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

Civilsdaily

Login

Subject: International Relations

  • Fragmenting world order, untied nations

    Context

    The outcome that should worry us apart from the devastating consequences for the Ukrainian nation, is the impact the Ukraine crisis is having on the global world order, which is fragmenting in every respect of global interconnectedness — in terms of international cooperation, security, military use, economic order, and even cultural ties.

    Implications of war for global order

    1] Question mark on the relevance of the UN and Security Council

    • Russia’s actions in Ukraine may, in terms of refusing to seek an international mandate, seem no different from the war by the United States in Iraq in 2003, Israel’s bombing of Lebanon in 2006 and the Saudi-coalition’s attacks of Yemen in 2015.
    • But Ukraine is in fact a bigger blow to the post-World War order than any other.
    • It run counter to the UN Charter preamble, i.e. “to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war…”, “to practice tolerance and live together in peace with one another as good neighbours”, as well as Articles 1 and 2 of the ‘Purposes and Principles’ of the United Nations (Chapter 1).
    • Meanwhile, in their responses, other P-5 members such as the United States, the United Kingdom and France did not seek to strengthen the global order either, imposing sanctions unilaterally rather than attempting to bring them to the UN.

    2] Declining nuclear safeguards

    • Russian military’s moves to target areas near Chernobyl and shell buildings near the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant show an alarming nonchalance towards safeguards in place over several decades.
    • The world must also consider the cost to the nuclear non-proliferation regime’s credibility: Ukraine and Libya that willingly gave up nuclear programmes have been invaded, while regimes such as Iran and North Korea can defy the global order because they have held on to their nuclear deterrents.

    3] Use of non-state actors

    • There are also the covenants agreed upon during the global war on terrorism, which have been degraded, with the use of non-state actors in the Ukraine crisis.
    • For years, pro-Russia armed militia operated in the Donbas regions, challenging the writ of the government in Kyiv.
    • With the arrival of Russian troops, the Ukrainian President, Volodymyr Zelensky, has invited all foreign fighters to support his forces to the country.

    4] Fragmentation of global financial order

    • While analysts have pointed out that the sanctions announced so far do not include some of Russia’s biggest banks in order to avoid the disruption of oil and gas from Russia, the intent to cut Russia out of all monetary and financial systems remains.
    • The arbitrary and unilateral nature of western sanctions rub against the international financial order set up under the World Trade Organization (that replaced the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, or GATT).
    • The obvious fallout of this “economic cancel culture” will, without doubt, be a reaction — a pushback from Russia and an exploration of alternative trading arrangements with countries such as China, India and much of the Eastern Hemisphere which continue to trade with Moscow.
    • For the S-400 missile defence deal, for example, New Delhi used a rupee-rouble mechanism and banks that were immunised from the U.S.’s CAATSA sanctions (or Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act) for advance payments.

    5] Isolation of Russia

    • While several governments including the U.S., the U.K. and Germany have persistently said that their quarrel is not with Russian citizens but with their leadership, it is clear that most of their actions will hurt the average Russian citizen.
    • Some of this isolation of its citizens will work to the favour of an increasingly authoritarian Kremlin.
    • Mr. Putin’s response to the banning of Russian channels in Europe and its allies has been to use the western media ban as a pretext to ban opposition-friendly Russian channels as well.

    Takeaways for India

    • India’s abstentionist responses and its desire not to be critical of any of the actions taken by the big powers might keep Indians safe in the short term.
    • But in the long term, it is only those nations that move proactively to uphold, strengthen and reinvent the global order that will make the world a safer place.

    Conclusion

    The events over the past two weeks, set in motion by Russia’s declaration of war on Ukraine, have no doubt reversed many of the ideas of 1945 and 1990, fragmenting the international order established with the UN, ushering in an era of deglobalisation and bringing down another Iron Curtain.

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

  • Ukraine invasion and the great geopolitical reset

    Context

    Major wars have significant consequences for the internal and international politics of the combatant nations. Wars between great powers are far more consequential.

