Foreign visits are mandatory for any head of the state. It cannot be simply escalated or avoided. However, India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s abroad visits have different stories. His foreign visits are showing a desperate attempt to land in a country in the name of a ‘state visit’. From what we read on his foreign visits – it is clearly understood that the sole objective is that ‘he has decided to go around the world in five years’. Moreover it has been noticed that many a time during his international visits our prime minister is talking more on domestic issues and criticism of his opponents rather than working for India’s interest.
In the first three (2014-17) years in his office Modi has visited 49 countries in comparison with Dr. Manmohan Singh (2004-7) 27 countries. This indicates that Modi is a frequent flyer. Since May 2014, Modi has made 40 foreign trips. He uses the IAF BBJ Aircraft for visiting our neighborhood. So that the total expenses spent for Modi’s last four years abroad visits are always hidden and are not disclosed.
Ramesh Abhishek the Secretary of the Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion (DIPP) claims that Modi’s abroad visits yield more investments to India. However, he did not also mention the large scale withdrawal of funds from India by the foreign investors due to BJP’s government unwise economic policies. Moreover, it is difficult to point out the link between flows of investment from abroad to India with regard to Modi’s abroad visits. On a rational note if one was to think that the flow of investment is more connected with by keeping the domestic atmosphere pleasant and with investor’s friendly practices. Then common understanding would be that the ruling elite have failed on both fronts.
At First, Modi has been speaking on foreign soil in a very calm and composed manner avoiding topics on the atrocities against minorities, women and dalits. Second, the foreigners are also completely disappointed with Modi’s foolish policies of demonetization and the way the GST was implemented.
The government claims that the flow of investment to India during the period 2017-18 from abroad is on a rising streak. Neither is it a surprise nor a big achievement. The reality would be the BJP government fails in many fronts in handling the economy. If we apply our commonsense we can realize that the flow of funds toward India concentrating mainly on our huge market. Since 1991 the new industrial policy announced by the then P.V. Narishima Rao government the flows of investment have been in a rising mode. When the Congress Party government liberalizes the Indian economy the BJP and their allies stand against our views.
Though the flow of investment to India in a raising mode due to the size of our big domestic market – the real question would be – who all have specifically gained from Modi’s abroad visits would be a better topic to debate on. What the supporters of the BJP tycoons benefited and what India has gained?
Who are the gainers and losers? Let us discuss the never-ending foreign tour programme of our Prime Minister Modi.
While his administration devastated the Indian economy by imposing the ill advised demonetization that killed more than 100 innocent lives and wrongly implemented the GST – will he will dare to talk in front of the foreign investors when visiting foreign countries. While the foreign media asks about the failed demonetization and GST to Modi, he never answers directly to any specific questions. Instead he will blame the opposition parties for his failures.
Let us see the statistical record of the government on FDI. According to the government recent announcement (June, 2018) on FDI in India, the inflow of investment rises to $61.96 billion in 2017-18.However, the CPI (M) General Secretary Sitaram Yechury says, “FDI has decreased despite Modi’s foreign tours”. In what way Modi’s visits were helping India to draw foreign investments would be a big question. Many foreign journalists praised Modi in the initial years of Modi taking his office now refused to write about him. The reason is – Modi’s failure to by his words. While in abroad he has been attacking his opponents but not presented anything worthy for the inventors to comply. He is simply a loud speaker; nothing can be expected seriously from him. In the last four years of his foreign visits he demonstrated that he is a better orator who can talk more on domestic politics on the international soil but not about developmental issues.
Moreover, all of his visits purposefully avoided the External Affairs Minister Susma Swaraj but accompanied by the selected business tycoons who had supported the BJP during the 2014 general elections. I can clearly highlight it here inthe order without any hesitation who all gaining by Modi’s foreign trips. And also I am expecting a counter argument from our BJP friends. This has been going around in the social media without any hindrances but the BJP leaders have no substantial answers to counter. Why other emerging business leaders from our country are not chosen to accompany the prime minister? This may not look like a serious question to many but its hidden agenda is worthy for the public of this country to understand.
