USSR Post
For friendship between India and Russia
Year 1976, USSR

India and Russia enjoy healthy strategic relations since Soviet era. Large part of Soviet help came in the sector of defence, education, mills, mining, and industry and infrastructure development. The two countries essentially shared the buyer-seller, give and take relation. However, after the collapse of Soviet Union and the liberalization of Indian economy the buyer-seller relationship turned into a full fledged partnership.

World's fastest cruise missile, Brahmos and fifth generation fighter aircraft PAK-FA/HAL FGFA is the result of close partnership between the two countries in defence sector. The two countries realized the potential of their economies, one of the fastest in the world, and pioneered furthermore collaborations and investments. One of the prominent example of the successful business collaboration is Sakhalin I project where India owns 20% stake in the oil field which has 2,300 million barrels of oil and 17,100 billion cubic feet of gas in place.

India has been seeking more such investment in Russia in the field of hydrocarbon, oil, and pharmacy. On the other hand Russia had not done any major commercial entry in the Indian markets, the only prominent investment by a Russian company in recent years is of Russian telecom company MTS. India is world's fastest growing telecom market and already has world's second largest mobile phone user base and third largest internet user base, making it one of the best region for any telecom company. Telecom industry is highly competitive in India, companies go to any extent (within the limits set by TRAI) to provide one of the best services to their customers including free SMS, freephone numbers, first few minutes of calls as free, etc. After the introduction of the brand in India, MTS had soon reached 16 million subscriber base in no time. However, the whole thing all of a sudden changed in India and most of the licenses provided to the private companies were cancelled giving a big blow to the Russian investment and economists. The developments were unwelcomed in Russia and expressing grief.

The recent changes in Indian system has affected Indo-Russian ties, defence sector in India which had seen a strong presence of Russian hardware and technology is also seeking partnership and contracts with other major providers in the world. Cancelling of telecom licenses in India was not directed against Russia, but was due to political corruption that had taken place during the auctioning of the licenses that led to the abrogation of all the licenses given. Another major investment that faced the stumbling block was Norway based company Uninor.

"We were very happy that such a new and interesting field of our mutual cooperation as telecom was opened, a new investment destination for the Russian capital – both private capital from the Sistema, as well as from the Government with its shares." Said ambassador of Russia to India, Alexander M. Kadakin in an interview to CNBC TV 18 Channel.

"As a bona fide buyer of that license we were thunderstruck when the whole thing all of a sudden changed here in India and all those licenses were pronounced invalid. It was a very unexpected development. I feel, the judicial and other authorities did not make a distinction between our company, which was a bona fide buyer, and all other companies. And the spectrum we bought was not claimed by any Indian company."

According to the Russian ambassador there seem to be the involvement of political element rather than judicial one in the whole case.

"I don’t want to comment on the Indian judicial system, with highest respect I have for it. But it seems there is more political content here than judicial one. If we take up the matter judicially, look - a bona fide buyer acquires a frequency which nobody claims, acting according to all norms and regulations, valid at that time, in 2008, and all of a sudden in 2011 they just cancel all the licenses and my company is boiled in one soup with all other companies which may have committed something. It is not a judicial matter only, it is a political one. The Russian Government will never allow 3.1 bln dollars to be thrown in the abyss. This must be understood. The Government’s shares are the tax-payers' money. It is about 1 bln. Are we to throw our money into the inferno of your internal problems in the telecom sector?"

When asked if India's popularity as an ideal destination for investment is declining, Kadakin reply was positive, he denied any such doubts and pointed to the "ill wishers" of the growing cooperation between India and Russia for creating such illusions.

"How can it be that India would seem not a very favourable destination for Russian investment if yesterday a deal was signed in Moscow opening a credit line for 3.5 bln US dollars for the development of Kudankulam power plant? This is a huge, very important and strategic project. How can one say that things are not OK? These are the intentions of 'ill-wishers' who try to sow evil seeds of doubt into our cooperation."

Further explaining the term 'ill wishers" he referred to the protests that were launched against the nuclear power plant in Kudankulam, India which are suspected to be motivated.

"When that situation continued for half a year, when India as a result was losing one million dollars every day. One should naturally think, how come those people were so well organized, on what money those “nature-protectors” were buying water and had food delivered, had shamianas erected there? It costs a lot. Who was giving the money? And the Indian Government has found that the money was channeled through all kind of ecological and “green” NGOs. But the money initially was targeted not for the anti-Kudankulam protests. Instead of developing the infrastructure in the region and in those villages, the money was used to organize protests!"

India and Russia has been great partners and there is hope of rising cooperation between the two as they participate constructively on international forums like BRICS and SCO. However, with the shift in India's vision towards the events in the world, its policies have become more pro western, on various recent international platforms and voting, India had taken sides with the western nations instead of taking with Russia and China. Referring to India's growing ties with United States, Russian media had said even to the extent that India is sliding to US pole and it is the time for Russia to being cooperation with Pakistan to maintain a healthy presence in the region.

However, according to Kadakin, all the claims are false and Russia seeks stronger partnership with India.

"As regards India, we are rejoicing together with India at its achievements. The figures of the India’s growth have been high, nearly 9 per cent, which in essence is almost an economic miracle. We are proud together with you, as Russia is India’s equal partner, a sister. So whenever I get to Moscow, I give one simple example: in five and a half years of my absence between the 'two Indias', when I was leaving my first ambassadorial post in 2004, the metro was inaugurated in Delhi and I took a joy ride. There were only seven stations there including Kashmiri Gate. But when I came back from Stockholm, you had more than 100 stations. Is that not a miracle? Moscow would be envious. We have one new station built in one year, and there is so much celebration. India is rushing ahead like a Russian troika. We are happy to be in that sledge together with India and want to rush even faster, and unite our efforts in all fields including that of mutual investment."

Please share and join the discussion on facebook by clicking the "Like" below.

Benidorm, photo taken by Enrique Domingo

A seaside resort in the Costa Blanca in the province of Alicante in Valencia, Spain, Benidorm has recently realized its potential as a holiday resort town. With the increase in the quality of accommodation, today it is not just for the people who come to celebrate bargain holidays to Benidorm, but also for the tourists who demand 5-star hotel and spa complexes.

The biggest attraction in Benidorm is the 4kms of Blue Flag safe sandy beaches which draw people from all over the world throughout the year. Benidorm has mild climate in Summer as well as winter making it an ideal sun destination throughout the year.

Marea Roja, photo taken by Enrique Domingo

I got to the central Benidorm, a very compact and congested place, easier on foot. I stayed in Levante Playa chosen by most visitors as the area to stay in. There are many shops that gives bikes and vehicles on rent, but the place is best when experienced on foot. There is excellent bus service in the town that runs until midnight. Although you can walk from one end of the resort town to the other, that should only take you little more than an hour.

