You are here
Events
| Title | Date | Author | Time | Event | Body | Research Area | Topics | File attachments | Image |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MP-IDSA - NIDS Virtual Bilateral Dialogue | November 17, 2022 | 1000 hrs | Bilateral |
The East Asia Centre at the Manohar Parrikar Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses (MP-IDSA) is holding a bilateral dialogue (online) with the National Institute for Defense Studies (NIDS) in Japan on Thursday, 17th November at 10.00 am. |
|||||
| Monday Morning Meeting on “No Money for Terror": Challenges and Strategies | November 21, 2022 | 1000 hrs | Monday Morning Meeting |
Col. Vivek Chadha (Retd.), Senior Fellow, Manohar Parrikar Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses (MP-IDSA), spoke on “No Money for Terror”: Challenges and Strategies at the Monday Morning Meeting held on 21 November 2022. The session was moderated by Dr. Uttam Kumar Sinha, Senior Fellow, MP-IDSA. Maj. Gen. (Dr.) Bipin Bakshi (Retd.), Deputy Director General, MP-IDSA, and scholars of the institute were in attendance. Executive SummaryTerror financing is a multifaceted and transnational security challenge for states, gaining prominence in the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks. It has been a constant issue of debate in three significant events organised over the past month – the 90th Interpol General Assembly, the United Nations Security Council Counter- Terrorism Committee’s Special Meeting, and the “No Money for Terror” Ministerial Conference. Furthermore, it must be noted that corruption levels in a society determine the severity and scale of operations of terror funding practiced by individuals or groups, and hawala networks are considered the most efficient way for perpetrators to transfer money illegally. Cryptocurrency is gaining prominence as a chosen medium of money transfers. Finally, the main takeaway would be that to succeed in dismantling terror finance networks; states worldwide must ensure that the costs imposed on terror funding outweigh the incentives involved. Detailed ReportDr. Sinha introduced the topic of the Monday Morning Meeting by highlighting the recently organised “No Money for Terror” Conference, hosted in New Delhi from 18-19 November 2022. He emphasised that the opening and concluding remarks by the Indian Minister of Home Affairs, Mr. Amit Shah were impactful, high on content, and indicated a clear sense of direction. He spoke about how the world is undergoing a permacrisis, i.e., an age of constant upheaval. Following the brief introduction, the Dr. Sinha gave the floor to Col. Chadha. Initially, the speaker briefly delved into the three most recent and major conferences about terrorism and terror finance conducted within one month – “No Money for Terror”, the UNSC Counter-Terrorism Committee’s Special Meeting resulting in the Delhi Declaration, and the 90th Interpol General Assembly. He contextualised these events within the trend of renewed focus on terrorism finance and hinted at how it has gained prominence as a critical issue post-9/11. While discussing Interpol’s 90th General Assembly, he shed light on how the resolution unveiled after the meeting drew to a close, linked corruption, crime, and terror funding as crucial factors in an interwoven model. The meeting also focused on the need for global responses to such problems due to financial systems' interconnectedness. Corruption is the core enabler within this dynamic, and the more corrupt a society is, the easier it becomes to undertake, among other activities, financial crime. Next, he underlined the critical features of the Delhi Declaration, where crowdfunding for terror purposes was one of the highlights of the 35-para document. In this context, it must be understood that there are traditional, anonymous, decentralised, and untraceable crowdfunding methods, including the hawala networks. Subsequently, he shifted the focus to the “No Money for Terror” Conference, primarily PM Modi and Home Minister Shah’s speeches. In his inaugural address, PM Modi spoke about the key challenges facing the world. This includes cyber terrorism, how poorer nations bear the brunt of terrorism, the use of terrorism as state policy by some countries, and the link between money laundering, terror funding, and crime. It was reiterated by the speaker that corruption remains the enabler factor for crime and money laundering. As indicated by the Prime Minister’s Address, specific approaches were highlighted to bring out the salience of the above mentioned threats. For example, criminal actors use technology as an enabler, while it is a solution for enforcement agencies. Additionally, multilateral forums should be employed to create consensus and pressure on countries like Pakistan and China with double standards on terrorism and create a uniform and straightforward approach to counter this threat. This is keeping in mind that the China-Pak nexus has long been undermining efforts to do so by blocking proposals at the UNSC. Furthermore, it was understood that a unified approach to countering terrorism could not be adopted unless this double-standard approach ends. Additionally, dismantling terror financing networks was also raised as an important issue while at the same time emphasising that terrorism as an issue is far more critical than terrorists committing an act of violence. Finally, there is a need to prevent the exploitation of systemic differences between various stakeholders by hostile actors, and attempts to reduce such fissures to the greatest possible extent must be made. Col. Chadha also brought to the fore the five-point strategy unveiled by the Home Minister to counter terror financing, which was the crux of his address. It has been highlighted below.
The speaker also spoke about the four characteristics of terror funding, including the legality of the origins of terror money, its involvement in the exploitation of financial systems, and religion as a crucial motivator within this scenario. Moreover, it is fast-evolving and minimal funds are needed to carry out a terror strike. He further talked about how terror finance will find the path of least resistance. He deconstructed the hybrid model of the terrorism finance cycle, highlighting the three core elements of terror funding, i.e., sources, the transfer mechanism and distribution. According to him, hawala networks and legal transfer remain the leading and efficient methods used in terror financing. Cryptocurrency has also been used individually or alongside hawala networks to sustain terrorism. It is incredibly challenging, nonetheless, to trace and track cryptocurrency exchanges. This dilemma is exacerbated by its uneven implementation despite Financial Action Task Forces’ regulation number 15 concerning its regulation and legalisation. For this regulation to take effect, service providers have to be registered and regulated. More worryingly, no standards have been set for its use. As a result, fissures such as these are bound to be exploited, the effects of which are already visible. Over the years, there has been a surge in terror funding cases related to cryptocurrency, from 5 to 20 per cent. However, hawala is considered by the speaker to be more efficient because of how difficult its transactions are to trace and track. Moreover, it cannot be regulated, especially in countries like India, where it is deemed illegal. There are also local and global funding methods deemed equally effective, including extortion and crime occurring locally and those that permeate geographical boundaries. Furthermore, regulated and unregulated sources of terror financing work together to sustain the system, alongside land and air transfers (for example, through drones) and legal and electronic sources; the lattermost might not always be regulated across borders. Here, it is vital to understand that terrorists will exploit emerging trends, protocol lacunae, information fissures, and a divided house. To counter this, agencies must look at emerging trends for lessons and implementation, create global protocols, improve methods of information sharing, and ensure unity of action. Q/A SessionDr. Sinha expressed his gratitude to the speaker for his detailed presentation and raised a question about how MP-IDSA can offer a fresh perspective, through intelligence analysis, about creating security architecture and legal and financial systems to counter terror financing. Afterwards, he invited questions from the attendees. The Q/A session broadly revolved around themes such as information sharing challenges faced on a national level, the narco-terror factor within terror financing, and the linkage between climate change and terror financing or climate change and terrorism. It also examined difficulties facing India in multilateral formats like the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation in addressing its security concerns, considering that Pakistan and China are permanent members of this forum. Finally, the speaker gave insightful responses to comments and questions received from the participants. This report was prepared by Ms. Saman Ayesha Kidwai, Research Analyst, Counter-Terrorism Centre, MP-IDSA. |
