1 00:00:08,620 --> 00:00:17,380 So for those of us on UK time, good afternoon and welcome to Week for here at the University of Oxford. 2 00:00:17,380 --> 00:00:27,220 That's week four of our autumn term. And this is the fourth seminar in modern South Asian Seminar series. 3 00:00:27,220 --> 00:00:32,710 We in this series are very grateful to draw on support across the University of Oxford. 4 00:00:32,710 --> 00:00:40,660 But I'd like to give special thanks to Professor Imray, banker who is the convenor of the series, and also to Clare Salter. 5 00:00:40,660 --> 00:00:47,950 And Stephen, my need for that administrative support from the Asian Studies Centre at some Antony's College and 6 00:00:47,950 --> 00:00:54,250 from the contemporary South Asian Studies Programme in the Oxford School of Global and Area Studies. 7 00:00:54,250 --> 00:00:57,100 And the latter is the programme that I direct. 8 00:00:57,100 --> 00:01:05,080 My name is Kate Sullivan De Strada and I am the Associate Professor in the International Relations of South Asia. 9 00:01:05,080 --> 00:01:12,960 And today, I'm absolutely delighted to welcome Dr Happyland Jacob, who is Associate Professor. 10 00:01:12,960 --> 00:01:17,310 I'm just getting a comment from somebody saying they can't hear me. 11 00:01:17,310 --> 00:01:21,940 Could somebody else let me know if I'm if I'm audible? Thank give you. 12 00:01:21,940 --> 00:01:31,510 OK. Well, Dr. Jacov, this one, though, if you can hear me, I'm delighted to welcome Dr. Happyland Jacob, 13 00:01:31,510 --> 00:01:36,710 who is associate professor of diplomacy and disarmament at The Jawa. 14 00:01:36,710 --> 00:01:43,600 How? Laurel Nehru University in New Delhi. Dr. Jacob teaches nuclear disarmament. 15 00:01:43,600 --> 00:01:48,280 Indian foreign policy. And national security. And international relations. 16 00:01:48,280 --> 00:01:54,940 And I think he's particularly well known for his work on the India Pakistan relationship, 17 00:01:54,940 --> 00:02:04,720 where his books Line of Control and Line of Fire stand out as really unique contributions to our understanding of that bilateral. 18 00:02:04,720 --> 00:02:10,540 I think what really strikes me about Dr. Jacobs work is that he's one of the few scholars of Indian foreign 19 00:02:10,540 --> 00:02:19,270 policy who writes from the region for the region rather than for U.S. or Western European policy consumption. 20 00:02:19,270 --> 00:02:26,470 And I think that really makes his work stand out just quite unique in its objectives and its arguments. 21 00:02:26,470 --> 00:02:33,940 And, of course, the other really unique dimension to his work is his sort of very hands on fieldwork. 22 00:02:33,940 --> 00:02:42,340 So travelling along the line of fire with both the Indian and the Pakistani armies as he writes in his book, The Line of Control. 23 00:02:42,340 --> 00:02:46,090 So we're really excited to have you with us. 24 00:02:46,090 --> 00:02:55,450 Dr. Jacob. We're also excited to be adding with this event another of your many videos, because, 25 00:02:55,450 --> 00:03:00,790 of course, you are a prominent public intellectual, a columnist for The Hindu. 26 00:03:00,790 --> 00:03:07,930 And also you have a very popular series hosted by The Wire under the rubric of national security conversation. 27 00:03:07,930 --> 00:03:13,750 So carrying on a number of conversations you've been involved in in the past. 28 00:03:13,750 --> 00:03:22,990 We'll hear from you today on domestic audience costs and firm policy making in India, recent shifts in the BJP strategy. 29 00:03:22,990 --> 00:03:29,770 Dr. Jacob will speak for about 40 to 45 minutes and then we'll have time for just a small number of questions. 30 00:03:29,770 --> 00:03:39,230 So if anybody wants to put their questions in the Q&A box, I will monitor those as Dr. Jacob speaks and select two, 31 00:03:39,230 --> 00:03:43,150 two or three of the most hard hitting to raise at the end of his talk. 32 00:03:43,150 --> 00:03:49,300 So without much further ado, Dr. Jacob Abati, you. Thank you, kid. 33 00:03:49,300 --> 00:03:54,490 Thank you so much for that, for that very generous and kind introduction. 34 00:03:54,490 --> 00:03:58,810 In fact, very delighted. Good afternoon to all of you. It's evening here. 35 00:03:58,810 --> 00:04:06,520 Good afternoon, everyone. Joining me from from New Delhi, I'm delighted and honoured to speak at the South Asia. 36 00:04:06,520 --> 00:04:16,220 Seven out of cities at the state got in his coatless. I'm grateful to Professor Gates Seventy-one and Ingrid Bonga for their very kind invitation, 37 00:04:16,220 --> 00:04:22,630 how they've been focussed, where it might have been possible for me to be dead in person by those entirely. 38 00:04:22,630 --> 00:04:31,350 So I the title suggests I should put my time or as well as the title suggests. 39 00:04:31,350 --> 00:04:39,190 I going to focus on the interplay between India's foreign policy and audience course, of what the current government in India. 40 00:04:39,190 --> 00:04:50,460 I will do so using two contemporary examples. So traditionally in India, foreign policy didn't really matter in domestic politics or put differently, 41 00:04:50,460 --> 00:04:57,720 foreign policy pursuits were more or less kept aloof from domestic politics as a debate on foreign policy. 42 00:04:57,720 --> 00:05:01,560 Gates did not get you any votes out of the way. 43 00:05:01,560 --> 00:05:07,470 But major foreign policy losses would cost you what's traditionally foreign policy was 44 00:05:07,470 --> 00:05:14,370 rarely used in election campaigns and really did not resonate with the public as it. 45 00:05:14,370 --> 00:05:24,570 Also, the central of this, the political elite was not particularly focussed on esoteric topics such as foreign policy and defence policy. 46 00:05:24,570 --> 00:05:33,240 This is traditionally, I would say, in Studio seven, and while all felt foreign policy kind of sort of went to some in the Indian political class. 47 00:05:33,240 --> 00:05:42,810 Now, if you add this, add to this the small number of career bureaucrats in the country who by training and socialisation, 48 00:05:42,810 --> 00:05:51,000 had not been particularly creative or proactive. What you get is even more foreign policy comes out of activism. 49 00:05:51,000 --> 00:06:02,850 Having said that, I should also say that since the 1990s, constituent units of the Indian states have started to influence the Indian unions, 50 00:06:02,850 --> 00:06:09,720 the central government, foreign policy, making them more sort of assertive about it. 51 00:06:09,720 --> 00:06:11,450 I actually tried to clarify this. 52 00:06:11,450 --> 00:06:21,270 It's that intervention was more prominent and pronounced in the foreign economic policy making than in the strategic or national security threat. 53 00:06:21,270 --> 00:06:28,740 I spoke with CoverGirl in contrast to the intimacy of conditions under which say, for example, 54 00:06:28,740 --> 00:06:33,330 the Canadian sweets and the gentleman constitutions where the provinces were 55 00:06:33,330 --> 00:06:37,570 allowed to engage in foreign affairs with a certain amount of restrictions. 56 00:06:37,570 --> 00:06:44,730 The Indian constitution does not provide for subnational engagement in foreign affairs at all, and it's pretty clear about that. 57 00:06:44,730 --> 00:06:52,430 So despite the constitutionally sanctioned preponderance of the Indian Union, all our foreign policy matters. 58 00:06:52,430 --> 00:06:59,290 The senator has often been restrained by states from making foreign policy unilaterally. 59 00:06:59,290 --> 00:07:04,950 And I'm saying all of this by way of a back door ambassador with the added four or five reasons as to why. 60 00:07:04,950 --> 00:07:09,060 The first is the 1990s. The states started playing a second. 61 00:07:09,060 --> 00:07:16,140 I'm on the road in the country's foreign policy, making one because of the special constitutional status given to some of the states, 62 00:07:16,140 --> 00:07:23,520 negative one because which, of course, doesn't exist anymore, as you know, the political weight of seven state leaders. 63 00:07:23,520 --> 00:07:28,440 So they have a certain amount of indirect influence on the senator's foreign policy making. 64 00:07:28,440 --> 00:07:33,930 And thirdly, the phenomenon of coalition politics, empowering, reaching of the parties outside. 65 00:07:33,930 --> 00:07:42,540 We have also had a certain impact on the states dissenters, foreign policy making. 