4th BRICS Summit: Playing Crucial Role at World Level

The BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) is a grouping of the world’s emerging economies, representing five continents. The BRICS countries together account for 40 per cent of global GDP ($18.49 trillion). Intra-BRICS trade is worth $212 billion, and is growing at 28 per cent a year. It has set itself a trade target of $500 billion by 2015.
The importance of BRICs in the world economy has increased manifold since the acronym was first coined approximately seven years ago. Few could have imagined then how the US economy would collapse and bring down with it much of the rest of the world. It is worth revisiting the original formulations on the significance of these four major countries that were made by representatives of a major US investment bank
Some member countries in the organization are among the fast emerging economies in the world. At the same time, the world has come to realize that to bring an end to the unipolar world and to maintain the power balance, the importance of Russia cannot be ignored. Countries such as China and Brazil not only want to maintain close relations with the United States, but with Russia as well.
However, the aim of the BRICS is to enhance cooperation among member countries and working together at the international forums. Clearly, it is an opportunity for India to improve and strengthen its relations with China and strive to get their disputes resolved.
The fourth BRICS Summit was held in New Delhi on March 28-29. The summit’s theme was “BRICS partnership for Global Stability, Security and Prosperity.” The participants included Presidents Hu Jintao of China, Dmitry Medvedev of Russia, Jacob Zuma of South Africa and Brazil’s Dilma Rouseff. Prime Minister Manmohan Singh hosted the summit, and also held a series of bilateral sessions with his guests, including China’s Hu Jintao.
The summit held against the backdrop of continued profound and complex changes in the international situation, uncertain prospects in world economic recovery and the steadily rising status and role of emerging markets and developing countries in international affairs. It was yet another important event in the ongoing BRICS cooperation. India has worked effectively in preparing for the summit. China tried to work with other BRICS members to push for positive outcomes. On the summit’s eve, the five nations resolved to resist protectionist tendencies worldwide.
The leaders of five emerging economic powerhouses affirmed not just their growing economic clout but also their impact on the global political order.
Delhi Declaration
At the end of the summit, BRICS leaders issued a Delhi Declaration. The Declaration hinted at backing an alternative candidate for the World Bank president's post which has always been appropriated by an American and exhorted the Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) to quickly realign their priorities and approach to the needs of the developing world. This is an agenda the five countries intend pursuing at the coming G20 meeting in Mexico as well.
The leaders also weighed the consequences of setting up a “BRICS Bank” and opted for a more contemplative approach by asking their Finance Ministers to examine its feasibility and report back at the next summit in Russia. They agreed that the bank should in no way emerge as a competitor to the World Bank and the IMF but provide funds for projects that do not find favor with these institutions.
In line with their professed commitment to multilateralism in economic and political problem solving, the leaders agreed to invest more in the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) which played a major role in catering to the interests of developing countries in the run-up to the setting up of the World Trade Organization (WTO).
Seeking to reinforce their growing economic heft with diplomatic clout, the BRICS grouping pitched for a bigger say in global governance institutions, including the United Nations and the IMF, and told the West that dialogue was the only way to resolve the Iranian nuclear issue and the Syria crisis.
The leaders of BRISC’s formulation on Iran came close to condemning the West's pressure tactics to make other countries obey their latest restrictions on trade ties, especially in the energy sphere. Saying that a conflict would have disastrous consequences, it wanted the two antagonists to resolve suspicions over Iran's nuclear program through talks on multilateral fora.
On Afghanistan, BRICS exhorted the international community to stay the course on the development front for 10 years after the West withdraws most of its combat troops by 2014-end and, on Russia's insistence, made a mention of checking narcotic trafficking.
In a fresh assertion, BRICS asked the West to implement the 2010 governance and quota reform before the 2012 IMF/World Bank annual meeting, as well as the comprehensive review of the quota formula to better reflect economic weights. They asked for enhancing the voice and representation of emerging market and developing countries by January 2013, followed by the completion of the next general quota review by January 2014.
In a signature step, the BRICS decided to create their first institution in the form of a BRICS-led South South Development Bank that will mobilise "resources for infrastructure and sustainable development projects in BRICS and other emerging economies and developing countries." The leaders directed their finance ministers "to examine the feasibility and viability of such an initiative, set up a joint working group for further study, and report back by the next summit."
The development banks of the five countries signed two pacts, including a master agreement on extending credit facility in local currency and BRICS multilateral letter of credit confirmation facility agreement, which could help scale up bilateral trade from $230 billion to $500 billion.
India’s Major Points
Addressing the summit, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh also said that the grouping has agreed to examine in "greater detail" a proposal to set up a South-South Development bank, funded and managed by BRICS and other developing countries.
Singh also urged member countries to speak in one voice on key issues such as the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) reforms. He suggested that BRICS countries should speak in one voice on issues such as reforms of the international body.
On UNSC reforms, Singh suggested that BRICS countries should speak in one voice on issues such as reforms of the international body.
He also said in their restricted session, the grouping also discussed the ongoing turmoil in West Asia and agreed to work together for a peaceful resolution of the crisis.
Touching upon the issue of terrorism, Singh said the countries should enhance cooperation against terrorism and other developing threats such as piracy, particularly emanating from Somalia.
UN Millennium Development Goals
BRICS nations are the defender and promoter of the interests of developing countries. In their cooperation, BRICS countries have committed to promoting South-South cooperation and North-South dialogue, endeavored to implement the UN Millennium Development Goals, worked for early realization of the goals set out in the mandate for the Doha development round negotiations, strived to secure a greater say for developing countries in global economic governance and fought all forms of protectionism.
Cooperation among BRICS countries is made necessary by the ongoing economic globalization and democratization in international relations. It is consistent with the trend of the times characterized by peace, development and cooperation, and fully conducive to building a harmonious world of durable peace and common prosperity.
Role of China
An impression is sought to be created that with its massive monetary reserves and political clout, China may exert undue influence in this bank. This is unlikely. Such a bank will not require too much paid-up capital (relative to the average size of respective sovereign reserves) if intelligent financial engineering can help sequester foreign reserves. This would mean that the smallest BRICS economy, South Africa, could easily commit an amount similar to that of China in the capital structure. Such doubts could be further allayed with the institution of a rotating Presidency of, say, a two-year term that could initially be restricted to the BRICS countries alone.
India-India Strategic Ties
The China-India strategic and cooperative partnership has made all-round progress in recent years. A sustained, sound and steady growth of relations between China and India, the two large developing countries sharing borders with each other, will serve not only the well-being of the two peoples but also peace, stability and prosperity in Asia and the world as a whole.
The Delhi Summit will be remembered forever for one major achievement, at least. Its expected decision to set up a BRICS bank on the lines of the World Bank may change the course of economic activity in the member-countries. The setting up of this new financial institution by the bloc that has brought together half of the world’s population may speed up infrastructure development programs in the BRICS countries and serve as a second line of financial defense in times of economic crisis as is being faced by Europe today.

