💥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’s Myanmar dilemma

    The coup in Myanmar poses several challenges for India. For one, it poses a dilemma in India’s dealing with Myanmar’s military. Also, it has implications for the Rohingya issue and containing the insurgency in north-east India.

    Implications of the coup in Myanmar

    1) Political realignment and role of Aung San Suu Kyi

    • Threat of sanctions from the United States and the West in the wake of the recent coup could lead to unique political realignments in Myanmar.
    • As a result, the international community may not have any alternatives than Aung San Suu Kyi when it comes to pursuing the restoration of democracy in the country.
    • The democratic credentials of Aung San Suu Kyi, remain deeply diminished today due to her justification of the ill-treatment meted out to the Rohingya,
    • Yet the recent events have brought her right back into the centre of the international community’s political calculations in Myanmar.

    2) Implications for Rohingya issus

    • International community will have to condone the government’s past actions against the Rohingya in order to highlight Suu Kyi as an anchor of democracy in Myanmar.
    • The case against Myanmar’s conduct during her government’s tenure at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) will most likely be put on the backburner.
    • Increasing global support for Ms. Suu Kyi could potentially negative consequences for the persecuted Rohingya.

    3) China factor

    • In the short run, the coup stands to hurt the interests of China, India and even the rest of the international community, all of whom were able to do business with Myanmar in their own unique ways.
    • For China, the coup has complicated its larger regional economic plans in Myanmar.
    • However, the international community’s sharp reactions will likely force the Tatmadaw (Myanmar’s military) to turn to China.
    • International sanctions are unlikely to have a major impact on the country’s largely inward-looking junta and its Generals.
    • However, it Generals would still expect Beijing to give them
    • For China, the coup has complicated its larger regional economic plans in Myanmar.
    • On the positive side for Beijing, decisive western sanctions will force the military to get closer to China.
    • To that extent, China will be its biggest beneficiary of the February coup by default.

    India’s dilemma

    • India faces the most challenging dilemma on how to respond to the military coup in Myanmar.
    • The dual power centres of the military and the civilian government that existed in Naypyitaw until recently, suited India.
    • While India’s national interests clearly lie in dealing with whoever is in power in Myanmar, India would find it difficult to openly support the junta given the strong western and American stance.
    • On the other hand, it can ill-afford to offend the junta by actively seeking a restoration of democracy there.
    • While Ms. Suu Kyi was getting cozy with Beijing, it was the Myanmar military that had been more circumspect.

    India’s concerns

    • While a friendless Myanmar junta getting closer to China is a real worry for New Delhi, there are other concerns too.
    • For one, Myanmar’s military played a helpful role in helping India contain the north-eastern insurgencies.
    • Equally important is the issue of providing succour to the Rohingya in the wake of the military coup in Myanmar.

    Consider the question “Developments in Myanmar have several implications for the regional geopolitics. In light of this, examine the challenges India faces from the development in Myanmar.”

    Conclusion

    India is left with very few clear policy options. And yet, it must continue to maintain relations with the government in power in Myanmar while discreetly pushing for political reconciliation in the country. In the meantime, the focus must be on improving trade, connectivity, and security links between the two sides.

  • Sri Lanka pushes India out of Colombo Terminal Project

    After the strong opposition from within, the Sri Lankan government was forced to revoke a 2019 agreement with India and Japan to develop the strategic East Container Terminal (ECT) at the Colombo Port.

    Map Reading: Note all these major ports and try recalling their sequences in the clockwise and counter-clockwise direction.

    What is the news?

    • PM Mahinda Rajapaksa made a statement that the operation of the east terminal would be done by Sri Lanka Ports Authority on its own.
    • Its cabinet has approved a proposal to develop the West Terminal at the Colombo Port as a PPP with India and Japan, which is seen as a bid to compensate India.
    • It is unclear whether India would accept the latest proposal.

    What is the Project?

    • The tripartite agreement, signed by India, Sri Lanka and Japan, proposes to develop the ECT, which is located at the newly expanded southern part of the Colombo Port.
    • The ECT is located 3 km away from the China-backed international financial city, known as Port City, currently being built in Colombo.
    • A Chinese company was behind the controversial 2018 Hambantota port project, signed its first contract in the Port City last month.
    • It is also on the map of China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI).

