Foreign Relations of India

74Copyright © 2009 | WWW.UPSCPORTAL.COM

Foreign Relations of IndiaIndia's Foreign Policy

India's foreign policyhas always regarded theconcept of neighbor-hood as one of wideningconcentric circles,around a central axis ofhistorical and culturalcommonalties. Theguiding principles of

India's Foreign Policy have been founded onPanchsheel, pragmatism and pursuit of nationalinterest. In a period of rapid and continuingchange, foreign policy must be capable of respond-ing optimally to new challenges and opportuni-ties. It has to be an integral part of the larger ef-fort of building the nation's capabilities througheconomic development, strengthening social fab-ric and well-being of the people and protectingIndia's sovereignty and territorial integrity. India'sforeign policy is a forward-looking engagementwith the rest of the world, based on a rigorous,realistic and contemporary assessment of the bi-lateral, regional and global geo-political and eco-nomic milieu. As many as 20 million people ofIndian origin live and work abroad and constitutean important link with the mother country. Animportant role of India's foreign policy has beento ensure their welfare and well being within theframework of the laws of the country where theylive.

Neighbours Countries:-

Afghanistan–India relations

Bilateral relations between the Republic of Indiaand the Islamic State of Afghanistan have beentraditionally strong and friendly. While the In-dian Republic was the only South Asian countryto recognise the Soviet-backed Democratic Repub-lic of Afghanistan in the 1980s, its relations werediminished during the Afghan civil wars and therule of the Islamist Taliban in the 1990s. Indiaaided the overthrow of the Taliban and becamethe largest regional provider of humanitarian andreconstruction aid. Afghanistan used to borderBritish India's Northwest Frontier Province(NWFP) and congress dominated, which was

home to a significant Pashtun population thatparticipated extensively in the Indian indepen-dence movement. Everything changed and after1947 the NWFP became a part of Pakistan, theRepublic of India and the modern State of Af-ghanistan maintained significant cultural and eco-nomic links. Films and music of India are widelypopular in Afghanistan and Afghan products suchas carpets, nuts and fruit are exported to India.For most of their independent history, both na-tions have enjoyed traditionally friendly relationsand have cooperated over respective conflicts withPakistan. Since April 2007, Afghanistan is eighthmember of SAARC after India endorsed Afghanfull membership.

Civil wars and Taliban: The Republic of Indiawas the only South Asian nation to recognise theSoviet-backed Democratic Republic of Afghani-stan and the Soviet Union's military presence inAfghan territories, and provided humanitarian aidto the country. Following the withdrawal of theSoviet armed forces from Afghanistan in 1989,republic of India and the international commu-nity supported the coalition government that tookcontrol, but relations and contacts ended with theoutbreak of another civil war, which brought topower the Taliban, an Islamist militia supportedby Pakistan.

The Taliban regime was recognised only by SaudiArabia, Turkmenistan, Pakistan and the UnitedArab Emirates (UAE). The rise of Islamism in Af-ghanistan and the proliferation of Afghanmujahideen in the militancy in Indian-adminis-tered Kashmir turned the Taliban and Afghani-stan into a security threat for the Government ofIndia. The destruction of the Bamiyan Buddhamonuments by the Taliban led to outrage and an-gry protests by India, the birthplace of Buddhism.In 1999, the Indian Airlines Flight 814 hijackedby Muslim militants landed and stayed inKandahar in Afghanistan and the Taliban andPakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) weresuspected of supporting them. India became oneof the key supporters of the anti-Taliban North-ern Alliance.

Section -6 (Mains Special: Foreign Relations of India)


Post-2001: During the U.S.-led invasion of Af-ghanistan in 2001, India offered intelligence andother forms of support for the Coalition forces.After the overthrow of the Taliban, India estab-lished diplomatic relations with the newly-estab-lished democratic government, provided aid andparticipated in the reconstruction efforts. India hasprovided USD 650-750 million in humanitarianand economic aid, making it the largest regionalprovider of aid for Afghanistan.The Indian Army's Border Roads Organisation isconstructing a major road in the remote Afghanprovince of Nimroz. India's support and collabo-ration extends to rebuilding of air links, powerplants and investing in health and education sec-tors as well as helping to train Afghan civil ser-vants, diplomats and police. India also seeks thedevelopment of supply lines of electricity, oil andnatural gas.

Both nations also developed strategic and militarycooperation against Islamic militants. Owing tothe killing of an Indian national by Taliban mili-tants in November 2005, India deployed 200 sol-diers of the Indo-Tibetan Border Police (ITBP) toprovide security for Indian nationals and theprojects supported by India. Afghanistan strength-ened its ties with India in wake of persisting ten-sions and problems with Pakistan, which was sus-pected of continuing to shelter and support theTaliban. India pursues a policy of close coopera-tion in order to bolster its standing as a regionalpower and contain its rival Pakistan, which itmaintains is supporting Islamic militants in Kash-mir and other parts of India.

Three MoUs (memorandum of understanding) forstrengthening cooperation in the fields of ruraldevelopment, education and standardization be-tween the Bureau of Indian Standards(BIS) andAfghan National Standardization Authority weresigned between India and Afghanistan duringHamid Karzai's visit to India during 9-13 April2006. An agreement providing $50 million to pro-mote bilateral businesses between India and Af-

ghanistan was signed during the visit of the Af-ghan Foreign Minister Dr. Spanta between June29 and July 1, 2006. During the same year, Indiaraised its aid package to Afghanistan by $150 mil-lion, to $750 million. India also supportedAfghanistan's bid to become a member of theSouth Asian Association for Regional Cooperation(SAARC).

On July 7, 2008 the Indian embassy in Kabul wasattacked by a suicide car bomb - the deadliest at-tack in Kabul since the fall of the Taliban in 2001.The bombing killed 58 people and wounded 141.Senior Indian Army officer Brigadier Ravi DattMehta was entering the embassy gates in a caralong with V. Venkateswara Rao when the at-tack took place. Both were killed in the blast. TheAfghan government had claimed that Pakistan'sISI was involved in the attack.

During the 15th SAARC summit in Colombo, In-dia pledged another USD $450 million along with$750 million already pledged for ongoing andforthcoming projects. In August 2008, AfghanPresident Hamid Karzai visited New Delhi. Thisvisit further strengthened bilateral relations, andPrime Minister Singh pledged further aid for Af-ghanistan.

Bangladesh–India relations

Both Bangladesh and India are part of what isknown as the Indian subcontinent and have had along common cultural, economic and political his-tory. The cultures of the two countries are simi-lar; in particular Bangladesh and India's statesWest Bengal and Tripura are all Bengali-speak-ing. However, since the partition of the Indiansub-continent in 1947, India emerged as an inde-pendent state and Bangladesh (as East Bengal, laterrename to East Pakistan in 1956) was allocated asa part of Pakistan. Following the bloody Libera-tion War of 1971, Bangladesh gained her inde-pendence and established relations with India. Thepolitical relationship between India and



Bangladesh has passed through cycles of hiccups.The relationship typically becomes favorable forBangladesh during periods of Awami League gov-ernment.

During the Partition of India after independencein 1947, the Bengal region was divided into two:East Bengal (present-day Bangladesh) and WestBengal. East Bengal was made a part of the Is-lamic Republic of Pakistan due to the fact thatboth regions had an overwhelmingly large Mus-lim population, more than 85%. In 1955, the gov-ernment of Pakistan changed its name from EastBengal to East Pakistan.

There were some confrontations between the tworegions though. Firstly, in 1948, Muhammad AliJinnah declared that only Urdu would the sole of-ficial language of the entire nation, though morethan 95% of the East Bengali population spokeBengali. And when protests broke out inBangladesh on February 21, 1952, Pakistani po-lice fired on the protesters, killing hundreds. Sec-ondly, East Bengal/East Pakistan was allotted onlya small amount of revenue for its development outof the Pakistani national budget. Therefore, a sepa-ratist movement started to grow in the isolatedprovince. When the main separatist party theAwami League, headed by Sheikh MujiburRahman, won 167 of 169 seats up for grabs in the1970 elections and got the right to form the gov-ernment, the Pakistan president under YahyaKhan refused to recognize the election results andarrested Sheikh Mujibur Rahman. This led towidespread protests in East Pakistan and in 1971,the Liberation War, followed by the declaration(by Sheikh Mujibur Rahman on 7 March 1971) ofthe independent state of Bangladesh.

India under Indira Gandhi fully supported thecause of the Bangladeshis and its troops and equip-ment were used to fight the Pakistani forces. TheIndian Army also gave full support to the mainBangladeshi guerrilla force, the Mukti Bahini. Fi-nally, on 26 March, 1971, Bangladesh emerged as

an independent state. Since then, there have beenseveral issues of agreement as well as of dispute.

Areas of agreement:-1. India played 0a central role in the independenceof Bangladesh. About 250,000 Indian soldiersfought for, and 20,000 losing their lives for thecause of an independent Bangladesh. India shel-tered over 10 million refugees who were fleeingthe atrocities of the occupying West PakistanArmy. India and its ally Bhutan were the firstcountries to recognize Bangladesh as an indepen-dent nation. Bangladeshis have some awarenessof their obligation and gratitude towards India.

2. Sheikh Mujibur Rahman’s first foreign visit asPrime Minister and the Founding Father of thenewly born nation was to India and it was thendecided Indo-Bangladesh relations would beguided by principles of democracy, socialism, non-alignment and opposition to colonialism and rac-ism. Indira Gandhi too visited Bangladesh in 1972and assured that India would never interfere inthe internal affairs of the country.

3. In 1972, both the countries signed a ‘Treaty ofFriendship and Peace’. An Indo-Bangladesh TradePact was also signed.

4. The mainstream party Awami League is gener-ally considered to be friendly towards India.

Areas of contention:-1. A major area of contention has been the con-struction and operation of the Farakka Barrage byIndia to increase water supply in the river Hoogly.Bangladesh insists that it does not receive a fairshare of the Ganga waters during the drier sea-sons, and gets flooded during the monsoons whenIndia releases excess waters.

2. There have also been disputes regarding thetransfer of Teen Bigha Corridor to Bangladesh.Part of Bangladesh is surrounded by the Indianstate of West Bengal. On 26 June, 1992, India



leased three bigha land to Bangladesh to connectthis enclave with mainland Bangladesh. There isdispute regarding the indefinite nature of the lease.

3. Indian border force's killing of people whilecrossing the border has been the topic of disputes.In August 2008, Indian Border Security Force of-ficials said that they killed 59 smugglers and ille-gal immigrants (34 Bangladeshis and 21 Indians)who were trying to cross the border between In-dia and Bangladesh during a 6 month period. OnNovember 16, 2008, 3 people including a womenand her child were shot dead in a Bangladeshi vil-lage by a drunken BSF soldier before he was ap-prehended.

4. Terrorist activities carried out by outfits basedin both countries, like Banga Sena and Harkat-ul-Jihad-al-Islami. Recently India and Bangladeshhad agreed to jointly fight terrorism.

5. The Sharing of Ganges Waters was also a mat-ter of dispute.

6. The unresolved issue of the status of theChittagonian plains of Bengal as part of CHT onthe (grounds of ethnic affiliation).

Bhutan–India relations

The bilateral relations between the HimalayanKingdom of Bhutan and the Republic of India havebeen traditionally close. With independence in1947, India inherited the suzerainty over Bhutanenjoyed by the British Raj. Although modified andmodernised since, India remains influential overBhutan's foreign policy, defence and commerce.

For much of history, Bhutan has preserved its iso-lation from the outside world, staying out of in-ternational organisations and maintaining few bi-lateral relations. Bhutan became a protectorate ofBritish India after signing a treaty in 1910 allow-ing the British to "guide" its foreign affairs anddefence. Bhutan was one of the first to recognizeIndia's independence in 1947 and both nationsfostered close relations, their importance aug-

mented by the annexation of Tibet in 1950 by thePeople's Republic of China and its border disputeswith both Bhutan and India, which saw close tieswith Nepal and Bhutan to be central to its "Hima-layan frontier" security policy. India shares a 605kilometres (376 miles) border with Bhutan and isits largest trading partner, accounting for 98 per-cent of its exports and 90 percent of its imports.

1949 Treaty : On August 8, 1949 Bhutan and In-dia signed the Treaty of Friendship, calling forpeace between the two nations and non-interfer-ence in each other's internal affairs. However,Bhutan agreed to let India "guide" its foreign policyand both nations would consult each other closelyon foreign and defence affairs. The treaty also es-tablished free trade and extradition protocols.

The occupation of Tibet by Communist Chinabrought both nations even closer. In 1958, thethen-Indian Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru vis-ited Bhutan and reiterated India's support forBhutan's independence and later declared in theIndian Parliament that any aggression againstBhutan would be seen as aggression against India.The period saw a major increase in India's eco-nomic, military and development aid to Bhutan,which had also embarked on a programme ofmodernisation to bolster its security. While Indiarepeatedly reiterated its military support toBhutan, the latter expressed concerns about India'sability to protect Bhutan against China whilefighting a two-front war involving Pakistan. De-spite good relations, India and Bhutan did not com-plete a detailed demarcation of their borders untilthe period between 1973 and 1984. Border demar-cation talks with India generally resolved disagree-ments except for several small sectors, includingthe middle zone between Sarpang and Geylegphugand the eastern frontier with the Indian state ofArunachal Pradesh.

Distancing from India: Although relations re-mained close and friendly, the Bhutanese govern-ment expressed a need to renegotiate parts of thetreaty to enhance Bhutan's sovereignty. Bhutanbegan to slowly assert an independent attitude in



foreign affairs by joining the United Nations in1971, recognising Bangladesh and signing a newtrade agreement in 1972 that provided an exemp-tion from export duties for goods from Bhutan tothird countries. Bhutan exerted its independentstance at the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM)summit conference in Havana, Cuba also in 1979,by voting with China and some Southeast Asiancountries rather than with India on the issue ofallowing Cambodia's Khmer Rouge to be seatedat the conference. Unlike in Nepal, where its 1950treaty with India is subject of great political con-troversy and nationalist resentment for decades,the nature of Bhutan's relationship with India hasnot been affected by concerns over the treaty pro-visions. From 2003 to 2004, the Royal BhutaneseArmy conducted operations against anti-India in-surgents of the United Liberation Front of Assam(ULFA) that were operating bases in Bhutan andusing its territory to carry out attacks on Indiansoil.

2007 treaty : India renegotiated the 1949 treatywith Bhutan and signed a new treaty of friend-ship in 2007. The new treaty replaced the provi-sion requiring Bhutan to take India's guidance onforeign policy with broader sovereignty and notrequire Bhutan to obtain India's permission overarms imports. In 2008, Indian Prime Minister Dr.Manmohan Singh visited Bhutan and expressedstrong support for Bhutan's move towards democ-racy. India allows 16 entry and exit points forBhutanese trade with other countries with excep-tion only being the PRC, and has agreed to im-port a minimum of 5,000 megawatts of electricityfrom Bhutan by 2020.

Burma–India relations

Bilateral relations between Burma (officially theUnion of Myanmar) and the Republic of India haveimproved considerably since 1993, overcomingstrains over drug trafficking, the suppression ofdemocracy and the rule of the military junta inBurma. Burma is situated to the south of the statesof Mizoram, Manipur, Nagaland and ArunachalPradesh in Northeast India. The proximity of the

People's Republic of China give strategic impor-tance to Indo-Burmese relations. The Indo-Bur-mese border stretches over 1,600 miles.

India was one of the leading supporters of Bur-mese independence and established diplomaticrelations after Burma's independence from GreatBritain in 1948. For many years, Indo-Burmeserelations were strong due Burma previously hav-ing been a province of India, due to cultural links,flourishing commerce, common interests in re-gional affairs and the presence of a significant In-dian community in Burma. India provided con-siderable support when Burma struggled with re-gional insurgencies. However, the overthrow ofthe democratic government by the Military ofBurma led to strains in ties. Along with much ofthe world, India condemned the suppression ofdemocracy and Burma ordered the expulsion ofthe Burmese Indian community, increasing itsown isolation from the world. Only China main-tained close links with Burma while India sup-ported the pro-democracy movement.

A major breakthrough occurred in 1987 when thethen-Indian Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi visitedBurma, but relations worsened after the militaryjunta's bloody repression of pro-democracy agita-tions in 1988, which led to an influx of Burmeserefugees into India. However, since 1993 the gov-ernments of the Indian Prime Ministers P.V.Narasimha Rao and Atal Bihari Vajpayee changedcourse and began cultivating ties with Myanmar,as part of a wider foreign policy approach aimedto increase India's participation and influence inSoutheast Asia and to counteract the growing in-fluence of the People's Republic of China.

Commercial relations: India is the largest mar-ket for Burmese exports, buying about USD 220million worth of goods in 2000; India's exports toBurma stood at USD 75.36 million. India is Burma’s4th largest trading partner after Thailand, Chinaand Singapore, and second largest export marketafter Thailand, absorbing 25 percent of its totalexports. India is also the seventh most importantsource of Burma’s imports. The governments of



India and Burma had set a target of achieving $1billion and bilateral trade reached USD 650 mil-lion U.S. dollars by 2006. The Indian governmenthas worked to extend air, land and sea routes tostrengthen trade links with Myanmar and estab-lish a gas pipeline. While the involvement ofIndia's private sector has been low and growingat a slow pace, both governments are proceedingto enhance cooperation in agriculture, telecom-munications, information technology, steel, oil,natural gas, hydrocarbons and food processing. Thebilateral border trade agreement of 1994 providesfor border trade to be carried out from three des-ignated border points, one each in Manipur,Mizoram and Nagaland.

On February 13, 2001 India and Burma inaugu-rated a major 160 kilometre highway, called theIndo-Myanmar Friendship Road, built mainly bythe Indian Army's Border Roads Organisation andaimed to provide a major strategic and commer-cial transport route connecting North-East Indiawhich connects South Asia with Southeast Asia.

Development of strategic ties: India's move toforge close relations with Burma are motivatedby a desire to counter China's growing influenceas a regional leader and enhance its own influ-ence and standing. Concerns and tensions in-creased in India over China's extensive militarycooperation and involvement in developing ports,naval and intelligence facilities and industries,specifically the upgrading of a naval base in Sittwe,a major seaport located close to the eastern Indiancity of Kolkata. India's engagement of the Bur-mese military junta has helped ease the regime'sinternational isolation and lessen Burma's tradi-tional reliance on China. Both nations sought tocooperate to counteract drug trafficking and in-surgent groups operating in the border areas. In-dia and Myanmar are leading members ofBIMSTEC and the Mekong-Ganga Cooperation,along with Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia and Thai-land, helping India develop its influence and tiesamongst Southeast Asian nations. India was slowand hesitant in reacting to the 2007 Burmese anti-government protests that had drawn overwhelm-

ing international condemnation. India also de-clared that it had no intention of interfering inBurma's internal affairs and that the Burmesepeople would have to achieve democracy them-selves. This low-key response has been widelycriticised both within India and abroad as weak-ening India's credentials as a leading democraticnation.

India–Maldives relations

Bilateral relations between the Republic of Indiaand the Republic of Maldives have been friendlyand close in strategic, economic and military co-operation. India contributed to maintaining secu-rity on the island nation and has forged an alli-ance with respect to its strategic interests in theIndian Ocean.

