India-ASEAN ties improving slowly

By Ganganath Jha

NEW DELHI (JP): The annual meeting of ASEAN foreign ministers is scheduled to be held in Brunei next month and important matters to be deliberated are appraisal of the success of the ASEAN Free Trade Area and other vital issues of economic cooperation. Vietnam's inclusion in the ASEAN fold is also on the agenda and subsequently they are to discuss security environment under the auspices of ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF).

Naturally to be discussed is maritime developments on ASEAN's western, southern and eastern frontiers. Thus strategic developments in the South China Sea and Indian Ocean and inadvertently the activities of important powers on Southeast Asian frontiers will come under scrutiny.

India has been aspiring to closer ties with ASEAN because of growing convergence of security and economic interests. It has chosen liberalization and is seeking foreign investments for its success. It is in search of vibrant new partners interested in economic cooperation. Naturally it looks towards ASEAN with great hopes.

However, this task is proving difficult. Though interactions have increased ever since India became a "sectorial partner" in January 1992, it is generally treated as a nation of little significance. Whether it is a case of investment or the question of inclusion in emerging regional groupings, India is the least supported.

Though India has sizable investments in ASEAN countries, 89 out of 222 Indian joint ventures abroad, this is yet to be appropriately reciprocated.

Presently ASEAN investors are negotiating more favorable terms and more transparency in the investment laws, and sometimes display their lack of confidence and understanding in India.

Singapore, Malaysia, Thailand and Indonesia have evinced greater enthusiasm in establishing joint ventures in India. Singapore is presently interested in information technology, power projects and tourism. They have come forward to construct a new airport in Bangalore and establish five-star hotels in New Delhi.

Again, Malaysia is interested in joint ventures to produce palm oil and some defense related products.

Thailand, on the other hand, is interested in tourism, particularly in areas associated with Lord Buddha, like Bodh Gaya, Sarnath, Lumbini and others.

Again Indonesia is interested in joint ventures to produce paper and pulp.

Some agreements and Memorandums of Understanding have been signed, but work on all those projects are at a standstill.

Some of the ASEAN investors have pessimistic projections and are afraid of the emergence of sectarian and eccentric leaders like Bal Thackeray in Maharashtra, Laloo Prasad Yadav in Bihar and Kanshi Ram in Uttar Pradesh. When the Shiv-Sena-BJP combine came to power in Maharashtra in March 1995, it deterred some prospective investors because they felt insecure under the new dispensation.

It is well known that foreign investors have no reason to feel concerned about changes in the political leadership. There is a broad consensus in India on the question of liberalization and the process is irreversible. Ruling Communist Party in West Bengal, Janata Dal in Bihar, BJP in Gujarat, and other recognized opposition parties have expressed their support of economic liberalization time and again. As India believes in democracy, the change of the government in the Center and states are possible, but reversal of liberalization is impossible.

However, ASEAN's impressions of India have yet to be positively influenced. We do find that distant countries are given regional importance but India is ignored. When Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation was launched, India was kept out. Again, India was not found worthwhile to be included in ARF.

The fact that India has conflict with Pakistan and it is not a signatory of non-proliferation treaty are some of the reasons that its membership is advocated against. ASEAN leaders ignore that the conflict with Pakistan can be resolved when public opinion of the two countries support it and in that endeavor the role of international media and associations could play a pivotal role.

Again the question of the non-proliferation treaty should not be examined in isolation. There must be a universal application of this principle and an objective assessment of the situation. It is well known that India's two neighbors -- China and Pakistan -- are in possession of nuclear bombs, but India has not proliferated bombs. It is interested in nuclear technology for peaceful purposes. In view of the tension in regional environment, it is believed to be pragmatic in keeping nuclear options open. This is aimed at deterrence vis-a-vis aggressors. The deterrence is necessitated because India suffered humiliating defeats in the 1962 war against China because it ignored defense preparedness. India is unwilling to repeat the same mistakes.

The Kashmir dispute is a lively issue between India and Pakistan. ASEAN has been categorical that the interference of one country against another is unjustified. They have also condemned transnational support of terrorism. Their united stand against Vietnam vis-a-vis Cambodia during 1979-1989 influenced Vietnam to withdraw. Kashmir offers a somewhat similar parallel and deserves similar treatment. The frontiers of India and Pakistan are clearly demarcated and conflicting partners are to be taught the principles of non-interference. If the Kashmir problem is resolved, the main raison d'etre of the Indo-Pak conflict would be solved.

Some ASEAN diplomats do opine sarcastically that, having failed in the SAARC, India pleads for inclusion in every regional groupings like ASEAN, ARF, Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation and others. This criticism, on the surface, seems to be correct. An understanding of India, however, suggest that its voice of concern about its omissions from such forums are not only to show its willingness to cooperate, but also to express its appreciation for those organizations. Again, it is keen to learn from ASEAN experiences. Because of geographic contiguity and similar concerns, ASEAN is important to India and vice versa.

India is keen to evolve consensus in security matters with ASEAN and desires collective naval exercises. Though individual ASEAN countries have gone for joint exercises, collective exercises are yet to be held.

India perceives an emerging security vacuum in the region in the event of American withdrawal. The Chinese are flexing their naval prowess. It claims sovereignty over South China Sea and has expanded its presence in the Indian Ocean by establishing bases at Coco Island and Hanggyi. Such activities have generated tension. But the most disturbing developments are witnessed in the contest over the Spratly group of islands. The Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia and Taiwan are distressed at Chinese maneuvers in the region. It is in this area where efforts for peace making are required and our interests do converge with ASEAN. There is a need of broader consensus and collective outlook on regional issues to deter ambitious powers.

India identifies its interests with ASEAN in both economic and security matters. As and when such gestures are reciprocated, it would open its gates for broader regional prosperity.

Dr. Ganganath Jha is Associate Professor in Southeast Asian Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi.