India has set the red carpet for Nepal’s PM, KP Oli on his first official visit. India’s trust on Nepal’s government will be attentive of its sincere security interests that includes honoring nation’s traditional red lines.

Nepal Prime Minister KP Oli who lambasted India after the 2015 blockade, accused it of toppling his Government in 2016 and travelled to Beijing in the interregnum to sign Nepal’s first ever trade and transit treaty with China, will be on his first official state visit to India commencing April 7. The last time he was invited was in 2016 when he urged Union External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj to do so and she obliged but only after he had passed the first amendment to Nepal’s Constitution, which only minimally granted rights to the Madhesis and other marginalised classes. On his last visit, he was ruling a shaky coalition Government.

Now Oli is a political colossus, following the strategic alliance with the Prachanda-led Maoist Center and will soon be heading a Government with more than two-third majority, having swept the local Government elections and captured six out of seven Provinces and also won a commanding majority in the new upper House. No one in Nepal’s tryst with democracy has amassed such infinite political power.

If this was not enough, he has concentrated in the Prime Minister’s Office, all investigative, intelligence and enforcement agencies, making Oli the master of all that he surveys. If power corrupts; absolute power corrupts absolutely? Whether we will see an authoritarian and dictatorial Oli, only time will tell.

In this column, on December 20 last year, after Oli’s dramatic political success, this writer had predicted that despite the pro-China and ultra nationalistic halo he had acquired, he would visit India first, before any pilgrimage to China as all elected Prime Ministers have done.

Despite teasing India with an interview to Hong Kong’s South China Morning Post and an invitation to Pakistan Prime Minister Shahid Khaqan Abbasi, to which Kathmandu media attributed several creative reasons, including exploring the whereabouts of former Inter-Services Intelligence official, Lt Col Zahir Hussain who was kidnapped from Nepal ostensibly by the Research and Analysis Wing in 2017, the substance of the Oli messaging to India was China — that ‘it will enable deepening explore additional options and leverages in dealing with India’. In 2008, shortly before Prachanda became the Prime Minister, he told a Nepali TV channel that Nepal needed China to balance India. In later years, Prachanda had a change in preference.

The second issue raised by Oli in the interview was about the recruitment of Nepali Gorkhas in the Indian Army. Two connections China desperately wants broken in the high Himalayas are India’s special relations with Nepal and Bhutan.

Both Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Foreign Minister Sushma Swaraj did some nimble diplomacy to woo Oli. Swaraj’s surprise visit to Kathmandu to congratulate and invite him to the Dilli Durbar was both spontaneous and an expression of regret over past misunderstandings, blockade et al.

Modi, meanwhile, worked the phone lines repeating his Mann ki Baat of forgiving, forgetting and looking at the future. This diplomatic coup, coupled with Oli’s missive to Modi on Republic Day, more than mad up for one of India’s greatest foreign policy blunders, pushed Nepal towards China. During Holi, while in Pokhara, Nepal, this writer learnt a new Nepali phrase. It goes like this: ‘Dukh payo Mangala le; afno hi dhang le’ (the pain India suffered was due to its own fault.) The Madhesi cause has been put on the back burner and the fractious Nepali Congress party marginalised.

China will extract maximum political, economic and people-to-people benefit from a pro-China Left alliance Government which it inspired and invested in putting together. China’s rise in Nepal is unstoppable. Nepal wishes to draw economic gains from the world’s two fastest growing economies. It also wants to reduce its dependence on India but realises that geography, culture, language and religion point otherwise. Still, Chinese presence, investment, involvement in domestic politics and creeping interest in the military and police have magnified rapidly. They have already bagged most of the rail, road, hydropower and airport projects. The new Pokhara and Bhairwa (Lumbini) airports and the expansion of the existing Tribhuvan International Airport are all with Chinese companies, financed by loans given by Exim Bank.

China has built a new $350 million Armed Police Force Academy for which Prime Minister Modi had laid the plaque. Now India is making the police academy instead. The 800 MW Buddha Koshi hydro project will also be restored to China. The Chinese are investing heavily in Pokhara lakeside area. Thirty five to 40 Confucian Centres have come up in Terai. Chinese tourists arriving by air are second only to those coming from India. There is an unconfirmed report that a Chinese General was conferred an honorary General’s rank like the ritual followed between the Army Chiefs of India and Nepal.

China seeks parity with India. The Belt and Road Initiative blueprint is at an advanced stage. Nepalese are worried about a Sri Lanka-like debt trap. No one understands how Chinese invest and construct their projects. There is never any criticism of China in Nepal — which is reserved for India — even if fraud is involved.

Nepal can look forward to Achche din. The two entities of the Left alliance — Unified Marxist-Leninist and Maoists — were to merge this month but the coming together has been postponed to April. Not everyone, especially among  the Maoists, is happy with playing second fiddle, especially Prachanda who led the revolution of making new Nepal secular, democratic and a republic.

One senior Maoist leader told this writer that the merger could lead to ‘indigestion’! Nepal will be stable, for the first two years as no-confidence motion is not permissible by the new Constitution. This writer heard conflicting accounts on a gentleman’s agreement on power sharing — all five years for Oli; two-and-a-half years each; and three years Oli, two years Prachanda. It is inconceivable that Prachanda will be satisfied with co-chairman of the merged Communist Party of Nepal.

