Home Contact Us  

India - Articles

Print Bookmark Email Facebook Subscribe
#5290, 5 June 2017

IPCS Discussion

The Roles and Dimensions of Science and Technology in India’s Foreign Policy
The transcript of the talk delivered by Dr V Siddhartha at IPCS on 18 May 2017

The Roles and Dimensions of Science and Technology in India’s Foreign Policy
Dr V Siddhartha

Emeritus Scientist (Retd), Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO), Government of India; Adjunct Faculty, National Institute of Advanced Studies (NIAS), Bengaluru

The following is the transcript of  the talk.

The new millennium perspectives on science and technology and its role in India’s foreign policy can be ascertained from a variety of instances. Former Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, during his visit to the US in September 2000 talked about the ‘repositioning’ of India in regional and world affairs. In January 2015, during his address to the Indian Science Congress, PM Narendra Modi talked about a growing trend of international collaboration in research and development that India should be able to take advantage of. It was primarily for this reason that PM Modi had placed science and technology at the forefront of India’s diplomatic engagement. The fact that this address was made at the Indian Science Congress and not at a meeting of Indian ambassadors was in itself significant. Besides, the recent discourse in newspapers on India’s membership to the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) and the Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR) has been led by the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA), rather than by the country’s scientific community. This substantive involvement is indicative of the noticeable diffusion of science and technology into India’s foreign policy-making.

The geopolitical ‘repositioning’ mentioned by PM Manmohan Singh is possible only if a significant part of India’s S&T and related military capabilities (capabilities that are dual-use in a dual-usable environment) are grown and shaped to be globally deployable as instruments for India to become one of the top five energy producing countries with co-responsibilities for climate  stewardship; one of the eight nuclear powers, and one of the six space powers that are ASAT-capable. Currently, there is no NPT-style regime for space. Nevertheless, the conduct of the ASAT test prior to an arbitrary date could become the fiducial event for a space regime that could segregate the 'space-haves' from the 'have-nots'. Also, the country’s S&T and military capabilities will need to be grown to a size and capability so as to be make it inevitable that India becomes a permanent member of the UN Security Council, co-responsible with the other members, for the maintenance of international peace and security.

A morphological distinction needs to be recognised between international collaborations in scientific and technological fields and S&T-in-foreign policy. While international collaborations in S&T usually take place between laboratories across different countries, the incorporation of S&T in foreign policy has wider connotations. Thus, when the findings of science or the potential use of technology could have ramifications for international relations beyond the ‘S’ or ‘T’ themselves, the pursuit of the ‘S’ or the use/denial-of-use of the ‘T’ influence are influenced  by foreign policy.

S&T becomes an item of diplomatic engagement when a quid pro quo is negotiated for India in return for India’s participation as a state, as distinct from being an international activity of the scientific community. It is necessary to make such a distinction because when participating as a state, foreign policy takes the 'pole position', so-to-speak, at the front-end of negotiations. Whereas, when the collaborative arrangements are settled between scientific communities, the primary driver of the relationship are the scientists themselves (A 'no objection' kind of approval from the MEA checks that there are no UN-mandated restrictions applicable to transactions envisaged in the collaboration. Any applicable restraints under Indian Export Control regulations always apply).

However, scientific engagements of the above kind are different from the use of S&T in diplomatic engagement which involves the proactive nature of the state using its S&T advantages. These advantages maybe locational, such as the UN-sponsored Thumba Equatorial Rocket Launching Station (TERLS) at the Magnetic Equator or the Laser Interferometer Gravitational-Wave Observatory (LIGO) experiment; they may be epidemiological, such as the WHO sponsored vaccine trials; they may also be technological, which include a contribution to sub-systems, such as the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER) project in France or the mirror actuators for the Thirty Meter Telescope (TMT) in Hawaii. Besides these, the reciprocal use of facilities such as those between Giant Meter-wave Radio Telescope (GMRT), in Khodad, near Pune, India and Arecibo in Puerto Rico, and the non-reciprocal offer for the use of unique Indian facilities such as the South Asian Satellite (SAS), or the infrared telescope in Ladakh are some other modes of scientific collaboration that carry foreign policy advantages. S&T collaborations and exchanges are thus a form of the country's ‘gentle power’.

