Showing posts with label SILK CORRIDOR ROUTE. Show all posts
Showing posts with label SILK CORRIDOR ROUTE. Show all posts

Thursday, April 9, 2015

About the Silk Road

Source: https://en.unesco.org/silkroad/about-silk-road






                     About the Silk Road

 
 ( Importance from Indian perspectives:Call this complete region of INDIAN OCEAN as
 "MONSOON COUNTRY"
ie from East African coastline to South China sea Region. Anyone who has travelled very slowly at luxury speed(pace) knows about the strong cultural similarities despite of wide racial dis-similarities. If INDIA does not put its Indian Ocean Policy in its correct Geo perspectives which is in shambles today,we Indians will hand over the compete maritime  AFRO-ASIAN REGION to the Chinese on the platter.- Vasundhra )
 
 
 
About the Silk Roads
 
Introduction

 
Human beings have always moved from place to place and traded with their neighbours, exchanging goods, skills and ideas. Throughout history, Eurasia was criss-crossed with communication routes and paths of trade, which gradually linked up to form what are known today as the Silk Roads; routes across both land and sea, along which silk and many other goods were exchanged between people from across the world. Maritime routes were an important part of this network, linking East and West by sea, and were used for the trade of spices in particular, thus becoming known as the Spice Routes.

 
These vast networks carried more than just merchandise and precious commodities however:

the constant movement and mixing of populations also brought about the transmission of knowledge, ideas, cultures and beliefs, which had a profound impact on the history and civilizations of the Eurasian peoples. Travellers along the Silk Roads were attracted not only by trade but also by the intellectual and cultural exchange that was taking place in cities along the Silk Roads, many of which developed into hubs of culture and learning. Science, arts and literature, as well as crafts and technologies were thus shared and disseminated into societies along the lengths of these routes, and in this way, languages, religions and cultures developed and influenced each other.

 
'Silk Road' is in fact a relatively recent term, and for the majority of their long history, these ancient roads had no particular name. In the mid-nineteenth century, the German geologist, Baron Ferdinand von Richthofen, named the trade and communication network Die Seidenstrasse (the Silk Road), and the term, also used in the plural, continues to stir imaginations with its evocative mystery.


 
 
Silk Production and the Silk Trade
 
Silk is a textile of ancient Chinese origin, woven from the protein fibre produced by the silkworm to make its cocoon, and was developed, according to Chinese tradition, sometime around the year 2,700 BC. Regarded as an extremely high value product, it was reserved for the exclusive usage of the Chinese imperial court for the making of cloths, drapes, banners, and other items of prestige. Its production was kept a fiercely guarded secret within China for some 3,000 years, with imperial decrees sentencing to death anyone who revealed to a foreigner the process of its production. Tombs in the Hubei province dating from the 4th and 3rd centuries BC contain outstanding examples of silk work, including brocade, gauze and embroidered silk, and the first complete silk garments.

 
The Chinese monopoly on silk production however did not mean that the product was restricted to the Chinese Empire – on the contrary, silk was used as a diplomatic gift, and was also traded extensively, first of all with China’s immediate neighbours, and subsequently further afield, becoming one of China’s chief exports under the Han dynasty (206 BC –220 AD). Indeed, Chinese cloths from this period have been found in Egypt, in northern Mongolia, and elsewhere.

 
At some point during the 1st century BC, silk was introduced to the Roman Empire, where it was considered an exotic luxury and became extremely popular, with imperial edicts being issued to control prices. Its popularity continued throughout the Middle Ages, with detailed Byzantine regulations for the manufacture of silk clothes, illustrating its importance as a quintessentially royal fabric and an important source of revenue for the crown. Additionally, the needs of the Byzantine Church for silk garments and hangings were substantial. This luxury item was thus one of the early impetuses in the development of trading routes from Europe to the Far East.

