💥Join UPSC 2027,2028 Mentorship (July Batch) + XFactor Notes & Microthemes PDF

GS Paper: GS2-19.Effect of policies and politics of developed and developing countries on India’s interests, Indian diaspora.

  • The battle in Beijing

    Context

    The coronavirus epidemic poses a challenge to China’s place in global affairs, its political leadership.

    The possible implications of coronavirus crisis

    • The Chines leadership might not be able to escape the blame: If the epidemic turns into a pandemic, as some analysts bet, China’s all-powerful leader Xi Jinping might not be able to escape the blame.
      • And will likely come under considerable political pressure.
    • It could also turn into a systemic threat: Some also speculate that the backlash against the government’s mishandling of the crisis could turn into a systemic threat against the dominance of the Chinese Communist Party.
    • Speculations as perennial hope among China’s critics: Sceptics, however, dismiss above speculation as merely reflecting the perennial hope among Beijing’s harshest critics who can’t wait to see a China without the CCP.
      • Realist’s stand: Realists point to the massive mobilisation of state power by President Xi in limiting the spread of the virus.

    Handling of the crisis by China

    • Initial faltering response: To be sure, there were major failures in the initial faltering response to the crisis.
      • Cover-up attempts from the lower level: The attempts at the lower levels to cover-up or underplays the crisis and the inadequate appreciation at the higher levels of the potential consequences are common to all large bureaucracies. The party-state in China is not an exception.
    • Praise for handling the crisis: China’s handling of the crisis had drawn much respect, grudging or otherwise, from the international community.
      • Whether it is the lockdown of Hubei province and its capital Wuhan, from where the virus began to spread.
      • Or in deploying thousands of doctors and health workers in the province and building massive hospitals for treating the infected.
    • Possibility of some political impact: Yet, there is no question that a crisis of this magnitude -will have some political impact.
      • The party-state is certainly having some difficulty in containing the public outrage against the initial failures.
    • Efforts to shield top leadership from blame: The CCP, however, is bound to shield the supreme leader from any damaging criticism and in fact, celebrate a triumph in containing the spread through a determined effort.
      • Responsibility will be affixed on provincial officials in Hubei and a purge of some kind may have already begun.

    Addressing the economic consequences of the crisis

    • International dimension: Nearly two decades after the SARS epidemic -China is now a much larger economy and its interdependence with the world has only deepened.
      • This interdependence, in turn, lends a strong international dimension to China’s crisis.
    • Optimist’s hope of future uptick: Optimists hope that a sharp drop in economic activity in the current quarter will be followed by a steep uptick in growth in the next when the virus is contained and normalcy returns.
    • Pessimist’s fear of economic disruption: Pessimists suggest that the economic disruption — in terms of the impact on internal and external trade and the breakdown of the global supply chains- could have lasting effects.
      • Reinforcing the disruption: Some suspect that the disruption could reinforce the slowdown driven by a number of other internal and external factors including the trade war with the US.

    China’s response to the rest of the world

    • Channelling of resentment against the West: Some in the West hope that a prolonged economic crisis might turn the people against the CCP. For now, though, Beijing is channelling the resentment against the West.
    • Terming evacuation as an over-reaction: Beijing has criticised the advisories from various countries against travel to China and the cancellation of flights as over-reaction.
      • Lukewarm response to evacuation efforts: China has also been lukewarm to efforts of various countries to evacuate their citizens from Wuhan and Hubei.
      • India evacuated students: India has managed to convince Beijing to let India airlift its students from Wuhan.
      • Pakistan has declared that it will not evacuate its students as a gesture of political solidarity with China in a time of crisis.
      • South Asian neighbour’s response: Many of India’s other South Asian neighbours are torn between the reluctance to offend Chinese sentiment and the mounting domestic pressures to bring students back.
      • Cooperation with the US: While being critical of the US travel restrictions against China, Beijing has certainly been open to cooperation with the US in dealing with the crisis.
    • India’s offer to help other countries in evacuation: The external affairs minister Subrahmanyam Jaishankar said last week that India has been willing to bring back students from all the neighbouring countries.
      • Balancing between Delhi and Beijing: The logic of balancing between Delhi and Beijing has prevented most of the smaller neighbours from requesting Indian assistance.
      • The Maldives has been the only exception.
    • The response of the East and Southeast Asia: Beyond South Asia, many countries in East and Southeast Asia have been hesitant to be seen as rushing to cut themselves from China.
      • What is making these countries hesitant: Deep economic interdependence and massive flows of Chinese tourists led to much dithering among the East Asian countries in their early responses to the crisis.