66 00:07:42,540 --> 00:07:52,560 Then, of course, the globalisation induced changes because the investments were sought by United States and not necessarily always by the centre. 67 00:07:52,560 --> 00:07:57,510 You had a situation where the states were able to influence the central government. 68 00:07:57,510 --> 00:08:05,110 And finally, the border, the states of India, Jammu and Kashmir, the north and northeastern states, southern state like states like Iowa. 69 00:08:05,110 --> 00:08:11,520 But we're also able to influence the central government's water policy since the 1990s. 70 00:08:11,520 --> 00:08:12,450 But since that area, 71 00:08:12,450 --> 00:08:21,470 all of this was done in a very informal way and also devotes very little strategic or national security content in such intervention. 72 00:08:21,470 --> 00:08:27,000 It goes mostly at different economic policy making, never now. 73 00:08:27,000 --> 00:08:32,890 So here I come to the set the last 10 years. Let's take a look at the last six to 10 years time. 74 00:08:32,890 --> 00:08:39,390 I, unable to see things have changed over the years because of because of these two prominent reasons. 75 00:08:39,390 --> 00:08:47,190 One despaired of Internet and access to information in various Indian languages. 76 00:08:47,190 --> 00:08:57,480 So, for example, in the India 2020, India has nearly 700 million Internet users across the country, and that's a huge number. 77 00:08:57,480 --> 00:09:07,160 So these people are now sort of in their position to understand, quote unquote, India's foreign policy engagements to some extent. 78 00:09:07,160 --> 00:09:17,370 And secondly, the politicians today are increasingly keen on politicising foreign policy for their own domestic political gains. 79 00:09:17,370 --> 00:09:22,230 So because foreign policy indeed figure in domestic politics, 80 00:09:22,230 --> 00:09:27,270 domestic political calculations didn't really shape foreign policy calculations and pursuits. 81 00:09:27,270 --> 00:09:30,720 And that's how the Senate audience scores. Did not matter. The. 82 00:09:30,720 --> 00:09:37,210 That point earlier. But now that is changing. Today, you have audience course making a difference. 83 00:09:37,210 --> 00:09:40,980 I've got it gets foreign policy making and contemplations outcome since. 84 00:09:40,980 --> 00:09:44,250 So unlike ever before in India's history, 85 00:09:44,250 --> 00:09:54,000 domestic political calculations and audience scores dictate the shaping of the country's foreign and security policy under the BJP government to date, 86 00:09:54,000 --> 00:09:59,180 key foreign and security policy pursuits are often not undertaken. 87 00:09:59,180 --> 00:10:07,920 If I put it that way. For their own sake. But to it. To domestic electoral outcomes and to speak convenient political Navitas. 88 00:10:07,920 --> 00:10:12,630 So as a result of all the domestic politicisation of foreign policy, 89 00:10:12,630 --> 00:10:20,370 there is today a breakdown of the broad foreign policy consensus that previously existed in the country. 90 00:10:20,370 --> 00:10:27,240 Now, I don't know. I don't want to overstate that point, but I would say that on the one hand, the larger population, 91 00:10:27,240 --> 00:10:33,500 the wider the population was not too concerned about foreign policy making. 92 00:10:33,500 --> 00:10:38,010 I also asked that as a rule, as a general rule and on the other hand, 93 00:10:38,010 --> 00:10:43,920 the Indian leaders were more focussed on winning the next elections are domestic political matters. 94 00:10:43,920 --> 00:10:52,530 They were not really keen on focussing on the use of their affairs, such as foreign policy, defence policy, national security expert, terrorism. 95 00:10:52,530 --> 00:11:02,700 There was a certain amount of consensus, broad political consensus that the country on political issues and that is clearly changing. 96 00:11:02,700 --> 00:11:13,200 So the because of the domestic politicisation of instead foreign policy, you have this kind of census that is breaking down today. 97 00:11:13,200 --> 00:11:19,290 So while traditionally foreign policy had the military impact on domestic political outcomes today, 98 00:11:19,290 --> 00:11:29,930 given the manner in which external behaviour of the country has been domestically politicised, the leadership seems to raise the domestic cause. 99 00:11:29,930 --> 00:11:33,600 Why are you making foreign policy decisions, as it were? 100 00:11:33,600 --> 00:11:41,640 Now, the Indian diaspora also effectively utilised to bite the current government, the BJP led government as never before. 101 00:11:41,640 --> 00:11:47,880 The party and the government speaks directly to the diaspora, especially in the United States and in Europe, 102 00:11:47,880 --> 00:11:53,490 and national honour of the country is a major ingredient in that sort of conversation. 103 00:11:53,490 --> 00:12:04,050 We often see the Indian leaders, the BJP leaders go abroad and talk to the diaspora, asked if they were Indian citizens with voting rights in India. 104 00:12:04,050 --> 00:12:16,200 Many of these arguments that they make abroad are intended to sort of sort of appeal to the diaspora community abroad, but often enough. 105 00:12:16,200 --> 00:12:22,080 Interestingly, the message is intended for a domestic audience that they are speaking to the diaspora communities. 106 00:12:22,080 --> 00:12:32,430 But the message is for audience by cook. So the huge diaspora receptions where the host country's leaders, like said Barack Obama or Donald Trump, 107 00:12:32,430 --> 00:12:38,330 are present at sort of the bike home in India, a major foreign policy achievement. 108 00:12:38,330 --> 00:12:41,850 So what what is the possibility and all of what I'm trying to say. 109 00:12:41,850 --> 00:12:45,850 So I think one of the one, you know, the brothers in. 110 00:12:45,850 --> 00:12:54,810 So what I'm trying to say. One of the striking features of the Modi governments foreign policy is its appetite for risk taking. 111 00:12:54,810 --> 00:13:03,780 So quite unlike the most of the previous governments fighting perhaps the exception of the DA Gandhi government. 112 00:13:03,780 --> 00:13:09,010 You have a government that is involved that is keen on taking risks. 113 00:13:09,010 --> 00:13:14,790 It has a clear majority and it seems to play it wants to play on the offensive 114 00:13:14,790 --> 00:13:20,520 and at undoing sort of the decades or the different severe strategic behaviour. 115 00:13:20,520 --> 00:13:32,940 So you at least actions, for example, at eat the these VSP tied up in surgical strikes against Pakistan in 2016 and the Audy after the Audy terror 116 00:13:32,940 --> 00:13:41,160 attacks and the battle for air strikes last year in the wake of the Wal-Mart terror attacks are all examples. 117 00:13:41,160 --> 00:13:47,820 In many ways of this new found offensive seek and risk taking tendency within the government today. 118 00:13:47,820 --> 00:13:55,300 Now, the question is what? What is notable is that the this risk taking is sort of unprecedented in many ways 119 00:13:55,300 --> 00:13:59,880 and without too much worry about the potential audience skorts associated with it. 120 00:13:59,880 --> 00:14:05,220 How do you explain that? In my mind, that's to my mind that's that's a major puzzle that needs to be explained. 121 00:14:05,220 --> 00:14:13,920 Secondly, traditionally, as I said earlier in deadliness, shied away from using foreign policy for domestic political purposes. 122 00:14:13,920 --> 00:14:22,600 However, the BJP government has broken that tradition. What explains this breaking of that prediction? 123 00:14:22,600 --> 00:14:30,460 13. How is it that Mr Modi's approval ratings soar despite major foreign policy and national security? 124 00:14:30,460 --> 00:14:35,660 Yes. I mean, you know, I have written about in the past, but look at the look at India's neighbourhood policy today. 125 00:14:35,660 --> 00:14:40,030 Look at the Elysee state line of actual control standoff with China today, 126 00:14:40,030 --> 00:14:45,800 unsuccessful Kashmir policy and vision way with Pakistan on on bringing peace to Kashmir. 127 00:14:45,800 --> 00:14:53,900 These are all, in my opinion, failures. And yet, Mr. Modi's and the BJP approval ratings are soaring and not going down. 128 00:14:53,900 --> 00:14:59,550 What explains this? Now, here is where I am trying to bring in the audience. 