 
Knowledge about silk production was very valuable and, despite the efforts of the Chinese emperor to keep it a closely guarded secret, it did eventually spread beyond China, first to India and Japan, then to the Persian Empire and finally to the west in the 6th century AD. This was described by the historian Procopius, writing in the 6th century:
 
    About the same time [ca. 550] there came from India certain monks; and when they had satisfied Justinian Augustus that the Romans no longer should buy silk from the Persians, they promised the emperor in an interview that they would provide the materials for making silk so that never should the Romans seek business of this kind from their enemy the Persians, or from any other people whatsoever. They said that they were formerly in Serinda, which they call the region frequented by the people of the Indies, and there they learned perfectly the art of making silk. Moreover, to the emperor who plied them with many questions as to whether he might have the secret, the monks replied that certain worms were manufacturers of silk, nature itself forcing them to keep always at work; the worms could certainly not be brought here alive, but they could be grown easily and without difficulty; the eggs of single hatchings are innumerable; as soon as they are laid men cover them with dung and keep them warm for as long as it is necessary so that they produce insects. When they had announced these tidings, led on by liberal promises of the emperor to prove the fact, they returned to India. When they had brought the eggs to Byzantium, the method having been learned, as I have said, they changed them by metamorphosis into worms which feed on the leaves of mulberry. Thus began the art of making silk from that time on in the Roman Empire.

 
 
Beyond Silk; A Diversity of Routes and Cargos
 
However, whilst the silk trade was one of the earliest catalysts for the trade routes across Central Asia, it was only one of a wide range of products that was traded between east and west, and which included textiles, spices, grain, vegetables and fruit, animal hides, tools, wood work, metal work, religious objects, art work, precious stones and much more. Indeed, the Silk Roads became more popular and increasingly well-travelled over the course of the Middle Ages, and were still in use in the 19th century, a testimony not only to their usefulness but also to their flexibility and adaptability to the changing demands of society. Nor did these trading paths follow any one trail – merchants had a wide choice of different routes crossing a variety of regions of Eastern Europe, the Middle East, Central Asia and the Far East, as well as the maritime routes, which transported goods from China and South East Asia through the Indian Ocean to Africa, India and the Near East.

 
These routes developed over time and according to shifting geopolitical contexts throughout history. For example, merchants from the Roman Empire would try to avoid crossing the territory of the Parthians, Rome’s enemies, and therefore took routes to the north, across the Caucasus region and over the Caspian Sea. Similarly, whilst extensive trade took place over the network of rivers that crossed the Central Asian steppes in the early Middle Ages, their water levels rose and fell, and sometimes dried up altogether, and trade routes shifted accordingly.

 
Maritime trade was another extremely important branch of this global trade network. Most famously used for the transportation of spices, the maritime trade routes have also been known as the Spice Roads, supplying markets across the world with cinnamon, pepper, ginger, cloves and nutmeg from the Moluccas islands in Indonesia (known as the Spice Islands), as well as a wide range of other goods. Textiles, woodwork, precious stones, metalwork, incense, timber, and saffron were all traded by the merchants travelling these routes, which stretched over 15,000 kilometres, from the west coast of Japan, past the Chinese coast, through South East Asia, and past India to reach the Middle East and so to the Mediterranean.

 
The history of these maritime routes can be traced back thousands of years, to links between the Arabian Peninsula, Mesopotamia and the Indus Valley Civilization. The early Middle Ages saw an expansion of this network, as sailors from the Arabian Peninsula forged new trading routes across the Arabian Sea and into the Indian Ocean. Indeed, maritime trading links were established between Arabia and China from as early as the 8th century AD. Technological advances in the science of navigation, in astronomy, and also in the techniques of ship building combined to make long-distance sea travel increasingly practical.  Lively coastal cities grew up around the most frequently visited ports along these routes, such as Zanzibar, Alexandria, Muscat, and Goa, and these cities became wealthy centres for the exchange of goods, ideas, languages and beliefs, with large markets and continually changing populations of merchants and sailors.

 
In the late 15th century, the Portuguese explorer, Vasco da Gama, navigated round the Cape of Good Hope, thereby connecting European sailors with these South East Asian maritime routes for the first time and initiating direct European involvement in this trade.  By the 16th and 17th centuries, these routes and their lucrative trade had become subject of fierce rivalries between the Portuguese, Dutch, and British. The conquest of ports along the maritime routes brought both wealth and security, as they effectively governed the passage of maritime trade and also allowed ruling powers to claim monopolies on these exotic and highly sought-after goods, as well as gathering the substantial taxes levied on merchant vessels.



