Publication Filter

It will not be an exaggeration to say that China poses the major challenge to India’s foreign policy and defence policy – which does not necessarily mean that a potential threat from China is imminent. Far from this, the Sino-Indian border of 3488 kms is by and large peaceful and tranquil, excepting occasional reports of border incursions. There are institutional mechanisms in place to meet any untoward incident on the border. Nevertheless, the security of the country, its territorial integrity and sovereignty warrant military preparedness to cope with any kind of eventualities.

• R N Das |
• July 2011 |
• Journal of Defence Studies

Civil society in general and the strategic community in particular must demand the release of documents pertaining to India’s security.

• Satish Nambiar |
• July 06, 2011 |
• IDSA Comments

An expanded role beyond its borders, including R2P, needs to be included in NATO’s concept to ensure its future relevance.

• Allyd Paynter |
• July 06, 2011 |
• IDSA Comments

A continuation of Australia’s ban on the sale of uranium to India is likely to hinder the goal of building a strategic partnership and exploring complementarities in the defence and maritime domain.

• Rajaram Panda |
• July 06, 2011 |
• IDSA Comments

Unless the NSG is willing to modify its guidelines to allow ENR transfers to India, India should not seek admission to NSG membeship even if offered.

• G. Balachandran |
• July 05, 2011 |
• Issue Brief

This article examines the strategic importance of Turkmenistan for India in respect of: energy resources; transit potential; and proximity to Afghanistan and Iran. It argues that India's economic potential, its liberal-democratic values, its pluralistic structure, secular fabric, military strength, strong financial, scientific and technological capabilities make it the most desirable partner for all the five Central Asian republics.

• Meena Singh Roy |
• July 2011 |
• Strategic Analysis

The 'Cheonan' incident has prodded and expedited the strategic comeback of the US in East Asia. The US offer to mediate the territorial disputes over islands and seabed minerals in the South China Sea at the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF) meeting in July 2010 has provoked harsh criticism from the Chinese. This US diplomatic move appears to be a premeditated one to substantially diminish the influence of China in the region, to re-secure its own strategic forward military presence and to signal that it is not yet time for China to acquire absolute control over this critical waterway.

• Preeti Nalwa |
• July 2011 |
• Strategic Analysis

K. Subrahmanyam, who passed away on 2 February 2011, has been hailed as one of India's leading strategic thinkers. Having joined the Indian Administrative Service (IAS) in 1950, his career graph turned out to be unique. He was one of those rare bureaucrats who came to be recognised more as a strategist than as a typical government official.

• Arvind Gupta |
• July 2011 |
• Strategic Analysis

Everything is geopolitical in Central Asia where the newly independent state (NIS) Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan are located. In other words, the major international political events in the region and most fateful political turns in regional developments bear, or are saturated with, geopolitical essence.

• Farkhod Tolipov |
• July 2011 |
• Strategic Analysis

I vividly remember my first encounter with K. Subrahmanyam in 1974 in Washington shortly after India had exploded its underground nuclear device. I was then country director for India in the state department and we had a lively and at times contentious debate over the wisdom of the test. As you would expect, Subbu stoutly defended India's action while scathingly criticising US policy. ‘Who do you Americans think you are, telling us what to do and trying to make us second class nuclear citizens’, I recall him saying.

• Dennis Kux |
• July 2011 |
• Strategic Analysis