India outed its nuclear bomb and yet remained the land of Gandhi. The same message of peace and power should follow the launch of its first ICBM.
With the successful Agni V test on Thursday, India appears to be aiming for status as much as security. Yet without credible reassurances, the by-product of this quest for prestige could be an increasingly insecure region.
Peaceful intentions
As so often in the past, India faces the challenge of reconciling its quest for military and nuclear status with the need to persuade the international community of its peaceful intentions. That India has the experience, skill and track record to do so is without doubt.
For decades, India's nuclear policy and discourse have been built on a curious mix of hard power and principle. The 1974 test was dubbed a “Peaceful Nuclear Explosion,” and successive governments opted to refrain from overtly developing a nuclear weapon capability. Following the nuclear tests of 1998, Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee stressed that the tests and India's future nuclear policy would “continue to reflect a commitment to the sensibilities and obligations of an ancient civilization, a sense of responsibility and restraint.”
India's nuclear tests were a means of establishing India's international status and prestige. Yet refreshingly, they were not simply an act of conformity to the dominant might-is-right maxim of the international system.
A synthesis was formed with an enduring set of principled foreign policy values. In the wake of the tests, India stressed its peaceful intentions, announced a voluntary moratorium on further testing, limited itself to a minimum credible deterrent, and later pledged a no-first-use policy.
China reacts
These measures meant that India's tests were an enhancement rather than a negation of an essentially peaceable but unquestionably powerful Indian civilizational self. The clearest evidence for this is that India's gradual build-up of military and nuclear capabilities from the 1970s onwards have not resulted in new policies based on the use of force.
In a predictable echo of the nuclear tests of 1998, the launch of Agni V, India's first intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM), was a moment of national pride. It met with jubilation from Indian defence officials and the Indian media. So far, the near-unanimous hype has centred on India's scientific achievements and new ranking among only a fistful of other states with ICBM capabilities. But little effort has been made to quell the fears about the dangers the launch poses to an Asia on the brink of an arms race.
The official line of the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) has been that Agni V “is not any country-specific.” Official commentary on the test has had little else to say about India's intentions or the actual purpose, use and deployment of the missile.
Reading between the lines, many have inferred that strategic Chinese cities are potential targets within the extended range of Agni V. While Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Liu Weimin evenly declared that India and China were “not competitors but partners,” China's influential tabloid, The Global Times, ominously declared that “India should not overestimate its strength” and would not profit “from being arrogant during disputes with China.”
History suggests that an ill-judged, even if unintentional, provocation of China could spell disaster for the region. India and China's battle for status in Asia in the 1950s and 1960s ended catastrophically for India in the 1962 border war.
The nuclear issue
Since 1998, the nuclear bomb has been a symbol of India's power and prestige, but the nuclear domain has always stood as a site within which India's unique moral judgment could be applied and exhibited. Dominant thinking in international relations finds it hard to reconcile the two trends, and many have scratched their heads in puzzlement over the incongruity of India's peaceful intentions and hard power hype, or the juxtaposition of “the land of Gandhi” and the bomb.
Yet in practice, if not in theory, the international community has accepted India's nuclear ambivalence. The credibility of Indian claims to nuclear restraint and responsibility contributed without doubt to the exceptional civil nuclear trading rights India received, outside the bounds of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), through the India-U.S. civil nuclear agreement.
The launch of Agni V has yet to be tempered with the usual reassurances of India's peaceful intentions towards the Asian region and the world. Without this string to India's ICBM bow, the diplomatic resource of 65 years of nuclear restraint that makes India stand apart will weaken.
India's traditional status-seeking policy of nuclear restraint need not jar with its desire to shine in the eyes of the global nuclear elite. Back in 1952, G.S. Bajpai, a pioneer of the Indian Foreign Service and one of India's first “realists,” reconciled the two positions in his writings. He claimed that the acquisition of material power need not eclipse India's moral pre-eminence, and that power was indeed essential for moral projection.
With new declarations of strength must come new reassurances. Public statements from the highest level that explicitly reiterate India's abiding policy of nuclear restraint would go some way towards allaying international fears. An official review of India's 2003 nuclear doctrine and incorporation of guidelines on its ICBM capabilities would go even further. Whether Agni V will push India to new international heights or simply place it in regional danger, will depend on how quickly and credibly India restates its peaceful intent.
