Introduction
In the early years of the 21st Century, we find ourselves relearning the most enduring lesson of history. That is, "Only thing constant in nature is change. It is not the reality that is changing but change, which is becoming a reality." The difference now is that the revolution in technology is making changes, including global trends and strategic changes, faster than ever before.
The global system is caught up in a revolutionary upheaval today. Globalisation is making geographic borders shrink and become transparent to the flow of ideas, people, as also to turmoil and insecurity. The concept of the nation-state, the most basic building block of the global system, is getting diluted. Currency rates, very often and very quickly, tend to get out of control. Imports and immigrants are moving freely across the world. There are clamors for improvement in socio-politics and socio-economics in the developing world. Approximately one-third of all the present members of the United Nations, are threatened by ethnic disharmony, rebel movements and insurgencies. Terrorists, guns, drugs and illegal migrations are threatening the civil life and sovereignty of the nations.
A few weeks ago, Henry Kissinger, a Guru of the global trends and strategic shifts, came to India. He listed three major trends on the global scene. One. Shift in the centre of gravity of the world from the Atlantic to Asia. Two. Terrorism, which he said is really the uprising of radical Islam against the secular and democratic world including moderate Islam. Three. Spread of weapons of mass destruction.
As I have been asked by the organizers to focus on Asia, Henry Kissinger's observations have come very handy to me.
Jawaharlal Nehru described Asia as "the mother of continents and the cradle of history's major civilization". Two thirds of the world's population resides in Asia today. The debate on whether the 21st century belongs to Asia or not is an on-going one, but there is no denying the fact that Asia is poised to play a significant role in international relations. Asia is now the center of economic growth and commercial dynamism. It has the world's most youthful and wage earning population. It is the fastest growing continent, with China and India set to emerge as the world's second and third largest economies over the next few decades. In the coming years, the economic dynamism of Asia will be sustained by growing connectivity and infrastructure development. It will be reinforced by the evident emphasis on integrating markets through free trade arrangements and restructuring and reforms in individual economies.
Asia is also the principal source of world's energy supply. There are ever new and impressive discoveries of oil and gas, not only in the Persian Gulf region but also in India, Bangladesh, Myanmar, Indonesia and Vietnam. China sits on foreign exchange reserves of nearly 540 billion dollars. India on the other hand is emerging as a major hub of international technology products and services. India's foreign exchange reserves have crossed 125 billion mark. Its exports have recorded a steady growth of 10 per cent in recent years. Some of the smaller countries like Vietnam and Thailand are also growing very fast, at the rate of 6 per cent or more.
Asia at the same time is troubled by some of the most intractable tensions of our time. The de-colonized, newly independent countries of Asia are acutely sensitive to political and economic bondage. That is also the reason why large parts of Asia are prone to instability on account of national and strategic rivalries, economic and political transitions and rapid social transformations. Security concerns, it appears, are keeping pace with the economic growth of Asian regions and sub regions. With terrorism increasing at a pace as rapid as the world trade, business, economic growth and security have become inseparable.
Let me refer to some major flash points threatening regional and international stability in Asia.
In West Asia, we have the bleeding sores of Palestine and Iraq. With the passing away of an era in Palestine, and the forthcoming elections in Iraq, there is now an opportunity and a ray of hope. We hope that this would lead to a conflict resolution; a democratic solution, without further sharpening of ideologies. A high degree of internationalization is the only realistic path toward stability in Iraq, as also in the region. Meaningful internationalization also requires a focus other than security.
In East Asia, we see the simmering tensions over the Taiwan issue and the grave new threat of nuclearization of the Korean peninsula. Fortunately, the forces recommending engagement continue to be predominant over those recommending armed escalation. A regional multilateral approach, like the six party forums, which addresses non-proliferation as well as political and strategic objectives of the regional nations, is the right approach.
The Central Asian Republics are yet to acquire strong political, social and security muscles to resist internal insurgencies and national onslaughts of Islamist revivalists. Currently, they are sitting over a potentially explosive terrorism environment. Nations that welcomed US troops and bases for Afghanistan war are feeling vulnerable to the Islamist threats. The Shanghai Cooperation Organization was timely but requires a boost. Till now, it has not helped much to curb fundamentalist militancy in the region.
