Events

Mr. Mohanasakthivel J., Research Analyst, Manohar Parrikar Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses (MP-IDSA) made a presentation on “Ethiopia’s Maritime Aspirations and Regional Implications” at the Monday Morning Meeting held on 29 April 2024. The session was moderated by Dr. Abhishek Mishra, Associate Fellow, MP-IDSA. Ambassador Sujan R. Chinoy, Director General, MP-IDSA and the scholars of MP-IDSA attended and enriched the discussions.

Executive Summary

Tensions in the already volatile Horn of Africa have increased as a result of a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with Somaliland signed on 1st January 2024 that grants landlocked Ethiopia access to the Red Sea. Any international recognition of Somaliland is interpreted by Somalia as an affront to its sovereignty, because Somalia considers the autonomous region of Somaliland as an integral part of its territory. Consequently, Somalia rejected the Agreement and demanded that it be terminated. This declaration comes at a critical moment when attacks against commercial shipping by Houthi rebels in the Red Sea have increased, which has subsequently caused a severe reduction in marine traffic and commerce in the region. The Agreement is expected to impact Somalia's bilateral relations with Ethiopia and neighbouring Somaliland, but also the Horn of Africa region as a whole. Regional organisations such as the African Union, Arab League, and Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) have expressed concerns about the Agreement and the possibility of escalating tensions and regional instability. 

Detailed Report

In his introductory remarks, Dr. Abhishek Mishra underlined that the Horn of Africa is on the verge of rising geopolitical tensions and realignment with a number of deals like the Ethiopia and Somaliland deal and the Somalia and Turkiye Agreement taking shape. Mr. Mohanasakthivel J. commenced his presentation by mentioning Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed’s  address to the Ethiopian Parliament in October 2023 on Ethiopia's marine access. 

Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed proclaimed that the Red Sea was Ethiopia's "natural boundary" and that its people could not live in a "geographic prison." He underlined the existential issues linked with access to the Red Sea region, which is becoming increasingly volatile and unpredictable, attracting more actors from far and near due to its strategic economic and political importance. Thus, the Speaker highlighted that being landlocked poses a risk to Ethiopia, as it relies on other littoral states for marine access, protecting its interests, and defending against any national security danger emanating from the Red Sea. Within a week after PM Ahmed’s speech, the Ethiopian Ministry of Peace issued an outline statement, declaring that Ethiopia will take all necessary steps to safeguard port access. Ethiopia's Prime Minister agreed with protecting port access peacefully but cautioned that force may be used if required. 

Subsequently, on 1 January 2024, Ethiopia and Somaliland signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU), giving Addis Ababa direct access to the Gulf of Aden. This strategic Agreement cleared the way for Ethiopia to construct commercial and military sites along the coastline. Under this arrangement, Somaliland has leased to Ethiopia 20 kilometres of its coastal land for 50 years. Ethiopia has agreed to provide Somaliland an interest in one of its profitable state-owned firms, Ethiopian Airlines. It is also considering recognition of Somaliland as an independent state. However, neighbouring coastal governments of Somalia, Djibouti, and Eritrea, have raised concerns regarding the Agreement. 

The Speaker highlighted the history of Ethiopia's maritime quest by mentioning that since Eritrea's 1993 secession from Ethiopia, the latter has remained landlocked, thereby putting an end to the Ethiopian Navy which was started in 1950’s. At first, Ethiopia was compelled to transfer its maritime resources to ports in Yemen. However, Ethiopia's naval presence was completely disbanded by the mid-1990s due to its eventual ejection from Yemen and failure to uphold its leasing Agreement in Djibouti. 

Ethiopia remains reliant on the stability of its coastal neighbours due to a lack of its direct access to the sea. Since then, it has attempted a variety of methods to secure access to the ocean. It entered into an Agreement with Djibouti in 2002. As a result, over 95 per cent of its import-export traffic now passes through Djibouti's port via the Addis-Djibouti corridor. Ethiopia also purchased a 19 per cent share in Somaliland's Berbera Port in 2018 as a means of diversifying its maritime access points.

Mr. Mohanasakthivel J. emphasised on the importance of ports for Ethiopia, stating that Ethiopia's trade is strongly dependent on access to ports for international commerce. This is owing to the bordering countries' insufficient capacity to absorb Ethiopian goods. Despite having several potential ports, logistical obstacles prevent their use. In his overview of potential ports for Ethiopia, he mentioned the Ports of Sudan, Djibouti, and Tadjourah, Eritrea's Massawa and Assab, Somaliland's Berbera, Somalia's Mogadishu and Kismayo, and Kenya's Mombasa and Lamu. 

