Our 'Look-East' Policy

By M.S.N. Menon
Source: The Tribune
8 November 2002

Do we belong to the West or the East? I raise this issue once again because it is fundamental to our foreign policy. And for another reason too: because we seem to be uncertain.

We were once part of the West and the East. That was at the time of Ashoka. Then we became part of the West: that was when we were under foreign rule — both under Muslims and then under Europeans. In between, we were part of Asia. South East Asia was called an “extension” of India. And the Chinese called India the “Western heaven”. It was a haven and heaven for all Asians.

We did not call the Asian Relations Conference for nothing. China could not have called it. It was a reflex. It was a call for new linkages.

Nations cannot live in isolation. They must concert with others to promote common policies. Or because they belong to a common religion (OIC, for instance) or common civilisation (European Union). India’s link with Asia is civilisational.

An Indian can feel at home anywhere in Asia. And Asians can feel at home in India. It is easier to build relations on this foundation. With the West, we have no such advantage. There is nothing to build on except democracy — a common factor.

It was history which separated us from our neighbourhood. There is no reason why we should not come together again. These are days of economic associations. But even they have a common cultural background.

No peoples are as close to the Hindus culturally as the Buddhists of the world. There is a natural affinity between the two. Foreign relations are built on such affinities.

But India is not a pure Hindu country. It is a country of multiple identities. Our people do not know its political and cultural implications. We do not know how to govern such a country. This is a serious weakness. India has not set its mind on this problem.

Will Muslims and Christians of India appreciate a policy built on Hindu-Buddhist affinity? What if the Christians want to be closer to the Christians of the world and the Muslims, closer to the Muslims of the world? This is a legitimate question. But it has not been raised, nor has it been answered. We prefer not to raise inconvenient questions. But we are not insensitive to Muslim concerns. For example, our policy towards Israel is built on our concern for Muslim opinion. But this, I say, is totally unacceptable. We do not care for Christian opinion at home while dealing with the Christian world. So, why are we sensitive when it comes to Muslims? A multi-cultural society cannot base its policies on race and religion. It can lead to anarchy. We must go for a foreign policy based on class interest (as in America) or evolve a new policy.

A new policy must be based on what is unique about us. We are unique about our immense diversity.

I consider a multicultural society superior to a monocultural society. Indian Muslims and Christians are thus superior to the Muslims and Christians in the rest of the world. How? Because they learn to be more tolerant and because they are closer to the ideal world citizen. A man brought up in a monocultural society is narrow in outlook, intolerant and unfit as a world citizen.

The Indian Muslims and Christians must, thus, take on the role of leaders of their communities in the world — as vanguards of a new movement. That is how they can make themselves important. They should set new standards. This is how they will win the hearts and minds of the Hindus.

Nonalignment served India as a foreign policy option during the cold war. But today it is not of the same relevance. In any case, it cannot serve India’s interests. These are days of economic associations. And India must be part of a group to be effective. SAARC was such a group. But it has no future. The alternative is to join ASEAN and East Asia. Economists once hailed the “economic miracle” of the region and predicted a “Pacific century.” The “look-East” policy is the result of this line of thinking. It is based on sound logic.

India has already established close relations with Vietnam, and of late with Cambodia, Laos, Thailand and Mynmar under the Mekong-Ganga project. This is where the Buddhist angle comes in.

But India is also close to other ASEAN countries. It is true, during the cold war, India was not welcome in ASEAN, being a country close to China and Russia. But times have changed. Today ASEAN countries are not only keen to have India as a member, but also as a leader of the ten.

But why? this calls for a brief analysis. South East Asia is more unstable today than at any time before. Indonesia has emerged as the centre of Islamic terrorism. It has already lost East Timor because it did not know how to win over the Christians. The Philippines is going through a civil war. Malaysia is in a crisis over leadership change. And Thailand has a Prime Minister who is under trial for hiding his wealth. But China is what worries ASEAN countries the most largely because of the conflict with China over the South China sea. And there is a sizeable Chinese minority in almost all countries. Their loyalty is first of all to China.

As against these fears, there are positive factors. China is emerging as the largest Asian market. And it is the most low-cost country in Asia at present. No wonder ASEAN countries look to the Chinese market for their imports, too. India cannot offer them any of these advantages.

China has also offered a free trade area to the South East Asian countries. This is not without calculations. But the economic merits cannot be ignored. It is the political problems which stand in the way. What is more, Japan, America and India cannot be enthusiastic about China’s free trade proposal.

But what is cause for greater concern today is the growing frenzy of Islamic fundamentalism. It can disrupt the unity of the region and bring to naught the ASEAN experiment. It will be a disaster. And it will do no good to the Muslims. In fact, they will come out of it the worst.

Islamic terrorism has the potential to break up Malaysia, the Philippines and Indonesia. It has brought America back to the Philippines in great force. In short, if Islamic terrorism is not contained, the history of South East Asia will take a new course. And what that is going to be, one cannot predict. India has a vital interest in what happens there. Which is why there is increasing naval cooperation between India and America today. It is a kind of guarantee that the ASEAN region will remain stable. Both Singapore and Malaysia are keen on the Indian presence in the region.

The “look-East” policy is thus welcome to the region. But we have another interest: to promote multicultural societies in the region. In this the Muslims of India can play a crucial role.