POLITICAL SCIENCE

Notes
Question: Critically analyze the nature of Politics as art of government and
public affairs, as compromise and consensus, and politics as power and struggle
for scarce resources?
Or
Discuss politics as ‘Compromise and Consensus’ and ‘Power and struggle for
scarce resources’. (2016) (2015)
Answer: In a Broader sense, Politics is the activity through which people make,
preserve and amend the general rules under which they live.
Politics as Art of Government
Once the Chancellor of Germany Bismarck said that ‘Politics is not a science
but an art’. The word ‘politics’ is derived from Greek word ‘polis’ means ‘city-
state’. Ancient Greek society was divided into a collection of independent city-
states, each of which possessed its own system of government. The largest and
most influential of these city-states was Athens, often portrayed as the cradle of
democratic government.
To study politics, it is important to study government, or to study the exercise of
authority. This view is advanced in the writings of the influential US political
scientist David Easton (1979), who defined politics as the ‘Authoritative
Allocation of Values’. By this, he meant that politics encompasses the various
processes through which government responds to pressures from the larger
society, in particular by allocating three things – Rewards, Benefits or Penalties.
‘Authoritative values’ are therefore those that are widely accepted in society,
and are considered binding by the mass of citizens.
In this view, politics is associated with ‘policy’- a plan of action for the
community. However, it offers a highly restricted view of politics. According to

1
aforesaid definition Politics is a system of social organization centred on the
machinery of government. Politics is therefore practised in cabinet rooms,
legislative chambers, government departments and it is engaged in by a limited
and specific group of people i.e. politicians, civil servants. This means that most
people, most institutions and most social activities can be regarded as being
‘outside’ politics. Businesses, schools and other educational institutions,
community groups, families and so on are in this sense ‘non-political’, because
they are not engaged in ‘running the country’.
Moreover, this definition can be narrowed still further. This is evident in the
tendency to treat politics as the equivalent of party politics. In other words, the
realm of ‘the political’ is restricted to those state actors who are consciously
motivated by ideological beliefs, and who seek to advance them through
membership of a formal organization such as a political party. This is the sense
in which politicians are described as ‘political’, whereas civil servants are seen
as ‘non-political’, as long as they act in a neutral and professional fashion.
Similarly, judges are taken to be ‘non-political’ figures while they interpret the
law impartially and in accordance with the available evidence, but they may be
accused of being ‘political’ if their judgement is influenced by personal
preferences or some other form of bias.

Politics as Public Affairs

Greek Philosopher Aristotle said that ‘man is by nature a political animal’.
The institutions of the state (the government, the courts, the police, the army,
and so forth) can be regarded as ‘public’ in the sense that they are responsible
for the collective organization of community life. Moreover, they are funded at
the public’s expense, out of taxation.
In contrast, civil society consists of what Edmund Burke called the ‘little
platoons’, institutions such as the family and kinship groups, private businesses,
trade unions, clubs, community groups and so on, can be regarded as ‘private’
2
in the sense that they are set up and funded by individual citizens to satisfy their
own interests, rather than those of the larger society.
On the basis of this ‘public/private’ division, politics is restricted to the
activities of the state itself and the responsibilities that are properly exercised by
public bodies. Although civil society can be distinguished from the state, it
nevertheless contains a range of institutions that are thought of as ‘public’ in the
wider sense that they are open institutions, operating in public, to which the
public has access. One of the crucial implications of this is that it broadens our
notion of the political, transferring the economy, in particular, from the private
to the public realm. A form of politics can thus be found in the workplace.
Nevertheless, although this view regards institutions such as businesses,
community groups, clubs and trade unions as ‘public’, it remains a restricted
view of politics. According to this perspective, politics does not, and should not,
infringe on ‘personal’ affairs and institutions. Feminist thinkers in particular
have pointed out that this implies that politics effectively stops at the front door;
it does not take place in the family, in domestic life, or in personal relationships.
This view is illustrated, for example, by the tendency of politicians to draw a
clear distinction between their professional conduct and their personal or
domestic behaviour. By classifying, say, cheating on their partners or treating
their children badly as ‘personal’ matters, they are able to deny the political
significance of such behaviour on the grounds that it does not touch on their
conduct of public affairs. The view of politics as an essentially ‘public’ activity
has generated both positive and negative images. In a tradition dating back to
Aristotle, politics has been seen as a noble and enlightened activity precisely
because of its ‘public’ character. This position was firmly endorsed by Hannah
Arendt, who argued in The Human Condition (1958) that politics is the most
important form of human activity because it involves interaction amongst free
and equal citizens. It thus gives meaning to life and affirms the uniqueness of
each individual. Theorists such as Jean-Jacques Rousseau and John Stuart Mill

3
who portrayed political participation as a good in itself have drawn similar
conclusions. Rousseau argued that only through the direct and continuous
participation of all citizens in political life can the state be bound to the common
good, or what he called the ‘general will’. In Mill’s view, involvement in
‘public’ affairs is educational, in that it promotes the personal, moral and
intellectual development of the individual. In sharp contrast, however, politics
as public activity has also been portrayed as a form of unwanted interference.
Liberal theorists, in particular, have exhibited a preference for civil society over
the state, on the grounds that ‘private’ life is a realm of choice, personal
freedom and individual responsibility. This is most clearly demonstrated by
attempts to narrow the realm of ‘the political’, commonly expressed as the wish
to ‘keep politics out of’ private activities such as business, sport and family life.
From this point of view, politics is unwholesome quite simply because it
prevents people acting as they choose. For example, it may interfere with how
firms conduct their business, or with how and with whom we play sports, or
with how we bring up our children.
Politics as Compromise and Consensus
Politics is conducted but to the way in which decisions are made. Politics can be
seen as a means of resolving conflict i.e. by compromise, conciliation and
negotiation, rather than through force and power. Therefore, Politics can be
portrayed as ‘the art of the possible’. The description of a solution to a problem
as a ‘political’ solution implies peaceful debate and arbitration, as opposed to
what is often called a ‘military’ solution.
Aristotle called ‘polity’ is the ideal system of government, as it is ‘mixed’, in
the sense that it combines both aristocratic and democratic features. Politics is
an activity by which different interests within a given unit of rule are conciliated
by giving them a share in power in proportion to their importance to the welfare
and survival of the whole community. (Bernard Crick, Defence of Politics,
1962). In this view, Crick argued that when social groups and interests possess
4
power they must be conciliated; they cannot merely be crushed. This is why he
portrayed politics as ‘that solution to the problem of order which chooses
conciliation rather than violence and coercion’. Such a view of politics reflects a
deep commitment to liberal–rationalist principles. It is based on resolute faith in
the efficacy of debate and discussion, as well as on the belief that society is
characterized by consensus, rather than by irreconcilable conflict. In other
words, the disagreements that exist can be resolved without resort to
intimidation and violence. Critics, however, point out that Crick’s conception of
politics is heavily biased towards the form of politics that takes place in western
pluralist democracies: in effect, he equated politics with electoral choice and
party competition. As a result, his model has little to tell us about, say, one-
party states or military regimes. This view of politics has an unmistakeably
positive character. Politics is certainly no utopian solution (compromise means
that concessions are made by all sides, leaving no one perfectly satisfied), but it
is undoubtedly preferable to the alternatives: bloodshed and brutality. In this
sense, politics can be seen as a civilized and civilizing force. People should be
encouraged to respect politics as an activity, and should be prepared to engage
in the political life of their own community. Nevertheless, a failure to
understand that politics as a process of compromise and reconciliation is
necessarily frustrating and difficult (because in involves listening carefully to
the opinions of others) may have contributed to a growing popular
disenchantment with democratic politics across much of the developed world.
As Stoker (2006) put it, ‘Politics is designed to disappoint’; its outcomes are
‘often messy, ambiguous and never final’. This is an issue to which we will
return in the final chapter of the book.
Politics as Power and allocation of scarce resources
Adrian Leftwich proclaimed in his book “What is Politics? The Activity and Its
Study” (2004), that ‘politics is at the heart of all collective social activity,
formal and informal, public and private, in all human groups, institutions and
5
societies’. In this sense, politics takes place at every level of social interaction.
It can be found within families and amongst small groups of friends just as
much as amongst nations and on the global stage. At its broadest, politics
concerns the production, distribution and use of resources in the course of social
existence.
Politics is power: the ability to achieve a desired outcome, through whatever
means. This notion was neatly summed up in the title of Harold Lasswell’s book
Politics: Who Gets What, When, How? (1936). From this perspective, politics is
about diversity and conflict, but the essential ingredient is the existence of
scarcity: the simple fact that, while human needs and desires are infinite, the
resources available to satisfy them are always limited. Therefore, Politics can
be seen as a struggle over scarce resources, and power can be seen as the
means through which this struggle is conducted. Advocates of the view of
politics as power include feminists and Marxists. The rise of the women’s
liberation movement in the 1960s and 1970s, bringing with it a growing interest
in feminism, stimulated more radical thinking about the nature of ‘the political’.
Not only have modern feminists sought to expand the arenas in which politics
can be seen to take place, a notion most boldly asserted through the radical
feminist slogan ‘the personal is the political’, but they have also tended to view
politics as a process, specifically one related to the exercise of power over
others. This view was summed by Kate Millett in Sexual Politics (1969), in
which she defined politics as ‘power-structured relationships, arrangements
whereby one group of persons is controlled by another’.
Marxists used the term ‘politics’ in two senses. On one level, Marx used
‘politics’ in a conventional sense to refer to the apparatus of the state. In the
Communist Manifesto, he referred to political power as ‘merely the organized
power of one class for oppressing another’. For Marx, politics, together with
law and culture, are part of a ‘superstructure’ that is distinct from the economic
‘base’ that is the real foundation of social life. However, he did not see the

6
economic ‘base’ and the legal and political ‘superstructure’ as entirely separate.
He believed that the ‘superstructure’ arose out of, and reflected, the economic
‘base’. At a deeper level, political power, in this view, is therefore rooted in the
class system; as Lenin put it, ‘politics is the most concentrated form of
economics’. As opposed to believing that politics can be confined to the state
and a narrow public sphere, Marxists can be said to believe that ‘the economic
is political’. From this perspective, civil society, characterized as Marxists
believe it to be by class struggle, is the very heart of politics. Views such as
these portray politics in largely negative terms. Politics is, quite simply, about
oppression and subjugation. Radical feminists hold that society is patriarchal, in
that women are systematically subordinated and subjected to male power.
Marxists traditionally argued that politics in a capitalist society is characterized
by the exploitation of the proletariat by the bourgeoisie. On the other hand,
these negative implications are balanced against the fact that politics is also seen
as an emancipating force, a means through which injustice and domination can
be challenged. Marx, for instance, predicted that class exploitation would be
overthrown by a proletarian revolution, and radical feminists proclaim the need
for gender relations to be reordered through a sexual revolution. However, it is
also clear that when politics is portrayed as power and domination it need not be
seen as an inevitable feature of social existence. Feminists look to an end of
‘sexual politics’ achieved through the construction of a non-sexist society, in
which people will be valued according to personal worth, rather than on the
basis of gender. Marxists believe that ‘class politics’ will end with the
establishment of a classless communist society. This, in turn, will eventually
lead to the ‘withering away’ of the state, also bringing politics in the
conventional sense to an end.

7
Question: “India is facing a crisis of governability”. Comment. (2016) (2015)
Answer: The statement “India is facing a crisis of governability” is made by
Atul Kohli in his book ‘Democracy and Discontent’.
It is said that all the developing countries will become difficult to govern. India
is also a developing a country and it has been moving towards that direction
over the last three decades. India was considered as one of the few stable
democracies in the non-western world during the 1950s and 1960s.
India is still a functioning democracy but increasingly it is not well governed.
The evidence of eroding political order is everywhere. Personal rule has been
replaced by the party rule at all levels- National, State and Local. Civil and
Police services have also been politicized. Various social groups have pressed
new political demands through demonstrations that have often led to the
violence. The omnipresent, but feeble state, has vacillated. The ineffectiveness
of repression has highlighted the breakdown of civil machinery which intended
to enforce the law and maintain order. In order to protect themselves, citizens in
some parts of the country have begun to organizing private armies. The growing
political violence has brought the armed forces into India’s political arena.
India’s Problems of Governability
The world’s largest democracy has become difficult to govern. In fact, India
was never easy to be governed. The conflict between centralized monarchs and
regional rulers can be seen in pre-colonial era. Colonial rulers laid the basis for
centralized power. The colonial rulers laid tried to penetrate the tradition-bound
villages of India which led to the nationalist movements. Nationalist movement
in India during the first half of the 19th centuary created the unity among the
people but at the same time it also sowed the seeds of divisiveness which
eventually leading to the creation of Pakistan.

The post-independent era was seen calm politically. It raised for the hopes for a
stable & democratic India. That was certainly the vision of the founding fathers

8
of India. The constitution of India laid the basis for a Parliamentary democracy.
Moreover, the diversity of India was also carefully considered in designing the
new federal system. It was also kept in mind during the making of the
constitution that to kept the armed forces outside from the political arena.

Under the leadership of Nehru, that vision took shape in the form of new
political institutions. The political arrangements in this early phase were
dominated by the educated and nationalist elites. The business class was also
politically influential.

To tackle the growing inequality and poverty in the country, the ruling Congress
party designed a formula for economic development: a marriage between
nationalism and democratic socialism. The five-year plans were stressed on the
economic growth of the country, self-sufficiency and reducing the inequality
and poverty.

During the Indira Gandhi Government, the political power was centralized in
few hands. Cabinet members had been selected by Indira Gandhi for their
personal loyalty, not for their ability, which eventually, to some extent, led to
the crisis of governability. Today, the Congress party has lost its hegemony over
Indian politics. Congress has experienced a profound organisational decline.
The decline of congress party has paved the way for the development of an
alternative national party: BJP. But still there is a growing organisational
vacuum at the core of India’s Political space.

