PARTITION : Trail of Tears

SOURCE:
http://www.pragyata.com/mag/trail-of-tears-493

PARTITION : Trail of Tears

The consequences of Muslim separatism have been seen throughout Indian history but it came to a head during the time of partition.

By 

Srinivas S

Perpetrators of India’s Partition

  [https://ithihas.wordpress.com/2018/05/03/perpetrators-of-indias-partition/ ]

Today we find Muslim communalists in India posing as the protectors of Dalits and accusing Hindu organisations of being communal. Many Muslim leaders talk as though they (Muslims) did a great sacrifice by remaining in India and not going to Pakistan after partition. Many people in India especially the power-hungry politicians and the majority of those in the media believe in the fabricated myth, through the history text books written by Marxist historians, that put the blame for India’s partition squarely on the Hindu nationalists and the British all the while portraying the Muslims as the aggrieved and innocent. But a thorough examination of facts reveals that the very existence of anti-patriotism among the Indian Muslims was responsible for the partition of India. What the Britishers did was to exploit and aggravate the problem. 

But the problem was there even before the arrival of the Britishers.

The Genesis of Muslim Separatism

The separatist and intolerant tendencies of the Muslims in India were dormant even before the establishment of British rule in India. During the Medieval period, though the Hindu rulers and the people accorded a generous treatment to Muslims, they did not reciprocate the same. For example, the Zamorin of Calicut gave orders that in every family of fishermen in his dominion; one or more of the male members should be brought up as Mohammedans. The Hindu reformers and teachers emphasized that Hinduism and Islam were two different paths leading to the same goal. They preached that Ram and Rahim, Krishna and Karim, Ishwar and Allah, were different names of the same god. An earnest attempt was made to bring about unity between the two communities by deprecating priestly ritualism and formalities and emphasizing inner religious devotion. Not only were the foreign Muslims honoured and respected, but even Indian converts to Islam were shown regard and a treatment which was better than that meted out to lower castes among the Hindu themselves. The Muslims on the other hand, believed in their superiority and branded the Hindus as an inferior people, feeble and unprogressive. If a Hindu, who was converted to Islam, showed any inclination to revert to the religion of his forefathers, he was, according to the law of the Sultanate, put to death, and if any Hindu preached that Hinduism and Islam alike were true religions, he was liable to capital punishment. Moreover, according to the Quranic injunction it is not permissible for a Muslim male to marry a non-Muslim woman without first converting her to Islam; nor it was permissible for a Muslim woman to be given in marriage to a Hindu, unless he himself became a Muslim. Further, by the orders of the Quran, Muslims were prohibited from showing any respect or consideration for their non-Muslim ancestors. This.... 

.....Quranic injunction made it impossible for Indian Muslim, most of them who were converts from Hinduism, to have anything to do with their Hindu ancestors, or to have legitimate pride in the ancient history of this country.

          Religious Fanaticism and Aggression

The Muslims of India though living in this country for centuries unmolested by the Hindus and having full religious freedom could not develop any friendly feeling with their Hindu counterpart or consider India as their motherland. The main reason for this was the religious fanaticism of the Muslims. The Muslims always insisted on their separate identity and never regarded themselves as Indians first. To them a Muslim foreigner was a nearer kith and kin than a Hindu neighbour. They were more sensitive to the misfortune of their Turkish co-religionists than to the murder of their Hindu brethren at Jallianwallabagh. The Indian Muslims searched for their national roots elsewhere and to some extent found them in the Afghan and Mughal periods of India. This search for their culture roots led the Indian Muslims to Islamic history and to the periods when Islam was a conquering and creative force in Baghdad, Spain, Constantinople, Central Asia and elsewhere. After the collapse of the Muslim power in India with the arrival of the British, the Indian Muslims began to derive their temporal and spiritual inspiration from the Turkish Empire and its Khalifa.

In contrast the Buddhist of China and South East Asia knew that their Lord (Buddha) was born in India, but never sought to glorify or emancipate India; they were exclusively concerned with national matters of the country in which they lived. Speaking on the Hindu-Muslim question, Bharat Ratna Rabindranath Tagore opined that it was almost impossible for Hindu-Muslim unity to become an accomplished fact as the Muslims could not confine their patriotism to any one country. The poet said that he had very frankly asked many Muslims whether in the event of any Mohammadan power invading India, they would stand side by side with their Hindu neighbours to defend their common land; he could not be satisfied with the reply he got from them. (The Times of India, April 18, 1924)  

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

google  CLICK TO OPEN  https://books.google.co.in/books?id=GXryl8xgQ5UC&pg=PA81&lpg=PA81&dq=The+Times+of+India,+April+18,+1924&source=bl&ots=OS0_yEyppw&sig=t6jmDTEpVj3TT1AbZgZHJQRxvVc&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiPpcG1w_PaAhVHOI8KHWOTAkQQ6AEIWjAE#v=onepage&q=The%20Times%20of%20India%2C%20April%2018%2C%201924&f=false

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

             Spewed Venom on Hindus

All prominent Muslim intellectuals were rabid communalists who had nothing but contempt towards India and Hindus. In a speech on 16^th March 1888, Syed Ahmed Khan said that the Hindus and Muslims were not only two nations but as two warring nations who could never lead a common political life should ever the British quit India. Mohammad Iqbal said to be the originator of a separate Muslim State was inspired by the spirit of Pan Islamism. He proposed the formation of a Muslim State in the North-West part of India. Mohammad Ali Jinnah considered as the father of Pakistan at the Lahore session of the Muslim League in March 1940 said that

the Hindus and Muslims belong to two different religious philosophies, social customs and literatures and it is a dream that Hindus and Muslims can ever evolve a common nationality.

During the Khilafat movement the Moplahs (Muslims of Kerala) committed terrible atrocities against their Hindu neighbours which included ripping open the stomach of pregnant Hindu women; this in spite of the Hindus giving support to their movement. None of the leaders of the Muslim community condemned this action of the Moplahs and instead denied the atrocities and even tried to shift the blame on Hindus. The Muslims animosity and hatred against Hindus was such that they even did not spare MK Gandhi. One of the leading men of the Khilafat Movement, Mohammed Ali made a statement in 1924 at Aligarh where he said that however pure Gandhi’s character may be, from his (Mohammed Ali) point of view he (Gandhiji) is inferior to any Mussalman even though that Mussalman may be of bad character. Many dismissed this statement as press fabrication. Later when he was asked to clarify Mohammed Ali reaffirmed that statement he had made. Mohammed Ali’s contempt for India was such that he preferred to be buried in Jerusalem rather in India.

The Muslim leaders were so intolerant that they found fault even with progressive leaders like Tilak, Lajpat Rai, Aurobindo, Bankim Chandra Chatterjee, Gandhi just for being pious Hindus in their personal life, for taking pride in their historical and mythical heroes and for praising their motherland. Contrast this attitude of the Muslims with that of Hindu nationalists; who all believed in the concept of Akhand Bharat and proclaimed that all those who live in India were Hindus. It should be remembered that the formation of Hindu Mahasabha and RSS. took place only to counter the aggressive attitude of the fanatical Muslims who at the drop of a hat used to organise communal riots.

     Appeasement Policy of the Congressmen

The Congress leaders from Gokhale to Gandhi presumed that by a policy of generosity they could win over the Muslims; but the Muslims demands were insatiable. The Muslim demanded certain rights which they were not prepared to concede to others.

[A]  They wanted the right to convert Hindus to Islam but objected to the Shuddi movement of Arya Samaj (a movement to bring back converted Muslims to their ancestor's faith). 

[B] The Muslims demanded the right to self-determination but tried to deny the same right to minorities in Muslim majority provinces.

 [C]  The Muslims were against parliamentary system because they wanted to dominate the political life of the country and reimpose their rule in India.

[D]  Deep inside their hearts the Congressmen knew the real character of the Muslims but acted as liberals in public as they wanted their support to fight against the Britishers. 

 [E]  According to Gandhiji it was Hindu’s cowardice that had made the Mussalman a ‘bully’ leading to Hindu Muslim riots and the parents of middle-class Hindus, themselves timid, continue to transmit their timidity to their children. (Harijan, January 6th, 1940)

[F]  The Congressmen knew that it was impossible to live with Muslims peacefully in united India and hence agreed to partition. Sardar Patel’s argument was that if two brothers cannot stay together, they better divide. If they are forced to stay together, they tend to fight every day. It is better to have one clean fight and then separate than have bickering every day. C Rajagopalachari also supported partition and so also Ambedkar.