|||||
| Report on Roundtable Discussion on Dangers of Tactical Nuclear Weapons | November 16, 2022 | Round Table |
Manohar Parrikar Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses (MP-IDSA) and the Indian Pugwash Society (IPS) jointly organised an in-person roundtable discussion on "Dangers of Tactical Nuclear Weapons" as part of the Nuclear Roundtable Series on 16 November 2022 at 1500 hrs in Room Number 005. Ambassador Sujan R. Chinoy, Director General, MP-IDSA and Convener, IPS chaired the session. Air Marshal Rajesh Kumar, PVSM, AVSM, VM, ADC, (Retd.), Former Commander-in-Chief, Strategic Forces Command; Dr. G. Balachandran, Independent Scholar; and Dr. Rajiv Nayan, Senior Research Associate and Centre Coordinator, Nuclear and Arms Control Centre, MP-IDSA participated in the discussion as panellists. Executive SummaryBrainstorming was done at the roundtable discussion on the implications of the use of Tactical Nuclear Weapons (TNW)s in the Russia-Ukraine war as well as in the various theatres of the world. The speakers brought out various factors related to TNWs right from its definition, the issue of command and control, nuclear doctrines, the demonstrative role of TNWs, and factors related to radiation among others. Also, that there was the least possibility of Russia using TNWs against Ukraine. In the India-Pakistan context, Pakistan’s threat to use TNWs was bluff and bluster and India needs to enforce deterrence through actions such as the Balakot strikes. Detailed ReportAmbassador Sujan R. Chinoy set the ball rolling by providing a brief background to the topic. He reminded the audience about the P-5 Joint Statement at the beginning of 2022, that abjured the use of nuclear weapons. But just a few weeks later, Russia put its nuclear forces on alert amidst the Ukraine crisis. However, the United States (US) did not react with a similar counter-action. Broadening the scope of the topic, Ambassador Chinoy spoke about the risks of escalation, retaliation and miscalculation with the TNWs being in the action. The New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START) Treaty was drawing to an end and new negotiations were yet to begin. China is loathe to get involved in any nuclear arms control treaty. Russia, even today, contains a large number of TNWs. However, the lack of consensus on the definition of TNWs adds to the problem of putting TNWs in meaningful arms control negotiations. With these initial remarks, the Chair invited Air Marshal Rajesh Kumar to speak on the topic. Air Marshal Rajesh Kumar began by stating that the TNWs are weapons meant to be used on the battlefield. Their yield varies from 1 – 50 Kilotons. Tactical weapons should be judged based on size, range and doctrine. There were so many TNWs before the advent of the START treaty but over a period of time, their numbers have been reduced. However, there is no treaty limiting TNWs. The US has drawn down tactical nuclear weapons because of the advent of precision weapons. However, the Russian Doctrine requires TNWs to have escalation control in the event of war as Russia doesn’t match up to the combined might of the NATO forces. For Russia, TNWs can be used to return the aggression, prevent conflict from expanding, pre-empt damaging strikes that pose an existential threat to Russia and terminate hostility. They have a strategy of escalating to deescalate. The US had a similar strategy when the Warsaw Pact was alive. Air Marshal Rajesh Kumar mentioned the Kalibr and Iskander missiles of Russia and the B61 air-delivered gravity bomb of the US. The US has not developed TNWs because their doctrine says that the use of TNWs will escalate the war in the nuclear ladder and there will be Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD). In the case of MAD, the US doctrine mandates to respond with strategic weapons. Russian assertion on 2 November 2022 that the nuclear war should not be fought has come out of a realisation that the nuclear war cannot be stopped after firing a single tactical nuclear weapon. The war would inevitably escalate. According to Air Marshal Rajesh Kumar, TNWs had limited utility when it came to achieving specific objectives such as stopping the war or stopping the enemy's advances. A study suggested that Pakistan would require 35 TNWs of 1-2 Kilotons each to stop the advancing Indian Armoured Division in its tracts by destroying at least fifty per cent of the tanks in a hypothetical situation. Targeting is a big problem with TNWs which is not the case with precision weapons. With the use of precision weapons, the objectives of TNWs can be achieved with conventional weapons. Later, the speaker highlighted the issue of command and control vis-à-vis TNWs. In the case of TNWs, command and control is delegated to the person on the ground unlike the case of strategic weapons where Command and Control is in safe hands. Therefore, there is a big risk of miscalculation in the case of TNWs. After dwelling on the theoretical issues related to tactical weapons, the speaker put forth his thoughts on the Russia-Ukraine war. Moscow’s action of putting nuclear forces on alert was a warning to the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) to not get involved. Surfacing of the Ohio-class Sub-surface Ballistic Nuclear Submarine (SSBN) in the Arabian Sea and the port visit of another Ohio-class SSBN to Gibraltar was a signal from the US to Russia. The US signalled that they would respond to TNWs with strategic nuclear weapons. The speaker, further, contended that the supporters of disarmament as well as those of deterrence were making strong arguments according to their respective positions with TNWs in the news. Air Marshal Rajesh Kumar dwelled on TNWs in various theatres across the world. He called out Pakistan’s threat to use TNWs and asserted that it was just bluff and bluster. Pakistan knows that if they use TNWs, the war will certainly be escalated to a full-fledged nuclear war. Additionally, they have inadequate fissile material for the consequential use of TNWs to meet their objectives. Therefore, India should make its doctrine of massive nuclear retaliation credible. According to the speaker, TNWs will be ineffective in the case of the Korean Peninsula. In the India-China context, both are No-First-Use states, so the question of TNWs does not arise. In conclusion, Air Marshal Kumar said that TNWs do not work. There is an issue of command and control. Any use of TNWs will lead to a full-fledged nuclear war. Therefore, any talk of normalisation of the use of nuclear weapons should be discouraged. Dr. G. Balachandran endorsed the arguments of Air Marshal Rajesh Kumar. He said that a dispersed delegation of command and control in the case of TNWs involves multiple actors. The more actors involved, the more the anarchy. He contended that distance became an important factor in distinguishing between strategic and TNWs because of the US-Russia dynamic. He defined strategic weapons as weapons that take out an opponent’s retaliatory weapons. If there is a first strike then strategic weapons take out the opponent’s strategic weapons. Whereas TNWs are used for tactical purposes. Thus, on average, strategic nuclear weapons have a higher yield than TNWs. Further, the speaker stated that if a nuclear weapon state uses TNWs against a non-nuclear weapon state, then a non-nuclear weapon state has to depend upon a nuclear-weapon state for retaliation. In the case of the Russia-Ukraine conflict, if Russia uses TNWs, the command and control would be vested only with the president rather than delegated to the local commander. TNWs can either be used against a large enemy formation or to create a radioactive barrier to slow down the advances of the enemy. Referring to JASON advisory group’s report regarding the use of TNWs in the Vietnam War, Dr. Balachandran asserted that the study concluded that the use of TNWs would not have been effective as conventional weapons could have achieved the same objectives. Additionally, the use of TNWs would have turned international and domestic opinion against the state that was using it. The same logic could be applied in the case of Russia today which is a rational state, therefore it would not use TNWs. However, if TNWs are used, it will be to send a strategic message to the opponent. Coming back to the use of TNWs, the speaker asserted that TNWs used in massive quantities could be effective. Moreover, they are effective in erecting radioactive barriers for advancing opponent forces. But even then, TNWs of a specified yield have to be continuously used as the radiation level drops after some time. Dr. Rajiv Nayan in his opening remarks stated that there was no universally accepted definition of TNWs. Broadly, missiles below a range of 550 km are