Maldives : Why is our Foreign Policy so spineless?

[SrNair]

@Abingdonboy . I agree with you for a certain extent .But look at the current govts effort .PM visited Nepal two times within this 9 months.Contribution of UPA policy .

We should nt forget the limitation of Indian intel services Neither they are CIA nor Mossad .We dont have any heavy hitters in Middle East .A 9 month time is not enough for set up such a network.
And labourses and nurses cases was very different .We have managed to know the abduction of laboures only after the incident .But nurses were contacted by our medias and govt even before a possible abduction.
In fact we had an idea and actionable intel about their position ,locations etc.A military intervention with our SF would be a disaster due to the same reason.That we dont have any network in there.So NSA contacted Qatar ,Saudi and Iraq .Digged up the datas of ISIS commanders ,most of them were top end officers in Saddam Army .And Indianofficers had good relation them.Through that way we had managed to contact one of those in that area and extractiiob was successful.
At one time ISIS commander that helped them orderd the female nurses to pin their hair completely to avoid the doubts in check points .So you can understand the 'diplomacy' worked in there .

And in laboures cases Qatar is our only help .

Can't keep blaming "spineless" UPA, the NDA/BJP/current GoI have been in power for more than 9 months now, they have the to take ownership of India's foriegn policy failures just like they don't hesitate to do for India's foriegn policy successes.

For all the hype about Modi's visits to Seychelles, Sri Lanka, Fiji, Aus etc etc let's not forget about the 40 Indian labourers STILL in the custody of ISIS who everyone seems to have forgetten about once Doval secured the release of the nurses.

Who told you about the force in here ?
Force is our last option .And we dont need that .Far more effective options is in there.

This is exactly why everyone hates India.



Diplomacy doesn't work that way. It isn't a lever that requires only more force.

 

[IND151]

It should indeed get attention, and detailed attention. Concern? Why? It is an open secret that China is building the foundation for an intrusion into the Indian Ocean, after it has, it hopes, overcome all meaningful resistance in the South China Sea, and has some claims to parity in the proximate Pacific Ocean. This cannot be overcome by sudden, melodramatic moves, as are being proposed in some concerns, but by quiet, sustained and objective economic and commercial diplomacy, and by a steady, rather than a sudden increase in maritime presence.

The situation is asymmetric. India does not need shore stations and facilities and footprint in the near Indian Ocean. China does; China therefore needs to pay for it, on a scale which beggars whatever India needs to do in response. What is more dangerous is the increasing Islamisation that may - may - take place due to the ISIS and its growth, and which may well be encouraged by Pakistan in its suicidal project of competing on terms with parity in the region with India. We may expect not merely religious hysteria; we may also expect Pakistan to acquire, cheap and at cut-rates, missile craft and long-range non-nuclear submarines from Chinese shipyards.

Strategic responses that are required are fairly clear. They do not need to be spelt out and it is obvious that we will get to see a fraction of what is actually being done, and that is how it ought to be.

Concern? No, just alertness and attention, and action taken in time, well ahead of any contingency, anticipating every adventure.

Agreed................

cheap and at cut-rates, missile craft and long-range non-nuclear submarines from Chinese shipyards

Submarines are more likely.

BTW do you believe wrt latest Shaheen III test there is more than what meets the eye?

 

[Joe Shearer]

This is exactly why everyone hates India.



Diplomacy doesn't work that way. It isn't a lever that requires only more force.

Everyone?

Agreed................



Submarines are more likely.

BTW do you believe wrt latest Shaheen III test there is more than what meets the eye?

Yes.

It was meaningless except in one context.

 

[IND151]

Everyone?



Yes.

It was meaningless except in one context.

which one?

 

[rajnikant]

I sympathise with your feelings, but don't agree with the way you have managed to express them.

First of all, before anything else, we should get rid of the fallacy that a country's foreign policy can be embarrassed! What does that mean? Is our foreign policy conducted on the lines of a petty landholder's disputes with his neighbours, with twirlings of moustaches, and cavalier shoulderings of shotguns, with a little swaggering walk in the marketplace in the presence of the opposing faction, with loud and derisive laughter never aimed at anyone but equally strongly and clearly intended to offend? Are these the symbols and outward forms of our execution of the national policy of a country of over a billion people? Or are we to look for impact on the ground, long-term, not in an incident here and a riot there, but achievement of our objectives with as little demonstration and show and bombast possible?

By no means should we wait and watch. Instead, we have to work relentlessly, now and in easier times alike, to keep the forces of secular democracy vitalised and confident, and to ensure that Islamism does not take hold. Not an easy task in a Muslim country, and not a task to be achieved with public display, which will precisely achieve the opposite of what we want.

As far as our other neighbours are concerned, nothing can be more calculated to enrage and upset them than any suggestion that one of them, the Maldives, in this case, should be dealt with harshly in order to serve as an example for the others. That will put the fat in the fire; Nepal, and Sri Lanka, and Bangladesh, will each in its own way look for help. And help in each of these cases is readily forthcoming, not in terms of massive military intervention or defence treaties, but in terms of a counter-campaign of economic and military aid which we can never hope to match in the next fifty years.

The last thing we need in the circumstances is bully-boy tactics; there are bigger boys in the yard.

We do have a foothold in the country; where did the imprisoned ex-President go first of all when threatened? To the Indian Embassy, where he stayed until the government of India itself intervened and persuaded him to face his own judicial system. It is precisely this foothold, and what it represents, that we need to strengthen, not chaos and anarchy and a degeneration of the constitutional system and the rule of law. The democrats are on our side, the autocrats are opposed to us.

Which points to another ironic lesson. Our best interests abroad lie in the opposite direction from the antics that we have sadly witnessed, and continue to witness, with greater and greater frequency, in our own country. India, abroad, means democracy and the rule of law; India, at home, sees both democracy and the rule of law under direct and indirect attack.

Coming to a 'blowback' from the developments in Sri Lanka, what was expected? That the Chinese, in their turn, should sit dumbfounded and watch our coup d'etat without making a counter-move? They made their counter-move, which restored some (not all) of their previous position, and now it is for us to build on our gains and move forward. There is no need to mingle this set of events with those on the Maldives; the situations are quite different.

What, above all else, we need to avoid is a sudden, jerky reaction, a knee-jerk; patient diplomacy and long-term plans and actions are the only sound foundations.

Thank you Sir, a very well written answer to my query.
I have few doubts though, I can't write like you but, it will be simple :
1 I know we can't flex muscle, I didn't meant embarrassment like that, rather in terms of in-efficiency of our diplomats to assess and report back in advance so that some thing (it can be anything even some military action if thought out well) can be done about it. Do we have capability in that terms.

2 Why we were not even able to help out the deposed President?
3 I agree with you, on long term policies, but a long term policy should not ignore or can't ignore short term gains ( I don't know what should I call It).
4 I dint understood the above part in bold.
5 Regarding there 'blowback' part, why did not we estimated it then and there and weighed the advantages or may be we have done it, that is why no knee-jerk (don't know whether cancelling Modi's trip was knee-jerk or not any idea? ) reaction till now regarding Maldives from our MEA.

I know we have to tread a middle path, as we are neither as of now a Industrial/economic or military power, but we have to look out for our interest and that too very shrewdly.

Thanks for bearing

 

[lasttry]

you guys sound like kids playing doctor patient, and trying to pass of as intellectuals discussing geopolitics.

China will build a naval base in Maldives, right in India's face? China has the balls to do that? Stop kidding yourself dude. Thats openly threatening war between the two biggest populations in the world.

Its embarrassing I have to even elaborate. Enjoy your blissful ignorance.

 

[GR!FF!N]

One of the key flaw of India is,it just can't shut mouth of Indian Media which knows nothing about how these kind of game gets played and simply makes hype about these things..

