South Asia's Realist Fascination and the Alternatives

Click to increase image sizeClick to decrease image size

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to thank anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments on an earlier draft of this paper.

Notes

For an overview of this debate, see Keith Krause and Michael C. Williams, ‘Broadening the Agenda of Security Studies: Politics and Methods’, Mershon International Studies Review, Vol. 40, No. 2 (October 1996), pp. 229–54.

The definition of South Asia, particularly its geographical and geo-strategic boundaries, is an issue of considerable debate. Without indulging into this definitional debate, this paper, for the sake of analytical convenience and coherence, includes India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka and Nepal within the purview of its discussion. However, primary focus will be on India and Pakistan for the simple reason that they have greater impact than others in shaping the regional security landscape. For a discussion on the definition of South Asia, see Partha S. Ghosh, Cooperation and Conflict in South Asia (Dhaka: University Press, 1989), pp. 4–6.

Sumit Ganguly, Conflict Unending: India–Pakistan Tensions Since 1947 (New York: Columbia University Press, 2002).

A.K.M. Abdus Sabur, ‘South Asian Security in the Post-Cold War Era: Issues and Outlook’, in Ifthekaruzzaman (ed.), South Asia's Security: Primacy of Internal Dimension (Dhaka: Academic Publishers, 1994), p. 1.

Realism is not a single body of thought; diverse perspectives inhere in realism, although there is a broad agreement on the fundamental assumptions of the theory. For classical realist arguments, see E.H. Carr, The Twenty Years' Crisis, 1919–1939 (New York: Harper and Row, 1964); Hans J. Morgenthau (revised by Kenneth W. Thompson), Politics among Nations: The Struggle for Power and Peace, 6th ed. (New Delhi: Kalyani Publishers, 1985). For the neo-realist argument, see Kenneth Waltz, Theory of International Politics (Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1979); Stephen M. Walt, Origins of Alliances (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1987); John Mearsheimer, The Tragedy of Great Powers Politics (New York: W.W. Norton, 2001). For an assessment of realism after the end of the Cold War, see Michael E. Brown et al. (eds), The Perils of Anarchy: Contemporary Realism and International Security (London: MIT Press, 1995).

Chetan Kumar, ‘A Chronology of Cooperation: 1947–1995’, in Kanti P. Bajpai et al., Brasstacks and Beyond: Perception and Management of Crisis in South Asia (New Delhi: Manohar, 1995), p. 115.

C. Raja Mohan, ‘Toward Cooperative Security in South Asia’, available at http://www.southasianmedia.net/conference/Regional_Cooperation/toward.htm

This line of argument is based on Interdependence theory. Some major works on this include: Robert O. Keohane and Joseph S. Nye, Jr, Power and Interdependence: World Politics in Transition (Boston: Little, Brown, 1978); Stephen D. Krasner (ed.), International Regimes (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1983); Robert Axelrod, The Evolution of Cooperation (New York: Basic Books, 1984); Robert O. Keohane, After Hegemony: Cooperation and Discord in the World Political Economy (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1984); Kenneth A. Oye (ed.), Cooperation under Anarchy (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1986).

As Dahal and Pandey observe: ‘The idea of comprehensive security [in the context of South Asia] does not necessarily exclude military capabilities and does not envisage a weak state but rather places emphasis on the non-military threats to security and ways and means to fuse these into a larger state security apparatus’. See Dev Raj Dahal and Nishchal Nath Pandey (eds), Comprehensive Security in South Asia (New Delhi: Manohar, 2006), p. 11.

K.C. Pant, ‘Introductory Address’, in Raja Ramanna (ed.), National Security and Modern Technology, USI National Security Lecture Series (New Delhi: United Services Institution of India, 1988), p. 4, quoted in Kanti Bajpai, ‘India: Modified Structuralism’, in Muthiah Alagappa (ed.), Asian Security Practice: Material and Ideational Influences (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1998), p. 164.

The idea of comprehensive security was initially developed by the Japanese Government, which emphasized economic and diplomatic means to advance their country's security interest than merely relying on the military means. The idea broadened the military-only focus of national security to include economic and political dimensions and postulated to address security problematics at the domestic, bilateral, regional and international level. Later, ASEAN states adopted the idea of comprehensive security emphasizing ‘balanced development’ and ‘national resilience’. On comprehensive security, see Tsuneo Akaha, ‘Japan's Comprehensive Security Policy’, Asian Survey, Vol. 31, No. 4 (April 1991), pp. 324–40; David Dewitt, ‘Common, Comprehensive, and Cooperative Security’, Pacific Review, Vol. 7, No. 1 (1994), pp. 1–15.