The India’s polity has experienced a growing crisis of governability since

political changes in India from 1960s to 1980s. India had experienced a growing
crisis of governability. According to Atul Kohli “crisis of governability” is
caused by the organizational vacuum; which was created after the congress
party’s position weakened without being replaced by a national party, it was
replaced by the alliance of some regional groups. The political parties of West

9
Bengal and Tamil Nadu were emerging stronger. Atul Kohli define the concept
of governability with direct capacity of the state to govern the state. He said that
for India situation, the issues of ‘growing crisis of governability’ refers to three
kind of problem:

1) Absence of the enduring coalition,

2) Policy ineffectiveness,
3) Incapacity to accommodate political conflict without violence.

He knows the pursuit of political goals by violent means as the most obvious
indicator of increasing problems of governability. Based on his analysis,
political violence had increased after decline of congress party and growing
crisis of governability in the India state.

Crisis of governability: the crises of governability is growing in India and the

author attempt to explain the root of the crisis. Detail investigation of local,
regional and national politics leads to the proposition that the root of India’s
growing problem of governability are more political and socio-economic: that
is, they are located mainly in India’s political structure. A highly interventionist
state dealing with a poor economy has become an object of the intense political
completion. The failure of political leaders to make timely concession has only
intensified political demand and activities. And the growing weakness of
fragmented political parties which both reflect the process of over politicization
and which has made it more difficult for the leaders to rule effectively.

The Empirical Study

The contemporary of Indian politics as being in crisis does not predict the
eminent break down of the democratic political order. The ‘crisis’ and
‘governability’ are the two separate words to be understood. The word crisis is
used to draw the attention to certain tendencies toward the study of deterioration
within the Indian policy. And the governability is used the capacity of the ruler

10
to do three thing: Maintain the coalitional support, Initiate solutions to the
problems perceived to be important and resolved political conflict without force
and violence. The instability of coalition form of government and emergence of
low-quality leaders with ineffective and corruption of the government are the
problem of the governability. The pattern of political change at various level of
the polity; like, declining of the congress party and popular new party arises
causes the consequences of the growing gap between institution capacities and
problem require political solution. The country can be well govern if its
government can simultaneously sustain legitimacy, promote socio-economics
development and maintain order without coercion.

The Analytical Argument

The analysis of India governability crises has found on the growing disjunction
between weakening institution and multiplying demands. The fore going
empirical analysis has suggested four major factors have influenced the nature
of political change in India:

1) The deinstitutionalization role of national and regional leaders.

2) The impact of weak political parties.
3) The undisciplined political mobilization of various caste, ethnic, religious
and other types of group.
4) The increasing conflict between the have and have not in the civil society.

We need to understand the four variable that they are independent only insofar
as they are not fully reducible to one another. The four significant independence
variable can be readily collapsed into larger analytical categories as they are
concerning of power distribution and conflict access to the state resources.
Analysis of India’s growing governability crisis as an inevitable by product of
modernization in general and economic development in particular. So, the state
is not only an agent of political order in India but it is responsible for promoting
socio-economic development.

11
Thus, a crisis of governability is understood in this study to be manifest not only
in growing political violence but also in the state’s developmental incapacity.
The crisis is on the conflict over power, status and economic resources based on
caste, languages, regions, and new identities based on occupation toward the
ruling of the government. The rising of regional party and the declining of
congress party which lead to the new era of coalition form of government in
India’s politics, except this new BJP government got the majority to form a
government without coalition in the recent election 2014. Many strategies,
including the use of violence, vote bank politic and money power has been used
to gain the power. However as the citizens of India, we must understand how
the power is won and how the power is used? It’s very important to understand
Indian political system to over-come the growing crisis of governability.

12
Question: Briefly explain the Chinese foreign policy in the recent years. Also
discuss the Chongqing model of development. (2017)
Answer: Chinese Foreign Policy
The foreign relations of the People's Republic of China (PRC), commonly
known as China, guides the way in which China interacts with foreign nations
and expresses its political, economic and cultural strengths and values. As
a great power and emerging superpower, China's foreign policy and strategic
thinking are highly influential. China officially states it "unswervingly pursues
an independent foreign policy of peace. The fundamental goals of this policy
are to preserve China's independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity,
create a favourable international environment for China's reform and opening
up and modernization of construction, and to maintain world peace and propel
common development." An example of a foreign policy decision guided by
"sovereignty and territorial integrity".

China is not engaging in diplomatic relations with any country that recognizes
the Republic of China (Taiwan), which the PRC does not recognise as
a separate nation.

China is a member of many international organizations, holding key positions

such as a permanent membership on the United Nations Security Council. The
PRC's diplomatic goals were expansionist for achieving
international communist revolution before the Cultural Revolution ended. In the
early 1970s, the PRC replaced the ROC as the recognised government of
"China" in the UN following Resolution 2758. As a nuclear power, China
signed the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons in the United
Nations. China's foreign policy today is summarized as strategic relations with
neighbouring countries and the world's superpowers to strive for China's
national interest, and to create a favourable environment for China's domestic
development for perpetual competition in the world in the long-run.

China portrays itself as a Third World country that pursues ‘an independent
foreign policy of peace’. Third World means that China is a poor, developing
country and not part of any power bloc such as that around the United States or
the socialist bloc formerly associated with the Soviet Union. China says that it
does not align itself with any other major power. China says its decisions on
foreign policy questions derive from the Five Principles of Peaceful
Coexistence:

13
 1) Mutual respect for sovereignty and territorial integrity,
2) Mutual non-aggression,
3) Mutual benefit and equality,
4) Non-interference in each other's internal affairs, and
5) Peaceful coexistence. The Chinese leadership originally enumerated these
principles in 1954 when China, with a communist government, was trying
to reach out to the non-communist countries of Asia.

Chinese Foreign Policy in Recent Years

In recent years, China's leaders have been regular travellers to all parts of the
globe, and it has sought a higher profile in the UN through its permanent seat on
the United Nations Security Council and other multilateral organizations.

Closer to home, China has made efforts to reduce tensions in parts of Asia; its
relations with its Asian neighbours have become stable during the last decades
of the 20th century. It has contributed to stability on the Korean Peninsula,
cultivated a more cooperative relationship with members of the Association of
Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and participated in the ASEAN Regional
Forum. In 1997, the ASEAN member nations and China, South Korea and
Japan agreed to hold yearly talks to further strengthen regional cooperation,
the ASEAN Plus Three meetings. In 2005, the "ASEAN Plus Three" countries
together with India, Australia and New Zealand held the inaugural East Asia
Summit (EAS). Relations have improved with Vietnam since a border war was
fought with the one-time close ally in 1979. A territorial dispute with its
Southeast Asian neighbours over islands in the South China Sea remains
unresolved, as does another dispute in the East China Sea with Japan. These
conflicts have had a negative impact on China's reputation in many parts of the
world.

China has improved ties with Russia. Vladimir Putin and Jiang Zemin, in large
part to serve as a counterbalance to the United States, signed a Treaty of
Friendship and Cooperation in July 2001. The two also joined with the Central
Asian countries of Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan to found
the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) in June 2001. The SCO is
designed to promote regional stability and cooperate to combat terrorism in the
region.

Relations with India have also improved considerably. After years of

competition, general distrust between the two (mostly over China's close

14
relationship with Pakistan and India's with the former Soviet Union) and a
border war, relations in the 21st century between the world's two most populous
states have never been more harmonious, as they have started to collaborate in
several economic and strategic areas. Both countries have doubled their
economic trade in the past few years, and China became India's largest trading
partner in 2010. The two countries are planning to host joint naval exercises. In
2003, China and India held negotiations for the first time since the Sino-Indian
War of 1962 on a major border dispute: however, the dispute over Aksai
Chin (formerly a part of the Indian state of Jammu and Kashmir) and South
Tibet (China) or Arunachal Pradesh (India) is not settled and plagues Sino-
Indian relations. While New Delhi has raised objections to Chinese military-aid
to arch-rival Pakistan and neighbouring Bangladesh, Beijing similarly objects to
India's growing military collaboration with Japan, Australia and the United
States.

China has border and maritime disputes, including with Vietnam in the Gulf of
Tonkin and with Japan. Beijing has resolved many of these disputes. Notably on
21 July 2008, Russia finally resolved the last remaining border dispute along the
4300 km border between the two countries by ceding a small amount of
territory to China. China also reached a 2000 agreement with Vietnam to
resolve some differences over their maritime borders, though disagreements
remain over some islands in the South China Sea.

During the late 1990s and early 21st century, Chinese foreign policy appeared
to be focused on improving relations with Russia and Europe to counterbalance
the United States. This strategy was based on the premise that the United States
was a hyper power whose influence could be checked through alliances with
other powers, such as Russia or the European Union. This assessment of United
States power was reconsidered after the United States intervention in Kosovo,
and as the 20th century drew to a close, the discussion among think tanks in
China involved how to reorient Chinese foreign policy in a unipolar world. This
discussion also occurred in the context of China's new security concept, which
argued that the post–Cold War era required nations to move away from thinking
in terms of alliances and power blocs and toward thinking in terms of economic
and diplomatic cooperation.

China had long been a close ally of North Korea but also found a valuable
trading partner in South Korea and eventually took a role in the early 2000s as a
proponent of "six-party talks" (North Korea, South Korea, Russia, Japan, the
15
United States, and China) to resolve tensions on the Korean Peninsula. China
was instrumental at brokering talks with North Korea over its nuclear program,
and in 2003, there was a concerted effort by China to improve relations with
the ASEAN countries and form a common East Asian market. These foreign
policy efforts have been part of a general foreign policy initiative known
as China's peaceful rise. On 15 November 2005, Hu Jintao visited Seoul and
spoke of the importance of both countries' contributions for regional peace and
cooperation in economic development.

However, China's opposition to the bid of two of its important neighbours—

India and Japan—to become permanent members of the United Nations
Security Council has proved to be an irritant in their respective relationships.
Japan, with its large economic and cultural influences in Asia, is seen by China
as its most formidable opponent and partner in regional diplomacy. The two
sides established diplomatic relations in 1972, and Japanese investment in
China was important in the early years of China's economic reforms and ever
since.

At a national meeting on diplomatic work in August 2004, China's paramount

leader Hu Jintao reiterated that China will continue its "independent foreign
policy of peaceful development," stressing the need for a peaceful and stable
international environment, especially among China's neighbours, that will foster
"mutually beneficial cooperation" and "common development." This policy line
has varied little in intent since the People's Republic was established in 1949,
but the rhetoric has varied in its stridency to reflect periods of domestic political
upheaval.

In 2005, there was talk of the European Union lifting its arms embargo imposed
in 1989, however the United States has objected to this.

In 2007, foreign ministry spokesman Qin Gang made a statement about the
eight-point diplomatic philosophy of China:

China will not seek hegemony. China is still a developing country and has no
resources to seek hegemony. Even if China becomes a developed country, it
will not seek hegemony.

1) China will not play power politics and will not interfere with other
countries' internal affairs. China will not impose its own ideology on
other countries.

16
 2) China maintains all countries, big or small, should be treated equally and
respect each other. All affairs should be consulted and resolved by all
countries on the basis of equal participation. No country should bully
others on the basis of strength.
3) China will make judgment on each case in international affairs, each
matter on the merit of the matter itself and it will not have double
standards. China will not have two policies: one for itself and one for
others. China believes that it cannot do unto others what they do not wish
others do unto them.
4) China advocates that all countries handle their relations on the basis of
the United Nations Charter and norms governing international relations.
China advocates stepping up international cooperation and is against
unilateral politics. China should not undermine the dignity and the
authority of the U.N. China should not impose and set its own wishes
above the U.N. Charter, international law and norms.
5) China advocates peaceful negotiation and consultation so as to resolve its
international disputes. China does not resort to force, or threat of force, in
resolving international disputes. China maintains a reasonable national
military build up to defend its own sovereignty and territorial integrity. It
is not made to expand, nor does it seek invasion or aggression.
6) China is firmly opposed to terrorism and the proliferation of weapons of
mass destruction. China is a responsible member of the international
community, and as for international treaties, China abides by all them in a
faithful way. China never plays by a double standard, selecting and
discarding treaties it does not need.
7) China respects the diversity of the civilization and the whole world.
China advocates different cultures make exchanges, learn from each
other, and complement one another with their own strengths. China is
opposed to clashes and confrontations between civilizations, and China
does not link any particular ethnic group or religion with terrorism.

• China’s secret strategy of displacing US as the sole Superpower.

• Why Chinese Education system is best in the world.
1. PISA: Program for International School Assessment - to check the level
of 15 – 10 year Maths, Science, Collaborative Problem solving, Reading,
Financial Literacy.

17
 2. Keju – Chinese Imperial Examination – Hans dynast, Sui Dynasty tries to
test the knowledge of student in confusion classics, only 5% pass.
• Why Chinese Education system is the worst in the world:
1. O2C2H: Order, Obedience, Conformity, Compliance, Homogenous
Thinking.
Chongqing Model
There is a wide range of policies that made up the Chongqing model, stretching
from public housing to anti-corruption campaigns. In 2008 Chongqing
municipality announced the ‘Five Chongqing’s plan’. This included policies
aimed at housing, transport, safety, the environment and public health.
Furthermore, the municipality experimented with reforms of the hukou and
rural land rights systems. Some of these policies were experimental, but
sanctioned by the central party leadership.
The Chongqing model refers to a series of social and economic policies adopted
in the municipality of Chongqing. It was executed by the Bo Xilai, who served
as the city's Communist Party secretary from 2007 to 2012.

The Chongqing model was characterized in part by increased state control and
the promotion of a neo-leftist ideology. It involved a sweeping and sometimes
extrajudicial campaign against organized crime, and increased the security and
police presence in the city. As a means of addressing declining public morality,
Bo launched a ‘red culture’ movement to promote Maoist-era socialist ethics.
On the economic front, he actively courted foreign investment and focused on
manufacturing for domestic consumption. The Chongqing model was also
characterized by massive public works programs, subsidized housing for the
poor, and social policies intended to make it easier for rural citizens to move to
the city.

