Role of Parliament in Execution of Foreign Policy

India's Parliament plays a lesser role in formulation and execution of foreign policy than in other parliamentary democracies. This is not what the founders of modern India envidaged. The record of discussions in the Constituent Assembly soon after Independence shows that India's founding elite wanted Parliament to be supreme in the conduct of international affairs. H.V. Kamath, a member of the Constituent Assembly, argued: "I am sure that Parliament will ultimately decide our international relations. It is neither the executive nor the President but Parliament which will have the final word on what our foreign relations are going to be, what our international policy is going to be."

Kamath's sentiment was shared by other Constituent Assembly members and, as a result, Articles 246 and 253 of the Indian Constitution empowered Parliament to legislate all aspects of foreign affairs including implementation of international treaties, agreements and conventions.

In practice, however, the conduct of Indian foreign policy rests with the executive branch of government even as the Ministry of External Affairs is subject to parliamentary oversight like all government ministries. Parliamentary oversight is exercised through discussions and debates on the floor, as well as through question hour -- the time set aside during Parliament's deliberations for PM's to question ministers on their department's performance. Parliamentary Committees on External Affairs and Defence also act as instruments of parliamentary oversight.

The parliament discusses and approves bills introduced by the Ministry of External Affairs, asks questions on issues and also studies and discusses the annual report of the Ministry of External Affairs before approving it.

Those who crticise parliamentary oversight note that in almost every democracy most politiciqans are oriented towards domestic issues and they have relatively little knowledge or awarnesss of foreign affairs. As a result, parliamentary debates on foreign policy are not alwatys based on hard facts or an objective assessment of reality. They often become an opportunity for the opposition to criticise the government or the party in power.

One way of building up a group of politicians who are knowledgeable about and have experience of foreign policy is through the committee system. There are two committees for external affairs, the consultative committee and the standing committee.

The origins of the consultative committee come from a practice started by Nehru who used to periodically consult with close parliamentary colleagues on aspects of foreign policy before he introduced that policy in Parliament. Lal Bahadur Shastri continued this policy. However, there was a backlash from members of parliament who demanded the establishment of formal consultative committees instead informal consultation. In 1969 parliamentary consultative committees were set up.

The consultative committee is ideally supposed to be comprised of representatives of all political parties roughly in proportion to their strength in Parliament. The current Parliamentary Consultative Committee on External Affairs and Overseas Indian Affairs is chaired by the Minister for External Affairs and Overseas Indian Affairs.

The Standing Committees too have proportionate representation from both the Houses of Parliament. The current Parliamentary Standing Committee on External Affairs is chaired by a member of the opposition, and has nineteen members of Parliament from the Lok Sabha and eight from the Rajya Sabha. The Standing Committee has the power to call the officials to testify before it. It looks over the annual reports of the Ministry of External Affairs, can ask questions about budgetary allocations and also has a veto over the budget of the Ministry of External Affairs. This Committee submits its annual report to the Parliament.

Supporters argue that the standing committee is like a mini Parliament and through it the Parliament exercises control over the conduct of foreign policy. They argue that these committees enable detailed discussions of issues, create an environment where a small number of people, politicians and bureaucrats, can sit and discuss issues.

Critics assert that what the committee achieve depends upon how interested parliamentarians are in foreign policy issues and how willing they are to contribute to discussions on foreign policy. According to former diplomats, most parliamentarians are interested not in broad issues of foreign and security policy but rather in issues like passports, visas, cultural exchanges, and of course on any issues to do with India's neighbours because all these have a domestic dimension. While the committee can call officials it does not have the power to call a minister or the Prime Minister.

According to most analysts, parliamentary oversight is not as intense as it used to be in the early years. According to academics and former diplomats, Nehru would always be in Parliament to answer questions and would never miss question hour unless he was out of town. After Nehru, however, most Prime Ministers have preferred to avoid parliament when they can. Further, while all ministers, including Ministry of External Affairs, provide answers to parliamentary questions, accountability is not what it used to be or what it should be. Thus the only time the Parliament is really interested in foreign affairs is when it is a critical issue.