The map above illustrates the great variety of routes that were available to merchants bearing a wide range of goods and travelling from different parts of the world, by both land and sea. Most often, individual merchant caravans would cover specific sections of the routes, pausing to rest and replenish supplies, or stopping altogether and selling on their cargos at points throughout the length of the roads, leading to the growth of lively trading cities and ports. The Silk Roads were dynamic and porous; goods were traded with local populations throughout, and local products were added into merchants’ cargos. This process enriched not only the merchants’ material wealth and the variety of their cargos, but also allowed for exchanges of culture, language and ideas to take place along the Silk Roads.

 
 
Routes of Dialogue
 
Perhaps the most lasting legacy of the Silk Roads has been their role in bringing cultures and peoples in contact with each other, and facilitating exchange between them. On a practical level, merchants had to learn the languages and customs of the countries they travelled through, in order to negotiate successfully. Cultural interaction was a vital aspect of material exchange. Moreover, many travellers ventured onto the Silk Roads in order to partake in this process of intellectual and cultural exchange that was taking place in cities along the routes. Knowledge about science, arts and literature, as well as crafts and technologies was shared across the Silk Roads, and in this way, languages, religions and cultures developed and influenced each other. One of the most famous technical advances to have been propagated worldwide by the Silk Roads was the technique of making paper, as well as the development of printing press technology. Similarly, irrigation systems across Central Asia share features that were spread by travellers who not only carried their own cultural knowledge, but also absorbed that of the societies in which they found themselves.

 
Indeed, the man who is often credited with founding the Silk Roads by opening up the first route from China to the West in the 2nd century BC, General Zhang Qian,   {http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zhang_Qian} was on a diplomatic mission rather than a trading expedition. Sent to the West in 139 BC by the Han Emperor Wudi to ensure alliances against the Xiongnu, the hereditary enemies of the Chinese, Zhang Qian was captured and imprisoned by them. Thirteen years later he escaped and made his way back to China. Pleased with the wealth of detail and accuracy of his reports, the emperor sent Zhang Qian on another mission in 119 BC to visit several neighbouring peoples, establishing early routes from China to Central Asia.


 
Religion and a quest for knowledge were further inspirations to travel along these routes. Buddhist monks from China made pilgrimages to India to bring back sacred texts, and their travel diaries are an extraordinary source of information. The diary of Xuan Zang (whose 25-year journal lasted from 629 to 654 AD) not only has an enormous historical value, but also inspired a comic novel in the sixteenth century, the 'Pilgrimage to the West', which has become one of the great Chinese classics. During the Middle Ages, European monks undertook diplomatic and religious missions to the east, notably Giovanni da Pian del Carpini, sent by Pope Innocent IV on a mission to the Mongols from 1245 to 1247, and William of Rubruck, a Flemish Franciscan monk sent by King Louis IX of France again to the Mongol hordes from 1253 to 1255. Perhaps the most famous was the Venetian explorer, Marco Polo, whose travels lasted for more than 20 years between 1271 and 1292, and whose account of his experiences became extremely popular in Europe after his death.

 
The routes were also fundamental in the dissemination of religions throughout Eurasia. Buddhism is one example of a religion that travelled the Silk Roads, with Buddhist art and shrines being found as far apart as Bamiyan in Afghanistan, Mount Wutai in China, and Borobudur in Indonesia. Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, Zoroastrianism and Manicheism spread in the same way, as travellers absorbed the cultures they encountered and then carried them back to their homelands with them. Thus, for example, Hinduism and subsequently Islam were introduced into Indonesia and Malaysia by Silk Road merchants travelling the maritime trade routes from India and Arabia.

 (Call this complete region of INDIAN OCEAN as "MONSOON COUNTRY" ie from East African coastline to South China sea Region. Anyone who has travelled very slowly at luxury speed(pace) knows about the strong cultural similarities despite of wide racial dis-similarities. If INDIA does not put its Indian Ocean Policy in its correct Geo perspectives which is in shambles today,we Indians will hand over the compete maritime  AFRO-ASIAN REGION to the Chinese on the platter.- Vasundhra) 

 
 
Travelling the Silk Roads

 
The process of travelling the Silk Roads developed along with the roads themselves. In the Middle Ages, caravans consisting of horses or camels were the standard means of transporting goods across land. Caravanserais, large guest houses or inns designed to welcome travelling merchants, played a vital role in facilitating the passage of people and goods along these routes. Found along the Silk Roads from Turkey to China, they provided not only a regular opportunity for merchants to eat well, rest and prepare themselves in safety for their onward journey, and also to exchange goods, trade with local markets and buy local products, and to meet other merchant travellers, and in doing so, to exchange cultures, languages and ideas.

