💥Join UPSC 2027,2028 Mentorship (August Batch) + XFactor Notes & Microthemes PDF
Talk to Mentor

Civilsdaily

Login

Subject: International Relations

  • China wants a larger BRICS to challenge the existing international order

    Context

    A virtual meeting of BRICS+ foreign ministers was held on May 20 in which the ministers of Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa (BRICS) were joined by representatives from Argentina, Egypt, Indonesia, Kazakhstan, Nigeria, the UAE, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, and Thailand.

    About BRICS

    • BRICS is an acronym for the grouping of the world’s leading emerging economies, namely Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa.
    • The BRICS Leaders’ Summit is convened annually.
    • It does not exist in form of organization, but it is an annual summit between the supreme leaders of five nations.
    • The grouping was formalized during the first meeting of BRIC Foreign Ministers on the margins of the UNGA in New York in September 2006.
    • The first BRIC Summit took place in 2009 in the Russian Federation and focused on issues such as reform of the global financial architecture.
    • South Africa was invited to join BRIC in December 2010, after which the group adopted the acronym BRICS.
    • South Africa subsequently attended the Third BRICS Summit in Sanya, China, in March 2011.
    • The Chairmanship of the forum is rotated annually among the members, in accordance with the acronym B-R-I-C-S.

    What are the factors leading to the expansion of BRICS?

    • Ukraine war and hardened Western positions: The disruption in the international order, heightened by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and the hardening of Western positions, are leading to the making of competitive plurilateral fora.
    • Russia and China have decided that this is an opportune time to expand BRICS and challenge the domain of the G7 by including members from the G20. 
    • China is challenging Western influence over countries and wants to use BRICS to that end.
    • China is taking the lead and setting the agenda for BRICS expansion.
    • The New Development Bank associated with BRICS, expanded membership in 2021, admitting Bangladesh, the UAE, Uruguay and Egypt
    •  This shows the Chinese determination for an expansion process on its watch.

    Criteria and the process of inducting new members into BRICS and challenges

    • Prioritise G20 members: The first likely criteria will be to prioritise G20 members.
    • Among the recent guests of the BRICS+ virtual meeting, Argentina, Indonesia and Saudi Arabia would qualify for this category.
    • From among Mexico, Indonesia, Korea, Turkey and Australia (MIKTA), only Indonesia was invited.
    • Thus, China, backed by Russia, is creating cleavages to choose its friends from among the G20 and beyond
    • Emerging economy: Another criteria which could come up would be an emerging economy status and adherence to BRICS objectives.
    • The push for setting criteria is actually a battle to choose partners who are more amenable to the individual members of the current BRICs.
    • Russia and China would prefer to have Indonesia, Kazakhstan, Saudi Arabia, UAE and Argentina excluding Egypt since it is a close ally of the US.
    • Brazil would have a say on including Argentina – the two countries have a longstanding rivalry in Latin America.
    • If Argentina is excluded, it may unravel the G20 membership criteria for inclusion in the BRICS.
    • South Africa has views on Nigeria and, particularly, Egypt. Being a member of G20 gives it leadership in Africa.
    • Being in the BRICS gave it heft as the African representative.
    • If Nigeria and Egypt are admitted, South Africa would no more be the African representative in the BRICS.
    • New Development Bank membership: The UAE and Egypt could utilise their membership of NDB as a qualifier.
    • There could be an easier consensus on Indonesia because India is unlikely to oppose it as its relationship has been improving politically, even if not economically.
    • On Kazakhstan, the decision would be that of Russia and China and how they deal with the other Central Asian countries.
    • China may also back Iran and Malaysia but then Indonesia may feel a loss of uniqueness.
    • A consensus with Brazil and South Africa for members from their regions will be critical.

