Members of the European Parliamentary delegation:
Herr Gunther Rinsche
Elmar Brok
Hartmut Nassauer
Hans-Gert Pottering
Karl von Wogau
Falk-Ulrich von Hoff

In his welcome address, Maj Gen Dipankar Banerjee delineated the scope of a very informal exchange of views between Indian scholars and European parliamentarians. He clarified that in view of the changing international order, the contours of the discussion would be restricted to India's perceptions about the region and the world and the manner in which it interacts with it. Adding that the European perspective is very important for India to explore the possibilities of constructive engagement between India and the EU, he handed over the proceedings to the chair, Amb Eric Gonsalves.

Amb Eric Gonsalves

The chair put the discussion in perspective by highlighting the fact that two perceived changes had taken place with the end of the Cold War: a new period of peace dividend and the emergence of an Asian century led by the economic miracles of Japan and the East Asian tigers, both of which remained elusive. Instead China and India have emerged as the economic power houses. Amb Gonsalves further elaborated that the threats of Cold War were replaced by an entire series of threats, many of them emanating from non-state actors, like the threat of terrorism.

The Chair pointed out that though India was enmeshed in its own South Asian confusion for a long time, it has been making considerable progress. In his view, the world system has changed making borders somewhat irrelevant. There are channels of communication and interactions which is bringing some cohesion in South Asia though long standing problems like Kashmir have not been solved. He expressed hope that in this process, India and Pakistan will find an answer to the entangled problems of South Asia. He was optimistic about the emergence of a new Asian identity. However, this process largely depends on the extent to which Asian countries present a more positive attitude towards resolving the problems within South Asia and across the borders of South Asia, East Asia and Southeast Asia. According to him, this is the only way to make Asia a much more potent partner in the world structure and to ensure balance in the international order.

Security Issues: Maj Gen Dipankar Banerjee

Gen Banerjee flagged certain critical issues on the security question in the region of Asia. According to him, the principle challenge is of international terrorism, which has been an ongoing feature for the last two decades. The second issue pertains to proliferation of not merely weapons of mass destruction into the hands of terrorists and non-state actors but also other weapons like small arms and light weapons. The third issue is the whole question of failing and failed states. How does the world deal with this, is a critical question. Speaking of Asian security, the emergence of China as a prominent economic player with equivalent military clout is an important question to be addressed. Another issue raised by Gen Banerjee was about the phenomenon of natural disaster in the form of tsunami which occurred on 26 December 2005. All these security concerns have brought issues pertaining to development and eradication of poverty to the fore. Even the UN High Level Panel's Report on the challenges to international security featured developmental issue on the top.

While talking about Southeast Asia, Gen Banerjee maintained that though the region continues to develop, there are significant areas of instability. Myanmar, Indonesia are some of the problem areas here which are capable of engaging the world community. The developments in the Iraq war create further turmoil in the region. Added to that is the question of energy security and the safety of the routes of energy transportation like the Persian Gulf, the Indian Ocean region or the new pipeline routes from Central Asia to China, South Asia and Europe. According to the speaker, the rationale for military power today is "an ability to influence these developments" essentially through cooperative engagement. Though safeguarding national interest will remain crucial in international relations, issues of larger regional and international interest will also have to be addressed. In this context regional organizations will begin to assume greater importance.

In the changing global order India will increasingly play a very significant and important role. Gen Banerjee recommended UN Secretary General's High Level Panel Report, which will be an important agenda for the September meeting of the UN General Assembly. The restructuring of the international order is an important issue at stake here. Germany, India and Japan will have a major role to play in this regard. The speaker concluded with a remark that India has to thoroughly and fully engage in the process of restructuring the international order.

Economic Issues: Amb Preet Malik

The speaker pointed out that half of the team that had implemented the process which drew India into the global economy is back in position of policy making. This is a positive point for Indian economy. What is relevant is that if we ensure an average growth rate of 7-7.5 percent in the next 5-10 years, there will be certain problems that the economy will face both in the domestic and global realm. The speaker cautioned that while making projections about India and China, a growing mismatch of demand and supply of energy resources and the population below the poverty line, should not be neglected.

