Search

By Dr. Sakti Prasad Srichandan Russia’s actions have now united the European countries more than ever before, which will also test India’s global actor role The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) has almost doubled its borders with Russia with the addition of Finland as its 31st member in April 2023. Sweden will become a member eventually, once the ratification process gets over, which will swell NATO’s territorial expanse like never before, and also make the Baltic Sea a NATO lake. The accession of Finland was the fastest on record. For long, Nordic countries Finland and Sweden had refused to take sides, maintaining military non-alignment and being focused more on their internal socio-economic development, thus making them models of modern welfare states. Their relations with Russia were moderate at best, if not deep enough. But the Russian invasion of Ukraine changed the way they had viewed their eastern neighbour and the predictability of its leader, Vladimir Putin. For sure, Mr. Putin’s actions have brought certain changes in the regional security dynamics of Europe. Russian actions, European unity First, engaging Russia has never been so easy for the European Union, mostly because of differences among member-states. Some European countries such as Germany and France had a soft corner for Russia, unlike some Baltic states such as Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania which have been in favour of treading a cautious path. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has not only brought back war to the European realm in the post-Second World War era, but is also a blow to the EU’s image as an actor, having failed to avert the war in its neighbourhood. An interesting outcome in this adverse situation is that Russia’s actions have now united European countries more than ever before. Second, Mr. Putin might not have expected that Finland and Sweden would give up their neutrality so soon. Their membership will also mean more expenditure, militarily, and restructuring apart from a stationing of NATO forces under the new command structure. As a response, Russia will also build its military presence in the adjoining northern areas and the Kaliningrad exclave. Bordering Finland, these northern areas (starting from St. Petersburg to Murmansk) come under the Russian Core region, which is strategically and economically important for Russia. Having NATO at its Finnish door will further fuel Russian anxiety. Spotlight on the Arctic Third, apart from these immediate border areas, another region where Nordic countries (or for that matter NATO) may face a standoff with Russia is the Arctic region, which has received little attention being too hostile an environment to merit any attention. But, due to climate change and prospects of harnessing untapped oil, gas and mineral resources, it is receiving wide attention, creating unexpected and complex challenges. Apart from the United States, Canada, and Russia, the Nordic countries such as Norway, Denmark, Iceland, Sweden and Finland are members of the Arctic Council, and have a direct stake in Arctic affairs. There have been localised confrontations between Russia and other actors here. NATO membership for the Nordic countries has brought a new geo-strategic dimension to the Arctic’s future. For Russia, cohabitation, rather than confrontation, with NATO was an option, but its military action has changed everything. By invading Ukraine, Mr. Putin wanted to stop NATO from expanding its base. On the contrary, it has triggered a NATO expansion instead, to a larger base in the Nordic, complicating the security landscape and creating more frontiers. There is more justification for NATO’s existence now. Many countries now see their secure future in NATO’s Article 5. Mr. Putin has in fact made NATO great again. Implications for India In recent years, India has had limited engagement with NATO, mostly as political dialogues. India has maintained a strategic silence on NATO’s recent expansion. But it needs to closely watch for scenarios that could emerge. First, Russia has few friends left in the current situation, but India, as one of them, is unlikely to help Moscow in maintaining the balance of power to counter NATO. China has maintained a strong stance against NATO’s existence and outreach towards the Indo-Pacific. Russia may count on China for support, bringing the two countries closer, strategically and militarily, which may not be in India’s interest. Second, in recent years, the Nordic region has caught the frequency of India’s strategic radar. Prime Minister Narendra Modi visited Copenhagen to participate in the Second India-Nordic Summit in May 2022, and underlined India’s deep interest in cooperation. This region now coming under a NATO umbrella will complicate India’s strategic choices. Third, India has observer status in the Arctic Council and pursues an Arctic Policy to promote multi-level cooperation. Finland’s NATO membership, with Sweden joining soon, along with China’s claim as a ‘Near Arctic State’ and its partnership with Russia in this region, may lead to the Arctic’s militarisation, thereby affecting the interests of all actors including India. India’s global actor role will be tested in view of the new European security architecture led by NATO, and contested by Russia. #NATO #Arctic #India Originally published : The Hindu, May 11, 2023 https://www.thehindu.com/opinion/op-ed/the-fallout-of-putin-helping-make-nato-great-again/article66835890.ece Posted in SIS Blog with the authorization of the author Dr. Sakti Prasad Srichandan is Assistant Professor, Centre for European Studies, School of International Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi

By Prof. Bharat H. Desai On the World Environment Day – June 05, 2023 – this author moderated a global webinar with a panel of eminent scholars from the four continents to ponder over the predicament of humankind as the triple planetary crisis has placed the Earth in the balance. This author enlisted select questions that would determine our future trajectory: i. How real is the triple planetary crisis? What level of existential threat it presents for the humankind, all life forms, the global environment and the commons? ii. Did the 2022 Stockholm+50 Moment became an effort to be ‘politically correct’ rather than seize the moment to ordain a serious revitalization of the existing corpus of international environmental legal instruments as well as the international environmental governance architecture? iii. What will take for the humankind to usher into a better common environmental future on a healthy planet? (here, here) iv. Are the suggested five ‘R’ pathways adequate? (a) reimagining the future (b) regeneration of the ecosystems (c) recovery (green) (d) rebalance equitable resource use (e) reinvigorated multilateralism (see, SIS Blog, March 29, 2023). v. What role futuristic scholarly ideas (here, here) can play in providing solutions for averting the planetary level crisis? vi. Can we turn to the General Assembly, as the plenary UN organ, for a clarion call to set in motion a bold normative process to address the crisis as a “plenary concern”? vii. What can we expect from the 2024 Summit of the Future (UNGA resolution 76/307 of September 8, 2022)? The webinar comprised five eminent panelists: Nicholas A Robinson, University Emeritus Professor, Elisabeth School of Law, Pace University, USA; Christina Voigt, Professor of International Law, University of Oslo, Norway; Nico Schrijver, Emeritus Professor in International Law, Leiden University, The Netherlands; Oliver Ruppel, Professor of Public International Law, Stellenbosch University, South Africa and Patricia Mbote, Director, Law Division, United Nations Environment Program, Kenya. Almost two hour long scintillating conversation with these panelists, affirmed this author’s indefatigable conviction for engaging in yet another audacious ideational venture preparatory to the 2024 Summit of the Future, as mandated by the UNGA (resolution 76/307) The organizing of the June 05 webinar, fifth one organized by the EPL publishers (IOS Press), affirmed that it is possible to lead from the front, even without any resources – from my home turf of SIS – in the global discourse on the future of the humankind at this critical juncture of the planetary level crisis. The Predicament The said planetary crisis has emanated from human frailty and inability to know The Limits to Growth, as propounded by the 1972 Club of Rome report and the finitude of resources on our only abode – the Earth. In fact, the human civilizational inability to overcome the greed (against need) constitutes the root cause of the global problematique and the predicament of humankind. The Club of Rome report aptly prophesized that: “It is the predicament of mankind that man can perceive the problematique, yet, despite his considerable knowledge and skills, he does not understand the origins, significance, and interrelationships of its many components and thus is unable to devise effective responses. This failure occurs in large part because we continue to examine single items in the problematique without understanding that the whole is more than the sum of its parts, that change in one element means change in the others.” (The Limits to Growth, p.11). Isn’t it ironical that after full 50 years, the humankind is unable to find a decisive way out and make a course correction from the proverbial predicament that pertains to our own existence? The humankind has sleepwalked into the planetary crisis riding on the ability to transform the Earth’s essential ecological processes. As observed in preface to this author’s curated futuristic ideational works, Envisioning Our Environmental Future (2022) as well as Our Earth Matters (2021), we need to “ponder on the rapidly depleting time we have left for remedial action to safeguard our future amid warnings of impending environmental catastrophe”. The Triple Planetary Crisis It is this planetary level crisis that stares the humankind in the face in the third decade of the 21st century. Exactly a year ago, the feisty UN Secretary-General (UNSG) António Guterres, in his opening remarks on June 02, 2022 at the 2022 Stockholm+50 Conference described the triple planetary crisis as “our number one existential threat” that needs “an urgent, all-out effort to turn things around.” Ironically, in the words of the UNSG, the human consumption is “at the rate of 1.7 