7/30/2019 DSA Alert April 2013 Issue
4/5
disclaimer
all rights reserved. reproduction and
translation in any language in whole or in
part by any means without permission from
Defence and Security Alert is prohibited.
opinions expressed are those of the individual
writers and do not necessarily reect those of
the publisher and / or editors. all disputes aresubject to
jurisdiction of delhi courts.
defence and security alert is printed,
published and owned by pawan agrawal
and printed at graphic world, 1686, kucha
dakhini rai, darya ganj, new delhi-110002 and
published at 4/19 asaf ali road, new delhi (india).
editor: maj gen (dr) gd bakshi (retd).
chairmanshyam sunderpublisher and ceopawan agrawalfounding
editormanvendra singh
editor-in-chiefmaj gen (dr) gd bakshi SM, VSM
(retd)directorshishir bhushancorporate consultantkj singhart
consultantdivya guptacentral saint martins college of art &
design,university of arts, londonbusiness developmentshaifali
sachdevapr and communicationsarpita duttacreativevivek anand
pantrepresentative (J and K)salil sharmacorrespondent
(Europe)dominika cosicproductiondilshad and dabeerwebmastersundar
rawatsystem administratormehar dographotographersubhashcirculation
and distributionrahul gupta and anup kumar
e-mail: (rst name)@dsalert.orginfo: [email protected]:
[email protected]: s [email protected]
edition: [email protected]: [email protected]
editorial and corporate ofce4/19 asaf ali roadnew delhi-110002
(India)t: +91-011-23243999, 23287999, 9958382999e:
[email protected]
Global geopolitics has changed dramatically over thepast two
decades. There have been leadership andregime changes through
external interventions in
Europe as seen in the Balkanisation of Yugoslavia into
itsconstituent ethnic and religious groups and the attempt togive
the Shias of oil rich Iraq an ascendant role is a work stillin
progress. There have been r evolutions sweeping across
theMediterranean coast of Africa and east Asia has the
potential
of becoming a political hotbed with conicting maritime boundary
claims that threaten
to disrupt the very concept of sea lanes being international
freeways.
What we see today is that there is a paradigm shift in the power
game on the globewhich I think is because of two major reasons: One
is the imperative to control ormanipulate and ensure unhampered
access to sources of hydrocarbons both gasand crude; and the second
is to dominate the manufacturing and sale of arms
andammunition.
The states that are small in size and resources are looking for
new resourcefulfriends who could be their political props at the
time of any crisis. The powerful statesare adding more power to
their muscles by associating with the other powerful statesto make
a total shift in the entire geopolitics of the globe.
In their single-minded pursuit of global dominance we have
witnessed bignation-states exploit local schisms to attain their
own politico-strategic goals. We seewhat is happening in Iraq the
displaced Sunnis are wreaking havoc on the Shiaswith a reenactment
of gory scenes on the tenth anniversary of the Coalitions
militaryintervention based on the falsehood that Iraq was trying to
acquire a nuclear bomb. Thesimilar dismantling of the former
Yugoslavia has left the new nations in suspended
animation, unable to reintegrate with neighbours who just cannot
be wished away.
In our part of the world China has been very aggressive in
developing its defenceindustrial base and what it has been doing in
the South China Sea makes it quite clearthat its long-term designs
and machinations converge on its intentions to control theareas
which are rich in oil resources.
On the other side are the states who have been quite
peace-loving and neutral andare developing gradually to capitalise
their resources like Japan, South Korea, India,Indonesia, Vietnam
and the other ASEAN nations. As the environment of
bilateralrelations is changing such states have to look for options
so as to safeguard their largerinterests. Thus the time has come
where all the developed and developing states haveto look for a
wider spectrum of strategic partnerships.
India, Japan and Vietnam are the states that have many common
factors todevelop a strategic partnership, contours of which can be
seen in the recent changein the leadership in Japan. India Japan
bilateral relationship has been declared asStrategic Global
Partnership since 2007. The evolving geopolitical and
geostrategicscenario offers a once in a generation opportunity to
India and Japan to forge strong,
vibrant and wide-ranging partnership in areas of mutual interest
strengthening thesecurity environment in the region. Fortuitously
the new Prime Minister of JapanShinzo Abe summed up his thinking on
Indo-Japan partnership so succintly whenhe said: Strong India is in
the best interest of Japan and strong Japan is in the bestinterest
of India and This will be the most important bilateral relationship
in theworld. In his book Towards a Beautiful Country, Abe surmises
It will not be a surpriseif in another decade Japan-India relations
overtake Japan-US and Japan-China ties.How India seizes this
opportunity and reciprocates remains to be seen.
