From the source of wonky ideas, another one!

[Trump and Angela Merkl in smooch mode; Modi looks on]

With every passing oped of his, it becomes more difficult to take Ram Madhav, General Secretary of the ruling BJP and sometime RSS pracharak, seriously. The upside, however, is these pieces provide no end of amusement. One can see just how desperate Madhav is to impress Narendra Modi with his flattery and supposed profundity (as reflected in quotes from here and there). His articles are a baffling mix of disjointedness and incoherence, spiked with random mentions of people, bits of history, and recent developments. Taken together they make no sense. For instance, his latest — “India can collaborate with the US and Germany to mould a new world order” [https://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/columns/coronavirus-global-lockdown-exit-strategy-ram-madhav-6385391/].

In this piece may be found references to Trump, Modi’s “democratic activism” — whatever that is (because there is no explanation), coronavirus, Niall Ferguson, Hitler, nationalism, ultra-nationalism, World War Two, Mao, Dengxiaoping, China, modern day Germany, and God knows what else, arrayed almost in bullet-points with no connecting tissue and constituting a melange that does not support his conclusion, which is that “In the unfolding new world order, India, along with countries like America and Germany, can play a pivotal role in building a world based on ‘human-centric development cooperation’ as suggested by Modi. It is time for a new Atlantic Charter: Environment, healthcare, technology and democratic liberalism can be its foundations.”

For a geopolitical grouping to amount to much, it has to be underpinned by geographic logic and power balancing imperatives. Consider any strategy or alliance for tactical or strategic reasons, for short-term gain or for the long haul, and one discovers two factors at work — geographic considerations and the desire to balance power against the dominant or would-be dominant state. Both these factors aligning is when a coalition or geopolitical strategy achieves success. 16th Century onwards, Britain practiced its ‘continental strategy’ of preventing any single continental power from attaining dominance. In pursuit of this strategy, Britain enforced a naval blockade of Napoleonic France in 1804, responding to which Napoleon enforced a ban in 1806 on European powers trading with Britain. Otto von Bismarck, who forcibly amalgamated the Germanic states in Central Europe into a single powerful entity, created an alliance system crowned by the 1882 ‘Triple Alliance’ featuring Germany, the Austro-Hungarian Empire and Italy to isolate chief rival, France. Imperial Russia, France, and Britain building on the 1894 Franco-Russian accord forged the 1904 ‘Triple Entente’ to hem in an ambitious Germany. Britain and Japan turned treaty allies in the first 2 decades of the 20th Century ostensibly to fight off Imperial Russia in Asia but in actuality to protect their colonial interests in China and Korea. In the throes of revolution, Russia signed the 1918 Brest-Litovsk Treaty with the German-led bloc of Central European powers to stabilize its borders. Some 20 years later, in August 1939, a month before the onset of the Second World war, Germany and Soviet Russia signed the Ribbentrop-Molotov accord to carve up Poland. Post-1945, the so-called “Atlantic Charter” (that Madhav bungs in for no good reason in his piece) resulted in NATO, reacting to which the USSR formed the Warsaw Pact consolidating, in the process, the US and Soviet spheres of influence in Europe. To firm up Communist solidarity and the control of the bulk of the Eurasian landmass, the Soviet Union closed in with Mao’s China to present a solid front to the West generally, and to the US and its allies in the Pacific specifically.

By what geopolitical or geostrategic metric and in what conceivable way does a grouping in the present day of a receding America, a much reduced Central European state, Germany, with no great independent military capability to speak of, and India, a country that has over time relentlessly marginalized itself to a point where it does not even pull its weight in its own backyard, leave alone assert itself as the primary rimland power in Asia, in a position to shape the world order as envisaged by Madhav? There’s, moreover, obvious natural affinity of race, culture, religion, etc., between the US and Germany, an affinity in no way shared by either of these countries with India.

Just how much of an interloper India is in a US-European concert is depicted starkly in the pic above where Modi and, by extension, India stand forlornly, watching the American and German leaders whoop it up even though German Chancellor Angela Merkl can barely conceal her contempt for Trump and thinks the US an unreliable ally, and Trump has labelled Merkl’s policies “insane” and has threatened to withdraw military support for Germany. There is nevertheless much there in the long term, Trump notwithstanding, for a new Atlantic Charter. But how can India expect to muscle in on this US-European partnership, considering there’s almost no serious overlap in the strategic interests of the US and Germany on the one hand and India on the other hand, unless one counts as common interest a peaceful global security milieu and a liberal trade regime which everybody craves, including the arch-global disruptor of the current order, China?

So the question of these three states getting together to construct a new international system does not arise. Also because there’s the inconvenient fact of what it is the three countries bring to the table. The US comes in with unmatched military and economic power, Germany pitches in as the European economic behemoth able to swing the European Union behind it. In comparison, Modi and India can boast of little more than the former’s flatulent ‘vishwa guru’ conceit (that Madhav predictably waxes on). Delhi, with a failing Indian economy and constricted strategic vision and policies and, therefore, limited military clout, cannot even get its immediate neighbours to support it.

