Asia in the Contemporary World

WPF Historic Publication Asia in the Contemporary World Inder Kumar Gujral December 31, 2004 Original copyright © 2004 by World Public Forum Dialogue of Civilizations Copyright © 2016 by Dialogue of Civilizations Research Institute The right of Inder Kumar Gujral to be identified as the author of this publication is hereby asserted. The views and opinions expressed in this publication are those of the original author(s) and do not necessarily represent or reflect the views and opinions of the Dialogue of Civilizations Research Institute, its co-founders, or its staff members. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, distributed, or transmitted in any form or by any means, including photocopying, recording, or other electronic or mechanical methods, without the prior written permission of the publisher, except in the case of brief quotations embodied in critical reviews and certain other noncommercial uses permitted by copyright law. For permission requests, please write to the publisher: Dialogue of Civilizations Research Institute gGmbH Französische Straße 23 10117 Berlin Germany +49 30 209677900 [email protected] Asia in the Contemporary World Inder Kumar Gujral Former Prime Minister of India Originally published 2004 in World Public Forum Dialogue of Civilizations Bulletin 1(1), 158–64. 2 Inder Kumar Gujral “Asia in the contemporary world” Surely I am voicing the feelings of my fellow participants when I thank the three zealously committed foundations for hosting this Conference at a time when the world is confronted with massive challenges of instability and a gravely damaged U.N. system. Not long back, on first day of the new millennium, the world leaders had gathered to re-affirm their faith in the “purpose and principles of the charter of the United Nations, which have proved timeless and universal. Indeed, their relevance and capacity to inspire have increased, as nations and peoples have become inter connected and inter dependant”. Unfortunately, and I say it with sadness, this commitment was short lived and was scorched primarily by those who were honour bound to protect its spirit and legacies. Mr. Chairman, it is at this critical moment of history that we are putting our minds together in this historic land of Greece that is renowned for nurturing the cultures of dialogue and fair play. Let there be no doubt that the world and more specifically Asia is in serious trouble. Country after country is destabilized by the ‘Jihadis’ who attack at will any civil society un-mindful of the religious beliefs of the victims. While the specter of September 11 continues to haunt, the diplomacies of the world are not yet able to bury its ghost. Remnants of the Talibans are not letting the Karzai regime stabilize in Afghanistan. History tells us that a disturbed Afghanistan had always affected peace and stability of the adjoining countries in Central and South Asia that now extends to the Central Eurasia. The process of nation-building in Afghanistan is so muddled that even the coalition forces are unable to effectively tackle it. The deployment of the American forces in Central Asia has added a new dynamic to the region. A crucial question, from the stand point of security environment, is how long the US and the NATO forces would remain there and for how long Russia and China would tolerate their presence in their strategic backyards. Instability in the region is nurturing the growth of the Islamist fundamentalisms in Xinjiang and Uighur Autonomous regions of China. Media WORLD PUBLIC FORUM BULLETIN #1(1), 2004 “DIALOGUE OF CIVILIZATIONS” 3 Inder Kumar Gujral “Asia in the contemporary world” reports that over 10,000 Uighurs are presently undergoing military cum religious trainings in Pakistan and Afghanistan. The Central Asian Republics, as we know, were born out of Soviet Union’s collapse. They are yet to stabilize as Nation states with enough muscle to resist the internal militancies and onslaughts of the Islamist revivalists from outside. Economic stagnations are adding to the instabilities and their authoritarian rulers do not appreciate that oppressive governance adds fuel to the fires. The SCO (Shanghai Cooperation Organization) of the six powers was delayed and it is yet to effectively counter the wide spread fundamentalist militancies. Excellencies, Asia, a home to much promise, is presently troubled by some of the most intractable tensions of our times. The major flash points threatening regional and international stability are unfortunately located in Asia. In West Asia, we have the bleeding sores of Palestine and now the Iraq. In East Asia, we see simmering tensions over the Taiwan issue, and the grave new threat of nuclearisation of the Korean peninsula. Finally, closer to us in India, the Kashmir issue has led to a perpetual Pakistani hostility that continues to abet terrorisms as an instrument of its state policies. Histories of these disputes are well known and I need not restate them. What does bear emphasis is the presence of a major non Asian power in Asia’s security