The Viyug issue brief is usually published quarterly by the researchers and contributors of The Viyug on selected geopolitical events ranging from War, Military/Foreign Affairs, Strategy and Geo-Political Opinions. Our second that is issue #2 features Johnny B. Davis, an International Law Attorney, Army National Guard JAG and Instructor at the Liberty University Helms School of Government.
This particular issue brief titled “Jus ad Bellum and Global Terrorism”. The writer has written it in a perspective for a reform of American foreign policy and on the use the force.
See the Cover Image
The cover image depicts the globe being threatened by various weapons which is a symbolic representation of global terrorism.
(The opinions expressed in the Viyug Issue Brief are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the Viyug)
This issue brief is free to download. Hit the button below and start reading.
Johnny Davis is a Constitutional and International Law Attorney, Professor at the Liberty University Helms School of Government, and an Army National Guard; Judge Advocate General (JAG). He practices International and Constitutional Law in the Washington DC area. He has an LLM International Law from Liberty Law School, an MDIV in Church History from Liberty University Seminary, a JD from Cumberland, and a BS in Government from Liberty University. Instructor Davis is also a writer for the Falkirk Center at Liberty University.
Some of the States have large number of migration. A large number of populations migrate not only across the country but worldwide from these states in search of livelihood. In recent days’ I have been coming across many WhatsApp status and news showing issues related to migrant workers. Then question comes why Bihar, UP & Delhi are in news. Author could not apply any of the theorems learned during his school and college. As a student the new thoughts and theories also failed to be applied in the case. Now in this call of total lock down by Prime Minister of India. Countrymen are looking at Bihar, UP & Delhi with different disciplines of academia be it Social Scientists, Political Scientists, Economists etc.
What happened?
Bihar, Uttar Pradesh (UP), and New Delhi are in the breaking news. People who spread the rumors in Delhi and NCR regions to leave for home in this total lock-down and as a result large number of migrant workers hailing from Bihar and UP were on road to home. Even with a distance of more than 300 km, they started walking toward their homes. Migrant workers who are working in infrastructural projects and unorganized sectors in Delhi and NCR areas specifically are the worst affected. As it is to be noted that this didn’t happen in other part of the nation on this scale (May be NCR Delhi is multi border). Any way they have started moving to their homes on foot, government is arranging bus in order to send them to their respective villages and towns. A lot of people are there and they need proper direction and support.
What is the background?
There is the fear of India entering into stage III due to COVID-19. Every migrant worker is on road heading their way home. They agree that they have done mistake by breaking the lock-down, when they came to know about the consequences of CORONA outbreak. There may be circumstances in which they had to leave for their permanent address. Some of them have started reaching to their native places. This may lead to disaster for poor states, if not tackled properly. Will they be able to control or again in the wake of national emergency, they will have to wait for assistance from center. CORONA is not giving sufficient time so the only way is lock down and minimizing the movement of these migrant workers.
What we can do
Stopping the blame game, Migrants should utilize government schemes of temporary shelter, food and many more at various places, wherever they are.
Those that are still on their way to home must be quarantined immediately.
People helping voluntarily, should also convince and stop them on as is where is basis and provide necessary help.
This is the most testing time for the states having large number of migration. This should be taken positively by some of the states like Bihar which does not have actual data of migrant workers working outside of Bihar. State Governments should utilize it as right time to count and frame policies accordingly for New Bihar or other states having higher number of migration.
The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author.
The author is an avid traveler. He has rich knowledge and working experience in Urban and Rural areas including those cities from Gujarat, Bihar, Uttar Pradesh and his residence in Bengaluru and Pondicherry. He is well versed in various Indian languages such as Hindi, Gujarati, Maithili, Angika, Bhojpuri, Magahi . He can be reached at spumisarc@gmail.com
Before going into the territorial dispute of Arunachal Pradesh (claimed by China as South Tibet) it’s important to know the history of this disputed state. It has various influences by Tibetan, Burmese, and Bhutanese cultures. In the 16th century, the most important heritage of the state- Tawang Monastery was built. This is one the most important sites for the Tibetan Buddhists. The area is assumed to have been populated by Tibetans during those times. In 1912, the border between Tibet and India was not quite delineated. Neither the Mughals nor the British Raj was controlling the region. During that time Qing dynasty ruled both China and Tibet and by 1913 their era came to an end which paved way for China’s sovereignty claim on Tibet. By 1914 it was the time for deciding the borders between Tibet, India and China. It came to be known as Simla convention. British India negotiated hard and got Tibet to accept the region of Tawang and the area south of it belonged to India. Thus the whole area to the south of Tibet came to be later known as, which is now called Arunachal Pradesh.
A map produced in the year 1864 shows Tibet as a separate country. But China claimed it was hers.However here is a map of China and Tibet in the year 1892. That sort of puts the state in part India/Burma
ORIGIN OF THE DISPUTE:
So what is the dispute all about? It all started way back in 1914 during the Simla convection. The representatives of Tibet and British India came to a conclusion that Tawang belongs to the Tibet and area south of it belongs to India. The border was formulated by Henry McMahon and it became to be known as McMohan line. It separated the Tibetan region of china and Arunachal Pradesh. But the Chinese representatives were not happy with the result of Simla convention. The Chinese representatives withdrew from the meeting and since then they refused to accept the accord resulted out from the Simla convection. After the meeting the border was not fully enforced, Except for Tawang.
The Shimla Convention
In 1935, a British administrative office ruled out that India could start using the region (Claimed by China as South Tibet) in her maps. China never recognized Tibet’s independence and took the territory under its control by using military aggression during the time period of Mao Zedong, nor the 1914 Simla convection. Meanwhile during 1947 British left India without solving the border issue. During 1950 china took over Tibet. Thus according to China, Tawang region belongs to her. This is due to the fact that China especially wants to hold on to the monastery as that is a leading center of Tibetan Buddhism in India. Thus the border dispute started for India and China over the ownership of Arunachal Pradesh which even paved way for serious number of conflicts between both the Indian and Chinese armed forces. In the year 1962 on October 20th, thus happened Sino-Indo war. It lasted for one month before China unilaterally declared ceasefire and ended the war. In a synchronized move People’s Liberation Army of China invaded Ladakh and Arunachal Pradesh.
China captured nearly 43000 square kilometres of land in which are called as Aksai Chin. It is of the size of Switzerland.
WAR LEADING TO SALAMI SLICING:
The outbreak of war in 1962 between China and India did only cause much widespread of hate towards each other. China refused to acknowledge the sanctity of the McMohan line and illegal claims over Aksai Chin two countries signed what is known as Panchsheel agreement. Although signing these agreements never made these land ownership dispute to be settled peacefully. India made maps showing Aksai Chin and Arunachal Pradesh as a part of her. On the other hand China made maps claiming ownership over Aksai Chin and Arunachal Pradesh. The then Chinese premier Zhou Enlai in year 1961 said that China would give up its claim over Arunachal Pradesh if India forfeits its claim over Aksai Chin. But Nehru the then prime minister of India declined this offer. If he had accepted that offer, today there would not been so called Border disputes between India and China. In the year 1961 India launched its forward policy. Its objectives were to create outposts behind advancing Chinese troops to cut supplies forcing them to retreat. Thus low scale military operations by both the Indian armed forces and the Chinese armed forces lead to a big scale war and also gave birth to a strategy called SalamiSlicing.
Salami Slicing/Cabbage Strategy
According to military terms salami slicing refers to divide and conquer process of threats and alliances used to overcome opposition. With it an aggressor can influence and eventually dominate a landscape piece by piece. Thus salami slicing means small, stealth military operations against enemies’ lands which over a period of time results in accumulation of lager territory gain. In this fashion, the opposition is eliminated “slice by slice” until it realises, usually too late, that is virtually gone in its entirety. This strategy is also called as Cabbage Strategy.
China’s Execution of this Strategy and Counter Strategy by India:
When this strategy is applied and matched with Chinese intentions, it can be found that China has been doing it way back for a long period of time. China annexing Tibet, part of territory along the Himalayas, claiming sovereignty over Aksai Chin, and whole of Arunachal Pradesh. All these may not be called as absolute salami slicing, but still in other aspects the ultimate aim of the strategy is to gain dominance over the enemy’s landscape. That’s what China is being doing for a long period of time.
On March 26, 2019 China has recently destroyed 30,000 world maps printed in the country for export for not showing Arunachal Pradesh as a part of South Tibet. China routinely objects Indian leaders visiting Arunachal Pradesh to highlight its stand. According to Liu Wenzong, professor from the department of International Law of China Foreign Affairs University was quoted saying that Sovereignty and Territorial integrity are the most vital things to a country. “Both Taiwan and South Tibet (Arunachal Pradesh) are parts of China’s territory which is sacred and inviolable based on international law”. China also firmly opposed the Modi’s visit to South Tibet (Arunachal Pradesh) during early February this year. China strongly remarked the Modi’s inauguration of various infrastructure development projects in South Tibet worth Rs. 4000 crore. Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson said that China’s position on the China-India border question is consistent and clear-cut. The Chinese government never recognised a so called territory named Arunachal Pradesh. There is also a claim that there had been incursions along the border of Arunachal Pradesh. Chinese military have entered the Indian Territory in Anjaw district of Arunachal Pradesh and constructed a wooden bridge over Doimru Nala. This claim of intrusion has been reported false by Indian army. Another claim states that last year October around 10 Chinese troops had entered approximately 14km inside India, in an area located near the banks of Mathu and Emra rivers in Dibang valley. Those troops had set up their camp and had stayed there for several hours before heading back.
Since there a poor development of infrastructure in the border areas of Arunachal Pradesh it helps easily to identify loopholes and let China to press in. Due to lack of even basic roads in the larger parts of border areas in India makes it difficult for security forces to maintain and prevent illegal encroachment of the Chinese inside Arunachal Pradesh.
The main reason why Chinese are always one step ahead because they keep their goals and objectives dynamic using this strategy. Not only their aim is to annex many parts of Indian territories but also develop their own infrastructure for the annexed lands. Thus they are adding their own unique elixir with this strategy to form the Grand Strategy of Salami Slicing (through diplomatic and military means). That is China aims captures Arunachal Pradesh then its infrastructure will develop leading it join the ambitious project of China that is one belt one road initiative. Thus India will lose another big piece of strategic land once again like it lost a part of Kashmir. China has assiduously built an extensive network of railway lines, logistics hub, and other infrastructure in the entire Tibet autonomous system to sustain over 30 divisions (each with over 15,000 soldiers) include five to six “Rapid reaction” forces there. So as the dish suggests SALAMI, China aims to rip India slice off slice thus peeling away our land piece by piece.
Whereas India has floundered in playing the catch-up. Only 27 “Strategic all weather roads” (963km) of the 73 (totalling 4643km) identified for construction along the LAC over 15 years ago. Moreover construction of 14 strategic railway lines for the western and eastern fronts has not even kicked off till now. India must raise Tibet issue to counter China’s claims on Arunachal Pradesh by adopting a weak foreign policy towards China. After decades of neglect, India builds roads along China border in Arunachal Pradesh. India will follow the bridge over the Brahmaputra by building a 2000km highway in the state at a cost of $6 billion. Lt. Col. P. Khongsai said that Chief of Eastern Command, Air Marshal R.D. Mathur and Chief of the Eastern Command Lt. Gen. Anil Chauhan will jointly inaugurate the Advanced Landing Ground (ALG) at Vijay Nagar, the remotest Circle of Changlang disctrict in Arunachal Pradesh located along the Indo-China Border. Along with it comes ALG launched at seven other places like Pasighat, Mechuka, Walong, Tuting, Ziro, Along and Tawang. The vijay nagar is completely cut off as there is no motorcycle road to reach a remote location. So every necessary step has been made to keep immense surveillance 24/7. There was a memorandum of Understanding between the Arunachal Pradesh government and the ministry of Defence in 2009, which took up infrastructure development of the pasighat and other ALGs located at different altitudes in the hilly state at an estimated cost of Rs. 1000 crore. To ensure faster movements of troops in Tawang, a strategically located town in Arunachal Pradesh bordering China, the government plans to build a tunnel which will go through the Sela Pass. This was announced by finance minister Arun Jaitley while presenting the union budget. Even the Indian Air Force to operationalise air field in Arunachal Pradesh near China border Vijaynagar is situated in a remote corner of the state and is not connected with any motor able road.