Russian Presidential Election: Putin Wins Third Term

Russians voted on March 4 in presidential polls set to return strongman Vladimir Putin to the Kremlin for an unprecedented third term, as he faced public wrath over allegations of rigging in December’s parliamentary elections which was won by his United Russia party, even as Opposition leaders and Russian observers say they are seeing widespread violations in the elections.
Voters turned out at 90,000 polling stations across Russia spread over 21 hours for the marathon electoral process, that is being monitored through election observers and over 100,000 webcams.
Prime Minister Vladimir Putin has won Russia's presidential election. The present vote saw Putin, hoping to become president for a third time after swapping role as prime minister with his close aide Dmitry Medvedev.
Reports of Large-Scale Violations
The Central Election Commission said, the 59-year-old ex-KGB spy Putin has got 62 per cent of the 85 per cent votes counted. Exit polls conducted by two leading pollsters gave Putin 58-59 per cent. Putin needed to win more than 50 per cent to avoid a runoff.
Communist leader Gennady Zyuganov came second with over 17 per cent of the votes. The other three candidates polled less than 10 per cent each.
The election was marred by reports of large-scale violations. Opposition activists and observers have reported thousands of violations that involved multiple voting, known here as “carousels” — voting without proper documents and non-admission of monitors to polling stations.
Other Candidates
Putin's main challenger was considered to be Communist Gennady Zyuganov, who was running for a fourth time. The other candidates were ultra-nationalist Vladimir Zhirinovsky, tycoon Mikhail Prokhorov, who was standing as an independent, and former Upper House speaker Sergey Mironov, from the centre-left A Just Russia party.
Putin was Russia's president from 2000 to 2008, but was barred by the constitution from standing for a third consecutive term. He faces four challengers, three of whom he has defeated in previous elections.

India-Russia Summit: Efforts To Resolve Bilateral and International Issues

The India-Russia summit has recently been concluded in Moscow. During his discussions with Russian President Dmitry Medvedev and Prime Minister Vladimir Putin, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh made an emphatic point about the utility, execution and expansion of the Russia-assisted Koodankulam nuclear power project, underlines the unerring durability of the relations between the two countries. The value of the relationship for both has transcended changes of government in New Delhi and the changed character of the state from communist to capitalist in Moscow. There were contretemps in Russia when the switch-over to capitalism was in progress, but the dispelling of doubts was swift as the new masters in the Kremlin looked around their region and the globe.
India’s continued pairing with Russia on a range of issues — to do with national security on the political as well as the hardware side, science and technology, and now possibly the education sector in terms of the understanding reached at the just-ended summit — plays a role of balance at a time when India’s relations have been fruitfully advanced with the West, especially the United States. Anxieties in the minds of not a few that the United States is invading every sphere of policymaking in this country appear misplaced when the significance of the Russian connection is understood in its widest meaning. The coming into being of the BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India and China) bloc in international affairs in recent years further cements India-Russia relations, which are not bedeviled by irritants in the bilateral sphere.
Areas of Mutual Interest
The agreements covered all the key areas that underpin the “special and privileged” strategic partnership between the two countries — energy, defence, space, trade and investment, and working together on the international scene. While a formal agreement on Units 3 and 4 at Kudankulam nuclear power project was not signed, pending the resolution of the safety issue controversy in India, the sides moved forward with the project. They agreed on exceptional soft loan terms for the new reactors that will ease the financial burden for India at the time of a global economic slowdown. The talks in Moscow also firmed up prospects for India to expand its presence in Russian oil and gas through joint ventures with Gazprom and Novatek.
Besides the global and regional issues, India and Russia have to further expand their bilateral cooperation in different areas of mutual interest like trade and industry, defense-related matters and civilian nuclear energy.
The two countries do not have a mere buyer-seller relationship. The prime minister has to ensure that more joint ventures, particularly in the area of defense, are undertaken so that India gets cutting-edge technologies from Russia.
Defense Supplies and Technology
In the four decades since the Indo-Soviet treaty the global political, strategic and economic landscapes have changed dramatically, but the core of the bilateral relationship was (and remains) cooperation in defense supplies and technology. In the years following the treaty, Moscow became a very dependable source of defense sales and technology transfer. To be sure, there was uncertainty and disruption of supplies and spares after the implosion of the Soviet Union. But these proved manageable.
Following India’s nuclear tests of 1998 and the ensuing international censure and sanctions, New Delhi and Moscow began moving closer. After Vladimir Putin became president in 2000, Russia and India concluded a fresh strategic partnership agreement.Bilateral Trade TiesDefense and nuclear energy will figure prominently in the prime minister’s discussions in Moscow. Yet it is equally important that both sides resolve at the highest levels to upgrade their economic relations. Bilateral trade has risen from a mere $1.67 billion in 2003-04 to $8.75 billion in 2010. But this fell short of even the modest projection of $10 billion.
An inter-governmental commission has been considering a range of measures to redress this state of affairs, including a comprehensive economic cooperation agreement and revival of the north-south transport corridor through Iran. Unless the two countries are able to add a solid economic layer to their relationship, its strategic dimension cannot be fully leveraged.
Strategic Partnership
Diverse areas of cooperation, from pharmaceuticals and hydrocarbons to information technology and aerospace engineering, which are yet to be explored, allow for optimism. Also, increased defense cooperation between the two countries has provided noteworthy results. At the start of the previous decade, India was only concerned with buying military technology from Russia.
The strategic partnership agreement has also facilitated cooperation in the energy sector. As a net importer of energy, India has increasingly turned to Russia as a major source of oil and natural gas. The Oil and Natural Gas Corporation (ONGC) Videsh has a 20 per cent stake in the Sakhalin-I oil and gas fields. New Delhi has also been keen on acquiring a comparable stake in the Sakhalin-III projects. India has been pursuing this for nearly six years now, but Russia is yet to respond favorably.
International Challenges
Putin takes over as president the following year and India can be assured of Russia’s continuing support with him around. After all, Putin has taken India-Russia relations to a new level since 2000, following the dry years of Boris Yeltsin. The real challenge is to reconcile the positions taken by India and Russia on the Afghanistan issue. While India believes that the US-led the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) forces should stay in Afghanistan until local forces are adequately equipped to take over, Russia insists that they should leave by 2014.
Moreover, the two countries are also faced with the challenge of evolving complimentary responses to a host of international challenges. The most pressing of these stems from Afghanistan. Even as the US and its allies prepare to drawdown their military presence in Afghanistan, the insurgency remains strong.
Both India and Russia are concerned about continuing instability, but their emphases are somewhat different. India is keen to ensure that Afghanistan does not again become a haven for terrorists, whereas Russia is more concerned about the problem of drugs flowing from that country. Moscow’s somewhat narrow approach is understandable in the light of its troubled history of involvement in Afghanistan. But it will be interesting to see how Russia’s policy shapes up in the aftermath of the US drawdown. The endgame in Afghanistan will unfold at a time when Russia’s relations with the United States are dipping.