 
As trade routes developed and became more lucrative, caravanserais became more of a necessity, and their construction intensified across Central Asia from the 10th century onwards, and continued until as late as the 19th century. This resulted in a network of caravanserais that stretched from China to the Indian subcontinent, Iran, the Caucasus, Turkey, and as far as North Africa, Russia and Eastern Europe, many of which still stand today.

 
Caravanserais were ideally positioned within a day’s journey of each other, so as to prevent merchants (and more particularly, their precious cargos) from spending days or nights exposed to the dangers of the road. On average, this resulted in a caravanserai every 30 to 40 kilometres in well-maintained areas.

 
Maritime traders had different challenges to face on their lengthy journeys. The development of sailing technology, and in particular of ship-building knowledge, increased the safety of sea travel throughout the Middle Ages. Ports grew up on coasts along these maritime trading routes, providing vital opportunities for merchants not only to trade and disembark, but also to take on fresh water supplies, with one of the greatest threats to sailors in the Middle Ages being a lack of drinking water. Pirates were another risk faced by all merchant ships along the maritime Silk Roads, as their lucrative cargos made them attractive targets. 

 
 
The legacy of the Silk Roads

 
In the nineteenth century, a new type of traveller ventured onto the Silk Roads: archaeologists and geographers, enthusiastic explorers looking for adventure. Coming from France, England, Germany, Russia and Japan, these researchers traversed the Taklamakan desert in western China, in what is now Xinjiang, to explore ancient sites along the Silk Roads, leading to many archaeological discoveries, numerous academic studies, and most of all, a renewed interest in the history of these routes.

 
Today, many historic buildings and monuments still stand, marking the passage of the Silk Roads through caravanserais, ports and cities. However, the long-standing and ongoing legacy of this remarkable network is reflected in the many distinct but interconnected cultures, languages, customs and religions that have developed over millennia along these routes.  The passage of merchants and travellers of many different nationalities resulted not only in commercial exchange but in a continuous and widespread process of cultural interaction. As such, from their early, exploratory origins, the Silk Roads developed to become a driving force in the formation of diverse societies across Eurasia and far beyond. 
   
Related links:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Friday, April 3, 2015

YEMEN - Eye on Sana’a

SOURCE:
http://www.msn.com/en-in/news/world/eye-on-sana%e2%80%99a/ar-AAamzZN






                                                 YEMEN - Eye on Sana’a


Saudi Arabia has got together with its inner circle of states in the Arab League to set things right in neighbouring Yemen, where a civil war is raging between a deposed president backed by Saudi Arabia and another president who was earlier deposed by it. Yemen’s own president has already run off to Riyadh. But there is a catch here.
 
The rebels include the Houthi tribe. They are called Shia but are actually Zaidi, which means they do not recognise the Twelve Imams of Iran because Imam Zaid was the son of the fourth Imam, which is where they end their confession. Iran is supporting the Houthis, backed by a split Sunni army in Yemen, which is also home to two other anti-Saudi killer outfits: al-Qaeda and the Islamic State. This means the Saudis are being squeezed in the south by more or less the same forces squeezing them from the north in Iraq.
 
Put Saudi Arabia together with the states of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), of which it is a member, and you have a clutch of very rich market states that can afford to spend on the Yemen invasion. They are target-killing the Houthis in Sana’a, Aden and elsewhere, without any “boots on the ground”. The big army of Egypt is on board, but the “biggest Muslim army of Pakistan” is not yet taking part.
 
 In Pakistan, no one supports participation in the invasion, forcing Islamabad to say Pakistan will go in if Saudi Arabia is invaded.
 
 
 
It is a tough decision not to go in and bomb the Iran-supported Houthis. Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, who is ruling Pakistan, was plucked out of prison in Karachi in 2000 —  where he was to serve a life sentence for having tried to kill his army chief, General Pervez Musharraf —  and given a comfortable life-in-exile in Saudi Arabia. Even earlier, when Nawaz faced sanctions for having tested a nuclear device in 1998, the kingdom had given him free oil for three years at the rate of $12 billion annually, which comes to a lot of money. In exile, Nawaz was able to restart his business in Saudi Arabia.
 