According to the speaker, the Indian economy has shown tremendous amount of resilience as seen by the growth of the consumer economy in the last ten years. While on the one hand, old traditional methods of protecting economies are on their way out, new technical barriers to trade are on the rise. This may have a negative impact on economies like that of India and China as these tariffs are completely outside what one would call the "international rule making system". Amb Malik finally pointed out that while the Indian economy has been growing rapidly, it is important to look at its role in the next four to five years vis-a-vis international economies. This depends on the extent to which Indian policy makers show flexibility towards regional trading agreements and systems that fragment the global economy.

Remarks

Prof Gunther Rinsche

On behalf of the European Parliament, Prof Rinsche thanked the Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies and the Konrad Adenauer Foundation for organizing the discussion on the problems that India faces in Asia which he argued are similar to the problems they face in Europe. He suggested that we follow the Kantian philosophy of thinking before acting as it entails lesser risks. In his view, globalisation means growing interdependence, which includes the necessity of mutual understanding, of informing each other, of coordination and cooperation. Think tanks and decision makers should work together in order to minimize risks and prevent dangerous conflicts from occurring. They must make use of the possibilities and opportunities of today and tomorrow. He expressed the hope that the information gathered during the deliberations would be of great value for future minded decision-making in the European Parliament.

Dr Elmar Brok

Dr Brok's opening remarks were that the region of Asia is full of instabilities and risks, but at the same time, enormous opportunities. Events occurring here will greatly impact their future in Europe. The question of terrorism, Islamic fundamentalism and proliferation of instruments of terrorism reflects the common security concerns of India and Europe. Dictatorships and single party system without any democratic structure, like China, is another concern. Whether China will follow a peaceful path to democratization or a dramatic one, is an important question for both the regions.

According to Dr. Brok, Cold War, with two major players, had established some kind of stability within the existing anarchy. But American unilateralism shattered this order. Amidst this background, the manner in which the UN can be made more effective is important. India's economic development coupled with its democratic dispensation will give it the credibility to play a crucial role in the long run at regional and international level. That is why, he argued that India-EU cooperation is vital for the future of a stable world order.

Dr Hans-Gert Pootering

Dr Pottering put forth some rationale for India-EU partnership. He argued that the notion that India is the informal leader of the third world has changed. India, as it stands today, is an established regional power. But the real question according to him is: Power for what? As we need a world based on the rule of law, democracy, and peace, India and Europe have greater role to play. According to him, India and European Union together can address the questions of democracy, establishment of a security system, stability with rule of law, and political liberalization through economic liberalization. He argued that the establishment of an Asian free market can be an important step to promote peace and cooperation. He insisted that EU cannot lift the arms embargo against China at this stage as it would like to see more progress on the issue of democracy and human rights.

Finally he clarified EU's stand on the expansion of the UN Security Council. According to him, multi-polar framework looks at only the big countries or the dominant powers and not the smaller countries. The same logic applies even to a seat in the UN Security Council. The moment Germany stakes a claim, Italy won't be far behind. Our attempt is to strengthen the EU and not split it as was the case in the Iraq crisis. Hence we are advocating for a seat for EU, instead of individual countries. He strongly welcomed the plan of a strategic partnership between India and Europe.

Dr Karl von Wogau

Dr Wogau mainly focused on the European Security Strategy. He said that unlike the common belief, Europe from the very beginning was concerned about defence related issues. "At the beginning of the European Union in 1952, we had an agreement between six member countries about the treaty for common defence. What people expect from a large EU is mainly to live in peace. If you look at the history of many countries you will see that first they developed a common defence policy, followed by a full- fledged foreign policy. An international system based on rule of law, partnership with the US, and other important players of the foreseeable future like China and India, are some of the salient features of our security strategy," is what he had to say. According to him, the changed threats of today include international terrorism, proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and civil wars. The European perception of threats is much larger though. It includes poverty, failing states, water supply, and energy supply. An ideal situation, according to him, would be to undertake civil prevention of conflicts instead of military prevention. Another element of European Security Strategy is the very close connection between civil and military prevention of wars. A testimony of it is the civil-military planning centre in Brussels where closer coordination between the two will be facilitated. One of the current weaknesses, he pointed out, is that EU is not spending much money on defence. Finally, he accepted the fact that though economically the EU is a global player it is yet to become one in defence and security related issues, for which EU will have to build its defence capabilities in close cooperation with others.