Of Course,China is making inroads towards Indian Ocean.but its nothing new.before,it was USA,Britain and other powers which jostled to control it,either via politically or militarily,and India played its own card too.Now its China's turn.but think about it,what kind of moves they can make....

1.Economically they can influence these small island countries,either providing them Aid,Money,Weapons or Infrastructure.

2.they can influence political parties and prominent political figures of a country.

3.They can make some good diplomatic inroads that enables them some kind of military presence there.

we simply can't stop them to do these,but,we can play our own game which can nullifies these threats.And we played it quite well since our birth.only when some blunder occurs,people see this kind of things,but else,every moment,we're playing these games.

about Nasheed,he's nothing but a pawn of this game.during his tenure,he soured his relationship with India.only when his @$$ was on fire,he tried to mend relationship with India...

read this article....


The social media is full of messages from Maldivians conveying their anger and desperation over how India has thus far tackled the explosive political situation in Maldives. Many Maldivians have lampooned India for its softpower diplomacy approach and throwing the Indian Ocean to crocodiles. No prizes for guessing which foreign power is being described as a "crocodile".

Ahmed Naseem, who was the foreign minister of Maldives during Nasheed’s presidency, told this writer in an interview in the Sri Lankan capital that India had done and is still doing quite a lot in resolving the Maldivian political tangle.

Naseem went to the extent of saying that if Nasheed was alive today in prison it was solely because of India’s pro-active diplomacy behind the scenes.


Mohamed Nasheed's arrest: How India tackled the explosive political situation in Maldives - Firstpost

I sense India is playing this game beautifully.we'll enter into scene right when Maldivians will scream for our assistance,and will wish "Death to the Crocodiles".Otherwise,Crocodiles will say,India is intervening into internal politics of a small country and bullying.

 

[my2cents]

As far as our other neighbours are concerned, nothing can be more calculated to enrage and upset them than any suggestion that one of them, the Maldives, in this case, should be dealt with harshly in order to serve as an example for the others. That will put the fat in the fire; Nepal, and Sri Lanka, and Bangladesh, will each in its own way look for help. And help in each of these cases is readily forthcoming, not in terms of massive military intervention or defence treaties, but in terms of a counter-campaign of economic and military aid which we can never hope to match in the next fifty years.

But we did interfere in Maldives in 1988 and thwarted the coup d'état from mercenaries based in Sri Lanka. It was at the request from then President Mr. Gayoom we sent our army. Our efforts were appreciated by all major power including UK and USA.

So, how is it any different now??

I am not advocating interference but playing devils advocate.

What, above all else, we need to avoid is a sudden, jerky reaction, a knee-jerk; patient diplomacy and long-term plans and actions are the only sound foundations.

We have legitimate grievances with them and our investments are at risk. They threw away the biggest airport contract which they gave to an Indian company. what are the chances that they will recoup their investments from the present government?

The state of Maldives is diving into one crises after the other and I see Chinese hand in it.

 

[Genesis]

We have legitimate grievances with them and our investments are at risk. They threw away the biggest airport contract which they gave to an Indian company. what are the chances that they will recoup their investments from the present government?

The state of Maldives is diving into one crises after the other and I see Chinese hand in it.

You don't see the irony in this? lol

 

[my2cents]

You don't see the irony in this? lol

I see irony, parody, heartburn and a lot of different emotions. LOL

 

[Genesis]

I see irony, parody, heartburn and a lot of different emotions. LOL

I applaud you for not using butthurt, maybe has something to do with your Americanness, but that insult just feels weird.

 

[TheTruth]

you guys sound like kids playing doctor patient, and trying to pass of as intellectuals discussing geopolitics.

China will build a naval base in Maldives, right in India's face? China has the balls to do that? Stop kidding yourself dude. Thats openly threatening war between the two biggest populations in the world.

Its embarrassing I have to even elaborate. Enjoy your blissful ignorance.

China doesn't give a shit how tough you think you are. They're more worried about 3rd countries suffering some paranoid Indian terrorist attack.

