Crouching Dragon, Kneeling Tiger

Discussion in 'Defence & Strategic Issues' started by Kharavela, Nov 21, 2015.

  1. Kharavela

    Kharavela Regular Member

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2013
    Messages:
    427
    Likes Received:
    370
    Location:
    Odisha, India
    WHY INDIA IS NOT A GREAT POWER (YET)
    Author:
    Bharat Karnad
    Publisher: Oxford University Press, New Delhi

    http://www.business-standard.com/ar...ing-dragon-kneeling-tiger-115112001203_1.html

    Followers of this country's strategic and security policy know well that to read Bharat Karnad is to imbibe the most hawkish Indian world view and perspectives outside the Sangh Parivar. Over the years, Karnad has steadfastly advocated staring down China (India's real rival, he asserts), ignoring Pakistan (irrelevant to a major power like India), developing, testing and deploying thermonuclear weapons (the final arbiter of power), establishing military bases abroad in areas like Central Asia (to outflank China and Pakistan) and a muscular, outgoing foreign policy (a la Israel) that tells any antagonist that she messes with India at her own peril.

    A few lines from the first page of Karnad's latest book sum up what he throws at you for the next 551 pages: "The United States did not become a globe-girdling country by staying behind the moats of the Pacific and the Atlantic Oceans nor Britain 'Great' by restricting itself to the Dover Strait; Czarist Russia obtained strategic weight by extending its reach to the Pacific; Prussia was a truculent Central European kingdom until Bismarck used the Prussian Army to unify the Germanic states and elbow Austria and France out of their pivotal position in continental Europe; and Japan would have remained a small group of islands in the Asian Far East but for the Meiji Restoration and the vigorous policies it sparked. Great power-wise, the twenty-first century is no different than the previous ages in that a combination of widely defined interests; an outgoing, agile, and proactive foreign policy backed by economic might and military prowess; and the ability and, especially, the will to power and the determination to use it still matters."

    Those who dismiss Karnad as a right-wing crackpot are usually guilty of focusing mistakenly only on his more outrageous suggestions (more on that later). In fact, Karnad brings to his work a wide-ranging reading of history -though some would contest his interpretation of it - a compelling and often elegant writing style, and an unapologetic drive to conclusions that do not seek shelter behind caveats. Karnad's expertise straddles the fields of strategy, diplomacy, nuclear weaponry and doctrine, and, importantly, defence planning and warfighting. This raises him above the bevy of former diplomats and intelligence officials who lord it over India's think tank community without any clear idea of the grey realm where diplomacy shades into military coercion. This perspective imbues Karnad's writing with a certitude that comes out in sentences like: "The problem in a nutshell is that the Indian government, military and the policy circles are habituated to aiming low and hitting lower."

    Among thinkers who relish the notion of a non-aggressive, soft-treading India - and there are many such, especially in the US and in India - Karnad's book will spark a fresh round of tut-tuting. His plans for boosting India's power include abandoning nuclear "no-first use" and resuming nuclear testing; placing "atomic demolition munitions" (miniature nukes) at Himalayan passes on the Sino-Indian border to block Chinese invading forces; basing nuclear missile submarines in Australia, from where Chinese targets are conveniently at hand; and arming Tibetan and Vietnamese guerrillas to fight China. India's grand strategy must be to "meet China's challenge, rather than … fight yesterday's wars with a lesser foe (Pakistan)"; and to implement an "Asian Monroe Doctrine", in which India becomes the sole security custodian of the Indian Ocean and other regional waters.

    This is disruptive stuff, especially for conservative New Delhi policy elites, whose strategy has traditionally accommodated international sentiments. Yet strategic thinkers should read Karnad's prescription carefully, knowing they bookend India's most provocative policy options. With Prime Minister Narendra Modi more inclined than his predecessors to assertiveness (though, so far at least, his policies are characterised more by continuity than transformative change), some of Karnad's scenarios may well come to pass. A key former policy maker, the previous national security advisor, Shivshankar Menon, noted during the book's release function in New Delhi that many of Karnad's prescriptions were already part of the Indian government's policy, excepting, of course, the most aggressive and eye-catching recommendations. For the author, of course, this is not nearly enough. He believes India's "ambition void" is ensuring that the country "is proving to be its own worst enemy".

