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:20110101T000000 END:STANDARD END:VTIMEZONE BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTART;TZID=Asia/Kolkata:20120413T053000 DTEND;TZID=Asia/Kolkata:20120413T053000 DTSTAMP:20261104T190746 CREATED:20231223T134406Z LAST-MODIFIED:20231224T130242Z UID:63172-1334295000-1334295000@idsa.in SUMMARY:Understanding Africa’s position on UN Security Council Reforms DESCRIPTION:Chairperson: Lt Gen Satish Nambiar (Retd)Discussants: Ambassador Rajiv Bhatia and Ambassador H H S Viswanathan \nReform and democratisation of the United Nations\, particularly the Security Council\, has been the focus of global attention in recent years. However\, progress on UNSC reforms has proven to be quite elusive\, mainly due to multiple and competing proposals by various groups like G-4\, Uniting for Consensus\, L-69 and S-5. Separately\, within the UN process\, through the Africa Group the African countries have tried to project their common position for permanent representation from the African continent at the Security Council. \nIn this context\, Ms. Ruchita Beri analysed the African position on UNSC reforms and provided some historical and political context necessary to situate the Africa’s debate over Security Council reforms. She argued that the continent’s inflexibility and failure to reach a compromise on the common position while negotiating with other like-minded groups is the single most significant roadblock in the African countries’ plans to acquire permanent position on the high table. Further\, while India’s quest for African support for its UNSC candidature may have been one of the factors fuelling India’s engagement of African countries in recent years\, doubts remain on India and Africa convergence at the negotiations on UNSC reforms in future. \nHighlighting the anachronistic structure of the UNSC\, Ms. Beri mentioned that there has been an engaging debate on the need for UNSC reforms since the end of the Cold War. Many countries\, especially from the developing world\, have expressed their dissatisfaction with the unrepresentative character of the UNSC and presented various formulae and proposals addressing three issues: \n\nThe size of the reformed Security Council\,\nLimitations on the scope and use of veto rights\, and\,\nThe UNSC’s working methods. \n\nHowever\, the new permanent membership has proven to be the most contentious issue in the debate on Security Council reforms. \nAmong different groups formed across the world to put forward the cases for permanent membership to the Security Council\, the Africa group remains the only geographical group to have reached a common position when\, after considerable deliberations\, the African countries agreed to a common position on the UNSC reforms called the Ezulwini Consensus (2005). Further\, the Sirte Summit of the African Union in July 2005 set up a follow up mechanism on the reform process and mandated to negotiate with other regions of the world and stakeholders to attain Africa’s aspiration with reference to the UNSC. However\, there was a lot of criticism of the African common position: \n\nThe Ezulwini consensus was based on the idea of regional representation\, while the current UN system focused on representation of countries on the basis of their individual merit.\nThe Ezulwini consensus was an inflexible negotiating position that was doomed to fail at the onset.\n\nOn their part\, the G-4 and the Africa group opened negotiations in London in 2005 in order to reach a consensus as they would be unable to muster the required support independently. Nevertheless\, negotiations revealed fissures in the unity of the Africa group and the leading African countries failed to convince other member states that it was practically impossible for Africa to attain a permanent representation at the UNSC without support from other players. Several factors influenced these events: \n\nFailure to name the possible African representatives in the African common position because of intense rivalry amongst them and severe criticism of their candidature within Africa. \nOnly 36 of the 53 African countries voted in favour of the Sirte Declaration\, meaning that even if the Africa group had managed to join in a coalition with G-4\, it would still not have got the votes of all members of AU.\nIt appears some of the P-5 countries also fuelled these differences among the African countries.