 

[Joe Shearer]

which one?

:-D

Thank you Sir, a very well written answer to my query.
I have few doubts though, I can't write like you but, it will be simple :
1 I know we can't flex muscle, I didn't meant embarrassment like that, rather in terms of in-efficiency of our diplomats to assess and report back in advance so that some thing (it can be anything even some military action if thought out well) can be done about it. Do we have capability in that terms.

It is not at all clear that diplomats of any country could have done much in the situation. Could anybody have predicted that the present administration would take such drastic action, and with such vindictive determination?

Secondly, there is this incredible belief among some of us that military action is possible by India, at her own wish and irrespective of the wishes of the government of the neighboring country concerned. Such a thing is impossible; we are talking of an invasion, and the resultant reaction of the world can only be imagined.

2 Why we were not even able to help out the deposed President?

How? Their courts decided that he was guilty as charged, sentenced him and he was jailed. What do you expect India to do? Would you hand over to Pakistan Afzal Guru just because Pakistani policy would have liked to have positioned that country as his supporter and demanded his release?

3 I agree with you, on long term policies, but a long term policy should not ignore or can't ignore short term gains ( I don't know what should I call It).

There is no visible short-term gain as I see it. Do let us discuss it.

4 I dint understood the above part in bold.

Which part in bold were you referring to?

5 Regarding there 'blowback' part, why did not we estimated it then and there and weighed the advantages or may be we have done it, that is why no knee-jerk (don't know whether cancelling Modi's trip was knee-jerk or not any idea? ) reaction till now regarding Maldives from our MEA.

Situations develop. How they look in the month of January and how they look in the month of March might be radically different. It is inherent in good diplomatic practice to flex whenever necessary.

I know we have to tread a middle path, as we are neither as of now a Industrial/economic or military power, but we have to look out for our interest and that too very shrewdly.

Thanks for bearing

Please see my interleaved answers above.

But we did interfere in Maldives in 1988 and thwarted the coup d'état from mercenaries based in Sri Lanka. It was at the request from then President Mr. Gayoom we sent our army. Our efforts were appreciated by all major power including UK and USA.

So, how is it any different now??

I am not advocating interference but playing devils advocate.

There is an enormous difference between offering military aid to the duly constituted government of a country, and sending in troops against the wishes of the sovereign nation. It is not interference, it is war.

We have legitimate grievances with them and our investments are at risk. They threw away the biggest airport contract which they gave to an Indian company. what are the chances that they will recoup their investments from the present government?

And so? We invade?

The state of Maldives is diving into one crises after the other and I see Chinese hand in it.

Please see my interleaved answers.

 

[rubyjackass]

Fear mongers on the loose.
Nice to see India has its own neocons. Superpower we will be soon.

What security can Indian government give to Nasheed? It is so spineless that Indian government did not meet the delegation which had come to India from Maldives on behalf of Nasheed. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs did not have the guts enough even listen to the plea of the delegation. It is scared that the Government of Maldives would get upset over the issue. India and Maldives! Is there any comparison?

It is called not interfering in a different country's internal affairs. When things go too bad, like any threat to Nasheed's life, India can take concrete steps. Otherwise it doesn't make sense. Nasheed may be a counter to Islamists in Maldives, but he was stupid in his own right earlier. Nothing for India to do right now there. This Vaidik guy sounds like an tutor to GoI, 'trust'ing Jaishankar with his job and calling spineless the entire foreign ministry, when no less than Modi himself is leading the ministry de-facto.

 

[livingdead]

This is exactly why everyone hates India.



Diplomacy doesn't work that way. It isn't a lever that requires only more force.

what? everyone hates India because some Indian fanboy had a fantasy? or because govt of India acted that way?
on topic: govt of India knows how to respond in a balanced way.. Nasheed is not exactly our man in maldives but we did save his as*.. even their own party minister agrees...
And I doubt he will be in jail for 13 years, there will be pressure from many countries including USA.