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

Civilsdaily

Login

Subject: Global Groupings and Conventions

Important International institutions, agencies and fora- their structure, mandate.

  • India launches campaign brochure for UNSC seat

    India has launched its campaign brochure ahead of elections for five non-permanent members of UNSC.

    Practice question for mains:

    Q. By any calculus, India will qualify for UNSC permanent seat. Analyse.

    India’s agenda for UNSC

    The normal process of international governance has been under increasing strain as frictions have increased. Traditional and non-traditional security challenges continue to grow unchecked. India will highlight:

    • International terrorism
    • UN reforms and Security Council expansion, and
    • Streamlining the world body’s peacekeeping operations
    • Various technological initiatives

    India and UNSC

    • India is guaranteed a place in the UNSC as it is the sole candidate for Asia-Pacific but needs two-thirds of the 193-member General Assembly to vote in its favour in a secret ballot scheduled this month in New York.
    • While India is expected to sail through with the 129 votes required for the seat, the government is setting its sights on much higher numbers than that ahead of the election.
    • In 2010, when India stood for the UNSC seat of 2011-2012, it won 187 of the 190 votes polled.

    Streamlining new NORMS

    • This will be the eighth time India will occupy a non-permanent UNSC seat, with its last stint in 2011-2012.
    • India’s overall objective during this tenure in the UN Security Council will be the achievement of N.O.R.M.S: a New Orientation for a Reformed Multilateral System.

    Non-permanent membership  isn’t a cup of tea

    • The government launched its plan for the UNSC seat as far back as 2013, officials said, with a keen eye on 2021, and the year that will mark its 75th year of Independence.
    • To our good fortune, the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan agreed, in a gesture to our friendship, to step aside for the 2021-22 seats.
    • The next big challenge was to pursue the Asia-Pacific grouping nomination without any last-minute contenders being propped up against India.
    • While diplomacy between capitals certainly helps, the vote had to be tied down by negotiations on the ground.
    • India was able to win a unanimous endorsement from the 55-nation grouping that included both China and Pakistan, in June 2019.

    Back2Basics: United Nations Security Council

    • The UNSC is one of the six principal organs of the United Nations and is charged with the maintenance of international peace and security.
    • Its powers include the establishment of peacekeeping operations, the establishment of international sanctions, and the authorization of military action through Security Council resolutions.
    • It is the only UN body with the authority to issue binding resolutions to member states.
    • The Security Council consists of fifteen members. Russia, the United Kingdom, France, China, and the United States—serve as the body’s five permanent members.
    • These permanent members can veto any substantive Security Council resolution, including those on the admission of new member states or candidates for Secretary-General.
    • The Security Council also has 10 non-permanent members, elected on a regional basis to serve two-year terms. The body’s presidency rotates monthly among its members.

    Also read:

    India’s Bid to United Nations Permanent Seat

  • Setting agenda for G-12

    Recently, there was a call for expansion of the membership of the G-7 by the U.S. President. But the expanded group should not be seen as an anti-China gang-up. Disciplining and not isolating China is what most of the members of the group would want. And to do so, this new group needs to have new agenda. This article discusses the items that must form the part of the new agenda.

    Evolution of the G-7

    • When it started in 1975—with six members, Canada joining a year later—it represented about 70% of the world economy.
    • And it was a cosy club for tackling issues such as the response to oil shocks.
    • Now it accounts for about 40% of global gdp.
    • Since the global financial crisis of 2007-09 it has sometimes been overshadowed by the broader g20.
    • The G-7 became the G-8 in 1997 when Russia was invited to join.
    • In 2014, Russia was debarred after it took over Crimea.

    Call for expansion of the membership

    • It was the French who first flew the kite of membership expansion.
    • France had invited heads of government of several “emerging economies” for a meeting of the group at Évian-les-Bains, France, in June 2003. 
    • After 2003, G-8 host countries began organising a meeting on the sidelines of their summits with a select group of five or six developing countries.
    • India and China were invited to all those summits.
    • Now, President Trump has, however, gone a step further.
    • Rather than invite “guests” to a G-7 summit, he has suggested expanding the G-7 to a G-10 or G-11.
    • Trump has come up with an interesting list of new members — Australia, India, South Korea and, possibly, Russia.
    • Inclusion of Russia: Trump’s pragmatism in including Russia should be welcomed.
    • The advantage of getting Russia in is that the group would not be viewed merely as an anti-China gang-up but, in fact, as a club of “free market democracies”.
    • The group could easily be made the G-12 with the inclusion of Indonesia — one of the few democratic nations in the Islamic world.