6th East Asia Summit Adopts 2 Declarations

The sixth East Asia Summit (EAS) has recently been held in the Indonesian resort island of Bali. The EAS is a gathering of leaders from 10 Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) countries – Brunei, Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, the Philippines, Thailand, Singapore and Vietnam– the Dialogue Partners and the United Nations.
Indonesian President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono addressed the opening ceremony that the combined forces of the participating countries are remarkable. New Zealand Prime Minister John Key and Russian President Dmitry Medvedev are represented by their respective Foreign Ministers.
The EAS discussed broad and strategic issues of common concern at the regional and international levels, and ways to enhance and strengthen the cooperation within five priority areas of the EAS, namely finance, energy, education, communicable diseases, and disaster management.
Joint Declarations
At the end of the summit, leaders adopted two declarations namely, the Declaration of the EAS on the Principles for Mutually Beneficial Relations, and Declaration of the 6th East Asia Summit on ASEAN Connectivity.
The first declaration contains basic norms and common principles taken from various previous basic documents including the UN Charter, the Treaty of Amity and Cooperation in Southeast Asia and other arrangements among EAS participating countries.
It will serve as the guidance of conduct for EAS participating countries toward promoting and maintaining peace, stability and prosperity in the region.
The second declaration includes connectivity as one of the key areas of cooperation of the East Asia Summit besides the existing five priorities, namely finance, energy, education, communicable diseases and disaster management.
This declaration will inter alia support and facilitate further cooperation between the ASEAN and other EAS participating countries in the Connectivity initiative, and a regional public- private partnership development agenda and will promote greater engagement and cooperation in people-to-people connectivity.
The EAS seeks to promote cooperation in political and security issues, boost economic growth and integration, and secure financial stability. At last year's summit in Vietnam, leaders formally agreed to expand the meeting to include the United States and Russia.
With the participation of the two world powers, the group hopes to strengthen cooperation on global challenges and discuss rules on maritime security and nuclear non-proliferation.
About EAS
The EAS is originally an annual gathering of 10-member ASEAN and six other East Asia countries, including Australia, China, India, Japan, South Korea and New Zealand. Established in 1967, ASEAN, which groups Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, Brunei, Vietnam, Laos, Myanmar and Cambodia, forms the core of the broader EAS.
In October 2010, ASEAN leader agreed at the end of the 17th ASEAN Summit to invite the United States and Russia to join the EAS in 2011, which increased the number of ASEAN dialogue partners to eight.
The EAS serves as a forum for dialogue on broad strategic issues of relevance to East Asia as well as other regional and global issues, with the focus on areas such as international terrorism, energy, infectious diseases, sustainable development, poverty reduction and others.
Relief measures for floods and other natural disaster will be a top agenda item for this year's EAS. Leaders will discuss how to recover their economic growth and prevent future natural disaster for the good of the whole region.

2012: Year of Change of Big Powers’ Governments

US President Barack Obama has announced that he would contest the presidential election in 2012. Not only he, the leadership of four more permanent members of the UN Security Council is also facing election phase in their respective countries and the change of leadership may possible be seen. Obama announced to participate in the presidential election at a time when he recalled his bombers from Libya. But perhaps to fulfill his this promise or for the time being to show the American people that he intends to fulfill his promises, including the promises he had made in 2008 that he would call back the US troops from across the world, but it is the phase of producing the proof of his US citizenship. He is presenting his birth certificate.
Economic Crisis
British Prime Minister David Cameron too faces elections and perhaps he too may be far away from the success because his coalition government may face any economic crisis. There are signs of change in China as well. Xi Jin Yung will replace Hu Jintao there.
In the case of Russia, the election of Russian President Dmitry Medvedev depends on Vladimir Putin.
The success of the French president depends on his success in Libya and his office is at stake in the Libyan war.
As far as Obama is concerned, he still enjoys popularity and is moving fast and the killing of Usama Bin Laden has upped his popularity graph and history is with him. Republicans have yet not nominated their candidate. Perhaps, the 2016 election may be their target because currently they have no personality, who could compete with Obama. They are, however, definitely being accused in the US that they do not take hard stance against the enemies and ignore friends. If Sarah Palin emerged successful, it would be a historical jerk but its chances are very slim. For the success, Obama also needs success in Libya while the game of the chances of success in Afghanistan and withdrawal of troops from there will have to be played whereas in the US, there is talk of dialogue with 400 Taliban.
The Americans have made much investment on Russian President Medvedev, as they consider him a moderate person and supporter of a moderate policy. The Americans believe that he would avoid the policy of confrontation with the US because their problems too are of very serious nature. This is the reason that he avoids raising voice against the US and NATO because he is aware of the difficulties hovering around Russia. Their economy is not on sound footing and their population is decreasing. They too face threat from the Islamic extremists and they face the threat of the vacation of Siberia. As far as China is concerned, Obama knows that China is preparing to challenge them. It will definitely happen one day.
Correcting World Situation
The Americans are saying themselves that the US hunger that it correct the world situation or can lesson the difficulties of the world has died and it has started looking inwards. Then, the Americans know a little less about the incoming Chinese president but they are supporters of establishing relations on the economic lines.
1. The China challenging the US and the competition between the US and China is unavoidable. It is very important question as what arrangement Obama makes for it.
2. The Russian wholly depends on one vote of Vladimir Putin as to whether he supports the Russian president or not or he himself becomes the president. If he himself becomes the president, the difficulties may increase for the US but the affairs of Putin are not much good.
3. Third issue is of Afghanistan. This issue will be very important in the election campaign of Obama and that whether he starts fulfillment of his promise or not. The American people will definitely want to see it.
4. Last, the most important thing is that another major terrorism incident can change the entire global scenario. Any non-state actor may do anything such that the power game in the world can be turn down. The world may plunge into a global war or the tension may increase in the world. If the US president wins but the British and French rulers face defeat and in addition to Putin does not accept the pro-US president in Russia, the scenario may change. Bu after the arrest and humiliation of the International Monetary Fund Chief Dominique Strauss-Kahn of French origin, who was a candidate for the French presidency, in a sex scandal, the chances of the success of the incumbent French president have increased. Thus, the US president is advancing the game of next five years.

Afghanistan-Russia Cooperation

Afghan President Hamid Karzai had gone to Russia recently leading a high-ranking delegation on a formal invitation of Russian President Dmitry Medvedev. During his two-day visit to Russia, Afghan President Karzai met Russian President Medvedev at the Kremlin House. Both presidents took part in a joint news conference after the meeting.

