Vivek Waghmare

Indian Foreign Policy

Syllabus: Indian Foreign Policy: Determinants of foreign policy; institutions of policy-making; continuity and change.

Indian Foreign Policy

Foreign policy refers to a set of principles, strategies, and actions adopted by a sovereign state to interact with other countries and international actors in pursuit of its national interests. It encompasses a range of diplomatic, economic, military, and cultural activities aimed at safeguarding and promoting the state's security, prosperity, and values in the global arena.

Hans J. Morgenthau provides a definition of foreign policy as "the planned pursuit of national interests through the use of diplomatic, economic, and military instruments of a state."

According to Joseph S. Nye a prominent scholar of international relations, foreign policy refers to "the actions and decisions of a state and its leaders toward the external environment." Nye emphasizes that foreign policy is driven by a country's goals and interests, which can include security, prosperity, and values.

Shivshankar Menon defines foreign policy as 'Minimaxing' - minimizing risks and maximizing benefits.

Overall Indian Foreign Policy – A broader perspective

Objectives of Foreign Policy

· According to Kanwal Sibal, a former Indian diplomat, continuity is an essential aspect of India's foreign policy. India's foreign policy priorities are rooted in several key principles and objectives that have remained consistent over time.

· Ensuring territorial integrity and sovereignty is a primary concern for India. The country is committed to safeguarding its borders and maintaining control over its territories. This objective reflects India's determination to protect its national interests and security.

o For example – Ban on Chinese apps - The ministry felt that such apps were engaged in activities that were prejudicial to the sovereignty, integrity, defence, security of state, and public order of India.

o During SCO chairmanship PM highlighted that - SCO members should respect sovereignty, territorial integrity of countries.

o India rejected its participation in the BRI project citing threat to its sovereignty and integrity.

o India’s commitment to territorial integrity has been further emphasized in recent developments. India expanded its ban on Chinese apps, targeting additional applications linked to Chinese firms due to ongoing concerns over data security and national sovereignty. This move aligns with India’s broader strategy to curb Chinese digital influence, particularly in light of persistent border tensions.

o During India’s SCO chairmanship (2023–2024), Prime Minister Narendra Modi reiterated the importance of sovereignty at the 2024 SCO Summit in Astana, Kazakhstan, urging members to counter external interference in regional affairs. Scholar Harsh V. Pant noted that India’s SCO leadership showcased its ability to balance relations with Russia, China, and Central Asian states while advocating for sovereignty, a nuanced approach in a multipolar world.

o India’s rejection of the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) was reaffirmed in 2024 when it declined to endorse BRI projects at the SCO Summit, citing concerns over debt traps and sovereignty violations, particularly in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir. C. Raja Mohan, argued that India’s stance reflects a strategic prioritization of national interests over regional connectivity schemes dominated by China.

· India's foreign policy is guided by the pursuit of international peace and security India has historically advocated for peaceful coexistence among nations and has been a vocal supporter of the principles of non-alignment and non-interference in the internal affairs of other countries.

o For example –During Russia –Ukraine crisis PM Narendra Modi highlighted that the “This is not the era of war”. This signifies the India’s stand on international peace and security.

o India’s advocacy for global peace was evident in its continued neutral stance on the Russia-Ukraine war. In September 2024, PM Modi visited Ukraine, meeting President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and offering India’s mediation to facilitate peace talks. Modi’s statement, “This is not the era of war,” was reiterated at the UN General Assembly in 2024, reinforcing India’s call for diplomacy over conflict. Shashi Tharoor praised India’s approach as a pragmatic balance between maintaining ties with Russia and engaging the West, though he cautioned that prolonged neutrality could strain relations with the US.

· India's foreign policy aims at ensuring the internal development and well-being of its citizens. The government recognizes the importance of fostering economic growth, social progress, and inclusive development.

o For example, the Comprehensive Economic Cooperation Agreement (CECA) with Singapore, the India-Japan Economic Partnership Agreement, and the India-Korea Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement (CEPA) are aimed at promoting trade, investment, and economic cooperation, benefiting Indian industries and businesses

o India’s opting out of RCEP negotiations to save the domestic manufacturers and business organisation shows how India ensures the internal development.

o India’s focus on internal development through economic diplomacy has seen significant advancements. India signed a Trade and Economic Partnership Agreement (TEPA) with the European Free Trade Association (EFTA), comprising Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway, and Switzerland, to boost investment and job creation. Arvind Panagariya highlighted this agreement as a strategic move to diversify India’s trade partnerships amid global economic uncertainties.

o India’s decision to remain outside the RCEP was reaffirmed in 2024 when Commerce Minister Piyush Goyal emphasized protecting domestic industries from unfair competition, particularly from China.

Other broader objectives of Indian foreign policy

1. Safeguarding National Interests: Indian foreign policy prioritizes the protection of territorial integrity, security, and economic development.

· C. Raja Mohan, an Indian strategic affairs expert, emphasizes the importance of protecting India's national interests in foreign policy decision-making. They argue that India's foreign policy should prioritize the pursuit of its core objectives to ensure its security, territorial integrity, and economic prosperity.