\n\nOn India-Africa convergence\, Ms. Beri mentioned that in recent years\, India has been engaging African countries in a big way\, at bilateral\, regional as well as pan-African levels. The need for a new paradigm encompassing diverse areas such as political\, economic\, science and technology\, human resource development\, social\, cultural and strategic was highlighted during the India-Africa Summit held in April 2008. Also\, India’s increasing engagement of Africa coupled with its involvement in UN peacekeeping in Africa can be viewed as a strategy to win support of the African countries for its candidature to the UNSC. In turn\, on various occasions\, individually or as part of a regional grouping\, African countries have gone on record to support India’s candidature to the reformed UNSC. \nIn conclusion\, she opined that currently it seems the Africa group cannot agree on suitable candidates to fill the permanent seats allocated to the region. It is also doubtful whether other groups will negotiate with African countries without identification of the possible African candidates. At the same time\, without African support it is inconceivable that any proposal or reform package could succeed in the General Assembly. Therefore\, at the moment\, Africa seems to be holding the key to further progress on the UNSC reforms debate. \nMajor Points from Discussion and Suggestions to the Author: \n\nThe world is putting unnecessary faith in Africa and its role in the expansion of Security Council. At the same time\, amongst the P-5 only UK and France are inclined for expansion and the other three are not in favour of the same. Therefore\, Africa becomes a minor bloc in any such expansions.\nSome consider arriving at the Ezulwini Consensus was the mistake committed by Africa as it could not move freely beyond the set position. At the same time\, the question is whether Africa has the power to go back on the consensus. Hence\, Ezulwini Consensus should be considered as the starting point of the process. It is the opening position of Africa wherein it has expressed its opinion on a major issue as Africa does not have such diplomatic leverage with the world.\nUnlike Asia and Latin America\, but like Europe\, Africa does not have probable candidates as the continent is too divided. Therefore\, it is very difficult to get consensus among African countries. Of late\, there have been new cases of Kenya and Ethiopia to be considered for membership of the UNSC. \nThere is no clear strategy of Africa and India as to how to proceed on the subject of UNSC reform. The current approach fails to deliver desired results. In this situation\, the only solution is the transitional solution between permanent and non-permanent category\, i.e. creating a rotational membership.\nThere is no clear support from Africa for India’s position. They only note India’s candidature. Their position could come out clearly when there are few contenders from the continent.\nIt is also important to look at the position taken in groupings like BRICS and IBSA by its member states.\nFor some time\, the issue of reforming the UNSC is has moved to the backburner in the world dominated by economic issues and it is time to pursue the same along with other impending issues.\nPermanent seats in the Security Council are not decided on the basis of regional representation. Therefore\, it is a non-starter and this practice has to be discarded. At the same time\, deciding criteria for new members is like deciding a country’s candidature well in advance.\nThe question of veto power for new members is a non-starter for negotiations as the current P-5 is in no mood to offer it to new members. There should be some compromise on this contentious issue and final push has to come from the P-5 in this regard. Separately\, there is a debate on the use of veto power\, conditions under which it was introduced\, and the current need to retain it.\nSome critics are of the opinion that it is time India starts its candidature campaign as an individual country\, leaving behind the G-4 because the G-4 is not getting full support because of opposition to the candidature for some of its members like Japan and Germany.\nThere are doubts over Africa’s ability to reach consensus ever because of mutual suspicion and jealousy among African countries. Recently\, Senegal put forward its candidature for the UNSC membership as the only francophone African country.\nIt is natural for African countries to think that the UNSC lacks credibility and legitimacy as there is no permanent representation for Africa which is home to 54 countries.\n\nReport prepared by Babjee Pothuraju\, Research Assistant\, IDSA. URL:https://idsa.in/idsa-event/understanding-africas-position-on-un-security-council-reforms 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:20120413T053000 DTEND;TZID=Asia/Kolkata:20120413T053000 DTSTAMP:20261104T190746 CREATED:20231223T134406Z LAST-MODIFIED:20231224T130242Z UID:63173-1334295000-1334295000@idsa.in SUMMARY:The Growing Chinese Maritime Influence: Implications for Regional Security DESCRIPTION:Chairperson: Vice Admiral P S Das (Retd)Discussants: Cdr Kamlesh Agnihotri and Dr Krishnendra Meena \nIn order to understand the strategy adopted by China in spreading its maritime influence and implications for regional security\, the tenets espoused by Alfred