GS Paper: India & Its Neighborhood – Relations

Introduction

India’s partnership with Africa is embedded in shared anti-colonial history, South-South cooperation, and long-standing developmental commitments. Over the last decade, India’s diplomatic presence, investments, training initiatives, and cultural engagement have expanded across the continent. However, shifting geopolitical equations, intensifying global competition, and Africa’s rising economic potential demand an upgraded, value-driven, and sustained approach. The article argues that India must now “connect, build and revive” its Africa policy to maintain its strategic foothold and align with Africa’s aspirations.

Why in the News?

A decade after hosting the largest-ever India-Africa Forum Summit, India’s engagement with Africa is again at a pivotal moment. India has added 17 new missions, trade has crossed USD 100 billion, and investment flows are surging. Yet Indian trade still lags behind China, and many flagship promises made in 2015 require renewed momentum. As Africa is set to become home to one-fourth of the world’s population by 2050, the scale, urgency, and strategic importance of India’s outreach makes this moment historically significant.

How has India’s outreach to Africa evolved in the past decade?

1. Expanded diplomatic footprint: India added 17 new missions across Africa, enhancing its on-ground presence and bilateral engagement.
2. Rising investment flows: India’s investment stock has crossed USD 100 billion, making it among Africa’s top five investors.
3. Growth in trade partnerships: Bilateral trade has crossed USD 100 billion, demonstrating the growing economic synergy.
4. Enhanced defence cooperation: Joint naval exercises such as AIMKEME (April 2025) saw participation from navies of Kenya, Madagascar, Mauritius, Mozambique, Seychelles, South Africa, and Tanzania.
5. Stronger multilateral alignment: India played a key role in enabling African Union membership in the G20, elevating Africa’s global voice.

Why is Africa emerging as a strategic priority for India?

1. Demographic transformation: By 2050, one in four people on Earth will be Africa, a major consumer, labour, and talent base.
2. Economic potential: Africa will be the world’s third-largest economy, creating opportunities in technology, health, infra, and manufacturing.
3. Geopolitical influence: Africa’s global role is expanding, and India aims to support African representation in global institutions and peacekeeping operations.
4. Shared developmental priorities: From education to digital public goods, India’s model aligns naturally with African development aspirations.

What challenges persist in India-Africa trade relations?

1. Lag behind China: India’s trade with Africa is expanding but still far behind China, which has deeper and wider market penetration.
2. Logistical hurdles: Indian firms often face bureaucratic delays, small balance sheets, and scalability issues.
3. Fragmented strategy: India’s UPID, digital stack, and trade missions have strengths but lack coordinated continental impact.
4. Competition from Europe and Asia: New entrants are building deeper financial and infrastructural linkages across the continent.

How is India building capacity and knowledge partnerships in Africa?

1. Human capital initiatives: India’s most enduring export to Africa is human capital, created through scholarships, training programs, and institutional partnerships.
2. Education & digital training: The new IIT Madras campus in Zanzibar is a flagship example of education-based cooperation.
3. Decadal knowledge ecosystems: Pan-African e-Network and India’s ITEC programme continue to train thousands across African nations.
4. Institutional bridges: African experts, ministers, and students working in India create lasting diplomatic and economic linkages.

What future steps should India take to revitalise momentum?

1. Move from promises to real outcomes: Lines of credit must become visible, viable, and deliverable rather than symbolic.
2. Build the India-Africa Digital Corridor: Collaboration on UPI, Aadhaar-stack, and digital payments can create a shared digital infrastructure.
3. Reinforce the institutional base: Revive the summit-based momentum of IAFS and reintroduce regular leadership exchanges.
4. Integrate private sector participation: Encourage start-ups, MSMEs, and fintech companies to expand into African markets.
5. Strengthen maritime cooperation: The Western Indian Ocean is becoming central to supply-chain security and blue-economy partnerships.

Conclusion

India’s partnership with Africa is rooted in trust, shared history, and developmental solidarity. But the world around both regions is changing rapidly. Africa’s demographic rise, digital aspirations, and geopolitical importance demand that India convert intent into implementation. “Connect, build, and revive” offers a timely blueprint for elevating India-Africa relations into a mature, inclusive, and futuristic partnership, one that benefits both regions and strengthens India’s global standing.