During the year 2015 while Modi visits Moscow “Reliance signs pact with Russia arms firm worth of $6 billion” (in.reuters.com). Further, in the year 2016 Modi’s visit to France made the “Reliance Group ties up with Dassault Aviation” (firstpost.com). “Everywhere that Modi goes, it seems, Gautam Adani sure to go” (Hindustan Times). Now the Adani’s company gets the coal mine project in Australia. Further, the same company got more projects in Bangladesh. Modi’s Israel visit also helped his old friend Adani. After Modi landed in Israel the Adani firm got a contract of jointly producing aerial vehicles with the Elbit Group. All his close friends can be visible and standing close with the ‘foreign state heads’ while visiting India or they will be specially accompanied with Modi on his foreign tours. Someone asks in the social media that “Modi a Prime Minister of India or business development manager for his long time friends.”
Domestic stability is the key to attract the foreign investors than unwanted foreign trips. Finance Minister Arun Jaitley can appreciate Modi’s abroad visits. This is simply to save his position as a minister. Jaitley should not forget that the people of this country are suffering to save Modi’s old friends in consuming the artificially increased price of goods and services. This is well exposed the way the oil price was handled by this government in the last four years. While the global crude oil price was in low its fruits were not distributed to the people of this country who have trusted Modi. Now it is well exposed without any doubt that Modi is working for few selected corporate who are helping him to stay in the prime minister chair. I am not getting any clue by comparing Modi’s foreign visits and benefits rendered to the poor of this country. Instead we should link how his foreign trips are utilized for the betterment of the corporate. Moreover, it would be better to say that not the poor men house of this country in better shape but the BJP’s Central Office in New Delhi.
From the above discussions let me sum up that the uninterrupted foreign visits should not be aagenda to a prime minister of a country like India. Have any of his foreign visits brought anything for the poor of this country? As an alternative the Modi government should have focused more on the economy. The former Finance Minister P. Chidambaram said “That requires collective economic wisdom, bold, structural reforms, radical policy changes and determined implementation that will lead to sustained and high (8-10%) economic growth over a period of 20 years” (The Indian Express). This would have helping the poor and needy of this country. If Modi doesn’t have the faith on his finance minister he should replace him with a suitable person who can deliver the best.
Whatever may be the investment flowing to India, Modi’s abroad visits bite the exchequer in a upswing mode. One thing is strongly indicating us from Modi’s abroad visits that he is in a desperate mood to visit foreign countries. Someone in the social media admired Modi that he would cover the remaining countries in the list of the UN in the year 2018-19.
India is a country aspiring to become a major power. China is a established major power aspiring to be a super power in 2043. The president of the all powerful China did not landed India more than one time in the last four years. Why does India’s prime minister continuous his fourth visit to China? Why the Prime Minister of India is often seen in abroad instead of meeting the challenges domestically. It is not ill advised that Modi criticizing the opponents from the foreign land. If he did not know diplomacy he should learn from the previous prime ministers. But he won’t lend his ears. He will soon learn that dancing like a dummy horse with empty hands in the foreign soil will not keep India’s interest alive in the international system or bring anything for the people of India.
Is Indian Democracy Dying?
The prominent journalist and editor, Shujaat Bukhari was leaving work when he and his two bodyguards were shot and killed. Suffice to say newspapers are the lifeblood of democracy and Indian administered Kashmir under the decades-long grip of a half-million strong security force has a questionable claim. Yet brave journalists, unafraid, write and sometimes pay the consequences.
Following Mr. Bukhari’s murder and the thousands attending his funeral, the security services have raided presses shutting down newspapers. The internet is not quite as easily controlled, so some have been busy updating their sites.
Since Gauari Lankesh was brutally murdered at her doorstep in September 2017, another four journalists have lost their lives. She, too, espoused views contrary to the ruling party’s current philosophy of an India aligned only with the mores of upper-caste Hindus.