(Excerpt from India's Engagement with the World; Published in CSC August 2018 issue)

Part 1- https://www.chronicleindia.in/article/14-india-s-engagement-with-the-world-defining-south-asia

(Based on World Bank Report- ‘South Asia’s Hotspots’)

Climate change has been a concern since a long time now with its impact manifested in many forms. Moreover, according to a recent World Bank report- ‘South Asia’s Hotspots: The Impact of Temperature and Precipitation Changes on Living Standards’, climate change has been surfacing as a grave threat to the growth prospective of the Indian economy. The report analyzes how changes in average temperature and precipitation (average weather) will affect living standards in South Asia.

Findings of the Report
• The report studies two future climate scenarios- “climate-sensitive,” in which some collective action is taken to limit greenhouse gas emissions, and “carbon-intensive,” in which no action is taken.
• Both scenarios show rising temperatures throughout the region in the coming decades, with the carbon-intensive scenario leading to greater increases.
• Unlike sea-level rise and extreme weather events, changes in average weather will affect inland areas the most.
• For most countries, growth of their GDP per capita will also decrease as a result off average weather change, compared to the scenario under current climate conditions. The GDP losses are more for severe hotspot areas.
• More than 800 million people i.e. nearly half of South Asia’s population, currently live in areas that are expected to become moderate to severe hotspots by 2050 under the carbon-intensive scenario. At the same time, living standards in some cold and dry mountain areas could better significantly.

South Asia- A Vulnerable Region

South Asia is recognized as being very vulnerable to climate change. The glaciated northern parts- which include the Himalayas, Karakoram, and Hindu Kush mountains- have annual average temperatures at or below freezing, whereas much of the Indian subcontinent averages 25°C to 30°C. Both the hot and cold extremes are challenging for human well-being, and climate change heightens these challenges.
Increasing average temperatures and changes in seasonal rainfall patterns are already having an effect on agriculture across South Asia. Urban areas that are home to more than 50 million people- Dhaka, Karachi, Kolkata, and Mumbai- face a considerable risk of flood-related damage over the next century.

On one hand, Western Afghanistan and South-western Pakistan have experienced the largest increases, with average temperature rising by 1.0°C to 3.0°C from 1950 to 2010, while on the other, Southeastern India, western Sri Lanka, northern Pakistan, and Eastern Nepal have experienced increases of 1.0°C to 1.5°C. Annual average temperatures in South Asia are projected to increase 1.6°C under the climate-sensitive scenario and 2.2°C under the carbon-intensive scenario by 2050, relative to 1981- 2010.



What is a Climate Hotspot?

The effects of changes in average temperature and precipitation on household living standards resulting in some climate hotspots- that is, locations predicted to be negatively impacted by changes in average weather. Climate hotspots are areas which are vulnerable to extreme events and sea-level rise, including coastal flooding and storm surges; South Asian megacities- such as Chennai, Dhaka, Karachi, Kolkata, and Mumbai are often said to be climate hotspots. However, according to the report, hotspots are areas where changes in average weather will adversely affect living standards.



The 2050 Prediction- Overall, more than half the region will be a hotspot by 2050 under the carbon-intensive scenario, with 45% of the present population of South Asia- 800 million people- living in areas projected to become moderate or severe hotspots. Under the climate-sensitive scenario, the number of people affected would be 375 million, or 21% of the population.

How Vulnerable is India?

Climate change could cost India 2.8% of GDP, and depress living standards of nearly half of its population by 2050, as average annual temperatures are expected to rise by 1-2% over three decades. Inland states in the central, northern, and north-western regions emerge as the most vulnerable to changes in average weather. Chhattisgarh and Madhya Pradesh which are predicted to have a living standards decline of more than 9%- are the top two hotspot states, followed by Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh, and Maharashtra. Chhattisgarh and Madhya Pradesh are also low-income states, home to large tribal populations. Changes in average weather could therefore have important implications for poverty reduction.