In the circumstances, pray, what can India contribute to ‘human-centric development cooperation’? The US and Germany, having achieved by their own effort high living standards, have excelled in human centric development; in comparison India has stumbled through 70-odd years of socialist development that Modi in his time in office has done nothing institutionally to correct, other than ring in cosmetic changes in the functioning of a still corrupt, inefficient, wasteful, and ineffective apparatus of government that persists from socialist times but produces very little governance. So, does Madhav’s “human-centric development cooperation” not seem like a plea for alms, an artful dressing up of the beggar’s bowl?

Wanting to capitalize on the imagery involving the PM, on Modi’s flying around hither and thither, visiting every country under the sun, and conferring with the high and mighty in international meets — the sort of activity the corona pandemic has shut down, Madhav conjures up, if only for the sake of op-eds, alliances out of thin air, fueled by nothing more, it’d appear, than passing whimsy! Damn good reason to deny him the role he apparently seeks for himself as some sort of intellectual vanguard, God forbid, for the PMO and the BJP government, unless Modi wants to further trivialize himself and India in the eyes of hardened professionals crafting foreign policies elsewhere in the world.

About Bharat Karnad

Senior Fellow in National Security Studies at the Centre for Policy Research, New Delhi, he was Member of the (1st) National Security Advisory Board and the Nuclear Doctrine-drafting Group, and author, among other books of, 'Nuclear Weapons and Indian Security: The Realist Foundations of Strategy', 'India's Nuclear Policy' and most recently, 'Why India is Not a Great Power (Yet)'. Educated at the University of California (undergrad and grad), he was Visiting Scholar at Princeton University, University of Pennsylvania, the Shanghai Institutes of International Studies, and Henry L. Stimson Center, Washington, DC.
This entry was posted in asia-Pacific/Indo-Pacific, Asian geopolitics, China, corruption, Culture, Decision-making, Europe, Geopolitics, Great Power imperatives, India's China Policy, India's strategic thinking and policy, Indian Air Force, Indian Army, Indian democracy, Indian ecobomic situation, Indian Navy, Indian Ocean, Japan, MEA/foreign policy, Military/military advice, Northeast Asia, Russia, russian military, SAARC, society, South Asia, Strategic Relations with the US & West, United States, US., Western militaries. Bookmark the permalink.

11 Responses to From the source of wonky ideas, another one!

  1. V.Ganesh says:

    India is no longer a socialist nation. It’s a different matter that India never envisaged itself to be a socialist nation, but, to be a mixed economy nation. The socialist path taken was thanks to Nehru’s socialist beliefs which were then in built in the Constitution by his daughter Indira who inserted the word socialist in the Preamble. It’s a different matter that socialist there meant social and economic equality. Post-1990, India has become a capitalist nation which Modi has reinforced with his minimum government, maximum governance motto.

    • It is the same old apparatus of govt and the people who man it, and that’s the problem and that Modi has done nothing to diminish the role of the govt, which’s my pet peeve.

      • V.Ganesh says:

        But, Modi has shaken the bureaucracy, the IAS is no longer the dominant bureaucracy and Modi is trying to get the government out of business by selling as many government companies he can. He’s trying to increase India’s rank in ease of doing business. Doesn’t all this indicate a gradually reducing role of the government and the move of India from socialism to capitalism?

      • The overly bureaucratized Indian govt system has been “gradually” changing a long awhile. What is needed is radical change and system overhaul that Modi promised in his 2014 election campaign. He won’t do this, I have argued in my ‘Staggering Forward’ book, because he is too much of a Statist believing that the country cannot do without big govt.

    • Anirudh says:

      The government in India isn’t ever really out of business as long as economic freedoms are denied. Just look at the ESOP policy as an example.
      https://inc42.com/features/the-curious-case-of-esop-double-taxation-india-against-other-startup-nations/

  2. V.Ganesh says:

    Do you think India will ever become a mixed economy nation as envisaged after Independence when India decided to neither adopt communism or capitalism and instead decide to take the good elements from both these ideologies and decided to become a mixed economy nation [which unfortunately remained only on paper]?

  3. LowIQ says:

    shrI Karnad,

    Let me set the record straight.
    Prakash Javdekar is Indian Humbolt (see this: https://www.dailypioneer.com/2017/columnists/is-javadekar-the-indian-humboldt.html)
    Thus, Ram Madhav is Indian Kissinger, which undoubtedly makes Modi Indian Bismarck and so I feel no hesitation in proclaiming myself Indian Goethe!

  4. PRATIK KUMAR says:

    Hi Bharat sir. Regarding Embraer issue, there is a golden moment for India now to buy 70% stakes in it so that it can be very beneficial for our aerospace industry (civil and military) in the long run. Further it can give new energy to Indo-Brazil relationship and BRIS grouping suggested by you sir. So I think India must grab this opportunity…

  5. RG says:

    Mr Karnard, a little digression. How feasible is it if we were to kick Chinese in a battle, just to make a point, not a war but something of the sort where we shatter PLAs image. I think its long overdue.

    Also, why don’t we forge a tri-alliance, India-Vietnam-Japan in an exclusive security arrangement, to keep China under check. A full on alliance with intelligence, resource sharing et al.

    • This is a version of the “Mod Quad” — India, Japan, Australia, group of South East Asian states, I have detailed and been advocating. Any organic security system will work. But Delhi from the Manmohan Singh days and now in the Modi era is stuck on partgnering the US.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.