Contrary to China’s hope that perhaps India would back off, as the standoff built up, India refused to blink. The global reaction too tended to lean towards India or was neutral.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi meets the President of the People’s Republic of China, Xi Jinping, on the sidelines of the 9th BRICS Summit, in Xiamen, China, recently. PTI

Bhartendu Kumar Singh

WHILE the Doklam crisis has ended, speculation and guesswork continue to masquerade the causes that triggered the crisis. Perceptions and misperceptions overshadow the actual sequence of developments on the ground but there is little doubt that the Chinese leadership wanted to build a road in the disputed area. However, it did eat humble pie, much against its expectations. When the crisis was on, some newspaper articles in India postulated it as another example of (insecure) Chinese nationalism. However, the crisis was neither caused nor precipitated by Chinese nationalism. India actually does not figure high in the Chinese calculus of nationalism. The aggressive posturing by the Global Times (a newspaper perceived to enjoy state support in China) at best represents the microscopic viewpoint. Chinese nationalism is still preoccupied with Japan, the US and Taiwan (to some extent). Throughout the crisis period, there were no mass protests against India as has been the case against Japan and the US in the past, often under state patronage. 

Alternative hypotheses

Though there are alternative hypotheses predicting the cause of Doklam, none of them or their combination could be entirely true.1 China was apparently not happy over India’s lack of enthusiasm in the Belt and Road initiative and its non-participation (along with Bhutan) at the inaugural conference in Beijing in May. Doklam could have been a well-thought geopolitical spot to embarrass India since the dispute was primarily with Bhutan. Also, it pinched India right on the Chicken’s Neck, considered as the most sensitive and vulnerable corridor that could cut the Indian mainland from the north-east portion. Thus, Doklam could have been a well-crafted Chinese strategy to inflict ‘revenge’ on India and shore up their own standing in international relations. 2 Doklam could also have been an initiative by President Xi Jinping to consolidate his own position against the collegiate spirit and leadership in the factional politics. This could be very much a probability since most foreign policy crises in China had internal roots. Witness, for example, the 1962 war which was as much about Mao’s personal decision (in order to divert the attention from the great famine deaths) as it was about certain misperceptions between China and India. Many leaders in the Party who could have been Xi’s wanna-be successors have actually been purged recently in the typical Chinese style of anti-corruption crusade. 3 It could have also been a test for China’s military modernisation and strategic consolidation in Tibet. After last year’s reorganisation of the command system in the People’s Liberation Army (PLA), the entire Indian front is against a one-theatre command and China, perhaps, wanted to test its combat-preparedness for local wars. The PLA enjoys considerable influence in Chinese foreign policy decision-making and may have nudged the leadership to check upon its troop movement in Tibet. While the crisis was going on, the PLA conducted a large-scale war exercise near the Line of Actual Control (LAC) in Tibet. Perhaps, the intention was also to gauge the Indian response. In his just-published book, How Statesmen Think — The Psychology Of International Relations (Princeton University Press, 2017), Robert Jervis says that decision-makers are often victims of misleading indicators of military strength and psychological pressures can lead them to run particularly high risks. This is what would have propelled Xi Jinping in playing the risky Doklam game. It is debatable if China gained any advantage from the Doklam crisis. If the Chinese objective was to wage a psychological war, it certainly did not work since India failed to blink. The Chinese whispers of a short and swift military operation to eke out India also did not evoke any panic across the Himalayas. If the objective was to test its war-preparedness in local conditions, it has come at a cost that would surely pinch through negative image building for China in international relations. 