    After deploring India's namby-pamby strategy and diplomacy in his initial chapters, Karnad moves on to an equally hard-hitting critique of India's military planning, structuring and war-fighting plans. These later chapters - with titles like "Hard Power and the Deficit of Strategic Imagination" and "Military Infirmities and Strengths" - analyse in detail India's defence forces and the military-industrial complex that should be backing it with weapons and material. Karnad laments that India's navy, air force and, especially, army, "haven't implemented systemic changes to make them capable of obtaining decisive results fast…" Milder observers have been irritated by this comedy of errors; the irascible author, predictably, tears apart the subject with relish.

    Amid this carnage, Karnad raises key issues. He dissects the viability of India's "theatre switching" strategy - or New Delhi's option to retaliate against Chinese land strikes into, say, the sensitive Tawang district of Arunachal Pradesh (where Chinese invaders would enjoy important advantages), by imposing a naval blockade on Chinese ships in the Indian Ocean (where the initiative and advantage would lie with India). Though this is a comforting thought for New Delhi policy makers, the author questions the viability of such a strategy: asking whether the navy could react quickly enough, and "is the sinking of a few Chinese warships and the apprehension of several merchantmen the equal of, and enough recompense for, the loss of valuable territory to China for good?"

    A strategically and militarily educated reader will both enjoy Karnad's book and be exasperated in equal measure by the certitude of his pronouncements. Even so, as one of the first studies of India's security dilemmas to include a keen study of the military apparatus and the industrial backbone that undergirds it, this book will find a place in every strategic scholar's library.


    Please feel free to comment...
     
    Last edited: Nov 21, 2015
    TrueSpirit2, alphacentury and Razor like this.
  2.  
  3. Kharavela

    Kharavela Regular Member

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2013
    Messages:
    427
    Likes Received:
    370
    Location:
    Odisha, India
  4. Kharavela

    Kharavela Regular Member

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2013
    Messages:
    427
    Likes Received:
    370
    Location:
    Odisha, India
  5. Srinivas_K

    Srinivas_K Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2009
    Messages:
    4,674
    Likes Received:
    3,351

    These are some jingoistic titles dude !

    We need muscle and until then we should work calmly. Chinese have big muscle and economy we have to match that first then we can play the game accordingly.

    we are on the right path and we should continue in this direction.

    Mean while we should form alliances with Japan, US and other like minded countries which are around China.

    We should also improve our economic relations with China. China is a market for us.
     
  6. pmaitra

    pmaitra Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2009
    Messages:
    31,640
    Likes Received:
    17,125
    Location:
    EST, USA
    I agree with the second paragraph of the OP.

    The rest of it is also reasonably argued.

    What India lacks is it is not internally forged into hardness. Most of the countries that became major powers because so only after resolving its internal weaknesses. India since 1947 has followed a slightly different approach. World powers are not inculcated on such foundations.
     
  7. Razor

    Razor CIDs from Tamilnadu Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2011
    Messages:
    5,345
    Likes Received:
    4,485
    Location:
    ഭരതം (Bharatham)
    If we are serious about countering China in the future, we need to form close relationships with at least Russia, Korea and Japan.

    China is securing to supply lines over land through Central Asia, Pak etc and through sea (string of pearls); in order to prevent Chinese hegemony in the near future, these must be disrupted.

    Oh, and nuke capability and missile defence should be a priority.
     
    Last edited: Nov 22, 2015
    Kharavela likes this.
  8. spikey360

    spikey360 Crusader Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2011
    Messages:
    2,285
    Likes Received:
    2,116
    Location:
    The Republic of India
    Wow! This is the right stuff. We need a mix of ambitious types like these and practical types like Ajit Doval.
    Couldn't have agreed more, especially with the first paragraph.
     
