This story first appeared in www.thehindu.com

Bhutan’s fifth King is aiming for his country’s ‘transformation’ through a new educational curriculum, governance reforms and connectivity and infrastructure projects 

On a cold but sunny day last December, Bhutan’s King Jigme Khesar Namgyel Wangchuck, the fifth King of the current line of Dragon Kings, stepped up onto the stage at Thimphu’s Changlimithang stadium to address the nation, the first such public address since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic. “We fought an unknown and unpredictable enemy. I can now safely say that we have won the war,” the 42-year-old King said in Dzongkha. Deviating to English, the King then delivered a strong message on drugs and alcohol addiction, addressing Bhutan’s youth in particular. “This is a challenge we have to face. This is a reality we have to face. Failure is not an option. We have to address this,” he said, looking straight at the audience.

It was this challenge, of a social ill borne of the lack of economic opportunities, as more Bhutanese youth move from villages to urban centres, increasing youth unemployment numbers (20.9%), and a large migration of young Bhutanese to other countries, that brought the Bhutanese King to India last week. In meetings with Prime Minister Narendra Modi and interactions with Indian CEOs and others around the world, he is seeking new global investment to power his plans for Bhutan’s “transformation”. Among the plans, powering his ‘Desuung’ programme (Guardians of Peace) for youth volunteers, a new educational curriculum called the Bhutan Baccalaureate, a slew of governance and bureaucratic reforms, bolstering Bhutan’s environmental agenda with a new Tourism policy that imposes $200 a day sustainable development fee (₹1,200 for Indians), and plans for a new connectivity and digital technology hub along Bhutan’s southern borders with India in a town called Gelephu, where its second international airport is coming up.

Another initiative, launched by the Bhutanese King a decade ago, is the Desuung Project (Guardians of Peace) that is building a network of young Bhutanese volunteers to work on community projects and help during natural disasters, and has trained about 35,000 volunteers so far. During the pandemic, where Bhutan saw about 62,000 COVID cases, but restricted casualties to 21 deaths, he didn’t just mobilise the Desuups (as the volunteers are called), he travelled to locations around the country himself to see the COVID task-force at work, spending close to 14 months as he trekked, rode by horse or drove to each affected district in the country.

Unusual tasks

Clearly, the tasks King Jigme Khesar sets himself are unusual for a monarch in any part of the world, where royalty is normally associated with a life of comfort and protocol, pressing the flesh and posing for photographs. What drives the fifth King, say most analysts in Bhutan, is the desire to fill the shoes the fourth King, Jigme Singye Wangchuck, famous for the concept of “Gross National Happiness” (GNH), left for him when he abdicated from the throne in 2006. The abdication was met with public sorrow, and for a while the population balked at the next step the former King took, to turn Bhutan into a functional democracy and constitutional monarchy. Such reforms are normally wrought by revolutions, as in the case of neighbouring Nepal, not by the incumbent monarch, then just 51, himself.

In 2011, the new Bhutanese King met and married his Queen, Jetsun Pema, a distant relative and nearly a decade his junior, and pictures of the royal couple, and their two sons aged 6 and 3, always dressed in traditional attire, make the covers of international glossy magazines often.

While much about the royal family speaks of tradition and reverence for history, the Bhutanese King was educated in the ways of the modern world — after high school in Bhutan, he went to the U.S. to complete his schooling and then went to college at Oxford University in the U.K. For about a year in 2005, as Crown Prince of Bhutan, he took courses at the National Defence College in Delhi, learning lessons in statecraft and warfare — a period that was significant, as it preceded his father’s decision to step down and hand over power to him.

As King, Jigme Khesar has had to use the lessons he may have learnt very quickly. During his reign, Bhutan has gone from having diplomatic ties with just 21 countries, to 54 today. Bhutan still does not maintain full diplomatic ties with any permanent member of the UNSC, but there is constant pressure to change that. The 2017 military standoff between India and China at Doklam was a big challenge for the Bhutanese government, and while there were no public statements, both the fourth and fifth Kings of Bhutan are understood to have been involved in deftly handling the tricky relations with both neighbours.

Boundary talks with China that began in 1984 have made considerable progress, which could have repercussions for India in Doklam, and will possibly need more nimble diplomatic footwork by Bhutan of the kind seen last week. Above all, King Jigme Khesar Namgyel Wangchuck’s task will be in ensuring a strong GDP and a strong GNH, so that as his country opens its doors wider, its people aren’t buffeted by both internal and external winds.

Link to original story

By Suhasini Haidar and Samridhi Tewari

For decades, Mohammad Karim Dastagir thought of India as a ‘second home’, a country he travelled to for work, and the country where he met his wife Rifaut. The 48-year-old businessman, who ran a travel agency in Kabul, which managed visas for the Indian embassy since 2002, found his world turned upside down in August 2021. While the Taliban takeover of Kabul and the closure of the Indian embassy robbed Karim of his livelihood and his sense of security, India’s decision to cancel all pre-existing visas for Afghans nearly robbed him of his family, including Rifaut and his daughter, four-year-old Hanya. What does one do when a ‘second home’ closes its doors on you, asks Karim, who fled to Türkiye in the aftermath of the Taliban’s brutal crackdown and restrictions on people.

