Asia's changing strategic landscape

Gone are the days of lone ranger approach. Even in a world dominated by a single power after the collapse of Soviet Union which virtually demolished the historic basis of inter-state relations as provided for in the treaty of Westphalia on the principle of balance of power the US cannot go it alone. An unwieldy coalition of the 'willings' in US' Iraq war is a pointer. The most reprehensible event of 9/11 broke the myth of American invincibility and exposed fragility of the psyche of the world's most powerful nation by driving it into a paroxysm of paranoia. While tracking down and destroying all those it suspects of harbouring anti-US sentiments it also found the necessity of strengthening politico-strategic ties with important states so that its existing power potential can be supplemented. This partly explains the US' rush to set up bases in far off places apparently to plug in her weak links. A desperate courting of India fits in this strategy of the US.

Then, India is not just another country. It's an emerging power on the world stage with its size, population, defence forces and economic growth. Being the world's largest democracy its liberal secular policy makes it the darling of the west. The neo conservative ideological gurus have long touted the advantage of establishing close ties with India located in a geopolitical area where they can see only Israel and India as "natural allies". As a result both the US and India are courting each other and it is not surprising that a "New Framework for US-India Defence Relationship" has come into being. It is the instrument that the Americans would like to use to fulfil their desire to occupy the centre-stage of world politics which is going to be shifted to the Pacific, an emerging growth area as predicted by Henry Kissinger.

It is not for nothing that Ms Condoleeza Rice during her visit to Delhi, wanted to make India a major power in 21st century. Rice told her associates in Washington that 'sky is limit' as far as Indians are concerned and nothing must impede the growth of ties with Delhi what has, after all, led Ms Rice and others to befriend India so desperately. It cannot be without substantive reason. In pursuit of its aggressive preemptive policy the US has already invaded Iraq, blackmailed the PLO leadership into acquiescing a 'Bantustan' option, kept the Syrians and Iranians under intense pressure and established military bases all over central Asia. She has also ensured that there is no voice of dissent anywhere under its sway or influence.

The 10 years agreement signed during Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's US visit envisages expanding two-way defence trade, increasing opportunity for transfer of defence related technology, co-producing and developing new armament and expanding collaboration in missile defence. On efforts to contain ploriferation the Indians have been offered membership of the exclusive club known as the ploriferation security initiative. The offer of the co-production of the F-16 and F-18 and the supply of BMD system as well as the likelihood of the transfer of "dual use" technologies are indeed tempting carrots. However, from the Indian point of view the possibility of American assistance in the nuclear field may be the most attractive offer, given India's acute energy needs.

While a friendly obliging India is floating in the vision of the Americans the influential figures in Bush Administration see China as a strategic rival. They have already determined that China is major longterm threat to the US and inimical to the latter's interest in Asia and Pacific. Although after 9/11 episode China behaved in a responsible way, supported the US war on terror and uttered no word against US neo imperialistic drive, the US policy with regard to China is already fraught with ambiguity. While their bilateral relations have suddenly gone frosty the warmth the US-China ties generated during the earlier US presidencies has substantially faded. China is rather circumspect in not provoking the US at this crucial stage but the latter would discover some faultline to take on China. In preparation, the US has in the meantime decided on a containment policy for China. India is ideally positioned to play that role.

But China, a nation for 8000 years couldn't be fooled. She already mended her fence with India with equally attractive package during Chinese Prime Minister's high profile visit to Delhi. Moreover why should India oblige the US in containing China? While China is least likely to give US a chance with any irrational behaviour to be hostile to her, India immersed in Nehruvian philosophy Wouldn't like a subservient role to play a second fiddle to anyone. India is too big, too proud to do that. Of course, the Americans do have other options. They have their close allies in the area i.e. Japan and Australia and South Korea. They are already encouraging the Japanese to abandon many of the self-imposed limitation on the pursuit of a militaristic agenda. Washington is also pushing Australia to get more aggressively involved in Asian affairs while reinforcing its linkages and commitment to South Korea and Taiwan.

Asia, it looks, is entering a fresh phase of turmoil and the region will be in a flux in days ahead. What shape of things will finally emerge from the looming hostilities is difficult to predict. The Indo-US strategic partnership and Pakistan's status as a non-Nato ally of the US will however be major factors in this fascinating power game in Asia.

Brig ( retd) Hafiz is former DG of BIISS.