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

Civilsdaily

Login

Subject: International Relations

  • Escaping the global sanctions net

    Context

    A shift is taking place in the business of global dominance and hegemony, from the model of expressing force through troop presence to financial sanctions. It is led by the US and has become recently visible in the US and EU sanctions on Russia.

    How sanctions works

    • Sanctions are designed by the government and implemented by both profit-making and non-profit private enterprises, domestic and international NGOs (including the United Nations).
    • From rule-bound globalism, there is a move to an understanding of the management of individual economies, bound together by multiple networks of investment and trade.
    • This is a global economy of individual rivalries between countries and corporations, continually shifting alliances, and contingencies overtaking assumed structural certainties.
    • A system of licencing: In Afghanistan, financial manipulations from afar in the form of sanctions may result in subjecting trading activities and investment ventures to the approval of the US Treasury through a system of licencing.
    • This may give the US a say in who trades with whom, but already China has found ways of working with or around US sanctions in several countries, including Iran.
    • Confiscation of foreign exchange reserves: Another way of exerting control from afar is through the confiscation of foreign exchange reserves in American banks.
    • Following the withdrawal of the American troops on August 15, the US froze Afghanistan’s foreign exchange reserves of $7 billion deposited in the New York Federal Bank.

    Issues with sanctions

    • An economic lever to China: Sanctions offer economic lever to China in its dealings with the Taliban, to the Chinese state-owned enterprises and private corporations with an opportunity to invest in Afghanistan’s infrastructure, linking it to the Belt and Road project, and in its rich mineral resources of copper, cobalt, and lithium.
    • Implications for India: China could also use this as an opportunity to unite investments in Afghanistan and Pakistan, isolating India.
    • Evading the sanction:  China and Russia, in concert, may provide a way out of the sanctions regime.
    • Possibility for China in Middle Eurasia: Russian military and political escalation to re-institute control over former Soviet regions, including Ukraine, Belarus, and Kazakhstan, and the rapprochement between China and Russia against the West, may open up new possibilities for China in Middle Eurasia.
    • Banning Russia from SWIFT is not effective: Banning Russia from the SWIFT system of international payments is a problem for the global financial system.
    • The Russian economy is more isolated, protected and less reliant on international funding than was the Afghan economy.
    • The impact of any disruption in Russian exports of oil, gas, palladium, wheat and fertiliser at a time when those prices are barely recovering from inflationary pressures caused by Covid-19 disruptions, is likely to offset any leverage the Western sanctions may hope to gain.

    Conclusion

    In the new game, the Western alliance led by the US seems lost in a maze of sanctions, largely ineffective in a global economy, the control of which is eluding its grip.

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

  • Doubts over Defence Supplies to India

    With tensions escalating between Russia and the West over the Ukraine crisis, India, which has major defence cooperation with Moscow and Kyiv, faces uncertainty over timely deliveries of the S-400.

    About S-400

    • The S-400 is known as Russia’s most advanced long-range surface-to-air missile defence system, capable of destroying hostile strategic bombers, jets, missiles and drones at a range of 380-km.

    US reservations against S-400 purchase

    • The US has made it clear that the delivery of the five S-400 systems is considered a “significant transaction”.
    • Such deals are considered under its Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act (CAATSA) of 2017.
    • It could trigger sanctions against Indian officials and the Government.

    About CAATSA

    • The CAATSA is designed to ensure that no country is able to increase military engagement with Iran, North Korea and Russia without facing deterrent punitive action from the US.
    • The sanctions are unilateral, and not part of any United Nations decision, and therefore no country is bound to accept them.
    • Section 231 says the President shall impose no fewer than five different sanctions on any Government that enters into a significant defence or intelligence deal with Russia.
    • Section 235 lists 12 options, including stopping credit lines from US and international banks such as the IMF, blocking sales of licensed goods and technology, banning banks, manufacturers and suppliers, property transactions and even financial and visa sanctions on specific officials.
    • However, the law also empowers the President to waiver sanctions or delay them if the waiver is in the US’s “vital national security interests”.

    Has the US used CAATSA before for S-400 sales?

    • The US has already placed sanctions on China and Turkey for purchase of the S-400.
    • The sanctions included denial of export licences, ban on foreign exchange transactions, blocking of all property and interests in property within the US jurisdiction and a visa ban.