    Conclusion

    India must explore all potential cooperative engagement with Beijing as well as its other international partners on pandemics-an important but the under-addressed challenge for national, regional and international security.

  • [op-ed snap] What Brexit means for the EU and its partners

    Context

    On January 31, 2020, the United Kingdom left the European Union, the EU project will be taken forward by the 27 member states.

    A structured exit

    • Minimum disruption:  This is largely thanks to the Withdrawal Agreement that was negotiated with the U.K., which enabled “an orderly Brexit”.
      • One that, at least for now, minimises disruption for our citizens, businesses, public administrations, as well as for our international partners.
    • An arrangement of the transition period: Under this agreement, the EU and the U.K. agreed on a transition period, until the end of 2020 at least.
      • During which the U.K. will continue to participate in the EU’s Customs Union and in the Single Market, and to apply EU law, even if it is no longer a Member State.
      • During this period, the U.K. will also continue to abide by the international agreements of the EU, as we made clear in a note verbale to our international partners.

    Building a new partnership between the EU and the UK

    • Degree of continuity: With the transition period in place, there is a degree of continuity. This was not easy given the magnitude of the task.
      • By leaving the Union, the U.K. automatically, mechanically, legally, leaves hundreds of international agreements concluded by or on behalf of the Union.
    • Building new partnership: That work will start in a few weeks as soon as the EU 27 Member States have approved the negotiating mandate proposed by the European Commission, setting out our terms and ambitions for achieving the closest possible partnership with a country which will remain EU’s ally, partner and friend.
    • Links and shared values: The EU and the U.K. are bound by history, by geography, culture, shared values and principles and a strong belief in rules-based multilateralism. Our future partnership will reflect these links and shared beliefs.
    • Working on topics beyond trade: Both sides want to go well beyond trade and keep working together on security and defence, areas where the U.K. has experiences and assets that are best used as part of a common effort.
    • Cooperation on the wide topics: In a world of big challenges and change, of turmoil and transition, we must consult each other and cooperate, bilaterally and in key regional and global fora, such as the United Nations, the World Trade Organization, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization or the G20.
    • Collective responses to handle global challenges: Today’s global challenges- from climate change to cybercrime, terrorism or inequality — require collective responses.
      • The more the U.K. is able to work in lockstep with the EU and together with partners around the world, the greater would be chances of addressing these challenges effectively.

    Way forward

    • Continuing project forward as 27: At the very core of the EU project is the idea that it is stronger together; that pooling resources and initiatives is the best way of achieving common goals. Brexit does not change this, and efforts must be taken to continue this project forward as 27.
    • Note for the partners: EU’s partners can be sure that EU will stay true to an ambitious, outward-looking agenda-be it on trade and investment, on climate action and digital, on connectivity, on security and counter-terrorism, on human rights and democracy, or on defence and foreign policy.

     

  • India abroad: On diplomats firefighting negative references to India

     

    Context

    The European Union Parliament’s discussion recently on India’s Citizenship (Amendment) Act or CAA, is a cause of concern.

    Reactions in the West over the act

    • In the U.K. and the U.S.:  Parliamentarians in the U.K. and U.S. Congressmen, including Democratic presidential contenders, have asked India to “reconsider” the law and to “engage” with the protesters.
    • Resolution in the EU parliament: The EU parliamentarians went a step further.
      • Six critical resolutions: The EU parliament put out six different and extremely critical resolutions.
      • One of the six articles spoke of the possible risk by the CAA and the proposed National Register of Citizens, of creating “the largest statelessness crisis in the world”.
      • A sixth less critical resolution, but which worried about the “brutal crackdown” on protesters, was dropped.
    • Diplomatic outreach by India
      • After India’s intense diplomatic outreach, the parliamentarians agreed to put off voting on the resolution until after External Affairs Minister and the PM visit Brussels.
      • The hope is that with the U.K. scheduled to leave the EU on January 31, interest in the anti-CAA resolutions will wane.
      • Finally, the government has held that the CAA is India’s internal law.