Ethiopia relies on the Port of Djibouti for 95 per cent of its foreign trade, with the Ports of Berbera and Sudan accounting for the remaining 5 per cent. Ethiopia's principal economic channel has been the Red Sea port of Djibouti, giving Djibouti a virtual monopoly on Ethiopian trade. However, Djibouti costs Ethiopia over a billion dollars in port fees each year. This is a large sum considering that over one-fifth out of Ethiopia’s 120 million population relies on food aid. 

With respect to Somalia, the Speaker noted that the arrangement will have an impact on the dynamics of the country's relations with its two neighbours – Ethiopia and Somaliland, with whom it has a history of intra-regional disputes and conflicts. The Somali Government asserts that Somaliland is an autonomous state within Somalia, and that only the Somali Government has the authority to lease its land to foreign forces. 

Somalia considers the Agreement to be an infringement of its sovereignty, and in reaction it has expelled the Ethiopian Ambassador and recalled its Ambassador from Ethiopia.  The Somali Administration also insists that there is no intention of negotiation with Ethiopia and has threatened serious escalation if Ethiopia proceeds with the Agreement. However, a clash between Ethiopia and Somalia seems unlikely. 

While discussing regional dynamics, the Speaker mentioned that Egypt has been critical of the transaction as an obvious infringement of Somalia's sovereignty. President Sisi emphasised that Egypt stands shoulder to shoulder with Somalia and has urged Ethiopia to seek benefits from seaports in Somalia and Djibouti through transitional measures rather than attempting to control another country's territory. Egypt's objection to Ethiopia's deal with Somaliland is partly affected by its ongoing dispute with Ethiopia over the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam on the Nile River.

Furthermore, if this Agreement is implemented, Djibouti will experience a decrease in commercial transit as well as a loss of Ethiopian annual fees, as revenues from ports and foreign military bases are Djibouti's principal source of income. Djibouti's port handles more than 95 percent of Ethiopia's trade, contributing to about 75 per cent to its GDP. Djibouti is dissatisfied with the fact that Somaliland has become Ethiopia's preferred maritime and commercial partner. 

With regard to Eritrea, the Speaker mentioned that no other country felt the threat as much as the Eritreans did as both countries have a history of hostility. In 1998, both the countries went to war, which ended in 2000 with the signing of the Algiers Agreement. Nevertheless, tensions developed, as Ethiopia refused to abide by the Agreement, which required Ethiopia to cede territory to Eritrea.

Between 2002 to 2018, both countries were in a state of no conflict or peace. Eventually, Abiy Ahmed and Isaias Afwerki met in 2018, this signified the end of the state of war, resuming diplomatic ties, trade, and travel between the two states. However, cooperation deteriorated as unsolved issues and antagonism persisted. 

Ethiopia's loss of the Red Sea coast to Eritrea fuels fear of encirclement by Arab powers as the Arab League members, including Egypt, Djibouti, and Sudan, control key ports. Potential Arab attacks from the Red Sea ports have seemed to heighten Ethiopia's security concerns. Moreover, Ethiopia has been consistently denied an observer status by the Council of Arab and African Littoral States of the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden. Since all the coastal countries have denied Ethiopia access to sea, the Speaker noted that the littoral states must develop a regional mechanism for the Red Sea rather than relying on their Arab neighbours, who may exploit the current rift. Although the Maritime Treaty may include certain concessions in favour of Ethiopia, the littoral states are unlikely to be interested in providing a naval base other than Somaliland.

It is worth noting that Ethiopia is the security guarantee for Somaliland, although it is yet to recognise Somaliland since the Agreement was signed. Formal recognition could strengthen the UAE's relationship with Somaliland, potentially leading to increased investments and development projects in the region. Recognition by Ethiopia, Kenya, and the UAE may persuade other countries to consider Somaliland as a state. 

Lastly, the Speaker stated that there is no possibility of war in the near future because Ethiopia had lost many of its officers during the Tigray Battle. The country’s military is thinly scattered and faces numerous obstacles, particularly in the Amhara and Oromia areas. Its economy is still struggling to recover from a civil war in the northern Tigray region that ended in 2022.  Moreover, it is facing a severe foreign-currency shortage.

Questions and Comments

Amb. Sujan R. Chinoy, congratulated Mr. Mohanasakthivel J. for providing a detailed picture of regional dynamics in the Horn of Africa, focusing on Ethiopia's maritime ambitions. He stated that, in theory, landlocked countries have the right to reach the sea under Article 126, Clause 10. However, this must be negotiated and transit states must be confident in their own security. As a result, the issue boils down to negotiating with neighbouring countries. Amb. Chinoy inquired about India's stance on the port, considering that the Agreement between Ethiopia and Somaliland has significant complications. 

Dr. Deepika Saraswat, observed that the UAE plays an important role in the changing dynamics of the region.

