INTELLIGENCE ARCHIVE

Asia

16 published analyses, newest first.

CHINAOCTOBER 16, 2026
01

How Chinese Activities Ecologically Impact Tibet and Downstream Regions

Executive Summary The Tibetan Plateau is the single most important source of fresh water in Asia. The Indus, Sutlej, Karnali, Gandaki, Koshi, Brahmaputra, Salween, Mekong, Yangtze and Yellow rivers all begin in its glaciers, snowfields, springs and high wetlands, and together they sustain well over a billion people across South, Southeast and East Asia. Since the People’s Republic of China took control of Tibet in 1950, this landscape has been treated less as a shared ecological commons and more as a frontier to be secured, engineered and extracted. Over the past two decades the pace of that transformation has accelerated sharply. Mainstream dams on the Yarlung Tsangpo, a mega hydropower project at the Great Bend in Medog, highways and railways driven through unstable valleys, fortified border settlements, expanding mining, the forced sedentarisation of nomads, and even large-scale attempts to modify the weather over the Plateau have all been pursued by Beijing with little transparency and almost no consultation with downstream countries. This report examines those activities against the background of the catastrophic flood of 26 August 2026, which tore through the Lhende Khola, Bhote Koshi and Trishuli corridors on the Nepal-Tibet border. By the end of September, Nepal Police were reporting 1,452 confirmed dead and 5,132 people listed as missing, while on the Chinese side Xinhua has held Tibet’s toll at 43 dead with 519 missing since 6 September. Hydropower plants, the Rasuwagadhi and Gyirong border crossings, dozens of bridges and long stretches of highway were wiped out, and Nepal’s Finance Minister estimated reconstruction costs at US$4 to 5 billion, close to a tenth of the national economy. The scientific consensus now places the trigger of the 2026 collapse on the Nepali flank of Langtang Lirung, and this report does not claim that any single Chinese project caused it. The disaster matters for a different reason. It came just thirteen months after the July 2025 flood that did originate in Tibet, from a supraglacial lake on the Purepu Glacier in Gyirong County, and it fits a long pattern of transboundary cryosphere disasters descending from the Plateau. More importantly, it exposed how little the downstream states know about what is happening upstream, how badly exposed critical infrastructure has been sited in the flood path, and how Beijing continues to treat hydrological and environmental information as a strategic asset rather than a humanitarian obligation. The central argument of this report is that Chinese policy on the Plateau is steadily raising the ecological risk carried by Tibetans and by the people of Nepal, India, Bangladesh and Bhutan, while denying them the information and voice they need to protect themselves. The report closes with a set of practical recommendations for downstream governments, regional bodies and the wider international community. Introduction: The Water Tower Under Management The Plateau is often called the Third Pole because it holds the largest store of ice outside the polar regions. It is also warming faster than most of the planet. Assessments of the Hindu Kush Himalaya have found that glaciers in the region disappeared 65 percent faster in the 2010s than in the the preceding decade, and that on current emissions pathways as much as 80 percent of present glacier volume could be gone by the end of the century. Even if warming is held below 2°C, a loss of roughly a third to a half of the ice is projected. More recent observations show that ice loss rates across the region have roughly doubled since 2000. Climate change is a global problem, and China alone cannot be blamed for it. But how a state manages a warming mountain system is very much a national choice. A government that recognised the fragility of the Plateau would slow down, map its hazards openly, share its data freely, and involve both local Tibetan communities and downstream neighbours in decisions about large projects. Beijing has done almost the opposite. It has treated the Plateau as an engine for national energy supply, a buffer for territorial security and a laboratory for top-down environmental engineering. Tibetans have had little say in any of this, and countries downstream have had even less. The consequences of this approach are visible at three levels. On the Plateau itself, rivers, wetlands, grasslands and pastoral communities have been reshaped by dams, drainage, mining and resettlement. Along the Himalayan border, construction for trade and military access has pushed roads, ports and settlements into narrow valleys exposed to floods and slope failures. And downstream, in Nepal, India and Bangladesh, people living along glacier-fed rivers face growing hazards with less and less warning. The August 2026 Flood: What Happened At about 8:37 in the morning on 26 August 2026, a very large slab of fractured rock and glacier ice broke away from the north face of Langtang Lirung, a peak of over 7,200 metres close to the border. The mass fell roughly 1,200 metres into the valley of the Lhende Khola, the stream that marks the boundary between Nepal’s Rasuwa district and Gyirong County in Tibet. It shattered into a mixture of pulverised rock, ice and meltwater, picked up loose sediment from a channel that had already been stripped and widened by the previous year’s flood, and became a debris flow of extraordinary speed. The energy released was strong enough to register on seismometers in the United States and Germany as the equivalent of a magnitude 5 earthquake, and early reports did in fact describe it as a quake. The surge smashed into the confluence at Rasuwagadhi and Gyirong Port, then roared down the Bhote Koshi and Trishuli through Timure, Syabrubesi and Betrawati. At Galchhi, about 100 kilometres downstream, the river rose around nine metres within half an hour. Bodies were later recovered as far away as Chitwan and Nawalparasi, which tells its own story about the reach of the flood. Nepal’s disaster authority classified two districts, Rasuwa and Nuwakot, as severely affected and put the number of people impacted at roughly 1.6 million. The damage to infrastructure was immense. Around

A
AdminAnalyst
arrow_outward
Importance of India and East Asia Cooperation in Higher Education, Research and Development, and the Skilling of Labour
ASIAAUGUST 8, 2026
02

Importance of India and East Asia Cooperation in Higher Education, Research and Development, and the Skilling of Labour

Importance of India and East Asia Cooperation in Higher Education, Research and Development, and the Skilling of Labour Prof. Tridivesh Singh Maini Assistant Professor of Diplomatic Practice & Assistant Dean (International Collaborations) Introduction In the past thirty years, India and the countries in East and South East Asia have strengthened their economic ties. Within the current geopolitical and economic context, a number of ASEAN member states, as well as countries in East Asia, have started channeling their investments in a limited number of priority areas, with a particular focus on the semiconductors and related domains. In recent years, India’s semiconductor industry has seen an influx of investment from Japanese, South Korean and Taiwanese companies. As a result, the industrial landscape in a number of Indian states is undergoing transformation, and Indian state governments are proactively engaging in efforts to secure foreign technological investment. However, financial investments alone will not strengthen these bonds. The depth of the partnership will depend on the collaboration across multiple research and development initiatives and the increase of joint ventures and academic partnerships between Indian and East and South East Asian universities. Demographic Changes and the Need for Skilled Labor East Asian countries are experiencing population decline and have an ageing population. One of the outcomes of this trend is the lack of skilled professionals, which is especially evident in the semiconductor and advanced manufacturing industries. As a response to this, universities in Japan, South Korea, Taiwan and other ASEAN countries, including Thailand, have started providing scholarships to foreign students in semiconductor manufacturing related programs. Both Indian students and educational institutions have the potential to take advantage of these offerings. The same demographic pressures have caused some of these governments to loosen their work visa requirements. Of these countries, India, due to its younger workforce and larger technical education system, has the potential to fill the gap the most. Why State Level Partnerships are Important India’s state governments must engage more with Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, and the ASEAN economies, rather than allowing the central government to take the lead. It is at these regional and industrial levels where the most opportunity and benefit is derived. Japan has begun to set these frameworks with Meghalaya and Assam by offering training and skill development programs in preparation for employment in the healthcare sector. This more adaptable and flexible approach can be developed for other states and industries. This is more important and necessary in regions which have primarily sought education and employment in the Anglosphere. A prime example of this is Punjab. Many of Punjab’s students have been denied Post Graduation Work Permit applications by Canada. Many state politicians, including Sukhbir Singh Badal, president of the Shiromani Akali Dal and former Deputy Chief Minister, and senior Bharatiya Janata Party leader Sunil Jakhar, have asked the central government to take this issue to Canada. With increasing restrictions and regulations on student and work visas in the Anglosphere, Punjab should consider looking towards the East and pursuing their training and skill development programs with Japan and South Korea. Andhra Pradesh as a Case Study Andhra Pradesh illustrates a particularly developed model of what this type of engagement can entail. During a recent trip to the state, a Taiwanese delegation had a meeting with Chief Minister Chandrababu Naidu, and expressed their desire to grow their presence in the state. The delegation included Delta Electronics, BenQ, CTBC Bank, DIMERCO, Sheng Huei Tech, Tech Top Engineering, K.S. Terminals, and Sandsun. The Chief Minister stated the priorities of the state in electronics, semiconductors, and IT, and cited the state’s connectivity, logistics, and adaptive policies as options for an investor’s assurance to commit. The delegation also had a separate meeting with the state’s Minister of IT and HR Development, Nara Lokesh, and stressed the importance of equipping the youth of Andhra Pradesh with job prospects in Taiwan. They discussed training programs incorporated with industry, educational collaborations, exchanges of students and faculty, industry certifications, as well as Mandarin training. One month prior, Lokesh made a similar proposition to Seong Dong Lee, Chief Executive Officer of the Korean company APACT, which specializes in equipment for the testing and packaging of semiconductors, during