PYQ Relevance

[UPSC 2024] Explain the reasons for the growth of Public Interest Litigation (PIL) in India. As a result of it, has the Indian Supreme Court emerged as the world’s most powerful judiciary?

Linkage: Judiciary is one of the most important topics for GS-II. This PYQ tests how failures of the lower judiciary, delay, pendency, and weak remedies, drive the rise of PILs and expand the Supreme Court’s role. The article directly shows these systemic gaps, explaining why litigants bypass subordinate courts and seek relief through PILs.

Introduction

The Palk Bay, a narrow strip separating Tamil Nadu from Sri Lanka, has historically been a shared fishing zone. However, repeated arrests of Indian fishermen for crossing the International Maritime Boundary Line (IMBL) underline a persistent challenge. Bottom trawling, a destructive fishing practice, has been the core issue fueling ecological degradation, diplomatic tension, and economic distress. The recent arrest on November 9, 2024, reopens the debate on reconciling traditional livelihoods with sustainable and legal marine resource use.

Why in the news?

The arrest of 14 Tamil Nadu fishermen by the Sri Lankan Navy marks another flashpoint in the Palk Bay fishing dispute. This incident is significant because:

1. Persistence of conflict: Despite decades of talks, fishermen from both nations continue to cross maritime boundaries for catch-rich zones.
2. Scale of problem: Over 128 fishermen from Tamil Nadu remain in Sri Lankan custody, with boats seized.
3. Diplomatic urgency: The issue features regularly in bilateral meetings, yet lacks a lasting policy resolution.
4. Ecological threat: The practice of bottom trawling continues to damage coral beds and marine biodiversity, making it a cross-border environmental crisis.

Why do Tamil Nadu fishermen continue to cross the IMBL?

1. Livelihood dependence: For thousands of families, fishing remains the only sustainable income source. The depletion of nearshore fish stocks has pushed them toward Sri Lankan waters.
2. Cost-pressure fishing: Each voyage involves high operational costs, forcing fishermen to maximize yield through fast, large-scale trawling.
3. Traditional persistence: The term “tradition” is often invoked to justify trawling, despite its destructive ecological footprint.
4. Rapid voyages: Quick trawling runs enhance profitability but heighten the risk of arrest and confiscation.

What is bottom trawling and why is it destructive?

1. Definition: Bottom trawling involves dragging weighted nets along the seabed.
2. Ecological damage: It destroys coral reefs, seabed habitats, and fish spawning grounds.
3. Stock depletion: Leads to overfishing and long-term decline of commercially valuable species.
4. Conflict trigger: Sri Lankan fishermen, especially from the Northern Province, oppose bottom trawling as it depletes shared marine resources vital for their post-war recovery.

What are the diplomatic and institutional mechanisms in place?

1. Joint Working Group (JWG) on Fisheries: Met in Colombo on October 29, 2024 to address arrests and sustainable fishing practices.
2. Bilateral discussions: Fishermen’s representatives met counterparts in March 2024, but lacked formal sanction or actionable outcomes.
3. Pending initiatives: The Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna-led People’s Power Party in Sri Lanka, in power for over a year, has yet to show urgency in resolving the dispute.

What policy solutions have been suggested?

1. Research collaboration: Proposal for a Palk Bay Research Station for ecosystem monitoring and sustainable fishing methods.
2. Technology transition: Gradual shift from bottom trawling to deep-sea fishing and small-boat operations.
3. Incentivization: Financial and policy support to Tamil Nadu fishermen to switch to non-destructive gear and practices.
4. Diplomatic liberalism: New Delhi may consider easing travel and fishing permits within limits to facilitate safe, sustainable livelihoods.
5. Regulatory measures: Imposing a progressive ban on bottom trawling in Indian waters to signal intent and compliance.

Conclusion

The Palk Bay issue is not merely a border dispute, it is a test of India’s ability to balance livelihood protection with ecological responsibility and regional diplomacy. Persuading fishermen to abandon bottom trawling requires education, compensation, and innovation, not coercion. A cooperative framework, rooted in mutual trust and science-based regulation, can transform a contentious boundary into a shared zone of prosperity and peace.

