Before Mr. Narendra Modi became Prime Minister this writer had serious misgivings about his China policy. His wooing of China and Beijing’s warmest of warm response raised serious concerns about security implications related to Pakistan’s main supplier of nuclear and missile technology, and a confirmed patron of terrorism. Mr. Modi’s passing warning to China related to Arunachal Pradesh during the election campaign was dismissed as empty poll rhetoric. However the invitation to all heads of SAARC nations to the PM’s swearing in ceremony raised exciting prospects of a reversal in Mr. Modi’s approach. This writer has been a long time proponent of developing SAARC into a full fledged South Asian Union having joint defence, common market and free movement of goods and people across borders among all its member states. The invitation to the SAARC leaders was perceived as the first step towards realization of this goal.

However the high hopes of a new China policy being formulated were dashed after reading media reports about BJP leader Mr. Subramaniam Swamy’s address to the World Peace Forum meeting organized by the Chinese government in a Beijing university. Addressing the conference Mr. Swamy argued that the rule barring discussion on contentious bilateral issues in SAARC meetings should be revoked. Why? It would allow America and China, currently observers at SAARC meetings, a greater role in SAARC deliberations.  Mr. Swamy also said that India should have trilateral meetings with America and China in deference to their influence in the region. He advised strict Indian neutrality between America and China. Mr. Swamy did clarify that he was expressing his own views and was not speaking on behalf of the BJP government. Nevertheless, as one of the earliest and most vocal supporters of Mr. Modi’s candidature as Prime Minister an uneasy feeling is unavoidable about whether or not Mr. Swamy is representing Mr. Modi’s views.

Mr. Swamy’s prescription for the future of SAARC confirms the worst fears about this nation perpetuating its puppet status vis-à-vis the big corporate lobby which operates through the Sino-American nexus that has successfully subverted governments both in Washington and Beijing. In America this nexus operates through the big business firms that fund US elections. In Beijing it operates through the People’s Liberation Army which dictates terms to the civilian government. This nexus which had been described earlier by this writer as the Real Axis of Evil is determined to prevent any one nation from becoming the world’s dominant power. Thereby this nexus can make and break alliances to dominate and direct world politics and economics. This writer will refrain from identifying any big business corporation that is part of this nexus. It may be noted however that the formation of BRICS makes little economic or political sense except that it prevents the emergence of the natural strategic alliance between the world’s most powerful democracy in the First World and the world’s largest democracy in the Third World. That alliance, were it to fructify, would alter the shape of the future world order.

Mr. Swamy has explicitly proposed that this powerful corporate nexus operating through America and China should tighten its hold over any future South Asian grouping. He has every right to hold his view even though it seems pathetic to this writer that while India crawls before Beijing to propitiate its concerns over Tibet and Xingjian, China brazenly interferes in Kashmir and Arunachal Pradesh and arms Pakistan with lethal weapons for possible use against India. What this writer would like to know, and what many in the nation have right to know, is whether Mr. Swamy represents the views of Mr. Modi. Otherwise Mr. Modi should publicly disown the views of an important party leader such as Mr. Swamy expressed on foreign soil. Mr. Modi’s silence may be interpreted as endorsement.