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:20070101T000000
END:STANDARD
END:VTIMEZONE
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Asia/Kolkata:20080412T053000
DTEND;TZID=Asia/Kolkata:20080412T053000
DTSTAMP:20261105T191446
CREATED:20231223T222748Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20231224T130252Z
UID:63797-1207978200-1207978200@idsa.in
SUMMARY:Climate Change and India: Building Scenarios to and beyond 2012
DESCRIPTION:Chair: Arvind Gupta\nDiscussants: Dinesh K Patnaik & M Padma Suresh
URL:https://idsa.in/idsa-event/climate-change-and-india-building-scenarios-to-and-beyond-2012
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:20080412T053000
DTEND;TZID=Asia/Kolkata:20080412T053000
DTSTAMP:20261105T191446
CREATED:20231223T222753Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20231224T130252Z
UID:63798-1207978200-1207978200@idsa.in
SUMMARY:Pakistan-European Relations: Examining the Islamic Radicalisation Phenomenon
DESCRIPTION:Chair: Thomas Mathew\nDiscussants: Rahul K Bhonsle & Indranil Banerjie
URL:https://idsa.in/idsa-event/pakistan-european-relations-examining-the-islamic-radicalisation-phenomenon
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:20080419T053000
DTEND;TZID=Asia/Kolkata:20080419T053000
DTSTAMP:20261105T191446
CREATED:20231223T222747Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20231224T130252Z
UID:63793-1208583000-1208583000@idsa.in
SUMMARY:Building on the Naga Peace Process: Lessons from Mizoram
DESCRIPTION:Chair: R N Kapur\nDiscussant: Bhagat Oinam
URL:https://idsa.in/idsa-event/building-on-the-naga-peace-process-lessons-from-mizoram
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:20080419T053000
DTEND;TZID=Asia/Kolkata:20080419T053000
DTSTAMP:20261105T191446
CREATED:20231223T222747Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20231224T130252Z
UID:63794-1208583000-1208583000@idsa.in
SUMMARY:Cross-Border Linkages of Insurgencies in Indo-Myanmar Relations
DESCRIPTION:Chair: Sujit Dutta\nDiscussants: Baladas Ghoshal & P S Grewal
URL:https://idsa.in/idsa-event/cross-border-linkages-of-insurgencies-in-indo-myanmar-relations
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:20080426T053000
DTEND;TZID=Asia/Kolkata:20080426T053000
DTSTAMP:20261105T191446
CREATED:20231223T222742Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20231224T130252Z
UID:63786-1209187800-1209187800@idsa.in
SUMMARY:Rise of Religious Right in Bangladesh Politics: A Case Study of Jama'at-i-Islami
DESCRIPTION:Chair: Veena Sikri\nDiscussants: Kalim Bahadur & G Dharmendra
URL:https://idsa.in/idsa-event/rise-of-religious-right-in-bangladesh-politics-a-case-study-of-jamaat-i-islami
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:20080426T053000
DTEND;TZID=Asia/Kolkata:20080426T053000
DTSTAMP:20261105T191446
CREATED:20231223T222742Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20231224T130252Z
UID:63787-1209187800-1209187800@idsa.in
SUMMARY:Japan And Regionalism: Study of Its Approach Towards Eas And Eac
DESCRIPTION:Chair: Sujit Dutta\nDiscussants: K V Kesavan & Srinivas Gotru
URL:https://idsa.in/idsa-event/japan-and-regionalism-study-of-its-approach-towards-eas-and-eac
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:20080503T053000
DTEND;TZID=Asia/Kolkata:20080503T053000
DTSTAMP:20261105T191446
CREATED:20231223T222737Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20231224T130252Z
UID:63782-1209792600-1209792600@idsa.in
SUMMARY:Topic: Evolution of Road Network in the Northeast: Drivers and Brake
DESCRIPTION:Chair: Ved Marwah\nDiscussants: Jatinderbir & Rahul K Bhonsle
URL:https://idsa.in/idsa-event/topic-evolution-of-road-network-in-the-northeast-drivers-and-brake
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:20080509T053000
DTEND;TZID=Asia/Kolkata:20080509T053000
DTSTAMP:20261105T191446
CREATED:20231223T222737Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20231224T130252Z
UID:63780-1210311000-1210311000@idsa.in
SUMMARY:Topic: Examining the Case for Expanding the UN Security Council
DESCRIPTION:Chair: Arundhati Ghose\nDiscussant: Tasneem Meenai
URL:https://idsa.in/idsa-event/topic-examining-the-case-for-expanding-the-un-security-council
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:20080509T053000
DTEND;TZID=Asia/Kolkata:20080509T053000
DTSTAMP:20261105T191446
CREATED:20231223T222737Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20231224T130252Z
UID:63781-1210311000-1210311000@idsa.in
SUMMARY:Assessing India's Defence Offset Policy
DESCRIPTION:Chair: Thomas Mathew\nDiscussants: Vinod Kumar Misra & Satyajeet Rajan
URL:https://idsa.in/idsa-event/assessing-indias-defence-offset-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:20080516T053000
DTEND;TZID=Asia/Kolkata:20080516T053000
DTSTAMP:20261105T191446
CREATED:20231223T222737Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20231224T130252Z
UID:63779-1210915800-1210915800@idsa.in
SUMMARY:Topic: Changing Political Dynamics in Malaysia: Impact on Ethnic Minorities
DESCRIPTION:Chair: Ranjit Gupta\nDiscussants: G V C Naidu & C S Kuppuswamy
URL:https://idsa.in/idsa-event/topic-changing-political-dynamics-in-malaysia-impact-on-ethnic-minorities
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:20080523T053000
DTEND;TZID=Asia/Kolkata:20080523T053000
DTSTAMP:20261105T191446
CREATED:20231223T222718Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20231224T130252Z
UID:63778-1211520600-1211520600@idsa.in
SUMMARY:A Critical Evaluation of Union Government Response to Maoist Challenge
DESCRIPTION:Chair: Ved Marwah\nDiscussant: Prakash Singh
URL:https://idsa.in/idsa-event/a-critical-evaluation-of-union-government-response-to-maoist-challenge
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:20080523T053000
DTEND;TZID=Asia/Kolkata:20080523T053000
DTSTAMP:20261105T191446
CREATED:20231224T105200Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20231224T105200Z
UID:64266-1211520600-1211520600@idsa.in
SUMMARY:Africa's Changing Security Architecture: A Case for India-Africa Security Dialogue
DESCRIPTION:Chair: Arvind Gupta\nDiscussants: Gurmeet Kanwal & Ajay K Dubey
URL:https://idsa.in/idsa-event/africas-changing-security-architecture-a-case-for-india-africa-security-dialogue-2
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:20080530T053000
DTEND;TZID=Asia/Kolkata:20080530T053000
DTSTAMP:20261105T191446
CREATED:20231223T222717Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20231224T130252Z
UID:63775-1212125400-1212125400@idsa.in
SUMMARY:China's 'RMA Driven Military Modernization': What it Implies for India?
