Search

By Prof. (Dr.) Gulshan Sachdeva Even if a trade deal remains elusive, the current geopolitical environment offers numerous opportunities for the two large democratic entities to collaborate on technology, connectivity, and green transition From today , President of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen, accompanied by the College of Commissioners is on an  unprecedented visit  to India. In addition to der Leyen, the college consists of Foreign Policy Chief Kaja Kallas, five executive vice-presidents, and 20 commissioners overseeing their respective portfolios. The 27 commissioners represent each of the EU's member states, with one from each country. They will meet Prime Minister Narendra Modi and their other counterparts in the Indian government.   During the visit, the India-EU Trade and Technology Council (TTC) meeting will also take place. Historically, Europe has been crucial for India's trade and investment. As India pursues its modernisation ambitions, the EU will remain a key partner in trade, technology, investment, and energy transition. In 2021, Modi  met all 27 EU leaders ,  leading to the resumption  of three separate negotiations on trade, investment, and Geographical Indications (GI) agreements as well as a ‘connectivity partnership’.   Last year, bilateral trade in goods and services reached  nearly $200 billion  and has remained balanced for many years. India has also attracted approximately  $120 billion  in investment from the EU. After exercising caution on trade deals for nearly a decade, India recently signed several agreements, including one with the four-nation European Free Trade Association (EFTA). Momentum  is also building  in India-UK trade negotiations.   The 10th round of India-EU trade talks is expected next month. Similarly, six rounds of negotiations have been held on investment and GI agreements. With the EU’s trade agreements cover 76 countries, India faces challenges in some of its exports. While a trade deal would be mutually beneficial, several issues  still need to be resolved .   Even if the FTA remains elusive, the current global geopolitical fragmentation offers new opportunities for the world’s two largest democratic entities to collaborate in many other areas. With a growing convergence of interests in the Indo-Pacific, both sides are actively exploring new avenues through initiatives like the TTC and the India Middle-East Europe Economic Corridor (IMEC).    Russia has become a major strategic challenge for the EU. For the past three years, India's perspective on the Ukraine war has differed from that of the EU. While the EU and several member states were disappointed with India’s stance, co-operation continued as their interests aligned in many areas. Now, the EU finds itself side-lined as the Donald Trump administration engages directly with Russia to resolve the conflict.  Picture Source: Deccan Herald Ursula von der Leyen has advocated for a ‘geopolitical Europe’ for the past four years, but European leaders are now confronted with real geopolitical shifts driven by the US and Russia. This has sparked discussions among European leaders about achieving greater ‘independence’ from the US in strategic affairs. Against this backdrop, India could emerge as a key partner for the EU in the evolving global order. In fact, the EU, India, and other partners could develop a joint strategy to counter Trump's tariff war.   In recent years, India’s engagement with the EU has expanded beyond its traditional focus on key member states like Germany, France, and the UK (when it was part of the EU). India has strengthened ties with the Nordics, Central, and Eastern Europe, and the Mediterranean region. It has launched India-Nordic summits, Baltic-Nordic business conclave, and established new strategic partnerships with Greece, Italy, and Poland.   Energy transition challenges in Europe differ significantly from those in India. New Delhi also has serious reservations about the EU’s Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM). However, the threat of climate change remains real. With the US once again withdrawing from the Paris Agreement, India and the EU have an opportunity to lead global climate initiatives. The International Solar Alliance is one such example. Since 2004, they have collaborated through various bilateral action plans. Additionally, India and the EU could also collaborate on transferring climate technology solutions to countries in the Global South.   Despite anti-immigrant rhetoric, particularly from far-Right political forces, most European nations are grappling with labour shortages. Unemployment rates are low, and the EU is facing a decline in competitiveness. This makes skilled and semi-skilled migration, as well as student mobility from India, beneficial for the EU. Since migration policies fall under the jurisdiction of individual member states, New Delhi has already signed — or is in the process of signing — migration and mobility agreements with several EU countries.   The EU College of Commissioners’ visit to India signals the EU’s strong intent to build a meaningful partnership with India. Geopolitical developments have opened new avenues for collaboration. However, both the EU and India must make serious intellectual efforts to understand each other. Otherwise, discussions will remain focused on peripheral issues rather than engaging on matters of real significance. Originally published : Deccan Herald, 27th February 2025 https://www.deccanherald.com/opinion/can-india-eu-trade-ties-withstand-global-geopolitical-fragmentation-3423872   Prof. Gulshan Sachdeva is the Chief Coordinator of DAKSHIN-Global South Centre of Excellence at RIS, New Delhi, and a Professor and Jean Monnet Chair at the School of International Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi, India