    Types of sanctions laid

    • In 2020, the US sanctioned its NATO partner Turkey, which it had warned about CAATSA sanctions for years, besides cancelling a deal to sell Ankara F-35 jets.
    • The sanctions on Turkey’s main defence procurement agency, also included a ban on licences and loans, and blocking of credit and visas to related officials.

    Likely impacts after India’s purchase

    • The Biden administration has no firm indication on where it leans on India’s case.
    • However, several senators (US parliamentarians) have called upon the Biden administration to consider a special waiver for India.
    • This is on account of India’s importance as a defence partner, and as a strategic partner on US concerns over China and in the Quad.
    • Other US leaders thinks that giving a waiver to India would be the wrong signal for others seeking to go ahead with similar deals.

    India’s dependence on Russia

    • While Russia has been a traditional military supplier sharing platforms and technologies that others would not, the cooperation has further deepened in recent years.
    • The defence trade between the two countries has crossed $15 billion since 2018.
    • Even today, over 60% of Indian military inventory is of Russian origin, especially with respect to fighter jets, tanks, helicopters and submarines among others, while several deals are in the pipeline.

    Why is the S-400 deal so important to India?

    • Security paradigm: S-400 is very important for India’s national security considerations due to the threats from China, Pakistan and now Afghanistan.
    • Air defence capability: The system will also offset the air defence capability gaps due to the IAF’s dwindling fighter squadron strength.
    • Russian legacy: Integrating the S-400 will be much easier as India has a large number of legacy Russian air defence systems.
    • Strategic autonomy: For both political as well as operational reasons, the deal is at a point of no return.

    Conclusion

    • The deal is a way for the Government to assert its strategic autonomy.
    • India had earlier agreed to stop buying Iranian oil over the threat of sanctions in 2019, a move that caused India both financial and reputational damage.
    • Not giving in to the US’s unilateral sanctions would be one way to restore some of that.

     

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

  • Controversy around the $500 million MCC grant to Nepal

    Nepal’s House of Representatives has ratified 500 million US Dollar grant assistance-Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) pact along with the “interpretative declaration”.

    What is Millenium Challenge Corporation?

    • The MCC was founded in 2004 as a US foreign aid agency that acts in accordance with governments that have demonstrated a commitment to good governance, economic freedom, and citizen investment.
    • It was envisioned as an organisation that would follow the Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness’ key principles.
    • MCC works with countries that have been identified as being eligible for assistance to develop programmes that are based on MCC’s purpose of decreasing poverty via economic growth.
    • MCC’s results framework, which is based on the fourth and fifth principles of the Paris Declaration, Results and Mutual Accountability.
    • It provides a framework for applying the agency’s rigorous methods for projecting, tracking, and evaluating the effects of its programmes.
    • MCC uses this framework to address basic questions about aid effectiveness.

    Investments made by MCC

    • Compact and threshold programmes are the two types of programmes in which MCC invests.
    • Compacts are large, five-year grants implemented by an accountable entity established by each partner nation.
    • Thresholds are smaller funds focusing on policy and institutional transformation in selected countries implemented by MCC.

    The background of the project

    • MCC’s partnership with Nepal began in 2011, when the country requested assistance.
    • MCC first chose Nepal for a smaller threshold grant, and subsequently in December 2014, for a larger compact.
    • Three years later, in September 2017, the MCC-Nepal compact was signed, with the US committing $500 million and Nepal committing $130 million.
    • Nepal is expected to generate an electricity infrastructure with 400kVA transmission lines through the MCC project, which will be used to distribute power both domestically and to India.
    • Furthermore, the MCC’s implementation could boost the Nepalese economy by increasing employment possibilities and increasing per capita income.

    Issues with the project

    • It is estimated that if the agreement is not passed by Parliament, the power producers in the country are likely to lose a staggering Rs. 142 billion every year.
    • As a result, PM Sher Bahadur Deuba is striving to get the MCC passed in Parliament as soon as possible, even if it means splitting the coalition government.
    • In addition, if he fails to get it through Parliament, there is a possible risk of losing his international credibility.

    America vs China: Objections around MCC

    • The MCC agreement has created a political divide in Nepal.
    • The compact has been criticised in Nepal as endangering the country’s sovereignty, integrity, and constitutional autonomy.
    • The claim that the MCC agreement supersedes the national charter and shall prevail over Nepal’s domestic laws.
    • Many have interpreted this to suggest that the compact replaces the constitution, compromising Nepal’s sovereignty.
    • The MCC’s inclusion in the Indo-Pacific Strategy (IPS) is considered problematic for Nepal, as the majority of the country’s political class views the US strategy as anti-China.

    India’s role in the ongoing political crisis in Nepal

    • Few claim that the electricity generated by MCC will be only for export to India and will not be for the local public.
    • As a result, it will not benefit the local economy directly.
    • Nepal’s hydroelectric generation potential is huge, with over 6,000 large and small rivers.
    • However, through a series of barrages and dams, India has control over the majority of Nepal’s major rivers.
    • Nationalists in the Himalayan country have strongly objected to this.
    • In Nepal, where India is still perceived as a meddling big brother, its goal of strengthening India’s military capabilities through this agreement to counter China’s was questioned.

     

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

  • What is the International Court of Justice?

    Ukraine has filed an application before the International Court of Justice (ICJ), instituting proceedings against the Russian Federation for committing Genocide.

    International Court of Justice

    • The ICJ is the principal judicial organ of the United Nations (UN).
    • It was established in June 1945 by the Charter of the United Nations and began work in April 1946.
    • The court is the successor to the Permanent Court of International Justice (PCIJ), which was brought into being through, and by, the League of Nations.
    • It held its inaugural sitting at the Peace Palace in The Hague, Netherlands, in February 1922.

    Its establishment

    • After World War II, the League of Nations and PCIJ were replaced by the United Nations and ICJ respectively.
    • The PCIJ was formally dissolved in April 1946, and its last president, Judge José Gustavo Guerrero of El Salvador, became the first president of the ICJ.
    • The first case, which was brought by the UK against Albania over concerning incidents in the Corfu channel — the narrow strait of the Ionian Sea between the Greek island of Corfu and Albania.

    Seat and role

    • Like the PCIJ, the ICJ is based at the Peace Palace in The Hague.
    • It is the only one of the six principal organs of the UN that is not located in New York City.
    • The other five organs are:
    1. General Assembly
    2. Security Council
    3. Economic and Social Council
    4. Trusteeship Council
    5. Secretariat
    • The court as a whole must represent the main forms of civilization and the principal legal systems of the world.
    • The judges of the court are assisted by a Registry, the administrative organ of the ICJ. English and French are the ICJ’s official languages.

    Jurisdiction of ICJ

    • All members of the UN are automatically parties to the ICJ statute, but this does not automatically give the ICJ jurisdiction over disputes involving them.
    • The ICJ gets jurisdiction only if both parties consent to it.
    • The judgment of the ICJ is final and technically binding on the parties to a case.
    • There is no provision of appeal; it can at the most, be subject to interpretation or, upon the discovery of a new fact, revision.
    • However, the ICJ has no way to ensure compliance of its orders, and its authority is derived from the willingness of countries to abide by them.

    Judges of the court

    • The ICJ has 15 judges who are elected to nine-year terms by the UN General Assembly and Security Council, which vote simultaneously but separately.
    • To be elected, a candidate must receive a majority of the votes in both bodies, a requirement that sometimes necessitates multiple rounds of voting.
    • Elections are held at the UNHQ in New York during the annual UNGA meeting.
    • A third of the court is elected every three years.
    • The judges elected at the triennial election commence their term of office on February 6 of the following year.
    • The president and vice-president of the court are elected for three-year terms by secret ballot. Judges are eligible for re-election.

    India in ICJ

    • Four Indians have been members of the ICJ so far.
    • Justice Dalveer Bhandari, former judge of the Supreme Court, has been serving at the ICJ since 2012.
    • Former Chief Justice of India R S Pathak served from 1989-91, and former Chief Election Commissioner of India Nagendra Singh from 1973-88.
    • Singh was also president of the court from 1985-88, and vice-president from 1976-79.
    • Before him, Sir Benegal Rau, who was an advisor to the Constituent Assembly, was a member of the ICJ from 1952-53.