BRICS gave exit setting

As the crisis unfolded, India didn’t blink, contrary to China’s expectation. The international reaction was either neutral or inclined in India’s favour. The US and all other great powers refused to toe the Chinese line of posturing, despite China linking the same (at least indirectly) with the North Korean crisis. The crisis only muddled China’s image as a bullying neighbour against its much-hyped “good neighbourly policy” announced in February this year. China’s expectations for a passive aggression strategy had failed. The domination strategy gave way to submission to reality that India will not back off. China perhaps felt the desirability of an exit strategy acceptable to both. The BRICS summit at Xiamen provided the strategic choice environment to China. India is one of the pivotal members of this select club that provides an alternative space for member countries to push their own agenda in international relations. Even a diluted participation from India would have taken the sheen out of summit and exposed internal contradiction in BRICS. The Chinese interlocutors perhaps realised this and kept the diplomatic channels active. Also, the protracted crisis could have become a sore point for the Chinese leadership in the coming Party Congress in October.The writer is in the Indian Defence Accounts Service

Ajay Banerjee

Tribune News Service

New Delhi, August 31

The Ministry of Defence has decided to again invite foreign companies to make fighter jets in India. However, this time the foreign partners have been told to ‘make in India’.The MoD has approved a proposal by the Indian Air Force to invite international manufacturers to produce 100 single-engine fighter jets. The expected cost is around $10 billion (Rs 65,000 crore). The IAF and the MoD have listed single-engine jets as top priority.The new proposal is similar to the previous scraped tender in which the IAF had sought 126 medium multirole combat aircraft. The difference, however, is that the IAF will specify its single-engine requirement. During the previous tender scrapped in 2015, the IAF had made known its preference for a twin-engine jet.The request for information — it’s the first step of the buying process — will be sent to identified global players who will come and join hands with an Indian partner to produce these planes under the “Make in India” initiative, source in the security establishment have confirmed to The Tribune.The target is to acquire the first plane within three years of signing the agreement and finish the deliveries within the next seven. It is estimated that the agreement signing will take about two years. In other words, if everything goes well, the first plane would be in by 2021-2022. This will be done under the strategic partnership model announced by the Ministry of Defence in July. Under this, foreign companies and their Indian partners will bid for the project together.The two possible single-engine plane makers who may be shortlisted are Saab of Sweden with its “Gripen-E” jet and Lockheed Martin of the US with its latest block 70 version of “F-16”. Both companies have made it known in public statements that they are ready to “make in India”.The IAF needs some 200 single-engine planes to replace the Soviet/Russian origin MiG-21 and MiG-27 fighter jets. These are more than 35 years old. As per information tabled in Parliament in December 2016, the MiG-21 and MiG-27 are scheduled to retire in phases by 2024. The option of making indigenous fighter jet “Tejas” is being exercised to fill in the gap.

First plane expected in 2021-2022

• In its 2015 tender, which was scrapped, the IAF had sought a twin-engine jet. The Air Force now wants a single-engine jet
• It wants 18 jets in flay-away condition and the rest to be made in India. If all goes to plan, the first plane may fly in by 2021-2022
• The IAF requires 200 single-engine planes to replace MiG-21 and MiG-27 fighter jets. These are to be phased out by 2024

STAYING POWER: US soldiers stand guard near the site of a US bombing in Nangarhar province, in eastern Afghanistan. Photos: Reuters