129 00:14:59,550 --> 00:15:02,450 Of course, argument sake, 130 00:15:02,450 --> 00:15:13,490 roughly defined as audience goes to roughly defined as the domestic price leader would be for making foreign fisc and then backing down. 131 00:15:13,490 --> 00:15:19,880 So the argument being that concern over a nation's reputation pushes the waters to sanction 132 00:15:19,880 --> 00:15:26,660 leaders who make empty threats because they have tarnished the nation's order in the Indian case. 133 00:15:26,660 --> 00:15:34,520 As I said, as I pointed out earlier, foreign policy did not play a huge role in domestic politics earlier. 134 00:15:34,520 --> 00:15:43,700 But it does now stop playing a bit of role in the recent years and far more prominently under the BJP after the BJP came to power in 2014. 135 00:15:43,700 --> 00:15:51,380 So to recap, foreign policy pursuits are undertaken by the BJP government with an eye on domestic politics. 136 00:15:51,380 --> 00:15:56,780 Foreign policy achievements are used to for domestic political gains. 137 00:15:56,780 --> 00:16:05,300 Now, why the theory of domestic courts talks about making threats and backing down by leaders. 138 00:16:05,300 --> 00:16:14,330 Not so much attention is paid to how leaders and governments sometimes we fully award acknowledging external threats, 139 00:16:14,330 --> 00:16:18,440 since doing so can cost, can be costly in some cases. 140 00:16:18,440 --> 00:16:22,560 So in such situations, I thought I'm going to describe that in a minute. 141 00:16:22,560 --> 00:16:32,330 In such situations, the government might simply refuse to acknowledge the presence of a of an imminent threat or an existing threat, as it were. 142 00:16:32,330 --> 00:16:34,980 So let's look at the two cases that I have in mind. 143 00:16:34,980 --> 00:16:45,730 The Wal-Mart terror attack last year in twenty nineteen and the India China military standoff on the line of control. 144 00:16:45,730 --> 00:16:48,010 And what happened thereafter, 145 00:16:48,010 --> 00:16:57,620 the even's is that the events that followed the twenty nine input WELLMARK that I can assure you showed that the BJP government adopted an aggressive 146 00:16:57,620 --> 00:17:06,620 posture towards Pakistan in tandem with a carefully choreographed domestic political narrative to suit its forthcoming election campaign. 147 00:17:06,620 --> 00:17:10,130 The ME election, the national election in India last year. 148 00:17:10,130 --> 00:17:16,820 How about the recent Silow Indian military standoff on the line of actual control in 20, 2010? 149 00:17:16,820 --> 00:17:21,020 A completely different story. The BJP led government, as I said earlier, 150 00:17:21,020 --> 00:17:28,400 refused to acknowledge the extent of incursions made by the Chinese People's Liberation Army, all designed the Indian border. 151 00:17:28,400 --> 00:17:33,350 Given how such an acknowledgement would have been particularly cost me for the ruling party. 152 00:17:33,350 --> 00:17:38,390 So let's let's examine the first case in in somewhat detail. 153 00:17:38,390 --> 00:17:45,270 So. This happened in the deep they put you on whatever attack happened in February 20, 154 00:17:45,270 --> 00:17:51,800 20 close to the national election, and it would have been tough for the government not to do anything. 155 00:17:51,800 --> 00:17:58,110 So that beat the gauntlet and grabbed the opportunity to carry out a strike against Pakistan. 156 00:17:58,110 --> 00:18:06,110 A military strike against Pakistan. Much of what unfolded thereafter, including the release release of the captured pilot. 157 00:18:06,110 --> 00:18:09,230 But did Pattakos, who was captured by the Pakistan. 158 00:18:09,230 --> 00:18:16,640 By the Pakistanis that was released there after all of that was used astutely by the party for political gains? 159 00:18:16,640 --> 00:18:21,410 That how we'd force the Brown government to hand him over to the Indian side? 160 00:18:21,410 --> 00:18:32,540 What I would say that it made several trips and followed up with the proper action between February 20, 19 and June twenty nineteen. 161 00:18:32,540 --> 00:18:42,200 If you actually do have been counting the key BJP leaders, cubie deputies involved last year between 20 19 February and 20 19 June, 162 00:18:42,200 --> 00:18:47,760 then walk to Pakistan around 19 times in major election speeches. 163 00:18:47,760 --> 00:18:54,800 Massive campaign speeches run by the national elections were forthcoming in May last year. 164 00:18:54,800 --> 00:18:59,050 So they used Depok in what, the Pakistan 19 times. 165 00:18:59,050 --> 00:19:05,780 Why, in the first case was on expected lines from a high court, from a type of nationalistic government. 166 00:19:05,780 --> 00:19:12,650 The second worst case was curious. The second case, as I said, is the stand off on the Yellow Sea with China, 167 00:19:12,650 --> 00:19:18,170 despite the widely reported loss of territory by India in the military standard with China. 168 00:19:18,170 --> 00:19:23,950 In summer of this year, the Modi government and the deaths of nineteen sixty eight, 169 00:19:23,950 --> 00:19:28,870 some forgetting that the more the government refused to acknowledge the extent of the threat, 170 00:19:28,870 --> 00:19:33,830 Mr. Modi said, and I quote, No one entered into territory. 171 00:19:33,830 --> 00:19:38,510 No Indian posts were taken over by anyone. 172 00:19:38,510 --> 00:19:44,030 In fact, he did not even mention China by name in a speech. 173 00:19:44,030 --> 00:19:54,530 So Mr Modi made sure that he made no military commitments against China so as to avoid commitment trap Freshway made by other leaders, 174 00:19:54,530 --> 00:19:59,360 even twilly, but not followed up. But that didn't matter because the leader, 175 00:19:59,360 --> 00:20:03,500 which is much better than what the prime minister did not make any commitments because 176 00:20:03,500 --> 00:20:07,280 there was no and there was no question of therefore backing down from that threat. 177 00:20:07,280 --> 00:20:13,690 So consider this between June again, bean counting between June and October of this year. 178 00:20:13,690 --> 00:20:21,450 Shining. That was hardly used to by the BJP leaders in their public utterances, despite territory ID laws, 179 00:20:21,450 --> 00:20:32,520 it was invoked just four times as opposed to 17, 19 times between February 20, 19 and June 20, 19 after the Rama terror attack. 180 00:20:32,520 --> 00:20:36,410 What is even more interesting is that Pakistan was in, what, 181 00:20:36,410 --> 00:20:45,870 seven times during the election campaign speeches by the BJP leaders in the mump in in the last month, the month of October 2020 alone. 182 00:20:45,870 --> 00:20:51,610 So there is an ongoing situation with China. But China's name is taken four times. 183 00:20:51,610 --> 00:20:55,590 There's a normal there is no ongoing situation with Pakistan. Nothing out of the ordinary. 184 00:20:55,590 --> 00:20:59,850 And yet Pakistan's name is taken seven times this year. 185 00:20:59,850 --> 00:21:09,440 The party also focussed party also used it set of diversity tactics to offset the audience, of course, audience calls in India. 186 00:21:09,440 --> 00:21:15,410 And support, for example, focussing on other things. Catch me, Pakistan, anti nationalist, etc. 187 00:21:15,410 --> 00:21:22,690 It's argued that those accusing the government of giving into China, giving that India gave in to China. 188 00:21:22,690 --> 00:21:27,330 I said before China actually denigrating the memory of the slave. 189 00:21:27,330 --> 00:21:32,370 So do you think this this is not a given that the BJP government has been using in its 190 00:21:32,370 --> 00:21:37,040 campaign speeches in Bihar because the soldiers who accounted for the Bihar regiment? 191 00:21:37,040 --> 00:21:48,240 But I think most importantly, it is not 80 was created to show that the reputation of the country was reputation of the country was not damaged. 192 00:21:48,240 --> 00:21:52,950 China is, for example, the argument to end it like this. 193 00:21:52,950 --> 00:21:54,900 China used a alone today. 194 00:21:54,900 --> 00:22:03,000 The international community is with India and therefore at the end of the tussling with China, India has come out with Gordius. 195 00:22:03,000 --> 00:22:08,010 There are also arguments that there are many Chinese Koshu, I think just on the Chinese side. 196 00:22:08,010 --> 00:22:12,150 So at the end of the day and there Davis, of course, nobody has accepted into territory extracts. 197 00:22:12,150 --> 00:22:16,800 So there is a certain number of narrative building and put it. 198 00:22:16,800 --> 00:22:25,590 But this this sort of takes me to directly to the issue of narrative building and foreign policy by the part of the Democrat Party going on today. 