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

Civilsdaily

Login

Subject: International Relations

  • [op-ed snap] Navy to the rescue

    Context

    Earlier this week, India sent an amphibious warship, INS Airavat, to Madagascar in the Indian Ocean Region (IOR) to help in rescue efforts after the island nation was hit by a cyclone.

    Humanitarian operations- Key component of peacetime strategy

    • A key component in IOR: In recent years, humanitarian operations have emerged as a key component of the Indian Navy’s peacetime strategy in the IOR.
      • In March 2019, the Navy deployed four warships for relief operations when Mozambique was hit by Cyclone Idai.
      • Indian naval teams played a stellar role in search and rescue operations and even set up medical camps.
      • A few months later, the Navy sent two warships to Japan to assist in rescue efforts following Typhoon Hagibis.
      • A year earlier, Indian vessels had delivered urgent medical assistance to Sulawesi, Indonesia, after it was struck by a high-intensity earthquake.
      • Operation Samudra Maitri was launched after a telephonic conversation between Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Indonesian President Joko Widodo, with naval planners mobilising assets and relief material in quick time.
    • India’s vision for IOR: The Navy’s new humanitarian approach, many says, is a maritime manifestation of India’s vision for the IOR, christened SAGAR (Security And Growth for All in the Region).
      • Lesson’s from tsunami: The Navy’s turn towards human-centred maritime security isn’t recent. It was in the aftermath of the 2004 tsunami that naval commanders first recognised the importance of large-scale relief and rescue missions in the IOR.
      • For over a decade, considerable resource and energy have been spent developing specialist capability and skills for naval humanitarian operations.

    India- A regional security provider

    • What is changing in India’s stance: What’s new today is New Delhi’s resolve to burnish its ‘regional security provider’ credentials.
      • The Navy has reached out to countries across the Indo-Pacific region, with greater deployment of assets, personnel and specialist equipment, showcasing an ability to undertake complex and diverse missions.
    • The highpoint for India: The highpoint of the Navy’s ‘benign’ efforts was the evacuation of over 1,500 Indian expatriates and 1,300 foreign nationals from Yemen in 2015 amid fighting for control of Aden.
      • Three years later, Indian naval ships were in Yemen again, to evacuate 38 Indians stranded in the cyclone-hit Socotra Island.

    How the new role could help India?

    • India’s desire to be the linchpin of security: The Navy’s humanitarian impulse stems from a desire to be a linchpin of security in the IOR.
      • The concept of the first responder: At the core of the evolving operations philosophy is the concept of ‘the first responder’, with the capability and willingness to provide assistance.
      • Extension of the sphere of influence: The above approach has the potential to create an extended sphere of Indian influence in the IOR.
      • Projection of soft power: Naval leaders recognise that benign missions help project Indian soft power and extend New Delhi’s influence in the littorals.
      • Creating goodwill: Prompt response during a humanitarian crisis helps generate political goodwill in the neighbourhood.

    Cause for caution with maritime presence

    • The issue with prolonged presence: While low-end naval assets in humanitarian mode create strategic equity for India, the prolonged presence of front-line warships in foreign waters has the potential to make partners anxious.
    • Shaping perception over naval presence: Naval power, experts underline, must be deployed discreetly, shaping perceptions in subtle ways.
      • Need to hide the underlying intent: The key is to not let the underlying intent of a mission appear geopolitical.
      • To ensure that motives aren’t misunderstood, and the assistance provided is efficient and cost-effective, it is best to use dedicated disaster-relief platforms.
    • India lacking inventory hospital ship: However, unlike the U.S. and China that have in their inventory hospital ships fully equipped for medical assistance, India deploys regular warships and survey ships converted for medical aid.
      • India’s improvised platforms do not match the U.S. Navy’s medical ship USNS Mercy or the People’s Liberation Army Navy’s Peace Ark.

    Need for greater coordination

    • The Navy’s expanding array of humanitarian missions reveals a need for greater coordination with the Indo-Pacific navies
      • In particular the U.S. Navy, the Royal Australian Navy and the Japanese Self-Defense Forces- which possess significant experience and assets to mitigate humanitarian threats.