“I handled thousands of visas for the Indian embassy for years, but when I needed them the most, for my own visa, they forgot I existed,” he says with some bitterness, speaking to Magazine from Istanbul. Eventually, Karim moved his family to Türkiye. He shares a confirmation message that he applied for an Overseas Citizen of India card in October 2021, something he is entitled to have as the spouse of an Indian national, but he has received no response from the Indian embassy yet. When he telephones officials he knew earlier in India, they often don’t take his call, and when they do, plead helplessness. The online status simply says “under-process” 18 months later, and Karim says his savings from his once flourishing business are now running out.

Who is affected by India’s visa ban for Afghans?
Spouses of Indian nationals who were outside India when the Taliban took over
Indian nationals married to Afghans who do not want to return home without children/ spouses
Afghan students who had received new admissions and scholarships
Afghan students who had returned home during the COVID-19 pandemic and for summer vacations
Afghan students in India who are unable to return and visit their families for fear they can’t come back to India
Traders and businessmen seeking to resume travel to India

No fairytale ending

Karim isn’t alone. According to officials, among more than an estimated 60,000 Afghans who have requested visas for India are a large number of those married to Indian nationals. Many couples met each other while they were studying, as India ran a generous programme for Afghan students from 2002-2021, offering seats at different universities and scholarships. Others came as traders and businessmen, much like Tagore’s Kabuliwala, and built up flourishing trade between the two countries. Many others came and fell in love, but today are separated from them due to circumstances, and a cruel visa regime.

For 33-year-old Fahim Raihan, Kaifee Siddiqui came as a god-send when he visited Delhi in 2017 with an ailing relative. Kaifee, now 32, who was working at the Max Hospital in Delhi, helped him navigate medical procedures and seek doctors’ appointments. Over a number of waiting room meetings, and then later, when he visited Delhi for business, their relationship blossomed, and Kaifee and Fahim got married and settled in Delhi. They ran an auto parts business.

That should have been the fairytale ending to their romance, but on August 15, 2021, fate intervened. Fahim, who was in Kabul for a short visit, was heading to the airport to catch his flight to Delhi, but was stopped from leaving by armed guards who sent him home. Ever since then, he has tried in vain to secure a new visa as mandated by India. In Delhi, Kaifee says she has been running from pillar to post, from the Ministry of External Affairs to the Ministry of Home Affairs to the Afghanistan embassy. “Every night, Kaifee calls me to ask just one question, when will I come back?” says Fahim.

Sadia Khan and her 10-year-old daughter also have the same question. In 2007, Sadia married Ghazanfar Khan, an Afghan who had come as a tourist to Delhi. The two had met and grown closer as they shared an interest in ancient monuments and architecture, and Ghazanfar stayed back. Since 2021, the couple has been separated, living a hand-to-mouth existence as they wait for an Indian visa for Ghazanfar, who had returned to Kabul briefly to meet his ailing mother.

“My 10-year-old daughter and I have to move often, as rents become unaffordable, and she has not been enrolled in a school for two years because of this,” says Sadia. Her husband is now in Iran. Ghazanfar says he has waited for hours together at the Indian embassy in Tehran, but has not been able to make officials take note of his case. “There’s no job here, but back in India I used to manage a guest house, I had a shop, I even worked as a translator. Now everything is gone, I depend on the money my family sends,” he says.

An endless wait

In Istanbul, Shamimullah Mehmoodi, who earlier ran a dry fruits business in Delhi, has to now contend with the difficulties his sons, aged five and seven, face over language at the local school. Shamimullah says that while his family is with him, they all miss their home in India.

Shamimullah Mehmoodi and his wife who are trying to return to their home in India. | Photo Credit: R.V. Moorthy

While many have been able to leave Afghanistan for a third country while they wait for visas, those that remain have a more difficult time eking out an existence in the middle of a country in chaos. Abdul Hamid Nawab, 39, says he has been reduced to cleaning dishes at a local hotel in Kabul while he waits for a visa so he can see his wife and four children again.

The Ministry of External Affairs has declined to respond to a number of requests for comments on when visas may be available for Afghan nationals. When asked about the Modi government’s policy to shut out tens of thousands of Afghans, including students, professionals, and even those married to Indians, officials are unable to help.

“I was told a divorce would be easier”

I met Faizan* at a party in Delhi in 2012. He was from Afghanistan, a businessman with a clothing export factory, who would frequently visit India. We fell deeply in love and decided to marry in 2014. We had a nikaah, but also a Hindu marriage, as Faizan said he was even prepared to convert for me, and live in India. We had a happy marriage, although we kept it a secret from many members in my family who would not have approved of an inter-religion marriage. When the Taliban took over in Kabul, we were worried, but also relieved that at least we were together in Delhi, and safe. In August 2022, however, Faizan had to go back for a family emergency. He approached officials here for a visa as his previous single-entry visa had been cancelled along with all other pre-existing visas given to Afghans. One official told him he would have no problem in securing a new visa in Kabul, as the Indian mission there had just re-opened. We realised too late that we had been misled. Since then Faizan keeps trying to meet someone at the heavily-guarded mission in Kabul, but the gates are shut and nobody is allowed near the periphery. There is no one to listen to his plea. Here in Delhi, I have met every possible official I could in the hope that someone would allow my husband to come back to me. Faizan and I had legally adopted his 10-year-old son, who lives with me, and I have no answer when he repeatedly asks me when his father will come home. I have no income, and my father is seriously ill. I travel from one government office to the next, but receive no response. I have panic attacks and sleepless nights. Some officials have been sympathetic, but others have been downright rude. I broke down when one official asked me, ‘Why are you taking so much trouble for his visa… wouldn’t it be easier if you get a divorce and start your life again?’ I was shocked. What is my crime? Is it a sin to marry someone from another country? Is it Faizan’s fault that the regime in his country changed? We are both victims of circumstance, and have no control over what is happening to us. No country and no law should stop a husband and wife from meeting each other. — Rashmi*
(*Names changed on request)

