areas for exploration and improvement. In response Mr. Avit A. Chami said that he valued the informative discussion and addressed a few of the crucial issues brought up during the discussion. According to him, the ongoing review of Tanzanian foreign policy addresses critical issues, including climate change, negotiations, and dual citizenship, which has sparked significant debate. The concern is centered around potential security risks associated with offering citizenship to the diaspora. The President's recent acknowledgment of this issue and the consideration of adopting a special status for diaspora members reflect the complexity of this debate. Regarding India-Tanzania trade relations amidst Chinese competition, the Speaker highlighted untapped sectors like agriculture and tourism as significant opportunities for Indian companies. The comparison with Chinese influence underscores the need for a strategic and hybrid approach in sectors where India has a competitive advantage, such as defence and security. He acknowledged India's success in these sectors due to stability and well-organised exchanges but emphasised the importance of addressing concerns in other sectors for effective collaboration. The Director General, Ambassador Sujan R. Chinoy expressed appreciation to the Speaker for sharing valuable insights, particularly those related to Tanzania's perspective. He said that these insights have significantly enriched the Institute's understanding of Africa. Ambassador Chinoy extended best wishes to Mr. Avit A. Chami and expressed anticipation for future interactions with him. *The report has been prepared by Mohanasakthivel J., Research Analyst, MP-IDSA.*	Africa, Latin America, Caribbean & UN	India-Tanzania Relations, Tanzania
Report of MP-IDSA Fellows Seminar: “Iran in the Emerging (Eur)Asian Order: Mapping the Rise of a Regional Middle Power”	October 26, 2023			Fellows' Seminar	Dr. Deepika Saraswat, Associate Fellow, West Asia Centre, Manohar Parrikar Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses (MP-IDSA), presented her Fellow Paper on “Iran in the Emerging (Eur)Asian Order: Mapping the Rise of a Regional Middle Power” at the MP-IDSA Fellows Seminar held on 26 October 2023. The Seminar was chaired by Professor Gulshan Dietl, former Professor, School of International Studies (SIS), Jawaharlal Nehru University. The External Discussants were Professor A.K. Ramakrishnan, Centre for West Asian Studies, SIS, Jawaharlal Nehru University and Dr. Meena Singh Roy, Senior Fellow (West and Central Asia), Tillotama Foundation. Dr. Rajorshi Roy, Associate Fellow, Europe and Eurasia Centre and Dr. Jason Wahlang, Research Analyst, Europe and Eurasia Centre, MP-IDSA, were Internal Discussants. Director General of MP-IDSA, Ambassador Sujan R. Chinoy and scholars of the Institute attended the Seminar. Executive Summary Three noteworthy trends delineate Iran’s emerging middle power behaviour. Firstly, there is a proactive involvement in Asian multilateralism, exemplified by active participation in regional institutions like the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO). Secondly, Iran employs an ideational strategy that leverages its civilisational identity and values as a foundation for nurturing an Asian regional security community. Thirdly, Iran strategically positions itself as a geographic-civilisational “bridge,” actively facilitating connections in transcontinental connectivity initiatives spearheaded by major powers, including China, Russia, and India. These trends collectively signify Iran’s role in shaping the geoeconomic landscape of (Eur)Asia. Detailed Report In his opening remarks, Ambassador Sujan R. Chinoy welcomed the Chair and the External and Internal Discussants. He emphasised the importance of Iran being a part of India’s close neighbourhood and how India’s Act West policy encapsulates geopolitical and civilisational relations. He stated that Iran has special significance in West Asian politics. Amb. Chinoy highlighted that Iran frequently remains in the news for one or other issues like being part of a long-drawn imbroglio in Yemen with the Houthi problem, Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), nuclear postures, bilateral relations with the US, and peace and security in the Persian Gulf. He outlined the role of Iran in the International North-South Transport Corridor (INSTC). It was also noted that Iran has been a general outlier in the international system but gains a significant constituency when required. Its bilateral relations with India are mostly on a reciprocal basis. Amb. Chinoy recalled his tenure at the UN from 1992-1995 and specified that, particularly in 1994-95, Iran was instrumental in helping India counter Pakistan-backed human rights resolutions in Geneva. Introducing the topic, Dr. Deepika Saraswat highlighted the context of Iran’s return to a ‘Look East’ strategy and emerging middle power behaviour. She stated that Iran preferred Eastern partnerships over the West, advocating closer ties with neighbouring nations and collaboration with countries sharing common goals. As a Persian country, Iran desired to find a home in Asia to overcome identity isolation. Iran’s preference for the term “West Asia” over “Middle East” indicates this transformative paradigm. Dr. Saraswat further pointed out that Iran strategically channels its investments in Asia, forging alliances with rising powers such as China, India, and Russia. Iran is seeing growing convergence between East, Central, West and South Asian regional systems. Dr. Saraswat highlighted the significance of Iran’s outlook in the evolving geopolitical landscape where mega connectivity projects are seen cooperatively, considering it an opportunity. Iran has placed development-security connections and regional connectivity at the forefront of its regional cooperation initiatives. The Speaker outlined multiple definitions of middle powers to contextualise Iran’s position. Middle powers possess the military and strategic strength requisite to elicit support from great powers during