Cmde. Abhay Singh explained the intricacies of the UNCLOS with respect to the status of the landlocked states and transit rights. In addition to that he further explained that Djibouti’s economic reliance on Ethiopia is 75% of its GDP.

Dr. Abhishek Mishra inquired about the international response to the port arrangement. He further enquired about the position of Somalia and the Arab Council on the Agreement. He also inquired how the citizens of both Somalia and Somaliland have reacted to the port arrangement. 

Mr. Mohanasakhtivel J. provided insightful answers to the questions and comments raised by the Director General and the MP-IDSA scholars.

The report was prepared by Ms. Anusha Khurana, Intern, ALACUN Centre, MP-IDSA. 

Dr. Swasti Rao, Associate Fellow, Europe and Eurasia Centre, Manohar Parrikar Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses (MP-IDSA), made a presentation on “Evolving Trade and Investment Ties with Europe” at the Monday Morning Meeting held on 15 April 2024. The session was moderated by Ms. Anandita Bhada, Research Analyst, Europe and Eurasia Centre, MP-IDSA. Scholars of the Institute attended the session.

Executive Summary

On 10 March 2024, member states of the European Free Trade Association (EFTA) – Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway, and Switzerland – and the Republic of India signed a comprehensive Trade and Economic Partnership Agreement (TEPA). It is a USD 100 bn Free Trade Agreement (FTA) with the four non-European Union nations under which India will lift most import tariffs on industrial products from these countries in return for the investment over 15 years. The investments will be done across a range of Indian sectors, including pharmaceuticals, machinery and manufacturing.

Detailed Report

Ms. Anandita Bhada, in her opening remarks provided an overview of India’s recent trade agreement with the European Free Trade Association (EFTA). She noted that the negotiations between EFTA and India started in 2008 and the agreement was signed in March 2024. However, the deal is still to be ratified by the countries. She also mentioned the India-EU FTA, which is still under negotiation. In terms of collaboration on import and export of goods, EU is India’s second largest partner whereas India is EU’s tenth largest partner. Over the years, this partnership has seen several rounds of negotiations, however, there still remain disagreements regarding the technical barriers to trade, imports and pharmaceuticals. With regard to the India-UK FTA, Ms. Bhada noted that some developments could happen before January 2025, as it is said to be in its last stage.

Dr. Swasti Rao commenced her presentation by highlighting a list of 10 commandments for Free Trade Agreements (FTA) to conduct trade negotiations as given by John Clarke, EU’s former trade negotiator. Her presentation was divided into the India-EU FTA which is under negotiation, India-UK FTA, which is also under negotiation, and recently signed Trade and Economic Partnership Agreement (TEPA) which is India’s trade deal with the EFTA, showcasing its strategic importance which is being viewed as a success.

Dr. Rao emphasised that the EU, the United States of America (US), the UK are one of the largest sources of Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) in India. She also pointed out that India has not been able to utilise the full potential of China +1 diversification, as most of the diversified investments from Europe are going to countries like Vietnam and Bangladesh. According to Dr. Rao, one of the reasons for this is India’s reluctance to agree on bilateral investment guarantees that the investor countries insist on. India prefers the multilateral approach towards investment through the World Trade Organisation (WTO) framework, whereas the western countries stress more on bilateral investment guarantees which are more case-specific and country-specific. In case of the UK or the EU, one could see that enhancing trade ties and bilateral investments with India are considered a part of their larger foreign policy objectives like friendshoring.

Dr. Rao noted that when it comes to dispute settlements as well, India prefers the WTO framework whereas the western countries prefer bilateral arrangements. She also noted that traditionally India has had high tariff barriers and a protectionist approach to safeguard its small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) from foreign competition. She pointed that the Indian Government prefers to have a sector-by-sector approach for analysing the pros and cons in reduction of tariffs in sensitive areas. She highlighted that the idea of ‘Make in India’ is to first boost the manufacturing in India and then merge it with the global supply chains.

Dr. Rao further stated that when the current government came to power in 2014, it had suspended all FTAs and scrapped the Bilateral Investment Treaties (BITs), as India’s exports had not increased much in the past decade. She illustrated that most FTAs, like the ones with the Southeast Asian partners, were not technically advantageous to India as they did not provide India with significant export surplus. Thus, the government launched an FTA Review in 2019. This review delved into the details of India’s low FTA utilisation, Respective Comparative Advantage, non-tariff barrier issues and the solutions to them. The Review addressed the challenge of India incurring trade deficit despite the FTAs. After 2019, the government’s approach to FTAs has been to rectify the export deficit which has been on a rise. Dr. Rao referred to the gradual increase in trade deficit from 2019 until 2023 where the top two deficits are recorded with China (approximately USD 100 bn) and Russia (USD 35 bn) due to India’s oil purchases.