A
AdminAnalyst
arrow_outward
Chinese Cyber-Enabled Narrative Operations Around India’s 2026 Student Protests
CHINAJULY 29, 2026
03

Chinese Cyber-Enabled Narrative Operations Around India’s 2026 Student Protests

We’re pleased to share Red Lantern Analytica’s latest analytical report, “Chinese Cyber-Enabled Narrative Operations Around India’s 2026 Student Protests.” Based on open-source evidence, the report examines how sections of the Chinese digital information ecosystem reframed India’s domestic student protests for Chinese audiences through narrative amplification, political framing, and indirect encouragement. The assessment documents how narratives evolved across platforms including WeChat, Weibo, Xiaohongshu, Guancha, Huxiu, China News Network, and Knews, highlighting recurring themes such as governance failure, democratic decline, political instability, and anti-India stereotyping. We welcome constructive feedback and informed discussion from the strategic affairs, cybersecurity, and policy research communities. To Download PDF of this report click here

A
AdminAnalyst
arrow_outward
China–Nepal Border Re Survey: Cartographic Invasion or Strategic Overture
ASIAJUNE 12, 2025
04

China–Nepal Border Re Survey: Cartographic Invasion or Strategic Overture

In early 2025, China and Nepal launched a comprehensive re survey of their 1,389-kilometre Himalayan border—the first such exercise since 2011. The joint effort, conducted under the provisions of the 1963 Boundary Protocol and revitalized through a bilateral understanding reached in June 2024, is framed as a technical necessity. Yet, the geopolitical undertones cannot be ignored. The question now being asked in Kathmandu, New Delhi, and beyond is whether this effort marks a mere cartographic modernization—or a more calculated strategic overture by Beijing. This re survey has emerged from the revival of the long-dormant Joint Expert Group, a bilateral mechanism that had fallen silent since 2006. Its recent activation comes with renewed energy. With both governments formally agreeing to resume ground work, teams of technicians equipped with satellite imagery, GPS instruments, drones, and digital cartographic tools began conducting on-site inspections of boundary pillars in early 2025. Chinese mapping experts, who possess a far superior technological edge, have been working alongside Nepali surveyors, ostensibly under the spirit of mutual cooperation. However, Nepalese stakeholders have expressed concern about the asymmetric nature of this collaboration—particularly the fear that technical superiority may translate into quiet leverage over physical terrain. For Kathmandu, the official narrative is one of modernization and clarity. Nepalese authorities have emphasized the survey’s potential to resolve minor discrepancies, update outdated maps, and facilitate future infrastructure planning in remote Himalayan regions. This includes better management of border crossings and improved access for development projects that traverse difficult topography. More importantly, government representatives point to the need to regularize trans-Himalayan trade corridors, particularly as Nepal’s reliance on China for trade diversification grows in the aftermath of its ruling leaders favouring Beijing due to political likeness. Despite this, the re survey has reawakened some longstanding concerns. Several areas remain disputed, notably the location of pillar No. 57 in Dolakha, discrepancies in Humla district, and disagreements in the Gorkha region. In these places, uncertainty over the precise boundary line leaves room for friction—not only between locals and authorities but also in terms of international diplomacy. A more recent concern emerged in June 2025, when pillar No. 71 near Kimathanka in Sankhuwasabha was buried due to a monsoon-triggered landslide. The replacement of this marker—how, where, and by whom it is reinstalled—will serve as a litmus test of the spirit of joint management or potential unilateral overreach. What complicates the matter is the simultaneous rise of large-scale Chinese infrastructure projects. The re survey is occurring alongside China’s push to integrate Nepal into its Trans-Himalayan Multi-Dimensional Connectivity Network. This includes the much-publicized Gyirong–Kathmandu railway line, for which feasibility studies are already underway and projected for completion in 2026. The re survey, by refining boundary coordinates and validating terrain assessments, supports these infrastructure plans both technically and diplomatically. Analysts suggest that the mapping exercise serves more than just border clarity—it is foundational to unlocking routes for Chinese investment and logistical presence in Nepal’s northern districts. Public perception in Nepal mirrors this ambivalence. While many welcome the potential for improved connectivity and development, skepticism persists. A recent poll conducted in Kathmandu in March 2025 found that 61 percent of respondents viewed trade and investment as the most valuable aspect of Nepal–China relations, but only 42 percent considered the bilateral relationship “strong,” compared to 57 percent who felt similarly about ties with India. This suggests that while Beijing’s material contributions are appreciated, they have yet to foster the same level of political or emotional trust that India retains. The political class in Kathmandu is therefore walking a tightrope—eager to harness the benefits of Chinese cooperation without ceding perceptual or territorial ground. India, meanwhile, is watching closely. The Sino–Nepali re survey has come at a time when Kathmandu’s own boundary tensions with New Delhi—particularly in the Kalapani–Lipulekh region—remain unresolved. Any perceived tilt toward Chinese narratives, especially if tied to digital mapping or the reinterpretation of pillar positions, could exacerbate tensions with India. New Delhi’s strategic concern centers around whether this re survey offers China more than data: it may offer leverage in the form of terrain familiarity, the legitimization of strategic infrastructure, and a deepening presence in Nepal’s northern periphery. Further complicating the picture is the issue of transparency. China’s prowess in geospatial intelligence, artificial intelligence, and surveillance capabilities is widely acknowledged. The concern within Nepal’s civil society and policy circles is that unless both parties are operating with equal access to mapping data, satellite imagery, and interpretive tools, the process might inadvertently cede informational sovereignty to Beijing. Nepalese lawmakers have demanded that any boundary-related agreements, particularly the proposed “Boundary Management System,” be formally ratified through Parliament and anchored in national law, not merely as memoranda. The public release of digital maps, field updates, and raw survey data has been requested by multiple transparency advocates, yet the details remain mostly behind closed doors. How Kathmandu and Beijing manage these sensitivities in the coming months will be telling. For example, the fate of the buried pillar in Kimathanka could set a precedent. If replaced jointly with public oversight and documented GPS coordinates made available to Nepal’s Survey Department and legal entities, it may reinforce mutual trust. However, if Chinese teams act independently or if mapping data is withheld or quietly revised, it would bolster narratives of cartographic intrusion. Similarly, if the Boundary Management System is passed through Nepal’s Parliament with full legal scrutiny, it will be seen as a sovereign endorsement. But any attempt to institutionalize new mapping standards through executive fiat may spark opposition, especially if linked to infrastructural projects involving land reallocation. What bears close watching is how this re survey becomes functionally integrated into Nepal’s broader policy trajectory. Should the updated boundary lines be used to expedite approvals for Chinese-built infrastructure—roads, railways, power corridors, or data cables—it will signal that the cartographic effort is not isolated, but deeply enmeshed in Beijing’s regional strategy. If those infrastructures are followed by increased security presence, surveillance installations, or joint patrol agreements, it may well amount to a silent shift in influence along

TR
Team Red Lantern AnalyticaAnalyst
arrow_outward
China’s Deceptive Playbook on Pledges and Provocations
ASIAJUNE 6, 2025
05