The Chongqing model represented an alternative model of development which

diverged from the policies favoured by the reformist faction led by Party
general secretary Hu Jintao and Premier Wen Jiabao. When Bo Xilai was
removed from his posts in the spring of 2012, authorities began a campaign to
reverse several of the policies that characterized the Chongqing model,
including by cracking down on expressions of ‘red culture’. Individuals, who
believed they had been wrongly persecuted under the anti-corruption campaign,
also began seeking legal redress.

18
Bo used his leadership of Chongqing to pioneer the ‘Chongqing Model’: a
systematic set of social and economic policies intended to address diverse
challenges facing modern China.

Crackdown on Organised Crime

Bo's tenure in Chongqing was dominated by a protracted war ostensibly against
organized crime and corruption known as "Striking Black". Since 2009, an
estimated 5,700 people were arrested in the sweeping campaign that ensnared
not only criminals, but also businessmen, members of the police force, judges,
government officials, and political adversaries who were accused of corruption
or criminal collaboration.

The ‘Striking Black’ campaign earned Bo national recognition and widespread

popularity in Chongqing. The apparent success of Bo's campaign raised Bo's
national and international profile and resulted in calls for a nationwide
campaign based on his experiences in Chongqing. Through the campaign, Bo
gained the support of a number of powerful members of the Politburo Standing
Committee.

Bo's measures were criticized for neglecting due process and contributing to the
erosion of the rule of law. Individuals targeted in the campaign were arbitrarily
detained by the authorities. Lawyers for the accused were reportedly
intimidated; one lawyer was sentenced to 18 months in prison. Allegations also
surfaced over the use of torture to extract confessions. Moreover, many of those
targeted in the campaign were not criminals, but businessmen and political
rivals whose assets were reportedly seized in order to help pay for Bo’s popular
social housing programs. The Wall Street Journal reported estimates that $11
billion was seized through the campaign. The campaign to combat crime and
maintain political stability also involved the launch of a major electronic
surveillance operation in the city.

Social Policies
A cornerstone of Bo’s Chongqing model was a series of egalitarian social
policies aimed at lessening the gap between rich and poor and easing the rural-
urban divide. Bo promoted the notion of pursuing ‘Red GDP’—an economic
model embodying communist egalitarianism.

To that end, the city reportedly spent $15.8 billion on public apartment
complexes for use by recent college graduates, migrant workers, and low-
19
income residents. Bo aimed to provide housing for 2.4 million residents by
2012. Residents whose incomes were under 3,000 Yuan ($480) per month
would be eligible to rent apartments for three years, with an option to buy
thereafter. The Chongqing model also involved a major campaign to "green" the
city through a tree-planting initiative.

Economic Policies
Another major component of Bo’s Chongqing model concerned the city’s
economic policies. Bo ambitiously pursued foreign investment in the city,
lowered corporate income tax rates, and sought to stimulate rapid urbanization
and industrialization. He also carried on policies which focused on domestic
consumption, rather than export-led growth. The Chongqing model also placed
emphasis on the importance of state-owned enterprises. In 2010, Bo stressed
that China “needs to have things that are state-owned.”

Red Culture Movement

During his time in Chongqing, Bo initiated a series of Maoist-style campaigns
to revive ‘red culture’. Prior to the 60th Anniversary of the People's Republic of
China celebrations, Bo sent out "red text messages" to the city's 13 million cell-
phone users, which included phrases such as ‘I like how Chairman Mao puts it:
The world is ours, we will all have to work together’ and ‘responsibility and
seriousness can conquer the world, and the Chinese Communist Party members
represent these qualities.’

Bo also raised new Mao statues in Chongqing, while providing social housing
to the city's less well-off. Some scholars have characterized this as an example
of the revival of Maoism in the Chinese Communist ethos. In 2011, Bo and the
city's Media Department initiated a "Red Songs campaign" that demanded every
district, government department, commercial enterprise, educational institution,
and state radio and TV station begin ‘singing red songs’ praising the
achievements of the Communist Party of China.

20
Question: Comment on Corruption in India.
Answer: Corruption
Corruption is an age old phenomenon. It can be seen everywhere now a days. It
is like a cancer in public life, which has not become to rampant and perpetuated
overnight, but is course of time. The word corruption means destruction, ruining
or spoiling a society. A corrupt society is characterized by immorality and lack
of fear or lack of respect for the law. It is the abuse of public power for private
gain. Corruption comes under many different guises like bribery, extortion,
fraud, embezzlement, misappropriations of public goods, nepotism, and
cronyism. Corruption has been defined in many different ways, each lacking in
some aspect.
According to the definition given by World Bank, “Corruption is the abuse of
public power for private benefit”. From this definition it should not be
concluded that corruption cannot exist within private sector activities.
Especially in large private enterprises, this phenomenon clearly exists, as for
example in procurement or even in hiring. It also exist in private activities
regulated by the government.
Corruption is a financial terrorism, it is anti-poor, anti-national and anti-
development. (Mr. Vitthal)
A country’s ratio of political to economic opportunities affect the nature of
Corruption, if the former outweighs the latter, being particular India – increase
in public health. (Samuel P. Huntington)
Average income and assets of India’s 100 topmost richest legislatures grew by
745% between consequent elections and individual legislators saw their assets
grow their upto 25 fold. (Association of Democratic Reforms (ADR): Data -
1370 Re-elected MLAs and 200 re-elected MPs)
Problem with India is spiritual sterility and moral illiteracy. (Nani Palkhivala)

Causes of Corruption in India

Corruption is a global phenomenon. It has progressively increased and is now
rampant in our society. Corruption in India has wings, not wheels. As the nation
grows, the corrupt also grow to invent new methods of cheating the government
and public. The cause of corruption are many and complex. Corruption is a
phenomenon that takes place due to the presence of a number of factors. The
following are some Administrative Causes of Corruption:
1) Political Patronage
2) Administrative labyrinth

21
 3) Red Tapism
4) Obsolete Rules
5) Cushions of Legal Safety
6) Biradri
7) Lack of Punishment and Poor Conviction Rate
Political Patronage
The biggest cause of corruption in today’s life India is undoubtedly the political
leadership at the helm of affairs in the country. From this fountainhead of
corruption flow various streams of corrupt practices which plague the political
economic and social activities in the country. The post-independence political
leadership has risen from the grassroots level in the form of regional, caste,
linguistic and other protest movements. They have transformed the nature of
politics and administration. Amoral politics, self-aggrandizement, disregard of
the constitutional norms in the pursuit of power, political survival at any cost is
their rules of the game. They interfere with the administration of justice and
have bent bureaucracy to do their bidding. Political patronage is the
dispensation of favours or rewards such as public office, jobs, contracts,
subsidies, prestige by a patron to a client. The patron is usually an elected
official or empowered to make such grants. In return, the client supplies the
patron with some valued service, such as voting for the patron’s party or
providing money or labour for electoral campaigning.

Administrative labyrinth
Cumbersome and dilatory administrative procedures and practices are other
major causes of corruption in India. India’s legal and administrative system was
designed in the middle of the nineteenth century to serve the interests of
colonial administration. The Indian Penal Code, the main instrument for
controlling crime and administering criminal justice, was enacted in 1860. The
organization and functions of the police are governed by the India Police Act of
1861. The Indian Evidence Act came into force in 1872. Fundamental Rules and
Supplementary Rules, the financial Bibles for all government financial
transactions, were framed in the twenties when the government’s financial
transactions and commitments were simple. The focal point of colonial justice
was the individual and the protection of individual property rights whereas the
emphasis of a welfare state is on the right of the society and social justice.
Elution time is a time when corruption is at its peak. Big industrialists fund
politicians to meet high cost of election and ultimately to seek personal favour.

22
Bribery to politicians buys influences and bribery by politicians buys votes. In
order to get elected, politicians bribe poor, illiterate people.
Red Tapism
Red tape is an idiom that refers to excessive regulation or rigid conformity to
formal rules that is considered redundant or bureaucratic and hinders or
prevents action or decision-making. It is usually applied to governments,
corporations, and other large organizations.

Collection or sequence of forms and procedures required to gain bureaucratic

approval for something, especially when oppressively complex and time-
consuming".

Red tape generally includes filling out paperwork, obtaining licenses, having
multiple people or committees approve a decision and various low-level rules
that make conducting one's affairs slower, more difficult, or both. Red tape can
also include "filing and certification requirements, reporting, investigation,
inspection and enforcement practices, and procedures.

Obsolete Rules
The 248th Report of Law Commission on ‘How to simplify our laws’,
recommended 261 Statutes should be revised, 72 should be straight away be
repealed.
According to Professor Raghuram Rajan, the license raj was replaced by
resource raj in which the politically connected industrialists build empires by
gaining access to public goods such as coal, minerals, land and telecom
spectrum.
Legal Safety
To provide Legal Safety to the corrupt people is also one of the main causes of
corruption which encourages the corrupt practices in future.
Biradri
Favouring relatives (nepotism) or personal friends (cronyism) of an official is a
form of illegitimate private gain. Kinship and caste groups do not consider that
behaviour which deviates from the formal duties of a public role as ‘deviation’
or ‘corruption’ but view it as a ‘family obligation’. This explains corrupt actions
of many a public servant both at the lower as well as the higher levels .

Lack of Punishment and Poor Conviction Rate

23
A contributory factor to the growth of corruption in India is that the cases
relating to corruption are often handled in a casual and clumsy manner. Those in
hierarchy vested with disciplinary powers shirk duty and so unwillingness to
use their powers against corrupt practices. This may be due to different reasons
like political or trade union pressure, vested interests or sheer ineptitude in
handling criminal investigation. The result is that the corrupt are rarely caught
and even if caught are let off with minor or no politics. The Government
officials entrusted with the responsibility of dealing with corruption does it in a
most inefficient and lethargic manner and this suits the political leadership
which patroness corruption.
Socio-Psycho Causes of Corruption
The following are the some Socio-Psycho Causes of Corruption:
1) Social and Public Acceptance
2) Rise of Consumerism
3) Emulative Consumption
4) Cultural Essentialism
5) Low Salaries and Wages
6) Insecurity about the Future
Solutions for Corruption
Corruption is a cancer, which every Indian must strike to cure. Many new
leaders declare their determination to eradicate corruption but soon they
themselves become corrupt and start amassing huge wealth. Many people
become materialistic and money oriented, there is no importance of ethics and
morals in business dealing. This is because these kinds of people have no moral
accountability to anybody. To combat the corruption, the six broad categories
are as follows:
1. Information/ Bottom up monitoring
Information is seen as a basic pillar of the fight against corruption worldwide.
According to Transparency International, “access to information and a strong
civil society are essential for good governance and public accountability.”
Remarkably, India’s RTI Act (RTIA) that was passed in 2005 is ranked as the
second best right to information law in the entire world.
Public awareness is must to combat corruption in India. It is also important to
improve our education system because education is the best mean to understand
fundamental and legal rights.
2. Technology

24
Technology is one of the basic pillars of fight against corruption. Technological
approaches to tackling corruption are appealing but face their own set of
challenges. Technological innovations still rely on higher levels of government
to monitor and enforce punishments for malfeasance, which they may be loathe
to do for political economy reasons. In addition, the logistical details of last-
mile delivery can severely hinder effectiveness. Technology-based solutions
work best with concerted institutional support, and when they decentralise
enforcement, circumvent middlemen bureaucrats, and empower ordinary
citizens. For example, a technologically innovative programme in Andhra
Pradesh used biometrically authenticated smartcards to decentralise payment-
making authority for the rural jobs guarantee scheme and social security
pensions, resulting in a more than 40% reduction in leakage.

3. Finance Management
Reforms focussing on improving financial management and strengthening the
role of auditing agencies have in many countries achieved greater impact than
public sector reforms on curbing corruption.

One such reform is the disclosure of budget information, which prevents waste
and misappropriation of resources.

4. Electoral Reforms
Funding of elections is at the core of political corruption. Electoral reforms are
crucial in this regard. Several reforms like state funding of election expenses for
candidates, strict enforcement of statutory requirements like holding in-party
elections, making political parties get their accounts audited regularly and filing
income-tax returns, denying persons with criminal records a chance to contest
elections, should be brought in. Responsiveness, accountability and
transparency are a must for a clean system. Bureaucracy, the backbone of good
governance, should be made more citizen-friendly, accountable, ethical and
transparent. More and more courts should be opened for speedy and inexpensive
justice so that cases don’t linger in courts for years and justice is delivered on
time.
5. Legal Reforms
Many cases of corruption take years to be given verdict. This delay in cases
creates lack of fear for being corrupt and also huge time span for court trials
gives sufficient time to make alterations in the witness. Establishing fast track

25
courts and giving severe punishment for corruption practice will keep a control
on corruption.

Question: Write a note on types of Rent Raj.

Answer: Types of Rent
1) Regulatory Rent
2) Extractive Rent
3) Political Rent
4) Terrestrial Rent
5) Subterranean Rent
6) Ethereal Rent
Regulatory Rent
It is the rent which the State takes in areas where the State plays a domineering
role or where the state has opened up the sector but failed to institute sound
regulatory institutions in wake of liberation. This has led to some suggest that
what India suffers from is ‘Crony Socialism’ rather than ‘Crony Capitalism’.
Extractive Rent
It involves rents stemming from the natural resources or extractive industries
such as mining. Here corruption is involved in extractive rents. The
discretionary allocation of public resources to private or other public players for
their development and refinement.
Political Rent
It is related to the two aspects of political system:
1. The nature of Political finance in India is opaque and is highly dependent
on undented cash.
2. The extent to which the criminality intersects with & resides within the
political sphere. Politicians associated with criminal activities are tide in
corruption on two accounts:
(a) They acquire political status on the basis of their ability to manipulate
the state to divert benefits to a narrowly defined community.
(b) Such politicians cultivate their own criminal reputations and
perpetuate the corruption and subversion of the state to consolidate
their own political successes. E.g. Politician Raghu Raj Pratap Singh.
Terrestrial Rent
It is derived from the allocation of land or resources located above the ground.
Subterranean Rent
It is derived from the allocation of rights to three things: Coal mining, Oil and
Gas exploration, which take place below the ground.
Ethereal Rent
It is derived from the allocation of telecommunication spectrum.

