BEGIN:VCALENDAR
VERSION:2.0
PRODID:-//MP-IDSA - ECPv6.15.12.2//NONSGML v1.0//EN
CALSCALE:GREGORIAN
METHOD:PUBLISH
X-ORIGINAL-URL:https://idsa.in
X-WR-CALDESC:Events for MP-IDSA
REFRESH-INTERVAL;VALUE=DURATION:PT1H
X-Robots-Tag:noindex
X-PUBLISHED-TTL:PT1H
BEGIN:VTIMEZONE
TZID:Asia/Kolkata
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:+0530
TZOFFSETTO:+0530
TZNAME:IST
DTSTART:20100101T000000
END:STANDARD
END:VTIMEZONE
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Asia/Kolkata:20110401T053000
DTEND;TZID=Asia/Kolkata:20110401T053000
DTSTAMP:20261104T195418
CREATED:20231223T220638Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20231224T103810Z
UID:63581-1301635800-1301635800@idsa.in
SUMMARY:Nuclear Energy in China & India: A Comparative Study
DESCRIPTION:Chairperson: Dr G BalachandranDiscussants: Prof Swaran Singh and Dr R Ramachandran \nDr Ch Viyyanna Sastry in his present paper aimed to analyse and compare the nuclear energy development programmes in China and India. The key issues that he tried to address in the paper are: the roadmaps of China and India in securing their energy demands; how both the countries started their nuclear energy programmes; routes through which they are planning to achieve this; and finally to see what are the possible outcomes. \nAt the outset he said that nuclear energy is being viewed by many countries including China and India as one of the potential alternatives to the growing demands on carbon emissions and global warming. The energy deficient countries are also looking for nuclear energy as an alternative source of energy\, because of its steady supply source and the stable and predictability of costs for the full operation of reactors.  \nMoreover\, China and India as the two most populous countries with high economic growth rates for the past several years\, they have to generate more energy to sustain their growth rates. Therefore\, as the global plans on nuclear energy expand\, China and India are poised to play a strong role in this area.  \nOn China’s nuclear energy programme\, Dr. Sastry said that till recently\, the role of nuclear energy in the overall energy production was quite low amounting to just 2 per cent of the total electricity generation. At present\, China has about 13 nuclear power plants of different capacitates in operation generating about 10.8 GWe. During the eleventh economic plan period for the years 2006-2010\, China set an ambitious goal for new nuclear plant construction for developing about 40 GWe by 2020. In addition\, there are various revised plans and projections in China for achieving even more than 40 GWe by 2020. As the State Energy Bureau (SEB) of China set the target of 50 GWe and the State Council claimed of possibility of achieving 70 GWe by 2020. Dr Sastry pointed out that in pursuit of the set targets\, Chinese government approved the construction of an additional 28 nuclear reactors by 2020 of which 20 are already under construction. Several new reactors are also being planned.  \nOn India’s nuclear energy programme\, he explained that Indian civilian nuclear energy programme is based on the three stage programme envisioned by Dr Homi J Bhabha. The first stage of the indigenous nuclear power programme involving setting up of pressurized heavy water reactors is now in industrial domain. With the start of construction of the 500 MWe prototype fast breeder reactors in October 2004\, the second stage has been launched. He opined that it is time for India to accelerate the implementation of the second stage and move towards the development of the third stage of the nuclear power programme. He suggested that in parallel\, India has to continue to work towards development of emerging nuclear energy technologies to address its long term energy requirements which are indeed very large. \nDr Sastry said that despite the criticism based on proliferation\, safety and security of reactors and environmental concerns after the recent Japanese nuclear crisis\, it is possible that India\, along with other Asian countries like China\, Russia and South Korea\, is actively involved in the global resurgence of nuclear power that is being witnessed in the past few years. He held that both China and India are likely to increase their share of nuclear energy significantly in the next decades\, thus\, leading a nuclear renaissance which could revive the nuclear industry. While the Indian target of 20 GWe by 2020 appears achievable\, China too can reach 40 GWe by that time. In addition\, China with its resources\, manpower\, unhindered technology transfers\, the single party governance and not much opposition from the people\, is more likely to reach its desired figures. \nThough nuclear energy is going to play a pivotal role\, he suggested that both the countries have to work on clear technologies to sustain their higher growth rates. The increasing population could be a wild card.  \nSo far as the export of future nuclear reactors are concerned\, he said that with passing indigenisation and development of related nuclear infrastructure\, China is certain to become a nuclear exporter in a big way. On India’s export capability\, however\, he said that till it masters the fast-breeder technology\, India should not hesitate to consider offering soft loans to kick start export of its nuclear reactors i.e. Pressurised Heavy Water Reactors (PHWRs). It is possible that many countries would like to start with medium to small nuclear power plants than say 1000 MWe plants. \nAt the end of his presentation\, Dr Sastry said that India was a victim of international politics because of its principled stand against the nuclear proliferation treaty (NPT) and subsequent nuclear tests which led to the formation of the nuclear suppliers group (NSG). He pointed out that the Indo-US nuclear deal has changed the situation enabling India to import nuclear reactors along with the required fuel from outside.  Finally\, he suggested that India can become a world leader in the production and running of fast breeders if it manages to run successfully the much-awaited Prototype Fast Breeder Reactor (PFBR) at Kalpakkam. In fact\, that success is likely to turn a new leaf in the development of nuclear energy.  \nMajor Points of Discussion and Suggestions:\n\nAlthough at present the primary emphasis of China’s nuclear programme is on its peaceful uses\, its nuclear programme started for military purposes and in October 1964 it conducted its first nuclear test. However\, India’s nuclear programme was started solely for peaceful purposes and its civil nuclear programme is the oldest among the Asian countries.\n\nThe DAE’s announcement of targetting 10\,000 MWe by the year 2000 and its subsequent failure to achieve it had lessened the image of the department. However\, the main reason for the failure to achieve the stated objective was because of the government’s failure to put equity in this sphere.\nIndia’s civilian nuclear programme would have improved if the Indian government had put more equity in this sector. The situation\, however\, is improving gradually after the successful conclusion of the Indo-US nuclear deal and the follow up measures taken by the Indian government in this regard. \nOn China’s standardisation of nuclear energy reactors\, what are the measures China has taken in this regard and how India can learn this from China?\nSo far as the indigenisation and development of nuclear infrastructures are concerned\, how can India cooperate with China?\nChina has recently taken many safety measures for its nuclear reactors. However\, how it is going to address the issues relating to the safe disposal of nuclear wastes and environmental concerns still remain the major concerns. \nRole of civil society in China is very critical in the Chinese civil nuclear energy programme especially in locating the reactors and addressing the environmental concerns. How civil society in China is going to react in coming years on this needs to be looked into. However\, at present no such major opposition is coming from the civil society. \nVietnam wants to build nuclear energy reactors and China is interested in supporting it\, if this will materialise how it would impact other countries of the region?\nFrom the present Japanese nuclear crisis\, what are the lessons Indian government has learned and what are the safety measures that the government is going to take to face similar situations in the future.\nSo far there is no allegation against India on proliferation concerned activity. It has impeccable track record on nuclear non-proliferation. There is also no case against India of diverting the imported civil nuclear technology or energy for military purposes. \nThe stated objectives of the research paper are not clear enough at present and there are also no clear policy recommendations. The author needs to focus on this and needs to further streamline the paper.\n\nReport prepared by Dr Saroj Bishoyi\, Research Assistant\, IDSA
URL:https://idsa.in/idsa-event/nuclear-energy-in-china-india-a-comparative-study
CATEGORIES:FELLOW'S SEMINAR
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://idsa.in/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/no_photo-200x150-2.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Asia/Kolkata:20110408T053000
DTEND;TZID=Asia/Kolkata:20110408T053000
DTSTAMP:20261104T195418
CREATED:20231223T220538Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20231224T130244Z