The Laser Interferometer Gravitational-Wave Observatory experiment is a case that highlights the exchange between India's foreign policy and S&T. LIGO is an international collaborative project that uses to foreign policy advantage India's location at the opposite end of the globe from the other LIGO detector in the US. It is an expensive project whose cost to India may well about go up to INR 2,000 crore by the time the facility is commissioned.

The Department of Atomic Energy (DAE) is funding the Indian component of LIGO. While there is no doubt that it has helped India garner foreign policy advantage, there are many significant voices in India's scientific community that have questioned the worthwhileness of LIGO even from a purely scientific point of view. Occasionally, the MEA drives some collaborations, notwithstanding a lack of domestic consensus on the scientific merits of the investments. For example, in 2016 India became an associate member of the CERN group. The associate membership would cost India approximately INR 78 crore annually though it still would not have voting rights on decisions of the Council. The DAE was not keen because India already had time-access to conduct experiments on the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) by virtue of India’s association with CERN that goes back decades and with an active involvement in the construction of the LHC, in the areas of design, development and supply of accelerator components/systems and its commissioning, and software development and deployment in the machine. Associate membership of CERN therefore had nothing very tangible to add. The decision to become a member was evidently taken in view of Pakistan’s associate membership of CERN. Pakistan gave itself bragging rights -- 'first Asian country'. India's re-visit of its earlier policy was, in this case, clearly foreign-policy driven.

As human threats to the global commons become ever more severe, global diplomatic negotiations over treaty-based national actions to mitigate them become increasingly underpinned by a common transnational appreciation of the underlying science. Equally, unilateral withdrawals from such treaties signify a lack of national appreciation of the underlying scientific drivers, leading to a breakdown of international diplomatic engagement.
There are two hardly-known Indian traces to international science-informed diplomatic negotiations. These include the Kothari-Krishnan-Parthasarathy report on the Effects of Nuclear Explosions, which subsequently formed the scientific foundation for the Limited Test Ban Treaty (LTBT), and the Kulkarni-Ramanathan papers from the late 1940s on the vertical transport of Ozone in the atmosphere which resulted in the Ozone-CFC chemistry that was fundamental to the framing of the Montreal Protocol.

High-technology engagements have dominated the exchange between S&T and foreign policy. Although the 'height of a technology' is really only an anthropological concept! Technologies that are controlled in respect of their international trade for foreign policy or national security reasons are referred to as ‘high technology’. The development of high technology and engagement in this sector have transformed India's position from being a 'discriminatee' after the conduct of the 1974 nuclear test, to the status of a 'participant discriminator' at the threshold of NSG membership, supported by the very countries that sanctioned it severely in 1974. India's Augmented Satellite Launch Vehicle (ASLV) was launched in 1987 and this event triggered the formation of the MTCR, of which technology-denial regime India became a target. However, with the granting of MTCR membership in 2016, India has now become a participant-discriminator.

India was aware that to obtain high-technologies from abroad it was important to become a full member of international technology control regimes, as well as design a sound system domestically for a regulated control of full supply chain management from the source to the end-user. This was done to prevent a horizontal leakage of technology. Over the last two decades, Indian export control has evolved. In 1993, the first group was set up under the Department of Science and Technology, and by 2000, the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) Act was passed. As per the requirements under chapter 7 of the UN Security Council Resolution 1540, the Indian parliament passed the Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) Act in 2005. In 2013, India began a process of selective concordance with the regime lists, and by 2014, India had a wide extant-member support for India’s membership of export control regimes, including the NSG. Regulations notified under Indian laws pertaining to ‘dual-use’ and military materials and technology whose export is controlled by India were thus designed to advance India’s foreign policy goals through trade in high-technology.

A data-supported article in the prestigious international scientific journal Nature published on 18 October 2012 draws attention to a very significant shift that is taking place in the geography of science. The article notes: "Networks of research collaboration are expanding in every region of the globe. US and Europe, the established science superpowers, have dominated the research world since 1945. Yet this Atlantic axis is unlikely to be the main focus of research by 2045, or perhaps even by 2020." This quote is indicative of a science ‘re-balance’ to Asia. It is important to note the use of terms such as ‘science superpowers’ and ‘Atlantic axis’ which are commonly used in diplomatic parlance. However, they are not regularly used in the world of science.