26
Question: Critically examine the role of non-state actors (MINTIE) in the field
of transnational relations. (2017)
Answer: Non-state actors (NSAs) are entities that participate on the world stage
or act in the international relations to engage themselves in affairs relative to
territorial possession, human rights, social justice and global commerce. They
are organisations with sufficient power to influence and cause a change even
though they could not belong to any established institution of a state.
MINTIE is the abbreviation of the followings:
• Multi-National Corporations (MNCs) and Trans-National Corporations
(TNCs)
• International Economic Order
• Non-Government Organisations (NGOs)
• Terrorist Groups
• International Media Order
• Ethnic Groups
Multi-National Corporations (MNCs)
Multi-National Corporations (MNCs) are huge firms that own and control plants
and offices in at least more than one country. They sell their goods and services
around the world.
MNCs are “major driver of global economic integration” and “establish
unprecedented linkages among economies worldwide” (Peterson, 1995). The
biggest and the most effective industrial corporations are based in the United
States, Europe and Japan. Naturally the primary objective of MNCs is profit
maximization (Miyoshi, 1993). They are very effective in directing foreign
policy of states, including that of the most powerful ones, and they set agenda
for international politics. They have become a major factor in national economic
decision making process (Peterson, 1995). As mentioned by Miller (1994), the
activities of MNCs “may seem evidence of the growing inability today of the
sovereign state to control and regulate effectively economic activities within the
private sector. If that is so, then one of the traditional rationales for modern
sovereignty is undermined”. One of the measures of the influence of MNCs is
the extent of the resources they control. They have enormous “flexibility in
moving goods, money, personnel, and technology across national boundaries,
and this flexibility increases their bargaining power with governments”. Dozens
of MNCs have annual sales of tens of billions of dollars each. Many of them
have more economic activity than the GDPs of the majority of the states in the

27
world. For instance, MNCs such as General Motors, Royal Dutch Shell, General
Electric.
International Economic Order
The term international economic order refers to the set of proscribed rules,
norms, and procedures that regulate the cross-border exchange of goods,
services, and capital. While economists have persistently preached the virtues of
an open economy since David Ricardo (1772–1823), leaders have been warier
because of a combination of ideological concerns, domestic politics, and
realpolitik.

Non-Government Organisation (NGOs)

Non-governmental organizations are institutions that are established by non-
state actors. There are many kinds of NGOs such as transnational, government
organized, government-regulated, people’s organizations. Their number
increased and their effectiveness for transnational politics became more relevant
in recent decades. They have become “crucial participants in the international
policy process” (Brown, 1995). NGOs create and mobilize global networks by
creating transnational organizations, gathering information on local conditions
through contacts around the world, alerting global network of supporters to
conditions requiring attention, creating emergency response around world, and
mobilizing pressure from outside states. They participate in Inter-Governmental
Organisations (IGOs) (ASEAN etc.) conferences by mobilizing transnational
social movements organizations around issues in IGOs, building transnational
social coalitions, raising new issues, supporting IGO development, addressing
IGO meetings, submitting documents to governmental organizations’ meetings,
improving skills in conference diplomacy, and increasing expertise on issues
(Mingst, 1999). They facilitate inter-state cooperation by preparing background
papers and reports, educating delegates and representatives of states to narrow
technical gap, serving as third party source of information, expanding policy
options, facilitating agreements, and bringing delegates together in third party
fora. NGOs conduct many kinds of activities within states such as linking to
local partners, linking to transnational social movements with complementary
skills, working in national arenas to harmonize state policies, providing
humanitarian aid, and protecting accompaniment of persons in danger. They
also enhance public participation within states by reminding government
delegates that they are being watched, enhancing public understanding,
increasing transparency of international negotiations and institutions, and

28
provoking public protest. As a by-product of intensified globalization process,
NGOs which operate at transnational level have become more significant
determinants of foreign policies of nation-states. Like their counterparts that
operates at domestic level and lobby in their respective countries, they lobby at
international and transnational levels. Human rights advocates, gender activists,
religious movements, developmentalists, and indigenous peoples have invaded
the territory of nation-states. As pointed out by Brown (1995), “as the countries
and sectors of world society have become more and more interdependent, it has
become commonplace for nongovernmental groups representing similar
communities in their various countries to closely coordinate their policies and to
constitute (or reconstitute) themselves as international nongovernmental
organizations (INGOs)”.
Terrorist Groups
Although national liberation movements and ethnic groups sometime use
terrorism, but terrorist organizations are different from NLMs since terrorism is
their main means of struggle. Terrorist groups use terrorism as the main
instrument and largely lack large-scale support from the public. Individuals and
groups engage in terrorism for different political, economic, social, religious,
cultural, and even personal reasons (Mickolus, 1995: 98). Their goals are to
publicize their grievances and aspirations to international community by
hijacking, assassination, kidnapping and attacking on embassies. Terrorism has
moved from the national to transnational level and from plane hijacking to a
wider range of terrorist techniques since the 1960s. The transnational dimension
of terrorism is established when there is collusion and cooperation between
different terrorist groups and when some countries serve as sanctuaries and
training-centres for terrorists of various nationalities. While some states orient
their policies by supporting terrorist groups, some other states change their
foreign policies by taking counter-terrorist measures. One way or another, all
states are influenced by terrorist activities; therefore, no country tends to ignore
terrorism. Today, terrorism is globalized like other non-state actors, as was
witnessed during the attacks directed toward the heart of the American state and
the US-led international system on September 11. That particular terrorist attack
has caused more damages than most of the attacks carried out by nation-states
and shocked the whole world as well as the US more than the Pearl Harbour
attack, which made by Japanese and ended up the US to take place in the
Second World War. September 11 incident showed the world the horror of

29
terrorism, the vulnerability of all nations-states including the strongest one, and
its paramount effect on international politics and the world order.
International Media Order
International media agencies, which are also usually corporations, report on the
social and political situation in countries worldwide, and may therefore be
highly influential as NSAs.

Example:

Agence France-Presse

Ethnic Groups
Ethnic groups are also engaged in the political affairs at international level.
Although they resides mainly within an individual state, they are often affected
by external forces and increasingly spill over international borders.

Example:

Uighur Muslims in China.

Role of Non-State Actors
Some of the major role of non-state actors in international relations is as
follows:
1) Changes in the concept of Sovereignty and Nationalism
The emergence of non-state actors and the transnational relations has attacked
the state-centric international system. It has changed the nature of international
relations. Non-state actors have forced a change in the concepts of sovereignty
and nationalism. These have affected the role of the nation-states as actors in
international relations.
The policies, decisions and actions of the nation-states now bear the increasing
influence of the presence and activities of the non-state actors. The latter have
emerged as powerful non-political, commercial, economic, cultural or trading
actors in the international environment.
Wye and Keohane have observed that IGOs, NGOs and MNCs help to build and
broaden the foreign policy agendas of national decision-makers by serving as
transmission belts through which a nation’s policies become sensitive to
another’s. At the same time non-state actors are pursuing their interests largely
outside the direct control of nation-states. However these frequently involve
governments in particular problems as a result of their activities.

30
 2) Non-state actors and the Nation-States system
The non-state actors have produced several big changes in the nation-states
system as well as in the role of the nation-state in international relations. These
have been instrumental in increasing international independence and relations,
as well as in ordering and expanding relations in this age of interdependence.
These have, overshadowed and are still overshadowing the role of the nation-
state in some areas. The low politics (Economic relations) has assumed more
importance in international relations because of the growth of several economic
and functional non-state actors, particularly the multinational corporations.
3) Non-state actors as the products of the new international system
Non-state actors are the products of the nuclear age, space age, age of
communication revolution, internationalism and globalization, which have in
turn been the products of the nation-state system. Most of these non-state actors
have emerged and are working because of the acceptance of their utility by the
nation-states.
The inter-governmental organizations (ASEAN), and the international
organization like the United Nations, have their existence in their accordance
with the wishes of the nation-states. The nation-state still holds monopoly on
the use of coercive power in the international system. It still moulds the
activities of non-state actors more than its behavior is molded by them.
4) A New Complexity in International Relations
Non-state actors have made international relations more complex and
problematic. These have been in the main responsible for a reduced importance
of political relations in the international system. Some of these have been acting
as harbingers of international peace and security while some others have been
acting as agents of neo-colonialism and dependency for the under-developed
countries.
These have contributed towards the growth of internationalism, and dilution of
nationalism in favor of internationalism. These have also been instrumental in
the emergence of several strong peaceful, developmental and ecological
movements.

31
Question: Discuss the different types of power according to Joseph S Nye.
(2017)
Answer: Introduction
In the 21st century, the world is undergoing a critical transformation, with
nation-states facing serious political and socio-economic issues. The challenges
are global in their nature and affect the policies of many countries. A prevalent
trend in today’s global context is the individual nation-states’ concern over their
power and influence. This is especially significant in light of the growing
geopolitical tensions, as well as the diffusion of power among global actors.
One can differentiate between hard and soft power tools in international
relations. Traditionally, the states opted for hard power tools in the framework
of realpolitik thinking. Meanwhile, the scholars and practitioners start to
recognize that the world is in need of a shift from old assumptions and rigid
distinctions about ‘hard’ and ‘soft’ power since the economic and political
challenges can no longer be simply resolved by military power or policy
innovation (Bound, 2007). The concept of soft power, initially introduced by
Joseph Nye (1990).
“Power is the global information age is like 3D Chess game.”- (Joseph S. Nye)
Concept of Power
The subject of power has been an interest of social scientists for many decades.
One of the most influential definitions of power was given by Max Weber who
defined it as the probability of one actor within a social relationship to be in a
position to carry out his own will despite resistance. According to Weber, power
is a zero-sum game and is an attribute that derives from the qualities, resources
and capabilities of one subject.
Power remains one of the critical topic in political science as well as in
international relations. In general, power is the ability to influence the behaviour
of others to get the outcomes one wants.
As the discipline of international relations was evolving, the rigid interpretation
of power slowly started to change. Joseph Nye argued that that the changing
nature of international framework has re-emphasized the use of intangible forms
of power, such as culture, ideology, and foreign policy of a country. The
growing social mobilization make the factors of technology, education, and
economic growth as significant as geography, population, military and
resources. Joseph S. Nye splits the power into two forms: hard power and soft
power. According to Joseph S. Nye, “power is as an ability to affect others to

32
achieve the outcomes one wants.” Hard and soft power can be considered two
pure forms of power.
Types of Power
According to Joseph S. Nye Power can be of 2 types:
A. Hard Power
B. Soft Power
Smart Power = Hard Power + Soft Power
Hard Power
Hard power is the oldest form of power. It is connected to the idea of an
anarchic international system, where countries do not recognize any superior
authority and thus have to focus on power politics. Hard power is defined as an
ability to reach one's goals through coercive actions or threats, the so-called
'carrots' and 'sticks' of international politics. Historically, hard power has been
measured by such criteria as population size, territory, geography, natural
resources, military force, and economic strength.
Hard power is the use of military and economic means to influence the
behaviour or interests of other political bodies. This form of political power is
often aggressive (coercion), and is most immediately effective when imposed
by one political body upon another of lesser military and economic power.

According to Joseph Nye, hard power involves ‘the ability to use the carrots and
sticks of economic and military might to make others follow your will’. Here,
‘carrots’ stand for inducements such as the reduction of trade barriers, the offer
of an alliance or the promise of military protection. On the other hand, "sticks"
represent threats - including the use of coercive diplomacy, the threat of military
intervention, or the implementation of economic sanctions. Ernest
Wilson describes hard power as the capacity to coerce ‘another to act in ways in
which that entity would not have acted otherwise’.

Example:

The United States has demonstrated a 'hard power' policy in terms of Military
power in the Iraq War and in the Afghanistan War and in terms of economic
terms, sanctions on Iran and North Korea.

Hard power can be of 2 forms:

1) Sharp Power
2) Sticky Power (Economic Power)

33
 Sharp Power
Today's authoritarian states such as China and Russia, are using ‘sharp power’
to project their influence internationally, with the objectives of limiting free
expression, spreading confusion, and distorting the political environment within
democracies. Sharp power is an approach to international affairs that typically
involves efforts at censorship or the use of manipulation to sap the integrity of
independent institutions. This approach takes advantage of the asymmetry
between free and unfree systems, allowing authoritarian regimes both to limit
free expression and to distort political environments in democracies while
simultaneously shielding their own domestic public spaces from democratic
appeals coming from abroad.

There are two important criteria of military power: Manpower and access to
military assets.
Man Power + Nuclear Power = World Power
Sticky Power (Economic Power)
Sticky power or Economic Power is different from both Sharp power. It is not
based on military compulsion. The United States built its sticky power on two
foundations: an international monetary system and free trade. The Bretton
Woods agreements of 1944 made the U.S. dollar the world’s central currency,
and while the dollar was still linked to gold at least in theory for another
generation, the U.S. Federal Reserve could increase the supply of dollars in
response to economic needs. The result for almost 30 years was the magic
combination of an expanding monetary base with price stability. These
conditions helped produce the economic miracle that transformed living
standards in the USA. The progress toward free trade and economic integration
represents one of the great unheralded triumphs of U.S. foreign policy in the
20th century.

With the opening of its market, the role of the dollar as a global reserve
currency has increased and US became known as the "locomotive of the global
economy" and the "consumer of last resort." U.S. trade deficits stimulated
production and consumption in the rest of the world, increasing the prosperity
of other countries and their willingness to participate in the U.S. led global
economy.

A collapse of the U.S. economy and the ruin of the dollar would do more than
dent the prosperity of the United States, countries including China and Japan

34
would fall into depressions. The financial strength of every country would be
severely shook or collapsed. Under those circumstances, debt becomes a
strength, not a weakness. Therefore, a collapsing U.S. economy would inflict
enormous, unacceptable damage on the rest of the world. That is sticky power
with a vengeance.

