Category: Ranker Webinars

Context

As External Affairs Minister Dr S Jaishankar has just completed a visit to Australia after attending the annual Foreign Ministers’ Framework Dialogue. In this article we take a deep dive into India’s relationship with Australia.

India-Australia Relations: A Backgrounder

• The India-Australia bilateral relationship has undergone evolution in recent years, developing along a positive track, into a friendly partnership.
• The two nations have much in common, underpinned by shared values of a pluralistic, Westminster-style democracy, Commonwealth traditions, expanding economic engagement etc.
• Several commonalities include strong, vibrant, secular and multicultural democracies, free press, independent judicial system and English language.

Historical Perspective

• The historical ties between India and Australia started immediately following European settlement in Australia from 1788.
• All trade, to and fro from the penal colony of New South Wales was controlled by the British East India Company through Kolkata.
• India and Australia established diplomatic relations in the pre-Independence period, with the establishment of India Trade Office in Sydney in 1941.
• The end of the Cold War and simultaneously, India’s decision to launch major economic reforms in 1991 provided the first positive move towards development of bilateral ties.

Various dimensions of ties

[A] Political partnership

• Both the countries are members of G-20, ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF), IORA (Indian Ocean Rim Association), Asia Pacific Partnership on Climate and Clean Development, East Asia Summit and the Commonwealth.
• Australia has been extremely supportive of India’s quest for membership of the APEC (Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation).
• Australia whole-heartedly welcomed India’s joining of the MTCR (Missile Technology Control Regime).

[B] Trade and Economy

• India is the 5th largest trade partner of Australia with trade in goods and services.
• Two-way trade between India and Australia was worth A$24.3 billion ($18.3 billion) in 2020, up from just $13.6 billion in 2007, according to the Australian government.
• After a series of attempts, in 2016, Australia opened the door for uranium exports to India.
• An Australia-India Strategic Research Fund (AISRF) which was established in 2006, supports collaboration between scientists in India and Australia on cutting-edge research.

[C] Cultural ties

• There is a longstanding people-to-people ties, ever increasing Indian students coming to Australia for higher education.
• Growing tourism and sporting links, especially Cricket and Hockey, have played a significant role in further strengthening bilateral relations between the two countries.
• India is one of the top sources of skilled immigrants to Australia.
• The number of Indian students continue to grow with approximately 105,000 students presently studying in Australian universities.
• After England, India is the second largest migrant group in Australia in 2020.

[D] Strategic Partnership

• In 2009, India and Australia established a ‘Strategic Partnership’, including a Joint Declaration on Security Cooperation which has been further elevated to Comprehensive Strategic Partnership in 2020.
• The Mutual Logistics Support Agreement has been signed during the summit that should enhance defence cooperation and ease the conduct of large-scale joint military exercises.
• There is a technical Agreement on White Shipping Information Exchange.
• Both nations conduct bilateral maritime exercise AUSINDEX. In 2018, Indian Air Force participated for the first time in the Exercise Pitch Black in Australia.
• Foreign and Defence Ministers of both countries agreed to meet in a ‘2+2’ format biennially.
• The first-ever Quad Leaders’ Virtual Summit held on 12 March 2021 saw the participation of Prime Ministers of India, Australia, Japan and President of USA.
• A Civil Nuclear Cooperation Agreement between the two countries was signed in September 2014 during the visit of then-PM Tony Abbott to India.

Significance of the ties

• COVID Management: Australia is one of the few countries that has managed to combat COVID-19 so far through “controlled adaptation” by which the coronavirus has been suppressed to very low levels.
• STEM: From farming practices through food processing, supply and distribution to consumers, the Australian agribusiness sector has the desired R&D capacity, experience and technical knowledge.
• Natural resources: Australia is rich in natural resources that India’s growing economy needs. It also has huge reservoirs of strength in higher education, scientific and technological research.
• Alliance with US: The two countries also have increasingly common military platforms as India’s defence purchases from the US continue to grow.
• Affinity with ASEAN: Australia has deep economic, political and security connections with the ASEAN and a strategic partnership with one of the leading non-aligned nations, Indonesia.
• Containing China: The Indo-Pacific region has the potential to facilitate connectivity and trade between India and Australia. Both nations can leverage their equation in QUAD to contain China.

International cooperation

• Support at UNSC: Australia supports India’s candidature in an expanded UN Security Council.
• APEC: Australia is an important player in APEC and supports   India’s membership in the organization. In 2008, Australia became an Observer in SAARC.

Some irritants in ties

• Trade imbalance: India’s trade deficit with Australia has been increasing since 2001-02 due to India-Australia Free Trade Agreement. It is also a contentious issue in the ongoing RCEP negotiations which India left.