They also deny that the policy is discriminatory towards Afghan Muslims, but point out that Hindus and Sikhs in Afghanistan were at greater risk for their lives and thus were evacuated sooner. During a public lecture in Vadodara in October 2022, External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar told a group of Afghan students who petitioned him that “nobody could doubt India’s feelings for the Afghan people”. Alluding to security concerns, he added that visas can only be restarted when a “level of trust and efficiency” grows.

For thousands like Shamimullah, Ghazanfar and Sadia, Fahim and Kaifee, Karim and Rifaut, and their children, the doubts are indeed growing as they stare at an uncertain future with the ‘second home’ they have loved for years seeming more distant from them every day.

This story first appeared in www.thehindu.com

South Asia appears to be the exception and the outlier to the most logical principle now — regional cooperation

It is an ill-wind that blows throughout the neighbourhood. A recent World Bank study on air pollution concludes that about two million people die prematurely in South Asia each year as particulate measure concentrations put nine South Asian cities among the world’s top 10 worst affected by air pollution. The ill effects of this pollution, regardless of where it originates from, are clouding even the region’s once-pristine tourist destinations.

One surprising study in Bhutan found that the average PM 2.5 concentration from 2018-2020 was three times World Health Organization-prescribed limits. Last week, the Maldives Meteorological Service warned that visibility had been reduced by 60% due to smog it has blamed on “winds from the Himalayan foothills”. Not only that, it is clear from success stories in other parts of the world, including countries of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, European alpine nations and China, that the solution to the problems of air pollution lies in a “whole of region” approach, and is not one that any one country in the “air sheds” can resolve on its own. The report ends by asking India, Pakistan, Bangladesh and all other South Asian countries to begin talks between scientists, officials and eventually ministers and leaders to create a mechanism for the cooperative management of the six air sheds the region is made up of. That such a conversation does not exist or is even being contemplated is one more example of the rejection of the idea of South Asia that continues to bedevil a region refusing to see itself as one geographical unit. This is particularly illogical when you consider that all South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) nations are members of the Group of 77 Developing countries, which under the chairpersonship of Pakistan last year, negotiated a breakthrough at the COP27 Climate Change summit at Sharm el-Sheikh, but are unable to convene a climate change conference for themselves.

Climate crisis, Ukraine issue

The climate crisis is only one of the immediate challenges of the times where South Asia has failed to build a platform. In fact, while India and Pakistan, the chief opponents of an integrated South Asia, continue to point to past disputes as the reason to hold up South Asian summits such as SAARC, block trade, connectivity and other avenues for cooperation, the undeniable truth is that every immediate geopolitical challenge is pushing the region to work more closely together: from the climate change crisis that saw Pakistan being engulfed in floods, the Ukraine war that sent costs of procuring energy, grain, fertilizers all soaring, persistent global economic recession, to more variants of the COVID-19 virus, and from terrorism, especially arising from the Taliban takeover of Afghanistan.

The failure to build a regional defence to the issues arising from Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and from North Atlantic Treaty Organization sanctions, trade ban and weapons stockpiling, means that South Asia has missed the chance to position itself as an energy “cartel” commanding a better price for the region. Apart from crude dependencies, Bangladesh, Pakistan and India buy more than 50% of their liquefied natural gas through the spot market — an indicator of how vulnerable they are to global energy trends.

Regional fissures

Pakistan has refused talks with India to its own detriment, and now stands to miss out on being part of the South Asia energy grid that is already powering dreams of regional connectivity between Bangladesh, Bhutan, India and Nepal (BBIN grouping), and possibly Sri Lanka. Phrases such as “Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam” and “diplomacy and dialogue” as being the only ways to resolve the conflict sound hollow when compared to India and Pakistan’s act of holding up the SAARC Summit from meeting for nearly a decade. Furthermore, if New Delhi can virtually hold a special meeting for the “Global South”, with the impact of the Ukraine war on the agenda, there is no reason why it cannot convene or participate in a regional dialogue to discuss the issue, or even to include the regional agenda in its G-20 narrative. Similar opportunities for regional cooperation in health security are being missed, although India has worked bilaterally with most of its neighbours to provide vaccines and COVID-19 medicines. Another move may be to unilaterally extend copyright waivers on medical products within South Asia of the sort India has proposed, unsuccessfully thus far, at the World Trade Organisation (WTO).