The 2000km Highway connecting all the strategic places along the border of Arunachal Pradesh
Army Chief Bipin Rawat had recently pointed out China’s strategy of taking over Indian Territory as Salami Slicing, and it is something India has to look into this threshold. Adequate infrastructure in border areas will deter Chinese from intruding into India and laying claims over disputed territories.
WILL THIS SLICING END?
There are two important components in slicing. One is the thing which is being sliced. Other being the thing by which it is sliced. So when one takes control of any one of this then there will be end for China’s Salami Slicing spree. So let the thing which is being sliced be Arunachal Pradesh. And the thing used to slice could be a blend mixture of Chinese politics and military tactics in the border. Before jumping to a conclusion one should know what makes this slicing so easy for China. Arunachal Pradesh, when analysed it has rough terrain and dense mountain vegetation which makes slow progress for infrastructure development of road and rail networks in the Indian part of the state’s territory. A Chinese scholar Wang Tao Tao has termed China’s claims on Arunachal Pradesh as meaningless. In reality it’s just a chicken rib for China. For both the country it’s a huge economical, management and political losses since border land are NO MEN’S LAND. In today’s term it is hard for China to actually go war with India for these chicken ribs. Moreover the area is always prone to threats which cannot provide superior strategic depth to China unlike the Aksai Chin. So it can be assumed that this dispute is a trump card for China to trade Arunachal Pradesh with that of Aksai Chin. Also this dispute never ends because the border is still not recognized by China. In these areas the border lies a few meters while other areas it stretches for more than a mile. So to reduce the standoffs caused by border issue, A Border Defense Cooperation Agreement was signed. It ensures nothing resides permanent in border areas and the patrols do not confront each other. If at all there is a standoff it must cease to exist immediately. Over the period of three decades 21 rounds of peaceful settlement of border dispute has been made but all went in vein due to one or the other bargaining. So in my opinion the dispute prolongs to divert India from Tibet support. The two countries are gripped strongly by nationalism, bordering on jingoism, which makes give and take, so vital in the resolution of such vexatious disputes, extremely difficult. This badlands is mixed up with more of Indian culture and Indian nationalism and even the local public are in support of India than China. Nevertheless the Chinese dragon is being given a tit-for-tat treatment by the Indian elephant.
Note: This article was originally presented by the author in form of visual presentation and dedicated this to Jaswant Singh Rawat, MVC (unsung hero Sino-Indian war 1962) during a National Symposium held at Guru Nanak College, Chennai on 27th September 2019. The original visual presentation is available for download.
The Novel Coronavirus outbreak in China began in tandem with a significant holiday in the Chinese culture: the Lunar New Year. Parts of China, including Wuhan, went under unprecedented quarantines of large number of people in hopes of stemming the spread of disease, known as 2019-nCoV, which was later officially named as COVID-19 by the World Health Organization. The people were forced to cancel one of the most important cultural events of the year due this sudden epidemic.
Subscribe to The Viyug newsletter
Processing…
Success! You're on the list. You will receive welcome email shortly!
Whoops! There was an error and we couldn't process your subscription. Please reload the page and try again.
A brief analysis of the COVID-19 at the time period of its outbreak:
Nature of the virus:
This specific virus famously dubbed as 2019-nCoV belongs to the family known as Coronaviridae, subgenus being Sarbecovirus. A team led by Shi Zheng-Li, a Coronavirus specialist at the Wuhan Institute of Virology on 23rd January on bioRxiv stated that this virus had 96.2% genome similarity with that of a Coronavirus (RaTG13) found in bats, which was the cause of SARS outbreak 15 years ago in China. Both the Virus differs by nearly 1100 nucleotides. Close study of this strain of virus has lead to discovery that it spreads between humans to humans through close contact and causes severe respiratory organ damage. The incubation period is estimated at 2-14 days (up to 2 weeks without symptoms).
Where the Virus did came from?
The cause of the outbreak is suspected to be a zoonotic origin. Reports dating back to 8th December 2019 from the Chinese Health Authorities showed that the first patient caught the infection from the seafood market. At the end of December 2019, public health officials from China informed the World Health Organization (WHO) that they had a problem: an unknown, new type of virus was causing a mysterious illness similar to that of pneumonia in the city of Wuhan. After the reported outbreak all eyes were fixed at the Huanan Seafood Market as the origin point of this deadly outbreak. An article published in The Lancet recorded an important statement given by Daniel Lucey, an infectious disease specialist at Georgetown University. Out of 41 hospitalized patients with confirmed infections 13 had no epidemiological link to the marketplace. Lucey argues that the first human infections must have occurred in November 2019—if not earlier—because there is an incubation time between infection and symptoms surfacing. This raises a question regarding the origin point of the virus.
On January 30th, the World Health Organization (WHO) declared the Coronavirus outbreak as a Global Public Health Emergency. On January 31st United Nations issued 14 days quarantine rules for US citizens entering the US from China.
The very same day 2 cases from the UK, 2 from Russia and the first case from Sweden and Spain were reported. Canada reported its 4th case. India confirms its first case in Kerala.
On February 2, a death in the Philippines marked the first death occurring outside China.
On February 3, two new cases were reported in Germany.
The very same day a man in Hong-Kong died and 1st case of this virus is confirmed in Belgium. 2 new cases in Japan and 1 from Australia and Taiwan.
On February 4 Japan has confirmed at least 10 cases of Coronavirus from a cruise ship in the port of Yokohama near Tokyo. Earlier on the same day authorities quarantined 3700 passengers in an attempt to contain the virus from causing an outbreak.
As of February 5th nearly 28 countries around the world had confirmed cases of the virus. The widespread is caused due to people who traveled to and fro from Wuhan to other parts of the world.
A brief description of China during the early stages of the outbreak:
The virus is spreading very rapidly in many parts of China and 29 other countries which include India, Japan, Singapore, USA, U.K., and Germany. The condition of the people in China is worsening at a rapid rate as state authorities of Wuhan shut down transport links which freezes the locomotion of people. The city of Huanggang was also placed under quarantine and the city of Ezhou closed its train stations, followed by Wenzhou since it had the highest reported cases after Wuhan. During early stages more than 28500 people was confirmed positive to this deadly virus of which 3700 are in critical condition and that accounts for 13% of the total infected people. The total death toll reaches 600 and increases at a rapid rate. Presently in Wuhan residents are enduring an isolated, frightening time. Most forms of traffic have been banned, and 18 million people isolatedin their homes. A video surfaced online in Weibo (China’s twitter) which shows people of Wuhan shouting ‘Wuhan Jiayou!’, this translates as ‘Stay Strong Wuhan’.
Interesting thing to be noted about this virus is that, its deadly capabilities make it an eligible bio-weapon. Three parameters make this a potential bio-weapon. The first one being the transmission rate. Ro of this virus is 4.08% which means for every 1 person gets affected it transmits to the next 4 persons, which is quite high in number. The second parameter is the fatality rate. As of now, the FR is estimated at 3% which can go to any extent since the virus can mutate itself over time. The third parameter is the asymptomatic transmission, which is possessed by this type of virus. It means the virus can infect its carrier and can go undetected without any symptoms for 2 weeks. That is the reason why still the origin point of the outbreak cannot be determined.
It is still unsure whether this is an outbreak that is natural or man-made. Medical experts claim that novel Coronavirus is not an engineered one. John Nicholls a clinical professor in pathology at the University of Hong Kong was the key researcher and expert in Coronavirus stated that this virus will burn itself out in May when the temperature rises. It is a bad cold that kills people due to their poor health and unhealthy eating habits. This can be noted in China.
Advertisements
Subscribe today @ INR 99/Month
Read more of this analysis when you subscribe to The Viyug. Unlock all premium analysis and research.
TO: Directorate National De Securitate Cibernetica, Romania1
FROM: The National Security Advisor
RE: Our policy on countering recent cyberattacks (2022) and improving Romania’s Cybersecurity.
Objectives
To strengthen the organisation’s agenda and increase the size of its employees to smoothen the decentralisation of workload. Formulate a policy oriented cyber strategy to develop on course of this newly formed organisation.2
Construct an excellent cyber defence as well as offensive capabilities.
To prevent another, cyberattack on Romania’s critical infrastructure related to government, military, national banks, mass media websites, and other essential elements of interests connecting with cyber realm.
Background
On April 26, 2022, Romania’s high-profile delegations like Prime Minister Nicolae Ciuca, Minister of Foreign Affairs Bogdan Aurescu, and the President of the Chamber of Deputies of Romania Marcel Ciolacu visited Ukraine’s capital city Kyiv to meet Ukrainian President Zelenskyy, Prime Minister Denys Shmyhal, and the President of Rada, Ruslan Stefanchuk. The high-profile meeting ended up in Romania’s dedicated support towards Ukraine and its aspirations for European integration, as well as helping the war-torn country in its reconstruction phase.
Subscribe to The Viyug Updates
Get exclusive contents and fresh perspectives on defence, geopolitics, international affairs, public policy, intelligence, strategic studies, and many more delivered to your inbox.
Furthermore, Romania’s President of the Senate Florin Citu visited Ukraine by himself the very next day after which he stated that Bucharest will support Ukraine more than any other country including by supplying military coordination and equipment.
These two high delegation meetings resulted in publishing a statement by the Russian President Putin stating that Russia strongly condemns US backed up countries supporting Ukraine. Further the statement conveyed those outside countries making intervention in current Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is creating strategic threats for Russia and retaliation towards those countries will be only by use of force.
On April 29, 2022, pro-Kremlin hacking group called Killnet, launched a series of cyberattacks on various critical infrastructures belonging to Romania, which lasted till 1 May. The two-day series of multiple DDoS attacks resulted in damage of cyber infrastructures of Romanian government, military, national banks, and news publication outlets. Further the websites of the Ministry of National Defence (MApN), the Romanian Border Police, and of state railway were taken down as a retaliation to Romania-Ukraine high delegation meetings. The state railway had to adopt alternate means of issuing train tickets digitally.
The Killnet group eventually took down the website belonging to Romania’s National Cybersecurity Directorate (DNSC) and Romanian Police. The hacking spree by Killnet further resulted in demolition of websites and users’ data belonging to seven Romanian airports including the one located at its capital Bucharest.
The following options with the pros and cons for each have been developed by the office of National Security Advisor to facilitate strengthening of our country’s cyber capabilities and prevent future cyberattacks on Romanian soil.
Option One: Strengthen DNSC in all possible aspects
Advertisements
Advertisements
Advertisements
Since DNSC is a newly formed organisation to replace its predecessor the Romanian National Cyber Security Incident Response Team (CERT-RO), the organisation must shape its agenda in a crystal-clear notion. Unlike the predecessor, DNSC must widen its area of focus and responsibility by adopting to the ever-changing landscape of advancing technology. The directorate should know the disadvantages of its predecessor whereby their outdated structure and least effective modus operandi were some of the causes for its closure. The directorate must aim to create an agenda matching the current trends and developments in cyberspace.
It has been reported that the directorate will aim to become a competent authority at the national level as a civilian based cybersecurity organisation. Additional amendments such as collaboration with other government agencies like Presidential Administration, several ministries including foreign affairs, national defence, internal affairs, and intelligence agencies to further strengthen the objectives of the DNSC. Collaborations with these agencies will unlock the cross-cultural work abilities as well as sharing of data and enhanced cooperation.
It has also been reported that DNSC currently has employees’ size ranging between 51 to 200.3 Romania lost nearly $3 million in 2019 due to cyberattacks, which is reported to increase over coming years. Also, for an organisation established at the national level to deal with cybersecurity for country, then workforce becomes a principal element. DNSC should increase its employee size ranging between 500 to 700 people for smoothening the workload given due to the nature of organisation.
Our country having the second highest defence spending in Europe, proper………
Read the full article from our recent publications
Available in E-book, Paperback & Hardback
Available in E-book, Paperback & Hardback
References and Endnotes
FYI in English: National Cybersecurity Directorate, Romania
FYI: The National Cybersecurity Directorate is a newly formed government organisation on 24 September 2021, that is responsible for cyber security at national level for Romania. Abbreviated as DNSC, the organisation replaced CERT-RO.
National Cyber Security Directorate, LinkedIn.
Views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author. This article was originally published by the author in his book titled “Research Papers on Defence & Strategic Studies Vol. 2”. Image credit, click here.
About the Author
Anirudh Phadke is the Founder/Editor of The Viyug. He holds a Master of Science (Strategic Studies) and certificate in Terrorism Studies from S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS) at Nanyang Technological University (NTU), Singapore. He can be reached out via email at anirudh.r.phadke@viyug.com.
