Modi’s China Policy: Between Rhetoric and Reality

Niharika Tagotra

Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s policy towards China can be best described as a balancing act displaying elements of both pragmatism and realism. India has sought closer ties with countries like the US and Japan, but has simultaneously also displayed its willingness to accommodate Chinese interests in the region. After the initial euphoria over the prospects of strengthening the bilateral ties, Modi’s China policy has been remarkably re-shaped by the changing ground realities.

 

The bilateral relations between the two countries under Modi have taken the slow yet steady route. Modi himself has agreed that while India can “speak to China eye-to eye,” the objectives of foreign policy lay not in “changing mindsets” but in “finding common grounds for converging interests.” This careful deliberation of interests with a hint of realpolitik is also reflected in India’s stance over issues of critical importance to China. For instance, while India has been more assertive in demanding a peaceful resolution to the South China Sea (SCS) dispute, in May 2016, it refused to hold joint patrols with the US in the region. It also explicitly ruled out its participation in any such future patrols. This, however, was in stark contrast to India’s participation with the US and Japan in the trilateral naval exercise held in June 2016 in the West Philippine Sea, treading dangerously close to the SCS region. This could be read as a sign of India’s assertion of its dominance over the Indian Ocean, while simultaneously respecting China’s interests in the SCS. Modi during his recent US visit also gave reassurances that China would not be not be “demonized” in view of the developments in the India-US bilateral ties.

 

India has been even more accommodating towards China in the economic sphere. Under Modi, there’s been a growing emphasis on demarcating India’s core strategic interests from its economic interests. This is an acknowledgment of the fact that while India benefits from aligning with the US in the strategic sphere, economically, its regional interests resonate more closely with those of China. India has pushed for deals worth $22 billion with China, despite the growing trade deficit. That India sees its economic ties with China, with whom it shares tremendous economic complementarities, as vital to the country’s growth can be ascertained from India’s particularly cooperative attitude towards the China-led multilateral economic initiatives such as the Asian Infrastructure and Investment Bank and the New Development Bank.

 

The Pakistan conundrum has, however, cast a long shadow over the India-China ties. India’s opposition to the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor, in view of the threat it poses to India’s strategic interests in Pakistan Occupied Kashmir, as along with China’s attempts to block the UN ban on Jaish-e-Mohammed Chief Masood Azhar highlights how the Pakistan factor has further complicated India-China relations. India has been unable to clearly factor in China’s interests in Pakistan as a part of its own China policy. While the rhetoric over the issue has been high, the response by the current Indian establishment has been remarkably muted. There have been attempts to delink Pakistan from India-China ties, but Modi’s back and forth on the ties in view of the developments in the China-Pakistan relations has caused a certain degree of ambiguity.

 

The present regional security scenario presents India with a range of very complex policy options. China’s attempts at widening its regional influence can substantially threaten India’s core strategic interests, which primarily include a strategic pre-eminence in the South-Asian region, and control of the energy and mineral resources, and the sea lines of communication. Any ambiguity in spelling out its strategic choices will cost India a lot of manoeuvring space in the future. Moreover, in order to benefit from the bilateral economic relations, India will also need to de-link its economic engagements with China from its security interests. Growing bilateral economic interdependence can potentially blunt the more contentious aspects of the relations. This is also the policy that China has been following in its engagement with the US. Despite the usual rhetoric that the two countries engage in over the SCS region, the trade ties between them run deep, hovering around $562 billion in 2013. China is currently the third largest export market for US while the US is China's largest export market. This has given China a substantial amount of strategic space with respect to the US, an approach that holds important lessons for India. 

 

The organic continuum of India-China relations will also be of much significance in the changed geo-political scenario. With the change of regime in the US, the balance of power in the Asia-Pacific could see significant alteration with smaller states in the region possibly bandwagoning with a more assertive China. This will, in turn, have important consequences for India, which will now need to re-think the regional implications of its global alliances and recalibrate accordingly. The India-US relationship and the US’ China policy, both of which are poised for changes under the new government, will also impact India’s China policy. In the face of changing times, India will need to wait and watch for the events to unfold in the next few months. Until then, the best strategy for India would be to tone down the public rhetoric against China, and look for possible avenues of economic cooperation, while pursuing more robust strategic alliances with the other states in the Asia-Pacific region.

Pakistan's New Army Chief and the Indo-Pak Dialogue Process

Sarral Sharma

On 26 November 2016, Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif confirmed the appointment of Lt Gen Qamar Javed Bajwa as the new Chief of the Army Ataff (COAS). Lt Gen Zubair Mahmood Hayat takes the charge as the Chairman of the Joint Chief of Staff Committee (CJCSC). Gen Bajwa assumes office on 29 November 2016 as the current COAS, Gen Raheel Sharif, completes his three-year tenure.

 

The successful transition of power will boost the confidence of Pakistan's Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif's government which has seen many ups and downs in its relations with the military in the last three years. The new army chief will take at least two to three months to settle in, to make new appointments and to build his new team. During that period, Sharif will have the window of opportunity to assert a bit more on crucial issues such as improving relations with India. However, it is expected that this time around, Sharif will be cautiously treading the path of restarting any dialogue process with India. This is because even one wrong decision would eventually give leeway to the new army chief to dominate both domestic and international policies.