    Discipline China, not isolate it

    • Trump’s motivation in expanding the G-7 to include India and Russia while keeping China out is transparent.
    • If keeping China out was not the intention, the G-7 could easily have dissolved themselves and revitalised the presently inert G-20.
    • There are, of course, good reasons why Xi Jinping’s China requires to be put on notice for its various acts of omission and commission and disrespect for international law.
    • However, disciplining China is one thing, isolating it quite another.
    • If the new group is viewed as yet another arrow in the China containment quiver it would place India and most other members of the group in a spot.
    • Everyone wants China disciplined, few would like to be seen seeking its isolation.
    • Asia needs a law-abiding China, not a sullen China.
    • Japan and Australia, have serious concerns about China’s behaviour.
    • But they may not like the new group to be viewed purely as an anti-China gang-up.
    • That may well be the case with South Korea too.
    • Indeed, even India should tread cautiously.
    • India has more issues with China than most others in the group, spanning across economic and national security issues and yet it should seek a disciplined China, not an isolated one.

    So, what should be on the agenda of the new group?

    • The proposed new group should define its agenda in terms that would encourage China to return to the pre-Xi era of global good behaviour.
    • The G-7 came into being in the mid-1970s against the background of shocks to the global financial and energy markets.
    • The G-12 would come into being against the background of a global economic crisis and the disruption to global trade caused both by protectionism and a pandemic.
    • The two items on the next summit agenda would have to be the global response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the rising tide of protectionism and mercantilism and the global economic slowdown.
    • The summit will have to come forward with some international dos and don’ts to deal with the challenge posed by these disruptions.

    New rules should apply to both the US and China

    • These new rules of international conduct would have to apply to both China and the US.
    • The G-12— have a shared interest in ensuring that both China and the US respect international law and desist from unilateralism in dealing with neighbours and global challenges.

    Widening the agenda

    • To be able to alter China’s behaviour without isolating it, the G-12 will have to widen their agenda.
    • Widening involves going beyond the purely economic issues that the G-7 originally focused on, and include climate change, health care and human rights.

    What should the “free market democracies” mean

    • In identifying themselves as “free market democracies” the G-12 must issue a new charter of respect for human rights, adherence to international law and multilateralism in trade and security.
    • This is easier said than done.
    • President Trump will have to re-assure the group’s members that he has their combined interests at heart in proposing a new group.
    • And he also has to show that he has an imagination beyond just an “America First” policy.
    • Even as the world is increasingly wary of an assertive China and of Xi Jinping’s China Dream and his version of a “China First” policy, it is also wary of Trump’s unilateralism on many fronts.

    What should the invitee nations consider before joining the group?

    • Many countries share Trump’s displeasure with China for its manipulation of the World Health Organisation.
    • But many of them are equally unhappy with the manner in which the Trump administration has treated the World Trade Organisation.
    • A G-12 cannot ignore such partisan behaviour by either the US or China.
    • If Trump does issue an invitation to the three or four new members to join the new group, they should seek clarity on the terms of membership.
    • Russia’s experience, of being invited and then disinvited and now being considered for being re-invited should be a salutary message to all others invitees.

    Consider the question- “The expanded new G-12 with India as its member, should also needs new agenda with its focus beyond China. Comment.”

    Conclusion

    As the world’s largest free market democracy India deserves to be a member of not just a G-12 but of even a new G-7. India’s political and economic credentials are certainly stronger than those of Canada, Britain and Italy.

  • Seizing the moment at the WHO

    India has been tasked with helming the  WHO executive board at the turbulent times. The world is facing the health crisis. It is against this backdrop, India has to lead the executive board. This article suggests 5 elements that should form the part of India’s policy approach.

    Challenges for India as it heads WHO executive board

    • Minister of Health and Family Welfare is elected as the Chair of the World Health Organization’s (WHO) executive board.
    • The 34-member body is tasked with implementing the decisions of the recently concluded World Health Assembly (WHA).
    • The elevation affords India an important platform to steer the global public health response to COVID-19.
    • It also comes at a time when the WHO is being rocked politically as never before.

    WHO: caught between the US-China crossfire

    • Recently, U.S. President Donald Trump wrote a letter to the WHO Director-General.
    • In the letter, he threatened to make permanent his temporary funding freeze as well as reconsider the U.S’s membership in the organisation if the latter did not commit to major substantive reforms within 30 days.
    • By contrast, at the WHA plenary, Chinese President Xi Jinping pledged $2 billion to fight the virus.
    • He also promised to pair up 30 African hospitals with domestic counterparts, accelerate the building of the Africa Centers for Disease Control headquarters, and ensure that vaccine development in China, when available, would be made a global public good.

    So, as WHO executive body chair, India will have to navigate this treacherous power landscape with candour and tact. Following 5 elements should inform its policy approach.

    1. Set epidemic prevention and control as a priority

    • India must insist that epidemic prevention and control remain the international community’s foremost priority.
    • As the virus’ chain of transmission is broken, the focus should shift to identifying the animal-to-human transmission origins of SARS-CoV-2.
    • China shares an important interest in facilitating international access to investigate COVID-19’s zoonotic origins.
    • Why China shares interest? Because Wuhan and other previously infected zones could yet be susceptible to the risk of viral reintroduction.

    2. Review the early response of China and WHO to outbreak

    • India should lean on the WHO secretariat to fast-track the “impartial, independent, and comprehensive review” of the WHO’s – and China’s – early response to the outbreak.
    • The review’s findings should illuminate best practice and highlight areas for improvement, both in the WHO’s leadership and capacity as well as member states’ implementation of the International Health Regulations.
    • For those in New Delhi inclined to relish the prospect of Beijing’s comeuppance, the review’s findings may yet sorely disappoint.
    • The WHO-China Joint Mission featuring renowned global epidemiologists had termed China’s early COVID-19 response as the “most ambitious, agile and aggressive disease containment effort in history”.

    3. Ensure equitable access to COVID-19 vaccines for all

    • For ensuring equitable access to COVID-19 therapeutics and vaccines for all countries, India must promote the establishment of an appropriate multilateral governance mechanism.
    • The envisaged voluntary pooling mechanism to collect patent rights and regulatory test data should be suitably tailored to the needs of crisis.
    • And the World Trade Organization’s intellectual property rights provisions should be overridden as is allowed during a public health emergency to assure affordable vaccine availability.

    4. Taiwan issue at WHA: India should stay aloof

    •  India must stay aloof from the West’s campaign to re-seat Taiwan as an observer at the WHA.
    • When Taipei last attended in 2016, it did so under the explicit aegis of UN General Assembly Resolution 2758, whereby the UN considers Taiwan to be an integral part of the People’s Republic of China.
    • That the independence-minded Tsai government is unwilling to concede this basis for attendance has more to do with domestic political manoeuvring than Chinese or international ostracism.

    5.Global ban on consumption of wild animals

    •  India must lead the call for a permanent global ban on the consumption and trade of wild animals.
    • This ban should be with limited exceptions built-in for scientific research, species protection and traditional livelihood interests.
    • With two-thirds of emerging infections and diseases now arising from wildlife, the destruction of natural habitats and biodiversity loss must be taken much more seriously.

    Consider the question “The WHO has been facing the credibility crisis for its response to the Covid-19. In such a difficult time for the agency, India has to lead the executive board of WHA. In light of this, suggest the policy approach that India should adopt at WHA.”

    Conclusion

    India has its work cut out. The government should seize the moment to steer the global response in addressing the shortcomings in various areas exposed by the Covid-19 pandemic.

  • G-7

    Calling the existing Group of Seven (G-7) club a “very outdated group of countries”, US Prez. Trump said that he wanted to include India, Russia, South Korea, and Australia in the group.

    Note the members of G7 and G20. UPSC may puzzle you asking which G20 nation isn’t a member of G7.

    The Group of 7

    • The G-7 or ‘Group of Seven’ includes Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom, and the United States.
    • It is an intergovernmental organisation that was formed in 1975 by the top economies of the time as an informal forum to discuss pressing world issues.
    • Initially, it was formed as an effort by the US and its allies to discuss economic issues.
    • The G-7 forum now discusses several challenges such as oil prices and many pressing issues such as financial crises, terrorism, arms control, and drug trafficking.
    • It does not have a formal constitution or a fixed headquarters. The decisions taken by leaders during annual summits are non-binding.
    • Canada joined the group in 1976, and the European Union began attending in 1977.

    Evolution of the G-7

    • When it started in 1975—with six members, Canada joining a year later—it represented about 70% of the world economy.
    • And it was a cosy club for tackling issues such as the response to oil shocks.
    • Now it accounts for about 40% of global gdp.
    • Since the global financial crisis of 2007-09 it has sometimes been overshadowed by the broader g20.
    • The G-7 became the G-8 in 1997 when Russia was invited to join.
    • In 2014, Russia was debarred after it took over Crimea.

    Expelling Russia

    • The G-7 was known as the ‘G-8’ for several years after the original seven were joined by Russia in 1997.
    • The Group returned to being called G-7 after Russia was expelled as a member in 2014 following the latter’s annexation of the Crimea region of Ukraine.
    • Since his election in 2016, President Trump has suggested on several occasions that Russia be added again, given what he described as Moscow’s global strategic importance.

    Why Trump wants to expand the G7 group?

    1.Joint  front against China

    •  The expanded G7 is seen as an attempt by the US to form a joint front against China.
    • The US President has stepped up his criticism of the Asian powerhouse over a range of issues, from initially holding back information on the coronavirus outbreak to its actions on Taiwan and changes in Hong Kong’s special status.

    2.Pressure  from G7 countries

    • Another reason is Trump has faced heat from other G7 members in the last two summits, for various controversial decisions taken by him such as pulling out from trade deals, the Iran nuclear deal as well as the Paris climate pact.
    • Trump’s “America First” policy and his attacks on key US allies over various trade and economic issues have created faultlines within the grouping.

    3.Add more weight to the grouping’s profile. 

    The participation and eventual inclusion of Australia, South Korea, Russia (not favoured by the UK) and India could certainly add more weight to the grouping’s profile.

    Why G7 needs a revival?

    • The rise of India, China, and Brazil over the past few decades has reduced the G-7’s relevance, whose share in global GDP has now fallen to around 40%.

    Relevance of G7 for India

    • India will get more voice, more influence and more power by entering the G7.
    • After UN Security Council (UNSC), this is the most influential grouping.
    • If the group is expanded it will collectively address the humongous issues created by the Wuhan virus,
    • Diplomatically, a seat at the high table could help New Delhi further its security and foreign policy interests, especially at the nuclear club and UN Security Council reform as well as protecting its interests in the Indian Ocean.

    Challenges in India’s entry

    1.Lack of consensus:

    • The decision to expand the grouping cannot be taken by the US alone.
    • Other members such as the UK, France, Germany, Italy, Japan and Canada, have to not only agree to Trump’s proposal to expand the grouping but also on the new members that he wants to add, said a diplomatic source of one of the G7 member countries.

    2.Upset China:

    • China is upset at the plans to expand the G7, stating that such actions will result in the creation of a “small circle” against Beijing and thus such a plan is “doomed to fail”.
    • China will put pressure on G-7 countries

    Discipline China, not isolate it

    • Trump’s motivation in expanding the G-7 to include India and Russia while keeping China out is transparent.
    • If keeping China out was not the intention, the G-7 could easily have dissolved themselves and revitalised the presently inert G-20.
    • There are, of course, good reasons why Xi Jinping’s China requires to be put on notice for its various acts of omission and commission and disrespect for international law.
    • However, disciplining China is one thing, isolating it quite another.
    • If the new group is viewed as yet another arrow in the China containment quiver, it would place India and most other members of the group in a spot.
    • Everyone wants China disciplined, few would like to be seen seeking its isolation.
    • Asia needs a law-abiding China, not a sullen China.
    • Japan and Australia, have serious concerns about China’s behaviour.
    • But they may not like the new group to be viewed purely as an anti-China gang-up.
    • That may well be the case with South Korea too.
    • Indeed, even India should tread cautiously.
    • India has more issues with China than most others in the group, spanning across economic and national security issues and yet it should seek a disciplined China, not an isolated one.

    So, what should be on the agenda of the new group?

    • The proposed expanded G7 group should define its agenda in terms that would encourage China to return to the pre-Xi era of global good behaviour.
    • The G-7 came into being in the mid-1970s against the background of shocks to the global financial and energy markets.
    • The G-12(proposed expanded group)  would come into being against the background of a global economic crisis and the disruption to global trade caused both by protectionism and a pandemic.
    • The two items on the next summit agenda would have to be the global response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the rising tide of protectionism and mercantilism and the global economic slowdown.
    • The summit will have to come forward with some international dos and don’ts to deal with the challenge posed by these disruptions.
    • New rules should apply to both the US and China: These new rules of international conduct would have to apply to both China and the US.
    • Widening the agenda: To be able to alter China’s behaviour without isolating it, the expanded group will have to widen their agenda.
    • Widening involves going beyond the purely economic issues that the G-7 originally focused on, and include climate change, health care and human rights.

    Back2Basics: The G-20

    • The G-20 is a larger group of countries, which also includes G7 members.
    • The G-20 was formed in 1999, in response to a felt need to bring more countries on board to address global economic concerns.
    • Apart from the G-7 countries, the G-20 comprises Argentina, Australia, Brazil, China, India, Indonesia, Mexico, Russia, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, South Korea, and Turkey.
    • Together, the G-20 countries make up around 80% of the world’s economy.
    • As opposed to the G-7, which discusses a broad range of issues, deliberations at the G-20 are confined to those concerning the global economy and financial markets.
    • India is slated to host a G-20 summit in 2022.

  • India to chair ‘WHO Executive Board’

    India would now be playing a more prominent role at the World Health Organisation (WHO), with Union Health Minister taking charge as chairman of the WHO Executive Board at its 147th session.  Dr Harsh Vardhan would succeed Dr Hiroki Nakatani of Japan.

    Practice question for Mains:

    Q. The World Health Organisation (WHO) had “missed the call” on the COVID-19 pandemic. Critically comment with context to the ongoing spat between the US and China.

    About WHO

    • The WHO is a specialized agency of the United Nations responsible for international public health.
    • It is part of the U.N. Sustainable Development Group.
    • The WHO Constitution, which establishes the agency’s governing structure and principles, states its main objective as ensuring “the attainment by all peoples of the highest possible level of health.”
    • It is headquartered in Geneva, Switzerland, with six semi-autonomous regional offices and 150 field offices worldwide.

