16 November 2011 | Vol. 2, № 43. From the Editor’s Desk

Dear FDI supporters,

Welcome to this week’s edition of the Strategic South Asia, we report on speculation that Pakistani Weekly Analysis. FDI’s Global Food and Water politician, and former cricketer, Imran Khan is Security Programme extends its thanks to all those positioning himself for a run at a leadership who took part in our recent roundtables in Sydney, position when elections are next held. Canberra and Perth, as we investigated the roles of science, technology and innovation in food Moving to South-, we consider the security. We are indebted to our attendees for possible return to political life of leading Burmese their time and expertise. Summaries of the dissident Aung San Suu Kyi and ’s discussions will be released in the coming weeks. recently announced plans for a 35 per cent increase in defence spending. In this week’s SWA, the Northern /Energy Security Research Programme considers the news Upcoming Strategic Analysis Papers include an of an increased United States military presence in analysis from the Indian Ocean Research Darwin. Programme of -Nepal relations, and examinations of the national involvement in the Meanwhile, the Global Food and Water Security Indian Ocean region of France, Indonesia and Programme reports on an important new study . The Global Food and Water Crises from the Consultative Group on International Research Programme will investigate the amount Agricultural Research. It found that improvements of food lost or wasted during the different phases to rainwater harvesting and usage in the world’s of agricultural production. river basins could increase food production by between two and ten times. I trust that you will enjoy this edition of the Strategic Weekly Analysis. Looking to the Indian Ocean region, FDI Associate Tridivesh Maini analyses the prospects for Major General John Hartley AO (Retd) Institute Director and CEO improved relations between and Pakistan, Future Directions International following the recent South Asian Association for Regional Co-operation (SAARC) summit. Still in

*****

American Military Increase: Limited in Force, Significant in Symbolism

Background

This week, President Obama will visit Darwin to announce an increase in the American military presence in the region. The agreement, to be announced on the 60th anniversary of the United States-Australia alliance, is expected to lead to more joint military exercises and provision for a number of US military personnel to be rotated through Darwin. While the media has been quick to contend that this represents a significant shift in US strategic architecture, the limited force increases are, in reality, designed to be a symbolic message, aimed at fostering confidence in American longevity in the Indo-Pacific, and confirming the primacy of the ANZUS Treaty.

Comment

Australia and the United States share a number of strategic objectives in the Indo-Pacific region, including: preventing dominance of the region by a single state or coalition of states; developing a system of relationships to ensure stability in the region; and securing the increasingly important sea lines of communication, to facilitate commerce and trade access and ensure continued prosperity. Changing power dynamics, most notably from the rise of China and India, coupled with enduring threats from North Korea’s nuclear programme; the formation of new regional institutions; competition for energy resources; and Islamic fundamentalism, all have the potential to disrupt US-Australian interests.

In this context, the Pentagon, like the Australian Department of Defence, is currently engaged in a force posture review. Analysts contend that the likely outcome may include an increase in the American military presence in the Indo-Pacific. Australia’s, and more particularly Darwin’s, position at the nexus of the Indian and Pacific Oceans, coupled with its existing infrastructure, will become an increasingly attractive prospect for a nominal American force with the aim of promoting US interests, rather than an integral forward deployment site. Potential increases to exercises, visitations and rotational basing at shared facilities, could substantially spread the United States influence, currently limited to existing facilities in north-east Asia and the Indian Ocean, without the prohibitive cost of developing new military infrastructure.

While the message President Obama wishes to portray is clear and warranted, the manner in which the United States is attempting to allay regional concerns and unease seems overly ambitious and even, perhaps, potentially damaging. Australia, along with India and , has been identified by the United States as a key partner in a quadrilateral security arrangement. Yet, the proposed regional security architecture ignores the realities and idiosyncrasies of the member states. Article Nine of Japan’s constitution and strong pacifist public sentiment will be significant inhibitors to Japanese involvement in any multinational security forum. India remains ambivalent about American overtures for a greater security relationship and has observer status in the Shanghai Co-operation Organisation (SCO) meetings, an institution of which China is a key member. China’s economic growth, and the commercial opportunities created in its wake, has created a number of opportunities for Australia. These factors will feature heavily in defining the future of the US-Australia alliance.