    India’s Reaction

    • The sovereign right of India: While the government is right about India’s sovereign right, it would be deluding itself if it thinks any of these explanations are passing muster with the EU parliamentarians.
      • Dilution of case against foreign interference: The government diluted its own case against foreign interference when it facilitated a visit by EU MEPs to Srinagar last year.
      • By engaging the EU MEPs to avoid a vote in the EU Parliament this week, and offering to explain the reasons behind CAA, the government is diluting it further.
    • Need to stop reference to Pakistan: New Delhi must also consider the impact of its repeated reference to Pakistan as the sole mover of any motion against it at world legislatures and fora.
      •  626 MEPs of the total 751 were members of the groups that originally drafted the six resolutions, and it seems unlikely that Islamabad could have achieved such a majority.

    Diplomatic toll

    • Cumulative toll: The government must reflect on the cumulative toll on its diplomatic heft following international alarm over the CAA, plans for an NRC and the dilution of Article 370.
    • Instead of pushing a positive agenda for India or handling global challenges, Indian diplomats seem to be overwhelmed keeping out any negative references to India at official fora.

    Conclusion

    India must take steps to address the concerns raised at the global level over the act and also prepare itself for the possible impact of such actions.

     

     

     

  • [op-ed snap] It’s not yet Howdy, Modi!

    Context

    Persistent in their efforts to remake their countries and their engagement with the world, Mr Modi and Mr Trump are shaking up the bilateral ties between the two countries, and the resultant flux could outlive their tenures.

    The emergence of both the leaders on similar promises

    • Improvements over the legacy of their predecessors: Both leaders continuously reiterate that their predecessors were incapable of protecting national interest.
      • The compulsion to reframe the national interest: Such premises commits them both to reframe the national interest, and both have articulated it with clarity and force.
      • For instance, Mr Modi, in Houston in September 2019 and Mr Trump in Davos this week, went great lengths to lay out figures that presented their respective regimes as the most effective guardians.
    • Both have cultural and economic agenda: Both dispensations believe that “the people” had been given a raw deal by earlier regimes.
      • Both have a cultural and economic agenda.
      • National awakening: They are now leading a national reawakening, and working hard for the hard-working people.
      • Both believe that cultural nationalism is a force for the good.
      • Securing borders and entry barriers: Both believe that national borders need to be strengthened by stricter monitoring and setting new bars for entry.
      • Renegotiating the treaties: Both leaders try to renegotiate the contract between the union and the States, and between citizens and the state within their respective countries.
      • The supremacy of executive: They assert the supremacy of the executive over the legislature and the judiciary.
      • Shared values: The notion of shared values of India and the U.S. has acquired a whole new meaning under Mr Trump and Mr Modi.

    Politics and governance

    • Hopes of status-quo in bilateral relations shattered: It was hoped that the stronger U.S.-India ties- that have autonomous drivers of convergence-would not be impacted by the nationalist politics of these two leaders.
      • But both leaders have been remarkably true to their politics in their governance.
      • Current tumult in the India-US ties: Shared values notwithstanding, national interests as perceived by these leaders have several points of divergence and therein lies in the current tumult in India-U.S. ties.
      • Opposition to the “world order”: Mr Trump has been outspokenly confrontational with the “world order” that he says has worked against American interests.
      • Dismantling the treaties: America under Mr Trump has wrecked treaties such as the Paris climate agreement and institutions such as the World Trade Organization and the United Nations, disrupting the “rule-based order”.
      • India’s relations with Bangladesh: India’s spirited outreach in the neighbourhood is still playing out. India’s historically warm ties with Bangladesh have been frayed after CAA.
    • India’s ambitions on the global level
    • The seat at the UNSC: India under continues to push for more space for itself in global affairs by seeking a permanent seat in the UN Security Council and membership.
    • NSG membership: India is also pushing for the membership of the Nuclear Suppliers Group.
    • The US actions at global levels
      • Expansion of the principle of the pre-emptive strike: America expanded the principle of pre-emptive strike to include the assassination of a senior official of Iran.
      • Renegotiating the treaties: After dismantling the North American Free Trade Agreement, Mr Trump forced Mexico and Canada to accede to his demands in a new trade deal.
    • The India-US relations and impact of U.S. relations with other countries
      • Impact on India-US ties: India’s ties with the U.S. are impacted by America’s ties with India’s adversaries and neighbours, China and Pakistan.
      • Hopes of alignment in the Indo-US ties: Mr Trump’s bluster against both had lit hope that there would finally be a near-complete alignment between India and the U.S. on strategy.
      • US-Iran conflict: Despite Mr Trump’s avowed opposition to America’s endless wars in West Asia, the US is going against Iran headlong, which is not in India’s interest.
      • Relations with Gulf Countries: Trump and Mr Modi share a strong bonding with the Gulf Cooperation Council kings, but their courses in the region are diverging.
      • US-Pakistan coming closer once again: The American President’s impatience to get out of Afghanistan has already pushed his administration closer to Pakistan, which is now further necessitated by his adventurist Iran policy.
      • The US disregard for China’s expansionist policies: Mr Trump has been singularly focused on one question-trade. He cares little about China’s expansionism and at any rate that is not a factor in his ties with other Asian countries.

