On 3 November 1988, a coup d’état attempt with Tamil Sri Lankan mercenaries was attempted against the Maumoon Abdul Gayoom government in Maldives. Mercenaries had taken over almost all major buildings, and desperate SOS messages to Sri Lanka, Pakistan, Singapore, US and UK elicited no positive response, till India was finally requested.

With turmoil in India’s perceived ‘backyard’, New Delhi reacted swiftly, and Operation Cactus was launched. Within nine hours of the appeal, Indian Air Force flew non-stop from Agra and landed its 50th Para Brigade in Male. Within hours, the situation was restored and mercenaries fleeing back to Sri Lanka were successfully intercepted by Indian Navy frigates. The vulnerable island nation heaved a sigh of relief and was highly obliged, whereas the inherently non-expansionist Indian government withdrew its troops as soon as the situation was handed over to the Maldivian authorities.

Advertisement

The reciprocal sentiment of ‘India-First’ held good for decades. On 17 November 2013, former leader Maumoon Abdul Gayoom’s half-brother, Abdulla Yameen Abdul Gayoom, took over as the President. Abdulla’s run-up campaign had borne contrarian positions ~ he was clearly anti-India and decidedly Islamist in his appeal, with a manifesto pledging death penalty under Sharia and strengthening relations with Muslim nations.

One of the first casualties of his ascendancy to Presidentship, was the decades long ‘India-First’ policy that had survived the earlier and rival administrations of Mohamed Nasheed and Maumoon Abdul Gayoom, respectively. Almost immediately, annulation of key contracts to Indian firms was followed by the parallel grant of the same to Chinese parties, and the Chinese footprint by ‘friendly visits’ of Chinese naval vessels, tourists, and flurry of officials, followed. New Delhi was horrified.

The tilt towards Beijing was more than compensated in terms of largesse, and the China-Maldives Friendship Bridge became the visible symbol of the ‘newnormal’ in Male. But like all authoritarian-usurpers who invoke religiousity, the Abdulla dispensation became increasingly intolerant, illiberal, and harsh on the opposition, so much so that by the 2018 elections, he was heading an unpopular regime.

The relatively moderate, Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP), made a return and by this time, Abdulla’s half-brother, previous leader Maumoon Abdul Gayoom had switched sides to the incoming MDP dispensation, calling India its ‘closest and most trusted ally’, with memories of the 1988 coup d’état still resonating.

Since 17 November 2018, Ibrahim Mohamed Solih as President of Maldives (and former President Mohamed Nasheed as Speaker), have restored the ‘India-First’ stance and brought back the historical warmth to Indo-Maldivian ties. Collateral moves of moderating the religious temper on the islands, with President Solih expressively calling out ‘terrorist and extremist groups that undermine religion and culture’, run contrary to the previous Abdulla government which pandered to religious extremism, as a means of political legitimacy.

The pro-China policy of the previous Abdulla dispensation was aligned to domestic expressions of hard religiousity, as is practiced dually, in the neighbouring country of Pakistan. Now, three years into power, the President Solih-led MDP government is facing multiple domestic issues like sexual harassment cases, graft charges and above all, pandemic related slowdown. This has reignited the relevance of the principal opposition party, the Islamist Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM), led by Abdulla Yameen. This has expectedly led to a brazen counter ‘India Out’ campaign, despite the widespread acknowledgement of India’s role in rushing Covid-19 vaccines, testing-kits and PPE material in trying times.

The role of India in developmental-infrastructural projects, medical care/ facilities, and education opportunities for outbound Maldivians, as indeed, India’s burgeoning contribution towards life-sustaining inbound tourism, makes it extremely critical for sustenance. So, this leaves former President Abdulla to only play up the emotional angle of ‘sovereign surrender’, as he rakes up the issue of Indian pilots and technicians manning the aircraft (India-gifted Dorniers and helicopters), which are often engaged in humanitarian emergencies and natural disaster SOSs. He then slyly dials up the loaded ‘no need for Indian military presence’ notions that are half-truths and intended to convey deliberate malintents.

The oldest formula of knowingly mixing hyper-nationalism with religion is fertile ground for Abdulla to appropriate, as religious invocations have timeless appeals and faith transcends logic, especially when pitted against the more moderate, progressive, and secular agenda of incumbent President Solih. This vile appeal towards personal beliefs can galvanise, stir and contextualise all related and unrelated angst, towards finding succor and trust in the words of the ‘true believers.’

While, Abdulla has retained the tempo of the ‘India Out’ spiel for the last few months, it has not gained much traction beyond his cadres, who swear allegiance towards PPM in any case. These pro-or-anti perceptions of political parties in India’s neighbourhood is a slippery slope that must not be perpetuated. Partisan politics of countries like Nepal, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh are deeply divided on these lines of perception which makes for extremely difficult situations, whenever the ostensibly ‘anti-India’ parties come to power.

Occasionally certain ill-advised moves that seem clearly intrusive and meddlesome from India’s side e.g., during Nepal’s adoption of its new constitution in 2015, have inadvertently fed such perceptions. Meanwhile the nimble Chinese always lurk on the sidelines to jump into any situationalopening offered by such divisive politics of the so-called pro-oranti India parties, like they did in Nepal or Sri Lanka. That there is an increasing global consensus on the ‘debttraps’ that accompany any Chinese largesse, and that is a factor that needs to be amplified diplomatically ~ the Sri Lankans with Hambantota port and the almost-indebted Maldivians are testimony to the ensnaring phenomenon of the Chinese embrace.

Equally, the narrative of India’s domestic politics also has ramifications that can be exploited by certain political parties outside. Thus, if there are concerns pertaining to the Indian regime’s perceived discrimination against any religious group, it can be exploited by the likes of Maldivian former President Abdulla. This can undo all the support and aid that the same Indian regime may have offered Maldives. Care to remain sensitive to all citizenry in neighbouring countries without any preference to a group, party or ideology would be helpful to avoid the ‘India Out’ type of campaigns.

(The writer is Lt Gen PVSM, AVSM (Retd) and former Lt Governor of Andaman & Nicobar Islands and Puducherry)