199 00:22:25,590 --> 00:22:30,510 So at the heart of it, I think if you actually look at the other half of the audience, core audience, 200 00:22:30,510 --> 00:22:39,030 Kostina is the feeling of the citizens that their leader has damage to the nation's order by backing down. 201 00:22:39,030 --> 00:22:45,390 Right. So if the feeling of the loss, feeling about the loss of all of these key, 202 00:22:45,390 --> 00:22:54,150 what needs to be done is to manage the popular perception of corporate a feeling about what has happened, not to make it into facts on the ground. 203 00:22:54,150 --> 00:23:00,300 That's exactly what the BJP has done so far. Won the loss of territory was denied, denied. 204 00:23:00,300 --> 00:23:07,990 So they may have the facts on the ground, but completely denied that the supercurrent casualties on the Chinese side was played up. 205 00:23:07,990 --> 00:23:16,590 The party's spinmeisters were deployed to argue that the government took up to the Chinese and that the communist leaders were close to the 206 00:23:16,590 --> 00:23:26,880 Chinese and that the communist government had lost a lot more territory or had lost territory earlier while they were in power in 2013. 207 00:23:26,880 --> 00:23:39,500 For Modi's strong man, image was played up in a major way goman to also ensure that the media reporting on the issue was skewed in a major way. 208 00:23:39,500 --> 00:23:49,690 I'd find the opposition or the opposition's communication skills and narrative management simply couldn't match that of the government. 209 00:23:49,690 --> 00:23:55,410 Now, briefly, about the framing of the threats as a do it, 210 00:23:55,410 --> 00:24:03,820 it's a deadly strategic and national security decisions in India are increasingly taken based on their domestic audience calls in India, 211 00:24:03,820 --> 00:24:15,330 decisions on how to frame threats, what to call it threat and how threats are to be addressed are dictated by domestic political considerations today, 212 00:24:15,330 --> 00:24:20,970 not on the basis of material facts or objective evidence or strategic interests for that matter. 213 00:24:20,970 --> 00:24:26,970 Framing and shaping the media narrative gave significance because much of the population 214 00:24:26,970 --> 00:24:32,760 is not focussed on objective fact finding of fact based reporting or analysis, 215 00:24:32,760 --> 00:24:35,340 but or how it is framed. 216 00:24:35,340 --> 00:24:46,530 So friendly media tends to Paulson so sort of groups friendly, friendly social media platforms such as, say, allegedly the what's up? 217 00:24:46,530 --> 00:24:51,990 Except a hint the government create such framing and narrative. 218 00:24:51,990 --> 00:24:57,810 So you don't need to really focus on the material reality of the material objective facts on the ground, 219 00:24:57,810 --> 00:25:02,820 but just focus on the framing of it, because that's what people are going to focus on at the end of the day. 220 00:25:02,820 --> 00:25:05,490 So that can be securitisation. 221 00:25:05,490 --> 00:25:17,190 Feherty, who does the framing and how work is done, are also important in the whole dynamics of the domestic politicisation of foreign policy. 222 00:25:17,190 --> 00:25:27,720 For example, soon after the Mumbai terror attacks in 2008, the caucus party went on to win the Maharashtra elections. 223 00:25:27,720 --> 00:25:34,680 The opposition framing the narrative about Congress's failure in Mumbai did not succeed. 224 00:25:34,680 --> 00:25:44,100 Put differently BJP, his use of Pakistan wasn't very successful in domestic electric films in twenty two thousand eight. 225 00:25:44,100 --> 00:25:46,170 The leadership was not strong enough to do that. 226 00:25:46,170 --> 00:25:54,810 But Mr Moore, is the use of Pakistan off by the BJP is used to Pakistan after Blackbaud was exceptionally successful. 227 00:25:54,810 --> 00:25:59,330 So who does the framing or Salafist Modi's ability to undermine? 228 00:25:59,330 --> 00:26:06,710 The opposition's framing of the debacle at the hands of the China at the hands of China has also been very successful. 229 00:26:06,710 --> 00:26:12,140 So today it is widely recognised that India has lost territory. 230 00:26:12,140 --> 00:26:18,110 But the passage of time and the absence of a narrative about its Trone narrative, 231 00:26:18,110 --> 00:26:24,740 about the government's failure to have also ensured that there is no audience scores on the government. 232 00:26:24,740 --> 00:26:34,700 So what really are some of the implications of the domestic politicisation of foreign policy? 233 00:26:34,700 --> 00:26:45,470 I've I've sort of taken you to what I think are the tumours and the strategies used to by the current government 234 00:26:45,470 --> 00:26:54,950 to offset domestic political cost or domestic political course when it comes to foreign policy decision making. 235 00:26:54,950 --> 00:27:01,790 I used to one case to show that footwell mob of Black Hawk or the Pakistan case to show 236 00:27:01,790 --> 00:27:11,810 that the case of Pakistan was used in order to make domestic political gains by the day. 237 00:27:11,810 --> 00:27:19,640 I used to China example or the LSC example to show how the government used to framing and denial in 238 00:27:19,640 --> 00:27:29,000 order to offset domestic political cause for not acting tough against an alleged intruder Askwith. 239 00:27:29,000 --> 00:27:39,380 Now, what are the implications of all this sort of a really high amount of domestic politicisation of foreign policy in India? 240 00:27:39,380 --> 00:27:47,210 I think it is to be fair, it is important to admit that in this age of social media and mass communication, 241 00:27:47,210 --> 00:27:52,190 there is no way really to white domestic politicisation of foreign policy. 242 00:27:52,190 --> 00:27:53,030 So being called, 243 00:27:53,030 --> 00:28:05,990 Gandhi said to all of the domestic political implications of foreign policy behaving in the age of mass communication and social media is undecided. 244 00:28:05,990 --> 00:28:13,100 So, no, not being honest. He's undecided. But, I mean, that's that's a fact that I think is something that we need to address. 245 00:28:13,100 --> 00:28:14,630 Having said that, 246 00:28:14,630 --> 00:28:25,290 I think it is important for us to try and tease out what the implications of such a domestic politicisation are even in a country like India. 247 00:28:25,290 --> 00:28:34,730 May I also say that domestic politics can often be used to creatively to seek concessions while negotiating to use an insight to say, 248 00:28:34,730 --> 00:28:38,900 for example, from Robert Putnam's to David Gates. Now, 249 00:28:38,900 --> 00:28:45,020 let me give you an example of how domestic politics can be or was used to bind the 250 00:28:45,020 --> 00:28:49,400 government to seek concessions while negotiating for and assisting Manmohan Singh. 251 00:28:49,400 --> 00:28:56,990 Government during the 2000s had used domestic political course to seek and 252 00:28:56,990 --> 00:29:04,400 gain concessions during negotiations with the Americans on the nuclear deal. 253 00:29:04,400 --> 00:29:15,120 I woke up or even the hubbub with this has not happened in the case of Mr. Modi of the BJP government because. 254 00:29:15,120 --> 00:29:20,670 Using domestic politics in order to seek concessions from your counterpart, 255 00:29:20,670 --> 00:29:26,940 interlocutor requires that the negotiator playing with enquiries to negotiate 256 00:29:26,940 --> 00:29:32,580 a plea on his domestic one notability now being one that a good or short one, 257 00:29:32,580 --> 00:29:38,700 that ability is something that doesn't go with Mr. Morty's persona or to be give his political culture. 258 00:29:38,700 --> 00:29:49,620 So why in domestic politics get to actually be used for national interests that require sustained an amount of playing it, 259 00:29:49,620 --> 00:29:57,570 playing, playing once won that ability to one side. Right. But with a strong man image, if that is not something that you can do. 260 00:29:57,570 --> 00:30:04,920 The current study of domestic politicisation of foreign policy also insists that this is one of the obligations 261 00:30:04,920 --> 00:30:10,380 that I've been I've been talking about the current state of domestic politicisation of foreign policy. 262 00:30:10,380 --> 00:30:20,970 Also, instead of, say, winner takes all mentality in the ruling dispensation, thereby straining the domestic space for consensus building. 263 00:30:20,970 --> 00:30:26,720 What do I mean by winner takes all mentality now looking similar to the opposition? 