The Maldives is located south of India'sLakshadweep Islands in the Indian Ocean andapproximately 700 kilometres from Sri Lanka.Both nations established diplomatic relations af-ter the independence of Maldives from British rulein 1966. Since then, India and Maldives have de-veloped close strategic, military, economic andcultural relations. India has supported Maldives'policy of keeping regional issues and strugglesaway from itself, and the latter has seen friend-ship with India as a source of aid as well as acounter-balance to Sri Lanka, which is in proxim-ity to the island nation and its largest trading part-ner.

Development of bilateral relations: India andMaldives officially and amicably decided theirmaritime boundary in 1976, although a minor dip-lomatic incident occurred in 1982 when thebrother of the President of Maldives MaumoonAbdul Gayoom declared that the neighbouringMinicoy Island that belonged to India were a partof Maldives; Maldives quickly and officially de-nied that it was laying claim to the island. Indiaand Maldives signed a comprehensive trade agree-ment in 1981. Both nations are founding mem-bers of the South Asian Association for RegionalCooperation (SAARC), the South Asian Economic



Union and signatories to the South Asia Free TradeAgreement. Indian and Maldivian leaders havemaintained high-level contacts and consultationson regional issues.

Operation Cactus: In November 1988 speedboatscarrying 80 armed militants of the People's Lib-eration Organisation of Tamil Eelam landed inMaldives and along with allies who had infiltratedthe country, began taking over the government.The plot, planned in Sri Lanka by the Tamil na-tionalist group was believed to be an attempt by aMaldivian businessman and politician opposed tothe regime of the President of Maldives MaumoonAbdul Gayoom to gain control while the PLOTEsought a safe haven and base for its activities.

The militants took control of the airport in Male,the national capital, but failed to capture the Presi-dent of Maldives Maumoon Abdul Gayoom, whohad fled and asked for military aid from India onNovember 3. The then-Indian Prime MinisterRajiv Gandhi ordered 1,600 troops to aid theMaldivian government. In a military operationcodenamed "Operation Cactus," Indian forces ar-rived within 12 hours of the request for aid beingmade, squashed the coup attempt and achievedfull control of the country within hours. 19PLOTE militants were killed and 1 Indian soldierwounded.

India's intervention was endorsed by other nationssuch as the United States, Soviet Union, Great Brit-ain and its neighbours Nepal and Bangladesh. Itsspeedy and decisive victory and the restoration ofthe Maldivian government brought both nationseven closer in friendship and cooperation. In wakeof internal security crises and tensions with SriLanka, Maldives saw its relationship with India asa source of future security.

Commercial relations: Since the success of Opera-tion Cactus, the relations between India andMaldives have expanded significantly. India hasprovided extensive economic aid and has partici-pated in bilateral programs for the developmentof infrastructure, health, civil aviation, telecom-

munications and labour resources. It establishedthe Indira Gandhi Memorial Hospital in Male, thecapital of Maldives, expanded telecommunicationsand air links and increased scholarships forMaldivian students. While India's exports toMaldives during 2006 were worth Rs. 384 crores,imports were worth less than Rs. 6 crores. TheState Bank of India has contributed more than USD500 million to aid the economic expansion ofMaldives. India and Maldives have announcedplans to jointly work to expand fisheries and tunaprocessing.

Military relations: On 7 March 2005 DefenceAttaché's Office ( DAO) was established in theHigh commission of the Republic of Maldives inIndia by making Lt.Colonel Abdulla Shamaal asfirst defense attaché.This was the first DefenceAttaché's office set up abroad. Given, that defencerelations is a major component of the Indo-Maldives bilateral relations and both counties havea long record of strengthening their defense tiesthrough a wide range of activities, such as Mili-tary Joint Exercises, exchange of visits of seniorofficers of the Armed forces, training of large num-ber of defense services personnel from theMaldives at Indian defense establishments, provi-sion of military aid, and intelligence and informa-tion sharing, the necessity for a DAO was felt.Hence, the DAO was instituted to furtherstrengthen and consolidate the already existing bi-lateral defense relations in a mutually beneficialmanner. As a result, the DAO functions as theprimary mechanism integrated in the residentMission of the Republic of Maldives in New Delhi,India to guide direct and coordinate defense tiesbetween the two countries.

On April 2006 Indian Navy gifted a Trinkat ClassFast Attack Craft of 46m length to Maldives Na-tional Defence Force's Coast Guard.

Indo-Nepalese relations

Relations between India and Nepal are close yetfraught with difficulties stemming from geogra-phy, economics, the problems inherent in big



power-small power relations, and common eth-nic, linguistic and cultural identities that overlapthe two countries' borders. New Delhi andKathmandu initiated their intertwined relation-ship with the 1950 Indo-Nepal Treaty of Peaceand Friendship? and accompanying letters thatdefined security relations between the two coun-tries, and an agreement governing both bilateraltrade and trade transiting Indian soil. The 1950treaty and letters stated that "neither governmentshall tolerate any threat to the security of the otherby a foreign aggressor" and obligated both sides"to inform each other of any serious friction ormisunderstanding with any neighboring statelikely to cause any breach in the friendly rela-tions subsisting between the two governments."These accords cemented a "special relationship"between India and Nepal that granted Nepal pref-erential economic treatment and providedNepalese in India the same economic and educa-tional opportunities as Indian citizens.

Independent Political History: In the 1950s,Nepal welcomed close relations with India, but asthe number of Nepalese living and working inIndia increased and the involvement of India inNepal's economy deepened in the 1960s and af-ter, so too did Nepalese discomfort with the spe-cial relationship. Tensions came to a head in themid-1970s, when Nepal pressed for substantialamendments in its favor in the trade and transittreaty and openly criticized India's 1975 annex-ation of Sikkim which was considered as part ofGreater Nepal. In 1975 King Birendra Bir BikramShah Dev proposed that Nepal be recognized in-ternationally as a zone of peace; he received sup-port from China and Pakistan. In New Delhi'sview, if the king's proposal did not contradict the1950 treaty and was merely an extension of non-alignment, it was unnecessary; if it was a repudia-tion of the special relationship, it represented apossible threat to India's security and could notbe endorsed. In 1984 Nepal repeated the proposal,but there was no reaction from India. Nepal con-tinually promoted the proposal in internationalforums, with Chinese support; by 1990 it had wonthe support of 112 countries.

In 1978 India agreed to separate trade and transittreaties, satisfying a long-term Nepalese demand.In 1988, when the two treaties were up for re-newal, Nepal's refusal to accommodate India'swishes on the transit treaty caused India to callfor a single trade and transit treaty. Thereafter,Nepal took a hard-line position that led to a seri-ous crisis in India-Nepal relations. After two ex-tensions, the two treaties expired on March 23,1989, resulting in a virtual Indian economic block-ade of Nepal that lasted until late April 1990. Al-though economic issues were a major factor in thetwo countries' confrontation, Indian dissatisfac-tion with Nepal's 1988 acquisition of Chineseweaponry played an important role. New Delhiperceived the arms purchase as an indication ofKathmandu's intent to build a military relation-ship with Beijing, in violation of the 1950 treatyand letters exchanged in 1959 and 1965, whichincluded Nepal in India's security zone and pre-cluded arms purchases without India's approval.India linked security with economic relations andinsisted on reviewing India-Nepal relations as awhole. Nepal had to back down after worseningeconomic conditions led to a change in Nepal'spolitical system, in which the king was forced toinstitute a parliamentary democracy. The newgovernment sought quick restoration of amicablerelations with India.

The special security relationship between NewDelhi and Kathmandu was reestablished duringthe June 1990 New Delhi meeting of Nepal's primeminister Krishna Prasad Bhattarai and Indianprime minister V.P. Singh. During the December1991 visit to India by Nepalese prime ministerGirija Prasad Koirala, the two countries signednew, separate trade and transit treaties and othereconomic agreements designed to accord Nepaladditional economic benefits.

Indian-Nepali relations appeared to be undergo-ing still more reassessment when Nepal's primeminister Man Mohan Adhikary visited New Delhiin April 1995 and insisted on a major review ofthe 1950 peace and friendship treaty. In the faceof benign statements by his Indian hosts relating



to the treaty, Adhikary sought greater economicindependence for his landlocked nation while si-multaneously striving to improve ties with China.In 2005, after King Gyanendra took over, Nepaleserelations with India soured. However, after therestoration of democracy, in 2008, Prachanda, thePrime Minister of Nepal, visited India, in Septem-ber 2008. He spoke about a new dawn, in the bi-lateral relations, between the two countries. Hesaid, "I am going back to Nepal as a satisfied per-son. I will tell Nepali citizens back home that anew era has dawned. Time has come to effect arevolutionary change in bilateral relations. Onbehalf of the new government, I assure you thatwe are committed to make a fresh start." He metIndian Prime minister, Manmohan Singh, andForeign Minister, Pranab Mukherjee. He askedIndia to help Nepal frame a new constitution, andto invest in Nepal's infrastructure, and its tourismindustry.

In 2008, Indo-Nepali ties got a further boost withan agreement to resume water talks after a 4 yearhiatus. The Nepalese Water Resources SecretaryShanker Prasad Koirala said the Nepal-India JointCommittee on Water Resources meet decided tostart the reconstruction of breached Kosi embank-ment after the water level goes down. During theNepal PM's visit to New Delhi in September thetwo Prime Ministers expressed satisfaction at theage-old close, cordial and extensive relationshipsbetween their states and expressed their supportand cooperation to further consolidate the rela-tionship.

The two issued a 22-point statement highlightingthe need to review, adjust and update the 1950Treaty of Peace and Friendship, amongst otheragreements. India would also provide a credit lineof up to 150 crore rupees to Nepal to ensure unin-terrupted supplies of petroleum products, as wellas lift bans on the export of rice, wheat, maize,sugar and sucrose for quantities agreed to withNepal. India would also provide 20 crore as im-mediate flood relief.

In return, Nepal will take measures for the "pro-motion of investor friendly, enabling business en-

vironment to encourage Indian...investments inNepal."

Furthermore, a three-tier mechanism at the levelof ministerial, secretary and technical levels willbe built to push forward discussions on the devel-opment of water resources between the two sides.Politically, India acknowledged a willingness topromote efforts towards peace in Nepal. IndianExternal affairs minister Pranab Mukherjee prom-ised the Nepali Prime Minister Prachanda that hewould "extend all possible help for peace and de-velopment."

In 2008, the Bollywood film Chandni Chowk toChina was banned in Nepal, because of a scenesuggesting the Gautama Buddha was born in In-dia. Some protesters called for commercial boy-cott of all Indian films.

Indo-Pakistan relations

Indo-Pakistani relations are grounded in the po-litical, geographic, cultural, and economic linksbetween the Islamic Republic of Pakistan and theRepublic of India, two of the largest and fastest-developing countries in South Asia. The two coun-tries share much of their common geographic lo-cation, and religious demographics (most notablyIslam, Hinduism, Sikhism, Buddhism); yet diplo-matic relations between the two are defined bynumerous military conflicts and territorial dis-putes.

Much of South Asia came under direct control ofGreat Britain in the late 18th century. The Brit-ish Raj over the Indian subcontinent lasted foralmost two centuries. 95% of the people living inSouth Asia practised either Islam or Hinduism. TheMuslim League, headed by Jinnah, proposed theTwo Nation Theory in the early 20th century.According to the theory, Muslims and othersshared little in common, and British India shouldbe divided into two separate countries, one for theMuslims and the other for the Hindu majority,which he feared would suppress the Muslim mi-nority. The campaign gained momentum in early



1940s and by the end of World War II, BritishIndia's partition looked inevitable. The Partitionof India in 1947 created two large countries inde-pendent from Britain: Pakistan as two wings inthe East and West, separated by India in themiddle. Soon after Independence, India and Paki-stan established diplomatic relations. Subsequentyears were marked by bitter periodic conflict, andthe nations went to war four times. The war in1971 ended in defeat and another partition of Pa-kistan. The eastern wing split off as a new coun-try named Bangladesh, while the western wingcontinued as Pakistan.

There was some improvement in relations sincethe mid-2000s. But relations soured again after the2007 Samjhauta Express bombings by extremistsfrom India, and the 2008 Mumbai Terrorist At-tacks by a group of Pakistani men, and now mu-tual suspicion governs the relationship again.

Seeds of conflict: Millions of Muslims and Hin-dus were killed in communal riots following thepartition of the British Empire. Millions of Mus-lims living in India and Hindus and Sikhs living inPakistan emigrated in one of the most colossaltransfers of population in the modern age. Bothcountries accused each other of not providing ad-equate security to the minorities emigratingthrough their territory. This served to increasetensions between the newly-born countries.

According to the British plan for the partition ofBritish India, all the 680 princely states were al-lowed to decide which of the two countries tojoin. With the exception of a few, most of theMuslim-majority princely-states acceded to Paki-stan while most of the Hindu-majority princelystates joined India. However, the decisions of someof the princely-states would shape the Pakistan-India relationship considerably, in the years tocome.

Junagadh Dispute: Junagadh was a state on thesouthwestern end of Gujarat, with the principali-ties of The Indian point of view was that sinceJunagadh was a state with a predominantly Hindu

population it should be a part of India. Addition-ally, since the state was encircled by Indian terri-tory it should have been a part of India. Indianpoliticians also stated that by giving Pakistan apredominantly Hindu region to govern, the basisof the two nation theory was contradicted.

The Pakistani point of view was that sinceJunagadh had a ruler and governing body whochose to accede to Pakistan, they should be al-lowed to do so. Junagadh, having a coastline, couldhave maintained maritime links with Pakistan.Additionally, Pakistani politicians stated that thetwo nation theory did not necessarily mean a cleardivision of land and absolute transfer of popula-tions as the sheer magnitude of such a proceedingwould wreak havoc upon millions.

Neither of the ten states were able to resolve thisissue amicably and it only added fuel to an alreadycharged environment.

Sardar Patel, India's then Defence Minister, feltthat if Junagadh was permitted to go to Pakistan,it would create communal unrest across Gujarat.The government of India gave Pakistan time tovoid the accession and hold a plebiscite inJunagadh to pre empt any violence in Gujarat.Samaldas Gandhi formed a government-in-exile,the Arzi Hukumat of the people of Junagadh. Patelordered the annexation of Junagadh's three prin-cipalities. Junagadh, facing financial collapse, firstinvited the Arzi Hukumat, and later the Govern-ment of India to accept the reins of power.

Kashmir Dispute: Kashmir was a princely state,ruled by a Hindu, Hari Singh. The Maharaja ofKashmir was equally hesitant to join either In-dia – , because he knew his Muslim subjects wouldnot like to join a Hindu-based and Hindu-major-ity nation – , or Pakistan – which as a Hindu hewas personally averse to. Pakistan coveted theHimalayan kingdom, while Indian leader Ma-hatma Gandhi and Indian PM Jawaharlal Nehruhoped that the kingdom would join India. HariSingh signed a Standstill Agreement (preservingstatus quo) with Pakistan, but did not make hisdecision by August 15, 1947.



Rumours spread in Pakistan that Hari Singh wastrying to accede Kashmir to India. Alarmed by thisthreat, a team of Pakistani forces were dispatchedinto Kashmir, fearing an Indian invasion of theregion. Backed by Pakistani paramilitary forces,Pakistani Pashtun tribal warlords invaded Kash-mir in September 1947. Kashmir's security forceswere too weak and ill-equipped to fight againstPakistan. Troubled by the deteriorating politicalpressure that was being applied to Hari Singh andhis governance, the Maharaja asked for India'shelp. However, the Constitution of India barredthe Indian Armed Forces' intervention since Kash-mir did not come under India's jurisdiction. Des-perate to get India's help and get Kashmir back inhis own control, the Maharaja acceded Kashmirto India (which was against the will of the major-ity of Kashmiris), and signed the Instrument ofAccession. By this time the raiders were close tothe capital, Srinagar. On October 27, 1947, theIndian Air Force airlifted Indian troops intoSrinagar and made an intervention. The Indiantroops managed to seize parts of Kashmir whichincluded Jammu, Srinagar and the Kashmir valleyitself, but the strong and intense fighting, flaggedwith the onset of winter, made much of the stateimpassable.

After weeks of intense fighting between Pakistanand India, Pakistani leaders and the Indian PrimeMinister Nehru declared a ceasefire and soughtU.N. arbitration with the promise of a plebiscite.Sardar Patel had argued against both, describingKashmir as a bilateral dispute and its accession asjustified by international law. In 1957, north-west-ern Kashmir was fully integrated into Pakistan,becoming Azad Kashmir (Pakistan-administeredKashmir), while the other portion was acceded toIndian control, and the state of Jammu and Kash-mir (Indian-administered Kashmir) was created.In 1962, China occupied Aksai Chin, the north-eastern region bordering Ladakh. In 1984, Indialaunched Operation Meghdoot and captured morethan 80% of the Siachen Glacier.

Pakistan maintains Kashmiris' rights to self-de-termination through a plebiscite in accordance

with an earlier Indian statement and a UN resolu-tion. Pakistan also points to India's failure of notunderstanding its own political logic and apply-ing it to Kashmir, by taking their opinion on thecase of the accession of Junagadh as an example(that the Hindu majority state should have goneto India even though it had a Muslim ruler), thatKashmir should also rightfully and legally havebecome a part of Pakistan since majoirity of thepeople were Muslim, even though they had aHindu ruler. Pakistan also states that at the veryleast, the promised plebiscite should be allowedto decide the fate of the Kashmiri people.

India on the other hand asserts that the Maharaja'sdecision, which was the norm for every otherprincely state at the time of independence, andsubsequent elections, for over 40 years, on Kash-mir has made it an integral part of India. This opin-ion has often become controversial, as Pakistanasserts that the decision of the ruler of Junagadhalso adhered to Pakistan. Due to all such politicaldifferences, this dispute has also been the subjectof wars between the two countries in 1947 and1965, and a limited conflict in 1999. The state/province remains divided between the two coun-tries by the Line of Control (LoC), which demar-cates the ceasefire line agreed upon in the 1947conflict.

Other Territorial Disputes

Pakistan is locked in other territorial disputes withIndia such as the Siachen Glacier and Kori Creek.Pakistan is also currently having dialogue withIndia regarding the Baglihar Dam being built overthe River Chenab in Jammu and Kashmir.

Bengal refugee crisis: In 1949, India recordedclose to 1 million Hindu refugees, who floodedinto West Bengal and other states from East Paki-stan, owing to communal violence, intimidationand repression from authorities. The plight of therefugees outraged Hindus and Indian nationalists,and the refugee population drained the resourcesof Indian states, which were unable to absorbthem. While not ruling out war, Prime Minister



Nehru and Sardar Patel invited Liaquat Ali Khanfor talks in Delhi. Although many Indians termedthis appeasement, Nehru signed a pact withLiaquat Ali Khan that pledged both nations to theprotection of minorities and creation of minoritycommissions. Although opposed to the principle,Patel decided to back this Pact for the sake ofpeace, and played a critical role in garnering sup-port from West Bengal and across India, and en-forcing the provisions of the Pact. Khan and Nehrualso signed a trade agreement, and committed toresolving bilateral disputes through peacefulmeans. Steadily, hundreds of thousands of Hin-dus returned to East Pakistan, but the thaw inrelations did not last long, primarily owing to theKashmir dispute.

Bangladesh Liberation War: Pakistan, since inde-pendence, was geo-politically divided into twomajor regions, West Pakistan and East Pakistan.East Pakistan was occupied mostly by Bengalipeople. In December 1971, following a politicalcrisis in East Pakistan, the situation soon spiralledout of control in East Pakistan and India inter-vened in favour of the rebelling Bengali populace.The conflict, a brief but bloody war, resulted inan independence of East Pakistan. In the war, thePakistani army swiftly fell to India, forcing theindependence of East Pakistan, which separatedand became Bangladesh. The Pakistani military,being a thousand miles from its base and sur-rounded by enemies, was forced to give in.