peacetime. Although they may not emerge victorious against great powers in times of conflict, these middle powers can inflict disproportionate costs upon them. She articulated that being categorised as a middle power involves possessing specific capabilities, adopting a particular attitude, and asserting a distinct national identity. To analyse Iran’s behaviour, Dr. Saraswat used the concept of emerging middle powers, especially in the post-Cold War era context. Emerging middle powers possess substantial relative power advantages over their smaller neighbours. These nations manifest dissatisfaction with their current standing and aspire to carve an independent trajectory guided by their interests, values, and ambitions for regional and global influence. Notably, many of these middle powers have historical and cultural backgrounds that align with the concept of civilisational states. She highlighted that revisionist emerging middle powers actively seek to reshape the prevailing international order, often aligning themselves with revisionist great powers in pursuit of their objectives. Iran has positioned the “Look East” policy or “Asia orientation” as a central focus within incumbent Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi’s led foreign policy framework. The formalisation of Iran’s deepening engagement with Eur(Asia) was marked by its full membership approval in the SCO during the 21st summit, a development Dr. Saraswat identified as a significant milestone in Iran’s evolving regional strategy. Positioned as a middle power, Iran has demonstrated several key behaviours, as outlined by the speaker: Firstly, Iran has actively embraced “Asian multilateralism” by participating in regional institutions such as the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO). Initially joining as an Observer in 2004, Iran applied for full membership in 2008, ultimately achieving it in 2023. Dr. Saraswat contextualised this Iranian initiative within the institutional balancing framework, replacing conventional military means with a focus on leveraging multilateral institutions to gain power and influence in world politics. Ebrahim Raisi’s address at the UNGA in 2023, envisioning a novel and equitable world order rooted in regional cooperation, was cited as evidence of Iran’s commitment to this approach. The Speaker noted that the withdrawal of the United States from Afghanistan, coupled with the subsequent takeover by the Taliban, has not only highlighted the diminishing influence of the US in shaping the regional order but has also triggered a realignment in the regional geopolitical landscape. Iran’s involvement in the 3+3 regional cooperation format to resolve problems of the South Caucasus without the interference of extra-regional and Western countries is a part of its regional diplomacy. Secondly, Iran has employed its civilisational identity and values to construct an ideational strategy to foster an Asian regional security community. Dr. Saraswat highlighted Iran’s practice of framing bilateral ties with Asian powers, including India and China, in civilisational terms. Iran’s leaders have offered a conception of Asia as comprising diverse civilisations and cultures, emphasising regional cultural and ideational autonomy and rejection of the Western normative universalism based on liberal democracy. The call for endogenous security and Asian unity by Iran was noted to align with the Chinese President’s ‘new Asian security concept,’ emphasising the leadership of Asians in Asian affairs. The Speaker also mentioned Iran’s effort toward displacing Turkiye’s ethnic-linguistic narrative of pan-Turkism. Thirdly, drawing from its notion of geographical centrality, Iran strategically positions itself as a geographic-civilisational “bridge,” actively connecting transcontinental connectivity initiatives spearheaded by China, Russia, and India. Iran considers itself a civilisational crossroad in the Silk Road narrative. The Speaker argued that Iran looks at the Chinese Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) with both optimism and fear as BRI proposes to address the development deficit but can have adverse geopolitical implications. BRI may lead to Russia-China’s ‘Great Game’ and can have implications for Iran’s transit potential and bargaining power in Central Asian energy markets. This role underscores Iran’s significance in facilitating broader regional cooperation and integration. Dr. Saraswat also emphasised Iran’s declared foreign-policy priority of developing friendly cooperative relations with Central Asian countries and its pivotal role as a ‘gateway’ in the INSTC. Furthermore, Iran’s ‘bridge’ role in projects such as BRI, the Eurasian Economic Union, and INSTC was underscored, emphasising the Iranian focus on the complementary nature of these initiatives rather than their competitive dynamics. Dr. Saraswat noted that Iran is actively articulating a conspicuous regional role in (Eur)Asia by promoting regional autonomy, aligning with the shared objectives of Russia and China. Notably, Iran’s observable effort is to enhance its geoeconomic ties with the three principal actors in the region, namely China, Russia, and India. This strategic engagement aims to mitigate the potential challenges of multipolar rivalry and the prospect of Chinese-led hegemonic regionalism. Prof. A. K. Ramakrishnan offered positive feedback on the paper, commending its logical argumentation and contribution to comprehending Iran’s (Eur)Asia policy. He suggested additional nuances to enhance the analysis, emphasising the need to highlight Iran’s quest for both strategic and regional autonomy. Encouraging the inclusion of major trends characterising emerging middle powers, he underscored the importance of considering major powers entering the geopolitical space as Iran navigates through it. The impact of sanctions and isolation on Iran’s economy, along with resulting constraints in foreign relations, particularly with the West, was noted. Prof. Ramakrishnan stressed the significance of contextualising