 
Saudi Arabia didn’t like socialist PM Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, who took Pakistan leftward. But it took to General Zia-ul-Haq, who hanged Bhutto and then Islamised Pakistan with a lot of Saudi money. Bhutto had built up Libya’s then President Muammar Gaddafi in opposition to the Saudi king during an Islamic summit in Lahore in 1974, thus taking sides in a polarised Arab world. The kingdom, thereafter, never really took to Bhutto’s Pakistan People’s Party and fawned on the right-wing Muslim League supported by the Pakistan army.
 
 
Zia rolled back Bhutto’s leftist legacy with hard Islam. Lucky for him, he had America and Saudi Arabia fighting on the same side in Afghanistan against the Soviet Union. That meant Iran had to be ignored. The Soviet invasion had coincided with the Islamic Revolution led by the anti-US Imam Khomeini, who had mauled the US embassy in Tehran and started destabilising the small states across the Gulf in 1979. Zia was strapped for cash after the Bhutto interregnum of bad economics. He just couldn’t be neutral.
 
 
In the 1990s, the Muslim League (Nawaz) and the PPP (Benazir) alternated in power, with the army calling the shots, cutting short their tenures and expanding into Afghanistan with American and Saudi money. In 1996, Pakistan put in place the dreaded Taliban government and recognised it. The world stood aside, but Saudi Arabia and the UAE went along with Pakistan. In 1998, the Taliban killed Iranian “diplomats” in Mazar-e-Sharif and invited Tehran’s wrath. Pakistan, thereafter, became the arena of “relocated” sectarian mayhem that has, today, forced the country into a popular stance of neutrality as the Arabs and Iranians take each other on.
 
 
 
 
By the time Musharraf was ousted in 2008, he had already upset the Saudis because of the way he had treated Nawaz. The PPP alternative was never to the kingdom’s liking. When the party came to power after Musharraf, it favoured the Iranian pipeline project because America had imposed sanctions on a “nuclearising” Iran and India had ducked out of it earlier. At the fag end of the PPP rule in 2013, its leader, Asif Ali Zardari, went to Tehran as president and signed an impossible deal with his Iranian counterpart, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad — Pakistan would build its side of the $7.6 billion pipeline or pay $200 million a month if it failed to buy Iranian gas by December 2014.
 
In 2013, Nawaz returned to power, but wisely didn’t say how hopeless the pipeline project was under the sanctions. Tehran wooed him by proposing to lend him money for his part of the project. It then waived the post-December 2014 fine. But nothing moved. What moved was new Iranian President Hassan Rouhani’s palm-bearing diplomacy and the newfound “heroic flexibility” of Ayatollah Khamenei, who produced the clinching fatwa that Islam forbade nuclear weapons. Washington and Europe (P5+1) bit the bait and put Saudi Arabia — and Israel — off, landing Pakistan in an awkward locus of two very hard places.
 
 
Pakistan was unstable and broke. Iran has the rial but not much of it, and under sanctions, that too is scarce. Saudi Arabia has the riyal too, but its supply is abundant.
 
The kingdom played its cards better than Iran. Proud Iranians had backed a restless Ahmadinejad, who needled the region with dubious adventure and saw his oil — which he didn’t refine —  come under sanctions. The kingdom, pragmatic and plugged into the global economy, was heavy with dollars and purse-proud. A measure of its power was experienced when it refused to cut production in 2014, during a demand slump and piled more hardship on Iran through tumbling prices. It funded the generals in Egypt and propped up a Pakistan that can’t say no, paralysed by terrorism.
 
 
 
 
A photo taken by an Indian expat of an airstrike in Sanaa.

© Provided by Indian Express A photo taken by an Indian expat of an airstrike in Sanaa. 



 
Pakistan is going to get into more trouble in Afghanistan unless it gets together with India to fight the post-withdrawal war there, which no one is going to win after the 3,00,000-strong Afghan National Army takes to its heels — and the Taliban, now anti-Pakistan, kills all the “empowered women” in Kabul and pushes millions more refugees into Pakistan.
 
 
India is now a bigger presence in Afghanistan than Pakistan, and the Afghans are clearly not too enamoured of Pakistan. Singly, India and Pakistan will both come to grief. But a mutually agreed upon plan of action against the Taliban can stop the Islamic State — which Afghan President Ashraf Ghani says is already in Afghanistan — from entering Pakistan on its way to India as the “Army of Khorasan”.
 