Mahbub ul Haq Human Development Centre, Human Development in South Asia 2005: Human Security in South Asia (Karachi: Oxford University Press, 2006), p. 7.

P.R. Chari and Sonika Gupta (eds), Human Security in South Asia: Gender, Energy, Migration and Globalisation (New Delhi: Social Science Press, 2003), p. 12.

Proponents of human security posit that security must be ‘centered on people – not states’. See Commission on Human Security, Human Security Now, New York, 2003, p. 2, available at http://www.humansecurity-chs.org/finalreport/English/FinalReport.pdf. Two perspectives are discernible in the analysis of human security. The first perspective is developed by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), which emphasizes indirect threats to human beings that emanate from economic and environmental problems. It calls for ensuring ‘freedom from want’. The second perspective is developed by Canada, which puts greater emphasis on direct threats which arise from national/societal and international violence. Its basic aim is to ensure ‘freedom from fear’. For a robust treatment on the UNDP and Canadian origins of human security conceptualization, see Kanti Bajpai, ‘Human Security: Concept and Measurement’, Kroc Institute Occasional Paper #19:OP:1, available at http://www.nd.edu/~krocinst/ocpapers/op_19_1.PDF#search='human%20security

Nils Petter Gleditsch, ‘The Liberal Moment Fifteen Years On’, International Studies Quarterly, Vol. 52, No. 4 (December 2008), pp. 691–712.

For an overview on South Asia's recurring pattern of war, see Sumit Ganguly, The Origins of War in South Asia, 2nd edn (Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1995).

On this issue, see Shelton U Kodikara (ed.), South Asian Strategic Issues: Sri Lankan Perspectives (New Delhi: Sage Publications, 1990), particularly three papers: Bertram E.S.J. Bastiampillai, ‘Ethnic Conflict in South Asia and Inter-State Relations Especially in Relations to Sri Lanka’, pp. 82–115; A. Sivarajah, ‘Indo-Sri Lanka Relations and Sri Lanka's Ethnic Crisis: The Tamil Nadu Factor’, pp. 135–59; Shelton U. Kodikara, ‘The Indo-Sri Lanka Agreement of July 1987: Retrospect’, pp. 160–74.

Sandy Gordon, ‘Resources and Instability in South Asia’, Survival, Vol. 35, No. 2 (Summer 1993), pp. 66–87.

For a discussion on this issue, see Nurul Islam and Md. Humayun Kabir, ‘Indo-Bangladesh Common Rivers and Water Diplomacy’, BIISS Paper 5, Bangladesh Institute of International and Strategic Studies, December 1986; Ashok Swain, ‘Conflict over Water: The Ganges Water Dispute’, Security Dialogue, Vol. 24, No. 4 (1993), pp. 429–39.

For example, the issue of Baglihar dam between India and Pakistan is a case in point. Moreover, it is noteworthy that rivers in Kashmir, although neglected in standard analysis, are a formidable barrier in the resolution of the Kashmir dispute.

On the linkage between environmental degradation and conflict in the context of India and Bangladesh, see Narottam Gaan, Environmental Degradation and Conflict: The Case of Bangladesh–India (Dhaka: Parma, 1998); Nahid Islam, ‘The Ganges Water Dispute: Environmental and Related Impacts on Bangladesh’, BIISS Journal (Dhaka), Vol. 12, No. 3 (July 1991), pp. 263–92.

Shelton U Kodikara (ed.), External Compulsions of South Asian Politics (New Delhi: Sage Publications, 1993), p. 8.

US National Intelligence Council, Mapping the Global Future (Washington, DC: National Intelligence Council, 2004), available at http://www.foia.cia.gov/2020/2020.pdf

Alagappa, Asian Security Practice (note 10), p. ix.

The Kashmir dispute has led the two countries to at least three wars (in 1948, 1965 and 1999) and numerous crises since their emergence as independent states in 1947. For a historical background of the Kashmir dispute, see Sisir Gupta, Kashmir: A Study in India–Pakistan Relations (New York: Asia Publishing House, 1966); Sumit Ganguly, Conflict Unending (note 3).