Iran’s power positioning as an Emerging Middle Power within the context of its historical isolation. He also highlighted the guiding principles of Iran’s foreign policy, focusing on its revolutionary nature and the pursuit of a dignified existence. Further suggestions included exploring East-West dimensions, considering Iran’s call for unity and its role in the non-aligned movement within the paper. The importance of recognising Iran as an ideological state, with domestic politics playing a role in its ideological revivalism, was emphasised. The recommendation to include immediate neighbouring countries, including Afghanistan, aimed at providing a more comprehensive understanding of Iran’s foreign relations. Prof. Ramakrishnan concluded by stating the paper connects conceptual aspects with empirical descriptions and acknowledged the paper’s strength lies in capturing the intricate dynamics of Iran’s foreign policy. Dr. Meena Singh Roy suggested that the author include a brief abstract and mention that the paper is part of a larger project. The need to clarify the theoretical focus in the title and introduce the hypothesis early on was emphasised. Dr. Roy commended the analytical rigour of the paper but recommended a reconsideration of subtitles for reader comprehension. Acknowledging the paper’s extensive use of primary references, she suggested supplementary readings for a practical understanding of Iran’s foreign policy. Dr. Roy highlighted Iran’s strategic adaptability and sophistication, emphasising the importance of understanding its use of strategic assets. She proposed exploring how the international system perceives Iran, particularly its acceptability in regional groupings like the SCO. Additionally, Dr. Roy called for a precise analysis to determine whether Iran has attained emerging middle power status. It was suggested that concepts like emerging middle power should be explained early in the paper, along with clarifying Iran’s narrative regarding (Eur)Asia due to the region’s vastness. Addressing Iran’s regional interests, she recommended specifying its focus on the INSTC over the Silk Route and assessing its aspirations for regional power status. Dr. Rajorshi Roy noted that the author has adeptly navigated the complexities of evolving issues, intricate power dynamics, and contestations within the paper. The incorporation of International Relations theories was noted as a strength, rendering the analysis more credible and nuanced in deciphering Iran’s role in (Eur)Asia. Dr. Rajorshi suggested expanding the section on emerging (Eur)Asian politics to include issues related to Central Asian countries, given their significant relevance. Additionally, he recommended examining whether Iran possesses the capacity to actualise its identity as a revisionist power and raised questions about whether Russia and China would relinquish space for Iran. Furthermore, Dr. Rajorshi underscored the importance of exploring the role of the SCO in the context of Eur(Asian) governance, considering it as a potential backbone in this regard. Dr. Jason Wahlang raised the issue of the possibility of China overtaking Russia in the region due to Russia’s preoccupation with Ukraine, citing the Chinese base in Tajikistan as an illustrative example. Dr. Wahlang emphasised the importance of assessing whether Iran could capitalise on these shifting dynamics in the long term. Additionally, he recommended delving into Iran-Turkiye relations, particularly in terms of civilisational connections and cultural aspects. Dr. Wahlang highlighted Iran’s role as a Caspian nation alongside Kazakhstan and Russia, suggesting that further exploration of this aspect would enhance the paper’s value. He also proposed addressing Iran’s focus on non-traditional security issues, specifically related to water, considering the Aral Sea and Amu Darya. Prof. Gulshan Dietl commenced her remarks with the poignant quote, “today is the best of times, and today is the worst of times,” emphasising Iran’s vulnerable position in its immediate neighbourhood. She recommended a clear definition of ‘(Eur)Asia,’ as it is integral to the paper’s title, and encouraged the author to provide her own interpretation of an emerging regional middle power. Prof. Dietl highlighted the relevance of using ‘West Asia’ based on its geographical placement, referencing Jawaharlal Nehru’s critique of ‘Middle East’ as a colonial term. Considering Iran’s global impact, Prof. Dietl acknowledged its significant energy resources in proximity to Central Asia but underscored the challenges arising from linguistic and religious differences with neighbouring countries. This isolation, she noted, sheds light on Iran’s support for entities like Hezbollah, Houthis, and the Palestinians. Prof. Dietl succinctly outlined challenges faced by Iran, including sanctions, which limit its foreign relations, domestic concerns over election outcomes, and controversies surrounding issues such as Hijab. She highlighted slogans reflecting domestic sentiments, such as “Not Gaza, Not Lebanon; I will die for Iran,” and observed Iran’s outreach to revisionist major powers like China and Russia. In the broader context of changing world order, Prof. Dietl emphasised the constraints faced by Iran, particularly domestic challenges, during a time when even the United Nations is under scrutiny. Q&A Session The Q&A session delved into various themes, encompassing Iran’s identity as a theological revolutionary state, the reliability of information about Iran on social media platforms, definitional and conceptual aspects of emerging middle power, the nuanced relationship between (Eur)Asia and the security order, the historical context of the Iranian revolution, Iran’s ideological positions in relation to other countries, and the constraints impeding Iran’s realisation of emerging middle power status. Dr. Saraswat addressed and responded to the comments and questions raised during this comprehensive discussion. This report was prepared by Mr. Abhishek Yadav, Research Analyst, West Asia Centre, MP-IDSA.
