18 AUGUST 2015

Ø  India and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) elevated their relationship to a comprehensive strategic partnership and undertook to “co-ordinate efforts to fight radicalisation and misuse of religion by groups and countries for inciting hatred, perpetrating and justifying terrorism or pursuing political aims.” This was announced in a joint statement after bilateral talks between Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Crown Prince Sheikh Mohammad Bin Zayed Al Nahyan in Abu Dhabi on Monday. The statement which encompasses joint military exercises and greater security cooperation is also significant in the way it indicts Pakistan and state-sponsored terror without naming the country.

Ø  The move by the United States to oppose any large-scale reforms in the United Nations Security Council does not match the promise President Barack Obama made to India, that it would back New Delhi’s candidacy for a permanent seat at the global decision-making body. Though U.S. Ambassador to India Richard Verma later said his country remained committed to its promise, Washington’s policy towards UNSC reforms still lacks clarity. If the U.S. is keen on reforming the Council, why did it, in the first place, team up with Russia and China to oppose negotiations on reforms? And the assertion by these countries that the prerogatives, including the veto power, of the existing permanent members should remain intact even if there are reforms, is tantamount to pre-empting any major reform. The UNSC, created in the post-War context, doesn’t actually reflect the changes that have occurred in the international system after the end of the Cold War. In a quarter century, the global economic architecture has undergone massive changes. The developing nations, including India, now play a bigger role in international affairs. But within the UN, the five permanent veto-wielding members still effectively take all the crucial decisions. The Indian position is that this “democracy deficit in the UN prevents effective multilateralism” in the global arena. The way the UNSC handled — or failed to handle — some of the recent crises would underscore the soundness of the Indian position. Take the examples of Libya and Syria. While the western nations are accused of distorting the UNSC mandate in Libya, the Security Council failed to reach a consensus on how the Syrian crisis may be resolved. This clearly points to a worsening institutional crisis within the UNSC. Meaningful reform of the Council to make it more representative and democratic would strengthen the UN to address the challenges of a changing world more effectively. India’s demand for a permanent seat has to be looked into, duly considering the merits of the case. It is the world’s largest democracy and Asia’s third largest economy. The Indian Army is the largest contributor to the UN peacekeeping mission since the inception of the mission. More important, India’s foreign policy has historically been aligned with world peace, and not with conflicts. As a permanent member of the UNSC it will be able to play a larger role concerning pressing international issues. But the latest development shows the path will not be smooth. New Delhi should continue its efforts to build a democratically evolved global consensus on restructuring the Security Council, at the same time pursuing bilateral diplomacy with the big powers. The permanent members ought to realise that there are much more serious issues at stake globally than their own so-called prerogatives, and they should be flexible in addressing those issues.

Ø  The announcement of a strategic partnership between India and the United Arab Emirates is being seen as a significant elevation of ties as well as a sign of India’s shift in the region. Equally it is a shift in foreign policy where security and terrorism take precedence over diplomacy in driving India’s interests. In terms of the region, the partnership is unique. But it is one of more than a dozen partnerships India has forged in the past decade including with the big economies of Russia, U.S., France, U.K., Germany and Japan but also with smaller neighbours like Afghanistan and Mongolia. “When you sign so many strategic partnerships, the term does lose some of its meaning,” agrees Sanjaya Baru of the International Institute of Strategic Studies. Others see strategic partnerships as a way of building “special” relations with several countries all at once, without being tied down to a military alliance or belonging to a bloc of any kind. In 2011, a study on the efficacy of India’s many strategic partnerships concluded that “the respectable nomenclature of a ‘Strategic Partner’ should be bestowed only on those countries with which there is a strong and mutually beneficial relationship in all the three sectors of political-diplomatic, defence and economic cooperation.”  Like the UAE, India has signed defence agreements with several countries in the region including Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and Oman. While they have had some counter-terror cooperation on exchanging information, they have seen closer maritime cooperation under a Defence cooperation agreement signed in 2003 where the Indian navy holds regular port visits, and anti-piracy exercises.

Ø  Prime Minister Narendra Modi concluded his two-day visit to the United Arab Emirates in style by addressing a massive community reception in Dubai, where he not only lavished praise on the 2.6 million strong Indian community in the UAE but also called for a standing ovation for Crown Prince Sheikh Mohammad Bin Zayed Al Nahyan for allotting land for a temple in Abu Dhabi.