China’s Deceptive Playbook on Pledges and Provocations

In international diplomacy, consistency and good faith are the bedrock of trust. Only few powers have drawn as much scrutiny and criticism as the People’s Republic of China for its actions in disputed maritime and territorial zones. Boasting rapid economic growth, expanding military reach, and a growing appetite for regional leadership, Beijing has positioned itself as a global power. Beneath the veneer of “peaceful rise” rhetoric lies a consistent pattern of diplomatic duplicity: agreements signed in ink that are later eroded by deployments, infrastructure projects, and legal dismissals. A pattern has emerged over the past two decades in which China systematically disregards international judgments, bilateral agreements, and multilateral frameworks, asserting dominance through coercion, strategic infrastructure build-up, and selective adherence to legal norms. China has exhibited a pattern of calculated duplicity using diplomacy to stall while militarizing on the ground. This article examines major incidents where China promised peace but pursued power, unpacking the motivations, fallout, and wider geopolitical implications. 1. The Scarborough Shoal Standoff (2012) In mid-2012, the Philippine Coast Guard and Chinese maritime surveillance vessels became locked in a standoff at Scarborough Shoal, a traditional fishing ground well within Manila’s internationally recognized Exclusive Economic Zone. Initially, both parties agreed—even under U.S. auspices—to withdraw and negotiate under the umbrella of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). But when Philippine boats pulled back, China seized the initiative: coast guard cutters moved in, establishing a blockade that prevented Filipino fishermen from returning. This maneuvers epitomized a “two-step” approach: publicly pledge cooperation, then exploit any opening to cement control. By cloaking its actions in diplomatic engagement, Beijing avoided international sanctions or direct military confrontation. In the weeks that followed, reports surfaced of Chinese vessels physically barring Filipino boats and harassing crews. The sudden conversion of Scarborough Shoal into a de facto Chinese outpost left Manila scrambling to protect its sovereign rights while grappling with domestic outrage over the loss of vital livelihood zones. Regionally, ASEAN’s credibility waned as smaller claimant states questioned whether the bloc’s consultative mechanisms possessed any real teeth. 2. Disregard for the ICA Ruling (2016) Perhaps the most blatant example of China’s defiance came in 2016 when the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) in The Hague ruled overwhelmingly in favour of the Philippines in its case against China. In its landmark judgement the court held that China’s historic “Nine-Dash Line” held no legal standing, and its island-building, fishing restrictions, and hydrocarbon activities violated Philippine sovereign rights. Instead of accepting defeat, China branded the decision “null and void,” refusing to participate in the proceedings or implement any of the tribunal’s directives. Beijing’s dismissal of the PCA ruling underscored a cold calculation: international courts cannot enforce judgments without the cooperation of the losing party. By defiantly pressing on with land reclamation and military deployments, China signaled that its strategic objectives trumped any external adjudication. The immediate consequence was a profound erosion of faith in peaceful dispute resolution; Southeast Asian states, once hopeful that legal avenues might counter China’s heft, grew wary of challenging Beijing in court. Globally, allies of the United States and regional middle powers—Japan, Australia, and India—found themselves compelled to shore up “rules-based” coalitions, fearing a world where powerful states could ignore multilateral judgments with impunity. 3. Militarising the Spratly and Paracel Islands (2002) Under the 2002 ASEAN–China Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea, signatories vowed to exercise “self-restraint” and avoid “actions that would complicate or escalate disputes,” specifically militarization. Nonetheless, starting in earnest around 2013, China embarked on an unprecedented land reclamation campaign across the Spratly and Paracel archipelagos. Satellite imagery revealed dredged sand and coral piling up to form artificial islets, which soon sprouted airstrips capable of handling fighter jets, hardened aircraft shelters, radar installations, and surface-to-air missile batteries. The strategic logic was unmistakable: transform outposts into “unsinkable aircraft carriers” that could extend China’s anti-access/area-denial (A2/AD) envelope hundreds of miles from its mainland coasts. Such installations not only consolidate Beijing’s claims but also pose a direct challenge to U.S. naval operations tasked with maintaining freedom of navigation. ASEAN members fiercely protested this violation of the 2002 pledge, but with no formal enforcement mechanism in the South China Sea regime, China’s island-fortresses became a new status quo. Consequently, the U.S. ramped up its Freedom of Navigation Operations (FONOPs), sailing warships within 12 nautical miles of contested features, while Quad partners (Australia, India, Japan, and the U.S.) began coordinating patrols and exercises to reassure Southeast Asian states of their security commitments. 4. The ADIZ in the East China Sea (2013) In November 2013, Beijing announced an Air Defense Identification Zone that encompassed nearly all of the East China Sea, including the Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands—administered by Japan but claimed by China. Without prior notice to Tokyo or Washington, China required all foreign civilian and military aircraft to submit flight plans and identify themselves, or face “emergency defensive measures.” This abrupt extension of airspace claims breached existing Sino-Japanese crisis-management arrangements designed to prevent accidental escalation. China’s motive was to assert aerial sovereignty over an increasingly contested space and test both Japan’s resolve and the U.S. alliance pledge. Predictably, Tokyo rejected the ADIZ and, with U.S. encouragement, continued its own flights without filing into Beijing’s identification system. U.S. B-52 bombers deliberately traversed the zone without notifying Beijing, underscoring both Washington’s rejection of unilateral revisionism and its commitment to uphold open skies. The incident entrenched mutual suspicion: Japan accelerated defense modernization, deepening cooperation with the U.S., Australia, and India, while China’s rhetoric glorified the ADIZ as a symbol of its “new stature,” further polarizing Northeast Asia. 5. The Haiyand Shiyou 981 Oil Rig Incident (2014) April 2014 witnessed another pivotal showdown when China deployed the Haiyang Shiyou 981 deep-water drilling rig into waters within Vietnam’s Exclusive Economic Zone. Though Hanoi and Beijing had once pursued joint hydrocarbon exploration, Beijing’s unilateral placement of the rig violated both the spirit and letter of their prior understanding. Accompanied by a flotilla of Chinese coast guard and naval

TR
Team Red Lantern AnalyticaAnalyst
arrow_outward
Narco-Arms Trafficking from Afghanistan
ASIAAPRIL 10, 2024
06

Narco-Arms Trafficking from Afghanistan

Abstract Arms and drug trafficking have long been associated with Afghanistan and have been intricately entwined with the country’s turbulent past. Arms smuggling in Afghanistan dates back to resistance against British colonial forces in the 19th century. Afghan tribes relied on clandestine networks to obtain weapons from neighbouring regions like Persia and Central Asia, crucial for their fight for independence. This tradition persisted into the 20th century, remaining significant despite Afghanistan’s independence from British Forces, due to its rugged terrain and porous borders facilitating clandestine activities. However, since the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan and the US-Pakistan involvement in the war, arms smuggling further flourished, with war groups receiving weapons through Pakistan. Whereas, the scale of production of Opium was relatively small in Afghanistan before the Soviet invasion and there was not a well-established narco-smuggling network as is seen in later decades. However, in the 1960s and 1970s, the demand for Afghan drugs grew beyond regional markets of Middle East, Central Asia, and Southeast Asia. The narcotics phenomenon peaked during the country’s civil war and became an infamous source of income for the group during the Taliban’s rule in 1996. Since then, Afghanistan has suffered from these two ominous phenomena. After 2001 and the US invasion of Afghanistan, several measures were taken to combat these phenomena, but the scope was so strong that despite the presence of the United States and NATO, it did not stop it at all. The United States spent 9 billion dollars in counternarcotic operations in Afghanistan since 2002. (HEARING, 2020) Now that the Taliban have once again come to power, the question has been on the minds of many experts: will drug and arms trafficking, which are important sources for the survival of terrorist groups in the region and the world, increase? Drugs trafficking As many experts argue that there is a deep and growing relationship between terrorism and drugs. In fact, in the cultivation of narcotics, large networks of trafficking and its refinement are the main sources of funding for the war economies of terrorist groups. For this reason, drug cultivation is common in countries where terrorism has deep roots and is prone to violence and extremism. Historically, the British East India Company monopolized the opium trade in Asia during the 18th century to fund its expansionist goals with tightly controlled production levels to maintain high prices. Facing competition from Turkey and Persia in the Chinese market, Britain increased opium cultivation in Bengal and Bihar. To meet demand, cultivation expanded to Afghanistan during British friendly Emir Abdur Rahman Khan’s rule (1880-1901). Opium produced in Afghanistan was exported to China, India, and Russia. ( UNODC , 2008) The Mahaban Mountains along the Afghanistan-Pakistan border became a prime cultivation area. Opium trade flourished in British India’s North-West Frontier Province (now Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan), where it remains prevalent even today. Although opium production was limited to the Mahaban Mountains, this period marked Afghanistan’s first time ever formal engagement in the opium trade under Abdur Rahman’s government. (Winston, 2022) The “Golden Crescent” region, which includes Afghanistan, southwestern Pakistan and southeastern Iran, is one of the major geographical areas for the cultivation, packaging, refining and trafficking of narcotics especially Opium, Hashish and Heroin, which plays a major role in the rotation of this security phenomenon. (Sen, 1992) More recently, the methamphetamine industry has also intensified in Afghanistan. Before Afghanistan entered a cycle of violence, war, and terrorism, other countries like Colombia, Mexico & Myanmar were major producers of narcotics, known as the “crescent zone,” which produced and trafficked a significant portion of the world’s narcotics. Although narcotics cultivation in Afghanistan has a long history, the beginning of the armed struggle against Soviet aggression in Afghanistan, the civil war within the Mujahidin and the emergence and rise of great warlords mark the peak of the cultivation, refining and major smuggling of opium. This was the time when warlords gained more power and controlled a particular region in the country such as the Northern Alliance in the north and Haqqani network, Hezb-e-Islami and the Taliban group in the Southeast. When the old Mujahidins were ousted in the midst of a civil war fighting against more extremist, harsh and violent version with an Islamic ideology i.e. Taliban in 1994, drug production and trafficking peaked and the Taliban’s birth coincided with the stormy birth of the narcotics phenomenon on a large scale. (Peters, 2009) Furthermore, in the 1980s, the CIA’s support of the Afghan mujahidin resulted in a significant increase in opium production in Afghanistan. This surge in production facilitated the expansion of heroin laboratories in Pakistan, which became linked to the global market. By 1989, after a decade of substantial CIA covert operations in the region, Afghanistan emerged as the world’s largest supplier of illicit heroin, with Pakistan following closely as the second largest supplier. (Haq, 1996) Fig. 1: Afghanistan’s Opium Poppy cultivation from 1996 to 2006 (in hectares) Source: Strategic Studies Institute, U.S (Glaze, 2007) During the 1970s, Pakistan led Afghanistan in opium production, but Afghanistan rapidly caught up in the 1980s. Following the Soviet invasion, some Afghan farmers returned to poppy cultivation. The occupation further fueled an illicit economy due to Soviet policies that aimed to starve the mujahidin by destroying food crops. The disruption of agricultural production, combined with neglect from the government and a lack of support from Western and Muslim countries, led to the abandonment of legal agriculture and a turn to opium cultivation in some areas. Heroin profits were used to purchase weapons and food in Pakistan. In 1980s, reports emerged of a drug trade route through Pakistan-occupied Kashmir from the adjacent NWFP that went up the Karakoram Pass into Chinese controlled Xinjiang and Tibet, then down into Nepal; where nearly all the opium was sent to India. As there were no effective controls on the India-Nepal border, the drug supply could pass through to a port for shipment abroad. (Haq, 1996) Opium and narcotics funded the Taliban’s war economy. Although the consumption and sale of intoxicants are forbidden in Islam,

