Through the long era of the “Nehruvian consensus”, Indian policymakers enjoyed a favourite occupation: introspection.
Every problem needed introspection. Every setback called for introspection. Every initiative required introspection.
After over 60 years of introspection, we have policymakers who still advise – yes – further introspection.
The new Indian government has laid the Nehruvian consensus to rest. Action and outcomes count. Introspection is fine. But too much of it can lead to sclerotic inertia.
Can an outcome-focused government lose sight of first principles? The Nehruvian consensus had three guiding dictums: socialism, secularism and non-alignment.
Socialism fell apart under Narasimha Rao, Manmohan Singh (when he was finance minister) and Atal Bihari Vajpayee. It was revived by Sonia Gandhi and Manmohan Singh (when he was Prime Minister).
Instead of growing the economy and then distributing its benefits inclusively, the Sonia Gandhi-Manmohan Singh government did the exact opposite. The fiscal crisis is the result of failed economic socialism.
The Nehruvian consensus on secularism (introduced into the Constitution along with socialism by Indira Gandhi during the Emergency in 1976) descended into farce under Rajiv Gandhi following the Shah Bano case in 1985-86.
Muslims have since become poorer than even Dalits. Communal polarization began not with LK Advani’s rath yatra in 1990 but with Rajiv’s terrible blunder over Shah Bano five years earlier.
The third pillar of the Nehruvian consensus, non-alignment, fell with the Berlin wall 25 years ago. In a unipolar world dominated by the United States, strategic policy requires India to be a regional leader, not part of an amorphous non-aligned bloc.
Jairam Ramesh recently compared Narendra Modi to Richard Nixon – the US President who opened up China to American blandishments at the height of the Cold War.
Weaning China away from the Soviet Union into a position of equidistance with the US was achieved by both Nixon and Henry Kissinger.
Can Modi do the same with China over Pakistan?
Modi’s visit to Bhutan was calibrated to achieve several key ends. Bhutan has conducted over 25 rounds of border talks with China since 1986. The next round of talks between the two countries is scheduled in July/August.
India sought and got an assurance in Thimpu that vulnerable border areas in the north and the east will not be compromised during the China-Bhutan talks.
India’s own border dispute with China in Arunachal and Ladakh can then progress without unnecessary impediments.
China’s growing concern over Islamist militancy in its northwestern Xinjiang province is a lever India will use to focus Chinese minds on restraining terrorism bred in Pakistan’s fertile jihadi soil.
As events in Karachi have shown terrorism, like water, is fungible. It can drown its creators and damage its neighbours. China has no wish to allow further Islamist radicalization of Xinjiang, where Muslim Uighars speak a Turkic dialect. China earlier this week executed 13 terrorists for a series of attacks by Uighars in Xinjiang.
The emergence of the Islamic State of Iraq and Greater Syria (ISIS) has further underscored the dangers Sunni jihadism poses to the world.
ISIS was initially funded by wealthy individual donors in Sunni Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states to weaken Shia-majority Iran and Iraq (which is 60% Shia, 20% Sunni and 20% Kurd).
Like all Frankensteins – including Pakistan’s Tehreek-e-Taliban — ISIS has now become a menace to its sponsors. It could in future threaten the Saudi Wahhabi princelings and spread its brand of unspeakable brutality from the Middle-East to north-west India.
ISIS will eventually be defeated by moderate Sunni rebel factions in Syria and Iraq once Iraq’s blundering Shia prime minister Nouri al-Maliki gives minority Sunnis a role in his government. ISIS’s lightning advance towards Baghdad has warned the world against allowing the culture of jihadism free rein. A rattlesnake has to be defanged before it spreads its poison.
India has long punched below its geopolitical weight. A colonial inferiority complex, corrupt governments and chronic misgovernance since, especially, 2004 have eroded India’s ability to influence events outside its own sphere.
The new government must change that. How?
The three Abrahamic religions – Christianity, Islam and Judaism – have been the fount of global conflict for centuries. India’s post-Nehruvian consensus must deal with the embers of that conflict by evolving a robust strategic doctrine. A future article will expand on that and more.