considered tactical weapons. However, there was no limit to the yield of the weapon. Therefore, even weapons with a yield of 200 Kilotons could be termed as TNWs. In 2010, the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) tried to reach a consensus regarding the definition of TNWs but failed. Talking about the Russia-Ukraine conflict, Dr. Nayan asserted that western media, western think tanks, research institutes, and western leadership had created hype about Russian TNWs. One-third of Russian nuclear weapons are always on alert. So, there is nothing unusual. Rather Russian actions vis-à-vis nuclear weapons are according to their doctrine. In the Ukraine crisis, TNWs are not in the picture except maybe for signalling. Russia has always denied the use of TNWs but the western strategic community has projected the Russian threat of TNWs against Ukrainian infrastructure and NATO forces. Dr. Nayan, further, spoke about the implications of the use of TNWs after the Ukraine conflict. He foresaw a demand for the deployment of TNWs in Europe. Although some European countries were not in favour of the same, the changed equations may lead to the redeployment of the weapons. Then there is a possibility that nations will try to modernise their respective TNWs. The Russian threat projection can be used for securing modernisation funding by the US. Further, the concept of graduated deterrence might come into vogue. The speaker predicted that there could be a verification problem in coming times. The world will have to grapple with how to deal with stored nuclear weapons as they are likely to come into play. Unless there is overall disarmament, TNWs are unlikely to fade away. Nations are likely to take a fresh look at the doctrines to make necessary changes. In the ensuing discussion including the question and answer session, Ambassador Chinoy argued compellingly that tactical and strategic nuclear weapons were conjoined. The use of one would involve the other. There was no doctrine for TNWs. Taking over from him, Dr. Balachandran argued that if Russia were to use TNWs, it won’t face any counter-action from NATO. However, the use of nuclear weapons would certainly lead to the collapse of the international non-proliferation regime. Responding to questions and comments, Air Marshal Rajesh Kumar opined that India’s nuclear doctrine is very well crafted. However, it is not studied well by practitioners and academicians. There is an air of secrecy about our strategic weapons. Sometimes political and military leadership work in silos, as a result, they speak differently as there is a difference in understanding of strategy and doctrine by the two. Our programme does not appear to be credible because many stakeholders speak at cross-purposes. We should set our narrative right so that the world interprets it as we want. Further, the cold-start doctrine is no longer required. Rather Generals are worried about so many soldiers being deployed on the border as there is a possibility of tiredness at the beginning of the war. Bringing back the debate on the Russia-Ukraine crisis, Dr. Nayan drew the attention of the audience to the fact that Uranium can be accessed by countries in indirect ways and Russians were not pondering using TNWs. In the India-Pakistan context, Dr. Nayan contended that India needs to take action like at Balakot to achieve deterrence. If actions is not taken, Pakistan will get emboldened. In the end, Ambassador Chinoy complimented the panel and the audience for intense brainstorming. The report was prepared by Mr. Niranjan Chandrashekhar Oak, Research Analyst, MP-IDSA. |
||||||
| Monday Morning Meeting on "Change in Leadership in the UK: Implications for the India-UK Strategic Partnership” | November 14, 2022 | 1000 hrs | Monday Morning Meeting |
Ms. Anandita Bhada, Research Analyst, Europe and Eurasia Centre, MP-IDSA spoke on the topic "Change in Leadership in the UK: An Evaluation” at the Monday Morning Meeting held on 14 November 2022. The webinar was moderated by Dr. Swasti Rao, Associate Fellow, Europe and Eurasia Centre, MP-IDSA. Ambassador Sujan R. Chinoy, Director General, MP-IDSA, Maj. Gen. (Dr.) Bipin Bakshi (Retd.), Deputy Director General, MP-IDSA, the panellists, scholars and members of the institute participated in the meeting. Executive SummaryRishi Sunak became the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom on 25 October 2022. He took over responsibility after Elizabeth Truss’ mini-budget led to her resignation. He took over the country marred with economic and energy crises. Discussions have emerged around his ethnic origins, political life and policy towards India, particularly the Free Trade Agreement (FTA). International actors will be observing his policies towards Brexit, Ukraine, the Indo-Pacific and especially his stance on immigration. Detailed ReportThe Monday Morning Meeting began with Dr. Swasti Rao highlighting the recent growth in the India-UK relationship. One of the key factors is the Free Trade Agreement (FTA) which is due to be signed. She talked about the events that led to Rishi Sunak becoming the Prime Minister, including the role played by the ‘mini-budget’. She stated the various expectations from the newly formed Sunak Government when it comes to issues such as the FTA with India, China, and the Indo-Pacific. Ms. Anandita Bhada at the onset presented a timeline of the Conservative leadership in the United Kingdom from 2010-2022. She then highlighted the reasons for Elizabeth Truss’s resignation which included the creation of a friend vs enemy narrative, lack of positive optics, including mechanical engagements with the public, and taking important decisions without adequate scrutiny, including the mini-budget. The speaker explained what the mini-budget meant, its shortcomings, scrutinisation and the economic impact it had. It had a bearing on the rise of inflation, decline in GDP growth, rise in interest rates, devaluation of the pound, fall of the stock market and a surge in the cost of borrowing. The mini-budget had international ramifications, for the stock markets, especially the London Stock Market. The Conservative Party also suffers from a loss of domestic popularity, which is a point of worry for the party. Rishi Sunak is seen as the best alternative to avoid early general elections. The speaker reflected on the various reasons responsible for Rishi Sunak becoming the leader of the UK. She highlighted that his coming into power is a reflection of the scale of crisis affecting the country. Other factors include the competitors backing out, efforts to prevent a General Election prior to January 2024 and Sunak’s schemes as the Chancellor of the Exchequer during the lockdown. International reactions to his victory including reactions of Prime Minister Narendra Modi, Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky, President of the United States, Joe Biden, French President Emmanuel Macron and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen were discussed. The challenges Rishi Sunak will be facing are the economic crisis including low wage growth, strong demand and low supply in the post pandemic market leading to inflation and avoiding a stock market crash. The second challenge is the Ukraine Crisis. The crisis has provided two sub-challenges. One is the distortion in the supply chains and the other is the energy crisis. The third challenge is Brexit which has not lived up to its heightened expectations. Post-Brexit the economy, employment and job market has gone down. Voices within the United Kingdom stress that if a vote on the reversal of Brexit was possible, it might win the majority support in current times. The fourth challenge is low legitimacy. 