Events

Ms. Mayuri Banerjee, Research Analyst, Manohar Parrikar Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses, made a presentation on “The Status of Sino-US Relations: Assessing the Contemporary Trends of Sino-US Rivalry” at the Monday Morning Meeting held on 31 July 2023. The session was moderated by Dr. Prashant Kumar Singh, Research Fellow, MP-IDSA. Maj. Gen. (Dr.) Bipin Bakshi (Retd.), Deputy Director General, MP-IDSA, and scholars of the Institute were in attendance.

Executive Summary

Ms. Mayuri Banerjee's presentation highlighted the escalating rivalry between China and the US, marked by strained relations across economic, technological, geopolitical, and military domains. The trade war featured tariff battles and technology restrictions. The tech competition extended to AI and semiconductor exports. Geopolitical issues included tensions over Taiwan and power struggles over regional influence. Both nations employed initiatives to bolster their sway. The rivalry, reminiscent of Thucydidean dynamics, stems from a decline in cooperation, treating issues as security matters. The future looks uncertain, with both sides unlikely to ease stances, resulting in a conflicted coexistence.

Detailed Report

Dr. Prashant Kumar Singh initiated the discussion by highlighting the genesis of the Sino-US rivalry and then provided an overall overview of the Sino-US relationship. Additionally, he discussed the ongoing dynamics between the two nations, encompassing matters such as high-tech trade and concerns surrounding the Taiwan Strait.

Ms. Mayuri Banerjee began her presentation by giving a broad overview of the current situation of the Sino-US relationship. Ms. Banerjee explained that rivalry arises when two nations have hostile ties and there is potential for armed conflict. Recent events and behaviors indicate a shift towards major power rivalry. Sino-US relations are strained and historically low, marked by heightened economic, political, technological, and military competition. Further, disputes, disagreements and threats to use force persist, leading to frozen bilateral ties. Recent high-level meetings have failed to yield significant breakthroughs.

The speaker highlighted the fault lines of the Sino-US relationship in four different domains: trade war, geopolitical competition, high-tech war, and Taiwan.

In the trade war section, Ms. Banerjee highlighted that in 2018, the Trump administration launched the trade war. Thereafter, both US and China imposed tariffs on various goods sourced from each other. She explained that China's Huawei was restricted, and cotton imports from Xinjiang were banned by the US. During Trump's term, tariffs increased significantly across four rounds, reaching 21% from 3.1% in 2018. The following Biden administration maintained tariffs but with a more focused approach. By August 2022, about 660 Chinese companies faced US trade restrictions, and the sale of communication equipment from Chinese telecom firms was prohibited. In response, China created its Entity List in 2020 and introduced the Anti-Foreign Sanctions Law in June 2021. In 2023, China excluded US chipmaker Micron from critical projects and passed the Foreign Relations Law in July, as a counter-measure to the US restrictions.

In addition to the trade war, she highlighted the Sino-US clash over high technology and artificial intelligence. She pointed out that Trump restricted semiconductor exports to China, putting key chip makers like Huawei and SMIC on the "Entity List." In September 2022, Nvidia and Advanced Micron Devices halted AI computing chip exports to China. The Biden administration then introduced comprehensive export controls, including limiting China's access to certain chips made with US equipment. By December 2022, the US had blacklisted China's YMTC (Yangtze Memory Technologies Corp) and other firms. In retaliation, China banned mergers between Chinese companies in the US market and their US counterparts. Recently, China announced export controls on critical minerals like germanium and gallium.

The tech rivalry between the US and China is closely linked to Taiwan. Ms. Banerjee explained that Sino-US bilateral relations took a major hit after Nancy Pelosi's visit in August 2022. China canceled and suspended eight bilateral dialogue mechanisms. Dangerous military encounters between the US and Chinese Navy in the Taiwan Straits were reported in June 2023.  With regard to Taiwan, both sides accuse each other of trying to change the status quo. The US claims that Chinese economic and military pressure on Taiwan, imposition of diplomatic isolation, and interference in Taiwan‘s election are aimed to coerce Taipei into China’s fold. On the other hand, Beijing asserts that US diplomatic and military support is aimed to strengthen Taiwan’s aspiration for independence.