DESCRIPTION:Chair: V.P. Dutt\nDiscussants: Madhu Bhalla & Vinod Anand
URL:https://idsa.in/idsa-event/chinas-rma-driven-military-modernization-what-it-implies-for-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:20080530T053000
DTEND;TZID=Asia/Kolkata:20080530T053000
DTSTAMP:20261105T191446
CREATED:20231223T222717Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20231224T130252Z
UID:63776-1212125400-1212125400@idsa.in
SUMMARY:PLA Integration into the Nepal Army: Challenges and Prospects
DESCRIPTION:Chair: Arvind Gupta\nDiscussants: Y M Bammi & Siddarth Varadarajan
URL:https://idsa.in/idsa-event/pla-integration-into-the-nepal-army-challenges-and-prospects
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:20080606T053000
DTEND;TZID=Asia/Kolkata:20080606T053000
DTSTAMP:20261105T191446
CREATED:20231223T222713Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20231224T130251Z
UID:63773-1212730200-1212730200@idsa.in
SUMMARY:Export Controls and India
DESCRIPTION:Chair: K. Santhanam\nDiscussants: Anupam Srivastava & Pallava Bagla
URL:https://idsa.in/idsa-event/export-controls-and-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:20080606T053000
DTEND;TZID=Asia/Kolkata:20080606T053000
DTSTAMP:20261105T191446
CREATED:20231223T222717Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20231224T130252Z
UID:63774-1212730200-1212730200@idsa.in
SUMMARY:China's Growing Engagement with Central Asian Republics: Implications for India
DESCRIPTION:Chair: V.P. Dutt\nDiscussants: Madhu Bhalla & Nandan Unnikrishnan
URL:https://idsa.in/idsa-event/chinas-growing-engagement-with-central-asian-republics-implications-for-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:20080613T053000
DTEND;TZID=Asia/Kolkata:20080613T053000
DTSTAMP:20261105T191446
CREATED:20231223T222712Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20231224T130251Z
UID:63772-1213335000-1213335000@idsa.in
SUMMARY:Emerging Challenges In Combating Terrorist Financing
DESCRIPTION:Chair: Arvind Gupta\nDiscussants: Ravi Sawhney & Vivek Wadekar
URL:https://idsa.in/idsa-event/emerging-challenges-in-combating-terrorist-financing
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:20080620T053000
DTEND;TZID=Asia/Kolkata:20080620T053000
DTSTAMP:20261105T191446
CREATED:20231223T222712Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20231224T130251Z
UID:63770-1213939800-1213939800@idsa.in
SUMMARY:The Tibet Crisis
DESCRIPTION:Chair: Sujit Dutta\nDiscussants: Mohan Guruswamy & Bhaskar Roy
URL:https://idsa.in/idsa-event/the-tibet-crisis
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:20080620T053000
DTEND;TZID=Asia/Kolkata:20080620T053000
DTSTAMP:20261105T191446
CREATED:20231223T222712Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20231224T130251Z
UID:63771-1213939800-1213939800@idsa.in
SUMMARY:Al Qaeda and Nuclear Weapons Understanding the Quest
DESCRIPTION:Chair: Ranjit Gupta\nDiscussants: V K Nair & J Madhan Mohan
URL:https://idsa.in/idsa-event/al-qaeda-and-nuclear-weapons-understanding-the-quest
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:20080627T053000
DTEND;TZID=Asia/Kolkata:20080627T053000
DTSTAMP:20261105T191446
CREATED:20231223T222643Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20231224T130251Z
UID:63768-1214544600-1214544600@idsa.in
SUMMARY:Jamaat and its Agenda of Islamic State in Bangladesh
DESCRIPTION:Chair: Professor Kalim Bahadur\nDiscussants: Veena Sikri & Bhaskar Roy
URL:https://idsa.in/idsa-event/jamaat-and-its-agenda-of-islamic-state-in-bangladesh
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:20080801T053000
DTEND;TZID=Asia/Kolkata:20080801T053000
DTSTAMP:20261105T191446
CREATED:20231223T222642Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20231224T130251Z
UID:63764-1217568600-1217568600@idsa.in
SUMMARY:Can Regional Energy Cooperation in South Asia be enhanced?
DESCRIPTION:Chair: Sujit Dutta\nDiscussants: Ram Upendra Das & Prashant Agrawal
URL:https://idsa.in/idsa-event/can-regional-energy-cooperation-in-south-asia-be-enhanced
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:20080801T053000
DTEND;TZID=Asia/Kolkata:20080801T053000
DTSTAMP:20261105T191446
CREATED:20231223T222642Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20231224T130251Z
UID:63765-1217568600-1217568600@idsa.in
SUMMARY:Pakistan's Approach to Kashmir since Lahore Agreement : Is there any change?