Sticky power is also differs from country to country. In India, Modi’s attempt to
achieve economic diplomacy, is based on two pillars:
(a) Aid diplomacy: India engaged in aid diplomacy in 2004. When during the
Tsunami India showed:
(i) Skills in disaster management
(ii) Well trained medical community
(iii) Well trained military machinery
(iv) Material resources
(b) Striking of FTAs (Free Trade Agreements) & RTAs (Regional Trade
Agreements)
Soft Power
Soft power rests on the ability to shape the preferences of others, without the
use of force, coercion or violence, but through intangible assets such as an
attractive personality, culture, political values, institutions, and foreign policies
that are seen as legitimate or having moral authority (Nye, 2008). Legitimacy is
central for soft power.
There are three things central to Soft Power:
(i) Political values
(ii) Culture
(iii) Foreign Policy
According to Nye, soft power of a country rests primarily on three resources: its
culture (in places where it is attractive to others), its political values (when it
lives up to them at home and abroad), and its foreign policies (when they are
seen as legitimate and having moral authority):
1) Culture is the set of practices that create meaning for a society, and it has
many manifestations.
2) Government policies at home and abroad are another potential source of soft
power. Similarly, foreign policies strongly affect soft power. Government
policies can reinforce or diminish a country’s soft power.
3) Foreign policies and Domestic policies that appear to be hypocritical and
indifferent to the opinion of others or based on a narrow approach to national
interests can undermine soft power (Pallaver, 2011)
35
 Agents of Soft Power
To understand soft power in the current global context, a methodological
change is required. In particular, one of the theoretical ambiguities stems from
the notion of who are its agents/implementers. The model proposed in the thesis
emphasizes the following agents of soft power: States, NGOs, Civil society,
MNEs and network of actors.
Nation-states
The traditional actor of soft power is the state, which implements initiatives
through various state agencies. However, the state is no longer the only actor
able to build and mobilize soft power. The new global context requires
governments to integrate other agents in its decision-making process (Bolewski,
2008). Many non-traditional actors such as NGOs, multinational corporations,
civil society groups and individuals are becoming significant power players.

NGOs
With the proliferation of media technologies, the credibility of national
government today is often suspect; hence, one could argue that the political
control should be removed from soft power initiatives (Mark, 2009). The 2014
Edelman Trust Barometer ranked NGOs as the world's most trusted institution −
the seventh year in a row that they have come out on top of business, media and
governments (Dauvergne and LeBaron, 2014). NGOs can be defined as
professionalized independent societal organizations whose primary aim is to
promote common goals at the national or the international level (Martens,
2002). As stated before, legitimacy is central to soft power (Nye and Armitage,
2007) and NGOs can provide the objectivity and transparency. Unlike state and
market institutions, which are driven by the need for social control and profit,
NGOs are interested, primarily in building communities. They are generally
smaller in size than the states, not as bureaucratic in their management styles,
and have gained legitimacy as a result of their effectiveness and accountability.
Indeed, NGOs are often viewed as powerful and legitimate players because of
their organizational priorities and grassroots foundation. However, the bottom-
up initiatives 11 are often indirectly dependent on the top-down institutions and
inevitably there is some level of connection with the political actors (Sanyal,
1998). Moreover, as argued by Nye and Armitage (2007: 49), certain elements
of public diplomacy will always remain in the government’s purview since it is
linked to the national interest and policy objectives. In view of such issues,
perhaps the responsibility for soft power needs to be transferred to independent

36
entities such as British Council (Mark, 2009), whose arm’s length connection
with the government is highly acclaimed for its success (Bound, et al. 2007). An
alternative model to the British Council is to establish an independent entity
within a foreign service, accountable to an independent board (Mark, 2007).
MNCs
Multinational Corporations are another source of co-operative power (Nye,
1990). On many issues, private actors and small states have become more
powerful than states. The following has contributed to this diffusion of power:
economic interdependence, transnational actors, nationalism in weak states, the
spread of technology, and changing political issues, as well as modernization,
urbanization, and increased communication in developing countries (Nye,
1990). In the recent years, businesses across the world started to actively pursue
corporate social responsibility and thus have an incentive to support soft power
strategies. Companies are embedding corporate social responsibility into their
policies and processes based on the conviction that the environmental,
economic and social sustainability of communities are part of ensuring long-
term business sustainability (UNAC and UNGC, 2010). Using private
organizations to conduct public diplomacy can be advantageous. However,
there are weaknesses such as lack of controlled over transmitted message and
the difficulty of taking relationships outside the private sector (Buckle, 2012).
There is also the question of for profit versus non-for-profit imperative. Finally,
it might be difficult to control where the private sector chooses to invest.
Nevertheless, private sector is potentially a powerful player that could aid in
building and sustaining soft power.
Co-operation
In view of the various issues and shortcomings of the state, NGOs and MNEs,
one could argue for the constructive cooperation among the global actors. This
refers to both the networks including several countries, as well as the alliance of
the principally different global actors. Although the triple alliance between the
state, market, and civil society are rare (Sanyal, 1998), the collective action
problem makes it more likely to occur. In fact, there is evidence that in the
current global framework, the establishment of networks is a key point in
establishing or sustaining power and influence. The networks are becoming
important and the positioning in current international network is an important
power resource (Nye, 2011). So the power will likely to shift towards
multifaceted networks and coalitions in a multipolar world (National

37
Intelligence Council, 2012). In sum, the ambiguity of the actors of soft power is
one of the concept’s complex areas.
Question: Comment on the India-China relationship.
Answer: India-China relations (Sino-Indian relations) refers to the bilateral
relationship between the People's Republic of China (PRC) and the Republic
of India. Although the relationship has been cordial, there are border disputes
and an economic competition between the two countries that have at times led
to strained relations. The modern relationship began in 1950 when India was
among the first countries to end formal ties with the Republic of China
(Taiwan) and recognize the PRC as the legitimate government of Mainland
China. China and India are the two most populous countries and fastest growing
major economies in the world. Growth in diplomatic and economic influence
has increased the significance of their bilateral relationship.

Sino-Indian Relationship
The Sino-Indo relations can be divided into five phases:
Five Phases of Sino-Indian Relationship
(A) 1949-1962 (Hindi Chini Bhai-Bhai)
India established diplomatic relations with the PRC on 1 January 1950, the first
non-communist nation to do so. Sino-Indian Friendship Association on 16 May
1952 in Beijing was founded.

It is the popular perception that the catch phrase of India's diplomacy with
China in the 1950s was Hindi-Chini bhai-bhai, which means ‘Indians and
Chinese are brothers’. While VK Krishna Menon was the Defence Minister in
1958, Nehru had privately told G. Parthasarathi the Indian envoy to China to
send all communications directly to him bypassing Menon, due to his
communist background and sympathy towards China.

Nehru sought to initiate a more direct dialogue between the peoples of China
and India in culture and literature.

In 1954, India published new maps that included the Aksai Chin region within
the boundaries of India. China claimed the territory over which India's maps

38
showed clear sovereignty, and demanded rectification of the entire border.
When India discovered that China built a road through the region, border
clashes and Indian protests became more frequent. In January 1959, PRC
premier Zhou Enlai wrote to Nehru, pointing out that no government in China
had accepted as legal the McMahon Line, which in the 1914 Simla Convention
defined the eastern section of the border between India and Tibet.

➢ Panch Sheel Agreement [M3P2]

1) Mutual Non-interference
2) Mutual Non-aggression
3) Mutual Respect for sovereignty and territorial organisation
4) Peaceful Co-existence
5) Peaceful settlement of disputes
(B) 1962-1988
Border disputes resulted in a war between the People's Republic of China and
India in 1962. The border clash resulted in a defeat of India. China occupied
strategic points in the Aksai Chin and Demchok regions of Ladakh, before
declaring a unilateral cease-fire.

Relations between the PRC and India deteriorated during the rest of the 1960s
and the early 1970s while the Sino–Pak relations improved and the Sino-Soviet
relations worsened. The PRC backed Pakistan in its 1965 war with India.
Between 1967 and 1971, an all-weather road was built across territory claimed
by India, linking PRC's Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region with Pakistan;
India could do no more than protest. The PRC continued an active propaganda
campaign against India and supplied ideological, financial, and other assistance
to dissident groups, especially to tribes in north-eastern India.

In late 1967, there were two more conflicts between Indian and Chinese forces
at their contested border, in Sikkim. The first conflict was dubbed the ‘Nathu La
Incident’, and the other the ‘Cho La Incident’.

In August 1971, India signed ‘Treaty of Peace, Friendship, and Co-

operation’ with the Soviet Union. The PRC sided with Pakistan in its December
1971 war with India. Although China strongly condemned India, it did not carry
out its veiled threat to intervene on Pakistan's behalf. By this time, the PRC
had replaced the Republic of China (Taiwan) in the UN where its
representatives denounced India as being a "tool of Soviet expansionism."

39
India and the PRC renewed efforts to improve relations after Indian Prime
Minister Indira Gandhi's Congress party lost the 1977 elections to Morarji
Desai's Janata Party. In 1978, the Indian Minister of External Affairs Atal Bihari
Vajpayee made a landmark visit to Beijing, and both countries officially re-
established diplomatic relations in 1979. The PRC modified its pro-Pakistan
stand on Kashmir and appeared willing to remain silent on India's absorption of
Sikkim and its special advisory relationship with Bhutan. The PRC's leaders
agreed to discuss the boundary issue, India's priority, as the first step to a
broadening of relations. The two countries hosted each other's news agencies,
and Mount Kailash and Mansarowar Lake in Tibet, the mythological home of
the Hindu pantheon, were opened to annual pilgrimages.

In 1984, squads of Indian soldiers began actively patrolling the Sumdorong

Chu Valley in Arunachal Pradesh. In the winter of 1986, the Chinese deployed
their troops to the Sumdorong Chu before the Indian team could arrive and built
a Helipad at Wandung. Surprised by the Chinese occupation, India's then Chief
of Army Staff, General K. Sundarji, airlifted a brigade to the region.

Chinese troops could not move any further into the valley and were forced to
away from the valley. By 1987, Beijing's reaction was similar to that in 1962
and this prompted many Western diplomats to predict war. However, Indian
foreign minister N.D. Tiwari and Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi travelled to
Beijing to negotiate a mutual de-escalation.

India and the PRC held eight rounds of border negotiations between 1981 and
1987. China's construction of a military post and helicopter pad in the area in
1986 and India's grant of statehood to Arunachal Pradesh (formerly the North-
East Frontier Agency) in February 1987 caused both sides to deploy troops to
the area. The PRC relayed warnings that it would ‘teach India a lesson’ if it did
not cease ‘nibbling’ at Chinese territory. By the summer of 1987, however, both
sides had backed away from conflict and denied military clashes had taken
place.

A warming trend in relations was facilitated by Rajiv Gandhi's visit to China in

December 1988. The two sides issued a joint communiqué that stressed the need
to restore friendly relations on the basis of the Panchsheel. India and China
agreed to achieve a ‘fair and reasonable settlement while seeking a mutually
acceptable solution’ to the border dispute. The communiqué also expressed
China's concern about agitation by Tibetan separatists in India and reiterated

40
that anti-China political activities by expatriate Tibetans would not be tolerated.
The two sides also agreed to hold annual diplomatic consultations between
foreign ministers, set up a joint committee on economic and scientific co-
operation, and a joint working group on the boundary issue.

(C) 1988-1997
Six rounds of talks of the Indian-Chinese Joint Working Group on the Border
Issue were held between 1988 and 1993. In 1993, the sixth-round of the joint
working group talks was held in New Delhi but resulted in only minor
developments. Prime Minister Narasimha Rao and Premier Li Peng signed a
border agreement dealing with cross-border trade, cooperation on
environmental issues and radio and television broadcasting. A senior-level
Chinese military delegation made a goodwill visit to India in December 1993
aimed at "fostering confidence-building measures between the defence forces of
the two countries." The visit, however, came at a time when China was
providing greater military support to Burma. The presence of Chinese radar
technicians in Burma's Coco Islands, which border India's Andaman and
Nicobar Islands caused concern in India.

In January 1994, Beijing announced that it not only favoured a negotiated

solution on Kashmir, but also opposed any form of independence for the region.
Talks were held in New Delhi in February aimed at confirming established
"confidence-building measures", discussing clarification of the ‘Line of actual
Control’ (LAC).

In 1995, the two sides were reportedly "seriously engaged" in defining the
McMahon Line and the line of actual control vis-à-vis military exercises and
prevention of air intrusion.

There was little notice taken in Beijing of the April 1995 announcement of the
opening of the Taipei Economic and Cultural Centre in New Delhi. The Centre
serves as the representative office of the Republic of China (Taiwan) and is the
counterpart of the India-Taipei Association located in Taiwan. Both institutions
share the goal of improving India-ROC relations, which have been strained
since New Delhi's recognition of Beijing in 1950.

• Gujral Doctrine: Old wine of Panch Sheel in New bottle.

• India will give out concessions but non-reciprocity.

41
(D) Post Pokhran Phase
Sino-Indian relations hit a low point in 1998 following India's nuclear tests.
Indian Defence Minister George Fernandes declared that “in my perception of
national security, China is enemy No 1, and any person who is concerned about
India’s security must agree with that fact”, hinting that India developed nuclear
weapons in defence against China's nuclear arsenal. In 1998, China was one of
the strongest international critics of India's nuclear tests and entry into the
nuclear club. During the 1999 Kargil War, China voiced support for Pakistan,
but also counselled Pakistan to withdraw its forces.

• In 1988, relationship between India and China was on the back burner.
• China was shocked because of Shakti Test.
• UNSC-1172: China was at the forefront and called upon India and
Pakistan to sign non-proliferation treaty.
(E) The New Bhai-Bhai (Wuhan Summit)
Geo-economics > Geo-politics.