Benidorm has two pulchritude Blue Flag beaches - Levante and the more calm Poniente, which is preferred by locals and families. The town was developed as a resort for fun and leisure, hence you won't find much if you are looking for cultural places, although a trip to the nearby villages and old town Church is will give you the feel of being in the "Real Spain".

Mundomar Aquarium, Photo taken by Mike Young

I went to Mundomar, known as one of the best man made attraction in the town. It is an aquarium with water park, or may be other way round. If you are following my trips then you would be thinking why I am going to such aquariums again? Unlike other places where you can see Dolphins from a distance, here you can swim with the Dolphins, which was first time for me, and really exciting. Dolphins are very clever and friendly. Getting into the water may cost you 150 Euros, but it is worth, last from 10 AM to 6 PM and you get towels, tee shirts, photos, lunch included in it. It is a good idea to take discount vouchers as soon as you arrive at Alicante Airport. 

Levante beach, photo taken by Carmen Martin

Benidorm is famous for its blue flag beaches, I had gone to Levante Beach. It is beautiful scenic, sandy beach, quite busy in peak times though, but still you will have good room for yourself. Lots of water activities to do. Really crystal clear ocean and warm water. It was a perfect combination. Sun beds were not cheap, and local sellers will come every 10 minutes trying to sell you various things, just say No! if you do not want.

There are nearly eight hundred bars selling alcohol and drinks, the competition is huge and you get various deals and schemes with happy hours, two for one, etc. British pubs, Dutch bars, Irish bars, and Spanish cafeterias are in numbers here.

Beware of pickpockets, and don't leave you belongings unattended, although Benidorm is as safe as any other busy tourist resort. However, the crime rate has been rising, where the majority of crimes are alcohol fuelled. There are number of police cars patrolling the streets.

Please share and join the discussion on facebook by clicking the "Like" below.

Drop the Debt bus, photo taken by reds on tour

The sovereign debt crisis recently made headlines and the issue is still ongoing with the European Union endeavoring to work our strategies to help in improving the finances of the Spanish banks. This debt crisis has made it rather complicated for some countries in the eurozone to re-finance their government debt without the help and support of third parties.

With a view to meet the budget-deficit target for Spain in the very near future, the Prime Minister of Spain has initiated new consumption taxes and spending cuts. But reaching the above-mentioned target is still a far cry, as Spain is presently reeling under the stress of an immensely limp economy along with redundancy at nearly 25%, which is something to worry about.

In addition to the above, considering the fact that some countries are trying desperately to meet the shortfalls in their budget, it is almost impossible to take on the Spanish ten-year bond yields that spiked above seven percent and the Italian bond yields that pushed above six percent. Such high-interest payments along with the reduced tax revenue are saddling the countries with more load than they can carry, so the additional burden of sovereign debt cannot be rolled over in the market, considering the seriousness of the continuing recession in the eurozone.

To add to the troubles, Italian bond yields persistently remain spiked, mainly due to the market belief that its sovereign debt will deteriorate further and so Italy’s efforts to reduce its budget deficit by endeavoring to execute its own austerity measures may prove to be fruitless. The European Unions is being relentlessly pressurized by Spain and Italy to make money available at cheap interest rates.

The woes that Greece faces are further saddened because of the requirement of yet another bailout due to its sovereign debt. And the stark fact remains that its target of budget deficit remains far beyond its reach as it grapples with acute recession and crumpling tax revenues.

Presently, the sovereign debt of Greece stands at just over 500 billion euros; quite a sizeable amount of money that would financially impair the European Union members individually in the event that they would require to do a complete bail-out of Greece. But still, it is not an impossible task.

The sovereign debt of Spain stands at a little over 1.00 trillion euros. The question remains whether the European Union countries can unite to raise enough money to cover this amount. Now if the pressure on Italy intensifies, it could default and see its sovereign debt stand at over 2.7 trillion euros.

So while Greece stands a chance of being bailed out, it looks a bit impossible for Spain, while a certain “No” for Italy to be bailed out by the European Union.

Thus it is very imperative that the European Union gathers itself to get economic growth growing again. Similarly, due care should be taken to guarantee that Spain’s sovereign debt does not touch high magnitudes, because if this happens; i.e., if Spain defaults, it will be impossible to bail out the country’s sovereign debt. And if this happens, it would be the end of Spain and hence the end of the European Union.

That is why it is very important that the sovereign debt crisis is resolved at the earliest.

By Contrarian Investing

Please share and join the discussion on facebook by clicking the "Like" below.

Supply Trucks, csmonitor.com

Background

On November 26, 2012 in a brazen incident NATO attacked the Salala post on the Pakistan-Afghanistan border in which 24 Pakistani soldiers were killed. Pakistanis were shocked at the incident since it was unprovoked. The Government of Pakistan reacted by immediately closing the Ground Lines of Communications (GLOCs) for NATO supplies into Afghanistan from the Karachi port. Also, it demanded an apology and an investigation from the United States for the incident. Later on, an investigation was conducted by NATO which suggested that mistakes had been committed on both sides. Pakistan firmly rejected the NATO version and insisted that it was at fault in the Salala incident. It characterized the incident as “unprovoked, deliberate and planned (Dawn, July 5, 2012). The United States seemed to be forthcoming at the apology demand but later backed down because of another terrorist incident in Kabul blamed on the Haqqani network based inside North Waziristan inside Pakistan. Resultantly, relations between the United States and Pakistan were seveere3ly strained reaching to the lowest ebb in history. Finally, some seven months after the Salala incident Hillary Clinton the United States said sorry and on July 3, 2012 Pakistan and the United States reached an agreement to reopen the closed GLOCs. However, the United States still characterized the Salala incident as being the result of a mutual mistake and did not touch upon the key Pakistani demand of cessation of drone attacks inside North Waziristan, inside Pakistan (Dawn, July 5, 2012). More importantly, Pakistan was assured by the United States that there would not be any repetition of such an incident. Pakistan’s reaction in closing GLOCs cost the United States at least $700 million, as it rerouted supplies across more expensive northern routes. It was reported that he final bill may have been significantly greater (Dawn, July 7, 2012). 

Prime Minister Raja Pervaiz Ashraf said on July 5, 2012 that the decision to open the GLOCs was taken in the national interest and in light of parliamentary recommendations. The agreement was announce as a “turning point” by Hina Rabbani Khar Foreign Minister of Pakistan who further stated that “the progress achieved so far would now help the two countries to engage seriously on other issues (Dawn, July 5, 2012). Raja Pervaiz, Prime Minister of Pakistan said The News International Friday, July 06, 2012):

As the draw down of NATO and Isaf forces got underway, Pakistan wanted to facilitate the process in the interest of regional peace and stability, because peace and stability in Afghanistan was closely linked to peace and stability in Pakistan…Pakistan was a partner of the international community and playing a leading role against terrorism as a frontline state….that the prolonged deadlock over the issue of supplies could have hurt the country’s relations with the NATO countries, including friendly and brotherly Muslim states such as Turkey, Qatar and UAE… that it was for the first time in the country’s history that a bipartisan parliamentary consensus was evolved on the broad contours of foreign policy….Pakistan made it clear that its red-lines should be respected and in the same context the new terms of engagement as approved by Parliament were visibly heeded to by the US and Nato countries. 