Changes to military posture must be coupled with frank dialogue; the United States must engage all stakeholders in the region’s security and highlight their credentials to secure the region’s long-term stability. Failure to do so will lead to a theatre of bi-polar competition, an outcome inconsistent with the strategic objectives of all of the region’s states.

Page 2 of 9

Australia must prudently position itself to maximise opportunities from these latest developments, while ensuring that its position within the region is not compromised. Analysts have argued that any increase in the military relationship announced this week will be seen in China as provocative. Yet, Australia through the ANZUS Treaty and its resulting policies and practices, has long had a strong relationship with the United States. This has been successfully managed alongside the strong and growing economic links with China; a rapport that must be stressed to Beijing. Further, Canberra must convey the message that the increased military links are not from a perception of military threat, but rather are a continued commitment to Indo-Pacific security and stability.

Liam McHugh Manager Northern Australia and Energy Security Research Programmes [email protected]

*****

River Basins Could Secure Sustainable Food Future

Background

A new five-year study of ten major river basins, from the Nile to the Indus-Ganges, has found that there is more than enough water to sustain food demands during the twenty-first century. The analysis, by scientists from the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR), identified that inefficient use and inequitable distribution of the water that flows through key river basins should be the major concern, when considering the impact of water scarcity on global food production.

Comment

According to the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), farming accounts for 70 per cent of total water use worldwide. This lends significant credence to concerns over the potential impact of water scarcity on global food production. The study’s findings indicate that it is more of a political challenge than a resource concern. If policymakers can work out how to establish efficient usage practices and equitable distribution mechanisms in the world’s river basins, then sustainability will be readily manageable.

Outside of a few places, such as California or China’s Yellow River basin, there is no genuine scarcity of water for agricultural purposes. Rather, the root underlying cause of scarcity is that significant volumes of rainwater are lost or left unused. In sub-Saharan Africa, the report concludes that even ‘modest’ improvements to rainwater harvesting and usage could support two to three times more food production. In regions across Asia and South America, similar changes could yield an increase in food production of at least ten per cent.

The ten river basins that were studied include: the Andes and São Francisco in South America; the Nile, Volta, Limpopo and Niger basins in Africa; and the Ganges, Indus, Karkheh, Mekong and Yellow river basins in Asia. The basins cover 13.5 million square kilometres and are home to some 1.5 billion people, 470 million of whom are among the world’s poorest.

Page 3 of 9

Simon Cook, of the International Centre for Tropical Agriculture (ICTA), notes that inefficient distribution is a driver of water scarcity and is usually exacerbated by population growth grouped around water sources, primarily in the developing world. Accordingly, collaboration and dialogue between river users, and particularly those located upstream and downstream, or users in contrasting practices such as irrigation and hydropower, will be the key to enabling effective distribution and sustainable usage.

The CGIAR report suggests that small reservoirs, to catch and store rainfall until it is actually needed, could help. It also promotes the need for equitable access to stored water for famers across the wealth spectrum. Otherwise, Cook identifies communication as crucial. Constructive engagement is necessary, including: between the agricultural and water industries; across state and national lines; inside governmental circles – where, often, the water ministry will not have sufficient engagement with the agricultural ministry – and in the private sector. Communication derived through shared local interest will be at the core of successfully grappling with the political nature of this problem.

For the Basin Study, visit: http://waterandfood.org/page/Press-Room---Major-River-Basins-Have-Enough- Water-to-Sustainably-Double-Food-Production-in-Coming-Decades

Tim Thomas FDI Research Intern Global Food and Water Crises Research Programme

*****

South Asia: Is This SAARC Summit Any Different?

Background

The meeting of Indian Prime Minister Dr with his Pakistani counterpart, Syed Yusuf Raza Gilani, on 10 November 2011 on the sidelines of the 17th South Asian Association for Regional Co- operation (SAARC) summit in the Maldives, should be welcomed. The former’s vision for South Asia in general, and Indo-Pak relations in particular, should be praised. Dr Singh, who has been cautious on many issues, has stuck his neck out for a more harmonious relationship with Pakistan. Last week’s meeting was no different.

