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

Civilsdaily

Login

Subject: International Relations

  • Seeking equilibrium with China

    The article analyses the India’s efforts to establish strategic equilibrium with assertive China and how that idea clashes with China’s desire to form an Asian order with itself at the top.

    Strategic equilibrium

    •  External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar articulated that India is seeking strategic equilibrium with an increasingly aggressive China.
    • It is hoped that with China’s growing differences with the U.S. China would pay attention to India’s sensitivities.
    • In achieving equilibrium with China, India has bravely been confronting a face-off in the Himalayas for the past several months.
    • India has been building issue-based alliances with the US and Asian majors like Japan, Korea, Vietnam and Indonesia, and Australia.
    • It has taken initiatives in the direction of economic de-coupling with China in the name of “atmanirbharata”.

    Hierarchical Asian order with China at top

    • China is not interested in equilibrium with any of its Asian neighbours, least of all with India.
    • China’s efforts are clearly to build a hierarchical Asian order, with itself at the top.
    • It is acutely conscious of India’s economic strength, military modernisation and overall capabilities.
    • It knows that India is also far behind on these counts.
    • China is ruthlessly resisting India’s access to global governance bodies, such as the UNSC and NSG.
    • To keep India tied at that level, China is objecting to India’s growing strategic proximity to the US. I
    • It is encircling India strategically and economically through its strategic and economic corridors — BCIM (Bangladesh, China, India and Myanmar), CPEC and the Trans-Himalayan Connectivity Network.
    • It is raising issues like Kashmir at the UN and establishing footprints in the Indian Ocean.

    What should India do

    1. Adjust with China, at least tactically.

    • Such an adjustment could be based on mutual give and take.
    • For India, our first priority could be the resolution of the border dispute.
    • Secondly, since China has offered to mediate between India and Pakistan, it should be asked to prevail over Pakistan to resolve the Kashmir issue.
    • In return for these “takes” India could offer access to Chinese commercial cargos to sea, through the Nathula pass.
    • India could also join China’s BRI on mutually acceptable terms.
    • India may also show its willingness, at least tactically, to join CPEC as both Pakistan and China have asked for, provided, India is allowed to undertake projects in PoK and Balochistan.

    2.India should revisit its Tibet policy, which is a core irritant for China.

    Consider the question “China seeking to establish an Asian order with itself at the top comes in the way of India establishing strategic equilibrium with China. Comment.”

    Conclusion

    It is possible that this “give” and “take” may not be acceptable to China. Even if it does not work out as planned, India would have made a bold diplomatic initiative and a huge tactical move towards thinking through out-of-the-box solutions and displaying that it can undertake risks to pursue its long-term national interests.

  • India’s strategic autonomy and its evolution

    The article analyses the evolution of India’s approach to strategic autonomy from the unipolar world dominated by the U.S. to now when the Chinese threat has been looming large.

    Context

    • Addressing a Southeast Asian forum last week, external affairs minister outlined India’s new quest for “strategic autonomy” in its global economic engagement.

    Connection with Atmanirbhar Bharat

    • This new quest for “strategic autonomy” is the natural external complement to new economic strategy, described as “Atmanirbharata” or “self-reliance”.
    • The concept carries so much ideological baggage, its revival by Government inevitably raised many questions
    • Senior ministers and officials of the NDA government sought to reassure India’s partners that Delhi was not marching backwards.
    • When applied to the foreign policy framework, “self-reliance” becomes “strategic autonomy”.

    Evolution of the idea of strategic autonomy

    • America towered over the world after the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991.
    • India’s past emphasis on strategic autonomy was in the context of the “unipolar moment” [dominated by the U.S.] that emerged after the Cold War.
    • On the one hand, India needed Western capital as well as technology and better access to its markets.
    • On the other hand, Delhi had to protect some of its core national interests from the threats of US intervention.

    India-U.S. Relations: Evolution after the Cold war

    • In the early 1990s, the Clinton Administration strong desire to resolve the Kashmir dispute between India and Pakistan.
    • The Clinton Administration saw the nuclear and Kashmir disputes as one and the same thing.
    • Indian diplomacy for the next two decades tried to change the US policy on both Kashmir and nuclear issues.
    • Under President George W Bush, the US discarded the long-standing temptation to insert itself in the Kashmir dispute.
    • The US also went out of the way to resolve the nuclear dispute with India by changing its domestic laws and international norms on nuclear proliferation.
    • The Obama and Trump Administrations have stayed the course since then.