Enclaves are pieces of land with juridical sovereignty of a particular state, which are located within the territory of another state and do not have land connection with the mother country. There are over one hundred such enclaves within the territories of India and Bangladesh, which were created at the time of partition in 1947 in accordance with the provisions of Bengal Boundary Commission. Unless the government of the state in which the enclave is located permits, the people of that enclave have no outlet to communicate with the mother country or the outside world. This is a constant source of friction between India and Bangladesh. On their enclave disputes, see ‘India–Bangladesh Conflicts’, South Asia Media Net, available at http://www.southasianmedia.net/profile/india/india_interstateconflicts1.cfm

For a discussion on this point, see Lorne J. Kavic, India's Quest for Security: Defense Policies, 1947–1965 (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1967).

Sajjad Hyder, Foreign Policy of Pakistan: Reflections of an Ambassador (Lahore: Progressive Publishers, 1987), pp. 74–5.

Ifthekaruzzaman, ‘The India Doctrine: Relevance for Bangladesh’, in M.G. Kabir and Shaukat Hassan (eds), Issues and Challenges Facing Bangladesh Foreign Policy (Dhaka: Bangladesh Society for International Studies, 1989), p. 38.

Shelton U Kodikara, Strategic Factors in Inter-State Relations in South Asia (Canberra: Strategic and Defence Studies Centre, Australian National University, 1983).

Bhabani Sen Gupta, ‘The Indian Doctrine’, India Today, 31 August 1983, p. 20.

For details on those episodes, see Devin T. Hagerty, ‘India's Regional Security Doctrine’, Asian Survey, Vol. 31, No. 4 (April 1991), pp. 351–63.

R. Chandran, ‘New Chinese Missiles Target India: US Daily’, The Times of India, 11 July 1997.

The Pressler Amendment, named after Senator Larry Pressler who tabled the bill, is a Pakistan-specific anti-proliferation legislation enacted by the US Congress in 1985. This legislation was designed to cut off US aid and government-to-government military sales to Pakistan unless the President certified at the beginning of each fiscal year that Pakistan did not ‘possess a nuclear explosive device and that the proposed U.S. assistance program will significantly reduce the risk that Pakistan will possess a nuclear explosive device’. From 1985 to 1989 President Reagan and President Bush certified every year that Pakistan did not possess a nuclear explosive device in order to facilitate military and economic aid to that country. They did so despite strong evidence that Pakistan was making significant advances in acquiring nuclear weapons capability.

The Simla Agreement was signed in 1972 between India and Pakistan in the aftermath of the 1971 Indo-Pakistani War, which is thought to be favourable to the former state.

For more exposition on the crisis and the rise of a nuclear deterrence system in South Asia, see Devin T. Hagerty, ‘Nuclear Deterrence in South Asia: The 1990 Indo-Pakistani Crisis’, International Security, Vol. 20, No. 3 (Winter 1995–96), pp. 79–114.

The News, 10 February 1992.

On this point, see Bhumitra Chakma, ‘Toward Pokhran II: Explaining India's Nuclearisation Process’, Modern Asian Studies, Vol. 39, No. 1 (February 2005), pp. 229–30.

‘Excerpt from Report by Pakistan TV on 19 March (2005)’, available at http://www.presidentofpakistan.gov.pk/NewsEventsDetail.aspx?NewsEventID=1416

On the Kargil conflict, see John H. Gill, Military Operations during the Kargil Conflict (Washington, DC: US National Defense University, 2003).

Sumit Ganguly, ‘Indo-Pakistani Nuclear Issues and Stability/Instability Paradox’, Studies in Conflict and Terrorism, Vol. 18, No. 4 (October–December 1995), pp. 325–34.

On the 2001–02 Indo-Pakistani military standoff, see V.K. Sood and Pravin Sawhney, Operation Parakram: The War Unfinished (New Delhi: Sage, 2003).

On this episode, see International Institute for Strategic Studies, ‘Terror in Mumbai’, Strategic Comments, Vol. 14, No. 10 (November 2008), pp. 1–2.