    India’s reaction

    • A few weeks ago EAM S. Jaishankar visited Sri Lanka where he discussed the development of the stalled project.
    • India’s first response was that the island nation should not be taking a decision in a unilateral manner on an existing tripartite agreement.

    Compensatory offer to India

    • After the decision on revoking the 2019 agreement, SL has approved another proposal to develop the west terminal of the Colombo port with Japan and India.
    • Commercially, the west terminal offer is better for India as it gives 85% stake for developers of the West Terminal against the 49% in ECT.

    Sri Lanka expects India to rethink. Why?

    • Indian response to this compensatory offer is unclear since there was no formal communication by SL authorities.
    • Geo-politically, west terminal is almost the same India considers the security aspect and the necessity to have a port terminal in Sri Lanka.
    • There is no difference between East and West Terminals except for the fact that development of the ECT is partially completed while the development of the West Terminal has to start from scratch.

    SL version of the revocation

    • Incumbent PM Mahinda Rajapaksa said the pressure was immense on the President Gotabaya Rajapaksa to cancel the 2019 agreement.
    • The pressure was brewing so much that he was becoming so unpopular among the people.
    • As per the agreement signed by the former Maithripala Sirisena-Ranil Wickremesinghe administration, India and Japan together were to hold 49% stake in ECT.
    • What had finally made the government surrender before trade unions were the increasing support of many more sections in the society for the protests against privatization.

    The inevitable factor: China

    • This move can be easily interpreted as a reaction to Chinese communication to Sri Lanka.
    • China has reportedly instigated trade unions and civil societies against this project.

    Q.The threat of Chinese presence in South Asia can be tackled more effectively if India changes course in its dealings with its neighbours and becomes more sensitive to their concerns. Critically analyse.

    Outcome: Souring of the ties

    • For India, the strategic ECT project was important. Even the EAM has visited Colombo in January in this regard.
    • Critics of the Sri Lankan government anticipate many national and international impacts surrounding the latest decision on ECT.
    • Meantime, internationally an offended India can make life tough for Sri Lanka, isolating the tiny island nation, geo-politically and on the economic front.
    • The economic isolation will not help Sri Lanka at a time when the country is taking steps to revive the economy amid a pandemic.

  • Foreign Minister suggests way forward for India-China ties

    External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar has given useful insight on the future of India-China ties amid heating border tensions and has suggested the best way forward.

    Statements made by EAM are major breakthrough in itself. They are the most logical and amply reflect his perfect statesmanship.

    We can imbibe such statements in our answers as they hold extraordinary significance like any gospel.

    Key takeaways from EAM’s speech

    • 2020 was a year of exceptional stress in a relationship profoundly disturbed by the border crisis.
    • China’s actions last year had not only signaled a disregard of commitments to reduce troop levels” but also “a willingness” to breach the peace and tranquillity on the border.
    • For all the disagreements we had, the fact is the border areas still remained fundamentally peaceful with the last incident of a loss of life in 1975, prior to 2020.
    • Until now, India is yet to receive a credible explanation for the change in China’s stance or reasons for its amassing of troops.
    • Any expectation that can be brushed aside and life can carry on undisturbed despite the situation in the border is simply not realistic.

    China’s contentious moves

    • China did a unilateral attempt to redraw the LAC in several areas in eastern Ladakh
    • China’s issuing of stapled visas to Indian citizens from Jammu and Kashmir in 2010
    • Reluctance from China to deal with some of India’s military commands, Beijing had that same year refused to host the Northern Army Commander
    • China’s opposition to India’s membership of the Nuclear Suppliers Group and the U.N. Security Council as a permanent member
    • Blocking of U.N. listings of Pakistani terrorists, and
    • China Pakistan Economic Corridor, a flagship project under China’s Belt and Road Initiative, violating India’s sovereignty

    Gone is the past

    • Both sides had “painstakingly” worked to normalize relations after the post-1962 war freeze and the first prime ministerial visit in 1988.
    • For the border areas, he said, both had agreed a complete and practical set of understandings and agreements focused on border management, while negotiations were being conducted on the boundary dispute.
    • The advancement of ties, he said, was predicated on ensuring that peace and tranquillity were not disturbed, and the LAC was both observed and respected by both sides.
    • For this reason, it was explicitly agreed the two countries would refrain from massing troops on their common border, along with a detailed understanding of handling frictions that would arise.

    No progress over the years

    • Over the years, he said, there was no sign of progress of arriving at a common understanding of the LAC, while there was increasing construction of border infrastructure, especially in the Chinese side.
    • India had made efforts to reduce the considerable infrastructure gap since 2014, including through greater budgetary commitments and border road building.

    Way forward

    The External Affairs Minister suggested “three mutuals” and “eight broad propositions” as a way forward for the relationship.

    #Three mutuals

    Mutual respect, mutual sensitivities and mutual interests are the “determining factors”.

    #Major propositions

    (1) Adhering to commitment

    • The first proposition was that agreements already reached must be adhered to in their entirety, both in letter and in spirit.

    (2) Respect for LAC

    • Both sides also needed to strictly observe and respect the LAC, and any attempt to unilaterally change the status quo was completely unacceptable.

    (3) Maintaining peace and tranquillity

    • Peace and tranquillity in border areas was the basis for the development of the relationship in other domains. If that was disturbed, he said, the rest of the relationship would be too.

    (4) Broader partnership

    • The fourth proposition was that while both remain committed to a multipolar world, they should recognise that a multipolar Asia was one of its essential constituents.

    (5) Reciprocity

    • While each state had its interests, concerns and priorities, sensitivities to them could not be one-sided and relations were reciprocal in nature. As rising powers, neither should ignore the other’s set of aspirations.

    (6) Divergences management

    • While both sides had made a common cause on development and economic issues and common membership of plurilateral groups was a meeting point, there were divergences when it came to interests and aspirations.

    (7) Civilizational ties

    • The last proposition was that as civilizational states, India and China must always take the long view.

    (8) Cooperation and competition

    • Even before the events of 2020, the relationship had reflected a duality of cooperation and competition.

  • China builds a new village in Arunachal Pradesh

    Satellite images show that China has constructed a new village in Arunachal Pradesh, around 4.5 kilometres inside of the de facto border on the Indian side.

    Indian and Chinese soldiers have confronted each other in their deadliest clash in decades in Ladakh last year and the earlier one in Doklam. Now another front has been opened up by China in Arunachal.

    This year could face another ugliest standoffs and skirmishes.

    Location of the village

    • The village, located on the banks of the River Tsari Chu, lies in the Upper Subansiri district.
    • It is an area that has been long disputed by India and China and has been marked by armed conflict.
    • Sources in the defense ministry have said that Beijing has, for years, maintained an army post on this territory, and the various constructions by the Chinese have not happened suddenly.

    Background of the story

    • China’s June 1959 operation known as the Longju incident reportedly accused Indian troops of occupying some places in Tibet and colluding with Tibetan rebels.
    • In August same year, the PLA clashed with the Indian personnel of the 9 Assam Rifles.
    • Two Indian soldiers were killed in action and the issue was finally resolved through diplomatic channels. Both sides withdrew from the area on August 20, 1960.
    • And the Assam Rifles then did not re-occupy the post.
    • In the late 1990s however, China established a company level post 3 kilometers inside the Indian Territory. Since then, the area remains contested to this day.

    India and Arunachal

    • Arunachal Pradesh (called South Tibet in China) is a full-fledged state of India.
    • India’s sovereignty over the area is internationally recognized and its residents have not shown any inclination to leave India.
    • The majority of the international maps acknowledge the area to be an Indian Territory.
    • China has some (pre-) historical claims through its ownership of Tibet, but the people and geography primarily favor India.

    Back2Basics: Chinese claim over Arunachal Pradesh

    • When the new Peoples Republic of China was formed in February 1912 after the abdication of the Qing emperor, the Tibetans asserted their independence.
    • They forced the Chinese troops based in Lhasa to return to the mainland-via India. A year later, Tibet declared independence from China.
    • In order to ensure that the unrest did not spread to India and assert their boundaries, the ruling British convened a tripartite meeting at Shimla with Tibetan and Chinese delegates to define the border.
    • The meeting gave China suzerainty over most of Tibet, and the boundary defined in this treaty was later known as the McMohan line.

    Chinese reluctance

    • The essential dispute is over China’s refusal to acknowledge the McMohan Line as the border between the two nations, and staking claim to large tracts of land as a contiguous part of Tibet.
    • However, it laid claim to the entire state of Arunachal Pradesh.
    • In the 16th century, the most important heritage of the state – Tawang Monastery was built. This is one of the most important sites for Tibetan Buddhists.
    • China never recognized Tibet’s independence nor the 1914 Simla convention.
    • In 1950 China completely took over Tibet. Thus, according to their version, the Tawang region belongs to them.
    • It especially wants to hold on to the monastery as that is a leading center of Tibetan Buddhism in India.

  • Ratle Hydroelectric Project

    The Centre has decided to go ahead with the long-pending 850-megawatt Ratle hydroelectric power project on the river Chenab in J&K Kishtwar district, despite objections raised by the Pakistan government over the same.

    Tap to read more about Indus River System

    Ratle Hydel Plant

    • It is a run-of-the-river hydroelectric power station currently under construction on the Chenab River, downstream of the village near Drabshalla in Kishtwar district of the Indian UT of Jammu and Kashmir.
    • The project includes a 133 m (436 ft) tall gravity dam and two power stations adjacent to one another.
    • The installed capacity of both power stations will be 850 MW.
    • In June 2013, then PM Manmohan Singh laid the foundation stone for the dam.
    • Pakistan has frequently alleged that it violates the Indus Water Treaty.

    What is the Indus Water Treaty?

    • The Indus Waters Treaty is a water-distribution treaty between India and Pakistan, brokered by the World Bank signed in Karachi in 1960.
    • According to this agreement, control over the water flowing in three “eastern” rivers of India — the Beas, the Ravi, and the Sutlej was given to India.
    • The control over the water flowing in three “western” rivers of India — the Indus, the Chenab, and the Jhelum was given to Pakistan
    • The treaty allowed India to use western rivers water for limited irrigation use and unrestricted use for power generation, domestic, industrial, and non-consumptive uses such as navigation, floating of property, fish culture, etc. while laying down precise regulations for India to build projects
    • India has also been given the right to generate hydroelectricity through the run of the river (RoR) projects on the Western Rivers which, subject to specific criteria for design and operation is unrestricted.

  • India-Nepal relations in a new transition

    India-Nepal Joint Commission meeting took place at a time when Nepal in going through a political turmoil. The article examines the issues discussed in the meeting and how its implications for the bilateral relations between the two countries.

    India-Nepal joint commission meeting amid political chaos in Nepal

    • Recently, the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Nepal visited New Delhi for the sixth meeting of the India-Nepal Joint Commission.
    • Nepal’s Prime Minister dissolved the House of Representatives in late December 2020, the move was termed ‘unconstitutional’ by the experts and the country’s Supreme Court is hearing writ petitions against the move.
    • As a unique characteristic, Nepal’s internal political fundamentals continue to shape its foreign policy choices. 
    • In such a scenario, any inbound or outbound delegation is seen from a different prism.

    Issues discussed in the meeting

    1) Progress on the development partnership front

    • On the development partnership front, the expansion of the Motihari-Amlekhganj petroleum products pipelines to Chitwan and the establishment of a new pipeline on the eastern side connecting Siliguri to Jhapa in Nepal formed a part of the discussions.
    • The operating procedures for commencement of train services of the first passenger railway line between India and Nepal from Jaynagar to Kurtha via Janakpurhave have been discussed.
    • Other cross-border rail connectivity projects, including a possible Raxaul-Kathmandu broad gauge railway line, were also discussed.
    • The joint hydropower projects, including the proposed Pancheshwar Multipurpose Project, should get positive momentum following this round of meetings.

    2) Facilitating the cross-border movement of people

    • The recently inaugurated Integrated Check Posts (ICPs) at Birgunj and Biratnagar have helped in the seamless movement of people and trade between the two countries.
    • The construction of a third integrated check post at Nepalgunj has already commenced, while the new integrated check post at Bhairahwa would begin shortly.
    • Since Nepal relies on India’s seaports in a big way for trading, and goods are transported by road, the integrated check posts are expected to ease trade and transit.

    3) Border issue

    • Nepali side’s demand to include the boundary in the Joint Commission Meeting.
    • However, India made it clear to find a fresh mechanism to resolve any such crucial long-pending issue.

    4) New direction to bilateral ties

    • India’s support for two more cultural heritage projects in Nepal, namely, the Pashupatinath Riverfront Development and the Bhandarkhal Garden Restoration in Patan Durbar is significant.
    • Nepal expressed support for India’s permanent membership of an expanded UN Security Council (UNSC) to reflect the changed balance of power.
    • The next meeting of the Joint Commission in Nepal should be crucial in giving a new direction to the bilateral ties, keeping a balance between change and continuity.

    India’s deepening engagement with all sections

    • There is growing disenchantment among the Nepali masses over the increased centralization of power, failure of the Provincial System in addressing the developmental issues, misuse of Presidential authority, and unprecedented corruption.
    • While the unusual developments are taking place in Nepal, there are many who still think that India is comfortable with some changes as its Nepal policy is heading very clearly towards a deeper engagement with all sections.

    Consider the question “How India-Nepal ties are affected by the internal political fundamentals in Nepal? What approach should be adopted by India in dealing with Nepal?” 

    Conclusion

    Nepal cannot afford to enter into another round of political instability, and those who have commanding authority to spearhead India-Nepal bilateral relations must give a humane consideration to it. At the crossroads, Nepal needs action and to come to terms with realities.

  • Nepal once again raises Kalapani Boundary Issue

    Nepal has raised the Kalapani boundary dispute with India during the Joint Commission meeting of the Foreign Ministers.

    Q.The India-Nepal bilateral relations these days are increasingly seen through the lens of China factor. Examine.

    Kalapani Boundary Issue

    • Mapped within Uttarakhand is a 372-sq km area called Kalapani, bordering far-west Nepal and Tibet.
    • A treaty signed between Nepal and British India in 1816 determined the Makhali river, that runs through Kalapani, as the boundary between the two neighbours.
    • The Treaty of Sugauli concluded between British India and the Kingdom of Nepal in the year 1816, maps the Makhali River as the western boundary with India.
    • But different British maps showed the source of the tributary at different places which were mainly due to underdeveloped and less-defined surveying techniques used at that time.
    • However, the river has many tributaries that meet at Kalapani. For this reason, India claims that the river begins at Kalapani but Nepal says that it begins from Lipu Lekh pass, which is the source of most of its tributaries.
    • While the Nepal government and political parties have protested, India has said the new map does not revise the existing boundary with Nepal.
    • India claims that the river begins at Kalapani but Nepal says that it begins from Lipu Lekh pass, which is the source of most of its tributaries.

    Legal Dimension of Issue

    According to International Laws, the principles of avulsion and accretion are applicable in determining the borders when a boundary river changes course.

    • Avulsion: It is the pushing back of the shoreline by sudden, violent action of the elements, perceptible while in progress. Also, it can be defined as the sudden and perceptible change in the land brought about by water, which may result in the addition or removal of land from a bank or shoreline.
    • Accretion: It is the process of growth or enlargement by a gradual buildup. It is the natural, slow and gradual deposit of soil by the water.

    If the change of the river course is rapid – by avulsion – the boundary does not change. But if the river changes course gradually – that is, by accretion – the boundary changes accordingly.

    Since, the Gandak change, of course, has been gradual, India claimed Susta as part of their territory as per international laws.

    • On several occasions, India has tried to resolve the issue through friendly and peaceful negotiations, but the Nepali leadership has always shown hesitation in resolving the issue.
    • In Nepal, the issue has become a tool for arousing strong public sentiment against India. Therefore, resolving the issue may not be in the best interest of Nepal’s domestic politics.

    Significance for India

    • The Lipu Lekh pass serves strategic importance for India as a key point to monitor Chinese troop movement.
    • The link road via Lipulekh Himalayan Pass is also considered one of the shortest and most feasible trade routes between India and China.
    • The Nepalese reaction would probably have triggered in response to Chinese assertion.

    An undefined boundary claimed by Nepal

    • Nepal’s western boundary with India was marked out in the Treaty of Sugauli between the East India Company and Nepal in 1816.
    • Nepali authorities claim that people living in the low-density area were included in the Census of Nepal until 58 years ago.
    • Five years ago, Nepali Foreign Minister had claimed that the late King Mahendra “handed over the territory to India”.
    • By some accounts in Nepal, this allegedly took place in the wake of India-China War of 1962.

    Must read:

    [Burning Issue] India-Nepal Border Row

  • Who are the persecuted Hazara Community of Pakistan?

    Pakistan’s Hazaras finally ended a protest and agreed to bury the bodies of 11 coal miners from the community killed by the IS.

    Genocide and Pakistan are the two inseparable metaphors. Pakistan’s treatment of its minorities is the least highlighted global violation of Human Rights. Hindus, Sikhs and Christians are the most persecuted communities.

    Who are the Hazaras?

    • Around 1773, the mountainous region of Hazarajat in modern-day central Afghanistan was annexed and made a part of the territories of the Afghan Empire under Pashtun ruler Ahmad Shah Durrani.
    • The Sunni Muslim majority under the Pashtun ruler resulted in further marginalization of the Shiite Hazara community, to the extent that in the 18th and 19th century.
    • They were forced to leave fertile lowlands in central Afghanistan and make the dry, arid mountainous landscape their new home.

    Their persecution

    • Persecution of the Shiite Hazaras is nothing new in Pakistan or neighbouring Afghanistan.
    • They have been frequently targeted by Taliban and IS militants and other militant groups in both countries.

    Causes of persecution: Ethnicity and Religion

    • Their unique identity, ethnicity and religion always made the Hazaras stand out among the other communities.
    • Hazaras speak Hazaragi, which is close to Dari Persian, the official language of modern-day Afghanistan.
    • The community also shares physical similarities with the Mongols and their speech, specific terms and phrases, reflect strong Central Asian Turkic influences.
    • This sets them apart from their neighbours in Pakistan and other communities within Afghanistan.

    An attempted ethnic cleansing

    • In the 19th century, the Hazara community constituted approximately 67 per cent of Afghanistan’s total population.
    • Since then, primarily due to violence, oppression and targeted massacres, that number has come down to a little as 10 to 20 per cent of the population now.
    • The attacks reached a crescendo in 2013 when three separate bombings killed more than 200 people in Hazara neighbourhoods of Quetta.
    • In the aftermath of this incident, the Shia community in Pakistan had erupted in anger over the Pakistani government’s lack of protection of its minorities.

  • Reframing India’s foreign policy priorities

    The article highlights the challenges facing the India’s foreign policy and factors responsible for these challenging circumstances.

    Stronger China in 2021 and Impact on India

    • China is about the only major country which had a positive rate of growth at the end of 2020, and its economy is poised to grow even faster in 2021.
    • Europe has recently revived its China links by ‘concluding in principle the negotiations for an EU-China Comprehensive Agreement on Investment’.
    •  The China-EU Investment Treaty which is an indication that Europe values its economy more than its politics.
    • In one swift move, Europe has thus shattered all hope that China would remain ostracised in 2021.
    • India which has greatly curtailed its relations with China in the wake of Chinese aggression in Eastern Ladakh, will find itself in difficult position.

    Major changes in West Asia and implications for India

    • In West Asia, the Abraham Accords have sharpened the division between the Saudi Bloc and Iran-Turkey.
    • Despite the hype surrounding the Abraham Accords the risk of a confrontation between Iran and Israel remains high.
    • This does pose problems for India, since both have relations with it.
    • Meanwhile, China demonstrates a willingness to play a much larger role in the region, including contemplating a 25-year strategic cooperation agreement with Iran.

