September 16, 2017

What the World’s Emptiest International Airport Says About China’s Influence

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/09/13/magazine/what-the-worlds-emptiest-international-airport-says-about-chinas-influence.html?mwrsm=WhatsApp&referer=



查看简体中文版查看繁體中文版

ILLUSTRATION BY ANDREW RAE

SEPTEMBER 13, 2017

On Money

By BROOK LARMER

The four-lane highway leading out of the Sri Lankan town of Hambantota gets so little traffic that it sometimes attracts more wild elephants than automobiles. The pachyderms are intelligent — they seem to use the road as a jungle shortcut — but not intelligent enough, alas, to appreciate the pun their course embodies: It links together a series of white elephants, i.e. boondoggles, built and financed by the Chinese. Beyond the lonely highway itself, there is a 35,000-seat cricket stadium, an almost vacant $1.5 billion deepwater port and, 16 miles inland, a $209 million jewel known as “the world’s emptiest international airport.”

Mattala Rajapaksa International Airport, the second-largest in Sri Lanka, is designed to handle a million passengers per year. It currently receives about a dozen passengers per day. Business is so slow that the airport has made more money from renting out the unused cargo terminals for rice storage than from flight-related activities. In one burst of activity last year, 350 security personnel armed with firecrackers were deployed to scare off wild animals, the airport’s most common visitors.

Projects like Mattala are not driven by local economic needs but by remote stratagems. When Sri Lanka’s 27-year civil war ended in 2009, the president at the time, Mahinda Rajapaksa, fixated on the idea of turning his poor home district into a world-class business and tourism hub to help its moribund economy. China, with a dream of its own, was happy to oblige. Hambantota sits in a very strategic location, just a few miles north of the vital Indian Ocean shipping lane over which more than 80 percent of China’s imported oil travels. A port added luster to the “string of pearls” that China was starting to assemble all along the so-called Maritime Silk Road.

Sadly, no travelers came, only the bills. The Mattala airport has annual revenues of roughly $300,000, but now it must repay China $23.6 million a year for the next eight years, according to Sri Lanka’s Transport and Civil Aviation Ministry. Over all, around 90 percent of the country’s revenues goes to servicing debt. Even a new president who took office in 2015 on a promise to curb Chinese influence succumbed to financial reality.

To relieve its debt crisis, Sri Lanka has put its white elephants up for sale. In late July, the government agreed to give China control of the deepwater port — a 70 percent equity stake over 99 years — in exchange for writing off $1.1 billion of the island’s debt. (China has promised to invest another $600 million to make the port commercially viable.) When the preliminary deal was first floated in January, protests erupted in response to the perceived sell-off of national sovereignty, a reminder of Sri Lanka’s colonial past under British rule. “We always thought China’s investments would help our economy,” says Amantha Perera, a Sri Lankan journalist and university researcher. “But now there’s a sense that we’ve been maneuvered into selling some of the family jewels.”

As the United States beats a haphazard retreat from the world — nixing trade agreements, eschewing diplomacy, antagonizing allies — China marches on with its unabashedly ambitious global-expansion program known as One Belt, One Road. The branding is awkward: “Belt” refers to the land-bound trading route through Central Asia and Europe, while “Road,” confusingly, stands for the maritime route stretching from Southeast Asia across the Indian Ocean to the Middle East, Africa and Europe. Still, the intentions are clear: With a lending and acquisitions blitz extending to 68 countries (and counting), OBOR seeks to create the ports, roads and rail and telecommunications links for a modern-day Silk Road — with all paths leading to China.

ILLUSTRATION BY ANDREW RAE

This is China’s long game. It’s not about immediate profits; infrastructure projects are a bad way to make money. So why is President Xi Jinping fast-tracking OBOR projects amid an economic slowdown at home and a crackdown on other overseas acquisitions? Economics is a big part: China wants to secure access to key resources, export its idle industrial capacity, even tilt the world order in its favor. But there is also a far greater cultural ambition. For centuries, Western liberalism has ruled the world. The Chinese believe their time has come. “China sees itself as a great civilization that needs to regain its status as leader of the world,” says Kadira Pethiyagoda, a fellow at the Brookings Institution Doha Center. “And America’s retreat gives China the space to do that.”

It’s tempting to see OBOR as a muscled-up Marshall Plan, the American-led program that helped rebuild Western Europe after World War II. OBOR, too, is designed to build vital infrastructure, spread prosperity and drive global development. Yet little of what China offers is aid or even low-interest lending. Much OBOR financing comes in the form of market-rate loans that weaker countries are eager to receive — but may struggle to repay. Even when the projects are well suited for the local economy, the result can look a bit like a shell game: Things are built, money goes to Chinese companies and the country is saddled with more debt. What happens when, as is often the case, infrastructure projects are driven more by geopolitical ambition or the need to give China’s state-owned companies something to do? Well, Sri Lanka has an empty airport for sale.

Sri Lanka may be a harbinger for debt crises to come. Many other OBOR countries have taken on huge Chinese loans that could prove difficult to repay. For example, Chinese banks, according to The Financial Times, recently lent Pakistan $1.2 billion to stave off a currency crisis — even as they pledged $57 billion more to develop the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor. “The projects China proposes are so big and appealing and revolutionary that many small countries can’t resist,” says Brahma Chellaney, a professor of strategic studies at New Delhi’s Center for Policy Research. “They take on loans like it’s a drug addiction and then get trapped in debt servitude. It’s clearly part of China’s geostrategic vision.”

This charge conjures the specter of colonialism, when the British and Dutch weaponized debt to take control of nations’ strategic assets. China insists it is nothing like a colonial power. Its appeal to developing countries, after all, is often based on a shared negative experience of colonialism — and the desire to have cooperative “win-win” trade and investment relationships. Unlike Western countries and institutions that try to influence how developing countries govern themselves, China says it espouses the principle of noninterference. If local partners benefit from a new road or port, the Chinese suggest, shouldn’t they be able to “win,” too — by securing its main trade routes, building loyal partnerships and enhancing its global prestige?

The last time China was a global power, back in the early 1400s, it also sought to amplify its glory and might along the Maritime Silk Road, through the epic voyages of Zheng He. A towering Ming dynasty eunuch — in some accounts he stands seven feet tall — Zheng He commanded seven expeditions from Asia to the Middle East and Africa. When he came ashore on Ceylon (present-day Sri Lanka) around 1406, his fleet commanded shock and awe: It was a floating city of more than 300 ships and some 30,000 sailors. Besides seeking tributes and trade — the ships were laden with silk, gold and porcelain — his mission was to enhance China’s status as the greatest civilization on earth.

After Zheng He’s death at sea in 1433, China turned inward for the next six centuries. Now, as the country has become a global power once again, Communist Party leaders have revived the legend of Zheng He to show China’s peaceful intentions and its historical connections to the region. His goal, they say, was not to conquer — unlike Western empires — but to establish friendly trade and diplomatic relations. In Sri Lanka today, Chinese tour groups often traipse through a Colombo museum to see the trilingual stone tablet the admiral brought here — proof, it seems, that China respected all peoples and religions. No mention is made of a less savory aspect of Zheng He’s dealings in Ceylon. On a later expedition, around 1411, his troops became embroiled in a war. Zheng He prevailed and took the local king back to China as a prisoner.

The unsanitized version of Zheng He’s story may contain a lesson for present-day China about unintended consequences. Pushing countries deeper into debt, even inadvertently, may give China leverage in the short run, but it risks losing the good will essential to OBOR’s long-term success. For all the big projects China is engaged in around the world — high-speed rail in Laos, a military base in Djibouti, highways in Kenya — arguably its most perilous step so far may be taking control of the foundering Hambantota port. “It’s folly to take equity stakes,” says Joshua Eisenman, an assistant professor at the University of Texas at Austin. “China will have to become further entwined in local politics. And what happens if the country decides to deny a permit or throw them out. Do they retreat? Do they protect?” China promotes itself as a new, gentler kind of power, but it’s worth remembering that dredging deepwater ports and laying down railroad ties to secure new trade routes — and then having to defend them from angry locals — was precisely how Britain started down the slippery slope to empire.

Brook Larmer is a contributing writer for the magazine. His last article was about a Chinese-owned uranium mine in Namibia

Baloch Nation stand by with their Kurdish brothers on their historic referendum for Freedom.

http://balochistannationalcongress.blogspot.in/2017/09/baloch-nation-stand-by-with-their.html?m=1



Saturday, September 16, 2017

Baloch Nation stand by with their Kurdish brothers on their historic referendum for Freedom.

PRESS RELEASE



FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

September 16, 2017

Washington, D.C: - Baloch Nation congratulate and stand by with their Kurdish brothers on their historic referendum for freedom and share their joy and enthusiasm to cease the opportunity to embrace the path of freedom and to be FREE as a nation among the free nations of the world, which was long overdue,” said Dr. Wahid Baloch, President of Balochistan National Congress (BNC) - Washing D.C Chapter.

His Excellency Qubad Talabani 
and Dr. Wahid Baloch
Dr. Wahid Baloch who met with His Excellency Qubad Talabani, the U.S representative of the Kurdistan Regional Government, in his office in Washington, D.C in 2006, and extended solidarity to him on the behalf of Baloch Nation in person, said Baloch people are the closest friends and kin to Kurdish people and that they always stand by with their Kurdish Brothers and sisters through thick and thin.