UID:63577-1302240600-1302240600@idsa.in
SUMMARY:Civil-Military Relations in Post-Suharto Indonesia
DESCRIPTION:Chairperson: Dr R N DasDiscussants: Professor Baladas Ghoshal and Shri C S Kuppuswamy \n \nThe author analysed the developments in civil-military relations in Indonesia especially in the post Suharto era. He highlighted the fact that Indonesia charted its own civil military relation and almost defied the predetermined path laid out by theoreticians. \nHe also argued that military’s disposition in the civilian sphere had declined in the successive administrations since 1998. The military was unwilling to take on direct political role during the time of B J Habibie. Under the Habibie administration\, military introduce few changes in its doctrine and charted out four principles viz. a) the Military would no longer be in forefront of politics; b) It would influence the political process indirectly; c) It would shift its sociopolitical position from occupier to that of influencer and d) It would concede some of its sociopolitical functions to the nonmilitary partners. In the administration of Adburrahman Wahid\, the civilian government appropriated certain function such as appointments and promotion of senior officers which until now the military had exercised.   \nIn this paper\, the author discussed various theories of civil-military relations including the Separation and Concordance theory. He argued that the Separation theory is inadequate in explaining the relationship between armed forces\, the political elite\, the society and the institutions in post-Suharto Indonesia. The author highlighted that it is Concordance theory (which takes into account a nation’s historical and cultural context in determining the democratization of the country) better explains the developments in the post Suharto period. \nThe author identified various internal variables\, external variables\, and international variables to enquire the nature and developments in civil-military relations in Indonesia and attempted to extrapolate the future trend of civil military relations. \nAs regards internal variables\, he  explained that the internal variable refers to factors internal to the military such as professionalism\, corporate interests\, politicization etc. He highlighted the fact that army with its hierarchic organization and a cohesive characteristic ensures speedy implementation of decisions taken. He stated that it is claimed that armies are agents of modernization\, whether or not they intervene in politics\, since military driven investment has spin-off benefits for the civilian sector as well. He offered the explanation that Indonesian military drew its political strength from the doctrine of “dual function” which assigned it a direct political role beyond its strictly military role. He also enumerated the role of external factors such as political\, social system and governance and the related factors that shaped civil-military relations in Indonesia. \nIn conclusion he emphasised that Indonesia is undergoing societal changes which have their basis in the civil society. Quoting Huntington\, he stated that future problems in civil military relations in new democracies such as Indonesia are likely to come from the failures of democratic governments to promote economic developments and maintain law and order and not necessarily from the military. He speculated that these challenges will be faced with a new interpretation of civil military relations. \nMajor points of discussion and suggestions:\nThe author should highlight the characteristics of Indonesian army and should give more details how it came into existence. \nThe author should give more empirical evidences to the theories discussed in the paper and should test whether these theories are applicable to the Indonesian case. \nThe author should highlight the reason for continued domination of military in Indonesia\, may be in conclusion of the paper. \nThe author should emphasize as to how these three factors (i.e. internal\, external and international) emphasized in the paper interact with each other\, thus influencing the nature of civil military relations. \nA separate paragraph on the socio-political fabric of Indonesia is needed right at the outset\, qualify more explicitly which will help the author’s argument\, the futility of the Separation theory that is discussed in the paper. \nThe author should add a hypothesis\, particularly because the paper discusses about independent variable and dependent variable. The author needs to identify the relationship between the independent variable and dependent variable.  \nReport prepared by Shamshad A. Khan\, Research Assistant\, East Asia cluster.