Welcoming his Afghan counterpart Karzai at the news conference, the Russian president expressed the determination that Russian would extend its cooperation with Afghanistan in trade and economic sector, and the trade transaction would be increased from last year's estimated $500 million.

Referring to strengthening of economic cooperation with Afghanistan, Medvedev said that in addition to modernizing the Naghlu power dam, central wind projects, factories of chemical fertilizers, and reconstruction of the Salang tunnel, Russia will also initiate power production projects in other provinces of the country, which will resolve problems of Afghanistan regarding power.

Boosting Defense Relations
The Russian president said at the news conference that in addition to cooperation with Afghanistan in the civil sector, his country will also continue providing support in the military sectors, which will start from extending the training of the National Army and the National Police of the country.

Similarly, he added that Russia would also increase the number of its experts in civil as well as military sectors in Afghanistan.

Referring to provision of academic scholarships to Afghan youths in Russia, Medvedev said: 'In the field of promoting and strengthening education in Afghanistan, we will continue our cooperation with the country, so that its youths receive higher education in Russia. Just now a number of students of Afghanistan are engaged in study in different fields in Russia.'

Medvedev announced the support of his country to the peace and national reconciliation process in Afghanistan, saying Russia would increase its support and cooperation in strengthening security foundations for establishing peace and stability in the country so that Afghanistan being an independent country gets strong national foundations and it can independently protect its land after withdrawal of international forces, and achieve considerable progress in different sectors with each passing year.

Fight Against Terrorism
Pointing to the international fight against terrorism, the Russian president said: 'Russia is cooperating in the field of providing transit facilities to international forces for establishment of peace and stability in Afghanistan and the region, so that these forces are able to further extend and make effective the joint struggle against terrorism.'

Medvedev said that Russian and Afghanistan had ancient relations, and termed Karzai's visit to Russian opening of a new chapter in the relations between the two countries. He said that strengthening and promoting the relations could further protect national interests of the two countries.

At the news conference, Afghan President Karzai thanked the Russian president and the people of the country for the better hospitality, and termed his visit to Russia very fruitful and successful in political and economic sector.

Referring to the ancient relations between Afghanistan and Russia, Karzai said: 'We have been having ties with each other for a long time, and now we are trying to have further close and deep relations.'

He acknowledged the support of Russia with Afghanistan in different sectors during the past 10 years, and hoped that this support would be further enhanced and extended in future.
During the news conference, the Afghan president sought the Russian president's cooperation in timely completion of the process of transferring responsibility of security from international forces to the Afghan forces.

He added: 'We demand of Russia to provide every kind of support in the field of training the National Army and the National Police of Afghanistan so that the Afghan forces are able to independently defend their land after the withdrawal of international forces from Afghanistan.'
Similarly, Karzai sought President Medvedev's support and cooperation in provision of scholarships to Afghan students and, similarly, reconstruction of projects carried out by the Soviet Union of the time in Afghanistan, and completion of a number of other projects, which have been left incomplete long ago.

At the news conference, Karzai invited Russian President Medvedev to visit Afghanistan at a suitable time, which he accepted.

Answering a question that United States is not repeating the mistake of the Soviet Union of the time in Afghanistan, the Russian president said that Russia was closely observing the mission of international forces in Afghanistan. He said: 'We want that their mission is successfully completed; that is why we are continuing our cooperation with them in the transit sector. Russia wants establishment of peace in the country and the region. International forces should not commit strategic mistakes that can become the reason for their failure.'

Russia is supporting Afghanistan so that its forces can protect their land themselves, and the international forces can leave Afghanistan one day with pride after completing their mission.
Replying to a question at the news conference regarding opening of a new chapter of relations between Afghanistan and Russia, Karzai said: 'Russia has very old relations with Afghanistan, the two countries understand each other well, and our relations have improved since 2002, and further promotion and strengthening of the relations is in the interest of both countries and the region.'

Similarly, Afghan President Karzai, and Russian President Medvedev also signed before the media a joint declaration of cooperation in different sectors between the two countries.

Similarly, before the press conference, Afghanistan Foreign Minister Dr Zalmay Rasool and Russian Economic Development Minister Livonia signed a trade and economic cooperation agreement in the presence of the presidents of the two countries, under which a number of projects will be initiated in the power production sector in different provinces of Afghanistan, including reconstruction of the Salang tunnel and central wind projects.

Afghan President Karzai met Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin on 20 January. At the meeting held at the residence of the Russian prime minister, both sides stressed further promotion of political, economic, trade and cultural relations between the two countries.

Putin expressed the determination that his country would extend cooperation with Afghanistan in different sectors, saying: Russia is ready to provide support to Afghanistan in those fields where it needed the most.

On the second day of his visit to the Russia, Afghan President Karzai said in his address to students of the Diplomatic Academy of the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs: 'As a great political and economic country, Russia is capable of supporting not only Afghanistan but also other countries of the world in different fields.'

The president said: 'Afghanistan and Russia have had mutual relations for a century. The said relations are very old and everlasting, and Afghanistan is among those countries which the Soviet Union of the time has helped in different fields and has completed many projects in this country.'

He said that the relations between Afghanistan and Russia had grown stronger during the past 10 years and Russia was among those first countries whose heads he had met in 2002.
About the economic and trade relations between Russia and Afghanistan and similarly the military support, Karzai said that the approximation of the annual transaction between the two countries now reached $500 million and Russia was the country that did have economic and trade cooperation with Afghanistan and also supported them in training the National Army and the National Police.

Referring to the presence of international community in Afghanistan, the president said: 'In a situation when Afghanistan has relations with the United States, NATO and many other countries in different fields, it also holds very good bilateral relations with Russia; each of which is worth significance in its own place and no one can take the place of other.'

Referring to the better terms and conditions for investment in Afghanistan, the president said: 'Now Afghanistan is offering better terms and conditions for Russian investors, which will enable them to expand their projects by investing in Afghanistan.'

New Phase of Ties
About the fight against narcotics, Karzai said: 'The fight against this menace requires wide global efforts. Afghanistan is unable to fight against this phenomenon alone because the international mafia is involved in producing and transporting narcotics. We all should launch a strong and wide struggle for eliminating this menace.'

President Karzai met the head and members of the Russian Trade House and a number of traders of the country at the hall of the Trade House of the said country on 21 January.
Referring to trade relations between Afghanistan and Russia at the meeting, the Afghan president said that trade relations between the two countries existed for a long time, even before the formation of the Soviet Union, an example of which is the purchase of 50,000 tons of raisin from Afghanistan during the period of the Soviet Union. Construction of the Salang tunnel had also start during that time.

Pointing to the new phase of relations between Russia and Afghanistan, Karzai said that Afghanistan and Russia had entered into a new phase of their relations since 2002 and the approximation of transaction between the two countries reached $500 million per annum, now.

