The 1st IISS-Citi India Global Forum
India as a Rising Great Power:
Challenges and Opportunities
New Delhi, 18–20 April 2008
Third Plenary Session:
India’s Defence Diplomacy Q&A
Admiral Sureesh Mehta
Chairman, Chiefs of Staff Committee and Chief of Naval Staff, India
Admiral (Retd) Dennis C Blair, USN
Omar Bradley Chair of Strategic Leadership, US Army War College and Dickinson College; Former PACOM Commander,US
Ichita Yamamoto
Ranking member, Committee on Foreign Affairs and Defense, House of Councillors; Former State Secretary for Foreign Affairs, Japan
Questions and Answers
(Provisional transcript)
Dr John Chipman
Thank you very much. It was perhaps inevitable that two of our three speakers would emphasise maritime security, but not inevitable that all three would. For those of you who are interested in the linkages between economics and defence, it might be worth pointing out that, as a result of the increased cooperation in the Malacca Straits, between the US, Malaysia, Indonesia, Singapore, and indeed from time to time, other states, Lloyds Insurance premiums for ships passing through the Malacca Straits have dramatically reduced. So the links between important defence diplomacy, inspiring cooperation and the economic wellbeing of the globalised world in which we live are indeed direct.
Sheikh Mohammed Bin Essa
I have a question for Admiral Mehta. Earlier today we heard undercurrents in questions from the floor about India’s role of the Navy and how assertive it should be with regards to foreign policy. I think it is inevitable, but can you put a timeframe as to how soon India will start to use its Navy as a foreign policy tool? We have just started seeing Indian ships in the Gulf, from several months ago. Will this likely increase significantly over the coming months or will it take a longer time period?
Admiral Sureesh Mehta
We have been doing this for a long time. It is not something new. The outward movement of ships for what we used to call ‘goodwill missions’ has been ongoing for many years. Unfortunately the number of ships that we had – even the ones with the longer reach – was somewhat limited. In the more recent past, we have acquired larger platforms which are capable of reaching out much more. More than that is that the rising economic status of India has automatically brought about the need for greater stress on the development of maritime forces and the need for us to stretch out a little more to extend our hand of friendship to countries a little further away. This recent upsurge will certainly continue. The intention is that there will be cooperative engagement with everyone to ensure peace and stability in the region so that economic development can take place for the betterment of human kind.
Sanjay Nayar
My question is for Mr Yamamoto. I must compliment you on a very frank exposition of the security position as you see it. In view of the exponential increase in Chinese military power, should there be a weakening of US interests in the future? How would that affect the Japanese military posture, and that includes the nuclear field also?
Xiaojun Heng
My question is for Mr Yamamoto. I would like to make three brief short statements before I ask the question. Firstly, I think our world is changing very fast. Economic globalisation, regional economic migration and the information age have brought us much closer, and the countries have become much more interdependent on each other. Sometimes, however, our thinking, behind the reality of today’s world, is behind the times.
Before I came here, I read a book titled The India-China Relationship, in which there is an article written by Professor Henry Harding from George Washington University, who is a China expert. He explained a lot about the strategic triangle. My question is: according to the theory of realism in international relations there is always a balance of power, the balance and the counterbalance, military capability, and we can find a lot of examples in history. Do you think that this kind of thing is conducive to a win-win result? Personally I do not believe in this kind of balance of power. In today’s world where we have experienced a lot of changes, and considering the reality of today’s world, I think we need to consider the world in a linear description.
For example, there are two trends: one trend is looking forward to the future, which is represented by cooperation, development, common prosperity, and peace. If we look behind to the past, maybe that is conflict, hostility and confrontational rule. Which one do we prefer? I believe in the theory of constructivism: if he is not an enemy, but we try to make him an enemy, finally he will turn out to be an enemy. That is not very good in today’s world.
Finally, very often it is easy to accuse other countries of shortcomings and mistakes, but it is not easy to see one’s own mistakes. I remember one of the speakers in the morning session mentioned that we always try to be better than yesterday and you slowly but surely should see the step-by-step improvements, but we cannot be too impatient.
My final question for Mr Yamamoto is: according to your opinion of this kind of balance and counterbalance, and the strategic triangular relationship, do you think that this is very conducive to finally establishing a win-win result between countries?