Jawaharlal Nehru and Gandhi, the principal Indian leaders who fought many decades for independence would have been appalled. Gandhi protected low caste untouchables referring to them as the ‘children of god’; they are now known as Dalits. Nehru, a Brahmin by birth, was a socialist in belief. His dream was of a secular, socialist India. The latter is long over, the former under vicious attack as Muslim and Christian minorities are marginalized. In addition to journalists, three heavyweight intellectuals have been killed. All were rationalists, the Indian word for atheists.
Gandhi was assassinated less than six months after independence by a right-wing Hindu nationalist who was angry at Gandhi’s moderate attitude toward Muslims. The assassin Nathuram Godse was a member of the extreme-right Hindu Mahasabha political party, and had his roots in the paramilitary, Hindutva-promoting Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS). Its militancy has led to its being banned three times: after the Gandhi assassination, during the Indira Gandhi emergency rule in the mid-1970s, and for its role in the Babri Mosque demolition. The British also found its beliefs beyond the pale and banned it during their rule.
Not only is the RSS flourishing now but it serves openly as the ideological mentor of the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). Together they continue to push their agenda for a Hindu India tolerating only Hindu culture or beliefs, in other words, Hindutva or Hindu hegemony.
Hindutva scholar Shridhar D. Damle confirms what is quite well known, that the RSS is now exerting its influence in academia, government and cultural organizations. The laws restricting cow slaughter are not a Narendra Modi whim. Mr. Modi joined the RSS at the age of eight, was nurtured and nourished by it, the philosophy seeping into his bones like mother’s milk; any moderation necessitated only by political considerations.
The RSS infiltration of academia is pervasive. Last year, its think tank, Prajnah Pravah, summoned 700 academics including 51 university vice-chancellors (presidents) to Delhi to attend a workshop on the importance of a Hindu narrative in higher education; just one example of influencing what can be taught. A gradual loss of academic freedom has been the frightening consequence of constant interference backed up by its militancy — frightening because dying with intellectual freedom, journalists, writers and thinkers is also Indian democracy … slowly but surely, unless the voters stand up to the RSS sharkhas (volunteers) at the next election.
Nobody knows who killed Mr. Bukhari. But when the standards have been set and a certain climate prevails, does it mean much?
US- North Korea talks: A role model for Pakistan and India?
Shahbaz Sharif — Former PM Nawaz Sharif’s younger brother, current PML-N President, Former CM of Punjab (Pakistan) and the party’s Prime Ministerial candidate for the general election — while reacting to the meeting between US President, Donald Trump and North Korean leader, Kim Jong Un, stated that India and Pakistan should seek to emulate both countries, and explore the possibility of resuming dialogue.
Tweeted Shahbaz Sharif: ‘The US and North Korea talks should be a role model for Pakistan and Indian. If they can return from their previous hostile positions of attacking each other, Pakistan and India can also resume composite dialogue,’
Shahbaz, an astute politician and a capable administrator has generally refrained from commenting on India. More so, after his elder brother, had got into trouble after his remarks on the Mumbai attacks In an interview to Dawn, the former PM had said:
‘Militant organisations are active. Call them non-state actors, should we allow them to cross the border and kill 150 people in Mumbai”.. Why can’t we complete the trial?’
Nawaz Sharif drew flak not just from the National Security Committee (which includes top civil servants and defense officials). NSC issued a statement, saying:
‘The participants observed that it was very unfortunate that the opinion arising out of either misconceptions or grievances was being presented in disregard of concrete facts and realities. The participants unanimously rejected the allegations and condemned the fallacious assertions.
Some parliamentarians of the PML-N, also said that Sharif’s remarks were ‘inappropriate’. They had to be assuaged by Shahbaz
What are the precise implications of Shahbaz’s statements at this time?