Free Trade Economy
Karzai added: 'Keeping in view that Afghanistan and Russia are situated in the same region, this feature can prepare ground for investment for traders of the two countries. He informed that Afghanistan welcomed the initiatives and presence of Russian investors in the country.'
He said: 'At present, Afghanistan has made quick progress in the telephonic service sector, and this country depended on free trade economy, its laws have also been formed on this basis.'
Similarly, about the performance of both Afghan and foreign joint companies in Afghanistan, the president said that the aforementioned companies were making good profits. He added that the economy of Afghanistan was improving; our country had $180 million in its coffers in 2002 which has now reached approximately $5 billion.

Similarly, pointing to natural reserves of Afghanistan, the president said: 'The natural reserves of Afghanistan are much richer than estimated in the past. According to initial studies, Afghanistan had natural reserves worth $3 trillion. On the basis of this study, I invite you to take advantage from the opportunities and sources available in Afghanistan, and invest in the country.

During the meeting, the Russian investors showed willingness to make investment in Afghanistan in different fields and demanded to functionalize the ports of Hairatan and Torghandi for the facilitation of trade between Afghanistan and Russia. Similarly, they showed their willingness in reconstruction of power production factories, mono-technique institutes and the Kabul Polytechnic, which were established at the time of the former Soviet Union.

Russian President Visits India

After the successful back-to-back visit to India by US President Barack Obama and Chinese Prime Minister Wen Jiabao, Russian President Dmitry Medvedev's visit can be termed significant in view of the fact that the two countries have renewed their relations in the light of the global situation. India has specifically conveyed to Russia that its increasing closeness with the United States and China would, in no way hamper or affect India-Russia relations. India further conveyed that it is seriously determined to strengthen and expand their mutual relations.

Important and Significant Agreements
During the Russian president's visit, several important and significant agreements were inked between the two countries. These agreements reflect the deep desire to further strengthen the relations. The statement made by the Russian president on terrorism endorses the Indian stand on the menace and gives a hint of closer ties on this particular issue.

The two countries have set a target to increase bilateral trade up to $20 billion by 2015. It is the manifestation of Russia's acknowledgement that India is a fast emerging economy in the world. It, further, reveals Russia's desire to maintain closer cooperation with India in the economic sector. The two countries have recognized the need of a more inclusive and expansive agreement to carry their economic ties to new heights. The useful discussions the two leaders had on investment in the private sector promise better outcome and greater possibilities in the near future.

Strategic Partnership
The way the two countries have recognized that cooperation in the nuclear energy sector is the significant part of a strategic partnership, reveals that despite having entered into a civil nuclear deal with the United States, India attaches great significance to its trusted and old friend in this sector. India, in fact, wants to keep all options open as far as nuclear energy is concerned and is viewing the nuclear sector as greatly significant in renewing old relations with Russia. Russian expertise in the nuclear sector is globally acknowledged. Though some doubts and apprehensions were being cast prior to the visit by the Russian president but it has become absolutely clear after his visit that the two countries would progress in the field of nuclear cooperation as well.

During Medvedev's visit, India and Russia signed 30 agreements, which include, defense, nuclear cooperation, technology, strengthening diplomatic relations and improved relations in trade and commerce. In view of the increasing defense and security needs of India, an agreement on fighter planes, worth over $30 billion, was also signed. It makes it abundantly clear that Russia continues to be an important and trusted ally of India in the field of defense. The two have also expressed unanimity on development and research on peaceful uses of nuclear energy.

UN Role Against Terrorist
The two countries have also agreed to simplify the procedures for grant of visas so as to further cement their diplomatic relations and bringing the peoples of the two countries closer. Yet another significant agreement was reached on hydrocarbons, pharmaceuticals and gas under which both intend to extend their cooperation in these fields. Though the Russian president did not comment on the issue of India's inclusion in the UN Security Council, Russia had already extended support to India on the issue.

The harsh stand that the Russian president has adopted against terrorism in indeed sweet to ears of Indian leadership. The most significant aspect of it is that the Russian president clearly gave an indication to make UN role against terrorist organizations more effective, imposing stringent sanctions and bans by international organization on terrorist outfits. He even stressed the need of simplifying international procedure on the issue of extradition.

In short, the visit by the Russian president can be easily called an attempt to give a new direction to the mutual friendship, and a positive progress in their relations.

New Chapter in Russia-Norway Relations

A new chapter has been added in the relations between Russia and Norway. A 40-year-old negotiation saga has been concluded. But the book is not closed -- there will be more writing in it.
Russian President Dmitry Medvedev emphasizes the point by banging lightly on the table। The page has been turned, he says। A beaming satisfied Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg has released the news -- there is agreement on where the border will be drawn between Norway and Russia in the Barents Sea and the Arctic Sea; 175,000 sq km of sea floor and ocean area have been divided in two equal parts। It has only taken 40 years. 'A sensation,' the Russian president calls the news. He is not exaggerating.

Beginning of Historic Step
So from here on we must, unfortunately, use the well-worn cliches about what happened in Oslo and, as told by reliable sources, actually took place roughly when the clock had passed midnight, in a negotiating room। That is when the 'boundary line for the continental shelf and the ocean area in the Barents Sea and Arctic Sea' was settled.

It was a historic day। It really marks a new era, even if it is now up to governments as well as business sectors and others to use the potential and possibilities triggered by a clear border agreement. That will be the challenge. The first step is, naturally, to get all the technical details in place. This means, among other things, that the maps must be drawn and checked and stamped by the respective authorities -- which in Russia is the Russian Navy. An extensive body of regulations on, among other things, the exploitation of oil and gas resources that cross the line has been drawn up in both Norwegian and Russian. But it must also be approved in all its details. And, finally, it remains to get the agreement signed and ratified by the Storting in Norway and the Duma in Russia.

International Negotiations
So why did the agreement come now? Something was in the works, which can be seen afterward from the positive statements President Medvedev before the visit। He talked about a 'sensible compromise,' and he said that Russia has considerably more difficult territorial problems with other nations than with Norway. Those would be clear enough signals. 'Compromise' has not always been the most prominent word in the Russian vocabulary. Land areas are difficult to divide; that applies not only to Russia. Then, it is easier, after all, to draw a line on a continental shelf where there are neither reefs nor islands.

But anyone who has participated in or followed complicated international negotiations knows that there are many technical and political reefs in the sea। It is easy to run aground at the last moment. So keeping it secret, as President Medvedev admitted with a smile that Russia has deep traditions for, was necessary because no one was quite sure before it was possible to be quite sure.

It helped that the negotiators agreed that everything they had agreed to over the course of 40 years should remain। No new or unexpected demands or wishes or interpretations appeared at the last moment.

Developing Personal Relationships
But most crucial of all must have been that now there is a Russian leader who thought the time was ripe to resolve a long-standing problem with a neighboring country। A lengthy buildup of trust probably also contributed. So did the well-developed personal relationships between Russian and Norwegian leaders. Stoltenberg and Medvedev have had many meetings, and so have Foreign Ministers Jonas Gahr Store and Sergey Lavrov.