    The WHO Executive Board

    • The WHO is governed by two decision-making bodies — the World Health Assembly and the Executive Board.
    • The Board is composed of 34 members technically qualified in the field of health, with members being elected for three-year terms.
    • The Health Assembly is the WHO’s decision-making body and consists of 194 Member States.
    • The Board chairman’s post is held by rotation for one year by each of the WHO’s six regional groups: African Region, Region of the Americas, South-East Asia Region, European Region, Eastern Mediterranean Region, and Western Pacific Region.

    Functions of the Board

    • The main functions of the Board are to give effect to the decisions and policies of the Health Assembly, to advise it and generally to facilitate its work.
    • The Board and the Assembly create a forum for debate on health issues and for addressing concerns raised by the Member States.
    • Both the Board and the Assembly produce three kinds of documents — Resolutions and Decisions passed by the two bodies, Official Records as published in WHO Official publications, and Documents that are presented “in session” of the two bodies.

    Back2Basics: India at the WHO

    • India became a party to the WHO Constitution on 12 January 1948.
    • The first session of the South East Asia Regional Committee was held on October 4-5, 1948 in the office of the Indian Minister of Health, and was inaugurated by Jawaharlal Nehru, the first PM.
    • The first Regional Director for South-East Asia was an Indian, Dr Chandra Mani, who served between 1948-1968.
    • Currently, the post has again been occupied by an Indian appointee, Dr Poonam Khetrapal Singh, who has been in office since 2014.
    • Since 2019, Dr Soumya Swaminathan has been the WHO’s, Chief Scientist.

    Also read:

    [Burning Issue] World Health Organization (WHO) And Coronavirus Handling

  • Global crisis and opportunities for India

    Multilateralism has been on the decline for some time now.  The corona pandemic has acted like a catalyst to heightene this crisis. China’s role in weaponising the interdependence of multilateralism would have far-reaching consequences to the world as we know it. Yet, the crisis presents India with some unique opportunities. What are these opportunities? How can we save multilateralism? or do we even need to? These questions and such other issues are discussed in the article.

    The basic Idea

    • Multilateralism has its benefits like to reduce the further spread of the virus, to develop effective medical treatments, and to curtail the worst effects of the inevitable recession- cooperation among nations will be necessary.
    • But the very foundation of multilateralism is shaking today. Hence, the need of the hour is a meaningful fix.
    • The US faces multiple internal challenges like the divisive Presidential election in November and China is facing a global crisis of credibility.
    • Thus, India is uniquely positioned to help resuscitate multilateralism.
    • New Delhi can assume leadership in strengthening constructive transnational cooperation.
    • India may also help China: Through mediation to temper what is increasingly seen as Beijing’s unilateralist revisionism; revive the promise of the gradual socialisation of China into the international system; and its acceptance of the norms and rules that regulate the principal multilateral institutions.

    So, when did the crisis of multilateralism start?

    • The malaise that afflicts multilateralism is not new.
    • 1) The paralysis of all three functions of the World Trade Organization (WTO) — negotiation, dispute settlement, and transparency — was one sign of that deep-rooted malaise.
    • 2) The severely dented credibility of the World Health Organization (WHO) is just another more recent indicator.
    • The pandemic has heightened the crisis of multilateralism, not created it.
    • Pandemic has highlighted the misuse of international institutions (like WHO) and multilateralism is incapable of dealing with it.

    Weaponisation of the global supply chain by China

    • Post-war multilateral system was based on the idea of peace and prosperity.
    • It was expected that economic inter-mingling among various countries would lead to peace.
    • Most of the countries of were democratic and countries with a different system of governance were not part of this system.
    • Our multinational institutions were not designed to handle the situation in which one country starts misusing its dominant position in interdependence (ex. global supply chains).
    • The misuse of existing loopholes within the existing rules by China to gain an unfair advantage in trade relations was already attracting critique in the last years.
    • China has been accused of forced technology requirements, intellectual property rights violations, and subsidies.
    • But the pandemic has provided us with some even more alarming illustrations of how damaging the weaponisation of global supply chains can be.

    Examples of China weaponising interdependence

    • When India complained that test kits imported from China were faulty, China slammed it for “irresponsible” behaviour.
    • When Australia indicated that it would conduct an independent investigation of China’s early handling of the epidemic, China threatened it with economic consequences.
    • Several actors, including the EU and India, were alarmed at the prospects of predatory takeovers of their companies by China.

    Against this background, repeated calls by heads of governments and international organisations urging countries to remain committed to multilateralism ring hollow.

    So, what are remedies to save multilateralism?

    • 1. Policies with renewed commitment
    • There is the need for reassurance and policies that reflect a renewed commitment to the raison d’étre of multilateralism.
    • A “retreating” United States must demonstrate that it remains committed to strengthening global supply chains.
    • Global supply chains must be based on the promise of ensuring global stability and the attendant promise of peace and prosperity.
    • 2. Strategic separation of value chains
    • There is an urgent need for some strategic decoupling, handled smartly in cooperation with other like-minded countries.
    • It will undoubtedly cause considerable disruption to existing global value chains.
    • We will be less prosperous. But we will also be more secure.
    • 3. Closer integration with some distancing from others
    • A multilateralism that recognises the need for decoupling will necessitate closer cooperation with some and distancing from others.
    • Membership of such renewed multilateral institutions would not be universal.
    • Rather, one would limit deep integration to countries with which one shares values — such as pluralism, democracy, liberalism, animal welfare rights, and more.

    Opportunities for India

    • India is a country whose pluralism, democracy and liberalism have often been underestimated by the West.
    • As some constituencies in the West seek a gradual decoupling from China, they would be well served to look toward India.
    • To make use of the opportunities, for itself and for the provision of certain global public goods, India’s cooperation with like-minded actors will be key.
    • India could work closely with the Alliance for Multilateralism, an initiative launched by Germany and France, to shape both the alliance itself and the reform agenda at large.
    • Working together with a group of countries from the developed and developing countries could further amplify India’s voice.
    • China may recover faster than most economically, and its military might remains intact, its image as a reliable partner has suffered a huge dent.
    • India could lead a coalition to bridge the deficit of trust between China and the rest of the world.

    Consider the following question “Covid pandemic has been acting as a catalyst in precipitating the fall of global order and multilateralism. At the same time, we are well aware of the utility of the multilateralism. Examine the opportunities that falling global order provides for India in restoring it in the new form.”

    Conclusion

    The disruption in the global order provides India with a unique opportunity. One the one hand it has to steer the gradual decoupling with China and on the other hand, it has the opportunity to lead the coalition to bridge trust deficit with China. India should not squander these opportunities.

     

  • Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) Virtual Summit

    PM Modi has for the first addressed the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) summit since assuming office in 2014.

    Possible mains question-

    Q. Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) has lost its relevance in the new era of multipolar world. Comment.

    Highlights of the online summit

    • The online NAM Contact Group Summit on “United against COVID-19” was hosted by current NAM Chairman and Azerbaijan President Ilham Aliyev.
    • The NAM leaders announced the creation of a task force to identify requirements of member countries through a common database reflecting their basic medical, social and humanitarian needs in the fight against COVID-19.

    What is the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM)?

    • The NAM is a forum of 120 developing world states that are not formally aligned with or against any major power bloc.
    • The group was started in Belgrade, Yugoslavia in 1961.
    • After the UN, it is the largest grouping of states worldwide.

    Its formation

    • NAM emerged in the context of the wave of decolonization that followed World War II.
    • It was created by Yugoslavia’s President, Josip Broz Tito, India’s first PM, Jawaharlal Nehru, Egypt’s second President Gamal Abdel Nasser, Ghana’s first president Kwame Nkrumah, and Indonesia’s first President, Sukarno.
    • All five leaders believed that developing countries should not help either the Western or Eastern blocs in the Cold War.
    • As a condition for membership, the states of the NAM cannot be part of a multilateral military alliance (such as the NATO) or have signed a bilateral military agreement with one of the “big powers” involved in Great Power conflicts.
    • However, its idea does not signify that a state ought to remain passive or even neutral in international politics.

    Terms of summits

    • Unlike the UN or the Organization of American States, the NAM has no formal constitution or permanent secretariat.
    • All members of the NAM have equal weight within its organization.
    • The movement’s positions are reached by consensus in the Summit Conference of Heads of State or Government, which usually convenes every three years.
    • The administration of the organization is the responsibility of the country holding the chair, a position that rotates at every summit.
    • The ministers of foreign affairs of the member states meet more regularly in order to discuss common challenges, notably at the opening of each regular session of the UN General Assembly.

    Its relevance today

    • One of the challenges of the NAM in the 21st century has been to reassess its identity and purpose in the post-Cold War era.
    • The movement has continued to advocate for international cooperation, multilateralism, and national self-determination, but it has also been increasingly vocal against the inequities of the world economic order.
    • On the contrary, from the founding of the NAM, its stated aim has been to give a voice to developing countries and to encourage their concerted action in world affairs.

  • Foreign Policy Watch: United Nations

  • BRICS’ fight against COVID

    “BRICS” is an acronym coined by Jim O’Neill in 2001. In the start of the 21st century, BRICS seemed like the future economic powerhouse. Somehow this picture faded a little with time. This article shows the resilience and potential demonstrated by BRICS in times of Covid-19. It throws light on the latest initiatives of BRICS like New Development Bank. Finally what lies in the future for BRICS?

    The “I” in BRICS

    • India has reinforced its reputation as a rapidly emerging pharmacy of the world.

    • As the world’s largest producer of hydroxychloroquine, India has exported the drug to many countries like Russia, Brazil, Israel, U.S,  SAARC and Gulf nations.