Thayer Mahan and Julian Corbett have been studied in this paper. \nThe two great strategists differed from each other; whereas Mahan emphasised establishing Command of Sea\, Corbett focused more on denial of command of sea. Mahan advocated the Big Battle theory (requiring big Ships and Weapons); but Corbett believed in advance indicators before big battles will occur. Whilst Mahan looked at the sea as means to an end\, Corbett looked at a skilful combination of maritime and continental strategies. \nOn comparing the two strategists it was observed that the Chinese maritime thought process was heavily influenced by Mahan\, but there are also shades of Corbett’s ideas. \nChina\, in order to gain power\, has consolidated the strategies of Mahan and Corbett in the present era and its strategy is now based on three conjoined aspects—economics\, diplomacy and military expansion. \nThe importance of maritime strategy for China emerges in three ways: first\, breakaway from the coastal defence syndrome; second\, consolidation in the immediate area in the face of the Soviet threat and the presence of the US in Japan; and thirdly\, break away from the immediate area and enter into the outer areas. \nComparisons were drawn between China’s wish to absorb Taiwan and the US annexation of Hawaii Islands and expansion in US maritime influence post the world wars\, as these aspects hold important geostrategic indicators for China. \nIt was brought out that in order to expand its influence China must first gain the advantage of sea denial tactics through Submarines and Anti-Ship Ballistic Missiles (ASBM)\, second\, gain sea control through establishment of working control and control in dispute\, third\, China’s naval operations outside the first and second island chains would fall more into the category of presence and trade protection and finally\, the strategy of overseas bases which is followed by China in a subtle way in Myanmar\, Maldives\, Sri Lanka\, eastern coast of Africa\, etc.\nAs far as the future is concerned\, it was observed that with the steady increase in China’s defence budget\, a US-China conflict cannot be ruled out. Whereas the US will spread its assets all over the world\, China will concentrate only in areas of interest. \nConclusion: \n\nThe Mahan and Corbett views could have not foreseen subsequent technological advancements.\nLaws of the sea are interpreted by China according to its interest.\nChina is following more of Mahanian intent\, however capability gap still exist as compared to the US—in terms of technology the latter has an advantage. And till this gap is not bridged China will follow sea denial.\nConcept of Chinese navy is moving ahead in modernisation of manpower/capabilities\, building a professional navy. The idea of “removing the rust” is being followed in China. Anti Piracy law is used as a disguise for spreading its influence in the sea.\nChina was an inward looking civilization and the maritime outlook is a recent development\, hence Chinese naval expansion is infantile and it’s just a beginning. According to Selby Cohen\, ”geostrategically China since Post Cold War time has broken away from land oriented strategy to maritime.“ \nChina is not a sea faring society and therefore it is not re-emerging as a naval power as it was never a sea power earlier.\nChina is facing an expert naval force in the form of the US Navy therefore technology should be its priority rather than numbers. China is engaging with a vast number of nations (mostly economically weak) and investing in their land\, so that in future they can be used during war.\nThe national strategy and maritime strategy keep changing as capabilities increase.\nThere will be an arms race in future and the number of assets will be important; further instability in the maritime world will continue to exist.\n\nSuggestions for the Paper: \n\nThe title of the paper should be revisited/ revised in order to describe the actual study undertaken in the paper. \nThe paper should consult Chinese writings like the 1993 ‘Military Strategic Guidelines’\, which discuss the role of the PLA Navy\, the guidelines provided by Hu Jintao in 2004\, and Gorshkov’s four roles for the Soviet navy must be studied.  \nHistoric missions and strategic guidelines should be amalgamated in the paper.\nComparison between the US\, UK and China could be avoided as the US perspective is more alarmist than is the actual reality.\nImplications for India and other regions must be discussed.\nSome mention of the South China Sea and China’s influence in the region must be discussed.\nElaboration on the regions involved in maritime issues is required. \n\nReport Prepared by Soumya Tiwari\, Research Intern\, Centre for Military Affairs URL:https://idsa.in/idsa-event/the-growing-chinese-maritime-influence-implications-for-regional-security 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