‘Australia doesn’t want to lose Indian students’

The journey from being an ‘only White’ society to a ‘multi-cultural’ one has not been too smooth for Australia. Thanks to the recent racist attacks on Indian students, Australia’s image as a welcoming country has been harmed. Besides its dented image, what is affecting Australia more is the fear that the racist attacks may hamper its ties with India in the wake of rising China.

In an exclusive interview with Kamna Arora of Zeenews.com, an expert on Australia, Dr Pankaj Kumar Jha, discusses racist attacks and their after-effects on Indo-Australia ties. Dr Pankaj Kumar Jha is Associate Fellow at Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses, New Delhi. Kamna: Racist attacks on Indian students have somewhat dented the image of ‘multi-cultural’ Australia. Top Australian officials, including PM Kevin Rudd, had to come to India to water down the incidents. How do you measure India’s response to the plight of students? Jha: The racial attacks have surely dented the image of Australia. Though in public life and even in society, Australia is extra careful not to create ethnic cleavages and not to hurt national sensitivities of foreign students, the ongoing spate of attacks has, in a sense, become a unique reaction to the problems of unemployment, financial crunch and racial differences. The interesting part is that Chinese being a very large community there, has not been attacked while Indians have suffered the brunt because of the three factors. Firstly, Indian students have been trying very hard to get Permanent Residency (PR) in Australia and for that they have to have clean credit and police records, so they do not engage in any brawl and even silently suffer racial abuse. Secondly, most of the parents in India, who have taken heavy loans to send their children to Australia, think that they should start earning foreign exchange immediately and start repaying the debt, and this is the reason why Indian students start working early and maintain a rather simple lifestyle, so as to save enough to repay their loans. Thirdly, owing to their hardworking nature and commitment to their Indian values, they are not able to assimilate into Australian way of life, which is quite different. Also a number of Indians living in low rent localities and in suburbs become victims of attacks and racial abuse. Australians are also somehow feeling the pinch of Chinese and Indian communities occupying their social space and also increasing footprint in public life. This is a phase of social transformation, adjustment and the question of identity. Indians are the most vulnerable lot. In fact, it is believed that Indian government’s strong stance on this issue would have sent out the right signals, but the response was rather muted or overcautious. India should and must address the issue, both at the domestic level as well as at a bilateral level. It is Australia which is going to lose Indian students, as Canada and New Zealand are trying to attract Indian students in their Universities. India is Australia’s fourth largest export market, and so India does have leverages with regard to Australia, but on the other hand, Australia’s coal (low ash content) deposits and immense uranium deposits are the energy resources that India is eyeing. Therefore the response was constrained and calculated. Kamna: How have ties between India and Australia been affected, if at all, due to racism episode? Jha: I won`t deny the fact that the relations have not been very congenial in the aftermath of the student attacks, but the way prominent leaders of Australia have visited India in the last six months shows that Australia does not want to lose Indian students. After all they are of one of the largest students’ communities in Australia - about 95,000, which accounts for nearly USD 2 billion of earning for the Australian economy. Also, I believe, to a large extent media from both the sides had first positively highlighted the problem, but later aggravated it to a certain extent. Australia and India want to engage at both security and strategic levels, and these incidents have dented the confidence between them. Kamna: Australia cannot afford to lose India if it wants to fulfil its dream to build a Asia-Pacific Community and to counter China’s emergence. Comment. Jha: Australia knows that China is a rising power, and India is a potential counter balance. With Indo-US nuclear deal, India’s relations with the US allies have been reconfigured. And now with the growing economy and strong recovery shown by India, every country at the global level wants to engage India. This serves two purposes. Firstly, it opens up the large Indian market, and creates strategic leverages. Secondly, India’s commitment to Asia Pacific Community mooted by Rudd is still an unclear picture. But India would like to become a member of APEC first, and would probably want to decide about new organisations at a later date. One thing is certain that India would like to be a part of any multilateral initiative in Asia-Pacific because its diplomacy has started taking a rather proactive stance. With China making serious inroads in Timor (which is located to the eats of Indonesia) with regard to building their official buildings and Prime Minister’s house, it might be a foreseen conclusion that China wants to control alternative routes to Malacca like Sunda and Lombok straits and secure its energy supplies in case of disruption or any incident in Malacca Straits. Australia very well knows that Chinese footprint in both Timor Sea and Indian Ocean is increasing and it would be prudent to strategically engage India. Kamna: India and Australia have agreed to take their ties to strategic partnership level. How significant is this for geopolitics? Jha: The one important transformation that is taking shape in international politics is China’s strong assertion in terms of gaining stature in international order and this was somehow visible during Obama`s visit to China, where he maintained a muted stance with regards to Tibet, human rights, minority issues in Xinjiang and averted the Taiwan question. Somehow, it seems that the US has become a declining power due to its overstretched commitments in Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as the problems with its allies like Australia and Japan have become rather apparent. Australia has categorically remarked in its Defence Whitepaper that the US’ position in global order is eroding and Australia needs to take care of its security and strategic issues, rather than relying on US support. Japan also has problems with regard to relocation of Futenma base and it wants to become a `normal` power. These configurations have compelled Australia to look for alternative arrangements for its security, and India figures prominently due to its presence in Indian Ocean as well as increasing economic growth, which is likely to support its defence expenditure and modernisation. At this critical juncture, it would not be pragmatic for Australia to ignore India. Kamna: Despite the fact that Canberra wants to have defence and security ties with New Delhi, why is Australia not ready to supply nuclear fuel to India? Jha: The problem with both New Zealand and Australia is that they have been scrupulously maintaining a line with regard to NPT (Non-Proliferation Treaty) and disarmament. Australia has been particular about exporting the ‘Yellow cake’ to only NPT signatory countries. This has worked against India’s case. Ironically enough, Australia is supplying uranium to China, which is a `Nuclear Elite` though it has been most prolific proliferators; while India having an impeccable record on non-proliferation is kept at a safe distance with regard to uranium supplies. Though there is a particular group of strategic thinkers in Australia, which advocates that India should not be devoid of uranium supplies because there is a list of countries, which are more than willing to supply uranium to India including Kazakhstan (which has the third largest source of uranium). It is possible that Australia might reconsider its decision to supply uranium to India in coming years because of increasing bilateral interactions. Even in the past, John Howard government had shown willingness to export uranium to India.