 He said, our Kurdish brothers and sisters has gone through a lot sufferings and sacrifices to make this brilliant and bright day happens in their lives for a better future for them and for their future generations and their dreams to come true to be free as a Free and independent nation among the nations of the world.

“We are extremely happy and overwhelmed with joy to see our Kurdish Brothers and sisters made it through the tough times and overcomed all their difficulties to finally make their dream come true. This is a great accomplishment and we are extremely happy and overwhelmed with them on their success and path to freedom,” said Dr. Baloch.

He said, like the Kurdish people, the Baloch people and their motherland, Balochistan, is also divided into three countries, Viz, Pakistan, Iran and Afghanistan, by the artificial Goldsmith lines and borders, drawn by the British rulers to ‘divide and rule’, and Baloch citizens are being subjected to daily humiliation, subjugation, discrimination and torture in their own homeland by the foreign occupying forces.   

He said It is time that the world community to recognize that no any artificial border can separate the families and blood kins for too long and that these borders and Goldsmith lines must be abolished once and for all as these are unjust and they violates the international laws.

He said, like Kurds, Baloch people have also a long history of struggle for freedom and justice to reunite their divided motherland and to re-gain their lost and stolen independence from the foreign occupier.  He said, today is FREE Kurdistan and tomorrow, God willing, it will be the FREE Balochistan. He asked the Baloch Diaspora to shun their pity differences and join hands together like Kurds to make their dream to come true.

                                                                                                              ###

September 15, 2017

China's Risky Investment in Pakistan


http://dailycaller.com/2017/09/15/chinas-risky-investment-in-pakistan/

LAWRENCE SELLIN

Retired Colonel, U.S. Army Reserve

11:09 AM 09/15/2017

The China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), which is part of China’s larger Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), aims to connect Asia through land-based and maritime economic zones. CPEC is an infrastructure project, the backbone of which is a transportation network connecting China to the Pakistani seaports of Gwadar and Karachi located on the Arabian Sea.

Pakistan has made a different type of investment, in radical Islam, one which could become very costly to the Chinese.

At a recent conference in the Chinese city of Xiamen, the five BRICS countries – Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa, issued a declaration that for the first time highlighted shared concerns about terrorism from radical Islamic groups, most based in Pakistan.

Although not naming Pakistan directly, the BRICS nations listed specific Islamic terrorist organizations; the Taliban, ISIS, al- Qaida and its affiliates, including Eastern Turkistan Islamic Movement, Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan, the Haqqani network, Lashkar-e-Taiba, Jaish-e- Mohammad, Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) and Hizb ut- Tahrir.

Given China’s traditional “all weather” support of Pakistan, the BRICS declaration was unprecedented and a clear signal that China considers Pakistan’s support of Islamic terrorism as a threat to its economic and geopolitical interests.

That action was undoubtedly triggered by the June 2017 kidnapping and killingof two Chinese teachers by the Islamic State affiliate Lashkar-e-Jhangvi Al-Almi (LeJ-A) in Quetta, which followed the killing of four Chinese engineers in Balochistan last year.

China condemned the kidnapping, saying it “attaches high importance to the safety of Chinese citizens overseas” and the state-run media had said the abduction “highlights risks” associated with CPEC, particularly in Balochistan, which China considers as the “center” of that effort.

Balochistan, a region rich in minerals and other natural resources that China hopes to exploit, is where the CPEC transportation network transits and ends in the southwestern city of Gwadar at the mouth of the Persian Gulf, which China is attempting to develop as a seaport and an international air cargo center, aka military bases.

Balochistan has also been the home of a festering ethnic insurgency since the partition of India in 1947, when the Baloch were promised autonomy and briefly gained independence from August 1947 to March 1948, but were then forcibly incorporated into Pakistan.

To counter ethnic separatism, Pakistan, the South Asian equivalent of Yugoslavia, has for forty years promoted the policy of “pan Islamism” as societal glue. As a result, there has been a proliferation of radical Islamic groups, both “good” and “bad” terrorists.

Pakistan’s “good terrorists” are those closely associated with the Pakistani military and its intelligence agency the ISI, such as Laskar-e-Taiba (LeT) and Jamaat-ud-Dawa (JuD), both having a strong presence in, for example, Kharan, Balochistan under Muneer Mullazai, reportedly a close associate of LeT leader Hafiz Saeed, now under house arrest in Lahore.

The “bad terrorists” are those not under the control of the Pakistani military and the ISI, extremist splinter groups like LeJ-A or those led by former ISI agents like Shafiq Mengal, who is the alleged leader of the Islamic State in Pakistan and, according to Reuters, is believed to control a Jihadi recruitment network in Pakistan and Afghanistan.

Ethnic separatism is also suppressed by the Pakistani military and the ISI by leveraging tribal rivalries or simply by hiring local criminals as enforcers. In Balochistan, government officials and the Pakistan Army Frontier Corps are supplemented by locally recruited police forces called “Levies,” whose members have been linked to off-duty extrajudicial “death squads” to eliminate government opponents and sometimes tribal rivals.

It is also the fear of Afghan nationalism that drives, at least partially, Pakistan’s support for the Taliban. With such deep-seated paranoia, it is unlikely that the Pakistani “Deep State” will forego an Islamist policy considered Pakistan’s raison d’être.

China and Pakistan are making a huge bet that economic development can coexist with the infrastructure of terrorism. Good luck with that.

Lawrence Sellin, Ph.D. is a retired US Army Reserve colonel, an IT command and control subject matter expert, trained in Arabic and Kurdish, and a veteran of Afghanistan, northern Iraq and a humanitarian mission to West Africa. He receives email at lawrence.sellin@gmail.com.

China's Risky Investment in Pakistan


http://dailycaller.com/2017/09/15/chinas-risky-investment-in-pakistan/

LAWRENCE SELLIN

Retired Colonel, U.S. Army Reserve

11:09 AM 09/15/2017

The China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), which is part of China’s larger Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), aims to connect Asia through land-based and maritime economic zones. CPEC is an infrastructure project, the backbone of which is a transportation network connecting China to the Pakistani seaports of Gwadar and Karachi located on the Arabian Sea.

Pakistan has made a different type of investment, in radical Islam, one which could become very costly to the Chinese.

At a recent conference in the Chinese city of Xiamen, the five BRICS countries – Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa, issued a declaration that for the first time highlighted shared concerns about terrorism from radical Islamic groups, most based in Pakistan.

Although not naming Pakistan directly, the BRICS nations listed specific Islamic terrorist organizations; the Taliban, ISIS, al- Qaida and its affiliates, including Eastern Turkistan Islamic Movement, Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan, the Haqqani network, Lashkar-e-Taiba, Jaish-e- Mohammad, Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) and Hizb ut- Tahrir.

Given China’s traditional “all weather” support of Pakistan, the BRICS declaration was unprecedented and a clear signal that China considers Pakistan’s support of Islamic terrorism as a threat to its economic and geopolitical interests.

That action was undoubtedly triggered by the June 2017 kidnapping and killingof two Chinese teachers by the Islamic State affiliate Lashkar-e-Jhangvi Al-Almi (LeJ-A) in Quetta, which followed the killing of four Chinese engineers in Balochistan last year.

China condemned the kidnapping, saying it “attaches high importance to the safety of Chinese citizens overseas” and the state-run media had said the abduction “highlights risks” associated with CPEC, particularly in Balochistan, which China considers as the “center” of that effort.

Balochistan, a region rich in minerals and other natural resources that China hopes to exploit, is where the CPEC transportation network transits and ends in the southwestern city of Gwadar at the mouth of the Persian Gulf, which China is attempting to develop as a seaport and an international air cargo center, aka military bases.

Balochistan has also been the home of a festering ethnic insurgency since the partition of India in 1947, when the Baloch were promised autonomy and briefly gained independence from August 1947 to March 1948, but were then forcibly incorporated into Pakistan.

To counter ethnic separatism, Pakistan, the South Asian equivalent of Yugoslavia, has for forty years promoted the policy of “pan Islamism” as societal glue. As a result, there has been a proliferation of radical Islamic groups, both “good” and “bad” terrorists.

Pakistan’s “good terrorists” are those closely associated with the Pakistani military and its intelligence agency the ISI, such as Laskar-e-Taiba (LeT) and Jamaat-ud-Dawa (JuD), both having a strong presence in, for example, Kharan, Balochistan under Muneer Mullazai, reportedly a close associate of LeT leader Hafiz Saeed, now under house arrest in Lahore.

The “bad terrorists” are those not under the control of the Pakistani military and the ISI, extremist splinter groups like LeJ-A or those led by former ISI agents like Shafiq Mengal, who is the alleged leader of the Islamic State in Pakistan and, according to Reuters, is believed to control a Jihadi recruitment network in Pakistan and Afghanistan.

Ethnic separatism is also suppressed by the Pakistani military and the ISI by leveraging tribal rivalries or simply by hiring local criminals as enforcers. In Balochistan, government officials and the Pakistan Army Frontier Corps are supplemented by locally recruited police forces called “Levies,” whose members have been linked to off-duty extrajudicial “death squads” to eliminate government opponents and sometimes tribal rivals.

It is also the fear of Afghan nationalism that drives, at least partially, Pakistan’s support for the Taliban. With such deep-seated paranoia, it is unlikely that the Pakistani “Deep State” will forego an Islamist policy considered Pakistan’s raison d’être.

