PLA Turns 94 And More Threatening Than Ever

 India must be cautious of at least four changes that will impact the border dispute with China The Chinese People’s Liberation Army celebrated its 94th founding anniversary on August 1. Formed in 1927, it has become the world’s largest armed force but it’s no longer a conventional land-centric army. Under the Central Military Commission Chairman Xi Jinping, it has undertaken military reforms intended to make it fully mechanised by 2020, informatised by 2035, and a world-class force by 2049.It has not yet achieved complete mechanisation, and Xi has also not defined what a world-class force means. But an informed guess is that it would mean being on a par with the US, UK, French, Russian and Indian armed forces.Although China’s primary strategic direction is reunification with Taiwan and to prepare for the US contingency during reunification, India and other Indo-Pacific countries are also impacted by its ongoing force modernisation. India needs to be cautious of at least four changes within PLA.Read more in the newspaper, the article was originally published in the Times of India.

Japan should think carefully about antagonizing Russia

Read the Full Article on Asia TimesThe recently published annual Defense of Japan white paper identifies the US as Japan’s “only ally” and the need to protect Taiwan if it is threatened by China.If read between the lines, it is a pragmatic expression of strategic clarity in the post-Shinzo Abe Japan’s geo-strategic posture. Japan acknowledges that it has no allies in its neighborhood and is willing to accept Taiwan as a quasi-protectorate.As evident from Russian Ambassador to Japan Mikhail Galuzin’s comments earlier this year, Russia does not see Japan as a threat, but is concerned about its security cooperation with the US. Despite this, Japan is on an ill-advised path of antagonizing Russia, paving the way for China and Russia to conflate their interests against Japan.On July 23, Russian President Vladimir Putin met with the permanent members of the Russian Security Council. After the meeting, it became apparent that an “unprecedented plan“ was in the works for engaging Japan in economic activities on the Kurils.The plan was broadly hinted at by Prime Minister Mikhail Mishustin during his visit to Iturup island on July 26 and involves a new regime of tax exemptions and setting up a free customs zone on the Kuril Islands.

Until the “unprecedented plan” was hinted at, the visit was only being seen as aimed at enticing Sakhalin Oblast residents to vote for the United Russia party, to which both Mishustin and Putin belong, in parliamentary elections next month.

The reactions to Mishustin’s visit by the Japanese government, diplomats and press can only be described as a tantrum meant to assuage domestic constituencies, with outrage trumping good sense.Japanese Chief Cabinet Secretary Katsunobu Kato in no uncertain terms called the visit “extremely regrettable.” After Kato’s comments, Galuzin was summoned by the Japanese Foreign Ministry and issued a diplomatic protest over the visit, which Galuzin called “inappropriate” and refused to accept.Read the Full Article on Asia TimesThe views expressed are the author’s own and don’t reflect the recommendations of the Takshashila Institution 

Digital health cooperation with Israel is in India’s health interest

By Shambhavi Naik and Gedaliah AftermanIndia’s dramatic surge in COVID-19 cases has refocused the local debate on the mismatch between demand and supply of medical services across the country. This discrepancy is aggravated by local lockdowns impeding access to doctors and fear of infection, as people are encouraged to seek medical attention at home. Pleas on social media have demonstrated the need to use digital tools to address issues of information asymmetry and access of health services in non-urban areas.Noticeably, countries have been able to direct their existing digital health solutions to augment their health infrastructure to respond quickly to COVID-19. Israel, which this week removed most COVID-19 related restrictions, is an excellent example of deploying digital health solutions. India can collaborate strategically with Israel to develop capacity in digital health, in preparation for future pandemics.India’s experiments in recent years with adopting digital health have led to mixed responses. Challenges include lack of digital infrastructure in non-urban areas, language barriers, and the absence of basic health services in remote areas. Thus, a blanket one-size-fits-all approach to digital health adoption is unlikely to work in India.Instead, a tiered approach or ground up building of infrastructure is required. Nonetheless, it is important to build to this goal, as digital health tools can help close several current gaps in healthcare. Electronic health records (EHR) maintained in an inter-operable manner, as envisioned under India’s Data Empowerment and Protection Architecture (DEPA), can reduce diagnostic costs and ease access to a patient’s health history for medical professionals. Such records can also form the basis for health information exchange, where EHR from remote areas can be sent to specialist doctors for their opinion.Telemedicine can be used by doctors to patients or consult amongst his peers. COVID-19 has highlighted the importance of developing telemedicine services even in urban centers, so that patients can continue receiving health services without endangering their lives. In addition, diagnostic tools such as wearables can enable real-time monitoring of patient’s health data, leading to more effective decision-making by medical professionals.While these tools cannot replace core medical functions, they can supplement operations and increase medical outreach. The implementation process is however accompanied by concerns about consent mechanisms for data acquisition, storage, and possible cybersecurity threats. Successful implementation of digital health therefore depends on an ecosystem that fosters not only innovation, but also trust and an adequate formulation of appropriate policies to govern digital health.Extending the India-Israel partnershipTo effectively plan and implement digital health policies, governments can learn from each other and work together. Furthermore, only by creating long-lasting cooperative structures and partnerships can they effectively prepare for future crises. Israel and India offer a particular case in point.Israel has actively engaged digital health tools in its public health service and is well placed to share its experience and knowhow with international partners. Under the aegis of Healthcare Israel, it has already provided professional assessments on health care programs in Africa, Asia, and Europe.Israel has successfully deployed digital health tools, but its population and infrastructural challenges are relatively small. On the other hand, India’s adoption of digital tools is still in its infancy, and choosing the right partner can help it expedite this growth. Both stand to benefit from increased cooperation in this field: India can provide an opportunity for Israel to trial technologies at scale in preparation for their international deployment. An effective way to achieve this, while safeguarding rights and health of Indian citizens, would be to create “regulatory sandboxes,” where innovators can trial promising solutions in a controlled environment under a regulator’s supervision. In exchange, Israel’s innovative capabilities make it a highly suitable partner for India.A good starting point for such a collaboration would be to map technologies for preventive healthcare. Point-of-care diagnostics and screening, as just one example, can help in the early detection of cancer and early intervention, which would not only save lives but also reduce the demand for tertiary healthcare and the costs of surgical treatments. Collectively gathered population-level data could inform on developing infectious disease outbreaks, underpinning a health response to prevent further spread. Such preventive strategies would provide relief to strained health resources and allow their effective use, even as India builds up more capacity.Increased investment in health infrastructure, legislation safeguarding the privacy of citizens, and the strengthening of the health regulator are three key actions that are critical for the successful adoption of digital health in both Israel and India. Creating this ecosystem can not only enable government-to-government collaboration, but also facilitate the growth of the domestic and international private sectors providing digital health services. Private sector participation will underline greater outreach of health services, contributing to improved health outcomes.The ongoing COVID-19 outbreak has demonstrated the urgency of increased international cooperation to protect global health interests. No country can be safe from a pandemic unless all countries have adequate, accessible, and affordable healthcare. Therefore, it is a national and global interest for India, Israel, and others to use this opportunity to collaborate and lead the way in creating world-class products and services that can benefit all.Download this article as a pdf.Authors: Shambhavi Naik (PhD) is the Head of Research at the Takshashila Institution  Gedaliah Afterman (PhD) is Head of the Asia Policy Program at the Abba Eban Institute for International Diplomacy.

What Pegasus says about Cyber Power and our National Security

Public discourse around the Pegasus reports alleging government surveillance of politicians, media persons, public officials and business people is understandably focused on its political and civil liberties dimensions. Yet, the affair also has crucial national security and geopolitical dimensions that must enter the national debate. The 130-year-old governance mindset and administrative processes that the Indian state employs in such matters is not tenable in the Information Age. Pegasus is another reminder that the Indian republic is more vulnerable than ever to information offensives by adversaries.

Information governance in liberal democracies has two key goals: first, to protect the fundamental rights (privacy included) of citizens; and second, to defend the national information sphere from hostile state and non-state adversaries. These goals are sometimes in conflict. There is a trade-off between liberty and national security. Liberal democracies achieve a balance by codifying the trade-off, placing limits on the state’s powers, defining due processes, and subjecting government actions to parliamentary and judicial review. While the Indian state has managed a balance in many areas, privacy and surveillance have remained in a grey zone since the Constitution came into force.Read the full article in The Mint

Not Swadeshi, Samarthya is the answer to India’s Economic Nationalism

The roots of swadeshi lie in the triple whammy encountered by 19th century India.