Comment

In fact, while Dr Singh has met his Pakistani counterpart a few times, it is the first time since the 2008 Mumbai attacks that both leaders have actually focussed on issues like trade and the visa regime. Previously, the meetings were limited in scope and India’s focus was more on the Mumbai attack, while Pakistan spoke about Kashmir. Prime Minister Singh has been working for peace ever since he took over in 2004 and this has got him into trouble on a few occasions. The most prominent instance was the Sharm El-Sheikh joint declaration of July 2009, where India acknowledged Pakistan’s concerns on Baluchistan.

This time, Dr Singh was at his bold best when he called Malé a ‘new chapter’ and referred to his counterpart as ‘a man of peace’. While Singh’s intentions cannot be doubted, there are numerous constraints, which both Gilani and Singh face. Maybe it would have been wiser to have met and not raised

Page 4 of 9

the stakes quite so high. Singh’s praise of his Pakistani counterpart has already raised eyebrows, especially among the opposition Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) which has, of late, missed no opportunity to go hammer and tongs against the United Progressive Alliance (UPA) government. As a consequence, while speaking to the media later, Dr Singh clarified that his government had no blind faith in any one individual.

Similarly, there have been many occasions when Singh has talked about ‘a new chapter’ in Indo-Pak relations, both during his engagement with the current government in Pakistan and with General Musharraf. This time, the Indian Prime Minister was probably appreciative of Pakistan’s decision to grant Most Favoured Nation trading status to India and also for the immediate release of an Indian Army helicopter with four soldiers that had “mistakenly” crossed the Line of Control. Going by past experience, however, Singh, who has vast experience in dealing with Pakistan, should have been cautious with his words, for a few reasons.

First, Dr Singh’s party and government – unlike himself – do not take a long-term view of things. The popularity of his government is rock-bottom as a consequence of corruption scandals. In this situation, it would not like to further increase public resentment by appearing to be soft on Pakistan. This would give yet another issue to the BJP, which already seems to be on the offensive against the government. For the moment, Singh’s moves will be viewed with cynicism by some and scepticism by others. In the event of any more terror attacks, his own party would surely stall Singh’s peace overtures towards Pakistan. Realising this, the Indian PM made it clear that any 26/11 type of event will make dialogue with Pakistan tough. Few other leaders in his government are convinced about de-linking terror and talks with Pakistan. So, it really remains to be seen how far talks on trade and liberalising the visa regime could go in the advent of a tense situation.

Second, while Pakistan’s Foreign Minister, Hina Rabbani Khar, has been speaking about the army being on board with regard to the Indo-Pak peace process – and her views were also echoed by the Indian Prime Minister – it remains to be seen how the Pakistani Army will react to some of the statements on terror made by Pakistani Interior Minister Rahman Malik, especially those referring to the Mumbai attacks. Would the military not feel threatened by an emboldened civilian leadership? If so, what steps might certain elements within it take?

Third, while the real hope for India and Pakistan, and for the SAARC region as a whole, is enhanced people-to-people contact and trade, the track record so far has been miserable, to say the least. While there has been a change of mindset in the Indian Ministry of External Affairs, the Ministry of Home Affairs, in a bid to exhibit its efficiency, has made the visa regime for Pakistanis very stringent. It will take some doing to reverse it and fulfil the dream of breakfast at Amritsar, lunch at Lahore and dinner at Kabul: the dream of Dr Singh and an aspiration of numerous Indians and Pakistanis. With multiple divisions in the current UPA government and not much time before the next general election, it would be quite an achievement to make this possible.

Finally, in the context of SAARC, while there definitely seems to be a desire to bridge differences, the failure of the South Asian University – a brainchild of Dr Singh – illustrates the vast gap between vision and implementation in South Asia. The university has no proper curriculum, the faculty selection is not transparent and there is no hostel to accommodate students.

In view of all these issues, the question is, can the 17th SAARC summit be different, or has it been just another talkfest?

Page 5 of 9

Tridivesh Maini FDI Associate

About the Author: Mr Maini is an Associate Fellow with the Observer Research Foundation, New Delhi and is one of the editors of ‘Warriors after War: Indian and Pakistani Retired Military Leaders Reflect on Relations between the Two Countries, Past, Present and Future’, (Peter Lang, 2011).

