New Delhi: As stipulated under government rules, the Ministry of External Affairs’ Toshakhana is the Centre’s depository of foreign gifts. For the last five years, the MEA had publicly listed gifts received by senior Indian government officials, vice-president onwards, from foreign nationals or when on foreign visits. A new list is uploaded on the webpage of Toshakahana on MEA’s website every quarter, with the simple title referring to the specific four-month period during which the item was submitted to the depository. Last week, a new category appeared on the Toshakhana webpage, with the title, “Gifts From Domestic/Unknown Sources”. This is the first time that Toshakhana webpage has recorded gifts from other sources. The document mentions that the time period for the list is from 2016 to April 2018.The latest addition on the Toshakhana page of MEA’s website.Only six items were apparently categorised under “domestic/unknown sources” in the last two years. This includes a globe table lamp received by Prime Minister Narendra Modi, valued at Rs 4,000 and a bust of Buddha for a minister of state. The then foreign secretary S. Jaishankar had deposited a copy of the Bhagwad Gita worth Rs 36,000, along with an iron peacock and a wooden veena replica, which were much less expensive.It was the third listing which perhaps was the most interesting. It noted that the MEA Toshakhana had received one iPhone 7, two gold biscuits of 20 grams each and one 50 gram silver coin from Revenue Secretary Hashmukh Adhia on November 8, 2016. The Wire had reported earlier in March about the two gold biscuits of unknown provenance gifted to Adhia for Diwali 2016. In an email reply dated March 7, Adhia had said that as per government rules, he had surrendered two items to the Toshakhana, namely an iPhone 7 and two gold biscuits. The MEA listing, of course, includes an additional silver coin.As per the MEA’s valuation, the two gold biscuits are worth Rs 1.26 lakh. Along with a silver coin worth Rs 2,100, the total value of Adhia’s gifts with MEA Toshakhana is Rs 1.74 lakh. At that time, The Wire had asked the revenue secretary why his items were not listed in the corresponding period (October-December 2016) or the next quarter. He stated that he had deposited the gifts in the Toshakhana and received a “receipt of the same dated 07-11-2016 from them”.V.K. Krishna Menon and the CommonwealthA couple of months before the Commonwealth Summit in London, the MEA asked for the Indian high commission to evaluate and submit a proposal for a new initiative – to set up a trade and investment centre in India. The request was a bit unusual, as the initiative was not an in-house proposal. Rather, a well-known London-based political strategist, who was a key advisor to BJP in the 2014 election, had been publicly advocating for India to push to establish a Commonwealth trade and investment centre.Aware of the close political links of the political strategist, the wheels began to turn automatically in South Block. To bring the proposal into the ‘system’, the Indian high commission drew up the concept paper and sent it over to headquarters. The MEA then diligently passed it to the commerce ministry for their input, who immediately nixed it as unviable. It is learnt that the MEA had not exactly endorsed the proposal when it was sent out to the other ministry.In fact, largely, there was skepticism among Indian official circles about the possibility of the Commonwealth forging a free trade bloc. “What does it mean? It is not structurally possible. It is like saying, will Canada do free trade with India. If it happens, it will be bilateral. But, will Canada do trade with Tuvalu? It won’t happen,” said a source.A key decision of the 2018 Commonwealth summit was that the next head of the group after Queen Elizabeth would be her eldest son, Prince Charles.When India joined the Commonwealth, the London Declaration had specified the terms of joining of the independent country after five days of deliberation in April 1949. It said that India had accepted “The King as the symbol of the free association of its independent member nations and as such the head of the Commonwealth”. With an emphasis on the phrase ‘as such’, India was only accepting then King George VI as the head of the Commonwealth in his personal capacity – and not the British Crown.Further, the declaration also refers to India’s intention to join the Commonwealth as a “sovereign independent republic”. Since India had only accepted King George VI in his personal capacity as head of Commonwealth, it meant that each time before the accession of a new British monarch, leaders of the commonwealth had to give their assent.In September 1951, when King George was in hospital for the removal of his left lung, Commonwealth high commissioners were informed by the foreign office about the arrangements in case of the monarch’s demise. This was apparently done as high commissioners were to be invited to sign the Proclamation of the new Queen.It was because of an intervention by then Indian high commissioner V.K. Krishna Menon that Queen Elizabeth, along with her royal titles and styles had a new formal moniker – “head of Commonwealth”. Her