2019 was the last General Election and Boris Johnson was the last leader elected by the electorate. Rishi Sunak has been selected by his fellow Tories and therefore has low legitimacy. The fifth challenge is the internal division among the Tories. There is a strong difference of opinion on various matters including the ‘fracking issue’. Rishi Sunak was one of the first leaders of the party to admit being part of the party gate scandal and apologised for his involvement. Hence, he has to look out for the Johnson loyalists and it might be a difficult task to garner their support on critical issues. The sixth issue is about Scotland and Ireland. The Scottish stress the need for a new referendum to leave the United Kingdom. The Irish are dealing with the Northern Ireland Protocol between United Kingdom and European Union and awaiting a solution to this issue. The speaker then focused on Rishi Sunak’s stand on various issues including the British economic crisis, the energy crisis, immigration, China and India. On the energy crisis, she stressed on the various steps taken by Sunak including the removal of VAT from electricity bills and temporary targeted tax cuts to help households. On immigration, Rishi Sunak has a ten-point plan including a cap on the refugees coming into the United Kingdom. He is supportive of a deal with the French Government towards resolving the issue of the influx of refugees entering the UK on small boats. Regarding China, PM Sunak has focused on the need to close down the Confucius Institutes within the country as they are seen as outlets of China’s soft power. He also suggests the improvement of British intelligence to tackle Chinese industrial espionage. Rishi Sunak has a positive view of India; the United Kingdom continues to view India as the pivot of its foreign policy to Asia. What India can expect from the new leadership is a continuity of the strong relationship. The FTA would be an important aspect to further improve the partnership. Sunak favours the development of a two-way relationship between the two countries, where the diaspora acts as a living bridge. The speaker emphasised that the modern relationship is rooted in the 21st Century and not the past. In recent times, the economic facet of the relationship is taking centre stage. The speaker highlighted the major problems and the advantages of the FTA. The four major issues for negotiations include sectors such as automobiles, liquor, intellectual property and mobility of students and professionals. The sectors that will benefit include India-UK trade in services, textiles, pharmaceuticals, healthcare, digital services and food and drinks. Ms. Bhada also focused on important visits in recent times including that of the United Kingdom Trade Secretary, Anne Marie Trevelyan in January 2022. The visit of then Prime Minister Boris Johnson in April 2022, and James Cleverly, the United Kingdom Foreign Secretary, for the United Nations Security Council Counter-Terrorism Committee Meeting on 25 October 2022. India’s Prime Minister is also set to meet Rishi Sunak at the G-20 Meet at Bali in November 2022. While concluding, the speaker focused on the United Kingdom and European Union negotiations over economic issues and how PM Sunak seeks to tackle them. Rishi Sunak’s relationship with the European Union and the rest of the world and how he handles them will be important going forward. According to the speaker, the most important date for the current Sunak Government would be 17 November 2022. On this date, the economic statement will be released and will clarify how the government plans to tackle the economic crisis plaguing the United Kingdom. Questions and CommentsAmbassador Sujan R. Chinoy, Director General, MP-IDSA enquired about any clause to permit Britain to rethink the Brexit policy. The Director General drew inferences from the cases in the Commonwealth. On the topic of Ukraine, the Director General emphasised the similar stances taken by both the European Union and the United Kingdom. This could work towards an advantage for a smoother economic relationship between the UK and EU. He questioned whether there is a possibility of a return of the UK to EU. Earlier, the UK was seen as a gateway to the EU for major companies, particularly in the economic sphere. China, which was one of the ‘blue-eyed boys’ of the United Kingdom, including for the Conservatives has suddenly been seen differently. The Director General questioned as to what this meant for business in general between the European and Asian countries? Does the United Kingdom still act as the vantage point for business and finance? The Director General also focused on maritime cooperation. He asked if Rishi Sunak will follow the already established line of the government. He also highlighted the area of concern with regard to the security and safety of the Indian High Commission from various misdemeanours and what could PM Rishi Sunak do in such situations. Maj. Gen. (Dr.) Bipin Bakshi (Retd.), Deputy Director General, MP-IDSA highlighted how the economic crisis has predated the Ukraine Crisis, and how PM Sunak was known to be a Brexit supporter. He asked if there could be a solution to the economic crisis, without reintegration with the European Union. He also emphasised that while defence and security cooperation is going well but various contours of the relationship could be improved to yield better outcomes. The question posed by the Deputy Director General was how defence and security cooperation could improve. The speaker, Ms Anandita Bhada gave detailed and insightful replies in response to comments and questions from the panellists and participants. Report prepared by Dr. Jason Wahlang, Research Analyst, Europe and Eurasia Centre, MP-IDSA. |
Europe and Eurasia | ||||
| Talk by Nepal’s Ambassador to India, H.E. Dr. Shankar Prasad Sharma on India-Nepal Relations | November 09, 2022 | 1530 hrs | Talk |
The Non-Traditional Security Centre of Manohar Parrikar Institute for Defence Studies (MP-IDSA) is organising a Talk by Nepal’s Ambassador to India, H.E. Dr. Shankar Prasad Sharma on India-Nepal Relations. The talk will be held on Wednesday, 09 November, 2022 at 3:30 PM in Room no. 005, Ground Floor. The session will be chaired by Amb. Sujan R. Chinoy, DG MP-IDSA. |
South Asia | ||||
| Monday Morning Meeting on "US National Defence Strategy: Key Highlights” | November 07, 2022 | 1000 hrs | Monday Morning Meeting |
Cmde. Abhay K. Singh (Retd.), Research Fellow, MP-IDSA spoke on the topic “US National Defence Strategy: Key Highlights” at the Monday Meeting held on 7 November 2022. The session was chaired by Ms. Shruti Pandalai, Associate Fellow and was attended by Ambassador Sujan R. Chinoy, the Director General, MP-IDSA, Maj. Gen. (Dr.) Bipin Bakshi, Deputy Director General, MP-IDSA, senior scholars & research analysts of MP-IDSA. Executive SummaryThe National Defence Strategy (NDS) released on 27 October 2022 is an attempt by the Biden Administration to map the strategic priorities of the US in the forthcoming decade. The NDS identifies China as a strategic challenger for the US and unequivocally declares that a clash of US interests with China is inevitable. Russia has been described as an acute threat due to its ongoing actions in Ukraine. While Iran, North Korea and extremist organisations have also been identified as actors who pose threats to the US. The NDS also enumerates the various emerging domains such as cyberspace, space and Artificial intelligence (AI) as influencing factors in the security dynamics of the US. For the first time, the NDS has listed grey zone activities by US adversaries as a major threat to its national security. Also, climate change and its effects have been listed among the key challenges to US national security. The NDS has envisaged various approaches to address the various security challenges of the US. The first among these approaches is the concept of integrated deterrence which refers to the seamless combination of capabilities across regions, domains, allies and intergovernmental capabilities tailored according to specific targets and circumstances. The NDS brings out that the US is committed to building a resilient security architecture in the Indo-Pacific region. In order to achieve this the NDS seeks to reinvigorate US-Japan bilateral relations for building a credible force structure in the Indo-Pacific. Also, the NDS brings out that the US aims to deepen its cooperation with Australia through the enhancement of interoperability between their respective militaries. India also figures as a very important partner of the US for maintaining a free and open Indo-Pacific. Regarding Taiwan, the NDS unequivocally lays emphasis on the US commitment to protecting Taiwan from any external aggression. The NDS reiterates the US’s commitment to NATO’s collective security and also lays emphasis on improving military posturing for deterring aggression in Eastern Europe. The document also brings forth a concept known as the “By-With-Through Approach” for describing the US strategy in Iraq and Syria. Regarding Africa, the NDS focuses on countering violent extremism and engaging in capacity building with local partners to degrade terrorist organisations in the region. On the Arctic, the NDS states that the US posturing in the region would be calibrated and collaboration with the Arctic allies would be deepened. Detailed ReportMs. Shruti Pandalai, Associate Fellow, MP-IDSA commenced the session by describing the recently released National Defence Strategy (NDS) document as an attempt by the Biden Administration to map the strategic priorities for the United States (US) both at home and abroad. She also pointed out that the classified draft of the NDS was initially sent to the US Congress in March 2022 and the Biden Administration’s 2023 budget request for US$ 773 billion is a four percent increase compared to the previous years. Ms. Pandalai brought out that the NDS document identifies China as a pacing challenge for the US with a specific mention of China’s growing nuclear arsenal. She also stated that the NDS describes Russia as an acute threat due to the ongoing Ukraine Crisis and nuclear threats issued by Russian President Vladimir Putin. Ms. Pandalai brought out that the US strategic