    Indian cases at the ICJ

    • India has been a party to a case at the ICJ on six occasions, four of which have involved Pakistan.
    • They are:
    1. Right of Passage over Indian Territory (Portugal v. India, culminated 1960);
    2. Appeal Relating to the Jurisdiction of the ICAO Council (India v. Pakistan, culminated 1972);
    3. Trial of Pakistani Prisoners of War (Pakistan v. India, culminated 1973);
    4. Aerial Incident of 10 August 1999 (Pakistan v. India, culminated 2000);
    5. Obligations concerning Negotiations relating to Cessation of the Nuclear Arms Race and to Nuclear Disarmament (Marshall Islands v. India, culminated 2016); and
    6. (Kulbhushan) Jadhav (India v. Pakistan, culminated 2019).

    Back2Basics:

    BASIS INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE
    Relationship with the United Nations Independent; UN Security Council may refer matters to it Primary judicial branch of the UN.
    Members 105 members 193 members (all members of the United Nations).
    Derives authority from The Rome Statute Charter of the United Nations and the Statute of the International Court of Justice.
    Scope of work Criminal matters – investigating and prosecuting crimes of genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes Civil matters- settling legal disputes between the member-states and giving advisory opinions on international legal issues
    Jurisdiction Only the member nations of the ICC, which means around 105 countries. Can try individuals. All the member nations of the UN, which means 193 countries. Cannot try individuals and other private entities.
    Composition 1 prosecutor and 18 judges, who are elected for a 9-year term each by the member-states which make up the Assembly of State Parties with all being from different nations 15 judges who are elected for a 9-year term each and are all from different nations.
    Funding Funded by state parties to the Rome Statute and voluntary contributions from the United Nations, governments, individual corporations, etc. Funded by the UN.

     

     

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

  • The significance of EU-India partnership in the Indo-Pacific

    Context

    Europe and its key Indo-Pacific partners are joining forces to deliver a positive agenda for the region at the ministerial Forum to be held in Paris.

    Importance of Indo-Pacific for EU

    • The issues at stake in this crucial region, including security challenges, are of concern to all EU countries.
    • EU unveiled EU Strategy for Cooperation in the Indo-Pacific,  in September 2021.
    •  Europe can offer the countries of the region a sustainable, transparent model for preserving their sovereignty, and an alternative to other models, such as China’s.
    • Addressing the connectivity and infrastructure need: There are immense connectivity and infrastructure needs in the Indo-Pacific.
    • But these needs should not force the countries of the region into unsustainable dependencies.
    • The EU’s Global Gateway initiative unveiled in December 2021 hopes to address this by pooling the resources of the EU’s institutions and its 27 member states to raise 300 billion euros to build sustainable links.
    • India’s role: The EU and India have already concluded a Connectivity Partnership (last May in Porto), which can be a pillar of this wider initiative.
    • The Indo-Pacific is a crucial region for tackling global challenges such as climate change, biodiversity protection and health resilience. 
    • At the Forum, the EU will present the support it can provide to countries of the region, including in terms of green finance, to achieve their ecological transitions in a just manner.
    • The ministers will also discuss concrete steps to strengthen health sovereignty and promote the “One Health” approach to the pandemic response.

    Role of France and India in the region

    • France, itself a nation of the Indo-Pacific, has a long-standing commitment to upholding the law of the sea in the region, particularly through our permanent naval presence and joint exercises, such as our annual “Varuna” drills with India.
    • In the fields of biodiversity protection and plastic pollution, France and India can act together to spur multilateral action, as exemplified by India’s decision to join the France-initiated international coalition to protect 30 per cent of the land and seas by 2030 (High Ambition Coalition for Nature and People).
    • Cooperation between France and India on protected areas and national parks can also be expanded at the Indo-Pacific scale.
    • At the forum, France will propose the creation of an Indo-Pacific health campus, to be established in India, to bring together India’s pharmaceutical prowess and Europe’s technological capacity for the benefit of the region.

    Conclusion

    In a world of growing tensions, the core goal of France’s EU Presidency is to strengthen Europe’s sovereignty and its ability to decide its own fate. This endeavour matches India’s fundamental aspiration for strategic autonomy.

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

  • The anatomy of India’s Ukraine dilemma

    Context

    Late last week, India abstained from a United Nations Security Council (UNSC) resolution which called for condemning the Russian military action against Ukraine.