When it comes to terrorism, the contradictions between what can be discussed at broader multilaterals, but not in the region, are manifold: India and Pakistan talk about terrorism at the United Nations and the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO), but will not discuss the issue bilaterally or within South Asia. In 2022, New Delhi and Islamabad exchanged teams as part of the SCO Regional Anti-Terrorist Structure (RATS), and India was part of the Financial Action Task Force grouping that let Pakistan off its terror financing “greylist”, but the two sides are still not able to find a way for talks on the subject between them. The recent slanging match between External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar and Pakistan Foreign Minister Bilawal Bhutto Zardari in New York is a sample of the only “engagement” that exists. There are other absurdities. Pakistan has made Kashmir its “sticking point” for any engagement with India, including opening trade with India, but allows transit for Indian wheat to Afghanistan. India will not hold talks with Pakistan due to its support for terrorists, but now has a dialogue open with UN designated terrorists themselves — Taliban leaders including Sirajuddin Haqqani, held responsible for the attacks on Indian missions where an Indian diplomat and several security personnel died. In the process of such rank lack of logical behaviour, any chance of coordinating or cooperating against the developing chaos in Afghanistan, and countering extra-regional terror threats are also lost for South Asia, the one region affected the most.

Comfort in regionalisation

Given the deepening polarisation in the world, climate chaos, and the growing scarcity of resources, it is clear to see that the underpinnings of globalisation over the past century are about to be upended, and nearly every other nation is finding its moorings in regionalisation and forums closer home. Regional trade now makes up for more than half of global trading, and agreements such as United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA), the Southern Common Market (MERCOSUR for its Spanish initials), the European Union, Eurasian Economic Union, the Cooperation Council for the Arab States of the Gulf, African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA) and Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) are further boosting this trend. However, South Asia, defined by the Himalayas and HinduKush to the north, and the Indian Ocean to the south (an area distinctly different from West Asia and South East Asia on either side), is the exception, the outlier to this most logical principle.

Some options still exist for South Asian cooperation. Just as Prime Minister Narendra Modi has delinked himself from the Non Aligned Meet (NAM) Summit since 2014, but with the Government seen asserting its belief in non-Alignment, it should be possible to delink Mr. Modi’s presence from the SAARC summit, due to be held next in Pakistan, and instead have the President or the Vice-President to represent India. A quid pro quo could even see Pakistan send a replacement for its Prime Minister to the SCO Heads of State summit due to be held in India in June. In any case, it is necessary for the future to delink South Asian cooperation from the summit itself, and allow other parts of the agenda ( health, energy, women’s rights, security and terrorism) to be held even if a leadership event is not. To reject this idea would mean a missed opportunity, with repercussions more dire than those that come from the poisoned air the region breathes today.

Link to original story

In a world of hard geopolitical realities, New Delhi must leverage its unique strengths in remaining engaged with Kabul

This story first appeared in The Hindu

Bangladesh denies the group was meant to exclude India.

India can join the China-led South Asian initiative for COVID-19 vaccines and poverty alleviation too if it so desires, said Bangladesh Foreign Minister A.K. Abdul Momen, denying that a six-nation grouping launched earlier this month was meant to exclude India. The creation of the China-South Asian Countries Emergency Supplies Reserve, and a Poverty Alleviation and Cooperative Development Centre set up in China on July 8, the outcome of a meeting of the Foreign Ministers of China, Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka in April, had raised eyebrows in New Delhi, as it appeared to leave out only India, Bhutan and the Maldives.

In dire need of vaccines

“The Chinese approached us at a time we were in dire need of vaccines,” Mr. Momen told The Hindu in an interaction on the sidelines of the connectivity conference in Tashkent last week, explaining that India’s decision to suspend vaccine exports, including to Bangladesh, who had contracted and made advance payments for 5 million doses of Covishield per month, had become a “big issue” in the country, particularly as many had taken the first dose of the vaccine and had no access to the second.

Mr. Momen said that after Bangladesh requested vaccines from China, Foreign Minister Wang Yi decided to convene the six-nation China-South Asia meeting, where he suggested setting up a poverty alleviation centre to deal with economic issues arising in South Asia due to COVID, an e-commerce economic cooperation forum and an emergency storage facility for vaccines.

“We asked, how about India, and the Chinese [government] said this forum is open to India and India is welcome. In fact, even at the Foreign Minister’s meeting which included Pakistan, they said India would be welcome to join,” Mr. Momen said, stressing that the issues involved in the forum are common to all South Asian countries battling COVID and its impact on GDPs in the region.

Aggression on LAC

The Ministry of External Affairs did not respond to a question on whether India had been invited to the forum or would consider joining the China-South Asia centre, now being established in the Southern Chinese city of Chongqing, in the future. However, given continuing tensions over Chinese PLA aggression at the Line of Actual Control in Ladakh, and New Delhi’s firm stand that other bilateral relations cannot move ahead without a resolution of the boundary stand-off, it is understood that India would be unlikely to consider a new grouping involving China, especially one that could be seen to dilute its role in the SAARC region.

The absence of India from the grouping as well as from a series of consultations on COVID relief between the Chinese Vice Foreign Minister and different combinations of all SAARC member countries (other than India and Bhutan) led some experts to suggest this was meant to be a “Minus India” initiative. India is the only country of all eight SAARC nations that has not requested or accepted Chinese COVID vaccines.