community is divided over the view brought out in the NDS that Washington does not consider Moscow as a systematic challenger in the long-term. She also highlighted some of the other key aspects of the NSS that point out the threats posed to the US by an unstable Iran, isolated North Korea and non-traditional threats like climate change. With these opening remarks, Ms. Pandalai invited Cmde. Abhay Singh to give his presentation. Cmde. Abhay K. Singh, Research Fellow, MP-IDSA, began his presentation by explaining that the US’s NDS and other related guidance documents have evolved from the requirement of the Goldwater-Nichols Department of Defence Reorganisation Act of 1986. This act compels the US Administration to provide a clear articulation of strategic challenges and opportunities, while also providing details on how the administration plans to address these challenges. Cmde. Singh brought out that initially the NDS was envisaged to be published every year but progressively the frequency of its publication has reduced to only once during a US Presidential term. He further explained that the current NDS is focused on steering US policy through what the Biden Administration describes as the ‘decisive decade’ and lays extensive focus on China. He brought out that the NDS states its key objective is to dissuade China from engaging in coercive tactics to achieve its national goals. He also stated that the document unequivocally declares that a clash of US interests with China is inevitable. Cmde. Singh underscored that the NDS directs the US Department of Defence (DoD) to act urgently to sustain and strengthen US’s capability for deterring China. He pointed out that the NDS for the very first time recognises both nuclear-armed China and Russia as highly capable and potential adversaries of the US. Cmde. Singh then brought out the four key priorities that the document enumerates as the main challenges of the US. China is the first among them and the document underscores the necessity of the US to deter and prevail against aggression by China in the Indo-Pacific as a key priority. Through the assessment of the various previously released US strategic documents, Cmde. Singh stated that the US approach to China has evolved considerably over two decades. The 2002 Quadrennial Defence Review (QDR) had no mention of China, while the 2006 QDR stated that the US intends to encourage China to play a constructive and peaceful role in global geopolitics. The 2010 QDR stated that both China and India would shape the international system in which the US would continue to remain the most powerful actor. The 2014 QDR identified China as among the nations that would create problems for the US. It was in the 2018 QDR that for the first time China was named as a strategic competitor to the US. Subsequently, the 2022 NDS has identified China as the most prominent challenge to US’s national security. Cmde. Singh stated that the NDS highlights China’s aggressive rhetoric in the Indo-Pacific as its attempts to undermine US alliances and security partners in the region. The document brings out that China’s heavy-handed approach to Taiwan and coercive posturing along the East China Sea (ECS), South China Sea (SCS) and the Line of Actual Control (LAC) can destabilise the region and lead to miscalculations. Also Cmde. Singh brought out that the document lays emphasis on China’s growing military footprint and expansion of its nuclear capability. He then went on to explain that Russia’s identification as an acute threat in the NDS document is attributed to its ongoing actions in Ukraine. He stated that the document also alludes to the collusion between China and Russia to challenge both the US and its allies. Cmde. Singh also brought out that it is for the first time both Russia and China have been listed among the key threats to the US homeland. He further stated that Iran, North Korea and extremist organisations have also been identified as actors who pose threats to the US. The NSS also enumerates the various emerging domains such as cyberspace, space and Artificial intelligence (AI) as influencing factors in the security dynamics of the US. Cmde. Singh brought out that for the first time the NDS has listed grey zone activities by US adversaries as a major threat to its national security. Also, climate change and its effects have been listed among the key challenges to US national security. He then went on to explain the various approaches envisaged by the NDS document to address these security challenges. The first among these approaches is the concept of integrated deterrence, which Cmde. Singh described as a seamless combination of capabilities across regions, domains, allies and intergovernmental capabilities tailored for specific targets and circumstances. He stated that operationalising a concept such as integrated deterrence would require credible capacity building. While the NDS does not reveal information on the steps taken for capacity building, certain principals have been unveiled for creating an enduring military posture. The document considers that the US and its allies would play a very important role in its defence strategy. The NDS brings out that the US is committed to building a resilient security architecture in the Indo-Pacific region. In order to achieve this the NSS seeks to reinvigorate US-Japan bilateral relations for building a credible force structure in the Indo-Pacific. Also, the NDS brings out that the US aims to deepen its cooperation with Australia through the enhancement of interoperability between their respective militaries. Cmde. Singh brought out that in the NDS, India figures as a very important partner of the US for maintaining a free and open Indo-Pacific. Regarding Taiwan, the NDS unequivocally lays emphasis on the US commitment to protect Taiwan from any external aggression. On Europe, Cmde. Singh stated that the NDS reiterates the US’s commitment to NATO’s collective security and also focuses on improving military posturing for deterring aggression in Eastern Europe. With reference to West Asia the NDS brings out that the US aims to right-size its presence in the region. Cmde. Singh stated that the NDS brings forth a concept known as the “By-With-Through Approach” for describing the US strategy in Iraq and Syria. He explained this concept by stating that under this approach the US’s regional allies would be at the forefront of military operations with the active support of the US military. He also underscored that the NDS reiterates the US intentions to deny nuclear weapons to Iran and carry out military action against Iranian-backed threats in West Asia. Regarding Africa, the NDS focuses on countering violent extremism and engaging in capacity building with local partners to degrade terrorist organisations in the region. It also states through collaboration with partners and inter-governmental agencies, the US seeks to counter the activities of Russia and China in Africa. On the Arctic, the NDS states that the US posturing in the region would be calibrated and collaboration with the Arctic allies would be deepened. Cmde. Singh then went on to briefly present his observations on the 2022 Nuclear Posture Review (NPR) and the 2022 Missile Defence Review (MDR). He stated that these documents signify that for the first time in history two major powers now pose threats to the US. The document brings forth that the policy of ‘No-First Use’ is only applicable to non-nuclear signatories of the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). Cmde. Singh then elaborated on the NPR document’s slated plans for the upgradation of the US’s nuclear and conventional strike capabilities. He also explained the plans and capabilities envisaged in the MDR document for defending the US homeland and interests against long-range cruise and hypersonic missiles. During the Discussion, Ambassador Sujan R. Chinoy pointed out the absence of Pakistan in the document despite the US President earlier referring to Pakistan as one of the most dangerous countries in the world. Maj. Gen. (Dr.) Bipin Bakshi, stated that Pivot to Asia, Quad and AUKUS reflects the US’s extensive focus on the ECS, SCS and Indo-Pacific Region in its strategic calculus. He also stated that the recently established Indo-Pacific Economic Framework (IPEF) and I2U2 as indicative of the US attempts to re-establish its footprints in regions where China has consolidated its presence due to the US absence. Dr. Rajiv Nayan, Senior Research Associate, MP-IDSA brought out that China’s military modernisation and Ukraine Crisis are the key factors that have influenced NDS. He noted that the NDS tacitly implies that nations have the right to aspire for nuclear weapons for safeguarding their territorial integrity taking into consideration the ongoing Ukraine Crisis. He also stated that the NDS has clearly indicated that the US would engage in the rapid modernisation of their nuclear capability. The session concluded after an insightful exchange of views between scholars during the Q&A session. Key Takeaways