Shahbaz Sharif’s statement is significant because the Pakistan Army Chief Qamar Javed Bajwa has sought to extend an olive branch to India via his statements — though the ground situation across the LoC has not witnessed a significant change .
Shahbaz Sharif on his part is seeking to send the signal, that he is all for a better relationship with India, and this will go down well with large sections of the population in Punjab (this includes not just members of Civil Society, but the business community as well). As Chief Minister of Punjab (Pakistan), he had visited India (December 2013), and met with then PM, Dr Manmohan Singh, while also visiting his ancestral village Jatti Umrah in (Punjab, India). Shahbaz had also attended the inauguration of the Integrated Check Post at Attari in April 2012. Shahbaz has sought to strengthen people to people as well as economic ties with Indian Punjab.
In 2017, when both Punjab’s and North India was engulfed in smog, Shahbaz had also written to his counterpart in Indian Punjab, Captain Amarinder Singh, seeking a mechanism to tackle the issue of smog, as well as environmental pollution. Said Sharif, ‘..Let us join hands for securing a prosperous future for the people of our two provinces,”
At the same time, in his recent tweet, Shahbaz also raised the Kashmir issue, and does not want to appear excessively soft or a ‘sell-out’. Especially, vis-à-vis the hardliners and the military. Shahbaz Sharif had tweeted:
‘If the United States and North Korea can return from the brink of a nuclear flashpoint, there is no reason why Pakistan and India cannot do the same, beginning with a dialogue on Kashmir whose heroic people have resisted and rejected Indian occupation.
In April 2018, at a rally Shahbaz had raised the Kashmir issue, saying ‘..we will make Kashmir part of Pakistan,”
Fourth, Shahbaz wants to ensure, that the PML-N sets the agenda of the election campaign with this statement he has also ensured, that PTI will need to make its stance on ties with India clear
Mixed signals from Imran Khan
Imran Khan has so far given mixed signals, on many issues including ties with India. Khan has attacked Sharif’s for being soft on the Kashmir issue, and stated that he will be far more vocal and raise the issue on International Forums. At a rally in 2016, the Pakistan-Tehreek-E-Insaaf PTI Chief and former cricketer stated:
“Human rights are being trampled in Kashmir…And no matter what, we will support Kashmiris morally and politically.
Imran Khan also accused Sharif of having a close rapport with Modi and bartering away Pakistan’s interests in the process. The PTI Chief has also sought an enquiry into Nawaz Sharif’s ‘business interests’ in India on more than one occasion.
On the other hand on occasions, Khan has spoken about the need for improving India-Pakistan ties. Interestingly, during a visit to India in December 2015, Imran had called on Modi, and claimed to have had a constructive conversation on bilateral issues.
What is clearly evident is that Shahbaz, a consummate politician, will essentially follow his brother’s approach of wanting to improve ties with India, while not ruffling feathers with the Pakistan army. Shahbaz, also wants to send a message to both the opposition (especially the PTI) and the establishment (Pakistan military and ISI). While the message to the PTI, is that he will not allow it to set the agenda for the election. To the establishment, Shahbaz Sharif’s message is that he is ready to work with them, but will not play second fiddle.
Pakistan & India’s NSG membership: Challenges and prospects
Both the front runners of South Asia have found a new interest in becoming a part of the international non-proliferation regime. This desire was made public when both the states applied for membership in May 2016. So far both have faced disappointment and as the NSG 28th plenary meeting approaches the debate of whether there will be one winner, two winners or no winner at all, rekindles. The decision is crucial for both because they have their own set of concerns riding on this membership. Indian Prime Minister Modi has made the NSG membership the single most important foreign policy agenda for his regime while Pakistan does not want to be blocked out of the trade group by India if it becomes a member.