    China challenge for India

    • On the atomic front, as the US sought to lift the prolonged atomic blockade against India, China sought to block the process.
    • China turned an obstacle to India’s membership of the Nuclear Suppliers Group.
    • China takes up the Kashmir issue regularly in the United Nations Security Council.
    • Today, India’s strategic autonomy is about coping with China’s challenge to India’s territorial integrity and sovereignty.
    •  China today is viewed in Delhi as a major threat to India’s economic development.
    • The bilateral trade deficit reached nearly $55billion in 2019.
    • India pulled out of an Asia-wide free-trade arrangement called the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership late last year, sensing the threat posed by China-led economic order.
    • Ladakh aggression forced India to go from a passive commercial withdrawal to an active economic decoupling from China.

    Way forward

    • The logic of strategic autonomy from China nudges India to look for strong security partnerships with the US, Europe, Japan and Australia.
    • On the economic front, India is exploring various forms of collaboration with a broad group of nations that have a shared interest in developing trustworthy global supply chains.

    Consider the question “Delineate the evolution of India’s approach towards the idea of strategic autonomy. How it differs from the past?”

    Conclusion

    Threats to either territorial integrity or economic prosperity are powerful enough on their own to compel drastic changes in any nation’s policies. Coming together, they promise to make strategic autonomy from an assertive China an enduring theme of India’s economic and foreign policies in the years ahead.

  • Thinking through the Nepal policy

    Unilateral actions by Nepal

    • Minor dispute involving territory around the Kalapani springs, was expanded to claim a large wedge of Indian territory towards the east, measuring nearly 400 square kilometres.
    • The expanded claim was incorporated into Nepal through a constitutional amendment and a revised official map.

    Future course of action

    • India should be willing to engage in talks with Nepal on all aspects of India-Nepal relations.
    • But any talks on the Kalapani issue should be limited to the area which was the original subject for negotiations and Susta.
    • Borders which have been accepted by both sides for more than 100 years and which have also been reflected on their official maps cannot be unilaterally altered by one side coming up with archival material which has surfaced in the meantime.
    • This would make national boundaries unstable and shifting, and create avoidable controversies between countries as is the case now between India and Nepal.

    Some historical background

    • The Treaty of Sugauli of 1816 sets the Kali river as the boundary between the two countries.
    • There was no map attached to the treaty.
    • Nepal is now claiming that the main tributary of the Kalapani river rises east of the Lipu Lekh pass from the Limpiyadhura ridgeline and hence should serve as the border.
    • Even if the lengthiest tributary may be one principle for a riverine boundary, it is not the only one.
    • There are many boundaries which do not follow any geographical principle at all but are the result of historical circumstances, mutual agreement and legal recognition.
    • British surveys of the region consistently showed the India-Nepal border heading due north of Kalapani springs.
    • This alignment never changed in subsequent years and was also reflected in Nepali official maps.
    • It has been argued by Nepal that it was the East India Company and successor governments “cartographic chicanery” to shift the source of the Kali river towards the east.
    • But Nepali government never contested such actions.
    • In 1969, the then Prime Minister of Nepal demanded that India military personnel manning 17 villages along the Nepal-Tibet border since the early 1950s be withdrawn.
    • If Lipu Lekh and Kalapani were on Nepali territory then why were they omitted from the list?
    • The Chinese, at least since 1954, have accepted Lipu Lekh Pass as being in Indian territory.
    • In the Nepal-China boundary agreement of 1960, the starting point of the boundary is clearly designated at a point just west of the Tinker Pass.

    Consider the question “Nepal’s newfound aspiration has led to the introduction of friction in India-Nepal ties, what is needed is recognition of each others’ concerns. Comment.”

    Conclusion

    For India, more than the exemplary inter-state relationship, it is the unique people-to-people relations between India and Nepal; and, fortunately, inter-state relations have been unable to undermine the dense affinities that bind our peoples together. While India should reject the Nepali state’s ill-conceived territorial claims, it should do everything to nurture the invaluable asset it has in the goodwill of the people of Nepal.

  • Explained: Pakistan-Saudi Rift

    The rift between Pakistan and Saudi Arabia over Jammu and Kashmir is out in the open after a delegation led by Pak Army Chief was denied a meeting with Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MBS).