    Geopolitical changes triggered by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine

    1] New dynamism in great power triangle

    •  Biden hoped to distance Russia from China and focus all of America’s energies on the Indo-Pacific.
    • But Putin chose to align with China and confront the US and Europe with an impossible set of demands including a sphere of influence in Central Europe and turning Ukraine into Moscow’s protectorate.
    • China’s public articulation has underlined “rock-solid” support for Moscow but it is under some pressure to balance between its Russian alliance “without limits” and its deep economic interdependence with the US and Europe.
    • Whichever way this plays out, the current crisis has revealed America’s pole position in the great strategic triangle.

    2] Reinforced US primacy amongst the great powers

    • The US primacy amongst the great powers has been reinforced by the restoration of strategic unity within the West.
    • While many trans-Atlantic differences remain on the nature and extent of sanctions against Russia, the crisis has revealed the enduring sources of Western unity.

    3] Disciplining of Europe

    • Third is the American disciplining of Europe, especially Germany, where illusions of normative soft power and the faith in mercantilism had blinded the continent to geopolitical challenges presented by Russia and China.
    • Europe’s belief that it can enrich itself in the Russian and Chinese markets while expecting Washington to do all the heavy lifting on security is no longer sustainable.
    • The German decision on rearmament announced in the wake of the Russian aggression marks a definitive geopolitical turn in Europe.

    4] EU’s dilemma in energy domain

    • Nowhere is the EU’s Russian dilemma more visible than in the energy domain where Europe is deeply tied to Russian imports of oil, natural gas, and coal.
    • The EU pays $110 billion a year to Moscow for these imports.
    • While stepping up pressure on Europe to drastically reduce energy imports from Russia, Washington is reaching out to Venezuela, Saudi Arabia, and Iran to fill the gap created by the planned blockade of Russian energy supplies.

    5] Asia is adapting to the change

    • Sensing the dangers from a Sino-Russian axis and fearing that Europe could distract America, Japan is rethinking its nuclear abstinence.
    • South Korea’s president-elect, Yoon Suk-Yeol wants to strengthen ties with the US, and explore potential cooperation with the Quad.
    •  While the ASEAN remains torn between the US and China, many in the region are waking up to the dangers of betting that Beijing’s rise is irreversible, and that the Western decline is terminal.

    Lessons for India

    • The first major conflict amongst the great powers in the 21st century has presented India with multiple challenges, including its long-standing reliance on Russian military supplies.
    •  More immediately, the crisis in Ukraine demands that Delhi move on a war-footing towards a rapid modernisation and expansion of its domestic defence industrial base that is so critical for sustaining India’s strategic autonomy.

    Conclusion

    Unless there is an early diplomatic breakthrough, the conflict between Russia and the West is likely to sharpen in the coming days. But this hinge moment in world politics is also an opportunity for Delhi to increase its heft in the changing global balance.

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

  • Analysing India’s stand on the war on Ukraine

    Context

    Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has placed considerable moral responsibility on India. However, at the United Nations (UN), India has refused to condemn the violation of the rights of the Ukrainians.

    Issues involved in India’s vote

    1] Commitment to principles

    • National interest: One of the arguments justifying India’s stance is that in international affairs, a country must be guided by its national interest and not some abstract principles.
    • It is pointed out that due to the very high dependence of India on the Soviet Union for defence equipment and the likely need of support on the Pakistan issue in the Security Council, India must not offend Russia by condemning the invasion.
    • Why India should condemn Russia: If a people’s principles are their most deeply held beliefs about how the world must be ordered, then their interest lies in ensuring that their principles prevail in international relations.
    • Thus, if India does not want to see itself to be the victim of territorial aggression in the future, it must communicate strongly on the world stage that it condemns the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

    2] India-West relations

    • In the 1950s the West was clearly unsympathetic to India, playing its card openly on the Kashmir issue at the UN as early as 1947.
    • On the other hand, the Soviet Union, the precursor to the present-day Russian state, had rescued India several times by exercising its veto in the UN Security Council.
    • Now, close to 75 years later, the situation has changed.
    • Public opinion in the West does not favour unconditional support of Pakistan vis-à-vis India while Russia encourages Pakistan.
    • Moreover, we know by now that some limited support at the UN matters little, as taking the Kashmir issue to the UN Security Council has not got Pakistan to withdraw from the territory it occupied.