First, European colonialism resulted in the loss of political power to a foreign race and a sense of being dominated by the British overlords. The Raj was resolute in keeping Indians as subjects and away from the corridors of political, bureaucratic and military power. Britain saw itself as lord and the Indian colonies as subject – and the people of India were clearly aware of it. The seeds of Indian economic nationalism lay in the resistance to being ruled by foreign overlords and in the rejection of their norms.Second, the era of globalisation and free trade of the mid-19th century affected economic players in different ways. Traders from communities that were capable and did not impose social restrictions on travel could benefit from national and international trade. The majority of the population, however, was unable to adapt to the changes in the international economic pattern and faced intense competition from foreign imports. The colonial government was unconcerned about helping this population make the transition and improve its productivity and competitiveness.

Third, the Industrial Revolution transformed the relative competitiveness of goods produced in Britain and India. Not only were imported goods better than domestic products, they were cheaper. India did not industrialise in the 19th century because the colonial government either actively discouraged it, or failed to create the environment for it. Another reason is that Indian society was unable to create effective mechanisms to convert savings into capital and allocate it effectively.It was in this broad context that the disempowered elites of a subordinate polity sought to change consumer preferences – the only area they had influence over. We see this in the early phase of swadeshi, which was mostly pursued through increasingly organised social mobilisation.Read the full article in ThePrint

E-commerce: Don’t let Protectionism Drive Policy

It is hard to imagine how prohibiting high discounts and attractive offers is supposed to protect consumer interests. It is easier, however, to imagine how this move can help the “offline” stores in their competition against the online ones

The new rules also mandate e-commerce companies to provide a domestic alternative for any imported goods or services offered for sale. Consumer protection rules imposed on e-commerce firms should not be used for the atmanirbhar and swadeshi drive.Perhaps the most contentious rule, which highlights a misunderstanding of how marketplaces work, is the “fallback liability” clause. In short, this clause makes the e-commerce entity responsible for the goods and services sold by sellers registered on the platform. This is not dissimilar to holding a mall responsible for the products sold by individual retail shops within it. This is impractical and unfair to the marketplace.Further, there is an array of rules that increase compliance requirements, such as registering with the department for promotion of industry and internal trade, mandatory partnering with the National Consumer Helpline, and the appointment of compliance officers. Every e-commerce platform must appoint a chief compliance officer (who will be liable for third party information on the platform), nodal contact person (to coordinate with law enforcement), and a grievance officer.In the final analysis, though, these rules will fail the test of necessity and proportionality. Most e-commerce firms have fairly robust systems of customer care, which consumers can approach for grievance redressal. Further, e-commerce platforms facilitate refunds and returns in cases where customers are dissatisfied with the products. Beyond that, they have built a network where users rate and review both products and sellers of the products that can provide crucial information to any potential customers.

It would behove the government to withdraw most of these proposed rule changes, as the veneer of consumer protection peels away rather easily to reveal the underlying protectionist motivations.Read the full article here

Deniability is Pegasus Scandal’s Strongest Suit. And National Security is the Biggest Price

The storm of the recent Pegasus spyware episode raging in the international and domestic media discourses could have varied consequences for diverse constituencies. The revelations, led by Amnesty International, has India keeping company with Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Hungary, Kazakhstan, Mexico, Morocco, Rwanda, Saudi Arabia, Togo, and the United Arab Emirates. The list was promptly denied by the NSO Group — the Israeli corporate entity that marketed the spyware. Deniability revealed itself as the strongest suit of Pegasus.

Amnesty’s efforts cannot provide the sinews for legal challenges but they will fan political storms in democracies and India is the only one on the list. This should be a matter of concern. The heart of the issue is the possibility of abusing power in the garb of national security. The abuse lies in the feasibility of illegal deprivation of human rights, especially the right to privacy. Illegal, because snooping is supposedly being done without the due process of law.Read the full article in ThePrint

MoD and IDSA No Longer Separate

At the recently concluded annual general body meeting of the Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses (IDSA), the flavour of the discussion was the think tank’s autonomy. The meeting discussed the resolution on renaming the institute, by affixing Manohar Parrikar to its existing nomenclature. The Narendra Modi government had changed the name last year itself without consulting the institute’s executive council. Later, the government left it to the general body to take the final call.

Since its inception in 1965, the IDSA has had a tenuous relationship with the Ministry of Defence (MoD) that has suzerainty over the institute, but at the same time is expected to respect its autonomy. By the end of the annual general meeting (AGM) on 15 July, its autonomy might have taken a body blow by the decisions of the very members who are supposed to protect it. The soul of late K. Subrahmanyam, the architect of the IDSA’s structural relationship with the MoD, could be restless over the changes thrust upon his brainchild.

Read the full article in ThePrint

How India can guard its Interests should Kabul fall to the Taliban

As the prospect of Taliban bands fighting their way to Kabul becomes more likely with the withdrawal of American troops from Afghanistan, there is a growing perception in New Delhi that, as a newspaper editorial put it, for India the situation “holds no glad tidings, good options or even a silver lining." The concern is that if the Taliban regain power, not only will India lose influence, but also that battle-hardened Islamist militants will turn their attentions to Kashmir, just as they did 30 years ago after the Soviet retreat from Afghanistan.

Well, as much as these fears and concerns are genuine, they are also overblown. International politics is vastly different today from what it was in 1991 or even 2001. The return of the Taliban will be terrible for the people of their unfortunate country, but it does not automatically follow that they will pose the same kind of threat to India as they did in the 1990s. Even then, their hostility towards India was found to be driven more by the agenda of the Pakistani military-jihadi complex and less by any intrinsic animosity towards us. In recent times, their adversarial position towards New Delhi has been in response to India’s support for the Afghan government and, until recently, the refusal to talk to them.Read the full article in The Mint

Army must ditch ‘superiority’ mindset. Distrust, Animosity will only hamper Military Reforms

It would be naïve to expect that anything good would emerge from the public spat between Chief of Defence Staff General Bipin Rawat and Air Chief Marshal Rakesh Kumar Singh Bhadauria on the politically mandated creation of the Theatre Command System. There is nothing wrong in professional disagreements but to air them in public is unacceptable to the military ethos. Worse, it comes at a time when threats to national security are assuming ominous proportions.

In all probability, both Gen Rawat and ACM Bhadauria would have got the political pipe down messages and one can expect that things will settle down. India’s military image would have temporarily taken a beating. But certain good things can come out of this unbecoming episode, if the next moves by the political leadership are appropriately and speedily managed.

Read the full article in ThePrint

Mint | Why liberal democracies have a distinct edge on cyber capability

According to a recent report on the cyber capabilities of 15 countries, the US is the world’s only cyber superpower. China is the leading power in the next tier, along with Russia, the UK, Israel, France, Australia and Canada. India is placed in the third tier, alongside Iran, Japan, Malaysia, North Korea, Vietnam and Indonesia. The International Institute of Strategic Studies net assessment of Cyber Capabilities and National Power compares countries across seven dimensions ranging from doctrines to offensive capabilities, and concludes that China and Russia are much farther behind the US than popular media reports would suggest. Read the full article here.

One Year On, Assessing the Ban on Chinese Apps

In June last year, the Indian government’s decision to block 59 Chinese apps was greeted with much fanfare in the media.The official rationale behind this, the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology had explained then, was that these products were “prejudicial to sovereignty and integrity of India, defence of India, security of state and public order.”Following this, there were three more rounds of such bans targeting Chinese apps, taking the total number of apps banned to 267. Earlier this year, reports indicated that the government had asked companies like ByteDance, Tencent and Alibaba to respond to a list of queries. Not satisfied with their response, it has persisted with the ban.Read the full article in the Quint.