Elaborating on the geopolitical competition, Ms. Banerjee highlighted that China and the US are locked in a competitive struggle, vying for control over political, military, and economic influence across different regions like Africa, Latin America, and South-East Asia. They're competing in sectors like infrastructure, healthcare management, technology, training, and capacity development. Both countries are trying to shape rules and institutions to enhance their sway over regional security and economic patterns. China is utilizing initiatives such as the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), AIIB, SCO, GSI, GCI, and GDI, among others. Meanwhile, the US has sought to counter through initiatives like Free and Open Indo-Pacific, Build Back Better World, Quad, IPEF, Partnership for Global Infrastructure and Development, AUKUS, Five-Eyes alliance, and NATO Plus Five.

She also highlighted that the current dynamics of rivalry between China and the United States can be interpreted through four frameworks; Thucydidean rivalry, power-maximisation and security competition, securitization, and erosion of pro-cooperation lobby in both countries.

Concluding her presentation, Ms. Banerjee highlighted the future of Sino-US Relations remains uncertain as neither side has shown signs of easing their foreign policy approach toward the other. The US is likely to focus on strengthening partnerships in the Indo-Pacific region to enhance deterrence. China, on the other hand, will further collaborate with Russia, enhance its military capabilities, and increase diplomatic engagement in the Indo-Pacific and beyond. For the foreseeable future, both countries are expected to continue a conflictual coexistence.  

Q&A Session

Deputy Director General, Maj. Gen. (Dr.) Bipin Bakshi (Retd.) in his remarks emphasised the significance of the US Defense Secretary’s visit to Papua New Guinea. He highlighted the US’ endeavor to enhance relations and establish a dual-use base, catering to both civilian and military purposes in the central Pacific region. In her reply, Ms. Banerjee mentioned the recent summit held in the US between US President Joe Biden and the leaders of the Pacific Island nations. She noted that independent research is required to understand the smaller nations' efforts to navigate the Sino-US rivalry.

Dr. Prashant Kumar Singh, Research Fellow, addressed the origins of the Sino-US rivalry, pointing out its roots in politics, history, geo-strategy, and China's commitment to the one-China policy. He made a query about the perspective of the US business lobby towards China within this rivalry's context.

Capt. Anurag Bisen, Research Fellow, posed a query regarding India's stance on the Sino-US rivalry.

J. Mohansakthivel, Research Analyst, brought up the use of the term "Cold War 2.0" to describe the current rivalry and questioned its appropriateness.

Mr. Anit Kumar, Research Intern, asked whether a similar competition existed between the two nations in Space.

Dr. Adil Rashid, Research Fellow, expressed concerns about the impact of Chinese currency devaluation on the US.

Mr. Harshit Sharma, Research Intern, posed a question about China's potential to reshape the world order.

Dr. Prashant Kumar Singh and Ms. Mayuri Banerjee gave a detailed explanation on the comments and questions raised by the participants.

Report prepared by Mr. Mohan Singh Dhangar, Research Intern, East Asia Centre, MP-IDSA, New Delhi.

An MP-IDSA Fellows Seminar presentation by Dr. Adil Rasheed, Research Fellow, on “Influence Operations: Winning Without Waging Wars in the 21st Century” was held on 20 July 2023. It was chaired by Lt. Gen. (Dr.) Rakesh Sharma (Retd.), Member, Executive Council, Manohar Parrikar Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses (MP-IDSA). The External Discussants were Maj. Gen. Roopesh Mehta, ADG CD (B) IHQ, and Mr. Vinit Goenka, Secretary, Centre for Knowledge Sovereignty (CKS). Maj. Gen. (Dr.) Bipin Bakshi (Retd.), Deputy Director General, MP-IDSA; Lt. Gen. Akshat Upadhyay, Research Fellow, MP-IDSA; and Ms. Shruti Pandalai, Associate Fellow, MP-IDSA were Internal Discussants.

Executive Summary

Influence Operations (IO), a battle of narratives, is considered a new and rapidly-evolving field of study. Russia, China, the US, and Pakistan have been at the forefront of using their strategy. It pertains to clandestine operations that can manipulate and influence individuals’ and governments’ perceptions, decisions, and cognition of individuals and governments. IO includes active measures carried out by the erstwhile Soviet Union and is a non-kinetic form of warfare. It also gives each country relying on this strategy plausible deniability while conducting its activities. Social media, big tech, and artificial intelligence are crucial in this regard.

