What wrong has india done to Irk it's Neighbours?

Discussion in 'Subcontinent & Central Asia' started by A.V., Dec 23, 2009.

  1. A.V.

    A.V. New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2009
    Messages:
    6,503
    Likes Received:
    1,106
    Location:
    Moscow, russia
    Although india by nature is a very peaceful country and was one of the founding members of the non-aligned movement during the cold war era and has its importance growing day by day in the word stage yet in its own backyard we find that various politically motivated movements have tried to blame and undermine india's importance in the region.
    A parallel could be drawn with the recent blame by nepal , bangladesh has long been pointing towards india for many of its misfortunes , sri-lanka has just come out of a civil war which they blame on india, and not to forget pakistan which blames india for whatever wrong happens in their country

    in rise of the current situation we at DFI try to look back at old times and and try and figure out what were the fundamental mistakes that india did because of which its neighbours try to point a finger
    what do you members forsee in the near future ?
    how can we improve on the bilateral and multilateral relationships?
    what does the future hod for india's positio on the sub-continent?


    PLEASE BRING OUT YOUR VIEWS AND REMEMBER ITS HQ SO NO LINKS PLEASE
     
  2.  
  3. Dark Sorrow

    Dark Sorrow Respected Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2009
    Messages:
    1,566
    Likes Received:
    368
    Location:
    Mumbai
    Could it be our tilt towards the Soviets taking in account most of neighbour were pro-american.
    But what i feel is almost ever indian neighbour(except china) is/was a failed state and it is a psychology that people having less facilities(less fortunate) always tends to blame people with more facility. In China's case it is because we are competitors.
    Our foriegn policy was also not proper. We didn't care for anything, we didnot support pro-Indian people in these countries.
     
  4. bengalraider

    bengalraider DFI Technocrat Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2009
    Messages:
    3,617
    Likes Received:
    2,013
    Location:
    in a fast food joint next to the imperial shipyard
    My guess is the author means India's relations with Nepal, Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh in particular let me outline the reasons for our failures nation by nation.

    NEPAL- India has for long had deep cultural and religious relations with Nepal and for the majority of our history the relations have been mutually beneficial and friendly. however of late the Indian foreign policy in Nepal has faltered and a lot of Anti-India sentiment has come to the fore there is but one overwhelming reason for this "The failure of India's government to support the Nepali citizens in the maintenance of Nepali democracy".India stood by while the usurper King Gyanendra(as seen by a lot of Nepalis)did all he could to curb the freedoms of ordinary Nepalis. Our Foreign office was(i am sad to state) simply too myopic and stubborn to realize that unless we stepped in to restore order and return government to the people of Nepal others would use it to further their ends; the Chinese did exactly that they used the vacuum in Kathmandu to foster closer ties with the Maoists and got closer to the new government of Nepal.None of this would have happened if we had supported Mr Girija prasad koirala(or any other popular Nepali politician) to form a government in Kathmandu.However all is not lost we still have close ties with most of the powers that be in Nepal and we can turn this around.

    Pakistan-our less than neighborly relations with our western neighbor are a byproduct of the shared birth of our nations. they are simply put dependent on one word "Kashmir".The wounds of partition are deep on both sides of the border and no wound is deeper than the ever festering wound of Kashmir, as long as this issue remains i see no love lost between India and Pakistan.

    Sri Lanka-More than anything it is domestic Indian politics and the question of the status of the Tamil people in Sri Lanka that have hampered our relations with our southern neighbor, anything related to Sri Lanka Sri lankan Tamils becomes a rallying call for a Variety of south Indian politicos to throw the entire southern half of India out of sync. It was on the insistence (and subsequent political pressure & blackmail)of the Tamil politicos that LTTE was formed and trained in India by the IA and RAW, though we later abandoned velupillai as he was too dangerous the damage had been done, the IPKF debacle cut short our commitment to put troops on the ground in sri Lanka to maintain the peace. The subsequent assassination of Rajiv Gandhi by a group his mother helped form was the last straw India simply pulled out, the Sri Lankans kept calling us to come help but we pulled out we backed down to terror threats and political pressure(from Tamil politicians). Pakistan and china filled the vacuum left by us when we should have supplied arms and ammunition to the sri Lankans they did wile we stood by, when we should have negotiated with the LTTE the Norwegians did; the entire saga of Indian involvement in Sri Lanka is the story of a nation trying to work while one leg and one hand(the Tamils of India) refused to have anything but what was unacceptable to the sri Lankans(an independent EELAM).