(Kate Sullivan is Lecturer in Modern Indian Studies, Contemporary South Asian Studies Programme, School of Interdisciplinary Area Studies at the University of Oxford. E-mail: kate.sullivan@area.ox.ac.uk)
Agni V is a great scientific achievement which makes every Indian genuinely proud. Congratulations to all and sundry who made this landmark accomplishment of reaching across 5000 Km of space possible. That said is it not equally, perhaps more important to scan what is happening within a radius of 500 Km from any point in India to find out how many children sleep empty stomach each night? That figure will put us in shame and not ‘in the elitist club of six.’
Here we go again... preaching to the great unwashed. Sprinkle a few words about
great ancient civilisation, Gandhi and the advice is legitimate. India owes no
explanations to anyone, least of all to the 52nd or 53rd or whatever number state. If
65 years as the author says of an impeccable record teaches nothing, then professor,
you are a bad student of history. I am sure when the other countries tested their
ICBM's, they did give reassurances to the rest of us, about their peaceful intentions.
Ohhh, they did not you say... then it becomes a case of "Do as I say, not as I do".
Our biggest security threat is not from outside but from within. Will Agni-V protect us from the maoists, the Indian mujahideen or corrupt politicians? Spend more on poverty eradication and social empowerment programs, or we wont be left with a country to defend
India is a sovereign republic and doesn't have to please any country...if china doesnt like Agni-V...its their problem
A mere restatement of our peaceful intent is not going to carry any
conviction to the powers concerned.
What does India stand for? That must be clearly and categorically laid
down. Let us not be diplomatic while laying down our fundamental
principles. For instance in the Sri Lanka case, we should openly and
unambiguously declare that war crimes must be investigated into and
the guilty punished within a stipulated timelimit. If not India should
start acting seriously on several fronts. This we should do as firmly
as China is doing in the case of the South China Sea.
India need to draft and ratify same in national parliament a WAR DOCTRINE. As India is facing two adversaries, one is troubled fanatic and other one is mighty, India need something on line of Russia, should be used as template to draft one herself. To summarize it in one lines, Russian attitude is " if Russia burns, Earth will be scorched".
India need to assert same, if India attacked by both enemies same time, will burn the whole south Asia to ashes.
Making/Testing of Agni V is cannot be detrimental to the region for more than one reason. If the region need to be in peace, there should be a balance and such balance will not arrive only by peace talks. Time and again a country needs to flex it mussels in order to maintain its existence. In a age where wars will start and end in blink of an eye, timely flexing of mussels prevent such consequence. Well, India is just not only the "Land of Mahatma" as the westerners stereotype, its also the "land of Chanakya", "land of Buddha" and more. Ahimsa is one of the may philosophies which India has offered, but it also says you can do the necessary to protect yourself.(Story of Saint and cobra). The new one is "Agni V", pretty much similar to "Gun Boat Diplomacy". sounds familiar right? yet it is well realized by Indian mind the intent to flex mussels is to gain the due respect of a rising power rather than to offer an unnecessary threat. The respect that brings room for Bilateral talks.
As President Roosevelt attributed his term borrowed from a West African proverb, "Speak softly and carry a big stick; you will go far", the same applies to India as well.
To this reader speaking "softly" ALSO means preserving and advancing the Rule of Law - regardless of the theater.
Yes.A lot of hype from media. I see Chinese media expressing fears(not
true in reality though).Silence of US, praise from British and French
is something unusual. A an Indian i am Proud,though Agni - V is
successful but still requires couple more test flights and approx 3
years of production before it gets deployed in the Army. The whole
scene looks like western powers are indirectly using India to keep
Chinese leadership busy,I agree with Kate that, an official statement
on Agni V should be published to the world to calm down unwanted
developments wiered imaginations.
Well which nation is Mr Kate Sullivan talking about? "" But little effort has been made to quell the fears about the dangers the launch poses to an Asia on the brink of an arms race. "" It is of course a deterrent against China. If there is any nation in Asia which needs to assure and be more honest and transparent it is CHINA and not India.