planets a year” and the “global well-being is in jeopardy”. Similarly, Inger Andersen, UNEP executive director and the Secretary-General of Stockholm+50, underscored that “If we do not change, the triple planetary crisis of climate change, nature and biodiversity loss, and pollution and waste will only accelerate." The President of the 76th General Assembly, Abdulla Shahid, also reminded that the policies we implement today “will shape the world we live in tomorrow”. The UNSG’s warning has graphically vindicated this author’s 1992 scholarly prognosis (Social Science & Medicine, vol.35, no.4, 1992), at the time of the 1992 Rio Earth Summit that: “much of the developmental process in the world today does not appear to be sustainable…the human quest to conquer nature through science and technology has brought us on to the present brink. The threats to our eco-system essentially emanate from human activities in almost every sector.” At this stage, the drivers of the triple planetary crisis are: climate emergency; ecosystem degradation leading to biodiversity loss and pollution and waste. The alarm bells rung by the UNSG, as the chief executive officer, is based upon the findings of several scientific reports released during 2022-2023 including IPCC6; UNEP and WMO. The IPCC Sixth Assessment Report (April 2022) drew a grim scenario that the “Net anthropogenic GHG emissions have increased since 2010 across all major sectors globally…as have cumulative net CO2 emissions since 1850”. Similarly, UNEP’s Emissions Gap Report on October 27, 2022 has reinforced the global concerns that “the international community is falling far short of the Paris goals, with no credible pathway to 1.5°C in place. Only an urgent system-wide transformation can avoid climate disaster”. In February 2023 report, the World Meteorological Organization predicted that during the period 2013-2022 sea level rise has been 4.5 mm/yr, wherein the human influence is construed as the main driver of such ominous sea level rise. The Road Ahead The above mentioned gathering storms provide enough indications of a planetary-level environmental crisis. Do they cast shadows of the coming events before in the 21st century? It is almost akin to some of the catastrophic events including the two world wars that devastated the world in the 20th century. Hence, it was logical that one of the panelists of the June 5, 2023 global webinar, Patricia Mbote (Director, UNEP Law Division) called for “futuristic scholarly ideas” to address the planetary level crisis. Thus, it makes great sense to strive for innovative and iconoclastic solutions that could form a basis for a decisive course correction. This author precisely sought to walk-the-talk by bringing together cutting-edge ideas of global thought leaders by curating three marathon scholarly processes: (i) Regulating Global Climate Change (2023); (ii) Envisioning Our Environmental Future (2022); and (iii) Our Earth Matters (2021). On the road to 2024 Summit of the Future, maybe the UNGA could hold an emergency special session to set in motion a normative process to nudge the member states to gear up for the planetary concern. It posits a challenge for the global scholarly community to do the ideational groundwork, including contours of the UNGA’s normative process, to be affirmed by a concrete plan of action when the Heads of Government assemble for the forthcoming 2024 New York Summit. #WorldEnvironmentDay #PlanetaryConcern #LimitsToGrowth #OurEarthMatters #EnvisioningEnvironmentalFuture Dr. Bharat H. Desai is Jawaharlal Nehru Chair, Professor of International Law and Chairperson of the Centre for International Legal Studies (SIS, JNU), who served as a member of the Official Indian Delegations to various multilateral negotiations (2002-2008) as well as coordinated the knowledge initiatives for Making SIS Visible (2008-2013) and the four partner Inter-University Consortium: JNU; Jammu; Kashmir; Sikkim (2012-2020)

By Prof. Swaran Singh BRICS’ economic rise also marks an important challenge to the US-led ‘liberal world order’ This week, the five foreign ministers of BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) will meet in Cape Town. On the second day of their meet they will be joined by 15 other foreign ministers representing Africa, the Global South, and “Friends of BRICS” nations. Among other things these deliberations will seek to firm up the agenda for the BRICS Summit to be held during August 22-24 this year. What are the core issues that are expected to engage their interactions, and what makes BRICS an increasingly decisive forum for global governance? BRICS 2.0 In its second decade, BRICS has emerged as the world’s most powerful grouping, with expanding recognition for being the locomotive of global growth. But BRICS’ economic rise also marks an important geopolitical drift, as this grouping has come to be seen as an alternative to the US-led “liberal world order.” For instance, BRICS’ collective gross domestic product has surpassed the US-led Group of Seven advanced industrialized nations. In purchasing power parity terms, while the collective GDP of the G7 shrank from 50.42% of world GDP in 1982 to 30.39% in 2022, BRICS’ GDP for the same period enhanced its share from 10.66% to 31.59%. As well, while the Covid-19 pandemic set in deceleration of the G7 economies, BRICS economies – especially those of China and India – continued to show strong potential. Also, the Ukraine war has set the stage for BRICS becoming increasingly conspicuous, as the grouping is seen as the most reliable partner for Russia. Besides Russia itself, not one of the other four BRICS nations has supported any of the Western resolutions to condemn Moscow’s military operations. They have also not collaborated with Western economic sanctions that seek to impose obligations on other nations. Indeed, BRICS has emerged as the singular support base keeping the Russian economy afloat. Also, while the United States has been busy raising a coalition of 50 or so nations to supply Ukraine for its war efforts, South Africa, the current chair, has prioritized BRICS playing a greater role in ending the conflict between Ukraine and Russia. Individually as well, China and India have been exploring ways to facilitate an early end of the Ukraine war. This clearly reflects the new bold BRICS. In face of the International Criminal Court having issued arrest warrants for President Vladimir Putin for his so-called war crimes in Ukraine, South Africa has announced diplomatic immunity to all officials from Russia. This confidence and enthusiasm both within BRICS and about BRICS makes their parleys both interesting and intriguing, with implications way beyond these five nations. BRICS expansion For instance, about two dozen nations have expressed interest in joining the BRICS grouping. About 20 have formally applied for membership, which of course has remained frozen since South Africa joined the original BRIC grouping in 2011. These applicants include nations from across the world: Algeria, Argentina, Baharain, Bangladesh, Belarus, Egypt, Indonesia, Iran, Nigeria, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sudan, Thailand, Tunisia, Uruguay, Venezuela, Zimbabwe and so on. Within BRICS as well, the member nations’ reluctance to open up has witnessed change. China has typically been the most vocal supporter of expansion, while India was seen as the most reluctant. Over the years, Russia, Brazil and South Africa – in that order – have also shown greater inclination to add new members, though each of them has its own preferences. The Ukraine war has seen Russia becoming increasingly supportive of BRICS expansion. This is driven by its need to expand its support base against Western censure and sanctions. New Delhi remains concerned about Beijing trying to pack more of its friends into the forum, which could result in India getting marginalized. But with India now the world’s fifth-largest economy, New Delhi may have its own reasons to support friendly nations like Argentina, Indonesia, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates. While BRICS members will need to build consensus on detailed criteria and other modalities for new members’ inclusion, this growing global interest surely enhances BRICS’ credibility and influence on global governance. Expanding intra-BRICS trade has been the primary tool for strengthening the forum. This has lately seen increasing focus on exploring alternatives to reduce their dependence on the US dollar, and creation of a BRICS currency is expected to be on top of their agenda this week. The freezing of Russian assets by the West has seen this becoming a priority, where some of the BRICS members have already put in place mechanisms for using local currencies. China has been working on globalizing its yuan. New Delhi has also evolved arrangements to trade in Indian rupees with 18 nations. India’s agenda India, which is going to host two back-to-back summits – of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization on July 3-4 followed by the Group of Twenty meet on September 9-10 – has sought to use such multilateral meetings to evolve a consensus on its own agenda. But in addition to these preoccupations, the BRICS foreign ministers’ meet this week will see Indian Foreign Minister Subrahmanyam Jaishankar’s bilateral meetings with China and Russia drawing special scrutiny and interest. The Hiroshima G7 summit two weeks ago saw Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi having his first in-person bilateral meeting since the beginning of Ukraine war with President Volodomyr Zelensky. During the war these two leaders had spoken four times by phone, and before that they had only met briefly at the Glasgow climate-change summit in 2021. But now, after this month’s meeting, Modi’s call to “raise your voice against unilateral attempts to change the status quo,” even if spoken in the context of border tensions between India and China, will require some explaining with India’s time-tested friend Russia. This will also be seen against the backdrop of Modi’s meeting with Vladimir Putin during the Samarkand SCO Summit last September where the Indian PM had told the Russian president that “today’s era is not an era of war,” words that were repeated ad nauseam in Ukrainian narratives with Western media seeking to paint them as India’s warning to Moscow. Likewise, with India preparing to host President Xi Jinping at the SCO and G20 summits, this has