URL:https://idsa.in/idsa-event/civil-military-relations-in-post-suharto-indonesia
CATEGORIES:FELLOW'S SEMINAR,EVENT REPORT
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://idsa.in/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/no_photo-200x150-2.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Asia/Kolkata:20110415T053000
DTEND;TZID=Asia/Kolkata:20110415T053000
DTSTAMP:20261104T195418
CREATED:20231223T220538Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20231224T130244Z
UID:63575-1302845400-1302845400@idsa.in
SUMMARY:The Role and Impact of Supreme Leader (Velayat-e Faqih) on Iranian Foreign Policy
DESCRIPTION:Chairperson: Ambassador Ishrat AzizDiscussants: Professor Qamar Agha and Professor A K Ramakrishnan \n \n \nDr. Rizvi started his presentation with the concept of velayat-e-faqih and its evolution. Velayat-e-Faqih is the most important institution in the post-revolution political system of Iran. The essence of this theory\, developed and applied by Ayatollah Khomeini\, is that one man with a thorough knowledge of Islamic law is to be designated as vali-e-faqih. Preamble of the Iranian constitution provides for the leadership of a fully qualified faqih whom the people consider as the leader who ensures that no institution deviates from its Islamic mandate. Despite the division of the three branches of government\, the constitution gives the velayat-e-faqih total control over the affairs of the state. Since the religious and political powers rest in one person\, the Imam’s powers are far beyond those of any contemporary head of state. \nGiven this background\, this paper studied the role of the institution of velayat-e-faqih during three phases of Iranian politics. The first phase covered the period 1979-1989\, during which Khomeini was the supreme leader. The second phase dealt with the period 1989-2005. Seyyed Ali Hossein Khamenei became the supreme leader in 1989 and during this period\, there were two presidents\, Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani (1989-1997) and Seyyed Mohammad Khatami (1997-2005). The third phase dealt with the post-2005 period\, when the hardliner Ahmadinejad was elected as President of Iran. It also examined how the institution has interacted with an executive presidency with differing ideological orientations and whether it has ensured continuity in the foreign policy of the Islamic republic. \nInitiating the discussion\, Mr. Qamar Agha clarified that there is no rule of clergy in Islam\, though among Shia it is still continuing. He said that it was basically a Christian concept. Conversely\, the holy Quran is a guide and one does not need anybody in between. Though interpretation is traditionally allowed\, the present problem lies in the fact that interpretation has been stopped. Further\, people in general believe that legitimacy of state lies with people\, not with god. Therefore\, government should be elected and hence democracy is considered as the best form of governance.  \nThen\, he talked about Shi’a theology and the concept of jihad and argued that there is no offensive jihad as killing of people is considered as killing of civilisation. Moreover\, Imam is needed to wage an offensive jihad. Rather\, they believe in jihad-e-Akbar\, fight with evil forces all the time; take out everything bad from the society like poverty and illiteracy. On the other hand\, the modern concept of holy war (jihad) is a medieval Christian concept adopted by the Muslims. Applying the principles of jihad\, Mr. Agha supported that if the government is corrupt\, it is the duty of its citizens to wage jihad against it and Iran did the same. The Iranian revolution is also unique as there was large popular participation. In the recent past\, voluntary demonstrations posed a grave threat to dictatorial regimes in many Muslim countries.  \nTaking the talk to the Iran-Iraq war\, Mr. Agha pointed out that Khomeini opposed any compromise. He wanted to introduce liberal Islam but during the war\, lesser clergy took over the reigns and Khomeini had to compromise. Separately\, the Najaf School mentions that clerics have no right to be part of government because it corrupts both religion and politics. But Khamenei\, present ruler\, managed things tactfully and was able to use both conservatives as well as liberals. He followed the policy of rapprochement\, as a result\, relations improved with Persian Gulf. Nevertheless\, Iranians are still fighting for democracy. \nProf. A. K. Ramakrishnan commented that the significance of the institution of faqih is intertwined with the aspects of Khomeini’s personality. In essence\, it is both constitutional and extra-constitutional authority derived from political\, constitutional religious as well as personality factors. He mentioned three important moments in Iranian history after the revolution: \n\nImmediate days when faqih became an institution. It is a constitutional process.\nKhomeini and drafting of constitution and his death led to a crisis as to what would happen to faqih (political crisis).\n2009 presidential elections—the institution of faqih was questioned.