This article remindes me of the discussion I had with my Chinese friend. He made an interesting point, huge countries like India and China fighting war, will result in nothing but a stale mate. China has to balance its yin and yang, no matter what their tabloids say, India is a threat if provoked. Both countries are developing at a brisk pace, with unmitigated control within. I agree Kate that China is more powerful than India when it comes to Arms race, but Nuclear bombs can destroy cities, in both India and China. A prototype of the nuke destroyed Hiroshima and Nagasaki, one can just imagine what its mature version can do.
Thanks everyone for some thought-provoking comments, which I've enjoyed reading. To Shivalik I would say - if you have any advice on how to improve the state of affairs in the UK I would love to hear it! But two serious points: Gurbally Seth - I don't think I misrepresent 1962. Status isn't only about nukes and weapons, as I hope my article suggests. I believe India and China were engaged in a a competition for status in the 1950s and 1960s, and that they are again now. Status indicators can and do change. Sajith Sasidharan - is being the land of Gandhi really no more than a burden if it in part leads to the international community more or less trusting' India with the bomb (think US deal and NSG waiver)? Roperia - what's to stop India being the 'land of Gandhi' but now with a dandi?! Again, many thanks for these comments and all the emails.
A nicely written article. The main theme appears to be that India should reassure the International Community of its continued peaceful intentions in the light of the Agni V test. I see nothing wrong in that. It merely states the truth.
A nuclear tipped Agni-V will act as a deterrent to the mischievous minds in other countries. With No-First-Use nuclear doctrine, it is paramount to have a massive retaliatory capability to safeguard the country. Making an analogy with hindu mythology, the brahmastra is seldom used but when it is used, it caused havoc on the enemy. Same is the case with weapons like Agni-V.
Land of Gandhi Comment has been a burden on Indian shoulders for the last 60 years.My only question to Kate sullivan is if Countries such as China & pakistan and others had recongnised this fact what was the cause for the Chinese agression against India in 12962,the wars which Pakistan started on 3 occassions including kargil,Chinese support of N-east militants,Pak supporting terror in India-26/11 attacks-The Land of the Gandhi has been attacked,bruised,wounded time and again.China questions us on Arunachal,boundaries,has taken over Aksai chin,Meddles in POK Even after all this Kate sullivan enforces the burden of Pacifism on India-describing it as the Land of the Gandhi.Great Going most Universty intellectuals in America elsewhere according to Rajiv Malhotara who wrote the Best seller Breaking India are apologists for Pakistan,Christian evangelists-hell bent on seeing India fail! As shameful propaganda article.
Dear Kate,Two points - 1. I think A-5 makes Asia safer. The bully China would always have in mind that it stands lose a lot, if not all, if it threatens to gain something by its nukes. 2. I think in 62 we tried to be exactly this - "Land of Gandhi", by preaching non-violence with no stick. Having said that, I agree we should not be aggressors but we should build up offensive capability to reach mainland China if it covers to blows on Arunachal. Lastly, this is hypocrite coming out from a Brit.
In the other side of the coin India is dealing to buy weapons in the highest price ever. WRONG IRONY. If India can make Agni like missiles and rockets why to buy precious war planes instead of manufacturing indigenous ? Why minister is in eager to buy from America and Europe.
The author is deliberately distorting the truth while saying that ``India and China's battle for status in Asia in the 1950s and 1960s ended catastrophically for India in the 1962 border war.'' Was India in any arms race with China at that time? And didn't China take advantage of the October 1962 Cuba missile crisis (when the US bogged down with the then USSR) to teach India a quick lesson? The Chinese withdrew quickly as the Cuban missile crisis was over and President Kennedy was about to turn his attention to the Himalayan war.
What a senseless article by Ms. Sullivan. India is not obliged to give "explicit public statements" to "reiterate" our policy of restraint to ANYONE. I wonder where the professor was when the British were crying foul on losing out to the MMRCA deal..no worries about starting an arms race if we buy British fighter planes, right? Agni V is a matter of pride for the nation, and necessary for its defence. No one has the tiniest right to dictate the terms of our nuclear policy to us. If people are so worried about peace in the region then they should give China the same advice, which spends more money on defence than India. The Britishers would be better off concentrating their efforts on the imminent independence of Scotland rather than offering advice where it is not needed. The Hindu should atleast think twice before publishing such meaningless articles.
After 1998 Pokharan-II, west imposed many sanctions on India. This time with Agni-V, which undeniably targets China, there are no sanctions at all. Definitely, lots of things have changed over last decade.
Please Email the Editor