BEGIN:VCALENDAR
VERSION:2.0
PRODID:-//MP-IDSA - ECPv6.15.12.2//NONSGML v1.0//EN
CALSCALE:GREGORIAN
METHOD:PUBLISH
X-ORIGINAL-URL:https://idsa.in
X-WR-CALDESC:Events for MP-IDSA
REFRESH-INTERVAL;VALUE=DURATION:PT1H
X-Robots-Tag:noindex
X-PUBLISHED-TTL:PT1H
BEGIN:VTIMEZONE
TZID:Asia/Kolkata
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:+0530
TZOFFSETTO:+0530
TZNAME:IST
DTSTART:20100101T000000
END:STANDARD
END:VTIMEZONE
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Asia/Kolkata:20110505T053000
DTEND;TZID=Asia/Kolkata:20110505T053000
DTSTAMP:20261104T195950
CREATED:20231223T220522Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20231224T130741Z
UID:63571-1304573400-1304573400@idsa.in
SUMMARY:Interaction with Israeli Delegation
DESCRIPTION:The 3-member delegation from the Israeli Ministry of Defence visited IDSA to interact with IDSA scholars and discuss recent developments in the West Asian region\, and other issues of mutual interest. Mr. Sisodia framed the agenda for the discussion to include Osama Bin Laden’s death on May 2\, the ‘Arab Spring’ brought about by the recent uprisings in Arab countries\, and India’s engagement with Israel. Following are the responses by the delegation head\, Amos Gilad\, to queries posed by IDSA scholars: \n\n‘Spring’ might not be the right word to describe the region surrounding Israel\, and this period may be short-lived taking into account the rising death toll among protesters in countries like Syria.\nAny regime change/developments in Egypt would have a great impact on Israel\, with Egypt being a leader in the Middle East and the Arab World. Israel maintains daily communications with the Egyptians on matters relating to security. Peace with Egypt would mean increased security for Israel. \nThere has been no tradition of democracy in the Middle East. With the resignation of Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak following the protests there\, the Muslim Brotherhood may be emerging to capture power in that country; this would prove to be a threat to Israel with the Muslim Brotherhood being cousins of the Hamas in Gaza; these groups would impose Sharia law if in power.\nThe signing of a unity agreement between Hamas and Fatah on May 4 is an unfortunate development\, and cannot be implemented. Hamas is a terror organization\, and has killed many innocent civilians through rocket attacks into Israel. Israel cannot foresee the U.S. Congress supporting the Hamas government in any form.\nIsrael cannot tolerate nuclear and hostile states like Iran. Israel will never tolerate nuclear war; it is necessary to differentiate between intentions and capabilities.\nOsama Bin Laden will be remembered as successful in his mission\, though he may have died too late given that the poison of his ideology has spread. It is important to expose the Pakistani connection in this story.\nWhat are the reasons for China’s support for Pakistan? The reason is their fear of Muslims\, and China’s dislike for India – to support Pakistan is to harass India.\nThe peace process\, as defined by the Israeli Prime Minister\, is based on the two-state solution. The Palestinian unity agreement is a bad news for Israel. Following this\, if Hamas launches missiles against Israel\, Abu Mazen (Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas) will be held responsible as the head of the unity government. This government would never recognize Israel and we would never have peace\, hence how can Israel negotiate with them? Israel will never accept terror and will continue to fight against it. Israel has supported Fatah as it could\, but terror and peace cannot live together.\nIsrael’s relation with China is based on a strategic decision not to maintain security relations with Pakistan. Israel has excellent security relations with China through engaging with them on mutual visits\, cultural relations\, and dialogues on strategic climate and nuclear proliferation. No technological cooperation takes place between the two countries\, taking into account Israel’s friendship with India\, and any threat that may emanate from China’s expansion. Israel maintains no relations with Taiwan.\nIsrael is also not worried about India’s relations with the GCC countries; this is understandable to Israel considering the large number of Indians who reside in those countries.\n\nGilad thanked IDSA for the hospitality shown\, and expressed his eagerness to return to hear views and opinions for continued engagement. The Chair concluded the interaction thanking the delegation for their interest in IDSA’s work and mutual engagement.  \n(Report prepared by Princy Marin George\, RA\, IDSA)
