top of page

Search

321 results found with an empty search

Events (12)

View All

Blog Posts (283)

  • What’s In a Name? The Politics of Renaming places

    By Aman J Thomas In Romeo and Juliet , Shakespeare asked ‘What’s in a name’? and the answer is ‘a lot’. Words have meanings and those words in the form of language and map making can shape the material realities and political choices. Donald Trump, in one of his first presidential orders, has decided to rename Mount Denali to Mount McKinley after President McKinley , an imperialist under whom the U.S. brought Hawaii and Guam under its control, and whom Trump refers to as a model president he would like to emulate. He has also ordered the renaming of the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of America , reflecting his expansionist rhetoric.    George Orwell’s ‘1984’ is strikingly relevant today . Orwell reminds us that ‘Big Brother’ is really keeping an eye on us. In the novel ‘1984’, the notorious "Ministry of Truth," and its mission to adapt the past to the present, and its attempt to change history. The names of people from street signs, scholarships, dorms, monuments, and the like are struck down using the clear magnifying glass of "Presentism". Colonial and imperial powers have imposed their identity and culture by renaming places in colonial lands and later native people have reclaimed their identity and culture by self-determination. Renaming places also has geopolitical and ideological interests. Colonialism has effectively used renaming as a tool to oppress the history, culture and tradition of native people. Through place naming, colonialism aimed to imprint meaning and order onto human landscapes. The colonial place names that were imposed or codified served to legitimize territorialization and strengthened settlers' rights to the land. Alfred Mahan is credited to have coined the term Middle East in 1902 but it does not reflect any sense from a geographic point of view. The Middle East vaguely represents the identity or geographical positioning of the place, it rather points that it is Middle East of another region or state, which brings up the question: the Middle East of what? The term Middle East reflects the colonial imperial identity that the British gave and later the U.S. has adopted. There have been movements against colonialism, especially those headed by organizations that identify as indigenous, have been increasingly instrumental in mobilizing support for self-determination. For instance,  renaming cities in India has been an effort to do rid of the lingering effects of British rule. In 1995, Bombay reclaimed its name from the Marathi language and became Mumbai. A return to regional linguistic and cultural origins was also reflected in the renaming of Madras as Chennai and Calcutta as Kolkata. These changes weren't only aesthetic; they were a part of a larger effort to reshape the country's identity according to its own standards. The renaming process has had an equally revolutionary effect throughout Africa. As Robert Kaplan reminds us , the way maps are created and labeled also matters since it influences how the strong perceive the world. There are numerous instances of renaming places for geopolitical interests. As Machiavelli emphasized that states also act out of pride and prestige , thereby from a realist perspective, we can grasp why states tend to change the toponym of strategic places, China has been employing the strategy of renaming places with countries that it has maritime and border disputes with. The Chinese call the Paracel Islands and Spratly Islands as Xisha and Nansha islands which are in the South China Sea and the Senkaku islands as Diaoyu islands  over which they have disputes with the Japanese. They refer to Aksai Chin as the southwestern part of Hotan prefecture of Xinjiang, which India considers as an integral part of Jammu & Kashmir. As the age-old axiom goes “If you rebel against someone, someone will rebel against you” and thus the effort to rename places is not only limited to the Chinese. To counter the Chinese expansion, countries led by the U.S. are also actively trying to balance China in the region and as a part of it, the U.S has opted for the use of the term Indo-Pacific which was earlier referred as Asia-Pacific . The term "Indo-Pacific" was hardly used ten years ago, but today the U.S., India, Japan and other countries refer to the region as Indo- Pacific.  There can also be ideological and political reasons for renaming places. In the last century, the city of St. Petersburg has had two name changes . Peter the Great founded St. Petersburg in the early 1700s, and while it retained its founder’s name, it also clearly showed the influence of Europe. The name’s Germanic "burg" was a reference to the Westernization movement that characterized Peter's rule. But the moniker became an intolerable encumbrance when World War I broke out and Russia was at war with Germany. As nationalist sentiment grew in 1914, the city was renamed Petrograd , changing its suffix to the Slavic “grad”, signifying its transition from a multicultural outpost to a distinctly Russian bastion. The city thereafter experienced yet another change following Lenin's passing in 1924. The Bolshevik leader’s legacy was woven into the very foundation of the Soviet Union’s urban setting when Petrograd was transformed into Leningrad . Residents chose to return it to its previous name, St. Petersburg , years after the USSR collapsed in 1991, making a full cycle of historical revision. Place names are important as they inscribe ideological messages about past practices and they permeate daily vocabulary through visual and verbal cues like road signs, addresses, advertising billboards and maps. Place names not only mould history, but they also mend group and cultural identity because of the shared context of using these toponyms. #US #Mexico This is an Original Contribution to the SIS Blog   Aman J Thomas is currently a second-year student pursuing a Master’s in Politics with Specialization in International Studies (M.A PISM) from the School of International Studies (SIS), Jawaharlal Nehru University, JNU.

  • Global Tech, Local Rules: The European Union’s Vision for Emerging Technologies

    By Simran Mishra In its 2024-2029 institutional cycle , the EU’s approach focuses on combining technological proficiency with geopolitical realism, making it a rule-setter and not a rule-taker in the global technology race, reflecting in its Digital Compass 2030  initiative which aims at digitally transformed Europe by the end of the decade. The European Union, regarded as a normative power - an actor that promotes its values and principles through diplomacy, trade and cooperation. In the context of emerging technologies, the EU has positioned itself as a leader in shaping global norms and values, in areas such as data protection , AI ethics and digital governance , evident in its effort to promote the Brussels Effect  - the phenomenon whereby EU regulations and standards are adopted globally due to the EU’s market power and regulatory reach, e.g., The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR)  has inspired similar legislation globally. As emerging technologies continue to redefine IR, through the assertion of the technological sovereignty the EU enters into a critical arena of 21st century tech-competition. Through proactive leadership in regulatory frameworks and research partnerships, the EU is shaping the technological revolution. Its approach intertwines geopolitical strategy with ethical principles and multinational cooperation. This leadership positions the EU at the forefront of responsible technology governance, ensuring alignment with human rights, democratic values, and sustainable development . Balancing Autonomy and Openness The EU emphasises responsible innovation , strategic foresight and anticipatory governance mechanisms to ensure that technological development aligns with European values and promotes societal well-being while preparing for future technological challenges and opportunities. The EU advocates the promotion of democratic values in technology governance, sustainability and equitability in digital growth worldwide.  The EU faces a trilemma in its technology policy: Innovation, Protection, and Influence. In addressal of geopolitical risks, The EU views the essentiality of strengthening cybersecurity  and digital resilience while navigating geopolitical risks associated with emerging technologies such as cyberwarfare, election interference and misinformation. For instance, the EU is leading in sustainable technology development, by integrating emerging technologies and digital strategies with green objectives, under the EU’s Green Deal  objectives.   Precaution Meets Innovation The EU's position shows a precautionary mindset, in contrast to the United States, which is more of a laissez-faire nature. Emerging technologies are seen by the EU as important facilitators of economic growth and societal progress, for instance, when referring to the Horizon Europe  or Digital Compass  initiatives. The EU-US Trade and Technology Council  (TTC),2021 and the Global Gateway  project exemplify the strategy to improve digital diplomacy and lessen up on strategic dependencies. As the EU views, these technologies are also critical for the attainment of strategic autonomy - a development goal which aims to lessen external dependencies and enhance industrial resilience. The EU has a framework for governance and promotion of emerging technologies - the' framework' covers policies, regulations, and funding programs aimed at fostering innovation while ensuring their ethical and safe uses, such as Horizon Europe, Digital Single Market Strategy. Ethical Considerations and Regulation Quite emphatically, the EU has indeed taken the issue to the emerging technologies. The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) ,2018 is perhaps one of the most striking expressions of the encouragement the EU gave for protecting privacy and data in the digital age. The most significant regulatory initiative in the EU’s policy is the Artificial Intelligence (AI) Act , hailed as a landmark piece that could set a global standard for AI regulation, which aims to create a comprehensive framework for AI applications, categorizing then based on their level of risk: unacceptable, high, limited, minimal.  In addition to the AI Act, the EU has two more key legislation aimed at regulating the digital economy: the Digital Services Act (DSA ), to combat illegal content, disinformation and harmful practices and the Digital Markets Act (DMA), to impose rules to ensure fair competition and prevent anti-competitive practices targeting the market power of large tech companies, known as “gatekeepers”. International Collaboration The rise of techno-nationalism , have created a fragmented global landscape, which emphasizes the importance of international cooperation and multilateralism, recognizing that the challenges posed by ETs are global in nature. The EU has been actively promoting Global Partnership on Artificial Intelligence (GPAI ), bringing governments, industry and civil society together for a responsible AI development. Amidst the US-China rivalry  in digital diplomacy, the EU-US Trade and Technology Council strengthened transatlantic cooperation on trade, technology and digital policy while the EU is balancing its economic interests with its concerns over China’s technological ambitions and human rights record. Policy Recommendations To accelerate technological sovereignty, the EU should focus upon reducing its reliance on non-EU suppliers for critical components like semiconductors, and support domestic production capacities through targeted subsidies while fostering public-private partnerships to accelerate innovation. The EU should establish additional Trade and Technology Councils (TTCs) with key democracies like Japan, South Korea and India to enhance technological cooperation and reduce reliance on external suppliers and shall also promote European values about digital diplomacy  through development initiatives in the Global South, ensuring AI ethics, emerging technologies and data governance align with democratic principles. Way forward The EU being prominently capable of reinforcing its position as a key actor in global technology governance and tech competitiveness must boost R&D investments to be at par with the US and China in development of emerging technologies, while regulating harmonization and balancing innovation in critical supply chains and digital infrastructure with stringent regulations remains a challenge for the EU, global cooperation by strengthening multilateral initiatives will be essential for addressing geopolitical risks.     Conclusion Amidst the evolving geopolitical scenario, technology has become a critical battleground. As global digital competition intensifies, the EU has the potential to drive sustainable growth, enhance competitiveness, and contribute to global governance framework. Strengthening R&D investments, fostering innovation ecosystems, and balancing internal policy with external diplomacy will be crucial for achieving strategic autonomy and securing the EU's position in global technology governance. This Article is an Original Contribution to the SIS Blog.   Simran Mishra is a postgraduate student of Politics with specialization in International Relations (PISM) at the School of International Studies, JNU. Her academic interests revolve around contemporary global affairs influencing international engagements, multilateral cooperation and digital diplomacy.

  • BLOG SPECIAL: On the Global State of Women’s Rights: 50 Years of IWD and 30 Years of the Beijing Declaration

    By Prof. Dr. Bharat H. Desai   I. INTRODUCTION   March 08, 2025, the 50th anniversary of the UN’s International Women’s Day (IWD), also coincides  with 30 years after the historic 1995 Beijing Declaration and Program of Action  that solemnly resolved “to advance the goals of equality, development and peace for all women everywhere in the interest of all humanity”. It was endorsed by 189 countries. Now, after three decades, almost one-fourth countries are facing a backlash   and backsliding. A series of factors such as economic instability, the climate crisis, rising conflicts and political pushback have contributed to a worsening global landscape for gender equality.  In his annual   2025 IWD message , the UN Secretary-General (UNSG) Antonio Guterres observed that “When women and girls can rise, we all thrive…(yet) instead of mainstreaming equal rights, we are seeing the mainstreaming of misogyny.”   Picture Source : UN Women: Session of the Commission on the Status of Women II.   GLOBAL STATE OF WOMEN’S RIGHTS The above scenario underscores the graphic reality that in spite of the advocacy by the entire UN system, the UN member states, international developmental agencies and the civil society groups, it has not been possible to make a desired change in securing women’s rights. The UN Women Strategic Plan (2022-2025)  adopted a three-pronged approach: (1) to promote coordination across the UN system (2) to support to member states in strengthening global norms and standards for gender equality and (3) to carry out operational activities at country and regional levels. With a paltry budget of US $ 1.03 billion (2024-2025; projected contributions) , the UN Women faces a herculean task to turn the tide. Significantly, the Pact for the Future  ( UNGA resolution 79/1 of September 22, 2024 ), stated: “None of our goals can be achieved without the full, safe, equal and meaningful participation and representation of all women in political and economic life. We reaffirm our commitment to the Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action” (paragraph 15). Ironically, notwithstanding all solemn declarations at the UN summits and inter-governmental confabulations,  Goal 5 (Gender Equality and empowerment of all women and girls)  of the 2030 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)  faces dismal prospects due to very slow progress or has regressed below the 2015 baseline. Picture Source: UN Women Thus, the global state of women is worsening. It is reflected in spine-chilling figures including plight of 2 billion women without any social protection coverage , 612 million women and girls living in global conflict zones  and 393 million women and girls mired in extreme poverty . In growing worldwide gender-based violence, a women or girl is killed every 10 minutes by a family member or an intimate partner. There has been 50% rise in conflict related sexual violence wherein 95% victim-survivors are women and girls.  In fact, the home has also become the “most dangerous place for women and girls”. As per the 2024 report published by the UNODC , 60.2% women were killed in 2023 by their intimate partners (45%) or other family members (55%). Gender based violence is a global challenge ( Author: The Tribune, November 02, 2021 ). The ‘femicide’ reflects entrenched gender-based hatred and sadistic mindsets that assume “most brutal and extreme manifestation of violence against women and girls”.    III.  REVITALIZING THE UN SYSTEM PROCESSES The 69th session of the Commission of the Status of Women (CSW )  will be held in New York during March 10 to 21, 2025. It was established by the ECOSOC resolution 11(II) of 21 June 1946 . The CSW has been instrumental in promoting women’s and girls' rights, and shaping global standards on gender equality and the empowerment of women and girls. At Beijing+30, CSW 69 will do a crucial stocktaking process by reviewing implementation of the  Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action  and the outcomes of the  23rd special session of the General Assembly .   The digital technologies have been a cause of concern for the CSW. Barring women in a few privileged settings, well-educated women and otherwise already empowered women, the digital technologies have heightened already serious gender inequalities, discrimination and violence against women. Since the adoption of the resolution 1325 of October 31, 2000 , the UN Security Council (UNSC) has been periodically addressing the agenda item “women, peace and security” (WPS). Several UNSC members have sought to prioritize the WPS agenda during their monthly presidency. Now a fter 25 years and adoption of some ten additional UNSC resolutions later , WPS agenda has become one of the main thematic pillars of the UNSC’s work. Moreover, the UNSG’s 14 annual reports (between 2011 to 2024) on the implementation of the WPS agenda (since resolution 1325/ 2000 ; and requested by the UNSC Presidential Statement; S/PRST/2010/22 of October 26, 2010 ), as well as 13 reports (2012-2024)  on conflict related sexual violence, have provided a remarkable corpus of action on the issue. The 2024 UNSG report ( S/2024/671 of September 24, 2024 ) has graphically underscored the gravity of the challenge faced by women and girls: “ Amid record levels of armed conflict and violence, progress made over decades is vanishing before our eyes. Generational gains in women’s rights hang in the balance around the world, undercutting the transformative potential of women’s leadership and inclusion in the pursuit of peace”.    The WPS agenda of the UNSC has been justified on the ground that due to the arme d conflic t s, women and girls face the consequences including sexual and gender-based violence (SGBV) . Rape as a weapon of war ( Author SIS Blog : March 11, 2023 ; June 22, 2022 ) has been widely used by all the combatants (State and non-State). It has been analyzed in this author’s scholarly work [ Sexual and Gender Based Violence in International Law  (Singapore: Springer: English 2022 ; German 2023 ] as well as highlighted in the 2018 Nobel Peace Prize  awarded (Denis Mukhwege and Nadia Murad) for “ efforts to end the use of sexual violence as a weapon of war and armed conflict" . IV.  CONCLUSION: ROAD AHEAD In view of the above global state of play, the ideational and cutting-edge scholarly works need to be geared up to provide concrete solutions for protection of rights of women and girls. As the things stand today, it will take 131 years to bridge the global gender gap. Between 1995 and 2024, 1,531 legal reforms around the world  have sought to advance gender equality. Yet the grim scenario shows deep rooted patriarchy and misogyny at work since it largely remains a question of mindsets. The legalese, policy and institutional measures (commissions on women and human rights etc) per se  will not be able to turn the tide in near future unless the empowered women themselves feel obliged to ‘light the lamp’ and carry the torch forward. Many of the empowered women get coopted by the patriarchy and they pursue the same path as male counterparts. Hence, mere adding the numbers will not result in empathy and upliftment of other disadvantaged women and girls. As a research supervisor, this author knows firsthand, a large number of female students, barring honorable exceptions, adopt the same attitude of male students for personal advancement. They abhor mentoring and reaching out to others. As a consequence, it remains a big challenge to carry forward the torch to empower other disadvantaged women and girls. Thus, the desired change will be accelerated if the empowered women take the lead to become the agents of change the world needs for securing our common future. #CSW69 #UN Women #UNSG #UNSC #UNGA #MEA #PMIndia #JNU_official_50 This is an Original Contribution 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) .

View All

Other Pages (26)

  • About | SIS Blog

    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.

  • Index of International Studies | SIS Blog

    Index of International Studies Quarterly Dr. MD Naushad Archival Superintendent Room No. 132, Editorial Office, School of International Studies-I Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi-110067 Email ID: naushadk112@yahoo.com Mob. No. 9899621554

  • Editorial Collective | SIS Blog

    Editorial Collective Blog Coordinator Prof. Sameena Hameed Chairperson Centre for West Asian Studies Dr. Sheetal Sharma Associate Professor Centre for European Studies Dr. Sakti Prasad Srichandan Assistant Professor Centre for European Studies Dr. Ankita Dutta Assistant Professor Centre for European Studies Aarshiya Chowdhary PhD Research Scholar Centre for European Studies

View All

Subscription Form

Thanks for submitting!

©2023 by SIS Blog.

Disclaimer: The contents in the blog posts are solely the personal opinions of the authors and do not reflect the opinions and beliefs of the website, SIS, JNU, Editors or its affiliates.

bottom of page