    3] India’s dependence on Russia for defence supplies

    •  It is indeed correct that India relies on the Russians for such equipment and their spare parts.
    • At the same time there is a global market for arms. It is not evident that anything withheld by the Russians cannot be sourced from that market.
    •  For India to base its public stance on the Russian invasion of Ukraine on the assured supply of armaments is to really drag ourselves down to the bottom of the pit in terms of ethics.

    4] East-West conflict argument

    • Another argument is that this is a conflict between the east and the west, and India should stay out of it.
    • To say that this is just another east-west conflict from which India should stay out is tantamount to seeing the Russian invasion and the brave defence of their country by the Ukrainians as a mere marital squabble.
    • India had refused in 1956 to condemn the Soviet invasion of Hungary, its action today is much worse.

    Conclusion

    India must take a long view of how it wants to engage with it. Its actions so far leave it in the company of Russia and China.

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

  • Geneva Conventions and the Russia-Ukraine War

    As the evidence of casualties in the civilian population continues to mount, the world will increasingly look to the Geneva Conventions in the Russia-Ukraine conflict.

    Geneva Conventions Guidelines for Wartime

    • These are a set of four treaties, formalized in 1949, and three additional protocols, which codify widely accepted ethical and legal international standards for humanitarian treatment of those impacted by war.
    • The focus of the Conventions is the:
    1. Treatment of non-combatants and prisoners of war, and
    2. Not the use of conventional or biological and chemical weapons

    What are the four Geneva Conventions?

    (1) First Geneva Convention: Health and Medical Issues

    • It protects wounded and sick soldiers on land during war.
    • This convention extends to medical and religious personnel, medical units, and medical transport.
    • It has two annexes containing a draft agreement relating to hospital zones and a model identity card for medical and religious personnel.

    (2) Second Geneva Convention:  Offshore Protection

    • It protects wounded, sick and shipwrecked military personnel at sea during war.
    • This convention also extends to hospital ships and medical transports by sea, with specific commentary on the treatment and protections for their personnel.

    (3) Third Geneva Convention: Treatment of Prisoners of War (PoW)

    It applies to prisoners of war, including a wide range of general protections such as humane treatment, maintenance and equality across prisoners, conditions of captivity, questioning and evacuation of prisoners, transit camps, food, clothing, medicines, hygiene and right to religious, intellectual, and physical activities of prisoners.

    (4) Fourth Geneva Convention: Civilian protection of occupied territory ***

    • It particularly applies to the invasion of Ukraine by Russian military forces.
    • It protects civilians, including those in occupied territory.
    • Comprising 159 articles, it outlines the norms for this critical dimension of conflict.

    Extent of the Fourth Geneva Convention amid the Ukraine-Russia War

    • Along with the Additional Protocols of 1977, the Fourth Convention expounds upon the:
    1. General protection of populations against certain consequences of war
    2. Conduct of hostilities and the status and
    3. Treatment of protected persons
    4. Distinguishing between the situation of foreigners on the territory of one of the parties to the conflict and that of civilians in occupied territory
    • This convention also spells out the obligations of the occupying power vis-à-vis the civilian population and outlines detailed provisions on humanitarian relief for populations in occupied territory.

    Which countries are signatories?

    • The Geneva Conventions have been ratified by 196 states, including all UN member states.
    • The three Protocols have been ratified by 174, 169 and 79 states respectively.

    Russia and these conventions

    • In 2019, perhaps anticipating the possibility of its invading Ukraine in the near future, Russia withdrew its declaration under Article 90 of Protocol 1.
    • By withdrawing this declaration, Russia has pre-emptively left itself with the option to refuse access by any international fact-finding missions to Russian entities.
    • Not withdrawing could have find Russia responsible for violations of the Geneva Conventions standards.
    • Further, the four conventions and first two protocols of the Geneva Conventions were ratified by the Soviet Union, not Russia.
    • Hence there is a risk of the Russian government of the day disavowing any responsibility under the Conventions.