DESCRIPTION:Chair: N.S. Sisodia\nDiscussants: Satish Chandra & R Rajagopalan
URL:https://idsa.in/idsa-event/pakistans-approach-to-kashmir-since-lahore-agreement-is-there-any-change
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:20080808T053000
DTEND;TZID=Asia/Kolkata:20080808T053000
DTSTAMP:20261105T191446
CREATED:20231223T222624Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20231224T130251Z
UID:63762-1218173400-1218173400@idsa.in
SUMMARY:Pakistan's Energy Security: Challenges and Options
DESCRIPTION:Chair: Arvind Gupta\nDiscussants: G Balachandran & Savita Pande
URL:https://idsa.in/idsa-event/pakistans-energy-security-challenges-and-options
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:20080808T053000
DTEND;TZID=Asia/Kolkata:20080808T053000
DTSTAMP:20261105T191446
CREATED:20231223T222624Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20231224T130251Z
UID:63763-1218173400-1218173400@idsa.in
SUMMARY:Special Forces for Anti - Naxal Operations: an Assessment of the Security Environment
DESCRIPTION:Chair: Ved Marwah\nDiscussants: J N Roy & D M Mitra
URL:https://idsa.in/idsa-event/special-forces-for-anti-naxal-operations-an-assessment-of-the-security-environment
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:20080822T053000
DTEND;TZID=Asia/Kolkata:20080822T053000
DTSTAMP:20261105T191446
CREATED:20231223T222619Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20231224T130251Z
UID:63758-1219383000-1219383000@idsa.in
SUMMARY:China's Discourse on Regionalism
DESCRIPTION:Chair: V P Dutt\nDiscussants: S K Bhutani & Baladas Ghoshal
URL:https://idsa.in/idsa-event/chinas-discourse-on-regionalism
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:20080822T053000
DTEND;TZID=Asia/Kolkata:20080822T053000
DTSTAMP:20261105T191446
CREATED:20231223T222624Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20231224T130251Z
UID:63759-1219383000-1219383000@idsa.in
SUMMARY:Talking to the Taliban: Will it Ensure 'Peace' in Afghanistan?
DESCRIPTION:Chair: V G Patankar\nDiscussants: Shakti Sinha & Gurmeet Kanwal
URL:https://idsa.in/idsa-event/talking-to-the-taliban-will-it-ensure-peace-in-afghanistan
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:20080829T053000
DTEND;TZID=Asia/Kolkata:20080829T053000
DTSTAMP:20261105T191446
CREATED:20231223T222619Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20231224T130251Z
UID:63755-1219987800-1219987800@idsa.in
SUMMARY:Confronting the Threat in Cyberspace
DESCRIPTION:Chair: Thomas MathewDiscussants: Prem Chand & Subimal Bhattacharjee  \nThe central premises of the paper presenter were that governements were neglecting the current threats on the Internet not out negligance but because these threats were too diffuse and inchoate. This prevented a appropriate and timely response from the state to this threat. There was a tendency to approach these threats as law and order problem \, or technology problem\, whereas they are of a much higher order\, and could impact on national security. \nThere were two parts to the equation of securing cyberspace. One was premised on the definition that “Cyberspace is composed of hundreds of thousands of interconnected computers\, servers\, routers\, switches\, and fiber optic cables that allow our critical infrastructures to work.”. Over the years\, ensuring the security and integrity of the networks that connect critical infrastructure has become of paramount importance since crucial sectors such as the financial\, energy\, transportation and telecommunications sectors are connected through cyber networks. This applies to India as well with core areas of the Indian economy\, from the financial markets to the banking sector\, to telecommunications are networked\, and other areas such as energy distribution and transportation are headed in that direction. \nA second part of the equation\, but one that has proved to be problematic when it comes to implementation\, has been securing the Internet\, the vast network of networks\, which has now become synonymous with cyberspace. Users of the Internet\, an estimated 1.5 billion of the world’s population\, vary from individuals to corporations to governments\, all of whom use the same pipes for the transmission of some or all of their data and communications. \nThe rise in the Internet population has meant that while the threats and vulnerabilities inherent to the Internet and Cyberspace might have remained more or less the same as before\, the probability of disruption has grown apace with the rise in the number of users. At the same time\, the nature of the Internet\, with all the characteristics of a “global commons” means that no nation can unilaterally take on the responsibility of defending or policing networks owned variously by nation states\, commercial companies and individuals. In fact\, cyberspace is characterised by blurred boundaries; there are no clear demarcations between civilian and military\, state and non-state\, and foreign and domestic as in other domains. It is those same characteristics that make it an ideal medium for committing malafide activities which can have repercussions for national and international security. \nCharacteristics of the Internet\nIt is akin to a Global Commons where no nation can unilaterally take on the responsibility of defending or policing networks owned variously by nation states\, commercial companies and individuals; it has blurred boundaries where there are no clear demarcations between civilian and military\, state and non-state\, and foreign and domestic and: the architecture of the Internetas it has evolved is that of an open all-inclusive\, decentralised environment. Part of the problem is that the Internet’s organic evolution meant that security was not a consideration and trying to bring ina secure internet environment is like bolting the stable door after the horses have bolted. \nInternet War\nThis has led to Internet War or I-War which can be described as a low-intensity war where actors unkown are exploiting “the ubiquitous low security” internet infrastructure to target users with malware that compromises their systems and networks. These attacks take advantages of the bugs and vulnerabilities in software\, systems and networks and are perpetrated though the machinations of a hacker-criminal network-state nexus. \nThe Hacker-Criminal Network-State nexus\nCriminal networks have\, over the years\, professionalised the business of discovering and exploiting weaknesses in software that allow them to undertake a variety of actions ranging from taking control of those computers\, accessing information on those computers or rendering them unusable. Whilst hackers provide the technical expertise\, existing international criminal networks have learnt how to squeeze the maximum out of these compromised computers\, and have turnovers estimated in the billions of dollars. Whilst this would remain at the level of criminal activity\, it has acquired dangerous proportions and impinges on national security when a state-criminal network-hacker nexus builds up. There is enough circumstantial evidence to show that some states have turned a blind eye to cyber-space centred criminal and illegal activities\, perceiving certain advantages to be had from building up such a capacity. The means\, motivation and objectives and approaches to I-War are examined in greater detail in two case studies. \nInternational Responses to I-War\nWhile I-War might seem to be blown out of proportion when compared to the actual disruption it causes at present\, it provides sufficient indication that the threats of the future are vastly different from that envisioned by national security planners. The blurred boundaries and the anonymity provided by cyber-space make it difficult to pin responsibility for such attacks\, which\, going by current trends\, will be perpetrated by individuals\, networks\, communities and organisations\, with the state acting as facilitator\, and nationalistic fervour providing the motivation. \nGovernments have found it hard put to grapple with the complex