Share this article with your friends and colleagues on Twitter
Read this article titled “An Suggested Policy Memo for Improving the Cybersecurity by Romania’s National Cyber Security Directorate”.
This Paper dwells on finding whether the aspect of human intelligence still remains in the 21st century. The rapid technological advancements in the past two decades changed the dynamics of threat perception so did the landscape of security and intelligence. From using traditional methods of spying like undercover agents in enemy territories and prying eyes to today sitting in a confined space and using satellites to collect intelligence similar to what human eyes can see; the business of spying has drastically transformed into new dimension due to technological advancements. Amid these technological factors, intelligence agencies have reduced their HUMINT resources. The paper attempts to argue that HUMINT still matters even in this digital age by dwelling on US geopolitical references followed by detailed study of Indian intelligence agency and thereby ending that technology can give excellent hand over counterintelligence, but HUMINT still plays a significant role.
Introduction
Rapid advancement in technology has changed the dynamics of threat perception so did the dimensions of security and intelligence aspects. From using the traditional way of spies beyond enemy lines to collecting intelligence and now the same being done sitting inside a room by using technology has significantly reduced the use of human intelligence. The technology has become so advanced that literally one can get real time updates from anywhere in the world using satellites orbiting the earth from space. Optical image reconnaissance satellites are extensively used by intelligence agencies and military to receive digital images or video of a particular location, which has helped them increase their chance of success rate in times of war or counterterrorism operations.
These satellite technologies orbiting 200 miles above the earth surface has increasingly become more powerful overtime. Travelling at speed of Mach 25, these satellites can identify anything that is five inches and above on ground followed by sending clear digital images of it to its operator. The Central Intelligence Agency have been using it for nearly thirty years to spy over missile fields in China, Russia, and its other adversaries.
These rapid technological advancements have changed the warfare dimensions, so did the collection of intelligence. Today, the concept of cyber-intelligence followed by cyber-warfare is prominent all over the globe and many countries have started spending in billions for formulating a cyber defence force. While technology has eased the collection of intelligence, it also significantly reduced the risk factors and burdens of running an intelligence agency powered by human resources. From the monarchical times till Cold War era, history has seen a lot of deadly spies as well as a lot of loss of lives due to traditional method of spying.
Given the context of rapid technological advancements which can be applied to intelligence, this paper attempts to answer the question on whether human intelligence still matters in this 21st century.
Subscribe to The Viyug Updates
Get exclusive contents and fresh perspectives on defence, geopolitics, international affairs, public policy, intelligence, strategic studies, and many more delivered to your inbox.
Human Intelligence vs Technological Intelligence
Human intelligence, often abbreviated as HUMINT, is defined as the information provided by people rather than technological instruments. The HUMINT is obtained via covert agents who operate both domestically and internationally beyond enemy lines. It is often quoted that HUMINT is a primary source of information for policymakers, political and military leaders of a nation.
In terms of technology, the foremost instrument in collecting information is by using computers which can be better termed as cyber-intelligence. The concept of cyber-intelligence can be defined as the tracking, analysing, processing, and countering digital threats. According to U.S. Naval War College, this type of intelligence is a mixture of human powered espionage followed by modern information technologies. While this statement gives us a hint of human intelligence being used till today, the real question is do their involvement really reflect any changes? Do their absence have nullified effect on intelligence collection?
Technological applications such as smart instruments and Artificial Intelligence have made the answer to the above statements much more difficult. Furthermore, new disciplines in intelligence powered by technological instruments such as Signal’s Intelligence (SIGINT), Imagery Intelligence (IMINT), Measurement and Signatures Intelligence (MASINT), and Open-Source Intelligence (OSINT) have raised the question among desk experts regarding whether Human Intelligence still matters or not.
The amalgamation of technological wonder known as Artificial Intelligence has contributed many organisations to adopt the principle of minimising the workforce and maximising output by automation process. This is applicable even to intelligence agencies since today many government organisations are powered by Artificial Intelligence thereby maximising their desired output. The US Naval War College has defined Artificial Intelligence as the human like intelligence which can perform certain human capable actions such as judgement, learning, awareness of environment, and process the desired output. Thus, in the intelligence community it can be applied to tasks such as data mining and gathering and to basic HUMINT gathering applications. It is no doubt that automation process to be integrated with these new disciplines require human resources, the question arises that by applying these techniques, whether we can replace human spies or not. To better find a solution lets analyse if OSINT analyst can be replaced by Automation or not.
Advertisements
Advertisements
Advertisements
Can OSINT Analyst be Replaced by Automation?
OSINT is defined as the application of tradecrafts and intelligence methods that is publicly available information where anyone can access it. Similar to any intelligence disciplines, this method also employs the concept of intelligence cycle to produce intelligence. Thus, this model too puts a weight on human resources at every stage of intelligence cycle. Not every country and situation are same including the local idiosyncrasies which are crucial component when receiving a desired intelligence output. Thus, considering all the factors including collection, assessment, objective metrics, and subjective analysis automation stands no chance to process all these parameters which are satisfied only by knowledge and experience of human resources.
Although some technological companies claim that Artificial Intelligence can indeed perform few above mentioned human tasks, there is no record of machine producing solution by analytical output. Thus, human intelligence is highly significant in OSINT analysis but where does Artificial Intelligence stand here? The automation mechanism stands to give vague or overview results by using pre-fed standard indicators such as political instability, civil unrest, terrorism data, war data, and geography etc to flash forecast risk assessment as desired output. Amalgamation of human resources and technological capabilities have been the priority for both government agencies and private entities. According to security analysts, the AI can never replace the abilities of human workforce atleast in the field of intelligence. Do HUMINT still matters?
An Ex-CIA expert has quoted that the idea of officers going undercover away from prying eyes is obsolete and the culprit for this is technological advancements. Duyane Norman who has rich twenty-seven years of intelligence career in CIA said that the era of human spies operating in foreign countries have rapidly coming to an end. He further states that the era of digital age where human lives totally depend on social media, smartphones, facial recognition technology, and even super computers have drastically affected the traditional business of spying. It has further resulted for spies difficult to maintain their disguise relationships nor false identities when operating in enemy territory.
It is no doubt that the world of espionage is facing huge technological, political, social, and commercial changes. One sect of intelligence analysts argues that those who break the old rules of spying will eventually emerge victorious. Further this shift has caused the closed government regimes to gain upper hand than their counterparts who are open regimes. This is the reason why the Western powers like US are facing hardships to spy on authoritarian regimes like China, Iran, and Russia and while it is easier for them to spy of their adversaries. The democracies are bound to many legal laws whereby it slows down the process of intelligence investigation whereas in authoritarian regimes all the parties are legally bound to share their data with the close watch of intelligence agencies. Will this technological shift push intelligence agencies to reduce their human resources?
Advertisements
Advertisements
Advertisements
While definitively intelligence agencies have reduced their HUMINT clandestine operations due to technology, the democracies can still leverage the potential vulnerabilities posed by authoritarian regimes in their respective nations by devising a fresh strategy which can look out for trapping possible defectors. The authoritarian regimes such as Russia, North Korea, Cuba, and China where the people have still restricted access to freedom of speech in this digital age are prone to become defectors by fleeing the country. For example, US can exploit this vulnerability with imaginative innovation to formulate new class of HUMINT strategy composing of defectors. The authoritarian regimes have a huge problem of trust and fear over its citizens. Their strict laws amid digital world have made the people prone to alienation. This can be inturn a rich fodder for democracies like the US to trap those who want to defect their homeland given they have classified information which of high interests to national security.
An independent Russian agency in its May 2021 poll has found that nearly 22 percent of Russians from all the age groups were willing to move out of Russia. Among the age group of 25-39 it stood at 33 percent while the age group 18-24 mushroomed to 44 percent. Sources from 2018 shows that nearly 67,000 people from China became lawful US’ green card holders. It was the third highest migration of a community to US after Mexico and Cuba, respectively. This data is not to prove that alienation only occurs in authoritarian regimes and not in democracies. Rather, it is show that US intelligence agencies can potentially tap this since most of the migrated people to US originate from its adversaries.
Currently the US has been entangled in lot of geopolitical tensions across the globe. For example, the Cross-Strait conflict between China, Taiwan, and the US. If China extinguishes Taiwan’s democratic identity the geopolitical consequences will be seismic for the US and its allies. So, it is necessary for the US to keep constant watch over Chinese plans for takeover of Taiwan. These matters revolve internally within the Chinese administration thus taking the intangible format, that is something which the US cannot investigate through satellites by sitting in Washington. This kind of intelligence can be obtained only through human resources. Additionally, some elements such as adversaries planning attacks on national infrastructure, ethnic repression, political assassination plots, and plots to disrupt peace stability etc needs a human spy planted inside the adversary to have a track on it. These elements are planned and executed timely without any warnings which something cannot be forecasted solely by technological means.
The above-mentioned elements are not mysteries rather it’s a secret on the concerned bodies. The answers are known to the people who work in them. Analysts says that the US’ HUMINT strategy is not well defined amid the adoption of technologies by the intelligence agencies. Not only the US but any nation which aim to tackle their adversaries in the above-mentioned elements must formulate innovative HUMINT strategy as classic spy-craft never go out of fashion.
A Peek into the Research and Analysis Wing- India’s Premier Foreign Intelligence Agency
Amid the digital age, India’s external intelligence agency known as Research and Analysis Wing still largely operates by deploying clandestine human agents beyond borders to gather intelligence on its adversaries. Their primary motive is to collect information via HUMINT through psychological warfare, sabotage, and subversion. The agency has been in forefront of collecting information regarding counterterrorism, counter-proliferation, giving inputs to policymakers, and securing India’s strategic interests.
Advertisements
Advertisements
Advertisements
The total number of people employed by the agency remains confidential but still various analysis shows that it primarily operates by using human resources with a total of 5000 employees as of 2013 estimate. Even it employs a huge chunk of female personnel at various stages in organisation including operational division.
The agency has done remarkable operations using HUMIT across many countries. R&AW was one of the primary agencies to provide information about Ravi Pujari who was an Indian Gangster link terror links hiding in Senegal. R&AW officers along with Senegalese authorities captured him alive and later deported back into India for court trials. Post 9/11 attacks on US, R&AW provided the intelligence to Western countries that over 120 training camps were operated by terror groups linked with 9/11 across Afghanistan and Pakistan. Back in 2017, R&AW conducted a covert joint counterterrorism operation with CIA to block a major terrorist attack on New Delhi plotted by an ISIS suicide bomber. The operation spanned across three countries in search for the suicide bomber which involved 80 research officers. Later the nabbed militant was transferred to a US airbase in Afghanistan for interrogation.
In 2020, ten operatives belonging to Ministry of State Security (MSS) from China’s Xinjiang State Security Department (XSSD) were apprehended by Afghanistan’s National Directorate of Security (NDS) in Kabul. Later it was found that these ten operatives were tasked with gathering intelligence related to Al-Qaeda, Taliban and plotting assassination of high-profile targets belonging to the Turkish Islamic Party (TIP). This successful counterintelligence operation was carried out by the NDS based on tipoff provided by R&AW’s……..
Read the full article from our latest publications
Available in E-book, Paperback & Hardback
Available in E-book, Paperback & Hardback
All the views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author. This article was originally published by the author in his book titled “Research Papers on Defence & Strategic Studies Vol. 2”. For image credit click here.
About the Author
Anirudh Phadke is the Founder/Editor of The Viyug. He holds a Master of Science (Strategic Studies) and a certificate in Terrorism Studies from S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS) at Nanyang Technological University, Singapore.
Share this article with your friends and colleagues on Twitter
Read this article titled “Does Human Intelligence Still Matters in the 21st Century?”
The report titled “Mapping the Global Future: Report of the National Intelligence Council’s 2020 Project” has been chosen to write the following critique paper.
Summary of Key Assessments including Critique
Subscribe to The Viyug Updates
Get exclusive contents and fresh perspectives on defence, geopolitics, international affairs, public policy, intelligence, strategic studies, and many more delivered to your inbox.
The end of Cold War has shifted the dynamics of power but the repercussions from those are still unfolding. Rise of new powers in Asia, Europe and the Middle East will pose new challenges to landscape of governance and security including terrorism. The role of United States will be an important influencing factor on deciding how the world will be constructed. The report suggests that China’s GNP will not exceed US anywhere in 2020. However, Global Times’ calculations show that China’s economy grew by $3 trillion in 2021 as compared to 2020, while US had grown by $2.1 trillion. China’s economy expanded by 2.3 percent in 2020 while the same year US’ economy contracted by 3.4 percent.
