1
Introduction
Satish Kumar
The global security environment as determined by relations among major powers has tended to deteriorate in the past few years. The threat perceptions of three major powers, that is the US, China and Russia vis-a-vis each other, have sharpened. There is stiff competition between them to dominate the strategic space in global hotspots like the Middle East, Eastern Europe and Asia Pacific. This competition among them has led to the formulation of national security strategies which are more assertive, aggressive and competitive. It has also resulted in a lack of consensus and consequent delay in the resolution of conflicts in Afghanistan and Syria. There is also no concerted effort in meeting the challenge of the Islamic State (IS). This kind of security environment imposes constraints on a country like India, which is struggling to carve out its rightful place in the world and needs the cooperation and support of all major powers. In the first section of the book, which begins with the chapter on ‘Global Security Trends’, an attempt has been made to examine the strategic thinking of major powers and the situation with regard to continuing international conflicts and crises in order to assess their impact on national security concerns of upcoming powers like India.
India’s external security continues to be challenged by the hostile attitudes of Pakistan and China. The dominant influence of the army and militant Islamist groups in the decision-making structures of Pakistan gives no hope that its attitude will change in the near future. China continues to pressurise and coerce India by delaying the settlement of disputes and obstructing the rise of India as a major power. China–Pakistan nexus adds to India’s worries. India has developed a robust partnership with the US. While maintaining a sturdy relationship with Russia and the European powers, India has infused new life in relationships with Japan and Australia. Common threat perceptions have also led India to strengthen relations with other countries in the Indo-Pacific region. India has also paid special attention to relations with Iran, Israel, Saudi Arabia, and the Gulf region as a whole. All these endeavours meant to build India’s capacity to meet security threats from its adversaries have been dealt with in detail in the chapters on ‘External Security Situation’.
Internal security of India remains a source of concern. In all the three disturbed regions of India, namely the Northeast, the Maoist-dominated zone in Central India and the State of Jammu and Kashmir (J&K), there is no substantial improvement in security situation. In the Northeast, dialogues have been conducted with insurgent groups, but they yielded uncertain results. These groups have external links with neighbouring countries and also find sanctuaries there. The Maoists keep spreading their tentacles and changing their tactics. The government initiatives have been inadequate. In J&K, there is no doubt that Pakistan continues to play its role in destabilising the state through infiltrations and incidents of terrorism. But people’s discontent is expressed in different forms of violence at the slightest provocation, blaming the central and state governments for their woes. The chapter on ‘Internal Security Developments’ analyses the dynamics of these and other relevant issues extensively.
The territorial expanse from the Himalayas to the Indian Ocean and the maritime domain from the Persian Gulf to the Malacca Straits constitute India’s natural security zone. Critical developments in this region need to be examined in terms of their impact on India’s security. In Section II, ‘India’s Security Zone’, we have tried to identify attitudes and developments in the South Asian region, which are a matter of concern to India. Also examined are the increasing importance of army in Pakistan and the challenges that India faces in the Indian Ocean. The impact of developments in West Asia and the importance of India–Japan strategic partnership for India’s security have been analysed in detail.
In this volume we have put the spotlight on critical developments which pose difficult challenges and need to be handled with high levels of diplomatic and administrative acumen. These challenges, discussed in Section III, include China’s plan to build ‘China–Pakistan Economic Corridor’, role of private sector in the defence industry and counter-insurgency operations in India.
In Section IV of this volume, we have chosen to undertake an in-depth inquiry into three intractable problems of internal security. Until a few years ago we were proud of the fact that Indian youth were not involved in terrorism. What has led to their radicalisation in the past twenty years is the subject of analysis in this section. A historical analysis of the evolution of Naga insurgency and the complexities of finding a solution has also been undertaken. A deep insight into the causes and remedies of rural poverty is provided in another chapter in this section.
National security of a large and well-populated country like India is directly affected by global norms and regulations in various fields. In view of the widely prevalent threat of global terrorism, India has been advocating for many years the need for a counter-terror convention. The importance of such a convention has been brought out in Section V dealing with ‘Changing Global Imperatives’. In another chapter, an attempt has been made to examine the impact of newly emerging trade regimes, particularly the trans-pacific partnership, on India. Environmental degradation as a ‘non-traditional’ security threat has been on the international agenda for many years. How does it impact India’s security environment has also been analysed in this section to enable India to contribute effectively to global policy making in this respect.
Section VI contains a special study done by the Confederation of Indian Industry to evaluate the economic aspects of strategic partnerships that India has signed with over thirty countries.
In the last section of the book, we have introduced a new feature in this volume under the title ‘National Security Assessment’. This is intended to provide the reader an analytical snapshot of the national security situation.