TR
Team Red Lantern AnalyticaAnalyst
arrow_outward
2023 in Review for the People’s Republic of China
CHINAJANUARY 3, 2024
07

2023 in Review for the People’s Republic of China

For People’s Republic of China (PRC), 2023 has been a roller-coaster ride. A few recurring themes were present in the Chinese politics and Foreign Policy approach like the Human Rights violations in Xinjiang and Hong Kong, the Trade war with Western countries, the stand on Russia-Ukraine and Israel-HAMAS war, etc. Here we try to break down a few of these events throughout the year: Downward economic trend On 5 December, Moody’s downgraded its outlook for Chinese sovereign bonds from stable to negative, citing concerns over China’s ability to repay government borrowing. The credit rating agency highlighted the ripple effects of a crisis in the property sector, warning that Beijing might need to bail out local and regional governments and state-owned enterprises struggling with rising debts. This move highlights global concerns about the level of debt in the world’s second-largest economy and suggests that China’s credit rating could be cut in the future. This came amid the reports in August that the Chinese Economy is slipping into deflation as consumer prices fell year on year in July for the first time in over two years. The decline is attributed to slowing domestic spending and weaker demand for Chinese products globally. Lesser domestic spending can be attributed to the decline in population. According to the reports released by the government in August, China’s fertility rate had hit an estimated record low of 1.09 in 2022, making it the lowest among countries with a population over 100 million. The working-age population contracted by over 40 million between 2019 and 2022. The decline in the economy prompted Evergrande, China’s heavily indebted property developer, to file for bankruptcy protection in a US court under Chapter 15 of the US bankruptcy code. The company’s collapse fears sent shockwaves through China’s economy. The step came as China’s property sector continued to face challenges, impacting economic growth. Another shock came from Country Garden, once China’s largest developer by revenue, which faced the risk of default. Until August, the company had missed two-dollar bond payments last week and has until early September to address concerns of a potential default. This negative economic trend prompted the Chinese government to suspend the release of youth unemployment figures when youth unemployment had hit a record high of 21.3% in June, citing the need to “further improve and optimize labour force survey statistics.” In contrast to its declining trend, according to news reports in November, China has become the world’s largest debt collector, with the money owed to the country from developing nations surging to between $1.1 trillion and $1.5 trillion. However, as the debts to Chinese lenders have mounted, the number of suspended or cancelled projects increased which raised concerns in China about the risk of defaults. Chinese lenders are also increasing penalties for late repayments, although this move may alienate borrowers. Human Rights Violations in Hong Kong, Xinjiang and Tibet On 18 January, Hong Kong police raided a Lunar New Year shopping fair, arresting six people for selling a “seditious” book related to the 2019 anti-government protests, just days before the celebrations. The individuals, aged between 18 and 62, were accused of producing and publishing a “seditious book about a series of riots that occurred in Hong Kong from June 2019 to February 2020.” These actions spread terror and are part of the ongoing political crackdown on freedom of speech and expression in Hong Kong under the national security law. Then in February, United Kingdom’s MPs through an inquiry by the All-Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) on Hong Kong accused HSBC Bank of complicity in human rights abuses against Hong Kong residents by siding with Chinese authorities and denying pension payouts to those who fled the authoritarian crackdown. The APPG argues that HSBC’s decision has hindered Hong Kong residents from establishing new lives in the UK and deems the bank complicit in human rights abuses. On 4 March, three former members of a Hong Kong organization that arranged annual vigils commemorating China’s Tiananmen Square crackdown were convicted of failing to comply with a national security police request for information. The group disbanded in September 2021, and the charges against its former members were part of a broader crackdown on pro-democracy activists and organizations in Hong Kong. Later that same month, Hong Kong’s national security police arrested two men for possessing children’s books deemed seditious. The arrests were the first known incidents where individuals were detained for possessing books considered seditious which raised concerns about vague definitions of sedition charges in Hong Kong. On 24 July, Hong Kong’s national security police detained the daughter, son, and daughter-in-law of activist Elmer Yuen, accusing them of aiding wanted activists. Elmer Yuen is accused of encouraging foreign countries to impose sanctions on Hong Kong officials and promoting Hong Kong’s self-determination. The arrest was part of a broader crackdown on pro-democracy figures in exile. Authorities in Hong Kong had issued bounties for the arrest of eight activists based overseas, including the UK, US, and Australia. Not only Hong Kong, there are Human Rights violations in Xinjiang as well. On 24 September, Rahile Dawut, a prominent Uyghur professor specializing in Uyghur folklore and traditions, who disappeared six years ago, was sentenced to life in prison by Chinese authorities for “endangering state security.” Dawut is one among more than 300 Uyghur intellectuals detained since 2016, while an estimated 1.5 million Uyghurs have been held in re-education camps. On 13 October, a report based on a four-year long investigation by the Outlaw Ocean Project revealed the extensive use of forced labour in China’s government-backed fishing industry, including the deployment of Uyghur forced labour in seafood processing facilities. The investigation sheds light on the appalling conditions faced by workers on China’s distant-water fishing fleet and underscores the large-scale use of Uyghur forced labour in seafood processing. The report warns that Beijing’s persecution of Uyghurs has evolved, with some being moved into forced labour after facing global scrutiny. In another case in November, a Uyghur filmmaker Ikram Nurmehmet alleged that he

TR
Team Red Lantern AnalyticaAnalyst
arrow_outward
List of China’s aggressive behavior both across the Himalayas and Taiwan Strait in recent years (since 2019)
ASIAMARCH 3, 2023
08

List of China’s aggressive behavior both across the Himalayas and Taiwan Strait in recent years (since 2019)