Recently China has dethroned US to become the world’s richest country. This could suggest that China’s GNP will exceed the US in upcoming years. Europe will either adapt their workforces, amend social welfare including tax systems, and education, accept growing immigrant population or face a period of protected economic crisis. Due to current Russia- Ukraine conflict, Europe will be more mediated towards facing an economic crisis. The war has impacted huge spike rate in Europe’s energy and food industries.
I agree with the report stating that Japan faces ageing crisis that could cripple its economic recovery eventually. Further achieving regional equilibrium in the Taiwan Strait followed by attempt to unify Taiwan and China would complicate the Cross-Strait relations. Russia is likely to be an important partner for established powers like US and for rising powers like India and China. The report also states that Russia has the potential to elevate its rising position as the leading oil & gas exporter. However, due to current Russian-Ukraine conflict, sources have estimated that Russia could lose 30 percent of its oil output thereby reducing its exports. Further economic sanctions from several countries including the US and the European Union’s ban on further investments in Russian oil industry will have bigger impact in the country in upcoming years. The Western oil companies are now focused on UAE and Saudi Arabia for satisfying their oil needs. Thus, oil export from the Middle East will scale up rapidly.
Originally the concept of Globalisation dealt with capital, goods, services, and information technology throughout the world, the oncourse of globalisation will occur in a different notion. Both state and nonstate actors including private entities and NGOs will race to shape its contours. As per report it tells that even in 2020 US will be the single most important country across all dimensions of power. However, the statement is not true as the US will witness its relative power being eroding away. Rising powers like China and India will exploit and grab every opportunity afforded by emerging global marketplaces.
Advertisements
Advertisements
Advertisements
More companies will become global from Asian region rather than Western regions. China and India will leverage this situation to become technological giants thereby making US run behind Asia. Even under-developed countries can profit from this situation by procuring modern technologies at cheaper prices. Thus, on course of Globalisation will take place increasingly on a non-Western notion with special focus to Asia region. Amid this the oil sector will be a key concern of uncertainty due to the growing demand-driven competition for energy resources.
The advent of technology has spurred the rise of virtual communities in Internet which inturn has complicated the state’s governing abilities. It has paved the way for new challenges in methods of governance. Furthermore, politicisation of religion will put greater pressure on governing authorities of a nation. The ‘third-wave’ of democratisation will be partially reversed post 2020 among the former USSR states and Southeast Asian countries where they never embraced democracy.
Another aspect born because of above is ‘pervasive insecurity.’ Technological innovation on one hand has educated young working population and on other hand made cost-effective source of labours. However, this transformation is a double-edged sword as it also increases the young employment competition. Especially the Asian region can…..
Read the full article from our latest publications
Available in E-book, Paperback & Hardback
Available in E-book, Paperback & Hardback
All the views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author. This article was originally published by the author in his book titled “Research Papers on Defence & Strategic Studies Vol. 2”. For image credit, click here.
About the Author
Anirudh Phadke is the Founder/Editor of The Viyug. He holds a Master of Science (Strategic Studies) and a certificate in Terrorism Studies from S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS) at Nanyang Technological University (NTU), Singapore.
Share this article with your friends and colleagues on Twitter
A critical analysis and review of some of the thoughts from Sun Tzu’s finest work ‘The Art of War’.
The world embarked on a journey filled with wars and saw the changing dynamics of war from being a mere land & naval warfare and now producing weapons of mass destruction and cyber (virtual) warfare. This piece is my thoughts on how your work is practically implemented in today’s world.
Subscribe to The Viyug Updates
Get exclusive contents and fresh perspectives on defence, geopolitics, international affairs, public policy, intelligence, strategic studies, and many more delivered to your inbox.
Firstly, I would like to recall that his timely classic has survived through many centuries and has been considered as one of the greatest military science literature of all time by famous French revolutionary and world war figures such as Napoleon, Mao Zedong, Fidel Castro, General MacArthur, and Joseph Stalin. Your ideologies now represent contemporary behaviours and geopolitical happenings of the Chinese government and its military wing- People’s Liberation Army (PLA).
I totally agree with the values your work presented. One such famous quote from your book ‘know your enemy and know yourself and fight hundred battles without danger’ and the other ‘know yourself but not your enemy and win battle but lose another’ still stands fresh as written in your times. We need to be always careful of enemies and prepare ourselves for different kind of responses enemy have, thus, not just likely to focus on central part of planning. I would like to touch up on six key points from your work.
First aspect which you touched upon was how one must understand significance of terrain. It is vital that one must know key features of terrain such as urban areas, deserts, valleys, rivers, hills, and mountains as these features dictate how to gain a strategic advantage over any battle. In 2020 India and China engaged into fierce hand to hand combat near Line of Actual Control (LAC) in Ladakh. Although India had a victory followed by huge losses of its soldiers, both the nations struggle to solve the problem because their administrations fail to understand the concept of terrain and separation of boundaries. Right from the beginning no roundtable discussions were able to identity who owns which part of the key areas of terrain along the Indo-China border stretching all over Himalayas.
Secondly, your quote ‘If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle’ rightly can be phrased as information is key to success. In today’s scenario every information is digitalised and stored in form of data and nations devise strong cyber defence capabilities to guard themselves from data thieves called hackers. Thus, countries move up the ladder to success by processing relevant geopolitical happenings by form of gathering information.
Advertisements
Advertisements
Advertisements
Next quote which I would like to place here is “There is no instance of a nation benefiting from prolonged warfare.” This aptly suits for the US withdrawal from Afghanistan. Long insurgency of nineteen years by US did not reap edible fruit and finally resulting in handing over the US’ backed administration to Taliban. Currently the territory under Taliban called as ‘Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan’ created much further rising tensions of local communities.
Fourth, you mention the use of spies and assassins in your strategy guide. In today’s scenario the core concept remains the same while execution of this item has much evolved than it was during your times. Today many countries established a special cell units called intelligence departments, whose sole work is to collect and analyse the movement of enemies. Furthermore, the military have a specialised branch of well-trained men usually labelled as special forces.
For example, India has special units under each of its military divisions called Para SF (for army), Garud Command Force (for air force), and MARCOS (for navy). These units deal with the functions like spies and assassins belonging in your era. Raised in July 1966…..
Read the full article from our recent publications
Available in E-book, Paperback & Hardback
Available in E-book, Paperback & Hardback
All the views and opinions expressed are those of the author. This article was originally published by the author in his book titled ‘Research Papers on Defence & Strategic Studies Vol. 1’. For image credit click here.
About the Author
Anirudh Phadke is the Founder/Editor of The Viyug. He is currently working in an international organisation based in Singapore. He holds a Master of Science (Strategic Studies) and a certificate in Terrorism Studies from S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS), Nanyang Technological University (NTU).
Share this article with your friends and colleagues on Twitter
Read this article titled- Finding Modern Day Relevance in ‘The Art of War’.
In the 21st Century, world saw major shift in deterrence strategies such as from nuclear to cyber to economic sanctions. This paper is an attempt to bring out the viability of deterrence by analysing the current geopolitical happenings around the world. Further this paper brings out how non-nuclear states have developed a reliable deterrence doctrine despite lacking nuclear power. The key takeaways are;
The deterrence strategies are still viable in 21st century.
Cyber Deterrence is still in its infant period. Countries are adopting more reliable for of deterrence such as economic sanctions.
Sir Churchill’s proclamation still holds true. By the end of day nations prefer military as a means of deterrence to achieve their goals. Thus, military deterrence stands God forever. That is why slogan of army is always apt- Always Ready, Always here.
Nations’s goal is to protect its sovereignty at any costs. Thus, it leads them to bump into other nations in form of war at some given point of time. So, the most reliable instrument for protection is deterrence.
According to Bernard Brodie, famous military strategist and father of deterrence theory wrote Strategy in the Missile Age (1959), in which he outlined the framework of the deterrence theory. Brodie concluded that deterrence by second-strike capability would lead to a more secure outcome for both the parties. He stated hardening of land-based missile locations which was important for the second-strike capability force to have first strike capabilities to provide the stasis necessary for deterrence.
Sir Lawrence Freedman, the notable deterrence researcher pinned his viewpoint on deterrence theories, said that it works best when clear red lines exist, when vital interests are at stake, and when capabilities are known by the host. In simpler perspective, deterrence denotes ‘the action of discouraging an action or event through instilling doubt or fear of the consequences. For example, the latter statement when put into practical terms as ‘nuclear missiles remain the main deterrence against possible aggression.’
Subscribe to The Viyug Updates
Get exclusive contents and fresh perspectives on defence, geopolitics, international affairs, public policy, intelligence, strategic studies, and many more delivered to your inbox.
The popularity of deterrence theory saw an immense growth during the Cold War periods. During this hostile state of high global tensions, deterrence strategy was aimed at preventing aggression by the hostile communist power centres- the USSR and its allies, communist China, and North Korea. In particular, the strategy was devised to prevent a nuclear attack by the USSR or China.
In the 21st century notable military strategies from all over the world have delivered how deterrence plays a vital role in the current global order. The concept of deterrence has changed how nations convert political tensions into war and prevent the same from happening.
RAND Corporation analyst Karl Muller analyses different approaches to conventional deterrence, arguing that it will remain a major tool for prevention of war. He strongly disagreed with those scholars who argued nuclear weapons have superseded conventional deterrence. Since the threat of nuclear weapons was not justifiable with current global order, investments in conventional deterrence remained the topmost priority. Alexey Arbatov affiliated with the Institute of World Economy and International Relations in Moscow dwells upon the self-destructive tendencies inherent with nuclear deterrence. The nuclear nations involve in continuous quest for new weapon systems such as hypersonic missiles, weapons of mass destruction (MAD), and integrating new modifications in existing stockpiles which could erode strategic stability.
The best example of how nuclear deterrence holding its viability still today can be found between the geopolitical happenings of North Korea and the United States. Both the nations frequently create high tensions of possible nuclear conflicts. The communist Korea has always stricken with poverty and lack of sufficient survivable resources. Each time when the nation gets depleted of resources, North Korea tests fires its new weapon systems. This in turn raises huge security concern for US’ military stationed in Camp Humphreys, Pyeongtaek in South Korea. Thus, to nullify the effects and push North Korea towards controlled arms production environment, the United States shook hands with North Korea by providing sufficient food aids worth $800 million.
The United States proved to be the largest essential resources exporter to North Korea since the times when both the nations acted hostile to each other. Thus, North Korean leaders channelised their funds towards a sole source that is to produce nuclear missiles and force the democratic power to lend resources which the nation did not possess. Although North Korea shut down its nuclear reactors in exchange for food aids from the United States, the nuclear deterrence indeed proved viable here to achieve the objectives.
Another example of nuclear deterrence can be found between the recent geopolitical happenings of China and Japan in their Taiwan card. Mid this year, The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) aired a video in which it warned Japan of a full-scale war including a nuclear response if the island nation interferes in China’s treatment of Taiwan. The communist giant under the administration of Xi-Jinping singles out Japan as the one exception to China’s policy to not use nuclear propelled weapons against non-nuclear powers.
Advertisements
Advertisements
Advertisements
The video aired on Chinese media sharing platform ‘Xigua’ quoted that China will use nuclear bombs first and continuously until Japan withdraw its intervention in Taiwan. Further the video showed the Chinese intentions to use nuclear weapons against Japan, till the nation declares unconditional surrender for the second time. Although the video was deleted from Xigua, additional copies were uploaded to YouTube and Twitter. These nuclear threats were delivered due to the result of Japanese officials recognising Taiwan’s sovereignty. It is crucial for Japan to give diplomatic immunity to Taiwan for securing upper hand in the East China Sea dispute.
Japan ceded its aggressive advancements in Taiwan card as soon as the communist giant declared call for nuclear strikes against the nation. If this major incident happens, it will be a high threatening situation to both Japan and Taiwan. If that is the case, Japan and the United States must defend Taiwan together.
Meanwhile the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesperson Zhao Lijian urged Japan to adjust its mentality over the Taiwan’s issue. Further he conveyed that Japan must show respect for China’s sovereignty over Taiwan which is crucial for upholding regional peace and stability among the sinicized countries.
Another evolving example of nuclear deterrence can be evidenced between the two Asian powers- China, and India. Both the nations possess strong nuclear capabilities and deeply developed nuclear doctrines. While many analysts argue the nuclear deterrence failure of India against China in the backdrop of Ladakh skirmishes in 2020, it should be noted that due to much evolved nuclear technologies and doctrines between the two Asian powers, the recent Ladakh standoff subdued without any major conflict including call for nuclear strikes Both India, and China pursue defensive nuclear strategies and bureaucrats not only understand the importance of avoiding nuclear conflicts but also retain complete authority over the nuclear command control. Both the nations have remained optimistic that nuclear weapons are a stabilising factor in their bilateral relationship rather than a source for concern- even though the tempering effects of economic interdependence may be warning and the strength of both the countries’ nuclear no first-use policies is facing growing internal scrutiny.
Despite the potential for future instability and constant high political tensions between the two nations, there is a chance of holding official bilateral nuclear dialogue between Modi and Xi-Jinping soon as there is much support for expert-level engagement to discuss mutual concerns.
Although if the bilateral nuclear dialogue occurs, it does not necessary mean that China and India will turn into friends from enemies, but for sure any future conflicts that occurs between these two nations does not turn into a nuclear conflict since nuclear technologies keep rapidly evolving in both India as well as China. Thus, this example is incredibly unique in nature being a solution where both nations benefits. Thus, nuclear deterrence holds viable for China and India to escalate their political tensions into a full-scale war.
Advertisements
Advertisements
Advertisements
The nuclear deterrence in 21st century is very much hyped. The public floats on a notion that nuclear states enjoy a superior position than the non-nuclear states. This is not the case for every states. Even before the start of this century, where United States rested as one of the major nuclear superpowers failed to cripple the smaller non-nuclear state- Cuba. Even today Cuba does not possess nuclear, chemical, biological, or even long-range ballistic missiles. The nation is an active participant in many of the major non-proliferation treaties and regimes. The non-nuclear nations have also developed strong warfare capabilities and proved that a nation certainly does not need nuclear weapons to go against nuclear nations.
The non-nuclear nations’ main concern for developing deterrence which is not involved of nuclear weapons is because it delivers the threat of total annihilation. So, if the enemy territory used nuclear weapons as pinned down in the second-strike capability doctrine, the smaller non-nuclear states stand no chance of survival. Thus, non-nuclear states, especially smaller countries found their best interests in developing some form of conventional deterrence as war could prove catastrophic. Furthermore, the non-nuclear states have found that when employing deterrence strategies should take note not to escalate diplomatic tensions or inadvertently highlight their weaknesses in the process.
“Then it may well be that we shall by a process of sublime irony have reached a stage in this story where safety will be the sturdy child of terror, and survival the twin brother of annihilation.”- Sir Winston Churchill.
The above quote indeed proves that the fear of destructive nuclear retaliation will paradoxically create a stable strategic environment where nuclear powered states are deterred from using nuclear weapons against one another. Sir Churchill’s proclamation was proven right in this regard; the Cold war ended without direct military conflict between the two competing nuclear powers- US and the USSR. Further the total destructive component of nuclear weapons paved way for emerging new security dynamics out from the Cold War era. Especially the smaller and politically weaker nations sought the help of security analysts to develop a conventional deterrence doctrine which can be pursued by them eventually. The non-nuclear states developed their doctrine from traditional deterrence strategies such as ‘deterrence by punishment’ and ‘deterrence by denial’ by opting out nuclear component.
Most of the nation’s not possessing nuclear weapons followed a common pattern in executing deterrence strategies. For example, Singapore being a smaller nation enjoyed an elevated level of national security by implementing deterrence along with diplomacy which is known as the ‘twin Ds.’ It was not feasible for a state, especially smaller one to just stick on to once aspects of twin Ds. Thus, deterrence followed by diplomacy was needed by Singapore for its survival. This pattern is also followed by many smaller nations and non-nuclear countries. Singapore had always paid attention to the balance of power rather than seeking an international power to act as a protector for extended deterrence.
There is also another notable aspect of deterrence development in the smaller non-nuclear states. These nations were separated from a larger neighbouring country or usually recognised by their larger neighbours only to make their national security concerns directed towards the acts of their parent country or neighbouring ones. For example, one of the Singapore’s long-term concerns has always been securing its sea routes from its maritime neighbour and parent- Malaysia. The example of Singapore’s deterrence is much specifically unique in nature as it is the only country to do so. Singapore keeps on strengthening its inland defence capabilities making it more powerful although being a smaller when compared to its neighbours. The nation also showed massive feats in economic accomplishments. Singapore became hub for entrepot trade making its economy more self-reliant and stronger.
Advertisements
Advertisements
Advertisements
Singapore also implemented good aspects of psychological deterrence. The nation’s enlistment acts which states that all the male citizens and permanent residents (PRs) of Singapore are liable to national service obligation. This in turn increased the nation’s pride and uniqueness among its larger neighbours. Thus, the nation constantly invests heavily in its defence, economic, and civil aspects making it a country not to mess with. Thus, Singapore’s inland deterrence concept can be matched with deterrence by denial. Those nations who….
Read the full article from our recent publications
Available in E-book, Paperback & Hardback
Available in E-book, Paperback & Hardback
References & Endnotes
All the views and opinions expressed are those of the author.This article was originally published by the author in his book titled “Research Papers on Defence & Strategic Studies Vol. 1”. For image credit, click here.
About the Author
Anirudh Phadke is the Founder/Editor of The Viyug. He is currently working in an international organisation based in Singapore. He holds a Master of Science (Strategic Studies) and certificate in Terrorism Studies from S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS) at Nanyang Technological University.
Share this article with your friends and colleagues on Twitter
Read this article titled “The Viability of Deterrence Strategies in the 21st Century”.
Research Papers on Defence & Strategic Studies Vol. 1 & 2 is the finest collection of research papers, Op-Eds, critical analysis report, and other essay formats written and complied by the author. This volume deals with various aspects of terrorism studies, intelligence & espionage, and cyber warfare.
Contents
Chapter: 6- Intelligence in Peace & War. The essays under this chapter are;
Do Human Intelligence Still Matter in the 21st Century?
A well analysed critique paper on the report titled “Mapping the Global Future: Report of the National Intelligence Council’s 2020 Project”.
Chapter: 7- Terrorism, Intelligence and Homeland Security. The essays under this chapter are;
Critical Reflection Report: 1- Pathways of Radicalisation.
“Law Enforcement’s Over Reliance on Profiling and Informants will not Counter the Small but Dynamic Threat of Lone-wolf Attacks and Terrorist Cells”.
Critical Reflection Report: 2- Digital CVE Mobilisation Strategy.
A Special Research Paper addressing the following questions;
Identify and discuss emerging or persistent challenges that security and intelligence agencies face in combatting terrorism and defending homeland.
Finding out the short, medium and long threats posed by non-state actors for US’ aviation industry.
Chapter: 8- Countering Religiously Motivated Terrorism in Southeast Asia. Issues and Challenges. The essays under this chapter are;
Subscribe to The Viyug Updates
Get exclusive contents and fresh perspectives on defence, geopolitics, international affairs, public policy, intelligence, strategic studies, and many more delivered to your inbox.
The Evolving Landscape of Saffron Terrorism: Is it Terrorism or Retaliation; Should we Counter It?
Are Lone Wolf Terrorists really Alone?
The Mindset of Suicide Terrorists.
Chapter: 9- Conflicts in the Digital Age: Information Operations and Cyber Warfare. The essays under this chapter are;
A well analysed critique paper for the article titled “Intelligence in Cyber and Cyber in Intelligence”
Op-Ed: The Future of Policing
A suggested Policy Memo for Improving the Cybersecurity by Romania’s National Cyber Security Directorate.
Read a free sample of this publication
buy printed copies🚚
Buy the printed version of this book directly from The Viyug. The book is available in paperback and hardback formats. Shipment will be usually dispatched to your doorstep within 1 to 2 weeks. All the details will be coordinated directly to you via email once the order has been placed.
As of now we ship within anywhere in India. For other regions and countries the printed versions can be purchased on Amazon.
Currently Out of Stock with us. For digital & printed copies, purchase on NotionPress or Amazon or other major online book stores.
Anirudh Phadke is the founder and editor of The Viyug. He holds a Master of Science (Strategic Studies) and certificate in Terrorism Studies from S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS) at Nanyang Technological University (NTU), Singapore. He currently works for an international organisation at Singapore. He can be reached out via email at anirudh.r.phadke@viyug.com
Share this book with your friends and colleagues on Twitter
Check out this book “Research Papers on Defence & Strategic Studies- Vol 2- Terrorism, Intelligence & Cyber Warfare”.
Alfred Thayer Mahan (September 27, 1840 – December 1, 1914) was a United States Rear Admiral who was dubbed the “most significant American strategist of the nineteenth century” by John Keegan. Mahan’s well-known books, ‘The Influence of Sea Power Upon History, 1660-1783’ and ‘The Influence of Sea Power Upon the French Revolution and Empire, 1793-1812,’ established him as the most important American author of the nineteenth century.
Mahan detected and propounded his sea doctrine aligning with the strategic position of the United States, as the nation reached the limits of its continental expansion by early the 1880s. He analysed the historical factors that formed the basis of British power. His sea doctrine stated that;
Advertisements
Advertisements
Advertisements
The United States should be a world power.
Control of seas is necessary for world power status.
The way to maintain such control is by a powerful navy.
Mahan’s theory of sea power still stands strong in the 21st century. Upon probing his book ‘The Influence of Sea Power Upon History, 1793-1812’ the following lines indeed prove the famous sea doctrine is still relevant in the 21st century.
“Notwithstanding all the familiar and unfamiliar dangers of the sea, both travel and traffic by water have always been easier and cheaper than by land.”
The above statement conveys that Mahan travelled back into the history of mankind’s struggle to develop his thesis concerning sea power. His sea power theory packed concisely states how different nations used/using the sea routes to achieve both military and non-military objectives. For example, Great Britain emerged as an undefeatable colonial power by establishing an advanced navy, thus controlling vast sea routes which resulted in the British becoming an economical super-power of the medieval and pre-modern eras. From a military perspective, Mahan gives an account of how Rome used the waters of the Mediterranean Sea to defeat Carthage. Thus, waters being a vital component of human evolution sea strategies stand deep-rooted till this day.
The above-quoted lines neglected the concept of the sky as this dimension was yet to be developed during the author’s era. Considering the concept of the sky, even then air freight is 12-16 times more expensive than the same volume of sea freight cargo due to the volume of cargo a ship can carry at once as compared to an aircraft.
Subscribe to The Viyug Updates
Get exclusive contents and fresh perspectives on defence, geopolitics, international affairs, public policy, intelligence, strategic studies, and many more delivered to your inbox.
In Mahan’s view, international commerce is essential for the success of America’s economy, thus overseas military establishments are necessary to facilitate foreign trade and commerce. Mahan believed that commerce prospers by peace and suffers by war, so peace is the greater interest for great seafaring countries. In an effort to contextualise America’s growing internal industrialism with a global role he emphasised the link between America’s internal industrialisation and the ongoing economic transformation in China & India. There is a historical anomaly occurring in the Asian waters today that is the rise of two indigenous maritime powers concurrently with the United States’ monopoly of the global commons.
As both the nations move up the economic and political hierarchy in the world, India and China have begun to attach new importance to maritime policy initiatives. Both the Chinese and Indian governments did not merely turn into their water boundaries but were adapting the expansive conceptions of maritime power pioneered by Mahan, who was also quoted as the evangelist of sea power. Paradoxically, like India and China, both embarked on similar emulation of Mahan they were also bound to run into each other’s maritime aspirations.
It is not difficult to explain why both China and India are fascinated by Mahan’s theories of Sea Power. Mahan’s era was also the peak of the colonial period, when all the major industrial powers began acquiring far-flung colonies and exploiting natural resources and markets. Thus, the shifting of supremacy began and turned towards Asian countries. This brief paper sheds light on Mahan’s relevance of sea power doctrine in the 21st century through stressing the Chinese and Indian perspective and connecting it with Mahan’s identification of four main components of sea power- seaborne commerce, merchant shipping, navy, and overseas bases.
The first pillar of sea power according to Mahan is robust domestic industrial production and its export to overseas markets. This led to the further derivative statement that disrupting a rival’s sea-borne trade would be at the heart of modern warfare. Therefore, the construction of modern navies that could achieve this objective in decisive battles at sea. If protecting the sea lines of communication between the centres of industrial production is the goal, then the third derivative statement would define itself. It was necessary to have naval bases and facilities to protect the navies from their competitors. Mahan asserted that merchant ships and naval ships in nations without overseas facilities were like “land birds unable to fly far from their shores”.