By Prof. (Dr.) Bharat H. Desai I. The Context: Fear of the ICC   On February 06, 2025 , the maverick President of the United States of America (USA), Donald Trump, chose to take up cudgels against the International Criminal Court (ICC) based at The Hague (The Netherlands). Invoking the grouse of “ International Criminal Court (ICC), as established by the Rome Statute , has engaged in illegitimate and baseless actions targeting America and our close ally Israel”, President Trump chose to designate it as a “national emergency to address that threat” and pronounced a series of ‘sanctions’ against the ICC and its officials. The US action has virtually placed the ICC on trial, as it did earlier when the Trump 1.0 Administration imposed similar sanctions on the ICC Prosecutor Fatou Bensouda on September 02, 2020 . They were subsequently revoked on April 02, 2021  by the Biden Administration. This targeting of the ICC as a judicial body reflects the time we live in. It shows that sovereign states prefer international judicial institutions to deliver but don’t want their arrogant and authoritarian leaders hauled up for brazen use of force in violation of the UN Charter and the Laws of War. It is reminiscent of the US attack on the International Court of Justice (The Hague) in the aftermath of the 1986 Nicaragua Judgement  that held the USA responsible for “ breach of its obligations under customary international law not to use force against another State, not to intervene in its affairs, not to violate its sovereignty” ( page 136, paragraph 292 ). ICC President Judge Tomoko Akane (source: ICC website). The US action elicited a swift response from the President of the ICC on February 07, 2025 . “The announced Executive Order is only the latest in a series of unprecedented and escalatory attacks aiming to undermine the Court’s ability to administer justice in all Situations. Such threats and coercive measures constitute serious attacks against the Court’s States Parties, the rule of law based international order and millions of victims”, Judge Tomoko Akane said. The ICC has remained under attack from some of the powerful States that are not parties to the Rome Statute. Some leading non-member States include: China, India, Israel, Russia, United States etc. II.  Idea of International Criminal Justice   The idea of international criminal justice i.e. prosecuting the perpetrators before an independent tribunal or court of law having an international character has been in vogue for more than a century. It was works of scholars such as James L. Brierly ( 8 Brit. YB Int'l L. , 1927 ), Manley Hudson ( 38 American JIL 1938 549-554 ) and others that gave fillip to the idea and justification for a permanent International Criminal Court. Over the years, different models of institutional designs have emerged – international military tribunals (Nuremberg and Tokyo), international criminal tribunals (Yugoslavia and Rwanda), hybrid courts (Sierra Leone, Lebanon, Kosovo, East Timor and Cambodia) and national court with competence to try international crimes (Bangladesh). Jean-Paul Akayesu, former Rwandan politician prosecuted before the Int. Criminal Tribunal for Rwanada The permanent form, multilateral structure, judicial independence, fairness, expertise, transparency, among others, provided much legitimacy, credibility and an edge to the idea of the ICC. It performs functions to enforce universally recognised rules of international law, including the law of armed conflicts and human rights law. Has the ICC overcome the shortcomings and pitfalls of other tribunals?   It grapples with problems faced by the ICTY and ICTR in terms of distance from the conflict zone, cost factor, delay in trial and non-participation of local population. It follows ‘retributive model’ by focusing on criminal prosecution of the offenders instead of promoting post-conflict justice mechanisms. The Preambular paragraph 10 of the Statute as well as Articles 1, 17 and 18 lay down the principle of complementarity.   It implies the ICC shall “ exercise its jurisdiction over persons for the most serious crimes of international concern” as “complementary to the jurisdiction of national criminal courts” wherein they fail, or are unwilling or unable to act. Thus, availing cooperation of the States holds the key to compliance with the ICC orders to arrest and deliver the indicted persons for trial. ICC Trial Chamber in session  (source: ICC website) Governed through the Rome Statute (1998) , the ICC  came into being on July 01, 2002   ( vide  Article 125). With the seat in The Hague and 125 States Parties (February 11, 2025) [Africa: 33; Asia-Pacific: 19; Eastern Europe: 20; Latin America & Caribbean States: 28 and Western Europe & other States: 25], as a treaty-based independent international organization, the ICC aims to end impunity for the perpetrators of the most serious crimes of concern to the international community. The ICC structure comprises: Presidency (3 Judges), Judicial Division (Appeal; Trial; Pre-Trial); Office of the Prosecutor and the Registry. The Court has jurisdiction to prosecute and punish individuals for genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity and aggression.  The ICC process starts with the Prosecutor determining a formal charge or accusation of a serious crime and identifying an individual who bears the greatest criminal responsibility for the crimes. However, the ICC’s role is circumscribed and hence it may exercise jurisdiction wherein national legal systems fail to do so or are unwilling or unable to genuinely carry out criminal proceedings. III. Future of the ICC   All international institutions come under attack including the UN when they seek to give effect to their mandate that impinges upon vital national interests or adversely affect people in power in the member States. Things become precarious when a judicial body such as the ICC seeks to arraign key individuals of non-member States. Hence the recent outburst and attack on the ICC. For instance, on March 17, 2023 , the ICC issued  arrest warrants  for Russian president  Vladimir Putin  and other officials for alleged crimes committed in the wake of Russia’s ‘special military operation” in Ukraine.  Russia promptly denounced the arrest warrants as "outrageous" and Russia's Ministry of Internal Affairs  retaliated by placing several ICC officials on its wanted list. Similarly, on November 21, 2024 , the ICC announced arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister  Benjamin Netanyahu , and  Defense Minister  Yoav Gallant  for the war crimes committed in the Israel-Gaza war . It is in this backdrop that the US sanctions ( February 06, 2025 ) were announced on the ICC coinciding with an official visit of the Israeli PM . The ICC arrest warrants do infuriate the powerful people as they retaliate against the ICC Judges, the Prosecutor and the institution. It is a serious hazard for the judicial body to hold such individuals accountable for crimes under the Rome Statute as compared to affixing responsibility of their States (Russia or Israel) per se .   IV. Conclusion   As mentioned in this author’s previous twelve SIS Blogs on   Weapons of War   ( January 24, 2025 ), the question of Legal Controls of International Conflicts , taught by the author in SIS programs (MA and Ph.D.), has always remained a scholarly quest to eliminate warfare as an evil. Notwithstanding persistent quest for ‘outlawry’  of war ( 1907 Hague Peace Conferences ; 1919 Treaty of Versailles ; 1928 Pact of Paris ; 1945 UN Charter , Article 2 (4) ; Article 51 ), they continue to be a scourge for the humankind. It is truism that our “future lies not in war” ( Indian PM, January 09, 2025 ). Hence, Gandhi’s prophetic words provide us a ray of hope: “When I despair, I remember that all through history the way of truth and love has always won. There have been tyrants and murderers and for a time they seem invincible, but in the end, they always fall...think of it, always.” In the end, as asserted by President Tomoko Akane, the ICC staying the course amidst attacks matters since some 2 billion people face grave risks in 59 conflicts raging in 34 countries ( PRIO, June 10, 2024 ) in our troubled world.   This is an Original Contribution, the13th article in “Weapons of War” series, to the SIS Blog. Prof. (Dr.) Bharat H. Desai is the former Chairperson and Professor of International Law at the Centre for International Legal Studies (SIS, JNU), who served as a member of the Official Indian Delegations to various multilateral negotiations (2002-2008), initiated & coordinated the futuristic knowledge initiatives for the SIS Faculty Wall of Honor (2023-24) , the Inter-University Consortium: JNU; Jammu; Kashmir; Sikkim (2012-2020)  and the Making SIS Visible (2008-2013)  as well as contributes as the Editor-in-Chief  of Environmental Policy and Law (Sage: Amsterdam) .

By Sazia Azgar Recently US President Donald Trump remarked that, Turkey will “hold the key”  to what happens in Syria. Turkey's President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has been an ardent supporter of the anti-Assad Syrian opposition since the Syrian uprisings of 2011 and backed the protesters opposing the Bashar al-Assad regime. In December 2024, the government of Bashar al Assad was toppled by the rebels backed by Ankara, after which Hayat Tahrir Al-Sham (HTS) took power under the leadership of commander-in-chief of the new administration Ahmad Al Sharaa and President Erdogan pledged full cabinet support to Syria’s new government. Since then relation between Syria and Turkey has been on an upswing, with high-level visits of figures like Syria's new foreign minister, Asaad Al Shaibani, to Turkey on January 15th, and Turkish foreign minister  Hakan Fidan recently met Syria's new leader, Ahmad al Shaara,  in Damascus. The Turkish flag was raised at the embassy in Damascus, which had reopened after a 12-year hiatus, within a week after former Syrian tyrant Bashar al-Assad's departure from Syria.   Picture Source : Aljazeera Syria in turkey's strategic calculus   On 25 December, Turkey's President, while addressing his Justice and Development, or AK Party’s parliamentary group meeting,  said  that “Syria’s security and peace might be secondary for others, but we can't have such luxury with a country with which we have a 910km long border.” President Erdogan has time and again emphasized on the creation of stable Syria with national reconciliation and economic development which will enable all Syrian refugees in Turkey to return to their homeland.” This is partly because Turkey is home to  3.6 million registered Syrian refugees  – the most in the world – opposition has been accusing the government of mismanaging refugee crisis and put the blame on refugees for Turkey's economic problems. There is significant domestic unrest fueled by growing anti-Syrian sentiments in Turkey which has resulted, in many places, in Syrian riots.   Turkey has been involved militarily along the northern Syria border, where the presence of the People’s Protection Unit (YPG) has been prominent. Turkey regards YPG as an affiliate of the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK), a group that has fought for secession of the Kurdish region from Turkey to establish an independent Kurdish state, and  this conflict has claimed the lives of up to 40,000 people . Hence Turkey has designated it as a “terrorist” group and it remains at the center of the security strategy of Ankara. Turkey already occupies significant parts of Syria after it launched offensives against the YPG, and threatening to launch more attacks against the American-backed YPG. The Turkish government sees the overthrow of the Assad regime as an opportunity  to tackle the Kurdish  threat to its security. Regarding the YPG, Turkiye is now working with the new Syrian government and wishes to allow the new leadership to resolve the matter.   Another critical security threat for Turkey is the increasing encroachment of Israel into Syrian territory beyond the occupied Golan Heights. Since the fall of the al-Assad regime, Israel has increased its attack on Syria  to expand the occupation of Golan Heights,  with hundreds of air attacks, tanks, and illegal settlements. Therefore Israel is not only violating Syrian sovereignty and territorial integrity but also posing threats to Turkey’s national security.     Turkey’s approach to rebuild Syria   Turkey is the first country to engage with a new Syrian government after the fall of Assad. The reopening of the Turkish embassy signifies that Turkey is all set to play a crucial role in reconstruction and development post-Assad. Turkey believes that the reconstruction of Syria is essential for the return of 3.6 million Syrian refugees living in Turkey. As one of the biggest economies in the region with a robust construction industry, Turkey is conscious of its ability to restore Syria, which has been devastated in terms of infrastructure, services, and the economy during the past ten years. As Syria is to be rebuilt, Ankara is providing lucrative contracts for a Turkish reconstruction company. Turkey's ministries of transportation, energy, and natural resources have already declared their plans to repair Syria’s roads, airports, energy, and electrical infrastructure. These developments are already evident as  Turkish airlines resume flights to Damascus starting from 23 January , after a halt of more than a decade. Turkey’s President Erdogan has offered to help Syria in the  formation of a new constitution.  Turkey wants to train and modernize the Syrian army.      Challenges and Way Forward   There are many challenges to Turkey’s ambition in Syria as the situation in Syria remains unstable, Turkey's role in the reconstruction of Syria is getting the attention of other contending rival powers in the region. Since Ankara has emerged as the most influential powerbroker in Syria, the deepening of its influence is making some Arab governments uncomfortable. There has always been a rivalry between Turkey and Saudi Arabia for the leadership of the Sunni Muslim world. Some Arab countries like UAE and Egypt are upset with Turkey’s explicit support for Islamist groups.  Managing Kurdish autonomy aspirations is also a major challenge for Turkey. Though, HTS has assured that, Syrian grounds will not again be used for launching an attack against Turkey. The Turkish foreign minister remarked that  the Kurdish-led armed group YPG will be eliminated.   HTS doesn't want to put all its eggs in one basket. The new government of Syria is following the strategy of getting support from all sides. For instance, Saudi Arabia is also sending humanitarian aid to Syria. During the Assad regime, Syria served as an Iranian foothold in the Arab world. HTS wants to break from Iranian influence not only to come under Turkey’s.   Reports from the Israeli government suggest that Turkey and Israel could be on a collision course in Syria. Israel is backing the YPG against Turkey and Israel’s growing encroachment in Syria is jeopardizing the national security of Turkey. Therefore these geopolitical struggles suggest that Turkey is one of the main actors in Syria, not the dominant one. To have a say in the future of Syria, Turkey needs to control the northern part of Syria, however for this to happen, Turkey will have to make a compromise with the US which has been strengthening YPG. Also, Turkey will have to walk on a tightrope while pursuing its ambitions in Syria without making other regional powers uneasy.    #Syria #Turkey #Geopolitics This is an Original Contribution to the SIS Blog.   Saziya Asgar is a 2nd year masters student in Politics (with specialization in international politics), School of International Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi.

Dr. Sana Hashmi Visting Fellow Taiwan-Asia Exchange Foundation ​

CONTACT Write to SIS Blog: sisblog@jnu.ac.in or Fill this form Submit Thanks for submitting!

ABOUT THE BLOG The 'SIS Blog' is an initiative of the School of International Studies (SIS), Jawaharlal Nehru University to disseminate contemporary debates, comments and opinions related to international relations. This blog will publish posts written by faculty members, students, alumni of SIS and invited contributors. Blogging is a dynamic way to complement other channels of knowledge and engage vast audiences with new perspectives.