    Conclusion

    As natural disasters in the IOR become more frequent and intense, India’s regional security role is likely to grow exponentially. At the forefront of disaster scenarios, the Indian Navy and Coast Guard would find themselves undertaking demanding missions. Humanitarian operations could serve as a springboard for a larger cooperative endeavour in the maritime commons.

  • [op-ed snap] A case of a maritime presence adrift

    Context

    The International Maritime Organization (IMO), had mandated that merchant ships should not burn fuel with sulphur content greater than 0.5% beginning January 1.

    Why the new sulphur content limit matters?

    • The previous limit of 3.5 %: Before the ban, fuel had a comfortable sulphur content limit of 3.5%, which was applicable to most parts of the world.
    • Problem with low content fuel: Many industry professionals feared that the new very-low-sulphur fuel would be incompatible with the engines and other vessel equipment.
    • Problems with past US limits: Past mandates on sulphur limits in American waters had led to many technical problems. There have been instances of ships having been stranded after fine particles separated out from the fuel, damaging equipment and clogging up devices.

    How such regulations matter for India?

    • Sulphur cap one of the many problems: The global sulphur cap is only one of the many environment-related regulations that have been shaking up the shipping industry.
      • The industry is generally risk-averse and slow to accept changes.
      • For instance, efforts are ongoing to reduce nitrogen oxides (NOx) and ozone-depleting gases.
    • IMO project to decarbonise shipping: Further, the IMO has announced an ambitious project to decarbonise shipping in order to reduce carbon emissions.
    • How it matters for India? These regulations are triggering massive technological, operational and structural changes.
      • They come at a price which will have to be borne to a large extent by developing countries such as India.
      • India among 10 countries: The IMO currently lists India as among the 10 states with the “largest interest in international seaborne trade”.
      • Inadequate participation of India: But India’s participation in the IMO to advance its national interests has been desultory and woefully inadequate.
    • How it could matters: The sulphur cap, for instance-
      • Will reduce emissions.
      • Reduce the health impact on coastal populations but-
      • Ship operational costs are going up since the new fuel product is more expensive.
    • Refineries struggling to meet demand: As refineries including those in India struggle to meet the demand, freight costs have started moving up, with a cascading effect on retail prices.

    Significance of shipping and the role of IMO

    • Significance of shipping: Shipping, which accounts for over 90% by volume and about 80% by value of global trade.
      • Role of IMO: It is a highly regulated industry with a range of legislation promulgated by the IMO.
      • The IMO currently has 174 member states and three associate members; there are also scores of non-governmental and inter-governmental organisations.
      • The IMO’s policies or conventions have a serious impact on every aspect of shipping including the cost of maritime trade.
    • How IMO functions
      • The IMO, like any other UN agency, is primarily a secretariat, which facilitates decision-making processes on all maritime matters through meetings of member states.
      • How treaties are made? The binding instruments are brought in through the conventions -to which member states sign on to for compliance -as well as amendments to the same and related codes.
      • Structure of IMO: Structurally, maritime matters are dealt with by the committees of the IMO –
      • The Maritime Safety Committee (MSC).
      • Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC).
      • Technical Cooperation Committee.
      • Legal Committee and the Facilitation Committee.
      • Each committee is designated a separate aspect of shipping and supported by sub-committees. Working groups and correspondence groups support the subcommittees.
    • Role of subcommittees of IMO: The subcommittees are the main working organs, where the proposals from a member state are parsed before they are forwarded to one of the main committees.
      • The main committees, thereafter, with the nod of the Assembly, put the approved proposal for enactment through the Convention, amendments, and codes or circulars.

    India’s inadequate efforts at protecting the interest

    • How other countries deal with the issues: To ensure that their maritime interests are protected, the European countries move their proposals in unison and voting or support are given en bloc.
      • Permanent representative: China, Japan, Singapore, Korea and a few others represent their interests through their permanent representative as well as ensuring that a large delegation takes part and intervenes in the meetings.
    • How India is falling short? While these countries have fiercely protected their interests, India has not.
      • No permanent representative: For example, its permanent representative post at London has remained vacant for the last 25 years.
      • Representation at meetings is often through a skeletal delegation
      • India’s presentation inadequate: A review of IMO documents shows that the number of submissions made by India in the recent past has been measly and not in proportion to India’s stakes in global shipping.
    • “High-Risk Area” demarcation issue: The promulgation of “High-Risk Areas” when piracy was at its peak and dominated media headlines.
      • What happened in the issue? The IMO’s demarcation resulted in half the Arabian Sea and virtually the entire south-west coast of India being seen as piracy-infested, despite the presence of the Indian Navy and Coast Guard.
      • The “Enrica Lexie” shooting incident of 2012, off the coast of Kerala, was a direct fallout of the demarcation.
    • What were the consequences of the demarcation issue?
      • Increase in insurance costs: The “High-Risk Area” formulation led to a ballooning of insurance costs; it affected goods coming into or out of India.
      • It took great efforts to revoke the promulgation and negate the financial burden.
      • The episode highlighted India’s apathy and inadequate representation at the IMO.
      • NavIC introduction difficulty: There was also great difficulty in introducing the indigenously designed NavIC (NAVigation with Indian Constellation) in the worldwide maritime navigation system.
    • What could be the consequences in future?
      • EU’s documented procedure: In contrast, the European Union has a documented procedure on how to influence the IMO.
      • Agenda driven by developed countries: New legislative mandates, fitment of new equipment and changes to ship structural designs being brought on have been driven by developed countries.
      • Consequences for India: All the issues pushed by developed countries are not entirely pragmatic from the point of view of India’s interests.
      • Further, it will not be mere speculation to see them as efforts to push products and companies based in the West.

    Conclusion

    So far, India’s presence and participation in the IMO has been at the individual level. India should now make its presence felt so that its national interests are served. It is time India regained its status as a major maritime power.

     

  • [op-ed snap] What Brexit means for the EU and its partners

    Context

    On January 31, 2020, the United Kingdom left the European Union, the EU project will be taken forward by the 27 member states.

    A structured exit

    • Minimum disruption:  This is largely thanks to the Withdrawal Agreement that was negotiated with the U.K., which enabled “an orderly Brexit”.
      • One that, at least for now, minimises disruption for our citizens, businesses, public administrations, as well as for our international partners.
    • An arrangement of the transition period: Under this agreement, the EU and the U.K. agreed on a transition period, until the end of 2020 at least.
      • During which the U.K. will continue to participate in the EU’s Customs Union and in the Single Market, and to apply EU law, even if it is no longer a Member State.
      • During this period, the U.K. will also continue to abide by the international agreements of the EU, as we made clear in a note verbale to our international partners.

    Building a new partnership between the EU and the UK

    • Degree of continuity: With the transition period in place, there is a degree of continuity. This was not easy given the magnitude of the task.
      • By leaving the Union, the U.K. automatically, mechanically, legally, leaves hundreds of international agreements concluded by or on behalf of the Union.
    • Building new partnership: That work will start in a few weeks as soon as the EU 27 Member States have approved the negotiating mandate proposed by the European Commission, setting out our terms and ambitions for achieving the closest possible partnership with a country which will remain EU’s ally, partner and friend.
    • Links and shared values: The EU and the U.K. are bound by history, by geography, culture, shared values and principles and a strong belief in rules-based multilateralism. Our future partnership will reflect these links and shared beliefs.
    • Working on topics beyond trade: Both sides want to go well beyond trade and keep working together on security and defence, areas where the U.K. has experiences and assets that are best used as part of a common effort.
    • Cooperation on the wide topics: In a world of big challenges and change, of turmoil and transition, we must consult each other and cooperate, bilaterally and in key regional and global fora, such as the United Nations, the World Trade Organization, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization or the G20.
    • Collective responses to handle global challenges: Today’s global challenges- from climate change to cybercrime, terrorism or inequality — require collective responses.
      • The more the U.K. is able to work in lockstep with the EU and together with partners around the world, the greater would be chances of addressing these challenges effectively.

    Way forward

    • Continuing project forward as 27: At the very core of the EU project is the idea that it is stronger together; that pooling resources and initiatives is the best way of achieving common goals. Brexit does not change this, and efforts must be taken to continue this project forward as 27.
    • Note for the partners: EU’s partners can be sure that EU will stay true to an ambitious, outward-looking agenda-be it on trade and investment, on climate action and digital, on connectivity, on security and counter-terrorism, on human rights and democracy, or on defence and foreign policy.

     

  • India abroad: On diplomats firefighting negative references to India

     

    Context

    The European Union Parliament’s discussion recently on India’s Citizenship (Amendment) Act or CAA, is a cause of concern.

    Reactions in the West over the act

    • In the U.K. and the U.S.:  Parliamentarians in the U.K. and U.S. Congressmen, including Democratic presidential contenders, have asked India to “reconsider” the law and to “engage” with the protesters.
    • Resolution in the EU parliament: The EU parliamentarians went a step further.
      • Six critical resolutions: The EU parliament put out six different and extremely critical resolutions.
      • One of the six articles spoke of the possible risk by the CAA and the proposed National Register of Citizens, of creating “the largest statelessness crisis in the world”.
      • A sixth less critical resolution, but which worried about the “brutal crackdown” on protesters, was dropped.
    • Diplomatic outreach by India
      • After India’s intense diplomatic outreach, the parliamentarians agreed to put off voting on the resolution until after External Affairs Minister and the PM visit Brussels.
      • The hope is that with the U.K. scheduled to leave the EU on January 31, interest in the anti-CAA resolutions will wane.
      • Finally, the government has held that the CAA is India’s internal law.

    India’s Reaction

    • The sovereign right of India: While the government is right about India’s sovereign right, it would be deluding itself if it thinks any of these explanations are passing muster with the EU parliamentarians.
      • Dilution of case against foreign interference: The government diluted its own case against foreign interference when it facilitated a visit by EU MEPs to Srinagar last year.
      • By engaging the EU MEPs to avoid a vote in the EU Parliament this week, and offering to explain the reasons behind CAA, the government is diluting it further.
    • Need to stop reference to Pakistan: New Delhi must also consider the impact of its repeated reference to Pakistan as the sole mover of any motion against it at world legislatures and fora.
      •  626 MEPs of the total 751 were members of the groups that originally drafted the six resolutions, and it seems unlikely that Islamabad could have achieved such a majority.

    Diplomatic toll

    • Cumulative toll: The government must reflect on the cumulative toll on its diplomatic heft following international alarm over the CAA, plans for an NRC and the dilution of Article 370.
    • Instead of pushing a positive agenda for India or handling global challenges, Indian diplomats seem to be overwhelmed keeping out any negative references to India at official fora.

    Conclusion

    India must take steps to address the concerns raised at the global level over the act and also prepare itself for the possible impact of such actions.

     

     

     

  • [pib] Exercise SAMPRITI-IX

    As part of the ongoing Indo-Bangladesh defence cooperation, a joint military training exercise SAMPRITI-IX is being conducted in Meghalaya.

    Exercise SAMPRITI

    • It is an important bilateral defence cooperation endeavour between India and Bangladesh and will be the ninth edition of the exercise which is hosted alternately by both countries.
    • During the joint military exercise SAMPRITI-IX, a Command Post Exercise (CPX) and a Field Training Exercise (FTX) will be conducted.
    • For both the CPX and FTX, a scenario where both nations are working together in a Counter-Terrorism environment will be simulated under the UN Charter.
    • The FTX curriculum is progressively planned where the participants will initially get familiar with each other’s organizational structure and tactical drills.
    • The training will culminate with a final validation exercise in which troops of both armies will jointly practice a Counter Terrorist Operation in a controlled and simulated environment.

  • Explained: West Asia Peace Plan

    With West Asia Peace plan US plans to revive the stalled two-state talks between the Israelis and the Palestinians. Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu, who had earlier spoken against the two-state solution, has accepted the Trump plan.

    West Asia Peace Plan

    The West Asia peace plan unveiled by U.S. President Trump seeks to give the Israelis what they have long wanted — an expansive state with Jerusalem as its “undivided capital” and tight security control over a future Palestinian state.

    What’s the plan about?

    • The Trump plan seeks to address most of the contentious issues in the conflict such as the border of Israel, status of Palestinian refugees, Jewish settlements on the West Bank, land swap between Israel and Palestine, Israel’s security concerns and the status of the city of Jerusalem.
    • However US have proposed to almost all of these issues favour the Israeli positions.
    • For example, Israel would be allowed to annex the Jewish settlements on the West Bank as well as the Jordan Valley.
    • The Palestinian refugees, who were forced out from their homes during the 1948 Arab-Israeli war that followed the declaration of the state of Israel in the historic Palestine, would not be allowed to return.
    • They could move to the future Palestinian state, be integrated into the host countries or settled in other regional countries.

    Jerusalem: The undivided Capital

    • Jerusalem, perhaps the most contentious issue, would be “the undivided capital” of Israel, with Palestine gaining its capital in the east of the city — beyond the security border Israel has already built.
    • In return, Israel would freeze further settlement activities on the West Bank for four years — the time for negotiations.

    Land Swap

    • According to the Oslo Accords, the West Bank was divided into three areas and only one of them is under the direct control of the Palestinian Authority.
    • The plan proposes some land swap for the Israeli annexation of the West Bank Jewish settlements.
    • It seeks to enlarge Gaza and connect the strip with the West Bank through a tunnel.
    • The Arab towns in the southeast of Israel, which are close to Gaza, could become part of a future Palestinian state.

    Curb on Hamas

    • During this period, the Palestinian Authority should dismiss its current complaints at the International Criminal Court against Israel and refrain itself from taking further actions.
    • It should also crack down on “terrorist” groups such as Hamas and the Islamic Jihad.

    Investment Plans

    • US has also proposed $50 billion in investment over 10 years should Palestine accept the proposals.
    • In the final settlement, Palestine would get control over more land than what it currently controls.

    Implications for Palestine

    • The Palestine position is backed by most of the world powers is the formation of an independent, sovereign Palestinian state based on the 1967 border.
    • It means the whole of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip with East Jerusalem as its capital including the Old City that houses Haram esh-Sharif, also known as Temple Mount, a holy site for both Muslims and Jews.
    • Issues like the right of return of the Palestinian refugees are to be settled in final negotiations.
    • But US has effectively rejected the Palestinian claims outright and asked them to make more compromises.
    • He seeks to give Jerusalem and about 30% of the West Bank to the Israelis and has denied the right of return of the Palestinian refugees.
    • And for this, the Palestinians should take action against militant groups, stop supporting Palestinian families of those jailed or killed by Israel and refrain itself from questioning the occupation in international fora.

  • Oslo Peace Accord

     

    Palestinian officials threatened to withdraw from key provisions of the Oslo Accords, which define relations with Israel, if U.S. President Donald Trump announces his Middle East peace plan next week.

    The Oslo Peace Accord

    • The Oslo Accords were a landmark moment in the pursuit of peace in the Middle East.
    • Actually a set of two separate agreements signed by the government of Israel and the leadership of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO)—the militant organization established in 1964 to create a Palestinian state.
    • The negotiations between Israel and the PLO that ultimately led to the Oslo Accords began, in secret, in Oslo, Norway, in 1993.
    • The Oslo Accords were ratified in Washington, D.C., in 1993 (Oslo I) and in Taba, Egypt, in 1995 (Oslo II).
    • Sometimes called Oslo II, the interim agreement set out the scope of Palestinian autonomy in the West Bank and Gaza.
    • The interim pact was only supposed to last five years while a permanent agreement was finalised but it has tacitly been rolled over for more than two decades.

    A final nail in the coffin

    • World powers have long agreed that Jerusalem’s fate should be settled through negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians.
    • The Palestinians see east Jerusalem as the capital of their future state and believe Trump’s plan buries the two-state solution that has been for decades the cornerstone of international Middle East diplomacy.

  • Sagarmatha Sambaad

     

    Nepal has invited the PMs of India and Pakistan along with several other heads of government and heads of state for the Sagarmatha Sambaad.

    Sagarmatha Sambaad

    • Sagarmatha Sambaad is a multi-stakeholder, permanent global dialogue forum initiated by the Government of Nepal.
    • It is scheduled to be held biennially in Nepal.
    • The Sambaad (dialogue) is named after the world’s tallest mountain Sagarmatha (Mount Everest).
    • The Everest is also a symbol of friendship and is meant to promote the notions of common good and collective well-being of humanity.
    • The first episode of the Sambaad is scheduled to be held from 2 to 4 April 2020 by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (Nepal).
    • The theme of the first Sambaad is “Climate Change, Mountains and the Future of Humanity.”

    Significance

    • This is the first ever multi-stakeholder dialogue and a biggest diplomatic initiative in Nepal’s recent history.
    • India and Pakistan have been caught up in a cycle of hostility, which had prevented Islamabad from hosting the SAARC Summit in 2016.
    • The Kathmandu event aims to draw all the SAARC leaders and provide an opportunity to break the ice.
    • India had accused Pakistan of cross border terrorism while boycotting the Islamabad summit leading to its cancellation.

  • [op-ed snap] It’s not yet Howdy, Modi!

    Context

    Persistent in their efforts to remake their countries and their engagement with the world, Mr Modi and Mr Trump are shaking up the bilateral ties between the two countries, and the resultant flux could outlive their tenures.

    The emergence of both the leaders on similar promises

    • Improvements over the legacy of their predecessors: Both leaders continuously reiterate that their predecessors were incapable of protecting national interest.
      • The compulsion to reframe the national interest: Such premises commits them both to reframe the national interest, and both have articulated it with clarity and force.
      • For instance, Mr Modi, in Houston in September 2019 and Mr Trump in Davos this week, went great lengths to lay out figures that presented their respective regimes as the most effective guardians.
    • Both have cultural and economic agenda: Both dispensations believe that “the people” had been given a raw deal by earlier regimes.
      • Both have a cultural and economic agenda.
      • National awakening: They are now leading a national reawakening, and working hard for the hard-working people.
      • Both believe that cultural nationalism is a force for the good.
      • Securing borders and entry barriers: Both believe that national borders need to be strengthened by stricter monitoring and setting new bars for entry.
      • Renegotiating the treaties: Both leaders try to renegotiate the contract between the union and the States, and between citizens and the state within their respective countries.
      • The supremacy of executive: They assert the supremacy of the executive over the legislature and the judiciary.
      • Shared values: The notion of shared values of India and the U.S. has acquired a whole new meaning under Mr Trump and Mr Modi.

    Politics and governance

    • Hopes of status-quo in bilateral relations shattered: It was hoped that the stronger U.S.-India ties- that have autonomous drivers of convergence-would not be impacted by the nationalist politics of these two leaders.
      • But both leaders have been remarkably true to their politics in their governance.
      • Current tumult in the India-US ties: Shared values notwithstanding, national interests as perceived by these leaders have several points of divergence and therein lies in the current tumult in India-U.S. ties.
      • Opposition to the “world order”: Mr Trump has been outspokenly confrontational with the “world order” that he says has worked against American interests.
      • Dismantling the treaties: America under Mr Trump has wrecked treaties such as the Paris climate agreement and institutions such as the World Trade Organization and the United Nations, disrupting the “rule-based order”.
      • India’s relations with Bangladesh: India’s spirited outreach in the neighbourhood is still playing out. India’s historically warm ties with Bangladesh have been frayed after CAA.
    • India’s ambitions on the global level
    • The seat at the UNSC: India under continues to push for more space for itself in global affairs by seeking a permanent seat in the UN Security Council and membership.
    • NSG membership: India is also pushing for the membership of the Nuclear Suppliers Group.
    • The US actions at global levels
      • Expansion of the principle of the pre-emptive strike: America expanded the principle of pre-emptive strike to include the assassination of a senior official of Iran.
      • Renegotiating the treaties: After dismantling the North American Free Trade Agreement, Mr Trump forced Mexico and Canada to accede to his demands in a new trade deal.
    • The India-US relations and impact of U.S. relations with other countries
      • Impact on India-US ties: India’s ties with the U.S. are impacted by America’s ties with India’s adversaries and neighbours, China and Pakistan.
      • Hopes of alignment in the Indo-US ties: Mr Trump’s bluster against both had lit hope that there would finally be a near-complete alignment between India and the U.S. on strategy.
      • US-Iran conflict: Despite Mr Trump’s avowed opposition to America’s endless wars in West Asia, the US is going against Iran headlong, which is not in India’s interest.
      • Relations with Gulf Countries: Trump and Mr Modi share a strong bonding with the Gulf Cooperation Council kings, but their courses in the region are diverging.
      • US-Pakistan coming closer once again: The American President’s impatience to get out of Afghanistan has already pushed his administration closer to Pakistan, which is now further necessitated by his adventurist Iran policy.
      • The US disregard for China’s expansionist policies: Mr Trump has been singularly focused on one question-trade. He cares little about China’s expansionism and at any rate that is not a factor in his ties with other Asian countries.

    India-US ties- Points of fission

    • On the trade front: Mr Trump has bracketed India and China as two countries that have duped his predecessors to gain undue advantage. Which is far from seeing India as deserving special concessions to counterbalance China as old wisdom demanded.
      • Ending GSP: The US ended India’s status under the World Trade Organization’s Generalized System of Preferences and took other punitive measures.
      • India trying to decrease the trade surplus: By increasing hydrocarbon imports from the U.S., the government is trying to reduce India’s trade surplus.
    • Restrictions on H1-B visa: The US has tightened the restrictions on the H1-B visa which is used by the Indian companies.
    • Decreasing bipartisan support in the US: The mobilisation of Indian diaspora in America by the government has resulted in the inevitable blowback.
      • Diaspora divided and bipartisan support waning: The diaspora has been divided, and the bipartisan support for India is now squandered. Progressive sections on the Democratic side and religious libertarians and evangelicals on the Trump side are both concerned over India’s actions back home.

    Conclusion

    Partnership with America is critical to India. India must take the steps to align the interest but whenever it diverges India must take measures to minimise its impact on India while furthering its interests.

  • [op-ed snap] As India prepares to honour Bolsonaro

    Context

    India has invited the Brazilian President to be a guest of honour for Republic Day 2020. It is also a good opportunity for focusing on intra-BRICS partnership and trade.

    Future of the BRICS

    • To move towards multi-polarity: This was set up as a move towards greater multi-polarity; hence the spread across three continents and both hemispheres.
      • Infirmities in the group: The BRICS combination accounts for about one-third of global output, but a glance at the GDP t and growth rates will show the infirmities of the group.
      • Differences in GDP: In terms of GDP, China occupies the second position; India the fifth; Brazil the ninth; Russia the 11th; and South Africa the 35th.
      • Differences in growth rate: In terms of growth rates, China grew at 6%; India at 4.5%, Russia 1.7%, Brazil 1.2% and South Africa 0.1%.
      • Both politically and economically, Brazil and South Africa have been the laggards in recent years. But there are certain similarities as well.
    • Similarities in the group: Each country has different economic and political leverage and its own burden of domestic and external issues.
      • Decision-making structure: They all share the benefits of autonomous decision making.
      • Non-affiliation: The members of the group have non-affiliation with any binding alliances.
      • Informal structure: The group’s informal structure is an advantage for coordination among the most influential non-Western countries.
    • Challenges to the survival of the group: The BRICS group can survive only if its members maximise their congruencies to the extent possible. Following are the challenges to the existence of the group-
      • The growing intensity of Sino-Russian ties.
      • The pro-American leanings in Brazil.
      • The socio-economic difficulties of South Africa after nine years under the controversial Jacob Zuma.
      • India’s many difficulties with China, including its abstention from the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership.

    Achievement of the grouping

    • New Development Bank: The main achievement of BRICS is the New Development Bank, with each country contributing equally to its equity.
      • The bank has so far financed over 40 projects at a cost of $12 billion.
      • The BRICS countries are also developing a joint payments mechanism to reduce foreign trade settlements in U.S. dollars.
    • BASICS: An offshoot of the group, dealing with climate change, is BASIC (BRICS without Russia).
      • BASICS met at the Spain conference last month and reiterated its support to the Paris Agreement.
    • India’s lead role: India is taking the lead role in-
      • Digital health, Digital forensics
      • Film technology.
      • Traditional medicine.
      • Sustainable water management,
      • Internships and fellowships.

    Brazil-India relation

    • Visa waiver for Indians: Brazil declared the decision to waive visa requirements for Indian citizens.
    • Potential for investments: There is potential for Brazilian investments in the sectors of space and defence, agricultural equipment, animal husbandry, post-harvest technologies, and bio-fuels.
    • Low two-way trade: The total two-way trade is at a paltry $8 billion, and the prospect of closer economic ties, however desirable, would require considerable optimism.

    Conclusion

    Both India and Brazil need to further deepen the ties and increase cooperation in various areas of cooperation. BRICS, despite the various challenges, need to focus on congruencies between them and work towards greater cooperation.

    .