    India-US ties- Points of fission

    • On the trade front: Mr Trump has bracketed India and China as two countries that have duped his predecessors to gain undue advantage. Which is far from seeing India as deserving special concessions to counterbalance China as old wisdom demanded.
      • Ending GSP: The US ended India’s status under the World Trade Organization’s Generalized System of Preferences and took other punitive measures.
      • India trying to decrease the trade surplus: By increasing hydrocarbon imports from the U.S., the government is trying to reduce India’s trade surplus.
    • Restrictions on H1-B visa: The US has tightened the restrictions on the H1-B visa which is used by the Indian companies.
    • Decreasing bipartisan support in the US: The mobilisation of Indian diaspora in America by the government has resulted in the inevitable blowback.
      • Diaspora divided and bipartisan support waning: The diaspora has been divided, and the bipartisan support for India is now squandered. Progressive sections on the Democratic side and religious libertarians and evangelicals on the Trump side are both concerned over India’s actions back home.

    Conclusion

    Partnership with America is critical to India. India must take the steps to align the interest but whenever it diverges India must take measures to minimise its impact on India while furthering its interests.

  • [op-ed snap] The world from Raisina.

    Context:

    As the world is moving from an era of predictability to an era of unpredictability led by the US and China, a new Middle Power coalition is the need of an hour.

    The “Rising India” narrative and challenges

    • The narrative was scripted over the two post-Cold War decades, 1991 to 2011.
    • Narrative of plural secular democracy: It was based on the improving performance of the economy and India’s political ability to deal with many longstanding diplomatic challenges within a paradigm of realism.
    • Three successive prime ministers – scripted the narrative of India rising as a plural, secular democracy, as opposed to China’s rise within an authoritarian system.
    • Opening of new vistas: India’s improving economic performance had opened up new vistas for cooperation with major powers and neighbours.
    • New challenges to the narrative: Now the economy’s subdued performance and domestic political issues have created new challenges for Indian foreign policy.
      • The new approach to relations with India adopted by both President Donald Trump and President Xi Jinping has created a more challenging external environment.

    Relations with the US

    • New demands from the US: Each time New Delhi has tried to meet a US demand, Washington DC has come up with new demands.
    • US-China dispute resolution and effects for India: Any resolution of US differences with China, can only reduce whatever little bargaining clout India has.
    • Complaint at WTO: The US has, in fact, actively lodged complaints against India at the World Trade Organisation.
    • Geopolitical effects for India:  On the geopolitical side, US intervention in West Asia has always imposed an additional economic burden on India.

    Relations with China

    • Consistent policy: There has been continuity and consistency in India-China policy over the past two decades, with some ups and downs.
    • Effects of power difference with China: As the bilateral power differential widens, China has little incentive or compulsion to be accommodative of Indian concerns, much less the interests
      • China never fails to remind India of the growing power differential between the two.
    • Building strength to deal with China: In dealing with China, India will have to, paraphrasing Deng Xiaoping, “build its strength and bide its time.

    Russia’s focus

    • It will remain focused on Eurasian geopolitics.
    • It will also be concerned with the geo-economics of energy.
    • Implications for India: Both these factors define Russia’s relations with China, and increasingly, with Pakistan, posing a challenge for India.

     

    Way forward in the relations with Pakistan

    • The government’s Pakistan policy has run its course.
      • It yielded some short-term results thanks to Pakistan’s efforts not to get “black-listed” by the Financial Action Task Force (FATF).
      • But the rest of the world is doing business with Pakistan, lending billions in aid.
    • The global community may increasingly accept future pleas from Pakistan that terror attacks in India are home-grown.
    • related to the situation in Kashmir or concerns about the welfare of Muslims, unless incontrovertible evidence to the contrary is offered.
    • The need for a new Pakistan policy: Backchannel talks should be resumed and visas should be given liberally to Pakistani intellectuals, media and entertainers to improve cross-border perceptions as a first step towards improving relations.

