💥Mains Ready By December. Smash Mains & Smash PYQ Admissions Open
Talk to Mentor

Civilsdaily

Login

Subject: Bilateral Relations

1. Major World Events
2. India’s Interests in neighbourhood
3. Effects of our Policies

  • India- Sri Lanka Fisherman Issue

    The Sri Lankan Navy has seized eight Indian fishing vessels and arrested 55 fishermen on the charge of poaching.

    What is the issue?

    • As in the past, fishermen from Rameswaram and nearby coasts continue to sail towards Talaimannar and Katchatheevu coasts, a region famous for rich maritime resources in Sri Lanka.
    • Indian boats have been fishing in the troubled waters for centuries and had a free run of the Bay of Bengal, the Palk Bay and the Gulf of Mannar until 1974 and 1976.
    • Treaties were later signed between the two countries to demarcate the maritime boundary — the ‘International Maritime Boundary Line'(IMBL).

    Issues for Sri Lanka

    • Proliferation of Trawlers: The overuse of mechanized trawlers in Palk Bay is damaging the marine ecosystem in SL waters.
    • Breach of sovereignty: There were many favorable reasons too for Indian fishermen as their access to Sri Lankan waters was easier at the time of Sri Lankan civil war.
    • Porous borders: Maritime boundaries were never tightly guarded as a result, Indian trawlers continue to routinely enter Lankan waters for fishing.
    • End of Civil War: Everything changed in 2009 with the end of civil war. Arrests and attacks increased on Indian fishermen as they continued entering Lankan waters because of depletion of marine resources on the Indian side.

    Fishermen’s concern:

    (1) Depletion of fisheries

    • There is a depletion of fisheries on the Indian side, so Indian fishermen cross into Sri Lankan waters thus denying the livelihood of their counterparts.
    • They deliberately cross the territorial waters even at the risk of getting arrested or shot dead by the Sri Lankan Navy.
    • Sri Lankan fishermen across Palk Bay are concerned over similar depletion on their side (where there is a ban for trawlers) because of poaching by Indian fishermen.

     (2) Rights over Katchatheevu Island

    • Tamil fishermen have been entering Sri Lankan waters nearby Katchatheevu island, where they had been fishing for centuries.
    • In 1974, the island was ceded to Sri Lanka after an agreement was signed by Indira Gandhi between the two countries without consulting the Tamil Nadu government.
    • The agreement allows Indian fishermen “access to Katchatheevu for rest, for drying of nests and for the annual St Anthony’s festival” but it did not ensure the traditional fishing rights.

    (3) Hefty fines

    • After some respite in the last couple of years, Sri Lanka introduced tougher laws banning bottom-trawling and put heavy fines for trespassing foreign vessels.
    • SL has increased the fine on Indian vessels found fishing in Sri Lankan waters to a minimum of LKR 6 million (about ₹25 lakh) and a maximum of LKR 175 million (about ₹17.5 Crore).
    • Quiet often, the fishermen are shot dead by SL marines.

    Fishermen issue in TN politics

    • It has been often a sensitive political issue in Tamil Nadu in the past one decade.
    • In a defiant speech in 1991, late CM Jayalalitha had called on the people of Tamil Nadu to retrieve the Katchatheevu Island.

    Way forward

    • Leasing: Two courses of action exist: (1) get back the island of Katchatheevu on “lease in perpetuity” or (2) permit licensed Indian fishermen to fish within a designated area of Sri Lankan waters and vice versa.
    • Licensing: The second course of action would persuade Colombo to permit licensed Indian fishermen to fish in Sri Lankan waters for five nautical miles from the IMBL.
    • Reconsidering old agreements: The 2003 proposal for licensed fishing can be revisited.
    • Looping in fishermen themselves: Arranging frequent meetings between fishing communities of both countries could be systematized so as to develop a friendlier atmosphere mid-seas during fishing.

    Conclusion

    • The underlying issues of the fisheries dispute need to be addressed so that bilateral relations do not reach a crisis point.
    • Immediate actions should be taken to begin the phase-out of trawling and identify other fishing practices.

