OCTOBER 20 — Prime Minister Nahedra Modi, ought to be congratulated, for winning handsomely in his May 2018 re-election campaign. But the plaudits, for now, stops there.

The media that supports him, such as the News Z, anchored by Rishab Gulati, has been broadcasting a clip (nearly 5 minutes) that India must support any Hindus in Malaysia that are up in arms against the office of Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamed.

The reasons, indeed, the diatribes offered, include punishing Malaysia for supporting Pakistan; for not chastising Islamabad for its support of ostensible terrorist movements against India. Thus India, which is experiencing a trade deficit of merely US$5 billion with Malaysia, should buy zero palm oil from Malaysia.

Instead all palm oil which is needed by India to be transformed into ghee, soap, vegetarian oil, potentially, bio-fuel, souls be bought in all from Indonesia. This is where Prime Minister Modi’s policy goes wrong, and has been hijacked by incendiary anchor men such as Magna Indica.

Advertisement

First and foremost, Rishab Gulati affirmed that there is a trade war between the US and China; which judging from his tone of language can deeply affect India too. That would suggest all trade wars, or, sheer weaponization of trade issues, are bad. They raise tariff and non-tariff barriers, and they trigger a dyadic trade relationship that is toxic on the rest of the global value chain, with India included. If that is an economic fact, why should India emulate the example of Washington DC and Beijing?

Secondly, perhaps most importantly above all else — there is actually an unsaid yet practical principle in Asean — that any countries that want to be a part of the thriving region of 680 million people in the Association of Southeast Asia Nations cannot throw their support to any opposition in the region. PM Modi has a “Southerly Policy” to Asean since 2015, and is a member of the East Asian Summit, indeed, a Dialogue Partner of Asean. India is destroying a key principle of its own diplomatic engagement. Not only will the whole of Asean oppose it but the rest of the East Asian region will see India’s behavior as the beginning of the use of “hatchet diplomacy”.

Thirdly, the conflict between India and Pakistan, is not merely a conventional weapons stand-off but a nuclear eye-to-eye standoff. In such a conflict, the likes of Malaysia are needed as a friendly third party to reduce the tension of the two, consequently, not go ratchet up the rivalry of the couplet. Insisting that Putrajaya must side with New Delhi at all cost suggests a bigger economic juggernaut imposing a zero-sum economic and diplomatic game on not just Malaysia, ultimately the whole of the region too.

Advertisement

Besides, much of Indonesia’s palm oil are owned and sold by the likes of Malaysian companies such as IOI and Genting. Will India, to satisfy its egoistical objectives, be buying selectively only from Indonesian palm oil without Malaysian equity and partnership in these companies too?

The current prices of palm oil are influenced by the consumption pattern of India and China. Indonesia and Malaysia, which together sell 90 per cent of the palm oil of the world, do have an understanding not to be pressured by other countries. Instead it is Indonesia and Malaysia that hold the upper hand, as Jakarta and Putrajaya are not necessarily agreeable to New Delhi’s strong-arm tactic.

An Indian foreign policy, that seeks to be pro Asean, pro East Asia, both of which India is intimately involved in, cannot begin by targeting any one country in the region on sheer political discrimination. In fact, this is against the practice of the World Trade Organisation (WTO), which Malaysia is liable to seek a legal redress. An eye for an eye makes the world go blind. Amidst its Hindu nationalism, New Delhi has become blinded by its own electoral victory; which if not careful can end up in a nuclear flash with Pakistan too, which is what Tun Dr Mahathir, Malaysia and the rest of the world are trying to pre-empt.

* This is the personal opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of Malay Mail.