    Try this question:

    Q. Discuss the new geopolitical realignment in the Arab world and India’s role in it.

    Take a look after how the ties emerged and deteriorated:

    Saudi-Pakistan ties: A Recap

    • The relationship between Saudi Arabia and Pakistan was most prominent during the 1971 war between India and Pakistan.
    • Saudi Arabia is also reported to have transferred arms and equipment including the loan of some 75 aircraft to Pakistan.
    • After the war, Saudi Arabia consistently supported the call for the return of Pakistan’s prisoners of war and for dropping the Dacca (Dhaka) Trial against 195 of them.
    • After the war, Saudi Arabia gave loans to Pakistan enabling it to buy arms worth about $1 million by 1977, including F-16s and Harpoon missiles from the US.
    • Saudi oil and dollars have kept Pakistan’s economy on its feet after sanctions following the nuclear tests.
    • Over the last two decades, Saudi Arabia has provided oil on deferred payments to Pakistan whenever it ran into economic difficulty.
    • Saudi funding of madrasas has also led to their mushrooming, later giving rise to religious extremism.
    • In 1990, Pakistan sent its ground forces to defend Saudi Arabia against Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait.

    Alignment over Kashmir

    • The alignment over Kashmir at the Organisation of Islamic Conference (OIC) crystallized since 1990 when the insurgency in J&K began.
    • While the OIC has issued statements over the last three decades, it became a ritual of little significance to India.
    • Last year, after India revoked Article 370 in Kashmir, Pakistan lobbied with the OIC for its condemnation of India’s move.
    • To Pakistan’s surprise, Saudi Arabia and the UAE issued statements that were nuanced rather than harshly critical of New Delhi.
    • Over the last year, Pakistan has tried to rouse the sentiments among the Islamic countries, but only a handful of them — Turkey and Malaysia — publicly criticised India.

    The Saudi perspective

    • Saudi Arabia’s change in position has been a gradual process under Crown Prince MBS.
    • As it seeks to diversify from its heavily oil-dependent economy, it sees India as a valuable partner in the region.
    • New Delhi, for its part, has wooed the Arab world over the last six years.
    • From Saudi Arabia to the UAE, it worked the diplomatic levers through high-level visits and dangled opportunities for investment and business
    • MBS, who is looking to invest in India, has taken a realistic view, along with UAE’s crown prince Mohammed bin Zayed.

    Energy connection to India

    • Saudi Arabia is India’s fourth-largest trade partner (after China, US and Japan) and a major source of energy: India imports around 18% of its crude oil requirement from the Kingdom.
    • Saudi Arabia is also a major source of LPG for India.
    • And, with India stopping oil imports from Iran due to the threat of US sanctions, Saudi Arabia is key in this respect as well.

    Saudi-Pakistan tension

    The tension between Saudi Arabia and Pakistan has been brewing for some time.

    • In 2015, Pakistan’s Parliament decided not to support the Saudi military effort to restore an internationally recognised government in Yemen.
    • Later, Pakistan’s then army chief General Raheel Sharif led the Saudi-led Islamic Military Alliance to Fight Terrorism, comprising 41 Muslim countries.
    • In February 2019, after the Pulwama terror attack, it was Saudi Arabia and the UAE that pulled their weight to get Wing Commander Abhinandan released, apart from the US.
    • The Saudi Crown Prince visited Pakistan and India at that time and made it clear that he valued economic opportunities. He did not wade into the Kashmir issue in India or the terrorism issue in Pakistan.

    Frustration over Kashmir

    A year after Article 370 was revoked, Qureshi belled the cat.

    • Pak accuses that Saudi Arabia has failed to deliver on the Kashmir and OIC had not played a leadership role in backing Pakistan against India.
    • This angered Saudi Arabia, which in November 2018 had announced a $6.2 billion loan package for Pakistan.
    • The package included $3 billion in loans and an oil credit facility amounting to $3.2 billion.
    • Riyadh demanded the return of the $3 billion loans and refused to sell oil to Islamabad on deferred payment. Pakistan immediately returned $1 billion, displaying the rift.
    • But, in the current economic situation, Pakistan is unable to pay the next tranche.
    • What has also angered Saudi Arabia is that Pakistan has been trying to pander to Turkey and Malaysia.

