The Hindu : National : `Terrorism, fundamentalism main threats'

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Tuesday, May 03, 2005

National

National

`Terrorism, fundamentalism main threats'

Special Correspondent

India's security interests require a mix of land-based, maritime and air capabilities

NEW DELHI: The Defence Ministry is of the view that the country's immediate security concerns, though tempered by positive developments in ties with China and Pakistan, "remained basically the same."

Its annual report says India's extended neighbourhood is uneasy because of internal instability, authoritarian or military rule, extremist political or religious movements, weak state structures and insurgencies. As a result, "at its widest level, with some variations for better or worse," India's strategic environment remained "largely unchanged" from last year.

Despite the operations against the Al-Qaeda and the Taliban on the Pakistan-Afghanistan border, the principal threats to peace and stability in the region remained the combination of fundamentalism and terrorism nurtured in `madrasas' and training camps in the area and the danger of proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and access to them by fundamentalists and militants, the report pointed out.

Numerous initiatives

On Pakistan, it noted the numerous initiatives taken during the year to ease tensions and normalise relations, including at the level of the armed forces. But "it could not be said" there was an end to cross-border terrorism in Jammu and Kashmir. The decline in infiltration was attributed more to measures on the part of the Indian Army than any "discernible change of heart, or action, by the Pakistani authorities."

There was no evidence of any "significant Pakistani effort" to dismantle the militant infrastructure such as communication pads and training camps on its soil.

The effort in this direction was not comparable to Pakistan's operations on its Afghan border. The acquisition of F-16 fighter planes and other sophisticated military equipment "has nothing to do with the war against terrorism," and "cast doubts on Pakistan's real intention in joining the war against terrorism" and "could complicate the prospects for lasting peace in the region."

Making a case for acquiring high-end military equipment, the report said Pakistan's acquisition of sophisticated weapons meant that India would have to guard against its implications for the balance of military power in the region.

Talks with China

Both China and India maintained peace and tranquillity on the border and stepped up efforts to address differences on the boundary question through discussions. However, China's close defence relationship with and military assistance to Pakistan continued and India would continue to "monitor" the development of military infrastructure by China in the border areas and its military modernisation, including the maritime sector.

Within the sub-continent, lesser security problems complicated the relationships. Bangladesh had been insensitive and unresponsive to the presence of Indian insurgent groups from the northeast and the ISI on its soil, large-scale illegal immigration and criminalisation of the border.

There was still no explanation for the large cache of arms and ammunition bound for the northeast and detected over a year ago in Chittagong.

Nepal situation

On Nepal, the report said the imposition of the emergency (since lifted), arrest of political leaders and press censorship led to a further deterioration of the security situation. "India is of the view that there cannot be a purely military solution to the Maoist insurgency whose grip over the countryside, links with Left extremist outfits in parts of India and the possible expansion of their influence remain causes of serious concern to India."

However, according to the report, Bhutan and Myanmar displayed "exemplary good neighbourliness," refusing sanctuary to anti-India insurgent groups.

India's strategic and security interests required a mix of land-based, maritime and air capabilities and a minimum credible deterrent to thwart the threat of use of nuclear weapons against it. Its force postures remained "defensive" in orientation while its nuclear policy was characterised by a commitment to no-first-use, moratorium on nuclear deterrence and rejection of an arms race or concepts and postures from the Cold War era.

Printer friendly page
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

National