PYQ Relevance

[UPSC 2013] In respect of India-Sri Lanka relations, discuss how domestic factors influence foreign policy.

Linkage: Domestic political pressures from Tamil Nadu fishermen and state parties shape India’s diplomatic stance toward Sri Lanka. This internal-external linkage influences how New Delhi balances livelihood concerns with bilateral maritime cooperation.

Introduction

When the Taliban recaptured Kabul in August 2021, Pakistan perceived it as a strategic victory after two decades of covert support to the insurgents. However, the celebration was short-lived. Four years later, Pakistan faces an unprecedented internal security crisis, with over 2,400 people killed in militancy-related violence in 2025 alone. The rise of the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) and recent Pakistani airstrikes on Kabul (October 2025) signal a dangerous escalation — and a stark reversal of the country’s long-standing policy of using non-state actors as strategic assets.

Why in the News?

For the first time, Pakistan bombed Kabul, directly targeting militants across the Afghan border. This marks a major policy shift, as Islamabad traditionally treated the Taliban as an ally and buffer against India. The strikes came while Afghan Foreign Minister Amir Khan Muttaqi was visiting India, adding a symbolic twist to regional alignments. The scale of violence, with over 2,414 deaths this year, underscores the depth of Pakistan’s internal crisis and its failure to control militancy in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. This development has drawn comparisons to India’s own doctrine of cross-border strikes, raising questions about whether Pakistan is now borrowing from a playbook it once condemned.

The Illusion of Strategic Depth

1. Taliban Patronage: Pakistan’s military establishment nurtured the Afghan Taliban for decades, offering refuge and logistical support during their insurgency against the U.S.-backed Afghan government.
2. Strategic Depth Doctrine: Islamabad’s rationale was to create a friendly regime in Kabul that could serve as a buffer against India and offer “strategic depth” in case of war.
3. Backfiring Reality: Instead, the Taliban’s rise empowered the TTP, an ideologically aligned but operationally separate entity, turning Pakistan’s proxy into its nemesis.

How the Taliban’s Return Changed the Equation

1. End of Patron-Client Relationship: Once in power, the Taliban sought state-to-state relations, not subservience to Pakistan’s military agenda.
2. Durand Line Dispute: Kabul never recognized the Durand Line, reigniting border tensions that colonial history had left unresolved.
3. TTP Empowerment: Inspired by the Afghan Taliban’s triumph, the TTP now demands enforcement of strict Islamic law and reversal of the merger of tribal areas with Khyber Pakhtunkhwa.
4. Refugee Crisis: Pakistan’s decision to deport thousands of Afghan refugees further worsened ties, adding a humanitarian dimension to political hostility.

Pakistan’s New Doctrine: Borrowing from India?

1. Airstrikes as Deterrence: By bombing Kabul, Pakistan appears to be testing a new counter-terrorism strategy, directly holding Afghanistan responsible for cross-border militant attacks.
2. India Parallel: The move is reminiscent of India’s 2016 and 2019 strikes on Pakistani territory after terror attacks in Uri and Pulwama.
3. Diplomatic Irony: The timing, coinciding with the Afghan FM’s India visit, highlights shifting regional equations where India engages diplomatically, and Pakistan responds militarily.

The Security Crisis within Pakistan

1. Rising Violence: The Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province has become the epicenter of TTP-led insurgency.
2. Contradictory Policy: Pakistan’s dual policy of fighting terrorism while nurturing militants targeting its neighbors has eroded domestic stability.
3. Blowback Effect: Militancy now threatens Pakistan’s political order, economic recovery, and regional credibility.
4. Qatar-Brokered Ceasefire: A fragile truce mediated by Qatar hints at the international community’s anxiety over a new South Asian flashpoint.

Why Pakistan’s Strategy is Self-Defeating

1. Cycle of Violence: Airstrikes may offer short-term political gains but deepen long-term instability.
2. Internal vs External Conflict: Pakistan’s greatest threat now emanates from within its borders, not across them.
3. Loss of Moral Credibility: Its past of backing non-state actors undercuts its legitimacy when accusing others of the same.
4. Strategic Isolation: Continued conflict risks alienating even traditional allies like China and Gulf states, who seek regional stability.

