Arctic Yearbook 2013
Lackenbauer
44
a steady flow of displaced people‖ forced from their homes and seeking access to India (Gadihoke,
2012: 7-8, 11).
Gadihoke‘s concerns about strategic impacts on the military domain also reflect the ―lingering
mistrust of Chinese military expansion‖ in Indian security circles since the 1962 border war. What if
Arctic militarization diverted the US Navy from the Indian Ocean, leaving a regional power
vacuum? Given the balance of air and army assets between the two Asian powers, Gadihoke
anticipates that maritime forces would play a decisive role. China‘s dependence on sea lanes to carry
energy imports from the Middle East and Africa represented a vulnerability that India could exploit
in a conflict. ―Were the Chinese vulnerability to lessen due to the Arctic route,‖ he argues, ―then
China may get more assertive not only with India, but with other countries in the region,‖ with
concomitant impacts on regional security and broader geopolitics. On the other hand, the Malacca
dilemma could be supplanted by a ―‗Bering Straits‘ dilemma subject to more focused strategic
leverage by the Arctic rim states, with all of whom Indian enjoys an excellent relationship‖
(Gadihoke, 2012: 5-6, 9).
Senior Indian defence officials are aware of transnational and transoceanic implications of Arctic
change. A.K. Antony, the Indian Minister of Defence, stated at an international maritime seminar in
New Delhi in February 2012 that the ―possible melting of the polar ice caps will have tectonic
consequences to our understanding of what maritime domains constitute ‗navigable‘ oceans of the
world. Specific to Asia and the Indian Ocean Region, there may be a need to reassess concepts like
chokepoints and critical sea lines of communication (SLOCs)‖ (quoted in Shukla, 28 February 2012).
As Gadihoke notes, no one knows how environmental changes and development will play out. ―The
plethora of Arctic imponderables – uncertainties inherent in any ―future‖ – will give rise to many
geopolitical questions.‖ Although unanswered at present, he emphasizes that ―the peril will be
greater if they were left unasked‖ – a clarion call to the Indian strategic community to engage ―the
major players‖ and join in discussions about the evolving Arctic (Gadihoke, 2012: 10-11).
Imaginative Geographies and Post-Colonial Polar Engagement: Sanjay
Chaturvedi
Political scientist Sanjay Chaturvedi, an expert on the theory and practice of geopolitics, is the
leading Indian scholarly commentator on polar issues. At the core of his analysis lies the ―Arctic
paradox‖: that the main driver of climate change, which is transforming the physical and cultural
environment, is the oil and gas that is the primary catalyst for international interest in the region. In
articulating his own ―imaginative geography‖ of the changing Arctic, he seeks to open space for a
positive ―geoeconomics of hope‖ to supplant negative imagery ―driven by unfounded politics and
geopolitics of fear‖ (Chaturvedi, 9 May 2013). His recent writings reflect the influence of both his
idealist aspirations to democratize the Antarctic Treaty System and encourage ―post-colonial
engagement‖ with the southern continent, as well as his critical appreciation of the challenge and
dilemmas posed by globalization and the ―rise of Asia‖ (Chaturvedi, 2012a: 50-51). He also criticizes
the ―new great game‖ thesis between India and China that some other commentators have extended
to the polar regions (Chaturvedi, 10 December 2012).