264 00:30:26,720 --> 00:30:29,640 Now, if you build a consensus with your opposition. 265 00:30:29,640 --> 00:30:36,870 If you build a consensus of a consensus across party lines, then you have to look similar to the opposition. 266 00:30:36,870 --> 00:30:42,800 You're going to look like. Your position, this difference between you and your opposition, that doesn't go. 267 00:30:42,800 --> 00:30:49,440 That doesn't. Of the government in the eyes of its core support base, because the court up looks somewhat based. 268 00:30:49,440 --> 00:30:55,470 Think that the things the things that the BJP said pocky that the different for that that can be one of their slogans, 269 00:30:55,470 --> 00:30:59,950 but looking different makes a looking difference. 270 00:30:59,950 --> 00:31:03,390 Dust's when the BJP some brownie points. 271 00:31:03,390 --> 00:31:13,560 So BJP makes a point that it does not create a consensus based foreign policy agenda. 272 00:31:13,560 --> 00:31:24,720 It makes sure that it sort of pushes you opposition to the corner and sort of takes all the credit for foreign policy, making us agree. 273 00:31:24,720 --> 00:31:35,400 So why make consensus and look like the opposition when you can get to all the political advantage by pushing your your own partisan agenda? 274 00:31:35,400 --> 00:31:40,770 So this kind of domestic politicisation of foreign policy makes kind of sense of building consensus, 275 00:31:40,770 --> 00:31:45,520 building tough and democratisation, foreign policy making hard to achieve. 276 00:31:45,520 --> 00:31:50,820 Now, whether or not democratisation of foreign policy making is a good thing. 277 00:31:50,820 --> 00:31:58,290 He said something completely different debate altogether in it, in a deeply divided polity, 278 00:31:58,290 --> 00:32:03,270 if one were to sort of have a referendum on foreign policy issues, 279 00:32:03,270 --> 00:32:13,400 whether or not we should use military force against that Pakistan to liberate Pewaukee and give Pakistan, 280 00:32:13,400 --> 00:32:18,660 you know, these deep stuttering might actually be ordered from debate to actually throw up surprises for you. 281 00:32:18,660 --> 00:32:27,410 So it's a different debate. Talked with whether or not democratisation of foreign policy making is a good thing. 282 00:32:27,410 --> 00:32:33,300 But in general, I think more discussion is more consensus. Building on foreign policy is a good idea. 283 00:32:33,300 --> 00:32:42,660 But if this kind of weather skewed environment of domestic politicisation of foreign policy, 284 00:32:42,660 --> 00:32:45,420 such consensus building stuff and such a Democratic senator, 285 00:32:45,420 --> 00:32:55,910 foreign policy making is also that, if anything, this process makes the opposition Treleaven irrelevant and decision making more centralised. 286 00:32:55,910 --> 00:33:00,430 Now, I did talk about the commitment drop earlier, 287 00:33:00,430 --> 00:33:09,260 but I think this so-called fair foreign policy making that is domestically focussed or domestic investigative focus, 288 00:33:09,260 --> 00:33:16,880 foreign policy making or domestic policy decision or foreign policy, you don't actually read out with its commitment traps. 289 00:33:16,880 --> 00:33:23,760 This kind of domestic politics ization of foreign policy leads to the leadership trait, commitment trap, absoluteness. 290 00:33:23,760 --> 00:33:30,130 It binds its hands when external circumstances demand a change in behaviour. 291 00:33:30,130 --> 00:33:34,930 I mean, today you have a government in India that used us. 292 00:33:34,930 --> 00:33:42,750 I said I get to see language when it comes to national security, when it comes to different policy, when it comes to foreign policy. 293 00:33:42,750 --> 00:33:50,120 And to my mind, using that language, using that zero sum language, it's also engaging in a civil commitment, 294 00:33:50,120 --> 00:33:59,690 dropped off a said kind of for instance, if there is an opportunity tomorrow to have a rapprochement with Pakistan. 295 00:33:59,690 --> 00:34:03,890 Wouldn't the government be able to do it? Imagine this today. 296 00:34:03,890 --> 00:34:08,270 India has a seven two front. Situation for a very long time. 297 00:34:08,270 --> 00:34:15,070 The Indian strategic strategists have been talking about a two front situation that would eventually face today. 298 00:34:15,070 --> 00:34:21,290 A debt prophecy has come true. You have a two front situation on the NSC and the on the NSC on the line of control. 299 00:34:21,290 --> 00:34:25,890 So the national interest, in my opinion, 300 00:34:25,890 --> 00:34:35,210 would demand that the government of India tries to isa one front and sort of reach out to reaching out to Pakistan on the Pakistani side. 301 00:34:35,210 --> 00:34:39,500 Let us have a sense of proportion now. Is that possible under the current circumstances? 302 00:34:39,500 --> 00:34:49,250 You have to fight Pakistan. You have created such a domestic political narrative about Pakistan today, intercompany that tomorrow it could be, 303 00:34:49,250 --> 00:34:57,560 even if the situation demands, even international interest demands, even if there is an opportunity to create that rapprochement with Pakistan. 304 00:34:57,560 --> 00:35:00,900 The Indian government would find it very, very difficult to do that. 305 00:35:00,900 --> 00:35:02,740 Now, let me give you another example. 306 00:35:02,740 --> 00:35:14,600 The prime minister Modi visited Pakistan on an impromptu visit to aim in December 2015 on his way back from Kabul and he visited Lahore. 307 00:35:14,600 --> 00:35:17,390 I admit I was scheduled for a family function, etc. 308 00:35:17,390 --> 00:35:26,630 Now, the amount of brickbats, brickbats that diplomats received for that visit from my case on article group in India, support base in India. 309 00:35:26,630 --> 00:35:31,460 The BJP out of the support base in India was unbelievable. No. 310 00:35:31,460 --> 00:35:39,110 If that's it to be the case in 2015, in 2020, thinks up things that will only become the domestic, 311 00:35:39,110 --> 00:35:43,490 the Indian domestic discourse on Pakistan hasn't really vitiated. 312 00:35:43,490 --> 00:35:51,530 So even if an opportunity presents itself tomorrow, it will be difficult for the more the government to take that opportunity. 313 00:35:51,530 --> 00:35:57,510 So I think this is a major commitment trap that comes with the domestic policy politicisation of foreign policy. 314 00:35:57,510 --> 00:36:08,160 And finally, I think if there is a certain UN wondered about Ingolf domestic politicisation of foreign policy, this also sort of sort of deep. 315 00:36:08,160 --> 00:36:16,320 It leads to difficulties, major difficulties in conflict resolution and peace building that requires giving concessions. 316 00:36:16,320 --> 00:36:22,480 Peace building requires long stressed out negotiations. 317 00:36:22,480 --> 00:36:28,690 Now, you can't have such a long negotiations with Pakistan to also say, for example, 318 00:36:28,690 --> 00:36:32,510 when they start a foreign policy issue with the cash media separatist, 319 00:36:32,510 --> 00:36:42,920 you can't be seen as giving any concessions to anybody because he's being so rude. 320 00:36:42,920 --> 00:36:47,990 You know, somehow the damage, the strongman image that has gotten more desperate. 321 00:36:47,990 --> 00:36:55,920 So I think not just the issue of commitment track, but also there is the problem of, you know, 322 00:36:55,920 --> 00:37:01,520 the sorts of land the government in a difficult spot as far as conflict resolution, 323 00:37:01,520 --> 00:37:09,380 undertaking a process of conflict resolution and peace building is concerned within the country and with its neighbours. 324 00:37:09,380 --> 00:37:14,900 I think I've taken enough time. I would leave it at that and I would be happy to take some questions. 325 00:37:14,900 --> 00:37:29,380 Thank you so much. Thank you so much, harping on so I can't see any questions coming through at the moment. 326 00:37:29,380 --> 00:37:35,510 It may be because the moderator needs to approve them. I'm not sure if that's you if you could. 327 00:37:35,510 --> 00:37:43,820 I can't take any questions at all, but I do have one of my own. So you've set out wonderfully in this situation with China. 328 00:37:43,820 --> 00:37:54,140 Of course. How? We have a leader or a ruling party with a strong man stance which then falls into a commitment trap, really, 329 00:37:54,140 --> 00:38:02,070 whereby no action should in theory need to be taken if there is a serious threat to national security. 