Last week, Bhutan announced that it had been sent 50,000 doses of Sinopharm from the Chinese government, (along with 500,000 doses from the U.S. and another 350,000 from the EU) after the Indian decision to suspend its Vaccine Maitri programme after the second wave of the pandemic had left it in the lurch for second doses.

Mr. Momen said the pending Indian deliveries for Bangladesh had also come up for discussion during his meeting with External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar in Tashkent last Thursday, and although India has promised to export the vaccines as soon as production levels are sufficient, no firm timeline has been given yet. Meanwhile, Bangladesh is managing with vaccines received from China, U.S., Europe and Japan.

“I hope the situation [in India] improves faster, and then they can afford to give vaccines to us, but we can understand [India’s] problems and naturally, we cannot push them too much,” Mr. Momen added. He also said that he had discussed the importance of resolving water-sharing agreements including on Teesta river, as well as a proposal for developing a number of riverine channels between Bangladesh and India to improve trade and transport connectivity, during his meeting with Mr. Jaishankar.

Link to original story

This story first appeared in The Hindu

‘We need Pakistan for peace. We need an enduring relationship, a predictable relationship with Pakistan.’

Afghan national forces will prevail over Taliban militants making advances on towns and borders check-posts of the country, said Afghanistan’s President Ashraf Ghani, but conceded that Taliban has won some battles thus far. In an interview to The Hindu, shortly after a fiery speech accusing Pakistan of failing to prevent “Jihadi” fighters from crossing the border and for not pushing the Taliban hard enough on talks, Mr. Ghani said he would keep dialogue open with both Islamabad and the intra-Afghan negotiations with the Taliban based in Doha.

“Winning battles is not winning the war. They (the Taliban) have won battles. But, they’re going to lose the war, and we are determined,” said Mr. Ghani, when asked about recent Taliban gains, particularly on the border with Pakistan at the Spin Boldak-Chaman crossing, where Indian photo journalist Danish Siddiqui was killed last week. Mr. Ghani, who condoled the death said that there may be a need to “rebalance” the situation to win the war militarily, but that the larger goal for his government was to arrive at a political settlement in Afghanistan. Mr. Ghani said he would want to avoid the fates of countries like “Algeria, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and Yemen” which continue to see strife.

As a result, after several changes in their plans, an Afghan delegation led by High Council chief Abdullah Abdullah travelled to Doha on Saturday to begin “high level” talks with Taliban leaders in an effort facilitated by the Qatar government and other countries to restart the stalled intra-Afghan dialogue.

When asked if he felt abandoned by the West, after the abrupt US pullout and after comments by the  British Defence Secretary who said that the UK was prepared to engage the Taliban if it came to power in Afghanistan, Mr. Ghani also emphatically denied having asked India for military assistance in the face of the Taliban’s advances. He said India was a “true partner” in Afghanistan’s development.

“This [defeating Taliban] is our job. The period of international engagement, or use of force in Afghanistan is over,” Mr. Ghani told The Hindu during his visit to the Uzbekistan capital to attend the Central and South Asia connectivity conference on Friday.

Excerpts

The situation at the border with Pakistan at Spin Boldak seems to be getting more and more violent, and an Indian photojournalist has been killed. Pakistan has denied it threatened missile strikes on the Afghan Air Force if it tries to clear Taliban from the area. Could you give us some clarity on the situation there?

I cannot give you any clarity, because I’ve been in non-stop meetings from early morning [in Tashkent], and that clarification will have to come from Kabul. But I would like to give my deepest sympathies to the family of the Indian journalist, to the journalistic community of India, and to all to journalists around the world.

There were some strong words at your speech at the connectivity conference here, especially as you named the Pakistan PM for making promises on the Taliban that haven’t been kept, right as he was sitting a few feet away. Why do you feel so disappointed?

We need Pakistan for peace. We need an enduring relationship, a predictable relationship with Pakistan. We need to overcome our past. And building trust is going to require clarity, so we do not carry a burden. And then do not have the political capital or the vision to move forward. To me politics is a vocation, the way science is a vocation. I’m honoured to be the chief servant of my people. We are a plain-speaking people. And I need to reflect with logic and rigour, about the emotions of our people… because if they are not given expression, they will find other channels, and I don’t want further destructive relationships between us.

We understood that Afghanistan had postponed plans to send a delegation to Doha led by Dr. Abdullah for talķs. Pakistan has also announced it has put off the conference planned in Islamabad…

We are going ahead with the dialogue [with the Taliban]. We had a frank and good exchange today [with Pakistan Prime Minister Imran Khan]. Without a dialogue, you cannot get through. So we have to peel the layers and get to the heart of the matter. If you examine the situation, from the perspective of a medium-term and long-term interest of Pakistan, a Taliban-dominated Afghanistan would not be in their interest. Taking this genie out of the bottle is going to have consequences for the entire region. Particularly for Pakistan, and hence, [I gave] my speech with clarity.

What is your assessment of the security situation in Afghanistan? It seems as if the Taliban has made gains on different towns, different border check posts as well. Do you think the Afghan National Defence and Security forces (ANDSF) are going to be able to hold them back, or do they need to change tactics?