Chaudhry Shujaat Hussain, PML (Q) leader and a coalition partner of the ruling PPP also supported the government’s decision to open NATO supplies and said (The News International, July 06, 2012): 

"No country could afford international diplomatic isolation…that the presence of US, NATO and ISAF forces in Afghanistan represented 50 countries under the UN mandate…. the diplomatic impasse over the issue could have created problems for Pakistan at the UN. ..Foreign policy decisions needed to be taken in a dispassionate and cool-headed manner as the stakes were too high to be left at the mercy of emotions and irrational behaviour."

United States Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton held a three-way meeting with the Khar Pakistani Foreign Minister and Afghan Foreign Minister Zalmai Rassoul in Tokyo, Japan on July 8, 2012. Clinton said her discussions with Khar covered “stalled Afghan reconciliation efforts”. They spoke as well about “enhancing US-Pakistani economic ties to make it a relationship defined more by trade than aid”. She “acknowledged the lingering difficulties hindering US-Pakistani cooperation, without getting into details”. She expressed hope on July 8, 2012 that Pakistan’s recent reopening of the GLOCs might lead to a “broader rapprochement in US-Pakistani relations after a difficult period for the reluctant allies” (Source: Dawn). 

Clinton further said, (Dawn)

"We are both encouraged that we’ve been able to put the recent difficulties behind us so we can focus on the many challenges ahead of us….We want to use the positive momentum generated by our recent agreement to take tangible steps on our many shared, core interests. The most important of these, was fighting the militant groups who’ve used Pakistan as a rear base to attack American troops and jeopardise the future of Afghanistan….focused on the necessity of defeating the terror networks that threat the stability of both Pakistan and Afghanistan, as well as the interests of the United States… a challenging but essential relationship….I have no reason to believe that it will not continue to raise hard questions for us both…But it is something that is in the interests of the United States as well as the interests of Pakistan."

The Recent Politics of the Pakistani Opposition

As expected, the Opposition parties, nationalist groups, and Islamic radicals in Pakistan were greatly angered at the development of the GLOCs reopening. The Zardari Government wasn’t caught by surprise at the reaction and did anticipate such a reaction. The Difa-e Pakistan Council (DPC) announced protest march from Lahore to Islamabad on July 8, 2012. It was commonly known that the DPC was supported by the ISI. The DPC was headed by Maulana Samiul Haq of the JUI. The DPC was composed of a group of Islamist parties and other right-wing groups, including but not limited to, JUI, Jamaat-i Islami, the banned Jamaatud Dawa headed by Hafiz Muhammad Saied, Sheikh Rasheed Ahmed, Hameed Gul, Hafiz Rehman Makki (Dawn, July 5, 2012). Maulana Samiul Haq said that the Zardari Government had “defied the parliament which had clearly decided not to resume the supply as long as drone attacks were not stopped (Dawn, July 5, 2012). The main Opposition party the PML (N) and the Pakistan Tehrik-i Insaaf (PTI) also condemned the restoration of the GLOCs calling it a “violation of the parliament’s resolutions” and also announced protest marches. Undoubtedly, the popular outcry against the United States was immense. Give, the high anti-Americanism in Pakistan, these protest marches would attract the people of Pakistan. The Opposition was bent upon simply riding the wave of the popular disgust against the United States. Mistaken politics at its best.

Was this really a breakthrough in United States-Pakistan relations as depicted by the Government of Pakistan and its coalition partners? Was the stalemate in Pakistan-United States relations been really broken and a new beginning made? Clearly the Government of Pakistan was in a damage control exercise. What actually happened was aptly captured by the Wall Street Journal which commented: (The News, July 8, 2012.)

"Pakistan had backed down as its anti-Americanism had exacted a diplomatic price…Pakistan is spinning the deal with the US to reopen NATO supply routes to Afghanistan as a triumph of its diplomacy. But it was Islamabad that climbed down from its extortionate demands and accepted the status quo ante. That’s a big change from previous situations when it was able to extort more aid out of Washington…The deal ended a seven month-long diplomatic standoff that began with a Nato incident on the Af-Pak border in November and led to the closing of land routes through Pakistan. Islamabad sought a full apology from the US for provoking the firefight in which 24 Pakistani troops died. But Washington says the Pakistanis opened fire first in the border clash, and even now it offers a carefully worded statement that it’s ‘sorry for the losses… Pakistan’s demands were partly bluster from the military, which has been looking to salve its pride since the Osama bin Laden raid. But the Obama Administration wasn’t exactly eager to make nice with a country Americans increasingly believe is acting in bad faith. The generals also noticed that Defence Secretary Leon Panetta last month reached out to their traditional rivals in New Delhi, and their usual paranoia probably kicked in. It’s useful to remind Pakistan it’s not indispensable. The other reason Islamabad adopted such a stance and stuck to it for so long is more worrying. The ruling party — beleaguered at home — had whipped up so much jingoism that it feared a political backlash if it backed down easily. Opposition politicians, mostly from religious parties, are now threatening protests against the government, so Islamabad could yet try to back out of the deal. Pakistan’s leaders find it convenient to open the Pandora’s Box of radical Islam and anti-Americanism for short-term gains. It’s Pakistan itself that has paid the highest price for that ugly bargain.”

No matter the politics and the spin of the so-called breakthrough in Pakistan-United States relations, the reopening of the GLOCs can be seen as an overall a positive development for both the United States and Pakistan. Contrary to the impression given by the Government of Pakistan and the Opposition political parties, the drone attacks were happening with the permission of both the Zardari Government and the Pakistan Army. The only thing was that the Pakistanis were not willing to admit it because of the fear of a political backlash. Increasingly, Pakistanis had turned against the United States and the politicians as well as the Army brass knew full well that saying so would be a political risk for them. In some ways the drone strikes was a fake issue. There was a convergence of national interests, as seen by the Pakistan military and Government of Pakistan, on allowing these drone strikes inside Pakistan. Therefore, the lingering issue of drone strikes in North Waziristan can be resolved in some manner like sharing responsibility in some ways. 

The real sticking point in Pak-US relations and the main divergence of national interests wasn’t the war on terror inside Pakistan but the one in neighbouring Afghanistan. This problem is real and remains. The real issue of conflict is the playing out of the so-called endgame in Afghanistan after the United States and NATO /ISAF troops depart by the end of 2014. 