Mudassir Ali Shah

President Donald Trump, breaking with his derision for the 16-year-old conflict, has finally rolled out his long-awaited policy towards Afghanistan. The presidential decision to boost troop levels is an extension of the botched approach of his predecessors. All options that were on the table during the protracted review of America’s new strategy for South Asia were bewildering. The number of extra troops for Afghanistan and benchmarks for victory are yet to be determined. The US president has virtually left the devil lying in the detail. In his prime-time address to troops at Fort Myer, Trump embraced deeper US involvement in a military campaign he once slammed as futile. Though touted as a conditions-based regional move towards a political solution, the new plan indicates little innovation. The presidential announcement is a success of sorts for his hawkish Defence Secretary James Mattis and National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster, who have repeatedly warned that a swift withdrawal would create a vacuum that the militant Islamic State group and Al-Qaida would fill instantly. The way forward in Afghanistan remains blurred.As expected, the US would mount pressure on Pakistan to shut down militant safe havens on its soil and take concrete action against the Afghan Taliban. At the same time, the US will woo India — Pakistan’s arch-rival — into helping Nato battle extremists in Afghanistan. His promise to pursue integration of all instruments of US might, diplomatic, economic and military, does not sound convincing. At the moment, the US neither has a full-time ambassador in Kabul nor a special envoy for Afghanistan and Pakistan. Many key diplomatic slots in the State Department are yet to be filled.Importantly, Trump has come to realise that the Afghan Taliban — who control over 40 per cent of Afghanistan — are a force to be reckoned with. Some elements of the insurgent movement may also be included in a future government. But US troops will be fighting against them, nonetheless. On the campaign trail, Trump scorned the Afghan war as an archetype of how the Bush and Obama administrations squandered billions of dollars in return for insignificant strategic gains. But he has reversed his position that American men and women in uniform should come home from that country. During the prolonged internal debate at the White House, his national security team bent over backward to come up with suggestions acceptable to a cynical commander-in-chief. Frenzied efforts by his advisers came to fruition last week when they coaxed the President into approving the deployment of more troops. By adding more troops to the 8,400-strong US force already stationed in Afghanistan, he has toed the line of warmongering Republican legislators and military commanders, who have been pleading for expanding the campaign against militants. However, there are no guarantees that the additional American forces would be able turn the tide, an objective that could not be realised by more than 130,000 international soldiers. The plan comes at a time when the tempo of fighting has risen steeply across Afghanistan. In the first half of 2017, civilians have died daily. The Afghan army has also been targeted in mass attacks, leaving several soldiers dead. The so-called way forward remains blurred. It remains to be seen how Trump’s team wrestles with a whole slew of complex questions — notably the cost of the new surge in treasure and blood, propping up the kleptocracy in Kabul and bringing the Taliban to the negotiating table.Consequences of cutting bait altogether presumably forced the US leader to take a U-turn. He must appreciate the fact that Washington’s fuzzy approach to winding down the conflict and riding roughshod over suggestions from regional powers will continue to hamper progress in Afghanistan. From America’s perspective, the mission must ensure foolproof homeland security. However, Trump’s road map is unlikely to yield the intended results in terms of vanquishing the Taliban or blocking the return of Al-Qaida to Afghanistan. A longer and deeper commitment of US forces is unlikely to hasten an outright military victory for America — a goal that 16 years of war have failed to achieve. As his government is still polarised and faced with popular discontent, President Ashraf Ghani has been kicking the can down the road on the key issues of institutional reforms and eradicating endemic corruption. Ubiquitous insecurity continues to be a huge impediment to the implementation of important policy decisions. As long as Kabul gropes for political and economic stability, frustrated youth will continue to swell the ranks of insurgent outfits. In the absence of a corresponding effort by Afghan rulers to set their house in order, the going will be as tough for Trump as it was for his predecessors — all playing whack-a-mole.By arrangement with the Dawn

Mukesh Ranjan

Tribune News Service

New Delhi, August 20

With the Centre deciding to hand over security arrangements at all airports to the Central Industrial Security Force (CISF), a joint committee has been constituted with senior officials drawn from the ministries of Home, Finance and Civil Aviation to work out a detailed plan, including financial implications attached to it and also ways to fund it.Sources in the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) said the committee might suggest increasing the passenger service fee (PSF), which is levied on air travellers. For long, the issue has been lingering as to who should bear the cost of providing security at airports, with the Ministry of Civil Aviation arguing that it should be borne out of the Consolidated Fund of India for the reason that providing security is the sovereign duty of the state. (Follow The Tribune on Facebook; and Twitter @thetribunechd)The idea of increasing PSF was first mooted at a recent meeting of Ministers of State for Home, Finance and Civil Aviation Kiren Rijiju, Arjun Ram Meghwal and Jayant Sinha, respectively, and for the purpose they constituted a “committee of senior officials”, sources said. Already the MHA owes a cumulative Rs 800 crore to the Civil Aviation Ministry for providing security at 59 of the total 98 existing small and big airports in the country.“Now, in-principle, it has been decided to hand over all current and future functional airports to CISF,” said the official, adding that the committee would help the Civil Aviation Ministry in finding out how much revenue it could generate from the PSF, car parking facilities and through rentals at the airports. Currently, around Rs 150 is levied as PSF on each traveller.The committee will also work out modalities for creating a unified security architecture for the aviation sector and consolidation of security at airports under the CISF cover. Of the 98 functional airports, 59 are under CISF cover. Among them, 26 airports, including those in New Delhi and Mumbai, are considered to be hyper-sensitive.Of these hyper-sensitive airports, six, like in Srinagar and Imphal, are being guarded by the CRPF, the state police or other paramilitary forces. Under the sensitive category, there are 56 airports of which only 37 had CISF cover.