South Asia, geo-politically, represents an integral security zone with India's unique centrality. No two South Asian nations can interact with each other directly without touching or crossing Indian land, sea or air space. India has special ties with each of her neighbours-of ethnicity, language, culture, common historical experience, or of shared access to vital natural resources like water- of a degree of intensity that is not shared by any two others. India provides security and stability to other nations of South Asia, it is not so much the other way round. Fortunately, the focus of national attention in this region too, is shifting towards economic issues and human development. Despite historical territorial disputes, political dialogue between India and China and India and Pakistan has now become more conciliatory and less confrontationist. India and Pakistan are now talking to each other, and not at each other.
With nuclear weapons here to stay, it is hard to perceive a large-scale conventional war between India and Pakistan, or for that matter between India and China. The probability of an all out high intensity war between these nations hereafter will remain low. Even if it does break out, it is likely to remain limited in time and scope.
There are two important trends, one positive and another negative that need to be noted.
Regionalism and Institutionalization of Cooperation and Mutual Understanding Most Asian nations are learning that improvement in economy tends to attract illegal migration from the neighborhood. The economic and security win win therefore lies in regionalism, sub regionalism and institutionalization of cooperation and mutual understanding.
There is an increasing trend towards forming regional economic and trade groupings, as evidenced by the Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) within and with outsiders like China and India, the South Asian Preferential Trade Agreement (SAPTA), Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) and the Indian Ocean Rim Block (IORB). As South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) has been very slow in moving forward due to Pakistan's non-democratic and non-progressive politics and obstinacy, India has started looking more towards its North, East and South to create or participate in regional and sub regional groupings. It has encouraged establishment of BIMSTECH, and is striving to join the APEC and the ASEAN. Most of these groupings are based on free trade, preferential trade agreements or mutually agreed tariffs, and leading to an unprecedented increase in regional trade and networking. Alongwith economic issues, these groups and sub groups are increasingly discussing security issues related to terrorism, gun running, drug traffic, natural and ecological disasters and illegal movement of people.
Rise of Ethnic Nationalism But events in the last decade of the 20th century have also starkly highlighted the dangers of ethnic nationalism. Is ethnic nationalism due to media/globalisation-promoted rapid rise in expectations and aspirations, or a result of freedom from cold war suppression? I do not know. But multi ethnic nations like India are acutely conscious that this is a latent force, a dormant volcano, with the potential to explode without warning. Ethnic populations have always straddled international boundaries. In many parts of Asia-West, Central and Southern- this trend has started threatening regional security with daily dosage of mindless violence. Unfortunately, many non-democratic regimes continue to support it in self-interest. The forces of ethnic nationalism cannot be dismissed out of hand.
What does all this indicate? One. The emergence of Asia is in reality the sum of the success of each of its parts today. Two. In most of the Asia, definitely in the North, South and South East, geo-economics is driving geo-politics and geo-strategy.
Global Terrorism Beside political and ethnic terrorism, which exist in many parts, Jehadi terrorism has spread all over Asia and is in most virulent form today.
Jehadi terrorism is a mixture of religion, politics, socially inspirational remorseless violence with no holds barred. It does not accept modern rational society, as practiced by democratic and many other states. Allow me to analyse some of its characteristics.
First. It is a hydra-headed global movement, mobilized by a common stock of rhetorical themes, inspirational imagery, and a dualistic worldview. Key themes of the movement are- beleaguered state of Islam, indispensability of Sharia for social order and justice, importance of Jehad for redressing parlous conditions of Muslim society, collaboration of infidel anti-muslim states led by the USA against pure Islam.