 

Sharif is likely to have an upper hand in the coming months as far as the relations with India are concerned. He is expected to move towards resuming the dialogue process with India. It appears that he has already made the first move in that direction. Pakistan's Adviser to the Prime Minister on Foreign Affairs, Sartaz Aziz has confirmed Islamabad's participation at the upcoming Heart of Asia (HoA) conference, scheduled to be held in Amritsar, India, from 3-4 December 2016. Although the focus of the conference is the situation in Afghanistan, it is possible that Aziz (if he represents Pakistan at the conference) will meet his Indian counterpart on the sidelines of the summit. If the meeting happens, it will be a deja vumoment for both countries. In 2015, India's Minister of External Affairs Sushma Swaraj met her Pakistani counterpart on the sidelines of the HoA conference in Islamabad, which paved the way for Indian Prime Minister Narenda Modi's surprise visit to Lahore. However, the leadership change in the Pakistan Army will likely to have some impact on the resumption of talks between India and Pakistan.

 

The army chief's succession may not immediately bring about a major policy change in Pakistan but it could still have important implications on India and Pakistan relations. The change may also hamper Sharif's efforts to normalise relations with India like it has done in the past. Institutionally, it is Rawalpindi that is in the driver's seat vis-a-vis prioritising the strategic outlook in Pakistan. The three main strategic considerations of the army are internal security apparatus, the situation in Afghanistan, and the Kashmir-centric India policy. The army's strategic outlook changes according to the domestic, regional and geo-political situation.

 

Gen Raheel Sharif prioritised the internal security situation in Pakistan over the situation in Afghanistan and Kashmir. He initiated Operation Zarb-e-Azb in North Waziristan in 2014, which is still ongoing, to target the Tehrik-e-Taliban (TTP) operatives; and the Karachi operation against local criminal syndicates, etc. to improve the overall security environment in Pakistan. During his tenure, the India-Pakistan bilateral has witnessed numerous highs and lows, beginning from Sharif's visit to India and Modi's visit to Lahore, the Pathankot and Uri attacks, and finally, the surgical strikes across the Line of Control (LoC).

 

The new COAS will take some time to draw the roadmap for next three years. His strategic priorities are expected to include the clampdown on home-grown groups - such as Lashkar-e-Jhangvi (LeJ), Jamaat-ul-Ahrar  - affiliated to the Islamic State (IS); continuing military operations against Tehreek-e-Taliban (TTP) in the Federally Administered Tribal Agency region; monitoring the separatist activities in Balochistan and Sindh provinces; helping the Sharif government in its efforts to mainstream FATA into Khyber Pakhtunkhwa before the 2018 elections; resumption of peace talks with the Taliban along with countries including China and Russia.

Presently, India and Pakistan are fighting a limited tactical battle along the LoC and the International Border (IB) with regular incidents of cross-border firing. In such a scenario, Gen Bajwa's foremost priority would be to either continue the present status quo along the border or consider a possible shift in the Pakistan Army's Kashmir policy. Having spent a considerable part of his military service in the Rawalpindi-based 10 Corps that is responsible for guarding the LoC, it is expected that Gen Bajwa would try to use his organisational experience to influence the Sharif government's Kashmir-centric India policy.

 

It is a wait-and-watch situation for India. The future of any dialogue process between India and Pakistan is heavily dependent on the civil-military relations in Pakistan. With the considerably weak Opposition and the change in military leadership, Sharif has a plausible chance to consolidate his influence in the domestic arena. In order to do that, Sharif will direct his ministers and diplomatic advisors to continue to internationalise the Kashmir issue. It is also possible that Pakistan will raise the Kashmir issue at the upcoming HoA conference in India. That will satisfy the domestic audience, whom Sharif is targeting for the 2018 general elections, and will also send across a strong message to the new military leadership in a bid to bolster civil-military relations.

 

Also, it is important to understand that the Pakistani military's institutional thinking is unlikely to change in the near future. Gen Bajwa might consider targeting terror groups such as Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT), Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM), or the Haqqani Network under international pressure. But Pakistan is likely to continue its current orientation of supporting certain non-state actors and concurrently, playing the nuclear card as a deterrence policy against India.

An Opportunity to Bring Heart Back to Kashmir

Syed Ata Hasnain

Something that escaped most observers even as queues at ATMs increased and worries about the next purchase of vegetables kept attention focused, is the sudden quieting of the situation in the Kashmir Valley. In ferment since 08 July 2016, when Burhan Wani was killed, stamina just collapsed after the Durbar moved to Jammu for the winter. Perhaps it was realised well in time that demonstrations and stone throwing are supposedly instruments to communicate collective negative emotions and angst. However, when there is no government to paralyse, no tourists to harass and no minorities to intimidate, there is not much point in protesting. That is the phenomenon that always takes place around the end of the year in the Valley. No doubt this year the de-monetisation exercise is contributing to ensure that professional stone throwers cannot earn their bread nor the smack, ganja or other drugs because there is not cash around with the organisers.

There is an opportunity beckoning here that needs to be grabbed. The emerging window is one in which the missing outreach can be restored. There has been much public debate through the summer such that awareness levels on the real problem of J&K have risen considerably. Everyone blames Pakistan for creating the mayhem on the streets and the strife. But equally after many years there is a majority consensus that the governance and outreach deficits are as much to blame. It is long since any commentaries have appeared blaming Article 370, the failure of ensuring conditions for safe return of the Pandits or even the Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA). Jammu has approached the problem with sincere maturity through the last many months, without raising a voice of protest despite that there has been reason to feel slighted. There cannot be a better time than now to demonstrate how the Establishment can empathise with the plight of those in the Valley who want to be delivered from the control of the young vigilantes and stop becoming a mirror image of Pakistan with radical faith dictating their lives. Scratch and scratch hard, because under the surface, there is a public awaiting a kind word and a change of heart.

The Army has been the quickest to realise it, as usual, sensing an opportunity. Throughout the summer and the autumn, it doggedly continued its counter-terrorism campaign without getting involved with too many stone throwers and demonstrators. As Headquarters Northern Command made available two brigades to 15 Corps, the challenge was in understanding, evolving, communicating and executing the concept of operations. The demonstration of its concept is best exemplified not by its operations on the LoC, which have been professional no doubt and not by the quick control it established over the so called fedayeens who were threatening to go out of control at a point in time. Instead, it is demonstrated by the runaway success of the most innocuous of all things - a program called 'School Chalo' (Let us go to School), once again confirming the immense role of military soft power.