[G]  But Ambedkar was of the view that there should be mutual transfer of population, Muslims living in India to migrate to Pakistan and Hindus living in Pakistan migrating to India so that Hindus could live in peace and free from Muslim aggression. But the Congress party under the leadership of Gandhiji and Nehru allowed the Muslims to stay behind in India to showcase their secular credentials though  they did not have such credentials. For instance, when Moti Lal Nehru’s daughter wished to marry Syed Hussain, the editor of a newspaper Independent, Moti Lal Nehru threatened that he would commit suicide. Gandhiji later persuaded Syed Hussain to forget about his marriage and to leave the country. Similarly, when Gandhi’s son embraced Islam, he ostracized him and only reconciled once he was brought back into the Hindu fold under Birla’s influence.

 [ CLICK / GOOGLE TO OPEN   http://urdufigures.blogspot.in/2010/02/syed-hussain-man-behind-motilal-nehrus.html    ]

Reasons behind Muslims remaining in India 

In the elections of 1945-46 the Muslim League captured an overwhelming majority of Muslim seats in all the provinces which shows that Muslim living all over India supported Pakistan. For most of the gullible Muslims who supported partition of India, Pakistan meant the very place they lived. Only later they realised that they had to leave their home, job and start a new life if they had to go to their dream land Pakistan. Hence except the rich and powerful, most of the Muslims stayed back. Moreover, the Muslims living in India were never threatened by the Hindus to convert nor their women’s honour outraged. Moreover, the mullahs had other sinister designs. The Jamait-ul-ulema was opposed to Pakistan, as it would affect its propagation of Islam. Maulana Madani delivering a speech on 19^thSeptember 1945 in Delhi on the occasion of the formation of the Azad Muslim Parliamentary Board to fight the last constitutional battle against the demand of Pakistan said that at the termination of the Muslim rule, there were about 25 million Muslims in India. Within a period of less than a century their number increased up to 100 million. The missionary work of the Jamait has a great share in this increase. The great object of an overall spread of Islam in the whole of India cannot be realized by appealing to passion of hatred and antagonism. It is the non-Muslims who are the field of action for the tabligh (spread of Islam) and form the raw material for this splendid activity.

                            Muslim and Dalit Divide

With regards to the Muslim pretension of being friends of Dalits, way back in 1947

Ambedkar had cautioned Dalits to be vary of Muslims intentions. 



On November 27^th 1947 in a press release Ambedkar said that it would be a fatal for the Scheduled Castes, whether in Pakistan or in Hyderabad to put their faith in the Muslims or the Muslim League. It has become a habit with the Scheduled Castes to look upon the Muslims as their friends simply because they dislike the Hindus. This is a mistaken view. The Muslim wanted the support of the Scheduled Castes but they never gave their support to the Scheduled Castes. Jinnah was all the time playing a double game. He was very insistent that the Scheduled Castes were a separate entity when it suited him but when it did not suit him he insisted with equal emphasis that they (Scheduled Castes) were Hindus. After the formation of Pakistan, Ambedkar invited the Scheduled Castes to come to India as they were subjected to forcible religious conversion.

It is high time that Hindus become aware of the real facts that had taken place in our history, especially our younger generation and very importantly those working in the media and public sphere.

References / Footnotes

1. Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar Writings and Speeches, Vol 8 and Vol 17- part I, Publishers- Dr. Ambedkar Foundation, Ministry of Social, Justice and Empowerment, Government of India, New Delhi

2. P.D.Kaushik- The Congress Ideology and Programmes- 1920-1947, Allied Publishers Pvt Ltd, 1964

 3. Ram Gopal- Indian Muslims: A Political History (1858-1947), Asia Publishing House, 1964

 4. Ziya ul Hasan Faruqi, The Deoband School and the demand of Pakistan, Asia Publishing House, 1963.

 5. Gauba K.L., The Consequences of Pakistan, Lion Press, Lahore. 1946

 6. Srivastava A.L,Medieval Indian Culture, Shiva Lal Agarwala & Company, Agra

 7. B.L.Grover, S.Grover- A New Look at Modern Indian History, S.Chand & Company Ltd, New Delhi, 1993

Strategic Support Force : China’s Strategic Arsenals in a New Era

SOURCE:
https://thebulletin.org/china%E2%80%99s-strategic-arsenals-new-era11716

ANALYSIS

China’s Strategic Arsenals in a New Era                                  By

                     Elsa B. Kania

20 APRIL 2018

Chinese President Xi Jinping has declared that Chinese national defense and military modernization have entered a “new era.” He has called for the People’s Liberation Army(PLA) to become a (or perhaps even the) “world-class” military by mid-century. The “China Dream” that Xi seeks to advance—a quest for the “great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation”—includes and is  enabled  by the “dream of a powerful military” (强军梦).