    The China factor

    • Pakistan and China have called themselves “all-weather allies” and “iron brothers” (during FMs meet).
    • Over the last year, Beijing has supported Pakistan on Kashmir, raising the issue at the UN Security Council thrice.
    • China has also emerged as Pakistan’s biggest benefactor through its funding of the CPEC.
    • Saudi Arabia too has invested in CPEC projects, to the tune of $10 billion, but Pakistan now looks towards Beijing for both diplomatic and economic support.

    Implications for India

    • Saudi’s silence on J&K as well as CAA-NRC has emboldened the Indian government.
    • At a time when India and China are locked in a border standoff, India has to be wary of Pakistan and China teaming up.
    • But with Saudi Arabia in its corner, for now, it may have leverage over Pakistan — Riyadh would not want a conflict and regional instability.
    • What is key to India’s calculus is that the Pakistan-China and the Pakistan-Saudi axes are not fused together at the moment: It is not a Saudi-Pakistan-China triangle.

  • China twist in Teesta Challenge

    Bangladesh is discussing an almost $1 billion loan from China for a comprehensive management and restoration project on the Teesta river. These discussions with China come at a time when India is particularly wary about China following the standoff in Ladakh.

    Try this question from our AWE initiative:

    Teesta River has become an important factor in India – Bangladesh relations. What are the hindrances in successful implementation of river water sharing agreement and what are its possible implications on India-Bangladesh relations? What could be the possible solutions?

    Teesta Project

    • The project is aimed at managing the river basin efficiently, controlling floods, and tackling the water crisis in summers.
    • India and Bangladesh have been engaged in a long-standing dispute over water-sharing in the Teesta.

    How has the Teesta dispute progressed?

    • The two countries were on the verge of signing a water-sharing pact in September 2011, when PM Manmohan Singh was going to visit Bangladesh.
    • But, West Bengal CM objected to it, and the deal was scuttled.
    • After the regime change in 2014, the government hoped that it could reach a “fair solution” on the Teesta through cooperation between central and state governments.
    • Five years later, the Teesta issue remains unresolved.

    Trends in India’s relationship with Bangladesh

    • New Delhi has had a robust relationship with Dhaka, carefully cultivated since 2008, especially with the Sheikh Hasina government at the helm.
    • Security: India has benefited from its security ties with Bangladesh, whose crackdown against anti-India outfits has helped the Indian government maintain peace in the eastern and Northeast states.
    • Trade: Bangladesh has benefited from its economic and development partnership. Bangladesh is India’s biggest trade partner in South Asia.
    • Bilateral trade has grown steadily over the last decade: India’s exports to Bangladesh in 2018-19 stood at $9.21 billion, and imports from Bangladesh at $1.04 billion.
    • Visas:India also grants 15 to 20 lakh visas every year to Bangladesh nationals for medical treatment, tourism, work, and just entertainment.

    Recent irritants in ties

    • There have been recent irritants in the relationship.
    • These include the proposed countrywide National Register of Citizens (NRC) and the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) passed in December last year.
    • Bangladesh had insisted that while the CAA and the proposed nationwide NRC were “internal matters” of India, the CAA move were “not necessary”.

    Chinese affinity with Bangladesh

    • China is the biggest trading partner of Bangladesh and is the foremost source of imports.
    • In 2019, the trade between the two countries was $18 billion and the imports from China commanded the lion’s share. The trade is heavily in favour of China.
    • Recently, China declared zero duty on 97% of imports from Bangladesh. The concession flowed from China’s duty-free, quota-free programme for the Least Developed Countries.
    • This move has been widely welcomed in Bangladesh, with the expectation that Bangladesh exports to China will increase.
    • China has promised around $30 billion worth of financial assistance to Bangladesh.
    • Additionally, Bangladesh’s strong defence ties with China make the situation complicated. China is the biggest arms supplier to Bangladesh and it has been a legacy issue — after its liberation.
    • Recently, Bangladesh purchased two Ming class submarines from China.

    India’s engagement post CAA

    • Over the last five months, India and Bangladesh have cooperated on pandemic-related moves.
    • Hasina supported Modi’s call for a regional emergency fund for fighting Covid-19 and declared a contribution of $1.5 million in March 2020. India has also provided medical aid to Bangladesh.
    • The two countries have also cooperated in railways, with India giving 10 locomotives to Bangladesh.
    • The first trial run for trans-shipment of Indian cargo through Bangladesh to Northeast states under a pact on the use of Chittagong and Mongla ports took place in July.
    • Bangladesh gave its readiness to collaborate in the development of a Covid-19 vaccine, including its trial, and looks forward to early, affordable availability of the vaccine when ready.