In 2021-22 India re-launched its FTA negotiations. These have been referred to as the ‘New Age FTAs’ as there is a tangible push towards finalising FTAs with western countries (UK, EU, EFTA), UAE and with the African partners. The post-COVID learning here is to actively build resilience of supply chains and overall economic security instead of merely trade. The government has been trying to link the FDI to production linked incentive schemes. There has been increased focus on natural trading partners (UAE, UK, Australia) with whom not only has the trade been in export surplus but there is also presence of resilient supply chains. The New Age FTAs have also focused on the service sector as compared to the old ones which were more focused on goods. While India’s overall trade in goods and services has increased manifold, the factor of mobility remains a hurdle in the FTAs with UK and EU, as India would like to have more mobility and countries such as the UK, are stringent about it. Further, the New Age FTAs are focused on improving the Logistics Performance Index (LPI) by lowering it from 13-14 per cent of GDP to 10 per cent under the National Logistics Policy.  

Dr. Rao highlighted that the India-UK FTA, which is still under negotiation, has 26 chapters. So far, there has been progress made on 24 chapters. Despite the bilateral trade in goods and services reaching USD 38 bn in 2023, tariff barriers remain one of the main concerns apart from mobility. The average tariff on exports from India is 4.2 per cent but on imports from the UK is 14.6 per cent. An example mentioned was the UK wanting India to reduce taxes on the electric vehicles (EV). One of the important takeaways according to Dr. Rao is that, the likely change in the UK to a labour government might lead to more flexible rules on mobility and visas.

Coming to India’s FTA negotiations with the EU and the EFTA countries in Europe, Dr. Rao emphasised that the EU is a customs union and has a single market whereas the EFTA countries are not a customs union. When it comes to FTAs with EFTA countries, India has a separate arrangement for all the four nations. It is different in the case of the EU, which operates as a single economic bloc. The agreements between India and the EU were suspended in 2013 and then re-launched in 2021. Upon the re-launch, the FTA was broken down into three separate negotiations – free trade agreement in goods and services, Bilateral Investment Treaty (BIT) and a treaty on geographical indicators.  Dr. Rao stated that one of the problems with the EU is the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) and the bloc’s stringent sustainability agenda, which is creating issues in their domestic markets as well. As an example, she mentioned the import of Ukrainian grains that are causing problems in Poland and Czech Republic due to the EU’s stringent rules for its own member states as compared to its liberal rules for Ukraine. The CBAM provisions are mentioned in the European Green Deal, and the EU wants all its FTAs to have this provision. This would create further problems for international trade agreements as CBAM would make it very expensive to export products with a high carbon footprint like steel or aluminium.

Regarding dispute settlement, Dr. Rao pointed out that the EU has proposed setting up an independent investment court system as a part of the dispute settlement mechanism under the investment protection act, which is not confined to the WTO. India on the other hand, prefers the WTO framework. The India-EU FTA is at the second stage of negotiations and has a long way to go. However, according to her, until the issues surrounding CBAM, the BITs and domestic hurdles are not addressed, the FTA might not reach an agreement.

Reflecting on the EFTA FTA, Dr. Rao stated that it is an exceptional agreement. The USD 100 bn investment commitment mentioned in the agreement is not legally binding but is an explicit obligation on the EFTA countries to encourage their private players to invest in India over the next 15 years. Under this FTA, India has opened its markets but not its sensitive sectors. Dr. Rao also pointed out that since economic relations among these countries and blocs are excellent, TEPA could act as a catalyst for the UK, the EU and other FTAs and pave the way forward. TEPA is a win-win situation, simply because India has given the EFTA member states access to its markets in lieu of the USD 100 bn investment promise. Additionally, what makes it more exceptional is that if the investment promises are not adhered to, both parties can review the situation and withdraw trade concessions.

Lastly, Dr. Rao emphasised that all the FTAs are different and there cannot be one standard rule for all. Thus, countries need to negotiate keeping in mind the differences in situations.

Q & A Session

Gp Capt (Dr.) RK Narang (Retd.), enquired about the lost opportunities in FDIs for technology-oriented collaboration and trade imbalance with European countries like France. He also enquired about the service sector focused versus manufacturing sector focused approaches of Europe.Dr. Gulbin Sultana, inquired about specific Indian sectors which could benefit from the EFTA FTA and the impact of India’s exports to the EFTA nations.

Dr. Deepika Saraswat, questioned about Europe’s approach to negotiating FTAs considering the current global geopolitical developments.

Dr. Ashok Behuria, stressed on the protectionist approach of developing countries, the removal of tariff barriers on imports and its impact on domestic industries. He also inquired about the EU and the UK FTA negotiations with China as compared to those with India.