India will want political stability after 25 Prime Ministers in 27 years. Its focus is on geo-economics (the economic package for the current year has been doubled from Rs 375 crore to Rs 650 crore), people-to-people, especially outreach to  the youth and timely delivery of projects. India trusts the Oli Government will be mindful of its legitimate security interests, including honouring its traditional red lines.

The red carpet is being laid out. No Nepali Prime Minister has been given the honour and respect Oli will receive, including being seted by Modi. It’s to make Oli feel respected and help him consider India as Nepal’s first neighbour.

(The writer is a retired Major General of the Indian Army and founder member of the Defence Planning Staff, currently the revamped Integrated Defence Staff)

Writer:  Ashok K Mehta

Courtesy: The Pioneer

The Indian legislature many a times fail to conduct debates on serious issues to come to a solution which, in turn, can have consequential implications. This negligence can lead to the questioning of the existence of budget allocated to the Parliament and the Parliament itself and no justification could possibly justify its existence in such a case.

The dysfunctionality of India’s Parliament has been a matter of concern for many years now but even the worst sceptics would not have expected the institution, which is at the apex of the country’s democratic structure, to fall to such depths as it did during the passage of the Union Budget a fortnight ago.

Normally, the Budget Session begins with the presentation of the Railway Budget, followed by a detailed discussion on the working of the Railways and passage of the Railway Minister’s budgetary proposals. The passage of the Union Budget would fall into four stages and run through the Budget Session of Parliament from mid-February to mid-May every year. After the Finance Minister presented his Budget proposals, several days were earmarked in both Houses for a general discussion on the budget. Thereafter, the Demands for Grants of several Ministries would be taken up for discussion.

In the old days, these discussions, which enable MPs to speak on the performance of specific Ministries and departments, would be spread over several weeks. Finally, at an appointed date and hour, the Speaker of the Lok Sabha would apply the guillotine (closure to the debate on the Demands for Grants) and put all the demands to the vote of the House. But this would happen several weeks after the debate on the Demands began in the House. Thereafter, the House would discuss and pass the Appropriation Bill and finally, in the later stages of the Budget Session, the Finance Bill containing the financial proposals of the Government, would be passed after much deliberation.

These traditions have been built over the last several decades not merely to keep the two Houses active but also to fulfill an important Constitutional obligation. Parliament is mandated by the Constitution to diligently scrutinise the expenditure and taxation proposals of the Union Government. Articles 112 to 119 deal with the procedure to follow in respect of the annual financial statement of the Union Government, the Demands for Grants and the method by which Government can secure Parliament’s sanction for expenditure, supplementary demands and votes on account.

Thus, from the time the Budget is presented and till the passage of the Appropriation and Finance Bills to give effect to the Government’s expenditure and taxation proposals, MPs got at least four opportunities to address issues relating to the Union Budget. A table published in “Practice and Procedure of Parliament” by MN Kaul and SL Shakdher about the time spent by the Lok Sabha to discuss the Railway Budget, the General Budget and the Demands for Grants in 1986-87 in revealing.

That year, the Lok Sabha spent 19 hours discussing the Railway Budget and the Railway Demand for Grants; close to 20 hours on the general discussion of the Union Budget and 92 hours to discuss the Demands for Grants of the various Ministries. In all, the House spent about 130 hours debating various aspects of the Budget. The time spent in 1986-87 on various aspects of the budgetary exercise is fairly representative of how Parliament carried out this responsibility since the inception of the two Houses in 1952.        

Contrast this with how the budgetary process went through the Lok Sabha this year. After the presentation of the budget on February 1, there was a general discussion on the Budget in the Lok Sabha on February 7 and 8, lasting approximately 12 hours. Thereafter, as is the practice, both Houses adjourned to enable the Departmentally Related Standing Committees to examine the Demands for Grants relating to various Ministers.

The Houses reconvened on March 5. Since then, both Houses have been unable to function because of disruptions caused by the MPs from Andhra Pradesh who are demanding a special status for the State; MPs from Tamil Nadu who are aggrieved about defilement of a statue and several other sundry protestors.

Since there is no sign of an end to this chaos and no indication of MPs wanting to utilise Parliament’s time for discussion on the Union Budget, the Speaker decided to put the Demands for Grants, the Appropriation Bill and the Finance Bill to the vote of the House on March 14.

On that day, the Speaker took up the passage of the Demands for Grants at 12.03 pm. She first put all cut motions to vote. These are motions given generally by Opposition MPs to show their displeasure in regard to a particular demand. It has an element of censure in it and, therefore, it is incumbent on the treasury benches to defeat these motions. The Speaker put all of them to vote in one go and they were rejected. At 12.04 pm, the Speaker announced that she was putting all the Demands for Grants to vote. The House adopted the motion. At 12.05 pm, Union Finance Minister Arun Jaitley moved the Appropriation Bill. The House passed the Bill after clause by clause consideration. At 12.06 pm, the Finance Minister moved the Finance Bill. This took a little longer than the other Bill because there were 21 Government amendments and three new clauses had to be inserted. Thereafter, after passage of another Budget-related matter, the House was adjourned at 12.38 pm.

In other words, the Lok Sabha devoted just one minute to give its consent to the Demands of all Government Ministries and departments — an exercise which took around 80 to 100 hours in the past. Overall, the Lok Sabha devoted just 12 hours and 35 minutes for Budget-related business which in the past took around 130 hours. This only means that Parliament has abdicated a primary responsibility given to it by the Constitution. The events of March 14 are even more disturbing because in the early days, at least 40 per cent of the Demands would be discussed in Parliament. Ten years ago, it dropped to about 25 percent. This year, not a single demand was discussed and the overall Government expenditure in this year’s Budget is estimated to be Rs 24.42 lakh crore.

