10-20-2004, 02:27 AM
Jaswant Singh in 1997 at CASI , UPenn....
Abstract
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->What Constitutes National Security in a Changing World Order?
Shri Jaswant Singh
Member of Parliament
Deputy Leader, Bharatiya Janata Party
(Paper presented by Ambassador S.K. Singh)
Strategic thought has its roots in national culture, and the two are closely allied. Indian society has not drawn inspiration from its national culture to the fullest possible extent, and history has dictated a deficient development of strategic thinking in India. Historically, a lack of territorial unity, which long subjected India to outside rule; the fact that Indian nationhood is essentially civilizational, and Indian civilization is non-proselytizing; as well as the maintenance of chivalric war practices were all costly to Indian strategic efficacy.
In todayâs rapidly changing world, nationalism and the state remain important for the direction and cohesion of a society. Likewise, weakness in these institutions can be harmful to a people. Indian society has a long history of patriotic allegiance to the Indian nation, but statecraft and strategic thinking have been more episodic and only incidental. The failure to construct a strategic policy has arisen from a lack of definition of national strategic interests by successive governments. Also, when the individual perceives that the state is lacking in its commitment to him or her, a loss of allegiance follows. The contemporary separatist movements in India may be attributed to this.
Shortfalls in economic development have also hindered development of coherent strategic thought in India. The economy has a significant effect on military power and security. When a nation is economically weak, it may also be militarily weak. This leads the nation to devote more and more of its resources to the military, which then decreases its economic strength, in a cruel spiral. Economic strength is a pre-requisite for security in international relations.
Infrastructure, and particular energy security, is another factor necessary for strategic development. Indiaâs energy policy, which should be efficient and environmentally conscious, is poorly defined. India has coal resources, but no significant deposits of oil and natural gas, and is dependent on energy imports.
With the 1974 underground explosion, India demonstrated a nuclear ability, but disclaimed the intent. In consequence, India has suffered the ill-effects of both, being suspected of being a nuclear weapons power, and not really being one. In the process, Indiaâs options were severely curtailed.
India needs to be more assertive in balancing both strategic needs and international pressures. National security should be a top priority in this issue. Restrictive regimes are in violation of national security. Disarmament is a goal so worthy of attaining that we must strive unceasingly for it. But if the challenge is global, then an answer does not lie in the regional. India cannot tolerate a system in which some countries have more privileges than others.
The world order is in flux. Economics and politics must work in partnership for success in the global order. A major question is the role of the United States, as well as that of the United Nations, in this changing world order. Order can emerge either as an expression of the global community, or as an imposition of the will of one, or a few. It is in this context that India must define its strategic vision. Idealistic principles must be combined with concrete international political realities.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Link: http://www.sas.upenn.edu/casi/reports/nu...anel3.html
Follow the discussion!!!
I think the paper was recast as a book and another version became the book 'Defending India' which Strobe Talbott dissed recently.
Abstract
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->What Constitutes National Security in a Changing World Order?
Shri Jaswant Singh
Member of Parliament
Deputy Leader, Bharatiya Janata Party
(Paper presented by Ambassador S.K. Singh)
Strategic thought has its roots in national culture, and the two are closely allied. Indian society has not drawn inspiration from its national culture to the fullest possible extent, and history has dictated a deficient development of strategic thinking in India. Historically, a lack of territorial unity, which long subjected India to outside rule; the fact that Indian nationhood is essentially civilizational, and Indian civilization is non-proselytizing; as well as the maintenance of chivalric war practices were all costly to Indian strategic efficacy.
In todayâs rapidly changing world, nationalism and the state remain important for the direction and cohesion of a society. Likewise, weakness in these institutions can be harmful to a people. Indian society has a long history of patriotic allegiance to the Indian nation, but statecraft and strategic thinking have been more episodic and only incidental. The failure to construct a strategic policy has arisen from a lack of definition of national strategic interests by successive governments. Also, when the individual perceives that the state is lacking in its commitment to him or her, a loss of allegiance follows. The contemporary separatist movements in India may be attributed to this.
Shortfalls in economic development have also hindered development of coherent strategic thought in India. The economy has a significant effect on military power and security. When a nation is economically weak, it may also be militarily weak. This leads the nation to devote more and more of its resources to the military, which then decreases its economic strength, in a cruel spiral. Economic strength is a pre-requisite for security in international relations.
Infrastructure, and particular energy security, is another factor necessary for strategic development. Indiaâs energy policy, which should be efficient and environmentally conscious, is poorly defined. India has coal resources, but no significant deposits of oil and natural gas, and is dependent on energy imports.
With the 1974 underground explosion, India demonstrated a nuclear ability, but disclaimed the intent. In consequence, India has suffered the ill-effects of both, being suspected of being a nuclear weapons power, and not really being one. In the process, Indiaâs options were severely curtailed.
India needs to be more assertive in balancing both strategic needs and international pressures. National security should be a top priority in this issue. Restrictive regimes are in violation of national security. Disarmament is a goal so worthy of attaining that we must strive unceasingly for it. But if the challenge is global, then an answer does not lie in the regional. India cannot tolerate a system in which some countries have more privileges than others.
The world order is in flux. Economics and politics must work in partnership for success in the global order. A major question is the role of the United States, as well as that of the United Nations, in this changing world order. Order can emerge either as an expression of the global community, or as an imposition of the will of one, or a few. It is in this context that India must define its strategic vision. Idealistic principles must be combined with concrete international political realities.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Link: http://www.sas.upenn.edu/casi/reports/nu...anel3.html
Follow the discussion!!!
I think the paper was recast as a book and another version became the book 'Defending India' which Strobe Talbott dissed recently.