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

Civilsdaily

Login

Subject: International Relations

  • Preparing for SAARC 2.0

    Context

    A tweet by Prime Minister Narendra Modi resulted in the first-ever virtual summit of SAARC leaders on March 15. What has happened to this innovative exercise in health diplomacy since then?

    The follow-up after the video-conference of SAARC members

    • Considering that SAARC has been dormant for several years due to regional tensions, it is worth stressing that the fight against COVID-19 has been taken up in right earnest through a series of tangible measures.
    • First, all the eight member-states were represented at the video conference — all at the level of head of state or government, except Pakistan.
    • The Secretary-General of SAARC participated. They readily agreed to work together to contain the virus and shared their experiences and perspectives.
    • Second, India’s proposal to launch a COVID-19 Emergency Fund was given positive reception.
    • Within days, all the countries, except Pakistan, contributed to it voluntarily, bringing the total contributions to $18.8 million. Although it is a modest amount, the spirit of readily expressed solidarity behind it matters.
    • Third, the fund has already been operationalised. It is controlled neither by India nor by the Secretariat.
    • It is learnt that each contributing member-state is responsible for approval and disbursement of funds in response to requests received from others.
    • Fourth, in the domain of implementation, India is in the lead, with its initial contribution of $10 million.
    • It has received requests for medical equipment, medicines and other supplies from Bhutan, Nepal, Afghanistan, Maldives, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka.
    • Many requests have already been accepted and action has been taken, whereas others are under implementation.
    • Fifth, a follow-up video-conference of senior health officials was arranged on March 26.
    • The agenda included issues ranging from specific protocols dealing with the screening at entry points and contact tracing to online training capsules for emergency response teams.
    • Technical cooperation: Steps are now underway to nurture technical cooperation through a shared electronic platform as also to arrange an exchange of all useful information among health professionals through more informal means.

    Is the fund sufficient to deal with the grave threat?

    • So far, South Asia has not exactly borne the brunt of the pandemic.
    • Of the total confirmed cases in the world that stood at 12,89,380 on April 6 (according to the Johns Hopkins Coronavirus Resources Center), SAARC countries reported only 8,292 cases, representing 0.64%.
    • Reasons of lower spread not known: Whether the low share is due to limited testing, a peculiarity of the strain of the virus, people’s unique immunity, South Asia’s climate, decisive measures by governments, or just good fortune is difficult to say.
    • But it is evident that India’s imaginative diplomacy has leveraged the crisis to create a new mechanism for workable cooperation.
    • It will become stronger if the crisis deepens and if member-states see advantages in working together. Seven of the eight members already do.

    Is it the sign of revival of SAARC?

    • To conclude that SAARC is now returning to an active phase on a broad front may, however, be
    • In the backdrop of political capital invested by New Delhi in strengthening BIMSTEC and the urgings it received recently from Nepal and Sri Lanka to resuscitate SAARC, India’s foreign minister said that India had no preference for a specific platform.
    • But India was fully committed to the cause of regional cooperation and connectivity.
    • The challenge facing the region is how to relate to a country which claims to favour regional cooperation, while working against it.
    • Clearly, India has little difficulty in cooperating with like-minded neighbours, as it showed by forging unity in the war against COVID-19.
    • This is diplomatic resilience and leadership at its best.

    Conclusion

    Given the grave threat posed by the pandemic and other benefits that the multilateral platforms such as SAARC offers Both New Delhi and its friendly neighbours need to start preparing themselves for SAARC 2.0.

  • Between nationalism and globalism

    Context

    Although all world leaders have acknowledged the global imperative in dealing with the virus, they have put the nation first without much consideration to the collective action.

    The middle path between extreme globalisation and hyper-nationalism

    • ‘Nation first’ approach: Although all world leaders have acknowledged the global imperative in dealing with the virus, they have put the nation first. Are all nations now for themselves? Not so fast.
    • Sovereignty is certainly back. Solidarity is under stress, but not dead. The drift is towards a middle path between extreme globalism and hyper-nationalism.
    • The last few decades have seen the growing awareness of “global problems” like climate change and the need for “global solutions”.
    • Lack of collective action: The corona pandemic certainly adds to that consciousness. But as in the case of climate change, collective action is not easy to come by.

    Closing of the borders and the idea of a “borderless world”

    • One of the first steps most governments took during the current crisis was to shut down their borders.
    • The idea of a “borderless world” had gained much acceptance in recent years but is now under serious questioning.
    • For example, how the US, Canada and Europe are outbidding each other in buying medical material from China.
    • They are ready to pay a hefty premium if Chinese suppliers break from an earlier commitment.
    • Nations banning medicines: Meanwhile, many nations, including India, have banned the export of much-needed medicines and equipment to combat the virus.
    • Washington, which initially criticised other countries for limiting exports of essential drugs, has had no option but to go down that path as the toll from coronavirus rose rapidly.
    • Donald Trump is angry with 3M, one of the leading American producers of masks, for exporting to other nations at a time of huge domestic shortfall.
    • The US ban on exports of medical supplies came just days after the G-20 affirmed that its member states “will work to ensure the flow of vital medical supplies, critical agricultural products, and other goods and services across borders”.

    Globalisation and related ideas under stress

    • A testing time for two ideas: The problem is not that governments are being hypocritical. They are simply trapped in a crisis that is testing two important assumptions that guided the world in the last three decades.
    • One is that globalisation, with its long and transborder supply chains, generates prosperity through economic efficiency.
    • The second was that economic globalisation based on the dispersal of production will serve the interests of all nations.

    Opposition to globalisation in the West

    • The new objections to economic globalisation are not coming from the traditional champions of sovereignty in the East and the South, but the West.
    • It was North America and Europe that had preached the virtues of unhindered economic
    • They also championed the idea of globalism that will transcend national sovereignty in terms of both institutions and values.
    • New converts to nationalism and sovereignty began to appear in the West well before corona crisis.
    • Brexit to take control own borders: Britain walked out of the European Union claiming the need to “take back control” of its borders.
    • Storming the White House against all predictions in 2016, Trump has sought to push Washington away from the trinity of America’s post-war political commitments-to open borders, free trade, and multilateralism.
    • Globalisation and corona crisis: For Trump and his team, the corona crisis is confirmation of the dangers of excessive globalisation.
    • This argument is finding some resonance in Europe.
    • Addressing workers at a factory that makes masks in France, President Emmanuel Macron echoed the same feelings.

    Arguments against globalisation

    • An argument against efficiency: The efficiency argument of the globalists has been countered in the West by many who say societies are not merely economic units; they are also political and social communities.
    • The disadvantage to working people: While expansive globalisation has helped generate super-profits for the capital, it has put the working people at an increasing disadvantage.
    • Uneven distribution of benefits: The uneven distribution of the benefits from the dispersal of production and free movement of labour has undermined political support for economic globalisation in the West.
    • Role of China: Reinforcing this downward trend is the belief that China is misusing global economic interdependence for unilateral political advantage.
    • There were indeed strategic consequences to China’s emergence as the world’s factory.
    • After all, China is not a passive territory; it is an ancient civilisation with ambitions of its own.

    Future of globalisation and the role of China

    • The peak of expansive globalisation is over: While economic interdependence among nations can’t be eliminated, we might be past the peak of expansive globalisation and hyper-connectivity.
    • Many countries are likely to move to the diversification of external production, short supply chains and stockpiles of essential materials to limit vulnerability during times of crises.
    • China-West relations may change: The palpable anger against China in the US and beyond, for keeping the world in the dark about the spread of the coronavirus, has been magnified by Beijing’s “mask diplomacy” and political triumphalism after it got in control of the situation in Wuhan.
    • This anger is bound to translate into long-term changes in the relations between China and the West and some rearrangement of multilateral mechanisms.

    Conclusion

    Out of this restructuring new international coalitions are likely to emerge. Even as world leaders put their own respective nations first, they will also explore new forms of solidarity. Like the instinct for self-preservation, solidarity too is part of human nature.

  • The spectre of a post-COVID-19 world

    Context

    As COVID-19 spreads exponentially across the world, profound uncertainty and extreme volatility are wreaking havoc of a kind seldom encountered previously. It might, hence, be wise to start thinking of what next, if at least to try and handle a situation created by the most serious pandemic in recent centuries.

    China’s important role

    • No previous experience: The problem with the novel coronavirus is that with the exception of China, which battled another coronavirus epidemic in 2003 — SARS epidemic — there is little available for most nations on which to base their assessment of what next.
    • Further drop in China’s growth rate: What is known is that China’s growth rate has further plummeted, even as it was confronting an economic slowdown which had been in the works for some time.
    • Economic downturn internationally: The consequences for the global economy of China ceasing to be the world’s biggest exporter of manufactured goods are considerable.
    • And with no country in a position to replace it, this development will precipitate a further economic downturn internationally.

    Uncertainties before epidemic

    • The COVID-19 pandemic could not have come at a more difficult time.
    • Uncertain economic environment: The world was already having to contend with an uncertain economic environment, with industries in turn facing newer challenges such as having to adjust to a shift from cost efficiencies to innovation and breakthrough improvements.
    • Added to this were: a global slowdown, increasing political and policy uncertainties, alterations in social behaviour, new environmental norms, etc.
    • India’s position: Newly emerging economies, such as India, were even more affected by all this, than some of the older established ones.

    Impact on India and what lies ahead?

    • Estimate of cost by ADB: An early estimate by the Asian Development Bank, soon after the epidemic was declared, was that it would cost the Indian economy $29.9 billion.
    • A recent industry estimate pegs the cost of the lockdown at around $120 billion or 4% of India’s GDP.
    • May require six months to recover after epidemic: The Confederation of Indian Industry (CII) had at one point warned that the COVID-19 impact, and the existing stress in the financial sector, meant that India would require up to six months even after the entire course of the COVID-19 epidemic is over to restore normalcy and business continuity.
    • The COVID-19 Taskforce under the Finance Minister come up with measures to mitigate the economic hardship engendered by the pandemic, and finally a three-week-long lockdown.
    • Several precautionary measures based on guidelines in vogue elsewhere in the world for preventing pandemics of this kind, have also been introduced including ‘home isolation’, ‘home quarantine’, etc.
    • The prognosis as to what lies ahead is indeed bleak.
    • On the economic plane, according to most experts, a global recession seems inevitable.
    • The decline in demand: Uncertainty, panic and lockdown policies are expected to cause demand worldwide to decline in a precipitous way.
    • Start of downward cycle: Decline in demand will inevitably lead to a vicious downward cycle, where companies close down, resulting in more lay-offs and a further drop in consumption.
    • A precipitous decline in GDP would follow.
    • Massive funds would be needed: To compensate for this loss, massive inflows of government funds would be needed, but most governments, India included, might find it difficult to find adequate resources for this purpose.
    • Right time for fund: Equally important, if not more so, is that such massive inflows of funds (if they are to be effective) should be here and now, and not later, by which time the situation may well have spiralled out of control. Global coordination was a must in the extant situation.