Simla Agreement: Since the 1971 war, Pakistanand India have made only slow progress towardsthe normalisation of relations. In July 1972, In-dian Prime Minister Indira Gandhi and PakistaniPresident Zulfikar Ali Bhutto met in the Indianhill station of Simla. They signed the Simla Agree-ment, by which India would return all Pakistanipersonnel (over 90,000) and captured territory inthe west, and the two countries would "settle theirdifferences by peaceful means through bilateralnegotiations." Diplomatic and trade relations werealso re-established in 1976.

Afghanistan crisis: After the 1979 Soviet war inAfghanistan, new strains appeared in Indo-Paki-

stani relations. Pakistan actively supported theAfghan resistance against the Soviet Union, whichwas a close ally of India, which brought opposingpolitical opinions. The Taliban regime in Afghani-stan was strongly supported by Pakistan - one ofthe few countries to do so - before the September11 attacks and the start of the era of global terror-ism. India, on the other hand, firmly opposedTaliban and criticised Pakistan for supporting it.Hatred for the Taliban grew amongst Hindu ul-tra-nationalists in India after they enforced lawson Afghan Hindus to "wear label".

In the following eight years, India voiced increas-ing concern over Pakistani arms purchases, U.S.military aid to Pakistan, and a clandestinePakistan's nuclear weapons programme. In an ef-fort to curtail tensions, the two countries formeda joint commission to examine disputes. In De-cember 1988, Prime Ministers Benazir Bhutto andRajiv Gandhi concluded a pact not to attack eachother's nuclear facilities. Agreements on culturalexchanges and civil aviation were also initiated.In 1997, high-level Indo-Pakistan talks resumedafter a three-year pause. The Prime Ministers ofPakistan and India met twice and the foreign sec-retaries conducted three rounds of talks. In June1997, the foreign secretaries identified eight "out-standing issues" around which continuing talkswould be focused. The dispute over the status ofKashmir, (referred by India as Jammu and Kash-mir), an issue since Independence, remains themajor stumbling block in their dialogue. Indiamaintains that the entire former princely state isan integral part of the Indian union, while Paki-stan insists that UN resolutions calling for self-determination of the people of the state/provincemust be taken into account. It however refuses toabide by the previous part of the resolution, whichcalls for it to vacate all territories occupied.

In September 1997, the talks broke down over thestructure of how to deal with the issues of Kash-mir, and peace and security. Pakistan advocatedthat the issues be treated by separate workinggroups. India responded that the two issues betaken up along with six others on a simultaneous



basis. In May 1998 India, and then Pakistan, con-ducted nuclear tests.

Samjhauta Express bombings & 2008 Mumbaiattacks : The 2007 Samjhauta Express bombingswas a terrorist attack targeted on the SamjhautaExpress train on the 18th of February.The 2008Mumbai attacks by ten terrorists killed over 173and wounded 308. India blamed the Lashkar-e-Taiba, a Pakistan-based Welfare group, for plan-ning and executing the attacks. Islamabad resistedthe claims and demanded evidence. India providedevidence in the form of interrogations,weapons,candy wrappers, Pakistani Brand MilkPackets, and telephone sets . Indian officials de-manded Pakistan extradite suspects for trial. Theyalso said that, given the sophistication of the at-tacks, the perpetrators "must have had the sup-port of some official agencies in Pakistan".

Terrorist acts in Jammu and Kashmir: KashmirisAttacks on Jammu & Kashmir State Assembly:A car bomb exploded near the Jammu and Kash-mir State Assembly on October 1, 2001, killing 27people on an attack that was blamed on Kashmiriseparatists. It was one of the most prominent at-tacks against India apart from on the Indian Par-liament in December 2001. The dead bodies of theterrorists and the data recovered from them re-vealed that Pakistan was solely responsible for theactivity.

Developments since 2004: Violent activities inthe region declined in 2004. There are two mainreasons for this: warming of relations betweenNew Delhi and Islamabad which consequentlylead to a ceasefire between the two countries in2003 and the fencing of the LOC being carriedout by the Indian Army. Moreover, coming un-der intense international pressure, Islamabad wascompelled to take actions against the militant'straining camps on its territory. In 2004, the twocountries also agreed upon decreasing the num-ber of troops present in the region. Under pres-sure, Kashmiri militant organisations have madean offer for talks and negotiations with New Delhi,which India has welcomed.

India's Border Security Force blamed the Pakistanimilitary for providing cover-fire for the terroristswhenever they infiltrated into Indian territoryfrom Pakistan. Pakistan has in turn has also blamedIndia for providing support for terrorist groupsinside Pakistan such as the MQM

In 2005, Pakistan's information minister, SheikhRashid, was alleged to have run a terrorist train-ing camp in 1990 in N.W. Frontier, Pakistan. ThePakistani government dismissed the chargesagainst its minister as an attempt to hamper theongoing peace process between the twoneighbours.

Both India and Pakistan have launched severalmutual confidence-building measures (CBMs) toease tensions between the two. These includemore high-level talks, easing visa restrictions, re-starting of cricket matches between the two. Thenew bus service between Srinagar andMuzaffarabad has also helped bring the two sidescloser. Pakistan and India have also decided to co-operate on economic fronts.

A major clash between Indian Security Forces andmilitants occurred when a group of insurgentstried to infiltrate into the Indian-administeredKashmir from Pakistan in July 2005. The samemonth, also saw Kashmiri militant attack onAyodhya and Srinagar. However, these develop-ments had little impact on the peace process. Someimprovements in the relations are seen with there-opening of a series of transportation networksnear the India-Pakistan border, with the mostimportant being bus routes and railway lines.

An Indian man held in Pakistani prisons since 1975as an accused spy walked across the border to free-dom March 3, 2008, an unconditional release thatPakistan said was meant to reduce the deep-rootedenmity between the countries.

Re-evaluation: The insurgents who initiallystarted their movement as a pro-Kashmiri inde-pendence movement, have gone through a lot ofchange in their ideology. Most of the insurgentsportray their struggle as a religious one.



Indian analysts allege that by supporting these in-surgents, Pakistan is trying to wage a proxy waragainst India while Pakistan claims that it regardsmost of these insurgent groups as "freedom fight-ers" rather than terrorists

Internationally known to be the most deadly the-atre of conflict, nearly 10 million people, includ-ing Muslims, Hindus, and Buddhists, have beenfighting a daily battle for survival. The cross-bor-der firing between India and Pakistan, and theterrorist attacks combined have taken its toll onthe Kashmiris, who have suffered poor living stan-dards and an erosion of human rights.

Kargil crisis: Attempts to restart dialogue betweenthe two nations were given a major boost by theFebruary 1999 meeting of both Prime Ministersin Lahore and their signing of three agreements.These efforts have since been stalled by the intru-sion of Pakistani forces into Indian territory nearKargil in Jammu and Kashmir in May 1999. Thisresulted in intense fighting between Indian andPakistani forces, known as the Kargil conflict.Backed by the Indian Air Force, the Indian Armysuccessfully regained Kargil. A subsequent mili-tary coup in Pakistan that overturned the demo-cratically elected Nawaz Sharif government inOctober of the same year also proved a setback torelations.

In 2001, a summit was called in Agra; PakistaniPresident Pervez Musharraf turned up to meetIndian Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee. Thetalks fell through.

On June 20, 2004, with a new government in placein India, both countries agreed to extend a nucleartesting ban and to set up a hotline between theirforeign secretaries aimed at preventing misunder-standings that might lead to a nuclear war.

India has granted Pakistan unilateral "mostfavoured nation" trade status under WTO guide-lines, but Pakistan is yet to reciprocate. As of early2005, both countries are committed to a processof dialogue to solve all outstanding issues. BagliharDam issue was a new issue raised by Pakistan in2005.

India – Sri Lanka Relations

Bilateral relations between the Democratic Social-ist Republic of Sri Lanka and the Republic of In-dia have been generally friendly, but were con-troversially affected by the Sri Lankan civil warand by the failure of Indian intervention duringthe war. India is the only neighbour of Sri Lanka,separated by the Palk Strait; both nations occupya strategic position in South Asia and have soughtto build a common security umbrella in the In-dian Ocean.

The two largest ethnic groups of Sri Lanka areSinhala and Tamil. Sinhalese descend from NorthIndia, and Tamils are the majority ethnic groupin the Indian state of Tamil Nadu.

Development of bilateral relations: India and SriLanka established diplomatic relations when thelatter gained its independence in 1948. Both na-tions proceeded to establish extensive cultural,commercial, strategic and defence ties to estab-lish a common sphere of influence in the region,adopting non-alignment to control Western andSoviet influence. The close relationship betweenthe then-Indian Prime Minister Indira Gandhi andthen-Sri Lankan Prime Minister SirimavoBandaranaike led to the development of strongbilateral relations. In 1971, Indian armed forceshelped squash a Communist rebellion against theSri Lankan government.

Indian intervention in the Sri Lankan civil war:In the 1980s, private entities and elements in thestate government of Tamil Nadu were believed tobe encouraging the funding and training for theLiberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam, a separatist in-surgent force. In 1987, faced with growing angeramongst its own Tamils, and a flood of refugees,India intervened directly in the conflict for thefirst time after the Sri Lankan government at-tempted to regain control of the northern Jaffnaregion by means of an economic blockade andmilitary assaults, India supplied food and medi-cine by air and sea. After subsequent negotiations,



India and Sri Lanka entered into an agreement.The peace accord assigned a certain degree of re-gional autonomy in the Tamil areas with EelamPeople's Revolutionary Liberation Front (EPRLF)controlling the regional council and called for theTamil militant groups to lay down their arms.Further India was to send a peacekeeping force,named the IPKF to Sri Lanka to enforce the disar-mament and to watch over the regional council.Even though the accord was signed between thegovernments of Sri Lanka and India, with theTamil Tigers and other Tamil militant groups nothaving a role in the signing of the accord, mostTamil militant groups accepted this agreement, theLTTE rejected the accord because they opposedthe candidate, who belonged to another militantgroup named Eelam Peoples Revolutionary Lib-eration Front (EPRLF), for chief administrativeofficer of the merged Northern and Eastern prov-inces. Instead the LTTE named three other can-didates for the position. The candidates proposedby the LTTE were rejected by India. The LTTEsubsequently refused to hand over their weaponsto the IPKF.

The result was that the LTTE now found itselfengaged in military conflict with the Indian Army,and launched their first attack on an Indian armyrations truck on October 8, killing five Indian para-commandos who were on board by strappingburning tires around their necks. The governmentof India then decided that the IPKF should dis-arm the LTTE by force, and the Indian Armylaunched number of assaults on the LTTE, includ-ing a month-long campaign dubbed OperationPawan to win control of the Jaffna peninsula fromthe LTTE. When the IPKF engaged the LTTE, thethen president of Sri Lanka, RanasinghePremadasa, began supporting LTTE and fundedLTTE with arms.

During the warfare with the ltte IPKF was alsoalleged for human rights violation against the ci-vilians. Notably, IPKF was alleged to have perpe-trated Jaffna teaching hospital massacre which wasthe killing of over 70 civilians including patients,doctors and nurses. The ruthlessness of this cam-paign, and the Indian army's subsequent anti-

LTTE operations made it extremely unpopularamongst many Tamils in Sri Lanka. The conflictbetween the LTTE and the Indian Army left over1,000 Indian soldiers dead.

The Indo-Sri Lankan Accord, which had been un-popular amongst Sri Lankans for giving India amajor influence, now became a source of nation-alist anger and resentment as the IPKF was drawnfully into the conflict. Sri Lankans protested thepresence of the IPKF, and the newly-elected SriLankan president Ranasinghe Premadasa de-manded its withdrawal, which was completed byMarch 1990. on May 21, 1992, Rajiv Gandhi wasassassinated and the LTTE was alleged to be theperpetrator. As a result India declared the LTTEto be a terrorist outfit in 1992. Bilateral relationsimproved in the 1990s and India supported thepeace process but has resisted calls to get involvedagain. India has also been wary of and criticisedthe extensive military involvement of Pakistan inthe conflict, accusing the latter of supplying le-thal weaponry and encouraging Sri Lanka to pur-sue military action rather than peaceful negotia-tions to end the civil war.

Commercial ties: India and Sri Lanka are mem-ber nations of several regional and multilateralorganisations such as the South Asian Associationfor Regional Cooperation (SAARC), South AsiaCo-operative Environment Programme, SouthAsian Economic Union and BIMSTEC, workingto enhance cultural and commercial ties. Since abilateral free trade agreement was signed and cameinto effect in 2000, Indo-Sri Lankan trade rose128% by 2004 and quadrupled by 2006, reachingUSD 2.6 billion. Between 2000 and 2004, India'sexports to Sri Lanka in the last four years increasedby 113%, from USD 618 million to $1,319 millionwhile Sri Lankan exports to India increased by342%, from $44 million to USD $194 million. In-dian exports account for 14% of Sri Lanka’s globalimports. India is also the fifth largest export des-tination for Sri Lankan goods, accounting for 3.6%of its exports. Both nations are also signatories ofthe South Asia Free Trade Agreement (SAFTA).Negotiations are also underway to expand the free



trade agreement to forge stronger commercial re-lations and increase corporate investment and ven-tures in various industries.

India's National Thermal Power Corp (NTPC) isalso scheduled to build a 500 MW thermal powerplant in Sampoor (Sampur). The NTPC claims thatthe this plan will take the Indo-Srilankan rela-tionship to new level.

Fishermen Issue: There have been several inci-dents of firing on Indian fishermen fishing in PalkBay.Indian Government has always taken up theissue of safety of Indian fishermen on a prioritybasis with the Government of Sri Lanka. Presentlythere is no bona fide Indian fisherman in the SriLankan custody. A Joint Working Group (JWG)has been constituted to deal with the issues re-lated to Indian fishermen straying in Sri Lankanterritorial waters, work out modalities for preven-tion of use of force against them and the earlyrelease of confiscated boats and explore possibili-ties of working towards bilateral arrangements forlicensed fishing. The JWG last met in Jan 2006.Development Cooperation: India is active in anumber of areas of development activity in SriLanka. About one-sixth of the total developmentcredit granted by GOI is made available to SriLanka.

Lines of credit: In the recent past three lines ofcredit were extended to Sri Lanka: US$ 100 mil-lion for capital goods, consumer durables,consultancy services and food items, US$ 31 mil-lion for supply of 300,000 MT of wheat and US$150 million for purchase of petroleum products.All of these lines of credit have been fully uti-lized. Another line of credit of US$ 100 million isnow being made available for rehabilitation of theColombo-Matara railway.

A number of development projects are imple-mented under ‘Aid to Sri Lanka’ funds. In 2006-07, the budget for ‘Aid to Sri Lanka’ was Rs 28.2Crs.

Small Development Projects: A MoU on Coop-eration in Small Development Projects has beensigned. Projects for providing fishing equipments

to the fishermen in the East of Sri Lanka and solarenergy aided computer education in 25 ruralschools in Eastern Sri Lanka are under consider-ation.

Health Projects: We have supplied medical equip-ments to hospitals at Hambantota and Point Pedro,supplied 4 state of the art ambulances to the Cen-tral Province, implemented a cataract eye surgeryprogramme for 1500 people in the Central Prov-ince and implemented a project of renovation ofOT at Dickoya hospital and supplying equipmentto it.

The projects under consideration are: Construc-tion of a 150-bed hospital at Dickoya, upgradationof the hospital at Trincomalee and a US$ 7.5 mil-lion grant for setting up a Cancer Hospital in Co-lombo. Upgradation of the educational infrastruc-ture of the schools in the Central province includ-ing teachers’ training, setting up of 10 computerlabs, setting up of 20 e-libraries (Nenasalas), Ma-hatma Gandhi scholarship scheme for +2 studentsand setting up of a vocational training centre inPuttalam. India also contributes to the CeylonWorkers Education Trust that gives scholarshipsto the children of estate workers.

Training: A training programme for 465 SriLankan Police officers has been commenced in Dec2005. Another 400 Sri Lankan Police personnelare being trained for the course of ‘Maintenanceof Public Order’.

Relation with Other Countries:-

China -Indian relations

China-India relations, refer to the ties and rela-tions between China and India. The economic anddiplomatic importance of People's Republic ofChina (PRC) and the Republic of India, which arethe two most populous states in the world, asemerging economies, has in recent years increasedthe significance of their bilateral relationship.They are emerging not only as world powers butare forecast to rival the US in the coming decadesin economic and military might. Historical rela-



tions between Beijing and New Delhi can mostaccurately be described as being controversial atbest. Their relationship has undergone times ofboth war and peace. It has been characterized byboth border disputes, resulting in military con-flict, and by economic cooperation. Both coun-tries, despite their belligerent mutual histories,have in recent years attempted to reignite diplo-matic, military and economic ties.

Geographical overview: China and India are sepa-rated by the formidable geographical obstacles ofthe Tibetan Plateau and the Himalayan mountainchain, with Tibet serving as a buffer region be-tween the two. China and India today share aborder along the Himalayas and Nepal and Bhutan,two states lying along the Himalaya range, andacting as buffer states. In addition, the disputedKashmir province (jointly claimed by India andPakistan) borders both the PRC and India. As Pa-kistan has tense relations with India, Kashmir'sstate of unrest serves as a natural ally to the PRC.Two territories are currently disputed between thePeople's Republic of China and India: Aksai Chinand Arunachal Pradesh. Arunachal Pradesh is lo-cated near the far east of India, while Aksai Chinis located near the northwest corner of India, atthe junction of India, Pakistan, and the PRC. How-ever, all sides in the dispute have agreed to re-spect the Line of Actual Control and this borderdispute is not widely seen as a major flashpoint.Jawaharlal Nehru based his vision of "resurgentAsia" on friendship between the two largest statesof Asia; his vision of an internationalist foreignpolicy governed by the ethics of the Panchsheel,which he initially believed was shared by China,came to grief when it became clear that the twocountries had a conflict of interest in Tibet, whichhad traditionally served as a geographical and po-litical buffer zone, and where India believed it hadinherited special privileges from the British Raj.However, the initial focus of the leaders of boththe nations was not the foreign policy, but theinternal development of their respective states.When they did concentrate on the foreign poli-cies, their concern wasn’t one another, but ratherthe United States of America and the Union of

Soviet Socialist Republics and the alliance systemswhich dominated by the two superpowers.

On October 1, 1949 the People’s Liberation Armydefeated the Kuomintang (Nationalist Party) ofChina in a civil war and established the People'sRepublic of China. On August 15, 1947, India be-came an independent dominion under BritishCommonwealth and became a federal, democraticrepublic after its constitution came into effect onJanuary 26, 1950. Mao Zedong, the Commanderof the Liberation Army and the Chairman of theCommunist Party of China viewed Tibet as anintegral part of the Chinese State. Mao was deter-mined to bring Tibet under direct administrativeand military control of People’s Republic of Chinaand saw Indian concern over Tibet as a manifes-tation of the Indian Government in the internalaffairs of the People’s Republic of China. The PRCsought to reassert control over Tibet and to endLamaism (Tibetan Buddhism) and feudalism,which it did by force of arms in 1950. To avoidantagonizing the People's Republic of China,Nehru informed Chinese leaders that India hadneither political nor territorial ambitions, nor didit seek special privileges in Tibet, but that tradi-tional trading rights must continue. With Indiansupport, Tibetan delegates signed an agreementin May 1951 recognizing PRC sovereignty butguaranteeing that the existing political and socialsystem of Tibet would continue. Direct negotia-tions between India and the PRC commenced inan atmosphere improved by India's mediation ef-forts in ending the Korean War (1950-1953).