     

    UPSC 2022 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)

  • Fathoming the new world disorder

    Context

    It may be too early to say how the American withdrawal from Afghanistan would shape regional geopolitics in Asia and the great power contest between the United States and its competitors. But it is certainly one of those developments that will have a far-reaching impact on global politics.

    Two narratives about the US withdrawal from Afghanistan

    • There are two dominant narratives about the American withdrawal.
    • Realignment in foreign policy: The first narrative is that the U.S. exited the country on its own will as it is undertaking a larger realignment in its foreign policy.
    • Failure to win the war: The other one is that the U.S. failed to win the war in Afghanistan and, like in the case of Vietnam, was forced to withdraw from the country.
    • Focus on China: The reorientation that is under way in American foreign policy, focused on China, certainly played a role in the Afghan withdrawal.
    • But that does not obscure the fact that the world’s most powerful military and economic power failed to win the war in Afghanistan against the Taliban even after fighting them for 20 years.

    Erosion of the US’s ability in shaping geopolitical outcomes

    •  The gradual erosion of the U.S.’s ability in shaping geopolitical outcomes in faraway regions has already shaken up the structures of American unipolarity.
    • Withdrawal from Afghanistan is not an isolated incident: The Afghan withdrawal was not an isolated incident.
    • In Iraq and Libya, it failed to establish political stability and order after invasions.
    • It could not stop Russia taking Crimea from Ukraine in 2014. In Syria, it was outmanoeuvred by Vladimir Putin.
    • Finally, the way American troops were withdrawn from Afghanistan and the return of the Taliban to power strengthened this perception of great power fatigue and emboldened America’s rivals to openly challenge the U.S.-centric “rules-based order.”

    Three geopolitical challenges facing the US

    • [1]Aggressive Russia: Russia has amassed about 175,000 troops on its border with Ukraine.
    • Western intelligence agencies claim that Russian President Vladimir Putin could order an invasion of Ukraine.
    • Russian sphere of influence: From the migrant crisis in Belarus to the troop mobilisation in Ukraine, Russia is unmistakably sending a message to the West that the region stretching from the Baltic Sea to the Black Sea, the eastern flank of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, is a Russian sphere of influence.
    • [2] Iran issue:  Iran, which has stepped up its nuclear programme after the Trump administration unilaterally withdrew the U.S. from the 2015 nuclear deal, has refused to hold direct talks with the U.S. 
    • Iran insists that the U.S. should first remove the sanctions and give assurance that a future President would not violate the terms of the agreement.
    • [3] Assertive China: China is sending dozens of fighter jets into the so-called Taiwan Air Defence Identification Zone almost on a weekly basis, triggering speculation on whether Beijing was considering taking the self-ruled island by force.
    • As the U.S. is trying to shift its focus to the Indo-Pacific region to tackle China’s rise, China is becoming more and more assertive in its periphery, seeking strategic depth.

    Implications

    • Limited choice: The pivot to Asia has limited America’s options elsewhere. For example, what could the U.S. do to deter Mr. Putin from making the next military move in Europe.
    • With regard to Iran, if the U.S. blinks first and lifts the sanctions, it could be read as another sign of weakness.
    • If it does not and if the Vienna talks collapse, Iran could continue to enrich uranium to a higher purity, attaining a de facto nuclear power status without a bomb (like Japan), which would be against America’s declared goals in West Asia.
    • The Afghan withdrawal and the downsizing in West Asia suggest that America’s strategic focus has shifted towards China.

    Conclusion

    This transition, from American unipolarity into something that is still unknown, has put America in a strategic dilemma: Should it stay focused on China, preparing itself for the next bipolar contest; or continue to act as a global policeman of the liberal order that is under attack from multiple fronts?

    UPSC 2022 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)

  • India-UK ties

    Context

    When Delhi thinks of technological cooperation with major powers, the US, Europe and Japan come to mind. The missing link in India’s technological mind space, however, is the United Kingdom.

