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:20120101T000000
END:STANDARD
END:VTIMEZONE
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Asia/Kolkata:20131108T053000
DTEND;TZID=Asia/Kolkata:20131108T053000
DTSTAMP:20261104T171913
CREATED:20231224T102528Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20250228T005210Z
UID:64059-1383888600-1383888600@idsa.in
SUMMARY:Overlapping Regional Security Governance Mechanisms: An Alternative Interpretation of the Difficulties of Regional Cooperation for Afghanistan
DESCRIPTION:Open to all Members; others pl. contact\nConference Cell\n\n\n\n\n1030 to 1300 hrs
URL:https://idsa.in/idsa-event/overlapping-regional-security-governance-mechanisms-an-alternative-interpretation-of-the-difficulties-of-regional-cooperation-for-afghanistan
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:20131122T053000
DTEND;TZID=Asia/Kolkata:20131122T053000
DTSTAMP:20261104T171913
CREATED:20231223T133606Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20231224T130239Z
UID:63113-1385098200-1385098200@idsa.in
SUMMARY:Threat of Israel’s Regional Isolation and Imperatives for the Future
DESCRIPTION:Event: Fellows’ seminarChair: Ambassador Rajiv  SikriExternal Discussants:  Dr. P R Kumaraswamy\, Mr. Ashok SinghInternal  Discussant: Mr.  S Samuel C Rajiv \nThe paper provides a  comprehensive overview of Israel’s history since its birth in 1948 and examines  the topical threat of its isolation in the West Asian region. A temporal  overview of Israel’s troubled transition since 1948 has been given\, along with a  meticulous account of Israel’s position during Arab spring and its WMD policy (Weapons  of Mass Destruction i.e. Chemical and Nuclear weapons). \nIn his study\, the  author has raised four pertinent research questions; the issue of Israel’s  reorientation of regional policy in recent past\, Effect of Arab Spring on  Israel\, Israel’s policy shift in response to Syrian crisis-Iran nuclear issue\,  and Imperatives for Israel’s regional strategy. \nThe paper was structured in three sections; the  first section elaborates Israel and its  engagement with the region with an exhaustive timeline of Israel’s  relations with its neighbours. The next section analyses impact of Arab Spring on Israel’s regional posture and Israel’s  ambiguous policy on Chemical and Nuclear  weapons. The last section highlights the likely future trends for Israel’s regional engagement. \nIsrael and its Engagement with  the region\nIn  the first section\, the author states that throughout its brief history\,  national security has always dominated Israel’s strategic thought in the  region. Israel’s foreign policy was defined as a culmination of three factors;  its strategic location\, Arab-Israeli conflict and Arab rejection of Israel and  it was further suggested that Israel’s strategic thought was always dominated  by national security. The period of Israel’s engagement in the region has been classified  into three distinct phases; 1948-1991\, 1991-2005 and 2005 onwards. The author  opined that the first phase highlighted Israel’s fight for survival and its  strategy of viewing the region through the spectrum of “peace through security”.  The second phase was one of a reconciliatory approach. During this phase\,  Israel traversed from its traditional security oriented approach to a  distinctly different reconciliatory strategic approach. The author built his  arguments based on Israeli Prime minister Rabin’s land-for-peace policy.  Reference to Madrid conference (1991)\, Oslo Accords (1993) and Oslo II i.e.  Taba Agreement (1995) was made to substantiate the main argument.  This period also witnessed the peace treaty  with Jordan in 1994. The third phase has however witnessed the return of  security oriented approach. In this section\, author outlined the failure of  Ariel Sharon’s Gaza Disengagement Plan of 2005 to bring about any lasting peace.  The author highlighted the impact of other important developments in the region  on Israel’s regional policy; particularly Saddam Hussein’s ouster and ensuing  political shifts in Iraq\, Iran’s escalating influence across the Levant\, and  rise of Hamas and Hezbollah.  