Readers would be aware that schools in the Valley have been shut for the last four months. An atrocious program of burning of schools has been undertaken by unknown elements that are anti-national in character. The Separatists perceive that a way of preventing the return of normalcy is to ensure schools remain closed. The young vigilantes in the rural areas, the ones controlling the stone throwing and holding their parents and elders to ransom, also have no wish to return to school. 

However, a vigorous social media campaign run by the Army in South Kashmir to bring home the message of its support to elders and parents, resonated splendidly in the hearts of the weary population. Schools reopened, the examinations drew 98 per cent attendance and the enthusiasm as per ground reports, was palpable.

This is one of the major successes of the Army employing a combination of ground campaign and social media outreach. It gives an indicator that more than anything else, the Army has simply to lead the way in outreach, social engagement and restoration of confidence. The State Government must take ownership of this success; it is not the Army's success alone because through and through it would have been discussed at the frequent Unified Command meetings and the Chief Minister would have been well aware of it, making it her success.

What does this signify? For those observing the virtual great game in the Valley, it should send home the lesson that a weary population needs to be handled with a heart and requires its hearts to be touched. This is a hearts game waiting to be played all over again. Restoration of self-esteem is the need as much as weeding out of rabble rousers. A degree of reverse vigilantism on the mosques; facilitation of the movement and meeting of political representatives with their constituencies; energetic return of governance demonstrated by good administrative performance against the vagaries of the expected severe winter; and domination of the social media space by positive messaging, will communicate the State Government's will and capability. The Army must assist in this energetically and whole heartedly. Just remember, it is all about ‘whole of government approach’ which will turn the tide and the Army must guide the government through with all its experience and knowledge of conflict.

The concept of Moral Dominance of the narrative remains the job of the Army, just as I strongly advocated in September 2016 when two infantry brigades were moving into deployment in South Kashmir. That is the way forward. Subsequently, build on it next summer. India will yet mainstream the Kashmiri populace - the Awam.

50 Fully-funded University of Oslo Norway Scholarships 2017

Application Deadline: 1st February 2017 | 

Offered annually? Yes

Eligible Countries: in Africa, Asia, Oceania, Central America and South America

To be taken at (country): University of Oslo, Norway

Eligible Fields of Study: Bachelors and Masters Courses at the University

About Scholarship:  The International Summer School – ISS offers Norway scholarships to applicants from certain countries. Competition for these scholarships is high and funds are limited, so the majority of scholarships awarded are partial scholarships.

Eligibility:

• Citizens from countries in Africa, Asia, Oceania, Central America or South America may apply for full or partial scholarships for Master’s courses.
• Candidates must demonstrate that their academic and professional background are the same as the course they are applying for. For example, a person with an engineering degree will not be considered for a course in human rights or peace studies.
• Applicants who are enrolled at one of UiO’s partner institutions in Central America and South America may also apply for both full and partial scholarships for Master’s courses.

Selection Criteria: To be a successful ISS scholarship recipient, candidate must demonstrate:

• that their academic background is relevant to the course you apply for
• that their professional background is relevant to the course you apply for
• their financial need

Number of Scholarships: 50 full scholarships are granted.

Value of Scholarships: Fully-funded and partial scholarships

Duration of Scholarships: not specified

How to Apply: Apply online as a scholarship applicant, and remember to complete and upload the scholarship form (webpage link below) with your application. In the scholarship form, you will be asked to specify the amount of money needed to participate.

It is important to read the ISS Terms and Conditions for detailed information on how to apply for this scholarship.

Visit Scholarship Webpage for details

Scholarship Provider: University of Oslo, Norway

Cadbury Research Fellowship Scheme for African Scholars 2017 – UK

Application Deadline:  9th December 2016.

Offered annually? Yes

Eligible Countries: African countries

To be taken at (country): UK

About the Award: The Cadbury Research Fellowship for 2017 will be organised around the theme of Marriage in Africa. It is convened in honour of Lynne Brydon and marks her contribution to the establishment of gender studies in Africa.

When visiting fellows arrive in the department, they join in a series of developmental activities which are organised around the annual research theme and are open to members of academic staff and postgraduate students. These activities may include presentations of work-in-progress, reading groups, writing groups, speaker events, research methods sessions, and one-to-one meetings. The final element of the programme is an international conference, at which fellows present their work, alongside other speakers from around the world. The department is grateful to the Cadbury family for its bequest which allows us to fund this annual programme.

Type: Fellowship

Eligibility: 

• Cadbury Research Fellowship is looking for early-career scholars whose research would benefit from a residential fellowship of approximately six weeks at the University of Birmingham.
• Applicants must be based in an African institution.
• They should be in the early stages of their academic careers (that is, they should have completed a PhD within the last four years, or now be close to completing one) and
• They must demonstrate that their research is relevant to the theme outlined above.

Number of Awardees: Not specified

Value of Fellowship: The Cadbury fellows will have time to use the University’s excellent library resources, discuss their work with academic staff and postgraduate students at DASA, and contribute to the intellectual life of the department by participating in the numerous events that will be organised here during the period of the fellowships. Fellowships will cover return air-fare, accommodation and living costs for a period of six weeks.

Duration of Fellowship: The Cadbury Research Fellowship programme will begin on 24 April 2017 and finish on 4 June 2017. The two-day international conference is scheduled for 1 and 2 June 2017.

How to Apply: If you would like to be considered for the 2017 scheme, please send your application by email to Dr Kate Skinner on k.a.skinner@bham.ac.uk by 9 December 2016.