With the advent of the 21st century, all three components of sea power have been united for India and China, and Mahan has become an inspiration for leaders in both countries. The The Maritime Military Strategy published by the Ministry of Defence, Government of India, draws a connection between “economic prosperity and increasing naval capabilities, which will attract investments, enable the nation’s natural resource development, and ensure the nation’s maritime interests are respected”. China has become acutely aware of the profound relationship between national economic development and strategic sea power under Xi Jinping’s leadership, and has constantly affirmed the determination to build a strong navy capable of fighting wars with modern technology. Both the nations have an equal share of maritime disputes, the need to protect a large water body of Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), Andaman & Nicobar Islands and Lakshadweep has been an important motivation behind India’s naval modernisation. The latter theme can be found behind the Chinese plans for navy advancements.
Advertisements
Advertisements
Advertisements
Thus, the sea-borne commerce component will be in the disguise of ‘resource security’ between India & China. As both the nations have been most populated countries in the world, food imports, and all other major consumer goods will be incoming into these nations via Asian waters. The massive dependence on imports will put the two Asian giants in an aggressive race to set their respective strong foothold for the Indian Ocean Region in upcoming years.
Read the full article in our recent publications. Free sample available.
Available in E-book, Paperback & Hardback
Available in E-book, Paperback & Hardback
All the views and opinions published in this article are those of the author. This article was originally published by the author in his book titled “Research Papers on Defence & Strategic Studies Vol. 1”. For Image Credit click here.
About the Author
Anirudh Phadke is the founding-editor of The Viyug. He holds a Master of Science (Strategic Studies) from S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS) at Nanyang Technological University (NTU), Singapore. He currently works for an International Law Enforcement Organisation based in Singapore. He can be contacted via email at anirudh.r.phadke@viyug.com
Tweet this article to your friends and colleagues on Twitter.
Check out this article titled ‘Are any of Mahan’s Principles on Sea Power still Relevant in the 21st Century?’
Since 1949 the Republic of China (ROC) otherwise called as Taiwan has been struggling to establish itself as a separate government entity. The People’s Republic of China (PRC) otherwise called the mainland China or simply China has vowed by making unification of Taiwan into its mainland as an agenda of national concern. Though both the countries predominantly consisting of similar ethnic groups, they have diverse cultural and political views from its Communist counterpart. Taiwan has democratically elected form of government thus, having a unique identity as an independent island nation and relations with mainland China. This unique nature also directly correlates with Taiwan’s economic component.
Advertisements
Advertisements
Advertisements
Right from the dawn of Cross-Strait confrontation between China and Taiwan, the latter has had discriminatory policies of trade and commerce towards its counterpart. This left serious impact not only on China and Taiwan but also on nations having trade interests in Taiwan Strait. Further free and open trade practises were hindered due to the result of regular escalating tensions between China and Taiwan. Despite (Taiwan) being an important country in East Asian economy, the past decade has been watershed for its economy due to reducing foreign direct investments because of bitter bilateral relations with Mainland China. Taiwan has least share in participating in the regional and international trade practises thereby cutting the access to other economies of the world. Despite all these shortcomings, reports have suggested that Taiwan has done exceptionally well in maintaing its economy and will continue to boom higher in upcoming years. Taiwan has shown that a Chinese democracy can be governed effectively including the economic dimension. Even as the world suffered pandemic, Taiwan grew as a high-income yielding economy for the previous year.
The Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement is a boon in Cross-Strait confrontation for Taiwan because it enabled the Chinese democracy to grab an opportunity to integrate more into the East Asian Economy and beyond. Due to the agreement Taiwan had an option to either pursue preferential trade practises with other countries or to pursue a multilateral trade strategy and focus on domestic reforms that will bring larger economic gains, diversification and avoid political risks especially with Mainland China to sail smoothly across Cross-Strait.
This paper aims to find out what are the strategies were used by Taiwan to reduce its economic dependence on China and how the same can be achieved in the forthcoming years.
An Overview of Taiwan’s Economy
Subscribe to The Viyug Updates
Get exclusive contents and fresh perspectives on defence, geopolitics, international affairs, public policy, intelligence, strategic studies, and many more delivered to your inbox.
Before we dive deep into the mainframe of question, it is important to understand the model of Taiwan’s economy. This section of the paper will find out and analyse the Taiwan’s economic model. It has been reported that Taiwan runs a highly developed free market economy. Taiwan’s economy is reported to be the 8th largest in Asia and 18th largest in the world depending on purchasing power parity index, making the country to be included in the advanced economies group by the International Monetary Fund (IMF). The World Bank also classified Taiwan under high-income level economies grouping.
History of Taiwan’s Economy
Upon probing the reports, we can find references that Taiwan has been transformed into what it is today with the help of US. During the early 1950s to late 1960s, US was the major financial aid donor for Taiwan and its sole foreign investor. Here it can be noted that the US on one hand has used Taiwan as a proxy to invest heavily in Mainland China. Thus, Taiwanese investment in mainland China is estimated to excess over US$ 150 billion. Taiwan also holds major investments share in other parts of Southeast Asia.
Historically, the country carefully crafted its strategy to minimise its dependence on mainland China, starting with industrialisation by land reforms. Taiwan’s rapid democratisation and economy being open led to US investments as stated above which accounted for 30 percent of country’s GDP during the period from 1950s to 1960s. Along with US’ investments and KMT’s proper planning, the country witnessed rapid advancement in industrial and agricultural aspects including people’s living standards. The Chinese democracy’s economy saw a shift from agricultural economy to industrial based economy post 1960s. Due to this change in economic orientation, Taiwan’s GDP grew by an average of 9.27 percent each year thereafter.
The smooth sail of Taiwan under US’ care gone off the tide when America established its formal diplomatic ties with mainland China by severing ties with Taiwan. Though security relations were maintained between the two sides, commitment of financial aids and economic links were cut off. Thus, the Taiwan policymakers took a hard turn from subsidised import economy model to export led growth economy model. The country’s government took the opportunity to shed its agriculturally based economy to utilise the significant growth it could achieve by shifting towards implantation of economy run by heavy industries and infrastructure developments. The government scaled up their economic activities towards more open markets and rapidly shifting towards privatisation of public owned enterprises.
Advertisements
Advertisements
Advertisements
During the 1980s, Taiwan’s government started integrating advanced electronics-based industries into its economy thus, fully shedding its cheap and labour-intensive manufacturing sectors. Post 1980s, Taiwanese investments in mainland China increased which spurred Cross- Strait trade aspects thereby decreasing the Chinese democracy’s dependence on the United States. Due to the country’s financial policies, Taiwan suffered little during the fiscal crisis from 1997 to 1999 as compared to other nations.
The nutshell of the historical economic build of Taiwan indeed shows very much less interaction with mainland China. Today mainland China stands as Taiwan’s number one exports and imports partner. Somewhere down the road China overtook America to make the Chinese democracy dependent on them. So where did the dragon’s gameplay occur?
How did Taiwan become economically dependent on China
It all started during the post-1990s and rapidly during the past two decades. During this period Taiwan’s economy deepened the ties to its counterpart. Today, China is Taiwan’s largest trading partner by absorbing nearly 30 percent of the island’s exports. Ironically, the dependence on mainland China started during the administration of Chen Shui Bian who was Taiwan’s first president from Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) whose core agenda was pioneering independence from China.
Despite advocating Taiwanese national identity, under his administration the government raised the value of island’s exports which resulted in total value of $66 billion at the end of his tenure in 2008. Furthermore, in 2015 exports by Taiwan accounted for 53 percent of its GDP, whereby mainland China was the leading market of its exports. Ma Ying-jeou who took over the administration from Chen, made the economic growth even more modest although the KMT leader did not deepened the economic ties between the two sides. Under Ma’s leadership the government opened the island nation for tourism to China, which lead a rapid increase in tourists from the mainland and vice versa. Today, the mainland Chinese citizens account for half of the incoming visitors to the Chinese Taipei.
The economic ties between Taiwan and China now went over the control. The second largest trading partner of Taiwan which is Hong Kong once again comes under China thus, indirectly swallowing the second spot too. The third largest trading partner which is US does not even come closer enough to the amounts of exports and imports done between China and Taiwan including Hong Kong. Thus, deeply connected by exports and imports for revenue, Taiwan has become heavily dependent on China which developed strongly during the course of several years. So, what are the strategies developed by Taiwan to deter reliance over China? The further section of this paper will analyse all the possible strategies constructed by Taiwan to become less reliant from the mainland China.
Strategies posed by Taiwan to counter Chinese dependency
Advertisements
Advertisements
Advertisements
Taiwanese in China
Analysing the past few years data has shown that nearly 2 million Taiwanese people live in mainland China permanently. These people with Taiwanese links are running small and medium scale enterprises known as Taishang, who are often employing thousands of mainland Chinese citizens in their businesses. Hon Hai Precision Industry or better known as Foxconn is the largest business who employs nearly 1 million Chinese citizens on the mainland. This led to transfer of over $10 billion worth of FDIs from Taiwan to China in past decade. On the other hand, a 2016 report shows that such kinds of FDI flowing from China to Taiwan remains comparatively smaller at $215 million because of strict regulations from the latter country’s control over where China can invest.
Though China had strict economic controls like Taiwan, the latter nation’s businessmen were successful in penetrating and navigating through highly complicated bureaucracy. Does Taiwan’s method of counter investing in mainland China will prove effective? In short, yes it has proved effective for Taiwan as revenue generated are ploughed back into the country as profits but still it’s a very dangerous way of constructing countermeasures.
The Chinese democracy’s top revenue generating sources come from technological sector which are involved in hardware manufacturing and assembly. Furthermore, all the Taiwanese technological based companies do business across the strait which makes them prone to political backlash and in worst case scenario that could lead to dissolution of the companies. It has been reported that Taiwanese companies like Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company (TMSC) and MediaTek are facing increasing competition from their respective Chinese counterparts which are mostly government owned corporations.
In case of Chinese government’s pressure, companies like device makers could cancel their contracts with Taiwanese chip manufacturing industries thereby switching to domestic makers such as Spreadtrum or Tsinghua Unigroup. Taiwanese investments in China would be dangerous for the island nation since those companies are bound by legal laws of China and changing dynamics of China such as economic slowdown could also inturn affect Taiwan leading to its economic slowdown.
Advertisements
Advertisements
Advertisements
The Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement
Read the full article in our recent publication.
Available in E-book, Paperback & Hardback
Available in E-book, Paperback & Hardback
Share this article with your friends and colleagues on Twitter
Check out this article ‘Taiwan’s Strategy to Reduce Economic Dependence on China’
Lin, Syaru Shirley. “Taiwan’s Continued Success Requires Economic Diversification of Products and Markets.” Brookings, 15 Mar. 2021, http://www.brookings.edu/blog/order- from-chaos/2021/03/15/taiwans-continued-success-requires-economic-diversification- of-products-and-markets/.
“World Bank Country and Lending Groups – World Bank Data Help Desk.” Web.archive.org, 11 Jan. 2018, web.archive.org/web/20180111190936/datahelpdesk.worldbank.org/knowledgebase/a rticles/906519#High_income/.
“Taiwanese Investment in China – Winkler Partners.” Web.archive.org, 21 Apr. 2011, web.archive.org/web/20110421035236/www.winklerpartners.com/a/comment/taiwanese-investment-in-china.php.
“The Story of Taiwan – Economy.” Archive.org, 2009, web.archive.org/web/20100202032138/www.taiwan.com.au/Polieco/History/ROC/re port04.html.
“Wayback Machine.” Web.archive.org, web.archive.org/web/20140709162957/www.aric.adb.org/pdf/aem/external/financial_ market/Sound_Practices/tap_bnk.pdf. Accessed 25 May 2022.
“The Definition, Purposes, Functions and Services of Incubation Centers.” Incubator.moeasmea.gov.tw, incubator.moeasmea.gov.tw/en/incubation-centers-en/incubation-centers-info-en. Accessed 25 May 2022.
Horwitz, Josh. “Charted: Taiwan’s Economy Is More Dependent on China than Ever Before, Making Trump’s Threats Dangerous.”Quartz, Quartz, 16 Dec. 2016, qz.com/861507/charted-taiwans-economy-is-more-dependent-on-china-than-ever- before-making-trumps-threats-dangerous/.