The author  pointed out that Israel witnessed a net deterioration in its regional posture  during this period\, particularly towards the end of 2010 when Arab uprisings  engulfed West Asia. \nIsrael and Arab Spring\nDevelopments  in Arab World-particularly regional players-Egypt and Syria were discussed. The  author highlighted how Turkey and Iran tried to make the best of these  revolutions while Israel kept getting pushed into a corner. Author contended  that Arab Spring aggravated Israel’s isolation in the region\, and “rise of Islamists on political maps of the  countries” was highlighted as a major concern for Israel. \nWeapons of Mass Destruction in  the region and Israel\nIn the  section\, the author drew attention towards Israel’s policy of ambiguity on  Chemical and Nuclear weapons. Israel’s regional threat perception was also examined  to understand why Israel maintains this ambiguity. Most importantly\, author  highlighted that destruction of Syria’s chemical weapons is likely to put  enormous pressure on Israel to ratify the Chemical Weapons Convention. Author  referred to various international reports to confirm Israel’s nuclear weapons programme\,  and emphasized that future of Iran-US nuclear deal will be an important factor  in determining Israel’s isolation in the future. \nConclusion: Likely Future Trends\nIn the  last section of the paper\, the author briefly summed up Israel’s equation with  its neighbours to reiterate Israel’s escalating regional isolation. Author noted  that it was time for Israel to think in terms of enhancing confidence building  measures in West Bank and Gaza\, and changing its position on CWC and NPT. Author  suggested that there is a need to signal diplomatic willingness to resolve  Palestine issue and by altering its anti-Iran rhetoric. \nComments and Observations:\n    Mr. Ashok Singh appreciated the  author for extending the scope of his study beyond the clichéd Israel Palestine  issue. He urged the author to interpret Israel’s perception of its own strategic  policy in the region. With respect to Israel’s regional isolation\, he stated  that Israel has a policy of keeping distance and it enjoys the threat. The  author was asked to offer concrete suggestions to guide Israel’s future  imperatives. \nDr. P R Kumaraswamy mentioned that in the current  scenario Iran is perceived as the most potent threat to Israel\, and in light of  recent developments\, Iran is likely to emerge as a decisive player in West Asia.  He urged the author to speculate as to how Israel prepares to face Iran  resurgence- via reconciliation or retaliation. The decline in US engagement  with Israel post-2009 was also underlined\, and he advised the author to comment  on role of US in shaping Israel’s regional policy. \nDr. Samual Rajiv appreciated author’s analysis  of Israel’s regional policy dynamics. He urged the author to focus more on  contemporary issues and also encompass Israeli narrative on peace. \nAmbassador Rajiv Sikri noted that the paper aptly  underlined the issue of Israel’s security oriented approach. He highlighted the  role of US in shaping Israel’s policy and urged the author to include US factor  within the framework of this paper. He pointed out that within Israel\, there is  dwindling public support for hard lined policy and thus it’s essential to  understand public as well as diplomatic perception about regional policy. With  reference to Israel’s policy of ambiguity on Chemical and Nuclear weapons\, he  asserted that Israel will gradually succumb to the compelling regional circumstances  and declare its stocks. \nThe  discussion was followed by Question and Answer round\, where questions regarding  Saudi-Israel cooperation against Iran\, GCC’s economic threat to Israel and Israel’s  internal politics were raised. \n  Chair  concluded the session by commenting on evolving geopolitics of West Asia and India’s  capability to intervene in the region.Report prepared by Divya Malhotra
URL:https://idsa.in/idsa-event/threat-of-israels-regional-isolation-and-imperatives-for-the-future
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:20131129T053000
DTEND;TZID=Asia/Kolkata:20131129T053000
DTSTAMP:20261104T171913
CREATED:20231223T133606Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20231224T130239Z
UID:63112-1385703000-1385703000@idsa.in
SUMMARY:Framing of Nationalism in Nepal's Radical Communist Movement: The India Factor