• High tariff on agri products in India: India has a high tariff for agriculture and dairy products which makes it difficult for Australian exporters to export these items to India.
• Non-tariff barriers in Australia: At the same time, India facesnon-tariff barriers and its skilled professionals in the Australian labour market face discrimination.
• Visa Policy: India wants greater free movement and relaxed visa norms for its IT professionals, on which Australia is reluctant.
• Future of QUAD: Australian lobby has sparked speculation over the fate of the Quadrilateral Consultative Dialogue (the ‘Quad) involving India, Australia, Japan and the United States.
• Nuclear reluctance: Building consensus on non-nuclear proliferation and disarmament has been a major hurdle given India’s status as a nuclear power.    
• Racism against Indians: Increasing Racist attacks on Indians in Australia has been a major issue.  

Way forward

• Upgradation of 2+2 format: It is prudent too for New Delhi and Canberra to elevate the ‘two plus two’ format for talks from the Secretary level to the level of Foreign and Defence Ministers.
• Removal of trade barriers: Both nations need to resolve disputes at the WTO with regard to the Australian sector can act as a serious impediment.
• Balancing China: An ‘engage and balance’ China strategy is the best alternative to the dead end of containment.

Conclusion

• Given the changing geopolitics, both Canberra and New Delhi are keen to move beyond mere rhetoric and build a robust partnership
• The key is to keep the Australia story thriving in India, and India story thriving in Australia on a consistent basis in public memory.
• This involves a holistic multi-stakeholder strategy and approach which deepens understanding and appreciation of each other.

UPSC 2023 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)

UPSC 2023 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)

Context

• Humanity has luckily survived 75 years without experiencing nuclear war, can one expect luck to last indefinitely?
• In this article, we shall discuss about what raising the nuclear stakes meant for the war in Ukraine and for the world at large.

Nuclear Deterrence: A brief backgrounder

• The principle of nuclear deterrence was born out of the symbiosis of the principle of military deterrence and the emergence of nuclear weapons.
• It is a military doctrine according to which the possibility that a country will use the nuclear weapons it possesses in retaliation will deter an enemy from attacking.
• The idea came to the forefront of US military policy.
• It helps avoid a nuclear war as each side tries to secure their interests by avoiding a nuclear confrontation.

Understanding the logic behind

The basic principle of this logic is:

1. One actor prevents another from taking some action by raising the latter’s fear of the consequences that will ensue.
2. Hypothetically, if Country A launches a nuclear war against Country B, Country B will be able to inflict enough damage on Country A that it would lead to what theorists call “Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD).”

Logic: Nobody will survive to claim oneself a winner!

• Thus, in a nuclear war, both sides will be so badly harmed that it will be impossible to declare one side or the other as the winner.
• Even if one of them tries to attack and disable the nuclear weapons of its rival, the other would still be left with enough nuclear weapons to inflict unacceptable destruction.

Advantages offered by Nuclear Deterrence

• Averting escalation of a world war: The threat of MAD is enough to prevent the world’s nuclear powers from escalating a conflict to the point that a military confrontation becomes inevitable.
• Promote stability: Analysts claim that nuclear weapons do not just protect countries against use of nuclear weapons by others, but even prevent war and promote stability. Ex. Weapons for peace.
• Increases stake and credibility of a nation: Security apparatus of a nation earns its global credibility. Having nuke inherently gives a geo-strategic advantage to countries.
• Prohibiting coercion: The role of the weapon is narrowly framed for safeguarding against nuclear blackmail and coercion.

Limitations of Nuclear Deterrence

• Increase in proxy wars: Nukes have not been shown to prevent proxy wars and acts of terrorism by various non-state actors.  
• Unequal advantage: With the unequal distribution of nuclear capabilities in today’s world, certain nations are at an immediate advantage over other countries. Ex. Russian annexation of de-nuclearized Ukraine.
• Complete deterrence is a myth: Several nations have armed themselves with highly maneuverable nuclear missiles that have much more destructive power to burst earth into dust.
• Alternative warfare: There is no assurance of peace even both conflicting countries may possess nuclear weapons. Biological wars have replaced nukes that are silent killers in disguise. Ex. Wuhan virus pandemic.
• Rise in cold and economic warfare: The world has entered into the phase of a new Cold War e.g. the one between US and China, economic sanctions against Russia, embargo on Visa.
• Non–state actors acquiring nukes: In worst nightmares, there is a likelihood that of inadvertent escalation due to acquisition of the nukes by Talibans or any other terror outfits.
• Emergence of rogue states: Rogue nation or state regarded as breaking international law and posing a threat to the security of other nations. Ex. North Korea.
• Limited nuclear war: In this each side exercises restraint in the use of nuclear weapons, employing small tactical weapons on selected targets. Ex. Pak Minister claiming ‘Pav-Pav kilo ke nuclear bombs’
• Cyberattacks on nuclear command and control: China has been highly successful in manipulating power grids in Pakistan. This can also happen anywhere in the world triggering uncontrolled reactions in nuclear grids.

Problems with the logic of nuclear deterrence

(1) Limited American theory

• There are many scholars who have expressed their scepticism about the logic of deterrence by arguing that just because it avoided a nuclear confrontation between then Soviet Union and the US.
• The world and of coursem the global security exists beyond US and Russia.
• It was the US who ushered nuclear era by bombing Japan and now sermons other to practice restrain.

(2) Still a unverified hypothesis

• The logic of nuclear deterrence is not an established norm but a “hypothesis” and, thus, basing a nation’s security strategy on it is a gamble.
• Nuclear deterrence is based on the assumption that a country will avoid starting a nuclear war in order to protect its own security.

(3) Who shall punish the rogues?

• Another major flaw with this logic is the presence of many uncontrollable variables.
• Ex. the control falls into the hands of the wrong leaders or a soldier deliberately starting a nuclear war to create mischief.

Why is nuclear deterrence still necessary?

• Cost-benefit analysis of a nuclear war: It is a given that nuclear weapons can bring so much destruction that the costs of war will outweigh the benefits and this would “deter” leaders from engaging in nuclear warfare.
• Impact of second strike is dreadful: There is a renewed threat of “second-strike capability” that keeps countries from engaging in nuclear warfare.
• Acknowledged fact (even by the nerds): Leaders who are driven by personal interests are aware of the fact that no winner would emerge from a nuclear war.
• Success of the theory: Despite China, India, and Pakistan having nuclear weapons, the region has been able to avoid a nuclear confrontation and peaceful resolution of conflicts.

During Kargil War, the Deputy Foreign Minister of Pakistan at the time, Shamshad Ahmed, told a Pakistani newspaper that Pakistan is willing to use “any weapon in our arsenal to defend our territorial integrity.” To this, George Fernandez, India’s then Defence Minister, responded that in doing so they would “liquidate” their own country in the process.

Nuclear Deterrence: Indian perspective

• Nuclear deterrence can serve as a pillar of international security only in conjunction with negotiations and agreements on the limitation, reduction, and non-proliferation of nuclear weapons.
• Without them, deterrence fuels an endless arms race, while any serious crisis between the great powers will bring them to the brink of nuclear war.
• India believes that nuclear weapons are political weapons, not weapons of war fighting.
• Their sole purpose is to deter the use and threat of use of nuclear weapons.

India’s Nuclear Doctrine

• This was first articulated by Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee on May 27, 1998, days after India had undertaken a series of nuclear tests in Pokhran.
• It outlined various principles:

1. Building and maintaining a Credible Minimum Deterrence
2. Posture of ‘No First Use’– nuclear weapons will only be used in retaliation against a nuclear attack on Indian Territory or on Indian forces anywhere
3. Massive Nuclear retaliation to a first strike will be designed to inflict unacceptable damage
4. Non-use against non-nuclear states
5. In response to biological or chemical weapons, India will retain the option of retaliating with nuclear weapons

How India performs well on these lines?

• On analyzing Sino-Indian relations, particularly the Ladakh stand-off of 2020, it is evident that both countries are careful to not use nuclear weapons even as a threat.
• Both these countries have stated that both have declared No First Use (NFU) positions.

India’s commitment for de-nuclearization

India has always batted for a universal commitment and an agreed global and non-discriminatory multilateral framework.

• It has outlined a working paper on Nuclear Disarmament submitted to the UN General Assembly in 2006.
• India participated in the Nuclear Security Summit process and has regularly participated in the International Conferences on Nuclear Security organised by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).
• India is also a member of the Nuclear Security Contact Group (but has signed off the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT)).
• India has expressed its readiness to support the commencement of negotiations on a Fissile Material Cut-off Treaty (FMCT).
• India couldn’t join the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT) due to several concerns raised by India.
• India has piloted an annual UNGA Resolution on “Measures to Prevent Terrorists from Acquiring Weapons of Mass Destruction” since 2002, which is adopted by consensus.

Conclusion

• Nuclear deterrence is not just a Cold War term but is extremely valid in a post-Cold War scenario.
• Countries have understood the importance of nuclear deterrence and it plays an important role in designing their security strategies.
• It is used by countries as a bargaining chip to deter nuclear retaliation by other countries.
• However, it should be noted that nuclear deterrence is not the only answer to security problems and its application can be enhanced by using other strategies such as peace talks and confidence-building measures.

UPSC 2023 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)