Second. The Jehadi terrorist web has now become global in nature. You have the Takfiris (Takfir- wal- Hijra) across the Mediterranean, the IMU and Hizb-ut-Tehrir in Central Asia, the HUM (Harkat-ul-Mujahideen), LET (Laskare-e-Toiba), JEM (Jaish-e-Mohammad) and LEJ (Lashkar-e-Jhangvi) in South Asia, the JI (Jemaah Islamiya), MILF (Moro Islamic Liberation Front) and Abu Sayyaf in South East Asia, and so on. These are like the Local Area Networks loosely linked to a Wide Area Network. The LANs have their local missions, local resources, local operational doctrines and procedures. But the key drivers are the same. In a globalised world, with educated and indoctrinated managers, it is not difficult to link autonomous activities through ideology.
Third. The Al Qaeda and its affiliates comprise not just poor, Madrassas-educated operatives, but also well-educated and ideologically indoctrinated senior and mid-level managers. These people can spur operations, have access to funds, know local militant leaders, use secure communications, travel widely, and can provide pre-operational support to local players anywhere in the world.
Fourth. Any pre-meditated and unlawful act of violence against innocent people or non-combatants, irrespective of its cause and motive, is terrorism. And yet, we continue to fight over its definition. The notion that someone's terrorist is someone else's freedom fighter is puerile. Such notions and advocacy reflect mischief and lack of commitment to war against terror. How does one share information and intelligence with countries that believe in such notions?
As a soldier who spent decades fighting insurgencies and terrorism, I also wish to emphasise that jehadi terrorism is not just a military problem. It is primarily a socio-political problem. In the worldwide counter terrorism strategy, beside checking violence, we have to isolate and combat an ideology that is irrational and not acceptable to modern society. We have to bridge the ideology gap- not create one. For this, we need both hard power as well as soft power: hard power to deal with armed terrorists, and soft power to deal humanely with societies, their culture, traditions and ethos. We have to stop countries, ethnic groups and societies, who have perfected the art and efficient machinery that recruits even children to fight a Jehad. We have to use all available means; not just military but political, economic and other kinds of persuasion and pressures.
But these persuasions and pressures cannot include military rewards! A military regime, well known for encouraging global terrorism, and creating its huge infrastructure, confesses its crime and says; "Now, I am on your side. I will not allow terrorists trained by me earlier to harm you." Such a regime is rewarded with the title of Major Non NATO Ally. It is given eight PC-3 Orion aircraft, 2000 TOW anti tank missiles and six PHALANX close-in weapon systems, and promised F-16 aircraft. For what? To bolster its 'surveillance capabilities against terrorists', we are told. It does not matter that the same regime continues to maintain and support terrorist infrastructure on the other front.
The international community needs to stand together and cooperate; regionally, in the United Nations, and as coalition partners. It must not chase short-term strategic goals at the cost of long-term global interests. It is high time for international fight against terrorism to start with an international law and give teeth to UNSCR 1353 and 1456.
That brings me to the need for further strengthening the democratic principles within the UN. Given that democracy is a system by majority rule with full respect to each individual, the population size of a member state must constitute a very important criterion for legitimacy of permanent membership. How can you then exclude a country like India, which is world's Number 2 in population and largest democracy, Asia Number 3 in economy, world Number 4 in Purchasing Power Parity, and highest contributor of UN peace keeping missions from the Security Council decision making process?
Conclusion There is a need to rebuild fundamental principles of world order. Global challenges and threats of the new millennium can only be met collectively. Global terrorism, the situation in Afghanistan, developments in Iraq, the Middle East Peace Process, and the continuing international debate on the Iranian and North Korean nuclear ambitions, make it inevitable for all powers in the West and East to stay engaged; maintain a permanent dialogue process with Asian strategic partners such as China, Japan, India, and also with regional groups. A concrete result of such an engagement is the nuclear programme agreement that the EU-3 (France, Britain and Germany) has been able to broker with Iran.
The debate between unilateralism and multilateralism must transcend with such a perspective in mind. I quote Henry Kissinger once again, "Unilateralism for its own sake is self-defeating. But so is abstract multilateralism." Unquote.
So, let there be real multilateralism!
General V P Malik, President, ORF Institute of Security Studies, New Delhi .
* Views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Observer Research Foundation.
The views expressed above belong to the author(s). ORF research and analyses now available on Telegram! Click here to access our curated content — blogs, longforms and interviews.
PREV