Dr. Anand Kumar, commented on increased imports from ASEAN as compared to India’s exports to the bloc. He also inquired about the type of investments that countries like Vietnam and Bangladesh are receiving.

Dr. Rajiv Nayan, observed that in a globalized world all countries (even the West) are protectionist in nature and try to safeguard their interests.

Dr. Swasti Rao responded to all the comments, questions and observations. She highlighted how FTAs help in facilitating trade between countries by increasing imports and exports. She concluded by stating that the EU FTA would not go forward in its current form as the CBAM provision seems completely against Indian economic interests. Thus, the EU needs to become more flexible in their sustainability agenda and the Green Deal.

Report has been prepared by Ms. Anusua Ganguly, Intern, Europe and Eurasia Centre, MP-IDSA.

Mr. Abhishek Verma, Research Analyst at the Manohar Parrikar Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses, made a presentation on “Khalistan Movement Overseas: A Case Study of Canada” at the Monday Morning Meeting held on 1 April, 2024. The session was chaired by Mr. Shantanu Sinha, Research Fellow, MP-IDSA. Ambassador Sujan R. Chinoy, Director General, MP-IDSA, Gp. Capt. (Dr) Ajey Lele (Retd.), Deputy Director General, MP-IDSA and the scholars of the Institute were in attendance.

Executive Summary

India’s relationship with Canada has been impacted by the recent surge in pro-Khalistan-related activities in Canada. The Government of India needs to follow a dual approach, keeping diplomatic engagement intact while putting pressure on the Canadian Government to address India’s security concerns.

Detailed Report

Mr. Shantanu Sinha began the meeting by mentioning the surge in pro-Khalistan activities in recent years. He further alluded to the recent developments in North America that have impacted India’s relations with the United States and Canada. Subsequently, he invited the Speaker to make his presentation.

Mr. Abhishek Verma began his presentation by noting India’s response to recent allegations made by Canada, which have been widely covered in the media and which led to diplomatic tension between the two sides. Subsequently, he classified pro-Khalistan and anti-India activities into three categories- protests, referendums and vandalism. Further, he explored the demographic dimension of the Sikh diaspora in Canada and traced the community’s migration from India. The migration of the Sikh community has taken place in four distinct phases.

The first phase started in 1897 when Sikhs in the British Indian Army migrated to Canada for the coronation ceremony of Queen Victoria. The migration of Sikh soldiers (especially those stationed overseas) became more prominent after the end of First World-War. This phase of migration was driven by aspirations for a better quality of life in Canada, in addition to the adverse fiscal and economic conditions prevailing in India.

The second phase of Sikh migration began during the 1950s and 1960s. In this phase, educated and trained professionals started migrating to western countries in pursuit of employment opportunities. Subsequently, the third phase commenced in the 1970s as a result of the agrarian transition brought about by the Green Revolution. The Green Revolution led to an increase in the number of large landowners, alongside a steep decline in the small and medium landholders. The semi-skilled, unemployed and educated youth from the distressed farming community started migrating overseas in search of opportunities. The fourth and the largest phase of migration took place during the phase of Punjab militancy. During this phase, Sikhs charged with terrorism, predominantly the youths, started migrating to Canada.  

Subsequently, Mr. Verma traced the genesis of the Khalistan movement overseas to religious mobilization in the 1950s. At the time, Sikh industrial workers in the United Kingdom started facing restrictions to profess their religion and to display their religious identity. To put forth their grievances, the Sikh community started organising themselves under Sikh Home Rule Movement led by Sardar Charan Singh Panchi. Following this, Mr. Verma elaborated on the evolution of Khalistan movement overseas from 1970s to late 1980s, including the bombing of Air India Flight 182 in 1985 that killed 329 passengers on board. With the end of militancy in Punjab in the mid-1990s, support for the Khalistan project also dwindled among the Sikh community overseas. Following the attacks on 11 September, 2001 in the United States and subsequent War on Terror, the United States, Canada and the United Kingdom banned terrorist groups like Babbar Khalsa International and International Sikh Youth Federation.

In the light of a major crackdown on their functioning, the pro-Khalistan elements in Western countries shifted their strategies and continued their secessionist activities through the politics of grievances and human rights. One of the prominent organisations that emerged as an international advocacy and human rights group was ‘Sikhs for Justice’. Since its inception, "Sikhs for Justice" has been engaged in frivolous anti-India activities, including filing cases against Indian leaders and celebrities in US courts as well as issuing security threats related to flight travel.