The larger geo-political landscape has witnessed significant changes with the rise of China dividing the world into two spheres — countries siding with China’s domestic order through alliances and partnerships, or countries reacting to its aggression by joining international security mechanisms to control its hegemonic tendencies. In recent times China has forced countries, especially in the Indo-Pacific region and South Asia to rethink their security interests because of its aggressive and encroaching behaviour. In the Himalayan region China has had a rocky relationship with India and Tibet (Chinese autonomous region) since late 1950s preceding to the Sino-Indian War in 1962 and 1967. With these events China in the Himalayan region has always had a presence of a sleeping dragon, lest it awake. Across the Taiwan strait, China has been at crossroads since Taiwan broke away from China in 1945. China has vehemently opposed the ‘two China’ system by not recognising Taiwan’s sovereignty because it believes it has a historical claim over this extended territory and wants to reinforce its dominance by expansion. Since 2019 China has been stealthily manoeuvring both these contentious geopolitical regions in order to reach its goal of displacing America as a global powerhouse and pursue the Chinese government global goal of building “a modern socialist country that is prosperous, strong, democratic, culturally advanced and harmonious” till 2049, set under the ODI’s Global China 2049 initiative. By looking at the ways it has manifested itself across the Himalayan, Taiwan and Indo-Pacific, we can figure our the trends of China’s foreign policy and understand how it sees the world. In the first part, China’s historical claim of the South China Sea under the nine-dash line theory saw territorial disputes occurring with ASEAN countries (Brunei, Cambodia, Indonesia, Lao, Malaysia, Myanmar, Philippines, Singapore, Thailand and Vietnam) as well as Taiwan. There was a major pushback from major powers such as the US for the South China Sea has major trade routes in the world with abundant natural resources and fishing areas on which China was illegally establishing its authority. In the second part and most recently, China’s contemptuous response after the U.S House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s Taiwan trip dictated that China would never let Taiwan go from its nationalist agenda. China’s political and strategic behavior lies on the fact whether the US will deter China from trying to take Taiwan by force leading to global woes and chaos. One can be certain any aggressive decision on Taiwan by China will lead to a destabilized global security architecture affecting every country. In the third part specifically, in examining the Himalayan region, Beijing’s revisionist ambitions have been continuously belligerent in erasing Tibet’s territorial integrity, national sovereignty, regional influence and cultural identity. With the ‘One China’ policy, the Chinese position in Tibet remains confrontational to this day. China’s constant standoffs with India along the LAC border also translates to a more volatile Himalayan region as China desperately tries to assert dominance fearing America’s global dominance. In the fourth part China also hasn’t been cordial to its immediate East Asian neighbors. It’s maritime and land issues with Japan over the Senkaku Islands and Ryukyu Islands have been ongoing along with a conflict over the Socotra Rock (Ieodo) in the East China Sea with South Korea. China’s overreaching ambitions of territorial claims and disbanding of internationally signed peace treaties puts it under a lens of scrutiny and distrust by the world. China says its intention is to only reclaim back of what was once theirs as the territorial area of such countries is ‘illegal’. These conflicts are only expected to rise with increasing geopolitical conflicts with Russia’s war with Ukraine and might lead to China taking an even more aggressive stance. Therefore, a study of China’s approach to foreign policy is important to predict the future of international politics as existing relations are put to a test in the Taiwan and Himalayan region. With China’s ‘wolf-warrior diplomacy’ China’s claim on these regions has been whitewashed and only spoken under terms of China’s national interests in the media. Due to these reasons, the world sees China as a black box. Events Covered: Taiwan: 2022: China’s largest ever military military excise in the air and seas around Taiwan, including the firing of ballistic missiles after Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the US House of Representatives, visit to the island. 2021: Chinese warplanes made 159 incursions into Taiwan’s air defence zone which is the second-highest month on record as Beijing continues to pile military pressure on the democratic island. 2020: According to Taiwan’s defense minister, the PLA has engaged in 49 military aircraft sorties across the Taiwan Strait median line in 2020, the highest number since 1990. In response, Taiwan conducted its own exercise, deploying its F-16 fighter jets. The United States has stepped up its diplomatic and military support to Taiwan. The U.S. has also agreed to a major arms package for Taiwan worth almost $2 billion. The total package may increase to as much as $5 billion to boost Taiwan’s capacity to defend itself from China. 2018-2019: China Holds Long-Range Air Combat Drill Near Taiwan with Su-35 Fighters Over Bashi Channel for the first time. Himalayan Strait and India: 2022: The India-China Tawang crisis came as a consequence of military face off at the Yangtse valley in Arunachal Paresh. The entire state itself, and within it, Tawang, are areas of serious contestation between India and China. 2021: Another face-off at Naku La in north Sikkim, an Indian state sandwiched between Bhutan and Nepal, east of the Ladakh area left troops injured on both sides. This was followed by the deadly Galwan Valley clash. 2020: Ladakh’s Galwan Valley in the Pangong Tso area witnessed a violent clash between the Armies of India and China. The clash, in which 20 Indian soldiers were killed, was one of the worst in 45 years, and led to a military standoff with China and at least 11 rounds of military talks for the disengagement process. 2019: Chinese third White paper on Tibet in the

TR
Team Red Lantern AnalyticaAnalyst
arrow_outward
Book Review: Foreign Policy Making in Taiwan: From Principle to Pragmatism by Dennis Van Hickey
ASIAFEBRUARY 21, 2023
09

Book Review: Foreign Policy Making in Taiwan: From Principle to Pragmatism by Dennis Van Hickey

The book under review i.e. foreign policy making in Taiwan was published in 2007 and has its background rooted in controversial election of 2004 that resulted in victory of Chen Sui-Ban. Understanding Taiwan had never been that easy. Moreover, in years when ambiguity over political issues among Taiwanese citizens is rising explaining the Taiwan issue had become more complex, particularly the external relations of Taiwan. In spite of this, Dennis V. Hickey, has presented an uncomplicated, well researched but brief study to explain foreign policy making in Taiwan. This study was based on both primary and secondary sources including author’s direct interview with both Chinese and Taiwanese, politicians and academicians. Unlike other authors who take single theoretical approach, Hickey took a multidimensional approach to examine changing foreign policy of Taiwan. He analyzed the phenomenon by looking through four different factors that in one way or the other shapes a state’s foreign policy. Prior to explaining the four factors, the international system, government structure, societal forces and presidential factors, author gave a historical overview of Taiwan’s foreign policy. In this chapter he clearly divided Taiwan’s foreign policy in three phases, phase one: the golden era from (1950-71), phase two: diplomatic isolation (1971-1988), phase three: pragmatic diplomacy. Later author took the help of these phase division, to examine the influence of four factors in evolution of Chinese foreign policy. Author, first analyses the impact of international system and the behavior of other states in foreign policy making of Taiwan. Being a shrimp among whales, Taiwan’s foreign policy was highly accommodative with changing international system. It not only defended itself from Chinese communist threat but also remained the member of UN till 1971. Later, it did compromise with its de-jure independence but still maintains its de facto independence with the support of US and as result of contemporary world politics. Despite being highly influenced by the international system and external factors; internal factors also played a major role in shaping Taiwan’s foreign policy. Moreover, the influence of internal factors has increased after the democratization. Now, government system is more concerned about public consensus and its entire organ once that was directly dictated by the president has a role to play. As author writes in pages 61, “Foreign policy issues are subject to widespread discussion and debate and the island’s voters hold decision makers accountable for their actions”. Continuing the argument further, Author in its next chapter discusses the societal influence over Taiwanese foreign policy, He argues that these days, along with political parties Taiwan’s the island’s interest groups, think-tanks, media and public contribute indirectly in shaping Taiwan’s external relations. Beside all the above mentioned factors, the role of president becomes essential component to be analysed, considering the fact that a leader’s values, beliefs, personalities, cultural baggage and perceptions can heavily impact the foreign policy outcome of a state. Author, discussed the foreign policy under each and every president to show how each president’s leadership style has shaped Taiwan’s foreign policy behavior. Alongside before discussing that author also gave theoretical explanation of individual’s role in determining foreign policy. Use of examples of both pragmatic and crusader leaders of world like Wilson, Hitler, Fidel Castro, Nixon and Mohammad Khamani made it easy to understand the theory. (Page 79) At the end author has put forwarded his own analysis giving some alternate explanations and figuring out the challenges and opportunities for Taiwan’s foreign policy. Despite being a good research work, I would like to submit some minor complains. Most prominent complain being the interview, author did not interview any KMT law makers, KMT being the longest ruling party and major opposition could have contributed a more neutral and detailed research of Taiwan’s foreign policy. Moving ahead, no unidimensional approach can explain Taiwan’s foreign policy and author did consider this fact. However, certain factor could have been more elaborate for example the government and system did not discuss the role of any institution in much detail. Besides, while discussing the political party the author missed to provide the detailed stand of different political parties over foreign policy. Along with this some of the sections have been a bit confusing for example the diplomatic isolation phase discussed more on informal alliance of Taiwan and not much of formal alienation of Taiwan (page 11 and 12). In addition to these at the end, a book easing the ambiguity over Taiwan left the reader with ambiguity over usage the 30 page constitution that is attached as appendix in the book, as it has never been referred in entire analysis and in last if an edited version of book comes I would like to read section on the role of social media section in the chapter of ‘societal influences and foreign policy’ as it has really became one of the most impactful platform influencing the policies and elections of various countries all around the world. Keeping aside all this negligible constraints, this book is a great contribution of Dennis V. Hickey in the field of Taiwanese foreign policy. He not only discussed the all factors but also provided the theoretical explanations behind that. It can be used as reference to any study research focused on Taiwan’s foreign policy, cross strait relations, US-China relation and even the politics in East Asia. Moreover, it should be a must read for anyone interested in studying the foreign policy of Taiwan. Abhishek Ranjan Centre for East Asian Studies School of International Studies, JNU

TR
Team Red Lantern AnalyticaAnalyst
arrow_outward
The US-China rivalry, Cold War or cold war?
ASIAJANUARY 17, 2023
10

The US-China rivalry, Cold War or cold war?

