A columnist at the People's Daily, the official newspaper of the Communist Party of China, recently suggested that India's Look East Policy means to encircle China as India strives for a more prominent role in East Asia. This observation comes when both India and China are participating in the East Asia summit at Hanoi, Vietnam.  India's "Look East Policy" means "Look to encircle China"? (Li Hongmei, People's Daily Online)

This is an alarmist reaction to India's attempts at integrating better with East Asia. I had written in my earlier posts how India shares a lot in common with East Asia culturally, however, this was never leveraged strategically to integrate India better with the region. India's Northeast shares lot of cultural similarities with Myanmar, Thailand or Vietnam than say a Bihar or UP in mainland India. However, trade and people to people contact between the regions remained low. Similarly sea faring population from South India had strong trade and cultural exchanges from ancient times with East Asia. For a brief period in history the region was also colonized by the Imperial Chola dynasty from South India. The presence of a strong Indian diaspora in countries like Singapore, Malaysia etc is a testament to the historic links between both the regions.

India's engagement with Southeast Asia has made remarkable progress recently. Look East policy of India is just a realization of India's historic role in the region, its strategic priorities and the economic motive to engage proactively in the Intra-Asian trade. India has recently signed several trade pacts with countries like Thailand, Malaysia and Singapore. There have been several high level visits from the region in recent times including that of the Japanese Prime Minister last week. The Indo-ASEAN FTA is also the second largest free trade agreement in Asia now bringing within its ambit a market of 2 billion people. It is a course correction from the Cold War era that saw South Asia maintain a distance from the region. I feel another reason may have been the 'north India fixation' of Indian politics and a political leadership dominated by north Indians obsessed with India's western borders. The above observation, coming from the mouthpiece of Chinese Communist Party, is essentially flawed and seems more like a word of caution to Indian leadership as it strives for closer engagement with the region. 

Suggestions/Critiques welcome.

-- Madhur

Email ThisBlogThis!Share to TwitterShare to FacebookShare to Pinterest

Media relations seem to have become crucial in managing Sino-Indian ties. Global Times of China recently focused on the effect of media coverage on Sino-Indian ties. Writing for the publication, Tian Wei, anchor of CCTV’s special coverage of important domestic and international events, said that media in both countries need to be more credible in their coverage of Sino-India relations and not succumb to, “the market and fierce media competition, since pandering to nationalism and popular hysteria is an easy way to drum up sales.” (Since media industry is growing exponentially in India and China)

Wei also highlighted that there was no media coverage in India on the passing away of prominent Chinese scholar Ji Xianlin in Beijing, “best remembered for his achievements on ancient Indian aboriginal languages, primeval Buddhist languages and Sanskrit literature.” Ji Xianlin also translated the epic Ramayana from Sanskrit into Chinese and was a recipient of Padma Bhushan, one of India's top civilian honor.

On 29th March 2010, the newspaper also carried an interview of Dr S. Jaishankar, Indian ambassador to China, on the future prospects of India- China relations. In the course of the interview, the Indian ambassador acknowledged the need to better manage the media by both countries to ensure there is no speculation among people resulting in a trust deficit between the countries. He said that, “it is important to reshape the relationship to push media reporting to a more positive direction.” The ambassador also stressed the need to improve messaging instead of worrying about the actions of the media.

The idea of managing media relations by professional managers is a new concept in China and India’s public diplomacy discourse. It has generally been limited to the mandarins in foreign office of both these countries, though, I must admit, China is a bit ahead on this. However, with the exponential growth of the industry in both these countries and also the boom in uncontrolled media like the internet, the need is felt for professional media managers within the government who can decide on the message, control the message, effectively disseminate, pitch story ideas, track and analyze coverage accordingly. Interestingly, there is a need to engage with media both internally as well as externally. The Indian ambassador is right in his reading of the situation and it remains to be seen how the Public Diplomacy Division in the MEA incorporates it in its long term strategy.

Suggestions/Critiques welcome.