Further, Mr. Verma explained the Canadian Government’s approach towards pro-Khalistan and anti-India activities in Canada. At the outset, he asserted that Canada's approach toward pro-Khalistan activities was largely influenced by three overarching factors: Cold War politics, political freedom of expression, and vote bank politics. During the Cold War, successive Canadian Governments, irrespective of parties, provided least priority to India’s sensitivities. While tolerating anti-India activities on Canadian soil, they adopted a lenient approach towards pro-Khalistan elements. However, the political dynamics changed since the end of Cold War. Although India’s relationship with the west improved, in general, the Canadian Government maintained that the right to freedom of expression was important and advocating Khalistan's homeland in Punjab was not illegal. By providing a synoptic overview of the current political dynamics in Canada, Mr. Verma concluded that vote bank politics largely influences the current Justin Trudeau Government’s attitude towards the Khalistani movement.

The Government of India has responded proactively to such anti-India activities. In addition to consistently and explicitly taking up the issue of Khalistan with the Canadian Government, successive Indian Governments have also pursued extradition of Khalistani and anti-India elements. However, extradition of Khalistani terrorists has remained negligible even after the signing of an extradition treaty in 1987. Domestically, the Government of India has taken measures such as banning pro-Khalistani websites and social media platforms. Furthermore, amendments to the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act of 1967 have been implemented to designate individuals as terrorists and to streamline the process of investigation and asset seizure.

Questions and Comments

While appreciating the Speaker’s presentation, Mr Sinha invited the Director General and Deputy Director General to make their comments.

Ambassador Sujan R. Chinoy, DG, MP-IDSA, complimented Mr. Verma for making an informative presentation while emphasising the fact that it is not unusual for foreign communities to influence domestic policies. Further, he made observations concerning the adverse implications of migration during the Punjab militancy phase, as well as the non-secular tradition of western countries.

Additionally, scholars raised pertinent points concerning the ineffectiveness of the Extradition Treaty of 1987, the nexus between Pakistan and Canada, and the role of the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) in the Khalistan movement. Inquiries regarding recent events in Canada and the United States were also made.

During the Session, both the Speaker and Moderator addressed the questions raised by the scholars. Mr. Sinha provided insights into the legal and investigation-related complexities inherent in the extradition process. He underscored that the success of an extradition treaty hinges not only on legal intricacies but also on bilateral relations between the involved countries and political will. Regarding the role of the ISI, Mr. Sinha mentioned that the territorial boundaries of the fictitious state of “Khalistan” do not include Pakistani territories which have Sikh history, for example, Nankana Sahib, the birthplace of the first Sikh Guru, Guru Nanak Dev. This absence within the purported territorial extent of "Khalistan" was highlighted by Mr. Sinha as indicative of the ISI's involvement.

Report prepared by Ms. Julia Jose Thachil, Intern, Counter Terrorism Centre, MP-IDSA.

An MP-IDSA Fellow Seminar presentation by Mr. Om Prakash Das, Research Fellow, titled ‘A Study of the Political Economic Framework of ASEAN Media and India’s Media Representation’ was held on 15 March 2024. It was chaired by Ambassador Sujan R. Chinoy, Director General, Manohar Parrikar Institute for Defense Studies and Analyses (MP-IDSA). The External Discussants were Mr. Shashi Shekhar Vempati, former CEO of Prasar Bharati, and Professor Reena Marwah, Jesus and Mary College, Delhi University, and the Internal Discussants were Dr. Adil Rasheed, Research Fellow and Coordinator, Counter Terrorism Centre, and Ms. Shruti Pandalai, Associate Fellow, Southeast Asia and Oceania Centre, MP-IDSA. 

Executive Summary

The presentation covered the major five countries of the ASEAN bloc and how their media outlets played a significant role in building perceptions across borders within a given political-economic framework. It also evaluated the prevalence of negative news narratives about India sourced from international agencies, potentially influencing decision-making processes and public opinion. The presentation underscored the indispensable role of media in shaping cross-border perceptions and advocated nuanced analysis to comprehend India's representation in Southeast Asia and its ramifications for regional geopolitics and economics. 

Detailed Report

The Chairperson, Amb. Sujan Chinoy, introduced the Speaker and his topic of study regarding the political-economic framework of ASEAN media and India’s media representation. He emphasised that he considered the topic esoteric, but he expressed confidence that the eminent External and Internal Discussants would deconstruct the topic and requested Mr. Om Prakash Das to present his paper.

The Speaker, Mr. O.P. Das, introduced his topic in two parts, which come together as the conceptual framework of the political-economics of media for the five biggest economies of ASEAN nations. The Speaker discussed India and Southeast Asia’s warm historical relations, various issues about rule-based order, China's growing presence as an expansionist power in the ASEAN region, and how India has come up with the ‘Act East Policy’ and ‘Neighbourhood First’ Policy to deal with various issues concerning ASEAN nations.