 
 
Both Saudi Arabia and Iran are equally important for South Asia. The GCC states give employment nearer home and are the only kinds of states that Muslims provisionally seem able to run well, if you can keep democracy away. If India and Pakistan act clever and coordinate their plan of action, they can benefit from the mushrooming manpower of South Asia.
 
 
 
The writer is consulting editor, ‘Newsweek Pakistan’
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Thursday, April 2, 2015

ASEAN Connectivity and China’s ‘One Belt, One Road’

Source:
http://thediplomat.com/2015/03/asean-connectivity-and-chinas-one-belt-one-road/





                    ASEAN Connectivity

                                   and

               China’s ‘One Belt, One Road’

Thursday, March 26, 2015

INDIA’S APPROACH TO CHINA’S MARITIME SILK ROAD AN ALTERNATIVE VIEW

Source:
http://www.maritimeindia.org/CommentryView.aspx?NMFCID=8390




INDIA’S APPROACH TO CHINA’S MARITIME SILK ROAD 
          AN ALTERNATIVE VIEW


 Author : Gurpreet S Khurana 





         
17 Feb 2015



In his December 2014 pre-election manifesto, Sri Lanka’s President Sirisena had expressed his intent to reconsider the US$1.4 billion Chinese-funded project to develop Colombo port. However, the visit of Chinese ‘special envoy’ (Liu Jianchao) to Sri Lanka in early-February 2015 led to a “careful assessment” of the issue, following which, the Sri Lankan government has indicated that it is likely to go ahead with the project.

The Colombo port project has been essential for the ‘Maritime Silk Road’ (MSR) initiative of the Chinese President Xi Jinping. But this success for China may be only the first step in the implementation of MSR, with more to follow. Many other countries in India’s maritime neighbourhood – Bangladesh, Indonesia, Kenya, Maldives, Pakistan, Thailand et al – are on the MSR bandwagon. In the context of this trend, this essay examines India’s approach to the MSR concept, and presents an alternative to the prevailing mainstream view in New Delhi.

Invoking the ‘ancient’ Chinese contribution to Asian seaborne trade and cultural linkages, the MSR concept essentially involves China helping its partner countries to develop their port infrastructure to enhance trade connectivity, and to establish manufacturing and free-trade zones in the hinterland, with attendant economic incentives. The MSR initiative is thus proposed as an economic concept. However, even as its specific details are yet unclear, its multi-dimensional strategic intent and wide-ranging ramifications cannot be ignored. India’s response to MSR has been guarded; and understandably so, owing to the adversarial potential of its relations with China.
  
While India has not yet rejected China’s MSR proposal, a preliminary assessment – outlined in the succeeding text – indicates that there may be a case for New Delhi to consider the MSR more objectively.

 The assessment needs to factor both economic and security considerations.

Economics

As the largest manufacturing economy in the world, China’s impressive economic growth in the past few decades has led to rising incomes and better lifestyles, but also slowing down of its exports due to rising production costs. China seeks to address this conundrum by outsourcing manufacturing to its MSR partners. For India – given its advantages in terms of the relatively low cost of labour and raw-material – this presents an opportunity to strengthen its manufacturing base, propagate its ‘Make in India’ campaign, and generate employment opportunities. The prevailing cynicism against shifting China’s ‘sunset industries’ to India purely on environmental considerations may be akin to ‘throwing the baby out with the bathwater’. Considering that China’s industrial capacity is at least two decades ahead, Indian industries could leapfrog in the same way that the Southeast Asian economies did in the 1980s on the back of ‘outsourcing’ by Japanese multinational companies. Commonly referred to as the ‘Flying Geese Paradigm’, the sound logic for such ‘outsourcing’ was based on comparative advantage and market rationalism.

On the other hand, if New Delhi opts to stay out of the MSR, India’s industrial growth will lag behind its Asian neighbours – most of which are China’s avowed MSR partners – thereby adversely affecting India’s economic growth and developmental plans.

India also needs to overcome infrastructure-related constraints to enhance connectivity for its overseas trade, which contributes substantially to the national economy.  Notably, in 1990–91, India’s external trade accounted for a mere six per cent of the GDP, which rose to 52 per cent by 2010–11. The MSR could be an effective maritime supplement to the land-based Bangladesh-China-India-Myanmar (BCIM) Economic Corridor under active consideration by New Delhi. It could be dovetailed with India’s own ‘Sagarmala’ project, and thereby contribute to the nation’s efforts to enhance sea-trade connectivity, while also progressively leading to ‘port-led development’ of the hinterland, and the SEZs. The MSR may also help India to develop its ‘blue economy’ through bolstering its marine industries and ship-building capacity.