-- Madhur

Email ThisBlogThis!Share to TwitterShare to FacebookShare to Pinterest

Thailand initiated an innovative project called the – “Roving Buakeaw Project” - that allows the government to take account of public opinion when formulating foreign policy. The project is led by the Foreign Minister who along with senior officials from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs goes to the people to listen on various issues with potential impact on Thai foreign policy. This is an attempt to engage and include Thai citizens from all walks of life, especially in the border provinces in shaping Thai foreign policy. Town halls, local temples, provincial schools etc serve as meeting sites and “information collected is taken into consideration in formulating foreign policy if and when appropriate.”

The Thai ministry of foreign affairs describe that the main activities of the project include, “informal discussion on issues of international affairs affecting the life such as trading and consular service as well as roving passport services.” People from the selected provinces also have the opportunity to participate through local radio stations via live broadcasts. Issues discussed include trading along the border, labor issues, tourism etc.

Apart from top echelons of the ministry, participants include Members of Parliament, businessmen, member of the local Chambers of Commerce, local media, local government officials, non-profits and civil society etc. In Southeast Asia, Thailand remains a dynamic state when it comes to foreign policy. It was one of the first states to accept the reality of a rising China and engage the Chinese aggressively despite US being the preeminent power in East Asian affairs. Historically too, Thailand was the only country in the whole of Asia to have never been colonized despite never being a great power. The “Roving Buakew Project” along with other such projects like “Young Ambassador of Virtue,” are wonderful initiatives to give ‘common people’ a direct say in formulating foreign policy. See this link for a presentation by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Thailand.

Suggestions/Critiques welcome.

- Madhur

Email ThisBlogThis!Share to TwitterShare to FacebookShare to Pinterest

Beginning of 2010 saw India aggressively engaging major East Asian countries. Apart from state visits by leaders of South Korea, Japan and Malaysia; Indian navy led 13 navies from the region in the ’Milan 2010’ anti terror, humanitarian assistance and disaster relief exercise in the Indian Ocean. India seems to be gradually figuring in geopolitical East Asian scheme of things even though geographically it’s not a part of it.

In a symbolic gesture that signifies the importance India attaches to East Asia, the South Korean President Lee Myung-bak, was the chief guest at this year’s Republic Day celebrations in New Delhi on January 26^th. While talks with Japan and South Korea centered around trade, economic and nuclear cooperation, talks with the Malaysian Prime Minister Sri Mohammad Najib Tun Abdul Razak also focused on reaching a bilateral agreement on culture and tourism apart from means to an early conclusion of CECA (Comprehensive Economic Cooperation Agreement).

While bilateral ties seem to be strengthening with East Asia, people to people connect seems to be minimal between both regions. The Malaysian prime minister did in fact admit this when he said, “for ties to be binding and meaningful, it is imperative to have the strongest people-to-people relationship.” Mr Najib said that Malaysia intended to improve its visa regime to facilitate travel of business persons and tourist to his country. He also called for improving connectivity through additional flights to either country and to elsewhere around the world and to establish a bilateral CEO forum for business leaders from both countries to discuss common issues. During his stay, Chennai also signed a “sister city” pact with Kuala Lumpur. Unlike Japan and Korea, Malaysia also has a strong Indian diaspora.

While the Look East policy is bearing fruit for India, people to people contact/exchanges need to be strongly cultivated given the geographical proximity and factors like shared history and demographics. The potential of India’s North East, which is culturally & geographically closer to Southeast Asia than rest of India, should also be tapped for better ‘people to people connect’. India’s domestic politics, dominated by the northern states is also partly responsible, which for reasons historic and cultural is obsessed with India’s western border and people to people ties with Pakistan. Joseph Nye, in his British Council Parliamentary Lecture on 20 January 2010, “Soft Power and Public Diplomacy in the 21st Century,” argued that “in an information age when power is more broadly distributed and less hierarchical than in earlier ages” there is some merit in a two way communication between societies to complement state policy. It’s a good time for India to take stock of its soft power reserves in East Asia and leverage it for the preeminent role it is destined to play in Asia in the 21^st century.

Suggestions/Critiques welcome.