Report of Monday Morning Meeting on Technology Development Fund of DRDO: Challenges and Opportunities	October 23, 2023			Monday Morning Meeting	Mr. Arvind Khare, IDAS, Senior Fellow, Manohar Parrikar Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses (MP-IDSA), delivered a presentation on “Technology Development Fund of DRDO: Challenges and Opportunities” at the Monday Morning Meeting held on 23 October 2023. Col. (Dr.) Rajneesh Singh (Retd.), Research Fellow and Coordinator of the Defence Economics and Industry Centre, MP-IDSA, moderated the session. Ambassador Sujan R. Chinoy, Director General, MP-IDSA and the scholars of MP-IDSA attended the meeting. Executive Summary Mr. Khare highlighted the crux of the Technology Development Fund (TDF) scheme, a flagship programme of the Ministry of Defence (MoD), being executed by the Defence Research and Development Organization (DRDO) for attaining self-reliance by promoting indigenously developed technologies and to further research and development culture in the private industries in India. Detailed Report Col. (Dr.) Rajneesh Singh (Retd.) commenced the meeting by providing some insights on the TDF scheme and placed in context the issue of earmarking 25 per cent of Defence R&D budget for private industry and academia. Mr. Arvind Khare noted that the TDF scheme is a Grant - in - Aid programme and noted that it is a step towards Atmanirbhar Bharat in defence and empowering the defence research and development ecosystem through industrial participation. The presentation provided the chronology of the TDF scheme, the involvement of users in the TDF development process and the benefits of TDF to the industry. Mr. Khare then went on to detail the process involved in the flow of funds under the TDF scheme and the criteria for evaluating the projects under TDF. He specified some of the various projects awarded under the scheme, the success stories as well as business opportunities and the future of the TDF scheme. The presentation also enumerated aspects relating to raising fund limit for a TDF project from ₹10 crores to ₹50 crores and earmarking 25 percent Defence R&D budget for funding industry, startups, and academia. The presentation examined aspects relating to technology management and the DRDO. Mr. Khare ended his presentation by pointing out the constraints and challenges in the TDF scheme and suggested some policy insights to overcome those challenges. Questions and Comments Discussion in the Q&A session related to the success rate of projects by the DRDO under the scheme, learning of best practices from organisations like the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) of the United States, and flagging of issues relating to scheme implementation, DRDO-private industry interactions, among other issues. Amb. Sujan R. Chinoy, DG, MP-IDSA, began his remarks by complimenting the Speaker for his presentation on an important subject, and urged all the scholars in MP-IDSA to work more on areas concerning defence and technology. He pointed out that the issues that were discussed by the Speaker were very relevant to Atmanirbharta in Defence manufacturing. The Director General highlighted that it is important for the Defence Public Sector Undertakings (DPSUs), the private sector and the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises (MSMEs) to have a greater technology focus as well as invest in indigenous R&D. The nature of technology development in the corporate sector role was also flagged, where incubation and innovation centres are established in promising and vital areas for commercial gains and larger public use. Mr. Khare responded to the comments and observations made by the Director General and the scholars. He added that the technology that emanates through innovations from projects under the TDF scheme would be a joint property of that industry partner and the DRDO. He also added that there is a need to make TDF scheme more hassle free for industry and startups by streamlining the procedure and continuing with the Grant - in - Aid mode of funding.

Pages

Top