Venkaiah Naidu, the Chairman of the Rajya Sabha and Sumitra Mahajan, the Lok Sabha Speaker have time and again appealed to members, but without much success. Naidu, with a tinge of exasperation, warned MPs that if the disruptions continued, people would lose faith in lawmakers. If Parliament does not have the time or the inclination to scrutinise the Union Budget, it will find it difficult to justify its existence and the huge Budget allocated to it. Will good sense prevail? We must keep our fingers crossed!

Writer: A Surya Prakash

Courtesy: The Pioneer

The Cambridge Analytica scandal is much more than a mere data leak. Finding this scandal a bit puzzling, a number of political reporters in India, especially those who have three decades experience in covering elections, did a little digging.  It appears that Cambridge Analytica scraped, that is illegally acquired information of 50 million Facebook users in the United States.

This has gotten privacy activists, including the ‘destroy the Aadhaar’ crowd, up in arms about privacy and user rights and what not. But data, particularly user information, in itself does not matter for much — it is how Cambridge Analytica studied that information and used it for their clients that made all the difference. The advent of supercomputers and artificial intelligence (AI) to analyse thousands of pieces of information has led to what marketers call ‘Big Data’. AI can analyse trends over millions of users and transactions, and can immediately red-flag any anomalies. This is what the tax authorities across the world are increasingly doing; and because linkages can be easily established, big data can go after tax evaders. It can also be used to better map traffic and population dynamics, helping city planners and policy makers. But AI can also be used to analyse the sentiments of users and drive them to a particular position or cause by feeding them information. This is not only limited to politics. Have you ever wondered why an e-commerce site often knows exactly what you want to buy and suggests it to you? Or when you do a series of searches, sometimes, a large search engine will suggest precisely what you are looking for. Suppose you are searching for a vacation, a search engine might already know your details without you ever explicitly informing them. Your information has already been put into various buckets. This can be creepy at times, there was a case of an e-commerce site knowing that a woman was already pregnant before she knew, based on her purchases. Another person was puzzled that a website knew that he wanted to acquire a dog without his even talking about it to anyone. AI makes large-scale behavioural analysis possible and when everyone puts their information onto a site, such as Facebook, it can easily be manipulated.

But in Indian politics, politicians and political managers have always had information. Electoral lists could and would be manually analysed for caste and economic data. Before the age of social media, local party workers often knew which buttons to press during campaigning. Social media and vulnerable data storage makes it much easier, AI removes the need for a comprehensive party machine, although not totally because the ‘get out the vote machine’ still needs to operate. That said, young voters with short-term memories and easily excitable have been manipulated by AI driven insights on often illegally acquired data. Have you wondered why so many strange electoral decisions have been made across the world? From Greece to Austria, from the US to New Zealand, AI is making it possible to better analyse data. The BJP and the Congress are both being hypocritical if either of them emerge as the party of ‘data protection’. This is a problem across the world and a global solution has to be found. But when power and politics get involved, it is doubtful if anything will be done, 2019 will still be a big data and AI driven election. Machines are truly taking over democracy.

Writer: Pioneer

Courtesy: The Pioneer

The Indo-France connection defined that how the France President, Emmanuel Macron, visit could be more beneficial if we get our hold right.

From solar power to defence deals, Asia-Pacific security to the possibility of France replacing Russia as India’s all-weather ally at a time when Moscow seems recalibrating its position in a fluid geostrategic environment in which some see a new global bi-polarity emerging with the US and China forming the poles, New Delhi has engaged with Paris at an apt juncture. Prime Minister Narendra Modi pulled out all the stops in ensuring President Emmanuel Macron’s recently concluded four-day visit to India, which had a hectic and by all accounts very productive itinerary, went off well. Indeed, even as you read, the navies of India and France are engaged in a joint bilateral exercise — Varuna-18 — in the Arabian Sea off the Goa coast which aims to enhance operational synchronicities.

Yet, the whole is not in the sum of these parts but dependent on the X Factor, as it were, which is the forging of a state-to state ideological and values-based relationship reflecting the affinity between the Indic and French civilisational ethos. This is a consummation devoutly to be wished as a countervailing force to the narrative of the global triad of multiculturalists, mullahs and Marxists which threatens to reduce contemporary narratives on individual (especially women’s) rights, personal liberty, the agency of nationalism, the role of the nation-state, issues of security related to terror and/or migration and cultural particularities into a communitarian discourse. Worse still, it is a narrative which champions membership of fundamentally illiberal groups and denies, by implication and/or directly, the notion of both an Indian and a French exceptionalism.

India has a similar affinity with Israel given the notion of an exceptionalism that runs through all three civilizational cultures and a common danger to all of them emanates from an ideological architecture that has enabled the arming, quite literally, of the enemies of the nation-state in general and the abovementioned nation-states in particular. The good news is that our engagement with the State of Israel has acquired some depth and is in the process of acquiring the breadth that would make for a lasting alliance, credit for which much go first to PV Narasimha Rao and his team of strategic thinkers in the early 1990s who had the moral courage and intellectual nous to grapple with the changing contours of a post-Cold War world and the, till then under-theorized, radicalization of the ‘Muslim World’ despite those from within the fold who tried then and haven’t, one eye on domestic politics, given up trying even now, to undermine them. Similarly, credit is due to Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee and President Jacques Chirac who started the process of a deep engagement between India and France as defined strategic partners in 1998.

