GLOBAL EYE. Healing touch

With the world watching a long-drawn and complex civil war spill out into a regionally charged neighbourhood, each passing day brings in newer posturing and alliances in this West Asian arena.

Pro-Assad forces now have almost full control of the ancient city of Palmyra and are closing into the strategic opposition stronghold of Aleppo. Previously led by Russian air strikes, Bashar al-Assad’s forces claim to be within 5 km of the city. The recapture of Aleppo would be a turning point in this war as it is one of the largest cities in the region and served as the economic heart of Syria. The taking of Aleppo would be as strategic as Operation Iskra in WW2 when the Soviets broke the German siege of Leningrad.

Russia’s alliance with Assad and Iran has been bewildering western observers for a while now and the reasons being attributed for this depend on whom you ask. Some believe Russia is out to protect its ‘strategic’ maritime interest in the Port of Tartus in Syria which gives it the only toehold it has in the Mediterranean.

Some say Russia wants to be seen as a dependable ally that never lets go of a client regime, as against the US which dropped Hosni Mubarak in Egypt at the first signs of civil rebellion. Whatever the reason, this regional war has created two blocks of actively polarised interests — Russia, Iran, and Syria on the one side and Saudi Arabia and Turkey on the other. NATO still plays fence sitter.

Two powers, however, have kept a studied distance from this conflict; their involvement has been limited to making calls for a peaceful solution — China and India. Both have had warm ties with the Assad regime and have expressed mild support for him in their limited posturing. Apart from joint statements by their foreign ministers, China and India have largely kept away from the Syrian crisis.

Thanks to their non-interventionist policies in West Asia, China and India have credibility in this volatile region. But India has an advantage over China here, given the historical ties and closer cultural context with West Asia.

China has been the largest trading partner for Syria and is into joint ventures in the main oil-producing consortium in the country, the Al-Furat Petroleum Company, apart from other economic partnerships. India’s trade with Syria has been limited to apparel, cement and machinery.

And it is now that India should act. Post-war reconstruction of Syria could be a start. Apart from the humanitarian impact on a battered nation and the resultant goodwill it would entitle, it would ensure that India starts asserting its global economic reach. Currently, the US dominates the post-war reconstruction arena, with corporates such as Halliburton and Bechtel cornering a share.

India could set up a consortium of state-owned and private infra companies which help draw out a reconstruction plan for Syria.

This soft economic diplomacy would be a crucial move for India, offering its infra firms a global market. India could also provide educational and vocation training to Syrians. India should proactively prepare for a post-war Syria and seek avenues which result in the sweet spot of non-intervention, humanitarian reconstruction and economic out-reach.

The writer heads new country development at Marico. The views are personal

COMMENT NOW