In this new era of Chinese military power, the PLA is seeking to develop new strategic arsenals that could enhance its future deterrence and war-fighting capabilities. In particular, the PLA  recognizes  the criticality of “assured retaliation” within its second-strike nuclear posture—and of advancing new capabilities in the space, cyber, and electromagnetic domains, which are seen as new “strategic frontiers” of warfare. 

Xi has also underscored the importance of new frontiers of military innovation in emerging technologies. Indeed, the PLA is pursuing next-generation capabilities, ranging from hypersonic missiles to counterspace weapons or military applications of artificial intelligence.

In the course of ongoing reforms and reorganization, the PLA has elevated its former Second Artillery Force (第二炮兵部队) and rebranded it as the Rocket Force (火箭军). 

It has also created the Strategic Support Force (战略支援部队), which consolidates, and enables the integration of, China’s capabilities for space, cyber, electronic, and psychological warfare. Directly under the command of the Central Military Commission, these two forces serve as the tip of the spear for China’s strategic deterrence. In any conflict scenario, the Rocket Force and Strategic Support Force would also serve as critical components of the PLA’s joint operations. Their missions thus extend across deterrence and actual combat (实战).

The Core Force. 

The Rocket Force, which controls nuclear and conventional missiles, is considered China’s “core force” for strategic deterrence. To date, the PLA has consolidated all of its nuclear capabilities within what is now the Rocket Force—unlike the US military, in which the nuclear triad is distributed across two services. China’s “lean and effective” (精干有效) arsenal includes conventional, nuclear-armed, and dual-capable (核常兼备) systems. The dual missions of deterrence and war-fighting are reflected in the structure of the Rocket Force.

The Rocket Force has developed a range of dual-capable missiles that it often characterizes as “trump cards” (杀手锏) that could threaten even a “powerful adversary” (强敌) such as the US military. During the August 2017 military parade marking the 90th anniversary of the PLA’s establishment, the Rocket Force displayed weapons systems including: the DF-21D, an intermediate-range ballistic missile with a range of at least 1,450 kilometers, known as the “carrier killer”; the DF-26, an intermediate-range ballistic missile with a maximum range of about 4,000 kilometers, characterized as the “Guam killer”; and the DF-31AG, a modified version of the road-mobile DF-31A intercontinental ballistic missile that is dual-capable, with an estimated range near 11,000 kilometers.

The Rocket Force seems to focus on dual-capable weapons systems because it appreciates their “usability” and versatility, including their ability to introduce next-generation capabilities to nuclear and conventional missile strikes. For instance, the DF-31AG could be armed  with multiple independently targetable re-entry vehicle (MIRV) warheads. Future Chinese hypersonic weapons would likely be dual-capable systems intended not only to enhance Chinese nuclear deterrence but also to respond to Washington’s pursuit of conventional prompt global strike. The PLA is also pursuing “intelligentization” (智能化) in missile development, a goal that entails the introduction of more advanced automation and artificial intelligence into weapons systems.

China’s Future Triad. 

Looking forward, the PLA is on track to create a full nuclear triad, developing new nuclear-armed submarines and a new nuclear bomber. The future delineation of roles and responsibilities among the Rocket Force and the PLA’s Air Force and Navy  remains to be determined, but these developments reflect a significant evolution of China’s nuclear arsenal and posture.

The PLA is actively advancing nuclear-armed ballistic missile submarines (of the Jin-class, or Type-094). By some accounts, such next-generation submarines could possess 

“AI-augmented brainpower,” potentially in the form of machine learning technology such as convolutional neural networks applied to acoustic signal processing or decision support. These future submarines could even leverage quantum navigation to enable independence from GPS and its Chinese equivalent Beidou, while attempting to actualize quantum communications under water.

At the same time, the PLA is in the process of developing a long-range, dual-capable strike bomber to enhance China’s strategic deterrence and war-fighting capabilities. This was first revealed in 2017 remarks by former PLA Air Force Commander Ma Xiaotian. According to recent reporting by The Diplomat’s Ankit Panda, China has been testing a nuclear-capable air-launched ballistic missile, along with a new long-range strategic bomber modified from variant H-6s.

The new “trump cards.” The PLA’s Strategic Support Force is intended to serve as an “incubator” for new strategic capabilities. Designed for dominance in new strategic frontiers of warfare, the Strategic Support Force could enable PLA information dominance and enhance information support for joint operations and power projection. Concurrently, the Strategic Support Force’s space, cyber, and electronic warfare capabilities, under its Network and Space Systems Departments, could be leveraged for coercion and deterrence. The Strategic Support Force constitutes an apparent innovation in force structure. If successful, it could enable China’s military to adopt an integrated approach toward capabilities across these domains and disciplines, with the ultimate aim of achieving critical synergies among them.