Firstly, winning battles is not winning the war. They (the Taliban) have won battles. But, they’re going to lose the war, and we are determined. We need to rebalance [ the situation], but our goal is not winning the war militarily. Our goal is to arrive at a political settlement that will ensure a just and lasting peace. I don’t want my country to become Algeria or Iraq, or Syria, or Lebanon, or Yemen. I’m a student of the Middle East, I studied in Lebanon, the war lasted 15 years. We cannot allow that type of destruction to be wrought on our lives.

I travel. I’m with my people. This thing that the President should be above and not engaged with the people is a figment of somebody’s imagination doesn’t work with our culture. If you’re not with your people, you’re not going to be taken seriously. Mazar Sharif in 2002 was a small town. Hardly with 20 buildings and those were dilapidated. Today, it’s a thriving metropolis. In 1991, I saw Khost looted, and today it is thriving and its airport was a dream come true, better than the Kabul airport. Amongst Afghan citizens, women, youth and poor are three major numerical majorities of our country, and all desire nothing but to live in peace and to pursue their lives with dignity. It is 40 years that we’ve been denied our collective right to peace. We are not a people that are going to take that lying down. That’s not our history.

But does the ANDSF have enough equipment, training they need?

It is never enough. If we went on a needs-based assessment, the world would not be able to fulfil our needs. Because what do we not want? This is not a moment of asking. It’s a moment of giving. It is a Kennedy moment for us combined with a Lincoln moment. A Kennedy moment, because we have to give for our country, and a Lincoln moment, because like Lincoln in 1861, we’re now facing the Battle of the Republic, which is for the values that the Islamic Republic (of Afghanistan) stands for. My efforts have been for women’s empowerment, youth empowerment, delivery to rural Afghanistan, regional connectivity, for a vision of engagement. It is a vision for Afghanistan to be a roundabout as [British historian Arnold] Toynbee said we did for millennia. And for that we need to focus on today. I don’t want the word to look at Afghanistan through the perspective of that America was here. It’s gone.

What is your expectation from India at this time… has Afghanistan asked for military support of any kind?

No, it has not. India has been a remarkable partner. I have the best of relations with the Prime Minister [Narendra Modi], who is wise. He has not asked of us something that will result in sacrificing our short, medium or long-term interests. India is a true partner. It’s the country with which we have a positive balance of trade. And what India stands for is the Salma dam, is the parliament building. It’s now the Shahtoot dam. It’s the transmission lines. And India is going to be booming. We want to be a participant in the immense shift that India is witnessing in terms of leadership of the fourth industrial revolution.

Do you feel that Afghanistan becomes a casualty to the hostilities between India and Pakistan?

We hope that Indian and Pakistan will be able to reach a resolution because that will change all of Asia. But accusations often made, that India is in every corner of Afghanistan, or there are 21 Indian consulates….

(interrupts) A former Pakistani minister just said that India had seven bases in Afghanistan…

It has none. None. And when [they] engage in that kind of fabrication, there is no credibility.

The U.S. has said it is pulling out its troops, and along with NATO has nearly completed that pull-out from Afghanistan. British says it will engage official whoever comes to power in Afghanistan, suggesting that even a Taliban government by force and the Islamic emirate would be acceptable. Do you feel abandoned?

No, no, I don’t . We have an engagement. As I mentioned, the assets that are left behind [by US], the capabilities that are left behind, the immense transformation that has taken place in our lives, is a product of these 20 years of [Afghan-U.S.] partnership. But so is the other side of the equation, the violence, the disenchantment, etc.

We have a proverb that says, ‘a bed borrowed from a neighbour will be recalled in the middle of the night’. Seven years ago, I predicted that the U.S. would leave. Two years ago I wrote to President Trump asking him to engage in an organised process with us. President Biden’s decision [to pull out troops] was not a surprise to me. We’ve respected it and I have the very best of relations with President Biden.

The U.S. also had a proposal which saw you step aside for a government of consensus. Would you be willing to do that?

Look, I’ve I’ve laid down my case. I’m a servant of my people. My condition is that my successor be elected by the people of Afghanistan. It’s the greatest honour of my life to serve them. I will serve them till it’s necessary. At this moment, they need a Commander in Chief and that’s what they’ve got.

What are the red lines for the Taliban that Afghanistan will not put up with?

Of course there are red lines. Our right to life, our right to liberty, our right to choose our future. Those are red line. And otherwise, we would not be fighting.

If the Taliban comes in by force, do you think that the international community should then come back to help ?

No. This is our job. The period of international engagement, or use of force in Afghanistan is over.

You’re confident that that will not happen?

Of course.

Link to original story

This story first appeared in The Hindu

However, both sides agree that neither should take unilateral actions and that the current situation suited neither.

While External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar conveyed to his Chinese counterpart Wang Yi on Wednesday the continuing impasse along the Line of Actual Control (LAC) was “visibly impacting the relationship in a negative manner”, the Chinese Minister offered a starkly different message, calling on both sides to “place the border issue in an appropriate position”.