URL:https://idsa.in/idsa-event/interaction-with-israeli-delegation
CATEGORIES:ROUND TABLES / WORKSHOPS,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:20110506T053000
DTEND;TZID=Asia/Kolkata:20110506T053000
DTSTAMP:20261104T195950
CREATED:20231223T220522Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20231224T130741Z
UID:63570-1304659800-1304659800@idsa.in
SUMMARY:Examining China's Hydrobehaviour
DESCRIPTION:Chair: Dr. Arvind GuptaDiscussants: Ambassador Rajiv Sikri\, Ambassador I P Khosla\, Ambassador R Rajagopalan. \nAmongst the audience were officials from the Ministry of External Affairs\, China branch and researchers from other think tanks. \n \nThe discussion was initiated by a paper presentation by Dr. Uttam Kumar Sinha on “Examining China’s Hydro-behaviour”. The paper queries China’s hydro-behaviour and examines its actions on the Brahamaputra River (Yarlung Tsangpo) and the Mekong River (Lancang) to infer certain hegemonic tendencies. Narrating the hydro-relevance of Tibet as the life-line of China\, he brought out the China’s policies on the Transborder Rivers\, which do not comply with the peaceful rise of China. There seems to be a great deal of hydro-arrogance\, hydro-aggression and hydro-egoism on part of Beijing. Beijing’s maximalist orientation towards harnessing the water resources through dams and diversions are engineering processes towards mitigating its food and energy requirements and overcoming its uneven distribution of water.  \nChina’s intransigence on Tibet is visibly for its vast water resources as it holds the key to sustaining China’s northwest region\, revitalizing its deserts and the Yellow river itself\, as well as being crucial to its Himalayan Strategy. Besides\, China’s thirst for more water will leave other lower riparian countries thirsty. Therefore\, a close observation enquiring the impacts of China’s action on the neighbouring states\, which it considers to be rivals\, is necessary. There are about 260 river basins\, that cater to nearly 40 percent of the world population with roughly 145 sharing agreements/treaties that makes the international system positively busy with an array of cooperation and shared benefits. But\, rivers waters treaties can never be settled permanently since the volume of water flowing never remains the same. As a consequence\, interventions and diversions on rivers impacts make the political relations swing according to the changing quantitative and qualitative nature of the river. \nThe paper also briefly conceptualises the role of hegemony and power in transboundary water in order to understand the power asymmetries and the hegemonic nature of transboundary water relations. China’s continued water development is now witnessing a rapid pace with successive interventions on the rivers in pursuance with its internal compulsions and is therefore self-driven. However\, China does not consider the concerns of its downstream neighbours. China has roughly 10 major rivers flowing out of its territory to 11 countries and none flow into China from outside. China’s upper riparian position gives it the hydrological advantage to use and control the waters on its will\, giving enormous power determining its hegemony.  \nChina is expected to face 25 percent supply gap as projected water demand by 2030 with two-thirds of its cities already facing difficulty in accessing water. Of late\, China is facing insecurity with its water and it is related to the disproportionate availability or uneven distribution of waters within its territory. The majority of water stressed being the northern and western parts of China. The region south of the Yangtze River accounts for roughly 36 percent of the Chinese territory and has 81 percent of its water resources whereas the northern regions need more water for its 64 percent territory and 19 percent of the water resources. Without Tibet\, China would have been water-dependent and that holds the strategic importance of Tibet for the control of water resources. Besides\, China has no significant bilateral