Meanwhile, India was the 16th state to establishdiplomatic relations with the People's Republicof China, and did so on April 1, 1950.

In April 1954, India and the PRC signed an eight-year agreement on Tibet that set forth the basis oftheir relationship in the form of the Five Prin-ciples of Peaceful Coexistence (or Panch Shila).Although critics called the Panch Shila naive,Nehru calculated that in the absence of either thewherewithal or a policy for defense of the Hima-layan region, India's best guarantee of security was



to establish a psychological buffer zone in placeof the lost physical buffer of Tibet. Thus the catchphrase of India's diplomacy with China in the1950s was Hindi-Chini bhai-bhai, which means,in Hindi, "Indians and Chinese are brothers". Upuntil 1959, despite border skirmishes and discrep-ancies between Indian and Chinese maps, Chineseleaders amicably had assured India that there wasno territorial controversy on the border thoughthere is some evidence that India avoided bring-ing up the border issue in high level meetings.

In 1954, India published new maps that includedthe Aksai Chin region within the boundaries ofIndia (maps published at the time of India's inde-pendence did not clearly indicate whether theregion was in India or Tibet). When an Indianreconnaissance party discovered a completed Chi-nese road running through the Aksai Chin regionof the Ladakh District of Jammu and Kashmir,border clashes and Indian protests became morefrequent and serious. In January 1959, PRC pre-mier Zhou Enlai wrote to Nehru, rejecting Nehru'scontention that the border was based on treatyand custom and pointing out that no governmentin China had accepted as legal the McMahon Line,which in the 1914 Simla Convention defined theeastern section of the border between India andTibet. The Dalai Lama, spiritual and temporal headof the Tibetan people, sought sanctuary inDharmsala, Himachal Pradesh, in March 1959, andthousands of Tibetan refugees settled in north-western India, particularly in Himachal Pradesh.The People's Republic of China accused India ofexpansionism and imperialism in Tibet andthroughout the Himalayan region. China claimed104,000 km² of territory over which India's mapsshowed clear sovereignty, and demanded "rectifi-cation" of the entire border.

Zhou proposed that China relinquish its claim tomost of India's northeast in exchange for India'sabandonment of its claim to Aksai Chin. The In-dian government, constrained by domestic publicopinion, rejected the idea of a settlement basedon uncompensated loss of territory as being hu-miliating and unequal.China-India War: Border disputes resulted in a

short border war between the People's Republicof China and India in 20 October 1962. The PRCpushed the unprepared and inadequately led In-dian forces to within forty-eight kilometres of theAssam plains in the northeast and occupied stra-tegic points in Ladakh, until the PRC declared aunilateral cease-fire on 21 November and with-drew twenty kilometers behind its contended lineof control.

At the time of Sino-Indian border conflict, a se-vere political split was taking place in the Com-munist Party of India. One section was accusedby the Indian government as being pro-PRC, anda large number of political leaders were jailed.Subsequently, CPI split with the leftist sectionforming the Communist Party of India (Marxist)in 1964. CPI(M) held some contacts with the Com-munist Party of China in the initial period afterthe split, but did not fully embrace the politicalline of Mao Zedong.

Relations between the PRC and India deterioratedduring the rest of the 1960s and the early 1970s asSino-Pakistani relations improved and Sino-Sovietrelations worsened. The PRC backed Pakistan inits 1965 war with India. Between 1967 and 1971,an all-weather road was built across territoryclaimed by India, linking PRC's Xinjiang UyghurAutonomous Region with Pakistan; India coulddo no more than protest. The PRC continued anactive propaganda campaign against India and sup-plied ideological, financial, and other assistanceto dissident groups, especially to tribes in north-eastern India. The PRC accused India of assistingthe Khampa rebels in Tibet. Diplomatic contactbetween the two governments was minimal al-though not formally severed. The flow of culturaland other exchanges that had marked the 1950sceased entirely. The flourishing wool, fur and spicetrade between Lhasa and India through theNathula Pass, an offshoot of the ancient Silk Roadin the then Indian protectorate of Sikkim was alsosevered. However, the biweekly postal networkthrough this pass was kept alive, which exists tilltoday.In late 1967, there were two skirmishes between



Indian and Chinese forces in Sikkim. The first onewas dubbed the "Nathu La incident", and the otherthe "Chola incident". Prior to these incidents hadbeen the Naxalbari uprising in India by the Com-munist Naxalites and Maoists.

In 1967 a peasant uprising broke out in Naxalbari,led by pro-Maoist elements. A pronunciation byMao titled "Spring Thunder over India" gave fullmoral support for the uprising. The support forthe revolt marked the end for the relations be-tween CPC and CPI(M). Naxalbari-inspired com-munists organized armed revolts in several partsof India, and in 1969 they formed the CommunistParty of India (Marxist-Leninist). However, as thenaxalite movement disintegrated in various splits,the PRC withdrew its political support and turnednon-committal towards the various Indian groups.On 11 September 1967, troops of the IndianArmy's 18th Rajput Regiment were protecting anEngineering Company that was fencing the NorthShoulder of Nathula, when Chinese troops openedfire on them. This escalated over the next five daysto an exchange of heavy artillery and mortar firebetween the Indians and the Chinese. 62 Indiansoldiers, from the 18th Rajput, the 2nd Grena-diers and the Artillery regiments were killed.Major Harbhajan Singh of the Rajput Regimentwas awarded a MVC (posthumous) and NaibSubedar Pandey a VrC (posthumous) for their gal-lant actions. The extent of Chinese casualties inthis incident is not known.

In the second, on 1 October 1967, a group of In-dian Gurkha Rifles soldiers (from the 7th Battal-ion of the 11th Regiment) noticed Chinese troopssurrounding a sentry post near a boulder at theChola outpost in Sikkim. After a heated argumentover the control of the boulder, a Chinese soldierbayoneted a Gurkha rifleman, triggering the startof a close-quarters knife and fire-fight, which thenescalated to a mortar and HMG duel. The Chinesetroops signaled a ceasefire after three hours offighting, but later scaled Point 15450 to establishthemselves there. The Gurkhas outflanked themthe next day to regain Point 15450 and the Chi-nese retreated across the LAC. 21 Indian soldierswere killed in this action. The Indian government

awarded Vir Chakras to Rifleman Limbu (post-humous) and battalion commander Major K.B.Joshi for their gallant actions. The extent of Chi-nese casualties in this skirmish is also not known.In August 1971, India signed its Treaty of Peace,Friendship, and Cooperation with the SovietUnion, and the United States and the PRC sidedwith Pakistan in its December 1971 war with In-dia. By this time, the PRC had just replaced theRepublic of China in the UN where its represen-tatives denounced India as being a "tool of Sovietexpansionism."

India and the PRC renewed efforts to improve re-lations after the Soviet Union invaded Afghani-stan in December 1979. The PRC modified its pro-Pakistan stand on Kashmir and appeared willingto remain silent on India's absorption of Sikkimand its special advisory relationship with Bhutan.The PRC's leaders agreed to discuss the boundaryissue, India's priority, as the first step to a broad-ening of relations. The two countries hosted eachothers' news agencies, and Mount Kailash andMansarowar Lake in Tibet, the mythological homeof the Hindu pantheon, were opened to annualpilgrimages from India.

In 1981 PRC minister of foreign affairs Huang Huawas invited to India, where he made complimen-tary remarks about India's role in South Asia. PRCpremier Zhao Ziyang concurrently toured Paki-stan, Nepal, and Bangladesh.In 1980, Indian Prime Minister Indira Gandhi ap-proved a plan to upgrade the deployment of forcesaround the Line of Actual Control to avoid uni-lateral redefinitions of the line. India also increasedfunds for infrastructural development in theseareas.

In 1984, squads of Indian soldiers began activelypatrolling the Sumdorong Chu Valley inArunachal Pradesh (formerly NEFA), which isnorth of the McMahon Line as drawn on the SimlaTreaty map but south of the ridge which Indianclaims is meant to delineate the McMahon Line.The Sumdorong Chu valley "seemed to lie to thenorth of the McMahon line; but is south of thehighest ridge in the area, and the McMahon line



is meant to follow the highest points" accordingto the Indian claims, while the Chinese did notrecognize the McMahon Line as legitimate andwere not prepared to accept an Indian claim lineeven further north than that. The Indian teamleft the area before the winter. In the winter of1986, the Chinese deployed their troops to theSumdorong Chu before the Indian team could ar-rive in the summer and built a Helipad atWandung. Surprised by the Chinese occupation,India's then Chief of Army Staff, GeneralK.Sundarji, airlifted a brigade to the region.

Chinese troops could not move any further intothe valley and were forced to move sideways alongthe Thag La ridge, away from the valley. By 1987,Beijing's reaction was similar to that in 1962 andthis prompted many Western diplomats to pre-dict war. However, Indian foreign minister N.D.Tiwari and Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi travelledto Beijing over the following months to negotiatea mutual de-escalation.

After the Huang visit, India and the PRC heldeight rounds of border negotiations between De-cember 1981 and November 1987. These talks ini-tially raised hopes that progress could be made onthe border issue. However, in 1985 the PRC stiff-ened its position on the border and insisted onmutual concessions without defining the exactterms of its "package proposal" or where the ac-tual line of control lay. In 1986 and 1987, the ne-gotiations achieved nothing, given the chargesexchanged between the two countries of militaryencroachment in the Sumdorung Chu Valley ofthe Tawang tract on the eastern sector of the bor-der. China's construction of a military post andhelicopter pad in the area in 1986 and India's grantof statehood to Arunachal Pradesh (formerly theNorth-East Frontier Agency) in February 1987caused both sides to deploy new troops to the area,raising tensions and fears of a new border war.The PRC relayed warnings that it would "teachIndia a lesson" if it did not cease "nibbling" at Chi-nese territory. By the summer of 1987, however,both sides had backed away from conflict and de-nied that military clashes had taken place.

A warming trend in relations was facilitated byRajiv Gandhi's visit to China in December 1988.The two sides issued a joint communiqué thatstressed the need to restore friendly relations onthe basis of the Panch Shila and noted the impor-tance of the first visit by an Indian prime ministerto China since Nehru's 1954 visit. India and thePeople's Republic of China agreed to broaden bi-lateral ties in various areas, working to achieve a"fair and reasonable settlement while seeking amutually acceptable solution" to the border dis-pute. The communiqué also expressed China's con-cern about agitation by Tibetan separatists in In-dia and reiterated China's position that Tibet wasan integral part of China and that anti-China po-litical activities by expatriate Tibetans was not tobe tolerated. Rajiv Gandhi signed bilateral agree-ments on science and technology cooperation, oncivil aviation to establish direct air links, and oncultural exchanges. The two sides also agreed tohold annual diplomatic consultations between for-eign ministers, and to set up a joint ministerialcommittee on economic and scientific coopera-tion and a joint working group on the boundaryissue. The latter group was to be led by the Indianforeign secretary and the Chinese vice minister offoreign affairs.

As the mid-1990s approached, slow but steady im-provement in relations with China was visible.Top-level dialogue continued with the December1991 visit of PRC premier Li Peng to India andthe May 1992 visit to China of Indian presidentR. Venkataraman. Six rounds of talks of the In-dian-Chinese Joint Working Group on the Bor-der Issue were held between December 1988 andJune 1993. Progress was also made in reducingtensions on the border via confidence-buildingmeasures, including mutual troop reductions,regular meetings of local military commanders,and advance notification of military exercises.Border trade resumed in July 1992 after a hiatusof more than thirty years, consulates reopened inBombay (Mumbai) and Shanghai in December1992, and, in June 1993, the two sides agreed toopen an additional border trading post. DuringSharad Pawar's July 1992 visit to Beijing, the firstever by an Indian minister of defence, the two



defense establishments agreed to develop aca-demic, military, scientific, and technological ex-changes and to schedule an Indian port call by aChinese naval vessel.

Substantial movement in relations continued in1993. The sixth-round joint working group talkswere held in June in New Delhi but resulted inonly minor developments. However, as the yearprogressed the long-standing border dispute waseased as a result of bilateral pledges to reduce trooplevels and to respect the cease-fire line along theIndia-China border. Prime Minister NarasimhaRao and Premier Li Peng signed the border agree-ment and three other agreements (on cross-bor-der trade, and on increased cooperation on theenvironment and in radio and television broad-casting) during the former's visit to Beijing in Sep-tember.

A senior-level Chinese military delegation madea six-day goodwill visit to India in December 1993aimed at "fostering confidence-building measuresbetween the defense forces of the two countries."The visit, however, came at a time when pressreports revealed that, as a result of improved rela-tions between the PRC and Burma, China wasexporting greater amounts of military matériel toBurma's army, navy, and air force and sending anincreasing number of technicians to Burma. Ofconcern to Indian security officials was the pres-ence of Chinese radar technicians in Burma's CocoIslands, which border India's Union Territory ofthe Andaman and Nicobar Islands. Nevertheless,movement continued in 1994 on troop reductionsalong the Himalayan frontier. Moreover, in Janu-ary 1994 Beijing announced that it not only fa-vored a negotiated solution on Kashmir, but alsoopposed any form of independence for the region.

Talks were held in New Delhi in February 1994aimed at confirming established "confidence-building measures" and discussing clarification ofthe "line of actual control", reduction of armedforces along the line, and prior information aboutforthcoming military exercises. China's hope forsettlement of the boundary issue was reiterated.

The 1993 Chinese military visit to India was re-ciprocated by Indian army chief of staff GeneralB. C. Joshi. During talks in Beijing in July 1994,the two sides agreed that border problems shouldbe resolved peacefully through "mutual under-standing and concessions." The border issue wasraised in September 1994 when PRC minister ofnational defense Chi Haotian visited New Delhifor extensive talks with high-level Indian tradeand defense officials. Further talks in New Delhiin March 1995 by the India-China Expert Groupled to an agreement to set up two additional pointsof contact along the 4,000 km border to facilitatemeetings between military personnel. The twosides also were reported as "seriously engaged" indefining the McMahon Line and the line of actualcontrol vis-à-vis military exercises and preventionof air intrusion. Talks in Beijing in July 1995 aimedat better border security and combating cross-bor-der crimes and in New Delhi in August 1995 onadditional troop withdrawals from the bordermade further progress in reducing tensions.

Possibly indicative of the further relaxation ofIndia-China relations, at least there was little no-tice taken in Beijing, was the April 1995 announce-ment, after a year of consultation, of the openingof the Taipei Economic and Cultural Center inNew Delhi. The center serves as the representa-tive office of the Republic of China (Taiwan) andis the counterpart of the India-Taipei Associationin Taiwan; both institutions have the goal of im-proving relations between the two sides, whichhave been strained since New Delhi's recognitionof Beijing in 1950.

Sino-Indian relations hit a low point in 1998 fol-lowing India's nuclear tests in May. Indian De-fense Minister George Fernandes declared that"China is India's number one threat", hinting thatIndia developed nuclear weapons in defenseagainst China's nuclear arsenal. In 1998, China wasone of the strongest international critics of India'snuclear tests and entry into the nuclear club. Re-lations between India and China stayed straineduntil the end of the decade.With Indian President K. R. Narayanan's visit to



China, 2000 marked a gradual re-engagement ofIndian and Chinese diplomacy. In a major embar-rassment for China, the 17th Karmapa, UrgyenTrinley Dorje, who was proclaimed by China,made a dramatic escape from Tibet to the RumtekMonastery in Sikkim. Chinese officials were in aquandary on this issue as any protest to India onthe issue would mean an explicit endorsement onIndia's governance of Sikkim, which the Chinesestill hadn't recognised. In 2002, Chinese PremierZhu Rongji reciprocated by visiting India, with afocus on economic issues. 2003 ushered in amarked improvement in Sino-Indian relations fol-lowing Indian Prime Minister Atal BihariVajpayee's landmark June 2003 visit to China.China officially recognized Indian sovereigntyover Sikkim as the two nations moved toward re-solving their border disputes.

2004 also witnessed a gradual improvement in theinternational area when the two countries pro-posed opening up the Nathula and Jelepla Passesin Sikkim which would be mutually beneficial toboth countries. 2004 was a milestone in Sino-In-dian bilateral trade, surpassing the $10 billion markfor the first time. In April 2005, Chinese PremierWen Jiabao visited Bangalore to push for increasedSino-Indian cooperation in high-tech industries.In a speech, Wen stated "Cooperation is just liketwo pagodas (temples), one hardware and one soft-ware. Combined, we can take the leadership po-sition in the world." Wen stated that the twenty-first century will be "the Asian century of the ITindustry." The high-level visit was also expectedto produce several agreements to deepen politi-cal, cultural and economic ties between the twonations. Regarding the issue of India gaining apermanent seat on the UN Security Council, onhis visit, Wen Jiabao initially seemed to supportthe idea, but had returned to a neutral position onthe subject by the time he returned to China. Inthe South Asian Association for Regional Coop-eration (SAARC) Summit (2005) China wasgranted an observer status. While other countriesin the region are ready to consider China for per-manent membership in the SAARC, India seemsreluctant.A very important dimension of the evolving Sino-

Indian relationship is based on the energy require-ments of their industrial expansion and their readi-ness to proactively secure them by investing inthe oilfields abroad - in Africa, the Middle Eastand Central Asia. On the one hand, these ven-tures entail competition (which has been evidentin oil biddings for various international projectsrecently). But on the other hand, a degree of co-operation too is visible, as they are increasinglyconfronting bigger players in the global oil mar-ket. This cooperation was sealed in Beijing on Janu-ary 12, 2006 during the visit of Petroleum andNatural Gas Minister Mani Shankar Aiyar, whosigned an agreement which envisages ONGCVidesh Ltd (OVL) and the China National Petro-leum Corporation (CNPC) placing joint bids forpromising projects elsewhere. This may have im-portant consequences for their international rela-tions.

On July 6, 2006, China and India re-openedNathula, an ancient trade route which was part ofthe Silk Road. Nathula is a pass through theHimalayas and it was closed 44 years prior to 2006when the Sino-Indian War broke out in 1962. Theinitial agreement for the re-opening of the traderoute was reached in 2003, and a final agreementwas formalized on June 18th, 2006. Officials saythat the re-opening of border trade will help easethe economic isolation of the region. In Novem-ber 2006, China and India had a verbal spat overclaim of the north-east Indian state of ArunachalPradesh. India claimed that China was occupying38,000 square kilometres of its territory in Kash-mir, while China claimed the whole of ArunachalPradesh as its own. In May 2007, China deniedthe application for visa from an Indian Adminis-trative Service officer in Arunachal Pradesh. Ac-cording to China, since Arunachal Pradesh is aterritory of China, he would not need a visa tovisit his own country. Later in December 2007,China appeared to have reversed its policy bygranting a visa to Marpe Sora, an Arunachal bornprofessor in computer science. In January 2008,Prime Minister Manmohan Singh visited Chinaand met with President Hu Jintao and PremierWen Jiabao and had bilateral discussions related



to trade, commerce, defense, military, and vari-ous other issues. In July 2008, at the 34th G8 sum-mit in Japan, Hu Jintao and Manmohan Singh hada friendly meeting. In the wake of the 2008Sichuan earthquake, India offered aid to help theearthquake victims.Until 2008 the British Government's position re-mained the same as had been since the Simla Ac-cord of 1913: that China held suzerainty over Ti-bet but not sovereignty. Britain revised this viewon 29 October 2008, when it recognised Chinesesovereignty over Tibet by issuing a statement onits website. The Economist stated that althoughthe British Foreign Office's website does not usethe word sovereignty, officials at the Foreign Of-fice said "it means that, as far as Britain is con-cerned, 'Tibet is part of China. Full stop.'" Thischange in Britain's position affects India's claimto its North Eastern territories which rely on thesame Simla agreement that Britain's prior posi-tion on Tibet's sovereignty was based upon.

