Commentary/Amberish K Diwanji

India's Asian choices

Oh wheat is wheat and rice is rice and India is where they meet!

(with apologies to Mark Twain)

In the eyes of the West, Asia today more or less means East and Southeast Asia, a vast region covering Japan, China, down to Indonesia, and westward up to Burma (rarely including India). The West’s term for West Asia is the Middle East, covering the countries of the Arabs, Iran, Egypt, and Israel. Central Asia is a new emerging area, closely linked to West Asia, and South Asia. If one can consider it by way of dietary habits, the West and Central Asian region comprises wheat eaters, often made into various kinds of nans and breads; East Asia represent the rice bowl region.

India is a region which consumes both wheat and rice. The northern and northwest areas are mainly eaters of chappati, made of wheat; while the eastern and southern areas of India are mainly rice eaters. Years ago, when Nehru dreamt of a resurgent Asia, he had said that given India’s central position in the vast continent, it would occupy a pivotal role. Till date, the sad truth is that India, and South Asia, is a neglected region as far as the West, especially the United States, is concerned. West Asia with its oil and Israel remains an important area; East Asia, with the booming economies of China, and ASEAN countries, is seen as emerging partners in trade, and therefore of value. South Asia has neither oil, nor has India’s economy taken off sufficiently to make the Americans overjoyed.

India, caught between two civilisations and cultures, is now forced to deal with both. The West Asian civilisation’s influence extends up to Afghanistan and Pakistan; instability in Afghanistan and Central Asia is forcing India’s hand into a dangerous and volatile area. There is no doubt that developments in Afghanistan will have a bearing on India, especially the Kashmir region whose loyalty to India, despite the recent elections, remains suspect. Terrorism in Kashmir has not been completely eliminated; it can rise again. Then there is the question of natural gas and other resources available in the Central Asian region, and Pakistan’s leverage. India would be loathe to see Pakistan create a bloc comprising Islamabad and the Central Asian Republics, giving it more resources in its perpetual conflict-competition situation vis-a-vis India.

On the other hand, there is the beckoning East and Southeast Asia. Thanks to the priorities of the British and the earlier inclination to look westwards, eastern Asian was accorded low priority after Independence. While historians do harp on India’s links with E&SE Asia (India exported Buddhism to China; Singapore is a Sanskrit word meaning City of Lions – singh-a-pur), the fact is that more recent history ensured greater links with the Islamic world. Yet today, this is the fastest growing region in the world: Japan is a developed country; China has a GDP rate of 10 to 12 per cent; the ASEAN countries around eight per cent. Trade and other ties with this region has to grow, and India would do well to exploit the many advantages it possess such as proximity to the region, cultural links, etc.

India is dealing with two fronts: one stable and growing economically; the other unstable but possessing vast natural resources. Worse, from India’s point of view, the instability in Afghanistan can have a spillover effect in India. Thus New Delhi really cannot afford to ignore developments in Afghanistan, and Central Asia. But few countries ever possess sufficient resources to deal equally well on two fronts; and the risk remains that in trying to do so, India may end up gaining a decisive advantage in neither region. And South Asia by itself is a region with a long way to go before it becomes important.

The question of choice is actually a misnomer. Between the areas of wheat and rice, the next century appears more and more to belong to the latter. Thus, the choice is made for India to forge closer links with E&SE Asia, especially Southeast Asia, with which countries India possess close ties. The Andamans and Nicobar Islands lie only 200 miles away from Indonesia, and for years there have been talks of making Port Blair a free port city. Then there is the common border between the Northeast and Myanmar. Unfortunately, the situation in both India’s northeast and Myanmar is hardly conducive to trade and economic growth. Yet, situations can change.

The northeast region’s chronic poverty is due to it being cut off from what would have been its natural market in Bangladesh; the rest of India is just too far to be of economic help. If Myanmar becomes part of ASEAN, something that is being planned, it would bring ASEAN up to India’s borders and open up new vistas, for India and the northeast. Another way out would to enter into free trade agreements with Bangladesh, under the auspices of SAARC, but that is another story.

Unfortunately, there remain many ifs and buts. Nevertheless, after centuries of being ruled by wheat-eaters and looking primarily at wheat-eating regions, now is perhaps the time for a change. The rice-eating regions of India (south and east) can exploit their historical links and resources and forge closer ties rice-eating Asia. A beginning was made in the Madras-Singapore corridor.

This does not mean the India ignores the region of Central Asia; it would be perilous for New Delhi to do so. But the thrust should be towards ensuring that Central/West Asian disputes do not affect India, rather than getting drawn into the imbroglios, even if it appears tempting to do so for a variety of reasons, not the least being to counter Islamabad. In fact, it is time to overcome the Pakistani-fixation and look east. Having in out country the cultures of both, let us make the most of it in the area which will benefit us the most. And right now it is the rice bowl which hold out the promised future.

Amberish K Diwanji, assistant editor, Rediff On The NeT, is the first journalist working on the Internet to have won the prestigious British Chevening scholarship.