Mr. Jaishankar reiterated India’s view in their talks on the sidelines of the SCO meeting — their first meeting since September last year in Moscow — that the LAC crisis would have a bearing on broader ties. “Assessing the overall relationship, the External Affairs Minister emphasised that maintenance of peace and tranquillity in the border areas has been the foundation for the development of ties since 1988,” the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) quoted him as saying, adding that attempts to change status quo last year “disregarded commitments under the 1993 and 1996 agreements” and “have inevitably affected ties”.

Mr. Wang, in contrast, said in China’s view the boundary should be kept “in an appropriate position” and it should be addressed while both sides looked to “expand the positive momentum of bilateral cooperation and create favourable conditions for resolving differences through negotiation”.

He said ‘cooperation’ should be “the main theme” of ties, while interaction “should still be seeking mutual benefits and complementarity, pursuing healthy competition and avoiding confrontation”. India has said normalcy in other areas of ties will not be possible until there is disengagement and then de-escalation along the border.

Mr. Wang also repeated China’s view that “the responsibility does not lie with the Chinese side” for the LAC crisis — another point of difference. Both also differed in their assessment of how to tackle remaining issues along the LAC, with problems unresolved in several areas including Depsang, Demchok, Gogra and Hot Springs after the February disengagement at Pangong Lake. Mr. Jaishankar said “the successful disengagement in the Pangong Lake Area earlier this year had created conditions for resolving the remaining issues” and noted “the situation in remaining areas is still unresolved”.

Mr. Wang did not refer to any remaining issues. He said since their September meeting in Moscow, frontier troops “disengaged in the Galwan Valley and the Pangong Lake areas, and the overall situation in the border area was de-escalated”. He said China “is ready to find a solution acceptable to both sides on the issue that needs emergency response through negotiation and consultation,” yet talks between the military to find a solution since February have made little headway.

The MEA statement noted the agreement between both sides at the last meeting of the Working Mechanism for Consultation and Coordination on border affairs on June 25 to “convene at the earliest” the next meeting of military commanders. This was not mentioned in the Chinese readout, and the view in New Delhi is Beijing has since February dragged its feet on talks to resolve the pending issues.

Both sides did agree that neither should take unilateral actions and that the current situation suited neither. Mr. Jaishankar said “both sides had agreed that a prolongation of the existing situation was not in the interest of either side”. Mr. Wang, for his part, said “relations still stay at a low level, which is not in the interest of either side”. He said China’s “strategic judgment on China-India relations remains unchanged”, which is, however, a view that isn’t entirely shared by New Delhi in the wake of the LAC crisis of last year.

Link to original story

This story first appeared in The Hindu

Afghan President and Imran Khan trade words at Tashkent meet

Pakistan has not severed its relationship with terror groups, said Afghanistan’s President Ashraf Ghani in a pointed charge at the neighbouring country as Pakistan’s Prime Minister Imran Khan sat a few feet away on stage at the Central and South Asia connectivity conference held here on Friday.

External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar, who also attended the conference, referred to the problems with transit trade in his speech alluding to Pakistan. He said economic development and prosperity go “hand in hand” with peace and security.

In a hard-hitting speech, Mr. Ghani said more than 10,000 ‘jihadi’ fighters have entered Afghanistan in the last month, according to intelligence reports, while the Pakistan government had failed to convince the Taliban to participate “seriously” in the peace talks.

“Contrary to repeated assurances by Prime Minister Khan and his Generals that Pakistan does not find a Taliban takeover in Afghanistan in Pakistan’s interest and short of use of force will use its power and influence to make the Taliban negotiate seriously, networks and organizations supporting the Taliban are openly celebrating the destruction of the assets and capabilities of the Afghan people and State,” Mr. Ghani said at the inaugural ceremony of the conference, as he listed the challenges and threats to regional connectivity.

Responding to the charges a few minutes later, Mr. Khan said he was “disappointed” by the allegation that Pakistan had a “negative role” in the conflict.

“President Ghani, the country that is going to be most affected by turmoil in Afghanistan is Pakistan. Pakistan suffered 70,000 casualties in the last 15 years. The last thing Pakistan wants is more conflict,” Mr. Khan said, addressing the Afghan President directly. “I can assure you that no country has tried harder to get Taliban on the dialogue table than Pakistan. We have taken all action short of taking military action, and every effort to bring them to the dialogue table and have a peaceful settlement there, and to blame Pakistan for what is going on in Afghanistan is extremely unfair,” he added.

Amrullah Saleh’s charge

Mr. Ghani and Mr. Khan spoke as another spat broke out between Kabul and Islamabad over allegations by Afghanistan Vice-President Amrullah Saleh that the Pakistan military had threatened missile launches against the Afghan Air Force if it targeted Taliban militia that has claimed border checkposts at Spin Boldak. In a statement, Pakistan’s Foreign Ministry denied the claim. It said Pakistan acknowledged Afghanistan’s sovereignty.

Mr. Khan said that apart from the violence in Afghanistan, “outstanding disputes” like Kashmir between regional players like India and Pakistan was the other big challenge to regional connectivity, and in comments to the media later even blamed the Rashtriya Swayamsewak Sangh (RSS) for creating hurdles to India-Pakistan dialogue, responding to a question from news agency ANI.

Despite the comment, words exchanged between Afghanistan and Pakistan were far sharper than the comments between India and Pakistan at the conference on Friday.