Disputed Areas between India-China

[T5S1]
1) Territorial Disputes
The India-China borders can be broken down into three sectors:

1) Western Sector (Disputed): This comprises the Aksai Chin sector. This
region which originally was a part of the state of Jammu and Kashmir is
claimed by China as part of its autonomous Xinjiang region. After the
1962 war, it is administered by China. The LAC is the effective military
border which separates Indian controlled areas of Jammu and Kashmir
from Aksai Chin. It is to be noted that this border is not a legally
recognised international boundary, but rather it is the practical boundary.
Conventionally, India considers the Johnson line of 1865, marked by a
civil servant W.H. Johnson, which put Aksai Chin in Jammu and
Kashmir. On the other hand, China recognises the Macartney-Macdonald
Line as the actual boundary which puts Aksai Chin in Xinjiang region of
China. In 1993, when the then Prime Minister Narasimha Rao visited

42
 China, ‘The Agreement for Maintenance of Peace and Tranquillity
along the LAC‘ has been signed between India and China.
2) Central Sector (Undisputed): Although China has recognised India’s
sovereignty over Sikkim and had initiated the trade at Nathu La pass, the
Doklam fiasco could mean trouble at all ends.
3) Eastern Sector (Disputed): The Arunachal Pradesh border that China
still claims to be its own territory is the largest disputed area. It was
formally called North East Frontier Agency (NEFA). During the 1962
war, the People’s Liberation Army occupied it but they announced a
unilateral ceasefire and withdrew respecting the international boundary
(Mcmahon Line). However, it has continued to assert its claim over the
territory. Nowadays, almost the whole of Arunachal is claimed by China.

2) Threat Perceptions
• Given by C. Rajamohan.
• China is India’s no. 1 enemy. (George Fernandez)
3) Triangular Relationship
• India has formed a group called QUAD – India, US, Japan & Australia.
4) Trade
China is India’s largest trading partner.
5) Tibet
Mao Zedong viewed Tibet as an integral part of the People's Republic of China.
Mao saw Indian concern over Tibet as a manifestation of interference in the
internal affairs of the PRC. The PRC reasserted control over Tibet and to
end Lamaism (Tibetan Buddhism) and feudalism, which it did by force of arms
in 1950. To avoid antagonizing the PRC, Nehru informed Chinese leaders that
India had no political ambitions, territorial ambitions, nor did it seek special
privileges in Tibet, but that traditional trading rights must continue. With Indian
support, Tibetan delegates signed an agreement in May 1951 recognizing PRC
sovereignty but guaranteeing that the existing political and social system of
Tibet would continue.

In April 1954, India and the PRC signed an eight-year agreement on Tibet that
later became the Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence (or Panchsheel).
Although critics called the Panchsheel naïve. Nehru calculated that India's best
guarantee of security was to establish a psychological buffer zone in place of
the lost physical buffer of Tibet.

6) Sikkim
43
The Nathu La and Cho La clashes were a series of military clashes in 1967
between India and China alongside the border of the Himalayan Kingdom of
Sikkim, then an Indian protectorate. The end of the conflicts saw a Chinese
military withdrawal from Sikkim.

In 1975, the Sikkim monarchy held a referendum, in which the Sikkemese voted
overwhelmingly in favour of joining India. At the time China protested and
rejected it as illegal. The Sino-Indian Memorandum of 2003 was hailed as a de
facto Chinese acceptance of the annexation. China published a map showing
Sikkim as a part of India and the Foreign Ministry deleted it from the list of
China's ‘border countries and regions’. Chinese Prime Minister Wen Jiabao said
in 2005 that "Sikkim is no longer the problem between China and India.

44
Question: ‘SAARC is a slow boat to nowhere’! In light of the above statement,
critically discuss the functioning of SAARC in recent years.
Answer: The statement ‘SAARC is a slow boat to nowhere’ is made by the C.
Raja Mohan in an Article of The Hindu in 2002.
Introduction
South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) was established in
1985. There were initially seven member states that mainly located in South
Asia, i.e. Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka.
In April 2007, at the 14th summit of SAARC, Afghanistan became its 8th
member. The Headquarter of SAARC is in Kathmandu, Nepal. His Excellency
Mr. Amjad Hussain B. Sial from Pakistan is the present Secretary General of
the SAARC. SAARC Charter is the constitution of SAARC and Member States
are legally bound to follow the provisions of this Charter.

Objectives of SAARC
According to Article I of the SAARC Charter, the Association has the following
objectives:

• To promote the welfare of the people of South Asia and to improve their quality
of life.
• To accelerate economic growth, social progress and cultural development in the
region and to provide all individuals the opportunity to live in dignity and to
realize their full potential.
• To promote and strengthen collective self-reliance among the countries of South
Asia.
• To contribute to mutual trust, understanding and appreciations of one another
problem.
• To promote active collaboration and mutual assistance in the economic, social,
cultural, technical and scientific fields.
• To strengthen cooperation with other developing countries.
• To strengthen cooperation among themselves in International forums on matters
of common interest.
• To cooperate with International and regional organizations with similar aims
and purposes.

45
 SAARC: A slow boat to nowhere
Every time when the leaders of the South Asian Association for Regional
Cooperation (SAARC) gather, the expectations of a substantive outcome from
their deliberations are very low. Neither the region nor the world is biting its
fingernails about the declaration that will emerge out of the SAARC summit.
The media will be more interested in the ‘body language’ of Indian and
Pakistani leaders than in the abracadabra of SAARC officialese.

Every time the South Asian political leaders met under the shadow of Indo-
Pakistan tensions. In 1998 too, everyone was pleased that the SAARC summit
took place despite the Indian and Pakistani nuclear tests. If worries about a
nuclear flashpoint dominated the region then, those have become a reality now.
This SAARC summit takes place amidst a looming prospect of a military
confrontation between India and Pakistan that could escalate to the nuclear
level.
SAARC remains satisfied with the fact that the leaders get to see each other
once in a while. Compared to similar organisations elsewhere in the world, the
record of SAARC in promoting regional integration has been dismal. The
SAARC summits have become expensive talk shops with little effect on the
lives of one and a quarter billion people in the region.
The SAARC is going nowhere. It will begin to go somewhere only if India
takes charge. Can the Prime Minister of India, make the future SAARC summit
somewhat different from the previous ones?

Mr. Vajpayee is right when talked about the most serious national security
crises ever faced by India i.e. the crisis of relations with one of its largest
neighbours in the SAARC.

The cross-border terrorism and regional cooperation do not go hand in hand.

Cooperation in combating terrorism is not a political favour one nation is doing
another, but in the national interest of every country in the region. He needs to
emphasise that unless this scourge is rooted out forthwith, the region will find
its dreams for peace and prosperity shattered.

India is always ready to take the leadership role in the SAARC. In the early
years of the SAARC, it was argued by many that New Delhi must maintain a
low profile in the organisation. It was suggested that if India as the largest
nation took the initiative, the others would get uncomfortable. India's strategy of

46
lying low has not worked. It has led to a mindless drift. If the SAARC is to
become productive, India has to take the lead. No one else will. Pakistan's
approach to regionalism has made it abundantly clear it has no interest in the
collective advancement of the region. The smaller countries are in no position to
set the agenda for the SAARC.

On the core economic issues before the SAARC, Pakistan has been the slowest
camel that has set the pace. It has been more interested in bringing its bilateral
dispute with India over Kashmir into the SAARC ambit than in trade
liberalisation. Pakistan's basic line in the SAARC is that there can be no
economic progress unless political issues are resolved. This approach, is the
exact opposite of what the other regional organisations have successfully
adopted - expand economic cooperation despite political differences. Pakistan's
refusal to benefit from regional cooperation has beggared itself. It should no
longer be allowed to hold the rest of the region back.

The smaller countries of the region have increasingly seen the benefits of a
regional market and are frustrated that integration is not taking place. To
prevent regionalism from being held hostage by Pakistan, India must get going
with those who are ready. The SAARC charter permits sub-regional cooperation
that involves two or more countries. There are serious possibilities for rapid
movement among India, Bangladesh, Nepal and Bhutan on the one hand and
among India, Sri Lanka and Maldives on the other. Pakistan can join this
process whenever it is ready to put commerce above politics.

As the Mr. Modi displayed India's negative unilateralism by downgrading ties

with Pakistan, Mr. Modi must show that he is capable of positive unilateralism
in relation to the other neighbours. The best way of demonstrating this will be
for Mr. Modi to offer duty free access to goods from the least developed
countries of the SAARC. Without India's leadership, the SAARC will continue
to drift aimlessly. (C. Raja Mohan, 2002)

47
Question: Comment on Naxalism in India.
Answer: Naxalites or Naxalism
1) Concept
2) Features
3) Linkages
4) Spread
5) Communist Parties of India
6) Analysis
7) Solutions
Concept
In the year 1967, revolutionary and violent activities started from the village
“Naxalbari” in the Darjeeling District of West Bengal. Hence, it is called
Naxalism and the supporter are called Naxalites.
In Naxalbari
CPI (Marxist) led by Charu Majumdar, initiated the violent uprising. In the
Siliguri Kisan Sabha, they declared their readiness to adopt armed struggle to
redistribute land to the landless.
Maoists in Eastern States hideouts in China declared as terrorist organization
under the unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967. Naxalism is considered to
be one of the biggest internal security threats India faces.
Features
[PAP-LOC]
• Power Vacuum created by inadequacy of political and administrative
institutions.
• Alternative form of governance, Parallel government which provides
emancipation of the subaltern (oppressed and suppressed or the weak & the
meek) from the barrel of gun (resort to violence). Mao Zedong, “Power from
the barrel of the gun”.
• Protracted war by Guerilla war tactics, the ratio of conventional and
unconventional soldier is 1:10.
• Local Demands. (espoused)
• Oppose government policies.
• Classless society. (supported)
Linkages

48
National Linkages
• Jammu & Kashmir terrorist groups
• North-Eastern insurgent groups like ULFA & NSCN.

International Linkages
• CCOMPOSA: Co-ordination Committee of the Maoists Parties of South
Asia), includes Maoists parties of four countries i.e. India, China, Nepal and
Sri-Lanka.
• Want to establish Compact Revolutionary Zone (CRZ).
Spread
• 182 districts in 16 States.
• Increased 235 districts in 20 States.
• Article in Times of India, 59 districts owe it to ‘dynamic leadership of NaMo’
& Paramilitary forces, also UPA had policy gaps.
• Naxalites are active in Red Corridor which comprises Bihar, Jharkhand,
Chhattisgarh, Odisha, Madhya Pradesh, Andhra Pradesh (BJ-COMA).
• There is an alternative red corridor area which is based in western-ghats of
Karnataka.
• In 2004, Naxalites released a documentary “Urban Perspective” – wave a red
flag in New Delhi by 2050.
• There are many States with the high proportion of Adivasis and Dalits but
have little influence of Naxalism such as Punjab, Haryana, Gujarat, and
Rajasthan.
• Poverty is one of the main reasons for expansion of Naxalism in India.
Poverty creates deprivation, denial of justice and human dignity and many other
things.
• It spread in three phases:
1) Organizational Phase (1967-72)
2) Disintegration Phase (1975-91)
3) Recent Phase (1991 till now)
• Maoist have set up their own elite training school in Danda karanga forests to
transform tribal cadres into Naxalites capable of handling the task of central
committee which is the outfit’s apex decision making body. (Times of India)
Communist Parties of India
• Communist Party of India joined electoral democracy in 1951. They believe in
the Parliamentary system.

49
• Communist Party of India (Marxist) was formed in 1964. Some of the radical
elements from CPI broke away and they formed CPI (M). During that time there
was a rift between Russia and China.
• Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist), 1969: Supported violence
• People’s War Group, 1980: Responsible for substance of Naxalism in India,
running parallel government in alternative and red corridor.
• Maoist Communist Centre, 2003
• Communist Party of India (Maoist) was formed in 2001 after the merger of
People’s War Group (PWG) and Maoist Communist Centre (MCC). They don’t
believe in Parliamentary democracy. They believe in the ideology of Mao who
said, “Power flows through the barrel of the gun.”
Analysis
In 2006, Manmohan Singh states that Naxalism is the single biggest internal
security threat to the country.
Times of India, 2011, Chidambaram Naxalism is a bigger threat to India than
terrorism, more people have been killed due to Naxalism than terrorism &
insurgencies support. It’s is a case of India fighting with itself and while
terrorist and separatist insurgencies project India as an outsider, the Maoist
justify their fight as being against a state which has failed to meet the
aspirations of the dispossessed, especially the tribal population.
50-60 million people were forcibly evicted from their hearth and home, PAP –
Project affected people, tribals constituted 40%, only 28-30% were properly
rehabilitated. (Yojana Magazine, Walter Fernandez, Data between 1951-2005)
Solutions
According to the Ministry of Home Affairs, Maoist influence has been
gradually shrinking. A report released in April, 2018 the Ministry of Home
Affairs redrew the red corridor and brought down the no. of districts affected
with Naxal violence from 106 to 90, spread across 11 states.
In order to comprehensively dissolve the Naxalite threat, the government has to
address its root causes.