Obviously, the Government of Pakistan would like to see the Taliban in power in Afghanistan. At least, this seems to be the present thinking in the power corridors of Pakistan today. Whether this actually happens or not is dependent on a number of factors though. Anyway a lot depends on how this endgame is played out between the US and Pakistan. It remains to be seen whether the United States and Pakistan join hands on Afghanistan or not. . In the interest of regional peace it can be argued that both countries must join hands to earnestly plan for a viable endgame in Afghanistan. Nothing can be more significant than a doable Afghan endgame strategy for both the United States and Pakistan. Is Pakistan ready for the challenge? Unfortunately, the Zardari Government is too preoccupied with the internal political and economic crisis to do much in this foreign policy area. Plus, it simply doesn’t have the capacity to take any meaningful action. Given the control of the army over foreign and security policy, not much can be expected of the Zardari Government. Also, the Foreign Office doesn’t have a viable strategy in place to deal with the situation. It must be emphasised that peace in Afghanistan remains a formidable challenge. 

Post-2014 Afghanistan?

The departure of US & allied troops from Afghanistan by end 2014 doesn’t suggest that there will necessarily be peace in the country. There is a real danger of a civil war erupting in Afghanistan after the departure of these troops. The politics of Afghanistan is complex. Country is weak and fragmented on ethnic lines. The Afghan Taliban are somewhat supported by Pakistan, while the Northern Alliance is supported by the US & India. The Hazaras are supposedly supported by Iran. In the eventuality of the departure of United States and ISAF/NATO troops, the Taliban will make a bid for power in Afghanistan. The Taliban can be expected to be resisted in taking over Hazara, Tajik and Uzbek areas, however. Today, the Taliban control the Southern portion of Afghanistan only. Meanwhile, the United States has signed a strategic partnership agreement with Afghanistan to assist it in building the Afghan National Security Forces (ANSF) to strength of 230,000 at a cost of $4 billion. Given the reality of Afghanistan, the chances of a half decent national army are very slim. The present Karzai Government in Afghanistan is not only very corrupt but also weak and ineffective. Therefore, Karzai isn’t expected to last long after most Nato-led foreign combat troops leave Afghanistan in 2014. Then the Karzai Government will assume responsibility for most of its own security. 

The past performance of the Karzai Government has been dismal. In total Afghanistan has received nearly $60 billion in civilian aid since 2002. The World Bank says foreign aid makes up nearly the equivalent of the country’s gross domestic product On July 8, 2012 international donors pledged $16 billion in a major donors’ conference held in Tokyo, attended by about 70 countries and organisations. The conference aimed at setting aid levels for the crucial period through and beyond 2014, The US portion is expected to be in the decade-long annual range of $1 billion to this year’s $2.3 billion. The total amount of international civilian support represents a slight decline from the current annual level of around $5 billion. Japan, the second-largest donor, says it will provide up to $3 billion through 2016, and Germany has announced it will keep its contribution to rebuilding and development at its current level of $536 million a year, at least until 2016. The $4 billion in annual civilian aid comes on top of $4.1 billion in yearly assistance pledged last May at a Nato conference in Chicago to fund the Afghan National Security Forces from 2015 to 2017.But the flow of aid is expected to sharply diminish after international troops withdraw, despite the ongoing threat the country faces from the Taliban and other militants.

Along with security issues, donors had become wary of widespread corruption and poor project governance. The aid was intended nevertheless to provide a stabilizing factor as Afghanistan transitions to greater independence from international involvement. But it will come with conditions. The pledges were expected to establish a road map of accountability to ensure that Afghanistan does more to improve governance and finance management, and to safeguard the democratic process, rule of law and human rights, especially those of women. Meanwhile, Karzai had vowed to “fight corruption with strong resolve.” But he still faces international weariness with the war and frustration over his failure to crack down on corruption. Clinton had acknowledged that corruption was a “major problem.” The donors planned to set up review and monitoring measures to assure the aid is used for development and not wasted by corruption or mismanagement, which has been a major hurdle in putting aid projects into practice (Dawn, July 8, 2012).

The Next Steps

What is happening in Afghanistan must be carefully analysed from the perspective of different stakeholders, especially Pakistan. The Pakistan military is worried that India is making inroads in Afghanistan and desires a role in the future of the country. More importantly, it believed that the United States was encouraging India in this development. The military leadership was apprehensive of any Indian role in Afghanistan and also firmly believed that these developments were happening at the cost of Pakistan. The reality is different, however.

What should Pakistan and United States do now in Afghanistan?

1. They should join hands to broker a power sharing arrangement in Afghanistan. Different power groups in the country, especially the Taliban and Northern Alliance, are brought on the negotiating table for this exercise. 
2. Intense and coordinated diplomatic activity shall be required for any meaningful intra-Afghan dialogue. These negotiations will surely be tedious but are needed nevertheless. 
3. Pakistan must facilitate a Taliban-United States deal to the extent possible. The United States work with Pakistan on this one. 
4. Both hold a series of meetings in Islamabad to chalk out the contours of a viable endgame in Afghanistan.
5. Later, invite other regional players like India, Russia, China, CARs and Iran to contribute their share in 
   finalising the endgame.
   
   There are a number of things for Pakistan to do immediately:
   
   1. Convince the US that Pakistan knows Afghanistan like no other and therefore must be trusted to play a key role in the endgame. A number of Confidence Building Measures (CBMs) are suggested:
   
   a) Renounce the old discredited policy of ‘Strategic Depth’ and ‘a friendly Western border’ propounded by the Pak Army. Most importantly, the Zardari Government must wrest control of the Afghanistan policy from the hands of the military. It must immediately announce a stopping of support for the Haqqani network and the Lashkar-i-Taiba. Pakistan must engage the United States which is counting on it to help convince the Taliban and other groups fighting the Afghan government to halt violence and enter into a political dialogue.

b) Stop the Defa-e Pakistan Council from going overboard in protesting against the United States.
c) Joint efforts with the United States to tackle the Islamic extremist problem.

The United States, on its part, must also take immediate action in a number of areas:

1. Stop covert CIA activity in Pakistan 
2. Reach out to the Pakistani Civil Society in a new effort at ‘winning hearts and minds’. 
3. Acknowledge that some past actions are responsible for a great deal of animosity among the Muslims. 
4. Support the Palestinian cause and stop Israeli military subjugation and occupation of Palestine. 
5. Support a final solution of the lingering Kashmir dispute between India and Pakistan 
6. Openly support Pakistan in taking a final and decisive military campaign against terrorist’s hideouts in North Waziristan. Remember the Pakistan Army is exhausted and badly stretched to do this alone. 
7. Stop threatening Iran over the nuclear issue. Give diplomacy a fuller chance. 
8. Release the stuck up CSF money to Pakistan.