330 00:38:02,070 --> 00:38:09,770 And it seems the way to solve this, as you very clearly laid out, is to create a narrative that suggests that there is no problem. 331 00:38:09,770 --> 00:38:21,740 There is really no major national security issue. And in fact, I suppose, quote, a really large number of individuals into sustaining that narrative. 332 00:38:21,740 --> 00:38:25,980 So it's not really just the media, is it? It must be also the armed forces. 333 00:38:25,980 --> 00:38:31,220 It must be individuals in the bureaucracy, in a foreign service, 334 00:38:31,220 --> 00:38:38,180 probably a number of individuals who for a very long time have been watching this happening and feeling quite frustrated by it. 335 00:38:38,180 --> 00:38:46,160 So I suppose my question is, where are the weak points in this edifice which holds up this narrative? 336 00:38:46,160 --> 00:38:57,950 And do you see any likelihood of anyone on the official side sort of breaking with this at breaking this edifice in any way? 337 00:38:57,950 --> 00:38:59,730 I think I think that's an interesting question. 338 00:38:59,730 --> 00:39:10,870 I mean, to us, too quickly pointed out that it is not in a country like India where you have a lot of profile agency institutions. 339 00:39:10,870 --> 00:39:19,910 It's a vibrant democracy. You have a very, very activist media, as if the way a country like India to speak and not acting like this, 340 00:39:19,910 --> 00:39:25,910 where you have a real situation with the Chinese, where, according to most reports, 341 00:39:25,910 --> 00:39:32,810 the Chinese have occupied the what is considered to be the independent view on a contested line, 342 00:39:32,810 --> 00:39:37,000 the fact that control is not easy to speak, that they do said that. 343 00:39:37,000 --> 00:39:44,960 Think you saw what actually looks at this situation with a certain amount of surprise and disbelief to see how did this happen? 344 00:39:44,960 --> 00:39:51,110 I mean, you know, usually when there is a cover up by a government in Delhi, 345 00:39:51,110 --> 00:39:57,760 there are all kinds of leaks that are all kinds of for alternative of that I think is coming out. 346 00:39:57,760 --> 00:40:05,030 But none whatsoever. I mean, at this point of time, what you basically have are a few leaks from I would say from the from the government 347 00:40:05,030 --> 00:40:10,410 to media groups and some of the media groups are actually talking about it. 348 00:40:10,410 --> 00:40:21,470 But the reality is that even the traditionally activist media groups in India are not very keen on taking 349 00:40:21,470 --> 00:40:27,740 a line that we should not necessarily in line with the narrative that is funded by the government. 350 00:40:27,740 --> 00:40:36,500 So I think if you look at the last six years, from 2014 onwards, you would see the dominos have fallen one after the other. 351 00:40:36,500 --> 00:40:40,970 So it's you have the media. You have the judiciary to some extent. 352 00:40:40,970 --> 00:40:51,950 You have the institutions, opinion makers, seemingly seemingly fantastic analysts who in the past have gone gone with evidence 353 00:40:51,950 --> 00:40:57,470 that the facts on the ground have done a fantastic analysis off them very, 354 00:40:57,470 --> 00:41:03,800 very carefully, all very scared. But perhaps to take a lie that is not in support of the governments. 355 00:41:03,800 --> 00:41:08,060 I think I think this this is not easy to read. 356 00:41:08,060 --> 00:41:13,970 It is not easy to be another thing of this kind and probably was more difficult during the first boom. 357 00:41:13,970 --> 00:41:18,560 All the gall. But I think it's becoming far, far easier today. 358 00:41:18,560 --> 00:41:24,890 I think it's only good to get more easy for the government to sort of create another one Senate, too. 359 00:41:24,890 --> 00:41:30,260 It's sort of you know, you may have you may have an elite group in Delhi and in India. 360 00:41:30,260 --> 00:41:35,120 Q Do you think that this is this is not the reality, but does this make any difference? 361 00:41:35,120 --> 00:41:43,000 What matters is what the people believe and what what what people believe is what is carefully choreographed and sort of fit to the logical position. 362 00:41:43,000 --> 00:41:50,510 Not well. Thank you very much. I've managed to have some questions, feed it through in the chat. 363 00:41:50,510 --> 00:41:54,530 The Q&A box is not working for me. But the questions are with me nonetheless. 364 00:41:54,530 --> 00:42:05,090 So I have a couple. I'll post to you. The first one is how is engine from policy likely to shift with Biden Harris administration? 365 00:42:05,090 --> 00:42:16,500 Will it be a tougher road and how is that likely to play out? Perhaps we can link that to more to the subject matter of fuel talk tank. 366 00:42:16,500 --> 00:42:22,790 Do you want to take me to take their Christmas? Yes. I know I'll get to. 367 00:42:22,790 --> 00:42:29,880 But I'll leave that out. But I'm going to be changes to the duties of the duties concerned. 368 00:42:29,880 --> 00:42:36,450 There is no question that the American establishment, the national security establishment, 369 00:42:36,450 --> 00:42:47,130 the political establishment, that the Congress is there or positively disposed towards India in all in several ways. 370 00:42:47,130 --> 00:42:53,670 There is a seven bipartisan consensus in the United States of improving its relationship with China. 371 00:42:53,670 --> 00:43:03,460 There's no question about that. I think United States looks at India, especially with the golden age of Indo-Pacific and the re-emergence of. 372 00:43:03,460 --> 00:43:09,250 Also to it, there's a lot more focus on India to improve defence ties. 373 00:43:09,250 --> 00:43:12,600 And of course, it is. That is the sale of weapons that Bitstamp the other. 374 00:43:12,600 --> 00:43:21,590 So I think I think that the there is no question that there will be a lot of continuity in delarge of national security, a political space. 375 00:43:21,590 --> 00:43:34,090 But having said that, I would also say that there will also be because the fight and how this administration comes with the Democratic baggage about, 376 00:43:34,090 --> 00:43:42,510 you know, quote unquote, baggage, about human rights, about the traditional focus on Kashmir, exit, drought and peace in the region, as it were. 377 00:43:42,510 --> 00:43:55,020 I think there will be some focus on human rights and Kashmir and dealing with the Pakistanis in that indictment process that extracts a threat. 378 00:43:55,020 --> 00:44:00,690 To my mind, the sort of see this for me, maybe get his consent, the bigger the threat, of course, that is China. 379 00:44:00,690 --> 00:44:08,420 So the advice from the administration in Washington would be that, you know, Senator, differences with the Pakistanis, 380 00:44:08,420 --> 00:44:13,410 but you don't bring you bring a certain amount of normalcy to Kashmir and focus on that. 381 00:44:13,410 --> 00:44:18,480 That is the big threat. So I think I think much of this is going to remain the same. 382 00:44:18,480 --> 00:44:24,280 But there will be some pushback on the question of, I think, Kashmir, Pakistan on human rights. 383 00:44:24,280 --> 00:44:32,010 That's a fact. Thank you for that. Another question here from James since. 384 00:44:32,010 --> 00:44:35,850 How is the border dispute with Nepal framed by the BJP? 385 00:44:35,850 --> 00:44:41,820 And is this an issue that can score points domestically for them? 386 00:44:41,820 --> 00:44:50,700 You know, interestingly, if it were to be the Congress government that had faced this kind of a situation with Nepal, 387 00:44:50,700 --> 00:44:58,720 where Nepal is one that has clearly swung towards the Chinese side in many ways. 388 00:44:58,720 --> 00:45:03,960 And secondly, there is a couple of, I think, aggression unilaterally. 389 00:45:03,960 --> 00:45:07,050 You have the Nepalese government, at least from an Indian point of view, 390 00:45:07,050 --> 00:45:14,160 the Nepalese government has changed to each its its map has included territories, 391 00:45:14,160 --> 00:45:20,310 which, at least from an Indian point of view, I'm not really fighting. 392 00:45:20,310 --> 00:45:28,010 So this would have been used by the BJP government, BJP opposition to denigrate the Congress government had the Congress been bought. 393 00:45:28,010 --> 00:45:41,880 But unfortunately or rather interestingly, this is not really a big, big dispute at this point of time or major competition in India. 