riparian agreement on water allocation or water utilization. In order to overcome such hydrological unevenness\, in 1952 Chairman Mao first proposed the “south-to-north water diversion” to ease water shortage in cities like Beijing and Tianjin as a national priority. Since then\, the Chinese leadership has thought hydrologically. At the same time\, many of the top Chinese leaders are hydraulic engineers and technocrats including Hu Jintao and Wen Jiabao. The south-to-north project which started in 2002 and expected to be completed by 2050 was designed to take water from China’s largest river Yangtze to the arid northern region. \nWater shortage is becoming an impediment to China’s goal of meeting food production and questions the leadership which aims self-sufficiency in food grains. Nevertheless\, reduced self-sufficiency is dangerous for a country with a population as large as china and therefore its search for water becomes an unending imperative\, often desperate and aggressive. China has been successful in damming the Yarlung Tsangpo (Brahmaputra) River in November 2010 and its hydropower development on the Lancang (Mekong) River is typically based on little information sharing and no transparency. As the upper riparian state\, China would like the water debate in the lower Mekong basin to be intensified between the lower riparian players alone and in case of South Asia would like Pakistan and Bangladesh’s anger to be directed and contested against India. Out of the 15 dams planned\, China has started work on eight dams in it territories. This has left the lower riparian countries including Laos\, Thailand and Cambodia to remain suspicious of China’s power game via the upstream hydroelectricity projects.  \nTo counter-balance China’s hydro-hegemony\, it is critically important to understand its intentions and accordingly frame policies that are not reactive but perceptive. A typical recourse is to advocate the principles of international water law\, however non-biding they are. There is a high moral ground that India can take but it has to shirk off its defensive stance over China’s water development on the Tibetan rivers for which India also has a rightful use. Since India is multi-river dependent on the Brahmaputra on the east and the Indus and the Sutlej on the west\, it is significant for India to draw China into a dialogue on water issues and consistently raise hydrological concerns at bilateral meetings. Besides\, India has to articulate its middle riparian position to change the perception in the neighbours that India is water hegemonic. India’s counter diplomacy should also be to isolate China as an unreasonable upper riparian state at the regional and global levels.  \nComments\, questions and suggested points:\n\nChina’s increase demand of water is related to the rapid growth of industrialization in the eastern and other regions of China.\nTibet is an autonomous region and should not be addressed as part of China at any instances.\nIt is debatable whether the China’s interest in Arunachal Pradesh of India has any intensions related to water.\nThrough the BIMSTEC and other regional corporations\, the issues of Chinese activities in Tibet can be raised.\nIndia should take the global concern about the China’s hydrological related strategies\nWhat India should do if China diverts water from downwards flows toward India?\nAny act of diverting water away from reaching towards India should be considered as an act of war.\n\nThe discussion was summarized by Dr. Uttam Kumar with the remark that China’s privileged upper riparian position endows it strategic latitude by deploying structural power in a coercive mode. With its enormous domestic water requirement\, a strategic character of trust and mistrust\, cooperation and misperception in the region and at different levels are seen. Moreover\, stability in the South and the Southeast Asian region would significantly depend on the stable supply of water.  \nReport prepared by Shivananda.H\, Research Assistant\, Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses
URL:https://idsa.in/idsa-event/examining-chinas-hydrobehaviour
CATEGORIES:ROUND TABLES / WORKSHOPS,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:20110516T053000
DTEND;TZID=Asia/Kolkata:20110516T053000
DTSTAMP:20261104T195950