Before the reopening of the GLOCs Pakistan-United States relations were at its lowest ebb but there are signs that they can still be repaired. Both sides must resolve their differences with a new determination. The US and Pakistan have a convergence of national interests in seeking a stable and peaceful Afghanistan. Therefore, both can, and should, work as real partners rather than rivals. Pakistan and United States also have much in common at the societal and cultural level also. There is no reason for the deep mistrust to prolong any longer. Undoubtedly, the United States has enemies inside Pakistan. Some Islamic radicals and other nationalists are convinced that the United States is their perpetual enemy. They believe that the United States is an enemy of Islam. Bad experiences and history has sharpened these perceptions. Circumstances change and so can perceptions. The people of Pakistan dislike the state policies of the United States but not just hate America as such. Media reports exaggerate these negative perceptions on both sides. The point is that these misperceptions cannot and should not come in the way of sensible policy making. Both need each other to build lasting peace in the region. Dreams of a prosperous, peaceful and secure Pakistan are the aspiration of all Pakistanis and Afghans. However, dreams of peace and prosperity aren’t just made without sustained effort at achieving them. Proper planning and wise policy making is required. Prudence is the need of the hour and not just emotions. It is pertinent to add that Pakistan will lose more if the Afghanistan endgame falters. Most importantly, Pakistan must act immediately. The US-Pakistan Relations and the Issue of Afghanistan 

Pakistan-US relations have been seriously strained because of recent events. This has happened primarily because of the logjam on the Afghanistan issue. Lack of vision and straight thinking in both American and Pakistan’s leadership circles is mainly responsible for the sharp deterioration in these relations. Continuing American drone strikes inside Waziristan in Pakistan is causing a swell of anti-American feelings in the country. The Obama administration is not going to stop them any time soon. Meanwhile, the level of mutual distrust has created a crisis situation now. The shortcomings Zardari government in power in Pakistan is simply incompetent and preoccupied with the domestic political mess to take any bold decisions on the Afghanistan issue. Unfortunately, the military establishment is still calling the shots on matters of national security and foreign policy. This is largely happening by default because the civilian government is too weak to take charge. The Zardari Government has failed to give any reasonable direction on foreign policy or national security. The US troops will pull out in 2014 and the future power arrangements in Kabul are the main bone of contention between Pakistan and the US. Meanwhile, the negotiations between the US and Taliban in Qatar have stalled. Meanwhile, the US is losing patience with Pakistan as it is still backing the Afghan Taliban who are fighting the ISAF-NATO military forces in Afghanistan from safe havens established inside the country. This is an open secret now. Incredibly, the presence of these terrorist safe havens inside the country is officially denied by Pakistan. Why is Pakistan hedging its bets on the Afghan Taliban? This is happening because of Pakistan’s legacy in Afghanistan, especially during the Soviet occupation in 1979 and eventual ouster in1989. Pakistan and the US had a convergence of interests then and both supported the Mujahedeen against the Soviet occupation force. It helped create the Taliban back in the mid-1990s and these connections supposedly matter, given the presence of a large Pakhtun population in the KPK province on the Pakistan-Afghan border area inside Pakistan. Plus, the Pakistan military believed in the infamous doctrine of ‘strategic depth’ inside Afghanistan as a national interest priority. Supposedly this was part of a larger strategic plan in its combat posture with arch enemy India. However, things have changed and the old doctrine is no more valid. India-Pakistan relations have improved somewhat and Pakistan is less threatened then before. Pakistan is a nuclear power and has formidable military muscle to deter India from any adventure against it. Reportedly, Pakistan has the fastest development in its nuclear establishment in the world. Undoubtedly, Pakistan’s military might is awesome and India would never attack Pakistan for the fear of unleashing a nuclear Armageddon in South Asia. Pakistan does not have to fear India now. In other words, Pakistan has attained the stapes where it is reasonably protected against India and other enemies as well. Therefore, Pakistan has the luxury of shifting focus to human security and development areas. The economy of Pakistan faces a formidable challenge and requires immediate attention of its rulers. Pakistan has achieved a lot in the military area and now must focus on the welfare of its people. 

Massive corruption, endemic bad governance, mismanagement and misperceived priorities have wrecked havoc in the country. The issue of human security, as opposed to military security, must now be the strategic priority of the government of Pakistan. This requires a paradigm shift as the military establishment is still obsessed with military security issues. 

Will the military establishment of Pakistan realize that Pakistan has weakened from within because of the governance crises engulfing it today? Is the military establishment ready to cut its share of the budget pie and divest scarce resources to solve the very serious energy crisis in the country? More importantly, will the Pakistan military establishment give up its policy of backing the Taliban in Afghanistan? Unfortunately, the answer to all three questions remains in the negative. The problem with Pakistan military establishment is that it fails to see the people’s aspirations as legitimate. Given its great power in still calling the shots in Pakistan, the military has lost vision of the true national interest of the country. The people of Pakistan just want stability, peace and economic opportunities and do not desire anything else. They want peace in the region which includes both Afghanistan and India. The Government of Pakistan must facilitate the US pullout in 2014 by immediately reopening the NATO supply routes closed since November last after the Salala incident. Insisting on an apology by the US isn’t required now. There is still a basis for repairing the US-Pakistan relationship. 

There is a convergence of national interest between Pakistan and the US on the issue of peace and stability in Afghanistan after the pullout. The Government of Pakistan must stop from playing favorites inside Afghanistan. It must reach out to the Northern Alliance groups and other non-Pashtun groups in a bid for reconciliation. The role of India in Afghanistan isn’t necessarily a big issue for Pakistan. Afghanistan is a member of SAARC and India has legitimate interests in Afghanistan. Pakistan must negotiate an end of Indian interference in Baluchistan by severing its own links with the Jihadist entities inside India. A quid pro quo can be worked out with some tense diplomacy and patience. It is in Pakistan’s supreme national interest to have peace and stability in Afghanistan by working out a power arrangement that includes the Taliban. Pakistan must have a proactive foreign policy and should take the imitative to arrange negotiations for a transfer of power after the pullout in 2014. Arrangements can be made to include the US, India, China and Iran in this diplomatic initiative. All concerned stakeholders can and should meet to settle a power-sharing arrangement. In Lebanon different ethnic groups have devised a formula for sharing power and this formula can be applied in case of Afghanistan as well. General elections will have to wait for this formula arrangement. While a Pakhtun can become a President of Afghanistan, other important positions must go to non-Pakhtuns. A sort of balance of power arrangement inside Afghanistan can be worked out and then general elections be held. The point is that the American model of democracy may not work in Afghanistan and a new democracy of ethnic groups power-sharing may be more applicable in tribal Afghanistan. There isn’t much time left as these negotiations will be prolonged and tedious at best, and unworkable at worst. In the interest of peaceful and stable Afghanistan it is certainly worth a try. Only Pakistan can host this negotiations arrangement. No other country has more at state in the post-western Afghanistan than neighbour Pakistan. Unfortunately, the leadership of Pakistan is too inept and ineffective to take this needed diplomatic imitative. The region will surely loose if timely action isn’t taken now to secure Afghanistan after the US & NATO troops have left in 2014. Eventually, a new peacekeeping force will have to replace the Western troops. It is best that an OIC peacekeeping force is placed to secure Afghanistan for some years. Pakistan can be instrumental in setting up this Muslim peacekeeping force for eventual deployment in Afghanistan. Firstly, Pakistan must get its own house in order and resolve its serious governance issues. A future of peace, prosperity and stability, in Afghanistan beckons both the United States and Pakistan only if they build a true partnership for the purpose. Nothing else will do. Meanwhile, the clock is ticking. Pakistan doesn’t have much time to change direction. 