· For example – India’s stand during the Russia Ukraine crisis was guided by the national interest. As highlighted by EAM –S Jaishankar.

· India’s national interest-driven approach was evident in its continued engagement with Russia despite Western pressure. In December 2024, India signed agreements with Russia for enhanced defense cooperation, including joint production of military equipment. EAM S. Jaishankar defended this at the Munich Security Conference 2025, stating that India’s ties with Russia serve its energy and defense needs, reflecting strategic pragmatism. C. Raja Mohan, in a Foreign Affairs article (January 2025), noted that India’s ability to maintain relations with both Russia and the US underscores its strategic autonomy in a polarized world.

2. Promoting Global Peace and Stability: India actively participates in international efforts to prevent conflicts, resolve disputes peacefully, and promote dialogue among nations.

· Shashi Tharoor, advocate for India's active role in promoting global peace and stability. They highlight the significance of India's commitment to peacekeeping operations, participation in international forums, and diplomatic efforts to resolve conflicts and build constructive relationships with other nations

For example –

· India’s immense contribution to the UN peacekeeping forces shows its commitment towards the global stability and peace.

· India’s emphasis on disarmament and the policy of keeping away from military alliances are intended to promote global peace.

· India’s peacekeeping contributions grew with the deployment of additional troops to UN missions in South Sudan and the Democratic Republic of Congo in 2024. Shashi Tharoor, lauded India’s role as a stabilizing force in conflict zones, though he urged greater Indian leadership in UN reforms to amplify its global influence.

· India’s push for nuclear disarmament was highlighted at the 2024 Conference on Disarmament in Geneva, where India called for a verifiable and non-discriminatory disarmament framework. Scholar Manoj Joshi, argued that India’s consistent advocacy for disarmament enhances its moral standing, though challenges remain due to global power rivalries.

3. Fostering Economic Growth: Indian foreign policy focuses on creating a conducive external environment for economic growth, attracting foreign investment, and expanding trade relations.

· Arvind Panagariya, stress the importance of economic considerations in Indian foreign policy. They argue that India's engagement with other countries should prioritize economic growth, attracting foreign investment, expanding trade relations, and securing access to global markets and resources.

· For example – India’s lobby for the economic interest at the multilateral institutions like WTO and other multilateral institutions.

· India’s economic diplomacy gained momentum with its leadership at the WTO’s 13th Ministerial Conference in Abu Dhabi (February 2024), where it successfully advocated for fair agricultural trade policies, protecting Indian farmers. Arvind Panagariya emphasized that India’s assertive WTO stance reflects its growing economic clout.

· In January 2025, India secured a $5 billion investment commitment from Japan for infrastructure projects, strengthening the India-Japan Economic Partnership Agreement. This aligns with India’s goal of attracting foreign investment to fuel domestic growth, as highlighted by scholar Sanjaya Baru.

4. Enhancing Security: India strengthens its security capabilities through strategic partnerships, regional stability initiatives, counterterrorism efforts, and addressing non-traditional security threats.

· S Raghavan emphasizes the need for a robust security strategy in Indian foreign policy. They highlight the importance of strategic partnerships, military modernization, intelligence cooperation, and counterterrorism efforts to enhance India's security posture and effectively address emerging security challenges.

· For example- The Government imposition of restrictions on bidders from countries which share a land border with India on grounds of defence of India, or matters directly or indirectly related thereto including national security. It was mainly to curb Chinese influence.

· India bolstered its security framework through a 2024 defense pact with the US, focusing on co-production of advanced weaponry. S. Raghavan, noted that this partnership enhances India’s military modernization while preserving strategic autonomy.

· In March 2025, India expanded its counterterrorism cooperation with Australia, signing an agreement for intelligence sharing and joint exercises to combat extremism. This move addresses rising threats in the Indo-Pacific, particularly from non-state actors, as emphasized by Harsh V. Pant.

5. Protecting National Sovereignty: India upholds its sovereignty, maintains peaceful relations with neighbours, and asserts its interests in international forums.

· Brahma Chellany focuses on India's commitment to protecting its sovereignty and territorial integrity. They advocate for assertive diplomacy, border management, and diplomatic engagement to uphold India's interests and ensure its national sovereignty is respected by other nations.

· For example - India’ opposition to the projects like China–Pakistan Economic Corridor shows its commitment towards national sovereignty.

· India’s opposition to the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) was reiterated in 2024 when it lodged a formal protest with China over infrastructure projects in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir. Brahma Chellaney, argued that India’s firm stance on CPEC underscores its resolve to counter China’s regional ambitions.

· In February 2025, India successfully negotiated the release of Indian fishermen detained by Pakistan, showcasing diplomatic efforts to maintain peaceful neighbourly relations while asserting sovereignty. Scholar Happymon Jacob praised this as a pragmatic approach to de-escalate tensions.

6. Advancing Global Standing: Indian foreign policy aims to enhance India's global influence, actively engaging in shaping international norms, rules, and institutions while ensuring India's voice is heard on global issues.

· Manoj Joshi stresses the significance of India's global standing and influence. They argue that India should proactively engage in international affairs, shape global norms and institutions, and assert its role as a responsible global actor, aligning with its aspiration to be a major power.