In his speech at the plenary session, which was attended by the foreign ministers of Russia and China and senior officials from about 40 countries, including the U.S., the U.K., EU and Iran, Mr. Jaishankar didn’t refer directly to Pakistan or to China as he stressed the need for resilient supply chains in the post COVID-19 situation, as well as the problems of “one-way” trade.

“Blocking connectivity in practice while professing support in principle benefits no one. A one-sided view of trade rights and obligations can never work. No serious connectivity can ever be a one-way street,” Mr. Jaishankar said in a reference to Pakistan’s refusal to allow Indian trade to Afghanistan over the land route through the Wagah border.

Chabahar port

Mr. Jaishankar also spoke of India’s efforts for a land route to Iran’s Chabahar port, which India is now promoting as a “secure, viable and unhindered” alternate access to the sea.

Uzbekistan and India announced the formation of the India-Uzbekistan-Iran-Afghanistan Quadrilateral working group to work on Chabahar during the conference. However, Uzbekistan’s President Shavkat Mirziyoyev announced that the Termez-Mazar-i-Sharif-Peshawar railroad would be a “key element of the entire architecture of connectivity”, which India would be cut out unless Pakistan reopens the land route for transit trade.

Making an oblique reference to China’s Belt and Road Initiative, Mr. Jaishankar said that building connectivity must conform to international law. “Respecting sovereignty and territorial integrity are the most basic principles of international relations,” he added, referring to the China Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) that runs through land India claims in Pakistan occupied Kashmir (PoK).

Link to original story

This story first appeared in The Hindu

External Affairs Minister to meet Pakistan, Chinese counterparts

External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar travels to Central Asia on Tuesday for two back-to-back meetings focusing on Afghanistan, which will see him face-to-face with the foreign ministers of both Pakistan and China as well as at the same conference as Pakistan Prime Minister Imran Khan, Afghanistan President Ashraf Ghani and U.S. Special Envoy Zalmay Khalilzad.

Mr. Jaishankar will first attend the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) ministerial in Dushanbe on July 13-14 after which he will travel to Tashkent for a regional connectivity conference on July 15-16.

Although Mr. Jaishankar has been at the same venue as the Pakistan Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi at least twice in the past few months, the SCO meeting marks the first time he will be in the room with Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi, since the two met in Moscow last September, when they agreed to de-escalate tensions at the Line of Actual Control.

However, the agreement has yet to be fully implemented on the ground. The MEA declined to comment on whether Mr. Jaishankar and Mr. Wang will have a separate meeting at either of the two venues that both will travel to.

The focus of both meetings is expected to be the deteriorating security situation in Afghanistan and regional solutions for the country in the wake of the U.S. and NATO troops pull-out, said organisers.

Dushanbe will host a special SCO-contact group meeting of eight member states (Russia, India, China, Pakistan and Central Asian states) with Afghanistan Foreign Minister Hanif Atmar on July 14. Significantly, the contact group, which normally meets at the level of Deputy Foreign Ministers, is being upgraded this time, and all foreign ministers are expected to give a joint statement on Afghanistan.

The statement will be of particular importance as the Taliban has stepped up violence in the country, and Taliban militants claim they are taking over more towns and cities from the Afghan forces, which led to India pulling all its staff out of the Kandahar Consulate on Saturday. Afghanistan was high on the agenda of Mr. Jaishankar’s meetings in Tehran and Moscow last week as well.

In Tashkent, Uzbekistan President Shavkat Mirziyoyev will make a greater push for trade connectivity between South and Central Asia, including discussing the importance of the Chabahar project with India and signing a transit trade agreement (TTA) with PM Khan that will give Uzbekistan access to Pakistani ports, benefitting trade with Afghanistan as well.

“Afghanistan is not just a neighbour, but a part of our region. Presently it is seen by some as a source of problems and threats, but it is also a source of possibilities, and the President feels that the foremost purpose of this conference is to strengthen connectivity, including through Afghanistan,” Uzbekistan Ambassador to India Dilshod Akhotov told The Hindu in an interview. He added that Afghanistan would be included in the Uzbekistan-India-Iran trilateral in the future, and plans for a Preferential Trade Agreement (PTA) with India were also under consideration.

“The most important goal is for Uzbekistan, which the only double landlocked country in the world other than Liechtenstein, to build a bridge to the South Asian region. Through our southern neighbours we want to access the seas, and the closest is the Indian ocean,” Mr. Akhotov added.

At the conference entitled “Central and South Asia: Regional Connectivity, Challenges and Opportunities”, Mr. Mirziyoyev will project Uzbekistan as the Central Asian fulcrum and key country in the Intra-Afghan peace process, that has, in the past, hosted Taliban delegations for talks.

Mr. Ghani and Mr. Khan will participate together at the inaugural session of the Conference on Friday, which will be addressed virtually by UN Secretary General Guterres, and followed by a plenary session with speeches by Mr. Jaishankar, Chinese FM Wang Yi, Russian FM Sergey Lavrov, and ministers and senior officials from other Central Asian countries, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka (virtually), Gulf States, the U.S. and the European Union.

Link to original story

This story first appeared in The Hindu

Link to original story