In addition, the lack of a boundary has prevented the development of the energy resources, and that has made it more complicated to administer the stock of cod and other types of fish that literally swim in both the Norwegian and Russian zones। With a border it becomes simpler: On the Norwegian side Norwegian authorities do the checking, on the Russian side Russian authorities monitor.

The temporary gray zone from 1977, which was to regulate fisheries in that part of the region, was not particularly favorable to Norway; it goes very far west। But now that the boundary is in place, for the two countries' economic zones as well, the temporary agreement can be left to the history books, along with the role played by then Undersecretary Arne Trehold behind the scenes.

Positive Political Effects
For Russia and President Medvedev the compromise is probably a diplomatic feather in the cap, after several diplomatic successes recently। For Stoltenberg and Jonas Gahr Store as well. Russia has rid itself of a problem in the relationship with a small and friendly neighbor, who is well anchored in North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and in a Western community. That could generate positive political effects. Medvedev did not exaggerate when he pointed out that the agreement will also have significance for European security.

One result of the agreement, connected with the development in the gas market, might be that energy from the Barents Sea could be conducted to the continent via an extension of the pipeline grid on the Norwegian continental shelf. In that case it means less investment for Norway and Russia, now that shale gas has made liquefied gas, Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG), from the north less attractive in the United States and internationally in general.

Resolving US-North Korea Nuclear Issue

A new treaty on Reduction and Limitation of Strategic Offensive Arms was signed recently between Russia and the United States in Prague, the Czech Republic. The treaty signed by Russian President Dmitry Medvedev and US President Barack Obama stipulates that Russia and the United States should pare back the nuclear weapons deployed for action by approximately one-third. It is said that even if the treaty is implemented properly, as it should, Russia and the United States will still have about 1,550 strategic nuclear warheads each after seven years.

Nuclear Arms Reduction
In light of the fact that a long time has passed since the end of the Cold War and in light of the fact that the new environment in which the danger of a global nuclear war has greatly diminished, it can be said that the nuclear arms reduction has little practical significance.

Given that nuclear-armed countries, other than the two signatories to the recent treaty, have at best hundreds of nuclear warheads, Russia and the United States would still be able to retain overwhelming nuclear supremacy even if the treaty goes into effect.

It is quite natural that unlike the disarmament treaties signed during the Cold War period, the course of negotiations for signing the treaty that has just been signed and the news on the signing of it have triggered various reactions from all over the world.

The person in charge in the United States, who declared his promise to build a world free of nuclear weapons following his inauguration, has pursued the signing of a Russia-US Treaty on Reduction and Limitation of Strategic Offensive Arms as the first outcome of his commitment.

Pressure From Nonnuclear Countries
The United States kicked up the commotion of making the signing of the treaty a success with the intention of placating the pressure from nonnuclear countries that call for nuclear disarmament and raising its international popularity in the Review Conference of the Parties to the Treaty on the Nuclear Non-Proliferation of Treaty (NPT) scheduled to be held in Washington next month.

Regardless of the background, environment, and the objective sought behind it, the latest treaty, though not satisfactory, showed that to a certain degree nuclear disarmament is possible among countries if there is confidence instead of hostile relations between them.

Witnessing the signing of the Russia-US treaty on reduction and limitation of strategic offensive arms, the world is paying a great deal of attention to the issue of denuclearizing the Korean peninsula where the danger of a nuclear war is the greatest internationally.

What does the present status of the Six-Party Talks, which the wall of distrust -- called sanctions -- imposed on North Korea has kept it from being resumed, indicate? It indicates that issues cannot be resolved unless there is confidence between the parties concerned.

In order to put the process of denuclearizing the Korean peninsula, which has repeatedly experienced setbacks and failures, back on track, primary attention should be paid to building mutual confidence between North Korea and the United States, the parties primarily responsible for the nuclear issue. This is the conclusion we have arrived at.

Parties to Armistice Agreement
That is the purpose for proposing to the parties to the Armistice Agreement the holding of talks at an early date to replace the Armistice Agreement with a peace agreement this year, which marks the 50th anniversary of the Korean war.

In order to build confidence between North Korea and the United States, a peace agreement should be signed first and foremost to bring an end to the state of war, the root cause of the hostile relations. The formula aimed at advancing denuclearization before discussing the issue of establishing a peace mechanism on the Korean peninsula has ended up in failure.

To speed up denuclearization by breaking the vicious circle of distrust while building confidence between North Korea and the United States, the signing of a peace agreement is the only way and there is no alternative.

The signing of a peace agreement is the only reasonable and practical method for realizing the denuclearization of the Korean peninsula. There has never been a case in history, in which parties in hostilities dropped their guns before building confidence.

Denuclearization of Korean Peninsula
In a state of war, where the parties concerned have their guns trained on each other, the distrust can never be removed, nor can talks be held smoothly, let alone denuclearization. Given its peculiar necessity and urgency, the peace agreement should have been signed a long time ago independent of the nuclear issue in the first place.

Had durable peace mechanism been built on the Korean peninsula early on, neither the nuclear issue nor the issue of denuclearization would have arisen. If and when a peace agreement is signed, it would expeditiously help remove the North Korea-US hostile relations and advance the denuclearization of the Korean peninsula.

The holding of negotiations for concluding a peace agreement alone undoubtedly will provide an effective driving force behind the denuclearization process.

US, Russia Sign New Nuclear Arms Reduction Treaty

The United States and Russia signed a new nuclear arms reduction treaty on 8 April, marking a first step in US President Barack Obama's comprehensive strategy toward a world without nuclear weapons. The new START Treaty was signed by US President Obama and his Russian counterpart Dmitry Medvedev in Prague.

Although the signing of the treaty came after the expiration of START1 (Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty), the fact that both countries managed to reach an agreement that could be a milestone for future nuclear arms reductions in one year showed the underlying strength and determination of the Obama administration regarding the reduction of nuclear arsenals. However, the road to the complete abolition of nuclear weapons is still very long and steep.

Tactical Nuclear Weapons
The new treaty reduces the current maximum number of strategic nuclear warheads that can be deployed by 30 percent. But Daryl Kimbal, executive director of the Arms Control Association, says: 'Undeployed nuclear warheads, tactical nuclear weapons, and other elements of nuclear arms stockpiles must also be reduced.' More than 20,000 nuclear weapons will still exist in the world.

In line with the United States' Nuclear Posture Review (NPR) announced on 6 April, Obama said at his news conference that after the new nuclear arms control treaty goes into effect, he intended to pursue further nuclear arms negotiations with Russia targeting all nuclear weapons, including tactical nuclear weapons and undeployed nuclear warheads. However, Russia is still deeply distrustful about the United States' Missile Defense (MD) plans -- some voices in Russia suggesting that Russia would withdraw from the new treaty if the United States expands its MD program in Europe -- and uncertainty shadows any future negotiations.