--Madhur

Email ThisBlogThis!Share to TwitterShare to FacebookShare to Pinterest

Joshua Kurlantzick’s “Charm Offensive” and Sunanda K Datta-Ray’s “Looking East to Look West” are two books which provide great insights into the diplomacy in Southeast Asia. Kurlantzick describes in detail Chinese public diplomacy and how it is (now) central to Chinese foreign policy with a mission to reassure the world about “China’s peaceful rise.” Datta-Ray, on the other hand, examines India-Singapore relations and, in the process, also looks at India’s engagement with Southeast Asia since 1947.

Kurlantzick’s “Charm Offensive” describes Chinese public diplomacy in various regions of the world, examines it as a strategic foreign policy tool and also goes into the values and theories driving China’s ‘charm’ campaign. It has detailed chapters on China’s engagement of Southeast Asia and Africa and also compares China’s public diplomacy with other ‘sophisticated players’ in the arena like United States. It’s an informative read and with great foot notes, ‘Notes to Pages’ and ‘Indexes’ is invaluable for a research scholar. While Kurlantzick does a good job of chronicling Chinese public diplomacy, he failed to examine Southeast Asia as a competitive space for ‘influence’ between India and China.

In international relations, 21^st century is touted to be an Asian century. This combined with other recent developments like, economic growth of India and China, debates around Climate change, the Af-Pak War, maritime security of trade traffic in Indian Ocean region, non-proliferation, Myanmar, Kashmir etc., dominating public discourses in diplomacy, India remains, and, will be a critical player in the years to come. India and China share borders with Southeast Asia and the region is important for both, economically as well as from a security perspective. Both the countries have been active in this region.(Though I must admit, Chinese are more aggressive). A rising Asia includes both India and China, and, so I thought Kurlantzick’s book would have been complete if it had also examined India as an important player in Southeast Asian diplomacy. It is indeed curious that most writings tend to ignore India’s relevance to Southeast Asia and the transformative potential of this relationship for the world.

Indian scholars, traditionally, are more focused on security and trade issues in international relations. Books on public diplomacy are rare (almost non-existent). While Datta-Ray’s book is not explicitly on India’s public diplomacy efforts, it does provide a context to India’s ‘Look East’ policy and the need for greater engagement with Southeast Asia. Focusing on Indo-Singapore relations since 1947 the book calls for a restoration of civilizational ties between Singapore and India. The book provides important insights into India’s importance and relevance to Singapore and Southeast Asia over different periods in history (also vis-à-vis the ‘China factor.’) and how Singapore under Lee Kuan Yew had often looked to India for leadership of Asia.

Suggestions/Critiques welcome.

-- Madhur

Email ThisBlogThis!Share to TwitterShare to FacebookShare to Pinterest

The seventh India-ASEAN summit was held in October, 2009, at Hua Hin in Thailand. At the summit Prime Minister Manmohan Singh reiterated India’s commitment to engage ASEAN nations and also outlined India’s vision of an Asian economic community based on an “open and inclusive” architecture.

Keeping with India’s “Look East policy,” public diplomacy initiatives are high on the agenda to connect India with Southeast Asia; rather emphasize the fact that India had always been connected closely with Southeast Asia through its people, culture and also geography and shared history (See me previous post on Northeast India in this blog). Prime Minister Singh suggested something interesting at the summit along the lines of the theme of ASEAN summit this year – “Enhancing Connectivity, Empowering Peoples."

The year 2012 will see the commemoration the 10th anniversary of India's participation as a summit level partner of ASEAN, and 20 years as a sectoral dialogue partner. These are significant milestones that need to be feted and also publicized. Prime Minister Singh suggested that India and ASEAN could jointly consider organizing a commemorative ship expedition in 2011-12 on the sea routes developed during the 10th to 12th centuries linking India with Southeast Asia and East Asia. He said that the sea route could cover modern and ancient ports in ASEAN countries, and other East Asian countries as well. This proposal was one of the five initiatives (economic and political) that the Prime Minister suggested to further strengthen links between India and ASEAN.