As India enlarges its 'scientific presence' in more S&T fields, more entities from different countries with a similar 'scientific presence' will seek to collaborate with the state and non-state institutions of the country. As India’s technological capabilities rise 'higher', in part through such collaborations themselves (a process known as 'boot-strapping'), the implications of these collaborations will increasingly lie at the confluence of S&T, foreign policy and national security.

Print Bookmark Email Facebook Subscribe
IPCS Columnists
Af-Pak Diary
D Suba Chandran
Resetting Kabul-Islamabad Relations: Three Key Issues
Can Pakistan Reset its Relations with Afghanistan?
The New Afghanistan: Four Major Challenges for President Ghani
Big Picture
Prof Varun Sahni
Understanding Democracy and Diversity in J&K
When Xi Met Modi: Juxtaposing China and India
Pakistan?s Tactical Nuclear Weapons: The Inevitability of Instability

Dateline Colombo

Asanga Abeyagoonasekera.
Sri Lanka: Moving Towards a Higher Collective Outcome
The Importance of Electing the Best to our Nation's Parliament
Sri Lanka: Toward a Diaspora Re-Engagement Plan
Dateline Islamabad
Salma Malik
Pakistan's Hurt Locker: What Next?
IPCS Forecast: Pakistan in 2015
India-Pakistan Relations in 2015: Through a Looking Glass
Dhaka Discourse
Prof Delwar Hossain
IPCS Forecast: Bangladesh in 2015
18th SAARC Summit: A Perspective from Bangladesh
Bangladesh in Global Forums: Diplomacy vs. Domestic Politics
Eagle Eye
Prof Chintamani Mahapatra
India-US: Significance of the Second Modi-Obama Meet
Has President Obama Turned Lame Duck?
Modi-Obama Summit: Criticism for Criticism?s Sake?

East Asia Compass
Dr Sandip Mishra
India-Japan-US Trilateral: India?s Policy for the Indo-Pacific
China-South Korea Ties: Implications for the US Pivot to Asia
Many ?Pivots to Asia?: What Does It Mean For Regional Stability?
Himalayan Frontier
Pramod Jaiswal
Nepal?s New Constitution: Instrument towards Peace or Catalyst to Conflict?
IPCS Forecast: Nepal in 2015
Constitution-making: Will Nepal Miss its Second Deadline?

Prof Shankari Sundararaman
IPCS Forecast: Southeast Asia in 2015
Indonesia's Pacific Identity: What Jakarta Must Do in West Papua
Modi in Myanmar: From ?Look East? to ?Act East?
Sushant Sareen
IPCS Forecast: Pakistan in 2015
Islamic State: Prospects in Pakistan
Pakistan: The Futility of Internationalising Kashmir

Looking East
Wasbir Hussain
Myanmar in New Delhi's Naga Riddle
China: ?Peaceful? Display of Military Might
Naga Peace Accord: Need to Reserve Euphoria
Maritime Matters
Vijay Sakhuja
Indian Ocean: Modi on a Maritime Pilgrimage
Indian Ocean: Exploring Maritime Domain Awareness
IPCS Forecast: The Indian Ocean in 2015

Nuke Street
Amb Sheelkant Sharma
US-Russia and Global Nuclear Security: Under a Frosty Spell?
India's Nuclear Capable Cruise Missile: The Nirbhay Test
India-Australia Nuclear Agreement: Bespeaking of a New Age
Red Affairs
Bibhu Prasad
Countering Left Wing Extremism: Failures within Successes
Return of the Native: CPI-Maoist in Kerala
The Rising Civilian Costs of the State-Vs-Extremists Conflict

Regional Economy
Amita Batra
India and the APEC
IPCS Forecast: South Asian Regional Integration
South Asia: Rupee Regionalisation and Intra-regional Trade Enhancement
South Asian Dialectic
PR Chari
Resuming the Indo-Pak Dialogue: Evolving a New Focus
Defence Management in India: An Agenda for Parrikar
Pakistani Taliban and Al Qaeda in Afghanistan: Implications for Asian Security