With the waiver India gained from NSG somehow got stuck in an illusion that this special treatment will apply to all the aspects of Indo-NSG understanding. The hope was killed when no decision was made in the 2016 plenary meeting. However India being India, did not register this clear signal. Part of its lobbying tactics was to become a part of MTCR. The agenda here was two fold: a)it wanted the support of the 34 MTCR members in NSG and; b). it wanted to help China become a part of MTCR (which it was previously rejected) so that China softens its stance on India’s NSG membership. The latter goal has not been met yet. The real problem is not India’s membership into NSG but its vision of itself as the driving force for the region, and as soon as it is able to get NSG membership, this agenda will be on top of its ‘to do list’ to block Pakistan out. If India was to play on fair lines it wouldn’t be as much of a problem. Its desire of blocking Pakistan out is clear by its insistence on a merit based approach through which it assumes Pakistan will be left out for not fulfilling the merit. What it doesn’t realize is that even to set a merit there needs to be a certain criteria for that.
Coming towards the second candidate for the membership i.e. Pakistan, it has maintained a principle stance over the membership of the trade group. If Pakistan cannot become a part of the NSG because the state is not party to NPT then the same applies to India as well and any special treatment would be nothing more than discrimination. What the international community needs to be communicated is that they it cannot have a biased approach for the state of Pakistan solely for the US and India’s strategic interests. The membership needs to be granted to both the South Asian states otherwise the asymmetry will further increase which will destabilize the peace and security of the South Asian region. Furthermore it needs to be brought into consideration that by granting membership to Pakistan, its nuclear program can be streamlined along with the rest of the recognized nuclear weapon states which will bring it under the rules and regulations of NSG. This is something the international community would want for Pakistan because apparently it has reservations regarding the safety and security of Pakistan’s nuclear program so why not bring it at par with the rest of the programs where the skepticism regarding illegal proliferation can be eradicated once and for all?
Considering the case of both the states the only rational solution which China advocates in the NSG openly is that first of all the factor of states being NPT members must not be ignored since it is an important cornerstone for NSG however if it is to be overlooked then it must be overlooked for all aspirants alike and country specific approach should not be an option. Joining NSG can solve many issues for Pakistan including its problem of energy shortage as well as financial backwardness. Such an opportunity can prove to be beneficial for Pakistan as well as to the other states of NSG because the forum can also be used for confidence building and mutual understanding of each other’s circumstances. However India would not like this to happen so easily because that means compromising the leverage it gets by becoming the front runner in South Asian politics.
UN forum to explore use of outer space to improve lives, protect planet
Marking 50 years since the world first came together to discuss the peaceful uses of outer space, government leaders, policy...
Iran at SCO: Role, achievements, and goals
Nearly a month after the U.S. withdrawal from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), leaders from the Shanghai Cooperation...
Modernization of nuclear weapons continues- number of peacekeepers declines
The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) launched the findings of SIPRI Yearbook 2018, which assesses the current state of...
The future we want depends on innovative policies and people-centred technology
ILO Director-General Guy Ryder has urged global business leaders to work together with the United Nations to build a future...
The Secret Gender plague: How The World’s Men Hate Women
In the now famous and well-recognized #MeToo era in America, the call to eliminate sexual harassment in the workplace and...
North Korea, the United States and the Singapore Summit Agreement
There are many essential points of the US-North Korean talks which have been treated, albeit briefly, in the Singapore Summit...
Is Indian Democracy Dying?
The prominent journalist and editor, Shujaat Bukhari was leaving work when he and his two bodyguards were shot and killed. ...
Energy2 days ago
Europe leads the global clean energy transition
Middle East1 day ago
Morocco may have lost the World Cup but could lead the way in protest
South Asia1 day ago
Is Indian Democracy Dying?
New Social Compact10 hours ago
The Secret Gender plague: How The World’s Men Hate Women
East Asia11 hours ago
North Korea, the United States and the Singapore Summit Agreement
Middle East2 days ago
Israel adopts abandoned Saudi sectarian logic
South Asia2 days ago
US- North Korea talks: A role model for Pakistan and India?
Newsdesk2 days ago
MDB Climate Finance Hit Record High of $35.2 Billion in 2017