\n\nThen\, Prof. Ramakrishnan touched upon some conceptual aspects and asked what Khomeini did to make Islam contemporary? He answered that Khomeini made it a religious as well as political concept after the concepts of Wahabbia and Muqaddama. He believed that religion and politics cannot be separated by any means and hence made it a part of worldly affair. There was also mention about the concept of ummah and the concept of grand struggle\, anti-imperialism\, global solidarity and non-alignment. Further\, Khomeini made faqih a political institution. Again\, the controversy between ummah and nationalism was resolved by Khomeini while invoking reference to Shi’a traditions. There was also debate between Islamic republic as a state and its people as civil society. People beyond clergy are included in political system and ideological difference is clearly different from earlier days. However\, the current period is one where there is crisis of democracy. Added to the trend is a notion of loosening of hegemony with 2009 elections. He ended discussion with a question\, whether there are counter-hegemonic forces? \nDr. Ashok K Behuria raised some important issues like origin of the concept\, faqih as political institution-elite hegemony\, main foreign policy making institutions in Iranian political system and some definitional issues. He also discussed certain issues like relations with West\, the Iranian nuclear issue and the approach of faqih towards the same. Finally\, he touched upon the political process and role of civil society. \nDr. Meena Singh Roy stressed upon the Iranian foreign policy goals and impact of faqih on foreign policy. She also referred to post 2009 changes and its impact. She posed a question of whether Islamic societies can embrace democracy and argued that Islam is not inherently hostile to democracy. Regarding the Iranian reform\, she insisted that it is a broad multiclass reform movement. \nThe discussion was followed by a meticulous Q&A session focused on a range of topics like the concept of faqih and its pan-Islamic impact\, distance between Indian Shi’as and Khomeini regime\, organic interconnection between Islam and politics and the future of faqih under present revolutionary phase in the Middle East. It was noted that the Iranian system is more similar to Saudi Arabian system where democracy and dictatorship are continuing simultaneously. However\, Iranian regime is very strong. Further discussion raised questions on dilution of faqih in 1989 and challenges in 2009\, internal debates within the institution about its role\, people’s perception about faqih especially non-Iranians\, reactions in Arab world\, process of faqih in foreign policy making\, role of Indian government\, and possible conflict between Iranian Shi’a clergy and nationalists. It is to be noted here that the influence of faqih was felt as threatening by other nations. It did not go well with Arabs as it was anti-monarchical revolution in Iran and threatened established monarchies in the Gulf. When Khomeini took over\, Iran was not entirely Islamic (it’s a religious discourse). Khomeini wanted to achieve Islamic unity. But in 1979\, there was division between radicals and liberals and continued till 1985. \nFinally\, Ambassador Ishrat Aziz summarized the discussion with questions like what were goals of Khomeini —political or religious; interpreting Islam or governance; does faqih lead to democracy; whether faqih is elected or selected etc. He explained that many came to power through ideology but few could rule (govern) on ideology and Khomeini was one of them. He was also a pragmatist and successfully made a distinction between final and absolute power.  \nReport prepared by Mr. Babjee Pothuraju\, Research Assistant\, IDSA.
URL:https://idsa.in/idsa-event/the-role-and-impact-of-supreme-leader-velayat-e-faqih-on-iranian-foreign-policy
CATEGORIES:FELLOW'S SEMINAR,EVENT REPORT
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://idsa.in/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/no_photo-200x150-2.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Asia/Kolkata:20110415T053000
DTEND;TZID=Asia/Kolkata:20110415T053000
DTSTAMP:20261104T195418
CREATED:20231224T103722Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20250228T050919Z
UID:64118-1302845400-1302845400@idsa.in
SUMMARY:India’s National Solar Mission – strategic lessons for energy security
DESCRIPTION:Open to all Members; others pl. contact 1030 to 1300 hrs Conference Cell \nChairperson: Dr G BalachandranDiscussants: Shri Pankaj Batra and Shri Ravi Raina
URL:https://idsa.in/idsa-event/indias-national-solar-mission-strategic-lessons-for-energy-security
CATEGORIES:FELLOW'S SEMINAR
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://idsa.in/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/no_photo-200x150-2.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Asia/Kolkata:20110429T053000
DTEND;TZID=Asia/Kolkata:20110429T053000
DTSTAMP:20261104T195418
CREATED:20231223T220523Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20231224T130244Z
UID:63572-1304055000-1304055000@idsa.in
SUMMARY:Renaissance of Military History\, War and International Studies in India