    What would be the steps for potential prosecution under the Conventions?

    • Under Article 8 of the Rome Statute of the ICC, it is the ICC that has jurisdiction in respect of war crimes, in particular “when committed as part of a plan or policy or as part of a large-scale commission of such crimes.”

    To what extent have Geneva Conventions been upheld worldwide in recent years?

    • Amnesty International notes that there has been a blatant disregard for civilian protection and international humanitarian law in armed conflicts where four of the five permanent members of the UN Security Council are parties.
    • Specifically, Amnesty cited:
    1. US-led coalition’s bombing of Raqqa in Syria, which left more than 1,600 civilians dead
    2. Destruction of civilian infrastructure and lives in Aleppo and Idlib by Russian forces
    3. Leading to mass displacement of millions
    4. War in Yemen where the Saudi Arabia and the UAE-led coalition, backed by the West, killed and injured thousands of civilians, fuelling a full-blown humanitarian crisis

     

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

  • What is ‘Most Favoured Nation’ Status?

    The United States, the European Union, Britain, Canada and Japan are to move jointly to revoke Russia’s “most favoured nation” (MFN) status over its invasion of Ukraine.

    What is MFN status?

    • The World Trade Organization’s 164 members commit to treating other members equally so they can all benefit from each other’s lowest tariffs, highest import quotas and fewest trade barriers.
    • This principle of non-discrimination is known as most favoured nation (MFN) treatment.
    • There are some exceptions, such as when members strike bilateral trade agreements or when members offer developing countries special access to their markets.
    • For countries outside the WTO, such as Iran, North Korea, Syria or Russian ally Belarus, WTO members can impose whatever trade measures they wish without flouting global trading rules.

    Removal of MFN status

    • There is no formal procedure for suspending MFN treatment and it is not clear whether members are obliged to inform the WTO if they do so.
    • India suspended Pakistan’s MFN status in 2019 after a suicide attack by a Pakistan-sponsored group.
    • Pakistan never applied MFN status to India.

    What does losing MFN status mean?

    • Revoking Russia’s MFN status sends a strong signal that the US and its Western allies do not consider Russia a economic partner in any way, but it does not in itself change conditions for trade.
    • It does formally allow the Western allies to increase import tariffs or impose quotas on Russian goods, or even ban them, and to restrict services out of the country.
    • They could also overlook Russian intellectual property rights.
    • Ahead of MFN status removal, the United States had already announced a ban on imports of Russian oil and gas.

     

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

  • Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention (BTWC)

    India has emphasized on following the Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention (BTWC) at the UNSC meeting on Ukraine.

    Why in news?

    • The meeting came after a request from Russia, who claimed that the US is involved in bioweapon manufacture in war-torn Ukraine.
    • However, Washington has strongly dismissed this claim.

    What is BTWC?

    • The Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention (BTWC) was the first multilateral treaty categorically banning a class of weapon.
    • It is a treaty that came into force in 1975 and prohibits the development, production, acquisition, transfer, stockpiling and use of biological weapons.
    • A total of 183 countries are party to the treaty that outlaws bioweapons, including US, Russia and Ukraine.

    Obligations of the treaty

    • The treaty prohibits the development, stockpile, production, or transfer of biological agents and toxins of “types and quantities” that have no justification for protective or peaceful use.
    • Furthermore, the treaty bans the development of weapons, equipment, or delivery systems to disseminate such agents or toxins.
    • Should a state possess any agent, toxin, or delivery system for them, they have nine months from entry into force of the treaty to destroy their stockpiles, or divert them for peaceful use.
    • The convention stipulates that states shall cooperate bilaterally or multilaterally to solve compliance issues.
    • States may also submit complaints to the UNSCR should they believe another state is violating the treaty.

    Issues with the treaty

    • There is no implementation body of the BTWC, allowing for blatant violations as seen in the past.
    • There is only a review conference that too every five years to review the convention’s implementation, and establish confidence-building measures.

    Signatories to the BTWC

    • The Convention currently has 183 states-parties, including Palestine, and four signatories (Egypt, Haiti, Somalia, and Syria).
    • Ten states have neither signed nor ratified the BWC: Chad, Comoros, Djibouti, Eritrea, Israel, Kiribati, Micronesia, Namibia, South Sudan, and Tuvalu.

     

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

  • Motor Vehicles Agreement (MVA) of the BBIN

    With Bhutan continuing to sit out the Motor Vehicles Agreement (MVA) of the sub-regional Bangladesh-Bhutan-India-Nepal (BBIN) grouping, a meeting of the other three countries was held to discuss the next steps in operationalizing the agreement for the free flow of goods and people between them.

    What is Motor Vehicles Agreement (MVA)?

    • India, Nepal, Bhutan and Bangladesh signed a Motor Vehicles Agreement (MVA) for the Regulation of Passenger, Personal and Cargo Vehicular Traffic among the four South Asian neighbours.
    • It was signed on 15 June 2015 at the BBIN transport ministers meeting in Thimpu, Bhutan.
    • The act will facilitate a way for a seamless movement of people and goods across their borders for the benefit and integration of the region and its economic development.

    Key terms of the Agreement

    • Trans-shipment of goods: Cargo vehicles will be able to enter any of the four nations without the need for trans-shipment of goods from one country’s truck to another’s at the border.
    • Free transport: The agreement would permit the member states to ply their vehicles in each other’s territory for transportation of cargo and passengers, including third-country transport and personal vehicles.
    • Electronic permit: As per the agreement each vehicle would require an electronic permit to enter another country’s territory, and border security arrangements between nations’ borders will also remain.
    • Ultra-security: Vehicles are fitted with an electronic seal that alerts regulators every time the container door is opened.

    Implementation status of the agreement

    • The agreement will enter into force after it is ratified by all four member nations.
    • The agreement has been ratified by Bangladesh, India and Nepal.
    • The lower house of the Bhutanese parliament approved the agreement in early 2016, but it was rejected by the upper house in November 2016.
    • Bhutan has requested for a cap to be fixed on the number of vehicles entering its territory

    What next?

    • India remains “hopeful” that Bhutan could change its position on the project, it was decided at a meeting in November 2021 to go ahead for now, given that there are no new signals from Thimphu on the project.
    • Progress on the seven-year-old project has been slow, despite several trial runs being held along the Bangladesh-India-Nepal road route for passenger buses and cargo trucks.
    • There are still some agreements holding up the final protocols.

    Back2Basics: Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Nepal (BBIN)

    • BBIN Initiative is a sub-regional architecture of countries in Eastern South Asia, a sub-region of South Asia.
    • The group meets through the official representation of member states to formulate, implement and review quadrilateral agreements across areas such as water resources management, connectivity of power, transport, and infrastructure.

     

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

  • What is the Temporary Protection Directive of the EU?

    Responding to the crisis, EU Member States made the unprecedented decision to activate a major European Union’s Council Directive, known as the Temporary Protection Directive (TPD).

    What is Temporary Protection?

    • The EU Commission describes “temporary protection” under the TPD as an “exceptional measure to provide immediate and temporary protection to displaced persons from non-EU countries and those unable to return to their country of origin”.
    • The directive applies when there is a risk that the standard asylum system is struggling to cope with demand stemming from a mass influx risking a negative impact on the processing of claims.

    Objectives of this protection

    1. To both establish minimum standards for giving temporary protection to displaced persons
    2. To promote a balance of effort between Member States in receiving and bearing the consequences of receiving such persons

    Why establish standards?

    The Commission gives two reasons for doing so:

    • It reduces disparities between the policies of EU States on the reception and treatment of displaced persons in a situation of mass influx.
    • It promotes solidarity and burden-sharing among EU States with respect to receiving large numbers of potential refugees at one time.”

    What obligations does the TPD place upon EU states?