    Way forward for India

    • Membership of the UAE and Saudi Arabia: The UAE and Saudi Arabia are two countries with whom India has rapidly enhanced its engagement and are good contributors to development.
    • Having them in the BRICS could be of advantage to India.
    • Both countries have a longstanding relationship with the US, but seek to diversify and would not be averse to joining BRICS.
    • Avoid BRICS expansion on Chinese terms: China, backed by Russia, is hastening the process of expansion of BRICS as part of its strategic challenge to the international order and to collect middle powers around them.
    • India needs to ensure that expansion is not on Chinese terms and that the countries admitted are equally receptive to India.
    • Bilateral engagement with them should see this perception built up.
    • Consultations on criteria and members must be strong.
    • Leverage ISBA: IBSA may act as a phalanx within BRICS to prevent China from running away with the expansion agenda over the views of other members.

    Conclusion

    Since Russia is simply with Chinese priorities, it’s time for the IBSA trilateral of democracies within BRICS to assert itself.

    UPSC 2023 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)

    Back2Basics: What is the fundamental difference between ISBA, BRICS and BASIC?

    • IBSA is between three democracies – India, Brazil and South Africa wanting to engage in deeper economic aspects and discuss security related issues.
    •  BASIC includes Brazil, South Africa, India and China.
    • These three expressions of multilateralism steer clear from articulating the softer aspects of foreign policy like refugee rights or human rights invoking the ‘sovereignty’ clause with domestic political sanctity paramount.
    • BRICS comprises Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa.
    • Russia is a democracy with its political spectrum anchoring around an individual.
    • China is a socialist country, successful by implementing economic reforms that do not agree with the basic tenets of socialism/communism.

  • Lessons from the Ukraine crisis price shock

    Context

    The Russia-Ukraine conflict, now more than three months old, will cause major, long-term shifts in the global energy and commodity trade.

    Factors responsible for high prices

    • Ukraine war: Western sanctions on Russia and efforts of European nations to diversify their energy supplies are already causing market distortions and high prices.
    • Crude oil prices are at their highest level since 2014; the price of LNG is at its highest ever, fertiliser and food are up and markets for several other commodities such as nickel have been disrupted.
    • Expensive commodities are already causing distress in India’s neighbourhood, for example, in Sri Lanka and Pakistan.
    • Insufficient investment: Insufficient investment in oil and gas production in preceding years resulted in high prices, and shortages were being felt.
    • A number of European investors, such as Norway’s sovereign wealth fund, announced they would no longer invest in traditional fuels — oil, gas, coal.
    • Natural gas is used as a feedstock for fertiliser.
    • An energy shock is then inevitably followed by a food price shock.

    Future trends

    1] Strained EU-Russia relations will distort prices

    • In the immediate term, the EU is trying to source its raw materials — most critically oil and natural gas, but also fertiliser, agricultural goods and metals — from non-Russian sources.
    • This will cause distortions and price spikes for those commodities in the global market, as can already be seen in the natural gas market, up 300 per cent in the last year.

    2] Sanctions are unlikely to achieve the desired political outcome

    • The US and its allies are quick to impose sanctions — and these are rarely withdrawn, if ever.
    • Iran has been under US sanctions since 1979, and the same with Venezuela for over a decade.
    • In both cases, sanctions have failed to achieve the desired political outcome.
    • As Russia is much better placed than either of those two countries to weather sanctions, the restrictions are likely to remain for a long while.

    3] Emerging world unwilling to align with West on sanctions

    • The high price of energy and the resulting inflation shows why much of the emerging world is unwilling and unable to align with the West on the current sanctions.
    • Russia is 11 per cent of the global landmass and among the world’s top five producers and exporters of oil, gas, fertiliser and other critical commodities like nickel.
    • It is too big to be replaced as a supplier.
    • In emerging economies, it can fan public anger and political unrest, as was seen in Tunisia and other Arab countries from 2010 on.

    4] Larger emerging economies will disregard sanction

    • Larger emerging economies such as China, India and Brazil will disregard sanctions on their key economic interests, particularly food, fertilisers and energy.
    • Specifically for India, its dependence on these essentials is unlikely to reduce meaningfully over the next 15-20 years.

    Way forward for India

    • Collaborate with other economies: In the immediate future, the India should collaborate with other similar economies to ensure that Russia doesn’t get locked out of global commodity markets.
    • Work on insulating the supply chains: For the long term, it must work on insulating its supply chains from global political crises.

    Conclusion

    India needs to brace for the price shock emanating from the distortion caused by the shift in the energy policies of Europe. At the same time, India needs to collaborate with other similar economies to ensure that Russia doesn’t get locked out of global commodity markets.