Source: http://blogs.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/headon/beyond-the-nehruvian-consensus/
Every problem needed introspection. Every setback called for introspection. Every initiative required introspection.
After over 60 years of introspection, we have policymakers who still advise – yes – further introspection.
The new Indian government has laid the Nehruvian consensus to rest. Action and outcomes count. Introspection is fine. But too much of it can lead to sclerotic inertia.
Can an outcome-focused government lose sight of first principles? The Nehruvian consensus had three guiding dictums: socialism, secularism and non-alignment.
Socialism fell apart under Narasimha Rao, Manmohan Singh (when he was finance minister) and Atal Bihari Vajpayee. It was revived by Sonia Gandhi and Manmohan Singh (when he was Prime Minister).
Instead of growing the economy and then distributing its benefits inclusively, the Sonia Gandhi-Manmohan Singh government did the exact opposite. The fiscal crisis is the result of failed economic socialism.
The Nehruvian consensus on secularism (introduced into the Constitution along with socialism by Indira Gandhi during the Emergency in 1976) descended into farce under Rajiv Gandhi following the Shah Bano case in 1985-86.
Muslims have since become poorer than even Dalits. Communal polarization began not with LK Advani’s rath yatra in 1990 but with Rajiv’s terrible blunder over Shah Bano five years earlier.
The third pillar of the Nehruvian consensus, non-alignment, fell with the Berlin wall 25 years ago. In a unipolar world dominated by the United States, strategic policy requires India to be a regional leader, not part of an amorphous non-aligned bloc.
Jairam Ramesh recently compared Narendra Modi to Richard Nixon – the US President who opened up China to American blandishments at the height of the Cold War.
Weaning China away from the Soviet Union into a position of equidistance with the US was achieved by both Nixon and Henry Kissinger.
Can Modi do the same with China over Pakistan?
Modi’s visit to Bhutan was calibrated to achieve several key ends. Bhutan has conducted over 25 rounds of border talks with China since 1986. The next round of talks between the two countries is scheduled in July/August.
India sought and got an assurance in Thimpu that vulnerable border areas in the north and the east will not be compromised during the China-Bhutan talks.
India’s own border dispute with China in Arunachal and Ladakh can then progress without unnecessary impediments.
China’s growing concern over Islamist militancy in its northwestern Xinjiang province is a lever India will use to focus Chinese minds on restraining terrorism bred in Pakistan’s fertile jihadi soil.
As events in Karachi have shown terrorism, like water, is fungible. It can drown its creators and damage its neighbours. China has no wish to allow further Islamist radicalization of Xinjiang, where Muslim Uighars speak a Turkic dialect. China earlier this week executed 13 terrorists for a series of attacks by Uighars in Xinjiang.
The emergence of the Islamic State of Iraq and Greater Syria (ISIS) has further underscored the dangers Sunni jihadism poses to the world.
ISIS was initially funded by wealthy individual donors in Sunni Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states to weaken Shia-majority Iran and Iraq (which is 60% Shia, 20% Sunni and 20% Kurd).
Like all Frankensteins – including Pakistan’s Tehreek-e-Taliban — ISIS has now become a menace to its sponsors. It could in future threaten the Saudi Wahhabi princelings and spread its brand of unspeakable brutality from the Middle-East to north-west India.
ISIS will eventually be defeated by moderate Sunni rebel factions in Syria and Iraq once Iraq’s blundering Shia prime minister Nouri al-Maliki gives minority Sunnis a role in his government. ISIS’s lightning advance towards Baghdad has warned the world against allowing the culture of jihadism free rein. A rattlesnake has to be defanged before it spreads its poison.
India has long punched below its geopolitical weight. A colonial inferiority complex, corrupt governments and chronic misgovernance since, especially, 2004 have eroded India’s ability to influence events outside its own sphere.
The new government must change that. How?
The three Abrahamic religions – Christianity, Islam and Judaism – have been the fount of global conflict for centuries. India’s post-Nehruvian consensus must deal with the embers of that conflict by evolving a robust strategic doctrine. A future article will expand on that and more.
Source: http://blogs.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/headon/beyond-the-nehruvian-consensus/
No comments:
Post a Comment