China and Pakistan are making a huge bet that economic development can coexist with the infrastructure of terrorism. Good luck with that.

Lawrence Sellin, Ph.D. is a retired US Army Reserve colonel, an IT command and control subject matter expert, trained in Arabic and Kurdish, and a veteran of Afghanistan, northern Iraq and a humanitarian mission to West Africa. He receives email at lawrence.sellin@gmail.com.

NIRMALA SEETHARAMAN, India's first full time, woman Defence Minister

🎯🎯🎯🎯🎯🎯🎯🎯🎯🎯🎯

NIRMALA SEETHARAMAN, India's first full time, woman Defence Minister. Indira Gandhi had held additional charge as the minister of defence.

Nirmala Sitharaman a native of Madurai in Tamil Nadu, was born in a conservative Brahmin family to Shri Narayanan  Seetaraman (a Railway employee)  and Savitri, a housewife.
She studied upto her middle school in various cìties of Tamil Nadu, because of her father's frequent transfers. For High School she and her sister went to be with her periamma(aunt) in Chennai. She did schooling in Savithri Vidyasala.

She obtained a B.A. degree from  Seethalakshmi Ramaswamy College, Trichy, and an MA degree in economics from JNU, Delhi in 1980 in the Indo-European textile trade within the GATT framework got an MPhil.  

While in JNU she met her husband Prakala Prabhakar, an Andhraite from Narasapuram, AP.

In 1986 they got married and left for London where her husband enrolled for his PhD. She worked briefly as a Sales Girl in a shop trading in home decor. Thereafter she joined Price Waterhouse Cooper as an analyst.

In 1991 they returned to their native place in Andhra and later pregnant Nirmala went to Chennai and had her baby girl, her only child.

Nirmala then served at  Price Waterhouse Coopers (India) as a Senior Manager and later worked for the BBC world service. She is one of the founding directors of Pranava school in Hyderabad, before joining BJP in 2004.
She loves Carnatic Classical music and collects devotional songs on Krishna.

One of the Highest positions... Proud of you Nirmala Seetharam.

Intelligence, balanced approach, dedication, integrity, will power & hard work have taken you to that coveted Position.

Whole country gives  you a standing ovation Madam.👏🏻👏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻😇😇

🎯🎯🎯🎯🎯🎯🎯🎯🎯🎯🎯

గౌరీ లంకేశ్ ని కమ్యూనిస్టు లే చంపారు అట..!!

హిందూ అభ్యు... దయ్యాలు పోస్టులు పెడుతున్నాయి!
వాటికి సపోర్టుగా మైనార్టీ అభ్యుదయవాదులు...
కామెంట్లలో చెలరేగిపోతున్నారు!
వీళ్లంతా...

ఫ్రాన్స్ లో జీహాది మతం వారు మహమ్మద్ ప్రవక్త మీద ఒక కార్టూన్ వేసినందుకు, ఫ్రాన్స్ లో వాళ్ళ ఆఫీస్ కి వెళ్లి మరి ఆ పత్రిక వాళ్ళలో 12 మందిని చంపేస్తే...  నోట్లో నేతి లడ్డూలు పెట్టుకుని వీళ్లు అంతా మౌనంగా వుండిపోయినోళ్లే!

ఇప్పడు పత్రిక స్వేచ్చ, హిందూ మతోన్మాదమ్ అని గుండెలు బాదుకుంటున్నారు..!!

జర్నలిస్ట్ గౌరీ లంకేష్ గార్ని
ఎవరు చంపారో తెలియలేదు
కానీ కొందరు ఎరుపులు
ఆ రక్తపు మరకల్ని కాషాయానికి
అంటించే పనిలో నిమగ్నమైపోయారు.

వీళ్ళ మేధస్సు ఆలోచనా శక్తి ముందర
సిబీఐ - సీఐడి - చివరికి ఇంటర్ పోల్
కూడా బలాదూరే...!!

అదే పనిగా ఒక వర్గం, ఒక మతం వార్ని విమర్శించి ఇంకో వర్గం, మతం  వారు అత్యంత దారుణాలకి పాల్పడుతుంటే తేలుకుట్టినట్లు వుండిపోవటం ఎ్పటికైనా 'దెబ్బే'! అది రుచి చూడాల్సిన టైం వస్తే 'గాంధీ'కే తప్పలేదు!

గౌరీ లంకేష్ లు, కల్బూర్గీలు అందరు ఛస్తున్నది కాంగ్రెస్ పాలిత రాష్ట్రాల్లోనే. చేతకాని తనం చేయి పార్టీది. మోదీ ఎట్టి పరిస్థితుల్లోనూ కారణం కాదు!

అమెరికా, చైనా, రష్యా అధ్యక్షులతో అంతర్జాతీయ వ్యవహారాలు చూసే మోదీ... ఈ చిన్న చిన్న బొద్దింకల కోసం హిట్ స్ప్రే పట్టుకుని ఊరూరా తిరగడు!
రాష్ట్ర ప్రభుత్వాలు తమ స్వార్థం కోసం సో కాల్డ్ పోరాట యోధుల్ని 'చావనిస్తున్నాయి'. ముందు కాంగ్రెస్, ఇతర లౌకికవాద స్థానిక ప్రభుత్వాల్ని ఆవేశవాదులు నిలదీయాలి...

హిందూవులు గనక డిసైడ్ అయితే,
రావణుడి గొప్పవాడు రాముడు వెస్ట్
అన్న కంచె హౌలయ్య,
దుర్గామాత సెక్స్ వర్కర్, పాకిస్తాన్ జిందాబాద్ అన్న ఏచూరి ఎవ్వరిని బతకనివ్వరు..!!

గౌరీ లంకేష్ కోసం నివళాలు ఘటిస్తున్న వారికోసం ఈ పోస్ట్  ఇంతకు ఈ గౌరీ లంకేష్ ఎవ్వరో తెలుసా .?

🔵 JNU విద్యార్ధులకు దేశ వ్యతరేక బావలతో కూడుకున్న ఆలోచనలను నురిపోసేది

🔴 కాశ్మీర్ మనది కాదు మనం కాశ్మీర్ ని పాకిస్తాన్ నుండి అక్రమించుకున్నం

🔵 హిందువులు తివ్రవాదుల కన్నా ప్రమాదం

🔴 యాకుబ్ మీనన్ ఉరి శిక్షకు వ్యతిరేకంగా ర్యాలీ చేసిన ఘనురాలు 

🔵 చిన్న చిన్న గ్రామమలో "మీరంతా నక్సేల్స్ తో జాయిన్ అవ్వి సైన్యంపై పోరాటం చేయండి.

🔴 భరత్ తేరే తుక్డే తుక్డే హుంగే అంటున్న వెక్తి తనకు కొడుకుతో సమానం

🔵 హిందూస్తాన్ సర్వనాసనం అవ్వే వరకు మా యుద్ధం ఆగదు అంటున్న వ్యక్తి కి తను తల్లీ లాంటింది అంటూ పోస్ట్ పెట్టి  తనకు ఈ దేశంపై ఉన్న ద్వేషం చూపించ సాగింది.

🔴 దేశంలో ఎక్కడ ఎవ్వరు చనిపోయిన "దళిత్ మరియు ముస్లింల పై దాడులు జరుగుతున్నాయి అంటూ మైనారిటీ మరియు గిరిజనులను బయబ్రంతులకు గురిచేసేది

🔵 ఈ దేశంలో దళితులకు రక్షణ లేదు అనుకుంటూ విదేశాలకు పోయి మన దేశంపై ఫిర్యాదు చేసిన ఘనురాలు ఈ గౌరీ లంఖేష్ గారు

🔴 ఏది ఏమైనా ఈమె మరణానికి 3 రోజుల ముందు చేసిన ట్వీట్ లను పరిశాలిస్తే అందరికి అర్ధం అవుతుంది ఈమె హత్యకు ముఖ్య కారకులు కమూనిస్ట్ గుండాలు అని.

🔵 రాముడు దేవుడు కాదు రావణాసుడిని కక్షతో చంపేసాడు

🔴 దుర్గమ్మను విమర్శిస్తూ ఆర్టికల్స్ రాస్తూ ఉండేది

✅దినిబట్టి అర్ధం అవ్వేది ఏమనగా కమ్యూనిస్ట్ పార్టీలో శివంగా చేరుతం కాదు కుదరదు అంటే శవంగా మారుతం

బెంగుళూరులొ తన ఇటివద్దనే హత్య చేయబడిన  ప్రముఖ కమ్యునిస్టు జర్నలిస్టు అయిన "గౌరి లంకేష్" హత్యకు మావొఇస్టులు లేదా రాడికల్స్ కారణమని కర్ణాటక పొలీసులు, నేషనల్ మీడియా అనుమానిస్తుంటే

కమ్యూనిస్టులు కాంగ్రెస్ పార్టీ మాత్రం బిజెపి నే ఈ హత్యకు  కారణమన్నట్టు చెబుతున్నాయి. వీరు ఉద్యేశ్య పూర్వకంగా గౌరి లంకేష్ తను చనిపొయే ముందు చేసిన ట్వీట్ల గురించి గాని, లేదా తనను తన సొదరుడు ఇంద్రజిట్ రివాల్వరు తొ బెదిరిస్తున్నాడని అమె పెట్టిన కేసు గురించిగాని చెప్పకుండా బిజెపి నే ఈ హత్య చేయించింది అనేలా అతి తెలివితొ వార్తలు ప్రసారం చేస్తున్నారు. సాక్షి అయితే మరొక అడుగు ముందుకేసి గౌరి లంకేష్,  హిందూ మతొన్మాదంమీద, బిజెపి మీద రాజిలేని పొరాటం చేసిందని చెబుతుంది.