CREATED:20231223T134807Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20231224T130741Z
UID:63206-1305523800-1305523800@idsa.in
SUMMARY:Interaction with the Visiting Editors from Tanzania
DESCRIPTION:Chairperson: Ms. Ruchita Beri \n \nIn the run up to the Prime Minister of India’s visit to Tanzania in May 2011\, four editors from Tanzania visited IDSA in order to generate interest in local media in Tanzania about the VVIP visit and also give the visiting editors some exposure to understanding India.  \nOpening the session\, Ms. Ruchita Beri briefed on the African region and India-Tanzania relations. She outlined that Africa was earlier portrayed as hopeless continent; a continent embraced with problems like colonialism\, apartheid\, under development and inequality etc. But much has changed since then and economic and political situation in Africa is slowly improving. Specifically\, Tanzania is among top 20 fastest growing countries in Africa. The African countries are working towards political and economic integration. These positive trends have been possible due to active interest taken by the African leaders in seeking “African solutions for African problems.” \nOver the years the strategic importance of Africa is growing. First\, in terms of population Africa is set to become the third largest region in the near future. Africa’s natural wealth\, particularly in hydrocarbons has also elevated the importance of the region. In recent years\, piracy in the Indian Ocean region has led to a serious concern. Nevertheless\, the consoling factor is that there is an increase in trade relations between India and Africa.  India is engaging Africa bilaterally\, regionally and at pan-African level. The first India India-Africa Forum Summit was held in 2008 and the second this year in Addis Ababa.  \nThereafter\, the discussion focused on the phenomenon of terrorism wherein it was mentioned that the kind of terrorism India faces originates outside the Indian Territory. It was also clarified that there is a difference between al-Qaeda type terrorism and the kind of terrorism India has been facing (which is Pakistan-sponsored). The related questions that were asked at this time included the issue of Pakistan-Osama linkages and the issue of Pakistan sovereignty being allegedly violated in Abbottabad.  \nOn the question of Tanzania’s impression of India as an emerging player vis-à-vis China\, it was answered that Tanzania views India as a rainbow nation which is home to diverse cultures\, castes and communities but has still well-managed to unite them in the bond of nationhood. Few examples were also cited to argue increased India-Tanzania relations in Africa. Here\, it was said that China and India are viewed in Africa as Asia’s emerging economies and it has been the fastest growing relationship with Africa for Asia in terms of increased business interaction.  \nFurther\, the discussion focused on democratisation\, wherein the visiting delegation commended the success of Indian electoral system despite having a huge population and varied diversities. This has been called the strength of India along with the Information Technology sector where India is considered as a leader and also the small scale industries sector. The delegation also wondered whether a less democratic India would surpass China faster. It was replied that China’s policy towards Africa is one of neo-colonialism which focused on building infrastructure and extracting resources. On the other hand\, India’s relationship with Africa is unique as it involves partnership in human resource development and increased interaction at both of the public sector and private sector level.   \nFinally\, the role of African Union in Libyan crisis was discussed. It was noted by the visitors that AU has not been proactive on the issue. There was also some discussion on Gaddafi and his pan-Africa vision. The Tanzanian delegates said that the response of Tanzania was to respect Libya’s sovereignty. However they lamented that there are double standards within international community for external intervention and shadow powers are at play in Libya. They also opined that democracy is subjective. The session concluded on a happy note of possible extension of cooperation between the two nations in diverse fields for mutual benefit.  \nReport prepared by Mr. Babjee Pothuraju\, Research Assistant\, IDSA.
