Instead of maintaining cordial relations with its neighbours, India is in danger of escalating tensions if it takes the role of aristocracy or military intervention.
 |
| Photo (https://unsplash.com/photos/GOWz0zTf_vY) |
In the political upheaval in the Maldives, the democratic forces were twice openly supported by the Indian government. After its success, the tone is now that India should establish dominance over its neighbors without resorting to military force. However, this role also has some limitations. Because even if there is no serious upheaval in the neighboring country and it does not pose a threat to India's security, India should not rush to the aid of that country with peacekeeping force. The policy of a powerful nation to keep small neighboring countries under its control is not always right.
As the popularity of former Maldivian President Abdulla Yameen waned among the Maldivian people, India issued the first and most important public statement on this political upheaval. As a result, opposition parties in the Maldives, formerly rivals, had to come together to fight elections as a matter of necessity or helplessness. But here the question arises, how appropriate was it for India to make such a statement before the political situation in the Maldives became clear, or how much right did India have to do so?
The Supreme Court of the Maldives, in its February 1, 2018 decision, had acquitted former president and Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) president Mohammed Nasheed, who is currently out of the country's politics. So what if the turn in the political situation there had been fatal? And in such a scenario, the chaos in the Maldives would have strengthened the country's security and the police would have had to take drastic steps in this regard! Even worse, what if the security forces had two sides?
After the Maldives became a democracy in 2008, both Abdullah Yameen and Mohammed Nasheed served as presidents for some time. When the opposition launched an agitation against Mohammad Nasheed, the police force was also heavily involved. As a result, Nasheed had to resign abruptly on February 7, 2012. In the ensuing arson and nationwide riots, several police stations caught fire and several jeeps donated by India to the Maldives were also torched. This had never happened before. In May 2015, similar protests erupted between police and protesters when protests erupted against Abdullah Yameen, but this time it was stopped.
Jump to the corners of the justice system
As the Maldives Supreme Court ruled against it last year, then-President Yameen declared a state of emergency in the country and arrested two of the five judges. The two were blamed for posting the court's unanimous verdict on the Supreme Court's website. He also imprisoned some opposition leaders. Many were accused of using money and positions to persuade judges and MPs to join him, including his half-brother and former president Maumoon Abdul Gayoom, son Ferris Maumoon and Yameen, son of one-time party colleague Gasim Ibrahim.
After the state of emergency was declared, the other two judges of the Supreme Court reversed the earlier decision of the court, but did not provide any explanation. Similarly, under the leadership of the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP), four different parties came together to win the election, and when Ibrahim Solih came to power on September 23 last year, defeating Yameen, he once again reversed most of the decisions taken during the Emergency. Was not present.
Incumbent Maldivian President Solih's Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) and party leader Nasheed have pledged to make fundamental reforms to the country's judicial system. But this work is extremely tragic. Because there are fundamental differences over what improvements are possible and what are needed. In the same way, not applying the smell of politics to all these democratic reforms is even more difficult. Therefore, the task of bridging the gap between the expectations of the party and the policies of the government was taken up by M.P. D. P. The government is doing its best. Therefore, it is not possible to predict the direction in which this journey will go.
It is not easy to implement a policy of making positive changes in the social and political situation of non-aligned countries in Asia, Africa and South America, also known as the Third World, which are India's closest neighbors. Be it the Maldives issue or any other country's issue. Democracy was established in Bhutan in the same year as the new pro-democracy government was formed in Maldives in 2008 and Nepal declared itself a democratic country. Bangladesh also held elections in the same year that were conducive to democracy. The deteriorating situation in Sri Lanka also began to return to normal around the same time. The world is watching India's political relations with all these countries.
If the priority is not certain then….
It may be a good strategy to move forward to promote democracy in third world countries; But it is also a way for a powerful country to use its geographical and international position to consolidate its dominance in the world. Because any country is a democracy, there is no guarantee that foreign domination will be curtailed automatically.