Kastner, Scott L. “Political Conflict and Economic Interdependence across the Taiwan Strait and Beyond.” Stanford University Press, Stanford University Press, 2009, http://www.sup.org/books/title/?id=16474.
Peter Drysdale & Xinpeng Xu, 2004. “Taiwan’s Role in the Economic Architecture of East Asia and the Pacific,” Asia Pacific Economic Papers 343, Australia-Japan Research Centre, Crawford School of Public Policy, The Australian National University.
By Virginia Marantidou – Pacific Forum. https://pacforum.org/wp- content/uploads/2019/02/140624_issuesinsights_vol14no7.pdf.
Zhao, Hong, and Sarah Tong. East Asian Policy East Asian Policy East Asian Policy East Asian Policy East Asian Policy 69 Implications of Taiwan- Mainland Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement. research.nus.edu.sg/eai/wp- content/uploads/sites/2/2017/11/Vol1No3_ZhaoHongSarahTong.pdf. Accessed 26 May 2022.
Ando, Mitsuyo, and Fukinari Kimura. “The Formation of International Production and Distribution Networks in East Asia.” National Bureau of Economic Research, 1 Dec. 2003, http://www.nber.org/papers/w10167.
Athukorala, Prema, and Nobuaki Yamashita. “Global Production Sharing and Sino–US Trade Relations.” China & World Economy, vol. 17, no. 3, 2009, pp. 39–56, ideas.repec.org/a/bla/chinae/v17y2009i3p39-56.html.
Dent, Christopher M. “Taiwan and the New Regional Political Economy of East Asia.” The China Quarterly, vol. 182, June 2005, pp. 385–406, https://doi.org/10.1017/s030574100500024x.
Hoan, Truong Quang, et al. “Taiwan–ASEAN Trade Relations: Trade Structure and Trade in Value Added.” China Report, vol. 55, no. 2, May 2019, pp. 102–124, doi:10.1177/0009445519834371.
Armstrong, Shiro Patrick. “Taiwan’s Asia Pacific Economic Strategies after the Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement.” Journal of the Asia Pacific Economy, vol. 18, no. 1, Feb. 2013, pp. 98–114, https://doi.org/10.1080/13547860.2012.742668.
“Taiwan GDP Growth Fastest in Decade in 2021 on Strong Exports.” Nikkei Asia, asia.nikkei.com/Economy/Taiwan-GDP-growth-fastest-in-decade-in-2021-on-strong- exports#:~:text=Taiwan. Accessed 27 May 2022.
Editor. “Challenges for Taiwan’s Defence & Economic Security and Its Required Efforts to Ensuring a Sustainable Peace.” Taiwan Insight, 1 June 2021, taiwaninsight.org/2021/06/01/challenges-for-taiwans-defence-economic-security-and- its-required-efforts-to-ensuring-a-sustainable-peace/.
Lee, Yen Nee. “Taiwan’s Economy Outgrows China’s for the First Time in 30 Years, as Chips Demand Soars.” CNBC, 1 Feb. 2021, http://www.cnbc.com/2021/02/01/taiwan- economy-outgrows-china-first-time-in-decades-as-chips-demand-rises.html.
All the views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author. This article was originally published by the author in his book titled “Research Papers on Defence & Strategic Studies Vol. 1”. Image Credit click here.
About the Author
Anirudh Phadke is the founding editor of The Viyug. He holds a Master of Science (Strategic Studies) and a certificate in Terrorism Studies from S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS) at Nanyang Technological University (NTU), Singapore. He currently works for an International Law Enforcement Organisation based in Singapore. He can be reached out via anirudh.r.phadke@viyug.com.
When a nation feels that it is threatened by outside forces paving way for incursions into their sphere of influence, that nation will undertake any means to stop it. Myanmar, being predominantly a Buddhist nation felt that Rohingyas (a Muslim community) have started occupying their sphere of influence resulting in decrease and freedom of Buddhist community. For several decades, the issue of Rohingyas as a classic example of ethnic genocide exists in the books of refugee crisis. The Southeast Asian Buddhist nation sharing borders with India, China, Thailand, Laos, and Bangladesh whose diverse population include Buddhists, Hindus, Chinese atheist government, and Muslims have resulted in international outcry for both helping Rohingyas and as well as ditching them. This paper attempts to examine the India’s stance on Rohingya crisis divided into a three-phase stages.
Background Brief on Rohingyas
The Rohingyas are Muslim minority group who claim their native to be Myanmar’s Rakhine state. However, the Myanmar government’s verdict on Rohingyas stated them as undocumented immigrants originated from Bangladesh. According to Human Rights Watch, the Rohingyas are denied of Myanmar citizenship, fundamental rights such as freedom of speech, movement, and employment including land ownership in Rakhine state.
Although stateless, they represent largest Muslim population in Myanmar. As of 2017 nearly 1 million Rohingyas were either displaced or began to flee from Rakhine state to Bangladesh, India, Pakistan, and Malaysia. The recent military coup that occurred last year disposing of National League for Democracy (NLD) by Tatmadaw (Myanmar’s military) made the situation even worse for the Rohingyas. Many scholars have argued that unstable political system in Myanmar has been major contributing factor of this unsolved crisis since 1970s.
Subscribe to The Viyug Updates
Get exclusive contents and fresh perspectives on defence, geopolitics, international affairs, public policy, intelligence, strategic studies, and many more delivered to your inbox.
Examining India’s stance on the Rohingya Crisis
It is a common notion for Indians lending their hands towards helpless. From monarchical period India has long records of understanding stateless people and taking them inside their country by granting refugee status. The most famous Buddhist leader Dalai Lama was also given political asylum status by past Indian government and tolerating his Tibet government in exile which he set up in Dharamshala, Himachal Pradesh. India and Myanmar share diplomatic ties tracing back into historical, religious, and cultural dimensions. India and Myanmar signed a treaty in 1951 known as the ‘treaty of friendship’. The visit of late prime minister Rajiv Gandhi to Myanmar in 1987 further strengthened the diplomatic relations between India and Myanmar. India has several ongoing economic projects (including Rakhine state) and trade activities with Myanmar.
Refugee crisis can be disastrous if not managed properly. That is the reason, India needs to equip itself with refugee management tactics while taking care of not corrupting the good bilateral relations with Myanmar. India is forced to act towards Rohingya issue due to its power projection status among Asia and rest of the world.
First Phase
Advertisements
Advertisements
Advertisements
India’s response to Rohingya crisis started back in 2012, when violent conflicts erupted between Myanmar’s government and Rohingyas in the Rakhine state. India intervened the conflict, but its support was mediated more towards Myanmar. Salman Kurshid, the then external affairs minister visited Myanmar’s Rakhine state to inspect the ground situation and later announced a US$ one million as humanitarian aid to the Rohingyas. Later that same year current UN Secretary General (the then UN high commissioner for refugees) Sir Antonio Guterres visited India leaving a token of appreciation for its long-standing tradition of understanding and helping refugees. Antonio on behalf of the UNHCR and New Delhi policy makers sat for a discussion about finding a solution to Rohingya crisis. India by that time had already allowed few thousands of Rohingyas to enter the country and settle down at Jammu & Kashmir.
The Rohingya issue started burning at an alarming rate in 2015 when Myanmar’s neighbouring states such as Thailand, Indonesia, and distant state Malaysia turned down permission for the boats carrying the Rohingyas to enter their territories. Several communities across the world made outcries towards India for lending her hand to Rohingya Muslims. By that time India saw a shift in power at central level (from Congress to BJP). This led to India dealing the Rohingya situation very differently.
India’s reply to the crisis can be divided into three stages. The first stage occurred during 2012 to 2015, where one can see events of India mediating its support between Rohingya Muslims and Myanmar’s government. India’s approach towards the crisis was shaped by combination of factors such as geopolitical, economic, and security interests. India’s actions of opening its borders to Rohingya between 2012 and 2015 was a result of gaining international image and sustaining its governance leadership position at the regional level.
India forecasted the threats to its diversified economic projects in the Northeast region further stretching till Myanmar via the Rakhine state. India felt that any deviation in its support against Rohingya Muslims during the early phase would result in turbulences in achieving its economic objectives. India through its state-owned oil company ONGC invested nearly US$ 121 million in Shwe gas fields to draw energy supplies to meet the country’s growing oil demand. The Shwe energy project was located offshore from Myanmar’s disputed Rakhine state. Another concern for India was that if the nation mediated towards Rohingyas then its ambitious plan to build a road connectivity corridor from North-East India to Myanmar would have adverse effects on its progress. India further planned to enhance the corridor with development of port Sittwe and in-land waterway in the Kalandan River.
Advertisements
Advertisements
Advertisements
In 2014 India and Myanmar authorities signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) regarding border crisis management. The growing violence against Rohingyas in Myanmar made them to migrate towards Bangladesh and later into India. Most of these immigrants began crossing the borders illegally. This made a loophole for terrorism activities such as illegal cross border smuggling to grow rapidly. The MoU between the two nations provided framework for security cooperation and intelligence sharing to strengthen their respective borders. The framework included details such as intelligence sharing on subjects related to insurgency, undocumented immigrant crossing, wildlife, arms, and drug trafficking. Both the nations agreed to help Rohingya Muslims who were deserted in borders towards safety shelters.
The then United Progressive Alliance (UPA) comprising of Congress at the central level promoted staying of Rohingyas in India without any hassle. In-fact all the events that occurred positively in the first phase of the India’s response to Rohingya crisis back in 2012 was due to the decision of Congress government. The UPA government had a mutual agreement with state government of Uttar Pradesh to accommodate thousands of Rohingya Muslims in their lands belonging to local government. Under the regime of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, the Rohingyas were considered as refugees and given better employment opportunities, regular donations, identity cards from UNHCR which granted them with additional humanitarian assistance from several international organisations. They were enabled to cross the borders without being questioned by the border police.
Now the question arises as why India allowed a lot of Rohingyas to stay inside the country during the period of 2012 to 2015. It was due to a lot of money in form of donations began to flow inside the country under Congress regime. Once Rohingyas entered Indian territory, the then government accepted them and granted refugee status to receive huge sum of funds from UNHCR and several other international organisations who were ready to support them. The next question is did those funds reach Rohingyas? What did the government do?
While some funds were indeed used to uplift the welfare status of Rohingyas, most of the incoming funds fell into the hands of politicians or NGOs who focus on refugee welfare. Hyderabad, the capital of Telangana’s state is also home to 4000 Rohingya Muslims. There has been recorded incidents stating refugees from camps were detained on several charges such as forgery, cheating, criminal breach of trust, and online money swindles. These collected funds through online campaign never reached to other refugees but instead used for living lavish lifestyles by the few culprits from Hyderabad camps While Rohingya’s small offences came into light, politically backed up money transfer labelled as Rohingya humanitarian assistance is shredded into secrecy.
Second Phase
Advertisements
Advertisements
Advertisements
The response to Rohingya crisis took a different turn when BJP led central government came to power. Their agenda was fully focused on strengthening India’s national security both internally and externally, so as a result their outlook on Rohingya crisis was different from UPA led government who supported Rohingya and delivered huge sum of humanitarian aid when ex-external affairs minister Salman Kurshid visited Myanmar. The first phase of response was heavily influenced by geopolitics and economic interests apart from UPA’s own agenda. During mid 2015 to late 2016 there were no major progression in events stating India’s actions towards Rohingya crisis as they were busy in setting up the big actions which are felt in India today. The second phase started in late 2017 as violent clash erupted in Rakhine state between Myanmar’s military and Rohingyas backed by Arakan Rohingya Salvation Army which led to 1 million Rohingyas displaced. Once again there were large incoming groups of that community into various parts of northeast India. The authorities found that large numbers (estimated to be forty thousand) of Rohingyas were undocumented while only sixteen thousand were holding government issued refugee registered cards.
Read the full article from our recent publication.
Available in E-book, Paperback & Hardback
Available in E-book, Paperback & Hardback
All the views and opinions expressed are those of the author. This article was originally published by the author in his book titled “Research Papers on Defence & Strategic Studies Vol. 1”. Image Credit- Google Images.