India’s French connection is still far from having been explored to its fullest potential, though, in part at least due to the language issue. Now the French establishment has always been as keen as mustard to spread globally the “language of freedom”, as it were, but in Macron it seems to have found a nuts-and-bolts man who has a plan — “plot”, according to the Brit tabloids, god bless them — to bring this to fruition. Speaking a couple of days ago, the French President announced an allocation of millions of euros to double the number of teachers and students learning French in schools worldwide, begin a sustained push in Africa to promote the language across the continent so it is not limited only to the former French colonies there and, post-Brexit, increase its use as the preferred language of communication in the European Union in place of English. Macron’s description of this effort as a “new moment in history”, however, has not gone down terribly well in the Francophone world especially in Africa where allegations of a colonial hangover and French meddling slip easily off the tongue, which is why the President asserted that France saw itself merely as “a country among others” in the French-speaking world.

Macron, who unlike previous French presidents loves to speak English at summits and regularly uses English slogans such as “start-up nation” and “make our planet great again”, makes no apologies for regularly speaking English, saying it has become an international language of business. But he iterates that speaking French is also a way to highlight French “values”. Therein lies the rub.

For India, which has an English-advantage in the modern world albeit the language spoken nowadays is more Queenie Singh’s than the Queen’s (but that’s just this writer being a youngish fogey and aesthete), the promotion of French isn’t what excites us. Equally, we should waste neither time nor resources on the promotion of Hindi globally — all three languages are, as the chips have fallen in world history, merely functional outside national borders though some more than others. (They are rightly cherished at home, of course, and lovers of each of these languages should always be encouraged to pursue them.) If anything, our emphasis should be to ensure that Sanskrit, along with Latin and Hebrew, are promoted as global languages of antiquity which enable access to pre-medieval primary sources and help us understand our cultural origins warts, glories and all.

The X Factor in our French connection is not, and very unlikely to be in the foreseeable future, a common language and we can safely elide Anglo-French competitiveness around which should be the lingua franca of the world. It is the ideas conveyed by the language, which it is fallacious to assume are lost in translation, which are of immediate import.

Professor Bhiku Parekh’s seminal work on the cultural particularity of liberal democracy is now widely accepted as historically evident and the Indian approximation of the same is today a work in progress. But the notion that individual rights can never be trumped by group rights, the imperative of gender equity and an uncompromising adherence to personal liberty all premised on a uniquely inclusive civilizational impulse within an Indic cultural context that India ought to attempt to institutionalise via state instrumentalities will gain immeasurably from a deepening of strategic, security and cultural ties with France.

Within this rubric, practicalities such as an Indo-French outreach in Africa makes a lot of sense given our weaknesses and strengths on that continent are broadly complimentary. Apart from gaining strategic depth including enhancing our energy security, such a move would provide a fillip to economic growth/capacity-building in individual African nation-states while boosting investment opportunities/growth for India and France as well as serve to counter the aggressive push over the past decade by an increasingly authoritarian China in Africa. Leveraging the French connection to deepen both economic and security ties with the EU, and Paris understands our concerns better than most in Europe, must be the other area of focus. Bilaterally, the sky is the limit if the Indo-French entente cordiale is actively transformed into a multi-faceted strategic partnership given the cultural affinity of our respective liberal, inclusive and secular heritages though both India and France, as nations, arrived at them via very different routes. In fact, it is these very values which are under attack from communitarian ideologies.

Nearly three centuries after the Carnatic Wars were fought on the Indian peninsula by the then dominant colonial powers for control over the sub-continent, a conflation of ideas and interests between New Delhi and Paris has come to pass.

(The writer is Consulting Editor, The Pioneer)

Writer: Ishan Joshi

Courtesy: The Pioneer

Amongst the current probe into Russian suspected interference in the US election held in year 2016, a new debate has come up with U.S. president Donald Trump congratulating his Russian mate Vladimir Putin on his re-election, in spite of warning as a national security adviser that not to do so.  

“I had a call with President Putin and congratulated him on the victory — his electoral victory,” he told reporters on Tuesday, adding: “The call had to do, also, with the fact that we will probably get together in the not-too-distant future so that we can discuss arms, we can discuss the arms race.”

“We had a very good call, and I suspect that we’ll probably be meeting in the not-too-distant future to discuss the arms race, which is getting out of control, but we will never allow anybody to have anything even close to what we have. And also to discuss Ukraine and Syria and North Korea and various other things,” Trump said.

Later in the day, The Washington Post, citing officials familiar with the call, reported that Trump did not follow “specific warnings from his national security advisers”, set out in briefing materials in all-capital letters, stating: “DO NOT CONGRATULATE”.

While there was no tweet from Trump himself on the subject, CNN cited a source as saying that the president was “infuriated” over the leak to the media that he had been directly instructed not to congratulate the Russian leader.

Trump’s congratulatory words also provoked fellow-Republican John McCain, known for his hawkish stance on Moscow, to put out a sharply critical statement against Trump.