We have no doubt that India-Japan-Vietnam strategic partnership
will play a criticaland dening role in the coming years and decades
in the game plan unfolding on theAsia Pacic chessboard.
Jai Hind!
publisher's view
D e f i n i n g a l i g n m e n t s
pawan agrawal
manvendra singh
odg do
India has an announced 'look east' policy. It was rst enunciated
in the 1990s when the country was being buffeted bywestern winds
that sought to trap it in the diplomatic quagmire caused by Jammu
and Kashmir. Late Prime MinisterPV Narasimha Rao, the much
underrated practitioner of statecraft, began the use of this term.
He used it in terms
of the need for a few constant pegs to Indian diplomatic and
security interests. At that time nothing seemed to showa direction.
The world had recently witnessed the end of the cold war and the
emergence of new countries from thedebris of the disintegrating
Soviet Union was a very real reality. It was a world quite unlike
anything seen in at least acouple of human generations.
In this world India was seeking to nd its place under the sun.
There was as much confusion within the countryas there was
globally. Little that was happening made much sense to most
practitioners of the diplomatic craft. Indiawas treading new
grounds as it had only recently opened up its economy, gingerly.
Diplomatic winds were not sofavourable, as Pakistan and China
teamed up to tie India down by the wrists. Even as China
proliferated nuclearweapons technology to Pakistan, the diplomatic
campaign on Jammu and Kashmir pinned down I ndia as a matter
ofroutine. In the search for an alternative India seemed to nd East
Asia as receptive as it was concerned by China's rising
stock. There was nally some commonality of interests with
someone sharing India's concerns and vision.
Japan and Vietnam have had a historically fractured relationship
with China, whether in the imperial, nationalist orthe communist
phases. Even as there have been territorial problems between China
and these countries, the relationshipseems to boil at the slightest
instigation. India, on the other hand, has always had good r
elations with these countries.Historically India has always had
good relations with China, making it the only conict free
neighbourly relationshipin the world. But that was to change in the
middle of the 20th century when the Communist Party of China came
topower under Mao Zedong. A certain unease now remains between the
two countries. Which makes for a 'look east'policy coloured by a
certain prism.
It is not in India's national interest to be drawn into a
military alliance that has a singular motivation checkingChina.
India's interests are far too complex to be reduced to a single
agenda. At the same time it is not in Indianeconomic interests that
there be a tense or conictual situation in East Asia. The future of
economic growth, globaland regional, depends to a large extent on
free and fair trade between East Asia and the rest of the world. A
militarycomplication precludes that in one stroke. Even as India
and some East Asian countries are drawn together by the
power of common fears, there are national security and economic
interests that override single agenda concerns. Itwould be an
insult to India, its history and its civilisational ethos, if it
were to be drawn into a hyped alliance, onlybecause some friends
said so.
2 April 2013 Defence AnD security Alert April 2013 Defence AnD
security Alert 3
7/30/2019 DSA Alert April 2013 Issue
5/5
Strategic Partnership: India-Japan-Vietnam
For online edition log on to: www.dsalert.org
A R T I C L E S
o
Follow DSA on: @dsalert Follow DSA on: @dsalert
Special Issue April 2013
V o l u m e 4 I s s u e 7 A P R I L 2 0 1 3
o mam oao: 6aa, aa ad maav Adm hdak Kada JMsDf (d)
Jaa-ida a ooao 16takako ho ad tak yokoo
mgg om ida oa go 18ad mao o ida
l G Op Kak pvsM, AvsM, vsM, M--D (d)
a a vam: o 24A Maa A coa pvsM, AvsM, vM, vsM (d)
ag ag moa o vam: 28 dam o Jaa ad idaD sao nagao
mam oo: 32ida-vam ad ida-Jaa aora Adma (D) s Ka (d)
ida-Jaa-vam ao 38ca boj Oaa (d)
omo Aa pa 42ad ma o ida, Jaa ad vambg (D) A sama (d) ad M A
paa
Jaa ad ida: oaoag o ommo good 48cmd sj samadda nM (d)
a a D-toko 52D ha v pa
o-g: 54o ad oaoa a a a d D ra Ja ad Dam Ma
indo-vetnam strategc artnersh n the Asa pacfc regon 59Maj G pK
cakao vsM (d)
oa dam Aa pa go 62ida-vam-Jaa agcama Maaaa
ida-Jaa oaoao 66D Moka caoa
ida-vam: a ag a 69D ra Ma
dog goag kag ido-pa: 72a ma o Aa naaaa sak
ida oa ad Aa pa: am ma 76rsn sg
a ag o ida: a a goo o 80Ma Dakao
F E A T U R E
E X C L U S I V E I N T E R V I E W
ho' smapa GbAs 23
D vK saaa, Do Ga, DrDO 10