ఇక్కడ విషయమేమిటంటే బిజెపి CBI  విచారణ కొరుతుంటే సిధారామయ్య మాత్రం అందుకు ఓప్పుకొవడం లేదు (సిద్ధారామయ్య అవినీతి మీద ఇన్వెస్టిగేషన్ చేస్తుంటే చంపబడింది అని వార్తలు వస్తున్నాయి)

Source :  from nationalists

September 14, 2017

India-Japan Joint Statement during visit of Prime Minister of Japan to India (September 14, 2017)

http://www.mea.gov.in/bilateral-documents.htm?dtl/28946/IndiaJapan_Joint_Statement_during_visit_of_Prime_Minister_of_Japan_to_India_September_14_2017

India-Japan Joint Statement during visit of Prime Minister of Japan to India (September 14, 2017)

September 14, 2017

Toward a Free, Open and Prosperous Indo-Pacific

H.E. Shinzo Abe, Prime Minister of Japan is paying an official visit to India from 13 September to 14 September, 2017 at the invitation of H.E. Narendra Modi, Prime Minister of India. On 14 September, the two Prime Ministers held strategic discussions on a wide range of issues under the Special Strategic and Global Partnership between the two countries.

The two Prime Ministers welcomed significant deepening of bilateral relations in the past three years and the growing convergence in the political, economic and strategic interests, based on the firm foundation of common values and traditions, as well as on an emerging consensus on contemporary issues of peace, security and development. They decided to work together to elevate their partnership to the next level to advance common strategic objectives at a time when the global community is faced with new challenges.The two Prime Ministers affirmed strong commitment to their values-based partnership in achieving a free, open and prosperous Indo-Pacific region where sovereignty and international law are respected, and differences are resolved through dialogue, and where all countries, large or small, enjoy freedom of navigation and overflight, sustainable development, and a free, fair, and open trade and investment system.The two Prime Ministers underlined that India and Japan could play a central role in safeguarding and strengthening such a rules-based order. To this end, they pledged to reinforce their efforts to:

- align Japan’s Free and Open Indo-Pacific Strategy with India’s Act East Policy, including through enhancing maritime security cooperation, improving connectivity in the wider Indo-Pacific region, strengthening cooperation with ASEAN, and promoting discussions between strategists and experts of the two countries;

- enhance defence and security cooperation and dialogues, including the MALABAR and other joint exercises, defence equipment and technology cooperation in such areas as surveillance and unmanned system technologies, and defence industry cooperation.

- ensure partnerships for prosperity through the India-Japan Investment Promotion Partnership, speedy implementation of key infrastructure projects including the Mumbai Ahmedabad High Speed Railway (MAHSR), and advancing cooperation in the fields of energy, smart cities, information and communication technology, space, science and technology, bio-technology, pharmaceuticals and health.

- strengthen people-to-people and cultural ties through enhanced Japanese language teaching in India and collaboration in the fields of tourism, civil aviation, higher education, women’s education, skills development and sports;

- work together on global challenges such as proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMDs), terrorism, space and cyber security, United Nations Security Council (UNSC) reform, climate change and environment;

- strengthen trilateral cooperation frameworks with the United States, Australia and other countries.

Reinforcing Defence and Security CooperationThe two Prime Ministers emphasised the significance of defence and security cooperation in enhancing the strategic partnership between the two countries. In this context, they welcomed the regular and institutionalised engagement through the annual Defence Ministerial Dialogue, the National Security Advisers' dialogue, the "2+2” Dialogue, the Defence Policy Dialogue and Service-to-Service staff talks.The two Prime Ministers commended the significant progress achieved in maritime security cooperation evidenced by the expansion in scale and complexity of the MALABAR Exercise in the Bay of Bengal in July 2017 (MALABAR-17). They noted the ongoing close cooperation between the Indian Navy and Japan Maritime Self-Defence Force (JMSDF) in various specialised areas of mutual interest, including anti-submarine aspects. They also acknowledged the importance of bilateral cooperation in maritime security by strengthening and enhancing exchanges in expanding maritime domain awareness (MDA) in the Indo-Pacific region.The two Prime Ministers shared the intention to expand joint exercises and cooperation in such areas as humanitarian assistance and disaster relief (HA/DR), peacekeeping operations(PKOs), counter-terrorism including the possibility of joint field exercises between Indian Army and Japan’s Ground Self-Defence Force (JGSDF) in 2018, and reciprocal visits by air assets to each other’s country. They welcomed significant development in the long-standing partnership between the two Coast Guards, including the 16th High Level Meeting and the joint exercise in Yokohama in January 2017 between the two coast guards.The two Prime Ministers noted recent progress in bilateral cooperation on defence equipment and technology, including the commencement of the technical discussion for the future research collaboration in the area of Unmanned Ground Vehicles and Robotics. Japan’s readiness to provide its state-of-the-art US-2 amphibian aircraft was appreciated as symbolising the high degree of trust between the two countries. The two governments decided to continue their discussions in this regard.The two Prime Ministers welcomed the recently held annual Defence Ministerial Dialogue and the first Defence Industry Forum in Tokyo on 5 September, which was addressed by the two Defence Ministers as well as the discussions covering other promising initiatives in defence industry cooperation. They recognised the importance of enhancing interactions between governments and defence industries of the two countries in order to encourage equipment collaboration including defence and dual-use technologies.The two Prime Ministers welcomed the holding of the Second India-Japan Cyber Dialogue in New Delhi on 17 August this year and reaffirmed their commitment to an open, free, secure, stable, peaceful and accessible cyberspace, enabling economic growth and innovation as well as mutual cooperation in this regard. 

Working Together for a Better Connected WorldThe two Prime Ministers expressed their strong commitment to work together to enhance connectivity in India and with other countries in the Indo-Pacific region including Africa. They welcomed the deepening of their connectivity dialogue aimed at achieving concrete progress, and decided to further accelerate such an initiative.The two Prime Ministers also underlined the importance of all countries ensuring the development and use of connectivity infrastructure in an open, transparent and non-exclusive manner based on international standards and responsible debt financing practices, while ensuring respect for sovereignty and territorial integrity, the rule of law, and the environment. They also reaffirmed the importance of "quality infrastructure” which, among others ensures alignment with local economic and development strategies, safety, resilience, social and environmental impacts, and job creation as well as capacity building for the local communities.The two Prime Ministers welcomed the efforts to explore the development of industrial corridors and industrial network for the growth of Asia and Africa, which will benefit various stakeholders in the Indo-Pacific region including Africa. They shared the desire to further promote cooperation and collaboration in Africa in line with the priority measures identified through the India-Japan dialogue on Africa and the processes of the India Africa Forum Summit (IAFS) and Tokyo International Conference on African Development (TICAD).The two Prime Ministers welcomed the India-Japan cooperation on development of India’s North Eastern Region (NER) as a concrete symbol of developing synergies between India’s Act East policy and Japan’s Free and Open Indo Pacific Strategy. In this context, they noted with satisfaction the setting up of the India-Japan Act East Forum. They appreciated the cooperation between Japan and North Eastern Region of India, ranging from key infrastructure such as road connectivity, electricity, water supply and sewage, to social and environmental sustainability such as afforestation and community empowerment, as well as people-to-people exchanges including the "IRIS Program” inviting youth from the NER to Japan.The two Prime Ministers also stressed the importance of the development of the smart islands to enhance regional connectivity and decided to further accelerate consultations to identify technologies, infrastructure and development strategies for the purpose.