China too, as part of its public diplomacy efforts, had done something similar. It organized exhibitions in museums of Malaysia and Singapore to celebrate the anniversary of the voyages of Zheng He, a Chinese admiral who took his fleet across Asia and Africa, exploring cultures, establishing linkages between Chinese and Southeast Asia cultures in the 14^th or 15^th centuries. Zheng He's expeditions, the Chinese claim, were peaceful exploratory voyages not aimed at conquest.

While these attempts to establish a cultural and historical connect is significant by the Asian giants, what can tilt the balance in India's favor is its impeccable democratic credentials, respect for diversity and resilient political framework in an otherwise unstable region and also vis-à-vis China.

Suggestions/Critiques welcome.

-- Madhur

Email ThisBlogThis!Share to TwitterShare to FacebookShare to Pinterest

India's Northeast remains a distinct cultural unit within India. The land, its people, languages, customs, cultural practices have lot in common with countries of Southeast Asia like Thailand, Myanmar etc. For example, Thai language, culture and customs are studied, preserved, promoted & practised extensively by the Ahom tribe - a dominant ehtnic group - in Assam. There are museums, cultural centres dedicated to such pursuits. Similarly, if you go to Moreh in Manipur you can just "walk over" to Myanmar at certain hours during the day when the borders are opened for sometime. Some Naga tribes are in Myanmar and not in Nagaland. Apart from similarities in physical appearances - the Mongoloid features - there are also similarities between languages and dialects of Northeast India to Southeast Asia. If you look at dietary habits, cuisines of Northeast are very "unindian" (Indian food for most people is Punjabi - tandoori chicken, paneer tikka or the occassional Masala Dosa!) There are some shared dishes and styles of cooking with Southeast Asian countries which one won't find in the rest of India. Besides, Tinsukia in Assam is 24 hours away by road from Bangkok but 40-50 hours away by train from New Delhi! Cultural alienation from the rest of India is not surprising. Coupled with the irrelevance of Northeast in Indian electoral politics, it feeds into the growing discontent in the region leading to militant movements against the Indian state.

Despite the similarities between India's Northeast and Southeast Asia, people to people contact between the regions remain minimal. This was recognised at the policy level by former Prime Minister PV Narasimha Rao during whose tenure India started its "Look East" policy to spread India's influence towards the east. This was also a strategic move to counter a rising China rapidly growing in influence in Myanmar, Nepal & Bangladesh. While trade ties and strategic ties have grown manifold people to people exchanges are not as frequent as they should have been. The direct Air India flight "Narmada," started from Lokapriya Gopinath Bordoloi Airport at Guwahati to Bangkok has been scrapped. No international flights operate between India's Northeast to Southeast Asia. Southeast Asia remains low when it comes to 'mindshare' and Northeasterners look towards Delhi or Kolkata for ideas and inspiration. The media (TV programmes especially) rarely have content about/from Southeast Asia. Very few students from Northeast prefer to go for higher studies in institutes such as Asian Insititute of Management at Manila or Bangkok Institute of Technology, similarly very few students come to universities in Northeast from say Myanmar or Cambodia. The history curriculum in Indian schools too seek to downplay the links with Southeast Asia and talk about the region's evolution vis-a-vis North/South India and emphasise the ties with mainland India instead. Cultural exchanges remain few between the regions. A Cambodian/Thai cultural or food festival in Guwahati makes more sense than one in New Delhi. Similarly, ICCR and other such organizations should also strive to promote India's Northeast in these countries. It is yet to become a trade and cultural hub of India for Southeast Asia. The road to India's Northeast is still via New Delhi.

India's public diplomacy will do well to aggressively promote people to people contacts between these two regions. Instead of stage managing or institutional showcasing there should be an attempt to promote spontaneity and embed popular conciousness with ideas about each other. The government should actually make it easier for the Northeast to reach out to Southeast Asia and vice-versa. Cultural similarities between the regions should be effectively leveraged, and in the long run, this will only facilitate Northeast India's development & progress.

-- Madhur

Email ThisBlogThis!Share to TwitterShare to FacebookShare to Pinterest