Dr. Sohail Mahmood is the Chairman of Department of Politics & International Relations, International Islamic University, Islamabad, Pakistan

Please share and join the discussion on facebook by clicking the "Like" below.

Soviet Car Mod, englishrussia.com

Selling and rate of manufacturing of car and auto parts are often related to the country's economy along with steel and electricity production. Asian countries has been creative with car manufacturing by rolling out eco-friendly cars as well embedding smart electronics. Indian and Russian companies on the other hand have not explored the Automobile R&D and manufacturing to the fullest yet.

Biggest auto companies from America, Europe and Asia have their manufacturing plants in India, signalling a great potential and skills that Indians carry in this industry, more and more luxury brands which are entering India are positive with the response they got from the consumers of the country, signalling that so called financially tight Indians are now willing to spend if they get the best, which gives a good hope about the future of auto industry in India.

India and Russia both have recorded a huge growth in the car market this financial year due to growing middle class, support from banks, loan schemes and car finance deals. Russia's car market continued its momentum in June with 272,125 sales, up 10.2% from last year. The Year to Date June sales were 1.4 million, up 14.6% from last year. Among the gainers there are mostly Chinese companies, Russian company Autovaz (Known for Lada) share at 16.5% was the worst ever. This was the 27th consecutive year on year gain in Russia.

Chinese companies have really well targeted Russian car market by  rolling low cost products that suits most of the Russian consumers, however in terms of quality, Russian consumers agree that Chinese cars are not that good and they would prefer other brands. In the first half of this year, Chinese companies have doubled their sales in Russia, whereas the Soviet Era Lada (Autovaz) is having a bad time having worst ever share of 16.5%

In India, on the other hand, there is an expected growth of 10%-11% in used car market compared to the 3%-4% last year. Auto market in India has been hit, with the rise in inflation and fuel price, affecting the sales of new cars. However,  used car sales are typically less affected and are subjected to a slower fall in growth than new cars in a market which is hit by slowdown. In the developed market like the US and Europe for every one new car sold, the industry sells around 2.8 used cars. In India, that ratio is still 1:1. As the market grows and people are introduced to new car models, consumers will change cars frequently, that will in turn help the growth of used car sales.

Meanwhile, the New Delhi based car maker, Maruti is aiming to sell Petrol cars abroad. The company has identified Africa and South East Asia as the potential market for them, the step was taken due to the declining popularity of petrol vehicles in the domestic market as diesel is highly subsidised in India. Exporting of vehicle will also help the company offset the costs of importing auto components as the rupee has declined by 19 percent against the US dollar in the past year causing the cost of import to double.

Please share and join the discussion on facebook by clicking the "Like" below.

Lake Baikal in Winter, Siberia
photo taken by Jim Linwood

In a meeting in Moscow on Monday, 9th July, Russian President, Vladimir Putin set guidelines to be followed by Russia's Ambassadors to foreign countries and international organizations.

He came out with the full plan for its long term and short term strategy in Asia, Europe and US.

Turning to Asia, he stressed on the dynamic economy of India and China which they can utilize and can learn from, to develop its Siberia and the Far East.

India has been present in the far eastern Russian island of Sakhalin as ONGC Videsh limited owns a stake in Sakhalin oil and gas fields. Indian presence has helped Russia develop this island somewhat. You might not find good Indian restaurants in some of the major cities of Russia, but you will definitely find one here.

Apart from helping develop its Siberian and far east region which is highly rich in natural resources, India may also join Russia to help in the project  of conversation of Siberian Tigers. 

Siberia is also considered a good place for solar power plant investment, although northern part of the region is in dark for half of the year. The greatest potential for solar energy is concentrated in the Southern Siberia - the Altai Republic. At the moment, there is no solar power plant with industrial capacity. However, a number of companies intend to build several large projects in 2012-2014 and promote installations of Sun tunnel on Siberian homes. India is also new in this market, and has successfully invested in Solar Energy in the state of Gujrat and Rajasthan. Russia would be willing to start a venture with India, but as per now, Russia prefers investment in this project from its home organizations.

In an unanticipated development, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's intensive engagement in the Russian capital with President Dmitry Medvedev and Prime Minister Vladimir Putin in December 2009, led to understandings of immediate and long-term nature to access the vast Russian resources in eastern Siberia and far eastern Russia.

The immediate focus is on oil and gas development. The two sides will also expand cooperation in infrastructure development and in advanced medical technologies and nanotechnology, areas set by Medvedev as key for breaking Russia out of its primitive dependence upon oil and other exports. 

Continuing the objectives of the meeting, Putin, Keeping in mind the volatility of the current world, said that the Ambassadors must react to the events taking place in it very promptly, vigorously and with the help of analysts who can provide reliable forecasts.

Among all the challenges that is being faced by Russia and its allies, he mentioned weapons proliferation, extremism, terrorism, food shortages, drugs and the Eurozone’s debt crisis. He said the West’s economic power is on the decline, but Russia cannot rejoice at this:

"This decline is a hard fact. Gloating or rejoicing at it is inappropriate. But feeling worried is a different matter. The problem is that the West is trying to make up for its economic difficulties by reasserting itself geopolitically. This often results in unilateral action which violates international law. The examples are many, and they include instances of so called ‘humanitarian interference’ and the export of democracy aided by rockets and bombs. Instances of this kind became increasingly frequent after the start of what is known as the ‘Arab Spring’." Putin said as quoted by Voice of Russia

At every major international summit scheduled for the near future - of the G8, the G20, BRICS and the Asia-Pacific Cooperation Forum – Russia will uphold the guiding principle that all international disputes must be resolved through negotiations, and the use of force requires authorization by the UN Security Council.

Concentrating on the former Soviet Union republics,The President then proceeded to the main tasks of Russia’s foreign policy which includes advancing economic integration within the former Soviet Union. Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan have already created what is known as the Customs Union, which is in fact a common market of 170 million people. Should Ukraine join in, the number would increase to 220 million:

"According to independent experts, Ukraine’s entry would add momentum to the integration process and bring immense benefits to all sides. The choice is up to the Ukrainian people. Moscow will respect this choice and continue to seek cooperation modes which would bring Russia and Ukraine even closer together in all important economic aspects. Rolling up economic ties with Ukraine is unacceptable."