    According to the European Commission, the TPD “foresees harmonised rights for the beneficiaries of temporary protection”, which include:

    • Residence permit for the duration of the protection (which can last from 1-3 years),
    • Appropriate information on temporary protection,
    • Access to employment,
    • Access to accommodation or housing,
    • Access to social welfare or means of subsistence,
    • Access to medical treatment,
    • Access to education for minors,
    • Opportunities for families to reunite in certain circumstances, and
    • Guarantees for access to the normal asylum procedure

    The TPD also contains provisions for the return of displaced persons to their country of origin, unless they have committed serious crimes or they “pose a threat to security from the benefit of temporary protection”.

     

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

  • How invasion of Ukraine could transform nuclear landscape of Asia

    Context

    Russian President Vladimir Putin’s nuclear sabre-rattling in Ukraine, has triggered a far more consequential debate on the importance of atomic weapons in deterring Chinese expansionism.

    Background

    • Ukraine agreed in 1994 to give up the nuclear weapons that it inherited from the Soviet Union in return for guarantees on Kyiv’s sovereignty and territorial integrity.
    • Clearly, those legal guarantees were no substitute for nuclear weapons.

    Changing stand on nuclear weapons

    • Debate in Japan: In an important statement last week, the former prime minister of Japan, Shinzo Abe, called for a national debate on hosting American nuclear weapons on Japanese soil.
    • One element of the debate is the fact that nuclear weapons remain the greatest deterrent, especially against a vastly superior adversary.
    • Korea strengthening nuclear deterrence: In South Korea, which is electing its president this week, front-runner Yoon Suk-yeol has talked of strengthening Seoul’s nuclear deterrence against both Pyongyang and Beijing.
    • Taiwan and Australia developing nuclear submarine: Taiwan, is reportedly developing a nuclear-powered submarine that could offer some deterrence against a Chinese invading force.
    • Australia, which is working with the UK and the US to build nuclear-powered submarines, is accelerating the project after the Ukraine invasion.

    Threat of escalation to nuclear war

    • The threat of escalation to the nuclear level was very much in the mind of NATO’s military planners when the alliance refused to be drawn into a firefight with Russia in Ukraine.
    • Moscow is also conscious of the fact that there are two nuclear weapon powers in Europe — Britain and France.
    • Nuclear sharing arrangement: Russia is also aware of the “nuclear sharing” arrangements between the US and some European allies — Belgium, Germany, Italy, and the Netherlands.
    • Under this framework, European allies host US nuclear weapons on their soil and authorise their armed forces to deliver American nuclear weapons on Russia.
    • Nuclear sharing also involves continuous consultations on nuclear doctrine and the planning of nuclear operations.
    • The US and its allies are also pursuing a “hybrid war” that boosts Ukrainian resistance against Russian armed forces and raises military, economic, and political costs of Moscow’s aggression.

    Threat of China invading Taiwan

    • Taiwan is far more important for Asian (and global) security than Ukraine is for Europe.
    • Taiwan sits at the heart of the Western Pacific and straddles the sea line of communication in the world’s most dynamic economic arena.
    • It is the main source of silicon chips for the world.
    • When China conquers Taiwan it will dramatically transform the geopolitics of Asia.
    • As Putin becomes more dependent on China, Russia is bound to back Xi Jinping’s ambitions in Asia.
    • This is the context in which China’s eastern neighbours are taking a fresh look at the nuclear option.
    • Nuclear sharing arrangement: On the nuclear front, the debate in Japan and South Korea is about potential nuclear sharing arrangements with the US.
    • In Taiwan and Australia, the emphasis is on developing nuclear-powered submarines.
    • Deployment of strategic weapons: The US too is debating the deployment of new strategic weapon systems in Asia that might encourage China to pause before trying to emulate Russia’s Ukraine adventure.

    Consider the question ” Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is going to transform the nuclear landscape of Asia. Comment.”

    Conclusion

    One way or another, Russia’s war in Ukraine is bound to transform the Asian nuclear landscape.

  • Russian Invasion of Ukraine: Global Implications