    Disruption in the global order- Implications for the position of the US

    • COVID-19 is, in turn, expected to bring about major changes in the global order.
    • Changes would get accelerated: Some of these changes have, no doubt, been in the making for some time, but would get accelerated.
    • As of now, though the U.S. is no longer the global power that it once was, it is hardly in retreat.
    • Retreat from Afghanistan, not the end: The US is, without doubt, increasingly disinclined to act as the world’s gendarme, as instanced by its retreat from Afghanistan after a dubious accord with the Afghan Taliban,
    • But this was not the end of the road as far as U.S. power was concerned.
    • The US would step back further: Post COVID-19, however, and given that the U.S. is among the countries badly affected by this pandemic, together with existing uncertainties affecting its financial markets, the U.S. can be expected to step back even further — from one of assertion to neutrality in global affairs.
    • Already, U.S. command of the global commons has weakened. Meantime, China and Russia have strengthened their relationship and improved their asymmetric capabilities.
    • US not the largest economy by PPP: The challenge from China is becoming more obvious by the day — measured by purchasing power parity, the S. is not the largest economy in the world as of now.
    • Russian challenge: Even more daunting from a U.S. standpoint, and also representing a sea-change from the recent past, Russia has become far more economically and politically stable and an important power broker in West Asia.
    • Impact on liberal international order: These shifts cannot but, and are likely to, have a direct impact on the liberal international order. It could, in turn, give a boost to authoritarian regimes and authoritarian trends.

    Impact on social behaviour

    • Moving away from the political and economic consequences of COVID-19 are other concerns arising from an extended lockdown, social distancing and isolation.
    • The epidemic of despair: Psychologists are even talking of an ‘epidemic of despair’ arising from a fear of unknown causes, resulting in serious anxiety and mental problems.
    • Problems due to extended isolation: Extended isolation, according to psychologists, can trigger a different kind of pandemic even leading to possible suicidal tendencies, fits of anger, depression, alcoholism and eccentric behavioural patterns.

    Inequality and impact

    • The impact is not the same for all: Another fallout from the current epidemic might well be the extent to which inequality in incomes impact segments of the population, facing a common malaise.
    • Countries lacking a comprehensive nation-wide health system would find this an even more difficult situation to handle.
    • Meantime, as the economy weakens, accompanied by job losses, those without high levels of skills would fall further behind.
    • This is evident to some extent already given recent reports of mass migration across the Indian landmass.
    • Out of work migrant labour, unable to find new jobs since they lack the necessary skills, are attempting to return to their normal habitat, bringing in their wake untold suffering and, perhaps even the spread of the virus.
    • This has all the makings of a huge human tragedy. Existing curbs on their movement would further exacerbate the problem, and could even lead to a major law and order situation.

    Possibility of the rise of digital authoritarianism

    • One possible, and unexpected, aspect of the COVID-19 epidemic could be the thrust it could provide to ‘digital authoritarianism’.
    • China’s authoritarian methods seem to have helped it to contain the spread of the virus — at least for the time being.
    • Somewhat similar tactics are being employed by some other countries as well.
    • In turn, leaders across many nations may find China’s methods, and the embracing of technology to refashion authoritarianism for the modern age irresistible, and a standard to be adapted, even if they profess to be democratic.
    • The rise of digital autocracies could lead to digital repression, and in the age of AI-powered surveillance, create a capacity for predictive control, or what is often referred to as ‘social management’.

    Conclusion

    The pandemic even after it’s over could change the world in more than one ways and we must be cautious in our approach in accepting or rejecting these changes brought about by the epidemic.

  • Operation Sanjeevani

    An Indian Air Force (IAF) C-130J transport aircraft o delivered 6.2 tonne of essential medicines and hospital consumables to Maldives under Operation Sanjeevani.

    Operation Sanjeevani

    • At the request of the govt. of Maldives, the IAF aircraft activated Operation Sanjeevani and lifted these medicines from airports in New Delhi, Mumbai, Chennai and Madurai before flying to the Maldives.
    • Among other things, these medicines include influenza vaccines, anti-viral drugs such as lopinavir and ritonavir — which have been used to treat patients with COVID-19 in other countries.
    • The flights are being operated on commercial basis following demands from pharmaceutical companies and their intermediaries and will carry cargo on inbound as well as outbound flights.
    • The cargo operations will help the airline earn some revenue at a time there is a ban on passenger flights and the entire fleet is grounded.

  • The art of China’s legalpolitic

    Context

    A resolution has been moved in the US Senate calling on the international community to inquire into the origins of the virus in China’s Wuhan province. Delhi could learn a trick or two from Beijing on how to make international law the keystone of India’s diplomacy, especially in the multilateral domain.

    Fixing responsibility for the outbreak on China

    • Compensation demand: Lawyers and activists have begun to sue China in US courts demanding compensation. Politicians are not far behind.
    • The U.S. Senate resolution: A resolution has been moved in the US Senate calling on the international community to inquire into the origins of the virus in China’s Wuhan province, quantify the damage inflicted on the rest of the world, and design a mechanism of reparations from Beijing.
    • Basis of the demand for compensation: The case for China’s culpability is based on the principles of state responsibility and Beijing’s alleged failure to respect the obligation, under the 2005 International Health Regulations (IHR), to notify the world on the outbreak of the epidemic.
    • Is the basis valid? Many international jurists dismiss these claims by citing the principles of sovereign state immunity, the lack of precedent in holding states to account for the spread of infectious disease beyond their borders and the absence of provisions for reparations under the IHR.

    The interplay between legality, moralpolitik and geopolitics

    • Gulliver and Lilliputs of the world: On the face of it, China is too much of a Gulliver to be tied down by legal Lilliputs.
    • The Legalpolitik: Before we dismiss international law as not real law, “legalpolitik” can put some real pressure on big nations and contribute to the power play among them.
    • Role of public opinion: As public opinion began to intrude into diplomacy over the last two centuries, legality and moralpolitik have become an integral part of geopolitics.

    Difficulty in proving the case against China

    • The cost of a pandemic: Most world leaders know, whether they say it aloud or not, the international costs of the pandemic could have been far lesser if China had acknowledged the spread of the virus from Wuhan early on and informed other countries.
    • It is one thing to know but entirely another to prove it under the law.
    • The pursuit of claims is a waste of time: Most governments believe the pursuit of claims against Beijing is a waste of time.
    • Political heft of China: If Beijing can make the World Health Organisation toe its line and prevent the rest of the world, including US President Donald Trump, from describing COVID-19 as the “China Virus”, it is unlikely to be impressed by a few legal impresarios from the West.
    • Precedence of defying the law: After all, China had dismissed the unanimous verdict of the International Court of Justice in 2016 on Beijing’s territorial claims over the South China Sea.
    • Beijing did not even bother to appear in the case filed by the Philippines.
    • China had simply declared that the ICJ has no jurisdiction in the matter.

    The relation between power and law in international relations

    • Power prevails: That power tends to prevail over law is certainly truer in international relations than domestic politics.
    • Law in the domestic domain: In the domestic domain, the state as the highest authority compels citizens to abide by the law, with force if necessary.
    • Law in the international arena: In the international arena, no single actor has a monopoly over the instruments of force.
    • We have multiple sovereigns but no “world government” that can compel deviant states to conform to rules.

    Role of the UNSC

    • In theory, the members of the UN Security Council can authorise coercion — in the form of economic sanctions or military force.
    • This, in turn, involves building a consensus among major powers, including the five permanent members of the UNSC who wield a veto.
    • In reality, then, the UNSC can’t act against one of the five permanent members.
    • Beijing, which was so eager to get the UNSC to discuss the situation in Jammu and Kashmir since last August, has simply blocked all suggestions for a discussion on the corona crisis in recent days.

    Are laws meaningless in the global arena?

    • Legal narratives have the weight of their own: While outcomes in international conflicts tend to be defined by power, the international discourse on any conflict today is framed in legal terms.
    • Whether it is a conversation between a state and its citizen or among governments or in a country’s outreach to the global society, legal narratives have a weight all of their own.
    • Delhi, for example, has struggled in recent days to counter the global interpretation of its domestic actions.
    • Importance of legal argument: Winning the legal argument, China has learnt from the history of great power relations, is very much part of great power jousting.
    • The negative lessons are from the Soviet Union that dismissed the Western legal arguments during the Cold War as based on the logic of capital and empire.
    • That did not convert many beyond the choir.
    • The positive lessons are from Great Britain and the United States.
    • The enduring Anglo-Saxon hegemony is rooted not just in economic and military power. It has always been underwritten by a powerful legal tradition that shapes the global narrative on most issues.
    • China developing own narrative: As it mounts a massive propaganda offensive against the US on the corona crisis, China’s state lawyers have filed a case in the Wuhan Intermediate People’s Court last week accusing various US government agencies of covering up the origin of the coronavirus.
    • China’s own narrative: It is no longer about China defending against a powerful international narrative; it is developing one of its own.

    Conclusions

    • 1. Make international law keystone of diplomacy: India has been at the receiving end of China’s legalpolitik — most recently on the quest for the membership of the Nuclear Suppliers Group and the constitutional changes in Kashmir.
    • Delhi could learn a trick or two from Beijing on how to make international law the keystone of India’s diplomacy, especially in the multilateral domain.
    • 2. Reinvest in the geo-legal arts: If China could emulate US and Britain on leveraging legalpolitik for strategic ends, India should not find it too hard to reinvest in the geo-legal arts that Delhi inherited from the Anglo-Saxons but seems to have lost along the way.

  • The deep void in global leadership

    Context

    The coronavirus’s flight across the world at lightning speed has exposed the total void in collective leadership at the global level.

    No global plan of action to combat the virus

    • No plan of action: Three months into the catastrophic war declared by an invisible virus, there is as yet no comprehensive, concerted plan of action, orchestrated by global leaders.
    • The G20 meeting: The G20 has just had a virtual meeting, at the prodding of Prime Minister Narendra Modi.
    • $ 5-trillion into the world economy: It is encouraging to learn that the G20 leaders have agreed to inject $5-trillion into the world economy to partially counter the devastating economic impact of the pandemic. This is indeed good news.
    • Need to do more: But taking collective ownership to fight a global war against the virus will require a lot more than writing cheques.

    SAARC meeting stands out in the world

    • Pandemic is not treated as a common enemy: World leaders are obviously overwhelmed with their own national challenges and do not appear inclined to view the pandemic as a common enemy against mankind, which it is.
    • Delay in reporting by China: China delayed reporting the virus to the World Health Organisation (WHO), and perhaps, contributed to the exacerbation of the spread of the virus across the globe.
    • Unilateral suspension of flight by the US: It was reported that the Trump administration did not even inform the European Union before it shut off flights from Europe.
    • Why the SAARC meeting stands out? It must be acknowledged that the initiative taken by Mr Modi in the early days to convene a meeting of South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation countries stands out in contrast to the pusillanimous leadership around the world.

    Need for leaders of nations to come together for collective global action.

    • Pandemic to persist: There is no evidence that, at the global level, the pandemic has abated yet and would be brought under control soon.
    • Massive lockdown, not a solution: To imagine that nations would be able to tame the virus soon with massive shutdowns might be just wishful thinking.
    • National shutdowns and physical distancing have been a challenge not only in the United States and some European countries, but it would also be more so in populous countries such as India.
    • At any rate, such lockouts come at enormous economic and social costs.
    • The utility of long suspension of international travel: As long as the virus is alive in some corner of the world, it would resume its travel across the world the moment international travel restrictions are relaxed.
    • Is it realistic to imagine that international travel will remain suspended until the last virus alive on this planet is extinguished?
    • This is a war. A good war against a bad enemy, and a common enemy, that respects no borders.
    • It is a global challenge to be fought by collective global leadership: If this global challenge is not a battle to be fought by a collective global leadership, nothing else is.
    • And yet, the typical response by all affected nations has been to impose ‘National distancing’ by closing borders.
    • While this is no doubt, a most appropriate response, there is a much bigger and emergent need for leaders of nations to come together for collective global action.

    Two reasons for the lack of collective global action

    • 1. Right-wing nationalism: The swing towards right-wing nationalism, as a guiding political ideology, in large swathes of the world, particularly in the U.S.
    • This ideology posits ‘global good’ being in conflict with and inimical to national interests.
    • 2. Ineffectiveness of the multilateral institutions: The United Nations was the outcome of the shared vision of the world leaders after World War II, that collective action is the only way forward to prevent the occurrence of another war.
    • That institution has notoriously failed to live up to its expectations to maintain peace among nations in the nearly 80 years since its formation.
    • Its affiliate organisations have, in several ways, failed to deliver on their lofty missions.
    • In particular WHO has proven to be too lethargic in reacting to pandemics in the past.
    • Its responses to COVID-19 has come under the scanner, not merely for incompetence, but also for lack of intellectual integrity.

    G-20 offers hope

    • A nimble outfit, not burdened with bureaucracy, is required to manage a global crisis of the nature that we are confronted with, today.
    • The G20, with co-option of other affected countries, itself might serve the purpose for the present.
    • What the global leadership must acknowledge: What is important is for the global leaders to acknowledge what every foot soldier knows: winning a war would require the right strategy, rapid mobilisation of relevant resources and, most importantly, timely action.
    • The following actions should come out of such a collective-
    • 1. Dealing with the shortages: The collective should ensure that shortages of drugs, medical equipment and protective gear do not come in the way of any nation’s capacity to contain or fight the pandemic.
    • Assistance from other countries: It is very likely that some nations that have succeeded in bringing the pandemic under control, such as China, Japan or South Korea, might have the capability to step up production at short notice to meet the increasing demand from other countries which are behind the curve.
    •  Development of information exchange: This would typically involve urgent development of information exchange on global production capacity, present and potential, demand and supply.
    • This is not to mean that there should be centralised management, which is not only infeasible but counterproductive, as the attendant bureaucracy will impede quick action.
    • A common information exchange could restrain the richer countries from predatory contracting of global capacities.
    • 2. Protocol among participant countries: Protocols might need to be put in place among participating countries to ensure seamless logistics for the supply chain for essential goods and services to function efficiently.
    • This might be particularly necessary in the context of controls on international traffic and national shutdowns.
    • There would need to be concomitant accord to eliminate all kinds of tariff and non-tariff barriers.
    • 3. Exchange of information: There needs to be an instantaneous exchange of authenticated information on what clinical solutions have succeeded and what has not.
    • A classic example is an issue relating to hydroxychloroquine, which is being used experimentally, bypassing the rigours of randomised clinical trials.
    • While there is no substitute to classic clinical proof, the more field-level information is shared within the medical community, the better will be the success rates of such experimentation.
    • 4.Cross country collaboration on the trials: This is a time to have cross-country collaboration on laboratory trials and clinical validation for vaccines and anti-viral drugs.
    • It must be acknowledged that WHO has already moved on this issue, although, perhaps, belatedly.
    • The best way to ensure speedy research is to pool global resources.
    • This attempt to collaborate might also bring in its wake an acceptable commercial solution that adequately incentivises private research while ensuring benefits being available to the entire world at affordable costs.
    • Such a framework might be necessary for sustained collaborations for future challenges.
    • 5. Easy movement of trained health professionals: There is a need to facilitate easy movement of trained health professionals across the world to train others and augment resources wherever there are shortages.
    • In other words, nations should come together to organise a global army to fight the pandemic, equipped with the best weapons and tools.
    • 6. The anticipation of food shortages: We must anticipate food shortages occurring sooner or later, in some part of the world, consequent to the national shutdowns.
    • Ironically, while we might have saved lives from the assault of the novel coronavirus, we might run the risk of losing lives to starvation and malnutrition, somewhere in the world if we do not take adequate precautions.
    • This requires not only coordinated global action; it would also turn out to be the test of global concern for mankind in general.

    Reconstruction of the global economy

    • Devastation no less than after the world war: Eventually, there is no doubt that human talent will triumph over the microscopic virus. But the economic devastation, that would have been caused as a result will be no less than the aftermath of a world war.
    • What should the reconstruction of economy involve? An orderly reconstruction of the global economy, which is equitable and inclusive, will eventually involve renegotiating terms of trade among key trading blocs, concerted action among central bankers to stabilise currencies, and a responsible way to regulate and manage global commodity markets.

    Conclusion

    Does India have the power to awaken the conscience of the Superpowers and catalyse collective global action? Remember, historically, it is always the weakling or the oppressed, who have caused transformational changes in the world order.

  • Terrorist attack in Kabul’s Gurudwara

    Context

    Attack on gurdwara underlines that the US-Taliban deal has brought Afghanistan no respite.

    The futility of US-Taliban deal highlighted

    • The attack on a gurdwara in Kabul, in which 25 people were killed, has shown that the coronavirus may well be vanquished by science, but human beings will continue to inflict barbarity upon each other.
    • Within hours, it was claimed by the Islamic State, which later also said it had carried it out in revenge for Kashmir.
    • The deal not leading to peace: If there were still doubts left on this score, it must be clear after this attack that the US-Taliban deal was not an arrangement to return Afghanistan to peace.

    Why the attack matters for India?

    • The gurdwara attack was the first strike after the agreement claimed by the IS.
    • A provision in pact: Under the pact, the Taliban have committed themselves to eliminate the Islamic State from Afghanistan.
    • Yet to start honouring commitment: If the IS claim is true, the Taliban have yet to begin honouring that commitment.
    • India’s reaction: Appearing to hint at something more sinister, the ministry of external affairs called the attack “diabolical” and condemned the “perpetrators and their backers”, a formulation usually reserved for attacks suspected to have emanated from or to have the backing of Pakistan.
    • Connection of attack with India: The Taliban’s operational leadership is now in the hands of Sirajuddin Haqqani of the Haqqani group, which has been blamed for several attacks on Indian targets, including the 2008 Indian Embassy bombing in Kabul.
    • The Taliban have denied having anything to do with the gurdwara attack, and Pakistan has condemned it strongly.
    • The question over IS in Afghanistan: Who, really, is the IS in Afghanistan is a question that security experts have been asking for some time now.

    COVID-19 outbreak in Afghanistan

    • Appeal for ceasefire: The UN Secretary-General made an appeal for an immediate ceasefire in theatres of conflict across the world, to enable governments, health workers and humanitarian aid agencies to access those who might be most vulnerable to COVID-19.
    • The epicentre of the outbreak is Herat, where over 1,00,000 Afghans recently crossed over from Iran.
    • After the number of confirmed cases rose to 58, the province has been placed under lockdown.
    • But the government is hobbled in its efforts to contain the disease, both by a contested election result — Afghanistan has two presidents — and the burden of an agreement that has brought it no respite.

    Conclusion

    With the recently concluded US-Taliban deal delivering no peace and coronavirus spreading unabated, Afghanistan faces two contagions, new and old — COVID-19 and the relentless violence.

  • [pib] Virtual Summit of G20 Leaders

    A Virtual G20 Leaders’ Summit was recently convened yesterday to discuss the challenges posed by the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic and to forge a globally coordinated response.

    About G20

    • Formed in 1999, the G20 is an international forum of the governments and central bank governors from 20 major economies.
    • Collectively, the G20 economies account for around 85 percent of the Gross World Product (GWP), 80 percent of world trade.
    • To tackle the problems or the address issues that plague the world, the heads of governments of the G20 nations periodically participate in summits.
    • In addition to it, the group also hosts separate meetings of the finance ministers and foreign ministers.
    • The G20 has no permanent staff of its own and its chairmanship rotates annually between nations divided into regional groupings. 

    Aims and objectives

    • The Group was formed with the aim of studying, reviewing, and promoting high-level discussion of policy issues pertaining to the promotion of international financial stability.
    • The forum aims to pre-empt the balance of payments problems and turmoil on financial markets by improved coordination of monetary, fiscal, and financial policies.
    • It seeks to address issues that go beyond the responsibilities of any one organisation.

    Member Countries

    The members of the G20 consist of 19 individual countries plus the European Union (EU).

    • The 19 member countries of the forum are Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, France, Germany, India, Indonesia, Italy, Japan, Mexico, Russia, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, South Korea, Turkey, United Kingdom and the United States.
    • The European Union is represented by the European Commission and by the European Central Bank.

     Who are the G20 Sherpas?

    • A Sherpa is the personal representative of a head of state or government who prepares an international summit, particularly the annual G7 and G20 summits.
    • Between the summits, there are multiple Sherpa conferences where possible agreements are laid out.
    • This reduces the amount of time and resources required at the negotiations of the heads of state at the final summit.
    • The Sherpa is generally quite influential, although they do not have the authority to make a final decision about any given agreement.
    • The name is derived from the Sherpa people, a Nepalese ethnic group, who serve as guides and porters in the Himalayas, a reference to the fact that the Sherpa clears the way for a head of state at a major summit.

  • China and WHO a new story

    Context

    The WHO leadership, especially its Director-General, has been accused of serving China’s interests rather than preparing the world against the spread of the virus.

    What is the basis of accusations?

    • The first basis for these charges is the WHO’s endorsement of the Chinese claim in mid-January that there was no evidence of human-to-human transmission of the virus.
    • Second, consistent support for Beijing’s handling of the crisis.
    • Third, WHO’s criticism of other nations for imposing travel restrictions to and from China.
    • Critics also believe the WHO lulled the world into complacence by delaying the decision on calling it a global emergency.

    The new geopolitics of multilateralism

    • Whatever the merits of the above arguments, they point to the new geopolitics of multilateralism,
    • It also disproves the assumptions in both the West and India on China’s role in the UN.
    • It also underlines Beijing’s success in the leveraging of international organisations for its national advantage.
    • Nations working together against the trans-national threat: On the face of it, the sentiment that nations must work together against common trans-national threats is an eminently sensible one. But it does not easily translate into concrete actions.
    • Example of failure to act against a common threat: Take climate change. Attempts at developing collective solutions to the problem over the last three decades have foundered.
    • Most leaders agree on the problem and the solutions but are not willing to accept the framework — either the domestic or international — for distributing the costs associated with the solutions.
    • The US-China rivalry angle to the coronavirus outbreak: The problem of the cost-benefit distribution is compounded by great power rivalries. The coronavirus has shown up at a moment of deepening tensions between the US and China.
    • The grave collective challenge that the virus constitutes has only sharpened the conflict.
    • The blame game between the two: The US blames Beijing for letting this virus become a global monster and Beijing is doing all it can to deny that the virus came out of China.

    How the relationship between China and WHO has transformed over the years?

    • WHO’s actions in the past: Nearly two decades ago, during the SARS crisis, WHO was at the front and centre of pressing China to come clean on the unfolding pandemic.
    • In 2003, it had issued the organisation’s first travel advisory ever on travel to and from the epicentre of the pandemic in southern China.
    • As the SARS crisis escalated, Beijing’s traditional arguments about the centrality of state sovereignty yielded place to a new policy of working with the WHO and taking proactive steps to reassure neighbours in South East Asia.
    • Reasons for change in WHO’s stance: Some attribute the turnaround in the relationship between Beijing and WHO to China’s growing financial contributions.
    • China’s efforts to expand clout: Observers of the UN point to something more fundamental — a conscious and consequential Chinese effort to expand its clout in the multilateral system.
    • China, which was admitted to the UN system in the 1970s, was focused on finding its way in the 1980s, cautiously raised its profile in the 1990s, took on some political initiatives at the turn of the millennium and seized the leadership in the last few years.

    How India and the West are reacting to China’s rise?

    • Unprepared to deal with China’s rise at UN: Neither the West nor India have been prepared to deal with the impact of China’s rise on the UN system.
    • The US and its allies bet that China will be a “responsible stakeholder”. Put another way, they hoped that China will play by the rules set by the West.
    • China’s ambitions: China, of course, wants to set its own rules. Only the political innocents will be shocked by China’s natural ambition.
    • India’s past alignment with China: India, which considered US dominance over the international institutions in the 1990s as a major threat, chose to align with China in promoting a “multipolar world”.
    • Delhi convinced itself that despite differences over the boundary, Pakistan and other issues, there is huge room for cooperation with China.
    • Replacing the US as the dominant force: To their chagrin, the West and India are being compelled to respond to a very different environment at the UN. China wants to replace America as the dominant force in the UN.
    • The US is now fighting back. Last month, Washington went all out to defeat the Chinese candidate for the leadership of an obscure UN agency called the World Intellectual Property Organisation.

    Implications of China’s rise for India

    • Chinese hegemony vs. American primacy: Delhi discovered that Chinese global hegemony could be a lot more problematic than American primacy.
    • After all, it is China that complicates India’s plans for membership of the Nuclear Suppliers Group, protects Pakistan against international pressures on cross-border terrorism, and relentlessly pushes the UN Security Council to take up the Kashmir question.
    • India now turns to the US and its allies to pursue some of its interests in the UN.
    • Multilateralism not an end in itself: Political ironies apart, if there is one lesson that India could learn from China’s experience with WHO and the UN, it is that multilateralism is not an end in itself for major powers.
    • It is an important means to secure one’s national interest and shape the international environment.
    • As a nation battered by the Cultural Revolution, China used international cooperation and global institutions to rebuild itself in the last decades of the 20th century.
    • Ready to reorder global governance: Having developed its economy and advanced its scientific and technological base, China is now ready to reorder global governance and become a rule-maker.
    • The effects are visible in the arena of global health.
    • China’s expanding global engagement with the WHO, its substantive international health assistance programmes, and an impressive domestic health technology sector are poised to boost China’s ambition to build a “Global Silk Road for Health’.

    Conclusion

    On its part, Delhi needs to intensify the recalibration of India’s multilateralism, rewrite its diplomatic lexicon at the UN, and build new political coalitions that will simultaneously contribute to India’s internal modernisation and enhance its international influence. The corona crisis is a good moment to start writing a new script for India’s own health diplomacy.

  • Test of regional solidarity lies ahead

    Context

    If PM Modi’s gesture to SAARC is to go some way towards a solution for the region, India, which will be picking up the pieces itself, must have something to offer to its neighbours.

    Background

    • Not a viable option: Since 2014, when the last SAARC summit was held in Kathmandu, India had made it more than clear that it no longer considers the South Asia grouping viable.
      • It was Islamabad’s turn to host the next summit in 2016, but the Uri attack intervened, and India refused to attend.
    • SAARC in limbo: Under the SAARC charter, the summit cannot be held even if a single nation stays away, and the grouping has remained in limbo since.
    • India’s increased engagement with other groups: In the last five years, India has actively sought to isolate Pakistan in the region.
      • India hyped up its engagement with other regional groupings such as-
      • BBIN (Bangladesh-Bhutan-India-Nepal), and
      • BIMSTEC (Bay of Bengal Initiative for Multi-Sectoral Technical and Economic Cooperation), which includes Bangladesh, India, Myanmar, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Nepal and Bhutan.

    How to read the sudden resurrection of SAARC?

    • Officials denied revival speculation: Despite hopes that this might be a SAARC revival, officials have discounted such speculation. That would require India to climb down from its position that Pakistan has taken verifiable steps to address India’s concerns on terrorism. There is no evidence at all that Delhi is about to do that.
    • No hope of move from Pakistan: It would need Pakistan to turn over a new leaf, stop playing with free radicals to use against India, in Kashmir or elsewhere when the time is ripe. Neither is about to happen.

    No cooperative response in the works

    • First to call the neighbours: At a time when leaders across the globe appeared to be engrossed in the COVID-19 calamity of their own nations, Modi was the first to think of calling the neighbours.
    • Why cooperation among neighbours matter? Almost all South Asian countries are bound to each other by land borders and frequent inter-travel, and it is important that the region liaises to stop the disease from spreading across the Subcontinent.
    • Countries not willing to learn from each other: It was a trifle disappointing, therefore, that beyond the experience of witnessing a unique video summit, there is not much to suggest that a cooperative response is in the works.
      • There is no evidence that each country is willing to learn from the other’s experiences, or public health systems, or that we are tracking each other’s data and responses.
    • What were the proposals made in the summit? Two proposals were made:
      • One by India for a regional fund that Modi has generously offered to put aside $10 million for.
      • Pakistan proposed the setting up of a diseases surveillance centre for sharing real-time data. India has said it would prepare emergency response task forces to help out the member countries in need.
      • Delhi is said to be in the process of sending medical supplies worth $1 million to Nepal, Afghanistan, Sri Lanka, Bhutan and Maldives, which sounds like a fraction of what they may eventually require.
      • Pakistan has said China will give it testing kits, protective gear and portable ventilators, as well as a cash grant for a state-of-the-art isolation centre.
      • Beijing, eager to live down its image as the point of origin for this global mayhem, will make the same offer to other South Asian countries soon.

    What were the lessons India need to learn from video-summit?

    • Indian need to go beyond Big Brother events: If the intention was to try and restore the aura Prime Minister Modi enjoyed in the region at the beginning of NDA-1, as some have not improbably suggested, it has to go beyond this Big Boss event.
      • The video summit saw polite attendance by all SAARC leaders, with the exception of Pakistan which sent its health minister.
      • But going by the scant media coverage that the summit, the first after six years, received in the neighbourhood, no one is holding their breath.
    • India has lost heft it once held: For many countries in the region now, India has lost the heft it used to have in the last century.
      • A proximate reason is that it is no longer an economic powerhouse nor holds the promise of being one in the near future.
      • The other reason is that it no longer offers itself as a model nation, pulling together its complex diversities, pluralism and political ideologies in a broad-minded vision.
    • CAA factor and changing the perception of India: The real damage to India’s standing was, of course, done by the badmouthing of the Muslim countries in the neighbourhood to justify the Citizenship (Amendment) Act 2019.
      • Larger image of themselves: Seen from the eyes of other countries in South Asia today, India is now just a larger version of themselves and their political and economic dysfunctions.
      • While additionally possessing and wielding the instruments to be vengeful and punitive in its foreign policy — including arm-twisting them now and then in its constant quest to isolate Pakistan.

    Conclusion

    • The real test for India lies ahead: The real test of Modi’s leadership of South Asia, and by extension of India’s, will come after the pandemic subsides, when each country has to deal with what remains of its economy.
      • The tourism economy of Bhutan, Maldives, Nepal and Sri Lanka would have been crushed by then. Pakistan will be worse off than it is now.
      • There will be more unemployment and hardship everywhere in the region.
      • Some of these countries will inevitably turn to China.
    • India must have something to offer as a solution: If Modi’s gesture is to go some way as part of the solution for the region, India, which will be picking up the pieces itself, must have something to offer to its South Asian neighbours six months to a year down the line.
      • Is there such a plan? Can India put aside the prejudices of its domestic communalism, and its own economic woes, demonstrate large-heartedness to all the countries of the region, irrespective of what religion its people follow, irrespective of its historical hostilities with at least one?
      • There may be more economic refugees knocking on India’s doors, apart from a host of other inter-regional problems.