Conclusion

Pakistan’s experiment with militant patronage has collapsed under its own contradictions. The strategic depth doctrine that once defined its Afghan policy has morphed into a strategic liability. Peace in Pakistan cannot be achieved through bombs over Kabul, but through a coherent internal reform of its security, political, and ideological ecosystem. As the editorial aptly concludes, “Pakistan cannot ensure internal security by bombing Afghanistan.”

PYQ Relevance

[UPSC 2013] The proposed withdrawal of the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) from Afghanistan in 2014 is fraught with major security implications for the countries of the region. Examine in light of the fact that India is faced with a plethora of challenges and needs to safeguard its own strategic interests.

Linkage: The 2013 PYQ and this 2025 editorial both explore the Afghan theatre as a pivot of regional security, then, in anticipation of instability; now, in its full manifestation. Both are invaluable for analysing India’s neighbourhood policy, counter-terror strategy, and regional diplomacy in the post-US Afghanistan order.

Introduction

Afghanistan’s Foreign Minister Amir Khan Muttaqi arrived in New Delhi on an official visit, his first since the Taliban’s return to power in August 2021.

The visit represents a major recalibration in India’s Afghanistan policy, as New Delhi cautiously engages the Taliban regime without formal recognition. India’s approach blends strategic pragmatism and regional security concerns, focusing on maintaining influence in Afghanistan’s evolving geopolitical environment while avoiding premature diplomatic endorsement.

India’s Post-2021 Approach- Diplomatic Balancing and Western Response:

1. India adopted a “cautious engagement” policy: restoring a technical mission in Kabul, resuming aid delivery, and holding diplomatic contacts.
2. In 2025, India announced plans to reopen its embassy in Kabul, initially with a Chargé d’affaires, avoiding formal recognition.
3. India’s silence on human rights and women’s issues during diplomatic talks reflects strategic restraint, balancing ideological concerns with geopolitical necessity.
4. The Western response is ambivalent. India’s engagement is scrutinized to ensure it does not inadvertently legitimize the Taliban or dilute India’s democratic credentials.

Taliban and Its Geopolitical Realignments (2024–2025):

1. China: First major power to exchange ambassadors with the Taliban (2024); deepening economic, mining, and infrastructure ties.
2. Russia: Moving to delist Taliban as a terrorist group; promoting counterterror cooperation.
3. Iran: Accepts Taliban rule pragmatically, balancing internal crises with regional influence.
4. Pakistan: Relations strained — Taliban criticism of Pakistani interference; cross-border tensions with TTP.
5. United States: Under Trump 2.0, US policy is transactionally disengaged; leaves India more space to engage diplomatically.

India’s Strategic Objectives in Engaging the Taliban:

1. Maintain influence in Afghanistan to protect long-term investments (infrastructure, education, healthcare).
2. Prevent Afghan territory from being used for anti-India terrorism.
3. Counter Pakistan–China influence by remaining a relevant actor in Afghan affairs.
4. Enable connectivity and trade, via Chabahar port and regional transit routes.
5. Promote soft power through development cooperation, scholarships, and cultural engagement.

Challenges and Diplomatic Constraints:

1. Non-recognition dilemma: Engagement without recognition may be seen as de facto endorsement by critics.
2. Human rights dissonance: Taliban’s restrictions on women’s rights conflict with India’s democratic values.
3. Visa and mobility barriers: Lack of operational consular services hampers people-to-people ties and educational exchanges.
4. Aid delivery limitations: Security, monitoring, and distribution bottlenecks constrain effective humanitarian impact.
5. Geopolitical competition: Pakistan and China retain deeper leverage in Afghan affairs; India must navigate their influence.

Way Forward:

1. Engagement without endorsement: Maintain diplomatic contact while tying cooperation to counterterror assurances.
2. Humanitarian focus: Channel aid for women and children through UN/trusted NGOs to avoid legitimizing Taliban governance.
3. Regional coalition building: Leverage multilateral forums (SAARC, SCO, QUAD) to strengthen India’s Afghan policy.
4. Expand economic roles: Prioritize mining, power, and infrastructure projects to anchor Indian presence.
5. Broaden diplomatic contacts: Engage Afghan civil society, minorities, and regional stakeholders for balanced outreach.