1) Socio-economic development
2) Multi-lateral Dialogue
3) Security forces or Military forces
4) Salwa Judum
Socio-economic development

50
As the Naxalites are fuelled by discontent from the marginalized and the poor, a
large percentage of national budget must be allocated to address the needs of
these regions. More of the national expenditure needs to be focused on
developing these poorer regions through initiatives regarding health, education,
social welfare and rural and urban development. Government service delivery
should be improved in these tribal areas. Both state and government must
ensure that things such as statutory minimum wages, access to land and water
sources initiatives are implemented. In coming up with strategies for national
economic growth, the government must always bear in mind the possible effects
of fast growth for all socio-economic groups in a country as large and diverse as
India. If the social needs of these marginalized people are addressed, there will
be no discontent to fuel the Naxalites’ movements.
Multi-lateral Dialogue
The government should initiate sincere dialogue with these marginalised
groups, the Naxalites and state leaders. The popularity of Naxalites with the
Adivasis is a reflection of the fact that the government has been unaware or
“unapologetically indifferent to their plight”. By communicating and starting a
dialogue between these stakeholders, these groups will feel that they being
listened to. By opening dialogue, the government can give opportunity for the
rebels to join the mainstream by showing them that solutions can be created
together with the government, by being part of the political system in a
legitimate way. They no longer need to resort to violence to get the state’s
attention. For example, the former director-general of AP concluded that as a
result of the ceasefire and dialogue with Maoists in 2004, the violence in the
state decreased by 80-90 percent in the region. As David Pilling noted, the
challenge for India’s leaders will be to allow the necessary development in
these poverty-stricken areas while acknowledging the rights of a neglected
indigenous group.
Security Forces or Military Forces
Currently, the main instrument employed by the government to address the Naxalite threat is
the increasing use of the military. While some military force is still needed to combat against
the Maoist guerrillas, it should not be the only solution. By only addressing the issue by brute
force, government risks alienating civilians who are caught in the middle. Coercion of the
state will only encourage people to rally against it.
Governance
The growing Naxalite insurgency also reflects a flaw in the federal structure.
Because law and order is seen as a state responsibility, the central government is
unable to be implementing a coherent national strategy to address the threat.
51
Ganguly notes that “in the absence of a near complete breakdown of public
order or without the express request of the afflicted state, the central
government cannot intervene.” The government has the overall responsibility of
mobilizing development, but it cannot do so without the support of the states.
The central government and the states need to cooperate together to solve the
internal security threats and co-ordinate the implementation of this multi-
dimensional approach. Both organizations must complement and support each
other’s initiatives and strategies.
Salwa Judum
• Salwa Judum means peace march and purification hunt.
• Refers to a militia in Chhattisgarh which is aimed at countering the Naxal
violence in the country.
• Started in 2006, as a people’s resistance movement against Naxalism.
• Initially an uprising of local indigenous people in Chhattisgarh but received a
bi-partisan support from both opposition and ruling party and the militia
consists of local tribal youths who received support and training from the
Chhattisgarh State government.
• Chhattisgarh has over the years trained a no. of Special Police Officers (SPOs)
also called Kaya commandos from amongst the tribals who are a part of Salwa
Judum in state.
• On July 5th 2011, the hon’ble Supreme Court of India declared militia as
illegal and unconstitutional.
• Use of Salwa Judum for anti-naxal was criticized for three reasons:
1) Violation of Human Rights
2) Use of child soldiers
3) Poorly trained uneducated youth for countering the insurgency.

52
 Short-Note Questions
Question: Write a short note on Separation of Power.
Answer: The term ‘Separation of Powers’ was coined by a French social and
political philosopher Montesquieu in 18th centuary. His publication, Spirit of the
Laws, is considered one of the great works in the history of political theory and
jurisprudence, and it inspired the Declaration of the Rights of Man and the
Constitution of the United States. Under his model, the political authority of the
state is divided into legislative, executive and judicial powers. He asserted that,
to most effectively promote liberty, these three powers must be separate and
acting independently. Separation of powers refers to the division of government
responsibilities into distinct branches to limit any one branch from exercising
the core functions of another. The intent is to prevent the concentration of
power and provide for checks and balances.
The traditional characterizations of the powers of the branches of American
government are:
• The legislative branch is responsible for enacting the laws of the state and

appropriating the money necessary to operate the government.

• The executive branch is responsible for implementing and administering the

public policy enacted and funded by the legislative branch.

• The judicial branch is responsible for interpreting the constitution and laws

and applying their interpretations to controversies brought before it.

Forty state constitutions specify that government be divided into three
branches: legislative, executive and judicial. California illustrates this
approach; "The powers of state government are legislative, executive, and
judicial. Persons charged with the exercise of one power may not exercise
either of the others except as permitted by the Constitution of America." India
also taken the concept of Separation of power in Article 50 of the Constitution
of India.

53
Question: ‘FUNTERNARSA’ factor (2017)

Answer: FUNTERNARSA factor is the short form of the following factors:

1) Fundamentalism
2) Terrorism
3) Narcotic Smuggling
4) Small Arms Proliferation

Fundamentalism

In the broader sense, Fundamentalism is an extreme adherence to the core rules

of any set of beliefs. However, we often use this term referring to religious
fundamentalism. Religious fundamentalism is a form of extremism. Its
adherents are often told that their religious views must be obeyed to the absolute
letter of the law, and any violation of the law is unforgivable. It makes people of
other religious beliefs inferior in the eyes of fundamentalists, and the results
tend to be very violent.

Terrorism

Terrorism is the systematic use of violence to create a general climate of fear in

a population and thereby to bring about a particular political objective.
Terrorism has been practiced by political organizations with both rightist and
leftist objectives, by nationalistic and religious groups, by revolutionaries, and
even by state institutions such as armies, intelligence services, and police.

Narcotic Smuggling

The drug smuggling is consider as s serious problem internationally. It is a

global black market dedicated to the cultivation, manufacture, distribution and
sale of drugs that are subject to drug prohibition laws. Most
jurisdictions prohibit trade, except under license, of many types of drugs
through the use of drug prohibition laws.

54
There are two main sources of drug production:

1) The Golden Crescent

2) The Golden Triangle

The Golden Crescent

It is located in south-west Asia, comprising of Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iran.
The Golden Triangle
It is located in South-East Asia, comprising of Laos, Thailand and Myanmar.

Small Arms Proliferation

The small arms market or trade includes both authorized transfers of small arms
and light weapons, and illicit transfers of such weapons. Small arms and light
weapons are those that can be transported by one or two people such
as pistols and light machine guns, mortars, and rocket-propelled
grenades (RPGs). The trade occurs globally, but is concentrated in areas of
armed conflict, violence, organized crime. In terms of actions that are illicit, this
trade involves the illegal trafficking of small arms, and the exchange of money
and drugs for small arms which are all commodities that cross borders around
the globe. These weapons are not only the choice for a majority of regional
conflicts today, but also for many terrorist groups operating around the world.
Legal transfers are generally defined as those approved by the involved
governments and in accord with national and international law. Black market
(illegal) transfers clearly violate either national or international law and take
place without official government authorization. Gray (or grey) market transfers
are those of unclear legality that do not belong in either of the other categories.

Small arms proliferation is a related term used to describe the growth in both the
authorized and the illicit markets. In 2003, various international organizations
such as Amnesty International, and domestic groups committed themselves to
limiting the trade of small arms around the world. They said that roughly
500,000 people are killed each year by the use of small arms.
55
Question: Comment on Washington Consensus.
Answer: Washington Consensus
The Washington Consensus is a set of 10 neoliberal economic prescriptions
made by the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, and the U.S.
Treasury to developing countries that faced economic crises. It recommended
structural reforms that increased the role of market forces in exchange for
immediate financial help.

The term was first used in 1989 by English economist John Williamson. The
prescriptions encompassed policies in such areas as macroeconomic
stabilization, economic opening with respect to both trade and investment, and
the expansion of market forces within the domestic economy.

Subsequent to Williamson's use of the terminology, and despite his emphatic

opposition, the phrase Washington Consensus has come to be used fairly widely
in a second, broader sense, to refer to a more general orientation towards a
strongly market-based approach (market fundamentalism or neoliberalism).

The consensus as originally stated by Williamson included ten broad sets of

policy recommendations:

1) Fiscal policy discipline: with avoidance of large fiscal deficits relative to

GDP,
2) Redirection of public spending: from subsidies toward broad-based
provision of key pro-growth, pro-poor services like primary education, primary
health care and infrastructure investment,
3) Tax reform: broadening the tax base and adopting moderate marginal tax
rates,
4) Interest rates that are market determined and positive (but moderate) in real
terms,
5) Competitive exchange rates;

56
6) Trade liberalization: liberalization of imports, with particular emphasis on
elimination of quantitative restrictions (licensing, etc.); any trade protection to
be provided by low and relatively uniform tariffs;
7) Liberalization of inward foreign direct investment;
8) Privatization of state enterprises;
9) Deregulation: abolition of regulations that impede market entry or restrict
competition, except for those justified on safety, environmental and consumer
protection grounds, and prudential oversight of financial institutions,
10) Legal security for property rights.

Features
• Democracy
• Free trade
• Tax reform
• Privatization of state-owned companies
• Fiscal policy reform

57
Question: Comment on Beijing Consensus.
Answer: Beijing Consensus (China Model)
The Beijing Consensus (also known as the China Model or Chinese Economic
Model) refers to the political and economic policies of the People's Republic of
China (PRC) instituted after Mao Zedong's death in 1976 by Deng Xiaoping.
The policies are thought to have contributed to China's eightfold growth in gross
national product over two decades. The phrase ‘Beijing Consensus’ was coined
by Joshua Cooper Ramo to frame China's economic development model as an
alternative (especially for developing countries) to the Washington
Consensus of market-friendly policies promoted by the IMF, World Bank,
and U.S. Treasury. In 2016, Ramo explained that the Beijing Consensus shows
not that "every nation will follow China’s development model, but that it
legitimizes the notion of particularity as opposed to the universality of a
Washington model".

Ramo has detailed it as a pragmatic policy that uses innovation and

experimentation to achieve "equitable, peaceful high-quality growth", and
"defense of national borders and interests", whereas other scholars have used it
to refer to "stable, if repressive, politics and high-speed economic growth".

The term ‘Beijing Consensus’ came into the mainstream in 2004 when
the United Kingdom's Foreign Policy Centre published a paper by Joshua
Cooper Ramo titled The Beijing Consensus. In this paper, he laid out three
broad guidelines for economic development under what he called the "China
model".

The first guideline involves a commitment to innovation and constant

experimentation. One of the major criticisms of the Washington Consensus is
its complacency. Ramo argues that there is no perfect solution, and that the only
true path to success is one that is dynamic, as no one plan works for every
situation.

The second guideline states that Per Capita Income should not be the lone
measure of progress. Ramo feels that the sustainability of the economic system
and an even distribution of wealth, along with GDP, are important indicators of
progress.

The third guideline urges a policy of self-determination, where the less-

developed nations use leverage to keep the superpowers in check and assure

58
their own financial sovereignty. This includes not only financial self-
determination, but also a shift to the most effective military strategy, which
Ramo suggests is more likely to be an asymmetric strategy rather than one that
seeks direct confrontation. Unlike the Washington Consensus, which largely
ignored questions of geo-politics, Ramo argues—particularly in the Chinese
context—that geo-politics and geo-economics are fundamentally linked.

Features
• Export led economic growth.
• Shaun Bresin, International Affairs, pointed out the four unique features of
Beijing Consensus (China Model):
1. Unique way of Social Organisation.
2. Unique way of organizing the economy.
3. Unique form of Government.
4. Unique outlook to the world.
Unique way of Social Organization
• China has an unfavorable dependency ratio (Proportion of working to non-
working people).
• One China Policy has boomeranged on the country’s future growth prospects.
• A demographic decline has set in with the fertility rate falling to below 1.7.
• China tried to make the physically challenged women to abort their children
because it would give rise to unhealthy children which would be a liability for
the state.
• Other organised religions are suppressed in China as they could act as a
platform for mobilizing of people against government.
Unique way of Organising the Economy
• Economic Model of China- ZHONGGUO or Jingji Moshi or Moxing.
• Globalising on your own terms.
• Nationalising key industries. Ownership of key industries by state.
• Economic liberalism is not accompanied by political liberalism and move
towards competitive democratic system but it has taken the form of political
illiberal economic liberation.
• Subodh Verma (2012) (Times of India)
➢ GDP Rank of China – 2
➢ GDP Per Capita Rank of China – 95
• For the past 11 years, China did not release an important tool to measure
economic inequality- Gini Co-efficient.

59
• Top 10% of population is 23 times richer than the bottom 10%.
Unique form of Government
• Factionalism is rampant in Communist Party of China, Factions compete for
power.
• Five Factions (CUSIP):
1) Conservative (More ideologically oriented old guard)
2) Peasants & Labour Unions (Supporters of BO XILAI – [EPW] –
Congqing Offensive)
3) Praise red & destroy black. (Chang Hong Da Hei)
4) Co-existence of Public & Private Sector. (Guo Jin Min Jin)
5) Managers of State owned enterprises (Strong pro-reform & pro-
liberalisation lobby)
6) Mao Zedong – 100 Flowers campaign- to check the demoralization of
intellectuals. Mao invited diverse opinions. “Let 100 flowers bloom let
100 schools of thought contend” – intellectuals. (Salman Rushdie)
Unique way of Organising the Government
1) Factionalism
2) Weiwen
3) Wai Song Nei Jin
China is the only country in the world where official internal security budget is
greater than official national budget because China has to carry out internal
repression to perpetuate one party rule & maintain control over the restive
ethnic minority homelands which constitute 60% of Chinese landmass.
(Main Ethnicity- Hans, Minority- Uighur Muslims, Mongolian, Tibetan)

60
Question: Comment on Mumbai Consensus. (2017)
Answer: Mumbai Consensus
The Mumbai Consensus is a term used to refer to India's particular model of
economic development, with a ‘people-centric’ approach to managing its
economy which may be taken up by other developing nations in time. India's
model of economic growth, which has relied on its domestic market more than
exports, boosted domestic consumption rather than investment, pursued service-
oriented industries rather than low-skilled manufacturing industries, has greatly
differed from the typical Asian strategy of exporting labour-intensive, low-
priced manufactured goods to the West. This model of economic development
remains distinct from the Beijing Consensus with an export-led
growth economy, and the Washington Consensus focused instead on
encouraging the spread of democracy and free trade.

By 2040, discussions will be less about Beijing Consensus and Washington

Consensus than about Mumbai Consensus. (Lawrence Summers, Chairman of
US President’s Economic Council- Oct 2010)

Features
• People centric approach to manage the economy. (Referred by Chrystia
Freeland, 22 Oct 2010)
• Relies on domestic market more than exports.
• Peruses service oriented industries which is different from the Asian strategy
from exporting labour and grassroots development- bottom up approach, not top
down approach.
• Intensive low priced manufacturing goods to the west.
• There are six main features of Mumbai Consensus:
1. Pluralistic & Democratic Polity.
2. Gradualism & Decentralisation in policy-making.
3. Grassroots Development & Empowerment in the socio-economic domain.
4. Domestic Demand driven & Service dominated economy.
5. Private Entrepreneurship & Innovation.
6. Non-expansionist & Internationally Status Quo. (Geopolitics)

61
Question: Indira doctrine, Gujral doctrine and Truman doctrine. (2017)

Answer: Indira Doctrine

Indira doctrine, named after the former Prime Minister of India Indira Gandhi,
was mooted by the Bhabani Sen Gupta in 1983. It refer to India’s assertive
role in the Indian subcontinent under the prime ministership of Indira Gandhi.
Indira doctrine is similar to the American Monroe Doctrine which was mooted
in 1823. The crux of this doctrine was that India will neither intervene in the
domestic affairs of any state in the region unless requested to do so nor tolerate
such intervention by outside power and if external assistance is required to meet
an internal crisis states should first look within the region for help. Such an
assertive posture was a sharp break from the idealism and liberal
internationalism driven foreign policy stance of Nehru ushering in the
realpolitik phase of Indian foreign policy.