Alleged 2009 naval stand-off: On January 15,Chinese sources reported that two Chinese de-stroyers and an anti-submarine helicopter engagedin a half an hour naval stand off against an Indiansubmarine. The report said that Chinese destroy-ers forced an Indian submarine to surface off So-malia waters after it tried to test Chinese sonarsystems for weaknesses. The Indian vessel thenapparently left without further confrontation.However, the report was later confirmed as aninaccurate one by both sides.

India–Japan relations

Throughout history, Indo-Japanese relations havealways been strong. For centuries, India and Ja-pan have engaged in cultural exchanges, prima-rily as a result of Buddhism which spread fromIndia to Japan. During the Indian IndependenceMovement, the Japanese Imperial Army helpedNetaji Subhash Chandra Bose's Indian NationalArmy in battles against British forces. Diplomatic,trade, economic, and technical relations betweenIndia and Japan were well established since the1950s. India's iron ore helped Japan's recovery

from World War II devastation, and followingJapanese Prime Minister Nobusuke Kishi's visit toIndia in 1957, Japan started providing yen loansto India in 1958, as the first yen loan aid extendedby Japanese government. Relations between thetwo nations were constrained, however, by ColdWar politics. Japan, as a result of World War IIreconstruction, was a U.S. ally, while India pur-sued a non-aligned foreign policy. Since the 1980s,however, efforts were made to strengthen bilat-eral ties. India’s ‘Look East’ policy posited Japanas a key partner. Since 1986, Japan has becomeIndia's largest aid donor, and remains so.

Relations between the two nations reached a brieflow in 1998 as a result of India's nuclear program.After India's nuclear tests in 1998, Japan suspendedall political exchanges with India. The long-es-tablish economic assistance was also stopped forthree years. Relations improved exponentially fol-lowing this period, as bilateral relations betweenthe two nations improved once again.

Economic: In August 2000, Japanese Prime Min-ister Mori visited India. At this meeting, Japan andIndia agreed to establish "Japan-India Global Part-nership in the 21st Century." Indian Prime Min-ister Vajpayee visited Japan in December, 2001,where both Prime Ministers issued "Japan-IndiaJoint Declaration", consisting of high-level dia-logue, economic cooperation, and military andanti-terrorism cooperation. In April, 2005, Japa-nese Prime Minister Koizumi visited India andsigned Joint Statement "Japan-India Partnershipin the New Asian Era: Strategic Orientation ofJapan-India Global Partnership" with IndianPrime Minister Manmohan Singh.

Japan is currently India’s third largest source offoreign direct investment; Japanese companieshave made cumulative investments of around $2.6billion in India since 1991. The 2007 annual sur-vey conducted by the Japan Bank for InternationalCooperation ranked India as the most promisingoverseas investment destination for Japanese com-panies over the long term. In recent years, Japanhas assisted India in infrastructure developmentprojects such as the Delhi Metro Rail Project. Both



sides are also discussing the Delhi-Mumbai Indus-trial Corridor Project and Dedicated Freight Cor-ridor Projects on the Mumbai-Delhi and theDelhi-Howrah routes.

In October 2008, Japan signed an agreement withIndia under which it would provide the latter alow-interest loan worth US$4.5 billion to con-struct a railway project between Delhi andMumbai. This is the single largest overseas projectbeing financed by Japan and reflected growingeconomic partnership between the two. India isalso one of the only three countries in the worldwith whom Japan has security pact, the other twobeing Australia and the United States. As of March2006, Japan was the third largest investor in Indiawith an estimated total investment of US$2.12billion.

Military: India and Japan also have close militaryties. They have shared interests in maintaining thesecurity of sea-lanes in the Asia-Pacific and In-dian Ocean, and in cooperation for fighting inter-national crime, terrorism, piracy and proliferationof weapons of mass destruction. The two nationshave frequently held joint military exercises andcooperate on technology.

Cultural: Japan and India maintain strong culturalconnections. The two nations announced 2007 asJapan-India Friendship Year, and held culturalevents in both India and Japan.Recently, Japan has also supported the reconstruc-tion of the ancient Nalanda University, and hasagreed to provide financial assistance, and recentlyapproached the Indian government with a pro-posal.

Brazil–India relations

Brazil and India are large continental sized coun-tries with social diversity, democratic govern-ments, a multiethnic society, and a large popula-tion base. Both possess advanced technologies. Thetwo countries share similar perceptions on issuesof interest to developing countries and have co-operated in the multilateral level on issues such

as international trade and development, environ-ment, reform of the UN and the UNSC expansion.India’s links with Brazil go back five centuries.Portugal’s Pedro Alvares Cabral is officiallyrecognised as the first European to “discover” Bra-zil in 1500. Cabral was sent to India by the Kingof Portugal soon after the return of Vasco da Gamafrom his pioneering journey. Cabral is reported tohave been blown-off course on his way to India.Brazil became an important Portuguese colony andstop-over in the long journey to Goa. This Portu-guese connection led to the exchange of severalagricultural crops between India and Brazil in thecolonial days. Indian cattle was also imported toBrazil. Most of the cattle in Brazil is of Indian ori-gin.

Diplomatic relations between India and Brazilwere established in 1948. The Indian Embassyopened in Rio de Janeiro on May 3, 1948, movingto Brasília on August 1, 1971.

Cultural relations: There is enormous interest inBrazil on India's culture, religion, performing artsand philosophy. A number of cultural events in-cluding performances by famous Kuchipudi dancegroup, "Raja and Radha Reddy" were organized inthe major cities of Brazil ahead of the Prime Min-ister Manmohan Singh's visit to Brasília from 11-14 September 2006. Earlier, a very successful Fes-tival of India was organised during the visit ofPresident K.R. Narayanan to Brazil in May 1998.

There are numerous organisations teaching yogaand they invite yoga teachers from India for in-structions and learning. ISKCON, Satya Sai Baba,Maharshi Mahesh Yogi, Bhakti Vedanta Founda-tion and other Indian spiritual gurus andorganisations have their chapters in Brazil. TheUniversity of Londrina has a good specializationcourse on India in its Department of Afro-AsianStudies. Mahatma Gandhi is highly regarded inthe country and the government has sought toteach his philosophy of non-violence to the po-lice to improve its track record. A statue of Ma-hatma Gandhi is located in a prominent square inRio de Janeiro. A group called the Filhos de Gandhi(Sons of Gandhi) participates regularly in the car-



nival in Salvador. Private Brazilian organizationsoccasionally invite Indian cultural troupes.

Economic relations: In recent years, relations be-tween Brazil and India have grown considerablyand co-operation between the two countries hasbeen extended to such diverse areas as science andtechnology, pharmaceuticals and space. The two-way trade in 2007 nearly tripled to US$ 3.12 bil-lion from US$ 1.2 billion in 2004.

Global software giant, Wipro Technologies, alsoset up a business process outsourcing centre inCuritiba to provide shared services to AmBev, thelargest brewery in Latin America. AmBev's zonalvice president, Renato Nahas Batista, said "We arehonoured to be a part of Wipro's expansion plansin Brazil and Latin America." AmBev's portfolioincludes leading brands like Brahma, Becks, Stellaand Antarctica.

Current issues

UNSC reform: Both countries want the participaion of developing countries in the UNSC perma-nent membership since the underlying philoso-phy for both of them are: UNSC should be moredemocratic, legitimate and representative - the G4is a novel grouping for this realization.

South-South cooperation: Brazil and India aredeeply committed to IBSA initiatives and attachutmost importance to this trilateral cooperationbetween the three large, multi-ethnic, multi-ra-cial and multi-religious developing countries,which are bound by the common principle of plu-ralism and democracy.

The first ever IBSA Summit was held in Brasíliain September 2006, followed by the Second IBSASummit held in Pretoria in October 2007, withthe third one to be held in Delhi in October 2008.Four IBSA Trilateral Commission meetings werealready held till 2007 since the first one was heldin 2004 and had covered many areas such as sci-ence, technology, education, agriculture, energy,culture, health, social issues, public administra-

tion and revenue administration. The target of US$10 billion in trade was already achieved by 2007.Both countries view this as a tool of transforma-tion diplomacy to bring economic growth, sus-tainable development, poverty reduction and re-gional prosperity in the vast regions of LatinAmerica, Africa and Asia. The IBSA Fund for Al-leviation of Poverty and Hunger has already pro-vided funds for capacity building in East Timorand for the fight against HIV/AIDS in Burundiand has won the South-South Partnership Awardat the 2006 UN Day event held in New York Cityon 19 December 2006.

India – United States relations

Despite being one of the pioneers and foundingmembers of the Non-Aligned Movement, Indiadeveloped a closer relationship with the SovietUnion during the Cold War. India's strategic andmilitary relations with Moscow and strong socialistpolicies had an adverse impact on its relations withthe United States. After the collapse of the SovietUnion, India began to review its foreign policy ina unipolar world following which, it took steps todevelop closer ties with the European Union andthe United States. Today, India and the U.S. sharean extensive cultural, strategic, military and eco-nomic relationship.

During the tenure of the Clinton and Bush ad-ministration, relations between India and theUnited States blossomed primarily over commonconcerns regarding growing Islamic extremism,energy security and climate change.

According to some foreign policy experts, therewas a slight downturn in India-U.S. relations fol-lowing the appointment of Barack Obama as theU.S. President in 2009. This was primarily due toObama administration's desire to increase relationswith China, and Barack Obama's protectionistviews on dealing with the economic crisis. How-ever, the leaders of the two countries have repeat-edly dismissed these concerns.

The historic relationship between India and the



United states was very strong. One event is thevisit of Swami Vivekananda who introduced Yogaand Vedanta to America. Vivekananda was thefirst known Hindu Sage to come to the West,where he introduced Eastern thought at theWorld's Parliament of Religions, in connectionwith the World's Fair in Chicago, in 1893. Here,his first lecture, which started with this line "Sis-ters and Brothers of America," made the audienceclap for two minutes just to the address, for priorto this seminal speech, the audience was alwaysused to this opening address: "Ladies and Gentle-men". It was this speech that catapulted him tofame by his wide audiences in Chicago and thenlater everywhere else in America, including far-flung places such as Memphis, Boston, San Fran-cisco, New York, Los Angeles, and St. Louis.

After Indian independence until the end of thecold war, the relationship between the two na-tions has often been thorny. Dwight Eisenhowerwas the first US President to visit India in 1959.He was so supportive of India that the New Yorktimes remarked "It did not seem to matter muchwhether Nehru had actually requested or beengiven a guarantee that the US would help India tomeet further Chinese communist aggression.

What mattered was the obvious strengthening ofIndian-American friendship to a point where nosuch guarantee was necessary."

During John F. Kennedy's period as President, hesaw India as a strategic partner against the rise ofcommunist China. He said "Chinese Communistshave been moving ahead the last 10 years. Indiahas been making some progress, but if India doesnot succeed with her 450 million people, if shecan't make freedom work, then people around theworld are going to determine, particularly in theunderdeveloped world, that the only way they candevelop their resources is through the Commu-nist system."

From 1961 to 1963 there was a promise to helpset up a large steel mill in Bokaro that was with-drawn by the U.S. The 1965 and 1971 Indo-Paki-

stani wars did not help their relations. During theCold War, the US asked for Pakistan's help be-cause India was seen to lean towards the SovietUnion. Later, when India would not agree to sup-port the anti-Soviet operation in Afghanistan, itwas left with few allies. Not until 1997 was thereany effort to improve relations with the UnitedStates.

Soon after Atal Bihari Vajpayee became IndianPrime Minister, he authorized a nuclear weaponstest in Pokhran, which got the immediate atten-tion of the US. The Clinton administration andVajpayee exchanged representatives to help buildrelations. In March 2000, President Bill Clintonvisited India. He had bilateral and economic dis-cussions with Prime Minster Atal Bihari Vajpayee.Over the course of improved diplomatic relationswith the Bush administration, India has agreed toallow close international monitoring of its nuclearweapons development while refusing to give upits current nuclear arsenal. India and the US havealso greatly enhanced their economic ties.

During the 9/11 terrorist attacks on the U.S., Presi-dent George W. Bush chose India as the countryto control and police the Indian Ocean sea-lanesfrom the Suez to Singapore. The tsunami that oc-curred in December 2004 saw the U.S. and Indiannavies to work together in search and rescue op-erations and to reconstruct the damaged lives andland. An Open Skies Agreement was made in April2005. This helped enhance trade, tourism, andbusiness by the increased number of flights. AirIndia purchased 68 US Boeing aircraft, which cost$8 billion.

Former U.S. Secretary of Defense DonaldRumsfeld and U.S. Secretary of State CondoleezzaRice have made recent visits to India as well. Af-ter Hurricane Katrina, India donated $5 millionto the American Red Cross and sent 2 plane loadsof relief supplies and materials to help. And on 1March 2006, President Bush made another diplo-matic visit to expand relations between India andthe United States.Military relations: The U.S.-India defense rela-



tionship derives from a common belief in free-dom, democracy, and the rule of law, and seeks toadvance shared security interests. These interestsinclude maintaining security and stability, defeat-ing terrorism and violent religious extremism, pre-venting the spread of weapons of mass destruc-tion and associated materials, data, and technolo-gies and protecting the free flow of commerce vialand, air and sea lanes.

In recent years India has conducted joint militaryexercises with the U.S. in the Indian Ocean. De-spite this the Indian government sees the sole U.S.base in the Indian Ocean, Diego Garcia, and thepermanent presence of the U.S. military there, asa potential escalation point in a future war, espe-cially because of the current U.S. operations inIraq and Afghanistan.

Recognizing India as a key to strategic U.S. inter-ests, the United States has sought to strengthenits relationship with India. The two countries arethe world's largest democracies, both committedto political freedom protected by representativegovernment. India is also moving gradually towardgreater economic freedom. The U.S. and Indiahave a common interest in the free flow of com-merce and resources, including through the vitalsea lanes of the Indian Ocean. They also share aninterest in fighting terrorism and in creating a stra-tegically stable Asia.

There were some differences, however, includingover India's nuclear weapons programs and thepace of India's economic reforms. In the past, theseconcerns may have dominated U.S. thinking aboutIndia, but today the U.S. views India as a growingworld power with which it shares common stra-tegic interests. A strong partnership between thetwo countries will continue to address differencesand shape a dynamic and collaborative future.

In late September 2001, President Bush lifted sanc-tions imposed under the terms of the 1994 NuclearProliferation Prevention Act following India'snuclear tests in May 1998. The nonproliferationdialogue initiated after the 1998 nuclear tests has

bridged many of the gaps in understanding be-tween the countries. In a meeting between Presi-dent Bush and Prime Minister Vajpayee in No-vember 2001, the two leaders expressed a stronginterest in transforming the U.S.-India bilateralrelationship. High-level meetings and concretecooperation between the two countries increasedduring 2002 and 2003. In January 2004, the U.S.and India launched the Next Steps in StrategicPartnership (NSSP), which was both a milestonein the transformation of the bilateral relationshipand a blueprint for its further progress.

In July 2005, President Bush hosted Prime Minis-ter Singh in Washington, DC. The two leaders an-nounced the successful completion of the NSSP,as well as other agreements which further enhancecooperation in the areas of civil nuclear, civil space,and high-technology commerce. Other initiativesannounced at this meeting include: an U.S.-IndiaEconomic Dialogue, Fight Against HIV/AIDS,Disaster Relief, Technology Cooperation, Democ-racy Initiative, an Agriculture Knowledge Initia-tive, a Trade Policy Forum, Energy Dialogue andCEO Forum. President Bush made a reciprocal visitto India in March 2006, during which the progressof these initiatives were reviewed, and new ini-tiatives were launched.

In December 2006, Congress passed the historicHenry J. Hyde United States-India PeacefulAtomic Cooperation Act, which allows direct ci-vilian nuclear commerce with India for the firsttime in 30 years. U.S. policy had opposed nuclearcooperation with India because the country haddeveloped nuclear weapons in contravention ofinternational conventions and never signed theNuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. The legislationclears the way for India to buy U.S. nuclear reac-tors and fuel for civilian use. In July 2007, theUnited States and India reached a historic mile-stone in their strategic partnership by completingnegotiations on the bilateral agreement for peace-ful nuclear cooperation, also known as the "123agreement." This agreement, signed by Secretaryof State Rice and External Affairs MinisterMukherjee on October 10, 2008, governs civil



nuclear trade between the two countries and opensthe door for American and Indian firms to par-ticipate in each other's civil nuclear energy sec-tor. The U.S. and India seek to elevate the strate-gic partnership further to include cooperation incounter-terrorism, defense cooperation, educa-tion, and joint democracy promotion.

Economic relations: The United States is also oneof India's largest direct investors. From the year1991 to 2004, the stock of FDI inflow has increasedfrom USD $11.3 million to $344.4 million, total-ing $4.13 billion. This is a compound rate increaseof 57.5% annually. Indian direct investmentsabroad were started in 1992. Indian corporationsand registered partnership firms are allowed toinvest in businesses up to 100% of their net worth.India's largest outgoing investments are manufac-turing, which account for 54.8% of the country'sforeign investments. The second largest are non-financial services (software development), whichaccounts for 35.4% of investments.

Trade relations: The United States is India's larg-est trading partner. In 2007, the United Statesexported $17.24 billion worth goods to India andimported $24.02 billion worth of Indian goods.Major items exported by India to the U.S. includeInformation Technology Services, textiles, ma-chinery, ITeS, gems and diamonds, chemicals, ironand steel products, coffee, tea, and other ediblefood products. Major American items imported byIndia include aircraft, fertilizers, computer hard-ware, scrap metal and medical equipment.

The United States is also India's largest investmentpartner, with American direct investment of $9billion accounting for 9% of total foreign invest-ment into India. Americans have made notableforeign investment in India's power generation,telecommunications, ports, roads, petroleum ex-ploration/processing, and mining industries.

In July 2005, President George W. Bush and In-dian Prime Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh cre-ated a new program called the Trade Policy Fo-rum. It is run by a representative from each na-tion. The United States Trade Representative is

Rob Portman and the Indian Commerce Secre-tary is Minister of Commerce Kamal Nath. Thegoal of the program is to increase bilateral tradewhich is a two-way trade deal and the flow ofinvestments.

There are five main sub-divisions of the TradePolicy Forum which include: Agricultural Tradegroup- This group has three main objectives:agreeing on terms that will allow India to exportmangoes to the United States, permitting India'sAPEDA (Agricultural and Process Food ProductsExport Development Authority) to certify Indianproducts to the standards of the USDA, and ex-ecuting regulation procedures for approving ed-ible wax on fruit. Tariff and Non-Tariff Barriersgroup- Goals of the group include: agreeing thatinsecticides that are manufactures by United Statescompanies can be sold throughout India. India hadagreed to cut special regulations on trading car-bonated drinks, many medicinal drugs, and low-ering regulations on many imports that are not ofagricultural nature. Both nations have agreed todiscuss improved facets on the trade of Indianregulation requirements, jewelry, computer parts,motorcycles, fertilizer, and those tariffs that af-fect the American process of exporting boric acid.

The two nations have discussed matters such asthose who wish to break into the accounting mar-ket, Indian companies gaining licenses for the tele-communications industry, and setting polices bythe interaction of companies from both countriesregarding new policies related to Indian media andbroadcasting. This group has strived to exchangevaluable information on recognizing different pro-fessional services offered by the two countries,discussing the movement and positioning of peoplein developing industries and assigning jobs to thosepeople, continuation of talks in how India's citi-zens can gain access into the market for financialservicing, and discussing the limitation of equi-ties.

The two countries have had talks about the re-striction of investments in industries such as fi-nancial services, insurance, and retail. Also, to take



advantage of any initiatives in joint investmentssuch as agricultural processing and the transpor-tation industries. Both countries have decided topromote small business initiatives in both coun-tries by allowing trade between them.The majority of exports from the United States toIndia include: aviation equipment, engineeringmaterials and machinery, instruments used inoptical and medical sectors, fertilizers, and stonesand metals.

Below are the percentages of traded items Indiato US increased by 21.12% to $6.94 billion.

1. Diamonds & precious stones (25%)

2. Textiles (29.01%)

3. Iron & Steel (5.81%)

4. Organic chemicals (4.3%)

5. Machinery (4.6%)

6. Electrical Machinery (4.28%)

Major items of export from U.S. to India: Forthe year 2006, figures are available up to themonth of April. Merchandise exports from USto India increased by 20.09.26% to US $2.95billion. Select major items with their percent-age shares are given below:

1. Engineering goods & machinery (including elec-

trical) (31.2%)

2. Precious stones & metals (8.01%)

3. Organic chemicals (4.98%)

4. Optical instruments & equipment (7.33%)

5. Aviation & aircraft ( 16.8%)

Ties Under Obama Administration

Despite much gains in Indo-American relationsduring the tenure of the Bush administration, In-dia was not one of the Asian countries U.S. Secre-tary of State Hillary Clinton visited in February2009. The Foreign Policy magazine reported thateven though Foreign Policy Staff of the previousadministration had recommended India as a "keystop" during any such official tour of Asia, HillaryClinton will not be making a visit to New Delhi.

The exclusion of India from the Asian tour wasregarded as a "mistake" by some analysts. Indiawas not even mentioned once in the Obamaadministration's official foreign policy agenda. TheForbes magazine alerted U.S. President BarackObama on the need to prevent United States' new-found alliance with India from erosion.

The initial approach of the Obama administrationtowards ties with India raised concerns of a down-turn in Indo-American relations. In an editorial,the National Interest suggested that the Obamaadministration could possibly damage "the foun-dations underlying the geostrategic partnership"between India and the United States. Anothereditorial published by the Taipei Times high-lighted the importance of India-U.S. relations andurged Barack Obama to give "India the attentionit deserves".Terming India to be United States' "in-dispensable ally", the Christian Science Monitorargued that the Obama administration needsIndia's cooperation on several issues, includingclimate change, Afghanistan war and energy se-curity and therefore, Obama cannot risk puttingties with India on "back-burner".

In an attempt to bolster relations between the twocountries, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clintonwill be making a visit to India in the second halfof July 2009. Calling India a "key partner" of theUnited States, Clinton said that the United Stateswants India "to succeed as an anchor for regionaland global security". She also mentioned four plat-forms for building future U.S.-India relationship— "global security, human development, eco-nomic activity, science and technology".

Foreign policy issues: According to some analysts,India-U.S. relations have strained over Obamaadministration's approach in handling the Talibaninsurgency in Afghanistan and Pakistan. India'sNational Security Adviser, M.K. Narayanan, criti-cized the Obama administration for linking theKashmir dispute to the instability in Pakistan andAfghanistan and said that by doing so, PresidentObama was "barking up the wrong tree".The For-eign Policy too criticized Obama's approach to-



wards South Asia saying that "India can be a partof the solution rather than part of the problem"in South Asia and suggested India to take a moreproactive role in rebuilding Afghanistan irrespec-tive of the attitude of the Obama administration.In a clear indication of growing rift between In-dia and the U.S., the former decided not to accepta U.S. invitation to attend a conference on Af-ghanistan. Bloomberg reported that since 2008Mumbai attacks, the public mood in India has beento pressure Pakistan more aggressively to take ac-tions against the culprits behind the terrorist at-tack and this might reflect on the upcoming gen-eral elections in May 2009. Consequently, theObama administration may find itself at odds withIndia's rigid stance against terrorism.

Robert Blake, assistant secretary of United States'Bureau of South and Central Asian Affairs, dis-missed any concerns over a rift with India regard-ing United States' AfPak policy. Calling India andthe United States "natural allies",Blake said thatthe United States cannot afford to meet the stra-tegic priorities in Pakistan and Afghanistan at "theexpense of India".

Economic relations:India strongly criticizedObama administration's decision to limit H-1Bvisas and India's External Affairs Minister, PranabMukherjee, said that his country would argueagainst U.S. "protectionism" at various interna-tional forums. The Vishwa Hindu Parishad, a closeaide of India's main opposition party the BJP, saidthat if the United States continues with its anti-outsourcing policies, then India will "have to takesteps to hurt American companies in India." India'sCommerce Minister, Kamal Nath, said that Indiamay move against Obama's outsourcing policiesat the World Trade Organization. However, theoutsourcing advisory head of KPMG said that In-dia had no reason to worry since Obama's state-ments were directed against "outsourcing beingcarried out by manufacturing companies" and notoutsourcing of IT-related services.

In May 2009, U.S. President Barack Obama reit-erated his anti-outsourcing views and criticizedthe current U.S. tax policy "that says you should

pay lower taxes if you create a job in Bangalore,India, than if you create one in Buffalo, New York."However, during the U.S.-India Business Councilmeet in June 2009, U.S. Secretary of State HillaryClinton advocated for stronger economic ties be-tween India and the United States. She also re-buked protectionist policies saying that "[UnitedStates] will not use the global financial crisis as anexcuse to fall back on protectionism. We hopeIndia will work with us to create a more open,equitable set of opportunities for trade betweenour nations."

In June 2009, United States provided diplomatichelp in successfully pushing through a US$2.9 bil-lion loan sponsored by the Asian DevelopmentBank, despite considerable opposition from thePeople's Republic of China.

Strategic and military relations:In March 2009, theObama administration cleared the US$2.1 billionsale of eight P-8 Poseidons to India, the largestmilitary deal between the two countries.

India expressed its concerns that Obamaadministration's non-military aid to Pakistan willnot be used for counter-insurgency, but for build-ing up its military against India. However, RobertBlake, assistant secretary of Bureau of South andCentral Asian Affairs, said that the Pakistani Gov-ernment was increasingly focused at fighting theTaliban insurgency and expressed hope that thepeople of India would "support and agree withwhat we are trying to do".

Concerns were raised in India that the Obama ad-ministration was delaying the full implementa-tion of the Indo-U.S. Nuclear Deal. The Obamaadministration has also strongly advocated for thestrengthening of the Comprehensive Test BanTreaty and has pressurized India to sign the agree-ment. India's special envoy, Shyam Saran,"warned" the United States that India would con-tinue to oppose any such treaty as it was "discrimi-natory". In June 2009, U.S. Secretary of StateHillary Clinton said that the Obama administra-tion was "fully committed" to the Indo-U.S. civil



nuclear agreement.

U.S. Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff MikeMullen encouraged stronger military ties betweenIndia and the United States and said that "Indiahas emerged as an increasingly important strate-gic partner [of the U.S.]".

Cold War era: India played a key role in estab-lishing the Non-Aligned Movement in 1961.Though India pursued close relations with bothUS and USSR, it decided not to join any majorpower bloc and refrained from joining militaryalliances. India, however began establishing closemilitary relationship with the Soviet Union.

After the Sino-Indian War and the Indo-PakistaniWar of 1965, India made considerable changes toits foreign policy. It developed a close relation-ship with the Soviet Union and started receivingmassive military equipment and financial assis-tance from the USSR. This had an adverse effecton the Indo-US relationship. The United Statessaw Pakistan as a counter-weight to pro-SovietIndia and started giving the former military assis-tance. This created an atmosphere of suspicionbetween India and US. The US-India relationshipsuffered a considerable setback during the Sovietinvasion of Afghanistan when India openly sup-ported the Soviet Union. Relations between Indiaand the United States came to an all-time lowduring the early 1970s. Despite reports of atroci-ties in East Pakistan, and being told, most notablyin the Blood telegram, of genocidal activities be-ing perpetrated by Pakistani forces, U.S. Secre-tary of State Henry Kissinger and U.S. PresidentRichard Nixon did nothing to discourage then Pa-kistani President Yahya Khan and the PakistanArmy. Kissinger was particularly concerned aboutSoviet expansion into South Asia as a result of atreaty of friendship that had recently been signedbetween India and the Soviet Union, and soughtto demonstrate to the People's Republic of Chinathe value of a tacit alliance with the United States.During the Indo-Pakistani War of 1971, IndianArmed Forces, along with the Mukti Bahini, suc-ceeded in liberating East Pakistan which soon

declared independence. Richard Nixon, then USPresident, feared that an Indian invasion of WestPakistan would mean total Soviet domination ofthe region, and that it would seriously underminethe global position of the United States and theregional position of America's new tacit ally,China. In order to demonstrate to China the bonafides of the United States as an ally, and in directviolation of the US Congress-imposed sanctionson Pakistan, Nixon sent military supplies to Paki-stan, routing them through Jordan and Iran, whilealso encouraging China to increase its arms sup-plies to Pakistan.

When Pakistan's defeat in the eastern sectorseemed certain, Nixon sent the USS Enterprise tothe Bay of Bengal, a move deemed by the Indiansas a nuclear threat. The Enterprise arrived on sta-tion on December 11, 1971. On 6 December and13 December, the Soviet Navy dispatched twogroups of ships, armed with nuclear missiles, fromVladivostok; they trailed U.S. Task Force 74 intothe Indian Ocean from 18 December 1971 until 7January 1972. The Soviets also sent a nuclear sub-marine to ward off the threat posed by USS En-terprise in the Indian Ocean.

Though American efforts had no effect in turningthe tide of the war, the incident involving USSEnterprise is viewed as the trigger for India's sub-sequent nuclear program. American policy to-wards the end of the war was dictated primarilyby a need to restrict the escalation of war on thewestern sector to prevent the 'dismemberment'of West Pakistan. Years after the war, manyAmerican writers criticized the White House poli-cies during the war as being badly flawed and ill-serving the interests of the United States. Indiacarried out nuclear tests a few years later result-ing in sanctions being imposed by United States,further drifting the two countries apart. In recentyears, Kissinger came under fire for commentsmade during the Indo-Pakistan War in which hedescribed Indians as "bastards." Kissinger has sinceexpressed his regret over the comments .

Post Cold War Era:Since the end of the Cold War,



India-US relations have improved dramatically.

This has largely been fostered by the fact that theUS and India are both democracies and have a largeand growing trade relationship. During the GulfWar, the economy of India went through an ex-tremely difficult phase. The Government of Indialiberalized the Indian economy. After the breakup of the Soviet Union, India started looking fornew allies and tried improving diplomatic rela-tions with the members of the NATO particularlythe United States, Canada, France and Germany.In 1992, India established formal diplomatic rela-tions with Israel.

In the mid-1990s, India tried to attract world at-tention towards the Pakistan backed terrorism inKashmir. The Kargil War resulted in a major dip-lomatic victory for India. The United States andEuropean Union recognized the fact that Paki-stani military had illegally infiltrated into Indianterritory and pressurized Pakistan to withdrawfrom Kargil. Several anti-India terrorist groupsbased in Pakistan were labelled as terrorist groupsby the United States and European Union.

Pokhran tests: In 1998, India tested nuclear weap-ons which resulted in several U.S., Japanese andEuropean sanctions on India. India's then defenceminister, George Fernandes, said that India'snuclear program was necessary as it provided adeterrence to some potential nuclear threat. Mostof the sanctions imposed on India were removedby 2001. India has categorically stated that it willnever use weapons first but will defend if attacked.In fact Pakistan is the first country that India in-forms if any nuclear tests are on the agenda.

The economic sanctions imposed by the UnitedStates in response to India's nuclear tests in May1998 appeared, at least initially, to seriously dam-age Indo-American relations. President BillClinton imposed wide-ranging sanctions pursu-ant to the 1994 Nuclear Proliferation PreventionAct. U.S. sanctions on Indian entities involved inthe nuclear industry and opposition to interna-tional financial institution loans for non-humani-

tarian assistance projects in India. The UnitedStates encouraged India to sign the Comprehen-sive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) immediately andwithout condition. The U.S. also called for re-straint in missile and nuclear testing and deploy-ment by both India and Pakistan. The non-prolif-eration dialogue initiated after the 1998 nucleartests has bridged many of the gaps in understand-ing between the countries.

Post-September 11 attack: After the September11, 2001 attacks, Indian intelligence agencies pro-vided the U.S. with significant information on Al-Qaeda and related groups' activities in Pakistanand Afghanistan. India's extensive contribution tothe War on Terrorism has helped India's diplo-matic relations with several countries. Over thepast few years, India has held numerous joint mili-tary exercises with U.S. and European nations thathave resulted in a strengthened U.S.-India andE.U.-India bilateral relationship. India's bilateraltrade with Europe and U.S. has more than doubledin the last five years.

However, India has yet to sign the CTBT, or theNuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, claiming thediscriminatory nature of the treaty that allows thefive declared nuclear countries of the world tokeep their nuclear arsenal and develop it usingcomputer simulation testing. Prior to its nucleartesting, India had pressed for a comprehensivedestruction of nuclear weapons by all countries ofthe world in a time-bound frame. This was notacceptable to the US and other countries. Pres-ently, India has declared its policy of "no-first useof nuclear weapons" and the maintenance of a"credible nuclear deterrence". The US, underPresident George W. Bush has also lifted most ofits sanctions on India and has resumed militaryco-operation. Relations with US have consider-ably improved in the recent years, with the twocountries taking part in joint naval exercises offthe coast of India and joint air exercises both inIndia as well as in the United States.

India has been pushing for reforms in the UN andWTO with mixed results. India's candidature fora permanent seat at the UN Security Council is



currently backed by several countries includingUnited Kingdom, France, Germany, Japan, Bra-zil, African Union nations and recently People'sRepublic of China. In 2005, the United Statessigned a nuclear co-operation agreement withIndia even though the latter is not a part of theNPT. The US argued that India's strong nuclearnon-proliferation record made it an exception andpersuaded other NSG members to sign similar dealswith India.

On March 2, 2006 India and the US signed theIndo-U.S. Nuclear Pact on co-operation in civil-ian nuclear field. This was signed during the fourdays state visit of US president George Bush inIndia. On its part, India would separate its civil-ian and military nuclear programs, and the civil-ian programs would be brought under the safe-guards of International Atomic Energy Agency(IAEA). The United States would sell India thereactor technologies and the nuclear fuel for set-ting up and upgrading its civilian nuclear program.The U.S. Congress needs to ratify this pact sinceU.S. federal law prohibits the trading of nucleartechnologies and materials outside the frameworkof the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG).

Indo-US Strategic Partnership

Indo-US relations got strategic content way backin early sixties. The rise of China worried thepolicymakers in Washington. Chinese annexationof Tibet, its role in Korean war and other suchacts convinced Washington about the expansion-ist designs of the Chinese. As the relations betweenIndia and China deteriorated during late fifties,the Americans found a golden opportunity to takeadvantage of this situation to promote India as acounterweight to China But any unidimensionalalliance is bound to be short-lived and this alli-ance was no exception to this general rule. AsChina ceased to be a headache for the Americanpolicymakers by the late sixties, this unidimen-sional alliance disappeared into thin air.

The end of the Cold War necessitated as well asfacilitated the infusion of strategic content to Indo-US relations–this time multidimensional.In the

post Cold War era, the strategic objectives of In-dia and the US converges on a number of issuesand not just one–as well as the case earlier. Theseissues include, inter alia, containment of terror-ism, promotion of democracy, counter prolifera-tion, freedom of navigation in the Indian Ocean,Asian balance of power, etc.

One of the very interesting feature of Indo-USrelations of recent times is the changes on theterms of engagement between the two countrieson the issue of nuclear proliferation.While ear-lier, in the US strategic thinking on nuclear pro-liferation, India figured mainly because of Ameri-can concern about latter’s nuclear and missileprogrammes, in the twenty-first century,however,American strategic thinking on the issue of nuclearproliferation has undergone radicalreorientation.Now, the Americans are increasinglyrealising the futility of insisting on a rollback ofIndia’s nuclear programme. They, rather, want toleverage India’s growing power and influence infavour of their broader nonproliferation andcounter proliferation objectives.

As promotion of democracy around the world isone of the most important foreign policy objec-tive of the USA, India- as the largest democracyof the world-can hardly be ignored by the US.Thisis the reason, cooperation in promotion of democ-racy in the world has become one of the mostimportant facets of Indo-US relations in recenttimes.India is a founding member of the ‘Com-munity of Democracies’ – a prominent endeavourof the US on promotion of democracy.

However,India rejected the suggestion of the USabout setting up a Centre for Asian Democracy.Agriculture is another important area of coopera-tion between India and the USA in presenttimes.Considering the fact that both the nationsat present have a vast pool of human resourcesadept at knowledge economy, it is only naturalthat the most optimal course such partnership canaim at is harnessing these human resources byconcentrating on development and disseminationof agricultural knowledge through research, edu-



cation and training etc.An initiative to forge sucha partnership is the 'India-US Knowledge Initia-tive on Agriculture' (KIA)

European Union

India was one of the first countries to develop re-lations with the Union, signing bilateral agree-ments in 1973, when the United Kingdom joined.The most recent cooperation agreement wassigned in 1994 and an action plan was signed in2005. As of April 2007 the Commission is pursu-ing a free trade agreement with India.

The Union is India's largest trading partner, ac-counting for 20% of Indian trade. However, Indiaaccounts for only 1.8% of the EU's trade and at-tracts only 0.3% of European Foreign Direct In-vestment, although still provides India's largestsource. During 2005 EU-India trade grew by20.3%.

There was controversy in 2006 when the IndianMittal Steel Company sought to take-over the Lux-embourg based steel company, Arcelor. The ap-proach met with opposition from France and Lux-embourg but was passed by the Commission whostated that were judging it on competition groundsonly.

The European Union (EU) and India agreed onSeptember 29,2008 at the EU-India summit inMarseille, France's largest commercial port, toexpand their cooperation in the fields of nuclearenergy and environmental protection and deepentheir strategic partnership. French PresidentNicolas Sarkozy, the EU's rotating president, saidat a joint press conference at the summit that "EUwelcomes India, as a large country, to engage indeveloping nuclear energy, adding that this cleanenergy will be helpful for the world to deal withthe global climate change." Sarkozy also said theEU and Indian Prime Minister Manmohan pledgedto accelerate talks on a free trade deal and expectedto finish the deal by 2009. The Indian prime min-ister was also cautiously optimistic about coop-eration on nuclear energy. "Tomorrow we have a

bilateral summit with France. This matter willcome up and I hope some good results will emergeout of that meeting," Singh said when asked aboutthe issue. Singh said that he was "very satisfied"with the results of the summit. He added that EUand India have "common values" and the twoeconomies are complementary to each other. Eu-ropean Commission President Jose ManuelBarroso, also speaking at Monday's press confer-ence, expounded the joint action plan on adjust-ments of EU's strategic partnership with India,saying the two sides will strengthen cooperationon world peace and safety, sustainable develop-ment, cooperation in science and technology andcultural exchanges.

Reviewing the two sides' efforts in developing thebilateral strategic partnership, the joint action planreckoned that in politics, dialogue and coopera-tion have enhanced through regular summits andexchanges of visits and that in economy, mutualinvestments have increased dramatically in recentyears, dialogue in macro economic policies and fi-nancial services has established and cooperationin energy, science and technology and environ-ment has been launched. Under the joint actionplan, EU and Indian would enhance consultationand dialogue on human rights within the UNframework, strengthen cooperation in worldpeacekeeping mission, fight against terror and non-proliferation of arms, promote cooperation andexchange in developing civil nuclear energy andstrike a free trade deal as soon as possible. France,which relies heavily on nuclear power and is amajor exporter of nuclear technology, is expectedto sign a deal that would allow it to provide nuclearfuel to India.

Trade between India and the 27-nation EU hasmore than doubled from 25.6 billion euros ($36.7billion) in 2000 to 55.6 billion euros last year, withfurther expansion to be seen. "We have agreed toachieve an annual bilateral trade turnover of 100billion euros within the next five years," Singh toldreporters. A joint statement issued at the end ofthe summit said the EU and India would work toreach an agreement on climate change by the end



of 2009.

India–United Kingdom relations

Indian–British relations are foreign relations be-tween the United Kingdom and India. India has ahigh commission in London and two consulates-general in Birmingham and Edinburgh. TheUnited Kingdom has a high commission in NewDelhi and three deputy high commissions inMumbai, Chennai and Kolkata. Both countries arefull members of the Commonwealth of Nations.Since 1947, relations between the two countrieshave been mostly friendly and there are manyareas in which both India and the UK seek stron-ger ties for mutual benefit. There are also strongcultural and social ties between the two nations.In India, English is one of the official languages,and Cricket is among the most popular sports. Inthe UK Indian Cuisine is hugely popular. Britainimports most of its tea from India, and there are anumber of words of Indian origin in the Englishlanguage. The UK has an ethnic Indian popula-tion of over 1 million.

Republic of India (since 1950): India remainedin the Commonwealth of Nations after become aRepublic, but diversified its foreign relations be-yond the former British Empire. In particular,India became a major force within the Non-Aligned Movement, which initially sought toavoid taking sides during the Cold War. This con-trasted with Britain's position as a founding mem-ber of NATO, and key ally of the United States.However, relations between the two countrieshave generally been cordial. Due mainly to postindependence immigration, there are now over amillion people of Indian descent in the UnitedKingdom.

Economy: India is the second largest foreign in-vestor in the UK after the USA, and the UK is alsoa significant investor in India. There are many bi-lateral trade agreements between the two nationsdesigned to strengthen ties. For example, in 2005,the Joint Economic and Trade Committee (JETCO)was inaugurated in New Delhi aimed at boosting

two-way bilateral investments.

Defense: Cooperation is undertaken under the De-fence Consultative Group (DCG) formed in 1995.India and the UK cooperate in a number of ways.Joint Indo-UK exercises (a ten-day exercise Em-erald Mercury was held in India in March 2005,the first of its kind between the two countries,which marked the biggest land deployment ofBritish military personnel in India), research andtechnology and defence equipment collaboration.Britain supports India’s case for permanent mem-bership of the United Nations Security Council aswell as bilateral cooperation in civilian nucleartechnology. The UK and India also cooperate onsecurity and terrorism issues.

Political: Politically, relations between India andthe UK occur mostly through the multilateralorganisations of which both are members, such asthe Commonwealth of Nations, the World TradeOrganisation and the Asian Development Bank.Britain was the first G8 nation to suggest that In-dia, along with China, Brazil, Mexico and SouthAfrica, be allowed to attend summits with the G8.Britain recently donated £825 million in aid toIndia for the development of India's HealthcareSystem and Educational System.

The President of India Sarvepalli Radhakrishnanpaid a state visit to the United Kingdom in June1963. The President of India RamaswamyVenkataraman paid a state visit to the UnitedKingdom in October 1990. HM Queen ElizabethII of the United Kingdom paid state visits to Indiain November 1963, and in April 1990.

India–Russia relations

India-Russian relations refers to the bilateral re-lations between the Republic of India and the Rus-sian Federation. During the Cold War, India andthe Soviet Union enjoyed a strong strategic, mili-tary, economic and diplomatic relationship. Afterthe collapse of the USSR, India improved its rela-tions with the West but it continued its close re-lations with Russia. India is the second largest



market for Russian arms industry. In 2004, morethan 70% on Indian Military's hardware camefrom Russia, making Russia the chief supplier ofarms. India has an embassy in Moscow and 2 Con-sulates-General (in Saint Petersburg andVladivostok). Russia has an embassy in New Delhiand 3 Consulates-General (in Chennai, Kolkata,Mumbai). Since 2000 and the visit of VladimirPutin in India there have been an Indo-RussianStrategic Partnership.

Soviet Union and India:A cordial relationship withIndia that began in the 1950s represented the mostsuccessful of the Soviet attempts to foster closerrelations with Third World countries. The rela-tionship began with a visit by Indian prime min-ister Jawaharlal Nehru to the Soviet Union in June1955 and Khrushchev's return trip to India in thefall of 1955. While in India, Khrushchev an-nounced that the Soviet Union supported Indiansovereignty over the disputed territory of theKashmir region and over Portuguese coastal en-claves.

The Soviet relationship with India rankled theChinese and contributed to Sino-Soviet enmityduring the Khrushchev period. The Soviet Uniondeclared its neutrality during the 1959 border dis-pute and the Indo-China war of 1962, althoughthe Chinese strongly objected. The Soviet Uniongave India substantial economic and military as-sistance during the Khrushchev period, and by1960 India had received more Soviet assistancethan China had. This disparity became anotherpoint of contention in Sino-Soviet relations. In1962 the Soviet Union agreed to transfer technol-ogy to coproduce the MiG-21 jet fighter in India,which the Soviet Union had earlier denied toChina.

In 1965 the Soviet Union served successfully aspeace broker between India and Pakistan after anIndian-Pakistani border war. The Soviet chairmanof the Council of Ministers, Aleksei N. Kosygin,met with representatives of India and Pakistan andhelped them negotiate an end to the military con-flict over Kashmir.In 1971 the former East Pakistan region initiated

an effort to secede from its political union withWest Pakistan. India supported the secession and,as a guarantee against possible Chinese entranceinto the conflict on the side of West Pakistan,signed a treaty of friendship and cooperation withthe Soviet Union in August 1971. In December,India entered the conflict and ensured the vic-tory of the secessionists and the establishment ofthe new state of Bangladesh.

Relations between the Soviet Union and India didnot suffer much during the rightist Janata Party'scoalition government in the late 1970s, althoughIndia did move to establish better economic andmilitary relations with Western countries. Tocounter these efforts by India to diversify its rela-tions, the Soviet Union proffered additional weap-onry and economic assistance.

During the 1980s, despite the 1984 assassinationby Sikh extremists of Prime Minister IndiraGandhi, the mainstay of cordial Indian-Soviet re-lations, India maintained a close relationship withthe Soviet Union. Indicating the high priority ofrelations with the Soviet Union in Indian foreignpolicy, the new Indian prime minister, RajivGandhi, visited the Soviet Union on his first statevisit abroad in May 1985 and signed two long-term economic agreements with the Soviet Union.In turn, Gorbachev's first visit to a Third Worldstate was his meeting with Gandhi in New Delhiin late 1986. Gorbachev unsuccessfully urgedGandhi to help the Soviet Union set up an Asiancollective security system. Gorbachev's advocacyof this proposal, which had also been made byBrezhnev, was an indication of continuing Sovietinterest in using close relations with India as ameans of containing China. With the improve-ment of Sino-Soviet relations in the late 1980s,containing China had less of a priority, but closerelations with India remained important as anexample of Gorbachev's new Third World policy.Military relations:Defence relations between In-dia and the Russian Federation have a historicalperspective. Russia has been an important supplierof defence goods for several decades. Today, thecooperation is not limited to a buyer-seller rela-



tionship but includes joint research and develop-ment, training, service to service contacts, includ-ing joint exercises. The last joint naval exercisestook place in April 2007 in the Sea of Japan andjoint airborne exercises were held in September2007 in Russia.

There is an Inter-Governmental commission onmilitary-technical cooperation co-chaired by thetwo Defence Ministers. The Seventh session of thisInter-Governmental Commission was held in Oc-tober 2007 in Moscow. During the visit, an Agree-ment on joint development and production of pro-spective multi role fighters was signed betweenthe two countries.

India and Russia have several major joint mili-tary programs such as those mentioned below:

» BrahMos cruise missile program

» INS Vikramaditya aircraft carrier program

» 5th generation fighter jet program

» Sukhoi Su-30MKI program (230+ to be built by

» Hindustan Aeronautics)

» Ilyushin/HAL Tactical Transport Aircraft

Additionally, India has purchased/leased severalmilitary hardware from Russia:

» T-90S Bhishma program. (1000+ to be built

in India)

» Akula-II nuclear submarine (2 to be leased)

» Tu-22M3 bombers (4 ordered)

» US$900 million upgrade of MiG-29

» Mil Mi-17 (80 ordered)

Ilyushin Il-76 Candid (6 ordered to fit Israeli

Phalcon radar)

Russia's MiG-35 is competing in the Indian MRCACompetition and is considered to be the front-run-ner for the winning bid, given India's already,largely Russian-built air force. The Farkhor AirBase in Tajikistan is currently jointly operated byIndia and Russia.Economic relations:Bilateral trade turnover is

modest and stood at US $ 3 bn in 2006-07, out ofwhich Indian Exports to Russia were valued at US$ 908 mn. Main Indian exports to Russia are phar-maceuticals; tea, coffee & spices; apparel & cloth-ing; edible preparations; and engineering goods.Main Indian imports from Russia are iron and steel;fertilizers; non-ferrous metals; paper products;coal, coke & briquettes; cereals; and rubber. Indo-Russian trade is expected to reach US$10 billionby 2010.

The India-Russia Inter-Governmental Commis-sion on Trade, Economic, Scientific, Technologi-cal and Cultural Cooperation (IRIGC) has had 13sessions so far and is co-chaired by the ExternalAffairs Minister from the Indian side and a DeputyPrime Minister from the Russian side. There aresix Joint Working Groups [WG] under the IRIGC,namely, WG on Trade and Economy [trade andfinancial matters], WG on Energy [oil and gas,thermal and hydel power, non-conventional en-ergy], WG on Metallurgy and Mining [steel, non-ferrous metal, coal], WG on Science & Technol-ogy; WG on Communication and InformationTechnology; and WG on Culture and Tourism. The13th of the IRIGC was held in Moscow on 12October 2007.

The two countries have set-up India-Russia Fo-rum on Trade and Investment at the level of thetwo Commerce Ministers to promote trade, in-vestment and economic cooperation. The firstForum was held in New Delhi on 12-13 February2007 which was attended by the Minister of Com-merce and Industry and the Russian Minister ofEconomic Development and Trade, apart from alarge number of business representatives from bothsides. The Minister of Commerce & Industry, ShriKamal Nath participated in the 11th Saint Peters-burg International Economic Forum on 9-10 June2007.

In February 2006, India and Russia also set-up aJoint Study Group to examine ways to increasetrade to US $ 10 bn by 2010 and to study feasibil-ity of a Comprehensive Economic CooperationAgreement (CECA). The Group finalized its re-port after its fourth meeting in Moscow in July



2007. It has been agreed that a Joint Task Forcewould monitor the implementation of the recom-mendation made in the Joint Stdy Group Report,including considering CECA.

Cooperation in the Energy sector: Energy sectoris an important area in Indo-Russian bilateral re-lations. In 2001, ONGC-Videsh Limited acquired20% stake in the Sakhalin-I oil and gas project inthe Russian Federation, and has invested aboutUS $ 1.7 billion in the project. The Russian com-pany Gazprom and Gas Authority of India Ltd.have collaborated in joint development of a blockin the Bay of Bengal. Kudankulam Nuclear PowerProject with two units of 1000 MW each is a goodexample of Indo-Russian nuclear energy coopera-tion. Both sides have expressed interest in expand-ing cooperation in the energy sector.

In December 2008, Russia and India signed anagreement to build civilian nuclear reactors inIndia during a visit by the Russian president toNew Delhi.

Space Cooperation:Space is another key sector ofcooperation between the two countries. DuringPresident Vladimir Putin’s visit to India in De-cember 2004, two space-related bilateral agree-ments were signed viz. Inter-Governmental um-brella Agreement on cooperation in the outerspace for peaceful purposes and the Inter SpaceAgency Agreement on cooperation in the Russiansatellite navigation system “GLONASS”. Subse-quently a number of follow-up agreements onGLONASS have been signed. In November 2007,the two countries have signed an agreement onjoint lunar exploration. These space cooperationprogrammes are under implementation.

Science and Technology:The ongoing cooperationin the field of science & technology, under theIntegrated Long-Term Programme of cooperation(ILTP) is the largest cooperation programme inthis sphere for both India and Russia. ILTP is co-ordinated by the Department of Science and Tech-nology from the Indian side and by the RussianAcademy of Sciences and Russian Ministry of In-

dustry & Science and Technology from the Rus-sian side. Development of SARAS Duet aircraft,semiconductor products, super computers, poly-vaccines, laser science and technology, seismol-ogy, high-purity materials, software & IT andAyurveda have been some of the priority areas ofco-operation under the ILTP. Under thisprogramme, eight joint Indo- Russian centers havebeen established to focus on joint research and de-velopment work. Two other Joint Centres on Non-ferrous Metals and Accelerators and Lasers are be-ing set up in India. A Joint Technology Centrebased in Moscow to bring cutting edge technolo-gies to the market is also under processing. AnILTP Joint Council met in Moscow on 11-12 Oc-tober 2007 to review cooperation and give it fur-ther direction. In August 2007, an MoU was signedbetween Department of Science and Technologyand Russian Foundation of Basic Research, Mos-cow to pursue scientific cooperation.

North-South Transport corridor: The “North-South” Transport Corridor Agreement [INSTC] hasbeen ratified by all the three original signatorystates, viz. India, Iran and Russia, and has comeinto force since 16 May, 2002. This route is ex-pected to reduce the cost of movement of goodsbetween India and Russia and beyond. The 3rdCoordination Council Meeting of the INSTC washeld in October 2005 in New Delhi and the 4thmeeting was held in Aktau, Kazakhstan in Octo-ber 2007 to discuss further streamlining the op-eration of the corridor.

Cooperation in the sphere of Culture: India-Rus-sia relations in the field of culture are historical.Five Chairs relating to Indology have been estab-lished in Moscow, Saint Petersburg, Kazan andVladivostok. Days of Russian Culture were heldin India in November 2003, in Delhi, Kolkata andMumbai. “Days of Indian Culture” in Russia wereorganized from September- October 2005 in Rus-sia. 130th birth anniversary of Nikolai Roerich and100th birth anniversary of Svyatoslav Roerichwere celebrated in India in October 2004. ChiefMinister of National Capital Territory of Delhi leda delegation for participating in the event “Days



of Delhi in Moscow” from 28 May-1 June 2006.The “Year of Russia in India” is being held in 2008.It will be followed by the “Year of India in Rus-sia” in 2009. There is a Hindi Department, in theUniversity of Moscow.

Terrorism:On international terrorism, India andRussia agree that there is no justification for ter-rorism, and this must be fought against, withoutcompromise and wherever it exists. Russia hassupported the Indian draft at the UN on Compre-hensive Convention on International Terrorism(CCIT). The two sides signed a MoU on coopera-tion in combating terrorism in December 2002. AJoint Working Group on Combating InternationalTerrorism meets from time to time and its fourthmeeting was held in Delhi on 24 October 2006.

India–Israel relations

Despite formation of the State of Israel in 1948,India's strong historic ties with the Arab worldprevented it establishing diplomatic ties with Is-rael. However, the collapse of the Soviet Union(with whom India maintained strong relations)and increasing concerns over the rise of Islamicextremism in the Indian subcontinent convincedIndia to change its position towards Israel. OnJanuary 29, 1992, full diplomatic ties between thetwo were established and since then the bilateralrelations have grown exceedingly.

During the tenure of the Hindu nationalistBhartiya Janata Party (BJP), relations betweenIndia and Israel blossomed. The relations havecontinued to grow ever since the Indian NationalCongress (INC) came to power in 2004. By 2008,bilateral trade between India and Israel exceededUS$4 billion and Israel was India's second-largestmilitary supplier after Russia. It was expected thatIsrael would overtake Russia as the largest armssupplier to India, which it did in 2009.

As of 2008, India has bought more than US$5 bil-lion worth of Israeli equipment since 2002. In ad-dition, Israel is training Indian military units anddiscussing an arrangement to give Indian comman-

dos instruction in counter-terrorist tactics andurban warfare. There is also growing space coop-eration between the two. In February 2008, theIndian Space Research Organization (ISRO)launched an Israeli spy satellite to monitor theactivities of Iran. Given India's strong relationswith both the Arab world and Israel, it has beenindicated that India can play a constructive rolein the Israeli–Palestinian peace process.

India gained independence from the British Em-pire in 1947, a year before the State of Israel wasfounded. Officially, India was opposed to the cre-ation of Israel for a philosophical reason, it didnot like the concept of creation of nations basedon religion. This was to keep India and Pakistanin one country. Due to its opposition for creationof Pakistan based on Islam, it opposed the cre-ation of Israel as a nation for Jews. Before Israelwas created, a number of countries sent their rep-resentatives and the representative from India wasa Muslim. Though Gandhi had a good relation-ship with Jews, he opposed the creation of Israelas he was against the creation of countries basedon religion]. India did not have any official rela-tions with Israel until 1991 due to its problem withPalestine. Despite this, its military had an excel-lent relationship with Israel. People like MosheDayan have had interaction with India despite thelack of diplomatic relationship between the twocountries. Israel has provided India with crucialinformation during multiple wars that India faced.India's first Prime Minister, Jawahar Lal Nehrusupported the creation of Israel.

Muslims in India were largely pro-Arab and theCongress-led Indian government did not want topublicly take a pro-Israel stance. India recognizedIsrael as a nation in 1950. Another factor whichaffected India-Israel diplomatic relationship wasthe Kashmir dispute. During the First KashmirWar, India referred the Kashmir issue to theUnited Nations Security Council. Had India es-tablished diplomatic relations with Israel, it wasthought in Indian power circles, that the Arabnations would favor Pakistan's claim over India'sto Kashmir. In private though, Indian politicalleaders have expressed their support for Israel. In



a statement in 1954, Nehru said he would not "bea party to a resolution which stated that the cre-ation of Israel was a violation of international law".He also wrote a letter to Frances Gunther express-ing his support for the general Jewish behavior inPalestine. Various Hindu organizations, led by theSangh Parivar, openly supported the Jewish causeand the creation of Israel. The opposition to theestablishment of diplomatic relations with Israelduring the 1960s and 1970s arose from the Con-gress Party's desire to appease the Muslims in In-dia.

In 1986, the members of the Organisation of theIslamic Conference (OIC) issued a joint declara-tion supporting Pakistan's claim over Kashmir.Relations between India and the OIC became tensein 2001 when the latter criticised India for takinginsufficient action to stop the alleged human rightsviolations against Muslims in the disputed Indianoccupied territory of Jammu and Kashmir. Indiadismissed these allegations as baseless and Paki-stani propaganda. India responded to the anti-In-dia position taken by the OIC by re-evaluating itsMiddle East policy.