    UPSC 2023 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)

  • India is expanding its nuclear arsenal: SIPRI

    India had 160 nuclear warheads as on January 2022 and it appears to be expanding its nuclear arsenal, said the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), a defense think tank.

    What is the news?

    • India’s nuclear stockpile increased from 156 in January 2021 to 160 in January 2022.

    Nukes in thy neighbour

    • Pakistan’s nuclear stockpile has remained at 165, SIPRI claimed.
    • China is in the middle of a substantial expansion of its nuclear weapon arsenal, which satellite images indicate includes the construction of over 300 new missile silos.
    • China had 350 nuclear warheads in January 2021 and 2022.

    Why do countries proliferate nuclear weapons?

    • Proliferation models centered on security concerns or dilemmas dominate nuclear literature.
    • Nuclear weapons provide an overwhelmingly destructive force that increases a state’s relative power in comparison to its neighbors.
    • It provides a powerful tool in an anarchic system where superpowers dominate other nation-states sovereignty.
    • Hence weaponizing helps establish a deterrence to prevent war.

    What is the Deterrence Theory?

    • Deterrence is widely defined as any use of threats (implicit or explicit) or limited force intended to dissuade an actor from taking an action (i.e. maintain the status quo).
    • The topic gained increased prominence as a military strategy during the Cold War with regard to the use of nuclear weapons.
    • It is related to but distinct from the concept of mutual assured destruction, which models the preventative nature of full-scale nuclear attack that would devastate both parties in a nuclear war.
    • The central problem of deterrence revolves around how to credibly threaten military action or nuclear punishment on the adversary despite its costs to the deterrer.

    Issues in Nuclear Disarmament

    • Notion of Nuclear ‘Haves’ and ‘Have-Nots’: The proponents of disarmaments are themselves nuclear armed countries thus creating a nuclear monopoly.
    • Concept of Peaceful Nuclear Explosion (PNE): conducted for non-military purposes such as mining.

    India’s commitment for de-nuclearization

    India has always batted for a universal commitment and an agreed global and non-discriminatory multilateral framework.

    • It has outlined a working paper on Nuclear Disarmament submitted to the UN General Assembly in 2006.
    • India participated in the Nuclear Security Summit process and has regularly participated in the International Conferences on Nuclear Security organised by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).
    • India is also a member of the Nuclear Security Contact Group (but has signed off the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT)).
    • India has expressed its readiness to support the commencement of negotiations on a Fissile Material Cut-off Treaty (FMCT).
    • India couldn’t join the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT) due to several concerns raised by India.
    • India has piloted an annual UNGA Resolution on “Measures to Prevent Terrorists from Acquiring Weapons of Mass Destruction” since 2002, which is adopted by consensus.

    Back2Basics: India’s Nuclear Doctrine

    • This was first articulated by Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee on May 27, 1998, days after India had undertaken a series of nuclear tests in Pokhran.
    • It outlined various principles:
    1. Building and maintaining a Credible Minimum Deterrence
    2. Posture of ‘No First Use’– nuclear weapons will only be used in retaliation against a nuclear attack on Indian Territory or on Indian forces anywhere
    3. Massive Nuclear retaliation to a first strike will be designed to inflict unacceptable damage
    4. Non-use against non-nuclear states
    5. In response to biological or chemical weapons, India will retain the option of retaliating with nuclear weapons

    UPSC 2023 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)

  • FATF and Pakistan’s position on its ‘Grey List’

    Pakistan which continues to face an economic crunch from the Financial Action Task Force (FATF), is hoping for some respite in the form of its removal from the FATF’s ‘grey list’.

    What is the FATF?

    • The FATF is an international watchdog for financial crimes such as money laundering and terror financing.
    • It was established at the G7 Summit of 1989 in Paris to address loopholes in the global financial system after member countries raised concerns about growing money laundering activities.
    • In the aftermath of the 9/11 terror attack on the US, FATF also added terror financing as a main focus area.
    • This was later broadened to include restricting the funding of weapons of mass destruction.
    • The FATF currently has 39 members.

    Working of FATF

    • The decision-making body of the FATF, known as its plenary, meets thrice a year.
    • Its meetings are attended by 206 countries of the global network.
    • It includes members, and observer organisations, such as the World Bank, some offices of the UN, and regional development banks.

    Functions of FATF

    • The FATF sets standards or recommendations for countries to achieve in order to plug the holes in their financial systems and make them less vulnerable to illegal financial activities.
    • It conducts regular peer-reviewed evaluations called Mutual Evaluations (ME) of countries to check their performance on standards prescribed by it.
    • The reviews are carried out by FATF and FATF-Style Regional Bodies (FSRBs), which then release Mutual Evaluation Reports (MERs).
    • For the countries that don’t perform well on certain standards, time-bound action plans are drawn up.
    • Recommendations for countries range from assessing risks of crimes to setting up legislative, investigative and judicial mechanisms to pursue cases of money laundering and terror funding.

    What are the Black List and the Grey List?

    • The words ‘grey’ and ‘black’ list do not exist in the official FATF lexicon.
    • They however designate countries that need to work on complying with FATF directives and those who are non-compliant.
    1. Black List: The blacklist, now called the “Call for action” was the common shorthand description for the FATF list of “Non-Cooperative Countries or Territories” (NCCTs).
    2. Grey List: Countries that are considered safe haven for supporting terror funding and money laundering are put in the FATF grey list. This inclusion serves as a warning to the country that it may enter the blacklist.

    Consequences of being:

    (1) In the grey list:

    • Economic sanctions from IMF, World Bank, ADB
    • Problem in getting loans from IMF, World Bank, ADB and other countries
    • Reduction in international trade
    • International boycott

    (2) In the black list:

    • High-risk jurisdictions subject to call for action
    • Countries have considerable deficiencies in their AML/CFT (anti-money laundering and counter terrorist financing) regimens
    • Enhanced due diligence
    • Members are told to apply counter-measures such as sanctions on the listed countries

    Note: Currently, North Korea and Iran are on the black list.

    Pakistan and FATF

    • Pakistan, which continues to remain on the “grey list” of FATF, had earlier been given the deadline till the June to ensure compliance with the 27-point action plan against terror funding networks.
    • It has been under the FATF’s scanner since June 2018, when it was put on the Grey List for terror financing and money laundering risks.
    • FATF and its partners such as the Asia Pacific Group (APG) are reviewing Pakistan’s processes, systems, and weaknesses on the basis of a standard matrix for anti-money laundering (AML) and combating the financing of terrorism (CFT) regime.

    Why is Pakistan on the grey list?

    • Pakistan has found itself on the grey list frequently since 2008, for weaknesses in fighting terror financing and money laundering.
    • It never addressed concerns on the front of terror financing investigations and prosecutions targeting senior leaders and commanders of UN-designated terrorist groups.
    • However, now steps had been taken in this direction such as the sentencing of terror outfit chief Hafiz Saeed, prosecution of Masood Azhar and seizure of their properties.
    • India meanwhile, a member of FATF, suspects the efficacy and permanence of Pakistani actions.

    Steps taken by Pakistan

    • Pakistan is currently banking on its potential exclusion from the grey list to help improve the status of tough negotiations with the International Monetary Fund to get bailout money.
    • Pakistan is now making a high-level political commitment to the FATF and APG to address its strategic AML/CFT deficiencies.

     

    UPSC 2023 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)

  • What India must do to protect its ties with the Islamic world

    Context

    A controversial remark by the ruling party spokesperson against the Prophet has snowballed into a diplomatic row. Against this backdrop, New Delhi should not stop engaging the Gulf countries and strive to move beyond damage control.

    International reaction against the remarks

    • The United Arab Emirates, Oman, Indonesia, Iraq, the Maldives, Jordan, Libya and Bahrain have joined the growing list of countries in the Islamic world that have condemned the remarks.
    • Earlier, Kuwait, Iran and Qatar had called Indian ambassadors to register their protest, and Saudi Arabia had issued a strongly-worded statement.
    • Campaigners (including a few GCC regimes) demand that Prime Minister of India should tender an apology for all that happened.
    • But New Delhi’s stance is categorial and legitimate insofar as the Union government has nothing to do with such unsolicited comments.

    Why WANA is important for India

    • Engagement with WANA: Countries in West Asia and North Africa (WANA) region do not have a fixed position vis-à-vis India.
    • Delhi has vibrant economic and strategic ties with almost all regimes in the region.
    • That’s precisely the reason these countries are unwilling to join the Islamabad-led chorus or go beyond passing resolutions.
    • India’s signing of a free trade agreement (FTA) with the UAE and the ongoing negotiations for a wider FTA with the GCC could be an eye-opener for the country’s detractors.
    • India’s energy needs: As much as 40 per cent of oil and an equal share of gas requirements are met through India’s strategic cooperation with the Gulf regimes.
    • Mutuality of interests: India and the WANA regimes know that there is a mutuality of interests in these transactions which cannot be substituted by any other segments of the world system.
    • Indian diaspora: Equally important is the role of the more than eight million-strong Indian diaspora in the WANA region.
    • The “Gulf remittance” is an important part of the Indian economy, as important as the Indian investment in the GCC and GCC investment in India.

    Way forward

    • India’s foreign policy strategy — which includes strategic bargaining with regional and international actors — would fetch reasonable dividends.
    • The response to its Ukraine war strategy has convinced South Block that it has adequate manoeuvrability in global affairs.

    Conclusion

    New Delhi should not stop engaging the countries, especially the ones in the WANA region, as both have shared interests. Therefore, South Block must go beyond a mere damage-control exercise.

    UPSC 2023 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)

  • Indo-Pacific Economic Framework presents opportunities

    Context

    The official launch of the Biden Administration’s Indo-Pacific Economic Framework (IPEF), the US’s de facto foreign economic policy for Asia, has been lauded and welcomed.

    About IPEF

    • Seen as a means to counter China in the region, it is a U.S.-led framework for participating countries to solidify their relationships and engage in crucial economic and trade matters in the region.
    • The member nations include Australia, Brunei, India, Indonesia, Japan, South Korea, Malaysia, New Zealand, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand and Vietnam.
    • It includes seven out of 10 members of the Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN), all four Quad countries, and New Zealand.
    • Together, these countries account for 40 per cent of the global GDP. 
    • Not a free trade agreement: The Indo-Pacific Economic Framework is not a free trade agreement.
    • No market access or tariff reductions have been outlined, although experts say it can pave the way for future trade deals.
    • The IPEF is also seen as a means by which the US is trying to regain credibility in the region after former President Donald Trump pulled out of the Trans Pacific Partnership TPP.
    • IPEF countries value its purpose and potential, particularly given some doubts over whether the US administration could sustain its focus in Asia as war broke out in Europe.
    • The IPEF empowers the Biden administration to shape rules across several critical pillars that will condition America’s economic engagement in the Indo-Pacific amid competing economic paradigms, notably the Chinese through the BRI and Europe through digital policies and standards.
    • Countering China: Besides Ukraine, the IPEF’s importance also owes to China’s patent economic footprint across Asia that could be checked by an alternative economic paradigm that emphasises openness, flexibility, and integration.

     Significance of IPEF

    • Boost supply chain resilience: Globally, the IPEF signifies the first multilateral attempt to boost supply chain resilience to ease global inflationary pressures and mitigate effects of future disruptions, particularly key raw materials, critical minerals, and semiconductors.
    • Four key pillars: It’s a framework or a starting point to regulate trade and commerce across four key pillars: Digital economy, supply chains, clean energy, and governance. 
    • Negotiating high standard rules: The IPEF also represents an effort to negotiate “high-standard” rules between like-minded countries to govern the digital economy, particularly data flows, climate mitigation, global tax, anti-money laundering and anti-bribery provisions.

    Challenges

    • Impact on domestic companies: IPEF commitments and standards that other signatories like India have to accede to, will likely facilitate US MNCs’ access to Asian economies at the expense of domestic preferences.
    • Impact on policy preference of countries: The IPEF’s pillars — climate, digital, supply chains, and governance reforms — could clash with and supersede these countries’ policy preferences on such issues.
    • For instance, the US’ preference to allow free and open data flows under the digital economy pillar will constrict India’s ability to regulate data for domestic purposes.

    Way forward for India

    • The IPEF remains attractive for India given its flexibility and open nature, allowing Delhi to demonstrate its political commitment to the United States to jointly shape the rules governing the Indo-Pacific’s economic future even as competitors lurk.
    • Tough policy choices, like the one on data and taxation, must be made by Indian officials while negotiating the terms of the IPEF accession.

    Conclusion

    What’s clear is that the IPEF represents both a mirage and aspiration. Collectively, it represents a leap into an unknown that has to be negotiated amongst partners that share interests and some values.

    UPSC 2023 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)

  • Indus Waters Treaty (IWT): An enduring agreement bridging India-Pakistan ties

    Context

    The 118th meeting of the Permanent Indus Commission (PIC) comprising the Indus Commissioners of India and Pakistan held on May 30-31, 2022 in New Delhi.

    Indus Waters Treaty, 1960: A background

    • After years of arduous negotiations, the Indus Waters Treaty was signed in Karachi on September 19, 1960, by then Indian Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru and then Pakistani President Ayub Khan, negotiated by the World Bank.
    • 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.
    • The Permanent Indus Commission, which has a commissioner from each country, oversees the cooperative mechanism and ensures that the two countries meet annually (alternately in India and Pakistan).
    • This year, the commission met twice, in March in Islamabad, Pakistan, and then in New Delhi, in May.
    • It is a rare feat that despite the many lows in India-Pakistan relations, talks under the treaty have been held on a regular basis.

    Some disagreements

    • Throughout its existence, there have been many occasions during which differences between the two countries were discernible.
    • Both countries held different positions when Pakistan raised objections regarding the technical design features of the Kishanganga and Ratle hydroelectric power plants.
    • Differences were also discernible when Pakistan approached the World Bank to facilitate the setting up of a court of arbitration to address the concerns related to these two projects referred to in Article IX Clause 5 of the treaty, and when India requested the appointment of a Neutral Expert referent to Clause 2.1 of Article IX .
    • Eventually, on March 31, 2022, the World Bank, decided to resume two separate processes by appointing a neutral expert and a chairman for the court of arbitration.
    • The appointment of a neutral expert will find precedence to address the differences since under Article IX Clause 6 of the treaty provisions, Arbitration ‘shall not apply to any difference while it is being dealt with by a Neutral Expert’.
    • Pakistan, invoking Article VII Clause 2 on future cooperation, raised objections on the construction and technical designs of the Pakal Dul and Lower Kalnai hydropower plants.
    • Similarly, India has raised concerns on issues such as Pakistan’s blockade of the Fazilka drain.

    Lessons from the treaty

    • Engagement between conflicting nations: The treaty is an illustration of a long-standing engagement between the conflicting nations that has stood the vagaries of time.
    • Water management cooperation: The treaty is considered one of the oldest and the most effective examples of water management cooperation in the region and the world.
    • Avoiding conflict: With the exception of differences on a few pending issues, both countries have avoided any actions resulting in the aggravation of the conflict or acted in a manner causing conflict to resurface.

    Potential for cooperation

    • Joint research: Recognising common interests and mutual benefits, India and Pakistan can undertake joint research on the rivers to study the impact of climate change for ‘future cooperation’ (underlined in Article VII).
    • Potential for cooperation and development: The Indus Waters Treaty also offers great potential for cooperation and development in the subcontinent which can go a long way in ensuring peace and stability.

    Conclusion

    Given that both India and Pakistan have been committed to manage the rivers in a responsible manner, the Treaty can be a reference point to resolve other water-related issues in the region through regular dialogue and interaction.

    UPSC 2023 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)

  • India and Vietnam sign Mutual Logistics Agreement

    India and Vietnam signed a MoU on mutual logistics support.

    India and other such Logistics Agreements

    • Logistics agreements are administrative arrangements facilitating access to military facilities for exchange of fuel.
    • It provides for logistical support and increasing operational turnaround of the military when operating away from India.
    • India has signed several logistics agreements including with all Quad countries, France, Singapore and South Korea beginning with the Logistics Exchange Memorandum of Agreement (LEMOA) with the U.S. in 2016.

    What makes this newer agreement special?

    • The MoU is the first such major agreement which Vietnam has signed with any country.
    • Both nations signed key pacts including a rare 10-year vision document.
    • Both have similar territorial challenges from China.

    Why Vietnam is at the centre of India’s policy to counter China?

    • India entered the contested region of the South China Sea via Vietnam.
    • India signed an agreement with Vietnam in October 2011 to expand and promote oil exploration in the South China Sea.
    • It stood by its decision despite China’s challenge to the legality of Indian presence.
    • Hanoi has been publicly sparring with Beijing over its claims to the South China Sea for some years now.
    • India and Vietnam share a Comprehensive Strategic Partnership since 2016 and defence cooperation is a key pillar of this partnership.
    • Vietnam is an important partner in India’s Act East policy.

    Significance of such ties

    • If China wants to expand its presence in South Asia and the Indian Ocean region, the thinking in New Delhi goes, India can do the same thing in East Asia.
    • India can develop robust ties with states on China’s periphery such as Vietnam without giving China a veto on such relationships.

    Contributing factor: India’s Necklace of Diamonds Strategy

    • Over the past few years, China is expanding its footprint in the Indian Ocean through its ‘Debt Trap Diplomacy’ and ‘String of Pearls Strategy’.
    • Through its String of Pearls strategy, China is expanding its footprints to contain Indian hold in the Indian Ocean.
    • It is creating a ring around India through strategically placed nations such as at Chittagong (Bangladesh), at Karachi, Gwadar port (Pakistan) and at Colombo, Hambantota (both in Sri Lanka) and other facilities.

    What is Necklace of Diamonds Strategy?

    • It strategy aims at garlanding China or in simple words, the counter encirclement strategy.
    • India is expanding its naval bases and is also improving relations with strategically placed countries to counter China’s strategies.
    • Under this strategy, India’s strategic bases include-
    1. Changi Naval Base, Singapore
    2. Sabang Port, Indonesia
    3. Duqm Port, Oman
    4. Assumption Island, Seychelles
    5. Chabahar Port, Iran
    • Apart from getting direct access to the strategically placed naval bases, India is also developing new naval bases, developing the old bases to garland China.

    Conclusion

    • India has a perfect antidote for Chinese expansion.
    • It has been successful in establishing healthy relations with all the nations on China’s periphery.

     

    UPSC 2023 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)

  • Challenges in dealing with Indo-Pacific

    Context

    The Indo-Pacific region has been under pressure and East Asia, in particular, has had to weather repeated storms.

    Background

    • Recently, U.S. President Joseph Biden was on his five-day visit to Asia.
    • During this visit, the new conservative South Korean government showed a willingness to expand the presence of a U.S. missile defence system in the country, which had earlier angered China.
    • In Japan, the administration promised him that it was ready to do away with its long-standing 1% GDP ceiling for annual defence spending.
    • Mr. Biden said at a press conference that the U.S. would intervene militarily to defend Taiwan if it came under attack from China.
    • The President and members of his delegation later clarified that there is no change in the substance of American foreign policy, which is still governed by the Taiwan Relations Act.
    • As per the 1979 Congressional law, the U.S. “shall provide Taiwan with arms of a defensive character” so that the region can defend itself.
    • The law says nothing about the U.S. being required to step in militarily to defend Taiwan in the event of an invasion by China.

    China-challenge in Indo-Pacific

    • South Korea and Japan face regular nuclear and missile threats from North Korea.
    • Challenge to international maritime law: China not only challenges international maritime laws in the South China Sea, but also confronts Japan over the Senkaku Islands.
    • Spratly Islands dispute: Six nations, including China and Taiwan, are involved in the dispute over the Spratly Islands, which are supposedly sitting on vast reserves of oil and natural gas.
    • Militarisation of disputed isles: China has vigorously militarised some portions of the disputed isles, islets and coral reefs; and countries like Vietnam and the Philippines are anxious not to be left behind.

    Will IPEF framework help in tackling challenges from China?

    • The US has sought to deal with China by establishing an Indo-Pacific Economic Framework (IPEF) with Australia, Brunei, India, Indonesia, Japan, South Korea, Malaysia, New Zealand, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, and Vietnam.
    • Four pillars of IPEF: The IPEF will work on fine-tuning four major pillars: standards and rules for digital trade; resilient supply chains; green energy commitments; and fair trade.
    • Issues of trade and tariffs: However, there is discontent that the framework does not address issues of trade and tariffs. 
    • Lack of trade component: Asian partners really want is trade, they want market access.
    • And the trade component of the IPEF is really lacking.

    Two facets of Indo-Pacific

    • 1] Balance relations with US and China: One is that China’s neighbours would rather balance relations between Washington and Beijing.
    • 2] Extent of resistance: Second is the extent to which countries in the region will want to get on the anti-China bandwagon, economic or strategic.
    • Whether it is in East, Southeast or South Asia, every country has its own unique relationship with Beijing.
    • India may be a part of the Quad, but is quite mindful that it is the only country in the group that shares a land border with China.
    • South Korea and Japan are part of a strong American security/strategic partnership but will be keen on maintaining their economic status with China.
    • This is also true for the Association of South East Asian Nations.

    Conclusion

    Given the complex nature of the threats and the challenges the Indo-Pacific faces, drawing up any strategy remains to be an uphill task.

    UPSC 2023 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)

  • India needs a forward-looking strategy on Pakistan

    Context

    India’s approach in dealing with Pakistan today is very different from the framework that emerged at the dawn of the 1990s.

    Terms of engagement with Pakistan

    • From the 1990s, for nearly three decades, it was Pakistan that had the political initiative.
    • The turmoil in Kashmir, the international focus on nuclear proliferation, and the relentless external pressure for a sustained dialogue with Pakistan put Delhi in a difficult situation.
    • If Pakistan was on the political offensive, a series of weak coalition governments in Delhi were forced onto the back foot.
    • At the heart of Pakistan’s ambition was to change the status quo in Jammu and Kashmir.
    • Islamabad also played up to the concerns in Western chancelleries that the conflict in Kashmir might escalate to the nuclear level.
    • The new international consensus that Kashmir is the “world’s most dangerous nuclear flashpoint” aligned well with Pakistan’s strategy.
    • Delhi had no option but to respond, but any move to counter Pakistan would make the situation worse.
    • Under Prime Minister Narendra Modi, India has begun to reset the terms of the engagement agenda.
    • Change in regional and international context: Meanwhile, the regional and international context has also altered in many ways since the early 1990s essentially in India’s favour.

    Reset in engagement

    • India’s transformed relations with the US, the resolution of Delhi’s dispute with the global nuclear order, and getting the West to discard its temptation to mediate on Kashmir enormously improved India’s diplomatic position.
    • But the most consequential change has been in the economic domain.
    • The persistent neglect of economic challenges left Pakistan in an increasingly weaker position in relation to India.
    • If India has inched its way into the top six global economies, Pakistan today is broke.
    • Modi had the opportunity to build on these shifting fortunes of Delhi and Islamabad and develop a three-pronged strategy of his own.
    • 1] India bet that the heavens won’t fall if Delhi stops talking to Islamabad or negotiating with Pakistan-backed militant groups in Kashmir.
    • 2] Delhi has been unafraid of staring at nuclear escalation in responding to Pakistan’s cross-border terrorism.
    • 3] By changing the constitutional status of Kashmir in 2019, India has reduced the scope of India’s future negotiations with Pakistan on Kashmir.

    Way forward

    • Pakistan’s hand today is much weaker than in the 1990s and Delhi’s room for manoeuvring has grown, notwithstanding the challenges it confronts on the China border.
    • That opens some room for new Indian initiatives toward Pakistan.
    • Getting Pakistan’s army and its political class to be more practical in engaging India is certainly a tall order; but Delhi can afford to make a move.

    Conclusion

    While there can be much disagreement on Pakistan’s capacity to respond, Delhi’s new initiatives can reinforce the positive evolution of Indian foreign policy, and expand the space for Indian diplomacy in the region and beyond.

    UPSC 2023 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)