    • Pharma-alliance: The above developments have set the stage for India to forge an inclusive BRICS-driven pharma alliance, which could also actively explore the production of vaccines.

    The “C” in BRICS

    • Despite allegations, China has responded strongly in containing the pandemic, leveraging its position as the workshop of the world.

    • China, using it’s manufacturing capabilities, responded to the disease by providing the “hardware” — masks, gloves, coveralls, shoe covers and testing kits — to hotspots across the globe.

    • Under its Health Silk Road doctrine, the Chinese are reaching out to two of the worst global hotspots, Italy and Iran.

    • China has also rolled out a medical air bridge for Europe.

    The “R” in BRICS

    • Despite fighting the virus at home, Russia too has sent its doctors and virologists overseas including an air mission to Italy.

    • At the request of U.S. President Donald Trump, Russia offered help in the form of medical experts and supplies.

    The “S” in BRICS

    • South Africa, the current rotating head of the African Union, is engaged in framing a pan-African response to COVID-19.

    The “B” in BRICS

    • Only Brazil’s response may need a course correction.

    • In Brazil’s case resistance to breaking the infection chains through travel bans, lockdowns, isolation and testing appear to have led to an infection surge.

    Where does the NDB’s model fit in this picture?

    • The New Development Bank of the BRICS has already demonstrated the way forward to allocate financial resources to combat COVID-19.

    • In April, NDB announced that it is going to disburse a $1 billion emergency loan to China, and subsequently to India, South Africa and Brazil.

    • The NDB had the financial heft to provide $10 billion in “crisis-related assistance” to BRICS member countries.

    The next step for BRICS –  COORDINATION

    • BRICS has demonstrated their comparative strengths as providers of Humanitarian Assistance and Disaster Relief (HADR).

    • BRICS countries now need to pool and coordinate their efforts, in partnership with the WHO, and Europe and North America, as part of a global assault on the virus.

    • BRICS countries also need to earmark resources and assets to combat a whole range of natural disasters, with special focus on the emerging economies and the global south.

    • The NDB’s financial model demonstrated to address the pandemic, can now become a template to address natural disasters.

    Bodies like BRICS have remained the favourite child of UPSC. Be it questions in prelims or mains. A question based on the regional grouping could be asked by the UPSC, for ex- “BRICS nations have proved to be more than merely an economic grouping. In light of the above statement, discuss the Humanitarian Assistance and Disaster Relief (HADR) potential of the BRICS countries.”

    Conclusion

    BRICS in future can leverage the coordination among them to work on finding the vaccine and also build on the experience gathered from the pandemic to form a disaster response policy in the future.

    Back2Basics: BRICS

    • BRICS is the acronym coined for an association of five major emerging national economies: Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa.
    • Originally the first four were grouped as “BRIC” (or “the BRICs”), before the induction of South Africa in 2010.
    • The BRICS members are known for their significant influence on regional affairs; all are members of G20.
    • Since 2009, the BRICS nations have met annually at formal summits. China hosted the 9th BRICS summit in Xiamen on September 2017, while Brazil hosted the most recent 11th BRICS summit on 13-14 November 2019.

    New Development Bank and the Fortaleza Declaration

    • During the sixth BRICS Summit in Fortaleza (2014), the leaders signed the Agreement establishing the New Development Bank (NDB).
    • In the Fortaleza Declaration, the leaders stressed that the NDB will strengthen cooperation among BRICS and will supplement the efforts of multilateral and regional financial institutions for global development, thus contributing to collective commitments for achieving the goal of strong, sustainable and balanced growth.
    • The bank was established in July 2015 by the BRICS countries (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa).
    • The aim of the bank is to mobilize funding for infrastructure and sustainable development.
    • Its ownership structure is unique, as the BRICS countries each have an equal share and no country has any veto power.
    • In this sense, the bank is a physical expression of the desire of emerging markets to play a bigger role in global governance.
    • NDB was created to help fill the funding gap in the BRICS economies and was intended to grow its global scope over time.
    • The bank, with its subscribed capital base of US$50bn, is now poised to become a meaningful additional source of long-term finance for infrastructure in its member countries.

  • COVID-19 and the crumbling world order

    Theme of this article is the failure of the world order in mounting a collective fight against the epidemic that has become the global problem. Role of WHO has also come under the scanner. Functioning and reluctance of UNSC to discuss the pandemic have raised questions over its relevance. The issue of China’s growing influence and implications for the rest of the world are being discussed. In the past week, some newspaper articles have covered the same issue for instance-“The deep void in global leadership” in the Hindu.

    Failure of the world order and global institutions

    • The contemporary global order and institutions were a hegemonic exercise meant to deal with isolated political and military crises and not serve humanity at large.
    • COVID-19 has exposed this as well as the worst nativist tendencies of the global leadership in the face of a major crisis.
    • That the United Nations Security Council took so long to meet (that too inconclusively) to discuss the pandemic is a ringing testimony to the UN’s insignificance.

    The above para. indicates that global order we are living in was made for entirely different purpose i.e. to maintain the peace and they are not capable to deal with the Covid-19  like challenges. So, from UPSC mains point of view you must take note of this.

    Failure of regional groupings

    • Regional institutions haven’t fared any better.
    • Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s SAARC initiative, curiously resurrecting a practically dead institution, was short-lived.
    • The EU, the most progressive post-national regional arrangement, stood clueless when the virus spread like wildfire in Europe.
    • Its member states turned inward for solutions: self-help, not regional coordination, was their first instinct. Brussels is the loser.

    What these failures indicate?

    • These failures are indicative of a deeper malaise: the global institutional framework is unrepresentative, a pawn in the hands of the great powers, cash-strapped, and its agenda is focused on high-table security issues.
    • The global institutional architecture of the 1940s cannot help humanity face the challenges of the 2020s.
    • What can be the solutions? Nothing less than a new social contract between states and the international system can save our future.

    Here we come across  the reasons for the failure of the world order and institutions. UPSC has asked questions related to UNESCO in 2019, who knows next could be the WHO.

    Factors that will help China come out stronger from the pandemic

    • Reports indicate that China has now managed the outbreak of COVID-19, and its industrial production is recovering even as that of every other country is taking a hit.
    • The oil price slump will make its recovery even faster.
    • When the greatest military power found itself in denial mode and the members of the EU were looking after their own interests, China appeared to use its manufacturing power to its geopolitical advantage.
    • Beijing has offered medical aid and expertise to those in need; it has increased cooperation with its arch-rival Japan.
    • This will aid Beijing’s claims to global leadership, push Huawei 5G trials as a side bargain, and showcase how the Belt and Road Initiative is the future of global connectivity.
    • COVID-19 will further push the international system into a world with Chinese characteristics.

    As China comes to dominate the emerging world order, we must pay attention to things related to China. Here, we can note down the factors that could help China emerge out stronger from the corona crisis.

    Implications for globalisation: the rise of protectionism and hypernationalism

    • Neoliberal economic globalisation will have taken a major beating in the wake of the pandemic.
    • Economists are warning of a global recession.
    • How the world reacted? The first instinct of every major economy was to close borders, look inwards and
    • The pre-existing structural weakness of the global order and the COVID-19 shock will further feed states’ protectionist tendencies fueled by hypernationalism.
    • A more inclusive global political and economic order is unlikely any time soon, if ever.
    • Instead, as former National Security Adviser Shivshankar Menon warns, “we are headed for a poorer, meaner, and smaller world.”
    • How this epidemic impact big corporations? The ability of big corporations to dictate the production, stocks, supply chains and backup plans will be limited by increased state intervention to avoid unpredictable supply sources, avoid geopolitically sensitive zones, and national demands for emergency reserves.
    • The profits of big corporations will reduce, and the demand for stability will increase.
    • Will the world after Covid-19 be more balance? State intervention in economic matters and protectionism are the easy way out, and that’s precisely what states will do once the crisis is over.
    • It would be a return of the ‘Licence Raj’ through the backdoor, not a push for inclusive and responsible globalisation with its associated political benefits.

    It is clear now that post-Covid-19 world would be different from the world we know today. Globalisation would take a significant beating. And globalisation is important topic from mains point of view. So, pay close attention to the points mentioned here.

    Will post-Covid-19 world lead to some positive controls?

    • Rise of state-led models: With the severe beating that globalisation has taken, state-led models of globalisation and economic development would be preferred over (big) corporates-led globalisation.
    • Will this enable some positive controls over the inherent deficiencies of globalisation? We will have to wait and see.
    • The relation between capitalists and the states: But the more important question is whether the state has any incentive to take on big capital.
    • Given the symbiotic relationship between the state and big capital, states have become used to protecting the interests of their corporations, often at the cost of the general public.
    • States preferred capital over health: Consider, for instance, that the first response of many Western states was to protect their capital markets than be concerned about public health.

    Rise of racism in post-Covid-19 world

    • Yet another undesirable outcome of the pandemic would be a spike in various forms of discrimination.
    • Globally, societies could become more self-seeking and inward-looking leading to further pushback against liberal policies regarding migration and refugees.
    • Implications for world trade: New questions are likely to be asked about the source of goods. More stringent imposition of phytosanitary measures by advanced states on products emanating from the less developed countries might become the new normal.
    • Lockdowns and travel restrictions could potentially legitimise the rhetoric around border walls in more conservative countries.
    • Tragically, therefore, while one answer to global pandemics is political globalisation, COVID-19 might further limit it.

    Conclusion

    The world order needs to wake up to new reality take measures to avoid the above listed undesired fallouts that could emerge in the post-Covid-19 world, and before that there is an urgent need for the global coalition to deal with the pandemic.