For CCP, the Era of Seeking Strength

On July 1, even as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) marks its centenary, it has sought to use the moment to catalyse the march towards the goals of “socialist modernisation” and “national rejuvenation”. According to the Party’s, and indeed Xi Jinping’s, historical narrative, the People’s Republic of China (PRC) entered a new era after the 19th Party Congress in 2017. If earlier periods were marked by efforts to “stand up” and then “grow rich”, the new era is marked by the country “becoming strong”. Examining Xi’s speeches, Party regulations, the government’s economic policies and official media discourse, one can identify some of the key features that characterise this era of seeking strength.Read the full article in Hindustan Times. Views are personal

‘Gray zone’ intrigue may derail Russia-Japan cooperation

Read the Full Text of the Article on Asia Times Rightly or wrongly, Moscow may interpret recent events as ‘war by other means’ waged by US ally JapanRussia and its adversaries are equally obsessed with a full spectrum of “gray zone” activities, including high-tech military, industrial and corporate espionage. While Russia does not see Japan as an adversary, it feels uncomfortable with Japan’s close ties to the US.The contemporary Russia-Japan relationship is complicated, with worrying trends signaling possible derailment of their bilateral ties in some fields.While the direction of great-power relations is rightly gauged from policy moves and summits, the shadowy world of espionage and spies, while overtly aligned with policy and polity, covertly operates to secure national interests, making no concessions, even to allies.Over the past few weeks, a curious case of alleged espionage has been grabbing headlines in Japan. Kazuo Miyasaka, the 70-year-old former owner of a technical research firm, was reportedly apprehended by the police for allegedly passing on high-tech military secrets to a member of the Russian trade representative mission in Japan.Miyasaka is believed to have betrayed secrets related to the US Space Force’s unmanned X-37B spacecraft, among other advanced systems.Read the Full Text of the Article on Asia Times All views are personal and do not reflect the recommendations of the Takshashila Institution 

Should India Worry About China's Naval Fleet in Indian Ocean?

The Indian Ocean Region (IOR) of the 21st century represents a geopolitical hotspot. Power politics is gaining traction in the region, with China attempting to form a leading presence in the vast waters surrounding the Indian subcontinent. In the context of (i) strategic identity, (ii) naval modernization and (iii) limitation in power, this article attempts to understand Chinese ambitions in the Indian ocean and argues that although the IOR will remain an Indian dominated region for the present, we cannot ignore the aggressive approach from China as a result of its highly ambitious foreign policy and increasing activities there.This article originally appeared in The Quint. You can read the full article here.

How to Beat China in the High-Tech Race

The near-daily cadence of reports highlighting China's growing technology prowess has set the cat among the pigeons in many democracies. In response, these countries are now offering higher subsidies and fatter incentives to increase the competitiveness of their own technology industries.

The US Senate, for instance, passed a $250 billion Innovation and Competition bill on 8th June aimed at outpacing China. The Indian government, since last year, has launched Product Linked Incentive (PLI) schemes for 13 sectors worth ₹2 trillion, some of them targeted at high-tech industries such as semiconductors, telecom, and networking. Earlier this month, a draft growth strategy of the Japanese government also promised generous financial incentives to attract cutting-edge chip-making facilities. Not to be left behind, the EU, too, has announced a €145 billion plan to upgrade its semiconductor and electronics manufacturing.

While the intent is encouraging, it's interesting to note that all these plans are qualitatively quite similar to China's 'Made in China 2025' — a state-led industrial policy for technology. Released in 2015, it was labelled as a threat to global trade for channelling state subsidies to achieve import substitution. But now, many countries seem to be following a similar approach. Of course, China's subsidies are often discriminatory and place extreme restrictions on foreign investment. Even so, all these policies mirror China's at their core — they are all about using old-style industrial policy instruments such as subsidies and incentives to achieve high-tech self-sufficiency.Read the full article in Times of India. Views are personal

Cyber Threats now sit alongside Nuclear Ones

The US-Russian meeting in Geneva on 15 June signified an attempt by both sides to arrest the pace of a worsening relationship. The US, as the aggrieved party, accused the Russians of cyberattacks. US President Joe Biden handed over a list of 16 ‘critical infrastructure’ entities and warned that if they were attacked, the US will respond in a ‘cyber way’. Russian President Vladimir Putin denied culpability for any attacks and held the US responsible for several malicious cyber campaigns in Russia. Both parties have, however, agreed to the creation of working groups for urgent arms control and cyber issues.

Cyber now sits alongside nuclear threats, and it is definitely a promotion in the value chain of strategic affairs. The US is concerned and there are good reasons for it. India should be too.