DESCRIPTION:Chairperson: Brig Rumel Dahiya\, SM (Retd)External Discussants: Ambassador Deb Mukherji and Ms Akashnya ShahInternal Discussants: Dr Anand Kumar and Dr Anshuman Behera \nMr Post Bhadur Basnet\, SAARC Visiting Fellow from Nepal presented his paper titled “Framing of Nationalism in Nepal’s Radical Communist Movement: The Indian Factor” on 29 November 2013.  \nThe paper argues that the Maoists used “negative nationalism”\, based on anti-Indian sentiments\, as one of the key “revolutionary” strategies during the insurgency. The same band of nationalism continues to feature in the radical communist discourse\, though it seems to have lost much of its appeal among the masses during the course of democratic politics in which the Maoists willingly participated since 2005.  \nThe genesis of anti-Indianism goes back to the days of the formation of Nepali state. The 1950 treaty\, which aimed to bring Nepal under the security sphere of India that possibly checked the import of communism to Nepal from China\, has been a major irritant for the communists. India’s security concern requires an India-friendly regime in Nepal and thus India is seen to be meddling in the internal affairs of the country and favouring some actors over the others\, which is viewed as external interference in Nepal’s internal politics and leads to anti-India sentiments amongst the Nepalese people. Moreover\, “not-to-be-an-Indian” is one of the key features in the identity formation process in Nepal. All these features collectively offered a fertile ground to the political actors to manufacture and exploit anti–India sentiments to their benefit over the years.  \nDuring the monarchy period\, the king was successful in sustaining his regime by instigating anti-Indianism and gathering the support of the communists. Once the relationship between the monarchy and the communists was broken\, there was a regime change in Nepal. With the monarchy gone\, the paper argues\, the role of nationalism for political mobilisation is no longer effective.  \nThe Maoists after 2006 have realised that the anti-India card does not work in the changed global\, regional and domestic political matirx. The mainstream faction of the Maoist party led by Prachanda has removed India from its hit-list\, and started talking about the internal nationalism (ethnic federalism and development). However\, the radical faction in the Maoist Party led by Kiran Baidya continues to talk about external intervention and take an anti-Indian line while framing its version of Nepalese nationalism. The presenter argued that while the line of “externalised nationalism” may have lost its glamour\, the Maoist plan for consolidating ‘internal nationalism’ through emphasis on ethnic nationalism has pushed the Nepali state into a state of wilderness.  \nThe presenter provides the following recommendations which according to him can remove the prevailing anti-India sentiments in Nepal: \n\nIndia should pay attention to dissemination of information regarding its approach to Nepal. In this regard\, Indian Embassy should extend its network with journalists. \nIndian investment in Nepal should increase. Other than in the hydro power sector\, India should invest in agriculture in the plains and mid-hills and in the capacity-building of security forces. \nIndia should recognise and analyse the reasons for the spread of anti-India sentiments in Nepal. There are frequent complaints about India micro-managing Nepalese politics. India should address this issue. \nIndia should try to build contacts with all the political actors and should not be seen as favouring some actors over others. While playing its role to build political consensus in matters concerning its security it should take care not to isolate any party and keep a low profile. \nThere should be proper coordination between Ministry of External affairs and intelligence agencies in their approach to Nepal. \n\nComments of the discussants\nThe discussants have made the following observations about the paper:  \n\nThe paper talked about hill-based nationalism rather than Nepali nationalism. \nNationalism has been used in the paper as a synonym of anti-Indianism. \nThe paper gives an impression that China is interested to play its own political game in Nepal. However\, it was argued by the discussants that it was the Nepalese who wanted to play the China card. China is quite pragmatic in its dealings with Nepal.\n \nTo justify the title\, a separate section on India factor should be incorporated in the paper. \nThe paper is detailed and timely. However to make it more up-to-date it should accommodate the analysis on the latest Constituent Assembly (CA) election results.
URL:https://idsa.in/idsa-event/framing-of-nationalism-in-nepals-radical-communist-movement-the-india-factor
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
END:VCALENDAR