Modi did not fail India at
BRICS, though ties with Russia are worrying
PM’s description of cross border terrorism
emanating from India's neighbouring country made his intent to isolate Pakistan
clear.
POLITICS | 6-minute read | 19-10-2016
If we go by the comments of the
Congress party on the just concluded BRICS summit and some of the analyses
carried out in print and electronic media, including the 150-character “wisdom”
cluttering the ether, Prime Minister Narendra Modi “failed” to get members to
deliver “the knockout blow on Pakistan” as one scribe put it.
Such comments are not
unexpected as these spin merchants always spew anti-Mode rhetoric, whether
relevant or not, on any issue.
Remember, they demanded proof
after the Indian Army announced carrying out the surgical strike across the LoC? It only exposes the grand old party’s
continuing leadership vacuum.
In the midst of the invasion of
these “hidden persuaders” (with apologies to Vance Packard who wrote the
classic on manipulative advertising with the same title in 1957), we seem to
have forgoten that multilateral summits are serious diplomatic exercises to
evolve an acceptable minimum to further the objectives of participating
nations.
Of course, PM Mode had kindled
a lot of expectations before the Summit to persuade the member-nations to
isolate Pakistan as a part of India’s strategy to fight cross-border terrorism.
He had also been trying to muster international support for his strategy in all
the international conclaves he participated after Uri and Pathankot attacks.
The BRICS members come from
four continents. At this point in time, their collective strength comes from
their growing technological and economic prowess with their total estimated GDP
(2015) at $34.415 trillion and their influence over nearly half the world’s
population estimated at 3.6 billion people and over nearly one third of global
land mass.
Their perspectives are conditioned
not only by their cultural, historical and developmental experiences but also
their strengths in the global
geo-strategic environment.
Despite their differing world
views, BRICS members have also come together to further their common aspiration
to be recognized for their status as globally reckonable emerging economic
entities with matching strategic clout.
The joint statements are not
spun out of thin air but after close interaction and discussion between the
representatives of member countries based on a collective agenda finalized well
before the summit. The statements are carefully drafted so it cannot be
misconstrued by others.
Evolving acceptable semantics
couched in diplomatese is an exercise best left to diplomats, with the leaders
providing only key operative elements.
Diplomats by training are
capable of saying without meaning and at times they’re intentionally vague and
cautious.
Official writings are also couched
carefully drafted sentences to stand political and legal scrutiny both at home
and abroad. Sometimes, bloopers do occur; India’s faux pas in the joint
statement after Sharm el-Sheikh meeting between Indian and Pakistan prime ministers
in November 2009 is one such example.
India after taking over the
chairmanship of BRICS from February 2016 has tried to infuse a lot energy into
the grouping.
A a lot of events and meetings
covering cultural, trade and commerce and issues of governance already took
place before the Summit to add more form and content to the grouping. The first
meeting of the BRICS Joint Working Group on Counter Terrorism on September 14,
2016 in New Delhi with BRICS with the participation of member countries’
national security representatives.
This was apparently part of PM
Modi’s international agenda to promote international cooperation to fight
growing menace of cross border terrorism the world over.
The theme of the 8th
BICS Summit held at Goa “Building Responsive, Inclusive
and Collective Solutions” (giving full play to Prime Minister
Modi’s penchant for pnemonics) clarifies its objective. Apart from
international terrorism, the agenda included financial, development,
infrastructure and environmental issues.
The members air their views
freely during the bilateral meetings of leaders to provide a better
understanding of their perspective during the plenary session. In conformity
with global practice on such conferences, only the nuanced wording of the
statement indicates the members’ accepted takeaways while omissions give an
inkling of their differences.
If we go by this yardstick, the
key players Russia, China and India had different strokes for different folks
including their domestic audience.
PM Modi’s press statement at
the conclusion of the summit on October 16 covered the gamut of issues covered
in the three sessions. These include exchange of views on important global
issues, including terrorism, global economic scenario and the need to reform
global governance architecture.
PM Modi’s speeches at the
Summit strongly stressed on terrorism as the biggest threat to development and
governance. Though he did not name Pakistan, his description of cross border terrorism emanating from India’s
neigbhouring country made his intent to press for isolating Pakistan clear.
Similarly, China had made clear
its position as a strong ally of Pakistan well in advance when it deferred
India’s application for NSG membership on “technical grounds.” It also
continues to block the UN Security Council naming Masood Azhar as a terrorist, though
he leads the Jaish e-Mohammad (JeM) an organization proscribed by the UN.
Though the Goa declaration
specifically mentioned “the recent several attacks, against some BRICS countries,
including that in India” and strongly condemned terrorism in all its forms and
manifestations, Pakistan was not specifically named. This fell short of public
expectations fanned by PM Modi’s high decibel speeches at the Summit.
India probably expected China
to dilute any reference to Pakistan. But it was disappointing to note that its
objection prevailed against including any reference to both Lashkar e Tayyaba
and JeM (both figuring on the UN list of global terrorist organizations) though
Islamic State and al Qaeda found a place.
It should be of some
consolation to India that China agreed to include two operative sentences:
“There can be no justification whatsoever for any acts of terrorism, whether
based upon ideological, religious, political, racial, ethnic or any other
reasons” and “we also agreed that those who nurture, shelter, support and sponsor
such forces of violence and terror are as much a threat to us as the terrorists
themselves.”
In the Indian context they
would point to Pakistan.
Similarly, PM Modi’s appeal to
all nations to adopt a comprehensive approach in combating terrorism including
recruitment and movement of terrorists including foreign terrorists and
blocking sources of terrorists finance and countering misuse of Internet and
social media has also found a place in the Goa declaration. This resonates with
his relentless efforts to promote a holistic international effort to counter
terrorism.
But India’s evergreen ally Russia
soft pedaling Indian approach on state-sponsored terrorism comes as a
disappointment.
Only a day before president
Putin had assured PM Modi that Russia would do nothing to hurt India’s
interests and a signed a slew of agreements to supply state-of-the-art
armaments. Did Chinese influence prevail over Russia to change its mind? Or is
it the lure of selling arms to Pakistan? Could it be a subtle warning to India to
temper its new found bonhomie with the US?
Probably it is a mix of all
these; but they certainly indicate India-Russia relations should not be taken
for granted and need urgent refurbishing if not repair.
Courtesy: India Today opinion
portal DailyO.in