    Kharavela likes this.
  9. I_PLAY_BAD

    I_PLAY_BAD Regular Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2015
    Messages:
    943
    Likes Received:
    482
    Location:
    Chennai
    The path to a regional power is eradicating poverty and illiteracy.
    Eradicating these two problems is a necessity to obtain an enhanced human resource base which India is mulling to use to attain power presently and in future. Any building cannot be built on a weak base. So the base must be strengthened first. Until then we must be calm and composed and focus only on our internal development with limited attention to playing a power.

    I like the idea of ignoring Pakistan which is a paper country with dozens of its own problem. It shouldn't cause much trouble to India until it is battling its own problems. For being pro-active India can fund and arm its rebels but nothing much attention beyond that on Pakis.

    I am completely against the idea of viewing China as an enemy. Rather China must be viewed as an opportunity like India is for them. China boasts of a better skill base but believe me they have but they do not have cutting edge innovation. On those grounds India and China are not the same level. This century purely belonging to people who innovate India must go on that path. For that Indians must be capable of doing that. Again this point is linked to my previous argument of empowering our people. So to counter China we must develop ourselves, again !

    Pakistan is a paper country and we must not take it into account whenever India is being discussed.
     
    Kharavela likes this.
  10. Rashna

    Rashna Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2015
    Messages:
    2,251
    Likes Received:
    671
    Location:
    India
    Not all powers began as powers, imperialism means destroying other economies to build your own. In the current world order superpower status is a dignified form of imperialism. In that sense one can go back to Ashoka's empire and the Mauryan empire, was it necessarily linked to economic prowess or more linked to military might?

    Economic might came after military success as one gained access to the wealth of other nations.
    In that perspective Karnad's theories say go belligerent, ignore the niceties of being a responsible country and forge ahead with getting hold of the superpower status through sheer bravado.

    I don't think we as a country can gain respect as superpower by muscling our way through. Case in point the nepal fiasco. We aren't able to bully even a tiny neighbour which is totally dependent on us for everything. In that light we have a long way to go before we achieve that status, but the soft power status which India earned with Buddha and the indian epics resonate even today. Food for thought.....
     
  11. spikey360

    spikey360 Crusader Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2011
    Messages:
    2,285
    Likes Received:
    2,116
    Location:
    The Republic of India
    .. and who kept track of how many such incident occurred during Ashoka's expansion? Also a food for thought..
     
    TrueSpirit2 likes this.
  12. pmaitra

    pmaitra Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2009
    Messages:
    31,640
    Likes Received:
    17,125
    Location:
    EST, USA
    @Rashna, good post.

    I like the Mauryan approach and you are right, economic might came after military conquest.

    Soft power is good but only to some extent. Ashoka became soft and started patronizing Buddhism. We all know what happened after that. Sadly, today Modi government is trying to abolish animal sacrifice in the Indian Army.

    India did not bully Nepal. India tried to reason with them. It is a part of Nepalis who are blockading the roads as they feel marginalized. If India wants, India can put Nepal under its finger tips.
     
    TrueSpirit2, saty, AnantS and 2 others like this.
  13. Rashna

    Rashna Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2015
    Messages:
    2,251
    Likes Received:
    671
    Location:
    India
    Ashoka turned to buddhism after a lot of blood was spilt. So there surely was lot of violence.... Someone should add on to this.
     
  14. Rashna

    Rashna Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2015
    Messages:
    2,251
    Likes Received:
    671
    Location:
    India
    They are trying to invoke "panchsheel". Is it relevant in the context of Karnad's theories? If we have to follow this theory we should be a China and not care about human rights record or our place in the world as a responsible power? Then again we are not even given a permanent place in the UNSC... what power do we have?

     
  15. Bahamut

    Bahamut Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2015
    Messages:
    1,824
    Likes Received:
    1,336
    Location:
    somewhere in space time
    First we need a very strong economy (75% of china), huge middle class and increase our industrial and scientific capability.We can do a lot of investment in china backyard .To be strong outside we have to be strong inside .Secure our interest in our backyard.Keeping the chines away form pak,Sri lanka etc .
    For china play a long term game ,the government is very unstable and if growth in china is slow that means more public backlash.The easiest way is let the CCP do what it is doing ,it will rot form inside. All central Asian countries will join EEU,sooner or later. More important get all the 5 columns out of India and increase our human resources .
     
    Kharavela likes this.
  16. alphacentury

    alphacentury Regular Member

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2013
    Messages:
    878
    Likes Received:
    1,205
    Indians need to be assertive for their Army to act assertively. But ,then we are expecting too much. We have better things to worry about - "Love, brotherhood, human rights". Good article.
     
    Kharavela likes this.
  17. Sylex21

    Sylex21 Regular Member

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2014
    Messages:
    439
    Likes Received:
    326
    Location:
    USA
    In short since you asked for opinions, the author of this book seems lost in hawkish day dreaming and imagined threats while failing to think of the practicality and consequences of his proposed actions, nearly all of which are TERRIBLE ideas. I counter that the real battle isn't India vs China but USA vs China. USA rules the world, China is the up and comer, India is in no place to challenge either one of them head on as a 3rd..... (yet), but perhaps it never really needs to. India needs to decide what it wants overall. Imagine infinite power, what would India really want to do with it? Would India ever want to be the world's only hyper power or police the entire globe? I highly doubt it. If that isn't the goal, then seeing China as a bitter enemy till the end isn't really needed anymore.

    I also hate all this "India is doing poorly" talk. I argue that India is doing GREAT. On every metric if you compare it over the past 20-30 years, India has surged ahead. True it hasn't matched the pace of China, but a 1 party dictatorship is better designed for rapid change than a democracy, but there are benefits to slow and steady quality long lasting change as well.

    India is also pretty much punching at its exact weight right now, and there is no need to try and act like a super power, till it has the military and economy to match.

    The only thing India needs to sort out is 1) Either to find a new way to reach a peaceful accommodation with Pakistan, 2) Find some way to finish off Pakistan permanently. Only when the USA was free of local challenges was it able to travel across the globe as a super power.
     
  18. Indx TechStyle

    Indx TechStyle Perfaarmance Naarmal Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2015
    Messages:
    7,008
    Likes Received:
    7,549
    Location:
    21°N 78°E / 21°N 78°E
    Actually, India is an intersection between great powers like US, China and Global Powers like Germany and UK.
    And no offense for India's current inability of great power status as no one had to start with just 13% literacy and 97% poverty rate.
    As of now, India still emerging as a great power.
    By watching speed, we can catch up in Human Development indicators in 2020, economically 2025 and militarily by 2030(for fully operationalizing indigenous industry).
    Better to watch our path.
    India has often done better than economist's predictions.
    I can't understand why everybody remains in hurry.
    GDP per capita can be 3 times in every 15years if current speed goes on.
    Rise of India is inevitable.
    But I will be happy to see India as a Vishwa Guru and not and bully. ;)
     
    roma and Chinmoy like this.
  19. genius

    genius Regular Member

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2014
    Messages:
    686
    Likes Received:
    117
    Location:
    India
    @Rashna is right. India is like a studious geek, whereas countries like china, america etc. are the jocks. If geeks act like jocks, they get thrashed and ridiculed. Better for geeks to focus on intellectual, creative, humanitarian pursuits - in short, soft power.
     
    roma likes this.
  20. AnantS

    AnantS Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2013
    Messages:
    1,225
    Likes Received:
    1,423
    Location:
    Yatra Tatra
    US could not bully Cuba into submission, this fact did not impact USA. The Nepal policy is prime case of Big Carrot & soft stick policy. Its a tried and tested one earlier. Nepal want to burn India via China. India very well knows its fault-lines, and is just using right pressure to hint Nepal costs of becoming another Pakistan for India.

    China can open new routes to Nepal which will be costly to maintain in winters, and things will be pricey unless China subsidizes it.
     
  21. Rashna

    Rashna Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2015
    Messages:
    2,251
    Likes Received:
    671
    Location:
    India
    I am of the opinion that bullying doesn't work hence India should focus on being firm but not belligerent.
    All of our neighbors stand to benefit from good relations with us and with China too, but it doesn't change the fact that they are culturally closer to India than to the Chinese, also the geography makes it difficult for China to react like India can and does most times.
    We should cash in on the natural advantage we have rather than adding to difficulties in our neighborhood. That is the right approach to "Super Powerhood", if one is aspiring for that status.

     

Share This Page