The Network Systems Department (网络系统部) combines a critical mass of forces for cyber, electronic, and psychological warfare. In this regard, the Strategic Support Force reflects an organizational realization of the PLA’s concept of integrated network-electronic warfare (网电一体战), combining disciplines and capabilities that were previously stove-piped. Indeed, the “Cyber Corps” (网军) associated with this department is designed to operate within a domain where the boundaries between peacetime reconnaissance and wartime offensive operations are highly blurred.

The Space Systems Department (航天系统部) has consolidated space-based and space-related capabilities. As an “information umbrella” for the PLA, it provides the space-based information support that is critical for joint operations and power projection, including Rocket Force missile strikes. This consolidation of space systems may be superior to the US model—at least from the perspective of certain PLA commentators—because it reduces stove-piping and redundancies, enabling greater integration of these systems. This new “Space Force” will likely leverage non-kinetic counterspace capabilities, such as directed energy weapons, and may also exercise control over the PLA’s emerging kinetic antisatellite capabilities—though the Rocket Force may also be fighting for control of these systems.

Pursuit of transformation. Beyond its traditional endeavors in military modernization, China is increasingly pursuing a new agenda of military innovation, seeking to “leapfrog” ahead through rapid innovation in strategic emerging technologies. Significantly, Xi has called for thePeople’s Liberation Army to “accelerate the development of military intelligentization” (智能化). This new concept represents a progression beyond the PLA’s existing strategy for informatization (信息化), which has involved the development of capabilities in command, control, communication, computers, intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (C4ISR).

The new concept will leverage emerging technologies recognized as integral to military power in future “intelligentized” (智能化) warfare. The frontiers for AI in warfare may include applications in C4ISR—ranging from AI-enabled decision support for commanders to uses in intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance.

The Strategic Support Force could also be a pioneer in Chinese advances in military applications of artificial intelligence in information operations. In particular, the Strategic Support Force may focus on cognitive electronic warfare and greater automation in cyber operations. For instance, several researchers from the Strategic Support Force have  highlighted  (link in Chinese) the importance of machine learning in future electromagnetic spectrum warfare. The new Military-Civil Fusion Cyberspace Security Innovation Center (军民融合网络空间安全创新中心), led by the cybersecurity company Qihoo360, intends to focus on AI in cyber defense.

New era of Chinese strategic deterrence. In the aggregate, the “new era” and traditional capabilities that the Rocket Force and Strategic Support Force command will enhance Chinese military power and elevate the PLA’s strategic deterrence capabilities. This integrated approach  is consistent with PLA strategic concepts that characterize military and strategic deterrence as including nuclear deterrence, conventional deterrence, space deterrence, and information deterrence. The PLA’s notion of deterrence (威慑), however, is often characterized as closer to coercion, which may shape the employment of these capabilities.

In the course of its modernization, the PLA has thus created a range of instruments for military deterrence with the precision and flexibility to defend against threats and advance core interests. Taken together, space, nuclear, and cyber capabilities—along with newly emerging technologies—could act as a “new triad” for this new era. These new strategic arsenals will enhance Chinese military power, disrupting the strategic balance within and beyond the Asia-Pacific. Going forward, Beijing will leverage its military might both to defend national interests that are becoming global and to project influence on the world stage.

ON WAR : The Art Of War In Global Politics: Whither South Asia?

SOURCE:
http://www.eurasiareview.com/12042018-the-art-of-war-in-global-politics-whither-south-asia-analysis/




ON WAR

The Art Of War In Global Politics: Whither South Asia? – Analysis 

                                    By 

                   Abu Sufian Shamrat*

ONLY  INDIANS  ARE CONFIDENT OF                                    NEGLECTING

                   THE ART OF WAR  

                    - [VASUNDHRA]

                              FOR 

        THE REST OF THE WORLD

The art of war is of vital importance to the state. It is a matter of life and death, a road either to safety or to ruin. Hence it is a subject of inquiry which can on no account be neglected (Sun Tzu).



However, the history of art of war roots back to the rise of property ownership and motivation of expanding imperialism under several empire states in order to strengthen the imperialist system of colonialism.



From ancient to contemporary global politics there are several traditions of the art of war and the prominent traditions include:

• The Clausewitzian or instrumentalist tradition which considers war as a part of political intercourse of governments and nations (Clausewitz: 1968).