“An American president does not lead the free world by congratulating dictators on winning sham elections,” Senator McCain said, adding: “And by doing so with Vladimir Putin, President Trump insulted every Russian citizen who was denied the right to vote in a free and fair election to determine their country’s future, including the countless Russian patriots who have risked so much to protest and resist Putin’s regime.”

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell commented that Trump can “call whomever he chooses,” but added that calling Putin “wouldn’t have been high on my list”. Yet another Republican, Senator Marco, said he doesn’t agree with Trump congratulating Putin.

Writer: S Rajagopalan

Courtesy: The Pioneer

After so many annoying tweets by the U.S. President Donald Trump on Sunday, it gives rise to so many rumors that he might have started laying ground to fire the special counselor Robert Mueller interfering in the US presidential election. After analyzing the continuous attack of Trump, some senior Republicans have warned Trump against going off route.

Any such move would mark “the beginning of the end of his presidency”, Republican Senator Lindsey Graham said, while a spokesperson for House Speaker Paul Ryan, without going into the President’s latest tweets, said: “As the Speaker has always said, Mr. Mueller and his team should be able to do their job.”

“I don’t know what the (President’s) designs are on Mueller, but it seems to be building toward that (firing him), and I just hope it doesn’t go there because it can’t. We can’t in Congress accept that,” said Senator Jeff Flake, another Republican and a strong Trump critic, on CNN.

And Republican Congressman Trey Gowdy, reacting to Trump’s personal lawyer John Dowd favoring disbanding the Mueller probe based on a “fraudulent and corrupt dossier”, commented that the lawyer was doing Trump a disservice, adding: “If you have an innocent client, Mr. Dowd, act like it.”

Trump’s tweets and commentary on Sunday talk shows intensified the talk of a possible Mueller ouster so much that White House lawyer Ty Cobb opted to issue a statement on Sunday night to say that the President was not considering the Special Counsel’s removal.

“In response to media speculation and related questions being posed to the Administration, the White House yet again confirms that the President is not considering or discussing the firing of the Special Counsel, Robert Mueller,” Cobb said.

And White House Legislative Affairs Director Marc Short took the stand that Trump’s team was fully cooperating in the investigation and that the President was only expressing his growing frustration with the manner in which the probe has been going on and on for so long.

But, in the midst of these clarifications, Trump himself took to the Twitter again on Monday morning, suggesting that the ongoing Russia probe was a “total WITCH HUNT with massive conflicts of interest”.

What set off the chatter on the fate of Mueller probe was Trump’s series of Sunday tweets, asserting: “The Mueller probe should never have been started in that there was no collusion and there was no crime.”

“It was based on fraudulent activities and a Fake Dossier paid for by Crooked Hillary and the DNC, and improperly used in FISA COURT for surveillance of my campaign. WITCH HUNT!” he tweeted.

Trump went a step further, suggesting for the first time that Mueller’s team was packed with Democrats.

Writer: S Rajagopalan

Courtesy: The Pioneer

Directed by their want of strategic partnership into decision making at the governmental level, India and France have taken a decision during Emmanuel Macron’s visit to become traditional partners. It’s the time for both the countries to take the hold and shape narratives and developing institutional agendas.

On the last day during his visit to India, Macron went to Varanasi to enjoy the cruise on River Ganga with Prime Minister Modi. This was the culmination of a visit with a difference.
Macron’s trip touched upon two aspects of the bilateral relations, the ancient and the modern (and strategic). Before the visit to the Ghats, Macron offered to Modi, an original copy of the Bhagavad Gita translated from Sanskrit into French in the early 20th century by the great French scholar Émile Senart. This symbolizes the first aspect of the relations, but perhaps more important in today’s world there is the ‘strategic’ angle.

Addressing the French community in Delhi, the young President explained: “geopolitical context is deeply changed. India rightly fears the reorganization of the world; she fears forms of hegemony in the region and in particular in the Indian Ocean and the Pacific. And why not name it, she fears a Chinese hegemony”.

He reminded his countrymen: “France is a power of the Indian and the Pacific Oceans; we are present at the Reunion, we are also there in French Polynesia and New Caledonia. And we are a maritime power, it is often forgotten but France is the second maritime power in the world. We have a strong navy, we have nuclear submarines equipped like few other powers in the world; a maritime surveillance capability through our own satellites and technologies; it is obvious we are a military and intelligence power ranking us among the first nations in the world”. France is now ready to share this power with India.

Before concluding, Macron quoted the Australian Prime Minister, who spoke of “freedom of sovereignty”; he then added: “This renewed strategic partnership is reflected by the confirmation of a defense link that has already materialised in some very important contracts, be it in the naval or aviation domain, in the engine industry …a coming generation of a new partnership on development of engines (the Kaveri for the Tejas), but also enhanced cooperation in terms of spatial surveillance or in terms of intelligence”.

A vast programme, symbolizing the special relations between France and India, which celebrate 20 years of ‘strategic partnership’; the accord signed in 1998 by French President Jacques Chirac and Indian Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee is the oldest such partnership.

Over the last two decades, it has grown steadily, no major political difference having darkened the sky between Paris and Delhi.
Between 1947 and 1954, the relations were often tense due to the issue of the French settlements in India which would only be solved with the de facto transfer of Pondicherry to the Union of India at the end of 1954.