Report prepared by Dr. R.Vignesh, Research Analyst, Military Affairs Centre, MP-IDSA. |
Military Affairs | ||||
| Monday Morning Meeting on "Deepening Internal Crises in Lebanon” | October 31, 2022 | 1000 hrs | Monday Morning Meeting |
Dr. Jatin Kumar, Research Analyst, West Asia Centre at the Manohar Parrikar Institute for Defense Studies and Analyses, spoke on “Deepening Internal Crises in Lebanon” at the Monday Morning Meeting held on 31 October 2022. The session was moderated by Dr. Md. Mudassir Quamar, Associate Fellow, MP-IDSA. Ambassador Sujan R. Chinoy (Retd.), Director General, MP-IDSA, Maj. Gen. (Dr.) Bipin Bakshi (Retd.), Deputy Director General, MP-IDSA and the scholars of the Institute were in attendance. EXECUTIVE SUMMARYSince 2019, Lebanon has been facing one of the world’s worst economic crisis which is exacerbated by political instability in the country, owing to several factors such as corruption and economic mismanagement. The crisïs has further deepened after the departure of President Michel Naim Aoun, who left office on 30 October 2022. The situation is also influenced by regional (Hezbollah, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Israel) and international actors. Various countries such as the United States (US), France, Qatar and Saudi Arabia, have come forward to help Lebanon but they have also urged that a new government be formed and structural reforms be introduced so that the international community can extend its support. DETAILED REPORTDr. Md. Mudassir Quamar, the moderator, during his opening remarks introduced the attendees to the crises in Lebanon. He began by explaining the general causes of instability in the region of West Asia along with their repercussions such as violence, terrorism, civil wars etc., and highlighted the impact felt throughout the world. For years, countries such as Syria, Libya, Iraq and Yemen have been facing several challenges. Now, even Lebanon faces severe economic and political crises to the point that the country is on the verge of collapse. Dr. Jatin Kumar began by discussing Lebanon’s consistent political and economic crises since 2019. He highlighted that the severity of the crises is evident in the difficulty faced by Lebanon in government formation, especially after the election of May 2022. The situation has got further aggravated after the departure of President Michel Aoun from office. Dr. Jatin began his analysis by first explaining the geographical positioning and strategic importance of Lebanon in the region. He stated that though small, Lebanon has strategically important in the region of West Asia with respect to countries such as Israel, Iran and Saudi Arabia. Iran’s relation with Hezbollah, Lebanon’s political and militia group which functions as a state within a state, has always been a rallying point in Lebanon’s internal politics and its relations with other Gulf countries. For Israel, Lebanon is an immediate neighbouring hostile country which has not yet officially signed a peace agreement unlike Jordan and Egypt. Further, the speaker highlighted how Iranian influence in Lebanon is a problem for Israel’s national security as Iran has been training and providing dangerous arms and ammunition to Hezbollah. Similar to Israel, the Iranian influence on Lebanon is also a problem for Saudi Arabia. The speaker emphasised how the deepening crisis in Lebanon can add to the misery of the region of West Asia and can trigger another refugee crisis. Dr. Kumar proceeded to describe the current political system of Lebanon and various problems associated with it. He stated that Lebanon follows a Confessional political system, where the key political positions such as President, Prime Minister and Speaker of the Parliament are reserved on the basis of religious and sectarian lines. In order to explain the political system he also provided the details of various religious communities residing in Lebanon. Thereafter, he highlighted the sectarian problems which the country is facing since its independence and that festered during the long civil war that continued between 1975 to 1989. The Ṭāʾif Accord which ended the civil war, did not change aspects related to sectarian divisions which over a period of time has become one of the major issues for Lebanon. The situation in Lebanon has continued to deteriorate on multiple fronts since 2019. Since then, Four Prime Ministers have changed but political instability remains. The parliamentary elections of May 2202, failed to provide a clear winner which made government formation even more difficult. Dr. Kumar listed several reasons for the delay in government formation. According to him, the first reason is the political system of Lebanon, which does not allow any single political party to secure a majority in the parliament. The people of Lebanon have consistently protested against the system due to the problems associated with it. Second reason is the misplaced priorities of the political elites in the country, usually with respect to securing lucrative portfolios such as the Ministry of Finance, Ministry of Interior and Energy etc. which provide profitable contracts. There was also a disagreement between Prime Minister Najib Azmi Mikati and President Aoun regarding the distribution of key ministries. Dr. Kumar further spoke about the economic crisis that has engulfed Lebanon. Since 2019, Lebanon has seen consistent economic degradation. Lebanon’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP) fell, inflation skyrocketed and unemployment worsened. Corruption in the country has been one of the major reasons for economic crises, which has led to underutilisation of funds provided by countries such as the US and France. The speaker also discussed the role of regional rivalries in worsening Lebanon’s conditions. Iran’s relation with Hezbollah becomes an obstacle in receiving financial support from the Gulf countries especially Saudi Arabia. He further highlighted the role of other international actors such as the US and Iran in the crisis. The international community has come forward to help Lebanon to deal with the current situation. Countries like France, US, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and European Union (EU) have given financial aid. India provided 70 metric tons of medical, food, and relief supplies to Lebanon. In his closing statement, Dr. Jatin concluded that the constant political crisis in Lebanon is a result of sectarianism and a confessional political system. He also concluded that assistance from the international community will not be enough to stabilise Lebanon, as the need of the hour is robust economic and political reforms. DISCUSSIONAmbassador Sujan R. Chinoy highlighted the importance of Lebanon in shaping Israel’s threat perceptions, not only with regard to Iranians or Hezbollah but also with regard to Palestinians. He encouraged the speaker to further examine Lebanon from a multifocal lens, in terms of Israel’s assessment of Lebanon, the impact of tumultuous upheavals in the Levant on Lebanon, impact of normalisation of relations between Israel and other West Asian countries in the region etc. He also suggested that the impact of Lebanon's internal crisis on the Lebanese diaspora throughout the world be studied and urged that any changes taking place within this community owing to the crisis, if any, be examined. Maj. Gen. (Dr.) Bipin Bakshi stated that apart from corruption and sectarianism, in the last three years, the impact of COVID-19 must also be taken into consideration for contributing to Lebanon’s dire state. He also observed that the rising prices of oil and grains due to the ongoing Russia-Ukraine war has exacerbated the crisis. Unemployment has increased, people are raiding the banks at gunpoint for their own rightful money. He emphasised that the effects of the crisis are colossal and that we might be witnessing a major humanitarian crisis looming large, and soon witness regional or multilateral intervention to contain the crisis. Points Made During Q&A
|
|||||
| Talk by Mr. Michael Rubin on “Evolving India-US Relationship” | October 13, 2022 | 1030 to 1300 hrs | Talk |
Mr. Michael Rubin, former Pentagon official now Senior Fellow at the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), is giving a Talk on “Evolving India-US Relationship” on Thursday, 13 October 2022 at 10:30 hrs in the Boardroom # 104, First Floor. |
|||||
| Monday Morning Meeting on "One Year of AUKUS: An Assessment of Progress and Challenges” | October 17, 2022 | 1000 hrs | Monday Morning Meeting |
Dr. R. Vignesh, Research Analyst, Manohar Parrikar Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses (MP-IDSA), spoke on "One Year of AUKUS: An Assessment of Progress and Challenges” at the Monday Morning Meeting held on 17 October 2022. The session was moderated by Cmde. Abhay K. Singh (Retd.) Research Fellow, MP-IDSA. Ambassador Sujan R. Chinoy, Director General, MP-IDSA, Maj. Gen. (Dr.) Bipin Bakshi (Retd.), Deputy Director General, MP-IDSA, and scholars of the Institute were in attendance and shared their valuable inputs. Executive SummaryOne year ago, Australia, the United Kingdom, and the United States announced the AUKUS pact. The key element of the agreement is Australia's creation of a new nuclear-powered submarine fleet. When it is completed, it will greatly enhance Australia's naval capabilities and help the country reach its objective of having a sizable maritime presence in both the Pacific and Indian Oceans. It has been stated that AUKUS will adhere to the highest non-proliferation regulations and enable Australia to acquire nuclear-powered, conventionally armed submarines at the earliest. At the same time, it has also become clear that AUKUS certainly goes beyond just SSNs and involves the development of other niche capabilities as well, in areas such as hypersonics, quantum technologies, artificial intelligence (AI), cyber, autonomous underwater vehicles (AUV) and electronic warfare capabilities (EWC). Consequently, a thorough analysis of current trends and projected outcomes in the Indo-Pacific is essential to carefully examine current trends and expected outcomes in the Indo-Pacific region, especially in light of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) dilemma. Detailed ReportIn his opening remarks, Cmde. Abhay K. Singh briefly highlighted the various developments that have taken place since the announcement of AUKUS and underscored certain challenges it faces. He described how the US, UK, and Australia signed this agreement on 15 September 2021 along with the announcement of their strengthened trilateral security alliance. He also emphasised the partnership's potential for further technology cooperation and assistance from the US and UK to help Australia fulfil its own desire for a nuclear strike submarine. He further set the tone by asking some straightforward questions about this arrangement in order for it to become clear. What drove Australia to terminate its French programme and its pursuit for a nuclear submarine? He illustrated the Australian military's commitment to partnerships with the US as moving beyond interoperability to interchangeability. He also lay out the presentation's framework in terms of what transpired during the AUKUS grouping's interim year and the limitations of this relationship. After the brief introduction, the Chair gave the floor to Dr. R.Vignesh. The speaker began by referring to AUKUS as a historic agreement since the last time a sought and ground-breaking military technology, such as naval nuclear propulsion, was shared was in 1958 under the US-UK Mutual Defense Agreement. The speaker also emphasised the enormous strides made so far by these three nations in effectively generating a momentum by developing the necessary legal and policy framework for facilitating the production of nuclear attack submarines, and developing other cutting-edge capabilities. The first point made by the speaker was with reference to the Agreement on the exchange of naval nuclear propulsion information (ENNPIA). He mentioned the purpose, which is to share critical information on naval nuclear propulsion with Australia. The agreement addresses a number of issues, including how the information will be distributed and how easily it would be accessible. The agreement was signed in Canberra on 22 November 2021, and it became effective on 8 February 2022. Additionally, the speaker brought up the ENNPIA's primary objective, which was to provide the legal framework for the Nuclear Power Submarine Task Force (NPST) which is led by Vice Admiral Jonathan Dallas Mead of the Royal Australian Navy. The Australian Government formed the NPST to determine the best course of action for the Royal Australian Navy's acquisition of conventionally armed nuclear attack submarines within the next 18 months. The NPST is currently engaged in carrying out a thorough examination of the design of the hull, the safety of the nuclear reactors and the establishment of the prerequisite infrastructure. According to the speaker, it is widely speculated that based on the recommendation given by NPST, Australia would make the choice between two nuclear attack submarines. One, the Virginia class (U.S) and other the Astute class submarine (Royal Navy). He further mentioned the series of meetings held over the year between AUKUS members with regard to the collaboration on the development of niche technologies like hypersonic, cyber capabilities and quantum technology. He went on explain the Chinese opposition to AUKUS at the IAEA and India’s role in persuading member-states to oppose China’s anti-AUKUS resolution in the IAEA. He also discussed the governance structure of AUKUS that has been created. The AUKUS partnership has created a three tier governance framework for better coordination among different stakeholders. The speaker continued by listing the different challenges that AUKUS might face. He cited the 2009 Australian Defence White Paper, which identified the absence of submarine capabilities in the Royal Australian Navy as a serious problem that needed to be addressed right away. Many commentators have since noted that this specific task has only been made more difficult by the termination of the submarine agreement with France and the signing of the AUKUS. The speaker noted that there is currently no nuclear industry in Australia. As a result, he brought out Australia’s attempts to manufacture advanced nuclear submarines under the AUKUS programme. However, it is to be assumed that the US Navy will help Australia during the time when it will essentially have no submarine capabilities before the first nuclear attack submarine is deployed, as Australia has traditionally been under the US's security umbrella. The speaker raised the question about continuing domestic support for AUKUS in Australia. He said that AUKUS has so far had significant political backing from both parties. The Green Party's opposition to AUKUS is merely a small portion of Australians' overall views. Finally, after analysing the developments till date pertaining to AUKUS, the speaker made three points. He brought out that there is an argument in the strategic community that by joining the AUKUS, Australia has surrendered its strategic autonomy. He cited Professor Hugh White of the Australian National University who brought forward this notion in his recent article where he stated that by joining AUKUS, Australia has compromised on its independent stance to deal with China’s rise. But the speaker noted that the US and Australian strategic conformity has been a common feature across all Indo-Pacific geostrategic architectures like the QUAD, Five Eyes and ANZUS. Taking this into context he described AUKUS as an indicator of Australia’s conformity with the US strategic perspective on the Indo-Pacific. The speaker stated that AUKUS is an indicator of the United Kingdom's (UK) return to the Suez region. He quoted Boris Johnson’s speech in 2016 where he described the UK’s decision to withdraw from east of Suez in 1968 as a historic error. He also asserted that the UK is committed to changing its policy, despite not possessing the strongest military, and that it will make use of any opportunities that have arisen as a result of the UK’s exit from the European Union. After more than fifty years, we can see that AUKUS is yet another sign that the UK is making a serious effort to establish its strategic presence in the Indo-Pacific region. The speaker also pointed out the fact that despite Australia being a continent-sized country, its population has long hindered its ability to develop an ideal defence industrial base. The speaker stated that AUKUS illustrates Australia’s attempt to revolutionise its military-industrial base. The speaker concluded by saying that, despite the numerous announcements and developments that have taken place since the AUKUS’s inception a year ago, it is unlikely that any of these developments will have a significant impact on the larger Indo-Pacific geopolitical discourse or provide strategic stability any time soon. During the panel discussion Ambassador Sujan R. Chinoy, mentioned that the AUKUS arrangement is a direct response to China's militarisation and its growing naval power in the oceanic spaces. The transformation of a brown water navy into a blue water navy is forcing the PLA navy to move beyond the first island chain and poses a threat to the existing security situation in the Pacific. He noted that nations like Australia and Japan seeking strategic autonomy with their existing military capability is equivalent to wishing for one's demise. Ambassador Chinoy cited the series of incidents wherein Chinese spy ships have been regularly tracking Australian Navy ships during the Talisman Sabre exercises with the US Navy. According to him Australia must provide protection to its naval assets, whether it does so independently with its limited capability or by collaboration with the US naval forces. Maj. Gen. (Dr.) Bipin Bakshi, brought out China’s recent attempts to sign a security agreement with the ten Pacific Island nations to counter the US influence in the region. He described this as an emerging power struggle between the West and China in the Pacific and also brought out that this is bound to increase the significance of AUKUS in the Pacific. . The session concluded after an insightful exchange of views between scholars during the Q&A session. Report was prepared by Mr. Om Ranjan, Intern, Military Affairs Centre, MP-IDSA |