• The Machiavellian tradition emphasis on the management of war and military affairs centering the ‘double standard of morality’.

• The Hobbesian or realist tradition which views international politics as a state of war against all with zero-sum game in moral and legal vacuum.

• The Marxist or dialectical materialist tradition which interprets the historical development as a resultant of class struggle where state, as an instrument of the dominant class, will be withered away through the means of proletarian war against the bourgeoisie.

• The Critical or contemporary tradition sees war within a transnational paradigm which includes regional-global conflict over environment, terrorism, illegal migration, humanitarian issues, energy, strategic resources and postures.

Since the ancient period there exists a long standing debate regarding the courses, forces, scale and management of war though the very basis of the art of war in contemporary world politics aggregates most of the principles of the war traditions.


Globalization of economics, politics, society, culture, civilization and conflict is shaping an ever changing world order where not a single issue remains only in the realm of a nation-state.
The factors which are indivisible from the local affairs have broader implications within the wider scale of international system which analyses the dimensions of global anarchy considering the prospects for perpetual peace, the possibilities of society among states and its moral basis, the nature of inter-state order, and the nature of power at the centre of inter-state relations.

However, the trends and issues of the art of war in contemporary world politics are highly inter-connected and work in a systematic way. If any issue is endangered then the others are impacted along with an unintentional manner and the security threats constitute transnational, multi-dimensional and multi-purposive dilemmas.


Considering these multifaceted scopes of contemporary world politics the issues of art of war can be discussed in the following way:


Firstly, since the beginning of the 21st century the world has been experiencing ruthless dramatic growth in mass displacement due to wars and conflict. The people of the Middle-East and Sub-Saharan African states are migrating to Europe in order to escape from the bloody war domains and ethno-religious conflict prone entities i.e. Syria, Iraq, Libya, South Sudan, Congo, Somalia and others. A huge number of people also died in the Mediterranean Sea during the period of illegal migration.

The UNHCR announced that the number of forced displacement had reached 51.2 million worldwide, a level not previously seen in the post-World War II era. Persecution, conflict, generalized violence, and human rights violations have formed a ‘nation of the displaced’ that, if they were a country, would make up the 24th largest in the world (UNHCR: 2015).



Secondly, 

struggles among the global powers centering war on terrorism are mapping the current geopolitical order. The world famous political scientist Samuel P. Huntington considers the post-cold war global politics within the paradigm of ‘Clash of Civilizations’ where a new world order is remaking dividing the ‘West’ from the ‘Rest’. Huntington argues that the contemporary war will not be launched by the state against any state rather a collective liberal civilization will fight against radical, militant and terrorist forces of the Rest. Since the beginning of the 21st century the West block is in war directly or indirectly in Afghanistan, Iraq, Nigeria, Somalia, Palestine, Tunisia, Yemen, Syria and so on in order to fight against Al-Qaida, Taliban, ISIS and other militant groups along with the fight against non-democratic regimes resulting 100,000 casualties. The war on terror affected the general people of these states rather than the terrorist groups.



Thirdly, the art of war in 21st century can be best understood within the paradigm of global environmental degradation. Robert D. Kaplan in his                                   ‘The Coming Anarchy’ argues about environmental causes of chaos and state breakdown explaining population growth, ozone holes, biodiversity loss and climate change (Kaplan: 1994). Scarcities of critical environmental resources- especially cropland, fresh water, forests, and fish stocks- are powerfully contributing to mass violence, wars among countries, ethnic clashes, urban unrest, and insurgencies in key areas of the world (Homer-Dixon: 1996).


A recent study of Solomon Hsiang is showing that, the Syrian civil war is a resultant of the severe drought from 2006 to 2011 along with 70% reduction in annual rainfall in East Syria causing serious food crisis. It compelled to the rural people to migrate to the near cities and created a situation of unemployment, poverty and finally instability reaching to the civil war in 2011.


Fourthly, conflict among the super powers in order to retain their system of neocolonialism and balance of power centering energy, market, naval and strategic postures, ideology has become a defining trend of contemporary global order. The conflict and unrest in the Middle East is often termed as the result of the power politics over the vast oil resources. The growing tension in the Asia-pacific Rim region (recently in the South China Sea) among the super powers especially the USA vs. China (the Asia Pivot vs. New Silk Route) is fueling in order to establishing supremacy over regional economy and energy.

Whither South Asia?