Partnership for prosperityThe two Prime Ministers welcomed the commencement of the project on the ground at the Sabarmati Station for the Mumbai-Ahmedabad High Speed Rail (MAHSR), which will be an important symbol of a new era marked by the 75th Anniversary of India’s Independence. Expressing satisfaction at the steady progress, they directed their teams to multiply their efforts for achieving the target scheduleThe two Prime Ministers welcomed the exchange of notes for 100 billion yen as the first ODA loan for the MAHSR project. They also witnessed commencement of the construction of the HSR training institute in Vadodara. They appreciated the commencement of the JICA technical cooperation program for the capacity development of the National High Speed Rail Corporation.The two Prime Ministers committed to advancing "Make in India” and transfer of technology in HSR projects, and expressed optimism in this direction. They welcomed the series of business matching efforts to establish India-Japan cooperation, such as the prospective technology collaboration between Kawasaki and BHEL. Both sides will explore further strengthening of partnership in high speed railways. They also recognised that there is potential for further collaboration between India and Japan in the modernisation and expansion of the conventional railway system and the construction of metro rails in India. They also highlighted the importance of the safety of conventional railways, and appreciated the commencement of the JICA technical cooperation program by the dispatch of railways safety experts of Japan in August 2017,followed by a railway safety seminar and other programs.Prime Minister Modi updated Prime Minister Abe about his Government’s efforts for the country’s economic and social development. Prime Minister Abe reiterated Japan’s strong support for the initiatives such as "Make in India”, "Digital India”, "Skill India”, "Smart City”, "Clean India,” and "Start-Up India”. Prime Minister Abe highly appreciated Prime Minister Modi’s economic reforms, especially the historic introduction of the Goods and Services Tax (GST), which facilitates ease of doing business and promotes market integration in India by realising a simple, efficient and nation-wide indirect tax system.The two Prime Ministers welcomed the expansion of Japan’s Foreign Direct Investment in India under the "India-Japan Investment Promotion Partnership”, committed to by both sides in 2014. They shared the view that the India-Japan Roadmap for Investment Promotion will provide greater impetus to "Make in India” through investment promotion activities, expanding the scope of professional services and assistance provided by JETRO to Japanese Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (SMEs) operating in India, Review Mechanisms for Issue Resolution and Approvals, Single Window Clearance Procedures, Japan Industrial Townships and infrastructure development. Prime Minister Abe expressed appreciation for the facilitation provided by "Japan Plus”, and the coordination by the Core Group. They also welcomed the progress in the projects of the Western Dedicated Freight Corridor (DFC), through JICA, the Delhi-Mumbai Industrial Corridor (DMIC) including the DMIC Logistic Data Bank Project and expressed expectations of promoting industrial investment in DMIC cities. They welcomed the signing of "the Joint Statement on the Development of the New Capital City and Industrial Cooperation in Andhra Pradesh”. They also welcomed Japanese cooperation for smart city projects in Ahmedabad, Chennai as well as Varanasi.The two Prime Ministers welcomed the signing of the Memorandum of Cooperation on the joint development of the "Japan and India Special Program for Make in India” in Mandal-Becharaj-Khoraj, Gujarat, as a regional development project driven by manufacturing cluster, and the plan to establish a JETRO’s Business Support Centre in its Ahmedabad office to promote Japanese SMEs investment in Gujarat.The two Prime Ministers welcomed the start of the first four Japan-India Institutes for Manufacturing (JIMs) in the States of Gujarat, Karnataka, Rajasthan and Tamil Nadu in 2017,under the Manufacturing Skill Transfer Promotion Program, and looked forward to more JIMs. They also welcomed the commencement of the first Japanese Endowed Courses (JEC) in Andhra Pradesh from September 2017. They strongly hoped that this program will introduce Japanese manufacturing practices and accelerate training of future shop floor leaders and engineers.The two Prime Ministers expressed the confidence that synergy between Japan’s advanced technology and India’s rich human resources can transform both countries into new centres of production in the global industrial network. They underscored the potential to further cooperate in human resources development and exchanges, including through utilising such frameworks as Japan’s "Innovative Asia” initiative and the Technical Intern Training Program(TITP).The two Prime Ministers noted with satisfaction the significant contribution of Japan’s ODA to the socio-economic development of India, especially the historically highest ever amount of ODA loan provided through JICA in the last two consecutive years. Prime Minister Abe expressed Japan’s intention to continue to support India’s efforts for social and industrial development including building key infrastructure projects.Prime Minister Modi appreciated the provision of ODA loan to the following projects, in addition to the Mumbai-Ahmedabad High Speed Railway (MAHSR) Project and its related training institute:

- Project for Upgradation of Environmental Management for Ship Recycling in Alang and Sosiya in Gujarat

- North East Road Network Connectivity Improvement Project (Phase 2)

- Kolkata East-West Metro Project (III)

- Gujarat Investment Promotion Program

In this regard, the two Prime Ministers welcomed progress in the ODA projects in urban transportation sector such as the Delhi, Chennai, Mumbai, Bangalore, Kolkata and Ahmedabad Metro, the Mumbai Trans-Harbour Link Project, and the introduction of the Intelligence Transport System along with the Eastern Peripheral Highway in Delhi.The two Prime Ministers expressed satisfaction at the entry into force of the Agreement between the Government of the Republic of India and the Government of Japan for Cooperation in the Peaceful Uses of Nuclear Energy. They looked forward to a working group to strengthen bilateral cooperation in this field and reiterated their shared view that the Agreement reflects a new level of mutual confidence and strategic partnership in the cause of clean energy, economic development and a peaceful and secure world.The two Prime Ministers recognised that access to reliable, clean and affordable energy is critical for the economic growth of both countries. In this regard, they decided to strengthen bilateral energy cooperation and welcomed the India-Japan Energy Partnership Initiative as well as early convening of 9th Energy dialogue. They appreciated Japan’s proposal for India-Japan Clean Energy and Energy Efficiency Cooperation Plan. They also welcomed the efforts to promote renewable energy, including the establishment of the International Solar Alliance (ISA), and the progress of New Energy and Industrial Technology Development Organization (NEDO)’s demonstration project such as a micro grid system using solar power in Neemrana. They looked forward to further acceleration of cooperation in areas of energy saving, energy efficiency and energy storage as well as manufacturing of eco-friendly vehicles including hybrid and electric vehicles.In this regard, the two Prime Ministers welcomed the opening of the first lithium-ion battery factory in India by a joint venture of three Japanese companies – Suzuki, Toshiba and Denso as well as a new automotive factory this year. They decided to further promote public and private sector collaboration to make environmentally friendly and energy efficient technologies accessible and affordable to the general public, recognising that such investments facilitate India’s National Electric Mobility Mission Plan 2020 (NEMMP) and Faster Adoption of Manufacturing of Hybrid and Electric Vehicles (FAME) vision, and underlined the importance of support measures to promote eco-friendly vehicles including in terms of "Make in India” and transfer of technology.The two Prime Ministers also stressed that sustainable ship industry is one of the key areas for sustainable growth of India, and reaffirmed their intention to achieve an early conclusion of the Hong Kong International Convention for the Safe and Environmentally Sound Recycling of Ships, 2009.The two Prime Ministers recognised the important role of science and technology in dealing with both developmental and societal challenges, and underlined the importance of enhanced bilateral cooperation in such fields as IoT, ICT, marine science, biomedical sciences, genetics, stem cell technology, and heavy ion radiotherapy. In this regard, they welcomed the successful holding of the 9th India-Japan Joint Committee on Science and Technology Cooperation in January 2017 in Delhi.The two Prime Ministers welcomed the progress made in the bilateral IT and IoT cooperation through the bilateral Joint Working Group on IT and Electronics, in particular by the signing of the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) between the National Association of Software and Services Companies (NASSCOM) of India and IoT Acceleration Consortium (ITAC) of Japan.The two Prime Ministers directed their respective sides to work closely to establish an India Japan Startup Hub, which will serve as a platform for promotion of information exchange, business collaboration and investments between the vibrant and innovative Startup ecosystems of two countries.The two Prime Ministers acknowledged that outer space is an ever-expanding frontier of human endeavour and welcomed the deepening of cooperation between the space agencies of the two countries in the field of earth observation, satellite based navigation, space sciences and lunar exploration. They welcomed establishment of the ISRO-JAXA Joint Working Group under the space cooperation MoU signed in November 2016. They also welcomed co-hosting by India and Japan of the 24th Session of the Asia-Pacific Regional Space Agency Forum (APRSAF-24) in November 2017 in India. They stressed the importance of enhancing comprehensive space cooperation.The two Prime Ministers noted with satisfaction the progress in the health sector and the joint efforts by their medical experts on medical device development. They also noted the opportunities for collaboration between Indian and Japanese pharmaceutical companies in light of the target regarding the quantitative share of generic medicines in Japan.The two Prime Ministers shared the importance of strengthening cooperation in the fields of agricultural and food related sectors. They welcomed Japan’s participation in World Food India 2017 as a partner country.The two Prime Ministers welcomed the efforts to develop cooperation in disaster prevention, response, recovery and reconstruction as envisaged in the Memorandum of Cooperation on disaster risk reduction between the Ministry of Home Affairs of the Government of India and the Cabinet Office of the Government of Japan . They underlined the importance of identifying and disseminating best practices to "build better” and thus reducing losses arising from infrastructure damage during natural disasters, as aimed by the international coalition proposed by Prime Minister Modi at the Asia Ministerial Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction(AMCDRR)-2016.The two Prime Ministers recognised the importance of the empowerment of women to maximise their national potential, and decided to strengthen cooperation in this area, including through conferences such as the World Assembly for Women (WAW!). They welcomed the convening of the "Indo-Japan Consultation on ‘Women at Work and Changing Social Norms’” in Delhi in July 2017.