father did not include this formally among his many royal titles.After [Constitutional advisor to Commonwealth relations office Charles] Dixon had explained the procedure, Menon said that he would be only too glad to attend in the same way as other high commissioners. Dixon pointed out to him that the Proclamation, which had been in use for the past three or four centuries without alteration, contained some expressions which were not suitable for a Republican country such as India had become. Menon replied that he would be sorry if he could not show his respect for the new Sovereign by signing the Proclamation, and asked whether it would not be possible to modify the wording in some respects. In particular, he hoped it would be possible to include the expression ‘Head of the Commonwealth’ for the authorship of which he seemed inclined to lay claim.Dixon characteristically expressed considerable doubt as to whether it would be possible to interfere with a time-honoured and established instrument of this kind, but promised that the suggestion would be considered. As a result, the form of the Proclamation was discussed by a small meeting of senior officials, presided over by the Secretary to the Cabinet, Sir Norman Brook. This meeting recommended a slightly different wording, including the expression ‘Head of the Commonwealth’. [The Round Table, Commonwealth Journal of International Affairs]Menon signed the Accession Proclamation of February 6, 1952, that pronounced the new sovereign, which included the phrase “Head of Commonwealth” for the first time. Indian Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru’s condolence cable to Queen Elizabeth welcoming her as the Head of Commonwealth, was published two days later in the Times.Extracts from the 1952 Accession Proclamation which appended ‘Head of Commonwealth’ as one of the titles of a British monarch for the first time. It was signed by then Indian high commissioner V.K. Krishna Menon.Sixty-six-years later, Queen Elizabeth addressed leaders and expressed her “sincere wish” that Prince Charles would succeed her as Head of the Commonwealth. During the consultation process in the run-up to the London summit, there had been some murmurs from a few small states that there was no need to go through this process of accession during every period of transition of British monarchy. But, this was a non-starter with the UK being “impeccable” in taking into consideration India’s uncompromising position on this issue. Sources described the continuation of the phrasing with which India joined the Commonwealth as one of the red lines for New Delhi.Naval patrolLast week, media reports talked about the deployment of Indian naval ship Sumedha to undertake joint patrol of Maldives’ Exclusive Economic Zone. While one article claimed that it was “seen as a move to improve bilateral relationship”, another described it as a “slight upswing in bilateral military ties”.Diplomatic sources asserted that making an link between the conduct joint EEZ surveillance to an improvement in the chilly ties between New Delhi and Malé was an incorrect reading of the situation.The regular joint patrols were initially disrupted in February, when Maldives President put his country under a state of emergency. It was during the emergency period that Maldives had declined to participate in the biennial international naval congregation, ‘Milan’ at Andaman and Nicobar Islands in March.The official reason given by Maldivian envoy was that security personnel were required to be in a “heightened stance of readiness” due to the state of emergency back home. As per diplomatic sources, not letting security personnel leave the shores was also another way to keep an eye on the Maldives National Defence Force (MNDF), since their loyalty is seen as a crucial component in the longevity of an administration.Indian officials recognised that it was only a question of when the patrols will be resumed, not if.Sources stated that MNDF had been keen to restart the joint patrols at the earliest, as any delay would leave its vast EEZ unprotected. New Delhi also had no intention to give up the privilege of joint patrols, which is important for the strategic presence of the Indian navy in the Indian Ocean. Pakistan has recently suggested joint patrols with Maldives, thought the latter has not accepted the offer. Further, observers also believe that MNDF does not entirely share the political instincts of the administration and would prefer not to tread on India’s toes. Officials also point out that the current deployment of INS Sumedha was not even the first joint patrol since it was suspended in February. An Indian ship had already conducted a joint patrol with MNDF last month.A direct correlation between defence partnership and the current political relationship between Indian and Maldives was not right in the present context, they reiterate. Rather, New Delhi is watching in rising alarm as the Maldives government does not seem to be taking any steps to ensure fair and free presidential elections, though there have been no public statements in nearly two months. The yawning trust deficit between India and Maldives shows no sign of being bridged yet.