Detailed Report

In his opening remarks, the Chair, Lt. Gen. (Dr.) Rakesh Sharma (Retd.) stated that Information Warfare (IW) is the future warfare strategy. He further stated that besides India’s victory in 1971, no wars have genuinely been won in the 21st century.

Dr. Adil Rasheed began by introducing the topic of his paper, Influence Operations (IO), a form of high-tech and hybrid warfare. One of the key definitions provided by the speaker was borrowed from Facebook, according to which IO refers to coordinated efforts to manipulate or corrupt public debate for a strategic goal. It was initially defined by RAND Corporation in 2009. IO could also be divided into three categories, i.e., political and economic, information, and psychological.

Dr. Rasheed clarified that his study encompasses the assessment of IO carried out by Russia, China, the United States (US), and Pakistan. He added that wars are now fought in the virtual space and cognitive domain. These operations include offline and online measures to infiltrate political institutions and processes of other countries, making them incapable of going to war. He elaborated on IO benefits, such as being highly adaptive and effective, low-cost, and sustainable in peacetime. Today, it is associated with a foreign and maligned sharp power technique, including subversive public diplomacy, crowd manipulations, engineering colour revolutions and agitations, and election meddling. In addition, social media has amplified IO’s impact through trolling, flaming, doxing, posting dark advertisements, presenting Potemkin villages of evidence, and participating in cognitive hacking.

He said that countries like China have relied on their diaspora based in foreign countries, such as the US, to act as spies and carry out industrial espionage. As per the Mueller Report, Russia was involved in elected meddling in the US in 2016, resulting in President Trump’s victory. 

At the same time, the US, despite referring to IO as a threat to democracy, has intervened in approximately 81 foreign elections, often accused by Russia and China of instigating colour revolutions and the Arab Spring. The speaker delved into ISI and ISPR’s (PR wing of ISI) role in spearheading and sustaining Pakistan’s IO, articulating that ISI engages in Soviet-styled active measures. Simultaneously, the role of diaspora and radicalisation through madrassas based in Jammu and Kashmir, Bangladesh, and Nepal have been essential to Pakistan’s IO strategy.

The speaker suggested that therefore, some key counter-measures India can adopt to address such threats include censorship of programmes aired on online streaming platforms, formulating a coherent and regulated social media policy and guidelines for protests and agitations, and reforming madrassas. 

Dr. Rasheed stated that digital and online tactics and techniques are associated with IO strategy, and some of the counter-measures involve capacity building, implementing effective and regulatory legal frameworks, and deterrence.

Maj. Gen. Roopesh Mehta spoke about the need to simplify IO as a term to counter these operations effectively. He also explained that Information Warfare (IW)/IO timeline is immaterial, regardless of whether it occurs in peacetime or war.

IO is a long-term strategy involving a battle of narratives. IO has two fundamental aims: turning a rival power into a modern vassal state or weakening it sufficiently to ensure it is neutralised as a threat. There are multiple layers of intervention concerning IO, which is not amenable to positive control. He also underscored how high-quality and appealing content must be disseminated swiftly in the IO/IW space as an antidote to misinformation and disinformation.

Furthermore, he presented his perspective on the Indian Army’s role in Kashmir and how ISI has been exploiting social media since 2014. Between 2015 and 2017, i.e., when Burhan Wani was active, there was immense synergy between the local media in the Kashmir Valley and developments in Pakistan. Therefore, India must draw lessons from this example. As far as China is concerned, its IO has proven more effective internally, while its impact externally remains debatable. Nevertheless, Indian leaders cannot rely on examples of authoritarian states such as Pakistan and China to establish IO-related institutions in the country. The US, however, has struggled to be effective in this domain and is a soft target since it has mainly relied on brute force to implement its agendas.

He talked about some key issues to be considered while discussing IO/OW. Firstly, ISIS successfully exploited social media to convince people worldwide to join its caliphate since 2014. Secondly, social media is an unfair terrain. Thirdly, India’s geography and diversity make the establishment of centralised control a challenging task. Fourthly, developments in IO are multiplying faster than legislative actions can be introduced to address them. Fifthly, information space is a reality. He said that therefore, these trends require a robust Indian response, an improved fact check and tech ban eco-system, collaboration with agencies such as Tech Against Terror, and sensitising the citizens towards challenges such as fake news and propaganda.