URL:https://idsa.in/idsa-event/interaction-with-the-visiting-editors-from-tanzania
CATEGORIES:ROUND TABLES / WORKSHOPS,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:20110519T053000
DTEND;TZID=Asia/Kolkata:20110519T053000
DTSTAMP:20261104T195950
CREATED:20231223T134806Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20231224T130741Z
UID:63204-1305783000-1305783000@idsa.in
SUMMARY:Lithuanian Delegation’s visit to IDSA
DESCRIPTION:Chair: Ms. Smita Purushottam \nA Lithuanian delegation comprising Mr. Eitvydas Bajar?nas\, Ambassador-at-Large\, Political Director\, Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Lithuania\, Ms. Diana Mickevi?ien?\, Director in charge of Latin America\, Africa\, Asia and Pacific Department\, Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Lithuania and H.E Petras Simeliunas\, Lithuanian Ambassador to India – visited IDSA and participated in an interaction with IDSA scholars on a range of issues of mutual interest including neighbourhood relations\, regional issues concerning Afghanistan\, terrorism\, the Lisbon Treaty\, the role of OSCE (Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe) in mediating on regional issues\, the NATO mission on cyber security\, Turkey\, tackling Islamic fundamentalism and so on. Mr. Bajar?nas pointed that as the Tajik-Afghan borders are poorly protected\, the answer to the problem lies in cooperation amongst all the interested international players. Lithuania has stationed its special forces in Afghanistan and has contributed 220 troops in the Regional Command Capital. It has contributed both financial and human resources and in the civilian sector and leads a provincial construction team.  \nCommenting on bilateral relations with Russia\, Mr. Bajar?nas said that Russia is different from the Soviet Union and current Russia is different from former Russia. In recent times\, Russia has re-set its relations with Poland and Norway\, and expressed eagerness to cooperate on issues like Iran sanctions and the NATO cargo transit. He outlined the areas where the West was interacting with Russia. \nThe other issues that were touched upon included cyber security\, the ballistic missile defence system\, and tactical nuclear weapons. The overall security framework in Asia was discussed in the light of the recent developments in South Asia and Central Asia. At the end of this insightful interaction\, it was emphasised that there was a need for all peace loving powers including EU member States to cooperate in stabilising the region. \nReport prepared by Joyce Sabina Lobo\, Research Assistant\, Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses\, New Delhi.
URL:https://idsa.in/idsa-event/lithuanian-delegations-visit-to-idsa
CATEGORIES:ROUND TABLES / WORKSHOPS,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:20110530T053000
DTEND;TZID=Asia/Kolkata:20110530T053000
DTSTAMP:20261104T195950
CREATED:20231223T134754Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20250311T225313Z
UID:63199-1306733400-1306733400@idsa.in
SUMMARY:Defence Reforms\, Civil-Military Relations and Military Effectiveness in India
DESCRIPTION:Presided over by: His Excellency Shri NN Vohra\, Governor of Jammu and Kashmir \n \n \nA roundtable discussion was held on 30 May 2011 to discuss the two papers on the subject written by Anit Mukherjee\, Research Fellow IDSA; \n\nFailing to Deliver: Post Crises Defence Reforms in India\, 1998-2010\,\nThe Absent Dialogue: Civil-Military Relations and Military Effectiveness in India.\n\nThe round table began with the author presenting the main aspects of both of his papers. He began his presentation by arguing that this was not a ‘blame game’ and instead the underlying presumption of his research has been that officials\, both civilian and military\, are hard working\, competent and patriotic. Despite this\, the structure of civil-military relations has had an adverse impact on the effectiveness of Indian military. In making this argument\, Anit described in considerable detail\, the unique characteristics of civil-military relations in India and how they shape four determinants of military effectiveness—weapons procurement\, jointness\, defence planning and officer education and promotions policies. Acknowledging these problems\, the government has tried time and again to push through defence reforms\, however as Anit’s Occasional Paper argues\, these have ‘failed to deliver.’ The author concluded by making two recommendations. First the need to declassify and allow a proper study of all our national security institutions. This will allow us to ‘know more’ and hence translate directly into better informed policies. Second\, the need to establish a committee that can\, after an exhaustive study\, recommend measures to prepare the Indian defence forces for future threats\, challenges and opportunities. Necessarily it will have to examine the interaction between politicians\, bureaucrats and soldiers and suitably re-engineer the relations between Ministry of Defence\, Service Headquarters and other National Security Agencies.  \nDiscussion Points\n\nThere is a need to engineer an attitudinal shift towards national security and engage the people on some of these issues. However\, such a shift can be engineered only if the service headquarters and the Ministry of Defence allow their files to be shared. Hence\, it is very important to examine our past and bring out lessons from it.\nThere was a debate on whether regulatory mechanisms exist for declassification. According to one participant\, the Public Records Act of 1993 makes it incumbent upon the Service HQ to declassify its old records. However another participant observed that that there is no national policy on declassification that leaves the service headquarters grappling for direction. It was also pointed out that while the government has published war histories\, the sources on which these accounts are written are themselves unavailable to the researchers.\nSome participants argued that before appointing a Chief of Defence Staff\, there was a need to integrate Ministry of Defence with the Service Headquarters. Moreover\, the Integrated Defence Staff does not currently have a mandate for operational control over the services. Hence there was a more compelling need to focus on higher defence management. However\, another participant noted that there was a need to understand what this integration precisely translates into. It was pointed that in other countries\, chiefs of armed forces are the chiefs of staff but in India they wear two hats—operational commanders and chiefs of staff. Does integration of Ministry of Defence envisage such a role? Is there also a concurrent need to establish the council systems that was envisaged but never implemented in 1955? However the same participants agreed that the generalist bureaucrat in the Ministry of Defence needs to be replaced perhaps by a cadre of trained security specialists that can rotate between different national security institutions.\nOne participant argued that it was important to highlight the weaknesses that accrue from the current problematic form of civil-military relations. Hence consequences of not reforming should be spelt out clearly and the seriousness of the problem should be emphasized. For instance\, recurring problems in jointness have seriously undermined their ability to operate together in the future wars.\nThe debate on civil-military relations needs to move forward from the ‘bureaucracy versus the military’ towards one that encourages a respectful and well informed dialogue between all the stakeholders in the system. Military education should instruct its officers to learn how the Government of India officials have to follow the rules of business. Moreover\, the challenges and characteristics of Indian democracy and public-policy making and implementation should also be highlighted. In turn\, there is a need to educate the civilian policy makers of the challenges and sacrifices made by the Indian military.\nMore than one participant highlighted the importance of Professional Military Education\, especially for senior military officers. As there is a lack of declassification\, teaching of Indian military history is driven by biographies and personal accounts and not\, as it should be\, based on primary sources. Moreover\, the absence of civilian instructors in military academies results in perpetuation of self-serving organizational narratives. Most participants agreed that there is a need to think of expertise within the military and to create an atmosphere that rewards self-examination and self-criticism.\nMost participants agreed that there is a need to establish another committee to re-examine the implementation of defence reforms. At the same time\, there is a need to engage the political class on this issue and raise the level of the discussion.\n\nVote of thanks\nDr. Arvind Gupta thanked the governor for presiding over the discussion. He also thanked all other participants for sharing their views. He ended on a hopeful note that such discussions would spread an awareness on this issue and bring about the desired policy changes. \nList of participants\nGeneral VP Malik (Retd)\, former Chief of Army Staff\nAjai Vikram Singh\, former Defence Secretary\nNS Sisodia\, DG\, IDSA\nAir Marshal M Matheswaran\, Air Headquarters\nAir Marshal PK Mehra (Retd)\, Distinguished Fellow\, CAPS\nVice Adm Pradeep Kaushiva (Retd)\, NMF\nMaj Gen PS Sandhu (Retd)\, USI\nDr. Arvind Gupta\, LBSC Chair\, IDSA\nSqn Ldr PS Chhina (Retd)\, CAFHR\, USI\nServing officers from the three service headquarters\nOther members of IDSA \nFurther Reading\n“Defence Reforms shouldn’t wait for another ‘Kargil’ Times of India\, March 27\, 2011\n“The Absent Dialogue\,” Seminar\, July 2009
URL:https://idsa.in/idsa-event/defence-reforms-civil-military-relations-and-military-effectiveness-in-india
CATEGORIES:ROUND TABLES / WORKSHOPS,EVENT REPORT
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://idsa.in/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/no_photo-200x150-2.jpg
END:VEVENT
END:VCALENDAR