Gujral Doctrine

‘Gujral Doctrine’ is considered as a milestone in India's foreign policy. It was

rendered by Mr. Inder Kumar Gujral, the Minister of External Affairs in H.
D. Deve Gowda Government in 1996. This theory says that "India" as a bigger
country of South Asia should give one-sided concession to her small neighbours
and have cordial relations with them.
Main Points of ‘Gujral Doctrine’ are as follows:
1. India would have to establish faithful relationship with her neighbouring
countries i.e. Maldives, Bangladesh, Nepal, Sri Lanka and Bhutan.
2. India should have resolved all kind of disputes (border, economic etc.) with
her neighbouring countries. If India have done something favourbale with her
neighbours then India need not to seek anything in return from neighbours.
3. No South Asian country should allow its territory to be used against the interest
of another country of the region.
4. No country should interfere in one another's internal matters.
5. All South Asian nations will resolve the dispute through peaceful bilateral
negotiations.

62
6. All the South Asian countries will respect each other's sovereignty and
integrity and will help each-others to cope up with any natural and economic
crisis.
Farakka agreement with India and Bangladesh in the year Dec. 1960 is the
proof of the positivity of Gujral Doctrine. Under the Farakka agreement, India
allowed the Bangladesh to use some water of the River Ganga.
Truman Doctrine

The Truman Doctrine was a part of American foreign policy whose stated
purpose was to counter Soviet geopolitical expansion during the Cold War. The
Truman Doctrine arose from a speech delivered by President Truman before a
joint session of Congress on March 12, 1947.

When the United Kingdom notified the United States that it could no longer
afford to fight communist insurgencies in Greece and Turkey, US President
Harry S. Truman issued the Truman Doctrine: a promise that the United States
would do whatever was necessary both economically and militarily to contain
the spread of communism around the world.

Truman justified his request on two grounds. He argued that a Communist

victory in the Greek Civil War would endanger the political stability of Turkey,
which would undermine the political stability of the Middle East. Truman also
argued that the United States was compelled to assist ‘free peoples’ in their
struggles against ‘totalitarian regimes’ because the spread of authoritarianism
would “undermine the foundations of international peace and hence the security
of the United States.” Eventually Truman Doctrine became “the policy of the
United States to support free peoples who are resisting attempted subjugation by
armed minorities or by outside pressures.”

Truman argued that the United States could no longer stand by and allow the
forcible expansion of Soviet totalitarianism into free, independent nations,
because American national security now depended upon more than just the
physical security of American territory. Rather, in a sharp break with its
traditional avoidance of extensive foreign commitments beyond the Western
Hemisphere during peacetime, the Truman Doctrine committed the United
States to actively offering assistance to preserve the political integrity of
democratic nations when such an offer was deemed to be in the best interest of
the United States.

63
Question: Comment on Modi Doctrine and Xi Doctrine.

Answer: Modi Doctrine

The foreign policy of the Modi government or commonly referred as Modi
Doctrine, concerns the policy initiatives made towards other states by the
current Modi government after he assumed office as Prime Minister of India on
26 May 2014. Modi's foreign policy is currently focused on improving relations
with neighbouring countries in South Asia. It also focuses upon South-east Asia
and the major global powers.

Foreign policy expert Leslie Gelb argued in 2010 that “GDP now matters more
than force.” After becoming Prime Minister, Modi’s priorities appear focused
on a pragmatic growth strategy to get the Indian economy back on track. To
achieve that he has indicated that international economics will acquire greater
prominence in Indian foreign policy.

Some important components of Modi Doctrine are following:

Act East policy

From the very beginning the Modi led government made it clear that India
would focus more and more on improving relations with ASEAN and other East
Asian countries as per India's Look East policy which was formulated during
PM Narasimha Rao's government in 1992 for better economic engagement with
its eastern neighbours but successive government later successfully turned it
into a tool for forging strategic partnership and security cooperation with
countries in that region. In her visit to Hanoi, Vietnam Sushma Swaraj has
stressed on the need for an ‘Act East Policy’ that she said should replace India's
over two decade-old ‘Look East Policy’ emphasizing a more proactive role for
India in this region.

Neighbourhood first policy

One of the major policy initiatives taken by Modi government is to focus on its
immediate neighbours in South Asia. Even before becoming the Prime
Minister, Narendra Modi hinted that his foreign policy will actively focus on
improving ties with India's immediate neighbours which is being termed
‘Neighbourhood First’ policy in the media and he started well by inviting all
heads of state/heads of government of South Asian countries in his

64
inauguration. Later during a launch event at ISRO he has asked Indian scientists
to take the endeavour to develop a dedicated SAARC satellite to share the fruits
of the technology like tele-medicine, e-learning etc.

Indian Ocean Outreach

The Indian Ocean region (IOR), which is long been considered as India's
nautical backyard, steadily turning into a hotspot thanks to growing Chinese
strategic presence over the region's numerous strategically located
archipelagos. To counter the move made by China of Maritime Silk
Road project, India started to reach out its maritime neighbours in the IOR with
proposals of enhanced economic and security cooperation. The policy towards
IOR started to unfold during Sri Lankan president's visit to New Delhi in early
February 2015. Following that Modi embarks on a three nations’ travel to
Mauritius, Seychelles and Sri Lanka, although Maldives was also initially part
of this outreach but political turmoil in that country led to last-minute
cancellation of the scheduled visit.

West Asia policy

Indian External Affairs Ministry refers the region of 'Middle east' as West Asia
and not as Middle East which is a more popular attribution, particularly in the
western countries. The region plays a vital role in India's economy as it supplies
nearly two third of India's total oil import, bilateral trade is also flourishing in
recent years particularly with UAE and other gulf states. Over the years millions
of Indian mostly working class have migrated to the gulf looking for jobs and
they account for a sizeable share in the total remittances received from abroad.

In an attempt to strengthen ties with the gulf countries, Modi proposed this
policy to complement his Act East policy concerning East Asia. Although it is
called 'Link West' (West of India) which gives it a bigger geographical
connotation, it is most likely to focus on the middle-east and some of the India's
strategic thinkers are calling it as Modi's middle-east policy. Indian foreign
policy makers say that India's interests in the GCC countries are intimately
linked with its energy security, trade, employment for Indians and remittances
while Middle Eastern foreign policy experts believe that India has showcased
itself as “Security Partner” during Modi's visit to UAE. Given the economic and
human security interests, the stability and security of the GCC countries is

65
crucial for India because huge flow of remittances comes from GCC to the
Indian economy.

Xi Doctrine

Xi Jinping Thought on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics for a New Era

known as Xi Jinping Thought or Xi Doctrine, is a political theory derived from
the General Secretary of the Communist Party of China Xi Jinping. The first
official mention of the term was at the 19th National Congress of the
Communist Party of China and it has gradually been developed since 2012 after
Xi became General Secretary of the Communist Party of China
(China's paramount leader). The 19th Congress unanimously affirmed
the ideology as a guiding political and military ideology of the Communist
Party of China (CPC). The incorporation made Xi the third Chinese leader
after Mao Zedong and Deng Xiaoping whose names appeared in the list of
fundamental doctrines of the CPC.

Since Mr. Xi became chairman of the Communist Party in 2012, he has vowed a
“great rejuvenation” to restore China to its ancient prominence and glory. In
recent decades, China has become the world’s second largest economy and a
powerhouse of global trade and investment. Xi Jinping Thought promotes
taking the next step, making China not only prosperous but also politically
powerful.

To sustain China’s global rise, Mr. Xi is modernizing China’s military and

investing heavily in a $1 trillion international trade initiative known as Belt and
Road.

But the promise of national glory comes with a catch: single-party rule. Mr.
Xi’s philosophy teaches that the goal of a powerful, unified China can be
achieved only if the Communist Party stays firmly in control of China.

Xi first made mention of the Thought on Socialism with Chinese

Characteristics for a New Era in the opening day speech delivered to the 19th
Party Congress in October 2017. At its closing session on 24 October, the 19th
Party Congress approved the incorporation of Xi Jinping Thought into
the Constitution of the Communist Party of China. Dozens of Chinese
universities have established research institutes for Xi Jinping Thought after the
Congress dedicated to advocating the incorporation of Xi Jinping Thought in all
aspects of daily life.
66
The thought consists of a 14-point basic policy as follows:

1. Ensuring Communist Party of China leadership over all forms of work in

China.
2. The Communist Party of China should take a people-centric approach for
the public interest.
3. The continuation of "comprehensive deepening of reforms".
4. Adopting new science-based ideas for "innovative, coordinated, green,
open and shared development".
5. Following "socialism with Chinese characteristics" with "people as the
masters of the country".
6. Governing China with Rule of Law.
7. "Practise socialist core values", including Marxism, communism and
socialism with Chinese characteristics.
8. "Improving people's livelihood and well-being is the primary goal of
development".
9. Coexist well with nature with "energy conservation and environmental
protection" policies and "contribute to global ecological safety".
10. Strengthen national security.
11. The Communist Party of China should have "absolute leadership over"
China's People's Liberation Army.
12. Promoting the one country, two systems system for Hong
Kong and Macau with a future of "complete national reunification" and to
follow the One-China policy and 1992 Consensus for Taiwan.
13. Establish a common destiny between Chinese people and other people
around the world with a "peaceful international environment".
14. Improve party discipline in the Communist Party of China.

67
Question: Write a short note on Modi’s 3 Cs. (2017)

Answer: Commerce, Culture and Connectivity are the three pillars of India’s
robust engagement with ASEAN. In the economic arena, the India-ASEAN
relations are poised to scale new frontiers. The two sides are expected to sign an
India-ASEAN FTA in services and investments soon. This will complement the
FTA in goods which was signed five years ago in 2009 and has led to a
quantum jump in bilateral trade, which is hovering around $80 billion. The two
sides are now confident of scaling it up to $100 billion by 2015 and double that
volume by 2022.

Modi’s 3 Cs
1) Culture
2) Commerce
3) Connectivity
a) Physical
b) Digital
c) In terms of sharing
(i) Ideas
(ii) Information
(iii) Knowledge
Cultural Connect
Culture and Creativity provide mental and spiritual fodder to nurture growing
engagement between India and ASEAN. Ramayana and Mahabharata are not
just Indian epics, but civilizational memories India shares with many Southeast
Asian countries like Indonesia, Thailand and Cambodia. Buddhism forms the
spiritual nucleus of India-ASEAN relations as Buddhists from all over the
region flock for pilgrimage to revered shrines like Bodh Gaya, the place where
Lord Buddha attained enlightenment under the Bodhi tree. Blending the ancient
and the modern, the Nalanda University, an ancient seat of learning, is no longer
a dream, but a living reality and has started functioning in 2014.

In the end, it’s robust people-to-people relations that keep a diplomatic

relationship humming with new ideas and initiatives. And rightly, the leaders of
India and ASEAN have identified forging a knowledge and culture bridge as the
enduring way to fructify the full potential of the relationship.

68
 Commerce
The ASEAN–India Free Area emerged from a mutual interest of both parties to
expand their economic ties in the Asia-Pacific region. India's Look East
policy was reciprocated by similar interests of many ASEAN countries to
expand their interactions westward. Acknowledging this trend and recognising
the economic potential of closer linkages, both sides recognised the
opportunities for deepening trade and investment ties, and agreed to negotiate a
framework agreement to pave the way for the establishment of an ASEAN–
India Free Trade Area (FTA)

The ASEAN–India Free Trade Area (AIFTA) is a free trade area among the ten
member states of the ASEAN and India. The initial framework agreement was
signed on 8 October 2003 in Bali, Indonesia, and the final agreement was on 13
August 2009. The free trade area came into effect on 1 January 2010. India
hosted the latest ASEAN-India Commemorative Summit in New Delhi on 20–
21 December 2012. In the financial year 2016-17, Indo-ASEAN bilateral trade
grew by almost 10% to reach US$ 71.6 billion. India's imports from ASEAN
stood at US$ 40.62 billion while its exports to ASEAN stood at US$ 30.96
billion.

Connectivity

Connectivity - physical, institutional and mental, remains the enduring agenda

of the India-ASEAN engagement. India has been in the forefront of pushing a
host of trans-national projects that seek to weave the region together in an
intricate web of road, rail and maritime links. The completion of India-
Myanmar-Thailand Trilateral Highway is poised to create a new dynamic in
India’s multi-faceted ties with the region. Modi government is focusing on the
economic upliftment of India’s north-eastern states, the gateway to ASEAN,
enhanced connectivity promises to unleash a new prosperity in this region. In
the days ahead, enhancing shipping and air connectivity will be major focus
areas.
Setting new benchmarks for this blossoming relationship, India has set up an
Indian mission to the ASEAN in Jakarta, and has set up an ASEAN-India
Centre which is housed in New Delhi. Capacity-building, developmental
cooperation, and the burgeoning knowledge partnership are key facets of what
experts are calling India’s ‘Enhanced Look East’ policy. This is reflected in

69
India sharing its expertise in capacity building projects in Southeast Asian
countries through the funds. India plans to set up four IT Centres in Cambodia,
Lao PDR, Myanmar and Vietnam.

Question: Write a short note on Modi’s 5 Ss.

Answer:

Modi’s 5 Ss

1) Samman (Respect)
2) Samvad (Dialogue)
3) Sahyog (Co-operation)
4) Shanti (Peace)
5) Samriddhi (Prosperity)

Question: Pakistan is governed by 5 As. Comment.

Answer:

1. Army
2. America
3. Anarchy
4. Allah
5. Awaam

70