    The Middle Powers and opportunities for India

    • What are the middle powers?  It is a mix of developed and developing economies, some friends of the US and other friends of China.
      • It is an amorphous group but can emerge into a grouping of the like-minded in a world of uncertainty capable of taming both the US and China.
      • A new Middle Powers coalition may be the need of the year.
    • Which countries can be part of it?  Germany, France, Japan, Australia, Brazil, Indonesia, Vietnam and perhaps South Korea. One could include Russia, Nigeria and South Africa also in this group.
    • Stakes involved but no influence: Like India, these countries have a stake in what the US and China do, but little influence over either.
    • What India can do? These countries which constitute the part of the Middle Powers should engage the attention of India’s external affairs minister.

    Disruptive policies not an option

    • Adoption of disruptive approach: There is a view among some policy analysts that India too can adopt a “disruptive” approach as a clever tactic in foreign affairs.
      • Disruption is not an end in itself. It has to be a means to an end.
      • Powerful nations can afford disruption as tactics.
    • Unchanged strategic elements: The strategic elements defining Indian foreign policy in the post-Cold War era have not changed.
    • Not an option: India cannot risk such tactics without measuring the risk they pose to strategy.

    Conclusion

    With the changing geopolitical atmosphere particularly with respect to the US and Chiana, India needs to adopt a suitable approach to its foreign policy especially involving the Middle Powers.

     

     

  • [op-ed snap] Iran’s tightrope

    Context

    In the aftermath of recent events, Iran needs a new compact to deal with the domestic crisis and also a framework to deal with the US.

    The threat of “regime change” in Iran

    • The US policy-The temptation for a policy of “regime change” in Iran has never disappeared from the US policy towards Iran.
      • The policy is based on the hope that mounting external pressure and deepening internal dissent will combine to produce a “regime collapse” in Tehran.
      • US President has often insisted that he is not seeking to overthrow the clerical regime in Tehran led by Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.
      • The Us demands were an end to the nuclear and missile programmes, stop supporting terror in the region and end the interference in the internal affairs of its Arab neighbours.
    • Iran’s success in fending off these threats: Iran has been successful so far in fending off these external and internal challenges.
      • Iran has put down repeated mass uprisings and neutered attempts from within the elite to reform the system.

    De-escalation of the tension after the war-like situation

    • Fear of escalation: The widespread assessment after the killing of Soleimani was that Iran would inevitably escalate the confrontation.
      • Tehran set up a token retaliation for domestic political consumption and quickly called for de-escalation.
    • The message of peace from the US: Trump also told the Iranian leaders that America “is ready to embrace peace with all who seek it”.

    The shooting of a passenger jet and the aftermath 

    • The shooting of the jet:
      • The Ukrainian passenger jet was shot-down near Tehran killing all 176 passengers and crew on-board.
      • It included 82 Iranian nationals and many Canadian citizens of Iranian origin
    • After initial denial, Tehran was forced to accept responsibility for shooting down the plane.
    • The aftermath of the shooting of the plane
      • Protests: Soon after the confession, protests broke out against the government.
      • Demand for accountability: Iranians are angry at the attempt of the government to cover up initially and are demanding full accountability.

    The general discontent of the people against the government

    • The latest round of protests must be seen as a continuation of those that have raged since the end of 2017.
    • Reasons for the discontent: Economic grievances, frustration with widespread corruption, demands for liberalising the restrictions on women and political opposition to the regime are the reasons.
    • Discontent against external adventures: There was also strong criticism of the government’s costly external adventures in the Middle East amidst the deteriorating economic conditions.
      • There is little love for the Revolutionary Guards, the principal face of state oppression.
    • External pressure: As the regime cracks down on the protests against the airliner shooting, the external pressures against Iran are only likely to mount.

    Available option and their dangers

    • As sanctions squeeze the Iranian economy, the costs of regional overreach become apparent, and internal protests become persistent, Khamenei has few good options.
    • The option of the new political compact: Offering a new political compact to the people of Iran or a new framework to deal with the Arab neighbours and the US would seem reasonable goals.
      • But they involve considerable risk for the regime.
    • The option of pragmatism: All revolutionary regimes come to a point when they need to replace ideological fervour with pragmatism.
      • But the change from ideological fervour to pragmatism is also the time of the greatest vulnerability for the regime.