The NPR also declared that the United States would not use nuclear weapons against any nonnuclear country that obeys the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT). But in regards to countries, particularly with Iran and North Korea in mind, that violate the obligation not to proliferate nuclear arms, the NPR also concluded that the United States could not renounce the option to use nuclear weapons against such countries. Even if progress is made in greatly reducing nuclear arms, the reality in the world is that nations are unable to commit to 'zero nuclear arms.'

International Community's Responsibility
What the Obama administration is looking at beyond the new nuclear arms reduction agreement is the issue of nuclear nonproliferation. The most important issue now is preventing Iran's nuclear development, which could set off a nuclear arms race in the Middle East. The spread of nuclear weapons technology and nuclear-related materials by North Korea is also a pressing problem. The offensive in 2009 by the armed Taliban Islamic fanatics in Pakistan suddenly gave a new reality to the nightmare of nuclear weapons falling into the hands of terrorists.

At the nuclear security summit to be held in Washington on 12-13 April, the Obama administration will raise discussion on the creation of a system to secure and control nuclear materials to prevent nuclear terrorism. At the NPT Review Conference to be held in May, the White House will also urge a restructuring of provisions for strengthening measures that can be taken when countries violating the NPT declare they are withdrawing from the treaty.

Medvedev-Obama Summit and New START Treaty

The new START Treaty to be signed by Russian and US Presidents Dmitry Medvedev and Barack Obama in Prague on April 8 creates real possibilities for saving funds even in the near future, for instance, at the time of verification of its implementation. The Russian and US delegations to the signing ceremony will also include legislators. It is impossible to expect 100 percent synchronization of the ratification because of different procedures in Russia and the United States.

The process has three phases in Russia, including hearings at the State Duma and the Federation Council and approval by the chief of state, and two phases in the United States (Senate hearings and approval by the chief of state). At the same time, Senate procedures take longer.

Preparation for Ratification

The State Duma is thoroughly preparing for the ratification. However, Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov has promised that the treaty would be submitted to the house by the end of April. There will be preliminary consultations or even special hearings. There are no disagreements over the content of the new treaty.

The US side said that the treaty did not limit missile defense systems but affirmed a link between strategic defensive and offensive weapons. This link allows Russia to quit the treaty in case of a unilateral breach of the balance of forces. That would be a deterring factor for the United States.

The treaty will be subject to ratification and will come into force at a time of exchange of instruments of ratification. Its period of operation is ten years. A provision is made for prolonging the treaty on a decision of the Sides for a period of no longer than five years if it is not replaced earlier by a subsequent agreement on reduction or limitation of strategic offensive weapons.

Implementation of Treaty

The treaty's implementation will not necessitate allocation of additional appropriations from the federal budget. Obligations, provided for by the treaty, will be implemented thanks to funds, provided for by federal bodies of executive power for appropriate activities.In addition, following reduction of the nuclear potential, redundant from the viewpoint of containment, the burden of its servicing will decrease in future, naturally.

The new treaty also creates real possibilities to save funds even in the near future, for instance, for verification of its implementation. At the same time, some difficulties may arise in creating favorable public opinion with respect to the document. Regrettably, both sides underestimated, at some stage, activities and antagonism of opponents to the development of Russian-American relations. Many of them exploited their criticism of the future Treaty as an instrument of pumping up political confrontation between the two countries.

Ensuring Global Security
This document, the new US nuclear strategy, has not been published yet and we do not have the opportunity to examine it closely. However, at first glance and judging by what President Obama has said, I have a positive opinion about this document, since it is a considerable step toward the Russian concept and in keeping with how Russia sees the problem of ensuring global security.

Hopefully, after the new treaty on strategic offensive weapons is signed by Russia and the US, all incomplete and unclear aspects will be removed and the treaty will be not just a diplomatic document, but truly reflect Russian and US stances on this issue.

Three Major Issues

At the same time, there are three main issues on which the White House could make its stance clearer. He recalled that the Russian leadership had recently proposed to keep nuclear arsenals based only in the countries where they currently exist. Russia has no nuclear weapons beyond its borders, whereas the US tactical nuclear weapons are deployed in Germany, Italy, Belgium, the Netherlands and, if I am not mistaken, Turkey, as well as the US.

The second issue is the commitment of the two leading world superpowers not to deploy nuclear weapons in space. For now, the US has not been deploying nuclear weapons in space, but as this is technically feasible one cannot entirely rule it out.

The third issue is the ratification of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT). Russia has long ratified it, but the US has not.

US Decides To Withdraw Anti-Missile Plan

The US foreign policy led by President Barack Obama has gone through a spate of reversal. First, the US President announced the US intention to hold direct talks with North Korea. This is followed by urging France, Germany, United Kingdom, and Russia to work together and engage in talks with Iran, a country deemed by the United States as "axis of evil".

Obama's Annoucement
Now, President Obama has again announced that the United States will withdraw former US President Bush's proposal to establish the anti-Iran missile defense system in Poland and the Czech Republic. However, President Obama's latest announcement on the withdrawal of the US missile defense system in Eastern Europe has immediately received a hostile reaction from the Republicans, including criticism of Senator McCain who was defeated by Obama during the presidential elections. These Republicans pointed directly to the fact that President Obama has betrayed US allies in order to please Russia.

As a result, the White House has also come up with an explanation quickly to explain that as a matter of fact, President Obama did not "abolish" this missile defense program, but instead it is President Obama's goal to replace this missile defense plan entirely with a new one.

Although the Obama government did not explain the type of new missile defense system it will use to replace the present missile defense system as proposed by former US President Bush, the US Government does say that it will replace it with a new system that has hundreds of missiles, mobile radar units, including the deployment of the radar in space, to protect the US troops and also the US allies in Europe. It added that ultimately, this new missile defense system to be deployed in Europe will also strengthen the US internal home security.

Iranian Nuclear Issue
President Obama also explained that he made this decision after accepting a congressional panel's discussion on the issue. President Obama said that according to the latest intelligence analysis, Iran's short range and medium-range missiles were most threatening. Obama's explanation is obviously saying that in the near future, Iran will not be able to obtain long-range missiles.

Although the Obama government did make clear that President Obama's decision to cancel the missile defense plan in East Europe has "nothing to do" with Russia, but it is an undisputable fact that to deter Teheran from moving toward its nuclear weapon research development, the United States must gain Russia's cooperation and support. Earlier, the United States has already hinted the possibility that the United States might abolish the US missile defense deployment in order to exchange from Moscow its promise for not selling Russia's advance missiles to Iran.