    How India can benefit from technology partnership with Britain

    • Britain was the first nation to industrialise and has a long tradition of scientific research and technological development.
    • With top-ranking universities and the golden triangle of science and innovation — London, Oxford and Cambridge — Britain is one of the world’s top technology powers.
    • WIPO ranking: This year, the World Intellectual Property Organisation ranked Britain fourth in the global innovation index.
    • India is far behind at the 46th position.
    • India, then, could gain in a technology partnership with Britain.

    Overview of the India-UK bilateral ties

    • Pakistan angle: India’s foreign policy community can’t shake off the Pakistan prism in viewing London.
    • To be sure, London’s advocacy of Pakistan has always irritated Delhi.
    • Instead of complaining about London’s South Asian policy, Delhi now simply ignores London’s claims for a special role in India’s political disputes with Pakistan.
    • By focusing on the positive, Delhi is betting it can reduce the traditional negative elements in the engagement with the UK.
    • At the same time, Delhi recognises the enormous strategic possibilities with Britain and is willing to invest political capital to build on those synergies.
    • Meanwhile, the steady relative decline of Pakistan — its economy is now about a tenth of India’s — and Delhi’s deepening strategic partnership with Washington are also encouraging London to rethink its past approach to the Subcontinent.
    • India is fully conscious of UK’s enduring global salience.
    • External Affairs Minister Subrahmanyam Jaishankar has often highlighted Britain’s continuing weight in the world as the fifth-largest economy, a permanent member of the UN Security Council, a major financial centre, and a leading hub of higher education and technology.
    • Britain also enjoys a global maritime reach and a measure of political influence across the world.

    Possibilities for partnership in the technological domain

    • While a trade agreement between Delhi and London is said to be imminent, it is in the technological domain that the prospects are immense but under-explored.
    • There is insufficient awareness in India’s strategic community of the British moves to put science and technology at the very heart of its political, economic, security and foreign policies.
    •  London announced a raft of measures this year starting with a major report on “Global Britain in a Competitive Age: An Integrated Review of Security, Defence, Development, and Foreign Policy”.
    • One of the broad themes stand out from these initiatives, which is forming a coalition of like-minded countries.
    • London wants to build a coalition of like-minded countries to reshape the global governance of technology.
    • This includes strengthening technological ties with the traditionally close partners in the Anglosphere — US, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand — as well as other partners like Japan and India.
    • All these elements of British policy mesh with India’s own economic, political, and security interests.
    • The British technology initiatives are also aligned with the technological agenda of the Quad — or the Quadrilateral forum that brings together Australia, India, Japan, and the US.

    Consider the question “In India’s partnership with the UK, it is the technological domain where prospects are immense but underexplored. Comment.”

    Conclusion

    For Delhi, the essence of the new alliance with Britain is fourfold — generate domestic prosperity, enhance national security, climb up the global technology hierarchy, and contribute to the construction of a free, open, and democratic global technological order.

    UPSC 2022 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)

    Back2Basics: Major themes of the policy report on “Global Britain in a Competitive Age”

    • [1] Leverage technology to “level up” the regional and social inequalities in Britain.
    • [2] Ensure Britain’s privileged position as a leading science power.
    • [3] Focus on technological innovation to drive Britain’s future economic growth.
    • [4] Build internal security resilience against new technological threats.
    • [5] Modernise the intelligence apparatus with the help of new technologies.
    • [6] Integrate technology into the national defence strategy as new capabilities like AI become as consequential as battle-tanks, ships and fighter jets.
    • [7] Project technological power to counter malevolent actors in the international system.
    • [8]A coalition of like-minded countries.

  • The ‘diplomatic’ Olympic boycott

    The US Government has decided not send any official representation to the Winter Olympic Games in Beijing announcing what is being called a “diplomatic boycott” of the games.

    What is a ‘diplomatic boycott’?

    • A “diplomatic boycott” means no US official will be present at the Winter Olympics in Beijing.
    • This stops short of a complete boycott, which would have meant the non-participation by US athletes.
    • As such, the absence of official representation will not impact the games as much as an athletic boycott would have.