Ajay Banerjee

Tribune News Service

New Delhi, August 17

The Ministry of Defence (MoD) today okayed the purchase of six attack helicopters, the first such machines for the Indian Army’s Aviation Corps.These will be a follow-on to the existing order of 22 ‘AH-64-E  Apache’ helicopters from US-based giant Boeing. These 22 helicopters, okayed by the MoD in September 2015, have been allocated to the IAF.  The IAF also operates the Russian built Mi35/Mi25 attack copters. (Follow The Tribune on Facebook; and Twitter @thetribunechd)The Defence Acquisition Council (DAC), the highest decision-making body of the MoD, okayed the Rs 4,168-crore project. The Apache is armed with the deadly Hellfire Longbow missiles, Hellfire-II missiles, Stinger missiles and fire-control radars.Apart from the Apache, the Army is also looking at the Light Combat Helicopter (LCH) being built by MoD- owned public sector undertaking Hindustan Aeronautics  Limited (HAL). The LCH is currently under development and undergoing weapons integration. The Aviation Corps has expressed its intention to acquire 114 helicopters, though no contract has been signed so far.In 2014, the MoD had in principle allowed attack helicopters for the Army. Till now, the Army only has ‘non-armed’ helicopters. The MoD has accepted the need to have 39 armed helicopters which will fly overhead when ground-based troops move in for attack. Such copters carry missiles.The DAC, headed by Defence Minister Arun Jaitley,  assessed  a request by the Army, which wanted  the MoD to exercise the ‘option clause’ that allows  the purchase of 11 more copters as a follow-up to the 22 already on order. The Defence Finance wing has its reservations on having all 11, and the MoD today okayed six copters. A high-level body called the Services Capital AcquisitionCategorisation Higher Committee (SCAPCHC), with representatives of the IAF and the Army, had decided that 11 copters should be taken as the capability was needed.The US helicopter had won the bid in an open competition, beating the Russian built Mi-28-H. For a number of years, the Army and the IAF  have been sparring over who should operate this future fleet of Apache copters.The acquisition council also cleared the purchase of two sets of engines from Ukraine for two Grigorovich class ships being built in Russia for India. These will cost Rs 490 crore. Admiral Grigorovich-class frigates were the first casualty in the Russian-Ukrainian conflict over Crimea after Ukraine refused to supply the Zorya-Mashproyekt gas-turbine propulsion plant for the last three ships.Following the 2014 Crimea conflict, Ukraine refused to deliver the remaining three engines to Russia.