    Bangladesh-Bangladesh was supposed to be our natural all weather friend , we had granted it life hadn't we?This was the attitude that led to a lackadaisical approach to Bangladeshi affairs in the years after 1971, the same RAW that had enjoyed a strong intelligence network in Bangladesh in 1971 was unable to prevent the assassination of "Bangabandhu" in 1975. then began the down fall of Indo-Bangladeshi relations. the Indian polity was by and large unable to overcome the shock of Mujib's death and followed a Knee-jerk reaction in cutting relations with Ziaur rehman, It also did not help that under Ziaur Bangladesh was extremely close to the United states while India in the aftermath of the "enterprise incident" was seen as closer to the U.S.S.R than most. Again our Myopia stopped us from dealing with a man most in Bangladesh called as "Mr clean" for his fair way of work(the coup not withstanding). The end result has been that India generally has impeccable relations with bangladesh whenever the awami league(Mujib's party) is in power and indifferent to bad relations whenever the BNP is in power.
     
  5. Quickgun Murugan

    Quickgun Murugan Regular Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2009
    Messages:
    778
    Likes Received:
    19
    Location:
    USA

    It will be wrong to blame everything on Tamil politicos without taking into account the actual atrocities committed by then sri lankan govt. which still doesn't give rights to the Tamils. Tamils cannot participate in main political stream of their SL govt to actually address their problem.

    But, this is just the root of the problem. Indian govt never gave a damn to the Tamil atrocities until RAW was actually formed. SL was always pro-Pakistan and always allowed its ships to be refueled in SL during 1965 and 71 wars. This gathered RAW's attention and desired momentum to train LTTE. The rest is history, but it was SL which made the wrong choice.
     
    amitkriit likes this.
  6. Rage

    Rage DFI TEAM Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2009
    Messages:
    5,381
    Likes Received:
    938
    A proper response to this would warrant an individual analysis for each country.

    Broad strokes: We've done nothing different from any other self-serving state except to project our interests less tactfully, or alternatively less forcibly than warranted. We've known how to interfere- and interfere effectively with respect to the result (bar the Tamil debacle in SriLanka), but we've not known how to interfere effectively with respect to the fallout- the media lambaste we groan under and the erosion of confidence in our state by foreign publiques that sees it as a local hegemon. In a word, we've know how to be good or bad, but to quote that refrain from the Florentian statesman who revolutionized politics five centuries ago, "men rarely know when to be completely good or completely bad, with the result that they often vacillate somewhere in between, achieving nothing in the process". Ofcourse, part of that blame owes itself to our political system and our hebetudinous bureaucracy, that strives to accommodate, rather than antagonize, placate rather than vilify. We see it even now, when the Home Ministry makes statements to pacify, then recalcitrates on its statements when all is done with. In the end, we must achieve some equilibrium between our interests and our compunctions, with the result that that equilibrium is often less amenable than desired, and the political fallout more cantankerous.
     
    Last edited: Mar 28, 2010
  7. sob

    sob Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    May 4, 2009
    Messages:
    6,359
    Likes Received:
    3,661
    Location:
    New Delhi
    On India's relationships with it's neighbours we have to classify them in two groups

    1. Pakistan/Afganistan

    2. Sri Lanka,Nepal,Bangladesh

    Regarding Pakistan the baggage that we carry is very large and only time will tell whether we can have normal relations with them. It is like a tango one step forward followed by two steps backward. There is too much of distrust built into the sysytem. Being on the opposite sides of the camp during the cold war also did not help the issue.

    Regarding our other neighbours IMO it is to a large instance been our insensitivity to their needs. We have alternatively treated them as distinct independent countries and at times we have expected them to be as an extension of our country supporting us blindly. From being heroes to the people of Bangladesh in 1971 and today we aren't their favourite neighbour even. This does not happen overnight. We must have done something for this to happen.