Expanding vistas of People-to-People CooperationThe two Prime Ministers renewed their commitment to strengthening human and cultural ties commensurate with their Special Strategic and Global Partnership.In this context, the two Prime Ministers welcomed a series of cultural events successfully held through the Year of India-Japan Friendly Exchanges in 2017.The two Prime Ministers recognised the importance of expanding Japanese language education in India, for achieving wider and closer industrial cooperation. In this regard, they decided to endeavour towards establishing Japanese language certificate courses at 100 higher educational institutions in India as well as training1,000 Japanese language teachers, over the next five years.The two Prime Ministers welcomed the exchange of notes for the construction of a state-of-art Convention Centre in Varanasi as a symbol of friendship between India and Japan and expressed their hope for its early completion.The two Prime Ministers expressed satisfaction at the increased interaction at all levels of the government, between Members of Parliament, and between prefectures and states. They welcomed the strengthening of parliamentary exchanges through mutual visits of parliamentarians from both sides.With a view to achieving greater policy coordination and deepening intellectual exchanges between the two countries, the two Prime Ministers encouraged interactions among senior officials, strategists and experts in leading think tanks and universities on wide-ranging issues in the Indo-Pacific region.Prime Minister Modi welcomed the growing interest in celebrating the International Day of Yoga in Japan and, in particular, welcomed the first-ever Parliamentary League for Promotion of Yoga set up in the Japanese Diet in April 2017.The two Prime Ministers underscored the importance of promoting tourism exchange between the two countries and hoped that the opening of the Japan National Tourism Organisation (JNTO) office in Delhi in March 2017 and further relaxation of visa requirements will facilitate business and tourism links between the two countries.The two Prime Ministers welcomed the expansion of civil aviation connectivity between India and Japan, utilising the recently updated open sky policies between the two countries.The two Prime Ministers noted the steady increase in the number of Indian students in Japan. They welcomed the SAKURA Science Plan (Japan-Asia Youth Exchange Programme in Science) and the Japan East Asia Network of Exchange for Students and Youths (JENESYS) which contributed to increase in numbers of young Indian students and researchers in science and technology visiting Japan and hoped for further strengthening of collaboration in these fields.Aiming to enhance the positive influence of traditions of non-violence, tolerance and democracy in Asia, the two Prime Ministers welcomed the SAMVAD II conference held in Yangon, Myanmar, in August 2017 and looked forward to the next conference in 2018.Prime Minister Abe welcomed the support offered by Prime Minister Modi for Japan’s efforts towards the successful organisation of the Tokyo 2020 Olympic and Paralympic Games. The two Prime Ministers noted with satisfaction the institutional linkages set up between India and Japan. They also acknowledged that the Olympic and Paralympic Games offer a unique opportunity for the two countries to further deepen their cooperation.

Working with Partners on Regional and Global ChallengesWelcoming the 50th anniversary of the establishment of ASEAN, the two Prime Ministers renewed their commitment to strengthening political, economic, and security cooperation with ASEAN countries, with a view to supporting the ASEAN’s unity and its centrality to regional architecture. They welcomed deepening bilateral policy coordination, including the launch of the India-Japan Dialogue on ASEAN in March 2017, and determined to work together to shape and strengthen the evolving regional architecture through ASEAN-led fora such as the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF), ASEAN Defence Ministers’ Meeting Plus, the Expanded ASEAN Maritime Forum.The two Prime Ministers reaffirmed that regular convening of the East Asia Summit (EAS) Ambassadors Meeting in Jakarta and the establishment of EAS Unit within the ASEAN Secretariat have contributed to ensuring that the EAS process, as the premier leaders-led forum to discuss broad strategic, security and economic issues of common concern, continues to retain its dynamic proactiveness in responding to emerging issues of global importance. They decided to work in unison to enhance physical and digital connectivity within the EAS framework while striving to ensure greater economic benefits to all in an equitable and balanced manner. They also decided to continue to enhance their cooperation in the maritime domain bilaterally as well as in multilateral fora.The two Prime Ministers reaffirmed the importance of freedom of navigation, overflight and unimpeded lawful commerce in accordance with international laws. They also highlighted the importance of peaceful resolution of disputes, including through full respect for legal and diplomatic processes, without resorting to the threat or use of force, and in accordance with the universally recognised principles of international law, notably the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). The two Prime Ministers also reiterated their desire and determination to work together to maintain and promote peace, stability, and development in the Indo-Pacific region.The two Prime Ministers reaffirmed the importance of securing the maritime domain and combating piracy, armed robbery at sea and other transnational organised crimes through regional and international mechanisms such as the ARF, the Regional Cooperation Agreement on Combating Piracy and Armed Robbery against Ships in Asia (ReCAAP), the Contact Group on Piracy off the Coast of Somalia (CGPCS) and Shared Awareness and Deconfliction (SHADE) Mechanism, and expressed their commitment to pursue regional and international cooperation to combat these activities.The two Prime Ministers welcomed the renewed momentum for trilateral cooperation with the US and Australia. They stressed on the strategic importance of these cooperative frameworks and shared willingness to expand concrete cooperation. They resolved to work with other countries and regional partners to ensure a rule-based order in the Indo-Pacific Region.The two Prime Ministers condemned in the strongest terms North Korea’s continued development of its nuclear weapons and ballistic missile programs, including the latest nuclear test conducted by North Korea on 3 September as well as its uranium enrichment activities. Recognising that North Korea’s continued pursuit of nuclear and ballistic missile programmes and its proliferation links, including the launch of a ballistic missile flying over Japanese territory on 29 August 2017, pose grave and real threat to international peace and stability and the international non-proliferation efforts, the two Prime Ministers strongly urged North Korea to abandon its nuclear and ballistic missile programmes and not to take any further provocative actions, and to fully comply with its international obligations under relevant UNSC resolutions including the newly and unanimously adopted resolution 2375, and other international commitments. They pledged to work together to deal with the current serious situation and called on the international community to rigorously and fully implement relevant UNSC resolutions to maximise pressure on North Korea. They stressed the importance of holding accountable all parties that have supported North Korea’s nuclear and missile programmes. They also urged North Korea to address at the earliest the abductions issue.The two Prime Ministers also condemned in the strongest terms the growing menace of terrorism and violent extremism. They shared the view that terrorism in all its forms and manifestations is a global scourge that must be forcefully combatted through concerted global action in the spirit of "zero tolerance”. Accordingly, the two Prime Ministers called upon all UN member countries to implement the UNSC Resolution 1267 and other relevant resolutions designating terrorist entities. They also called upon all countries to work towards rooting out terrorist safe havens and infrastructure, disrupting terrorist networks and financing channels and halting cross-border movement of terrorists. They underlined the need for all countries to ensure that their territory is not used to launch terrorist attacks on other countries. They emphasised the need for stronger international partnership in countering terrorism and violent extremism, including through increased sharing of information and intelligence. They called for enhanced bilateral cooperation in this regard. The two Prime Ministers also called for Pakistan to bring to justice the perpetrators of terrorist attacks including those of the November 2008 terrorist attack in Mumbai and the 2016 terrorist attack in Pathankot. They looked forward to the convening of the fifth India-Japan Consultation on Terrorism and to strengthening cooperation against terrorist threats from groups including Al-Qaida, ISIS, Jaish-e-Mohammad, Lakshar-e-Tayyiba, and their affiliates.The two Prime Ministers reaffirmed their shared commitment to expedite the reform process of the United Nations, in particular the UN Security Council, in order to make it more legitimate, effective and representative, given the contemporary realities of the 21st century, and emphasized the importance of building upon the recent developments in the Intergovernmental Negotiations (IGN) aimed at launching text-based negotiations during the 72nd session of the General Assembly. In this regard, they also called for collaboration among reform-oriented countries through the "Group of Friends” on UNSC reform. They reiterated their support for each other’s candidature, based on the firmly shared recognition that India and Japan are legitimate candidates for permanent membership in an expanded UNSC.The two Prime Ministers reaffirmed their shared commitment to the total elimination of nuclear weapons. Prime Minister Abe stressed the importance of early entry into force of the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT). They called for an immediate commencement and early conclusion of negotiations on a non-discriminatory, multilateral and internationally and effectively verifiable Fissile Material Cut-off Treaty (FMCT) on the basis of Shannon Mandate. They expressed their resolve towards strengthening international cooperation to address the challenges of nuclear proliferation and nuclear terrorism.Prime Minister Abe welcomed India's accession to the Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR) and the Hague Code of Conduct against Ballistic Missile Proliferation (HCOC) and its intensified engagement with the export control regimes. The two Prime Ministers reaffirmed their commitment to work together for India to become a full member in the remaining three international export control regimes: Nuclear Suppliers Group, Wassenaar Arrangement and Australia Group, with the aim to strengthen the international non-proliferation efforts.The two Prime Ministers emphasised the need for concerted global action to combat climate change reflecting the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities, in the light of different national circumstances and to preserve the environment for future generations. They reiterated their commitment to work together to finalise the work programme for implementation of the Paris Agreement adopted under the UN Framework Convention for Climate Change by 2018. They also decided to accelerate further consultations on the Joint Crediting Mechanism (JCM). Prime Minister Modi welcomed Japan’s cooperation on Clean India, including the Clean Ganga project.The two Prime Ministers underlined the crucial role of the rules-based multilateral trading system, and enhancing free, fair, and open trade, for achieving sustainable growth and development. They committed to resist protectionism including unfair trade practices and underlined the need to remove trade-distorting measures. They reaffirmed their commitment to work together to implement the Bali and Nairobi Ministerial decisions and make the eleventh WTO Ministerial Conference a success. They also decided to steadily implement WTO’s Trade Facilitation Agreement.Recognising India as the largest democracy and a fast growing large economy in the Asia-Pacific region, and acknowledging India’s robust macro-economic stability and its efforts at financial reforms, Japan reaffirmed its support to India’s membership in the APEC. The two Prime Ministers decided to work towards liberalisation and facilitation of trade and investment in the Asia-Pacific region. They reaffirmed to cooperate towards conclusion of a modern, comprehensive, high quality and mutually beneficial Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) Agreement, in order to achieve a balanced outcome. They reaffirmed their commitment to further strengthening cooperation and to working with partners to tackle excess capacity in steel. In this regard, they called for the removal of market-distorting subsidies and other types of support by governments and related entities. They also reaffirmed their commitment to developing concrete policy solutions at the Global Forum on Steel Excess Capacity by November 2017.Conclusion

Prime Minister Abe thanked the Government and the people of India for their warm hospitality and extended a cordial invitation to Prime Minister Modi to visit Japan at a mutually convenient time for the next annual summit meeting. Prime Minister Modi accepted the invitation with appreciation. 

Prime Minister of the Republic of India ---- Prime Minister of Japan 

Signed at Gandhinagar, Gujarat on 14 September 2017

September 13, 2017

Indonesia & China: The Sea Between

New New York Book Review

Philip Bowring

Kenzaburo Fukuhara-Pool/Getty Images

Indonesian President Joko Widodo and Chinese President Xi Jinping, Yanqi Lake, China, May 15, 2017

Indonesia has long been cautious in confronting China’s claims in the South China Sea, so its announcement on July 14 that it was renaming a part of the area the “North Natuna Sea” may have come to many as surprise. The new name encompasses a region north of the Natuna islands that partly falls within the infamous “nine dash line,” by which China claims the sea stretching fifteen hundred miles from its mainland coast almost to the shores of Malaysia, the Philippines, Brunei, Vietnam, and Indonesia. China immediately demanded a retraction—which it will not get.

The naming was a reminder of how seriously Indonesia treats its position as the seat of ancient trading empires and location of some of the world’s strategically most important straits—Melaka, Sunda, Lombok, and Makassar. Since he was elected in 2014, President Joko Widodo has made maritime issues central to Indonesia’s foreign policy, building up its navy, arresting dozens of foreign ships caught fishing illegally, and taking a quiet but firm stand on sea rights. Although not a populist vote-winner, the policy is generally approved, particularly by the military, which since the war of independence against the Dutch has seen itself as the guardian of the integrity of the nation and its internationally recognized status.

The naming also came shortly before the sixtieth anniversary of a pronouncement that has had a profound impact on the whole world. On December 13, 1957, the Indonesian government unilaterally declared that it was an “archipelagic state,” claiming sovereignty over all the waters within straight baselines between its thousands of far-flung islands. Though the young republic was in no position to enforce it, this was a revolutionary move: at the time, Western powers asserted that territorial seas were limited to three miles, and that otherwise foreign ships, military included, had complete freedom of movement.

Twenty-five years of international negotiation followed, culminating in the 1982 United Nations Convention on Law of the Sea, defining rights and obligations relating to sea boundaries and resources, and rights of “innocent passage”—not endangering the security of the coastal state—through straits and internal and territorial seas. It accepted the archipelagic state principle, and made twelve-mile territorial seas and two-hundred-mile “exclusive economic zones,” or EEZs—which give exclusive rights for fishing and exploitation of seabed resources—the global norm. (The United States in practice accepts the Convention, as clarified by a subsequent 1994 agreement, but has never ratified it.)

Although Indonesia has no island disputes with China, its stance on the Natuna waters allies it with the other littoral nations in facing up to China (though the Philippines under President Duterte currently appears to prefer Chinese money to sovereignty over its seas). Last year, the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague applied the Convention to rule decisively for the Philippines in its claim against Chinese actions within its EEZ, including driving out Philippine fishing boats, and building structures on rocks and shoals that did not have the status of islands. In doing so, the court rejected China’s claims to the whole sea and by implication the waters of North Natuna.

Mike King

Do not imagine that the term “South China Sea” ever implied Chinese ownership. It is a Western construction that dates to about 1900. Previously, European maps referred to it as the China Sea, and before that as part of the Indian Sea. When the Portuguese arrived there in the early sixteenth century they called it the Cham Sea, after the maritime kingdom of coastal Vietnam. Other names at various times include Luzon Sea and (by early Arab traders) the Clove Sea. To China it has long been the South Sea and to Vietnamese the East Sea. The Philippines now refers to it as the West Philippine Sea.

“Malay seas” is another term that has been applied to it and its immediate neighbors, the Java, Sulu, and Banda seas. The South China Sea itself is predominantly a Malay sea, as defined by the culture and language group of the majority of people living along its shores. Until European imperialism from the sixteenth century onward gradually snuffed out these trade-based kingdoms and sultanates, they were the region’s principal traders.

Earlier, the Sumatra-based Srivijaya kingdom held similar sway through its control of the Melaka straits and hence all seaborne trade between China and the Spice Islands with India, Arabia, and beyond. It was during this era that ships from the archipelago brought the first colonists to Madagascar, leaving a language and genetic imprint that remains to this day. They also traded across the Indian ocean to Africa and Yemen.

The first Romans known to have visited China did so by sea via India and the Malay peninsula. Trade spread Buddhism to Sumatra and Java, where by the fifth century it was flourishing to such an extent that Srivijaya attracted Chinese monks, who then traveled on to Sri Lanka and India. Chinese traders occasionally visited countries to the south, but did so on “barbarian” ships based out of Champa, Funan (in the Mekong delta), Java, Borneo, or Sumatra. Some of these ships were fifty meters long and capable of carrying five hundred people, according to contemporary Chinese sources.

Trade with China boomed during the seventh through tenth-century Tang dynasty, an era of peace and progress. As Chinese were barred from going overseas, trade brought large numbers of Indian, Malay, Persian, and Arab merchants to settle in the southern Chinese ports Guangzhou and Quanzhou, and prosperity to the ports of Sumatra, Java, and the Malay peninsula.

It was not until the Southern Song era, when northern China was under Central Asian rule, that Chinese began to participate directly in the trade, and even then it was often not in their own ships. The Yuan dynasty that followed further relaxed restrictions on Chinese participation in trade, but also invaded Java when the King of Singasari in east Java refused to pay tribute to the emperor Kublai Khan. The invasion was a disaster. What Kublai wanted was political submission that went beyond the so-called “tribute” missions sent by trading states to the imperial court. Contrary to what is often assumed, these missions mostly had no political implications. They were most frequent at a time when port rivalries were most intense. Tribute was a payment to receive preference for trading in China, and it also applied in reverse: Chinese traders visiting the Philippines had to bring gifts for local chiefs in order to be allowed to trade.

Kublai’s imperial ambitions were partly taken up by the Ming dynasty with the despatch between 1405 and 1433 of seven huge fleets under Muslim eunuch Zheng He to demonstrate Chinese power throughout the southern and western seas, demanding local rulers acknowledge the supremacy of the emperor. But the voyages had scant strategic value and were too costly to be sustained. Nor did they contribute much to the development of China’s trade. By then, small settlements of Chinese traders could be found in Java and Sumatra ports, some as a result of purges of Muslims in Quanzhou, but they were still only minor players when, a mere eighty years after the last Zheng He voyage, the Portuguese arrived to conquer Melaka, the Malay Muslim city which was the leading entrepôt of the region.

This was to be the start of more than four centuries of European influence, with Spain, the Netherlands, Britain, and the US following the Portuguese and in time converting commercial presence in the region into economic dominance and political control. The Dutch in Batavia (Jakarta) took trade way from Java’s other ports. Makassar, a beacon of free trade and religious tolerance, was also subdued by the Dutch. After the British took control of Singapore in 1824 and opened it to all comers, the ports of Sumatra and the peninsula—Aceh, Palembang, etc.—slowly faded until almost obliterated.

The role of overseas Chinese in regional trade grew steadily as colonial cities such as Batavia, Manila, and then Singapore offered opportunities for engagement in the local economy as well as regional trade. Then the mining and plantation booms of the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries attracted hundreds of thousands of Chinese migrants, who formed their own trading networks around the region. Meanwhile, the biggest businesses of all were Western-owned. Thus by the time of independence after 1945, the once trade-based states of the region saw their commerce in alien hands.

None of this was the doing of China itself. It was the work of enterprising Chinese leaving an overcrowded country. At no point since Zheng He had a Chinese government been actively involved in the seas that it now claims on the basis of history. Any actions it takes now to press those claims against its neighbors have the potential to arouse communal feeling, never far below the surface, against commercially dominant ethnic Chinese communities in those countries. The naming of North Natuna is a sign that the world’s largest archipelagic state will stand firm, encouraging the Philippines and Malaysia to do likewise, until China’s bout of arrogance abates and it can treat its 400 million maritime neighbors as equals, acknowledging their seafaring and trading history.

September 13, 2017, 3:47 pm

SOUTHERN ASIA IS HEATING UP: AN INDIAN PERSPECTIVE

https://warontherocks.com/2017/09/southern-asia-is-heating-up-an-indian-perspective/



GURMEET KANWAL

SEPTEMBER 13, 2017

For special access to experts and other members of the national security community, check out the new War on the Rocks membership.

FacebookTwitterGoogle+LinkedIn

Editor’s Note: This is the fifth installment of “Southern (Dis)Comfort,” a new series from War on the Rocks and the Stimson Center. The series seeks to unpack the dynamics of intensifying competition — military, economic, diplomatic — in Southern Asia, principally between China, India, Pakistan, and the United States. Catch up on the rest of the series here. 

Strife-torn Southern Asia is the second most unstable region in the world after West Asia. India has unresolved territorial disputes with both China and Pakistan. As the Line of Actual Control with China has not been demarcated, there are frequent patrol face-offs. A major standoff, that lasted over two months (mid-June to late August 2017) at the India-Bhutan-China tri-boundary region, has been resolved, but could flare up again. Though there is a cease-fire on the Line of Control in Jammu and Kashmir, of late it is being observed more in the breach. China colludeswith Pakistan in the nuclear warhead, ballistic missile, and military hardware fields. This has emboldened Pakistan’s deep state — the army and the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) Directorate — to sponsor terrorism as an instrument of state policy to destabilise Jammu and Kashmir and attack cities in India through mercenary jihadists. A large-scale terrorist strike in future, similar to the attacks on the Indian Parliament in December 2001 and at Mumbai in November 2008, could lead to war.

The unresolved territorial disputes and repeated terrorist attacks have the potential to trigger conflict, which may not remain limited. India, China, and Pakistan are nuclear-armed states and a miscalculation during conflict may result in rapid escalation to nuclear exchanges. Also, given the Chinese-Pakistani collusion, India is likely to be confronted with a two-front situation during a future conflict with either of them. To navigate the emerging instability in Southern Asia and shifting adversarial relationships with Pakistan and China, India will need to intensify its third most consequential relationship — its strategic partnership with the United States.

India-Pakistan Relations: Stuck in a Groove

Though an ugly stability has prevailed for some time, new risks are emerging in the Indian-Pakistani relationship. The situation demands that India strengthen its military capabilities while deepening U.S engagement. Despite grave provocation from Pakistan over the last three decades, India has consistently observed strategic restraint to keep the level of conflict low so as not to hamper Indian economic growth. However, two attacks by ISI-sponsored terrorists forced India to retaliate assertively. The first was an attack on the Pathankot Air Base in January 2016, a week after Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi made a bold, unscheduled halt in Lahore in a bid to meet Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and reach out to the leadership of Pakistan. The second was on a military camp at Uri near the Line of Control in September 2016.

Taking the Pakistan Army completely by surprise, Indian Special Forces launched multiple surgical strikesacross the Line of Control and caused extensive damage. In a one-night operation, six to eight teams crossed the Line of Control at several points over a wide front and destroyed terrorist launch pads in the near vicinity of the line. Regular Pakistani Army soldiers at these launch pads are also likely to have been killed or injured. The strikes had a salutary effect and infiltration levels dropped sharply in the months that followed.

India’s new policy is clearly to maintain a posture of tactical assertiveness under the umbrella of strategic restraint. The aim is to raise the cost for the Pakistan Army and the ISI for waging their war for Kashmir through asymmetric means. The level of the punishment inflicted and the caliber of the weapons employed for the purpose are likely to be raised with each new provocation until the cost becomes prohibitive for the Pakistan Army and the ISI. In case there is a major terrorist attack in India in future and there is credible evidence of the involvement of the organs of the Pakistani state, stronger military retaliation is likely.

The impact of the deterioration in relations is that the “ugly” stability prevailing in Southern Asia has been further undermined. A miscalculation on either side could lead to conventional conflict with nuclear undertones. India’s political leaders and the armed forces believe there is space for conventional conflict below the nuclear threshold. For now, tactical assertiveness under an umbrella of strategic restraint remains the favored approach. However, the Indian public’s patience is wearing thin and its willingness to countenance escalation as an appropriate response to terrorism may be increasing. These domestic pressures, combined with the army’s ongoing search for a limited-war strategy and military modernization, could lead New Delhi to give sanction to proactive offensive operations along the lines of Cold Start in the event of another terrorist-initiated spark. The belief in Western capitals is that conventional conflict between India and Pakistan could rapidly escalate to nuclear exchanges. India’s consideration of escalatory, Cold Start-like operations — and Pakistan’s development of tactical nuclear weapons and its plans to neutralize India’s superiority in conventional military forces through their early use — fuel these concerns.

India-China Relations: Clash of Worldviews

The Indian-Chinese relationship has been stable at the strategic level, but marked by political, diplomatic, and military instability at the tactical level. However, the modus vivendithat has managed relations for decades appears to be fraying. An enhanced U.S.-Indian relationship can help manage deepening Chinese-Pakistani ties.

Besides the long-standing territorial dispute between the two countries, transgressions across the Line of Actual Control by the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) are frequent despite the Border Peace and Tranquillity Agreement (1993) and several other accords, all of which forbid such activities. As was well reported, India and China were embroiled in a contest of wills in the India-Bhutan-China tri-boundary over the summer. The crisis started when the Indian Army crossed into territory disputed by Bhutan and China to stop PLA soldiers from constructing a motorable road toward a Bhutan Army outpost. In contrast to past border disputes involving India and China, Beijing insisted New Delhi had intervened across a settled international boundary and, therefore, had to withdraw its forces before negotiations could commence. As it was unfolding, Indian strategic thinkers interpreted the incident as no less than an attempt by Beijing to force New Delhi to “acknowledge the power disparity between the two sides and show appropriate deference to China.”

China refuses to allow Masood Azhar, the founder of the Pakistan-based Jaish-e-Mohammad — a U.N.-designated terrorist group — be designated as a terrorist by the U.N. sanctions committee. It has blockedIndia’s membership of the Nuclear Suppliers Group as it wants simultaneous entry for Pakistan, one of the world’s worst proliferators. China objects every time an Indian political leader visits Arunachal Pradesh — an Indian state that it claims — and even lodged a protest at the visit of the Dalai Lama to a monastery in the state.

The China-Pakistan relationship has been described by both as an “all-weather friendship.” The collusion between the two states has deepened with the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) beginning to take shape. CPEC is part of China’s Belt and Road Initiative that seeks to extend China’s strategic outreach deep into the Indo-Pacific region, giving a fillip to its flagging economy by generating large-scale construction activity and creating new markets for its products. Passing through the disputed territories of Gilgit-Baltistan and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir, the $54 billion project will link Xingjiang Province of China with Gwadar Port on the Makran Coast west of Karachi. New Delhi fears that the presence of PLA personnel in Pakistan in large numbers to protect CPEC and related investments could further vitiate the security environment.

Stabilizing Influence: Indo-U.S. Strategic Partnership

The Indo-U.S. defense relationship has witnessed a remarkable rise in recent years. During his tenure at the Pentagon’s helm, Ash Carter memorably remarked that the Indo-U.S. relationship was “destined to be one of the most significant partnerships of the 21st century.” These sentiments, widespread in New Delhi and Washington, have led to concrete advances, such as the conclusion of a Logistics Exchange Memorandum of Agreement and India’s designation as a Major Defense Partner of the United States.

Some expectations on both sides are yet to be met. For instance, India has not signed the Communication and Information Security Memorandum of Agreement or the Basic Exchange and Cooperation Agreement, which the Pentagon says must be concludedbefore Washington would be able to establish encrypted communication links with New Delhi and share sensitive data, such as targeting information, during both peacetime and crisis scenarios. Nevertheless, the overall trend in the relationship is clear, with defense trade between the two powers totalling more than $10 billion over the last decade. The partnership is likely to gradually rise to the next level, including joint threat assessment, joint contingency planning, and joint operations when the vital national interests of both countries are threatened.

Washington is also well-positioned to help New Delhi deal with the emerging competitive realities of its strategic environment.

One of the motivations behind this growing strategic partnership is to provide a hedge for both against what is increasingly being perceived as China’s not-so-peaceful rise. In case China behaves irresponsibly and uses military force somewhere in the Indo-Pacific, both India and the United States will need a strong partnership to manage the consequences. American support is essential to the revitalization of Indian military power, whether through arms sales, technology transfers, or co-production of weapons systems, all of which are on the table. The Doka La standoff serves as a reminder that India can ill afford to continue lagging in terms of the pace and scope of its defense-modernization process. Ties to the United States must also be leveraged in countering Beijing’s provocative diplomatic and military maneuvers. Washington has been steadfast in its support for New Delhi’s bid for NSG membership and Azhar’s designationas a global terrorist despite Beijing’s intransigence. It has also bolstered Indian naval capabilities via maritime exercises such as Malabarand the sale of maritime surveillance and anti-submarine platforms that are essential for tracking and countering China’s presence in the Indian Ocean.

The United States could also work with India to mitigate dangers emanating from Pakistan. Washington’s maintenance of ties to Rawalpindi is predicated upon ensuring that nuclear warheads never fall into jihadist hands. U.S.-Pakistani cooperation on nuclear security serves Indian interests, but there are other areas in which Washington could be a better friend to New Delhi.

First, the United States could help India bolster its standoff strike and surveillance capabilities along the Indo-Pakistani border. Israel has already offered India armed drones. The prospective sale of U.S.-made, unarmed Sea Guardian drones signals that intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance is a priority area of collaboration. Persistent American concerns that such transfers could violate its nonproliferation obligations under the Missile Technology Control Regime may be on the wane. Equally important, the United States could put more pressure on Pakistan to cease its support to anti-Indian terrorists. Washington’s decision last year to withhold $300 million from Rawalpindi in military reimbursements, the debate in policy circles as to whether the United States should designate Pakistan a state sponsor of terrorism, and the Modi-Trump joint statement’s emphasis on stopping “cross-border terrorist attacks perpetrated by Pakistan-based groups” are indicators of a potential New Delhi-Washington convergence on Pakistan. Resurgent India is now at a breakout moment in its history. As a status-quo power that has shunned military alliances and maintained its strategic autonomy, India is being gradually propelled by China’s military assertiveness to hedge its bets, especially by courting deeper ties to Washington. India must reassert its primacy in Southern Asia by looking and acting outwards. It is India’s manifest destiny to play a leading role in shaping the emerging order in the Indo-Pacific region.

 

Gurmeet Kanwal is Distinguished Fellow, Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses (IDSA), New Delhi and Adjunct Fellow, Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), Washington, D.C