Lt-Gen K J Singh (retd)While leaving India, the British left behind two Armies with Command HQs at Rawalpindi, Pune and Lucknow. The first challenge came in the form of large-scale riots and arson as a prelude to the impending Partition. As an emergency response, a Punjab Boundary Force and a Military Evacuation Organisation were created.  The Boundary Force became operational on August 1, 1947, under Maj Gen TW Reeves based at Lahore. It had 15 Indian and 10 Pak units with legendary officers like Brig KS Thimayya (later rose to be the Chief) from India and Brig Ayub Khan of Pakistan, who later made himself President. The failure of this Border Force is attributed to many factors, including idiosyncrasies of Reeves, and resulted in its disbandment on September 1 and the raising of the Delhi and East Punjab Command under Lt Gen Dudley Russel on 15th September. While the Force proved inadequate, yet it did save many lives, including that of my father (14 year old then) at Adhwal village in Chakwal district, where Sikh Light Infantry evacuated them in the face of marauding rioters in the nick of time. Both nations took over of their respective areas across the new boundary, which was unmarked on ground. The new HQ could not find suitable accommodation and was given a barrack-type hutment at the site where Sena Bhavan stands today in Delhi. Governor-General Mountbatten was more considerate and gave the old Viceregal train for mobile HQ. An initial thought was that like the Boundary Force, the Command would be a temporary requirement. The idea of train-based mobile HQ indeed was unique and a novelty. Mobile HQ took charge of the situation to organise an orderly movement of refugees, saving lives and property. It was greatly aided due to the alignment of the railway line along Grand Trunk Road. Refugee trains were provided with special railway wagons called ‘flats’ mounted with machine-gun emplacements and armoured car and infantry escorts. Similar escorts were provided to road convoys, my mother, an infant, travelled in one such convoy and lost her father due to mob violence as convoys despite protection got attacked on the way. Kabayali raids resulted in Kashmir being added to the Command’s charter and re-designation as the Western Command on 20th Jan 1948 with Lt Gen KM Cariappa (later Field Marshal) as Army Commander. The legacy of mobile HQ has been enshrined in the Western Command museum in the vintage train, restored under expert supervision of the late Lt-Gen SK Sinha, who was a staff officer in this unique HQ.

Tribune News service

Chandigarh, August 13

After initial hiccups, the Finance Department has finally sanctioned Rs 20 crore for Chief Minister Capt Amarinder Singh’s pet project, the Guardians of Governance scheme (GoG).Due to financial constraints, Rs 20 crore was allocated in the Budget against the projected requirement of Rs 100 crore.“With the financial sanction in hand, a fresh advertisement to invite the applications will be released in coming days. Against the initial plan to launch the scheme on August 15, the scheme has been delayed for want of financial sanction. It is now expected to be launched by the end of this month,” said a senior government official.The government plans to initially hire nearly 5,000 ex-servicemen as village-level guardians to oversee the implementation of government programmes and to keep a watch on officials working at the grassroots. In the first phase, the scheme would be launched in eight districts.The scheme would be formally launched with announcement on the honorarium to be given. As per the scheme, ex-servicemen will be enrolled from each of the nearly 12,730 villages of Punjab. “Around 3,000 applications have already been received,” he said.After receiving applications online, district-level boards of serving and retired defence officers will screen these. Those selected will have to undergo a two-week training at the Mahatma Gandhi Institute of Public Administration, Chandigarh.The hired ex-servicemen, who will have a smart phone having android software and internet facility, will keep a vigil on the implementation of various development and welfare schemes and report through mobile app daily at village, tehsil, district and state levels.

File photo of Bofors gun. AFP

New Delhi, August 6

An application has been moved in the Supreme Court seeking early hearing of the politically-sensitive Rs 64 crore Bofors pay-off case after a fresh media report suggesting a financial quid pro quo for the Rs 1,437 crore Howitzer gun deal in 1986.

The plea by BJP leader and advocate Ajay Agrawal has also alleged apparent collusiveness by CBI with the accused persons in the Bofors scam, saying the agency did not challenge the Delhi High Court’s May 31, 2005 judgment quashing all charges against the Europe-based Hinduja brothers.

He has challenged the judgment in the apex court which had on October 18, 2005 admitted his petition that was filed after the CBI failed to approach the top court with the appeal within the 90-day deadline after the High Court verdict.

In the application, the lawyer-turned-politician said he had filed the appeal in public interest because the CBI did not come forward and it was reported that the Law Ministry then had not given permission to the agency, despite the fact that the High Court order was illegal.

To substantiate the allegation of collusiveness between the CBI and the accused persons, Agrawal in his application has narrated the sequence of events that led to the defreezing of the London bank account of Italian businessman Ottavio Quattrocchi, alleged middleman in the deal, in 2006, for which the then Additional Solicitor General B Dutta had visited England.