Read the full article in ThePrint

The Pandemic has shown how Dysfunctional our World Order is

What is the best way to fight a pandemic in an era of intense globalization? The answer, clearly, is for humanity to throw its combined resources against its common adversary. Since no one is safe until everyone is safe, the longer it takes for the world’s population to acquire immunity against the coronavirus, the greater the risk that whatever protection immunized populations currently enjoy will be broken by new variants.

And what would a common global response to a common threat look like? Here too the answer is clear: temporarily suspend intellectual property rights restrictions, lift export controls, remove trade barriers and eliminate regulatory friction on vaccine supply chains. Essential drugs and medical equipment should flow unrestricted to wherever they are necessary. Amid a firefight with a common enemy, it makes no sense to demand payment from an ally who urgently needs bullets.Read the full article in The Mint

The Galwan Valley One Year On: What's Changed with China and the PLA?

This month marks the first anniversary of the Galwan Valley clash between China and India, which resulted in the deaths of 20 Indian and at least four PLA soldiers. It also marks the first fatalities on the Line of Actual Control (LAC) in over 45 years resulting from China’s attempts to change the status quo forcefully in Ladakh. The initial Chinese incursion was located at four points — Pangong Tso, the approach roads to the Depsang Plain, Gogra and Hotspring areas and Galwan Valley — which both China and India consider to be on their side of the LAC but were previously controlled by New Delhi. The Galwan Valley clash on the night of 15 June 2020 shattered three decades of trust and confidence established by five pacts signed between 1993 and 2012. In the days that followed, both sides deployed over two army divisions, battle tanks, self-propelled howitzers and surface to air missiles to Ladakh. Both sides also deployed fighter, surveillance and reconnaissance aircraft and drones at forward bases near the border. In August 2020, India carried out a “pre-emptive” operation on Pangong Tso’s south bank to strengthen its on-ground position and create leverage while negotiating a Chinese withdrawal.

Today, after thirteen months of friction, eleven rounds of Corps Commander-level meetings, seven Work Mechanism for Consultation and Coordination (WMCC) meetings and at least two known interactions between India’s External Affairs Minister Dr S Jaishankar and China’s Foreign Minister Wang Yi, the two sides have only disengaged at Galwan and Pangong Tso. The stand-off in Ladakh continues at other friction points. In his recent interview, India’s Chief of Army Staff, Gen MM. Naravane highlighted that India continues to maintain a significant troop presence along the entire border. Heightened tensions and a forward Sino-Indian military presence on the LAC seem to be the new status quo. But four specific developments on the Chinese side since the Galwan incident could further impact the LAC dispute in the future. Some are a direct result of the ongoing military stand-off, while others are a part of the broader PLA restructuring and China’s evolving military strategy.

This was originally published on 9Dashline, please read the whole article using the link.

High time Indian Foreign Policy jettisons ‘don’t annoy China’ notion & Supports Virus Probe

Of late, Covid-19 has been getting a geopolitical boost from the tailwinds of political and scientific narratives originating primarily from the US. In May,  US President Joe Biden ordered an intelligence probe into the origins of the novel coronavirus or SARS-CoV-2. The fact that it originated in China is undisputed. Scientific suspicions that the virus is an artificial creation and probably leaked from the Wuhan Institute of Virology have now received a booster dose. Anthony Fauci, the Chief Medical Adviser to the US President, stated that he never played down the possibility of the lab leak in China for political reasons. In the last few weeks, a slew of scientific papers have reinforced the lab leak theory, with the G7 and the European Union adding political traction to the call for concerted action to uncover the truth. International politics has now inserted itself into the investigative process and is gaining momentum within the spaces of scientific doubts regarding the origin of the virus. In the long run, the scientific quest for facts draped in political free play could eventually be the information missile that could do a lot of damage to China.In the case of Covid-19, science, geography and politics could create a potent brew in the information age. In global geopolitics, this could become deadly for China. For China’s detractors, it might provide informational fuel and create the psychological effect that can, at the global level, drive popular anger directed against the country. It is an anger that has the potential to sustain because of the colossal damage caused by Covid to lives and livelihood.Read the full article in ThePrint