Nuclear Bipolarity: The strategic framework in South Asia is comprised of a bipolar equation between India and Pakistan, inter-connected with a regional security complex and other major powers. In South Asia, nuclear arsenal is regarded as a great equalizer and the ultimate tool to counter the adversary’s present or future conventional strength.



One’s (India/Pakistan) strategists identify conventional military imbalance to that of other’s and believe nuclear weapons are a safe alternative to avoid a dangerous conventional arms race (Khalid, 2017). 

Indeed, the global nuclear powers- the USA, Russia, China, and France- involvement with these South Asian nuclear bipolar is shaping the regional geopolitical, geo-economic, geo-strategic, and diplomatic priorities within the greater global power matrix. For this nuclear bipolarity, the other regional small states- Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Afghanistan, Myanmar and others- are drawing huge attention among the global powers and institutions initiating a tradition of balance of power within the posture of the art of war.



Shadow of Terror and Militancy: The art of war in South Asian politics is changing drastically as well as dramatically due to the rise, development and having a close connection with the global terrorism and militancy. The rise and fall of the great Afghan civilizational politics is still in severe distress due to the strong foothold of religious militants i.e. Taliban having a caring relationship with both the statehood and global militants. Also the Afghan militant connection with the Pakistani militants provides a high breeding land for the spreading global terror within this region. India is also in strategic dilemma in controlling the increasing global terror connection with the regional militant and insurgent groups in the North-Eastern part (the Seven Sisters of India). Bangladesh is experiencing a huge geometric changes due to the rise of religious militancy. Over the years, militant groups in Bangladesh have grown in strength and reached the extent to where they are able to conduct organized terror campaigns all over the country. A close look at various militant acts conducted to date reveals that the problem has deeper roots and that all political forces in the country have been responsible for the present situation. In a nutshell, religious militancy brought about by Politicization of Islam, growth of Madrassas, upsurge of banned religious parties, perceived official patronage and ISIS/Al-Qaeda presence is the primary problem facing the whole South Asia (Shamrat, 2017).



Refugee Crisis: As the globe is struggling with migration and refugee crisis, South Asia is not out of this humanitarian crisis. Now a days the Rohingya refugee crisis is drawing a deep concern among the global communities pushing a sort of diplomatic and strategic pressure on the Myanmar government in order to control this crisis politically, culturally, nationally, and strategically. Even a huge Rohingya influx in Bangladesh portrayed a great humanitarian image globally though the state is in a great dilemma in order to manage this huge number of Rohigya people. This Rohingya refugee crisis is also impacting the demographic politics of Bangladesh, India, Pakistan and others.



Recently Indian pressure on the refugees living in several Indian states in order to driven them away from the land is fueling the South Asian refugee crisis from a great height. Sri Lankan statehood is struggling to form a strong nationhood due to their tamil ethnic problem.




Geo-economic War: In global as well as South Asian politics of 21st century, all types of economic activity- trade, access to finance, and investment- are being used as weapons and tools of disruption. Faced with war-weary publics and tightening budgets, global as well as regional powers are projecting power through their influence over the global economy, finance, and trade, and through their control over multinational corporations domiciled in their countries (Leonard, 2016: 16). As the South Asian region is becoming a huge market for the geo-economic power engines, the states of this region is becoming battlegrounds where political, strategic and diplomatic revenges initiated as a form of geo-economic war.



The USA framed the ‘Asia Pivot’ policy considering the growing importance of the Asia-Pacific region where the South Asian states- India, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, and Myanmar- are playing a key role in countering the rising global economic giant China. China portrayed its ‘Belt and Road Initiative (BRI)’ in order to establish itself one of the global powers where neighboring South Asian nations would be the basement of Chinese neo-imperialism. China’s huge investment in connectivity, energy projects, sea ports, economic zones, business development and so on in Myanmar, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Nepal and others draws tension among the global as well as regional powers. India’s ‘Cotton Route’ also places the neo-power engine in a great strategic position within the South Asian power matrix. India’s spreading involvement with Bangladesh, Bhutan, Myanmar, Sri Lanka, Afghanistan and others is strengthening the nation’s growing economic muscle.



Water Dispute: Due to regional scarcity of water, India has had long-standing disputes with its South Asian neighbors over the regulation and distribution of shared water resources, particularly rivers. These disputes are intensifying, as rising demand outpaces a shrinking supply of fresh water. In addition, as climate change alters weather patterns and shrinks glaciers, the quantity of water in these river systems is expected to become increasingly erratic, leading to a higher frequency of severe floods and droughts. In the long-term, experts predict, the quantity of water in these river systems will decrease, especially in the Indus River system. The combination of these two trends- increasing demand plus decreasing supply and access- is likely to exacerbate disputes over regional water resources. Thus far, conflicts between India and other nations have been mediated through a combination of treaties and international arbitration. As a number of rivers flow across national boundaries, these agreements govern water allocation between India and its neighbors and develop a protocol for hydrological construction projects. Despite a history of cooperation, the likelihood of conflict between India and Pakistan over shared river resources is expected to increase.