In your email, please let us know how you learned about this programme and confirm that you will be able to come to Birmingham for the fellowship period 24 April 2017 to 4 June 2017.

Attached to your email should be two documents:

1. A research project description of 1500 words, describing: a) the research that you have already done, b) the specific aspect that you seek to develop during the fellowship, and c) how this relates to the theme of Marriage in Africa.
2. A short CV (not more than 3 pages) including the names of two referees.

Visit Fellowship Webpage for details

Award Provider: The Department of African Studies and Anthropology in The University of Birmingham

Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS) – TWAS President’s PhD Fellowship Programme 2017 – China

Application Deadline: 31st March 2017

Eligible Countries: International

To be taken at (country): China

Eligible Fields of Study: 

01-Agricultural Sciences
02-Structural, Cell and Molecular Biology
03-Biological Systems and Organisms
04-Medical and Health Sciences incl. Neurosciences
05-Chemical Sciences
06-Engineering Sciences
07-Astronomy, Space and Earth Sciences
08-Mathematical Sciences
09-Physics

About the Award: According to an agreement between the Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS) and The World Academy of Sciences (TWAS) for the advancement of science in developing countries, up to 200 students/scholars from all over the world will be sponsored to study in China for doctoral degrees for up to 4 years.

This CAS-TWAS President’s Fellowship Programme provides students/scholars that are non-Chinese citizens an opportunity to pursue doctoral degrees at the University of Chinese Academy of Sciences (UCAS), the University of Science and Technology of China (USTC) or Institutes of CAS around China.

Under the terms of the CAS-TWAS agreement, travel from their home countries to China will be provided to the fellowship awardees in order to begin the fellowship in China (one trip only per student/scholar). TWAS will select 80 awardees from developing countries to support their international travel, while CAS will support the other 120. Visa fee will also be covered (once only per awardee) as a lump sum of USD 65 after all the awardees are on site in China. Any awardee on site in China, the host country, at the time of application will NOT be eligible for any travel or visa reimbursement.

Type: PhD

Eligibility: Applicants must:

• Be maximum age of 35 years on 31 December 2017;
• Not take up other assignments during the period of his/her fellowship;
• Not hold Chinese citizenship;
• Applicants for doctoral study should also:
• Meet the admission criteria for international students of UCAS/USTC (criteria of UCAS/criteria of USTC).
• Hold a master degree before the beginning of the fall semester: 1 September, 2017.
• Provide evidence that he/she will return to their home country on completion of their studies in China according to CAS-TWAS agreement.
• Provide proof of knowledge of English or Chinese language.

Number of Awardees: 200

Value of Fellowship: Thanks to generous contribution of CAS, fellowship awardees will receive a monthly stipend (to cover accommodation and other living expenses, local travel expenses and health insurance) of RMB 7,000 or RMB 8,000 from CAS through UCAS/USTC, depending on whether he/she has passed the qualification test arranged by UCAS/USTC for all doctoral candidates after admission. All awardees will also be provided tuition and application fee waivers.

Duration of Fellowship: Up to 4 years

How to Apply: Visit our official website for the online application system.

Visit Fellowship Webpage for details

Award Provider: Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS) and The World Academy of Sciences (TWAS)

Important Notes: 

• Applicants currently pursuing doctoral degrees at any university/institution in China are NOT eligible for this fellowship.
• Applicants CANNOT apply for both UCAS and USTC simultaneously.
• Applicants can ONLY apply to ONE supervisor from ONE institute/school at either UCAS or USTC.

Italy: ICTP Mathematics Research Fellowships for Developing Countries 2017

Application Deadline: 7th January 2017

Eligible Countries: Developing Countries

To be taken at (country): Italy

About the Award: ICTP Visiting Fellowships are intended for short visits to ICTP (1 to 3 months) during the period 1 September 2017 to 31 August 31 2018

Type: Research/Fellowship

Eligibility: Visiting Fellows must have a PhD in mathematics prior to the start of their fellowship.

Preference will be given to candidates who will benefit most from the time spent at ICTP, in the sense of pursuing their own research, using the ICTP facilities, interacting with other mathematicians, and ultimately turning the fellowship into a positive opportunity for their home institution or country as well as for themselves.

Number of Awardees: Limited

Value of Fellowship: Fully-funded

Duration of Fellowship: 1 to 3 months

How to Apply: Candidates should apply using the ICTP online application system.

Candidates are requested to provide letters of recommendations from established  researchers. Both the letters of recommendation and the research project are crucial components of the application and play a significant role in the evaluation of the candidates. Junior applicants are highly recommend to provide at least three letters of recommendation.

Visit Fellowship Webpage for details

Award Provider:  International Centre for Theoretical Physics (ICTP)

India moves to enhance strategic ties with Japan and Israel

Deepal Jayasekera

India has taken important steps in recent weeks to enhance its military-strategic ties with Japan and Israel, both close US allies.

These steps are aimed at aggressively pursuing the Indian elite’s great power ambitions in the broader Asian and Indian Ocean regions against its main rivals, China and Pakistan. At the same time, they are part of India’s ever-closer integration into Washington’s military-strategic offensive against China, including the development of closer bilateral and trilateral cooperation with the chief US allies in the Asia-Pacific, Japan and Australia.

Modi visited Japan on November 11-12, during which time he held talks with his Japanese counterpart, Shinzo Abe, and signed several bilateral agreements to enhance Indo-Japanese economic and military ties. Highlighting New Delhi’s and Tokyo’s mutual support for each other’s geopolitical ambitions, the joint statement Modi and Abe issued at the conclusion of their talks said, “Abe appreciated Prime Minister Modi’s active engagement in the region under (India’s) ‘Act East Policy’” and Modi “appreciated Japan’s greater engagement in the region under” its “Free and Open Indo-Pacific Strategy.” It went on to say that the two leaders had recognized the potential for “deeper bilateral cooperation and synergy” across the Indo-Pacific region.