Hartmut Nasseur

The speaker pointed out that exchange of visits change point of view about each other. He was impressed to hear that India and China are leading drivers of economic development and that the center of economic development is moving in this region which includes India, China, Japan, ASEAN countries, Korea and perhaps even Australia and New Zealand. The speaker believed that the future of the global economy would be decided in this paradigm. According to him, stability is an important factor for successful free trade. That is the reason for India being touted as a possible partner of the European Union.

On EU's relations with the United States and the NATO, the speaker said that it should be seen in a broader context. If we define European Union as anti-American then we divide the Union and destroy it. Citing the example of Boeing and Air Bus, he emphasized that this relationship includes competition but on a fair basis. As far as NATO is concerned, EU wants to be a stable partner and the second pillar of NATO. It is a partnership based on equality. He concluded that if EU adopts the same attitude while developing its relationship with India, it will be more sound and durable.

Discussion

            Following points were raised by the participants during the discussion:

• One remarkable feature of recent times is the international perception that India and China are the principle drivers of the Asian economy. What sort of responsibility can they undertake for the emergence of an Asian cooperative order needs to be seen. India has had some successes in its 'Look East' policy. Of course there is competition with China but certainly not the kind leading to divisive politics between the two. The challenge for India, however, is to get the Chinese to respect Indian interests in its immediate neighbourhood.
   

•  The question of rising population in Pakistan and Bangladesh and the ongoing migration in India from its neighborhood is going to be a major regional problem. Secondly, how do we visualize an Indo-EU strategic partnership? Important still, how do we pursue it? Are there possibilities of growth of institutional relationship between EU and India?
   

•  The salience of border issues with Pakistan and China has been reduced to such an extent that these problems do not any longer inhibit or prevent the rise of India as a power. The process of negotiations with Pakistan is going on very intensively and all efforts are being made to establish internal democracy in Kashmir. Besides this, India has achieved a rapid economic growth and also established a sustained strategic dialogue with all the major powers of the world including the United States, China, Russia, Japan and the ASEAN countries. Military cooperation is going on with the US and Russia. The point that I am trying to make is that India's evolution and the process of growth as a power of consequence has taken of and nothing is going to stop it.
   

•  I think we have tried to convey as much sense as we can about Asia. Now we can come to deal with the international system, whether it is rule-based and what is exactly meant by 'rule-based'. The problem before us is whether we can educate ourselves sufficiently to build a decision-making structure in which we can have an appropriate response in time without the kind of bureaucracy we have in the United Nations. This is a question that needs to be addressed in the dialogue between India and Europe in the years to come.
   

• We have tried to put in place a rule based international system for solving problems pertaining to trade matters. This is rather difficult to achieve on the political side because too many factors are involved like values and interests, which are not based on objective considerations. The more effective United Nations becomes the more rule-based will decisions become at that level.
   

•  How to address the question of alleviation of poverty and the development of agricultural systems in developing countries is the most important factor in India-EU partnership. This will be determined by the reconciliation process taking place within the European Union on these issues.
   

• The emphasis at the time of Doha declaration was development but the concept of special and differential treatment is far from implementation. Consensus making in trade bodies and in financial institutions means a greater degree of non-transparency in decision-making. UN certainly cannot be accused of that. It is definitely much more transparent but not necessarily an effective decision making body for the simple reason that a large number of the member countries make decisions at the level of the mission. So decision-making in New York and Geneva has tended to be a rather questionable commodity. It has to be made more democratic and credible. India and Europe can work in that direction. Another area of possible cooperation is on transfer of technology for nuclear energy.
   

• Some practical measures like student exchange programmes, cooperation in space and communication sectors, evolving common standards for open markets and cooperation among various institutions are important in furthering India-EU partnership.