In Sri Lanka, India has responded. Although Mahinda Rajapaksa had to step down in the 2015 elections, Sri Lanka's tendency to give preference to China has remained the same. This is a certainly the matter of a great interest and concern for India.
Despite the fact that personal freedom was being curtailed in all important areas during the Rajapaksa's presidency, all the democratic institutions in Sri Lanka have been equally curtailed by the government that came to power after him. Incumbent President Maithripala Sirisena and Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe have openly debated about all the important goals of the government. Issues related to India and Western democracies are also embroiled in controversy.
Should India's role be that of big brother or grandfather ?
Former Sri Lankan President Rajapaksa has repeatedly said, "China is our friend and our relationship with India is like a big brother." But there must be a gap between words and actions. In the Maldives, a state of emergency was declared on February 5 last year. D. P. The party's response was that if it wants to restore democracy in the Maldives, India should send troops. The statement was later distorted by social media in the Maldives.
The then Yameen government must have taken the matter seriously, and so the Maldivian government decided to return the two helicopters donated by India and sent a message to the Indian authorities that they should come and pick them up themselves. But that did not happen at the time, and it is unlikely that the Solih government that followed will do the same. However, the current situation is that an army of political conservatives is heading for the net in the Maldives, who do not accept the military intervention of any foreign government in our country. However, such people are now showing interest in maintaining strategic relations with India.
In particular, after India's military action in Sri Lanka, the tone of many friendly Western nations was that India should seek peace in Sri Lanka as per the pre-approval of the United Nations' R2P (Responsibility to Protect) policy. All countries would have been convinced that India's action was aimed at protecting human rights and democracy. But it is important to note that when the issue of East Pakistan, later Bangladesh, was simmering and India tried to raise the issue at the international level, the same ally was standing with Pakistan and opposing India's role. Are doing from time to time.
Importantly, if India were to try to influence the power equation by taking unilateral decisions in any of its neighbors, then the reaction of that country would be as important as the reaction of other countries. Democracy is currently flourishing in most of India's neighbors. Therefore, it is not possible to say in which country, if an outside nation like India intervenes, the results will be positive. Given the current state of world politics, the end of the Cold War may not be as belligerent as it used to be, but the internal politics of India's neighbors still do not seem to have changed much.
The United States' strong efforts to influence Venezuela's central politics, as well as its military action in Iraq and Afghanistan, should be seen as an example of "the wise man behind the stumbling block." That is why, apart from the US policy of 'grandfathering', India will have to adopt a different policy to maintain lasting friendly relations with its South Asian neighbors. India should pay close attention to the failures of the US so far. Because in the name of the Cold War, the United States has had to face humiliation in the countries where it tried to set foot. The United States has been pushing for decades to overthrow Fidel Castro in Cuba, but to no avail.
Yet the United States, with its economic and military might, has infiltrated every country where there are signs of instability. For that, whether it is a neighboring country or even a distant one, the US has put its grip on the politics there. The US attempt to take Asian countries like Vietnam, Iran and the Philippines under its steel wing during the Cold War is an important lesson for a newly entered country like India.
At present, India cannot be compared to a rich and powerful nation like the United States. Similarly, India cannot be compared to Russia, which has made its neighbors bow down to it out of fear of its military might. Although China has a policy of infiltrating maritime areas where there is open space, it seems to be taking great care to ensure that the border dispute with India does not escalate. In the case of Venezuela, Russia and China have sneered as much as they want. Of course, like Egypt, Lebanon, Chechnya, they have also increased the tension between Venezuela and shaken hands.
India must have a definite policy on how to maintain cordial relations with its neighbors. Plans like 'R2P' (Responsibility to Protect) or going for military intervention can lead to the risk of escalating tensions in the relationship. In return, China sees an opportunity to spread its arms and legs in countries where anti-India ideology is prevalent, and to gradually expand its network of economic, political and military intervention.
Post a Comment