BEGIN:VCALENDAR
VERSION:2.0
PRODID:-//MP-IDSA - ECPv6.15.12.2//NONSGML v1.0//EN
CALSCALE:GREGORIAN
METHOD:PUBLISH
X-WR-CALNAME:MP-IDSA
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:20110128T053000
DTEND;TZID=Asia/Kolkata:20110128T053000
DTSTAMP:20261104T201651
CREATED:20231223T220924Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20231224T130245Z
UID:63602-1296192600-1296192600@idsa.in
SUMMARY:Managing India’s Borders: Lessons from the US Experience
DESCRIPTION:Chairperson: Shri Naveen Verma\, National Security CouncilDiscussants: Professor Chintamani Mahapatra and Shri K Srinivasan \n \nThe paper focuses on how United States manages its borders through the concept of “smart borders”\, enhanced cross border cooperation with neighbours and utilisation of technological solutions and how far these measures are relevant to India’s approach to border management. Smart Border concept encompasses safe and secure flow of people and goods and improvement of transit infrastructure and cross border cooperation. According to Dr. Das\, border management entails facilitating cross border flows of people and goods while concurrently preventing the entry of persons or goods which pose threat to home territories or population. In this context\, the paper summarizes the Indian approach to border management and American practices to conclude that India’s “security centric” approach should be replaced by “smart border” principle for more fluid borders and increased trade efficiency.  \nThe major point of discussion and suggestions to the author: \n\nThe paper has given a new perspective on how traditionally borders are managed in India and the challenges posed by the same.\nExcellent comparison of border management in two largest democracies in the world but respective countries have qualitatively/quantitatively different border issues that has to be borne in mind\, for example drug trafficking and large scale illegal migration is a menace to the US while cross border terrorism is an issue for India.  \nIndia’s festering border issues with its neighbours and hostile relations pose security challenge to India’s borders and hence India has to keep “security approach” unlike US that has amiable relations with Canada and Mexico (main countries in focus in the paper). \nPolitical economy of US and South Asia are unique by themselves\, hence the fundamental flaw would be to compare how two countries manage their borders.\nIn Indian Context\, “Smart Border” does not seems to be an ideal concept as long as an unstable region prevails. Basic political dilemmas have to be addressed in the region for further improvement in relations between the countries that will entail better border management in the longer run.\nGreater importance to land border management negates the importance of coastal security\, specially post 26/11 threats that emanate from the coasts. Hence\, a new turf to explore in India’s security ambit.\nRole of individual states in border management needs to be incorporated/ evaluated for a robust border security\nOverall\, a security approach complementary with cooperative approach is in India’s interest\, and not smart border approach. \n\nReport prepared by Anwesha Ray Chaudhuri\, Research Assistant\, IDSA
URL:https://idsa.in/idsa-event/managing-indias-borders-lessons-from-the-us-experience
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:20110128T053000
DTEND;TZID=Asia/Kolkata:20110128T053000
DTSTAMP:20261104T201651
CREATED:20231223T220925Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20231224T130245Z
UID:63603-1296192600-1296192600@idsa.in
SUMMARY:The Making of Foreign Policy in Bhutan
DESCRIPTION:Chairperson: Ambassador I P KhoslaDiscussants: Ambassador Dalip Mehta and Professor Mathew Joseph C \n \nDr. Medha Bisht’s paper focused on Bhutan’s Policy shift over a period of time. In the process of explaining this broad aspect\, she tried to answer questions such as: who are the actors in Bhutan driving foreign policy choices? What are the factors that determine Bhutan’s foreign policy choices?  \nThe speaker presented the paper in three broad sections. The first section assessed the basic determinants responsible for influencing or making foreign policy decisions in Bhutan. In this section\, she amplified the role of domestic factors in the making of Bhutan’s foreign policy.  She argues that while\, geo-strategic location\, national security and economic engagement have shaped Bhutan’s foreign policy preferences\, the political institutions in Bhutan\, particularly\, Monarchy\, National Assembly\, Royal Advisory Council and Monastic Order are also important attributes shaping its foreign policy decision making. According to the speaker\, among the four political institutions mentioned above\, Monarchy and National Assembly emerged as important institutions in shaping foreign policy decisions.  \nIn the second section\, the speaker isolated security\, culture and economy as the factors which have predominantly shaped foreign policy preferences of Bhutan. According to her\, while security had played an important role in shaping Bhutan’s relations with China\, cultural factors had played a significant role in determining Bhutan’s position on negotiating the issue of refugees with Nepal. Economic benefits\, on the other hand\, have played an important role in defining Bhutan’s interaction with India. The speaker however argued that these categories were not distinct in relation to the three countries mentioned above. The thrust of the analysis she argued was to highlight the significance of these three factors as the primary determinants in Bhutan’s foreign policy.  \nThe third section identified the possibilities of continuity and change in Bhutan’s foreign policy post 2008.  Despite Bhutan’s shift to constitutional monarchy\, the King still holds an important place in deciding Bhutan’s external engagements. While mapping out the pattern of change and continuity in Bhutan’s foreign policy engagement in terms of the determinants\, speaker argued that economic engagements would govern Bhutan’s future foreign policy choices and interactions with China in near future could increase.  Regarding the role of political institutions in Bhutan\, National Assembly\, National Council\, Gross National Happiness Commission\, Druk and holding Investments\, Royal Service Commission and Anti Corruption Commission would be potential future players.  \nExternal Discussants:\nThe external discussants complimented the presenter for a comprehensive and well researched paper. The first external discussant suggested that the paper would benefit if a background mentioning Bhutan’s opening up to the world through Young Husbands expedition was included. The same discussant also felt that the paper should include a discussion on Bhutan –Britain relationship\, future of Indo-Bhutan relations in the context of China-Bhutan relations\, Bhutan shifting from closed medieval society to a modern society\, opening up of Bhutan to the globalised world\, Bhutan’s relations with P5 and some of the important events such as: Nehru’s visit in 1958. According to the discussant\, the paper gave too much importance on National Assembly\, but during 3rd and 4th King National Assembly was basically a rubber stamp. The same view was also echoed by the second external discussant. According to the second external discussant\, political culture required elaboration. He also suggested the speaker to re-look at her argument that economy determines Indo-Bhutan engagement. \nInternal Discussants:\nThe first internal discussant pointed out that the three determinants isolated by the speaker\, i.e. security\, culture and economy could not be compartmentalized in real sense. Political culture\, mentioned by the speaker was more about citizenship issue than of foreign policy. According to the first internal discussant Bhutan’s Trade relations with Assam needed to be substantiated. The discussant also suggested the presenter to address Bhutan’s reaction to the Chinese presence and recommendation for India. The second internal discussant suggested the speaker to elaborate Bhutan Nepal relations.  \nGeneral discussion focused on the following issues:\n\nIndia’s Development Assistance to Bhutan\nManifesto of the ruling and opposition parties on Bhutan’s policy towards China and India\nPresence of religious puzzle in Bhutan\nIndian Army’s OP Task in Bhutan\nAttitude of local people of Bhutan towards India\nBhutanese Diaspora\nClimate Change\,\nBinding factor that keeps Bhutan together\n\nChair’s Comments\nAccording to the chair\, the speaker had made an excellent effort to put the narratives into analytical framework. However\, he felt that the title and contents of the paper did not match.  He suggested the speaker to incorporate the comments by the discussants and substantiate them with the application of the Small State theory. \nReport prepared by Gulbin Sultana\, Research Assistant\, IDSA.
URL:https://idsa.in/idsa-event/the-making-of-foreign-policy-in-bhutan
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