An anonymous foreign ministry official of Bangladesh in a personal interview with this author in August 2008 said that the dominant view in the Bangladesh's Ministry of Foreign Affairs is that India's influence can be balanced out by invoking the China factor. Therefore, the balance of power strategy is evident in Bangladesh's security approach.

Harsh V. Pant, ‘India and Bangladesh: Will the Twain Ever Meet?’, Asian Survey, Vol. 47, No. 2 (March/April 2007), p. 234.

Nira Wickramasinghe, ‘Sri Lanka: The Many Faces of Security’, in Alagappa, Asian Security Practice (note 10), p. 371.

For a discussion on this point, see Manish Dabhade and Harsh V. Pant, ‘Coping with Challenges to Sovereignty: Sino-Indian Rivalry and Nepal's Foreign Policy’, Contemporary South Asia, Vol. 13, No. 2 (June 2004), pp. 157–69.

Shelton U. Kodikara, ‘The Security of South Asia in the 1990s: International Change and Domestic Dimension’, BIISS Journal, Vol. 13, No. 2 (April 1992), pp. 168–69.

Mohammad Humayun Kabir, ‘The Need for Confidence Building Measures and Security Cooperation in South Asia’, in Mohammad Humayun Kabir (ed.), Confidence Building Measures and Security Cooperation in South Asia: Challenges in the New Century (Dhaka: Academic Press and Publishers, 2002), p. 10.

Padmaja Murthy, ‘The Gujral Doctrine and Beyond’, Strategic Analysis, Vol. 23, No. 4 (April 1999), pp. 639–52.

E. Sridharan, ‘Improving India–Pakistan Relations: International Relations Theory, Nuclear Deterrence and Possibilities for Economic Cooperation’, Contemporary South Asia, Vol. 14, No. 3 (September 2005), p. 322.

Zafar Nawaz Jaspal, Nuclear Risk Reduction Measures and Restraint Regime in South Asia (Colombo: International Centre for Strategic Studies, 2004), p. 7.

A candid analysis on this can be found in Mitu Sengupta, ‘How the State Changed its Mind: Power, Politics and the Origins of India's Market Reforms’, Economic and Political Weekly, Vol. 43, No. 21 (24 May 2008), pp. 35–42.

According to Peter Lavoy, ‘Experts recently stopped asking if India will become a great power and began to wonder what kind of great power it will become’. See Peter R. Lavoy, ‘India in 2006: A New Emphasis on Engagement’, Asian Survey, Vol. XLVII, No. 1 (January/February 2007), p. 114.

Pallavi Aiyar, ‘Crisis Challenge for Sino-Indian Trade’, Asia Times Online, 20 February 2009, available at http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China_Business/KB20Cb01.html

Alka Acharya, ‘India–China Relations: Towards a “Shared Vision”’, Economic and Political Weekly, Vol. 43, No. 4 (26 January 2008), p. 12.

The Times of India, 8 March 2008.

For a discussion on Pakistan–India trade relations, see Rashid Ahmad Khan, ‘Pakistan–India Trade: Route to Intra-regional and Inter-regional connectivity’, IPRI Journal (Islamabad), Vol. 8, No. 2 (Summer 2008), pp. 19–32.

Rehman Sobhan, Promoting Cooperation in South Asia: An Agenda for the 13th SAARC Summit (Dhaka: University Press, 2004), p. 92.

Shaukat Hassan, Environmental Issues and Security in South Asia, Adelphi Paper No. 262 (London: International Institute for Strategic Studies, 1991).

Sanjay Bhardwaj, ‘Cooperative Security in South Asia: The Future Outlook’, in Farooq Sobhan (ed.), Strengthening Cooperation and Security in South Asia Post 9/11 (Dhaka: University Press, 2004), p. 21.

A few examples include: Ifthekaruzzaman (ed.), South Asia's Security: Primacy of Internal Dimension (Dhaka: Academic Publishers, 1994); Nancy Jetly (ed.), Regional Security in South Asia: The Ethno-Sectarian Dimensions (Dhaka: University Press, 2000).

For a discussion on India's role in the insurgency in the CHT, see Subir Bhaumik, ‘Strategic Pawn: Indian Policy in the Chittagong Hill Tracts’, in Subir Bhaumik, Meghna Guhathakurta and Sabyasachi Basu Ray Chaudhury (eds), On the Edge: Essays on the Chittagong Hill Tracts (Kolkata: Calcutta Research Group, 1997), pp. 127–38.