Security

China’s military-strategic intent behind the MSR cannot be discounted. The unprecedented docking of a PLA Navy submarine at Colombo port in September 2014 is a bellwether for future developments in the Indian Ocean.  China is likely to seek naval access to the maritime infrastructure that it is helping to create, thereby increasing its strategic presence in India’s primary areas of maritime interest. The PLA Navy could seek replenishment facilities in Chittagong, Colombo, Gwadar, Hambantota, and so on.
 
The question arises: what can India do to prevent this?
 
 India could possibly try to use its leverages with the IOR countries; but these are hardly adequate vis-á-vis the economic attractiveness of China’s MSR. Notably, even Bangladesh and Maldives have opted to support the MSR, and with Pakistan, India has no leverage at all. Hence, the progress of the ongoing developments seems inevitable, over which, New Delhi seems to have little control.

On the other hand, permitting a Chinese company to develop an economic zone – comprising a port-hinterland complex with manufacturing hubs – in an appropriate location in India would entail considerable Chinese investment in terms of finances, technology and possibly, skilled human resource. This would lead to China developing major stakes in India, which would contribute to the latter’s national security through ‘dissuasion’.  
 


It is important to note that in the present times of national technical means and stand-off non-kinetic offensive weapons, national security cannot be achieved through physical barriers, including denying Chinese companies / entrepreneurs’ access to Indian production and distribution hubs.

Understandably, India has been cautious with regard to its critical logistic infrastructure including ports and port-connectors, which it calls ‘strategic sectors’. However, the strategic value of a facility depends upon the context.  A ‘generic’ designation of sea-ports as ‘strategic’ may not be appropriate. Hence, a selected site on Indian coast allocated to a Chinese company for port construction need not be designated as strategic.
 
An apt parallel is New Delhi’s ‘active consideration’ to connect the (otherwise ‘strategic’) road infrastructure in India’s north-eastern states to the Bangladesh-China-India-Myanmar Economic Corridor (BCIM-EC).
 
 


Though the MSR is Beijing’s initiative, its historic roots are not exclusively Chinese.
 MSR represents the ancient maritime inter-linkages within Asia, which closely followed the regularly-reversing Monsoon winds, thereby enabling sea-borne commercial and cultural exchanges across Asia.
India’s support to the MSR concept would, therefore, serve to propagate Asia’s ‘rise’ and integrate Asia economically. In the process, it would create mutual dependence, and thereby contribute to regional stability and prosperity.

On the contrary, with the regional countries supporting MSR on the back of growing regional economic integration, India’s exclusivist approach would lead to its marginalisation, thereby helping China to ‘displace’ India’s influence in its own backyard.  
**********************************************

(*Captain Gurpreet S Khurana, PhD, Indian Navy is the Executive Director, National Maritime Foundation (NMF), New Delhi.  He can be reached at gurpreet.bulbul@gmail.com)


























Thursday, March 19, 2015

India’s Maritime Awakening? Modi Endorses A Blue Revolution

Source:
http://www.eurasiareview.com/18032015-indias-maritime-awakening-modi-endorses-a-blue-revolution-analysis/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+eurasiareview%2FVsnE+%28Eurasia+Review%29





The Indian Ocean is bounded by India's Lakshadweep Islands to the north
The Indian Ocean is bounded by India's Lakshadweep Islands to the north


India’s Maritime Awakening? Modi Endorses A Blue Revolution – Analysis

                                      By
                            C Uday Bhaskar*









The three island-nation trip that took Prime Minister Modi to Seychelles, Mauritius and Sri Lanka in mid-March may well mark the beginning of India’s long overdue maritime awakening. For a nation so richly endowed with a distinctive maritime geography, the paradox has been the tenacious indifference, often veering towards inexcusable sea-blindness, that has characterised Delhi’s policy orientation as regards the Indian Ocean.


However the very fact that Modi embarked upon such a trip to three strategically important island states in the Indian Ocean which have been long neglected by way of a summit visit reflects a political determination that has the potential to become the beginning of the end of this self-inflicted strategic myopia.