US-Russia Cooperation
In response, Russian President Dmitry Medvedev immediately welcomed President Obama's announcement. The decision by President Obama to withdraw its anti missile defense system in Europe can undeniably "warm up" the cool ties between Russia and the United States and can have some rebound effect on US-Russian bilateral ties.

However, whether the decision made by President Obama over the US antimissile plan in Europe can have a long-term and positive impact on the bilateral ties between Russia and the United States or not will still have to depend on how President Obama is going to handle NATO's eastward expansion issue. This is because all along, Russia has been worrying about that the influence of the United States and NATO's eastward expansion plan will spread to the Russian borders.

Disappointment for European Allies
As far as the European leaders are concerned, who have all along supported the US policy, President Obama's announcement to withdraw its anti missile defense plan is a "disappointment" or even an "embarrassment." To Poland and the Czech Republic, the two countries that can sense the direct impact as a consequent of President Obama's decision to withdraw its missile defense plan there, they are more concerned that others that the United States will eventually "reduce" the security commitments to them. All along, these two nations maintain that the US antimissile defense deployment in their countries is an indirect warning to Russia not to have any bad idea toward them.

The other former Eastern European countries such as Georgia and Ukraine, of course, have reason to worry too. They might wonder if it is because the United States wants to focus its attention to tackle the problems in North Korea, Iran, and Afghanistan that the United States has now ignored the US security commitments toward them.

Shanghai Cooperation Organisation Summit

The Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) Summit was held recently in Yektarinburg (Russia). The summit coincided with Prime Minister Dr Manmohan Singh’s participation in the Brazil-Russia-India-China (BRIC) meeting as also the SCO meeting. Six countries are included in the SCO, i.e. Russia, China, Kyrgyzstan, Kazakhstan, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan. Terrorism and defense are the main focus of their attention. India, Pakistan, Iran, and Mongolia have been invited to the meeting as mere observers. Apart from Russia and China, the other four countries are in Central Asia. A large part of Russia is confronting terrorism. So is Sinkiang in China, which is adjacent to the troubled region in Russia. Therefore, these countries bear special relevance in the matter. India had already received the status of an observer in 2005. It is, however, participating for the first time so actively and strongly. At their annual summit in Dushanbe in August 2008 the SCO leaders accepted Russian President Dmitry Medvedev’s proposal to invite the heads of state and government of the observer nations to SCO close-door meetings in order “to allow their views to weigh in.”

It is for the first time that the Indian Prime Minister participated in the SCO meeting where India enjoys only an observer status. In the past, India sent only ministers to attend SCO meetings.

The SCO summit provided an opportunity to Dr. Singh not only to interact with the SCO members, but also with Pakistan President Asif Ali Zardari, Afghanistan President Hamid Karzai and other leaders. This is suggestive of two things. First, it is a reflection of importance that India attaches to Russia, the host country. Second, it also signifies India’s priority to Central Asia.

Powerful Regional Organisation
The SCO essentially remains a grouping of Russia, most of the former Muslim republics of the ersrwhile Soviet Union, and China. These are countries that are contiguous or in very close proximity with one another — in terms of history, politics, and current threat perceptions. The formation of SCO possibly helps the former Soviet republics to maintain a positive neutrality between Russia and China, and help each other as well as these two giants in the context of fighting Islamist terrorism in SCO’s home terrain, the Central Asia theatre. The SCO countries are also hydrocarbon-rich as producers, and some of them — notably India and China — are massive consumers of energy. On paper, at least, the SCO can make it possible for energy to be available to member-states on favourable terms.

Over the years the SCO has evolved as one of the most potentially powerful regional organisations to appear in post-cold war Asia. The regional grouping came into being in April 1996, when Russia, China, Kazakhstan, Kyrgizstan and Tajikistan met in Shanghai. In June 2004, Mongolia was granted observer status. A year later, India, Iran and Pakistan were granted the rank of observers.

The inclusion of observer members resulted from the confidence that the SCO would expand its strategic and economic interest beyond Central Asia. Choosing which states to admit was the result of delicate political maneuvering and compromise between Beijing and Moscow, with former pushing for admission of India and Pakistan as observers and the latter refusing to consider the question of observers unless Iran was included.

The SCO ever since its inception has emerged as an important forum for strategic cooperation between the former Soviet Central Asian states as well as essential conduit between East and Central Asia. The SCO’s members have repeatedly insisted that it would be considered as a community based on mutual cooperation rather than alliance against any specific adversary.

Security Problems
The SCO security agenda has recently shifted from counter-balancing the US and North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) in Central Asia towards dealing with growing security threats from Afghanistan. India took part in the SCO conference on Afghanistan held in Moscow in March and welcomed its plan for the SCO to increase its role in international efforts to combat terrorism, drug trafficking and organised crime in the region in close collaboration with Kabul through the SCO-Afghanistan contact group.

The Central Asian region currently faces a host of traditional and non- traditional security problems including terrorism and political extremism, weak and sometimes porous states in the region. There is also the concern over the role of West in Eurasia, especially following the events of 9/11 and development of American and other international forces in Afghanistan.

The Organisation’s official Charter was unveiled at its second conference in St. Pettersburg in June 2002, which confirmed the SCO’s mandate to build mutual trust, friendship and good neighborliness.

The other key elements of the document included the confirmation that a Regional Anti-terrorism Structure (RTS) would be created as an information nexus for the regional security and that decision would be based on consensus. As an acknowledgement of the growing influence of Uzbekistan within Central Asian regional dynamics as well as the need to keep Tashkent engaged in SCO’s affairs, the Tashkent based Centre on Anti-terrorism, which was originally planned to open in Bishkek, was instead opened in Tashkent in June 2004.

On security side, India favours exchanging information with the SCO member countries. Besides, issues like the menace of terrorism and energy requirement are important consideration for India’s engagement with the SCO.

India has avoided high profile engagement with the SCO and has calibrated its relationship with the organisation on trade and economic issues. India is not inclined to align with the six-nation grouping in military, strategic and political terms. As an observer, India wants to be a hands-on participant, especially in improving trade and development related forum set up by SCO.

Other Initiatives
India also offers to share its experiences as well as learn from the SCO about opening up of the banking sector and deepening capital market. It is only after recent developments in the region and particularly after the US President Barak Obama, initiated his proactive policy of engagement in Afghanistan in which India has a great stake, that New Delhi has evinced greater interest in the regional grouping.

Although India has a low key engagement with the SCO, the Afghanistan issue has, however, added a further impetus to India’s engagement with the SCO. It is against this backdrop that India’s Special Envoy Satinder Lamba directly appealed for granting SCO membership to Afghanistan at the last meeting of the SCO on Afghanistan in March 2009.

Afghanistan joined SAARC in 2007 but it is neither a member nor observer in the SCO, though it is part of the SCO-Afghanistan Contact Group established in November 2005 to provide a mechanism for SCO member-states to jointly contribute to re-construction and stability in Afghanistan.