What is less known is that despite differences, India and France continued to work together. This was perhaps one of the most trying times on the ground, particularly in Pondicherry. A contract had, however, been signed with Dassault in June 1953 for 70 planes; in October 1953, while another 35 were sent to the Dixmude aircraft carrier, four planes reached India by air. The remainder 32 aircraft would be delivered in early 1954. And those were the difficult days between the two nations!

Since the signature of the 1998 Strategic Agreement, France has constantly been supportive of India.

On his arrival, Macron stated that the visit would open a new era in the strategic partnership for the coming decades: “Our two democracies have common concerns, like terrorism, lots of common risks and common threats. But we have to protect this history and the state of freedom”.

The French President also said “I want my country to be the best partner in Europe. This is a strong message. I want Indian citizens coming to France for studying, becoming entrepreneurs and opening start-ups”.

Some 14 bilateral agreements were signed at Hyderabad House, strengthening the bilateral economic, political and strategic ties between the two countries. The joint statement affirmed: “Both leaders agreed to deepen and strengthen the bilateral ties based on shared principles and values of democracy, freedom, rule of law and respect for human rights”.

A message for China?

And on the emotive side, it recalled “the valiant sacrifices made by Indian and French soldiers during the First World War”. The Indian Prime Minister agreed to participate in the closing of the First World War Centenary celebrations, which will take place on November 11 in Paris.

And there is, of course, the Rs59,000 crore deal for 36 Rafale fighters in September 2016; it will soon prove to be a game changer, mainly due to the offset clauses forcing the French to reinvest in India 50 percent of the total deal’s amount, but also for India’s western and northern fronts.

Delhi also knows that it needs to diversify its diplomatic relations if it wants to play a major role in the world. Here too, France could be a crucial partner. According to the Joint Statement: “The leaders reiterated that this cooperation will be crucial in order to maintain the safety of international sea lanes for unimpeded commerce and communications in accordance with the international law”. It may translate into a logistics accord allowing India access to the strategically important French base in the Reunion Islands near Madagascar. Another possibility is the opening to India of the French facilities in Djibouti in the Horn of Africa where India’s rival China has already a military base. This is part of India’s new maritime strategy.

The shortest article of the Joint Statement is worth noting: “The leaders noted ongoing discussions between Defence Research and Development Organisation and SAFRAN on combat aircraft engine and encouraged necessary measures and forward-looking approaches to facilitate early conclusion”. The idea is to develop an M88 engine for the Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) Tejas with Safran, one of Dassault’s partners in the Rafale deal.

There is also a vibrant educational cooperation between Indian and French Universities and academic institutes; a host of agreements were signed during the Knowledge Summit, the first Indo-French conference on research and higher education in presence of the French and Indian Minister of education.

The Joint Statement spoke of increasing the number and quality of student exchanges, with the aim of reaching 10,000 students by 2020. An agreement for the mutual recognition of degrees should “facilitate the pursuit of higher education by Indian students in France and French students in India and enhance their employability”. The cherry on the visit’s cake was the co-hosting of the International Solar Conference (ISA). An alliance of more than 121 countries launched at the UN Climate Change Conference in Paris in November 2015, the ISA wants to create a coalition of solar resource-rich countries and address each participant’s special energy needs.

All this does not mean that the practical collaboration will be easy, but it is worth a try.

Writer: Claude Arpi

Courtesy: The Pioneer

United States’s President Donald Trump fires United States Secretary of State Rex Tillerson on Tuesday. President Trump announced that he would replace Rex Tillerson with Mike Pompeo the C.I.A. director and former Tea Party congressman, who has a close relationship with the president and is in more sync with Mr. Trump’s America First credo.

Conspiracy theorists who believe, with some credibility, of Russian meddling in the 2016 US Presidential elections, which Donald Trump won in an electoral upset for the ages. However, that may not be the case for Tillerson, he had reportedly referred to his boss as a ‘moron’ (with an unkind adjective ahead of it) and even as the US President referred to last morning in Washington DC, Tillerson has major disagreements with Trump, particularly around the issue of the nuclear deal with Iran, which Trump despises and the State Department in the United States wanted to defend.

Had Tillerson’s firing or resignation been a one-off, it would have been quite ordinary. After all, premiers have the right to hire and fire staffers, even senior ones. However, Donald Trump’s White House seems almost dysfunctional. Tillerson was fired a week after David Cohn, Donald Trump’s Chief Economic Advisor, quit his job in protest over Trump’s import tariffs and headlong rush towards a trade war. A few days before that, Hope Hicks, a long-time Donald Trump confidant and the White House Communications Director, quit as well. And this follows a pattern of several top Trump Administration officials either being fired or being forced to resign in disgrace in the 14 months that the Administration has been in office.

Nations across the world look up to the United States, thanks to its democracy, economy, and military. However, what most people are currently viewing is a completely dysfunctional state. By his imposition of trade barriers, Trump has appealed to his populist base, but being has shocked the traditionally pro-business wing of the Republican party, and that is just one example. He has also questioned climate science, education and immigration in the United States as well as attacked traditional allies. Then again, Trump has by some fluke managed to bring North Korea to the negotiating table, he might even manage to push through gun reform in the United States. Yet, some stability and talent in his Cabinet would go a long way towards assuaging the rest of the world. It might be ‘America First’ for Trump but America does not live in isolation. However, many also feel that Tillerson was not doing a great job, so it remains to be seen how Mike Pompeo will bring the rest of the world around.