In Mauritius, Modi handed over an Indian built off-shore patrol vessel (OPV) to that country’s Coast Guard and this marks the first such export of a naval ship designed and built in India. Christened the MCGS Barracuda, the 1350 tonne ship, valued at US $50, million was commissioned by Modi on March 12 and his speech at this ceremony could well be described as the most lucid and comprehensive articulation of India’s resurrected maritime vision for the Indian Ocean Region (IOR).


Highlighting the centrality of a cooperative strategy to manage the vast water body of the Indian Ocean and the role of the smaller island nations, Modi drew attention to the strategic significance of the IOR and noted: “Because, the Indian Ocean is critical to the future of the world. This Ocean bears two-thirds of the world’s oil shipments, one-third of its bulk cargo; and half of its container traffic. Over three-fourths of its traffic goes to other regions of the world.”


 
 
PM Shri Narendra Modi speech at Civic Reception in Mauritius: 12.03.2015  


This overview is familiar to the professionals but what is instructive is the manner in which Modi invoked rich symbolism related to the national flag and endorsed the need for India to embark upon a Blue Revolution. In the course of his remarks at Port Louis, Modi observed: “To me the blue chakra or wheel in India’s national flag represents the potential of Blue Revolution or the Ocean Economy. That is how central the ocean economy is to us.” The speech writers in the prime minister’s stable warrant praise for the manner in which form and substance have been leavened.


India has witnessed two seminal revolutions that transformed the profile of the nation and the well-being of its people – namely the Green Revolution that began in 1963 and transformed India from a ‘basket-case’ to becoming self-sufficient in food production; and later the White Revolution (also referred to as Operation Flood) of 1970 that made India into the world’s largest milk producer.


The Blue Revolution endorsed by Modi, if realized in its entirety, has the potential to transform India in similar manner and both the normative vision and the policy clarity are laden with deep import. Asserting that the “Indian Ocean Region is at the top of our policy priorities”, Modi added that the regional vision “is rooted in advancing cooperation in our region; and, to use our capabilities for the benefit of all in our common maritime home.”


The five elements prioritize the core security interests of India and yet combine the collective well-being of the IOR. Inter alia, they include: “We will do everything to safeguard our mainland and islands and defend our interests; we will deepen our economic and security cooperation with our friends in the region, especially our maritime neighbours and island states; collective action and cooperation will best advance peace and security in our maritime region; we also seek a more integrated and cooperative future in the region that enhances the prospects for sustainable development for all; and those who live in this region have the primary responsibility for peace, stability and prosperity in the Indian Ocean but we recognize that there are other nations around the world, with strong interests and stakes in the region.”


This maritime pentagon provides the foundation for the Modi vision of the IOR and is in many ways a logical extension of the modest but relatively still-born ‘sagar mala’ (ocean garland ) enunciated by former Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee in August 2003 that sought to revitalize the moribund Indian ports sector and inland connectivity.


India’s comprehensive national power that includes the economic and trade sinews and the military component can be robustly advanced by sustained investment in the maritime sector. This is a well-trodden path taken by many major powers before India and the symbiotic relationship between ship-building, port efficacy and inland cum coastal connectivity lie at the core of such national endeavor.


China, which is the most recent of the major powers to focus on the maritime sector, offers many policy cues for India. One of the first priorities is to review and rationalize the myriad ministries and departments that have sectoral and insular responsibility in managing India’s maritime assets.


This is a subject worthy of immediate cabinet and legislative attention and Modi would be well-advised to fast-track the implementation of the Blue Revolution. Furthermore, the coastal states need to become committed stakeholders in this national endeavor and this in turn will strengthen the federal character of the Indian polity – an often stated Modi objective.

The Indian Ocean is not India’s ocean alone but the Modi vision is laudable:

“We seek a future for the Indian Ocean that lives up to the name of SAGAR – Security and Growth for All in the Region.”


Acronyms are addictive but the challenge now is to walk the talk and convert rich rhetoric into tangible reality.




*C Uday Bhaskar is Director, Society for Policy Studies. He can be contacted at cudyabhaskar@spsindia.in

IANS, March 17, 2015








 

IANS on March 17, 2015 at 1:58 pm
Indian MARCOS perform at Ramakrishna Beach in Visakhapatnam

India’s maritime awakening? Modi endorses a Blue Revolution