394 00:45:41,880 --> 00:45:50,020 They didn't do much to stop this at this point of time. There is too much focus on what is happening between Nepal and India, 395 00:45:50,020 --> 00:45:58,530 even if there is some focus on what's happening between Nepal and India over what is happening between India and this neighbourhood in general. 396 00:45:58,530 --> 00:46:06,960 The BJP is able to simply ignore that who are, you know, as if to say that we have bigger issues to deal with, that we have China to deal with. 397 00:46:06,960 --> 00:46:09,300 We have got, you know, Pasovic to deal with. 398 00:46:09,300 --> 00:46:16,170 These are small issues and that will be taken care of for all the opposition that keeps crying foul at dartboard at all points of time. 399 00:46:16,170 --> 00:46:27,120 So that if that is to be ignored, so there is this aggressive tendency to simply ignore the alternative narrative that together and move on. 400 00:46:27,120 --> 00:46:29,130 That seems to be succeeding. 401 00:46:29,130 --> 00:46:41,770 Did you see the strong, cultivated teeth to the BJP or there isn't a strong opposition to the government that its policies towards the neighbourhood, 402 00:46:41,770 --> 00:46:45,390 Nipon in particular, and that is that is simply surprising. 403 00:46:45,390 --> 00:46:51,840 So that's that's where we are, unfortunately. However. Thank you. 404 00:46:51,840 --> 00:46:58,080 We have a question here asking what the drivers are for the domestic pilots politicisation of from policy. 405 00:46:58,080 --> 00:47:01,930 But I think you actually covered that in the first sort of 10 minutes of your talk. 406 00:47:01,930 --> 00:47:11,340 So we might tweak that question slightly and ask which kinds of foreign policy issues become domestic politicised and which ones don't? 407 00:47:11,340 --> 00:47:19,160 And do you think that this has changed actually in the last sort of five or so years, five, six years? 408 00:47:19,160 --> 00:47:28,670 Right. Right. You know, as I said, from the 1990s onwards, we have had a lot farm activist, some foreign policy activity, 409 00:47:28,670 --> 00:47:34,510 some from the part of the Indian states that constitute an exotic way for a variety of reasons. 410 00:47:34,510 --> 00:47:41,790 They said, again, the Indian constitution simply does not allow any formal activism by the United States. 411 00:47:41,790 --> 00:47:50,800 The idea, the bid in six out money to play a certain amount of role in pushing the union to do their bidding. 412 00:47:50,800 --> 00:47:59,190 But I think that that depends on a variety of factors. For example, if you have a coalition government in Delhi, they go back to 2000. 413 00:47:59,190 --> 00:48:04,890 For example, when the India was you, it wasn't Paul India that got policy. 414 00:48:04,890 --> 00:48:13,330 What's the great deal influenced by the dominant parties in Tamil Nadu, India? 415 00:48:13,330 --> 00:48:14,880 Well, the policy towards United States, 416 00:48:14,880 --> 00:48:24,540 especially the nuclear deal that was interfered with by the left left parties in India, got to that point of time. 417 00:48:24,540 --> 00:48:27,970 In fact, the government was what most about before. 418 00:48:27,970 --> 00:48:33,300 But the so much what the public came in office to the government that got the everybody. 419 00:48:33,300 --> 00:48:42,870 Some of these exceptions, traditionally, you have had the Indian states dealing with foreign economic policy or border relations, 420 00:48:42,870 --> 00:48:44,370 relations with neighbouring countries, 421 00:48:44,370 --> 00:48:50,160 border states having good relations with neighbouring countries with very little strategic or security content, as it were. 422 00:48:50,160 --> 00:48:58,720 Now, that is changed today. You are you are talking about domestic politicisation of foreign policy, 423 00:48:58,720 --> 00:49:07,440 even in the sink in the national security and strategic Ophelia's outlook at the main national security and 424 00:49:07,440 --> 00:49:16,620 strategic defeats where it serves the BJP purpose to get it sort of gave them a certain amount of support, 425 00:49:16,620 --> 00:49:22,140 but particularly in their in their scope of job within the own support group. 426 00:49:22,140 --> 00:49:27,240 But may also say that this is all this is a very selective. 427 00:49:27,240 --> 00:49:32,190 You don't see that kind of mostly politicisation of, say, India U.S. relations, 428 00:49:32,190 --> 00:49:38,610 except when there are high-Profile with offers to more the United States or Trump without biotics attacks that are all, 429 00:49:38,610 --> 00:49:44,000 say, domestic politicisation of it. Do you guys or India I here? 430 00:49:44,000 --> 00:49:51,000 No, it's basically Pakistan that we have about it sometimes, but mostly Pakistan. 431 00:49:51,000 --> 00:49:55,620 So it's not a coup in that sense, even if you want to politicise. 432 00:49:55,620 --> 00:50:00,150 Even if the opposition wants to politicise China and the standard, 433 00:50:00,150 --> 00:50:06,070 which I doubt the ruling party would hit back and say that, you know, national security is being politicised by these guys. 434 00:50:06,070 --> 00:50:15,210 So it's sort of a very careful strategy of picking and choosing what suits the government and the role of the opposition. 435 00:50:15,210 --> 00:50:19,370 Thank you, sir. We'll finish with three last questions, if that's okay. 436 00:50:19,370 --> 00:50:25,020 Bunched in Shenna, when you press them, that will conclude our session. 437 00:50:25,020 --> 00:50:30,570 So we have a question here from Karen. She's asking. 438 00:50:30,570 --> 00:50:35,280 She's saying that the nationalist narratives make sense for a party like the BJP. 439 00:50:35,280 --> 00:50:42,270 But what she finds puzzling is the recent co-option of liberal Democratic narratives. 440 00:50:42,270 --> 00:50:43,080 So, for example, 441 00:50:43,080 --> 00:50:51,510 the Modi government is stressing support for France and the principles of secular liberalism and free speech in the wake of the terror attacks. 442 00:50:51,510 --> 00:50:58,200 She's asking, is this another way of expressing Islamophobia through other means or are they domestic 443 00:50:58,200 --> 00:51:05,850 audience benefits to feigning support for liberal principles on the international stage? 444 00:51:05,850 --> 00:51:15,960 Packing no punches, Kara. We've got a question from Paul Fluvanna, which is asking whether these changes. 445 00:51:15,960 --> 00:51:21,030 Presumably referring to the domestic politicisation of foreign policy, 446 00:51:21,030 --> 00:51:30,430 whether these changes are embedded now or can that change the situation change somewhat after the strong man approach of Modi? 447 00:51:30,430 --> 00:51:38,850 And then odd question from Sharon ejecta Yani asking whether the future of Indian foreign policy is likely to be 448 00:51:38,850 --> 00:51:47,940 affected by the decline of democracy and the declining domestic cheques and balances on the current government. 449 00:51:47,940 --> 00:51:51,690 That's quite a lot to do with. Great question. 450 00:51:51,690 --> 00:51:57,910 Thank you. Thanks. 451 00:51:57,910 --> 00:52:01,820 Kiran. Hi. I think that's that's a very interesting question. 452 00:52:01,820 --> 00:52:11,190 The espousing of liberal causes by a hyper rightwing government in India. 453 00:52:11,190 --> 00:52:26,240 So, in fact, I I tweeted the other day asking, you know, what is it that the government or the right wing party in India is trying to do? 454 00:52:26,240 --> 00:52:38,750 Are they basically saying that it is all right to make cuts, create cartoons of gods and prophets or what? 455 00:52:38,750 --> 00:52:46,730 What is the outlook of it? Because if the argument is that it is all right to create cartoons of gods and prophets, 456 00:52:46,730 --> 00:52:51,290 then that is not something that would be acceptable within India. 457 00:52:51,290 --> 00:52:59,540 Right? I mean, if someone and someone were to, for example, created the cartoon of Krishna or Rob in India, 458 00:52:59,540 --> 00:53:09,980 I'm not so sure that's going to be taken very likely or favourably by the Indian right wing or the BJP, for that matter. 459 00:53:09,980 --> 00:53:17,240 And yet this really garden meant to support the friends of governments, the actions of not. 460 00:53:17,240 --> 00:53:23,040 So they're going against the the prophets, Scotland, as it were. 461 00:53:23,040 --> 00:53:27,860 Now, what this tells me is that now is it Islamophobia? 462 00:53:27,860 --> 00:53:35,070 I would say this is more like you are getting a stick to beat the Pakistanis with. 463 00:53:35,070 --> 00:53:43,100 Right. I mean, because Imran Khan was very active on Twitter calling out the French government and sort of, 464 00:53:43,100 --> 00:53:46,830 you know, calling the French, calling out the French president personally. 465 00:53:46,830 --> 00:53:53,970 So here is here to say he is a veteran and that the BJP has or the Indian government has to sort of push you. 466 00:53:53,970 --> 00:54:02,090 But I'm kind of for that, too. The call them number one. And number two, it is also adding to the gender narrative in India that the BJP has, 467 00:54:02,090 --> 00:54:08,540 that, you know, that most things are backward, that Muslims need to be more liberal. 468 00:54:08,540 --> 00:54:15,620 This is a bunch of people that I've got conservative and I'm not necessarily very secular. 469 00:54:15,620 --> 00:54:26,080 But if the same yardstick were to be applied to the BJP, all to the Hindu right wing in India, I'm sure there would be very unhappy with that. 470 00:54:26,080 --> 00:54:33,650 So it's a very, you know, opportunistic sort of argument. 471 00:54:33,650 --> 00:54:41,010 This is not based on any liberal principle also because it is based on a liberal principle. 472 00:54:41,010 --> 00:54:45,710 You'd be happy if this applies to you as well. If somebody made a couple of overarm. 473 00:54:45,710 --> 00:54:49,190 Of course not. You did have a problem with that, but you'd have a problem with that. Right. 474 00:54:49,190 --> 00:54:53,990 Remember, the IMF will say in zero five episodes earlier on. 475 00:54:53,990 --> 00:54:58,070 So I don't think this is this is, technically speaking, espousing liberal cause. 476 00:54:58,070 --> 00:55:07,640 This is basically using the stick to beat the Pakistanis and sort of push back the Muslim population within India. 477 00:55:07,640 --> 00:55:13,760 So the second Christie is basically the domestic politicisation of India. 478 00:55:13,760 --> 00:55:20,450 Will this continue in future or will this change if if there if there is a new 479 00:55:20,450 --> 00:55:26,290 government and Liberal government there said Congress must left government in India? 480 00:55:26,290 --> 00:55:33,530 I think I think there are seven fundamental changes that have already sort of happened. 481 00:55:33,530 --> 00:55:38,840 Fundamental transformations happen, for instance. Let me give an example. 482 00:55:38,840 --> 00:55:46,940 The let's take the Kashmir case. For instance, in August 2013, the government of India took two decisions. 483 00:55:46,940 --> 00:55:53,570 What they would do, the special status that was given because mutilation, number nine, number two, 484 00:55:53,570 --> 00:55:59,010 divided the state into two union territory that just brought to the states with as with if this had come, 485 00:55:59,010 --> 00:56:04,610 this government tubercle, will that Congress government return the special status to Jammu and Kashmir? 486 00:56:04,610 --> 00:56:06,080 I don't think so. 487 00:56:06,080 --> 00:56:14,390 I think, you know, even the even even many, many members of the Congress party in August last year supported this particular decision. 488 00:56:14,390 --> 00:56:21,890 Now, you could say that's technically domestic political issue and yet this has a certain foreign policy angle to it. 489 00:56:21,890 --> 00:56:27,190 So I think the state of the relationship with Pakistan, for instance, 490 00:56:27,190 --> 00:56:35,910 if the BJP government does not begin a conversation with Pakistan and if tomorrow that is a competent government, 491 00:56:35,910 --> 00:56:43,490 will the Congress, Godman, be able to begin a new chapter, open a new chapter with the Pakistanis? 492 00:56:43,490 --> 00:56:54,900 I'm not so I'm not so sure because the narrative so so domestically is so deeply entrenched in the domestic political space where it would. 493 00:56:54,900 --> 00:56:59,620 For a new government to sort of say tomorrow that, you know, foreign policy is foreign policy, 494 00:56:59,620 --> 00:57:04,210 domestic politics is domestic politics, be able to keep the two up. I'm not so sure that's possible. 495 00:57:04,210 --> 00:57:08,070 Doubt. I think age is going up. So the only way out. 496 00:57:08,070 --> 00:57:13,830 The only way out is sort of create alternative narratives. 497 00:57:13,830 --> 00:57:17,500 The only way is just go for put facts forward, 498 00:57:17,500 --> 00:57:25,740 put put fact based analysis and sort of create composite narratives too deep that if it's attacked by the ruling party, that's the only way out. 499 00:57:25,740 --> 00:57:30,230 Reversing the domestic policy decision I don't think is an option. 500 00:57:30,230 --> 00:57:34,260 Or the third question was basically the future of India in foreign policy, 501 00:57:34,260 --> 00:57:43,240 given the decline of the traditional right used in the domestic political system, etc. 502 00:57:43,240 --> 00:57:46,980 I don't think I think I seriously think it has several implications. 503 00:57:46,980 --> 00:58:00,290 For example, you know, let me give an example. The recent research of the Indian foreign secretary, Army chief ex applied to Myanmar five years ago. 504 00:58:00,290 --> 00:58:06,240 But if the Indian leaders should be secured in Myanmar, all the Myanmar leadership visited India. 505 00:58:06,240 --> 00:58:10,990 There would have been questions in the media industry as a community about the thing. 506 00:58:10,990 --> 00:58:15,860 Yes, about human rights issues in Myanmar, about democracy in Myanmar. 507 00:58:15,860 --> 00:58:23,160 Not a question asked. In fact, I said that I did that programme for the wider audience online. 508 00:58:23,160 --> 00:58:30,300 There was very little content about human rights or democracy in Myanmar, which was all about Myanmar. 509 00:58:30,300 --> 00:58:35,090 China's Indo-Pacific and strategic issues. 510 00:58:35,090 --> 00:58:43,800 So the focus, the tradition focus India has had on supporting democracy, as we are all say, 511 00:58:43,800 --> 00:58:50,010 promoting human rights, giving refuge to the persecuted in the neighbourhood. 512 00:58:50,010 --> 00:58:59,700 All of that is going to be a thing of the past. And that, I think, is directly related to the moral decline in the domestic space in India. 513 00:58:59,700 --> 00:59:09,870 Now, the BJP could turn around and say, hey, the liberals are opposing the Citizenship Citizenship Citizenship Amendment law where 514 00:59:09,870 --> 00:59:13,260 we are trying to give citizenship to the persecuted minorities in the neighbourhood. 515 00:59:13,260 --> 00:59:18,810 But wait a minute, you are discriminating by doing that. So the political objective is very clear. 516 00:59:18,810 --> 00:59:25,950 Muslims have to be kept out. That's the argument. So it's not about supporting the non-Muslims. 517 00:59:25,950 --> 00:59:35,040 It's about more about keeping them to himself. So I think I think there is there is going to be the future of India's foreign policy, 518 00:59:35,040 --> 00:59:41,190 which is deeply being backed by the quarter on moral decline in the domestic space. 519 00:59:41,190 --> 00:59:51,850 And indeed, it's not difficult at all that. Thank you so much, Dr. Hoffman, Jacob, for this absolutely incredibly rich presentation. 520 00:59:51,850 --> 00:59:58,150 I mean, I really appreciated personally your masterful analysis of the diversification 521 00:59:58,150 --> 01:00:02,740 and the producers and consumers of India's foreign policy since the 1990s. 522 01:00:02,740 --> 01:00:06,760 And you walked just through two great, powerful case studies. 523 01:00:06,760 --> 01:00:13,690 And really, you've led us to quite a sobering prognosis for the future of India's national security. 524 01:00:13,690 --> 01:00:18,550 Without these kinds of democratic cheques and balances, your camera is going to be blurred. 525 01:00:18,550 --> 01:00:25,830 But I have been admiring your door handles behind you, which fit like a pair of dolphins swimming up the doors. 526 01:00:25,830 --> 01:00:32,750 Why? OK. So when you speak, Modise winner takes all mentality. 527 01:00:32,750 --> 01:00:37,080 I think you have definitely taken old in the context of door handles. 528 01:00:37,080 --> 01:00:41,140 I mean psychological. Thank you so much. Thank you. 529 01:00:41,140 --> 01:00:45,460 Such a pleasure. And we're looking forward to hearing from you again and again. 530 01:00:45,460 --> 01:00:57,169 Thank you. Delighted to be here. Thank you so much. Thank you. Bye.