DESCRIPTION:Chairperson: Brigadier R .Dahiya (Retd)\, Advisor\, Military Affairs Cluster\, (IDSA)Discussants: Prof Anirudh Deshpande (University of Delhi) and Sqn Ldr RTS Chhina (Retd)\, Secretary Armed Forces Historical Research\, USI of India. \n \n \nPK Gautam introduced the paper by saying that in India there is a knowledge gap in the pursuit of contemporary military history in the framework of international studies.  He emphasized the need to catch up with international standard practices in this respect. The core argument of the paper is that the military history can no longer be peripheral as it is the root discipline for the development of strategy. Globally\, the study of contemporary military history has already moved leaps ahead of the drums\, bugle and trumpet approach. Unlike in the past\, the trends in warfare have changed from inter state to that of intra state combined with the rapid changes in technology. Military transformations and change is still under inadequate conceptual scrutiny. In the force on force or the high end spectrum\, technology is a vital input. This has now generated new demands on historians to grapple with more of science and technology.   India is emerging as a global power. Yet in this soft academic and policy field it has serious deficiencies. \nThe bottlenecks \nUniversity System   \nIndian University system does not facilitate the study of Military History. In universities like JNU and DU\, there is no course in strategic theory and military history. The Department of Defence and Security Studies (DSS) in universities such as Pune\, Madras\, Allahabad\, Meerut\, Chandigarh\, Patiala\, Gorakhpur etc are also responsible for the neglect. Military history remains an optional paper with absence of professional faculty. This is an ad-hoc and inadequate approach. Although some limited work exists of the pre-independence British period\, there is no serious original work by an Indian author on modern war studies. Rather\, mostly foreign scholars excel here and are widely quoted. \nThe State \nThe state itself has not published official histories of major wars and operations barring that of 1947- 48  in J&K or liberation of Goa in 1961 and an un-official history of 1965 Indo- Pak war just released. Although the Kargil Review Committee and its follow up Group of Ministers Reports have been hailed as the first of its kind in independent India – the war dairies of the army have yet to reach the History Division for even archival safety.  \nMilitary institutions worldwide rarely have been interested in studying their own experiences with any degree of honesty. Major reason military institutions get the next war wrong is because they either deliberately fail to study the last war\, or do so only insofar as it makes leaders feel good. Seeing it from the Utilitarian History perspective\, probably from a theoretical point of view monumental myth making could be a strong driver for officials not to declassify records of the defeat in 1962 at the hands of the Chinese\, but the reason for reluctance to publish   1971 monumental victory is not clear.   \nIndian Military\nThere is no structural teaching of military history at the National Defence Academy (NDA). At the Indian Military Academy (IMA)\, there are no professors of war studies. The three general rules of study of military history- width\, depth and context should be the conceptual bedrock for the study of military history. But these are not well appreciated\, and understood. The fledgling Indian National Defence University (INDU) is expected to have a history section under the wing of its National Institute for Strategic Studies. But in the absence of consciously incorporating the History Division and archival work\, it is likely to fall in the same process of ‘IR centricity’. The Indian military is also weak in the professional art of the mandated record initiation and keeping. One glaring infirmity is the absence of maps and sketches post independence\, in after action reports. Units are the building block originators or sensors. But no scientific training is imparted to regimental or staff officers who need to initiate these primary sources like war diaries and historical records.  \nThe Result Due to Neglect  \nUsing archives not in India but in UK and other places\, a handful of contemporary Indian authors have demonstrated the use of the historian’s craft and methods to interpret military and strategic history post independence. Due to absence of archival work\, academics are discouraged to pursue diplomatic or strategic and war related topics. Historical maps like those of Sino- Indian border in any case are a rarity. On the 1962 war in Arunachal Pradesh we have not recorded oral history of the people. The same could be true for Ladakh. The popular history embedded in public psyche is that Chinese troop strength was overwhelming “waves and waves of hordes”: whereas interaction with people who were old enough to remember events of 1962 would perhaps reveal otherwise.  \nPolicy Suggestions  \nSuggestions were given out at three levels. Level 1 is with the larger question of the Indian university system\, where departments of History\, IR and DSS to include the subject of modern war studies and military history. Military history should be Included in the INDU curriculum. Level 2 is at official/government level. Some suggestions here are; revive Historical Division\, revive the statistical branch of the Armed Forces\, restart the flow of documents from service HQ to History Division for safekeeping and for use by academics and scholars once declassified in future\, incorporate the Indian Coast Guard in the loop\, which has not been done so far. Maps and Sketches must be of a very good standard\, projects to record history of insurgencies with counter insurgencies to be undertaken. Level 3 is about how units\, formations and Headquarters need to gear up to capture and report data for historical work. HQ Integrated Defense Staff should become the nodal agency of the military history dimension. Introduction of the concept of combat historians has also been recommended.    \nConclusion\nWhile declassification on time and in accordance with the Public Record Act and Rules (30 year cycle) is necessary\, it is not sufficient. What is more vital is to capture data in archives of the instruments of power of the state: that is its armed forces and security agencies as per institutional practices. A fresh debate is needed on this key component of the intellectual growth. The case here is just not to declassify (the issue may be that the operation or conflict is still on going) but also to institutionalize the study. This in no case will militarize society\, but would rather make our public in general and armed forces in particular\, more professional in dealing with external threats.  It will also throw new light on various insurgencies and facilitate policy options for counter insurgency in a vibrant democratic India.    \nDiscussion/Comments/Observations\nR.T.S Chhina was very appreciative of the paper. He found the paper to be a “groundbreaking” exercise. He urged upon IDSA to take necessary steps to make the recommendations of the paper see the light of the day. He was critical of the government’s policy of classifying documents.  Under the rubric of “embarrassment to the government”\, which is a very subjective thing\, the government cannot hold the information back from the public. He also suggested to put the Public Record Act and Rules at the centre stage of the study as then the author of the paper can highlight the issue of government’s apathy towards the writing of an objective military history. He cautioned the author not to mix up the key issues of history with the theoretical debates of historians and political scientists when they approach a subject differently. By doing this the clear message will get diluted. \nProf. Deshpande cited the lack of availability of the primary sources on military history in public domain as the main cause of the neglect of the subject. He elaborated how history is given a low priority in universities due to archival absence. “De-classifying” – is the only solution\, he said. He also raised a very sensitive but important question of lack of internal democracy within the armed forces. The issue was raised in the context of military’s reluctance to part with any information and the tendency to mark most of the files as sensitive and secret. He pointed out that in Delhi University he has come across very keen students who may like to pursue the study of post independence counter insurgency as historians\, but the climate is not encouraging. In many ways the armed forces themselves may be responsible for keeping all such matters under a security blanket.  \nDr Kalyanaraman suggested that the paper must clearly establish and explain the link of military history to that of strategic and security studies. One reason for the lack of interest in initial stages could be debate between guns vs. butter. His suggestion was to take up the study of military history at IDSA\, which is aptly suited for the purpose.  \nAnit Mukherjee\, like other panelists\, was very critical of the lack of primary sources for research and government’s apathy towards the problem. He suggested a slight change to the title of the study by prefixing “The Need” to the existing title. This he felt would obliterate any misconception about the study being only of academic value and would make it more policy relevant. \nChairperson’s Remarks\nBrig (retd) R. Dahiya complimented PK Gautam and said that the issue of writing military history is of utmost importance. He said that history is important as it guides us in our future ventures as each and every event of the past has a lesson ingrained in it for the future. The importance of history is more pronounced in the case of military strategy. He concluded by thanking the panelists and the gathering for a constructive engagement. \nReport prepared by Amit Kumar\, Research Assistant\, Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses\, New Delhi.
URL:https://idsa.in/idsa-event/renaissance-of-military-history-war-and-international-studies-in-india
CATEGORIES:FELLOW'S SEMINAR,EVENT REPORT
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://idsa.in/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/no_photo-200x150-2.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Asia/Kolkata:20110429T053000
DTEND;TZID=Asia/Kolkata:20110429T053000
DTSTAMP:20261104T195418
CREATED:20231224T103722Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20250228T042833Z
UID:64116-1304055000-1304055000@idsa.in
SUMMARY:The Balochistan Insurgency: A Political Analysis
DESCRIPTION:Open to all Members; others pl. contact 1030 to 1300 hrs Conference Cell \nChairperson: Professor Partho GhoshDiscussants: Professor Kalim Bahadur & Professor Savita Pande
URL:https://idsa.in/idsa-event/the-balochistan-insurgency-a-political-analysis
CATEGORIES:FELLOW'S SEMINAR
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://idsa.in/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/no_photo-200x150-2.jpg
END:VEVENT
END:VCALENDAR