issues of I-War\, though some are increasingly cognizant of its implications for national security. Among the possible measures that can be taken are the following: i)international treaties and agreements that clearly spell out what constitutes legal and illegal activities on the Internet should be worked out; ii)states such as Russia and China should be encouraged to ensure that international norms of behaviour are followed and iii) The CERT mechanism that provides a useful interface between government\, private sector and individuals should be implemented in countries where they don’t yet exist\, and there should be better co-ordination and sharing of information among existing CERTs . \nConclusion\nWhilst analysts have been tom-tomming the impending arrival of cyberwar with vivid imagery of the collapse of critical infrastructure\, the ongoing battle in the Internet space is much less noticeable but has equally important ramifications for national security. The means\, the motivation and the actors have come together in a combination that presages ever increasing I-War. It is for those at the receiving end to take urgent remedial action which does not mean responding in kind\, but by addressing the technical and legal lacunae in cyberspace that allows criminal elements to flourish\, and illegal activities to go unpunished. This should be done in consultation with all stake holders including national governments\, private sector companies and information infrastructure providers. While this would not end the problem completely\, it would mitigate it somewhat\, and might prevent other countries from going down the route of I-War. \nDiscussion\nAmong the points that came up in the discussion that followed the presentation were the following: \n\nEnsuring Information Security is a 21st century nightmare.\nFailure of the defences and the increasing profits from such practices has led to an increase in cyber crime.\nNetwork Security id dead. The need is to address Applications security…only 9% of software vulnerabilities are being addressed\nThe need is to divert focus on the question as to what the next level of security should be. More research is required in the domain of information warfare weapons and the issue of leakages in the war room.\nEconomic security is as important as national security.\nIt is premature to link the subject of cyber threat to nationalism.\nAs a country India has a fair lead in the realm of information technology.\nEMP or the electro magnetic pulse is an alternative to nuclear capability.\nThe information structures both at the national and global level should be studied.\nTen years back the American literature dominated the subject of cyber security. Gradually however other countries have also shown interest in the same.\nThere is practically no international mechanism for cooperation in this area except for the World Summit of UN Secretary General.\nIndividual is increasingly getting linked with national security.\nA great deal of academic work needs to be done in the field of cyber security to facilitate better understanding and comprehend the threat.\nCyber threat would be a potent one in the twenty first century be it national security\, education or health.\nIndia’s security domains are attacked by China on an everyday basis.\nTreaties and multinational forums should be fostered to reduce and ultimately eliminate the threat.\nIn this regard the IT Act of the year 2007 had many deficiencies which require attention.
URL:https://idsa.in/idsa-event/confronting-the-threat-in-cyberspace
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:20080905T053000
DTEND;TZID=Asia/Kolkata:20080905T053000
DTSTAMP:20261105T191446
CREATED:20231223T222619Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20231224T130251Z
UID:63754-1220592600-1220592600@idsa.in
SUMMARY:Role of Biotechnology in Defence
DESCRIPTION:Chair: B S SacharDiscussants: B M Gandhi & Sachin Chaturvedi  \nIn the 21st century\, the science of biology has been found adopting various techniques from other fields of life to improve its effectiveness. Modern-day biotechnology could be regarded as a multidisciplinary field where its utility has grown beyond traditional uses like agriculture and medicine. This draft paper by Ajey Lele\, Research Fellow at IDSA\, looks at the relevance of biotechnology for modern day militaries both from offensive and defensive perspectives. Major applications of biotechnology extending for their militaristic utility mainly fall into categories like sensors; electronics and computing; materials; logistics and therapeutics. This paper is divided into four main parts. Part I looks at the relevance of biotechnology with reference to the debate on ‘germ threats’. The second part deals with the defence related medical and non-medical aspects of this technology and the third part focuses on military investments made by few important states in this field. The last part takes a macro-view of disarmament issues.  \nRelevance of biotechnology for bio weapons/ bio terrorism \nIn general\, two main types of groups/individuals could be said to be in a position to apply the advanced techniques of biotechnology for the purposes of bio-terrorism. The first category could be the state sponsored international terrorist organizations undertaking such act with the help of the sponsor state possessing covert BW programme. The second type could be the disgruntled scientists working at clinical microbiology laboratory or academic laboratory involved in some aspect of microbiological research. She/he may do it just to prove a point or as an act of defiance against her/his own organization or because of influence from any terrorist organization.  \nCurrent research in biotechnology parallels earlier research in the nuclear field in the 1940s and 1950s. The database developed for nuclear technology was applicable for both military and industrial purposes. Similarly\, the database being developed for commercial genetic engineering in the fields of agriculture\, animal husbandry\, and medicine is potentially convertible to the development of a wide range of novel pathogens that can attack plant\, animal\, and human populations. Because of these advancements in various areas related to biotechnology and genetic engineering there exists a possibility that biological warfare could gain importance as a viable option not only amongst the terrorist organizations but covertly among some state actors too. \nIn the years ahead\, the use of biotechnology to create bioweapons will become far more powerful\, more available and less expensive. Engineering\, computing\, and the capital markets will push biology forward on a rapid trajectory. What used to take a highly skilled team of scientists to accomplish can now be done in rapid fashion with automated kits within few hours. Industrial techniques allow the cheap production of pathogens or toxins to tonnage quantities in places around the world. Historically\, it has been seen that all current inventions have found suitable applicability in the business of warfare. In case of futuristic bioweapons the only dilemma could be will terrorist organizations opt for this technology?  \nBiotechnological Weapons\nHow to turn modern biotechnology to make actual weapons is still not known\, but with their capability of attacking targets accurately and producing ultramicro\, non-lethal\, and reversible damage\, such weapons might finally change the methods of “physical annihilation” or “destruction within the killing range” which have characterized war since the invention of gunpowder. Today\, scientists are of the opinion that we can use many modern biotechnologies directly as a means of defence and attack\, and with further development\, they probably will become new weapons systems.  \nTechnically speaking war is simply the human behaviour that forces enemies to lose the power of resistance. It could be possible to create biological weapons which could alter the biological features of human bodies. It could be possible to create biotechnological weapons that can cause destruction that is more powerful and more civilized than that caused by conventional killing methods like gunpowder or nuclear weapons. However\, an important thing to note is that the military utility of biotechnology is likely to grow beyond biological weapons and medical protection. It is likely to revel a character of aggression not thought of till date.  \nBiotechnology and Biodefence\nVarious techniques exist today within the field of biotechnology which have direct or indirect relevance for biodefence. Processes like the automation of sequencing in genome projects\, bioinformatics\, and advances in combinational chemistry and high throughput screening of compounds are on the forefront in this arena. They are being developed for civilian application in medicine\, pharmaceuticals\, and agriculture\, as well as for purposes that are legitimate under the BTWC\, such as defence\, detection\, protection\, and prophylaxis. Biotechnology has been vital to the development of techniques for identifying and diagnosing diseases and for medical counter-measures. Moreover the recent advances in biotechnology offer a real opportunity for the development of effective counter-measures to biological and toxin weapons agents. From a biosecurity perspective\, vaccine development and production has great strategic value. \nMedical and Non-medical Aspects of BT\nFollowing are the broad areas in various medical and non-medical categories for military where biotechnology can be used in some manner  \n\nTherapeutics: Genomics and proteomics; drugs and vaccines; drug delivery systems \nElectronics and Computing: Protein based devices; biocomputing; biomolecular hybrid devices \nMaterials: Tissue engineering; biologically inspired materials and processes; hybrid materials \nLogistics: Miniaturizations of biological devices; functional foods; biological energy sources; renewable resources \n\nMilitary investments made by few important states\nUnderstanding the need for the induction of emerging technologies\, armed forces around the world have started investing in various strategic technologies. However\, in respect of biotechnology\, the interest appears to be still in an embryonic stage. The reasons for this could be many. Today\, biotechnology is still under the process of evolution. The growth of technology offers many promises but it still does not offer substantial solutions to existing military problems. And this could be the reason for the absence of interest in most of the cases. However\, as states have slowly started realizing that juxtaposing this technology with other technologies like nanotechnology could offer many dividends to military they have started investing in it. \nApart from the US\, states like China are looking at the military applicability of this technology. Only few states are showing overt interest in this field. However\, dual-use nature of this technology demand a ‘read between the line’ approach to understand the military intentions of various nation-states in respect of this technology.  \nChina’s overall technological capabilities have increased dramatically since its reform programme began in the late 1970s. However\, no direct indications are available about their interests in using biotechnology for military purposes. At the same time China understands that biotechnology has obvious military implications as a means for developing biological weapons and also providing defence against biological weapons. The military biotechnology may found its applicability in areas like non-lethal weapons. Here a possibility exists that microbes capable of destroying the fuel supplies of the enemy could be developed. \nChina’s main sources of biotech growth are expected to be in bio-agriculture\, genomic sequencing\, biochips\, traditional medicines\, bioinformatics\, stem cell research\, and bio-manufacturing. China is also making substantial investments in Agriculture biotechnology which it considers as a strategically significant tool for improving national food security.  \nBiotechnology and Disarmament\nThere exists an apparent linkage between the growth of biotechnology and development of biological or agriculture weapons. In future non-lethal biological agents could also be used as incapacitants under certain circumstances. This exponential growth of technology demands focused attention from the disarmament regime. In the present era\, it would be a profound mistake to see genomics as simply a scientific revolution. It could have both positive as well as negative impacts on the survival of the mankind. The entire spectra of biotechnologies could likely have major impact on creation of new biological weapons. \nConclusion\nBiotechnology has shown immense potential for its utility in various facets of life and military is no exception. Scientists and military leadership are increasingly finding its utility for militaristic purposes. At the same time this technology is raising fears because of many of its potential negative consequences.  \nBiotechnology and its products have created some amazing possibilities for military particularly in the area of sensor technology\, biocomputing\, protection of C4ISR\, Bioengineered materials\, biofuels\, etc. Induction of biotechnoogy in such areas is expected to bring radical changes to a broad range of military applications and even few military tactics could have to be redefined with the induction of this technology. Looking at the potential of this technology\, there is a need to invest more in military’s biomaterials needs.  \nUnfortunately\, the growth of BT has a darker side too and that is its potential to create bioweapons. Today\, due to the competitive nature of technology business houses are also found reluctant to provide information that could compromise their economic edge. Hence\, the biggest challenge exists to allow the growth of technology without letting it into the wrong hands. It is expected that in future\, the science of biotechnology itself may come in handy to tackle the threats posed by advances in biotechnology.  \nDiscussion\nWg. Cdr. Lele presented this paper as part of the IDSA Weekly Fellows’ Seminar series. The seminar was chaired by Brig. B. S. Sachar\, Senior Fellow at IDSA. Two external discussants were invited to provide their comments on the paper: Dr. B.M. Gandhi who is a biotechnologist and CEO of NeoMed Services\, and Dr. Sachin Chaturvedi who works at the Research and Information Systems for Developing Countries. In addition\, Dr. Uttam Sinha\, Research Fellow at IDSA\, was also invited to be a discussant. Some of the points raised during the course of the discussion are as below: \n\nBiotechnology industry surpasses the Aerospace industry. \nIndia is at a nascent stage of development in the field of biotechnology. \nOne needs to be more concerned regarding the non-scientific applications of the technology. \nBiotechnology should not be seen in isolation. \nOne the most significant questions today is as to who can use a biological weapon? \nBTWC does not provide enough space to control existing developments in the field of biotechnology. \nSAARC should be used as a forum where these issues should be discussed at the regional level. \nOne needs to highlight the politics involved in biotechnology and also look at the geo-politics of biotechnology. \nBiotechnology is likely to be a lead technology in the 21st Century. \nIt is necessary to highlight how useful or dubious existing international treaties are.\nIndia today is facing a number of problems related to biotechnology. \nThere is a need to dwell upon Agro-terrorism. \nPharmaceutical companies can also indulge in the spread of a biological agent for this can help them attain high levels of profits. \nThe biotechnology threat is increasing exponentially and there is a need to analyze the threat and also to get solutions and preventions. \nPrepared by Gunjan Singh\, Research Assistant at the Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses\, New Delhi.
