The MEA vs navy drama

The silent turf war between the ministry of external affairs and the burgeoning ambitions of the armed forces for a larger say in foreign policy spilled through the cracks at an international naval symposium last week.

A brainchild of the Indian navy’s current reigning star, Rear Admiral Pradeep Chauhan, the two-day meet narrowly avoided being a disaster, with the foreign policy establishment staying away while participants sparred and dueled their way through the minefield of divergent geopolitical visions.

The sparks almost lit a fire when a delegate from Saudi Arabia shouted “shut up” at the Australian representative for his disparaging remarks about “non-state actors like Hamas and Hezbollah”.

The Saudi was beside himself with rage as he hit out at the Australian. “You don’t know what you’re talking about,” he spat, according to witnesses. There were several other sharp exchanges, including one between Chauhan and former foreign secretary Kanwal Sibal who was clearly reflecting the disdain of foreign policy czars at this attempt by the defence establishment to meddle in international affairs.

Much to Chauhan’s discomfiture, Sibal punched holes in the basic theme of the symposium, which was to develop the concept of an Indian Ocean naval initiative. Navy chief Admiral Sureesh Mehta described it in his opening speech as “the first new and significant international security construct of the 21st century”.

Sibal suggested it was unworkable because of conflicting national interests of the littoral states, a warning borne out by the dissensions that emerged during the discussions.

Perhaps the navy needs to do more homework on global equations before it starts dreaming of leading a  blue-water presence in the Indian Ocean.

The storm clouds had gathered from the inception of the idea. The external affairs ministry turned up its nose at the navy’s proposal, which was seen as a case of over reach by the military. The navy went ahead anyway.

The foreign office retaliated with its top brass absenting itself. Even the minister gave the symposium a miss. Without a helping hand from the ministry that frames and coordinates our foreign relations, the navy found it difficult to draw in an impressive international presence.

Iran and Pakistan, both important nations on the Indian Ocean rim, sent junior delegates. Representatives from another critical component of the concept, the Horn of Africa, were virtually absent.

In fact, since the external affairs ministry wasn’t around to guide it, the navy didn’t know whom to invite from war-torn  Somalia, which went under-represented.

There is a background to the friction between the two wings of South Block. It has to do with the emergence of India as a major player in the international arms bazaar.

Global projections of India’s buying potential are making arms manufacturers in Europe and the US drool. Today, the armed forces are being wooed like never before, particularly by the Americans who have already held over 20 joint military exercises with India over the past few years as part of an aggressive sales pitch for their systems.

All this seems to have fuelled the military establishment’s desire for a bigger voice in foreign policy. Recently, navy chief Mehta crossed the Rubicon by asking for a review of our Russia policy because of arms contract disputes with Moscow.

He was rapped on the knuckles for speaking out on a subject that has traditionally been the domain of the foreign office. Is a dangerous new trend developing here? We will need more coherence in foreign policy thinking if we want to play the great global game.

Email: a_jerath@dnaindia.net