top of page

By:

Correspondent

21 August 2024 at 10:20:16 am

Broken Corridors

India likes to celebrate its growing tiger population as one of conservation’s great success stories. But tigers survive and thrive because their habitats remain connected. Fragmenting those forests entails risks for thriving tiger populations. The decision to grant an in-principle wildlife clearance for a third railway line through the Satpura-Melghat tiger corridor carries with it precisely that risk. The proposed railway line between Jujharpur and Chichonda cuts through one of central...

Broken Corridors

India likes to celebrate its growing tiger population as one of conservation’s great success stories. But tigers survive and thrive because their habitats remain connected. Fragmenting those forests entails risks for thriving tiger populations. The decision to grant an in-principle wildlife clearance for a third railway line through the Satpura-Melghat tiger corridor carries with it precisely that risk. The proposed railway line between Jujharpur and Chichonda cuts through one of central India’s most critical wildlife landscapes, linking the Satpura and Melghat tiger reserves and forming part of the larger Satpura-Pench-Melghat landscape. This corridor is a biological highway, allowing tigers and other wildlife to disperse, breed and maintain healthy genetic diversity. The Standing Committee of the National Board for Wildlife has insisted that mitigation measures such as wildlife overpasses be scientifically designed and reviewed before implementation. Yet the clearance itself exposes an unsettling contradiction. The committee’s own inspection found that the proposed 34 wildlife overpasses were based largely on field observations and mortality records rather than rigorous scientific assessment. Detailed engineering designs are still absent. Importantly, the comprehensive landscape study by the State Forest Research Institute, Jabalpur, is still awaited. The approval has been granted before the study is in. This reverses the basic principle that should govern projects in ecologically sensitive landscapes. Scientific evidence must guide approvals, not merely refine them after the fact. Once a project gathers administrative momentum, conditions often become exercises in compliance rather than conservation. There have been far too many examples where mitigation structures were inadequately designed, poorly located or inconsistently monitored, leaving wildlife to bear the consequences. The danger extends beyond tigers. The Satpura-Melghat landscape supports leopards, sloth bears, wild dogs, gaur and countless smaller species that depend on uninterrupted forests. Railways have already emerged as a significant source of wildlife mortality across India. Faster trains, higher traffic density and expanding rail infrastructure multiply these risks, especially where animal movement corridors intersect transport networks. None of this argues against development. India’s expanding economy requires better freight movement and modern transport infrastructure. But development ceases to be sustainable when it treats ecological safeguards as hurdles instead of foundations. While a railway can be built, a forest corridor, once fragmented, cannot simply be reconstructed through concrete overpasses and engineering optimism. India has spent decades and enormous public resources restoring tiger habitats and expanding protected areas. Allowing critical corridors to shrink through piecemeal clearances would squander those gains. The Satpura-Melghat corridor is the artery through which one of India’s finest wildlife landscapes continues to breathe. That said, if the government gets the balance between development and conversation right, this project could well become a model for reconciling economic ambition with ecological responsibility.

Bamboo Against the Dragon

As China grows more assertive in Asia, India and Vietnam are discovering that shared anxieties make for a durable strategic partnership.

In Asia’s crowded geopolitical theatre, few relationships have evolved as consequentially as that between India and Vietnam. Bound by ancient cultural ties and united by modern strategic anxieties, the two countries are steadily crafting a partnership that stretches from Buddhist monasteries to missile systems, from maritime security to semiconductor supply chains. What once rested on civilisational memory is now hardening into geopolitical necessity.


Vietnam, the slender S-shaped nation hugging the eastern edge of the Indochinese peninsula, occupies one of Asia’s most sensitive strategic locations. To its north lies China, with whom it shares a long and uneasy history; to its east stretches the increasingly contested South China Sea. Hanoi’s foreign policy establishment has responded with what diplomats call ‘bamboo diplomacy,’ which is flexible enough to bend with geopolitical winds, yet resilient enough not to break beneath them. Vietnam seeks cordial relations with China while simultaneously cultivating stronger partnerships with powers capable of balancing Beijing’s rise. India fits neatly into that calculus.


Pivotal Pillar

For New Delhi, meanwhile, Vietnam has emerged as a pivotal pillar of the “Act East” policy. Unlike many of India’s regional relationships, the connection with Vietnam carries little historical baggage. Instead, it is reinforced by a deep cultural familiarity that predates the modern nation-state. Indian traders, monks and scholars travelled across Southeast Asia centuries ago, leaving behind traces of Hindu and Buddhist civilisation that remain visible in Vietnam’s temples, art and folklore. The Archaeological Survey of India continues to assist in conserving ancient Cham monuments, reminders that India’s influence in Southeast Asia once travelled not through conquest, but commerce and culture.


Such historical sentiment alone, however, does not explain the growing warmth between the two governments. The real engine is strategic convergence.


The recent state visit of Vietnamese President To Lam to India underscored how rapidly the relationship is expanding. The two countries upgraded discussions on defence and foreign-policy coordination, explored the possibility of a future “2+2” ministerial dialogue, and reiterated their commitment to a free and stable Indo-Pacific. Behind the ceremonial embraces lay a harder geopolitical reality: both countries are wary of Chinese assertiveness in Asian waters.


Maritime Disputes

Vietnam’s maritime disputes with China in the South China Sea mirror India’s broader concerns over Beijing’s expanding footprint across the Indo-Pacific. As China projects naval power further into Asian waters, India and Vietnam increasingly see themselves as natural partners in preserving regional balance. Joint military exercises have become routine; defence cooperation has deepened; and Vietnam has shown interest in acquiring Indian-made defence equipment, including the BrahMos missile system, whose reputation has grown after India’s recent military demonstrations of indigenous capability.


To outside observers, this may appear an unlikely alignment. Vietnam remains officially communist; India is a boisterous democracy. Yet geopolitics often rewards pragmatism over ideology. Hanoi sees India as a trustworthy power with no territorial ambitions in Southeast Asia. India, in turn, views Vietnam as one of the few regional actors willing to quietly resist Chinese dominance without theatrical grandstanding.


Economics, too, is becoming central to the partnership. Bilateral trade remains modest relative to potential, but both governments have now set an ambitious target of reaching $25bn by 2030. That ambition reflects broader shifts in the global economy. As multinational firms seek alternatives to China-centric supply chains, Vietnam has become an increasingly attractive manufacturing destination. India hopes to position itself as both a market and a strategic economic partner in this transition.


The arrival of Vietnamese electric-vehicle manufacturer VinFast into Indian markets illustrates the possibilities. Investments planned in states such as Maharashtra and Tamil Nadu indicate that the relationship is moving beyond diplomatic symbolism into industrial cooperation. Discussions on semiconductors, digital technology, pharmaceuticals and rare-earth minerals further suggest that New Delhi and Hanoi increasingly view each other as partners in economic resilience.


Tourism and culture are adding another layer to this convergence. Tens of thousands of Indian tourists now visit Vietnam annually, drawn by its beaches, Buddhist heritage and affordability. Vietnamese pilgrims, meanwhile, travel to Buddhist sites in Bihar and Uttar Pradesh, retracing spiritual pathways that long predate modern diplomacy.


India increasingly recognises that its influence in Asia depends not only on military power or economic heft, but also on its ability to revive older cultural networks across the Indo-Pacific.


The India-Vietnam partnership represents the convergence of history and strategy, culture and commerce, diplomacy and deterrence.


In an era increasingly defined by Chinese assertiveness and American unpredictability, India and Vietnam are discovering the advantages of standing closer together.


(The writer is a foreign affairs expert. Views personal.)


Comments


bottom of page