    Among other issues

    • The two sides agreed that Implementation of projects should be done in a timely manner and that greater attention is required to development projects in Bangladesh under the Indian Lines of Credit.
    • Bangladesh sought the return of the Tablighi Jamaat members impacted by the lockdown in India.
    • Bangladesh requested for the urgent reopening of visa issuance from the Indian High Commission in Dhaka, particularly since many Bangladeshi patients need to visit India.
    • India was also requested to reopen travel through Benapole-Petrapole land port which has been halted by the West Bengal government in the wake of the pandemic.

    Way forward

    • While the Teesta project is important and urgent from India’s point of view, it will be difficult to address it before the West Bengal elections due next year.
    • What Delhi can do is to address other issues of concern, which too are challenging.
    • Now, the test will be if India can implement all its assurances in a time-bound manner.
    • Or else, the latent anti-India sentiment in Bangladesh, which has been revived after India’s CAA -NRC push can permanently damage the historic ties.

    Back2Basics: Teesta Water Dispute

  • Importance of close alignment with moderate Arab centre

    The article analyses the threat the Arab countries faces from the new geopolitical realignment and India’s role in it.

    Geopolitical realignment in the middle east

    • Agreement on the normalisation of relations between the United Arab Emirates and Israel was signed recently.
    • At the same time, there is an equally significant reorientation of the Subcontinent’s relationship with the region.
    • This is marked by Pakistan’s alignment with non-Arab powers.

    Deteriorating relation of Pakistan with Arab world

    • Pakistan has been angry with UAE’s invitation to India to address the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation in early 2019.
    • Saudi Arabia’s reluctance to convene a meeting to condemn Indian actions in Kashmir last August has angered Pakistan.
    • While Pakistan appears to be dreaming of a new regional alliance with Turkey and Iran.
    • Pakistan is also betting that a rising China and an assertive Russia will both support this new geopolitical formation as part of their own efforts to oust America from the Middle East.

    Threat to the Arab world

    • Saudis and Emiratis see sharpening existential threats to their kingdoms from both Turkey and Iran.
    • Both Turkey and Iran now intervene with impunity in the internal affairs of the Arab world.
    • Two other states have joined this Great Game.
    • Malaysia’s Mahathir fancied himself as a leader of the Islamic world.
    • Arab Qatar, which is locked in a fraternal fight with the Saudis and the Emiratis, wants to carve out an outsized role for itself in the Middle East.

    India’s should follow five principles for Arab Sovereignty

    • 1) India must resist the temptation of telling the Arabs what is good for them.
    • India should support their efforts to reconcile with non-Arab neighbours, including Israel, Turkey and Iran.
    • 2) Oppose foreign interventions in the Arab world. In the past, those came from the West and Israel.
    • Today, most Arabs see the greatest threat to their security from Turkish and Iranian interventions.
    • 3) Extend support to Arab economic integration, intra-Arab political reconciliation and the strengthening of regional institutions.
    • 4) Recognise that India’s geopolitical interests are in close alignment with those in the moderate Arab Centre — including Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Oman.
    • 5) India can’t be passive amidst the unfolding geopolitical realignment in West Asia.
    • Some members of the incipient alliance — Turkey, Malaysia and China — have been the most vocal in challenging India’s territorial sovereignty in Kashmir.

    Consider the question “Examine the importance of India’s relations with Arab countries. What are the threats the region faces to their sovereignty and how India can play an important role to ensure their sovereignty.”

    Conclusion

    Standing up for Arab sovereignty and opposing the forces of regional destabilisation must be at the very heart of India’s new engagement with the Middle East.

  • Why has the Israel-UAE pact unsettled Palestine and Iran?

    Last week Mr Trump has announced that Israel and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) had reached a peace agreement. Many countries, including the European powers and India, have welcomed it, while the Palestinian leadership, as well as Turkey and Iran, have lashed out at the UAE.

    The strategic location of Gaza strip, West Bank, Dead Sea etc. creates a hotspot for a possible map based prelims question. 

    Consider this PYQ:

    Q. The area is known as ‘Golan Heights’ sometimes appears in the news in the context of the events related to: (CSP 2015)

    a) Central Asia
    b) Middle East
    c) South-East Asia
    d) Central Africa

    The Israel-UAE Pact

    • The UAE and Israel would establish formal diplomatic relations and in exchange, Israel would suspend its plans to annex parts of the occupied West Bank.
    • Israeli PM Netanyahu had earlier vowed to annex the Jewish settlements in the West Bank.
    • But now, as part of the agreement, Israel “will suspend declaring sovereignty over areas” of the West Bank and “focus its efforts on expanding ties with other countries in the Arab and Muslim world”.