    The only neighbour who has been comfortable to be in our shadow and to whom India has been very sensitive to their needs is Bhutan and the result is for all of us to see.

    Our own socio economic problems have also taken a toll on our relations with our neighbours. But then that is the job of our leaders, how to reconcile domestic compulsions with the needs of international relations.
     
  8. bengalraider

    bengalraider DFI Technocrat Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2009
    Messages:
    3,617
    Likes Received:
    2,013
    Location:
    in a fast food joint next to the imperial shipyard

    I am not condoning the atrocities commited on tamils by the Lankans , neither am i ignoring them.however what i am alluding to is the high-handedness and stubborness of the Tamil poiliticos to discuss the issue and come out with a solution that would be mutually beneficial both to the Sinhalese and the Tamils. The Sri-lankan civil war was fought to get equality and autonomy for the Tamils. The Indian government was initally the peace-broker in Sri Lanka with significant presence whithin the Tamil movement via the TELO, the Violence unleashed by the LTTE changed all that. from a policy of active engagement fro Sri lankan Tamils in the early 80's we went into stoic silence in the years after. The domestic Tamil politics whithin india became more and more Pro-independence EELAM and separated from the National Indian goal of achieving equality and limited autonomy for the Tamils of Sri Lanka; this caused a political rift and led to indian disengagement from the entire affair. We created the Vacuum that the Chinese and pakistanis filled ;from the close relations between Mrs Indira gandhi and Mrs Bandaranaike we went to a state where talking to the Lankans would lead to domestic political strife, from a state where in the 50's Sri lanka supported an Indian security umbrella for the IOR to a state where the chinese are building a"pearl" in hamanbatota" , When we should have talked to the Lankans and brokered a peace we looked the other way and brokered a war.When we should have followed a policy of active engagement we disengaged because the Tamil parties in india looked at Sri Lanka as a "all or nothing" situation. In not compromising with our goals we lost them completely when we could have fostered a lasting relationship with an autonomous EELAM and a peaceful Sri Lanka we looked away what did we gain ?, what did the Sri Lankan Tamils gain?. We only lost due to domestic politics even the people(read Sri lankan tamils) these politicos claimed to be supporting lost everything due to their high-handedness, If Millions of Tamils live in squalid camps today i hold Indian Tamils politicios as responsible if not more than then Sri Lankans.

    Also RAW for the record was founded in september 1968 in the wake of the 62 & 65 wars. The sinhala-Tamil conflict has been going on for as long as one can remember ;the major injustices happened in 1948 with the "Ceylon Citizenship act of 1948 which was followed up by the declaration that sinhala was to be the only official language in 1956.
     
  9. johnee

    johnee Elite Member Elite Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2009
    Messages:
    3,474
    Likes Received:
    466
    A smaller or a less powerful country would always be uncomfortable with a bigger or more powerful country. If a country is both big and powerful then the levels of uncomfortability rise. If that country happens to be neighbour, then it gives rise to insecurity. The smaller country is always in fear of the bigger country, its because of the helplessness which it feels. There are two ways of dealing with this aspect by the bigger nation. One is to try and appease the smaller countries by trying to take them on board. The second approach is to simply understand that it is a natural dominant partner and hence behave that way. While the first approach temporarily cools off some fears, mostly the smaller nation will keep demanding more concessions, ultimately the root of their insecurity is the power and size of the other nation and their fear will be erased only if the other country's size or power or both are reduced. The bigger nation obviously cant afford it. So, the only approach is the second approach that of taking up the natural dominant role that its size and power warrant. This dominant approach bring two aspects to it. One is responsibility and two is accountability. The bigger nation must understand it is responsible for smaller nation as well. It must guarantee some privileges to it and make sure that smaller nation's rights are protected from the third country. The accountability involves punishing the smaller state if it steps out of line. In short, the bigger nation would have to deal with the smaller nation as if it were a vassal state. That is the natural state of affairs.
     
    maomao likes this.
  10. threadbrowser

    threadbrowser Regular Member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2009
    Messages:
    84
    Likes Received:
    2
    Johnee the logic of your second alternative is exactly why our smaller neighbours cozy up to China. Nobody likes being dictated to by the regional big boy, so naturally you play them off against another bigger power. It makes good geopolitical sense.
    China long term seeks to usurp the US's position as global hegemon. An important intermediate step is to first become the regional hegemon. Their only serious opposition is India, so they are using the least expensive method of keeping us busy by supporting pakistan and helping those other small nations around us.
    It is a sound strategy which is almost impossible to counter.
     