About the Author
Anirudh Phadke is the founding-editor of The Viyug. He holds a Master of Science (Strategic Studies) and certificate in Terrorism Studies from S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS) at Nanyang Technological University (NTU), Singapore. He currently works for an International Law Enforcement Organisation based in Singapore. He can be reached out via email at anirudh.r.phadke@viyug.com
Share this article with your friends and colleagues on Twitter
Read this article titled ‘Examining India’s Stance on the Rohingya Crisis’
The Indian Ocean is the third largest water body and covers 20% of earth’s surface after the pacific and the Atlantic Oceans. In current century it has become the most viable sea routes for trade and commerce connecting the US from West to Australia in the East. This vast theatre of water stretches from the Strait of Malacca and Australia’s western coast in the East to the Mozambique Channel in the West. This region serves as a home to key locations such as Arabian Sea, Bay of Bengal, Straits, Islands of Africa, Islands of India, and surrounded by power players of current global order such as China and India.
Serving livelihoods to around 2.5 billion people, the region’s vastness and diversity speaks of its geostrategic importance. The vital trading and business potential of this region paved way for wars between colonial powers such as British, French, and Portuguese to establish monopoly over this region to reap its luxurious benefits. Furthermore, the end of Cold War era created a new geopolitical framework of ‘Indian Ocean Region.’ Thus, at the heart of geopolitical struggle, different major powers from colonial era till today have constant military presence along with various means of deterrence strategies deployed in the Indian Ocean to maintain a sense of geopolitical stability.
For example, Kanhoji Angaria a Maratha Navy Admiral was famous for his marvellous naval warfare capabilities who deployed excellent sea deterrence strategies and injected the fear of serious punishments in the hearts of British and Portuguese for exploiting India under British era. He was dubbed as the ‘master of Arabian Sea’. Today’s scenario global powers such as India, China, and the US are engaged in the race for dominance in the Indian Ocean Region. Thus, this paper attempts to find the various means of deterrence strategies used and can be put to use in the Indian Ocean with special focus to India and China.
Under Sea (Nuclear) Deterrence
Subscribe to The Viyug Updates
Get exclusive contents and fresh perspectives on defence, geopolitics, international affairs, public policy, intelligence, strategic studies, and many more delivered to your inbox.
The acronym SSBN representing nuclear powered ballistic missile submarine is considered one of the most destructive weapons currently roaming in the waters of Indian Ocean. These submarines are gone undetected thus being dubbed as invulnerable to attacks. Introduction of these weapons have changed the dynamics of undersea warfare by adding the nuclear (total annihilation) component. Currently the United States have 14 SSBNs, China running with 6 SSBNs and finally India with one and only SSBN called INS Arihant (S3) that was commissioned in 2016. Although the US have higher number of SSBNs serious competition arises since China has much stronger foothold in the Indian Ocean region than the latter democratic giant.
China’s wider strategic activity and 2030 vision of controlling the East Asia has deepened the concerns for many countries, especially those engulfed around the Indian Ocean Region. Despite several warnings from US’ Pentagon, India’s Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) and other nations’ concerned authorities, China has been increasing its aggressive advancements which has resulted in several obvious flashcards such as territorial disputes in South & East China Sea with Japan and Taiwan and unhealthy competition with India in the Indian Ocean. Many of these flashcards are accompanied by call for nuclear threats from China itself to keep its enemies at bay. One credible explanation which the Chinese administration give us is that they have concerns regarding threats from US’ permanent military presence in the Indian Ocean and South China Sea which create hurdles for China to freely practice trade and sea exploration. Thus, as a means of deterrence China aims to make that region as a SSBNs populated area. Another credible reason China gives is that the nation can possess diplomatic turbulences with India over Maldives’ treatment, as both the nations outlook towards the tiny Island differs.
Another credible reason for China establishing undersea deterrence by willing to increase population of its SSBNs is due to the recent AUKUS (Australia United Kingdom US) pact. Under this new security pact, the US and Britain will provide full assistance to Australia including the technology to build nuclear-powered submarines. Although Australian Prime Minister Morrison said the nation is seeking to establish civil nuclear capability, China has delivered its sharp dislike to this pact. Chinese’s foreign ministry spokesperson Zhao Lijian said that the treaty will affect regional stability, intensifies arms race, and downplays international non-proliferation efforts.
Advertisements
Advertisements
Advertisements
Commodore Venugopal Menon (retd) says that AUKUS will keep China busy with Pacific theatre which will result in reduction of threat level posed by China in the Indian Ocean. This creates an ample time for India to revive its Under-Sea warfare capabilities and rise stronger in the coming years.
Given this potential threat of China deploying more SSBNs intersecting with Indian interests, India will be more likely to strengthen its naval capabilities. Apart from INS Arihant, India will commission another SSBN named ‘INS Arighat’ in near future, having sea trials in a completed stage. Although India sees Pakistan as a mere proxy in maritime realm, still the nation does not downplay its (Pakistan) nuclear naval implementation. Pakistan established a Naval Strategic Command Force to implement nuclear powered submarines to develop its sea deterrence doctrine, which is once again fully backed up by China.
Thus, Pakistan ‘First Use’ nuclear doctrine and willingness to develop a sea deterrence made growing concerns for India to speed up the process of deploying a second SSBN in the Indian Ocean. This will further enable India to strengthen its nuclear doctrine- second strike capabilities. Currently India does not possess good land based nuclear deterrence capabilities. In case of China, the communist giant can deploy missiles easily into populated territory close to India’s border across Himalayas whereas in case of India it can barely reach populated territory of eastern part of China with its current nuclear technologies.
Given these constraints, India develops a powerful undersea deterrence and with the given technology it can deploy its SSBN either in Bay of Bengal or deep into the southern parts of Indian Ocean. The US also has significant role in facilitating nuclear stability in this region. In recent times US has shown good signs by supporting India’s maritime nuclear doctrine as well as showing interest towards Pakistan’s attempt to establish nuclear submarines. This sign would be critical in stabilising the India-Pakistan nuclear dynamic. Nevertheless, a potentially more dangerous risk of tensions and escalations awaits in the Indian Ocean in coming days.
Security Dialogues as a form of Seagoing Deterrent
Many international forums and security dialogues were established to promote stability, free & open trade in the Indian Ocean. One such famous security dialogue named QUAD (Quadrilateral Security Dialogue) which always fall into the hands of critics and commentators calling it an ‘Asian NATO’ and stalemate despite its members having several meetings. The QUAD has been criticised for having its sole purpose to deter China in the Indian & Pacific Oceans, which is indeed true. China’s rapid navy modernisation has made huge concerns for India as the nation feels many parts of its sea routes especially in the Indian Ocean has been breached.
Advertisements
Advertisements
Advertisements
Originally this security dialogue born instantly out of 2004 Indian tsunami disaster that occurred in Tamil Nadu in a notion of countering natural calamities, today QUAD’s goal has changed due to change in dynamics of the geopolitical framework in Indian Ocean Region. Thus, returning in form QUAD 2.0 in 2017, the members re-framed their goals and objectives given the military modernisation challenges posed by China. Today QUAD’s objectives include regular military exercises with the recent example, being Malabar military exercise and long-term goal- to upgrade this security dialogue as a fully functional alternative to China’s Belt Road Initiative.
The QUAD grouping has met bi-annually since their realignment of goals to discuss connectivity, sustainable development, counterterrorism, non-proliferation, maritime and cybersecurity with a view of promoting peace and stability in the Indian Ocean Region. Thus, QUAD members set out to challenge China in its own game, creating a self-reliant atmosphere to cut off heavy Chinese exports to other countries. US has shown improved sign in setting up its market in India thereby making China to cut off its debt trap diplomacy to BRI (Belt and Road Initiative) and its child initiatives.
This counter strategy has not yet fully evolved, but each of the QUAD member countries have shown good cooperation and coordination in their responses to execute the proposed plans, for example US coordination in South Asia and the Indian Ocean Region with India. The QUAD never downplays the notion of military dimension. India has further strengthened its naval ties with other QUAD members and there have been more interactions on political and military level including both formal and informal dialogues.
Another kind of security dialogue, more of regional perspective meant only for the Indian Ocean named ‘The Colombo Security Conclave’ (CSC) has been once again pumped back into life by New Delhi early August this year. Analysts see this as a crucial move for India to secure its strategic interests in the Indian Ocean. As of present date the CSC is the only active sub-regional forum in the Indian Ocean Region. The Deputy National Security Advisors (DNSAs) from India, Sri Lanka, and tiny island nation- Maldives met virtually at a conference hosted by Sri Lanka along with Bangladesh, Mauritius, and the Seychelles in an observer status. The DNSAs discussed about the four pillars namely cyber security, maritime security, counterterrorism, and human trafficking in the Indian Ocean. Desk experts see China as a significant driver for India’s motive to revitalise the Colombo Security Conclave back into form.
One among the outcome of the conclave was to upgrade observer nations’ status into permanent members. The logic in this move is that by joining more members India can have support to balance its stiff competition with China in the Indian Ocean. Indian government has constant worries due to a report stating that China’s navy (PLAN) is on the process to establish a ‘special naval fleet for the Indian Ocean‘. On the other hand, China through its BRI project has constantly attempting to gain hands of every other country in the Indian Ocean except India. China’s one and only operational (foreign) military base in Djibouti has given such a strategic advantage. The communist nation gets full access into backyard of Arabian Sea and its functional port in Gwadar, Pakistan makes it a complete civil-military balance (presence) for China in the Indian Ocean. Also, China has been sending its warships inside the Indian waters of Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) which is located near Andaman and Nicobar Islands. This reminds India to further heighten its military in its own backyard- Indian Ocean.
Advertisements
Advertisements
Advertisements
Thus, China debate being an important agenda for India, the democratic Asian power under Prime Minister Modi’s administration show full resistance to China by growing the framework of the CSC. India also has been constantly improving its diplomatic relationship with each of the CSC members individually to further strengthen its success parameters. In the race to gain hands of the tiny island nations such as Mauritius and Seychelles, India once again overtakes China by providing them aids, human and material capacities.
Thus, upon close probing into the international & regional security dialogues, India and its allies has been trying to create a conventional form of sea deterrence. This would result in outcome being reliable than nuclear deterrence. The latter one is considered as a lender of last resort and since most of the nation’s having interests in the Indian Ocean Region such as US, India, China, and Pakistan are all nuclear capable countries with developed nuclear doctrines. Moreover, these countries have realised going for nuclear attacks would totally disable them since nuclear is a weapon of total annihilation. So, countries have adopted the method of mounting nuclear weapons in navy and preferring security dialogues for more reliable source of Seagoing deterrence.
China’s Economic & Military Deterrence in the Indian Ocean
Scholars trace roots of Chinese non-combat operations in the Indian Ocean starting long back into 1991 when the concerned authorities sent state owned rescue vessels to bring back stranded Chinese citizens in Somalia. That is where when world saw the capabilities of China conducting non-combat operations in deep seas. The 2006 Chinese white papers show that the nation has rising concerns over security related issues pertaining to trade & commerce routes it had in the Indian Ocean. The 2008 defence white paper of China showed the world that given rising competition in the Indian Ocean, need raised for China to establish PLAN’s capabilities to establish permanent military presence in the waters of Indian Ocean.
During that time, China possessed 13.71% of global market shares for commercial purposes. Thus, through five meta missions China developed an economic deterrence strategy that was executed which is having long term impacts now in the Indian Ocean Region. Those are;
Advertisements
Advertisements
Advertisements
Conduct non-combat activities focused on securing Chinese interests elsewhere other than Mainland China which included investments and bolstering of the nation’s soft power.
Undertake counterterrorism activities, unilaterally and bilaterally against organisation that is deemed as threat to China.
Collect intelligence against its key adversaries.
Give economic aids to small island countries in the Indian Ocean Region.
Enable functional operational bodies having the ability to deter, mitigate, or terminate state sponsored interdiction trade bound towards China. For example, to hold crucial assets of US & India in an event of massive conflict.
Read the full article from our recent publication.
Available in E-book, Paperback & Hardback
Available in E-book, Paperback & Hardback
All the views and opinions expressed are those of the author. This article was originally published by the author in his book titled “Research Papers on Defence and Strategic Studies Vol. 1”. Image Credit, Click here.
About the Author
Anirudh Phadke is the founding-editor of The Viyug. He holds a Master of Science (Strategic Studies) from S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS) at Nanyang Technological University (NTU), Singapore. He currently works for an International Law Enforcement Organisation based in Singapore. He can be reached out via email at anirudh.r.phadke@viyug.com.
Share this article with your friends and colleagues on Twitter
Read this article titled ‘Finding Deterrence Strategies Deployed in the Indian Ocean Region’.
The Viyug 