Military Affairs | AUKUS | |||
| Monday Morning Meeting on "20th National Congress of the Communist Party of China: A Preliminary Assessment” | October 10, 2022 | 1000 hrs | Monday Morning Meeting |
Dr. Prashant Kumar Singh, Associate Fellow, Manohar Parrikar Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses (MP-IDSA), spoke on "20th National Congress of the Communist Party of China: A Preliminary Assessment” at the Monday Morning Meeting held on 10 October 2022. The session was moderated by Dr. M. S. Prathibha, Associate Fellow. Ambassador Sujan R. Chinoy, Director General, MP-IDSA, offered his insightful comments. Scholars of the Institute were in attendance. Executive SummaryThe 20th Party Congress is one of the most anticipated events in China and the rest of the world. Xi Jinping is expected to begin his third term following the 20th Party Congress, to be held on 16 October 2022. Over the years, Xi has carefully redefined the ideological fabric of China and has re-engineered ‘Chineseness’. His success in abolition of absolute poverty in China and several anti-corruption campaigns have not only aided in restoring the party's credibility but have also made Xi Jinping a popular figure in China. As the 20th Party Congress draws closer, there are various tasks set for Xi. Along with the tasks, both Xi and China, face several challenges. Nevertheless, it can be said with certainty that Xi's third term would be critical. Detailed ReportDr. Prathibha commenced the Monday Morning Meeting by stating that the 20th Party Congress is one of the most anticipated events in China, the United States, and the rest of the world. She emphasised that China is facing numerous external and internal challenges. Internally, there is growing agreement that Xi Jinping has failed in restructuring China's economy. Furthermore, there are numerous issues arising from COVID shutdowns and their impact on the domestic industry. Externally, a number of events appear to have an impact on China's relationship with the rest of the world, including Xi's close relationship with Putin and the impact of the Ukraine-Russia war on China's foreign relations, as well as recent events surrounding Taiwan. As a result, the 20th Party Congress must unpack several complexities. The Speaker stated that the 20th Party Congress will be held on 16 October 2022. He began by exploring the National Party Congress' (NPC) organisational structure and functions. He asserted that the Communist Party operates under the Democratic Centralism Principle. According to the speaker, the NPC together with the Party's Central Committee, is the Supreme Body. The functions and powers of the NPC are defined in Article 19 of the Communist Party of China's Constitution. Here, Dr. Kumar, highlighted that the NPC has the power to revise the Constitution. The Central Committee, created by the National Congress, represents the party and carries out the party’s work. Once the NPC is convened, the Central Committee is elected, and the Central Committee establishes a Politburo and Politburo Standing Committee, together they serve for five years before being re-elected. The NPC is normally held once every five years. Dr. Singh went on to state that the Standing Committee is the locus of power in China. Moving further, the speaker discussed Xi Jinping’s rise to power. According to him, Xi first appeared on the national scene in 1997, when he was appointed as an alternate member of the 15th Central Committee of the Communist Party of China (CPC). He went on to say that Xi truly broke onto the national scene in 2002, when he was elected to the 16th CPC Central Committee and became the Zhejiang Province Party Secretary. At this point, Dr. Singh pointed out that being an astute politician, Xi didn’t reveal himself prematurely. In 2012, Xi Jinping forced Hu Jintao to step down from all positions – Party General Secretary, President of PRC, and Chairman of Central Military Commission (CMC), unlike Jiang Zemin who held that position for two more years after his stepping down from the post of Party General Secretary in 2002. In April 2016, he was named Commander-in-Chief of the CMC Joint Operations Centre. The same year, he was given the 'Party Core' title. Dr. Singh observed that Xi has engaged in power consolidation and centralisation throughout his rise to power. In terms of consolidation, the speaker pointed out that Xi has been hesitant to name a successor. He has also centralised power by forming sub-groups, transforming them into commissions, and serving as their Director. From 2013 to 2017, Xi was the Director of all commissions established during his term. Dr. Singh observed that the majority of these commissions were concerned with national security. Dr. Singh went on to say that Xi has carefully redefined the ideological fabric of China. He has re-engineered ‘Chineseness’. Elaborating on this, the speaker stated that, under Xi, the Communist Party has become synonymous with the Chinese nation. Every liberal idea is being fiercely rejected by the Party. Discussions on gradualism have been brought to a close. Xi is redefining the pursuit of a Fuqiang China, or a prosperous and powerful China. Chinese exceptionalism is emerging. Under Xi, China has strived to export its values that put premium on the capacity to deliver. China, under Xi Jinping, is claiming what it perceives to be its rightful place in the international order. The speaker asserted that Xi has, for the most part, been successful in his pursuits. Speaking on the core socialist values of the CPC, the speaker noted that socialist values have found mention in the 17th and 18th Party Congress Reports. He asserted that these core values such as - prosperity, democracy, harmony, freedom, justice, patriotism, integrity, etc. – are building blocks of a new ideology. These values are being disseminated through extensive propaganda, school curriculums, mass events, cultural events, celebrations, etc. Dr. Kumar commented on the perils of Xi's re-engineering which include:
The lack of any serious political challenges to Xi Jinping was also a prominent aspect of the discussion. Talking about why Xi Jinping is so popular, the speaker said that while the pandemic and targeting giant private sector companies has created problems for China, the successful abolition of absolute poverty in China remains Xi’s prime contribution. He claims that Xi and the party are popular in China because of the combination of basic socialist stability, cultural nationalism, and great power projection. Furthermore, anti-corruption campaigns have aided in restoring the party's credibility. The speaker said that Chinese people genuinely believe that America and its policies are unfair to China. He emphasised that Xi's policies are seen as countering America’s anti-China policies and projecting China's status to the rest of the world. In the final segment, Dr Singh spoke on Xi in the 20th CPC. The possibility of reintroducing the 'Chairman' title for Xi was discussed. The speaker was of the view that Xi Jinping may not be considered as powerful as Mao and Deng Xiaoping. Dr. Singh mentioned names of CPC members who were most likely to stay for another decade when speaking about CPC restructuring. He also noted that the induction to CPC will be done in a manner that doesn’t reveal Xi’s successor. As the presentation drew to a close, the post 20th CPC direction and upcoming tasks were covered, before moving to the challenges to China and Xi Jinping. The following direction and upcoming tasks were mentioned by the speaker:
Dr. Singh mentioned several challenges that China presently faces in the foreign policy domain. These are:
He pointed out that not just China, but Xi also faces challenges. The superrich and the politicians below him may present some challenges to him. In this regard, Dr. Singh stated that Xi's third term would be critical because the second-tier leadership would be more anxious for promotional avenues. Dr. Singh concluded his remarks by stating that the paradox of confidence and paranoia with increased caution will continue in China. Key Takeaways from the Q&A SessionThe question-and-answer session brought to light many viewpoints based on a thorough assessment of the matter presented during the discussion. A few of key points raised during the session are as below:
The Report has been prepared by Ms. Esha Banerjee, Intern, East Asia Centre. |