    Conclusion

    India as a friend of Iran will surely begin to debate if privately, the implications of the deepening regime crisis in Iran.

  • [op-ed snap]The U.S. is weakened by Soleimani’s killing

    Context

    Targeted killing of powerful Iranian Major-General could have done more bad than good for the U.S.

    Series of events after the assassination

    • The Iraqi parliament voted to expel the U.S. troops stationed in Iraq and deny them access to its airspace, land or water.
    • Pro-Iranian groups could attack across the region where thousands of U.S. troops and official personnel are stationed.
    • Soleimani’s assassination has awakened the deep strain of Iranian patriotism.
    • And Iran is not alone.
    • In Beirut, Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah called Soleimani the “glue that held the Resistance Axis together”.
    • The U.S threat of striking “52 Iranian sites” did not win the U.S. any support on the international stage.
    • Even the Europeans, otherwise steadfast with the U.S. in these sorts of adventures, hesitated.
    • Arab League’s Secretary-General Ahmed Aboul Gheit expressed concern over the situation and asked for calm.
    • This is the same man who had, only a few weeks ago, accused Iran of sowing chaos in the region.
    • It is likely that China and Russia will table a resolution at the UN that calls for calm as well as criticises the U.S.
    • This will certainly be vetoed by the U.S.

    Desperate and irrational policy

    • Till now the U.S. has not been able to extricate itself from its illegal war against Iraq.
    • That war provided a massive advantage to Iran not only in Iraq but also across the region.
    • This is what terrified two of the U.S.’s allies, Israel and Saudi Arabia, both of whom pressured Washington to increase its threats against Iran.
    • S. create the conditions for the rise of the worst kind of violence in Iraq, and later Syria
    • It also weakened the strategic position of its allies.
    • No attempt by the U.S. to regain its authority has worked.
    • The U.S. policy against Iran and Iraq appear desperate and irrational.

    Conclusion

    • The U.S recklessness has isolated it further and deepened anxieties amongst its increasingly isolated regional allies, Israel and Saudi Arabia.
  • [op-ed of the day]Spotting an opportunity in changing fundamentals

    “Phase one” of the trade deal between the U.S. and China notwithstanding, the ongoing dispute between the U.S. and China and other changing scenarios could turn out opportunities in various forms for India.

    Oil prices windfall

    • Slack demand and increased production by the U.S., had lowered oil prices which was good news for India.
    • It could also help India address its current account deficit.
    • But oil prices have surged more than 4% following the killing of Iranian general by the U.S.
    • An outbreak of hostilities could send the oil prices soaring.
    • India’s energy import from the U.S. is likely to touch $10 bn by 2019-20.
    • While China is increasing its stake in Saudi Aramco- one of the largest oil production company in the world.
    • China is also increasing its ties with the other oil producers which gives China the opportunity to increase its naval presence in the Indian Ocean increasing the Strait of Hormuz.

    On trade front

    • According to the State Bank of India report-Ecowrap, India has scarcely benefited from the trade war.
    • Of the $35bn decline in China’s export to the U.S. $21bn was diverted to the other countries and the rest $14bn was made good by the U.S. producers.
    • India contributed only $755-million of this diversion.
    • The U.S. tariff made some other players-Mexico, Taiwan, Vietnam even more competitive.
    • China is facing pork shortage but India exports pork indirectly through Vietnam, increasing its cost and reducing market share.
    • China’s thrust on the AI, robotics, autonomous vehicles, and space technology has raised the U.S. suspicion, raising the prospects of high-tech war.
    • The big three Chines high-tech companies, Baidu, Alibaba, and Tencent together invested $5bn in India.
    • India could use this opportunity to insist China open its market for the IT sector and other tech exports.
    • India has allowed all the players including Huawei to participate in the 5G trials but the outcomes are far from over.
    • With all that said, the U.S.-China tensions drive supply chains out of China, with the right policies as Vietnam has done, India could emerge as an alternative destination.
    • Restriction by the U.S. on  China could lead to difficulties in reducing emissions and mitigate climate change in China.
    • Restrictions on technology export often lead to an increase in domestic research.
    • So, China could succeed in developing all the technologies that are denied to it by the U.S. under the restrictions.
    • With the protests in Hong Kong showing no signs of abating, India may have to cater to refugees of Indian origin if things turn uglier.

    Key regional issues

    • The situation in the South China Sea is in favour of China as it already has occupied several of them.
    • Though India is a member of “Quad” dialogue on border issues, it has no role in negotiating the “Code of Conduct” with the ASEAN.
    • On the connectivity issues, the U.S. position is helpful for India. Recently the U.S. criticised China-Pakistan Economic Corridor.
    • India is not a member of the Indo-Pacific Business Forum created by the U.S., Japan, and Australia.
    • India is also not a member of Blue Dot network created by the U.S., Japan, and Australia.
    • In future India might have to reconcile its regional connectivity issues with BRI projects that have mushroomed in the region.
    • On the ideological fronts, China is so emboldened by its economic success that it seeks to challenge the liberal democratic model and offers an alternative based on its own system.
    • India might have to contend with the greater Chinese presence in the Asia-Pacific theatre.

    Conclusion

    India’s relations with the U.S. and Chinas growing influence in economic as well as all the other sphere represents multiple challenges for India and are likely to grow in the future.

  • [op-ed of the day]Bracing for global impact after Soleimani’s assassination

    Context

    The recent targeted killing of Commander of Quds Forces of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) by the US raised the tension in the region to a new high level. The imminent blowback from Iran could have several consequences for the rest of the world including India.

    Different from past killings

    • Though the U.S. has carried out many such targeted killings in the past but this case bears two important differences to the past killings.
    • Unlike Osama bin Laden or Abu Bakr, Gen. Soleimani was a state actor.
    • Unlike the above mentioned two, he was not past his prime.

    Roles played by Gen. Soleimani

    • He was the founder-commander of Iran’s Quds Force-formed for extra-territorial operations.
    • He enhanced Iran’s influence in the Arab countries by leveraging the disarray in the region.
    • Arab countries with a significant Shia population such as Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, and Yemen came under Iranian influence.

    What could be the fallouts

    • Tit-for-tat between Iran and the U.S. could easily go out of hand and precipitate into a major confrontation.
    • Both countries have domestic compulsions- there are elections due in both countries.
    • These compulsions limit options for both countries to low-intensity skirmishes.
    • The fact that the killing was carried on the Iraqi soil also assumes significance.
    • The incident could increase the problems in Iraq which is rocked by three months of youth protests against undue foreign interference by both Iran and the U.S.
    • The event is also likely to re-polarise the Iraqi society along sectarian lines.
    • In the worst-case scenario Iraq could turn into the new Syria.

    Potential fallout for India

    • Global oil prices have already seen a 4% rise in within hours of the incident.
    • India has already faced difficulty in maintaining relations with both countries because of the U.S.-Iran cold war.
    • While we want to be on the right side of the U.S., our ties with Iran apart from being civilisational have their own geostrategic logic.
    • With conflict turning hot, its adverse impact on India could magnify.
    • High oil prices will definitely increase our import bill and increase difficulties in supplies.
    • Safety of an estimated 8 million expatriates in the Gulf may be affected.
    • Iran could influence the U.S.-Taliban peace process in Afghanistan which in turn increases India’s woes.
    • After Iran, India has a large number of Shia population and some of them could be radicalised due to the event.

    Conclusion

    The event, if turn into a wider conflict between the two countries, could have many consequences for India from soaring oil prices and maintaining the balance between the two countries to the safety of expatriates in the Gulf.

  • BREXIT

    What has happened?

    A referendum – a vote in which everyone of voting age can take part was held to decide whether the UK should leave or remain in the European Union and Leave won. <what is the difference b/s referendum and plebiscite?>

    What is this UK, Britain, Ireland, Republic? What’s going on? Is Scotland a separate country?


    Without going into the history- 

    • Full name is United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland i.e Great Britain plus N.I.
    • Great Britain – It contains 3 somewhat autonomous regions – England, Wales and Scotland
    • Republic of Ireland separated from northern Ireland and UK in 1920s and is a separate country now <Belfast is capital of which Ireland and what is the capital of Wales and Scotland?>

    But why this referendum

    Conservative govt led by David Cameron had promised this referendum if they won the general election and as they won this referendum was held

    What is European Union?

    • It is an economic and political partnership involving 28 European countries <latest country to join EU?>
    • It is a single market (common market) allowing goods and people to move around, basically as if the member states were one country. So basically any French citizen can travel to Germany and work there without visa.
    • You can visit whole of EU with a single visa <no internal borders>

    I had to take a separate visa to travel to London. How about that?

    • So this common visa thing is applicable only to countries that are party to Schengen area <where is Schengen btw?>
    • There are 26 Schengen countries (22 EU + 4 Non EU)
    • 4 Non EU – Iceland, Norway, Switzerland, Liechtenstein <btw Liechtenstein is a double land locked country. Look in the map and find out which other country is doubly landlocked, There’s only one other>
    • 6 EU not party – Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Ireland, Romania and the UK.

    So as UK is not party to Schengen, you had to take Visa.

    What about euro? I had to use pound in UK. Isn’t the Euro currency of EU?

    • Euro currency is used by Eurozone countries. Eurozone is subset of EU. Only 19 EU countries are part of it. Obviously UK is not party to it. 
    • Euro is also used by 4 other European countries – Vatican, Andorra, San Marino, Monaco

    Any history ? How did EU begin?

    • It grew out of a desire for peace in a war-torn and divided continent. It started in 1951 with European Coal and steel community of 6 countries by treaty of Paris <France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Belgium and Luxembourg>
    • 1957 – European Economic Community (EEC) or common market was formed by treaty of Rome,
    • 1973 – Britain, Denmark and Ireland joins the EEC <total 9 countries now>
    • 1992 – Maastricht treaty was signed and comes into force in 1993. Formal beginning of EU
    • 2002 – Euro replaces national currency in eurozone

    What does EU do?

    • Eu oversees co-operation among its members in diverse areas, including trade, the environment, transport and employment
    • Common security and foreign policy
    • coordinates policy on asylum, immigration, drugs and terrorism <that’s why so much concern over migration fro middles east and north Africa>
    • EU policies on workers’ rights and other social issues <UK not part of this social chapter either>
    • Promotes human rights, give aid to agriculture, fisheries etc

    Okay, sounds great but how does it all work?

    EU works through 4 main institutions

    1. European Commission – All powerful bureaucracy of member states <each country, one representative>, propose laws, implement laws, job is to promote European interest, not the interest of member countries, HQ in Brussels <where is Brussels>
    2. European Council – It’s a political body, leaders meet here
    3. European Parliament – Directly elected MPs <MEPs> vote on almost all the issues now days. It sits in Strasbourg <where is Strasbourg?>
    4. European court of rights – name explains everything <where is its headquarters?

    Why do Brits want to leave EU?

    1. Sovereignty – that Britain ceded its sovereignty, right to pass its own laws to bureaucrats sitting in Brussels <Doesn’t India lose its sovereignty by being member of UN?>
    2. Regulations – That Brussels imposed too many regulations that hurt British business interest
    3. Money – Billions of pounds of entry fee with very little to show in return <Britain don’t have many farmers to get agriculture subsidies>
    4. Open borders/ migration – even though Britain is not part Schengen, workers from rest of the EU can come their freely and work there. Large numbers from eastern europe came just to claim British benefits, social security and all <so called welfare tourism>
    5. Ever Closer Union – detested the idea of United states of Europe <closer political union, confederation sort of thing>

    Why did Cameron want UK to stay in EU?

    1. Single market – much easier to sell things while being member of single market
    2. Security
    3. Britain’s status in the world is enhanced as part of EU

    How is single market different from free trade area?

    • In FTA there are no tariffs except on some negotiated goods and services but in single market, even labour mobility is free
    • In Single market, you impose common tariffs on all imports, it;s like a single country for the purpose of trade and commerce
    • There are common standards etc. <environment, labour, quality etc.>

    What is European free trade association (EFTA)?

    • It is FTA of 4 European countries -Iceland, Norway, Switzerland, Liechtenstein <do you recall they are all part of Schengen>
    • All of them have signed FTA with EU. Britain can sign similar FTA with EU now

    What happens now?

    • Britain would negotiate its exit <under Lisbon treaty>, But the fear is of contagion. Eurosceptic parties of other countries would also press for similar referendums.  
    • Plus as Scotland has voted overwhelmingly in favour of stay (68%), there would be fresh demand for referendum on Scottish independence. Similarly is the case with northern Ireland.

    Impact on India

    • No direct impact but expect turbulence in stock and forex market. Panicky investors may withdraw their hot money out of India
    • On positive side, India can sign FTA with Britain