The Speaker emphasised that the central premise of his research paper lies in understanding the origin and transformation of information into news and the role of information structure in shaping cross-border media representation. The presentation predominantly dealt with the five big economies of the ASEAN bloc, with five publications from five ASEAN countries: Indonesia, Thailand, Malaysia, the Philippines, and Singapore. Before he delved into the core of the presentation, the Speaker spoke about internal sources, external sources, and other variables like sentiments, whether the news is positive, apprehensive, negative, or neutral. Then the Speaker discussed in brief, the structure and political economy of media in Indonesia and Malaysia, where media ownership is concentrated among a limited number of conglomerates. An important consideration lies in the absence of anti-monopoly laws for regulating media ownership in Malaysia. The Speaker explained how the government has control over the licensing system to ensure pro-government policies, and the political sphere has consistently emphasised the necessity of media to operate within the framework of national development, asserting the need to guide the media in fulfilling its social responsibilities.

This was followed by a discussion on the media in Thailand. In Thailand, print media is essentially run by private players, but broadcast media is essentially dominated by the State. The Speaker emphasised how the constitution played a significant role in the transformation of Thai media from a government-oriented entity to a market-oriented private enterprise over a period of time.  This transition has realised a shift in media ownership patterns and the dynamic interplay between media owners and political structure.

The Speaker further spoke about the political-economic framework of media in Singapore, which operates within a constrained constitutional structure with the political class favouring a guided press that aligns with the government’s view. The Speaker went on to discuss the media in the Philippines, which underwent a political transformation post-1987, coming up with an ecosystem affording considerable leverage to the influential entities for fostering economic growth within the private sector. With time, political and economic ecosystems constructed a media landscape that had a good relationship between media owners and political elites. He also explained how the political structure in the Philippines has transformed into a democratic one.

The Speaker the discussed the most covered topics in Indonesia’s online version of the leading newspaper, which entailed geopolitics in India, India’s external affairs, defense news, and bilateral relations between India and Indonesia. The Speaker emphasised how international news agencies had given more than 74% of the news. He mentioned a sentiment analysis, which was positive for the Jakarta Post and international news agencies.

Mr. Das further discussed Malaysia’s most covered news topics, which entail India’s economy, geopolitics, and global economy. The Speaker emphasised how more than 67% of news is from different news agencies. 40.5% of the news is positive, and most of the positive news is covered by international news agencies.

The Speaker discussed Thailand's most covered news, which entailed geopolitics, India’s economy, and bilateral relations, and also mentioned that more than 73% of news is covered by international news agencies. He also emphasised how negative news is dominating Thailand’s newspaper (Bangkok Post).

The Speaker also discussed Singapore's most covered news, which entails geopolitics, India’s economy, domestic politics, and governance. He mentioned that in terms of sourcing, 74.4% of news is covered by international news agencies in Singapore’s ‘The Straits Times’. He also mentioned how negative sentiments are dominating in Singapore as well. He also brought up that the most positive news is being covered by international news agencies.

This was followed by a focus on the Philippines most-covered news, which entailed bilateral relations and geopolitics. He also emphasised how negative sentiment is dominating and that most of the positive news is covered by internal sources. The Speaker discussed that Malaysia carries most of the news from India; and the Philippines carries the least. Data suggest that these organizations have been disseminating news narratives that are largely sourced from international news agencies, which also means the perspectives and biases inherent in these international narratives have been propagated to the local audience without significant contextualization. The Speaker emphasised how the flow of information poses a significant challenge given its role in the decision-making process, particularly in the realm of global news dissemination. The Speaker emphasised the area to keep an eye on: the influence of news narratives on policymaking. The Speaker concluded the presentation with sentiment analysis, where he also emphasised the risk of overreliance on external news sources for coverage of Indian affairs in Southeast Asian media, highlighting potential consequences for information diversity, audience comprehension, and bilateral relations. The lack of indigenous reporting capabilities results in superficial and biased coverage based on external viewpoints, potentially impacting public discourse and relationships between countries.

The Chairperson, Amb. Chinoy started the discussion with a query and then opened the floor to External Discussants by introducing them to the audience. He mentioned Mr. Vempati’s immense experience in technology, media, and as CEO of Prasar Bharti, and Professor Marwah’s expertise in this area.

Mr. Shashi Shekhar Vempati

Mr. Vempati appreciated the Speaker for his presentation, made comments regarding the sample size being small, and appreciated the choice of subject. Mr. Vempati had a query regarding the analysis part and whether the news headlines are from editorials or other sections that are not that relevant. He also mentioned how English newspapers have a significant bias while reporting the news. He mentioned further the linkage of India’s representation with influencing policymaking, which is unclear.