Underscoring that China is the principal target of the burgeoning India-Japan alliance, the joint statement reiterated Abe’s and Modi’s position on the South China Sea dispute, which dovetails with that of Washington. The statement parroted the US claim that China is threatening “freedom of navigation and over flight.” This claim is in fact a transparent pretext for asserting the Pentagon’s right to maintain an armada off China’s shores, so it can impose a blockade and/or implement its AirSea Battle plan in the event of a war or war crisis with China.

Modi’s and Abe’s decision to highlight the South China Sea dispute is particularly provocative, as China had explicitly warned India not to involve Japan in the dispute on the eve of Modi’s visit.

Modi and Abe also lined up behind the recent US provocations against North Korea, including the massive military exercise it conducted with South Korea this summer based on the scenario of a “regime change” war against Pyongyang. The statement condemned “in the strongest terms North Korea’s continued development of its nuclear weapons and ballistic missile programmes.” Washington has consistently used the conflict with North Korea as a means to pressure Beijing and justify military preparations against it.

The most significant development during Modi’s Japan visit was the signing of a civil nuclear cooperation pact allowing India access to Japan’s nuclear technology. This is the first time Japan has signed a civil nuclear agreement with a country that has not signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and there was significant public opposition to doing so, because of Japan’s history as the only country to ever suffer nuclear attack and the 2011 Fukushima nuclear power plant disaster.

The potential for big profits for Japanese big business was undoubtedly a factor in the Abe government’s readiness to defy domestic opposition over nuclear commerce with India. But there were also major military-strategic calculations. A similar civil nuclear deal between New Delhi and Washington in 2008 was pivotal in cementing a “global Indo-US strategic partnership.” As with the 2008 deal, the Japan-India nuclear agreement will help New Delhi to further concentrate its indigenous nuclear program on the development of nuclear weapons. Last month India boasted that, with the launch of its first indigenously-built nuclear submarine, it has completed the “nuclear triad,” meaning it can now launch nuclear weapons from air, land and underwater.

In an attempt to downplay concerns about nuclear proliferation, the Abe government pointed to an addendum to the civil nuclear cooperation agreement in which New Delhi reiterated its commitment to a “voluntary moratorium” on nuclear weapons tests and Tokyo stipulated it has the “right” to terminate the agreement if India conducts a future nuclear test.

During Modi’s visit, the two countries moved to further expand their military ties. According to the joint statement, Abe and Modi “welcomed the entry into force of the two Defence Framework Agreements concerning the Transfer of Defence Equipment and Technology and concerning Security Measures for the Protection of Classified Military Information.”

India is reported to be on the verge of finalizing the purchase of 12 Japanese-built amphibious surveillance aircraft, in what would be one of Japan’s first arms deals since it removed restrictions on foreign arms sales.

In a clear indication of India’s further integration into a US-led anti-China alliance, the statement noted: “The two Prime Ministers welcomed the holding of trilateral dialogue among Japan, India and the United States, and strengthened coordination and cooperation in such areas as HA/DR [Humanitarian Assistance and Disaster Relief], regional connectivity as well as maritime security and safety. The two Prime Ministers also welcomed continued and deepened trilateral dialogue among Japan, India and Australia.”

Two days after the conclusion of Modi’s Japanese visit, Israeli President Reuven Rivlin made a six-day visit to India. This was the first such visit by an Israeli President to India in two decades. It was publicly acknowledged that its primary purpose was to pave the way for Modi to visit Israel early in 2016, in what will be the first-ever visit by an Indian Prime Minister to that country.

While India’s previous Congress-led government pursued closer relations with Israel, Modi and his Hindu supremacist Bharatiya Janatha Party (BJP) government have made expanding New Delhi’s military-strategic and economic relationship with Tel Aviv one of their main foreign policy goals. The ideological affinity between the Hindu supremacist, anti-Muslim BJP and Israel’s Zionist right has played no small part in furthering the burgeoning Indo-Israeli alliance. The stronger relations between India and Israel have also been clearly encouraged by the US, which views them as its main ally respectively in South Asia and the Middle East.

When Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu met Modi in New York in September 2014, he boasted that the “sky is the limit” for the relationship between the two countries. That meeting was followed by Israel Defence Minister Moshe Ya’alon’s visit to India in February 2015, the first ever such visit by an Israel Defence Minister; Indian President Pranab Mukherjee’s visit to Israel later that year; and External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj’s visit to Israel in early 2016.

Hailing the strengthening of Indian-Israeli ties under Modi, the Indian English-language daily Pioneer wrote in an editorial on November 18: “Long-held balancing acts in India-Israel relations have gone now. With the coming of Prime Minister Narendra Modi, the era of India's staid diplomatic establishment was replaced by active engagement of nations, cutting across ideological barriers of the Cold War days.”

For two decades Israel has been a major arms supplier to India. Indeed, New Delhi is the world’s largest buyer of Israeli military equipment. During his visit to India this month, the Israeli President indicated his government’s readiness to expand into the co-production of weapons. Modi subsequently said that both sides agreed on the need to make their defence ties “more broad-based” through a weapons-production and manufacturing partnership.

Israeli weapons sales to India amount to more than $1 billion annually and include missiles, unmanned aerial vehicles and weapons systems. Some Indian military analysts have expressed concerns that Tel Aviv is also selling weaponry to China and are calling for New Delhi to press for a guarantee that only India will be eligible to buy Israel’s most advanced weapons.