    Understanding India’s position on the Ukraine issue

    •  New Delhi has taken a subtle pro-Moscow position on the question of Russian attacks against Ukraine.
    • A geopolitical necessity: India’s Russia tilt should be seen not just as a product of its time-tested friendship with Moscow but also as a geopolitical necessity.
    • There are understandable reasons for India’s (subtle) pro-Russia position: an aggressive Russia is a problem for the U.S. and the West, not for India.
    •  North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) expansion is Russia’s problem, not India’s.
    • China problem: India’s problem is China, and it needs both the U.S./the West and Russia to deal with the “China problem”.
    • Neighbouring China as the rising superpower and Russia as its strategic ally challenging the U.S.-led global order at a time when China has time and again acted on its aggressive intentions vis-à-vis India, and when India is closest to the U.S. than ever before in its history, throws up a unique and unprecedented challenge for India.
    • There is an emerging dualism in contemporary Indian strategic Weltanschauung: the predicament of a continental space that is reeling under immense pressure from China, Pakistan and Taliban-led Afghanistan adding to its strategic claustrophobia; and, the emergence of a maritime sphere which presents an opportunity to break out of the same.

    Why India needs to balance relations with Russia and the US

    • Relations with Russia to manage continental challenges: New Delhi needs Moscow’s assistance to manage its continental difficulties be it through defence supplies, helping it ‘return’ to central Asia, working together at the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) or exploring opportunities for collaboration in Afghanistan.
    • Relations with US to manage maritime challenges: When it comes to the vast maritime sphere, the Indo-Pacific to be precise, Russia is not of great consequence to India.
    • That is where its American and western partners come into play. India is simply not in a position to address the China challenge in the maritime space without the active support of American and western navies and, of course, the Quad.
    • This unavoidable dualism in the contemporary Indian strategic landscape necessitates that India balances the two sides.

    Implications of war on Ukraine for India

    • 1] It will embolden China: Russian action in Ukraine dismissing the concerns of the rest of the international community including the U.S. will no doubt embolden China and its territorial ambitions.
    • 2] Sanctions on Russia will impact India’s defence cooperation: The new sanctions regime may have implications for India’s defence cooperation with Moscow.
    • 3] Russia-China axis: The longer the standoff lasts, the closer China and Russia could become, which certainly does not help India.
    • 4] Focus will move away from Indo-Pacific: The more severe the U.S.-Russia rivalry becomes, the less focus there would be on the Indo-Pacific and China, which is where India’s interests lie.

    Foreign policy challenge for India

    • Position of geopolitical vulnerability: India’s responses to the Russian aggression on Ukraine underline the fact that India is operating from a position of geopolitical vulnerability.
    • Going forward, India’s ability to be a “swing state”, “major power” or a “leading power” stands diminished.
    • There will be more middle-of-the-road behaviour from New Delhi rather than resolute positions on global strategic developments.
    • Interests over principles: India’s position also shows the unmistakable indication that when it comes to geopolitics, New Delhi will choose interests over principles.
    • A careful reading of India’s statements and positions taken over the past few days also demonstrates a certain amount of discomfort in having to choose interests over principles.
    • There is perhaps a realisation in New Delhi that a dog-eat-dog world, where rules and good behaviour do not matter, does not help India in the long run either.
    • Mastering the art of balancing extremes: Going forward, if tensions between Russia and the West persist, balancing extremes will be a key feature of Indian diplomacy.
    • Even though New Delhi abstained from voting on it (thereby siding with Moscow), it made its unhappiness about the Russian action clear in the written note.
    • Sticking to the principle of strategic autonomy: New Delhi’s response to the recent crisis, especially its “explanation of vote” at the UNSC indicates a careful recourse to the principle of strategic autonomy: India will make caveated statements and will not be pressured by either party.

    Conclusion

    India’s indirect support to the Russian position is not a product of Russian pressure but the result of a desire to safeguard its own interests.

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

  • Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication (SWIFT)

    The U.S., Europe and several other western nations are moving to exclude Russia from SWIFT, an international network for banks worldwide to facilitate smooth money transactions globally.

    What is SWIFT?

    • SWIFT is an international network for banks worldwide to facilitate smooth money transactions globally.
    • It is basically a messaging network used by banks and financial institutions globally for quick and faultless exchange of information pertaining to financial transactions.
    • The Belgium-headquartered SWIFT connects more than 11,000 banking and securities organizations in over 200 countries and territories.
    • First used in 1973, it went live in 1977 with 518 institutions from 22 countries, its website states.

    What exactly is it?

    • SWIFT is merely a platform that sends messages and does not hold any securities or money.
    • It facilitates standardized and reliable communication to facilitate the transaction.

    How does it facilitate banking?

    • Each participant on the platform is assigned a unique eight-digit SWIFT code or a bank identification code (BIC).
    • If a person, say, in New York with a Citibank account, wants to send money to someone with an HSBC account in London, the payee would have to submit to his bank the London-based beneficiary’s account number along with the eight-digit SWIFT code of the latter’s bank.
    • Citibank would then send a SWIFT message to HSBC. Once that is received and approved, the money would be credited to the required account.

    How is the organization governed?

    • SWIFT claims to be neutral. Its shareholders, consisting of 3,500 firms across the globe, elect the 25-member board, which is responsible for oversight and management of the company.
    • It is regulated by G-10 central banks from Belgium, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, The Netherlands, the UK, the US, Switzerland, and Sweden, alongside the European Central Bank.
    • Its lead overseer is the National Bank of Belgium.
    • The SWIFT oversight forum was established in 2012.
    • The G-10 participants were joined by the central banks of India, Australia, Russia, South Korea, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, South Africa, the Republic of Turkey, and the People’s Republic of China.
    • Europe, Middle East, and Africa are highest contributors to SWIFT.

    What happens if one is excluded from SWIFT?

    • US excluding Russia from SWIFT could have serious repercussions on how Russian banks carry out international financial transactions.
    • If a country is excluded from the most participatory financial facilitating platform, its foreign funding would take a hit, making it entirely reliant on domestic investors.
    • This is particularly troublesome when institutional investors are constantly seeking new markets in newer territories.
    • An alternative system would be cumbersome to build and even more difficult to integrate with an already expansive system.

    Are any countries excluded from SWIFT?

    • Iranian banks were ousted from the system in 2018 despite resistance from several countries in Europe.
    • This step, while regrettable, was taken in the interest of the stability and integrity of the wider global financial system, and based on an assessment of the economic situation.

     

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

  • What is the Munich Security Conference (MSC)?

    The latest edition of MSC a week ago assumed significance as it was here that the Ukrainian President appealed for help ahead of the Russian invasion.

    Munich Security Conference

    • The Munich Security Conference is an annual conference on international security policy that has been held in Munich, Bavaria, Germany since 1963.
    • It brings together heads of state, diplomats and business leaders from the world’s leading democracies for three days of meetings and presentations.
    • It is the world’s largest gathering of its kind.
    • Over the past four decades the MSC has become the most important independent forum for the exchange of views by international security policy decision-makers.

    How did it begin?

    • When the MSC was founded in 1963, it was envisioned as a way for leaders, mostly from the West, to discuss threats and dangers in an informal setting.
    • Most of the concerns at the time stemmed from the Cold War, which had dominated world politics for nearly a half-century.
    • Over time, the conference evolved into a platform for airing grievances and workshopping political agreements, some of them outside the realm of East-West relations.
    • In recent years, the conference has often invited leaders from authoritarian countries, and even adversaries, to speak.

     

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

  • Inflection point for the West-led global order

    Context

    The Ukraine crisis has come to a head with Russia biting the bullet and launching “a full-scale invasion of Ukraine.

    Russian invasion and response of the West

    • Hours before the invasion, the western countries had imposed a new round of sanctions against Moscow (targeting Russian individuals and banks linked to Mr. Putin’s regime).
    • German Chancellor Olaf Scholz suspended certification of Nord Stream 2, a major gas pipeline between Russia and his nation.
    • The European Union has announced a “massive” package of sanctions.
    • Incoherence in response: the West has been incoherent in its response — not being able to present a united front, and worse, not even speaking the same language at times.
    •  For the West, this has been a moment when it has been found wanting — a lack of imagination, lack of will and lack of leadership, all rolled into producing a lackadaisical response to the one of most serious security crises in decades.
    • France has used this moment of crisis in trying to showcase its own leadership credentials.
    • Lack of trans-Atlantic engagement: It turns out that even Mr. Biden has not been able to build the trans-Atlantic engagement around common objectives to be pursued collectively.
    • Energy dependence: With the EU importing 39% of its total gas imports and 30% of oil from Russia, and with the Central and Eastern European countries being almost 100% dependent on Russian gas, the reasons for internal EU dissonance are not that difficult to fathom.

    Implications for Indo-Pacific

    • Emboldening China: This ineffectual western response has emboldened not only Russia but also China as the focus of the West is in danger of moving away from the Indo-Pacific.
    •  The Russia-China ‘axis’ is only getting stronger as the two nations seem ready to take on the West that seems willing to concede without even putting up a fight.

    Conclusion

    Today, the balance of power is once again in flux, and as China develops a strategic partnership with Russia, the future of the West-led global order will be defined by how effectively it responds to the crisis in Ukraine.

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

  • Russian actions in Ukraine hardly pass the test for strategic victory

    Context

    On February 24, Russian President Vladimir Putin launched “special military operations” with the objective of “demilitarising Ukraine” but not “occupying” it.

    Why it was a crisis in the making?

    • Redrawing national boundaries by force: After 1945, this is the second time that national boundaries are being redrawn by force; the first was the 1999 North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) air strikes on Serbian forces that led to the creation of Kosovo.
    • Russian and Chinese protests about NATO undertaking “out of area operations” without United Nations Security Council approval carried little weight.
    • After the fall of the Berlin Wall in late-1989, then U.S. Secretary Of State had assured the Soviet President that “there would be no extension of NATO’s jurisdiction one inch to the east”.
    • Rather than look for a new European security framework, the newly independent Baltic and central European states sought security in a U.S.-led NATO.
    • Beginning in 1999, NATO has added 14 new members in stages.
    • At the NATO summit in 2008, at U.S. President George Bush’s urging, an in-principle opening for Ukraine and Georgia was announced, though France and Germany, conscious of Russian concerns, successfully opposed defining a time frame.
    • Later that year, Russia intervened in Georgia on the grounds of protecting the Russian minorities and took over the northern provinces of Abkhazia and South Ossetia.
    • Annexation of Crimea:  In 2014 Mr. Putin annexed Crimea.
    • For Russia, Crimea is vital as the peninsula hosts Russia’s Black Sea fleet, providing it access to the Mediterranean and its bases at Latakia and Tartus in Syria.
    • Despite no timeline for membership, Ukraine was made a NATO Enhanced Opportunity Partner in 2020.
    • The presence of British and U.S. warships in the Black Sea began to increase.
    • In 2019, the U.K. entered into a cooperation agreement with Ukraine to develop two new naval ports, Ochakiv on the Black Sea and Berdyansk on the Sea of Azov, a move that Russia saw as potentially threatening.
    • Beginning with NATO’s bombing of Serbia in 1999, interventions in Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya and colour revolutions to engineer regime changes, the U.S.’ unilateral withdrawal from the Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty in 2002 coupled with missile defence deployments in Poland and Romania, Russia’s grievances were accumulating.

    Faltering diplomacy

    • France and Germany initiated talks between Ukraine and Russia under the Normandy format leading to the Minsk agreements, in 2014 and 2015.
    • The first was for a ceasefire between Ukraine and the Russian-backed separatists and the second was between Ukraine, Russia, the two separatist regions of Luhansk and Donetsk and the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE).
    • Supportive declarations by France and Germany were intended to address Russian security concerns.
    • Ukraine undertook to introduce certain constitutional amendments to provide a degree of autonomy to the two provinces and Russia was to assist in withdrawal of all foreign forces.
    • However, neither side implemented and positions have only hardened since.
    • Russia’s threatening moves made NATO members, especially the Baltic states (Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania) and the central Europeans like Poland and Romania, especially nervous.
    • Finally, NATO remained united but unable to provide an off-ramps solution.

    Implications for Russia

    • NATO has been rejuvenated, the trans-Atlantic unity strengthened and Russia’s economic ties with Europe have been adversely impacted.
    • Given Russia’s considerable foreign exchange reserves, of nearly $640 billion, sanctions imposed by the U.S. and EU may not hurt immediately but eventually will begin to bite both the oligarchs and the common people.
    • Worse, Russia will become more dependent on China — for political support as well as a market for its energy exports. 
    • This will eventually weaken its hand in central Asia.

    Conclusion

    For Mr Putin challenge is to constrain the adversary’s options while increasing one’s own options and space for manoeuvre. His actions this week may yield tactical gains but hardly pass the test for strategic victory.

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