*****

Imran Khan to Run for Pakistani Leadership?

Background

Pakistani politician, and former cricketer, Imran Khan, has suddenly experienced a surge of public interest, after achieving a turnout of over 100,000 people at a recent political rally. Khan is tipped to run in the elections due to be held in 2012 or 2013, but it is unclear whether he is aiming to become President (a largely symbolic role) or the next Prime Minister of Pakistan.

Comment

Imran Khan is, for many, better known for his captaincy of the Pakistani cricket team, but upon retirement, he became politically active and formed the Tehreek-e-Insaf (Movement for Justice) party in 1996, winning a seat in Parliament in 2002. Khan has utilised the popularity from his past career well, but is criticised by political commentators as a political lightweight who holds lofty ideals while making compromising policy backflips. In 1999, he supported the bloodless coup of former President Pervez Musharraf, but then criticised his rule three years later, stating: ‘I was made to understand that when he won, the General would begin a clean-up of the corruption in the system, but, really, it wasn’t the case.’

Khan seems to readily switch between two personas, one he presents to Pakistan and another that he presents to the Western world. He is a well-known figure in countries such as the United Kingdom, and even holds the position of Chancellor of the University of Bradford. When speaking at home, however, he is critical of what he perceives to be Western cultural imperialism and is highly critical of foreign interference in Pakistan. He has been criticised for preaching Islamic values at home, but transforming into a different person when socialising amongst the élite in the UK.

Khan surprised many commentators when a rally he held in a Lahore park on 30 October, drew an estimated 100,000 people, the largest rally to be held in the city for several decades. It prompted comparisons with popular politicians of the past, such as Benazir Bhutto, who was assassinated while campaigning in 2008. Given the success of the rally, along with his recently published semi- autobiographical book, Pakistan: A Personal History, there has been media speculation that he will soon run for a major political office. Election dates for both national and presidential elections have not yet been decided, but they are expected to occur within the next 12 to 18 months. A recent opinion poll shows that Khan is currently the most popular political figure in Pakistan, with almost 70 per cent of respondents holding a favourable view of him.

Page 6 of 9

Khan’s recent political activity has reignited the debate over his potential as a politician. While he enjoys consistent popularity, particularly among young people and the internet-connected middle and upper classes, the highest office he has previously held was a seat in the lower house of Parliament. Many commentators have suggested that a great deal of his popularity stems from the fact that he isn’t in government, and has so far avoided the corruption, disappointment and public discontent that mainstream Pakistani politicians are inevitably exposed to. If Khan is elected as either President or Prime Minister, the gloss that he has had as a public figure may fade as he deals with the realities of leading a country regarded as among the most difficult to govern. Western powers could also be in for a surprise, if the Western-friendly persona displayed abroad gives way to a need to mirror nationalist and Islamist sentiments on the home front.

Chris Doyle FDI Research Intern Indian Ocean Research Programme

*****

Aung San Suu Kyi to Return to Politics in Burma

Background

Burma’s president, , has signed an amendment this month removing legal and ideological barriers affecting the country’s political parties in the autocratic, military dominated regime, paving the way for the return of Aung San Suu Kyi to political life.

Comment

Political parties had previously been bound to “preserving” the country’s 2008 constitution. The wording has now been changed to “respect and obey,” a small, but significant, difference which tolerates dialogue and criticism of the constitution.

While some uncertainty still exists about the government’s sincerity, the revision appears to be an effort to reach out to the regime’s political opponents, amid tentative signs of change in the repressive state. The amendment comes a week after high profile visits from senior officials from the United Nations and the United States.

Aung San Suu Kyi, leader of the National League for Democracy (NLD) and Nobel Prize winner, is set to make a return to politics after spending the past 22 years under house arrest. According to an NLD spokesperson, the party is ‘very likely to register’ in time for a series of by-elections expected to take place in December. Up to 50 parliamentary seats are expected to be contested, with 25 per cent restricted to serving members of the military.

The NLD has declined to discuss the implications of the amendment, until it has completed internal negotiations for a new plan of action. The negotiations are scheduled for 18 November. Ms Suu Kyi could potentially reassume her first official role since becoming Burma’s figurehead for democracy, well over two decades ago.

