The issue of water allocation and water rights of Bangladesh, India and China could form the basis of a framework on which joint cooperation among the three countries can be formulated.
The orientation of the existing administrative set up in Service Headquarters and in departments under the Ministry of Defence is to plan for the utilization of defence budget allocation. They are not in a position to pay attention to the aspect of defence receipts.
Why are the two largest democracies – India and the United States – starkly different when it comes to tackling terrorism? The answer to this perplexing question could lie in the two countries' divergent approach to security and management of national security resources. Equally relevant is the variance in their political resoluteness in exercising suitable responses to emergent threats.
A critical appraisal of the national security decision making (NSDM) during IPKF operations is revealing. At every stage, the NSDM was found wanting. The fact that none of the actors possessed the delicate skill or means by which to control events proved that not much thought had gone into the decisions. Involvement of numerous actors made the decision making challenging, which was further complicated by varied and cacophonous inputs and assessments. Overconfidence also created an opaque in the clarity of decisions taken. Lessons from the IPKF involvement are numerous.
The August 2009 bilateral pact will fortify the security of the Maldives as well as cater to Indian security concerns on the terrorism and geopolitical fronts.
The aggressive posture that the Chinese have adopted along the otherwise relatively tranquil Line of Actual Control (LOAC) has come under a lot of analytical examination by Indian Sinologists. They have advanced a number of explanations for the Chinese actions, all of which have a ring of truth about them.
In his April 5 speech in Prague, President Barack Obama made a renewed pledge to push the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) as a practical and immediate step to ‘seek the peace and security of a world without nuclear weapons’. However, global efforts to attain Global Zero as spearheaded by Obama have been interrupted by the refusal of the United States and China to ratify the treaty. The CTBT is also contingent on the approval of the threshold nuclear weapons states – India, Pakistan, and Israel – who have refused to sign and ratify the treaty.
Linked to the terrorist goal of intimidation of a targeted population, there is an inherent objective to spread fear and undermine the declared values of the targeted political system by pushing a frightened society and government into overreaction. On the other hand, the counter-insurgent state wishes to downplay the impact of the terrorist attack and works towards keeping the morale of the population as well as the security forces intact. In this battle, the media plays an important and influential role.
The Proliferation Security Initiative (PSI) is emerging as a key anti-proliferation platform with a global reach. However, being a US-promoted initiative with a military dimension, the PSI is yet to gain a multilateral character and raises concerns among nations. While backing the further expansion of this initiative, President Barack Obama seeks its institutionalization and cooperative enhancement. India is exhorted to join this initiative as part of the strategic cooperation with the United States. However, India is yet to decide its approach towards the PSI owing to various concerns.