He said such a step was undertaken despite the fact that the then UPA government and the CBI were aware that his appeal has been admitted by the apex court.

Agrawal, who had contested the Rai Bareli Lok Sabha elections in 2014 against Congress President Sonia Gandhi, also claimed that the CBI did not bother to inform the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, which was seized of the Quattrocchi matter, to inform about its move to defreeze the accounts.

He said that on August 3, he had written a letter to the CBI seeking re-investigation of the entire Bofors scam and the trail of alleged bribe money deposited in Quattrocchi’s London bank account and the subsequent developments after the defreezing of the account on January 16, 2006.

Fresh developments assume significance in the wake of a demand in Parliament by ruling BJP MPs for reopening of the probe into the Bofors kickback scandal after the media reports quoting Swedish chief investigator Sten Lindstrom’s suggested payment of alleged bribery at the top level.

After the developments in Parliament, Agrawal also wrote a letter to the Enforcement Directorate seeking investigation into the trail of the kickback money under the Foreign Exchange Management Act (FEMA), 1999 and the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002.

In the July 28 letter to the ED, he claimed that the alleged crimes were committed continuously till 2006 when two London accounts held by Quattrochi, who has been accused as one of the middlemen in the deal, were de-freezed.

The BJP leader said the CBI should file an affidavit about the facts and course of investigation into the case, as during the brief hearing on December 1, 2016, the agency had told the apex court that the authorities had not permitted it to file an appeal against the May 31, 2005 verdict.

He said he would try to convince the apex court through his petition that the “High Court had quashed the charges against the accused persons on technical grounds and the order was totally perverse which is liable to be set aside.” Justice R S Sodhi, since retired, of the Delhi High Court had on May 31, 2005, quashed all charges against the Hinduja brothers—Srichand, Gopichand and Prakashchand—and the Bofors company and castigated the CBI for its handling of the case saying it had cost the exchequer about Rs 250 crore.

Before the 2005 verdict, another judge of the Delhi High Court, Justice J D Kapoor (since retired) on February 4, 2004, had exonerated late Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi in the case and directed framing of charge of forgery under Section 465 of the IPC against the Bofors company.

The matter was last listed on February 28 this year when it was adjourned.

The apex court had on October 18, 2005 allowed Agrawal to file an appeal against the high court verdict in the absence of any appeal by CBI.

The December 1, 2016 hearing had taken place after a gap of almost six years since August 12, 2010.

The Rs 1,437 crore deal between India and the Swedish arms manufacturer AB Bofors for the supply of 400 155mm Howitzer guns for Indian Army was entered on March 24, 1986.

The Swedish Radio on April 16, 1987 had claimed that the company had paid bribes to top Indian politicians and defence personnel.

The CBI on January 22, 1990, had registered the FIR for the alleged offence of criminal conspiracy, cheating, forgery under the IPC and other sections of the Prevention of Corruption Act against Martin Ardbo, the then President of AB Bofors, alleged middleman Win Chadda and Hinduja brothers.

It had alleged that certain public servants and private persons in India and abroad had entered into a criminal conspiracy between 1982 and 1987 in pursuance of which the offences of bribery, corruption, cheating and forgery were committed to the extent of Rs 64 crore in the contracts for the supply of Bofors guns.

The first chargesheet in the case was filed on October 22, 1999, against Chadda, Quattrocchi, then Defence Secretary S K Bhatnagar, Ardbo and the Bofors company. A supplementary chargesheet against Hinduja brothers was filed on October 9, 2000.

A special CBI court in Delhi On March 4, 2011, had discharged Quattrocchi from the case saying the country cannot afford to spend hard-earned money on his extradition which has already cost Rs 250 crore.

Quattrocchi, who had fled from here on July 29-30, 1993, has never appeared before any court in India to face prosecution. He passed away on July 13, 2013. The other accused who have died are Bhatnagar, Chadda and Ardbo. PTI