Turning to Europe, he said Russia’s cooperation with it is far from what it could be and needs to be improved and considerably expanded. He called attention to the fact that Russia has contributed big sums to the funds used by the IMF for providing financial rescue to the Eurozone.

Turning to the US, Mr Putin emphasized the importance of Russian-American relations for safeguarding global stability. At the same time, he criticized the US for trying to replace the obsolete Jackson-Vanik amendment with the anti-Russian Magnitsky law and designs to develop a global missile defence system which would compromise Russia’s deterrence capability. He said, however, that he expected the anti-Russian rhetoric in the US to subside after next November’s presidential elections.

Presidential meetings with the Ambassadors have been held annually since 2002.

Please share and join the discussion on facebook by clicking the "Like" below.

Traian Basescu

Removing Basescu from office might seem illogical from the point of view of US-Romanian relations, but it is not by chance that the US is repudiating the Romanian president.

At first sight the president seemed to be a perfect vassal of the United States: he sent Romanian troops to Iraq and Afghanistan, allowed deployment of a missile defense site (thus turning Romania into one of the priority targets for Russian nuclear missiles), started verbal attacks against Russia, and advocated American interests at European forums where decisions were made. Under such conditions, many supporters of the Romanian president believe that Basescu’s patronage by the US is stable and will not be subject to any changes. The reality, however, turned out to be different.

General Clark’s visit to Bucharest and the fast replacement of Ambassador Gitenstein prove that Washington has made a decision to support Romania’s USL (Social-Liberal Union) party in the internal political struggle. Despite all of Basescu’s efforts to remain the best vassal of the United States, he ended up in a situation where the decision-makers at the US administration decided to remove him from politics.

The obvious question is: what has he done to upset Americans? There are two possible answers to this question and the answers might not be mutually exclusive.

Traian Basescu failed to become the president who could have won the benevolence of the democratic part of the American elite. The image of “being one of the republicans in Bucharest” turned out to be harmful for his political career. Probably there is another incident which made Washington nervous: Basescu’s visit to the Chinese Embassy earlier this year where, on January 10, the president of Romania decided to participate in the Chinese New Year celebrations. The decision was quite unexpected, since the president had never taken part in such events. Only a couple of Bucharest analysts note the inconsistency between the official version of the visit and the calendar. In 2012, the Chinese New year started on January 23 – two weeks after the official ceremony held in Bucharest. For an outsider the situation was absolutely clear: Basescu needed to discuss something important with Chinese diplomatic representatives and for that reason the New Year was moved two weeks. We can only guess what topics they might have discussed, but one thing is obvious – such discussions can not but cause certain irritation in Washington. Today the situation Basescu has found himself in might be the result of such annoyance.

Another possible explanation which does not exclude the above-mentioned might be Basescu’s behavior abroad. It is well known that superpowers often use their vassals as an exchange coin in their geopolitical operations. At a certain point, Basescu’s behavior abroad started to irritate some geopolitical forces so much that his “getting out of the game” became a topic for discussions at high-level talks. In the context of such operations, global geopolitical forces tend to make mutual concessions on certain regional problems often combining problems which do not have any apparent connection.

It is quite possible that change of regime in Romania – which means removal from the political life not only the president but also the entire team who supported him – is just an exchange coin, a concession in a geopolitical deal which the US made at the international level. Such explanation of the current situation can be proved by the fact that General Clark was sent over there and he actually organized Basescu’s removal in a blitzkrieg and with military accuracy. It looks like Washington needed the urgent resignation of the president, but did not want to leave the process in the hands of local executors.

The steps that USL government will be taking domestically and internationally and the difference between them and what Basescu was doing might be able to somewhat explain the real reasons for his removal. Regardless of that, it is absolutely clear that the policy of Romania will never be the same and Romanian politicians will understand that subservience cannot guarantee security for the future.

Valentin Mândrăşescu is the author and presenter at the Voice of Russia, Russia's first internationally broadcasted Radio. On air since 1929.

Please share and join the discussion on facebook by clicking the "Like" below.

Lanzarote, photo taken by
Robby Van Moor

Written by Alina Alex


Lanzarote is the part of Canary Islands, controlled by Spain. Spanish (Castilan) is the major language of the island with a distinct Canary Island accent and some vocabulary which is not found on the Spanish mainland.

Tourism is the main  driving force of the economy of the island. A large proportion of tourists arrive from Ireland and the U.K, hence English is also understood by some of the people in the island.

Capital city of Arrecife hosts the island's only airport. There are scheduled flights from Arrecife to other canalry islands, Spanish Mainland and London. Many chartered flights from other European countries also serve this island. 

Lanzarote has lot to offer for the sports loving people. It has one of the best Diving, Surfing and Go Karting schools. If you are not much into sports like me, still you would love to celebrate your cheap holidays to Lanzarote. I am here to enjoy the peacefulness of the island, if you have been following me on The World Reporter then you know this is my 12th - 13th island destination in past two months.

The attraction of the island which I found as most attractive was Timanfaya National Park.

You can take a bus or a car to travel up to the Volcano. Coach tour around the volcano then back to see the geyser and the burning of the grass. You can also see the chicken being cooked over the live volcano. If you are on a double Decker coach, try to g on the higher deck! The views were amazing and breathtaking.

Timanfaya National Park, photo taken by Sylviane Moss

The volcanoes and sights are unbelievably and is a great day out I would recommend going to see it.

This place is so unlike anywhere else on earth. You could be on any planet here. The volcanoes and sights are unbelievably awesome. It's amazing to see the steam blast from the ground within a few seconds of putting cold water down. The scenery is fantastic. 

After travelling so much in different islands and countries, I have had made a rule that never listen to guides who are there just to cheat, but here I was impressed with the knowledge and honesty of the guides. If you are in a bus you would get to listen to the commentary. And A guide would be there with you all time. There is not much walking. You would be in the bus for the most of the time, which stops at the convenient points where you can take photos. Keep a sunshade with you, since it can be very windy and dusty.

Montana Roja, photo taken by Joachim S. Müller

Montana Roja was another interesting place I visited, it is an extinct volcano, It is a long way up, it took me nearly 45 minutes to reach at the top. Overall it is an easy way up as long as you take the broad, official path around the back of the mountain. You have to follow little signs on the rocks, but if you are adventurous then there is another sea facing path, which is really beautiful, although in between it gets little tricky and very steep. Once you reach around the crater rim, you can see Timanfaya National Park over to Fuertaventura as well.

Playa de Papagayo, photo taken by CeBepuH

And if you are in Lanzarote, then you must see the sea side. I had very less time, and I could only make out to Playa de Papagayo. And I am glad that I did. Playa de Papagayo is a popular beach located in the area collectively also known as Playas del Papagayo in a national park at the South-Eastern tip of Lanzarote.