Mr. Vinit Goenka explained how colonisation by might in the erstwhile times has transformed into colonisation by big data today. Additionally, IO, a non-kinetic form of warfare, is not a time-bound strategy. He further presented three cases about IO potency. As per one of them, India’s western neighbour had used the local Marathi dialect online to stir up agitation against the development of a metro station near the Aarey colony in Mumbai. One of the other examples was a BBC documentary (1998) aired over 83 times in one year about AIDS-afflicted Indian truck drivers as a form of psychological warfare.

He recommended that the speaker examine the role of lone wolves who seek to gain notoriety through IO and are not beholden to an ideology or a country.

Maj. Gen (Dr.) Bipin Bakshi (Retd.) expounded on the multiple terminologies being used in this context, which he felt, need to be simplified, to make the paper more comprehensible. He went on to trace the terminology’s evolution over the past decades.

In the World War era, he explained that the only terms in use were psychological warfare and deception. With the advent of electronic and digital media, he mentioned the evolving terminologies of perception management, cyber warfare, information operations, and strategic communication. He further delved into the linkages between Arthashastra and IW and how the latter has always been a part of Chinese military strategy in Sun Tzu's writings, therefore the concepts are actually age-old. Moreover, he explained that information operations had been broadly segregated by the US military into two components, i.e., information technical operations and information and influence operations, an error according to him, given the Russian and Chinese integrated approach in this domain.

The discussant also spoke about how, in recent times, unverified bulk transmissions have been occurring with no editorial oversight, while assessing the differing components of perception management (PM) and the correlation between IW and PM. Additionally, the US Military Cyber Command Team’s role in training Ukrainians since 2014 against Russian IO, the inauguration of Singapore’s fourth military branch – Digital and Intelligence Service –, Chinese and Russian IO, the need to secure information space, India’s 2010 IW doctrine, and the November 2020 regulation about monitoring online streaming platforms was also discussed. In addition, he underlined the need for states to flood the information space with timely, credible data to avoid conjecture by uncontrolled media in an information vacuum. 

Regarding the disclaimer in the the paper wherein Non- State actors and terrorist organisations were not being covered, he suggested a greater focus on state response to this challenge, with particular reference to India. He outlined the various organisations working in this space in India and recommended the establishment of an HR vertical in IO/ IW domain.  He also underlined the need to synergise organisations working separately in Cyber, Cognitive and Physical dimensions, with a nominated lead agency to better coordinate the state response in the Information domain. He further recommended that we must generate an All of Nation response to this challenge, and integrate at two levels; Firstly the physical, cyber, and technical dimensions, and Secondly, Government, Military, Industry, Academia, and Civil Society.

Finally he suggested that the speaker may review if IO is actually a new constituent of hybrid warfare, and whether the cognitive domain is the sixth domain of warfare, as mentioned in the paper, or actually a part of the fifth domain- Information Domain, the first four being land, sea, air and space.

Lt. Col. Akshat Upadhyay stated that the speaker must introduce more clarity into his paper, modify its title and scope, and provide contextualisation for various terminologies mentioned. He also emphasised the need to expand the IO ambit as part of his research and expound on relevant statistical and anecdotal examples. There is also a need to examine the relationship between IO and truth, list sharp techniques associated with IO, and provide a more nuanced understanding of cognitive warfare.

At the same time, the speaker must account for how IO is not inherently malicious or positive and is merely a tool that state and non-state actors can use. It is also a battle of narratives. The discussant presented examples from the Gulf of Tonkin incident (Vietnam War) and humane treatment meted out by Indian officers to dead Pakistani soldiers during the Kargil War to support his argument. Lt. Col. Upadhyay delved into how the paper presented must re-orient from a West-centric approach and assess how Western countries have carried out IO elsewhere. Moreover, concrete examples are required to support assertions regarding US’ involvement in IO abroad.