  11. ajtr

    ajtr Veteran Member Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2009
    Messages:
    12,038
    Likes Received:
    715
    India in a “ring of fire”

     
  12. ajtr

    ajtr Veteran Member Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2009
    Messages:
    12,038
    Likes Received:
    715
    Indian neighbours burning!!!

    [​IMG]

     
  13. ajtr

    ajtr Veteran Member Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2009
    Messages:
    12,038
    Likes Received:
    715
    Posting here two papers to find out why china is successful in our neighbourhood compared to us.

    China’s Influence in India’s Neighbourhood-1



    China’s Influence in India’s Neighbourhood–Part II

     
    amoy likes this.
  14. Energon

    Energon DFI stars Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2009
    Messages:
    1,199
    Likes Received:
    760
    Many interesting points have been addressed here so I won't repeat them.

    A few things... starting with the sheer inability to handle matters gracefully especially when empowered. This ranges from the poor treatment of lesser powers or outright hegemonic belligerence. India wants to be regarded as a "rising power" but also wants to retain the liberty to engage in petty 3rd world behavior. Schizophrenic and self contradictory philosophies clearly hold good in Indian life, but they do not transfer to the international platform.

    The unwarranted moral high handedness is another factor that is detrimental to India on the global forum. I honestly do not know what fuels this ludicrous self aggrandizing behavior. As the Chinese have clearly shown, common sense, humility and introspective diligence goes a long way.

    Given the empirical economic and geopolitical rise of India, it is time its establishment develop leadership skills to match their new found status, and the first step would be to stop inflating the magnitude of their rise for the sake of self aggrandizement. The entire world (or at least the developed world with substantial Indian diaspora) knows that India's growth has been fueled by the industriousness of its people, not the clairvoyance or the superhuman achievements of its government.

    Nonetheless, the point is that unless India matures to become a benevolent leader it will always be bogged down by countless issues. It is entirely possible to fix this and at least pacify SL, Bangladesh, Nepal, Bhutan and other outliers in the short term.

    ** I don't think the outcome with Pakistan would have or will be any different, mostly because their self inflicted wounds preceded those of their Indian counterparts.
     
  15. mehwish92

    mehwish92 Founding Member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2009
    Messages:
    362
    Likes Received:
    61
    Conflicts are never one-sided. If India is at fault, so are its neighbours.

    Sri Lanka's atrocities against its Tamil population would naturally evoke a strong response from India's large Tamil population. Sri Lanka must understand that. However, India did wrong by funding the LTTE, in my opinion.

    Bangladesh is a safe haven for many anti-India terrorists. However, recently the Bangladeshi government seems to be cracking down on these groups.

    Pakistan, has done several things to harm India. The terror attacks, fake currency, supporting insurgencies, invasions, etc. etc. It has been doing this since the country was created.

    Nepal, I do not know too much about, other than the fact that Nepal believes that India interferes in their domestic affairs too often, leading to instability. But again, Nepal is one of the gateways used by terrorists to attack India. Recently a Nepali prince (I believe) was found to be involved in the fake currency racket, if I am not mistaken.
     
  16. johnee

    johnee Elite Member Elite Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2009
    Messages:
    3,474
    Likes Received:
    466
    Nobody like to be dictated by a country that will not look at your welfare when you need them. India does use its power to armtwist these powers once in a while. Obviously, there are situations that warrant such a behaviour. But at other times, India tries to deal with them as if they are our equals. This is the root of the problem. India cannot escape its responsibility towards this neighbourhood. The neighbourhood is in flames, the posts by ajtr are good indicator. But is it not India's fault that the neighbourhood is in fire? How did India allow this neighbourhood to become such a mess. India must take the onus upon itself to cleanse this mess and make sure that these nations and their people can look towards a bright future. Invest in these nations, build infrastructure, and help people on the ground. But there is a flip side to it as well, if and when some country or individual goes anti-india, then the retribution must also be swift and severe.
    The problem with Indian policy is that it is not consistent and does not define the red lines clearly. It does not give any rewards to good behaviour and does not punish bad behavior. Nepal was neglected until China backed maoists came to power, suddenly India became active, obviously such a policy attracts the ire of locals. We need to be constantly involved in all these smaller nations and direct them towards the goals that we want them to go. It will have a negative reaction from initially, but if our policy is consistent then they will accept the system. People accept any system that is clearly defined and is consistent. People reject system which is reactionary.
     
  17. no smoking

    no smoking Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2009
    Messages:
    3,154
    Likes Received:
    415
    But now it is India wants to be the power, not your neighbours. It is impossible for a country to be a power with no strong supporty from any of its neighbours. So, the ball is in your court.

    Yes, that is true. But, did india gov do anything to explain to Sri Lanka. Any conflict between groups of people is all for interest. As a result, the relevant policy is also based on group interest. The conflct is not your responsibility, but if you want one side to give its interest, then it is your responsibility to convince them that their compromise will be rewarded somehow.

    If you want your neighours do something for you, you must pay for it.

    Well, considering the history between your two, the blame should be put on both sides. The problem is no one want to back off. Especially for india, you are enjoying all the advantages in this conflict, there is no reason for india to back off. So, there is nothing wrong with india on this problem.


    Still, the same question: does india intend to pay the bill? And how much?
     
  18. A.V.

    A.V. New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2009
    Messages:
    6,503
    Likes Received:
    1,106
    Location:
    Moscow, russia
    ------------- Time Frame Bumped ------------------------------
     
  19. KS

    KS Bye bye DFI Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2010
    Messages:
    8,008
    Likes Received:
    5,716
    Location:
    irrelevant
    The "wrong" was India was never strong with its neighbors and let them know who is the boss of the region.
     
  20. Tianshan

    Tianshan Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2011
    Messages:
    675
    Likes Received:
    249
    i don't know about the others, but i think the sino-india rivalry was inevitable

    two giant countries growing fast in a world with not many resources
     
  21. amitkriit

    amitkriit Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2009
    Messages:
    2,465
    Likes Received:
    1,923
    Location:
    La La Land
    Sri Lanka: Described India as "the Shark in Indian Ocean" and tried to build ties with USA, Pakistan. In 1965 and 1971 wars Sri Lanka supported Pakistan logistically. Main reason behind the support for LTTE was that Sri Lanka was planning to let USA build a naval base in North, which was effectively negated by the insurgency in the tamil dominated area. Indian support to LTTE was based on national interest, once the cold war was over, India changed her stance leading to the killing of Rajiv Gandhi.

    Pakistan: If they don't hate us, they will not be able to exist as a nation.

    Bangladesh: Indo-Bangla ties are generally good, water sharing and immigrant issues are the major irritants. Bangladesh is a moderate nation and India has a huge cultural influence over the country.

    Maldives: Two nations have maintained excellent ties since "operation cactus" in 1988.

    Bhutan: Indo-Bhutan relations are very close, but Bhutan has kept itself distant from Tibet issue to ensure peace on it's Northern frontier.

    Nepal: Nepal looks at India as a hegemonic force. For them India is a necessary evil. India wields influence in the power center of Nepal. Indian Ambassador to Nepal is sarcastically called the "Viceroy of Nepal". Can't live with us, can't live without us, that's the case with Nepal.

    China: Rivalry between India and China is inevitable, both giants are competing with each other for economic and Geo-political influence. Indians look at China with envy when it comes to economic development. Healthy rivalry between the two nations is not such a bad thing, provided we don't let foreign forces to take benefit from the situation.

    Myanmar: Myanmar is sitting on gold thanks to Indo-China rivalry, they are trying to exploit the situation for self-interest.
     
    Param and nitesh like this.

Share This Page