Major General (Retd) Dipankar Banerjee, Director and Head, Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies (IPCS)
My question is to Admiral Blair, who talks of Indo-US cooperation, from the practice ground to Africa and Afghanistan. As you are aware, any operation far beyond the national frontier is bound to be unpopular at home, and evoke a hostile reaction and unethical counterattack from the area of operations. As India is already upset with multifarious operational problems on the ground, do you really feel that both the US and India will benefit in the long run? The present part of border operations, where both the US and Pakistan are operating, do you have any message on lessons that have been learned from there?
Air Marshal (Retd) Tej Mohan Asthana, Former Chief of Strategic Forces Command, New Delhi
I want to follow up on the question that Admiral Prakash asked in the morning. Since this is the session of India’s defence diplomacy I want to start by saying take the example of what happened in the Kargil war. The defence forces were interacting with the CCS, of which the Minister of External Affairs was also a member, on a daily basis. The net result was that we restricted ourselves to the international boundary, and the restraint that this country operated during that particular operation has been admired by the entire international community.
In 2001 there was a paradigm shift in the defence cooperation levels that our country has now entered into. Most important defence cooperation manoeuvres that have taken place have been post 2001. I would like to know from the present chairmen and chiefs of staff whether there is any established mechanism where there is a joint consultation between the Ministry of External Affairs, the MOD and the Chiefs of Staff Committee, and do they meet at regular intervals to review their own defence policy? If not, it is high time we established one, and established what regular intervals we should meet at.
Ichita Yamamoto
Let me answer the first question. I do not really believe the lies of China in this specific region will weaken the incentive of the US to get involved in the Asia Pacific region. Since China has been growing its power in this region, the US will play a more important role in this region. I am not concerned about that. Your second question is that if Japan will change its defence policy or not. Japan will never, ever choose the nuclear option. We will never, ever become a nuclear state. It is very short, but that is my answer.
We are not going to accuse China. Japan is not intending to offend your country or accuse China of being too strong. We would like to see that China will take a path of becoming a responsible superpower in this region. I think ASEAN countries as well as India have an apprehension about the future of China, because of the lack of transparency and democracy in your nation. I really hope that you can somehow progress political reform so that everybody can be quite easy about the future of your country.
You mentioned that it would be very difficult in the real world to come up with a win-win situation. I am a member of the parliament, I am a politician, so I firmly believe that we can constitute the first successful model in the Asia Pacific region. From Japan’s standpoint, also a big power in Asia, I firmly believe that I can forge a win-win situation with China.
Admiral (Retd) Dennis Blair
On the narrow question of national support within democracies like the US and India for use of military force overseas, I think that Americans and Indians understand that our personal and national security is bound up in what happens in very distant regions. When properly explained, justified and vigorously pursued, action to deal with threats at an early stage will be strongly supported. On the larger question, it is interesting to me, and I am very encouraged at the difference in attitude between those in the audience and what I have heard from those on the podium. In the audience I heard things like balance of power, threat, making enemies, old think. From the podium so far this morning I have been hearing win-win, common goals, prosperity, stability, opportunity. So I think maybe in this one case those in front are leading the transformation rather than trying to get out in front of it.
Admiral Sureesh Mehta
There is no doubt about the fact that as a nation we have sometimes lacked strategic thinking, long-term planning policymaking. It has been the case earlier, but a certain amount of transformation is now taking place. There is much more emphasis on doctrinal issues on organisational issues. At the same time it would not be correct to agree with you that the existing institutions are perhaps lacking far too much in the atmosphere in which they need to operate. There have been many correctives applied from Kargil to now, there are adequate fora of interaction available between inter-administrative groups and, of course, within the Ministry of Defence and the Security Committee, which works at the times that it is required. There could be more, but we are moving in that direction, and fairly soon there will be a fairly organised structure that will be available.
Dr John Chipman
Admiral Mehta and fellow panellists, thank you very much indeed. Last night I boldly said that the IISS was interested in reasoned debate and intellectual provocation. I do not think that we have lacked for either in the 11 presentations and ensuing debate that has been inspired this morning. Thank you very much for your patience and your animation at the same time.