It is a part of a protected area called the Monumento Natural de Los Ajaches, the oldest hills on the island. It is formed by a set of small bays separated by a series of reefs; because it's not easy to find, it's ideal for relaxing. The area is one of spectacular beauty and includes five large golden sandy beaches. Beaches are awesome, food is great. Everything is simple, don't expect anything more like Goa. You have to pay a small entrance fee if going by car and roads are just dirt tracks, but well worth the trip.

Please share and join the discussion on facebook by clicking the "Like" below.

INS Viraat

India and China, since they are being compared with each other have become more aggressive in the competition of spreading their influence in the region. While China projects itself as a world power, India continues to keep its limits within the subcontinent region. Although the world requires India to take leading role in the geopolitics diplomacy, India's response so far has been indifferent. India kept itself away from saying any word on the issue of Syria and Libya. 

Although India has been slow when compared to China to secure even regional influence, India has managed small achievements in gaining international strategic presence.

India and China play a complex diplomatic politics. Friends at global levels, but rivals in the regional level. India and China trade is worth billions of US dollars. Recently on March 29th, 2012 Indian and Chinese leaders met during BRIC summit. The leaders stressed on linking economies along with other BRIC nations, as in trading in local currencies as well as linking stock exchanges of the member countries. The leaders also stressed on setting up of an international bank on par with Asian Development Bank, IMF and World Bank. It would fund various development projects in member countries and other emerging economies and may act as a relief provider for first time buyer mortgage in case of real financial crisis and disaster. The goal of the bank will also include lending, in the long term, if there comes a global financial crises such as the Eurozone crisis and issuing convertible debt, which could be bought by the central banks of all the member nations. Hence it will be acting as a vessel for risk-sharing.

Things that irritates China is India's sweet relations with exiled Tibetan government and Taiwan Island, which China claims as its own territory. India and China has been involved in full fledged war in 1962, after that both the countries tried to keep their differences aside and focus on the economy, although border disputes occurred many times.

India's main concern at the moment is checking its all time arc rival Pakistan and securing its influence on the Indian Ocean region.

So far India had been taking on the invasion by the neighbouring countries on its land, but recently it has realized that its presence at the other strategic locations on the map is also necessary to showcase its military readiness, flexibility and superiority.

On Thursday, July 5th, the visiting Mauritius foreign affairs and trade minister Arvin Boolell to India made an unexpected offer of giving two Mauritius sun-drenched islands to India as part of a trade and investment deal. 

He said that India can use those islands to its advantage, it could be either a military base or India can develop them as a tourist spot. However soon the Mauritian High Commission in a press release denied that such an offer was ever made. 

This is not the first time when Mauritius presented such an offer. The island nation had offered India the same two of islands North and South Agalega Islands nearly 1,100KM north of the Mauritius main Island in 2006. But the country had to take back the offer due to large disagreement in the political system of the country.

If the political pressure eases down in Mauritius and Indian government accepts the offer, then situated close to an important sea lane of communication in the southern Indian Ocean, these islands can be effectively used by the Indian Navy and Air Force. North Agalega island already has an airfield and can be repaired to make it into an advanced airbase. The island also caries a huge potential of becoming a tourist destination and agricultural land, although the land area is officially mere 70 sq km and it could be smaller as suggested by the satellite images.

India shares good strategic relations with Mauritius and its Naval and Air Force personnel work closely with the Mauritian Police (Army, the country doesn't have its own standing army), helping them in various tasks like checking illegal fishing in the maritime zones of Mauritius as well as checking pirate activities. 

The deal is still on the paper and may not even exist as denied by the Mauritian High Commission, today the only Indian presence in the foreign country is Tajikistan where India maintains two air bases Farkhor and Ayni.

Farkhor is official Indian air force base. Situated near the border of Afghanistan, the airbase is nearly only 250KM away from Pakistan. Russia has a great influence in Tajikistan and doesn't allow any other country to form a base their. However, this base was secured by India with the assistance from Russia. in 2003, at the cost of $10 million, India repaired the base which was lying unused since 1980. The base hosts a squadron of Mig 29.

Ayni Airbase is situated much away near the border of Uzbekistan. Both India, Tajikistan and Russia deny the reports that India has been using this base for its Air Force. In January 2011, Tajik Foreign Minister, Hamrohan Zarifi, officially launched negotiations with Russia to discuss possible deployment of Russian military at Ayni. It is confusing that India has invested on this air base seven times more than what it invested in Farkhor, still there are denial from all the sides about its use as possible Indian Air Force base. Tajikistan has confirmed that India extended the length of the runway to 3,200 meters and installed state-of-the-art navigational and air defense equipment. India also maintains and operates a military hospital at the base. 

Farkhor and Ayni Air Base

Both the Bases gives India an advantage over China and Pakistan. Indian aircrafts stationed there can reach China and Pakistan within minutes from the backside, at the time when the enemy would be expecting Indian aircrafts to come from the conventional direction.

Located in the east, India has its own base in the Andaman and Nicobar islands, these islands joined the Indian Union in 1956 once the Royal Air Force handed the Car Nicobar airbase, once India secured the large island group, it not only had expanded India's Exclusive Economy Zone, but also brought Indian forces to the mouth of strategic Straight of Malacca.

Situated at the vital sea lines of communication between the Middle East and East Asia, the Maldives will be the nucleus of future security order in the Indian Ocean. M P Anil Kumar, analyst and former Indian Air Force Pilot says that India should offer Maldives statehood under its union. Maldives came into everybody's attention as it is the nation which has been experiencing the worst form of global warming. Maldives's height above the sea level is very low, that makes it very vulnerable to floods. Due to rise in sea level because of global warming, Maldives islands are feared to be submerged first. Considering the possibility that Maldivians will have to migrate before that happens, he said that their most preferred choice will be India, because of many similarities and closeness.

"Given what could happen by the year 2100, it is imperative for India to act in good faith, and also with an eye on our national interest. India should offer Maldives statehood within our Union. This move, apart from letting the Maldivians resettle on the mainland with minimum legal fuss will help to extend India's EEZ. A win-win prospect for both parties," He added "Even if they decline, India can ask for the belt of waters surrounding the archipelago to be converted into mare nostrum. Yep, the EEZ pitch is a decoy."

The possibility of Maldives joining Indian Union is very less, moreover China already has its footsteps on the island nation ans is trying its best to start the project of developing its base in Marao island of Maldives quickly. India has though tried to setup its naval and airbase in the island nation. It was in August 2009 when A.K. Anthony, visited the islands to discuss the deployment of surveillance aircraft and ships

Under the plan, India has expressed its will to renovate a former Royal Air Force base on the islands, and integrate the Maldives into its own coastguard system since the Maldivian government finds it impossible to police its own waters. 

"India wants to reinforce and expand its perimeter defence and an active surveillance from a naval base will contribute to that important strategic objective," said Dr Anupam Srivastava, director of the Asia Programme at the University of Georgia's Centre for International Trade and Security.

Please share and join the discussion on facebook by clicking the "Like" below.