Spotlight West Asia
Amb Ranjit Gupta
Prime Minister Modi Finally Begins His Interaction with West Asia*
A Potential Indian Role in West Asia?
US-GCC Summit: More Hype than Substance
Strategic Space
Manpreet Sethi
India-Russia Nuclear Vision Statement: See that it Delivers
Global Nuclear Disarmament: The Humanitarian Consequences Route
Nasr: Dangers of Pakistan's Short Range Ballistic Missile

The Strategist
Vice Admiral Vijay Shankar
Jihadi Aggression and Nuclear Deterrence
The Blight of Ambiguity
Falun Gong: The Fear Within

OTHER REGULAR contributors
Gurmeet Kanwal
Harun ur Rashid
N Manoharan
Wasbir Hussain
Rana Banerji
N Manoharan

Ruhee Neog
Teshu Singh
Aparupa Bhattacherjee
Roomana Hukil
Aparupa Bhattacherjee


Browse by Publications

Issue Briefs 
Special Reports 
Research Papers 
Seminar Reports 
Conference Reports 

Browse by Region/Countries

East Asia 
South Asia 
Southeast Asia 
US & South Asia 

Browse by Issues

India & the world  
Naxalite Violence 
Suicide Terrorism 
Peace & Conflict Database 
Article by same Author
Women in Indian Politics

China-India Rivalry in the Globalisation Era

Ceasefire Violations in Jammu & Kashmir: A Line on Fire

Investigating Crises in South Asia

How the BJP Wins: Inside India’s Greatest Election Machine

The People Next Door: The Curious History of India's Relations With Pakistan

Tibetan Caravans: Journeys from Leh to Lhasa

Chinese Military Reform, 2013-2030

Dominant Narratives in Kashmir: Evolving Security Dynamics

The Nuclear Future

Dealing with Dirty Wars

India-China-Nepal Trilateralism

'25 Years of Diplomatic Relations Between India and Israel and the Way Forward'

Maldives: Contextualising Freedom of Speech in the Murder of Yameen Rasheed

India’s Nuclear Strategy

Diplomacy and the Politics of Language

2017 Indian Assembly Elections: How Did the States Vote?

'Faith, Unity, Discipline: The ISI of Pakistan'

Women & Public Policy Journal [Vol. 2] Launch: 'Afghan Economy in the Decade of Transformation (2015-2024)'

India-Australia and Roles in the Indo-Pacific

Equality, Equity, Inclusion: Indian Laws & India’s Women

"Our Bilateral Relations"

Regional Power Play and Rise of Radicalism in Afghanistan

Afghanistan-Pakistan-India: A Paradigm Shift

Security of Bangladesh in the South Asian Context

Y! MyWeb
Print Bookmark Email Facebook Subscribe
Year 2018
 January  February
 2017  2016  2015  2014  2013  2012  2011  2010
 2009  2008  2007  2006  2005  2004  2003  2002
 2001  2000  1999  1998  1997

The Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies (IPCS) is the premier South Asian think tank which conducts independent research on and provides an in depth analysis of conventional and non-conventional issues related to national and South Asian security including nuclear issues, disarmament, non-proliferation, weapons of mass destruction, the war on terrorism, counter terrorism , strategies security sector reforms, and armed conflict and peace processes in the region.

For those in South Asia and elsewhere, the IPCS website provides a comprehensive analysis of the happenings within India with a special focus on Jammu and Kashmir and Naxalite Violence. Our research promotes greater understanding of India's foreign policy especially India-China relations, India's relations with SAARC countries and South East Asia.

Through close interaction with leading strategic thinkers, former members of the Indian Administrative Service, the Foreign Service and the three wings of the Armed Forces - the Indian Army, Indian Navy, and Indian Air Force, - the academic community as well as the media, the IPCS has contributed considerably to the strategic discourse in India.

Subscribe to Newswire | Site Map
18, Link Road, Jungpura Extension, New Delhi 110014, INDIA.

Tel: 91-11-4100-1902    Email: officemail@ipcs.org

© Copyright 2018, Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies.