The Middle East may soon feel India's growing power

The Bush Administration's serial blunders in the Middle East have not only seriously undermined American influence over the region, they have opened the way for new, emerging superpowers to vie for its energy resources. Energy security has become the primary and most immediate strategic concern of Asia's two rising giants, India and China. The Middle East will soon feel the full force of this growing competition.

China's and India's blazing nine per cent plus economic growth rate has pushed them well beyond their original estimates of energy needs, and is even causing tightening supplies in certain sectors. As a result, alarm bells are ringing in Delhi and Beijing and an urgent, often unseemly scramble for new sources of oil is under way. Last fall, I attended the Chinese-African summit in Beijing, the culmination of a masterful campaign by China to lock up a large chunk of Africa's energy and mineral resources. China, which efficiently integrated its energy and military policies, used financial and military aid, and a lot of flattering personal diplomacy, to secure oil concessions in Africa and Asia. Indian officials in Delhi and the business community here in Bombay/Mumbai are deeply worried China may soon have secured all available remaining oil supplies not already controlled by the United States. They are clamouring for action to secure energy supplies for India to assure its continued economic growth and expanding military power.

India's modest domestic oil production has been waning, forcing it to import 70 per cent of its oil. India's imports account for 3.2 per cent of world oil imports; China's 7.6 per cent; the US 25 per cent; and Europe 26 per cent.

India, quite clearly, is being left way behind in the stampede to secure energy supplies. Its oil imports will need to double by 2030 from the current 2.4 million bbls daily to sustain growth. By that year, China's imports will also double and reach 12 million bbls daily. Since most of this oil will originate from the Gulf or Indonesia, both Asian superpowers are rushing to deploy deep water naval forces to protect their oil lifelines, just as the US has done since World War II.

China is building a fleet of modern attack submarines, some of them nuclear-powered, adding missile-armed surface combatants, and extending the range of its land-based naval aviation. The People's Navy has gone from being a weak 'brown water' coastal force to a true 'blue-water' navy that could even challenge the US 7th Fleet in a clash over Taiwan.

But China is unable to project naval power westward through the Strait of Malacca into the vast Indian Ocean and to the Gulf due to its lack of bases and air cover. Here, India holds a major advantage. India's modern aircraft carrier, long-ranged shore-based aviation, and modern, Russian-supplied attack submarines and frigates armed with deadly cruise missiles will give India maritime dominance over the entire Indian Ocean from the coast of East Africa to Australia. Only the US Navy could challenge India's sway over the Indian Ocean.

But China's securing of port rights in Burma, warm relations with East African states, and expanding influence in energy-rich Central Asia, worries India. At the same time, India's surging naval power has deeply alarmed Pakistan, whose oil lifeline through the port of Karachi could be quickly severed by an Indian naval blockade.

Having come late to the Monopoly-like game of grabbing as many key oil properties as possible, India is now racing to make up for lost time. Being a democracy prone to debilitating party politics and infighting, India cannot operate with the ruthless strategic efficiency and speed as Communist China, but it knows time is running short. What this means is that some time soon, India's strategic energy and political interests are going to start actively competing, if not openly colliding, in the Middle East with those of the region's hegemon, the United States. In fact, it is surprising that India has been so slow to recognise that its national security will demand a deeper involvement in the Gulf and greater Middle East. While India's strategists are well aware of this fact, its politicians have been slow to understand just how dependant their growing economy will become on imported oil.

India's surging economy and military will need access to Arab and Iranian oil which, after all, is almost next door. Thanks to Washington's self-destructive Middle East policies, this door is now open to India. The five-way contest between the US, India, Japan, Europe and China for Asia and Africa's energy resources promises to be fascinating. Welcome to the new Great Game.

(Eric S. Margolis is a veteran American journalist and contributing foreign editor of The Toronto Sun)

During Indira Gandhi's reign, Indian forces came close to launching an attack on Diego Garcia, in order to annex it.

Links please.