Intelligence and military: India and Israel haveincreased cooperation in military and intelligenceventures since the establishment of diplomaticrelations. While India and Israel were officially"rivals" during the Cold War, the fall of the SovietUnion and the rise of Islamic terrorism in bothcountries have generated a solid strategic alliance.India recently launched a military satellite for Is-rael through its Indian Space Research Organiza-tion.

During the Kargil War, Israel provided India withmilitary hardware, including laser-guided bombsand unmanned aerial vehicles to help it to flushout the Pakistani infiltrators in Kargil. This rela-tionship soon developed into a major defense part-nership between India and Israel.

In 1997, Israel's President Ezer Weizman becamethe first head of the Jewish state to visit India. Hemet with Indian President Shankar Dayal Sharma,Vice President K.R. Narayanan and Prime Minis-

ter H.D. Deve Gowda. Weizman negotiated thefirst weapons deal between the two nations, in-volving the purchase of Barak-1 vertically-launched surface-to-air (SAM) missiles from Is-rael. The Barak-1 has the ability to intercept anti-ship cruise missiles such as the Harpoon. The pur-chase of the Barak-1 missiles from Israel by Indiawas a tactical necessity since Pakistan had pur-chased P3-C II Orion maritime strike aircraft and27 Harpoon sea-skimming anti-ship missiles fromthe United States. In what would be end of anera, Israel became India's biggest military supplierin 2009, supplying equipment worth more than 1Billion Dollars each year. Israel replaced Russia inthe process as biggest supplier, which tradition-ally had been India's top supplier.

Strategic Naval Cooperation: In naval terms Israelsees great strategic value in an alliance with theIndian Navy, given India's dominance of SouthAsian waters. It would be advantageous to the Is-raeli Navy to establish a logistical infrastructurein the Indian Ocean with the cooperation of theIndian Navy, since the Mediterranean has a domi-nant Arab and European presence that is hostileto the Israeli navy in varying degrees. In 2000,Israeli submarines reportedly conducted testlaunches of cruise missiles capable of carryingnuclear warheads in the waters of the IndianOcean, off the Sri Lanka coast.

Air Force contracts: In 1996 India purchased 32Searcher" Unmanned Aerial Vehicles, ElectronicSupport Measure sensors and an Air Combat Ma-noeuvering Instrumentation simulator systemfrom Israel. Since then Israel Aircraft Industries(IAI) has serviced several large contracts with theIndian Air Force including the upgrading of theIAF's Russian-made MiG-21 ground attack aircraftand there have been further sales of unmannedaerial vehicles as well as laser-guided bombs.

Intelligence: A Rediff story in 2003 revealed thatthe Indian external intelligence agency R&AWhad clandestine links with the Mossad, Israel'sexternal intelligence agency. When R&AW wasfounded in 1968 by Rameshwar Nath Kao, he wasadvised by the then Indian Prime Minister Indira



Gandhi to cultivate links with Mossad. This wassuggested as a countermeasure to military linksbetween that of a hostile Pakistan and China, aswell as with North Korea. Israel was also con-cerned that Pakistani army officers were trainingLibyans and Iranians in handling Chinese andNorth Korean military equipment. Though Indiaplanned to bomb Kahuta, as in Operation Opera,where Israel destroyed an Iraqi nuclear reactor,the plan was later dropped.

The Pakistanis eventually started to suspect in-telligence relations between India and Israel re-sulting in a threat to Pakistani security. Whenyoung Israeli tourists began visiting the Kashmirvalley in the early nineties, Pakistan suspectedthey were disguised Israeli army officers there tohelp Indian security forces with counter-terror-ism operations. Pakistani intelligence inspired aseries of terrorist attacks on the unsuspecting Is-raeli tourists with one slain and another kid-napped. Intense pressure from the Kashmiri Mus-lim diaspora in the United States led to their re-lease.

Phalcon AEW&C radar systems: In March 2004,Israel and India signed a US$1.1 billion deal ac-cording to which IAI would deliver the IndianAir Force three Phalcon AEW&C radar systems.India signed a separate deal with the IlyushinCorporation of Russia for the of supply three Il-76 A-50 heavy air-lifters, which were to be usedas platforms for these radar systems, for an addi-tional US $500 million.

On 12 January 2009, the Indian Air Force receivedits first aircraft, which was flown to the IAF Agrabase where it will be stationed. First AWACS air-craft will be inducted to No 50 sq based in Agra inend May 2009. According to the revised deliveryschedule, second and third ones now expected inNovember/December 2009 and May/June 2010.Order for another 3 in process, reports suggest thatdeal was inked in Nov 08. IAF is keen on buildingup its Phalcon AWACS fleet to a strength to six.AWACS will enable the IAF to carry out tacticalsurveillance over a radius of 400 kilometers andcollect surface target information deep inside Pa-

kistan even as the aircraft operates within Indianairspace.

Barak missile deal: Israel Aerospace Industries Ltdhas signed a $2.5 billion deal with India to de-velop an anti-aircraft system and missiles for thecountry, in the biggest defense contract in thehistory of Israel at the time. IAI CEO YitzhakNissan recently visited India to finalize the agree-ment with heads of the defense establishment andthe country's president. The Indian governmenthas already approved the project, in the frame-work of which the IAI will develop for the In-dian Navy and Air Force the Barak-8 missile thatis capable of protecting sea vessels and ground fa-cilities from aircraft and cruise missiles. The mis-sile has a range of over 70 kilometres. The missilewill replace the current obsolete Russian systemused by India.

On November 10 2008, Indian military officialsare expected to visit Israel to discuss joint weap-ons development projects, additional sales of Is-raeli equipment to the Indian military, andcounter-terrorism strategies. The new round oftalks are seen as a significant expansion in the In-dian-Israeli strategic partnership. In 2008, Israelsurpassed Russia as the largest arms supplier toIndia

MR-SAM deal: The deal, signed in February, in-volves development and production of a land-based version of the Barak 8 missile systems. Thesea-based version is already in advanced develop-ment stages.

The missile will be capable of intercepting enemyaircraft and missiles within a 70-kilometer range.DRDO-IAI joint venture will develop and equipIndian Air Force (IAF) with 18 combat manage-ment systems with 435 MRSAMs. Missiles willreplace obsolete PECHORA missile systems. InDecember 2008, DRDO chief M Natarajan in-formed Cabinet Committee on Security (CCS) thatthe nation’s air defence was under threat: IAF hadreported that 17 out of 60 firing units ofPECHORA had already been phased out.Science and technology:India is building closer ties



with Israel in the areas of nanotechnology, infor-mation technology, alternative fuels, agriculture,animal husbandry and space research.

Israel's Minister for Science and Technology,Eliezer Moodi Sandberg, said in 2003 that Israelwas keen on strengthening science and technol-ogy ties with India considering that the latter hada rich base of scientists and technologists and thetwo countries could benefit by synergising theiractivities.

Various activities under Indo-Israel Cooperationin Science & Technology continued during the1999 – 2000 year, including 22 joint researchprojects. Work on six projects was completed by2002. Twelve scientists from both countries vis-ited the laboratories of their collaborators and twoexploratory visits from India were also supportedwith three young Indian scientists deputed to Is-rael on short term exchange visits.

The Indo-Israel Joint Symposium on Human Ge-nome was held in Jerusalem in 1998 with 6 In-dian scientists working in the area. Subsequently,as a follow up to the symposium, a call for jointresearch proposals on Human Genome was issuedin July 1999 for which 11 proposals were received.Out of these, 6 research projects have been rec-ommended for implementation. Another Indo-Israel status seminar on human Genome Researchwas organized in India on December 2000.

In 2003, the two countries proposed to double theinvestment under the ongoing science and tech-nology collaboration to $1 million with $0.5 mil-lion from each country in the next biennial pe-riod starting October 2004.

The Indo-Israel Joint Committee of scientists wasconstituted with the DST (Department of Scienceand Technology)and India as Co-chairmen withrepresentatives from various research organiza-tions in India and the Ministry of InformationTechnology as members. The 4th Meeting of thejoint committee was held in the first week of No-vember 1999 in Jerusalem, attended by a 3 mem-ber Indian delegation. In 2004, the Ministry of

Science and Technology in India signed an MoUwith Israel for jointly funding industrial R&Dprojects.

In an agreement signed on May 30, 2005, Indiaand Israel pledged to set up a fund to encourageinvestment and joint industrial ventures. Accord-ing to the Press Trust of India, there are five pri-ority areas for enhanced collaboration:nanotechnology, biotechnology, water manage-ment, alternative energy, and space and aeronau-tics. India and Israel will each start by contribut-ing US$1 million to provide risk-free grants toentrepreneurs in the two countries.

In 2008, Israel and India finalised a three-year planto introduce crops such as olives, dates and grapesto be introduced and cultivated in the states ofRajasthan and Maharashtra, to create an agricul-tural market that meets Western demand for prod-ucts like olive oil. In addition to the hope thatthis plan would boost yield and stave off famine,officials presented the project as symbolic.

Spy satellites:Israel's Minister for Science andTechnology has expressed interest in collaborat-ing with the Indian Space Research Organization(ISRO) towards utilizing satellites for better man-agement of land and other resources. Israel hasalso expressed interest in participating in ISRO'sChandrayaan mission of sending an unmannedcraft to the moon. A Memorandum of Understand-ing, signed by ISRO and Israel's space agency, pro-vides for cooperation in multiple areas of spacescience and technology

TecSAR: In a significant move, Israel chose Indiato launch its satellites. The latest Israeli spy satel-lite, TecSAR, was launched by India on 22 Janu-ary, 2008. The Indian PSLV launch-vehicle waschosen instead of its own home grown Shavitrocket. This was due to the cost of the PSLV be-ing no more than $15 million (as it is a more ma-tured system), compared to the Shavit which isclose to $20 million. Besides the cost and matu-rity factors, the Shavit had other several criticaldrawbacks. The most important was the constrainton possible satellite orbits. Any launch from Is-



raeli territory must be directed westwards, to-wards the sea, in order to prevent the launcher'sfirst stages (or the satellite itself, in case of a mal-function) from falling on populated areas or onforeign (hostile) territory. A westward launch, thatis, against the direction of the Earth's rotation,seriously restricts the weight of the satellite thatthe launch vehicle can carry. In the past, Israelalso experienced several failures - the most recentexample being the attempted Ofeq-6 launch inMarch 2004. In such cases, security links and theoperational experience of a more capable partnercan allow alternative, more reliable launchingwhen needed.

RISAT-2: In March 2009, India acquired accessto Israeli advanced spy satellite, RISAT-2. The sat-ellite has the capability to take high resolutionimages at night and can carry out reconnaissanceoperations even through a dense cloud cover. MostIndian satellites currently in operation lack thesecapabilities. The decision to purchase the satellitewas taken in the wake of the 2008 Mumbai at-tacks. The 300 kilogram RISAT-2 was successfullylaunched by India's PSLV rocket in April 2009.A spokesman of the Indian Space Research Orga-nization said that RISAT-2 is an Indian satellitebuilt with assistance from Israel. India is also de-veloping its own, indigenous version of RISAT-2,capable of taking images through clouds and atnight. It will be launched in late 2009.

Tourism: India is a big destination for Israeli tour-ists. They usually visit the states of Goa, andHimachal Pradesh. Similarly, Israel is a destina-tion for religious tourism for the 15,000 IndianJews.

Ariel Sharon's visit to India: In 2003 Ariel Sharonwas the first Israeli Prime Minister to visit India.He was welcomed by the center-right wingBharatiya Janata Party led National DemocraticAlliance coalition government of India. Severalnewspapers expressed positive views on his visit,and Indian Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayeevoiced confidence that Sharon's visit would pavethe way for further consolidating bilateral ties andsaid there was no dilution of the country's stand

on the Palestinian issue.

Muslim response: Sharon's visit was condemnedby some, especially in leftist and Muslim circles.Hundreds of supporters of India's various pro-Is-lamic communist parties rallied in New Delhi,denouncing the visit. Muslims accused Sharon ofbeing a "terrorist and a war criminal". Nearly 100Muslims were arrested.

Students of the Aligarh Muslim University joinedthe protests of Sharon's visit, denounced him as a"terrorist," and demanded that India sever all tieswith Israel and increase ties with Palestine.

Newspapers like The Times of India and Outlookexpressed "concern" over "India's changing priori-ties", accusing India of "turning away" from thecause of supporting the Palestinians and other "op-pressed peoples".Urdu-language newspapers suchas Slasat launched a campaign against Sharon, ac-cusing Israel of "aggressive and fascistic inclina-tions".

Positive response: Sharon was welcomed by manyin India, including some politicians. The Hindi-language daily Navbharat Times condemned pro-tests made against him and wrote that none ofSharon's controversies can justify demonstrationsplanned in protest of his visit by some Indian op-position parties "because he is coming as the primeminister of Israel, which is an important friend ofIndia". Articles in The Indian Express agreed withthis view, noting that the issue of India's relationswith Israel "instantly polarises hard-nosed prag-matists from dewy-eyed idealists", which is "re-grettable, for cementing geo-political and tradelinks with Israel need in no way weaken NewDelhi's traditional insistence that Palestinians begranted control of their territories".

The various Jewish communities in India expressedsatisfaction at Sharon's visit, though some regret-ted that Sharon could not visit them in person,and some Indian Jews opined that it would havebeen better if a previous head of state from Israelhad visited India. Sharon's visit sparked an interMost of Sharon's activities in India went unhin-



dered and were largely productive towards ce-menting the India-Israel alliance. The central topicof the dialogues between the Indians and the Is-raeli delegation was the mutual problem of Islamicfundamentalism and Islamic terrorism in bothcountries, and how India and Israel can join forcesto defeat this enemy. Israeli deputy minister JosefLapid said that both India and Israel face "threatsfrom fanatic Muslims and terrorism". While de-livering a lecture on 'The Global War AgainstTerror -- Israel and India' organised by the IndianCouncil of World Affairs (ICWA) in Delhi, hestressed that Israel has developed an excellentmilitary and defense system to combat terrorismand the technology would be very beneficial toIndia. Since India had been experiencing terror-ism more than western Countries, its leaders un-derstood him better than others.

Sharon expressed satisfaction over the outcomeof the talks with Indian leaders, saying that thelandmark visit would result in upgradation of bi-lateral relations to new heights. Indian PrimeMinister Atal Bihari Vajpayee also expressed sat-isfaction, saying that the visit would increase tiesbetween India and Israel. Sharon also invitedVajpayee to visit Israel. Sharon himself spoke posi-tively of the importance of his hosts. Sharon him-self said that Israelis "regard India to be one of themost important countries in the world,", andVajpayee was sure that Sharon's visit would bringthe two states closer together. Sharon said thatterrorism was a menace that required an interna-tional response.

2007 Jewish-Hindu leadership summit:Theworld's first Jewish-Hindu interfaith leadershipsummit,spearheaded by Hindu organizations in In-dia and Jewish organizations in Israel, as well asthe American Jewish Committee, was held in NewDelhi on February 2007.

Visits of Indian politicians to Israel: In 2000Jaswant Singh became the first Indian foreignminister to visit Israel. Following the visit, the twocountries set up a joint anti-terror commission.The foreign ministers of the two countries sayintensified cooperation will range from areas such

as counter terrorism to information technology.In early 2006 Indian government ministers SharadPawar, Kapil Sibal and Kamal Nath visited Israel.Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi has alsovisited Israel.

Issue of Kashmir:Owing to Israel's turbulentlyvolatile relationship with Pakistan, Israel ardentlysupports India's Territorial integrity on the Kash-mir controversy and says the Disputed territorybelongs to them.

Bnei Menashe controversy:The Bnei Menashe area group of more than 8,000 people from India'sremote North-Eastern border states of Manipurand Mizoram who claim descent from one of theLost Tribes of Israel. Ethnically and linguistically,they are Tibeto-Burmans and belong to the Mizo,Kuki and Chin peoples (the terms are virtually in-terchangeable). Prior to their conversion by Brit-ish missionaries in the 19th century, they wereanimists.

On March 31, 2005 Sephardi Rabbi Shlomo Amar,one of Israel's two chief rabbis, accepted the BneiMenashe's claim because of their exemplary de-votion to Judaism. His decision was significant be-cause it paved the way for all of the Bnei Menasheto enter Israel under Israel's Law of Return.In thepast two decades, some 1,300 Bnei Menashe havemoved to Israel.

In June 2003 Israeli Interior Minister AvrahamPoraz halted Bnei Menashe immigration to Israelfollowing charges by Ofir Pines-Paz (Minister ofScience and Technology, 2006) that the BneiMenashe "are being cynically exploited for politi-cal purposes." Arutz Sheva quoted Rabbi EliyahuBirnbaum, a rabbinical judge dealing with theconversion of Bnei Menashe, as saying that theKnesset Absorption Committee's decision was oneof "ignorance, racism, and unjustifiable hate."

Rabbi Eliyahu Birnbaum says that communitymembers who move to Israel in fact suffer finan-cially because their move is motivated by a desireto return to the Holy Land and not material gain.Michael Freund has suggested that the Bnei



Menashe could help with Israel's demographic problem saying "I believe that groups like the Bnei Menasheconstitute a large, untapped demographic reservoir for Israel and the Jewish people."

With the March 2005 decision by Rabbi Amar, the immigration issue seemed to have been rendered moot.The Bnei Menashe's Orthodox conversion would in the future be conducted in India, and they would berecognized as wholly Jewish prior to their arrival in Israel. However, this solution was short-lived becausethe government of India, under pressure from Mizo-Kuki churches and Fundamentalist Christian preach-ers, objected formally to the conversion of its citizens. This ignited a furious controversy in Mizoram,culminating in top-rating television debates. The opposition mainly came from fundamentalist Christianpreachers such as Chuauthuama of the Aizawl Theological College, and Biaksiama from Aizawl's ChristianResearch Centre.

On November 9, 2005 the Israeli government halted all conversions of the Bnei Menashe in India, sayingit was straining relations between the two countries. Indian officials reportedly expressed concern aboutthe conversions and indicated mass conversions are considered illegal in India. Concern may have beentriggered after a task force from the Rabbinic Court travelled to India in September 2005 to complete theconversion process for 218 Bnei Menashe.

The decision by the Israeli government led to criticism from supporters of the Bnei Menashe who sayIsraeli officials failed to explain to the Indian government that the rabbis were not proselytising, but ratherformalizing the conversions of Bnei Menashe who had already accepted Judaism.

The Indian government's complaint was also criticized by some Hindu groups in India, who claim that theIndian government takes Christian complaints more seriously than theirs, and that Hindus have com-plained for years about Christian proselytizing without government response.

In July 2006 Israeli Immigration Absorption Minister Zeev Boim said that the 218 Bnei Menashe who wereformally converted in 2005 by the Chief Rabbinate "would be allowed to come here, but first the govern-ment must decide what its policy will be towards those who have yet to (formally) convert" . In responseMichael Freund said that Boim may devise a policy concerning the Bnei Menashe remaining in India, butmust allow the converted Bnei Menashe to immigrate to Israel without bureaucratic delays .Freund saysthat he has engaged "a prominent lawyer" and is prepared to take the minister to the Supreme Court if hedoes immediately facilitate the arrival of the Bnei Menashe.

The Bnei Menashe have not suffered anti-Semitism in India, but over 1300 have migrated to Israel as theyregard the country as their homeland and decided to emigrate "on Zionist considerations."


Documents

Foreign Relations of India