Writer: Pioneer

Courtesy: The Pioneer

The Republican members that constitute the House Committee have come to the conclusion that there is no proof that President Donald Trump or anyone from his campaign conspired with officials from Russia to influence the 2016 White House race.

“We found no evidence of collusion,” Congressman Michael Conaway, who oversees the Russia probe, told reporters ahead of Tuesday’s scheduled release of a 150-page draft report to the Democrats for review.

“We found perhaps some bad judgment, inappropriate meetings, inappropriate judgment in taking meetings — but only Tom Clancy could take this series of inadvertent contacts, meetings, whatever, and weave that into some sort of a spy thriller that could go out there,” Conway said.

Rejecting the assertions, Congressman Adam Schiff, the top Democrat on the panel, called the move to end the probe a “tragic milestone” and a “capitulation to the executive branch”.
“By ending its oversight role in the only authorized investigation in the House, the Majority has placed the interests of protecting the President over protecting the country, and history will judge its actions harshly,” Schiff commented.

Trump took to Twitter to capitalize on the news, saying: “The House Intelligence Committee has, after a 14 month long in-depth investigation, found no evidence of collusion or coordination between the Trump campaign and Russia to influence the 2016 presidential election.”

“We’re very happy with the decision by the House intelligence committee saying there’s absolutely no collusion with respect to Russia,” Trump told reporters on Tuesday, calling it “a very powerful decision, a very strong decision”.

“I understand they’re going to be releasing hundreds of pages of proof and evidence – but we are very, very happy with that decision. It was a powerful decision that left no doubt, so I want to thank the House intelligence committee and all of the people that voted,”

Trump said.

In contrast to the assertions by Trump and House Republicans, Schiff contended that the evidence “is clear and overwhelming that the Intelligence Community Assessment (of Russian meddling) was correct”.

“If the Russians do have leverage over the President of the United States, the Majority has simply decided it would rather not know,” Schiff said.

Writer: S Rajagopalan
Courtesy : The Pioneer

With the successful visit of Vietnam’s President Tran Dai Quang to India, from 2nd to 4th March, 2018, the relationship between the two countries are expected to mount to another level. The main agenda of the visit was a discussion on the possibilities of trade and defense collaboration and exchange. This was Quang’s first visit to India as President. He landed in the country with 18 delegates, including Foreign Minister Pham Binh Minh, Deputy PM, ministers for trade and industry, and ministers of planning and investment.

Earlier in Jan, Vietnam’s Prime Minister, Nguyen XuanPhuc, visited India on Republic day, to strengthen the partnership between the two countries. The visit also marked the manifestation of a landmark Memorandum of Understandings (MoUs) in port development and civil nuclear cooperation, which speaks volumes about how much Hanoi values defense partnership with India.

In view of China’s destructive posturing in the South China Sea, both Vietnam and India have recognized maritime security as one of the foremost areas in which they should unite. Three major agreements were signed that including nuclear cooperation and enhancement of trade and agricultural research. A MoU on cooperation between GCNEP and VINATOM was also discussed. The main purpose of the MoU is to support the technical cooperation of atomic energy.

South China Sea is a major crisis with abilities to swift a major conflict. While China entitles this part of the ocean space in its zone, there are several other claimants in the region who claims certain parts of the Sea falling in their zones. Although India is not directly involved in the matter, it is more concerned about China’s attempt to control this ocean space as trillion dollars of trade pass through the ocean every year. India has also its own economic stake as it has joined Vietnam on its invitation for joint exploration of oil and gas reserves off the coast of Vietnam in the South China Sea. After the discussion, Quang welcomed Indian businesses to expand their oil and gas exploitation and exploration activities on land and in the inland shelf and Exclusive Economic Zone of Vietnam”.

Though no agreement was signed in the field of defence cooperation, both are expected to continue to work on fulfilling India’s $100 million Credit Line commitment to Vietnam, some of which has been used for procuring Offshore Patrol Vehicles (OPVs), while talks continue on Akash Surface to Air Missile systems (SR-SAMS) and Dhruv advanced light helicopters. Vietnam has also from time to time expressed its desire to purchase BrahMos supersonic missiles from India. Both Modi and Quang also agreed to enhance exploring the possibility of co-production and opportunities in transfer of technology in defence manufacturing. Military-to-military cooperation between the services is also going on. The two countries also agreed to strengthen relations in different sectors such as renewable energy, agriculture, textiles and petroleum.

The two countries also signed a MoU on economic and trade cooperation aimed at establishing a framework for enhancing economic and trade promotion.In terms of trade, both are striving to bring bilateral trade to $15 billion by 2020. In the fiscal 2016-17, bilateral trade stood at $6.24 billion, an increase of 40 per cent from the previous year. From his side, Quang underlined his country’s commitment to creating favourable conditions for businesses in areas ranging from information technology to infrastructure. In a joint statement issued, both sides agreed to hold the next meeting of the Joint Sub-Commission on Trade in Vietnam’s capital city of Hanoi in 2018 at the earliest. The joint statement stated: “In order to realize potential to both increase the volume of trade and diversify its composition, they (Modi and Quang) requested the relevant ministries and agencies on both sides to explore substantive and practical measures to achieve the trade target of USD 15 billion by 2020 including but not limited to utilising established mechanisms, strengthening exchanges of trade delegations, business-to-business contacts, regular organisation of trade fairs and events”. Both sides urged leaders of business and industry of both countries to explore new trade and investment opportunities in identified priority areas of cooperation.

A work plan for the years 2018-2022 between the Indian Council of Agricultural Research and Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development of Vietnam was also signed between the two countries. The purpose of this work plan is to promote cooperation in the transfer of technology and exchange of visits of technical experts in the field of agriculture. India requested Vietnam to consider signing the Framework Agreement of the International Solar Alliance to strengthen cooperation in the renewable energy space. Vietnam agreed to examine.

When Modi visited Vietnam in 2016, the “strategic partnership” was elevated to a “special strategic partnership”. Quang committed to further deepen this partnership. In 2016, Modi had announced a grant of $5 million for the construction of an Army Software Park at the Telecommunications University in NhaTrang. A Line of Credit of $100 million is already being used for eight off-shore patrol vessels to Vietnam. The armies of the two countries conducted joint military exercise in February for the first time. Vietnam also buys defence equipment for its navy and air force. Also, though Vietnam has shown an interest in buying the Brahmos supersonic missile from India, not much headway been made. Negotiations on terms and conditions are under way.

The fact that a business delegation of 65 businessmen from 34 Vietnamese companies visited India with Quang and had interaction with prominent Indian businessmen shows that Vietnam is keen to deepen economic and business ties with India. As regards the composition of trade, while Vietnam exports a lot of manufacturing products such as mobile phones, machineries and computers, India’s export basket to the Vietnamese market includes machineries, textile materials, sea food and medicines. Despite the enthusiasm shown by both sides, the trade volume has not reached the expected level.  

India continues to be among Vietnam’s top ten largest trading partners. Though overall bilateral trade volume is below the desired level, it has increased 16 per cent per annum on average in the past decade and this is an achievement. Many major Indian firms have established and expanded their footprints in Vietnam. The growth trajectory cannot be overlooked. What also cannot be overlooked is the fact that India has given priority to Vietnam in development cooperation and education and training and focused on areas such as science and technology, information and communication.    

Investments from India in Vietnam are still very low. India ranks 28th among the 126 countries and territories investing in Vietnam in 2017 with 168 projects and total registered capital of $756 million. Many major Indian corporations, including Tata group, ONGC and Essar, have sound business in Vietnam. Vietnam expects more investments from India, so that the target of $15 billion in bilateral trade by 2020 can be realised. India’s strength in renewable energy, manufacturing, IT, infrastructure, could be attractive for Vietnam. Both need to strengthen bilateral and regional connectivity as well as infrastructural connectivity such as air links, roads and maritime links, and digital connectivity. Under Modi’s Act East thrust, these areas are the preferred projects and shall contribute to a win-win situation when energies of both sides are unleashed. Quang’s visit should be viewed from this perspective.

Writer: Rajaram Panda
Courtesy: The Pioneer

During the raucous rally of supporters in Pennsylvania on Saturday night, America’s President, Donald Trump, told that his new tariffs were related to save the steel industry and advised them to send a Republican to the House so he can keep delivering those kinds of results. The president gave his preference to Republican Rick Saccone in the final days of the competitive election outside Pittsburg that could resonate nationally ahead of the November interim elections. Hitting peak campaign mode for himself, he revitalized many of his 2016 riffs and even unveiled his 2020 planned slogan, “Keep America Great!”

“We can’t say ‘Make American Great Again’ because I already did that,” Trump said in Moon Township, a Pittsburgh suburb, adding: “Our new slogan when we start running in — can you believe it, two years from now? — is going to be ‘Keep American Great, exclamation point.”

It turns out that Trump actually had hit upon the “Keep America Great” slogan long ago, having told The Washington Post in January 2017 that he had instructed his lawyer to trademark the phrase with and without an exclamation point.

  “The task for all of us, for everyone here tonight is to make sure that this great American comeback continues full speed ahead. We are doing things that are amazing,” Trump said as he campaigned for a Republican locked in a stiff contest with a Democrat in a special Congressional election on Tuesday. “The world is watching. Get out on Tuesday and vote like crazy,” he told the crowd.

Trump made it a point to tout his controversial decision to slap 25 per cent on imported steel – something that was set to resonate in Pittsburgh – once the centre of America’s steel industry and still carries the title “The Steel City”, despite plants having closed down in recent decades in the face of acute competition from cheaper foreign steel.

“Steel is back. Aluminium is back,” he claimed, predicting that a lot of steel mills would now reopen because of his tariffs push to keep cheaper imports at bay.

Ditching his prepared address, Trump attacked his three predecessors – Barack Obama, George W. Bush and Bill Clinton – for their failure to resolve the North Korean nuclear issue. “They all had their shot and all they did was nothing,” he said and claimed that it was because of his own maximum pressure campaign that Kim Jong Un has now sought a meeting with him and he has accepted the invitation.

Back to his familiar campaign mode, Trump also lashed out yet again at the liberal mainstream media and a host of Democrats, notably House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi, Congresswoman Maxine Walters and Senator Elizabeth Warren, who is thought to be among a host of Democrats considering a presidential run in 2020.

“I look forward, I really do, I look forward to 2020 because I want to see how far left the person is going to be that we’re going to run against,” Trump said. Bringing up Oprah Winfrey, he urged the media celebrity to throw her hat into the ring, saying he would “love” to campaign against her. “I would love to beat Oprah. I know her weakness. I know her weakness … I would love it. That would be a painful experience for her,” he remarked.

Writer: S Rajagopalan
Courtesy: The Pioneer