Raju G.C. Thomas, South Asian Security in the 1990s, Adelphi Paper No. 278 (London: International Institute for Strategic Studies, 1993), p. 1.

For a background on South Asia's energy security, see Lawrence Saez, ‘U.S. Policy and Energy Security in South Asia: Economic Prospects and Strategic Implications’, Asian Survey, Vol. 47, No. 4 (July/August 2007), pp. 657–78; Qazi Khaliquzzaman Ahmad, M. Anwarul Azim and Abdul Awal Mintoo (eds), Energy Security in Bangladesh (Dhaka: Academic Press and Publishers Library, 2005).

Quentin Peel, ‘India's Terms of Engagement’, Financial Times, 11 November 2004.

Ifthekaruzzaman, Regional Economic Trends and South Asian Security (Dhaka: University Press, 1997), p. 8.

U.S. Bajpai (ed.), India's Security (New Delhi: Lancer, 1983), p. 9.

Farooq Sobhan, ‘Comprehensive Security in South Asia: A View from Bangladesh’, in Dahal and Pandey, Comprehensive Security in South Asia (note 9), p. 51.

For more exposition on this, see Robert D. Kaplan, ‘The Coming Anarchy’, The Atlantic Monthly, Vol. 273, No. 2 (February 1994), pp. 44–76.

Commission on Human Security, Human Security Now (note 14), p. 4.

A substantive body of literature on human security in South Asia has emerged in recent years. Some representative writings include: Abdur Rob Khan (ed.), Globalization and Non Traditional Security in South Asia (Dhaka: Academic Press and Publishers, 2001); Chari and Gupta, Human Security in South Asia (note 13); Mahbub ul Haq Human Development Centre, Human Development in South Asia 2005 (note 12); Ajay Darshan Behera, Violence, Terrorism and Human Security in South Asia (Dhaka: University Press, 2008); Gamini Keerawella, Evolving Security Discourse in Sri Lanka: From National Security to Human Security (Dhaka: University Press, 2008); Dhruba Kumar, Nepali State, Society and Human Security: An Infinite Discourse (Dhaka: University Press, 2008).

Mahbub ul Haq Human Development Centre, Human Development in South Asia 2005 (note 12), p. 12.

Ibid., p. 208.

‘Pakistan Close to Bottom on Global Gender Gap Report’, Daily Times, 13 November 2008.

A.K.M. Abdus Sabur, ‘Evolving Theoretical Perspective on Human Security: The South Asian Context’, in Chari and Gupta, Human Security in South Asia (note 13), p. 46.

For a background on the issue, see Syed Mahmud Ali, The Fearful State: Power, People, and Internal War in South Asia (London: Zed Books, 1993).

Gamini B. Keerawella, ‘State, National Security and Collective Identities: Security Implications of Ethnic Secessionist Movements in Post-Cold War South Asia’, in Jetly, Regional Security in South Asia (note 62), p. 207.

Behera, Violence, Terrorism and Human Security in South Asia (note 72), p. 217.

ul Haq Human Development Centre, Human Development in South Asia 2005 (note 12), p. 7.

Ikram Sehgal, ‘Concept of National Security’, News (Rawalpindi), 13 November 2008.

Sobhan, Promoting Cooperation in South Asia (note 59), p. 4.

‘Pakistan Army Still Considers India a Threat: Mullen’, Times of India, 6 July 2009.

A case of arms smuggling in a court in Bangladesh implicates the ISI in the transfer of arms to insurgent groups in India's Northeast region through Bangladesh. See ‘Liakat Tells the Same Story Too’, The Daily Star (Dhaka), 1 June 2009.

Mohammed Ayoob, The Third World Security Predicament: State Making, Regional Conflict, and the International System (Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner, 1995), p. 28.

For an elaboration on this point, see Atul Mishra, ‘Theorising State Sovereignty in South Asia’, Economic and Political Weekly, Vol. 43, No. 40 (4 October 2008), pp. 65–72.

The proxy war phenomenon in Northeast India is discussed in Subir Bhaumik, Insurgent Crossfire: North-East India (New Delhi: Lancer Publishers, 1996).

Behera, Violence, Terrorism and Human Security in South Asia (note 72), p. 3.