    What led to the US boycott?

    Ans. Uyghurs Genocide

    • The decision was taken because of China’s gross human rights abuses and atrocities in Xinjiang.
    • This is the latest clash adding to a long list of differences on trade, Taiwan, human rights and the South China Sea.
    • Xinjiang Uyghurs have been sent by Chinese authorities to “re-education” camps, a network of which were constructed beginning in 2016 to house thousands of detainees.
    • Beijing initially denied the existence of the camps, but subsequently claimed the centres were for “vocational training”.

    Who else is ‘diplomatically boycotting’ the games?

    • So far, Australia, Canada, and New Zealand have also announced that their officials will not be present at the games.
    • None, however, has said their athletes will not attend, which means the games themselves are unlikely to be impacted.
    • It remains to be seen if the boycott will gain traction beyond US allies and partners.
    • Russian President Vladimir Putin will travel to Beijing for the opening of the Winter Olympics.
    • China has been garnering support from countries in Asia, Africa and Latin America.

    How is China reacting to the boycott?

    • Beyond the statements decrying the “politicization” of sports, there is certainly a domestic political undercurrent to the games.
    • China’s media, meanwhile, has been largely playing down the reports of the boycotts, underlining how the authorities are going all-out to ensure the games are conducted without a hurdle.

    What will be the impact on US-China relations?

    • Much recently, the US and Chinese Presidents committed to “responsibly” managing their growing competition amid increasing conflicts.
    • Both nations called common-sense guardrails to ensure that competition does not veer into conflict.
    • China emphasized the “need to treat each other as equals” and warned against “drawing ideological lines”, calling on the US “to meet its word of not seeking a ‘new Cold War’”.

     

    UPSC 2022 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)

  • Realising the potential of India-Russia ties

    Context

    The Russian president is on visit to India. Visits by Russian presidents to India always invoke a sense of nostalgia. The Moscow-Delhi relationship dates back to the Cold War era and it has been strong ever since.

    Factors limiting the possibilities for bilateral partnership

    • The conflict between Russia and the West: One factor is the continuing conflict between the Kremlin and the West.
    • Absence of trade between India and Russia: The other is the absence of a thriving commercial relationship between India and Russia.
    • India-US relations: India’s relations with Washington has never been as intense as it is today.
    • Russia-China relations: Moscow’s embrace of Beijing is tighter than ever.
    • The US-China rivalry: That the US and China are now at each other’s throats makes the great power dynamic a lot more complicated for India and Russia.

    Importance of trade ties

    • Need for robust business ties: That Delhi and Moscow have problems with the best friend of the other would have been more manageable if business ties between India and Russia were solid.
    • Where India and Russia have greater freedom is in the economic domain, but their failure to boost the commercial relationship has been stark.
    • India-Russia annual trade in goods is stuck at about $10 billion.
    • Slow progress on enhancing trade and investment ties: During the last 20 summits with Putin, the two sides have repeatedly affirmed the importance of enhancing trade and investment ties; but progress has been hard to come by.
    • How to fix the problem? The problem clearly can’t be fixed at the level of governments.
    • The Russian business elites gravitate to Europe and China. The Indian corporations are focused on America and China.

    Russia-US ties and its implications for India

    • Implications for India? The structural constraints posed by the great power dynamic and vastly different appreciation of the regional security environment could be reduced if matters improve between Washington and Moscow.
    • In Washington, the Biden administration recognises the importance of ending this permanent crisis in US-Russian relations.
    • Winning a strategic competition with China: The Biden administration, which is focused on winning the intensifying strategic competition with China, values a stable relationship with Russia.
    •  Nothing pleases Moscow more than the image of being Washington’s equal on the global stage.
    • Relief for India: A less conflictual relationship between Washington and Moscow will be a huge relief for India; but Delhi can’t nudge them closer to each other.

    Why the partnership with India matters to Russia

    • Dangers of excessive reliance on China: Persistent conflict with the US, Europe, and Japan have moved Moscow ever closer to Beijing.
    • But Moscow knows the dangers of relying solely on a neighbour which has risen to greatness — the Chinese economy at nearly $15 trillion today is nearly 10 times larger than that of Russia.
    • Sustaining the traditional partnership with India: While resetting Russia’s relations with the West is hard, sustaining the traditional partnership with Delhi is of some political value to Moscow.
    • Longstanding defence ties: Russia is pleased that the S-400 missile sale has gone through despite strong US opposition.
    • For it signals Delhi’s commitment not to let Washington roll back India’s longstanding defence ties with Russia.
    • Russia knows India’s strategic cooperation with the US has acquired an unstoppable momentum; and Delhi knows it has no veto over the Sino-Russian strategic partnership.
    • Moscow and Delhi are learning to live with this uncomfortable unreality and stabilising their political ties within that context.

    Consider the question “While both India and Russia have drifted apart from the depth of past partnerships, there is a need for stabilising their political ties within the changed context.Comment.”

    Context

    Delhi and Moscow have no reason to be satisfied with the poor state of their commercial ties. The success of Monday’s summit lies not in squeezing more out of bilateral defence ties, but in laying a clear path for expansive economic cooperation, and generating a better understanding of each other’s imperatives on Afghanistan and the Indo-Pacific.

    UPSC 2022 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)

  • Beijing’s aggressive regional policies and its implications

    Context

    One of the many consequences of China’s assertive posture in Asia has been the emergence of geopolitical coalitions to limit the prospects for Beijing’s regional dominance.

    Two new coalitions forcing China rethink

    • Quad and AUKUS: Two new coalitions that have got a lot of political attention are the Quadrilateral framework involving Australia, India, Japan and the US, and the AUKUS, which brings together Australia, the United Kingdom and the United States.
    • Until recently, China was quite contemptuous of the new political formations.
    • It had compared the Quad to “seafoam” that is here now but gone in a second.
    • China’s dismissive attitude has now yielded place to denunciation.

    US’s policy forcing China to rethink

    • Two big factors are behind China’s rethinking.
    • Consensus in the US on Challenging China: One was the surprising emergence of American domestic political consensus on challenging China.
    • Beijing believed that Donald Trump was an exception to the longstanding US policy of deeper economic integration with China and sustained political engagement. But Biden has simply reinforced Trump’s strategy.
    • US making alliances critical element of China policy: Trump thought that alliances are a burden on US taxpayers.
    •  Biden, in contrast, has made alliances a critical element of his China strategy.
    • The idea was to create “situations of strength” vis-a-vis China by rebuilding US alliances and developing new coalitions.
    • In Asia, the Biden administration moved quickly to strengthen the traditional security ties with its allies in northeast Asia — Japan and South Korea.
    • Elevating the Quad to leaders-level: It also elevated the Quad to the leaders-level within weeks after Biden took charge and had a physical summit in Washington six months later.
    • AUKUS: It also announced the AUKUS.
    • Biden travelled to Europe in June this year to revitalise the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation.
    • Summit with Russia: Biden also decided on an early summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin that took place in Geneva at the end of his European tour.
    • Rebalancing relations: Biden’s team believed that the greatest strength of the US was its wide network of allies and partners.
    • And that mobilising them was the key to rebalancing relations with China.

    How China is making alliances and partnerships?

    • While China’s economic reach is now global and deep, political and military alliances have not been part of Beijing’s tradition.
    • Relations with Russia at peak: Beijing’s ties with Moscow have never been as close as they are.
    • Relations with N. Korea and Pakistan: China also has strong alliance-like relations with North Korea and Pakistan.
    • But there can be little comparison though between the kind of strengths that American allies bring to the table with those of China’s partners.

    Is Asian geopolitical structure turning in China’s favour?

    • Beijing was betting on the proposition that the Asian geopolitical structure was turning, irretrievably, in China’s favour.
    • This is based on a number of propositions.
    • Location of the US: America, located far from Asia, will have trouble overcoming the tyranny of geography in a conflict with China.
    • The economic and military power of China: China’s hard power — both economic and military — relative to the US is growing rapidly and shifting the local balance of power in its favour.
    • Location of China: The proximity of China and Asian regional integration have made Beijing the most important economic partner for the whole region.
    • Beijing believed that few Asian nations would want to spoil their commercial relations with China and align with Washington.
    • Power imbalance: The vast imbalance in military power between Beijing and its neighbours it presumed would dissuade most Asian states from considering armed confrontations with China
    • Breaking up coalition: China counted on the fact that it is easier to break up coalitions than build them.

    Implications of China’s aggressive policies

    • Making the US unfriendly prematurely: Chinese policies have driven the US towards an unanticipated internal consensus on containing Beijing.
    • Making a friendly America into an enemy prematurely could go down as one of Xi Jinping’s egregious strategic errors.
    • Driving regional countries towards the US: China’s aggressive regional policies are driving many countries like Australia, India, Japan, the Philippines and Vietnam, towards the US.
    • Neighbouring countries pursuing stronger national military capacities: While the military balance of power in Asia has certainly turned in China’s favour, it has not cowed down its neighbours.
    • Many are pursuing stronger national military capabilities to limit some of the threats from China.
    • Stoked nationalism: China, which never stops to emphasise its own nationalism, appears to have underestimated the depth of similar sentiment in other Asian states.
    • Today, it is driving many of China’s neighbours into the US camp.
    • It is America and not China that today talks about the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Asian nations.

    Consider the question “One of the many consequences of China’s assertive posture in Asia has been the emergence of geopolitical coalitions to limit Beijing’s regional dominance. Critically analyse.”

    Conclusion

    It has been quite fashionable in the West as well as in the East, to proclaim that China’s hegemony is inevitable, American decline is terminal, and Asian coalitions are unsustainable. Those conclusions are premature at best. For Xi Jinping has squandered many of China’s natural geopolitical advantages.

  • Bilateral trade between India and Pakistan should be first step to normalising links

    Context

    The recent partial opening of land borders between India and Pakistan signals a thaw in the troubled relations between the two South Asian neighbours.

    How normalising relations with Pakistan help India?

    • Reduce India’s vulnerability to China: From the Indian standpoint, as a Centre for Policy Research report argues, a continuing freeze in relations with Pakistan will “enhance India’s external vulnerability to other actors, in particular, China”.
    • Impact on bilateral trade: After the Pulwama terror attack, bilateral trade between the two countries plummeted from around $2 billion in 2017-18 to a paltry $280 million in 2020-21 (April to February).

    Steps to normalise relations

    1] Pakistan needs to revoke suspension of trade with India

    • Pakistan needs to revoke the unilateral suspension of trade with India undertaken in August 2019 due to India’s decision to dilute Article 370.
    • Suspension against GATT and SAFTA: The trade suspension by Pakistan is inconsistent with the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) and the South Asian Free Trade Area (SAFTA) agreement — the two international law instruments that regulate trade between India and Pakistan.
    • GATT, as part of the World Trade Organisation (WTO), allows countries to adopt trade-restraining measures on certain grounds such as public health and conservation of exhaustible natural resources (Article XX) and for national security purposes (Article XXI).
    • Neither the WTO nor SAFTA permits a country to suspend trade with another member country on grounds that it disapproves a domestic law enacted by the latter.

    2] Pakistan needs to confer MFN status on India

    • Pakistan needs to reverse its practice of not according the most favoured nation (MFN) status to India.
    • MFN is a principle of non-discrimination in trade given in Article I of GATT.
    • Breach of GATT: Pakistan is in breach of Article I of GATT towards India since the formation of the WTO in 1995.

    3] India should restore Pakistan’s MFN status

    • India should restore Pakistan’s MFN status that it revoked after the Pulwama terror attack by hiking the tariff rates on all Pakistani imports to an unfeasible rate of 200 per cent.
    • Such a move by India will put the ball in Pakistan’s court.
    • If Pakistan fails to reciprocate, India should exert pressure on Islamabad by mounting a legal challenge.

    4] Explore the special trading arrangement under GATT

    • Article XXIV.11 allows India and Pakistan to enter into any special trading arrangement without fully complying with GATT conditions that typically apply to countries signing free trade agreements.
    • This merciful rule that only India and Pakistan enjoy, out of 160 odd WTO members, was incorporated in GATT to enable the two sides to overcome the economic hardships caused by Partition.

    Consider the question “How normalising trade relations will India and Pakistan? Suggest the steps both the countries need to take in this regard.” 

    Conclusion

    India should appreciate that the rise of China, not Pakistan, poses the graver threat. Strengthening bilateral trade can be an important lever towards establishing a working relationship with Pakistan.

    UPSC 2022 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)

  • Land Boundary Agreement (LBA) with Bangladesh

    Union Home Minister has said that the Northeast States will be linked by road and railway to Bangladesh in a year or two under the historic Land Boundary Agreement (LBA).

    Land Boundary Agreement (LBA)

    • India and Bangladesh have signed the LBA in 2014 to ensure proper connectivity in the region.
    • The operationalization of LBA lays the way for the exchange of 162 enclaves under the control of either country as per the 1974 pact.
    • Under the Agreement, 111 border enclaves will be transferred to Bangladesh in exchange for 51 that will become part of India.
    • The agreement settles an old land boundary dispute which dates back to colonial times as India transfers 111 border enclaves to Bangladesh in exchange for 51 enclaves.
    • It also settles the question of citizenship for over 50,000 people residing under these enclaves.

    Why was such an agreement needed?

    • India and Bangladesh share a 4,096 km land boundary covering West Bengal, Assam, Tripura, Meghalaya and Mizoram.
    • This is the largest among the international boundaries that India shares with its neighbors.
    • On this boundary, some 50,000-100,000 people reside in so-called Chitmahals or Indo-Bangladeshi enclaves.
    • There are 102 Indian enclaves inside Bangladesh and 71 Bangladeshi ones inside India.
    • Inside those enclaves are also 28 counter-enclaves and one counter-counter-enclave, called Dahala Khagrabari.

    The inception of the agreement

    • For the first time, a vision to solve this issue had been enshrined in the Indira-Mujib pact of 1972.
    • Accordingly, the India-Bangladesh LBA was signed between the two countries in 1974.
    • However, this agreement need ratification from the parliaments of both countries as it involved the exchange of the territories.
    • While Bangladesh had ratified it as back as 1974 only, it was not ratified by the Indian parliament till 2014.
    • The 119th Amendment Bill 2013 sought to ratify the land boundary agreement between the two countries.

    Key features of the LBA

    • The LBA envisages a transfer of 111 Indian enclaves to Bangladesh in return for 51 enclaves to India.
    • The area transferred to India is less than that transferred by India to Bangladesh. In totality, India incurs a net loss in terms of area occupancy.
    • This remained a major concern of opposition from the north-eastern affected states and west Bengal.
    • Also, most of the area concerned is occupied by the tribals of the North-Eastern states and hence the swapping takes away their land rights leaving them more vulnerable.
    • Current Status of the Constitution (119th Amendment) Bill has been passed by the Parliament of India on 7th May 2015.
    • While India will gain 510 acres of land, ten thousand acres of land will notionally go to Bangladesh.
    • This legislation will redraw India’s boundary with Bangladesh by exchanging enclaves in Assam, West Bengal, Tripura and Meghalaya.

    Implications of the Agreement

    • It will secure the long-stranded boundary and enable to curb the illegal migration, smuggling and criminal acts across the border.
    • It would help those stateless citizens by granting them citizenship from their respective countries. It would help settle the boundary dispute at several points in Meghalaya, Tripura, Assam, and West Bengal.
    • It would improve the access to underdeveloped north-eastern states and would further enhance the developmental works in the region.
    • It would help to increase the connectivity with south-east Asia as part of India’s North-eastern policy.

     

    UPSC 2022 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)

  • Australia’s controversial Religious Discrimination Bill

    Australian PM Scott Morrison has introduced a contentious piece of anti-discrimination legislation called the “Religious Discrimination Bill” in their parliament.

    What is the Bill about?

    • The bill aims to eliminate discrimination on the ground of religious beliefs or activities.
    • It will ensure Australians are protected from discrimination on the basis of religious belief or activity.
    • The timing of the introduction of this bill, ahead of the federal elections is being seen as an attempt by the Morrison government to target religious voters.

    What does the Religious Discrimination Bill say?

    • The Act makes it unlawful to discriminate against a person on the grounds of religious belief or activity in a range of areas of life including work, education, access to premises, and the provision of goods, services, and accommodation.
    • Discrimination is unlawful if it occurs, for example, because of a religious belief or activity that the person holds or engages in.
    • It is also unlawful if it occurs because of the person’s association with someone else who holds or engages in a religious belief or activity, regardless of whether or not they themselves hold or engage in a religious belief or activity.

    Contentious provisions

    • The bill also allows faith-based organizations such as religious schools to hire and enrol people from particular faiths.
    • The bill states that religious bodies can give preference, “in good faith, to persons who hold or engage in a particular religious belief or activity”.
    • It goes on to say that a religious body does not discriminate against a person under this Act by engaging, in good faith, in conduct that a person of the same religion as the religious body could reasonably consider.

    Because of this clause, the bill has alarmed some LGBTQI groups and some legal experts who say that the bill will discriminate against gay teachers and students.

    Criticisms

    • Some critics of the bill see it as a piece of legislation that is legalizing hate.
    • Some are questioning the government and asking for proof that people are discriminated against on the basis of religion in the country.
    • Further, there are also demands to protect gay students from discrimination.

     

    UPSC 2022 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)

  • Dynamism in India-U.S. ties

    Context

    While there are regular interactions among officials at various levels and across sectors, as well as people-to-people engagement, there are no formal interactions between Members of Parliament in India and members of the U.S. Congress.

    US Congressional Delegation (CODEL) visit to India

    •  CODEL travels across the world during the periods when Congress takes a break from legislative work.
    • Interactions during these travels are important in shaping relations with foreign countries.
    • In November, a congressional delegation (CODEL) travelled to the Indo-Pacific Command countries, including the Philippines, Taiwan and India.
    • In New Delhi, the six-member delegation interacted with Prime Minister Narendra Modi, External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar, and representatives of the Dalai Lama.
    • The members of the delegation noted the “increasing convergence of strategic interests” between India and the U.S. and said they would like to “further enhance cooperation… to promote global peace and stability”.
    •  Mr. Modi appreciated the consistent support and constructive role of the U.S. Congress in deepening the India-U.S. comprehensive global strategic partnership.
    • Enhancing bilateral relationship on critical issues: Mr. Modi and CODEL exchanged views on enhancing the bilateral relationship and strengthening cooperation on contemporary global issues such as terrorism, climate change and reliable chains for critical technologies.
    • Demand for the presidential waiver for India: Two days after returning from his trip to India, CODEL member Senator Tommy Tuberville favoured India getting the presidential waiver under the Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act.
    • Significance of CODEL visit: Members of the U.S. Congress play an important role in determining foreign policy, which at times is dictated by the demands of constituents.

    Way forward

    •  Despite the robustness in India-U.S. relations, there is no institutional communication or interaction between MPs in India and members of the U.S. Congress.
    • Establishment of India-US Parliamentary Exchange: The joint statement at the end of the 2+2 Dialogue in 2019 stated: “The Ministers looked forward to the establishment of India-US Parliamentary Exchange to facilitate reciprocal visits by Parliamentarians of the two countries”.
    • Indian Parliamentary Group: India can take it forward through the Indian Parliamentary Group, which acts as a link between the Indian Parliament and the various Parliaments of the world.
    • At present, there are eight Parliamentary Friendship Groups of India’s including Japan, Russia, China and the European Union.
    • The U.S. is absent from this list.

    Conclusion

    The significance of the CODEL visit is not lost in the U.S. as members of the U.S. Congress play an important role in determining foreign policy, which at times is dictated by the demands of constituents.

    UPSC 2022 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)