The Neighbourhood Needs Closer Attention

With a Foreign Secretary only recently installed and a fresh Foreign Minister now in place, a new team is in charge at MEA. The changes at the top do not look like routine turnovers but bid fair to give renewed impetus to the conduct of foreign policy. It is thus a proper moment to consider where the new management could, or should, be headed, and what are the policy blanks that need to be filled. A prior question: as there is now a very senior Foreign Minister who may have his own priorities, will the Prime Minister continue to exercise his accustomed dominance in this sphere? Will initiatives closely associated with him ~ the India-US nuclear deal, strengthened dialogue with Pakistan ~ retain their salience? Let us assume that there will be continuity in essentials but also significant readjustment in some areas.

A useful starting point is the immediate neighbourhood of South Asia where there is a deficit of Indian attention. The siren song of further lands and bigger issues leads us away, though events have been raging within the region and India has an ineluctable regional role that it can never disregard.

Regional affairs
The neighbours themselves, despite their acute sensitivity to anything that could remotely look like a hegemonic gesture, are driven by the nature of their problems to seek stronger Indian participation in regional affairs. Thus this would be as good a time as any to move regional affairs further up the list of MEA's priorities.

Among the most severe of the problems on our doorstep is the unresolved crisis in Nepal. For years, India kept largely aloof, drawn in eventually only when there was no other recourse and the unquenchable disorder threatened to spread into home territory. By then, our earlier reluctance to get involved had achieved little and had indirectly promoted the involvement of third countries like the UK and the USA, something we had normally been anxious to prevent. And when we did get involved, it was in a curiously indirect manner, through a senior member of the CPI-M trying to broker a political arrangement between Nepal's Maoists and the democratic alliance in that country ~ scarcely a wholehearted, upfront engagement by the Government itself. Since then the crisis has continued to smoulder, and difficult issues of constitution-building and power-sharing are far from settled. A clearer, more visible engagement between India and the various Nepalese parties is called for, without any reversion to the benign neglect so often witnessed in the past. The Nepal Foreign Minister's visit to New Delhi that has just taken place could be the harbinger of a useful trend.

Further along the Himalayan chain, a major transition in Bhutan is in the offing. In 2008, the King of that country is due to abdicate in favour of his son the present Crown Prince. We are used to descanting about Bhutan, the virtues of its leadership, the ideal relationship it has developed with us; rightly so, and there is every reason to believe that the present excellent relations will continue. But this will require a specific effort, for the change of monarch will take place in the context of a democratic transition towards representative government. As parliamentary institutions take stronger hold and different ways of conducting business are adopted by Bhutan, careful handling by India will be needed. After 2008, we will not be able to rely on the bulwark of the King, a practiced and wise ruler, and will need to work in close harmony with new political forces. Bhutan is an important comfort zone on our sensitive frontier and we need to prepare for the transition from now.

Political change of a very different sort is also pending in Bangladesh. Preparations are now advancing for what shows all the signs of becoming a fiercely contested general election. Whatever the outcome, there will be substantial challenges for India. There has been an inexplicable deterioration in relations between these two close neighbours. Their mutual perceptions are gloomy and complaining, each being all too ready to blame the other for perceived shortcomings. India is increasingly vocal about the security threat it sees from Bangladesh, which it fears is infiltrated by terrorist groups and insufficiently cooperative in trying to curb them. Bangladesh has its own complaints. Neither side has succeeded in finding a way to restore the normal cooperation that should exist between such close neighbours. Both need to make the effort.

A more challenging matter on the regional agenda is the situation in Sri Lanka. After the failure of intervention by the IPKF, India has remained scrupulously disengaged from this problem. Norwegian good offices have been invoked, with some beneficial results but without a long-term solution taking shape. This may not be a problem of India's choosing but to find a way out may require Indian involvement. Perhaps it is time for India, however tentatively, to enlarge its role, in response to what many have been seeking. It is a delicate and difficult matter but that is not reason enough to keep away.

A particular regional test for India lies on the north-eastern border with Myanmar. Relations with Myanmar are not likely to expand greatly, chiefly because of the undemocratic and harsh nature of that country's regime. But there is still much that needs doing, not least because this is where India and China meet and there is thus a strategic element to be taken into account. There is also the problem of the 'inner line' restrictions that prevent the growth of normal relations between India's North East and the high growth areas of South-east Asia and southern China. Finding a less restrictive way of dealing with security concerns could greatly benefit the North East, which is a relatively neglected part of the country.

International profile
These are only some of the situations on India's periphery that demand closer attention from MEA. If no separate mention has been made of Pakistan, it is because there is no shortage of close attention in media or government to what goes on in that country. Indeed, the effort made there should be seen as part of India's larger attempt to build up relations with the region as a whole. The more India develops its international profile and is identified as a power of the future, the more it will need harmonious and supportive relations with its neighbours. Tangled, unfriendly relationships in its backyard will only reduce the perception of India as a successful model to be emulated and courted.

With its expanding reach and capacity, India's engagement in major international questions is bound to grow: that hardly needs emphasis. But what has been relatively shadowed, the neighbourhood, needs closer and more immediate attention. Let us see if the revamped MEA points us in that direction.

(The author is India’s former Foreign Secretary)
Source: The Statesman, November 9, 2006