URL:https://idsa.in/idsa-event/role-of-biotechnology-in-defence
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:20080912T053000
DTEND;TZID=Asia/Kolkata:20080912T053000
DTSTAMP:20261105T191446
CREATED:20231223T222539Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20231224T130251Z
UID:63752-1221197400-1221197400@idsa.in
SUMMARY:India and the Non-Proliferation Regime: Looking Beyond the Nuclear Deal
DESCRIPTION:Chair: G BalachandranDiscussants: K C Singh & R R Subramanian  \nThe India-United States civil nuclear cooperation agreement\, announced through the July 18\, 2005 joint statement\, besides opening the doors for global nuclear commerce\, is seen as a means to facilitate India’s greater integration with the global non-proliferation regime. India was always credited to be an adherent of the regime’s norms\, but was deemed an outsider owing to its non-membership in the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT)\, which is seen as the cornerstone of the regime. Through the nuclear agreement\, the U.S. had volunteered to assist this assimilation process\, the latest development being the India-specific exemption at the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG).  \nThe emergent global nuclear order and the NPT\nAs a Cold War arrangement\, the NPT sustained one of the most established international bargains whereby states without nuclear weapons pledged not to acquire them\, while existing nuclear weapon states committed to eventually give them up. However\, in the past four decades\, the Treaty had attained the tag of being a system with unfulfilled objectives outnumbering its achieved goals\, and failures accumulating as each of its articles were being violated with impunity. The Treaty was no longer seen to have the capability to address newer security threats arising out of a post 9/11 world\, influenced by non-state actors and an increasing number of threshold states. What looked more portentous was the imbalance a non-state actor would inflict on the non-proliferation regime and the NPT\, which were equipped only to handle the proliferation problem arising from states. Forty years later\, the Treaty might pride on its record of restricting new weapons states to three or four. But as of today\, the instances of non-compliance and likelihood of more threshold states emerging on the scene have increased\, partly due to the security deficit created by current geo-politics. \nIndia’s rendezvous with the non-proliferation regime\nFrom its early days of disarmament activism\, India had envisioned a third world leadership role for itself in the evolving non-proliferation regime\, and vociferously advocated the non-dissemination of nuclear weapons technology. In the early 1960s\, as a member of the Eighteen Nation Disarmament Committee (ENDC)\, India influenced the debate for a Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and argued for a credible bargain whereby weapon powers would give up their arsenals while ensuring that others refrained from developing or acquiring such weapons. But when the grand bargain became discriminatory\, India decided to stay away from the NPT. India’s decision to conduct a Peaceful Nuclear Explosion experiment was seen as the first challenge to the non-proliferation regime\, which invoked new mechanisms like the NSG to add to what the Zangger Committee had already initiated. \nIndia and the NPT: Towards Convergence or Drifting Apart?\nThe genesis of India’s confrontation with the NPT can be traced to the political power play enacted during the negotiations for the Treaty. Even before Ireland submitted a draft resolution to the General Assembly\, India had launched its campaign calling for steps to stop the spread of nuclear weapons and exhorted weapon states to take the initiative\, failing which non-nuclear nations would be tempted to acquire nuclear weapons. India was upset that the Irish draft talked of prohibiting acquisition of nuclear weapons\, but imposed no restriction on its continued manufacture and maintenance. Later\, India joined seven nations in the ENDC to submit a resolution (GA 2028 [XX]) with five principles of which the key ones were:  \n– The Treaty should be void of any loopholes for countries to proliferate;  \n– It should embody an acceptable balance of responsibilities and obligations;  \n– It should be a step towards complete disarmament. \nThe Other Challenges \nThough India could be prodded to think of campaigning for reforms in the NPT\, there are other areas like the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT)\, on which India would have serious reservations in its current form.  \nCTBT: India had vociferously argued for a test-ban\, along with a fissile production cut-off\, as part of its campaign to stop the production and development of nuclear weapons during the initial NPT debate. This was in consonance with its 1954 proposal calling for end to nuclear weapons testing. At the 1996 Conference on Disarmament\, India\, along with members of G-21\, proposed a Programme of Action for the phased elimination of nuclear weapons by 2020. However\, during the CTBT negotiations\, weapon states refused to agree to any commitment on disarmament and pushed for a test ban while insisting on the Entry into Force clause (XIV)\, which required India along with specified countries to join the Treaty before it became operational. \nFMCT: A key element of the July 2005 joint statement was India’s cooperation in negotiations for concluding a Fissile Materials Cut-Off Treaty (FMCT). India had strongly advocated a fissile production cut off in the NPT debate\, but later on resisted an FMCT owing to its potential impact on its own nuclear weapons programme. Differences over issues like time-bound disarmament had led to stalemate in negotiations. After initial opposition arguing that an FMCT would curtail its nuclear weapons programme\, India announced in 1998 its willingness to participate in the negotiations. There are some issues to be factored in India’s policy towards FMCT: (a) Does India have sufficient fissile material for its credible deterrent? (2) If not\, can it be mobilised before the Treaty is ratified? (3) Would the Treaty benefit disarmament or would it be used to curtail the strategic capability of countries like India? \nMTCR: Another commitment of similar character was compliance with the Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR). Though India has updated its national controls lists with that of MTCR Annex\, it is still treated as an outsider by the MTCR community for its defiance in pursuing its guided missile development programme. However\, the merit in India’s case is that it had managed to develop its missile systems indigenously and also resisted transfer of missile systems to another country.  \nConclusion\nWith the nuclear deal and NSG waiver\, India is moving towards greater integration with the non-proliferation regime. By doing so\, it would join ranks with the United States in evolving a new nuclear security order. However\, the more India’s proximity with global non-proliferation objectives\, the more would be the policy challenges on crucial issues connected with anti-proliferation. Irrespective of the success and acceptability of a new order\, the instruments of the old order would continue to hold significance in nuclear politics. As an active member of the non-proliferation regime\, India would have to initiate a dialogue with these instruments to ensure that its bonding with the regime is sustained. \nThe NPT continues to be the cornerstone of the global non-proliferation regime\, despite its many shortcomings. Being a near-universal mechanism\, the Treaty would continue to hold its primacy in global nuclear affairs. Though India managed to resist calls for membership all these years\, its stakes and responsibilities would increase with its weapon power status and greater access to nuclear commerce. On the other hand\, India has to realise that the driving spirit that motivated it to advocate the NPT and CTBT are still relevant. For decades\, Indians have seen NPT as discriminatory so much so that even a rethink is now seen as blasphemous. \nDiscussion\nA. Vinod Kumar presented this paper as part of the IDSA Weekly Fellows’ Seminar series. The seminar was chaired by Dr. G. Balachandran\, Visiting Fellow at IDSA. Discussants in this seminar were Dr. R. R. Subramanian\, former Senior Research Associate at IDSA and a renowned strategic analyst and Mr. K. C. Singh\, IFS (Retd.). Mr. Sujit Dutta\, Senior Fellow at IDSA and Dr. Rajiv Nayan\, Research Officer at IDSA\, also offered special comments as Discussants. Important points flagged during the discussion were: \n\nA favourable balance has to be struck between pragmatism and idealism on issues related to non-proliferation. \nIdeological and practical aspects are an important dimension of the debate on NPT. \nThere should be a degree of caution in the way the nuclear deal is looked at. US posturing may be different from action and the idea might be to target India’s strategic programme. US is no longer a superpower but a hyper power; and it has no friends but only allies. Therefore there should be an element of scepticism in the way the nuclear agreement is perceived. One has to keep in mid the ‘trade offs’ in such arrangements. \nThere is a debate on moralism versus pragmatism as India has been an over-moralising country in the past due to the Gandhian and Nehruvian legacy. Moralising kept India away from realpolitik for a long time. However\, the moral strategy also helped in some ways and India introduced the concept of ‘Atomic Apartheid.’ There is a dichotomy between moralism and practicality. India is shedding its moralistic stand and taking a more holistic view of the nuclear agreement. \nThe best thing about the deal is that India can trade with France and Russia\nIndia is the largest supplier of thorium (almost 60% of the total supplies).\nIndia is already a Nuclear Weapon State. There is no need therefore for enshrining this by India joining the NPT as a weapon state which is not likely in the near term.\nIndia is closer to signing CTBT than before. \nThe signing of an FMCT will take time. \nThe India-US nuclear deal is part of an American attempt to balance the strategic interest of making India a stakeholder to strengthen the international order and the American commitment to non-proliferation goals. \n\nPrepared by Dr. Priyanka Singh\, Research Assistant at IDSA.
URL:https://idsa.in/idsa-event/india-and-the-non-proliferation-regime-looking-beyond-the-nuclear-deal
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:20080919T053000
DTEND;TZID=Asia/Kolkata:20080919T053000
DTSTAMP:20261105T191446
CREATED:20231223T222539Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20231224T130251Z
UID:63750-1221802200-1221802200@idsa.in
SUMMARY:Geopolitics of Climate Change and India’s Position
DESCRIPTION:Chair: R RajagopalanDiscussants: Ashutosh Varshney & Sunil Chauhan  \nClimate change and security as a subject of enquiry is now being pursued by the IDSA in a comprehensive manner. Scholars from the non-traditional security cluster\, since 2008\, have been presenting papers and delivering talks on the topic. In April 2008 a run-up workshop was held on the security implications of climate change for India. A national workshop on security implications of climate change for India is planned on October 30\, 2008. A working group under Dr Arvind Gupta\, Lal Bahadur Shastri Chair\, IDSA comprising nine IDSA scholars and three outside members (a climatologist\, a disaster expert and an economist) has been formed for the purpose. It is intended that the draft report will be presented in the roundtable discussion. There has also been interaction with MEA officials on the various aspects of climate change. \nUttam Kumar Sinha who is working on the bilateral aspects of the climate change and also on international negotiations has recently authored a chapter in the re-launched IDSA Asian Strategic Review 2008 titled “Asia and Climate Change”. His paper “Geopolitics of Climate Change and India’s Position” in the fellows’ seminar was a logical movement from regional analysis to a global one.  \nThe seminar was chaired by Ambassador R. Rajagopalan\, who is a member of the IDSA Executive Council. The two external discussants were Prof C.K. Varshney\, former Dean of School of Environmental Science\, JNU\, and former Chairman Environmental Research and Wetland Research Committee\, Ministry of Environment and Forests\, and Commander Sunil Chauhan\, from the Centre for Strategic Studies and Simulation\, United Service Institution of India. The internal discussants were Vinod Kumar and Medha Bisht. The participant-level was high reflecting the interest in the topic and the growing concern over climate change. Over 20 scholars and members of IDSA attended the proceedings.  \nThe paper by referring to the debate in the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) in April 2007 explained how the issue of climate change is being “securitised” and how a counter argument is being built up to “desecuritise” it. India strongly criticized the “catastrophic scenarios” posited by the Stern Report and articulated a more “immediate and quantifiable threat from possible conflicts arising out of inadequate resources for development and poverty eradication as well as competition for energy.” The author identified loosely structured blocks of states with their own mix of concerns and actions on climate change. The Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS) with concerns and fears of rising sea levels and large submergence of the coastlines think from an “ecological effectiveness” and finds a willing partner in EU. The second group is of OPEC and various industrialized countries that look at climate change from an economic angle. Such groups are seeking “economic effectiveness”. The third group is the developing countries echoing the north-south divide and articulating concerns from a “social justice and equity”. There is also the G5 (Brazil\, China\, India\, Mexico and South Africa) which in the recently concluded G-8 summit challenged the economic dominance of the West and pivoted mostly around south-south cooperation.  \nAt the heart of India’s position on climate change is the notion that it must be allowed to pollute on a per capita basis equally with the West. India has thus been propounding the “per capita emission” line. It is a strong unconditional position that immediately shifts the responsibility on to the shoulder of the developed countries to drastically cut emissions. It also allows India the space and time to grow at a sustained pace and strengthen its poverty alleviation and developmental programmes. But even more significant is the assurance that its per capita emissions will never exceed that of developing countries. It is a position of confidence and self belief in its economic policies\, a challenge and a message to the developed world that it will not be pressurized in the negotiation process. While the per capita argument is quite justified for India\, it also suggests a dogged resistance in its approach\, a grandstanding of its newly acquired international status. But to be a serious player in global politics requires finely balancing self interest with certain global responsibilities and commitment (at least to be seen doing). This is not a moralistic position that India so pitifully pursued in the 1960s and suffered so seriously.  \nWhile the ‘per capita emission’ is being largely accepted including the UN\, there is a certain perception that India’s position is one of extreme rigidity with no allowance for even a self determined gradual carbon emission reduction quota. India here is missing out on a positive leadership role. Another critical element of this leadership is to dehyphenate itself from China. India’s approach to climate change is based on energy security and sustainable development while the Chinese plan focused on emission reduction. China has overtaken the US in total emission\, though its per capita pollution is lower than that of the US.  \nIndia’s other position on climate change is that it does not considers it a “threat” and particularly not in the sense of considering military options as a response. India’s stress on “collaborative action at the global level both through mitigation and adaptation in accordance with the common and differentiated responsibilities of the different countries” points to its faith in the UNFCCC as the agency for carrying out negotiations. So clearly for India an effective climate regime with equitable burden sharing can help tackle the adverse impacts and linking climate change with security is far-fetched and unnecessarily alarmist. Climate change is a concern but India would rather be worried about freer and fairer trade particularly of agricultural products and correcting the distorted trade practices of powerful countries.  \nThe geopolitics and domestic political considerations will remain critical determinants to the negotiation process leading to 2012. The changing power equation and a predominant shift towards Asia will see new groupings and alignments that will impact the existing climate change regimes. In the coming years\, the spotlight will increasingly fall on India\, China and also the US\, the chief protagonists in the emission targets. Since the new agreement needs to be concluded by the end of 2009 (Copenhagen Summit) so as to give countries adequate time for ratification\, the politics will intensify. For India\, however much it digs to its position\, pressures will come from different directions on different interlinked issues. Before the G8 summit\, India braced itself from the US on imposition of tariff barriers against exported goods from India that are seen as products with large carbon footprints\, such as iron and steel. The Japanese at the recently concluded Accra Climate Change Summit took the issue of “sectoral approaches” with India\, in order to establish “international energy efficiency standards” for polluting industries across the world. Has India given itself limited space for negotiations thereby constricting its ability to manoeuvre? If India is interested in world emissions\, its own emissions are important. There lies the challenge and the dilemma. India has long experience in negotiation on climate change and has been at the forefront of the debate ever since Mahatma Gandhi made the ‘greed and need’ connection. India will have to reconfigure its position. ‘Greed’ and ‘poverty’ are powerful arguments in the climate change debate but will not help clinch the emission issue. It has to be seen whether India will reconfigure its position. Of equal interest will be to observe whether other regimes\, groupings and alliances will challenge the Kyoto Protocol. At the end it is not about the sacrosanct nature of the Kyoto Protocol or which other regime should come into existence. The challenge is to be proactive\, innovative and find solutions to the problems.  \nProfessor C.K. Varshney commented the real issue was that of the extra carbon in the natural cycle due to fossil fuel use. Much more scientific work needs to be done. As far as India’s position\, he felt that it only served the purpose of short- term. In the long- term we need to focus more on issues of energy intensity and efficiency. He reminded that we often are too much human centric and neglect loss of biodiversity\, which in any case will not permit the current lifestyles. There was a discussion on the geopolitics and security aspect. Some members from the audience felt that it is the “politics” and not “geopolitics”. Cdr Sunil Chauhan mentioned that in a globalised world contiguous borders are not relevant any longer and thus the term “geopolitics” is in order. Medha Bisht mentioned that we need to take into account the environmental\, human and social costs of big infrastructure projects such as dams as they can be counter productive.  \nThere was also an exciting discussion on the referent object. While the author had taken it as climate\, Vinod Kumar felt that it should be survival. While others felt that the nation-state is the ultimate referent even from the human security perspective.  \nProfessor C.K. Varshney also elaborated on the uncertainties and dangers of geological sequestration of carbon. He mentioned that land-to-plant forests are also limited and too much reliance on aforestation thus has its own limits. Elaborating on Gandhian thought\, he mentioned that it in no way\, means to go backward in the past\, but instead to find alternative solution\, which necessarily may not be technology driven. What economic model India is following was also discussed. Some felt that we are blindly aping the West and we need to see how vulnerable we are internally due to the weather beaten economic path we are opting for. Enormous ecological challenges and social stresses are evident in the future.  \nThe paper generated considerable discussion and well overshot the defined time. Importantly it did not drift from the core feature of the paper. The chairman in agreement with the speaker summed up the proceedings by mentioning how important the topic is and how critically important it is for India to be proactive and not only posturing and grandstanding.  \nPrepared by P.K. Gautam\, Research Fellow at IDSA and Co-ordinator of Non-Traditional Security cluster.
URL:https://idsa.in/idsa-event/geopolitics-of-climate-change-and-indias-position
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