    A timeline of Israel-Arab Conflict

    Arab-Israeli ties have historically been conflict-ridden.

    • Arab countries, including Egypt, Transjordan, Syria and Iraq, fought their first war with Israel in 1948 after the formation of the state of Israel was announced.
    • The war ended with Israel capturing more territories, including West Jerusalem than what the UN Partition Plan originally proposed for a Jewish state.
    • After that, Israel and Arab states fought three more major wars — the 1956 Suez conflict, the 1967 Six-Day War and the 1973 Yom Kippur War.
    • After the 1967 war in which Israel captured the Sinai Peninsula and Gaza Strip from Egypt, East Jerusalem and the West Bank from Jordan and the Golan Heights from Syria.
    • Arab countries convened in Khartoum and declared their famous three “‘Nos’ — no peace with Israel, no talks with Israel and no recognition of Israel.
    • But it did not last long. After the death of Egypt President Gamal Abdel Nasser, his successor Anwar Sadat started making plans to get Sinai back from Israel.
    • His efforts, coupled with American pressure on Israel, led to the Camp David Accords of 1978 with Israel’s withdrawal.

    Significance of the deal

    • It’s a landmark agreement given that the UAE is only the third Arab country and the first in the Gulf region to establish diplomatic relations with Israel.
    • In 1994, Jordan became the second Arab country to sign a peace treaty with Israel.
    • The UAE-Israel agreement comes after 26 years. If more countries in the Gulf follow the UAE’s lead, it would open a new chapter in Arab-Israel ties.

    Why did the UAE sign the agreement?

    • The old enmity between Arab countries and Israel has dissipated.
    • The Sunni Arab kingdoms in the Gulf region such as Saudi Arabia and the UAE had developed backroom contacts with Israel over the past several years.
    • One of the major factors that brought them closer has been their shared antipathy towards Iran.
    • Arab countries have signalled that they are ready to live with Israel’s occupation of Palestine.

    What do Arab countries want from Israel?

    • Arab countries expect a major change in the status quo on West Bank annexation which would put Israel under political and diplomatic pressure.
    • The UAE-Israel agreement has averted that outcome.
    • If a Democratic Party (Trump’s opposition and Obama’s allegiance) comes to power and restores the Iran deal, both the Israeli and the Arab blocs in West Asia would come under pressure to live with an empowered Iran.
    • A formal agreement and enhanced security and economic ties make the Arab and Israeli sides better prepared to face such a situation.
    • So there is a convergence of interests for the UAE, Israel and the U.S. to come together in the region.

    Where does it leave the Palestinians?

    • Unlike the past two Arab-Israeli peace agreements, Palestinians do not figure prominently in the current one.
    • In the present UAE-Israel deal, Israel has not made any actual concession to the Palestinians.
    • The Palestinians are understandably upset. They called the UAE’s decision “treason”.

    Geopolitical implications of the deal

    • The agreement could fast-track the changes that are already underway in the region.
    • The Saudi bloc, consisting of Egypt, the UAE, Bahrain and others, see their interests being aligned with that of the U.S. and Israel and their support for Palestine, which Arab powers had historically upheld.
    • Turkey and Iran now emerge as the strongest supporters of the Palestinians in the Muslim world.
    • This tripolar contest is already at work in West Asia. The UAE-Israel thaw could sharpen it further.

    Also read:

    West Bank Annexation Plan

  • UAE, Israel reach agreement to establish diplomatic ties

    The United Arab Emirates and Israel have agreed to establish full diplomatic ties as part of a deal to halt the annexation of occupied land sought by the Palestinians for their future state.

    What is the deal?

    • The deal halts Israeli annexation plans, the Palestinians have repeatedly urged Arab governments not to normalize ties with Israel until a peace agreement establishing an independent Palestinian state is reached.

    Significance

    • The announcement makes the UAE the first Gulf Arab state to do so and only the third Arab nation to have active diplomatic ties to Israel.
    • For Israel, the announcement comes after years of boasting by Israeli PM Netanyahu that his government enjoys closer ties to Arab nations than publicly acknowledged.