created strong expectations of the two sides finding a breakthrough in their border tensions. These will soon enter their fourth year, with both sides maintaining heavy forward deployments while 18 rounds of senior-level talks and more than a dozen inter-ministerial meetings, plus meetings between their foreign and defense ministers, have not been of much avail so far. At Cape Town this week, the foreign ministers of India and China will have their third bilateral in three months. India has maintained that bilateral relations cannot be normal until the standoff on the border is resolved. Conclusion All these bilateral equations of BRICS members are bound to impact their efforts at building a multilateral consensus on a range of issues, from expanding membership to initiatives for addressing global challenges. Many of these are also issues that get reverberated in other forums and will have a direct impact on the parlays of coming SCO, BRICS and G20 summits. BRICS is seen today as the most formidable voice for the Global South on the high table of major powers of the post-World War II US-led world order. With the Ukraine war widening that bipolarity, BRICS will have to tread with care. Second, Brazil’s Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva becoming the next chairman of BRICS in August will also sharpen its credentials as an alternative to US-led global governance. For BRICS to overcome its internal disjunctions and harness its historic opportunities will require not just strong mutual understanding and trust but everyday diplomatic finesse and foresight for bold initiatives. And this will remain a work in progress, as an expanded BRICS will only makes consensus that much harder to achieve. #BRICS #Expanding Originally published : Asia Times, May 30, 2023 https://asiatimes.com/2023/05/brics-expanding-opportunities-to-influence-global-governance/ Posted in SIS Blog with the authorisation of the author Swaran Singh is visiting professor at the University of British Columbia, fellow of the Canadian Global Affairs Institute in Calgary, Alberta, and professor of diplomacy and disarmament at the School of International Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi, India

By Prof. Santishree Dhulipudi Pandit The huge uproar over a film and the politics of the ban in India is extremely unfortunate. Such is valid for the content of the national curriculum framework. The same textbooks were revised in 2006, yet no protests occurred. Those who represent the hegemonic narrative before 2014 believe they are ordained with the divine right to write the last word on history, and nothing could follow their final word. Any dissenting opinion or fact is branded misnomer or trolled endlessly. Through a well-coordinated ecosystem, the hegemonic Left vilifies anyone who disagrees with such curated narratives. This brings about the vital issue of freedom of speech and creative expression in the country, portending the absence of diversity with a preference for hegemony and exclusivism in intellectual and public spaces within and outside India. One sees this in the treatment of Karan Kataria at LSE. Had Karan not been a Hindu, would his case have been treated as it was? Such are the issues worth debates and discussions. India’s democracy is back after the Congress won in Karnataka and EVMs are reliable. Otherwise the same ecosystem cried that Indian democracy and diversity were in danger. This was being said in India and abroad by supporters like George Soros. Democracy and diversity are not determined by electoral victories and defeat. Indian democracy is very strong rooted and as old as our civilization. The advent of social media has been celebrated as a public good. However, the flip side of social media still needs to be understood through serious research within the academic discourse. Social media is blamed for promoting and sometimes perpetuating cancel culture. However, social media should be understood as a medium rather than the initiator of such ill practices. The cancel culture stands as an excellent example of failure to understand the risks associated with social media. Cancel culture is loosely defined as a contemporary phenomenon in which individuals or groups seek to publicly ostracize or punish individuals for their actual or perceived transgressions against certain social norms or values. Individuals or organizations are presumed guilty without due process, leading to loss of employment, reputational damage, psychological distress and even legal actions. Given the visibility and speed of social media, cancel culture relies on social media campaigns that quickly escalate and become viral, resulting in swift and severe (and sometimes unfair) consequences for the targeted individual or organization. However, the fascinating thing about these norms and values that cancel culture promotes is how they change with settings and individuals. Simply put, the same rules do not apply to everyone. Cancel culture is an extreme example of perverting the benefits of social pressure. It is commonly used to dismiss or target anyone with a slightly different opinion. Hate speeches are unacceptable, but social reprobation is still a necessary component of free speech. One can freely speak their mind, but one should be aware of its consequences. As is often said, “You cannot have your cake and eat it, too.” In his recent book, Cancel This Book: The Progressive Case Against Cancel Culture, a human rights lawyer and free speech advocate, Dan Kovalik, argues for the necessity of free speech in public spaces. He remarks, “speech that offends but does not interfere with another’s right of participation, should not be banned or otherwise suppressed. Rather, such speech … should be met with speech; with argument and dialogue, as a means to advance both free speech and hopefully equality.” A herd mentality traverses cancel culture where any discomfort or disagreement is not an instigation of self-reflection or recourse to checking facts. Instead, it becomes a cue to cancel the person or the idea. The most significant pathology of cancel culture is an ever-changing goal post where the behaviour is condemned regardless of its reasons, simply because you feel offended. Another pathology of cancel culture that increasingly occurs is “selectivity”. Some issues, content, or ideas are acceptable in one setting or when endorsed by like-minded individuals. Meanwhile, when someone else takes up the problems, they are condemned as insensitive, ill-informed, or accused of politicizing the issue. Besides negating facts and being selective, cancel culture is guilty of promoting the mob mentality that ultimately causes the death of reason, independent thinking, and, most importantly, due process. Some hateful actions or ideas, like Nazism, deserve to be curtailed and banished. Yet, criticism of Nazism is not based on a convenient alignment of interests but on facts and informed knowledge of the abhorrent Nazi ideas. Moreover, the lack of due process results in most victims being undeservedly besmirched. Cancel culture also causes great rifts in a society where even the dead are not safe, and such culture readily becomes a witch hunt. In the Indian case, before the film The Kerala Story could reach the theatres, a vicious campaign began that, in a Goebbelsian way, articulated falsehoods and double standards as the truth. Had it been a critique of Hindus, it would be labeled secular. Its release would have been linked with saving democracy in India. But since the role was reversed this time, the intolerant fringe refused to accept the reality and facts and tried to shoot down the messenger. Such an issue should have been championed by the so-called women’s studies centers in universities, who have turned a blind eye since it does not align with their agenda. The worrying issue with cancel culture is the convenience of labeling that comes with it. The labels are created and imposed through the lightning speed of social media. These labels cut short the room for context, nuances, or fact-checking. The result is before the issue or an idea appears in the public domain, the judgments are ready on how to receive them. One sees this in the case of Karan Kataria, whose Hindu identity automatically meant that he was an Islamophobe. Similarly, the appreciation or even acceptance of the film The Kerala Story meant that the individual was an Islamophobe. In both cases, labels were imposed, the merits of the cases were sidelined, while the evidence for such labeling was never provided. Another sad reality that cancel culture raises is the growing deniability and aversion to facts, no matter how widespread they might be. Despite the numerous real-life instances that The Kerala Story builds upon, there were not even attempts at reviewing the incidence of the concern that the film raises. Other vocal examples, like statements by the former Chief Minister of Kerala, V.S. Achuthanandan, who noted in 2010, “They (the ruling party) want to turn Kerala into a Muslim-majority state in 20 years. They are using money and other inducements to convert people to Islam. They even marry women from outside their community in order to increase the Muslim population,” are also conveniently left out in the dominant narratives. What should be concerning about the growing trend of cancel culture is that issues and ideas that it prevents reaching the audience might be something that the public should hear, even though it may not be convenient. Here emerges another pathology of the cancel culture: political correctness, which the cancel culture seeks to promote and champion. We must ask: what happens when one bows down to the cancel culture and stops the exposition of the truth? The answer is, fateful incidents like the “Rochdale child sex abuse” in the UK’s Great Manchester. This horrible episode involved abuse and sexual exploitation of underage girls in Great Manchester over several years. What is chilling about this horrendous episode was the failure of the system to address the issue because of political correctness since most of the offenders were Pakistani British. For such reasons, the insistence on free speech in public spaces is needed to see uncomfortable facts to address such problems instead of cancelling them because they do not align with one’s narratives and agendas. Finally, it must be asked why public spaces are being taken over by these cancel culture supporters in a vibrant democracy like India that will hold the largest elections in the history of mankind next year. The smear campaigns and perverse system of labeling individuals and organizations and conveniently refusing to listen to them have long-term consequences for individual development and society at large. It must be remembered that cancel culture breeds an environment of fear and self-censorship, where individuals are afraid to express themselves for fear of being “cancelled”. Nowadays, as societies become more polarized, it is essential to listen to people who are different and unlike us. Allowing them space would foster a harmonious society and lead to a better understanding of each other. #CancelCulture #SocialMedia Originally Published : The SundayGuardian, 28th, May 2023 https://sundayguardianlive.com/opinion/cancel-culture-and-public-space-in-india Posted in SIS Blog with the authorization of the author. Prof Santishree Dhulipudi Pandit is Vice Chancellor, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi

By Sanchita Borah The production of green hydrogen is achieved through the utilization of renewable energy to split water into hydrogen and oxygen. One of the protagonists of the imminent energy transformation that the world’s economies are obligated to achieve towards the procurement of carbon neutrality and tackling climate change will be green hydrogen. The production of green hydrogen is achieved through the utilization of renewable energy to split water into hydrogen and oxygen. When there is a requirement to turn it into energy, the storage of hydrogen in the specific tanks is then transmitted into fuel cells. There it unites again with oxygen from the air, and electricity is obtained. The by-product of this whole procedure is the only water that results in a clean, sustainable process. There is zero carbon dioxide emitted while producing this energy. The time is appropriate to cling to the potentiality of green hydrogen, which is here to play a vital role in tackling the crucial challenges in the energy sector. Scrutinizing the beneficiary ramifications of green hydrogen, India and Panama have leveraged the utilization of this process as an alternative and produced sustainable energy. India’s intense urge to achieve aspirational climate goals has driven the nation towards adopting missions in energy transmission. Leveraging green hydrogen as one of the catalysts for this mission, in 2022, the Union Cabinet of India adopted the National Green Hydrogen Mission, which visualizes India as a leading producer and supplier of green hydrogen in the world forum. Given the growing momentum in the global sphere over green hydrogen and the execution of the strategies for hydrogen by multiple countries, the forging of strategic partnerships in all areas of green hydrogen development becomes imperative for India. The own plans of India to achieve a hydrogen hub in the world captivated Panama’s attention. Janaina Tewaney Mencomo, the Foreign Minister of Panama, who recently visited India, discussed India-Panama’s potential collaboration in their mission of green hydrogen development and other renewable technology. As a substitute fuel for shipping, the two nations are looking forward to working together in green hydrogen production, with the aim of Panama evolving as a nucleus of hydrogen and environment-friendly shipping. The commencement of this vision of Panama is fostered with India’s assistance. The National Secretariat of Energy of Panama launched the “Green Hydrogen Roadmap” in the global south. It pursues strengthening the green hydrogen and derivatives industry in Panama. The nation is working on a specific strategy that aims to become the node or hub of storage, commercialization, and transmission of the green hydrogen produced in the region of Latin America. The Panama Canal is one of the world’s major shipping routes, through which 13,000 ships pass annually. This has become a critical factor in Panama’s aspirations towards leveraging green hydrogen production. The nation’s “Green Hydrogen Road Map” recognizes hydrogen as a future fuel and has aimed to establish Panama as a “Global Green Hydrogen Route.” Around 29 percent of the ships transiting through the Panama Canal are energized by diesel. Panama’s interest is to participate in the transition to green energy. As an indication of deepening collaboration in the energy sector, India and Central American countries like Panama will be establishing joint working groups to ameliorate the energy partnership. The talks towards this partnership came after the Indian government’s approval of Rs. 19,744 crores for the annual production of five million metric tons of green hydrogen and bringing in investment worth Rs. 8 trillion by 2030. India also plans to run its ships on green energy by involving a hybrid energy model that will comprise a mixture of solar, wind, seawater, and hydrogen. This can initiate a radical change, as transportation through the maritime sector accounts for around 90 percent and 75 percent of trade by volume and value for India. In their journey of discovering each other, India and Panama have initiated their collaboration in the future in various other sectors, incorporating pharmaceuticals, tourism, and women’s empowerment. India has recognized Panama’s geographic positions and logistic capabilities, which can make the nation a hub for Indian investors, according to the foreign minister of Panama. This international cooperation between India and Panama in the field of green hydrogen can become a potential game changer towards achieving climate goals and in the sphere of energy transmission. The 21st century has become an array of fast-growing bilateral deals that indicate the different hydrocarbon-based energy relationships of the 20th century. In recent years, as many as 30 countries and regions have incorporated plans for export and import, thus indicating that the cross-border hydrogen trade is set to grow considerably. The countries that have not traditionally traded energy are manifesting bilateral relations that center around hydrogen-related technologies. As India and Panama initiate their cooperative effort in the green hydrogen sector, it is time to see how far the political dynamics of cooperation between nations can lead toward a greener future. #IndiaPanama #GreenHydrogen Originally Published : May 15, 2023 https://www.financialexpress.com/business/defence-the-prospects-of-green-hydrogen-india-panamas-upcoming-collaboration-3088130/ Posted in SIS Blog with the authorisation of the author. Sanchita Borah is a Ph.D. Research Scholar at the Centre for Canadian, US & Latin American Studies, School of International Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi.

By Prof. Swaran Singh Since the arrest and subsequent release of Imran Khan, the entire country is in disarray Pakistan’s unfolding political drama has taken the focus off its piecemeal economic collapse in the making and the resultant social turmoil and plight of its citizens. For the region and Pakistan watchers around the world, it has eclipsed all other issues including the Ukraine war. Especially during the past week in Pakistan, things have been changing by the hour. On Monday morning, for instance, former prime minister Imran Khan, who believes he could be detained, jailed or even killed soon, claimed that the “London plan is out” and now the army has “assumed the role of judge, jury and executioner” and plans to invoke sedition charges to put him and his wife in jail for the next 10 years. Khan was referring to former prime minister Nawaz Sharif in exile in London having been the mastermind orchestrating Khan’s ouster from power, and how the current prime minister, Nawaz’ brother Shehbaz Sharif, has begun working with the army to ensure the elimination of Khan and his party, Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI). Meanwhile, there have emerged cracks within the Pakistan Democratic Movement (PDM), a coalition formed in 2020 by all major opposition parties to remove Imran Khan from power. This was achieved in a vote of no-confidence in the Federal Assembly in April last year. After that, a coalition government led by the Pakistan Muslim League (Nawaz) and the Pakistan People’s Party was formed. This weekend saw PDM leader Fazal-ur-Rehman preparing to hold a sit-in and protests in front of the Supreme Court that had declared Imran Khan’s detention illegal, followed by the Islamabad High Court granting him bail. Rehman believes the Supreme Court has been overly enthusiastic in protecting Khan. Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif, on the other hand, sought to have the protest moved to another venue, lest it trigger a law-and-order challenge in case Khan and his supporters showed up at the Supreme Court for their next legal action. History and religion Imran Khan meanwhile has begun to invoke history and religion while addressing not just members and supporters of PTI but the entire nation, which he sees as in peril of another dismemberment. Invoking emotional calls of fighting to last drop of his blood, Khan urged Pakistani citizens to bow to none other than Allah and not allow the army to threaten them with their un-Islamic behavior. Khan has become focused on targeting the Chief of Army Staff, General Asim Munir, avoiding criticizing the army itself as an institution and seeking support of the judiciary. But he also alludes to learning from the past when military repression resulted in the liberation war in East Pakistan, now Bangladesh. Such references reverberate enduring assertions of Baloch nationalism being the next existential threat for the nationhood of Pakistan. It is such insinuations that have triggered questions whether Imran Khan is headed for becoming Pakistan’s future Mujibur Rehman or might end up like Zulfikar Ali Bhutto. To recall the history of Pakistan’s former prime ministers, two of them, Nawaz Sharif and Benazir Bhutto, were exiled, and the latter was assassinated on her return. Another popular prime minister, Benazir’s father Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, faced trial and execution. In all of these cases, the military remained either directly in control of Pakistan or the kingmaker for subsequent regimes, including that of Imran Khan himself. Khan was anointed as prime minister in August 2018 after Nawaz Sharif’s disqualification. But the current state of affairs, of the Supreme Court declaring Imran Khan’s detention illegal, and nationwide protests threatening or destroying symbolic military properties, has put into doubt the army’s formerly unquestioned power and aura, and even its cohesion. Army’s cohesion in question Without doubt, armies the world over stand out as disciplined and united organizations, and the same should be the case of the Pakistan Army. Yet most armies also have had their own internal division and dissensions that occasionally become visible to the outside world and even a challenge for military leaders. Last week’s public outrage and violence following Imran Khan’s detention was one such occasion. The fact that the home of Lieutenant-General Fayyaz Ghani, corps commander of Lahore – once the home of the father of the nation, Mohammed Ali Jinnah – was attacked and damaged by fire has ignited speculations. Was this a case of the army being taken unawares? Was it the action of people restless due to increasing difficulties following a prolonged economic crisis? Or was it a case of at least a few generals looking the other way to express their displeasure with the way the army chief has handled the Imran Khan affair so far? The fact that two dates for holding elections for the Punjab Assembly have passed without elections being held also reveals inability of the both the government and the military to deliver results. While some see this as an example of the army becoming vulnerable, others see it as the retaliation of common people who have been on the receiving end of Pakistan’s economic collapse in the making. Election year Perhaps the fact that this is the year of Pakistan’s federal elections should explain some of this hyperbole if not its consequences. With Federal Assembly elections due by October, the continued popularity of Imran Khan has become a headache for both the ruling coalition and the military, especially General Asim Munir, who has become a target of Imran Khan’s tirades since his removal as prime minister. This government completes its term in August, which means federal elections can take place any time between now and October, that is, within 60 days of the National Assembly’s term coming to an end or within 90 days if it is dissolved earlier. This puts a premium on time, and the army needs to act fast, as the costs of ensuring peace and the pride of its place in Pakistan will keep increasing. The protests that followed Imran Khan’s detention last week would lead many experts believe that if elections are held on schedule on October 8 or before, Khan will win hands down. This has seen the army trying to ensure calm by deploying troops all over and detaining large numbers of PTI cadres and supporters. But this will only get the army more deeply entrenched in politics that it would like to avoid given that the impending economic collapse of Pakistan is not a time for the military to step in to ensure order. The coming two weeks will be crucial to see which way this intra-institutional and personality war in Pakistan go, and the world will keep awake given Pakistan being a state with nuclear weapons. Whether this will involve any major power’s intervention remains unclear as of now. #Pakistan #PersonalityWar Originally published: AsiaTimes, May 15, 2023. https://asiatimes.com/2023/05/pakistan-in-turmoil-what-next/ Posted in SIS Blog with the authorization of the author. Swaran Singh is visiting professor at the University of British Columbia, fellow of the Canadian Global Affairs Institute in Calgary, Alberta, and professor of diplomacy and disarmament at the School of International Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi, India

By Prof. Gulshan Sachdeva In the emerging global geopolitics, PM Narendra Modi may use a trusted India-France partnership during the July visit to shape broader India-EU ties To celebrate the 25th anniversary of the India-France strategic partnership, Prime Minister Narendra Modi will be attending Bastille Day Parade as guest of honour at the Champs-Elysées in Paris. This is the second time an Indian leader is invited as a guest of honour at the July 14 parade. Former Prime Minister Manmohan Singh along with an Indian military contingent attended the parade in 2009. India has signed more than 35 strategic partnerships so far. But the first-ever strategic partnership India signed with any country was with France in January 1998. A few months later, India conducted the Pokhran II nuclear tests. France not only refrained from imposing sanctions, but French President Jacques Chirac also wanted to resolve India’s exclusion from the global nuclear framework. In the last 25 years, a strong institutional mechanism has been established to strengthen co-operation in the areas of space, defence, civil nuclear, renewables, cyberspace, digital technology, counter-terrorism, and the blue economy. Apart from defence dialogues, India’s three services conduct regular defence exercises with their French counterparts. Both have jointly launched the International Solar Alliance (ISA). Modi’s visit may elevate the partnership further by 'setting new and ambitious goals for our strategic, cultural, scientific, academic, economic cooperation, including in a wide range of industries'. During the visit, a new deal to acquire 26 Rafale Marine fighters for indigenously-built aircraft carrier INS Vikrant could be announced. India has already purchased 36 Rafale fighter jets. Recently, Air India announced a deal to purchase 250 aircrafts from Airbus. Modi’s visit will take place at a time when French President Emmanuel Macron is facing internal and external challenges. Although the constitutional council has allowed him to go ahead with his pension reforms, political opposition to Macron both from the Left and Right has strengthened. While facing domestic opposition, he has been trying to project himself as a European voice externally. Of late, he is also being criticised for his softer approach both towards Russia and China as well as his remarks on Taiwan. He has been a proponent of European ‘strategic autonomy’, and has said that Europe should not be a follower of the United States on its Taiwan policy. During his recent China visit, Macron was not able to get any clear assurances from President Xi Jinping on the Ukraine war. In 2021, the AUKUS (Australia, the United Kingdom, and the US) submarine deal blindsided France where French companies lost a $65 billion contract to build Australian submarines. Within this context, strengthened collaboration with India and new defence deals could boost Macron’s standing. Maritime security within the Indo-Pacific narrative has emerged as a strong area of mutual co-operation. Modi’s visit could also be useful for India in the context of the Ukraine war, where Indian and European perceptions differ. Strengthening strategic components of the partnership with France could also reassure other EU nations that despite few differences, partnership with India continues to be crucial. After Brexit, France is now the only nuclear weapon state and permanent member of the UN Security Council within the European Union. An area which needs more focus is trade and investment. For the last few years, bilateral trade has been about $10-12 billion. In comparison, India’s trade with countries like Bangladesh, Thailand, and Vietnam is more than France. India could do more trade with a $3 trillion European economy. Negotiations on India-EU trade and investment agreements have re-started. However, knowing the history of past negotiations with the EU, we need to redouble our efforts to conclude these agreements at the earliest. France also hosts the fourth-largest Indian community in Europe after the UK, Italy, and Germany. Despite the challenging environment, France is making a concerted effort to attract students and professionals from India. A bilateral agreement on migration and mobility co-operation is already in place which aims to facilitate circular migration based on mobility and return of skills to the home country. It targets to enrol 20,000 Indian students by 2025. Like Charles De Gaulle and François Mitterrand, Macron also seems to believe that a strong and united Europe could be used as a tool to improve the French position in world affairs. New Delhi’s position on the Ukraine war has raised some concerns in Europe about limits of strategic convergence between India and EU. In the emerging global geopolitics, Modi may use a trusted India-France partnership during the visit to shape broader India-EU ties. #IndiaEU #FranceVisit #PMModi Originally Published : Deccan Herald, May 09, 2023 https://www.deccanherald.com/opinion/pm-narendra-modi-s-france-visit-to-boost-india-eu-ties-1217134.html Prof. Dr. Gulshan Sachdeva is Professor at the Centre for European Studies and Coordinator, Jean Monnet Centre of Excellence, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi

By Prof. Swaran Singh The international media have been busy debating the implications of India's possible overtaking China to become the world's most populous country. Many of the Western commentaries have sought to present this inflection point — which has been well known and long in the making — to drive a wedge between New Delhi and Beijing. However, the fact that they are the most and second-most populous countries does bring the focus of global demographic trends on India and China. After all, the third-most populous country, the United States, has less than one-fourth the population of India and China. But this evolution of global demography is often presented in rather simplistic and zero-sum terms as if India's gains from a larger workforce will trigger a similar, if not bigger, loss for China's growth. First, China's leaders have been fully aware of this demographic change being in the making. Like most developed countries that, at a certain level of their material development, experienced a decline in population growth, the Chinese leadership must have prepared for such an eventuality following China's unprecedented economic rise. They must have set in motion strategies to deal with such an inevitable but piecemeal demographic change. Second, the very argument of a rising aging population becoming a burden on a country stands contested. Increasing infusion of modern technologies into everyday life and robust trends of skill development, automation, and the larger drift from manufacturing to internet-driven services becoming the driver of economic growth have already demonstrated the limits of co-relation between an aging population and productivity. Countries have been revising their definition of senior citizens and raising the retirement age. Plus, advanced economies have always been attractive destinations for the younger workforce of less-developed countries which often sustain the advanced economies' growth rates and eldercare. China could do the same; or it could do even better. So what is the logic of putting two of the most populous countries in an artificial either/or binary? With the world becoming increasingly intertwined, what is pertinent to ask is what the United Nations' State of World Population 2023 report implies for global growth trajectories and which countries will be driving our shared destiny. Eight countries, the report says, will contribute half of the global population growth up to 2050. Of these, three are from Asia and five from Africa. Look closely and the three Asian countries — India, Pakistan and the Philippines — already have the world's largest, fifth-largest and 13th-largest populations. This means that the highest population will continue to be from Asia, led jointly by India and China, which have already become the epicenter of global growth and social transformation. Thus, Asia in the short and medium term till 2050 and Africa in the long run till 2100 will provide the bulk of new global consumers and producers, thereby becoming increasingly influential in determining global food production and consumption, as well as fashion and lifestyles. This transformation can already be seen in Asia's increasingly leading powerful international organizations and multinational companies, and in Asian leaders becoming central to the global governance structure and process. In fact, ethnic Asians are increasingly becoming an integral part of the ruling elites of advanced Western countries. The middle-income segment of populations — defined as people who spend between $12 and $120 a day — has been and continues to be the driving force behind global economic trends also in transforming social norms and best practices. Till the 1980s, more than 70 percent of the world's middle class was located in member states of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. But before the world was hit by the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, Asia had already tipped the balance by contributing more than 50 percent to this middle class of 4 billion people while OECD countries' share had shrunk to 40 percent. So to understand how demographic changes will drive global trends, it makes sense to look at China and India together rather than pitch them against each other. Today China and India respectively are trying to expand middle-income group to 900 million and 475 million. Therefore, will the world gain from China and India partnering in addressing their demographic changes or if they are to treat this as one more friction point? Of course, their policy choices are not going to be easy. China, and not the United States, today is the largest trading partner for the largest number of countries. But when it comes to India, the US and China have been alternating as India's largest trading partner. And the fact that India-US trade does not face an enduring and formidable trade deficit that is evident in India-China trade makes the former's proposition promising. In their respective social fabric as well, compared with 3.2 million people of Indian origin in the US, 50,000 people of Indian origin in China make their elite and street perceptions vulnerable to US interpretations and incentives. While hoping for more objective analyses, this calls for maximizing outcomes from the limited and skepticism-driven China-India interactions to ensure that the US brinkmanship does not distort their imagination of what these demographic trends entail for Asia's manifest destiny. #DemographicDividend #Asia #China #India Originally published: ChinaDaily, May 9, 2023. https://global.chinadaily.com.cn/a/202305/09/WS64597f9da310b6054fad1c31.html Posted in SIS Blog with the authorization of the author. Swaran Singh is visiting professor at the University of British Columbia, fellow of the Canadian Global Affairs Institute in Calgary, Alberta, and professor of diplomacy and disarmament at the School of International Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi, India

By Prof. Swaran Singh SCO expansion perhaps was the most exciting part of the CFM deliberations In the just-concluded Shanghai Cooperation Organization Council of Foreign Ministers (CFM) meet in Goa, current SCO chair and host India can draw satisfaction on having managed steady progress on 15 shortlisted discussion items plus five major draft documents to be finalized and enunciated during the SCO summit on July 3-4. These documents include the “New Delhi Declaration” for the upcoming summit plus four thematic joint statements on cooperation in de-radicalization strategies, promotion of millet cultivations, sustainable lifestyles to address climate change, and on digital transformation. Together these are expected to take forward this year’s theme of “Secure SCO” that aims to promote multilateral, political, security, economic and people-to-people interactions. Second, with the SCO now being in its third decade, India sought to push its perspectives on much-awaited reform and modernization. India has been especially vocal on making English, in addition to Russian and Chinese, the SCO’s third official language to ensure its wider global outreach and influence. India was also able to ensure focus on countering all forms of terrorism, especially cross-border terrorism, which remains one of the core and original mandates of the SCO. India also currently leads two SCO working groups on innovation and digital transformation. But it is the issue of SCO expansion that perhaps was the most exciting part of the CFM deliberations. SCO expansion Expansion of the SCO has lately come to be a constant, consensus-driven and potentially groundbreaking part of its evolution. This growth underlines the SCO’s growing international relevance with its footprint, after starting off in Central and South Asia, now moving to include several nations from the Middle East region as its new focal point. As of now, the SCO has eight full members (China, Russia, Kazakhstan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, India and Pakistan) and four observers (Afghanistan, Belarus, Iran and Mongolia). While the July summit is set to make Iran and Belarus its ninth and 10th members, the other two observers – Afghanistan and Mongolia – are expected to be the next to do so as well. It is the number of the SCO’s dialogue partners that has witnessed a rapid increase. Beginning with Sri Lanka (2010), Turkey (2013), Cambodia (2015), Azerbaijan, Nepal and Armenia (2016), and Egypt, Qatar and Saudi Arabia (2022), several others such as Bahrain, Kuwait, Maldives, Myanmar and the United Arab Emirates remain the next aspirants and applicants. Some of them are expected to be included at the coming SCO summit. The SCO started in 1996 as the Shanghai Five to connect China and Russia to their three newly independent Central Asian neighbors. Their initial task of demarcating boundaries and building trust was completed by 1999, which saw their focus shifting to energy security and countering terrorism. In 2001, the Shanghai Five recast itself as the Shanghai Cooperation Organization by adding Uzbekistan, which also became the headquarters for the SCO’s Regional Anti-Terrorism Structure. Membership remained frozen since 2001 until India and Pakistan were added as new members in 2017. This has given a whole new turn to the SCO’s anti-terrorism strategies, with India playing a leading role in pushing this agenda, sometimes to the discomfort of Pakistan and that country’s closest ally, China, which has lately come to present itself as the new peacemaker. Sino-Russian competition Indeed, the pace of expansion portends SCO becoming a mini-United Nations minus the United States and its friends. This is where China’s role as the new peacemaker and the SCO’s rapid expansion begin to reveal a correlation. The SCO has come to be seen as a grouping of China’s partners and friends. China’s mediation leading to the Saudi Arabia-Iran rapprochement followed by Iran being upgraded from observer to full member and Saudi Arabia joining the SCO as a new dialogue partner does lend credence to such suggestions. Indeed, there are speculations of Sino-Russia competition within the SCO. Interactions at the Goa SCO CFM saw experts speculating on Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov relying on Russia’s proximity with India to assert Moscow’s centrality to the SCO. Without doubt, the Ukraine war has further reinforced how the SCO remains Russia’s strongest support base and could create a situation of Sino-Russian competition enhancing India’s advantage. China’s unprecedented rise has seen it use its economic leverage to cultivate its influence in SCO nations. All SCO members have China as their largest trading partner, and most of them are recipients of China’s Belt and Road projects. But this also makes India and Russia cautious of China’s pre-eminence. China presenting itself as a peacemaker also brings focus on China-India border tensions, which were discussed during by Qin Gang’s and Subrahmanyam Jaishankar’s 45-minute bilateral session, resulting in lip service for umpteenth time. Chinese Defense Minister Li Shangfu was in New Delhi last week (April 27-28) to attend the SCO Defense Ministers’ meet. The two sides have also had 18 rounds of Core Commanders talks plus half a dozen ministerial meetings to no avail whatsoever. This mundane affair saw the SCO’s focus shifting from China to Pakistan. Pakistan focus The news that dominated media commentaries in India during the CFM was the visit by Pakistani Foreign Minister Bilawal Bhutto Zardari. This visit by a Pakistani foreign minister came after a long gap of over 12 years. This also made a splash given that Pakistan has so far been noncommittal to India’s presidency of the SCO. For instance, at last week’s SCO Defense Ministers’ meeting, Pakistani Minister Khawaja Asif was first reported to join online, but in the end completely skipped the meeting. Meanwhile all seven of the other members’ defense ministers were sitting face to face in New Delhi. Hina Rabbani Khar was the last foreign minister of Pakistan to visit New Delhi in 2011. That makes it a seven-year gap if one counts the India visit by a former foreign minister of Pakistan, Sartaj Aziz. He had visited Amritsar in December 2016 to attend a “Heart of Asia” conference on Afghanistan, and there were no bilateral meetings whatsoever. Bilawal Bhutto’s surname, his youth, flamboyance and use of social media all added to his presence in India. Indeed, his becoming Pakistan’s youngest ever foreign minister at 33 in April last year briefly created expectations, but in view of his history of acidic remarks on India, most commentators expect little substance from his debut visit to India. In any case, in face of the strained India-Pakistan relations, Bilawal Bhutto’s India visit does deserve consideration. It is important to underline that his tone and tenor were visibly different. He held two bilateral meetings with his Russian and Uzbek counterparts and attended all other routine CFM-related events. Notably, Bhutto’s warm handshake with his Indian counterpart during the gala dinner did make result in some media commentaries allude to his setting the stage for Prime Minister Shahbaz Sharif attending the SCO Summit in person. Positive spinoffs Finally, coming alongside India’s presidency of the Group of Twenty, which has faced a far more complex set of hurdles and invariably failed to achieve any consensus document so far, minor irritants and undercurrents in bilateral equations within the SCO CFM were surely not a matter of concern. Indeed, given that SCO nations including China, India, Russia and Saudi Arabia are also members of the G20, the visible camaraderie in the SCO CFM could be expected to have positive spinoffs for India as host of the G20 summit, which, perhaps intentionally follows the SCO Summit. #SCOExpansion #SinoRussia #NewDelhiDeclaration #India #Pakistan Originally published: AsiaTimes, May 5, 2023. https://asiatimes.com/2023/05/sco-foreign-ministers-meet-makes-steady-progress/?fbclid=IwAR3tMz-Ga0I0fPERjrL42qhziSTXMJOtSJ0SdWN4BdjuXYnPIZoigI5VjwU Posted in SIS Blog with the authorization of the author. Swaran Singh is visiting professor at the University of British Columbia, fellow of the Canadian Global Affairs Institute in Calgary, Alberta, and professor of diplomacy and disarmament at the School of International Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi, India

Dr. Aparajita Kashyap The build-up to the election had been dominated by problems like soaring poverty in one of the least developed countries of South America, rampant social inequality and neglect of the indigenous groups and informal labourers President Mario Abdo Benitez, will pass over the mantle to Santiago Peñain a governmental system where the Presidential term of five years is non-extendable. One among the political parties is the Conservative Partido Colorado (PC) or the Colorado Party which has dominated politics in the landlocked South American country for nearly seven decades since the 1950s. Santiago Peña, 44 who represented this party in the country’s presidential election on Sunday, is an economist and former finance minister. The Party in opposition is the Authentic Liberal Radical Party (PLRA), a left-of-center Party which has held power for only one term. The face of this party was a lawyer Efrain Alegre who was leading the Concertacion, the centre-left coalition that has united to defeat the Colorado Party. Peñascored a big win and secured 43 percent of the vote to 27.5 percent that Alegre could garner even though the exit polls had predicted a win for the latter. Peña’s win has ostensibly sent two signals- successful tightening of the conservative Colorado Party’s political grip in the country and defusing fears about the ending of diplomatic ties with Taiwan. The build-up to the election had been dominated by problems like soaring poverty in one of the least developed countries of South America, rampant social inequality and neglect of the indigenous groups and informal labourers. Corruption continues to plague Paraguay which is ranked 137 out of 180 countries on Transparency International’s Corruption Perceptions Index. To corroborate this, former President Horacio Cartes, one of Paraguay’s wealthiest and most powerful men, was accused of corruption and drug trafficking by the USA. Alegre had drawn an analogy between Cartesian and Pablo Escobar and had stated that Santiago Peña was his right hand man. The outcome of Paraguayan elections has defied the recent anti-incumbency trend in Latin American elections. The reasons for Peña’s victory could have been the divided opposition (PayoCubas, the candidate of the National Crusade, with 22.92 percent had cut into Alegre’s vote bank), a massive incumbency advantage, a formidable political machinery and the asymmetrical position of a single party in a state. Peña used a classic conservative campaign focused on issues such as crime, drugs and opposition to the legalization of abortion, usually popular concerns in most Latin American countries. The landlocked country is the last bastion in South America to still recognize Taiwan’s Presidency and is one of the 13 nations that maintain formal diplomatic ties withit.The Colorado Party’s strong alliance with Taiwan dates back to Paraguay’s former right-wing dictator Alfredo Stroessner, who ruled between 1954 and 1989, who saw a natural ally in anti-communist Chiang Kai-shek, the authoritarian ruler of Taiwan. In fact, Stroessner built a statue of Kai-shek in the capital after the two countries began diplomatic relations.In 2010, Paraguay’s President Fernando Lugo, credited with breaking the continuous rule of Colorado Party rule had floated the idea of establishing diplomatic relations with China.The other diplomatic backlash that Peñamay face relates to the decision to move Paraguay’s embassy in Israel to Jerusalem from Tel Aviv.Paraguay moved its embassy to Jerusalem in 2018 under Cartes but reversed its decision and relocated to its original location in Tel Aviv.The president-elect has also affirmed his intention to re-establish relations with Venezuela. Fiscal deficit, deficiencies in the health and education systems, the continued impacts of COVID-19 pandemic would remain major challenges for the new presidency. Diversification from the agricultural sector would be an expectation from this government. He would also have to deal with the rising pressures from soy and beef producers to drop associations with Taiwan in favour of China and its huge markets. Convergences between Colorado Party and PLRA emanate from the two being socially conservative, defending strong anti-abortion and anti-gay marriage stances in an overwhelmingly Catholic nation. Implications for India Paraguay is the one country in the region that has been able to keep China out and for this reason, India can use this as an opportunity to become Paraguay’s strategic partner. Collaboration in the space sector, especially in an effort to boost its space program at a low cost can have huge potential. The fact that as part of its Vaccine Maitri programme, India supplied it with Covaxin, at a time when the country was tempted by Chinese offers of a vaccine, can be used to leverage the ties. To further the cooperations, similar visions and stands on issues like the agreement to cooperate to deal with terrorism, combating the threats of climate change and global warming, or concerns with WTO rules would be the drivers. India and Paraguay have resonated in unison on the need for restructuring the United Nations and the move towards renewable sources of energy (Paraguay and India are signatories to the International Solar Alliance), these could become areas with the potential for furthering the bilateral relations. #ParaguayElections #ParaguayIndia #Taiwan Originally published : Financial Express, on May, 3, 2023 https://www.financialexpress.com/business/defence-presidential-poll-in-paraguay-persistence-of-incumbency-3072615/ Posted in SIS Blog with the authorization of the author. Dr. Aprajita Kashyap is Assistant Professor at the Centre for Canadian,US & Latin American Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi, India

By Himanshu Varshney Introduction Customs duties on merchandise imports are called tariffs. Tariffs give a price advantage to locally-produced products over similar products which are imported, and they raise revenues for governments. India imposed tariffs on electronics products used in Information and Communication Technology (ICT) to curb cheap electronic imports and to promote India’s domestic manufacturing industries. The Dispute The European Union (EU), Japan and Chinese Taipei complained the tariff treatment that India accorded to certain ICT products falling under the tariff items of India’s WTO Schedule and claimed that these measures lead, or led to the application of ordinary customs duties in excess of those set forth in India’s Schedule of Concessions, and, therefore, are or were inconsistent with Articles II: 1(a) and (b) of the GATT 1994. Even where India unconditionally exempts certain products from customs duties, India acts inconsistently with Article II:1(a) because India grants those exemptions through customs notifications which are subject to the possibility of repeal at any time, thus creating a lack of foreseeability for traders. However, India argued that- (i) its binding tariff commitments are set forth in the Information Technology Agreement (ITA), 1996 and those commitments are static and did not change due to their incorporation into India’s WTO Schedule; (ii) pursuant to Article 48 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (VCLT), aspects of India’s WTO Schedule are invalid as a consequence of an error on the part of India during the transposition of its Schedule from the Harmonized System (HS) 2002 to the HS2007; and (iii) the errors in India’s WTO Schedule are of a formal nature and were therefore capable of rectification pursuant to the 1980 Decision (Procedure for Modification and Rectification of Schedules of Tariff Concession) With respect to Japan’s complainant India specifically argued that pursuant to the India-Japan Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement (CEPA), and the implementing notification thereof, India exempts from ordinary customs duties the products at issue when originating from Japan, and therefore accords to products of Japan tariff treatment that is consistent with India’s duty-free tariff commitments set forth in its WTO Schedule. Panels’ Findings WTO on 17 April, 2023 circulated three panel reports in the cases brought by the European Union in “India — Tariff Treatment on Certain Goods in the Information and Communications Technology Sector” (DS582), Japan in “India — Tariff Treatment on Certain Goods” (DS584) and Chinese Taipei in “India — Tariff Treatment on Certain Goods in the Information and Communications Technology Sector” (DS588). The Panel rejected India’s (i) defence by saying that the ITA is not a covered agreement within the meaning of the WTO Agreement and the Dispute Settlement Understanding (DSU); and the ITA is not the source of India’s legal obligations in these disputes. The Panel also held that India’s WTO tariff commitments are not static in nature. With respect to India’s (ii) defence the Panel found that India did not satisfy the requirements of Article 48 of the VCLT and accepted in good faith India’s argument that at the time of the transposition of its HS2002 Schedule into its HS2007 Schedule, India had assumed that the scope of its WTO commitments was limited to the scope of its ITA undertakings and that the scope of those tariff commitments would not be expanded through the HS2007 transposition process and India had failed to demonstrate that this assumption constituted an essential basis of India’s consent to be bound by the certified Schedule. The Panel also found that India was put on notice of the possibility that its WTO tariff commitments in its HS2007 Schedule may have expanded from those set forth in its HS2002 Schedule, and similarly, that its WTO tariff commitments in its HS2007 Schedule may have expanded from those set forth in the ITA. Thus, even if Article 48 applied in WTO dispute settlement the circumstances did not satisfy the requirements of application of Articles 48 of VCLT. With respect to India’s (iii) defence the Panel declined to make findings on India’s request that the complainant countries violated paragraph 3 of the 1980 Decision by raising objections to India’s requested rectification unfounded in law, and thereby impeded India’s rights to make a formal rectification to its schedule of concessions under the 1980 Decision. The Panel found that India’s requests were claims, not affirmative defences, and therefore fell outside the Panel’s terms of reference. Even if the Panel made findings on this issue, to the extent that there remained objections on record to India’s rectification request, including those by WTO Members who were not parties to this dispute, India’s WTO Schedule would remain unmodified, and the findings requested by India would not modify India’s WTO obligations as set forth in its WTO Schedule. With respect to India-Japan CEPA Panel found that India failed to establish that the CEPA brings India into compliance with its WTO obligations pursuant to Articles II:1(a) and (b) of the GATT 1994. The Panel found that for products of Japan to access duty free treatment as set forth in India's WTO Schedule, they must satisfy preferential rules of origin which are not set forth in that Schedule, such that this notification does not accord unconditional duty-free treatment to the products at issue, and therefore does not bring India into consistency with its obligations under Articles II: 1(a) and (b) of the GATT 1994. Panel concluded that India’s tariff treatment of products falling under India’s WTO Schedule is inconsistent with Article II:1(b), first sentence, because: (i) certain such products are subject to ordinary customs duties in excess of those set forth in India’s WTO Schedule; and (ii) certain such products are subject to ordinary customs duties in excess of those set forth in India’s WTO Schedule unless they satisfy certain conditions that are not set forth in that WTO Schedule. India’s tariff treatment of such products is less favourable than that provided in its WTO Schedule, such that India is acting inconsistently with Article II:1(a) of the GATT 1994. India accords unconditional duty-free treatment to products in accordance with the terms of its WTO Schedule, and is therefore acting consistently with Article II:1(b), first sentence, of the GATT 1994. India by according to the commerce of complainant countries no less favourable than that provided for in its WTO Schedule, India’s tariff treatment of such products is consistent with Article II:1(a) of the GATT 1994. Panel recommended India to bring alleged measures in conformity with its obligation under the GATT 1994. Aftermath of the WTO Panel Reports India is willing to challenge these panel reports in WTO Appellate Body (AB) pending appeal such reports would not be enforceable because the WTO AB is dysfunctional due to non-appointment of AB members or exercising veto in appointment of AB members. The EU has approached India to resolve the dispute through Multi Party Interim Appeal Arbitration Arrangement (MPIA). However, India is not in favour of MPIA and believes in restoration of the WTO AB as affirmed during the 12th WTO Ministerial Conference, 2022 held in Geneva. If EU opt for retaliatory tariffs on Indian goods by invoking the EU Enforcement Regulation which allows it to enforce its rights by imposing customs duties or other restrictions in response to an appeal in to the void it would be a setback to India’s faith over multilateral trading system. #WTOPanel #IndiaTechTariffs Himanshu Varshney is a Ph.D. candidate at the Centre for International Legal Studies, School of International Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi

By Prof. Srikanth Kondapalli China refuses to vacate an estimated 60,000 to 70,000 troops from Depsang Plains and Demchok, and thus continues to obstruct Indian patrols Despite tremendous pressure from major powers, India is steering the G20 and Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) meetings with its own flavour of speaking for the Global South, humanitarian assistance and disaster relief (HADR), food security, climate change, and other issues. The SCO meeting in New Delhi on Friday saw the defence ministers of China, India, Russia, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan take part. Iran and Belarus joined as observers and Pakistan’s defence representative attended the meeting virtually. This was preceded by informal bilateral meetings amongst them the previous day, including between India’s Defence Minister Rajnath Singh and his Chinese counterpart Li Shangfu. The SCO defence ministerial mechanism is aimed at military cooperation among member-states, addressing regional security issues such as border disputes and arms control, pursuing counter-terrorism measures and enhancing cyber security cooperation. Given that SCO mandate and in the face of the Ukraine war and China’s violation of agreements with India in the border areas – manifesting most worryingly in such incidents as the conflict in Galwan in June 2020 and intrusions at Yangtse, Tawang, in December last, India, as the host, has to work out a way to obtain some substantial outcomes and ensure the success of its presidency of the SCO. At the SCO meeting, Rajnath Singh proposed HADR, in which India has demonstrated capability since the 2004-5 tsunami rescue and relief operations, as part of its agenda, in addition to defence capacity-building through training and co-manufacturing and co-development of items, food security and climate change mitigation and adaptation. Counter-terrorism issues were also raised, with a caveat that countries that promote terrorism should be penalised. The SCO states conduct “Peace Mission” counter-terrorism exercises, but these remain ineffective, mainly because of the prevailing double-standards. Another intractable SCO defence ministerial agenda item is border stability. Clearly, as Rajnath Singh told Gen Li, China’s “violation of existing agreements [1993, 1996, 2005, 2013, 2021 and others] has eroded the entire basis of bilateral relations”. Despite 18 corps commander-level meetings till last week, China refuses to implement the February 2021 defence ministerial agreement on “disengagement and de-escalation at all friction points” and thus violates the spirit of SCO as such. Earlier, on March 2, External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar told his Chinese counterpart Qin Gang, who came to attend the G20 foreign ministerial meeting, that the state of India-China relations is “abnormal”. On June 17, 2020, two days after Chinese troops killed 20 Indian soldiers at Galwan, Jaishankar had said that bilateral relations with China can only improve once efforts are made to restore peace and tranquillity. China, on the other hand, refuses to vacate an estimated 60,000 to 70,000 troops from Depsang Plains and Demchok, and thus continues to obstruct Indian patrols. It even wants India to accept the current situation as the “new normal”. Another phenomenon that has revealed itself at recent SCO meetings also could have far-reaching consequences. This is the attempt by China to marginalise India diplomatically and economically in Asia and beyond. In pursuit of this objective, Beijing floated a “Himalayan Quad” with Nepal, Pakistan and Afghanistan, another grouping with Pakistan, Afghanistan and Tajikistan, and is now attempting to form a “new RIC” – with Russia and Iran. China is propping up this “new RIC” to counter the US, but also to marginalise India. India built the Chabahar port in Iran to enhance trade and connectivity to the landlocked Afghanistan and Eurasian region. However, China sees this as a challenge to its Belt and Road Initiative and to its recent facilitation of a dialogue between Iran and Saudi Arabia. An ancient Chinese adage goes, “a mountain cannot accommodate more than one tiger”. Beijing is following that dictum to ensure that India does not build linkages into the Eurasian region, which it covets. Clearly then, the SCO defence ministerial meeting witnessed intense Chinese powerplay aimed simply at marginalising the host country – India – and ensuring that the declared SCO agenda of border stability, demilitarisation and arms control cannot be implemented. In these circumstances, India needs to re-calibrate its thinking and strategy to enhance its deterrence capabilities as well as to pay more attention to geopolitical issues. #China #SCO #Powerplay #newRIC Originally published : Deccan Herald, April, 30, 2023. https://www.deccanherald.com/opinion/beijing-s-powerplay-1214277.html Posted in SIS Blog with the authorization of the author. Prof. Srikanth Kondapalli is Dean of School of International Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University.