Due to Pakistan’s heavy reliance on the Indus system, as well as India’s control and damming of many of its major tributaries, increased shortages are liable to translate into increased tensions. To the northeast, India is also likely to face ongoing disputes with Nepal and Bangladesh over flood control and river diversion. However, the risk of armed interstate conflict is minor. Nepal and Bangladesh remain weak politically and militarily in relation to India, and they generally possess little leverage in negotiating water issues. Of greater concern are the substantial public health consequences of these disputes. Flooding, soil salinization and destruction of arable land in the northern Indian states of Bihar and Uttar Pradesh and in Bangladesh have displaced people and disrupted economic, social and political life. Such issues raise the potential for increased local-level, interprovincial and border-area conflict.



In addition, these disruptions threaten the quality of economic, social and political relationships between India and Nepal, and between India and Bangladesh (Condon, et al., 2006: xv).


Border Dispute: South Asian political analysis would not be fulfilled without analyzing the territorial disputes among the regional states. Because todays South Asian nations achieved their political territory as nationhood following the division of the Indian sub-continent in 1947. Since 1947 to till date, all the states are in physical as well as psychological war centering border dispute. India’s war with Pakistan portrays the territorial claim of both states regarding Kashmir. China is also involved in conflict with India centering Sikkim and Arunachal states of India. Recently the ‘Doklam Crisis’ fueled a huge tension between China and India-Bhutan nexus. Border killing in Bangladesh-India border areas is also spreading tension where the cornerstone of trust and friendship is weakening day by day. Also India’s concern regarding its North-Eastern part sketching a geopolitical tension among the bordering nations.



The pattern of the art of war in contemporary global politics is changing rapidly due to the intrusion of techno-strategic revolution. The influence of non-state actors along with several strategic principles like balance of power, collective security, geopolitical power projection, chemical warfare, information warfare, nuclear warfare, space warfare are shaping the postmodern pattern of war where the actors are involved in ‘Mind Mapping’ and ‘Issue Making’ for ensuring multi-purposive interests. The art of war in contemporary global politics is threatening the natural character of the earth which finally may cause the destruction of the whole planet. In a nutshell a quotation of H G Wells can be presented urging immediate initiatives from the global communities as

         “If we don’t end war, war will end us”.

*Abu Sufian Shamrat, M.S.S. in Political Science, is a researcher in Bangladesh. Shamrat is the highest gold medal awardee in the history of Dhaka University convocations. He writes on political, social, global, as well as strategic issues in the leading national and international dailies and journals. He can be reached at: shamrat08du@yahoo.com

Bibliography

Clausewitz, Carl Von, 1968, On War, New York: Routledge and Kegan Paul

Condon, Emma, Patrick Hillmann, Justin King, Katharine Lang, and Alison Patz, 2009, ‘Resource Disputes in South Asia: Water Scarcity and the Potential for Interstate Conflict’, Workshop in International Public Affairs, June 1, Madison: Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System

Homer Dixon, T. F., 1996, ‘Environmental scarcity, Mass violence, and the limits to Ingenuity’, Current History, November, 359-365

Hsiang SM, Burke M, Miguel E., 2013, ‘Quantifying the influence of climate on human conflict’, Science, Vol. 341 (6151):1235367

Huntington, S. P., 1997, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order, New Delhi: Penguin Books India

Kaplan, Robert, 1994, ‘The Coming Anarchy’, Atlantic Monthly, Vol. 273, No. 2, February

Khalid, Asma, 2017, ‘Nuclear politics in South Asia’, Daily Times, October 19
Leonard, Mark (Eds.), 2016, Connectivity Wars: Why Migration, Finance and Trade are the Geo-economic Battlegrounds of the Future, London: European Council on Foreign Relations
Shamrat, Abu Sufian, 2017, ‘Religious Militancy in Bangladesh: Opinion Survey’, South Asia Journal, June 10

Tzu, Sun, 2002, The Art of War, Translated by Lionel Giles, New York: Dover Publications, Inc.
UNHCR, 2015, World At War: Forced Displacement in 2014, Geneva, Switzerland