Seven out of the top 10 most affected hotspot districts belong to the Vidarbha region of Maharashtra State, with the remaining three districts located in Chhattisgarh and Madhya Pradesh. The 10 most affected states in India apart from Chhattisgarh and Madhya Pradesh are- Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh, Maharashtra, Jharkhand, Haryana, Andhra Pradesh, Punjab, and Chandigarh.

The Way Out- Building Resiliency

The adverse impacts of climate change are affecting all countries, especially developing countries, including drought and extreme weather events, rising sea levels, coastal erosion, and further threatening food security, water, energy and health, and more broadly the economic growth. The global nature of the problem calls for international cooperation by all countries and to continue mobilizing financing from a variety of sources, public and private, bilateral and multilateral.

Identifying hotspots from changes in average weather allows designing of strategies to cope with climate impacts with a great level of spatial granularity. Policies and actions must be made to address the specific impacts and needs based on local conditions.

To offset the negative economic impact in India, the report suggests enhancing educational attainment, reducing water stress, and improving job opportunities in the non-agricultural sectors. India should undertake aggressive efforts in its strategies and plans targeted towards climate change and its repercussions to minimize the effects and hence to avoid the foreseen destruction.

Defining South Asia

India faced several challenges to being viewed as the dominant power in South Asia and its desire that neighbours look only to India and not to outside powers. Slow economic growth for decades meant that India did not have the economic clout to provide its neighbours with the assistance they needed. Fabian socialism, a mixed economy and the principle of economic autarky meant that until the 1990s India only grew at 3 per cent a year, a growth rate that precluded India’s ability to assist neighbours. The growth of India’s economy in the last two decades has opened the way for India offering aid to neighbours as an instrument of influence.

India’s effort to woo its poorer South Asian neighbours with aid now face competition from China under the One Belt One Road (OBOR) initiative. China launched the China Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) and has promised to invest US $46 billion in Pakistan over the course of the next few years. Economic incentives are also being offered by China to Nepal, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka. Indian leaders are aware that managing a sphere of influence is not only a function of telling others what to do but being able to expend resources that deny space to competitors.

India’s neighbours complain that India has a history of big promises and extremely slow follow-through on aid projects. The gap between promise and delivery is seen in Bangladesh, Nepal, Sri Lanka and even Afghanistan where India is currently the largest regional bilateral donor. Under Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, and especially since the election of Narendra Modi, India has sought to offer trade concessions, such as zero tariff or removing non-tariff barriers, and concessional loans and credit to Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka and Nepal.

As Prime Minister, Narendra Modi has articulated a more assertive vision for India’s external relations. South Asia, India’s immediate periphery, is as critical to India under the present Government as it was under its predecessors. Narendra Modi invited all South Asian heads of Government to his inauguration and has travelled to Bhutan, Nepal, Mauritius, Myanmar, Sri Lanka, and Bangladesh within less than two years of coming to office.

Regional connectivity – trade, tourism and travel – between the South Asian countries has been key to the present Government’s push for South Asia. It would require building infrastructure within India and connecting it to the neighbouring countries. That would be a long-term endeavor requiring consistent investment and policy support. Further, for this connectivity to actualize, a South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) agreement along these lines would be needed. That is still a long way away.

In November 2014, the inkling of the SAARC connectivity agreements, including the motor vehicles pact, was stalled as Pakistan asked for time arguing it was yet to complete its internal process. seven months later, in Jun 2015, India, Nepal, Bhutan and Bangladesh signed a Motor Vehicle Agreement for the regulation of passenger, personnel and cargo vehicular traffic. India is thus trying to build connectivity with its neighbours even if Pakistan remains unwilling to cooperate. India believes that sooner or later Pakistan will understand that if it does not participate it will be left out.

(Excerpt from India's Engagement with the World; Published in CSC August 2018 issue)