I
National security review
2
National security environment
2 (i)
Global security trends
Satish Kumar 1
Strategic thinking of major powers
United States of America
US’s world view
President Barack Obama in his State of the Union address on 28 January 2014 emphasised that from nearly 180,000 Americans serving in Iraq and Afghanistan when he took office, all of the US troops were then out of Iraq and more than 60,000 troops had already come home from Afghanistan. With Afghan forces in the lead for their own security, the US troops had moved to a support role. Together with the allies, the US would complete the mission there by the end of 2014, and America’s longest war would finally be over. 2 However, this was not the case. As late as 15 October 2015, President Obama was constrained to revise his thinking and state that the US troops will stay in Afghanistan until 2017. 3
President Obama pointed out that the danger of terrorism remains. While al-Qaeda’s (AQ) core leadership has been defeated, the threat has evolved with AQ affiliates and other extremists taking root in different parts of the world. In Yemen, Somalia, Iraq, and Mali, the US has to keep working with partners to disrupt and disable these networks. In Syria, the US supports the opposition that rejects the agenda of terrorist networks. At home, the US would keep strengthening its defences and combat new threats like cyber-attacks. He added, in a world of complex threats, the US’s security and leadership depends on all elements of its power – including strong and principled diplomacy.
President Obama said that the US’s leadership is defined not just by its defence against threats, but by the enormous opportunities to do good and promote understanding around the globe – to forge greater cooperation, to expand new markets, to free people from fear and want. the US’s alliance with Europe remains the strongest the world has ever known. From Tunisia to Burma, the US would support those who are willing to do the hard work of building democracy. In Ukraine, it stands for the principle that all people have the right to express themselves freely and peacefully and have a say in their country’s future. Across Africa, the US is bringing together businesses and governments to double access to electricity and help end extreme poverty. In the Americas, it is not only building new ties of commerce but also expanding cultural and educational exchanges among young people, and it continues to focus on the Asia Pacific, where the US supports its allies and shapes a future of greater security and prosperity. 4
Delivering his sixth State of the Union address on 20 January 2015, President Obama said that they are fifteen years into this new century and the past fifteen years has seen terror touching US shores that resulted in two long and costly wars. However, he said, that for the first time since 9/11, the US combat mission in Afghanistan was over with only fewer than 15,000 troops remaining. Instead of Americans patrolling the valleys of Afghanistan, they trained their security forces, who have now taken the lead. Instead of sending large ground forces overseas, the US was now partnering with nations from South Asia to North Africa to deny safe haven to terrorists who threaten America. In Iraq and Syria, American leadership – including military power – was stopping ISIL’s advance. Instead of getting dragged into another ground war in the Middle East, the US was leading a broad coalition, including Arab nations, to degrade and ultimately destroy this terrorist group. 5
US’s threat perception
The US Secretary of Defence, Chuck Hagel, spoke at the Fiftieth Munich Security Conference on 1 February 2014. He pointed towards the political instability and violent extremism in the Middle East and North Africa and stated that these problems are posing as persistent and pressing challenges to the US. He also highlighted some of the global challenges emanating from issues such as dangerous non-state actors, ‘rogue nations’ such as North Korea, cyber warfare, economic disparity, poverty, and hunger. He said that as the US is trying to confront and find solutions to these global threats, China and Russia are rapidly modernising their militaries and global defence industries, thereby challenging the US’s technological edge in defence partnerships around the world. He said that the US sees Europe as its indispensable partner in addressing these threats and challenges, as well as addressing new opportunities. He said that the US’s relationship with NATO has been indispensable while dealing with problems in Afghanistan.
He concluded his speech by saying that since the end of the Cold War, the US has ‘continuously adjusted its defence posture to new strategic realities around the world’. He remarked that an important posture enhancement is European missile defence in response to ballistic missile threats from Iran. 6
President Obama’s vision for the US and US forces
During the president’s speech at the US Military Academy Commencement Ceremony on 28 May 2014, President Obama described his vision for how the US and the military should lead in the years to come. He said that the US’s counter-terrorism policy has shifted from efforts being focused on AQ’s core leadership – those who had carried out the 9/11 attacks – to the removal of troops from Iraq and winding down war in Afghanistan.
President Obama described his vision in four principles: first, the US would use military force, unilaterally if necessary, when the core interests demanded it. In this context he stated that ‘international opinion matters, but America should never ask permission to protect our people, our homeland, or our way of life’. Second, President Obama said that the most direct threat to America at home and abroad remains terrorism. He said that the US must shift its counter-terrorism strategy – drawing on the successes and shortcomings of its experience in Iraq and Afghanistan – to more effectively partner with countries where terrorist networks seek a foothold.
Third, th...