Amb. Chinoy appreciated Mr. Vempati’s feedback and comments on the presentation and invited Professor Reena Marwah to make her comments.

Professor Reena Marwah

Prof. Marwah congratulated the Speaker for undertaking a detailed study that provides the reader with immense depth of understanding considering India’s engagement with Southeast Asia. She emphasised reconsidering the focus area and how the problem statement is well defined, but in the meantime, there is an ambiguity concerning how media content originating from India reaches the populace of these countries and how media narratives portray India’s relations with the region. She discussed how ASEAN as an entity is not distinguished from Southeast Asian countries in terms of the linguistic and cultural diversity of these countries. She also emphasised how the diaspora in the ASEAN bloc was not taken into consideration as part of the study. She explained that more attention needs to be paid to the context in which the study was undertaken and to the geopolitical happenings in the last six months. She had a query regarding the source of the news: whether colonized nations had a lineage towards news sources from their colonizers. She emphasised how a greater comparative perspective is needed and that much more focus on sentimental analysis is needed as sentimental analysis is subjective. She discussed how more focus on positive news is needed.

Amb. Chinoy thanked Prof. Marwah for her valuable inputs and emphasised how a similar kind of study is needed for other regions as well. Then he opened the floor for the Internal Discussants to make their comments.

Dr. Adil Rasheed

Dr. Adil Rashid began the discussion by appreciating the Speaker for selecting a very relevant study for his research. He said the paper is well structured and contains all the elements of research in terms of statement, data collection, and statistical data. Dr. Rashid also emphasised how ASEAN doesn’t feature much in the paper. He also had a query regarding how much public opinion and the press create public perception, which influences government policy, and why the focus has not been on socialist and one-party states, which have a significant Indian footprint. He discussed the understanding of the Myanmar press and their perception of India, which is missing in this piece. He also had a query regarding why one newspaper was picked and not more for countries like Indonesia and Singapore. He also made comments regarding qualitative aspects being missing in the analysis. Dr. Rashid had a query regarding the scale for measuring whether a story is negative or neutral.

Amb. Chinoy thanked Dr. Adil Rashid for his perceptive remarks and invited Ms. Pandalai to speak.

Ms. Shruti Pandalai

Ms. Pandalai appreciated the Speaker for taking up such an interesting subject. She said the paper would benefit from a little bit of restructuring wherein the concept can be explained briefly and more weightage could be given to the penetration of Indian news in Southeast Asia. She explained how one can conclude by having a few variables in hand. She emphasised how one had to understand the hardware and software aspects of it. The hardware would be why you picked up the examples and papers for the discussion, and the software is regarding ownership control, advertising and sponsorship, audience perception and reception, political and diplomatic impact, regulatory environment, and cultural and linguistic factors. She emphasised how the discussion on the paper needs to be more qualitative. More focus on how a story is chosen, framed, and received is needed. She discussed how there is a need to analyse the news to understand cognitive bias.

Following Ms. Shruti Pandalai’s comments, Amb. Chinoy gave his comments on how the paper needs to include not ASEAN but select Southeast Asian countries and the reason for the exclusion of Cambodia, Laos, and Myanmar in the paper. He also discussed how ‘The Straits Times’ and other publications in Singapore come out with microfilmed versions to archive the previous editions.

Amb. Chinoy opened the floor for questions and comments from MP-IDSA scholars.

Questions and Comments

Dr. P.K. Singh appreciated the Speaker for coming up with an interesting topic and made suggestions like limiting the study of media sentiments and defining how many papers from each country in terms of coverage had been taken up for the study. Dr. Anand Kumar suggested that more focus should be on the boundaries and limits of the survey. Mr. Niranjan Oak had a query regarding the criteria for choosing these countries and publications. He suggested that the study of the op-eds and editorials of these publications would be more beneficial to get a clear picture in terms of sentiments. He also had a query regarding the FDI rules for conglomerates in these countries and whether Indian conglomerates have the opportunity to buy stakes in those media houses to influence opinion in those countries. The Deputy Director, Gp. Capt. (Dr.) Dr. Ajey Lele appreciated the Speaker for an interesting paper and raised a query regarding the owners of those newspapers mentioned in the study and whether there have been any political visits from India or from the countries mentioned in the study in those six months, as these things can have a significant impact.

Amb. Chinoy had a query regarding the parameters of the determination of any news items as apprehensive. Gp. Capt. R.K. Narang raised a query regarding All India Radio’s [AIR] penetration in the Southeast Asia region.

All the queries were answered well by the Speaker, who also agreed to the suggestions given by External and Internal discussants.

Report was prepared by Ms. Julia Jose Thachil, Intern, Counter Terrorism Centre, MP-IDSA.