equations and the role that this has played in perpetuating and in some cases escalating these tensions. America has for long involved itself in West Asian affairs. The vast oil reserves of this region have proven a fatal attraction and dictated expedient policies. It was fifty three years ago, virtually to this day, that the nascent secular Republic in Iran was violated in a CIA coup that saw Prime Minister Mossadegh overthrown, and the absolutist regime of the US-UK backed Shah Raza Pehlavi installed. Nearly three decades later, after the Iranian revolution had reinstated a popular regime, the WORLD PUBLIC FORUM BULLETIN #1(1), 2004 “DIALOGUE OF CIVILIZATIONS” 4 Inder Kumar Gujral “Asia in the contemporary world” US provided neighbouring Iraq with arms and intelligence to sustain and prolong the Iraq-Iran war. Also in the 1980’s America’s long held influence in Saudi Arabia was used to generate an anti-Soviet Union jihad in Afghanistan. Expedient policies always have a way of returning to haunt their creators. Today, as the products of its own past policies have returned to torment America, policy makers seem to have forsaken any claim to caution and idealism to formulate a new and aggressive foreign policy doctrine reliant on military force and a self proclaimed right to intervene anywhere in any region of the world that self-interest demands. The objectives of this new strategy were recently elaborated in the US National Security Strategy document that underlined an ostensible containment of WMD, defeating global terrorism, and promoting democratic values. These objectives while noble in themselves, have in actual practice come to cloak a more sinister design. The stated objective of reducing the threats from the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction are laudable. In Iraq, however, no such weapons of mass destruction have been found even several months after the invasion of the country by coalition forces. Persistent apprehensions that the threat of Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction were exaggerated are being confirmed in recent revelations. The on-going Hutton Enquiry in Great Britain dealing with the events leading to the suicide of one of their senior weapons experts has produced documentary evidence of deliberate political manipulation of the intelligence dossiers dealing with the threat of Iraqi weapons. It is becoming increasingly apparent that the threat of Iraqi WMD was deliberately over-played in order to frighten particularly the European opponents of the Iraqi war into acquiescence. The real motives for the Iraq war can only be guessed at. These could well include the desire to control the vast oil resources, the second largest in the world, that are located within Iraq. Certainly, the close WORLD PUBLIC FORUM BULLETIN #1(1), 2004 “DIALOGUE OF CIVILIZATIONS” 5 Inder Kumar Gujral “Asia in the contemporary world” association of western oil multi-nationals with leading figures in the coalition governments does nothing to allay this apprehension. In the absence of weapons of mass destruction, senior coalition leaders have started insisting that the war was justified to defeat the threat of global terrorism. This is a pathetic attempt at a post-facto rationalisation of the war. We had no sympathy with the authoritarianism of Saddam Hussein or the others. But it is well- known that Iraq’s secular regime, in marked contrast to some of its neighbours, was laying emphasis on shunning religious extremism while giving women equitous status and protecting the rights of its Christian and other minorities. The more reasonable inference is that the neo-conservative elites within the US administration saw the tragedy of the twin towers attack of September 11 as an opportunity to destroy the only government in the region that was strong enough to challenge the Western policies, particularly as they related to Israel and the Palestine question. Excellencies, Ladies and Gentlemen, When noble objectives are distorted and used as a cloak to hide dishonourable motives, it is bad enough. Even more objectionable, however, are the means which the coalition powers had chosen to pursue those objectives. Worthy friends, You will agree that this disturbing doctrine violates a fundamental principle of the United Nations, which was established after the horrifying experience of two world wars. Its objective was to stress collective security and de-legitimize the use of force as a means to dispute resolution. And now this new Security doctrine goes further to justify the pre-emptive wars that would deny the accumulated wisdom of history while overturning the key principles under-pinning the world order for the past 55 years. Little wonder that collective security of the past is now sought to be replaced by nothing better than collective insecurity. WORLD PUBLIC FORUM BULLETIN #1(1), 2004 “DIALOGUE OF CIVILIZATIONS” 6 Inder Kumar Gujral “Asia in the contemporary world” This projected doctrine asserts America’s right to meddle in internal affairs of individual nations in order to “democratize” them.

Load more