By Vishnu Makhijani, IANS
New Delhi : In a powerful signal to India’s defence planners – and also to China – Defence Minister A.K. Anotny has declared that infrastructure development in the country’s northeast is his top priority and that he will throw his full weight behind the effort.
In doing so, he has also signalled a paradigm shift in the strategic thinking of the Indian defence establishment that had hitherto been wary of strengthening the road network in the border areas of the northeast and Jammu and Kashmir – in spite of funds being sanctioned for the purpose – on the ground that this could be to the country’s disadvantage in times of hostilities.
With the threat of a conventional war with China or Pakistan now in the realm of improbability, it is only logical that the defence minister should turn to road development as the vehicle that will power the northeast’s economic development.
Speaking on two separate occasions during his just concluded visit to the strategically placed Sikkim, Antony maintained the journey had been an “eye opener” and had starkly brought to him the need to quickly improve road connectivity in the state and elsewhere in the northeast.
“Infrastructure on the other side is far, far superior. This is an eye opener,” the minister told reporters Sunday after his first visit to Nathu La on the Line of Control (LAC) with China. “There is no comparison between their side and our side. This is an eye opener.”
The import of the statement is significant, as is the spot where it was made.
Nathu La, which lies on the Ancient Silk Route, was sealed by India after the 1962 Sino-Indian War. It was reopened in 2006 following numerous bilateral trade agreements between the two countries. It is now one of only three trading border posts between China and India, the other two being Shipkila in Himachal Pradesh and Lipulekh in Uttarakhand.
While Nathu La escaped the scars of the 1962 war, it is one of two potential hotspots of conflict – after the Tawang-Bum La region of Arunachal Pradesh – even as India and China move to resolve their vexed boundary dispute. This is because of its location close to the tri-junction of India, China and Bhutan where, in November, Chinese troops reportedly “destroyed” two bunkers on the other side of the border.
China questions the alignment of its border with parts of Bhutan. Given that India has stoutly maintained that the incident didn’t occur on its territory, the inference is obvious that it happened in Bhutan, with which New Delhi has close strategic and other ties.
What then, is the importance of road connectivity in the northeast’s border areas?
Various analysts who have written about India’s mauling in 1962 have blamed this on the lack of roads from railway junctions to key points on the border to transport supplies in times of hostilities.
To quote just one instance, the railway junction at Tezpur in Assam, the offloading point for supplies to Tawang and the Bum La pass, is an eight-hour drive from Tawang, from where it takes another 90 minutes to reach the pass.
Now consider that the distance from Tezpur to Tawang is just about 250 km and that to Bum La a mere 40 km.
Strange as it may sound, the road conditions today are just a shade better than what they were in 1962 – and this is just one instance of how pathetic the situation is in the entire border region of the northeast.
And what has China being doing all along? It is constructing at least four new airfields in the Tibet Autonomous Region (TAR) along which the frontier with India runs and is also planning to extend the newly launched Beijing-Lhasa railway line right up to the Sikkim border.
As for India, it has been extremely tardy in addressing road connectivity in the northeast – and it was only in 2006 that the government allocated funds for building 1,200 km of “strategic roads” in Arunachal Pradesh by 2009.
But as Antony noted while speaking to reporters in the Sikkim capital Gangtok Saturday, funds alone would not serve the purpose.
“We are slow and our (bureaucratic) system is slow. Even when the government gives clearance, things don’t move. We need to improve the system and also give more funds,” the minister noted.
The question now is: will Antony be able to galvanise the Border Roads Organisation (BRO) that is responsible for developing infrastructure in the border areas into action?
Given a series of high-level meetings he has called, and given his enthusiasm for the subject, the chances are that he will. At least he cannot be faulted for trying – where others have not as much as even done so.