He also suggested that Dr. Rasheed analyse how the Soviet Union (now Russia) earlier used active measures to weaken NATO and establish continuity between its cold war strategies and contemporary tactics in Ukraine. Furthermore, India must institutionalise IO instead of relying on reactive counter-measures since the recommendations suggested in the paper will increase countries’ vulnerabilities instead of reducing them.

Ms. Shruti Pandalai lauded that Dr. Rasheed has attempted to simplify a complex and evolving field, and it is improbable that one can distinguish between IW and IO. She said that there are divergences, convergences, and collaboration between Russian and Chinese IO, as visible in Hong Kong, Taiwan, and Ukraine. An assertive China has increasingly adopted Russian tactics, which have ranged from controlling the diaspora and external and internal narratives in China’s favour.

According to her, the events in Ukraine demonstrate big tech and the West’s role in controlling and strengthening the narrative in Ukraine’s favour. She also pointed out that US’s Global Engagement Council, run by the US State Department, a grouping focused on combating disinformation, is inward-looking in its outlook.  

She pointed out that Dr. Rasheed needs to examine contemporary debates about IO, including artificial intelligence and big data, while being more cognisant of Western IO. At the same time, she emphasised that censorship of online streaming platforms, as suggested by the speaker, will be an ineffective deterrent in India. Finally, she believes it is necessary to focus on lessons learned.

Lt. Gen. Rakesh Sharma (Retd.) suggested modifications to the paper’s title to adequately capture the core arguments and for Dr. Rasheed to account for how states use non-state actors in the IO/IW domain and refrain from using disclaimers. At the same time, he urged caution in using terms such as hybrid warfare while he elaborated on Chinese IO in the US, the United Nations Human Rights Council and India, and Russia’s IO in the United Kingdom during the Brexit vote and differing interpretations about war. Furthermore, he emphasised the need to establish a national cognitive agency in India.

He also recommended that the speaker provide clarification about actors in India empowered to conduct cognitive warfare, India’s endgame regarding IO against China, and simplify terminologies used in the paper.

Q/A Session

Director General, Ambassador Sujan R. Chinoy affirmed the need to examine all narratives concerning IO, including the insidious attempts by the West or current adversaries like Pakistan and China to prepare for the future adequately. He suggested that the paper look deeper into the role of IO/IW within India and the transboundary civil society actors’ involvement in these domains since their potency rivals big tech. At the same time, there is a requirement to assess if proposed Indian narratives are based on consensus and where challenges lie. Finally, an agnostic approach to values in IO/IW domain must be practiced.

Some of the other themes discussed in the Q/A session included strategic relevance behind IO/IW in fields of health and disease, for example, the anti-vaccine campaign in the West, the scope of visibility of Indian IO, the need to analyse vulnerabilities in each segment of the population for antidotes to be forged, lack of domestic consensus on responding to IO threats against India, the synergy between state and non-state actors, and quantification of influence.

Dr. Rasheed responded to the comments and questions raised.

This report was prepared by Ms. Saman Ayesha Kidwai, Research Analyst, Counter-Terrorism Centre, MP-IDSA.

Mr. Mukesh Kumar Jha, Sr. Library Assistant and Dr. Vivek Dhankar, Technical Officer, GIS Section, Manohar Parrikar Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses (MP-IDSA), spoke on “Effective Utilisation of MP-IDSA Library Resources” on May 26, 2023. Maj. Gen. (Dr.) Bipin Bakshi (Retd.), the Deputy Director General of MP-IDSA and scholars of the Institute were in attendance.

Executive Summary

The library is a major source of information for research scholars. MP-IDSA has a rich collection of books and journals about different subject areas. In order to help MP-IDSA scholars in efficiently utilising the library, Mr. Jha and Dr. Dhankar gave presentations to familiarise scholars with the library resources. While giving a brief historical account of the library, Mr. Jha shed light on MP-IDSA’s collection of books and journals. Dr. Dhankar talked about the GIS section. He explained how maps are prepared at MP-IDSA and policies with regard to maps.

Detailed Report

Mr. Mukesh Kumar Jha began by explaining that the term library is based on the Latin word ‘liber’ which means document or book. Libraries have gone through a radical transformation from being made up of clay tablets to the digital era. Earlier it used to be like a storehouse, but with time its form kept changing. As the storehouse capacity is limited, the information got converted into digital format.  There are three types of libraries- academic, public and special. MP-IDSA’s library is a special library since it’s a research library and is focused on a particular subject area. We saw the advent of information society in the 1990’s. Our society is completely dependent on information now and we send and receive it in a digital format.

There are three types of sources of information- primary, secondary and tertiary. The most important are the primary sources. The researcher community is the only community who is not only the consumer of information but also its generator. Information communication also has a drawback. It brought with itself information explosion. With information explosion, the recall value increased, but it resulted in a lack of precision. The library is the only place where information gets compiled, repackaged, and consolidated. The most important role of a library is to provide ‘right information to the right user at the right time.’

MP-IDSA’s library is a fine library; it is air conditioned, and Wi-Fi enabled. It has more than 60,000 books other than monographs and reports. Its main focus is on military affairs, national security, strategic technologies, defence studies, etc. MP-IDSA’s library does generation and dissemination of information. It has diversified publications with more than 250 plus current journals subscription and 21,499 old volume journals. It is open to outsiders as well. MP-IDSA’s library is the only library in India now which provides indexing and abstracting services. Mr. Jha demonstrated how to use the digital library in an efficient way.   

Dr. Vivek Dhankar began his presentation by saying that the Geographic Information System is a small section limited to one room in the library. It is a system comprising of a computer system and an expert which capture or collect, manage (editing & updating) and display (maps) geographically referenced information or data. GIS helps in bringing out or displaying the relationship, trends and pattern from the data. Therefore, maps are important in studies because they help us look at the patterns and visualise data in a new way. Maps are a powerful means of providing information. The GIS lab in MP-IDSA was set up in September 2009. Currently, it has five GIS licenses. Since 2009, 2514 customised maps have been prepared so far on the request of the scholars.

All GIS maps are chargeable. There are two exceptions where the charges can be waived off. If the map is being prepared by an MP-IDSA’s scholar for MP-IDSA’s official work, then there would be no charges. If maps are for MP-IDSA’s scholars own work but are endorsed by the respective Centre Coordinator or from the DG, MP-IDSA, then the charges would be waived as well. The charges for a colour map are Rs. 750 and Rs. 1000 for a black and white map. For non-MP-IDSA members, charges are Rs. 2000 for a colour map and Rs. 2,500 for a black and white map. It is mandatory to get the map approved from the Director General or the Centre Coordinator. The form needs to be filled where one needs to mention if the map is for personal use or official purpose.

Dr. Dhankar explained that there are two types of data in GIS- spatial data and non-spatial data. Any data which has geographical information like satellite images and coordinates related to it is called spatial data. The non spatial data is attribute data which describes the data. For instance, describing total population in a district is non spatial data whereas a district boundary is spatial data.

In the GIS section, the data has been classified into political, economic, natural, social and cultural data. For instance, in political data, we have international boundaries, India’s administrative boundaries and province level boundaries. For economic data, we have rail network data and road infrastructure data, airports, seaports etc. We also have raster data which is picture form of data. For instance, we have topographical maps, gas pipelines, US Army topographic sheet of the South Asian region.

He also brought attention to collecting data/information from open sources. If the MP-IDSA’s scholars are using maps from open sources, the Indian territorial integrity must be given attention. The maps from the online sources can also get checked and corrected at the GIS section.

Comments and Questions

Gp. Capt. R.K. Narang asked whether the MP-IDSA’s library has Government reports from Ministry of Defence. In response to his question, Mr. Jha said that since the Ministry of Defence compiled its documents on its own website, there is no need for us to recompile it in our library. Gp. Capt. Narang also asked Dr. Dhankar about the software used for GIS. Dr. Dhankar said that the software’s name is ArcGIS. It is developed by an American company called Esri. 99% organisations all over the world use ArcGIS since it is the most advanced. The next best alternative is QGIS which is free.

Dr. Uttam Kumar Sinha asked how many new book recommendations we get per month. To which Mr. Jha replied that the library gets 5 to 10 new book recommendations every month. He further asked Dr. Dhankar what we can do about the resolution of the map getting distorted. Dr. Dhankar said that the resolution of the maps get distorted after being inserted into the word document, which is then sent for publication. We need to ensure that the size of the map does not get changed. It is often better to change the map independent of the text, so that it does not get squeezed or its resolution get lowered.

Mr. Anit Kumar, Intern asked Dr. Dhankar that can QGIS maps be gotten by directly downloading them or does one need special knowledge to do it? Dr. Dhankar replied that they can be downloaded but one needs to have an idea of using GIS beforehand. One must have an idea how to create boundaries, how to add text on the map and how to create the layout. One needs to be aware of copyrights for using different data.

The Report was prepared by Mr. Harshit Sharma, Intern, MP-IDSA.

Mr. Bipandeep Sharma, Research Analyst, Manohar Parrikar Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses (MP-IDSA), spoke on “India and the Geopolitics of Antarctic” at the Monday Morning Meeting held on 24 July 2023. The meeting was moderated by Capt. Anurag Bisen (IN), Research Fellow, MP-IDSA. Ambassador Sujan R. Chinoy, the Director General of MP-IDSA, Maj. Gen. (Dr.) Bipin Bakshi (Retd.), the Deputy Director General of MP-IDSA and scholars of the Institute were in attendance.

Executive Summary

The Antarctic region holds significant importance for scientific research, resource exploration, and geopolitical interests. It serves as a natural laboratory for various fields of study and is home to vast untapped resources, including potential hydrocarbon reserves and fisheries. India's role in the Antarctic has grown steadily, with multiple research expeditions and operational bases focused on climate change and related scientific research. As global events and territorial claims shape the future of Antarctica, India must proactively prepare from potential emerging challenges and opportunities from the region.

Detailed Report

The discussion was opened by Capt. Anurag Bisen, who highlighted the significance of the Antarctic Treaty, which came into force in 1961 and was signed by India in 1983. Currently, the Treaty has 56 member states. The differences between the Arctic, Antarctic, and Antarctica were outlined by him. Despite maintaining peace in the region for the last 60 years, he highlighted that differences are slowly arising between states as a result of geopolitical event occurring in the other parts of the world.

Mr. Bipandeep Sharma started his presentation by giving a brief overview of the region. He clarified the main difference between the two commonly used interchangeable terms; ‘Antarctic’ and ‘Antarctica’. Mr. Sharma also briefly familiarised the audience with the term ‘Antarctic convergence’. In his presentation Mr. Sharma highlighted that the Antarctic region remains primarily important for three reasons.  Firstly, it is a natural laboratory for research on astronomy, glaciology, geophysics, oceanography, and other scientific disciplines. Around 111 research stations are operational in the region, with India having two operational bases in Antarctica. Secondly, the importance of resources is crucial; however, the Madrid Protocol prohibits all activities related to the exploration and exploitation of mineral resources, except for scientific research. Nonetheless, various assessments estimate Antarctica to contain 19 billion barrels of recoverable oil and 106 trillion cubic feet of gas. The region is also home to fisheries, which are regulated by the Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR).

Finally, the region is gaining prominence as a result of geopolitical complexities emerging between states that could have implications for the future governance in the region.  Mr. Sharma highlighted that seven sovereign states - Argentina, the U.K, Australia, Chile, France, New Zealand, and Norway - have made their territorial claims in Antarctica. Many of these claims overlap, but according to Article 4 of the Antarctic Treaty, all these claims remain frozen. He further talked about the scientific bases and highlighted the dual use infrastructures at the bases of States like China which currently has four operational bases in Antarctica, and is in the process of constructing the fifth. These bases support China's BeiDou satellite navigation system and also facilitate intelligence collection. Mr. Sharma also highlighted that China's Great Wall station strategically oversees the Drake Passage, a key sea line of communication between the South Atlantic and South Pacific Oceans.

In the second part of his presentation, Mr. Sharma talked about the governance mechanism in Antarctica. He mentioned that it mainly comprises of five international mechanisms that include the Antarctic Treaty, Madrid Protocol, the Convention for the Conservation of Antarctic Seals (1972), CCAMLR, and Annual Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meetings (ATCM). The Antarctic Treaty, signed in 1959 and now joined by 56 countries, emphasises freedom of scientific investigation and peaceful purposes while prohibiting military establishments, weapon testing, nuclear explosions, and radioactive waste disposal. Mr. Sharma clarified that the Antarctic Treaty does not have any expiry date, but as per article 25 of the Madrid Protocol, there is a provision that after the first fifty years from the protocol`s entry into force (1998), it can only be modified through unanimous agreement of all consultative parties.

In the final part of his presentation, Mr. Sharma talked about India's presence in Antarctica. He mentioned that India sent its first expedition to Antarctica in 1981, and signed the Antarctic Treaty in 1983. After the initial base i.e. Dakshin Gangotri was abandoned due to submersion, India's current bases are ‘Bharati’ and ‘Maitri’. To date, 42 expeditions to Antarctica have been conducted by India, with the latest one scheduled for October-November 2023. India's Antarctic program primarily focuses on climate change research. Currently, Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) is collaborating with National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) on an important NASA-ISRO Synthetic Aperture Radar (NISAR) mission for Antarctic which is expected to be launched in January 2024. NISIR will observe sea ice characteristics over the seas surrounding India’s Antarctic polar stations. It could further detect the marine oil spill and disseminate the spill location during accidental oil seepage for preventive measures. Mr. Sharma also talked about The Indian Antarctic Act, 2022, that is an important instrument to protect the Antarctic environment and associated ecosystems, and grants jurisdiction to Indian courts for disputes or crimes committed in parts of Antarctica.

In the concluding part of his presentation Mr. Sharma emphasised on the future complexities of Antarctic governance and highlighted various challenges as a result of geopolitical events occurring in other parts of the world. He mentioned that China's presence in the region has already garnered attention among other countries. Mr. Sharma highlighted that India should consider acquiring or constructing its independent polar research vessel with advanced icebreaking capabilities at a fast pace. He mentioned that the country needs to prioritise its scientific research in certain areas that could enable India a strategic edge in Polar Regions. He suggested that R&D in Antarctic Bioprospecting could be one such area that can offer immense opportunities for India’s Pharmaceutical Industry. Lastly, he called for the need to promote Indian investments in Antarctic Fishing Industry and training Indian seafarers for Polar Waters.

Questions and Comments

Capt. Anurag Bisen (IN) highlighted that India is also part of COMNAP [Council of Managers of National Antarctic Programs] & SCAR [Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research]. He reiterated that it's already been 9 years since the Cabinet Committee on Security sanctioned the polar research vessel, which is still in the design phase.

Ambassador Sujan R. Chinoy applauded the presentation and asked questions regarding the possible scenario in terms of the balance of power in the Antarctic region by 2048, how it is decided that a country will have how many stations, and China's engagement in IUU (Illegal, Unreported, and Unregulated) fishing & dual-use infrastructure. Bipandeep answered - it is important to do scenario-building in different conditions. Additionally, according to the Antarctic Treaty, decisions are taken by consensus in the annual ATCM, and permission to set up research stations is granted based on the kind of research a state is undertaking. As for military use, he mentioned that as per Antarctic treaty, any kind of military activity is banned in the Antarctic, but there may be dual-use of military equipment such as antennas and communication systems by countries in the realm of space exploration.

Maj. Gen. (Dr.) Bipin Bakshi (Retd) discussed the inhospitable conditions of Antarctica and also highlighted that India provides fewer seafarers in comparison to our population. To which Bipandeep answered – we can definitely increase our seafarers, as we are growing in terms of commercial shipping and expeditions.

Capt. Bisen highlighted the DG's question on IUU, mentioning that China occasionally engages in IUU fishing in the garb of research, violating fishing norms throughout the world, and doing it in a very organized way. He noted that China has the highest subsidies on distant water fishing in the world.

Mr. Arvind Khare asked about many IT firms putting their data centers in the region, to which Bipandeep replied that those data centers are in the Arctic, not Antarctic.

Dr. Gulbin Sultana had a question on certain unclaimed areas shown on the map of Antarctica, asking who governs them? Bipandeep explained that those are the areas that haven't been claimed by any of the seven states that have made claims on other parts of the continent.

Ms. Yukti Panwar asked a question regarding the clash of jurisdiction of the area of the High Seas Treaty with that of the Antarctic Treaty to which Capt. Bisen gave a detailed explanation.

-The report has been prepared by Mr Anit Kumar, Research Intern, Internal Security Centre, MP-IDSA, New Delhi.

MP-IDSA News