Page 7 of 9

Despite the amendment, roughly 2,000 political dissidents remain in detention. The NLD estimates that 100 of its members are still locked up. Concerns also remain about the military’s arbitrary power to suspend civilian rule. ‘They can seize power without even firing a gun,’ says NLD party founder, U Win Tin. After 19 years in solitary confinement, he is against the registration and the NLD’s re-entry into politics in Burma. ‘I don't think we should go into parliament,’ he said. ‘If we go into parliament, we go under the rule of this constitution.’1

Whether the amendment will result in tangible progress for the people of Burma remains to be seen.

Ashley Woermann FDI Research Intern Indian Ocean Research Programme

*****

Indonesia to Increase Defence Spending

Background

Indonesia has announced that it will increase next year’s military budget by 35 per cent. The increased attention to defence is regarded as long overdue. Much of Indonesia’s military hardware is out of date, while regional powers such as China are ramping up their military development. The United States will most likely be heartened by the news, as it could ease some of the pressure to maintain a large strategic presence in Asia.

Comment

Over the past decade, military investment and development in Indonesia has been relatively stagnant. In that time, while the Indonesian defence budget has remained relatively constrained, China’s military spending has increased threefold. In addition, the US implemented an arms embargo against Indonesia in 1999 in response to human rights violations in . Consequently, the past decade has seen the Indonesian armed forces utilising outdated and obsolete military hardware, which has been blamed for a series of lethal air accidents and malfunctions.

The embargo was lifted in 2005, and Jakarta has now approved the much-needed 35 per cent budget increase. One of the key investments to be made with the additional funding will be the purchase of jet fighters. On the cards is an interim order of second-hand F-16s from the US, followed by new aircraft being built in South Korea, including the T-50 Golden Eagle.

The renewed focus on military development is a response to developments outside Indonesia’s borders; the republic’s 460,000-strong army has traditionally focussed on domestic stability. Current president , when announcing the budget increase, added that Indonesia will continue to push to achieve a status of minimum essential force (MEF) by 2025. Observers believe that Indonesia is

1 Allchin, J., ‘Aung San Suu Kyi braced for return to Burmese politics’, Guardian, 13 November 2011. .

Page 8 of 9

aiming to achieve MEF status so it can take a more proactive strategic role in the region, possibly acting as a mediating force between a number of nearby countries contesting territory in the .

The United States will most likely be encouraged by the budget increase. Facing possible budget cuts of its own, the US is looking to partners in Asia to take a greater stake in the maintenance of security and stability in the region. Other regional partners, such as Japan and South Korea, have been reluctant to increase their military budgets, so the significant increase in Indonesian spending will be welcomed. The revenue generated by the sale of US military hardware to Indonesia will naturally also be welcomed. This is a trend that is likely to spread to other South-East Asian countries wary of China’s rise. The recent US- military exercises, as well as the likely expansion of the US presence to Darwin, are indicators that the strategic significance of South-East Asia is increasing.

Chris Doyle FDI Research Intern Indian Ocean Research Programme

*****

What’s Next? The joint China-Pakistan anti-terrorism exercise “Friendship 2011” begins today. It will be

held near Islamabad over the next fortnight.

United States President will visit Australia from 16-17 November to mark the sixtieth anniversary of the US-Australia defence alliance.

The Sixth will take place in from 17-19 November.

Indian External Affairs Minister S.M. Krishna will visit from 17-19 November. Mr Krishna will co-chair the Indian-Russian Joint Commission on Trade, Economic, Scientific, Technological and Cultural Co-operation.

Delegates from Burma’s National League for Democracy will meet in Rangoon on 18 November, to discuss the re-registration of the NLD as a political party.

The Sixth Strategic Dialogue meeting of the Nile Basin Initiative will take place in the Ugandan capital, Kampala, on 18 November.

Any opinions or views expressed in this paper are those of the individual author, unless stated to be those of Future Directions International.

Published by Future Directions International Pty Ltd. Desborough House, Suite 2, 1161 Hay Street, West Perth WA 6005 Australia. Tel: +61 8 9486 1046 Fax: +61 8 9486 4000 E-mail: [email protected] Web: www.futuredirections.org.au

Page 9 of 9