Portal de Periódicos da CAPES

India in the Asia–Pacific: Rising Ambitions with an Eye on China

2007; Taylor & Francis; Volume: 14; Issue: 1 Linguagem: Inglês

10.1080/13439000701330577

1469-2937

Harsh V. Pant,

International Development and Aid

Abstract It is almost a conventional wisdom now that the centre of gravity of global politics has shifted from Europe to the Asia–Pacific in recent years with the rise of China and India, gradual assertion by Japan of its military profile, and a significant shift in the US global force posture in favour of Asia–Pacific. The debate now is whether Asia–Pacific will witness rising tensions and conflicts in the coming years with various powers jockeying for influence in the region or whether the forces of economic globalization and multilateralism will lead to peace and stability. Some have asked the question more directly: Will Asia's future resemble Europe's past?1 1See Aaron Friedberg, "Will Europe's Past be Asia's Future?" Survival, Vol. 42, No. 3 (Autumn 2000), pp. 147–159. It is, of course, difficult to answer this question as of now when major powers in Asia–Pacific such as China, India and Japan are still rising and grappling with a plethora of issues that confront any rising power in the international system. But what is clear is that all major powers are now re-evaluating their policy options vis-à-vis the Pacific. This paper examines India's foreign policy in the Pacific as it has emerged on the last few years. First, the emerging balance of power in Asia–Pacific will be examined in light of the theoretical debate on the issue followed by a broad assessment of the role that India envisages for itself in the region. Subsequently, India's relationship with the three major powers in Asia–Pacific—China, Japan, and the US is analysed. Finally, some observations will be made about the future trajectory of Indian foreign policy in the region. Notes 1See Aaron Friedberg, "Will Europe's Past be Asia's Future?" Survival, Vol. 42, No. 3 (Autumn 2000), pp. 147–159. 2Christopher Layne, "The Unipolar Illusion," International Security, Vol. 17/4 (Spring 1993), pp. 5–51. 3William C. Wohlforth, "The Stability of a Unipolar World," International Security, Vol. 24/1 (Summer 1999), pp. 5–41. 4Zbignew Brzezinski, The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives (New York: Basic Books, 1997), p. 24. 5Joseph S. Nye, Jr., Bound to Lead: the Changing Nature of American Power (New York: Basic Books, 1990), pp. 173–201. 6Samuel P. Huntington, "The Lonely Superpower," Foreign Affairs, Vol. 78/2 (March/April 1999), pp. 35–49. 7Paul Kennedy, "The Eagle Has Landed," The Financial Times, London, February 2, 2002. 8Kenneth Waltz, "Structural Realism after the Cold War," International Security, Vol. 25, No. 1 (Summer 2000), pp. 5–41. 9For a range of perspectives on this, see Keir A. Lieber and Gerard Alexander, "Waiting for Balancing: Why the World Is Not Pushing Back," International Security, Vol. 30, No. 1 (Summer 2005), pp. 109–139; Stephen G. Brooks and William Wohlworth, "Hard Times for Soft Balancing," International Security, Vol. 30, No. 1 (Fall 2005), pp. 72–108; Robert A. Pape, "Soft Balancing Against the United States," International Security, Vol. 30, No. 1 (Summer 2005), pp. 7–45; T.V. Paul, "Soft Balancing in the Age of US Primacy," International Security, Vol. 30, No. 1 (Summer 2005), pp. 46–71; Harsh V. Pant, "The Moscow-Beijing-Delhi 'Strategic Triangle': An Idea Whose Time May Never Come Security Dialogue, Vol. 35, No. 3 (September 2004), pp. 311–328. 10For a discussion of the various interpretations of China's 'peaceful rise,' see Evan S. Medeiros, "China Debates Its 'Peaceful Rise' Strategy?" available at http://yaleglobal.yale.edu/display.article?id = 4118 11On why multipolar systems are more unstable as compared to bipolar ones, see Kenneth Waltz, Theory of International Politics (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1979), pp. 161–193. Also see John Mearsheimer, Tragedy of Great Power Politics (New York: W.W. Norton, 2001), pp. 138–167. 12A detailed explication of the Power Transition theory can be found in A.F.K. Organski and Jacek Kugler, The War Ledger (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1980). 13The report is available at http://www.cia.gov/nic/NIC_globaltrend2020.html 14The report is available at http://www2.goldmansachs.com/insight/research/reports/99.pdf 15For details, see the "Declaration on Principles for Relations and Comprehensive Cooperation Between the Republic of India and the People's Republic of China," available at . 16Amit Baruah, "China keeps its word on Sikkim," The Hindu, New Delhi, May 7, 2004. 17"India-China bilateral trade touches $13.6 bn," Press Trust of India, March 5, 2005. 18"Iran, China key to India's oil march," Indian Express, New Delhi, February 20, 2005. 19Edward Cody, "China Offers Glimpse of Rationale Behind Its Military Policies," Washington Post, Deember 30, 2006. 20See the report of an independent task force of the Council on Foreign Relations on Chinese Military Power at http://www.cfr.org/pdf/China_TF.pdf 21Sudha Ramachandran, "China's Pearl in Pakistan's Waters," March 5, 2005, at http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/GC04Df06.html 22Haroon Habib, "Bangladesh, China sign nine agreements," The Hindu, April 9, 2005. 23"Hindi-Chini Bhai Bhai" (Indians and Chinese are brothers) was a popular slogan during the 1950s, the heydays of Sino-Indian relationship, that became discredited after the 1962 Sino-Indian war. 24For a detailed account of these talks, see Strobe Talbott, Engaging India: Diplomacy, Democracy and the Bomb (Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press, 2004). 25Condoleezza Rice, "Promoting the National Interest," Foreign Affairs, Vol. 79, No. 1, (January/February 2000), p. 56. 26C. Raja Mohan, Impossible Allies: Nuclear India, United States and the Global Order (New Delhi: India Research Press, 2006), p. 57. 27The transcript of the Background Briefing by Administration Officials on US-South Asia Relations is available at http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2005/43853.htm 28The testimonies of US Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice on the US-India Civilian Nuclear Cooperation Agreement before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee is available at http://www.state.gov/secretary/rm/2006/64136.htm and before the House International Relations Committee is available at http://www.state.gov/secretary/rm/2006/64146.htm 29K.P. Nayar, "What's in it for the US?" The Telegraph, March 8, 2006. 30The 2006 Quadrennial Defense Review Report is available at http://www.defenselink.mil/qdr/report/Report20060203.pdf 31Robert Marquand, "Anti-Japan protests jar an uneasy Asia," The Christian Science Monitor, April 11, 2005. 32S.D. Naik, "India-Japan Ties—Moving to the Next Level," The Hindu Business Line, January 2, 2007. 33Tukoji R. Pandit, "Sun Shines on India-Japan Relations," The Asian Tribune, December 29, 2006. 34V. Jayanth, "India and ASEAN set to focus on East Asia," The Hindu, January 12, 2007. 35P.S Suryanarayana, "A Promise for Cooperative Diplomacy," The Hindu, March 8, 2006. 36"NSG Exception only for India: Australia," Press Trust of India, February 1, 2007. 37Henry Kissinger, Does America Need a Foreign Policy? (New York: Simon & Schuster, 2001), p. 157.