    West Bank  and its annexation plan

    • The West Bank is located to the west of the Jordan River.
    • It is a patch of land about one and a half times the size of Goa, was captured by Jordan after the 1948 Arab-Israeli War.
    • Israel snatched it back during the Six-Day War of 1967 and has occupied it ever since.
    • It is a landlocked territory, bordered by Jordan to the east and Israel to the south, west, and north.
    • Following the Oslo Accords between the Israeli government and the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) during the 1990s, part of the West Bank came under the control of the Palestinian Authority.
    • With varying levels of autonomy, the Palestinian Authority controls close to 40 per cent of West Bank today, while the rest is controlled by Israel.

  • Greater Male Connectivity Project (GMCP)

    India will fund the implementation of the Greater Male Connectivity Project (GMCP) in the Maldives with $500 mn packages.

    Try this question from 2014:

    Which one of the following pairs of islands is separated from each other by the ‘Ten Degree Channel’?

    (a) Andaman and Nicobar

    (b) Nicobar and Sumatra

    (c) Maldives and Lakshadweep

    (d) Sumatra and Java

    About Greater Male Connectivity Project

    • The GMCP will consist of a number of bridges and causeways to connect Male to Villingili, Thilafushi and Gulhifahu islands that span 6.7 km.
    • It would ease much of the pressure of the main capital island of Male for commercial and residential purposes.
    • When completed, the project would render the Chinese built Sinamale Friendship bridge connecting Male to two other islands, thus far the most visible infrastructure project in the islands.
    • At present, India-assisted projects in the region include water and sewerage projects on 34 islands, reclamation project for the Addl island, a port on Gulhifalhu, airport redevelopment at Hanimadhoo, and a hospital and a cricket stadium in Hulhumale.

  • Strategic autonomy in foreign policy

    India has been maintaining strategic autonomy in its foreign policy since Independence. But the end of Cold War and growing closeness towards the U.S. raises concerns. This article addresses this issue.

    India’s foreign policy: characterised by autonomy

    • India has historically prided itself as an independent developing country which does not take orders from or succumb to pressure from great powers.
    • Indian maintained this stance in its foreign policy when the world order was bipolar from 1947 to 1991, dominated by the U.S. and Russia.
    • Also, when the world was unipolar from 1991 to 2008, dominated by the U.S.
    • Or when it is multipolar as at the present times.
    • The need for autonomy in making foreign policy choices has remained constant.

    Flexibility in foreign policy

    • However, strategic autonomy has often been adjusted in India’s history as per the changing milieu.
    • During the 1962 war with China, Prime Minister Nehru, had to appeal to the U.S. for emergency military aid.
    • In the build-up to the 1971 war with Pakistan, Prime Minister Indira Gandhi had to enter a Treaty of Peace, Friendship and Cooperation with the Soviet Union to ward off both China and the U.S.
    • And in Kargil in 1999, India welcomed a direct intervention by the U.S. to force Pakistan to back down.
    • In all the above examples, India did not become any less autonomous when geopolitical circumstances compelled it to enter into de facto alliance-like cooperation with major powers.
    • Rather, India secured its freedom, sovereignty and territorial integrity by manoeuvering the great power equations and playing the realpolitik game.

    Concerns over India’s growing closeness to the U.S.

    • As India is facing China’s growing aggression along the LAC, Non-alignment 2.0 with China and the U.S. makes little sense.
    • Fears that proximity to the U.S. will lead to loss of India’s strategic autonomy are overblown.
    • Because independent India has never been subordinated to a foreign hegemon.

    What should be India’s strategy

    • In the threat environment marked by a pushy China, India should aim to have both- American support and stay as an independent power centre by cooperation with middle powers in Asia and around the world.
    • For India complete dependence on the U.S. to counter China would be an error.
    • Such complete dependence would be detrimental to India’s national interest such as its ties with Iran and Russia and efforts to speed up indigenous defence modernisation.
    • A wide and diverse range of strategic partners, including the U.S. is the only viable diplomatic way forward in the current emerging multipolar world order.

    Consider the question “Does India’s close alignment with the U.S. harms its strategic autonomy? Suggest the strategy to balance India’s security concerns and maintaining strategic autonomy.”

    Conclusion

    We are free and self-reliant not through isolation or alliance with one great power, but only in variable combinations with several like-minded partners. India is familiar with the phrase ‘multi-vector’ foreign policy. It is time to maximise its potential.