Scholars differentiate between the terms Cold War and cold war to distinguish between what might seem like a regular cold war (i.e., the rivalry between two countries which is quite normal in international relations) and the Cold War between the USA and Russia. Moreover, it makes sense, especially today, when many view the USA-China rivalry through the lens of the cold war and try to draw an analogy with the US-Russia Cold War. A cold war is one manifestation of the long-duration rivalry between states, and the USA- China rivalry is further one manifestation of this cold war; hence, many find it unsuitable to use ‘Cold War’; instead, they prefer sticking to just the cold war. Many leaders might even deny any cold war between the two countries to cool things down, but it is also quite evident that a new cold war is brewing between them, and it was long ago predicted, looking at China’s rise. Every country that rises to the extent of becoming a superpower would threaten the existing superpower. Obviously, China has not reached that stage yet and has a long way to go; still, the USA would try to dim its influence to save or maintain its own. This cold war has a new player, i.e., China and one older one, the USA but one way this is different from the earlier one is that the USA already has a structure (thanks to its Cold War past) which it can use now to strengthen it further. It has maintained its military bases and partners in different regions to keep its presence worldwide. However, the US has also felt a need for new alliances, which has also meant shifting alliances (as realists say, in international relations, alliances are for convenience’s sake only) China’s adversaries are now USA’s friends or at least are allies in the making. Both countries are trying hard to expand their reach and influence and get as many countries as possible on their side. India has had a history of turbulent relations with China since their independence. Both countries have specific border issues which spark up now and then. In addition, China has a problem with India giving asylum to Dalai Lama, competing to become a larger economy and growing influence in South Asia and the Indo-Pacific. USA and India, on the other hand, have always had a convenience’s sake relationship. USA supported Pakistan during the cold war to get better access to its neighbouring area and gave it immense military aid after 9/11 to help prevent terrorism from springing from Pakistan (despite Pakistan not being a democracy which goes against the USA idealist claims). However, this changed when India acquired nuclear weapons- with sanctions on it- most challenging by the USA. However, in 2005, the Bush administration brought a historic change in their relations by waving off the sanctions and bringing the two countries closer. Meanwhile, Pakistan was getting closer to China, getting the desired help to develop its own nuclear weapons. The USA-India relations are now stronger than ever, with the House of Representatives passing an amendment approving “a waiver to India against the punitive CAATSA sanctions“, which made an exception for India despite putting sanctions on Turkey for doing the same (importing the S-400 missile system from Russia), so why make an exception for India? “The US sees India as an important ally in its fight against China. If sanctioned, the Quad collective, of which India is part, could be significantly impacted”. Then, India’s neutrality in the Russian- Ukraine war did not affect the relations much. Despite pressure from the USA to take a stand against Russian aggression on international platforms, India managed to escape that without welcoming any severe repercussions. India is now part of every significant alliance grouping of the USA. They have initiated a new West Asian QUAD called I2U2 (India, Israel, the USA and the UAE) in the Middle East and the QUAD in the Indo-Pacific. It shows how both countries are coming together for security and peace, i.e., against their common enemy- China. India has always been reluctant to invite the USA to help with its border or other issues with China but having the USA on its side does no harm. Both countries benefit from this relationship. Who needs who more is a topic for another debate. India is the only country in South Asia capable of countering China hence, becoming a vital strategic partner for the USA, especially after its Afghanistan blunder, the USA has lost its control over the region. China’s main card of getting countries to ally with it has been giving loans, massive infrastructure projects or development projects, but those are proving to fail, as seen in Sri Lanka and Pakistan. Countries are now looking for alternatives as they see how China gets control over territories by using diplomacy, which is a game-changer. The USA underestimated how China would play out in the new world order, i.e., post-World War 2. China which at one time seemed a potential communist country that could be liberalized and eventually democratized, has proved many optimists wrong in their analysis of it- it has chosen its own path, one that makes it stand head-to-head against the USA. Moreover, China prepared itself well for a situation like this; many worry about its influence and consequences. Then, the growing relationship between Beijing and Moscow makes some people believe that we are moving closer to another cold war. Both have stayed close despite the Russian aggression in Ukraine and China’s stance of being neutral.

TR
Team Red Lantern AnalyticaAnalyst
arrow_outward
Statement on US House Speaker’s Plan to Address the ‘Rise of Chinese Communist Party’
ASIAJANUARY 12, 2023
11

Statement on US House Speaker’s Plan to Address the ‘Rise of Chinese Communist Party’

The former US House of Representatives Speaker, Nancy Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan in August 2022 ignited the most severe Taiwan Strait Crisis ever with the Chinese President Xi Jinping being left insecure about his dreams of a national reunification with the island nation. What followed was a series of Chinese air strikes in Taiwan’s Air Defence Identification Zone (AIDZ) to instil fear among the Taiwanese government and people. The world, however rose in support of the democratically elected nation and the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is once again huffing and puffing to pursue its hegemonic desires. The newly elected Speaker of the House of Representatives, Kevin McCarthy, swooned the Americans with his inaugural speech where he pledged that the house will address the ‘rise of the Chinese Communist party’ and further went on to say that he wanted the US to win the economic competition which China as well. The trade war between the US and China had been the talk of the town for the recent few years. To tackle this, he proposed to create a bipartisan Select Committee on US-China Strategic Competition to investigate thoroughly on how the hundreds of thousands of jobs that went to China needed to be brought back. The world will agree to the fact that while the global leaders followed policies to help China grow for decades, the CCP has returned only betrayal, oppression and put out aggressive desires to alter the global order, both economically and ideologically. The newly elected speaker made it absolutely clear that “the era of trusting communist China is over” as most of its military and economy grew at the expense of democracy, freedom and human rights. Mr. McCarthy emphasized that the bipartisan task force will not only focus on economic arenas but will also look into crucial matters like China stealing the intellectual property rights, American farmlands being bought by the CCP, Chinese propaganda in schools and lobbying efforts in the US, and how China controlled so much of the pharmaceutical sector that it created a total havoc during Covid-19 pandemic,etc. So this committee will offer comprehensive recommendations for policy matters encompassing economic investment, technological progress and national security. The speaker further mentioned that he wanted to prevent trillions of the American dollars from financing communist genocide and military modernisation. While the speech acknowledges that CCP is a common hurdle for all and the promises made look really enticing, it is now time for the world to mirror this enthusiasm and initiate a collective action to put an end to the CCP authoritarianism.

TR
Team Red Lantern AnalyticaAnalyst
arrow_outward
Security and Stability are the Key Factors to Observe in Central Asia In 2023
ASIAJANUARY 11, 2023
12

Security and Stability are the Key Factors to Observe in Central Asia In 2023

There have been major shifts in the global geopolitical order in recent years. The COVID-19 pandemic has revealed the flaws of globalisation. Additionally, the Taliban’s rise to power as a result of the American exit from Afghanistan posed several challenges, particularly for the neighboring countries. The Russia-Ukraine Crisis has further destabilised the world order. The Central Asian region, surrounded by Russia, China, and Afghanistan, could not have avoided the impacts of these developments. Against this context, the year 2022 was challenging for the Central Asian region. The external influence of the Ukrainian crisis has exacerbated previously existing problems in these nations. Public dissatisfaction is evident from the widespread anti-government demonstrations brought on by the uneven domestic socioeconomic and political conditions. On the one hand, these demonstrations have brought attention to the domestic vulnerabilities of these countries. Nevertheless, on the positive side, they have forced the Central Asian governments to pay attention to popular dissatisfaction and to put up real initiatives to solve important issues and grievances. Kazakhstan saw a brutal protest in early 2022, which resulted in the government’s suspension and the end of the Nazarbayev era. Given the complexities of the situation, Kazakh President Kassym Jomart Tokayev initiated wide-ranging reforms. Similarly, in July 2022, protests erupted in Nukus, Karakalpakstan’s capital city, against proposed constitutional reforms in Uzbekistan. Official Uzbek sources claim that the protests were sparked by a misunderstanding of constitutional amendments proposed by the Uzbek government. During the confrontation between the government and the locals, 18 individuals were killed, and almost 200 were injured. However, in order to stabilize the situation, President Mirziyoyev reinstated the suggested changes. There have also been anti-government protests in Tajikistan’s Pamir region. While Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan have made significant efforts to implement socioeconomic and political reforms to secure human rights, a responsible government, the abolition of corruption and poverty, and so on, Tajikistan’s position remains a major concern for two reasons. Tajikistan’s economy is mostly based on remittances. As a result, a crisis such as a coronavirus pandemic or the Russia-Ukraine conflict is likely to worsen the already strained relationship between the administration and the local population in the Pamir region. Second, there is the possibility of a transfer of power in the country during the coming elections in 2025. Thus, President Rahmon will suppress any dissent in order to achieve a smooth power transition. As a result, it is essential to keep a watchful eye on Central Asia’s domestic security situation, particularly in Tajikistan. In this context, it is vital to assess Central Asian countries’ ability to adapt to changing environment. If Moscow’s Ukraine agenda is overstated, relations with Central Asia must also pass a litmus test. These countries will continue to strive to diversify their logistics and transit networks in order to lessen their reliance on Russia. The partnership with the West will expand. However, trade, economics, investment, and trans-continental transit will dominate Central Asia’s interactions with the West. Despite the fact that China’s loans are concerning for these countries, Beijing’s influence in this region is expanding, and it does not only remain economic. China is now attempting to expand its defence and military cooperation with these countries. Beijing is doing everything it can to strengthen its position in the region, from maintaining a military facility in Tajikistan to selling weapons to Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, and Turkmenistan. Russia has been Central Asia’s most reliable ally. However, after Moscow initiated military operations in Ukraine in February 2022, concerns about Moscow’s diminishing influence in Central Asia have circulated, owing mostly to these nations’ attempts to find a balance in their positions on the conflict. But considering that Moscow is not only the region’s largest economic partner but also that these countries have a long history of affinity with Russia, this cannot be true. China’s influence in the region is expanding beyond trade and economy. In addition to China, other external players, including Turkey, India, and Pakistan, have been pushing to expand their relations with the Central Asian region. In conclusion, it would be fair to argue that Turkey’s influence in Central Asia is growing exponentially. Ankara is attempting to increase military cooperation with Central Asian republics in addition to promoting its ethnic and cultural links to the region. The post- Soviet nations of Central Asia cannot be taken for granted by Moscow anymore. Therefore, Russia will regularly engage with regional leaders to strengthen its position and exert more control over the region. Additionally, there will be an improvement in ties between India and Central Asia. India will prioritise regional connectivity because it is the major obstacle to bilateral trade and economic cooperation. New Delhi will also host the SCO this year, which might be leveraged to strengthen ties between India and Central Asia in many ways. Author: Dr. Pravesh Kumar Gupta Senior Research Associate, Vivekananda International Foundation