According to press reports, New Delhi has placed hundreds of millions of dollars’ worth of rush orders with Israeli arms manufacturers in recent weeks so as to enhance its readiness to fight a war with Pakistan. For the past two months, South Asia’s nuclear-armed rivals have been involved in escalating border clashes.

Nearly two million people demand South Korean president’s removal

Ben McGrath 

Approximately 1.5 million people demonstrated in South Korea’s capital Saturday, demanding the removal of President Park Geun-hye. Demonstrations in other cities brought the total number of participants to 1.9 million. About 100,000 people took part in Busan, South Korea’s second largest city. An additional 50,000 people gathered in Gwangju and 20,000 in Daegu.

It was the fifth and largest weekly protest to date since allegations of corruption emerged in September surrounding the president and her personal confidante, Choi Soon-sil. Counting all the protests around the country, the rallies were the largest in South Korea’s history.

In Seoul, the protesters again filled Gwanghwamun Square in Seoul and marched within 200 meters of Cheongwadae, the presidential residence, while chanting “Park Geun-hye, resign!” They also carried placards reading “Arrest President Park” and “Surrender Now.” The protest was organized by 1,500 civic groups, many of which have close ties to the Democrats and other official opposition parties.

The immediate scandal involves accusations that Park allowed Choi Soon-sil, who holds no government post, to be involved in deciding policy matters and to solicit funds from corporations for companies that she effectively controlled. This affair is bound up with rifts in South Korean ruling circles, including Park’s own Saenuri Party.

However, the demonstrations also reflect broader popular opposition to her administration’s attacks on working-class conditions and basic democratic and social rights, including a drive to casualize the workforce, cut jobs, and privatize state-owned industries.

For many people, these are the first protests they have ever attended. Students from middle schools, high schools, and universities continued to take part in large numbers. Chang Hae-jin, an 18-year-old high school senior, told the media: “This is my first time participating in a rally. When I was studying for the (college entrance) exam, I was sorry because I could not do anything. Park should not hide like this. She should be honest about her wrongdoings.”

Parents also continued to bring their children. Jung Young-hoon, a 36-year-old father of two, told the Korea Herald: “It is difficult to take care of my children on the street during the rally, especially because of the weather, but it is peaceful, so it’s okay. I had to come to show them this is democracy.”

Significantly, protestors’ demands are beginning to go beyond the status of the president. As of last Friday, the student unions at 13 universities had decided to boycott classes while an additional 10 are expected to join them this week. Students at Korea University have occupied the school’s main building since Thursday to denounce the chancellor’s future plans, which include eliminating one of the university’s departments and raising tuition fees.

At Seoul National University students have occupied the administration building for a month to oppose privatization plans. The president of the student body, Lee Tak-gyu, said students would join the class boycott on November 30.

Demonstrators are also once more taking aim at the Park administration’s decision to revise history textbooks for middle and high schools. The government is attempting to re-write the books to whitewash the crimes of conservative leaders and dictators, including Park’s father, General Park Chung-hee.

Cho Seong-hun, 21, a student at Myongji University, said: “Students are taking to the streets as they are angry about Park’s policies, including a government-authored history textbook.” He added, reflecting the struggle young people face to find employment: “I am majoring in library and information science. Most graduates become librarians, and it’s getting more and more difficult to get a permanent job.”

According to Lee Jun-hyup of the Hyundai Research Institute, one in three youth, those between the ages of 15 and 29 years-old, could be considered unemployed. The real unemployment rate for all workers stands at 10 percent, including those who have given up looking for work or are in part-time jobs involuntarily.

For now, however, the protests have not gone beyond the confines established by the opposition parties, led by the Minjoo Party of Korea (MPK). These bourgeois parties are attempting to divert the public anger into support for their own campaigns, particularly for the presidential election scheduled for next year, and quell discontent over the growing social crisis.

Democrats and conservatives have the same aim. While Chu Mi-ae and Moon Jae-in of the MPK again took part in Saturday’s rally, right-wing politicians also joined, including Nam Gyeong-pil, the governor of Gyeonggi Province who recently left the ruling Saenuri Party, and former Seoul mayor Oh Se-hun.

The MPK and its allies, the People’s Party and Justice Party, as well as the anti-Park faction of the Saenuri Party have formed a de facto alliance, backing the president’s removal. The opposition intends to propose an impeachment bill this Wednesday, with a vote as early as Friday and no later than December 9. “Saenuri must promptly cooperate with the impeachment move that the three opposition parties have agreed to,” said Representative Chu Mi-ae, the MPK leader, appealing to those who still back Park or who may waver at the thought of breaking with their party.

Nam Gyeong-pil, a potential presidential candidate who openly supports South Korea obtaining nuclear weapons, stated at a recent news conference: “The impeachment motion should be done by December 9. If it pointlessly drags on, the people’s patience will reach its limit.” In other words, if Park is not removed soon, the protestors could begin advancing demands that none of the parties are willing to meet.

For the impeachment bill to pass, it requires a two-thirds vote of the 300-seat National Assembly. Assuming that all opposition and independent lawmakers vote in favor, it would still need the support of at least 28 lawmakers from the Saenuri Party. According to Yonhap News Agency, some 40 Saenuri lawmakers may vote for its approval.

If the bill succeeds, Park would remain president, but her official duties would be transferred to Prime Minister Hwang Gyo-an. The Constitutional Court would then examine the case. If six out of the nine justices support the charges against her, Park would be removed as president and a new election would be held within 60 days. The court proceedings could drag on for weeks. In 2004, the Constitutional Court took 63 days to dismiss impeachment charges against President Roh Moo-hyun (No Mu-hyeon).

According to media polls, Park’s approval rating has fallen to 4 percent, the lowest of any South Korean president. She is expected to deliver another public apology this week, but has shown no signs of willingly giving up her office.