    Foreing policy challenges for India in 2021

    • No breakthrough in Sino-Indian relations has, or is likely to occur.
    • India-Iran relations today lack warmth.
    • In Afghanistan, India has been marginalised as far as the peace process is concerned.
    • While India’s charges against Pakistan of sponsoring terror have had some impact globally, it has further aggravated tensions between the two neighbours and pushed Pakistan closer to China.
    • Hostility between India and Nepal appears to have reduced lately, relations continue to be strained.
    • Through a series of diplomatic visits, India has made efforts to improve relations with some of its neighbours such as Bangladesh, Myanmar and Sri Lanka, but as of now worthwhile results are not evident.
    • One key takeaway is that as India-China relations deteriorate, India’s neighbours are not averse to taking sides, increasing India’s isolation.
    • India will serve as the president of the powerful UN Security Council for the month of August, 2021, but if it is to make a real impact, it must be seen to possess substantial weight to shape policies, more so in its traditional areas of influence.

    Factors responsible for India’s foreing policy issues

    • There is a perception that India’s closeness to the U.S. has resulted in the weakening of its links with traditional friends such as Russia and Iran.
    • Perhaps the most relevant explanation could be the shifting balance of power in the region in which India is situated, notably the rise of China.
    • The enlarging conflict between the two biggest powers in Asia is compelling many nations to pick sides in the conflict.
    • Othe important factor is that India’s foreign policy suffers from an ideational vacuum.
    • India remains isolated from two important supranational bodies of which it used to be a founding member, viz., the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) and the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC).

    Conclusion

    As part of the ideational restructuring of India’s foreign policy, what is urgently required, apart from competent statecraft, is the adoption of prudent policies, pursuit of realistically achievable objectives, and, above all, a demonstration of continuity of policy, irrespective of changes in the nature of the Administration.

  • Domestic politics and its influence on foreign policy

    The article examines the issue of intervention in domestic politics by the external powers and the practical utilities of principles of non-intervention in the internal matters of neighbouring countries.

    Political turmoil in Nepal and India’s reaction

    • Nepal has been going through political crisis for some days now.
    • India’s reluctance to be drawn into the political turmoil in Kathmandu has drawn much attention.
    • India’s refusal is in contrast to Beijing’s active effort to preserve the unity of the ruling communist party in Kathmandu.

    The principles of sovereignty and non-intervention and its violations

    • India and China always insist that other countries should stop interfering in their respective internal affairs.
    • But big nations always intervene in other nations but fend off potential threats to their own sovereignty.
    • That does not prevent others from messing with India and Beijing.
    • Intervention is part of international life; all powers — big and small — frequently violate the principle of sovereignty.
    • The concept of national sovereignty was never absolute.
    • Big nations tend to intervene more, and the smaller ones find ways to manage this through the politics of balancing against their large neighbours.

    Analysing the causes of external interventions

    • The pressure for external intervention often comes from major domestic constituencies within.
    • For example, the conflict between Sinhala majority and Tamil minority in Sri Lanka produces political pressure on Delhi to intervene in Sri Lanka.
    • The demand sometimes comes from outside.
    • In Nepal, for example, elite competition sees different factions trying to mobilise external powers.
    • In recent years, we have also seen the intense interaction between domestic power struggles and external powers like India and China.
    • The Maldives is one example.

    Factors responsible for intervention

    • Given the nature of South Asia’s political geography, very few problems can be isolated within the territories of nations.
    • There is also the tension between the shared cultural identity in the subcontinent.
    • There is also the determination of the smaller nations to define a contemporary identity independent of India.
    • The bitter legacies of Partition leave the domestic political dynamics of Bangladesh, India and Pakistan tied together.
    • India’s relations with its smaller neighbours are also burdened by the legacy of India’s past hegemony and the emerging challenges to it.

    What should be India’s regional policy?

    • India can neither stand apart nor jump into every domestic conflict within the neighbourhood.
    • It is always about political judgement about specific situations.
    • Active and direct intervention in the domestic politics of neighbours must be a prudent exception rather than the rule in India’s regional diplomacy.

    Conclusion

    The subcontinent has historically been an integrated geopolitical space with a shared civilisational heritage. Equally true is the reality of multiple contemporary sovereignties within South Asia. In dealing with these twin realities, the principles guiding India’s engagement should be based on  “mutual respect and mutual sensitivity”.