TR
Team Red Lantern AnalyticaAnalyst
arrow_outward
A Taliban takeover which benefitted no one
AFGHANISTANJANUARY 8, 2023
13

A Taliban takeover which benefitted no one

The US troops had not even left Afghanistan when the Taliban took control of Kabul. On 16th August, a day after Kabul fell to the Taliban forces, the then Prime Minister of Pakistan Imran Khan claimed that Pakistan had broken the shackles of slavery. A year since that, the jubilation has subdued, as Pakistan is gripped with insurgencies in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and Balochistan. In its pursuit of strategic depth and the infatuation with having the Taliban govern Afghanistan, Pakistan has pushed the security structure in the Afgan-Pak region to the brink of collapse, threatening not just the continued existence of the state of Afghanistan and Pakistan but also the billions of dollars that China has invested in Pakistan and its ambitions in Afghanistan. At the time of writing, Pakistan is facing dual insurgencies in KP and Balochistan. Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) has been emboldened by the Taliban’s capture of Kabul and has been a recipient of the Taliban’s hospitality, something which Pakistan expected for itself. In the last year, TTP has conducted more than 350 attacks across Pakistan. In Balochistan, BLA has received renewed support from the TTP, and Pakistan now finds itself fighting a two-front war. Balochistan, regrettably for Pakistan is also a host to China’s biggest investment in the form of CPEC. A mild level insurgency has been going on in the region for over decades. China’s interference via investments has also become a point of conflict between Pakistani authorities and Baloch insurgents. Pakistan had hoped with the Taliban ruling Afghanistan, it’d finally be able to fence the border across the Durand Line. However, that has not been the case. Cross-border firings across the Durand Line have increased incessantly. Moreover, since coming to power Taliban has released maps which show the Greater Pashtunistan region as part of the Afghan territory. China, which had hosted the Taliban leadership after the fall of Kabul, and refused to close down its embassy along with Russia in the Afghan capital, had high hopes of getting its hands on the $1.3 trillion worth of Afghan minerals and securing a route for its ambitious BRI has failed to achieve any of its objectives. In addition, it is growing incessantly aggrieved about the current security situation in Balochistan, KP and Gilgit Baltistan through which the CPEC passes. Incidentally, China has also refused to furnish further loans to Pakistan until the security situation improves in the region. Currently, Chinese loans amount to a quarter of Pakistan’s external debt. Without fresh funds coming to the nation, Pakistan’s economy is in free fall. Its exports have dried up and food imports to the nation have dried up the country’s Forex reserve which is below $5 billion. Pakistan faces an unprecedented climb out of the economic and security situation. Parallels of its economic situation can be drawn with Sri Lanka. The Sri Lankan economic crisis was the worst economic crisis since its independence. China’s share in Sri Lanka’s external debt was around 20% which shows the seriousness of Pakistan’s economic situation which could be on the brink of collapse. There is no doubt that the current economic and security situation in the Afgan-Pak region has been exacerbated by the Taliban’s capture of Kabul. If Pakistan is unable to secure its borders and weed out the insurgencies there is a greater risk of Pakistan breaking up which would be detrimental to the security of South Asia as a whole. Pakistan is a nuclear state and has a population of 220 million. Its neighbours, especially India and China (Xinjiang) face unprecedented mass immigration and the threat of nuclear terrorism. Therefore, Pakistan requires greater attention from the international community. While the Taliban’s resurgence in Afghanistan was welcomed by Pakistan and China alike, they now face unprecedented risk to their future and investments respectively.

TR
Team Red Lantern AnalyticaAnalyst
arrow_outward
South Asia: not one but many
AFGHANISTANJANUARY 6, 2023
14

South Asia: not one but many

South Asia has a long-shared history of ancestry, culture, and colonisation (most of it, not all) and a history of partition, struggle for independence and forming different forms of governments, making them all very different from each other. However, looking at the linkages and earlier being part of one subcontinent, one would expect them to have carried forward that integration, but that has not happened. It remains one of the least integrated regions of the world. Realising this long ago that there was a need to bring the area together for increasing integration and cooperation, the countries formed SAARC (the South Asian Association of Regional Cooperation) in 1985. There was a hope that this organisation might finally bring the long-awaited integration. However, it seemed to be failing with time, mainly because of unresolved territorial disputes between the member states, particularly India and Pakistan. There were no SAARC summits held after the 2014 SAARC Summit in Kathmandu. The upcoming Summit, which was supposed to happen in 2016 in Islamabad, got cancelled due to tensions between India and Pakistan. There is no scope for future SAARC summits until the dispute gets resolved, which has as much chance as the China-Taiwan dispute getting solved. In a recent news release, it was reported that “it takes 138 hours to move a truck across the border from India to Bangladesh, and there are 22 documents required and 55 signatures. So, in many ways, South Asia is not well integrated” (Basu, 2022). What is sad is that this situation exists despite the two countries being in such geographical proximity. With the political regimes changing in the region, one state after another, stability needs to be there for countries to work upon some mutually agreed deals. Free trade should be everyone’s priority as it benefits all. There are disagreements over political culture existing in different countries and on geopolitics, but should these affect the trade relations? With regional integration, the South Asian economy can become one of the largest in the world. A report also noted, “Despite massive connectivity plans and infrastructure development, South Asia remains the least integrated region in the world — just 5 per cent of its total trade takes place within the region. Greater integration and seamless connectivity could see trade increase by an estimated $44 billion, according to Cecile Fruman, Director, Regional Integration and Engagement in the South Asia Region (SAR), World Bank’ (Basu, 2022). “In 2019, India and Pakistan undertook trade-restrictive measures against each other, perhaps the most severe in several decades. After the Pulwama terror attack in Kashmir in February 2019 and cross-border air strikes, India withdrew Pakistan’s Most Favoured Nation (MFN) status and imposed a customs duty hike of 200% on imports. Later, when India revoked the autonomy of Jammu and Kashmir, Pakistan suspended bilateral trade” (Hindu, 2021). It costs both countries in terms of expenses incurred to find alternatives. Similarly, Pakistan blocking India’s deal with Afghanistan to trade or transport goods only hampers the integration process. The region is complicated as it remains stuck in the past, halting projects in the present and putting in jeopardy their future. The ongoing conflicts between the countries have become the greatest obstacle to achieving cooperation. The unresolved conflicts are stretched for political gains, neglecting the greater regional interest and benefit one can take advantage of. On a positive note, it is a good sign that Nepal and India are coming together to discuss pending projects after the relations between the two soured last year. With regime change in Pakistan, there is a hope that the new government might relax some trade restrictions put on India to revive their economy. As Sri Lanka is in its worst economic crisis since independence, India is now taking the lead and coming forward to help it deal with the situation regarding aid and grants. Restoring stability brings hope that the countries could continue their trade on better terms which were affected due to Sri Lanka’s previous deals with China. However, this only shows that states are now preferring to go bilateral over working together as a group, entailing some positive outcomes. However, if the region unites, its economy could overtake many leading economies today. It is hard to say if the region’s prospect is to integrate, but it needs to act on it. The SAARC member states must realise the more significant gain here and try to work on their fault lines. Political skirmishes are coming in the way of trade, which is never a good sign; even China is India’s greatest trading partner despite their ongoing border disputes, only because one cannot risk their economy. Diplomatic solutions must pave the way, and leaders must meet and address the concerns of their respective countries. No other way can bring the region to grow and prosper than engagement. It is a long way, and it will not be easy. It will be interesting to see how this turns out to be. With the Russian invasion of Ukraine, there is already a food shortage; neighboring states could help each other out. These solutions may sound utopian, but it is better to hope than give up.