Support for the Saenuri Party has fallen to 12 percent. The pro-Park faction comprises about 68 lawmakers out of the 128 conservative party members in the National Assembly. The faction recently boycotted a party meeting to discuss the impeachment procedures.

Huge growth in “precarious employment” in the UK

Thomas Scripps

A new study reveals that one in five UK workers—over 7 million people—are in “precarious employment.” This includes self-employment, temporary work and zero-hours contracts.

The total number has increased by nearly 2 million over the past decade, rising from 18.1 percent of the workforce to 22.2 percent.

The figures reveal a vast network of highly exploited workers, occupying positions throughout the British economy and held at the beck and call of multi-million and multi-billion pound corporations.

According to the Guardian, the number of self-employed reached 4.7 million this year, with over half on low-pay as compared to 30 percent of employees. Over a quarter of these live in low-income households (compared to 19 percent of employees) and over 60 percent have no pensions, savings or investments. Across the country, 80 percent of self-employed workers live in poverty.

Among the 4.7 million are 460,000 who could be falsely classified as “self-employed”—costing as much as £314 million a year in lost tax and employer National Insurance Contributions, according to the charity Citizens Advice. Businesses classify workers who are, to all intents and purposes, full or part-time employees as self-employed so they can avoid paying sick pay, holiday pay and pensions. Self-employed workers also have far fewer employment rights than employees.

The World Socialist Web Site has reported on a number of companies accused of having falsely classified workers in this way, including Sports Direct, Hermes, Uber and Deliveroo. Many workers have engaged in strikes and protests to demand fair wages and recognition as employees, with attendant protections. Those on zero-hours earn 50 percent less per hour than the average worker. The number of workers on zero-hours contracts in their main job rose 20 percent this past year, to 930,000. The number of zero-hours contracts, however, was in the region of 1.7 million last November, suggesting many people hold more than one job on these terms.

Despite this, 30 percent of zero-hours workers are underemployed—that is they would work more hours if they could. This is three times the percentage of those in other forms of employment. Contrary to the claims that such employment is often temporary, the Resolution Foundation reported this September that 70 percent of over-25s on zero-hours contracts had been with their employer for more than a year.

According to the Office for National Statistics, zero-hours workers are more likely to work for large employees and are concentrated in the hotel and leisure industries, followed by the health and education sectors.

In health, the proportion of care workers on zero-hours contracts rose from one-in-ten to one-in-seven this past year. There are currently 130 care firms being investigated for paying workers on these contracts below the minimum wage. Over the last two years, HM Revenue & Customs found almost £1 million worth of unpaid wages in the sector.

In education, precarious employment extends even to the teaching staff, with more than half of university academics at elite Russell Group universities on some form of insecure, non-permanent contract. These include short, generally nine month, contracts and per-hour contracts to teach classes or mark essays and exams.

Fully 1.8 million people nationally are in temporary work—207,000 more than in 2006—in fields as diverse as supermarket warehouses, schools and construction. In 2012, when the number stood at roughly 1.6 million, well over a third were in temporary jobs because they couldn’t find permanent work, according to the Trades Union Congress.

Recently, it was revealed that several agencies have been forcing their workers to sign up with “umbrella companies” before giving them any placements. Under these arrangements, temporary workers are paid marginally higher hourly rates, but are required to pay both employee and employer National Insurance Contributions as if self-employed. The increased wages, moreover, are supposed to cover holiday pay and pensions. To rub salt in the wound, the umbrella company then charges an administrative fee for its services.

Such agencies are engaged in tax dodging and business fraud to the tune of hundreds of millions of pounds. An agency employing 1,000 workers receives a £3,000 employment allowance every year, designed to help small businesses. That agency will then split those 1,000 workers into 500 companies with two employees. Each “company” can then receive £3,000 and is allowed to charge VAT sales tax to customers at 20 percent, while paying it back to the government at 12 percent.

Between them, these business and employment agencies account for nearly one quarter of the UK workforce. The 7.1 million people employed in this way are faced with poverty wages, perpetual financial insecurity and little hope of a pension.

Gillian Guy, chief executive of Citizens Advice, described the day to day difficulties workers face: “Not knowing what hours you’re working from one week to the next, or how much money you will lose to travel costs, can make it very difficult to manage household finances. It can also cause problems with other aspects of money management, such as whether you can get a mortgage or even commit to a mobile phone contract.”

These are the grim realities of work in the “globally competitive” economy demanded by contemporary capitalist governments. Damian Green, the Conservative Work and Pensions Secretary, recently stated “Just a few years ago the idea of a proper job meant a job that brings in a fixed monthly salary, with fixed hours, paid holidays, sick pay, a pension scheme and other contractual benefits. But the gig economy has changed all that…”

Making a cynical pretense at this being liberating for the worker, he added, “People now own their time and control who receives their services and when. They can pick and mix their employers, their hours, their offices, their holiday patterns... The potential is huge and the change is exciting.”

His comments expose the fraudulent nature of the Taylor Review, set up by Prime Minister Theresa May, to investigate working practices. Whatever the results of the investigation, the government will do nothing to infringe on the profits of their paymasters in boardrooms across the country.

The primary responsibility for the appalling situation facing millions of workers and youth lies with the trade unions and Labour Party, whose refusal to defend the working class is the root cause of the catastrophic decline in living standards since the 2008 financial crash, including a 10 percent real wage drop across the board.

So successful has been their sabotage of the resistance of workers to attacks on their living and working conditions that employers have been emboldened to pursue ever more extreme forms of exploitation. Recent promises by the Labour Party and the Trades Union Congress to campaign against zero-hours contracts and umbrella companies, and for the extension of workers’ rights to cover the self-employed, should be understood for what they are: a cynical attempt to control rising militancy among this section of the labour force.

Trade unions already have a poor hold on private-sector workers, only 18 percent of whom are unionised. Among young workers, just 4 percent belong to trade unions. The unions are intervening among the self-employed, temporary and zero-hours sectors workers only in order to police them more effectively on behalf of management.

EU fears ‘no’ vote in Italian referendum

Marianne Arens

In less than a week voters in Italy will decide on the constitutional reform proposed by Prime Minister Matteo Renzi. The reform envisages abolishing the parliamentary two-chamber system by reducing the size of the Senate and its powers. The move, Renzi argues, will considerably facilitate decision-making processes in the Chamber of Deputies. In addition, the new right to vote, “Italicum,” which was passed last year, gives the strongest party a massive bonus and in turn the prime minister much greater power.

The constitutional reform is the key element of the political program of 41-year-old Renzi, who took over the government in February 2014 after an internal coup in the Democratic Party (PD). He has never stood for election. The sidelining of the Senate, in which numerous minor parties are represented, in conjunction with the “Italicum,” which automatically assures the strongest party an absolute majority of votes in the Chamber of Deputies, is aimed at strengthening Renzi’s hand in advancing his neoliberal reforms, in the force of fierce social resistance.

The reform is an obvious step towards authoritarian rule. According to the British-Italian historian Paul Ginsborg, “Such a serious reform, clearly linked to the ‘Italicum,’ is evidently intended to restrict political power and move increasingly towards a presidential republic, which could bring a strong man to power. This aspect alone leads me to doubt the reform.”

In order to increase pressure for introduction of the reform, Renzi has linked his political destiny to the referendum and repeatedly threatened his resignation if it fails. More recently, however, he has distanced himself from this threat. The referendum, however, has developed its own dynamic and turned into a vote on Renzi’s policies.

According to the latest polls, a majority is in favour of the constitutional reform, but still intends to vote “no” to demonstrate opposition to the government. Even the 91-year-old ex-president, Giorgio Napolitano, has sought to promote Renzi and his arguments. In the show “Porta a Porta,” on primetime television, Napolitano stressed that it was “not a vote for or against the government, but rather just about changing the law.”

Just days before the vote on December 4, the outcome of the referendum is still completely open. In the three weeks before the vote, no polls are allowed, but the latest published trends place opponents 7 percent ahead of supporters, while 10 to 25 percent remain undecided.

The possible failure of the referendum has alarmed advocates of the European Union and representatives of the business elite in Italy and throughout Europe. They fear that the fourth largest economy in the EU could plunge into a long period of recession and political instability should the referendum fail and Renzi resign. If new elections take place, a majority hostile to the EU could take over the government for the first time in the traditionally EU-friendly country. This would be a further step, following the Brexit vote, towards the breakdown of the EU.

According to the media, the Confindustria (Confederation of Employers) fears a recession following a “no” vote in the referendum. The Italian leading index on the Milan stock market is declining steadily, and the risk premiums for Italian bank bonds have risen by 20 percent over the past six months—a significant symptom of crisis.

In a Bloomberg survey, 41 out of 42 top managers spoke out in favour of Renzi’s constitutional reform. “I hope for a yes,” said Fiat-Chrysler CEO Sergio Marchionne when visiting Renzi in the company’s Cassino workshop.

Apparently, influential financial institutions are threatening to block rescue programs for Italian banks in the case of a “no” vote. Nonperforming loans on the books of Italian banks are estimated at €360 billion, with the bank Monte dei Paschi di Siena in immediate danger.

The Süddeutsche Zeitung, under the heading “Italy: Tighten your seat-belts,” wrote: “Following a defeat for Renzi, the planned capital increase [for this bank] could hardly be raised, according to Goldman Sachs. There could then be a domino effect for other financial concerns, which will have to collect billions in the coming months.”

Renzi himself has travelled up and down the country, arguing for a “yes” vote. He has met with earthquake and flood victims, debated with opponents of the reform and has been feted by his supporters on TV shows. Three years after he made his widely publicised promises to “shred” the old elites and modernize the country, however, his glamour has faded.

His reforms of pensions, the labour market and schools have had devastating consequences for a large portion of the population, and the economic situation has failed to improve. Under conditions of increasing poverty for the elderly, declining wages, job cuts, company bankruptcies and an official youth unemployment rate of 37 percent, Renzi is a despised figure.

Even a section of his own PD, its trade unions and associated pseudo-left groups feel unable to back Renzi any longer. The trade unions CGIL and FIOM, a wing of the PD, Sinistra Italiana, (which former SEL leader Nichi Vendola and some apostate PD members joined a year ago), as well as Rifondazione Comunista and similar groups have joined the “no” camp. Even former Prime Minister Massimo D’Alema (1998-2000) has spoken out against the constitutional reform.

But after almost 25 years of attacks on the social and political achievements of the working class by so-called “left” governments, backed by the trade unions, it is above all right-wing parties that are benefitting most from the anger directed against Renzi.

In particular, the Five-Star Movement led comedian Beppe Grillo, which has increasingly embraced xenophobia and nationalist positions and attacks the EU from the right, has been winning influence. On almost a daily basis Grillo insults the head of government on his blog, calling Renzi a “serial killer” (because he robs youth of a future), and compares Renzi’s campaign with the screams of a “wounded sow.”

The remnants of the party led by Silvio Berlusconi, who had proposed a similar constitutional reform, the far-right Lega Nord and the fascists of Fratelli d’Italia have campaigned vehemently for a “no” vote. This is despite the fact that, according to one survey, one-fifth of the supporters of these parties back the reform, which contains much of what they have long demanded: the reduction of state bureaucracy and introduction of an authoritarian state.