Here's a Time piece with the back story, namely Indira Gandhi's view that the existence of a US naval base at Diego Garcia was controversial.

Indian Prime Minister Indira Gandhi arrives in Washington this week for her first official visit in nearly eleven years. Her mission is to narrow India's differences with the U.S. on a number of issues. Among them: ... the controversial U.S. naval base on Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean.

More background:

At the Conference, the Indian Prime Minister was assiduously promoting the concept of the Indian Ocean as a Zone of Peace. Her intention was primarily to prevent the United States from establishing further military bases in the countries on the rim of the Indian Ocean and especially to force the United States Government to dismantle its base in Diego Garcia.

An Indian source on a military forum says it was an "eyes only" operation:

Originally Posted by Blademaster I am curious. Did InN or InAF have any contigency plans of hitting Diego Garcia, or is that simply too far out of reach?

During Indira Gandhi's time, we had an airborne operation half way towards the island to capture it, but was called back. But better sense prevaled and an incident against the US was avoided.

Originally Posted by Officer of Engineers I would love to learn and examine the operational details.

Sir, These are one of those "for your eyes only" type things. All I know is that one phase was already underway when they were called back. My fathers unit (a field ambulance unit), was packed and on the tarmac waiting for their turn to take off. It was one of those cold war era incidents, as Indo-US relations were not cordial.

Now, I understand that the official Indian position is that Diego Garcia belongs to Mauritius, but I can't believe the Indians would relinquish it after losing several thousand men in its taking.

First off, that was from a blog/forum, some anonymous war-strategist-wannabe's comment. There aren't any accredited sources to this wild claim.

Secondly, about the thing about "thousands of Indian troops" dying, well ,remember, this supposed "incident" was during the peak of the Cold War. The US's allies, viz. , the Islamic Republic of Pakistan and the Chinese autocracy, were being encouraged to attack India, besides being provided material, military and diplomatic support by the US. India had, as a result, won Soviet support for protection.

In 1971-72, when the Americans coaxed Pakistan and China to attack India, with the cover of support of the USS Enterprise, the Russians threatened involvement by bringing in their nuclear submarine fleet to chase the carrier group, in the Bay of Bengal.

Attesting to this, the "thousands of casualties" might have as well been of American lives.

Throughout that night INS Vikrant continued her sortie south, and our air recce covered an area to a depth of 500 miles. There was no sign of the U.S. task force, so in the absence of any instruction from the Naval Headquarters I turned back north to rejoin my patrol area. As the day dawned, BBC broadcast amplified its earlier report: that having entered the Bay of Bengal from the Malacca Straits, the U.S. task force had proceeded west instead of going north to Chittagong. On reflection I felt that my reactions in the warlike situation proved the value of my tenure at the NCC.

As a postscript to this anecdote, soon after the victory of the Indian Armed Forces, one of the foreign celebrities that visited India was the renowned naval leader Admiral S.G. Gorshkov, Chief of the Soviet Navy. During his visit to Bombay he came onboard INS Vikrant. I had known the Admiral well earlier during my tenure in Moscow as the Indian Naval Attaché. The Admiral congratulated me and asked, "Were you worried about a battle against the American carrier?" He answered himself: "Well, you had no reason to be worried, as I had a Soviet nuclear submarine trailing the American task force all the way into the Indian Ocean."

http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/NAVY/History/1971War/Games.html

I've seen fellows on mil-forums saying that their cousins are working on Iranian SSBNs which are patrolling a few miles outside New York harbour!!!!So that's how much importance I give to such dribble.Indeed,there was tension between India & the US on the issue of Diego Garcia in the 70s & 80s(which has been resolved)-tension is one thing,but preparing to go to war is another.

Even Indira's biggest critics would say that the woman knew how best to time her moves to perfection.Atleast in the time of her government,India just didn't have the airlift assets or naval assets to even hold Diego Garcia for 1 week,which always has/had warships for defense & could rely on airsupport from American bases in the Middle East.IOW,pure bullcrap.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.