TR
Team Red Lantern AnalyticaAnalyst
arrow_outward
China’s aggression across the Taiwan strait in 2022
ASIAJANUARY 3, 2023
15

China’s aggression across the Taiwan strait in 2022

What’s in the menu US speaker Nancy Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan in August 2022 saw a record number of Chinese aircraft incursions near to Taiwan, however, this ‘new normal’ aggression didn’t stop at that. For the umpteenth time, December’22 again surprised the observers of the difficult China-Taiwan relations, but this time with the highest ever number of aircraft incursions by China, including warplanes, some of which crossed over the Taiwan strait center line. China’s flimsy justification often quotes the reasons of such a response as a reaction to interference by external agents (read “US”), and the provocation by Taiwan independence forces. The month of August saw heavy incursions that were a response to US speaker Nancy Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan, which China took negatively, for known reasons (one china policy- Taiwan is only another system under overall ‘People’s Republic of China’). The December incursions are by all means a reply to recent US commitments to increase defense and arms assistance to Taiwan. The relations between China-Taiwan are once again in a limbo. THE RECIPE The Taiwan strait in recent couple of years has emerged has one of the most restive regions of our times when seen via lens of great games. It has become a pawn in the US-China rivalry that won’t abate anytime soon. The pro-democracy forces are in power in Taiwan, and China being an authoritarian regime, doesn’t seem to take well how Taiwan aligns with the democracies of the world. China hasn’t however ruled out the possibility of a ‘bloody reunification’ with Taiwan. Taiwan’s forced unification with china, one that will lead it to share a fate similar to Hong Kong, Tibet, Xinjiang is a nightmare that the world fidgets about. While some strategic analysts foresee a reunification happening soon, with or without any alarms, others say that neither China, nor the US can be lame-ducks enough to fight off each other in an era of economic interdependence and ever weaker supply chain resilience. However, the ongoing Russia-Ukraine war bears testimony to the fact that idiosyncratic factors and waves of populism, in the guise of nationalism can precipitate into worst nightmares of the global community. It’s not unknown that China’s zero covid strategy and its crumbling economy may lead to making of a restive Chinese populace that may stand against the Xi regime. Where can it then take recourse in such a situation? Answer is simple and predictable in the realm of international relations- trigger issues, create enemy states, and invoke nationalism by rabble rousing. A similar move is in play even in The United states. The bait is Taiwan this time. It’s a tough spot for Taiwan that its largest trade partner is also its greatest enemy. But enemy’s enemy is a friend (in line with Kautilyan wisdom), and that drags in US to the scene. Kurt Campbell, US based indo pacific strategist advised that US intensify its trade relations with Taiwan to deepen the strategic relationship. US hence also wants Taiwan to initiate decoupling its economy with China. Such a directive however can trigger a direct clash in the strait with the two important powers in a direct face off. The whole logic of deterrence may take a backseat, however to say if it for sure will, will be an over statement. United states is the most important global power that has the back of Taiwan in case of aggression by china. Its ‘Taiwan policy act’of 2022 is a direct commitment by US in providing weaponry and technical assistance to Taiwan to build a credible defense capability. US has pursued the policy of strategic ambiguity vis-à-vis Taiwan wherein it affirms to one china policy, while refuting any attempts by china to coercively incorporate Taiwan into itself. However, The US has shown more certitude and less ambiguity on the Taiwan issue ever since Biden has assumed power. This means an even hotter pacific (not even counting in climate change here). The US finds itself embroiled in Taiwan for a couple of reasons- A china free Indo-pacific. Critical components like electronic chips’ manufacturing being concentrated in Taiwan. To prevent choking of critical supply lines in an era global interdependence. SALT TO TASTE PLEASE Retired General Lee of Taiwan believes that china is only short of sufficient firepower before it can wage a war for Sinicizing Taiwan. What then are the current developments in Taiwan to handle an improbable yet possible militarily forced unification? Taiwan has changed its conscription policy to make its military voluntary. This has been a positive step as it’ll aid in infusing expertise and competence to its military which otherwise engaged in a “half-hearted, good for nothing and short periods of training. However yet again the Tsai government has decided to extend compulsory military service to one year from four months from 2024 citing insufficient preparedness. Moreover, it has increased its defense budget, while drawing further from technical expertise and arms sale of its most trusted ally- US. However, many scholars point to the possible heavy reliance on US that can make Taiwan to bandwagon after US thus creating a hierarchy of power. There are 3 options that small states usually have -Bandwagoning, balancing and hedging. Taiwan can’t afford to bandwagon entirely after China, or balance against it out rightly, considering its reliance on China economically and a possible blockade that it may be subjected to. Strategic hedging thus seems a better option. Through this Taiwan can pursue the dual poles of balancing and bandwagoning, with inclination towards any one as the context demands. Currently, the inclination is in favor of balancing against China, by forging its ties with the democratic regimes. Whatsoever, the wargames by China in and around the strait have become sharper in its character, with such incursions having become a normal daily news for the Taiwanese. China’s greyzone activities pose conundrum to the analysts who find it difficult to judge if China is crossing or will cross the fine line between its war of attrition on one hand

TR
Team Red Lantern AnalyticaAnalyst
arrow_outward
China and its Obsession with Claiming Territories
ASIAJUNE 5, 2022
16

China and its Obsession with Claiming Territories

Many things come to play when a country goes beyond its border to make claims and acts on it. They invoke international law, invite new states to become adversaries, and build new alliances against them. However, if done correctly, it has the potential to benefit itself in ways unmatchable to staying silent. This article does not discuss ethics or the ‘right’ thing to do but assesses why this is happening and how it could benefit China. China, a rising superpower, has come a long way from fighting a civil war just after World War 2, pursuing economic policies that failed severely, to being amongst the top countries in terms of military, economic growth, and more. China’s rise has been peaceful compared to other superpowers of their time. However, China is breaking the silence that it has successfully maintained for decades now, finding it perfect for moving ahead with a rigorous foreign policy as it now has the potential and power to do so. It has permeated itself into the world economy so much that if factories in China close, it can disrupt the world’s supply chain, as seen during the outbreak of covid-19. Countries have realised this and started looking for alternatives to save themselves from being dictated by China’s terms. The trend shows that when a country rises and has tremendous economic growth and military backup, it can dictate terms and conditions. China has been successful in doing so, which will be discussed in brief later in this article. So, why is China now making claims on foreign territories (which, it claims, are part of its mainland)? Firstly, territorial claims are not just limited to a few of its (land) neighbouring countries (like India, Myanmar, Nepal, Bhutan, Tibet, Mongolia) but also Vietnam, Taiwan, The Philippines, and Laos. The list goes on. While territorial disputes with countries like India, Nepal, and Bhutan flare up occasionally, the conflicts in the South China Sea and Taiwan are constant; it has made the involvement of other countries necessary in the region to contain China’s recklessness. China even made its own Maritime Traffic Safety Law (MTSL) which makes it mandatory for states to have permission from China to navigate freely in its jurisdictional waters (which extends further from EEZ); if not done, China can resort to force for infringing on Chinese sovereignty. The MTSL surpasses UNCLOS, which gives other states the freedom to navigate freely. This unilateral decision also includes the contested islands in the South China Sea, giving China the sole authority and de facto control, making these islands legally consolidated with China. ‘By defining baselines far beyond those allowed by UNCLOS terms, China inflated its resulting territorial sea and Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), infringing upon the rights of other nations to use those waters as allowed by international law’ (Trung & Ngan, 2021). The claimant’s Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) and China’s EEZ clash here because both lay claims, while China claims all of the South China Sea as its territory- using its nine-dash line as a reference point. Again, laying historical claim and ignoring the UN Maritime Law of EEZ 200 nm, by which many of the islands belong to the claimants’ states. Just making laws would not do, and China knows it well. Hence, it resorts to power projection- making artificial islands, setting massive militaries, and being the most considerable naval power in South China to intimidate other states. It even dismissed the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) ruling, which favoured the Philippines’ right to rule over its territories. Even though China had signed the UNCLOS, it still did not follow it. China wants to run its trade smooth for that undisrupted access to the South China Sea. Unsurprisingly, the world’s 40% of liquified natural gas passes through here- from the Gulf through the Indian ocean also, $3trillion of the worth of trade sails through here- 1/3rd of the world’s total. Hence, it becomes crucial for China to exert its control over all the choke points in the Indian Ocean or the South China Sea to make sure no other countries can ever play on its vulnerability while it can. Similarly, in the Indo-pacific, it follows a ‘pearl neck policy’ to gain a strategic position against India in times of conflict, i.e., by encircling India by establishing naval bases in surrounding countries. China’s actions raise suspicion and concerns because it does not conform to international norms and law. Whenever a country tries to ignore this, especially to expand its reach and control, it is bound to invite some reactions. China was already a superpower ruling world economy and trade at the days, but this changed when colonisation and the industrial revolution happened. After World War 2, when countries gave in to capitalism to revive their economy and eradicate poverty, China isolated itself, reaching rock bottom; and it was when Deng Xiaoping took charge to change this, that China got back to being a superpower again. Losing so much already, China wants back the territories which were once part of the kingdom and even those which were not. It wants its supremacy back. For this, it is going after sinking economies, offering glamourous deals like the BRI, which looks like benefiting to all (maybe in the short term) but ultimately, it is China that will dominate and will have control. It is not about the economy as much as it is about control, and to have that control, it would not mind making huge investments as even if the countries cannot pay the debt, China would get the property on lease, which it can then use to build naval bases. The countries see it as focused on them, but it is just a tiny portion of China’s colossal infrastructure plan to build this silk road which had existed centuries ago. In other words, ‘To recapture the diminishing appeal of the Communist Party of China (CPC), Xi Jinping has tried to sell the CPC as the inheritor and successor to a 5,000-year-old

TR
Team Red Lantern AnalyticaAnalyst
arrow_outward