· For example - India’s presidency of G-20, SCO, and invitation by Japan at G-7 shows its enhanced global standing.

· India’s global influence was further cemented by its leadership at the G20 Summit in New Delhi, where it secured the African Union’s permanent membership, enhancing its Global South leadership. Manoj Joshi, noted that India’s G20 presidency positioned it as a bridge between developed and developing nations.

· In May 2025, India’s invitation to the G7 Summit in Italy underscored its rising global stature, with discussions focusing on climate change and digital governance. Scholar Tanvi Madan argued that India’s proactive role in multilateral forums reflects its ambition to shape global norms while balancing strategic autonomy.

7. Protecting Indian Diaspora: India values its diaspora and works to strengthen ties, provide support, and protect the rights and interests of overseas Indians.

· Data -

· According to Global Migration Report 2020, India continues to be the largest country of origin of international migrants with a 17.5 million-strong diaspora across the world.

· 8 million people of Indian origin live in the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries.

· Shubh Mathur highlights the importance of India's diaspora in foreign policy considerations. They emphasize the need to safeguard the rights and interests of the Indian diaspora, foster strong connections, and leverage their potential for economic, cultural, and diplomatic exchanges.

· For example –

· Operation Devi Shakti – For evacuating citizens from Afghanistan

· Operation Ganga – To evacuate the students from the Ukraine during Russia Ukraine crisis.

· Evacuation of people from Sudan during recent civil crisis.

· Interaction of PM with the diaspora along with his visit like Australia, USA and other nations recently

India’s diaspora engagement intensified with Operation Kaveri in April 2024, evacuating over 3,000 Indian citizens from Sudan amid escalating violence. In January 2025, India launched a digital platform to streamline consular services for its diaspora, enhancing support for overseas Indians.

PM Modi’s diaspora engagements continued with high-profile interactions in the US (September 2024) and Australia (November 2024), where he addressed Indian communities to boost investment and cultural linkages.

MEA S. Jaishankar outlined the three core objectives of Indian foreign policy.

1. Firstly, India aims to address key global challenges through extensive engagement with a wide range of stakeholders. This involves actively participating in international forums, building partnerships, and collaborating with various countries to find collective solutions.

2. Secondly, Indian foreign policy seeks to effectively manage, and possibly leverage, the global contradictions that exist. This entails navigating complex international dynamics, balancing competing interests, and seizing opportunities that arise from these contradictions.

3. Finally, India is committed to advancing its interests in the evolving Multipolar world while contributing to the global good. It actively participates in shaping global norms, rules, and institutions to reflect the changing realities and aspirations of emerging powers.

4. EAM S. Jaishankar elaborated on these objectives in a speech at the 2024 Raisina Dialogue, emphasizing India’s role in navigating a fragmented global order. He highlighted India’s mediation efforts in the Russia-Ukraine war and its push for climate finance at COP29 in Baku (November 2024) as examples of addressing global challenges.

5. In March 2025, Jaishankar underscored India’s ability to leverage contradictions by maintaining ties with both the US and Russia, as seen in simultaneous defense deals with both nations. Scholar Happymon Jacob, argued that India’s multipolar strategy allows it to extract benefits from competing global powers while advancing its own interests.

Challenges of Indian foreign policy

1. Regional security challenges from neighbouring countries like Pakistan and Afghanistan, including cross-border terrorism and territorial disputes.

· Harsh V. Pant, have highlighted the persistent challenges to India's regional security, including cross-border terrorism and territorial disputes with Pakistan and China. They emphasize the need for robust diplomatic efforts to address these challenges and ensure stability in the region.

· For example- India has faced numerous instances of cross-border terrorism originating from Pakistan, such as the 2008 Mumbai attacks, which highlighted the threat posed to India's security

· India faced heightened security challenges from Pakistan, with a surge in terrorist infiltration attempts in Jammu and Kashmir in 2024. Harsh V. Pant called for stronger counterterrorism measures, including enhanced intelligence cooperation with the US and Israel.

· In Afghanistan, India’s engagement with the Taliban deepened with Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri’s meeting with Taliban Foreign Minister Amir Khan Muttaqi in January 2025, focusing on trade and counterterrorism. Scholar Tanvi Madan noted that India’s cautious outreach aims to secure its interests while countering Pakistan’s influence in Afghanistan.

· The update in context of Afghanistan reflects India’s evolving, pragmatic approach to Afghanistan, which may appear to contrast with the original focus on security challenges from Afghanistan. This shift underscores India’s balancing act between diplomacy and security concerns.

2. Rising power dynamics, particularly with China, and the need to balance relations and safeguard national interests.

· C. Raja Mohan, have discussed the implications of China's rise for India's foreign policy. They argue that India must carefully balance its relations with China, taking into account China's assertive foreign policy and territorial claims. Scholars stress the importance of safeguarding India's national interests while engaging in constructive dialogue with China.

· For instance, the border tensions between India and China in regions like Doklam in 2017 and the recent clashes in the Galwan Valley in 2020 have highlighted the challenges of managing territorial disputes and assertive behavior from China.

· The India-China border standoff saw partial de-escalation in 2024, with both sides agreeing to disengage at key friction points in eastern Ladakh. However, C. Raja Mohan, cautioned that unresolved boundary issues and China’s growing regional influence necessitate sustained diplomatic and military preparedness.

· In April 2025, India imposed additional trade restrictions on Chinese imports to protect domestic industries, reflecting a strategic response to China’s economic assertiveness. Scholar Brahma Chellaney argued that India’s multi-alignment strategy—engaging China diplomatically while strengthening ties with the Quad—effectively balances power dynamics.

3. Combating terrorism and extremism both domestically and internationally, requiring coordination and intelligence-sharing with other nations.

· Shashi Tharoor, have emphasized the significance of addressing terrorism and extremism in India's foreign policy. They underscore the need for international cooperation, intelligence-sharing, and coordinated efforts to combat terrorism effectively. Scholars also stress the importance of addressing the root causes of extremism to ensure long-term stability.

· For example - India has been grappling with insurgencies and acts of violence in regions like Jammu and Kashmir and the North-Eastern states, perpetrated by various extremist groups with different motivations.

· India strengthened its global counterterrorism framework by co-hosting a UN Security Council Counter-Terrorism Committee meeting in New Delhi in October 2024, focusing on financing of terrorism. Shashi Tharoor emphasized that India’s leadership in global counterterrorism reflects its commitment to addressing both domestic and international threats.

· India and France signed a pact for enhanced intelligence sharing to combat terrorism, particularly targeting networks in South Asia. Scholar Harsh V. Pant noted that such partnerships are critical to addressing the evolving nature of extremism, including cyber-enabled terrorism.

4. Economic interests and challenges related to trade barriers, protectionism, and global economic uncertainties.

· Raghuram Rajan, former Governor of the Reserve Bank of India, have discussed the challenges and opportunities related to India's economic interests in the global arena. They analyze the impact of trade barriers, protectionist policies, and global economic uncertainties on India's economic engagement. Scholars stress the need for proactive diplomacy and negotiation to safeguard India's economic interests.

· For instance, the imposition of tariffs on steel and aluminium by the US impacted India's steel exports.

· India has experienced protectionist measures in the agricultural sector, such as import restrictions on certain agricultural products.

· India faced new trade challenges with the US imposing additional tariffs on Indian pharmaceuticals, prompting retaliatory measures.

· India secured a favorable WTO ruling against EU agricultural tariffs, boosting its farm exports. Scholar Sanjaya Baru highlighted India’s proactive diplomacy as key to navigating global economic uncertainties, particularly amid US-China trade tensions.

· The newer US tariffs on pharmaceuticals, indicates a shift in trade friction areas. This change underscores the dynamic nature of India’s economic challenges, requiring ongoing diplomatic efforts.

5. Addressing non-traditional security threats such as climate change, cyber security, and pandemics, necessitating cooperation with other countries and international institutions.

· Shivshankar Menon, a former National Security Advisor, have highlighted the importance of addressing non-traditional security threats in India's foreign policy. They emphasize the need for international collaboration to tackle challenges like climate change, cyber security, and pandemics. Scholars stress the role of India as a responsible global actor in advocating for effective responses to these shared challenges.

· For example - India has been working on strengthening its cyber security capabilities and collaborating with countries like the United States and Israel in areas such as information sharing, capacity building, and joint cyber exercises.

· India advanced its climate diplomacy by committing to net-zero emissions by 2070 at COP29 in Baku, while securing $10 billion in climate finance for renewable energy projects. Shivshankar Menon, praised India’s leadership in pushing for equitable climate funding but warned of implementation challenges.

· In cyber security, India and the UK launched a joint cyber defense initiative in April 2025, focusing on countering state-sponsored cyberattacks. Scholar Rajeswari Pillai Rajagopalan, noted that India’s growing cyber partnerships reflect its proactive stance against non-traditional threats.

6. US Relations and Strategic Autonomy:

· Balancing Act: India continues to navigate its strategic autonomy amidst pressure from the US to adopt a more combative stance towards China. India prefers negotiations with China over direct confrontation, leading to perceptions of unreliability from US think tanks.

· Alleged Assassination Plot: Relations with the US have been strained by allegations of an Indian official's involvement in a plot to kill a Sikh separatist on American soil. This issue has required careful diplomatic management to maintain robust ties.

· India’s strategic autonomy was tested in 2024 when the US pressed for stronger sanctions on Russia, which India resisted to preserve its defense ties. Tanvi Madan noted that India’s balancing act reflects its commitment to multi-alignment, though it risks misperceptions in Washington.

· The alleged assassination plot issue saw progress with India cooperating with US investigations, leading to a de-escalation of tensions. Scholar Ashley J. Tellis argued that India’s transparency strengthened bilateral trust, though underlying concerns about strategic alignment persist.

7. China's Aggressiveness:

· Border Standoff: The ongoing border disputes with China remain a significant concern. Despite aggressive actions by China, India has opted for negotiations over military action while trying to ensure bilateral trade continues unhindered.

· India and China held high-level talks to finalize patrolling arrangements along the Line of Actual Control (LAC), reducing tensions in eastern Ladakh. C. Raja Mohan emphasized that India’s diplomatic persistence prevented escalation while maintaining economic engagement, with bilateral trade reaching $130 billion in 2024.

8. Russia-Ukraine War:

· Neutral Stance: India's neutral stance in the Russia-Ukraine conflict has been a point of contention, particularly with the US, which views Russia as a primary adversary. India continues to maintain and even expand its ties with Russia, focusing on defense and nuclear energy cooperation.

· India’s neutral stance persisted, with PM Modi’s visits to Russia in July and December 2024 reinforcing defense and energy ties, including a $10 billion nuclear energy deal. Harsh V. Pant argued that India’s Russia engagement secures critical supplies while navigating Western pressure. India’s peace mediation offer in Ukraine was welcomed by the UN but met with scepticism.

9. Regional Tensions:

· Maldives: The change in the Maldivian government to a pro-Chinese leadership poses a strategic challenge for India, impacting its influence in the Indian Ocean region.

· Pakistan and Afghanistan: While routine tensions with Pakistan persist, India's cautious engagement with the Taliban in Afghanistan reflects its nuanced approach to balancing security and diplomatic needs.

· The Maldives’ pro-China tilt intensified with President Mohamed Muizzu’s visit to Beijing, securing $500 million in Chinese infrastructure aid. India responded by doubling its aid to the Maldives to $600 crore for 2025–26. Scholar Zorawar Daulet Singh argued that India’s financial diplomacy aims to retain influence despite China’s inroads.

· Tensions with Pakistan escalated in June 2024 with a cross-border attack in Jammu, prompting India to strengthen border defenses. In Afghanistan, India’s increased aid to $200 crore in 2025–26 and diplomatic engagement with the Taliban reflect a strategic shift to secure regional stability. Happymon Jacob highlighted India’s pragmatic approach to counter Pakistan’s influence while addressing security concerns.

· India’s cautious engagement with the Taliban, which has evolved into more proactive diplomacy now, as seen in high-level meetings and increased aid. This shift may appear to soften the original emphasis on Afghanistan as a security challenge, reflecting India’s adaptive strategy in a complex regional landscape.

10. Middle East Dynamics:

· Israel-Palestine Conflict: India's position in the Israel-Gaza conflict is complicated by its need to balance relations with both Israel and the Palestinians, impacting its standing in the Global South.

· Iran: Despite US sanctions, India continues to maintain links with Iran, crucial for its strategic interests in the region.

· India’s balancing act in the Israel-Palestine conflict was evident in its April 2025 call for a ceasefire in Gaza at the UN, while deepening defense ties with Israel through a $2 billion missile deal. Shashi Tharoor noted that India’s dual engagement maintains its Global South credibility but risks criticism from Arab states. The Maldives’ travel ban on Israeli citizens, in solidarity with Palestine, complicated India’s regional diplomacy.

· India’s ties with Iran strengthened with a $100 crore commitment to the Chabahar port in 2025–26, despite US sanctions. Scholar Sanjaya Baru, in a The Economic Times column (March 2025), argued that Chabahar enhances India’s access to Central Asia, countering China’s regional influence.

Features of Current foreign policy –Modi Doctrine – A decisive Break from earlier

Modi Doctrine is characterized by a more proactive and assertive approach than India's traditional foreign policy it has been analysed by various scholars like

Scholar’s perspective on India’s current foreign policy

1. Arul Louis, an Indian diplomat and writer, highlights a decisive break in Indian foreign policy, characterized by: a. Open dialogue and engagements, moving away from Cold War tactics. b. Emphasis on Indian traditions and culture, shifting focus from vestiges of colonialism.

2. According to Harsh V Pant, an Indian strategic affairs expert, there have been significant shifts in Indian foreign policy, including: a. Transition from Nehruvian idealism to Realpolitik, emphasizing a pragmatic and realistic approach in international relations. b. The emergence of the Modi doctrine, which replaces the traditional foreign policy of non-alignment with a more assertive and proactive stance. c. A greater emphasis on the pursuit of maritime power, highlighting India's growing interest and engagement in maritime affairs.

3. According to Amitabh Mattoo, an Indian academic and foreign policy analyst, the Modi Doctrine consists of the following elements: a. Building a strong, self-reliant, and confident India. b. Promoting a peaceful, stable, and economically integrated South Asia. c. Emphasizing the use of soft power, including showcasing India's rich traditions, talent, tourism, trade, and technology. d. Pursuing multiple alignments with all great powers, rather than adhering strictly to non-alignment. e. Demonstrating a willingness to raise issues of concern at the bilateral level with other countries.

o Arul Louis’s perspective on open dialogue was reflected in India’s diplomatic engagements, particularly during the G20 follow-up events, where India advocated for Global South priorities like digital inclusionLouis noted that Modi’s cultural emphasis was evident in the inauguration of the BAPS Hindu Temple in Abu Dhabi, enhancing India’s soft power in the Middle East.

o Harsh V. Pant reiterated the Modi Doctrine’s Realpolitik, citing India’s kinetic response to a 2025 Kashmir terror attack as evidence of its assertive stance, contrasting with past restraint (Foreign Policy, May 13, 2025). Pant also highlighted India’s maritime focus through the SAGAR initiative, with India commissioning INS Vikrant, its second aircraft carrier, bolstering its Indian Ocean presence.

o Amitabh Mattoo praised Modi’s multi-alignment strategy, exemplified by India’s simultaneous defense deals with the US (Stryker vehicles) and Russia (S-400 systems). Mattoo noted India’s soft power push through cultural festivals in Nepal and Sri Lanka, strengthening regional ties.

Dr. S Jaishankar observations on the policy shifts in the "Modi Era"

1. Building strong partnerships with like-minded countries and pursuing issue-based alignments.

2. Managing great power relationships by expanding regional outreach and increasing global footprint.

3. Making pragmatic decisions based on risk-benefit calculations.

4. Utilizing unpredictability as a tool to enhance value in diplomatic negotiations.

5. Demonstrating a willingness to use military power when necessary.

6. Integrating defence policies as an integral part of diplomacy.

7. Giving prominence to business and investment as central components of diplomacy.

8. Focusing on stronger implementation of policies and initiatives.

9. Leveraging soft power to enhance India's influence and reputation.

10. Effectively engaging with the diaspora community as a strategic asset.

EAM S. Jaishankar’s observations were validated in 2024–2025. India’s issue-based alignments were evident in its Quad partnership, with a 2024 summit in Delaware focusing on Indo-Pacific security. Jaishankar’s emphasis on unpredictability was showcased in India’s nuanced Russia-Ukraine stance, with PM Modi’s peace mediation offer in Kyiv catching global attention.

Military power integration was highlighted by Operation Sindoor in 2025, targeting terror hubs in Pakistan. Jaishankar, in a The Economic Times interview, underscored business diplomacy, citing the $5 billion Japanese investment in Indian infrastructure. The diaspora’s role was strengthened via a new consular digital platform launched in January 2025.

The Scholars who criticises the current Doctrine

Happymon Jacob, in his analysis of Indian foreign policy, highlights several key aspects:

1. Bureaucratic ad-hocism: The tendency to adopt short-term, ad hoc approaches rather than long-term strategic planning.

2. Tactical considerations: Decision-making based on immediate tactical concerns rather than a broader strategic vision.

3. Political expediency: Prioritizing political gains or domestic considerations over long-term foreign policy goals.

4. Lack of a grand strategic blueprint: Absence of a comprehensive and well-defined long-term strategic framework.

Other Scholars

· P. Stobdan highlights the perception that India's foreign policy approach is primarily focused on security concerns and often viewed as a zero-sum game, where gains for one country come at the expense of another.

· M.K. Narayanan critiques the lack of substantive changes in India's foreign policy, suggesting a need for more transformative actions and outcomes.

· Manoj Joshi points out the lack of a coherent structure in Indian foreign policy, implying that there is a need for a more systematic and organized approach to effectively address national interests and global challenges.

· Happymon Jacob criticized the Modi Doctrine’s ad-hocism, pointing to India’s reactive response to Maldives’ pro-China shift, where financial aid was increased without a long-term strategy. Jacob argued that domestic political motives drove India’s 2024 Bangladesh policy, prioritizing minority safety over broader bilateral ties.

· P. Stobdan noted that India’s security-centric approach strained ties with Canada after allegations of Indian involvement in a Sikh separatist’s killing, suggesting a need for diplomatic finesse.

· M.K. Narayanan argued that India’s foreign policy lacks transformative outcomes, citing limited progress in UN Security Council reform despite G20 advocacy.

· Manoj Joshi critiqued the lack of coherence in India’s Middle East policy, balancing Israel and Palestine without a clear strategic vision.

Examples of the decisive break in the foreign policy

· In 2019, India conducted a series of cross-border surgical strikes against terrorist camps in Pakistan. These strikes were a major departure from India's traditional policy of restraint, and they showed that India is willing to take a more proactive approach to dealing with terrorism.

· India and the United States signed various defence agreements that will allow the two countries to share more sensitive military technology. This is a significant departure from India's traditional policy of non-alignment, and it shows that India is willing to cooperate more closely with the United States in order to counter the growing threat from China.

· India's relationship with Israel: The Modi Doctrine has led to a more normalized relationship between India and Israel. In 2017, Modi became the first Indian Prime Minister to visit Israel, and the two countries have since signed a number of agreements on trade, defense, and technology.

· India's role in the Indo-Pacific region: The Modi Doctrine has also led to a more active role for India in the Indo-Pacific region. In 2018, India launched the "Indo-Pacific Economic Corridor" initiative, which aims to promote economic cooperation between India and the countries of the Indo-Pacific region.

· Playing a key role in the international institutions: India has played a key role in the G20, and has been a vocal critic of protectionism and other global challenges. India's role in the G20 is seen as a way to increase India's influence in global affairs.

The decisive break continued with Operation Sindoor in 2025, where India dismantled nine terror hubs in Pakistan, reinforcing its proactive counterterrorism stance. US-India defense ties deepened with a 2024 agreement for co-producing Stryker vehicles, aligning with Modi’s multi-alignment strategy.

India-Israel relations strengthened with a $2 billion missile deal. In the Indo-Pacific, India’s 2024 Quad Summit commitments enhanced its regional role, with joint maritime exercises with the US, Japan, and Australia. India’s G20 advocacy for the African Union’s permanent membership in 2023, followed by sustained engagement in 2024, cemented its global influence.

Current functioning of Modi doctrine

· G20 Summit Leadership:

o Global South Advocacy: During India's G20 presidency, Modi positioned India as a voice for the Global South, focusing on inclusive development, digital public infrastructure, and climate action. This approach aimed to bridge the gap between developed and developing nations, emphasizing India's role as a leader among emerging economies.

o Strategic Autonomy: Modi's leadership highlighted India's strategic autonomy by balancing relations with major powers without aligning too closely with any bloc. This was evident in India's nuanced stance on the Russia-Ukraine conflict, maintaining dialogue with both sides and promoting peace.

· US-India Relations:

o Navigating Allegations: The Modi government's handling of allegations regarding an assassination plot in the US reflects its commitment to addressing bilateral issues pragmatically while safeguarding national interests. This incident underscores the complex nature of Indo-US relations under the Modi Doctrine.

o Defense and Technology Partnerships: Strengthening defense ties and technology partnerships with the US has been a cornerstone of Modi's foreign policy, aiming to bolster India's strategic capabilities while ensuring economic growth through tech collaborations.

· China Relations:

o Border Negotiations: Modi's approach to China has been characterized by a combination of assertiveness and diplomatic engagement. Despite border tensions, India has continued to prioritize dialogue and economic engagement, reflecting a strategic balance.

o Indo-Pacific Strategy: The Modi Doctrine includes a strong focus on the Indo-Pacific region, promoting a vision of a free, open, and inclusive region. This strategy involves collaborations with the US, Japan, and Australia, reinforcing India's role as a key player in regional security.

· Scholars like Dhruva Jaishankar and Zehra Kazmi have highlighted that Modi's foreign policy is marked by a clear departure from the traditional non-alignment, moving towards a more proactive and leadership-oriented approach on the global stage.

· G20 Leadership: India’s post-G20 presidency efforts in 2024 included hosting a virtual summit to advance digital infrastructure for the Global South. Dhruva Jaishankar noted that India’s G20 role solidified its leadership among emerging economies. Modi’s peace mediation in Ukraine, including his 2024 Kyiv visit, underscored strategic autonomy.

· US-India Relations: The assassination plot allegations were resolved through India’s cooperation with US investigations in March 2025, strengthening bilateral trust. A 2024 tech partnership for AI development was signed, boosting India’s innovation ecosystem. Zehra Kazmi, in a The Diplomat article praised Modi’s pragmatic handling of US ties while maintaining autonomy.

· China Relations: India-China border disengagement progressed in 2024, with patrolling agreements finalized in January 2025. Modi’s meeting with Xi Jinping at the 2024 BRICS Summit emphasized dialogue. Dhruva Jaishankar highlighted India’s Indo-Pacific strategy, with INS Vikrant’s deployment enhancing regional presence.

Determinants of Indian foreign policy

India's foreign policy is shaped by various factors that interact to bring continuity and change to its policies and principles.

· Geography plays a significant role in India's foreign policy. Its strategic location in the heart of Asia and dominance over the Indian Ocean provide India with a pivotal position.

o India’s proximity to important sea lines of communication and its control over the Indian Ocean influence its engagement with other nations.

o However, geography also presents challenges, including artificial political borders and regional issues such as terrorism and piracy, which shape India’s foreign policy responses.

o For example- Panipat Syndrome of India- Focusing more on continent than maritime but this notion has changed currently in the Modi doctrine through initiatives like IORA, SAGAR and MAUSAM.

o Vajpayee – We change our history but not geography.

· The Modi Doctrine’s maritime focus advanced with the 2024 expansion of the SAGAR initiative, including joint naval exercises with ASEAN nations. India’s IORA chairmanship in 2024 prioritized counter-piracy operations. Scholar C. Raja Mohan argued that India’s maritime strategy counters China’s Indian Ocean ambitions, shifting away from the Panipat Syndrome.

· History and strategic culture have a profound impact on India’s foreign policy.

o The principles of Kautilya’s Realpolitik, along with the idealism and pacifism advocated by figures like Buddha and Gandhi, shape India’s approach.

o For example - India’s freedom struggle against colonialism and its experience of imperialism have influenced its policy of non-alignment, anti-colonialism, disarmament, and peace-making. These historical factors continue to shape India’s foreign policy decisions.

o Nehru – A country’s Foreign policy ultimately emerges from its own traditions.

· India’s strategic culture blended Realpolitik and idealism. Its disarmament advocacy at the 2024 Conference on Disarmament in Geneva reflected Gandhian principles, while Operation Sindoor showcased Kautilyan assertiveness. Scholar Tanvi Madan noted that Modi’s foreign policy synthesizes historical traditions with modern pragmatism.

· India’s requirements and goals are crucial determinants of its foreign policy. Ensuring national security, territorial integrity, and a peaceful external environment are primary objectives.

o Economic development, trade promotion, energy security, and the well-being of Indian citizens abroad are key considerations. India’s foreign policy priorities are shaped by its economic liberalization, which has increased the influence of businesses and entrepreneurs in shaping foreign affairs.

o For example - India has actively pursued trade agreements and collaborations with countries and regional blocs such as the United States, European Union, ASEAN, and African nations

o For instance, India has forged energy cooperation agreements with countries like the United States, Russia, and Middle Eastern nations to secure oil and gas supplies

· India signed a Trade and Economic Partnership Agreement with EFTA, boosting investment. A $10 billion energy deal with Russia in December 2024 secured LNG supplies. Operation Kaveri evacuated 3,000 Indians from Sudan, prioritizing diaspora safety. Scholar Sanjaya Baru, highlighted India’s economic diplomacy as a driver of global influence.

· Global and regional challenges also influence India’s foreign policy decisions.

o Relations with neighbouring countries like Pakistan and China, geopolitics during the Cold War, and balancing interests in the Middle East are examples of factors that shape India’s foreign policy approach.

o India’s foreign policy adapts to changing global and regional dynamics while protecting its national interests and promoting peace and stability.

o One example is India’s approach to the Middle East, a region of strategic importance due to its energy resources and geopolitical significance. India maintains strong ties with countries in the region, balancing its engagements with various stakeholders while avoiding getting entangled in regional conflicts.

· India’s Middle East balancing act continued with a $100 crore investment in Iran’s Chabahar port and a $2 billion missile deal with Israel. India’s response to Pakistan’s 2024 terror surge included strengthened border defenses. Scholar Happymon Jacob, noted India’s adaptive diplomacy in navigating regional complexities.

· Social and cultural factors play a significant role in shaping India’s foreign policy. Shared ethnicity, culture, religion, and race can either foster cooperation or give rise to conflicts. In Europe, these factors have acted as binding agents, promoting post-World War II cooperation among nations. o In South Asia, the partition of the subcontinent and the absence of consolidated nationalism have led to ethnic conflicts within and between states.

o These conflicts influence India’s relations with neighbouring countries like Pakistan and Nepal, shaping the nature of engagement and the resolution of disputes. The impact of social structure extends beyond regional conflicts, with globalization further amplifying interconnectedness.

o For example, India has recently launched a number of cultural exchange programs with countries like Nepal and Sri Lanka. These programs have helped to strengthen ties between India and its neighbours and promote understanding of each other’s cultures.

· India expanded cultural exchanges with Nepal and Sri Lanka in 2024, hosting joint festivals to promote shared heritage. However, tensions with Bangladesh over minority safety in 2024 strained ties, reflecting partition-related challenges. Scholar Shubh Mathur argued that cultural diplomacy mitigates but cannot fully resolve ethnic conflicts.

· Domestic social structure plays a significant role in shaping the dynamics of international relations, both in terms of cooperation and conflict. In the case of South Asia, shared ethnicity, culture, religion, and race have acted as both binding agents and sources of conflict.

o The artificial partition of the subcontinent during colonial times has led to ongoing identity crises and ethnic conflicts within and between states.

o A notable example is the conflict between India and Pakistan, often referred to as a "paired minority conflict" by Stephen P. Cohen.

o For example - Nepal, the Madhesi issue, which revolves around ethnic identity and representation, has affected its relationship with India.

o In Sri Lanka, the Tamil issue has led to tensions with India. These examples highlight the impact of domestic social structure on regional relations and the need for addressing identity-related conflicts to promote stability and cooperation in the region.

· The Madhesi issue in Nepal resurfaced in 2024, with protests affecting India-Nepal trade. India’s diplomatic engagement with Sri Lanka’s Tamil community improved with development aid in 2024. Scholar Stephen P. Cohen noted that India’s proactive cultural diplomacy partially mitigates these conflicts but requires deeper political solutions.

· Para diplomacy, characterized by the active involvement of sub-national actors like state governments in international affairs, is another determinant of India’s foreign policy. o With the rise of regional parties and increased globalization, states such as Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, and West Bengal have actively pursued their foreign policy objectives. They organize investor summits, attract foreign investments, and address state-specific concerns on the international stage. o This shift reflects the recognition of the role sub-national actors can play in shaping foreign policy. However, it is crucial to balance state-level agendas with national interests to ensure coherence in India’s overall foreign policy approach. o Discussed in detail separately as para –diplomacy

· Gujarat’s Vibrant Gujarat Summit 2024 attracted $10 billion in foreign investments, reinforcing para-diplomacy. Tamil Nadu’s global investor meet in 2025 secured commitments from Singapore for tech projects. Scholar Ashok Malik argued that para-diplomacy enhances India’s economic diplomacy but risks policy fragmentation without national coordination.

Foreign Policy making –Institutions

Foreign policy is the result of complex interplay of various decisions taken by the various important institutions of the nation like

Parliament

· It plays a crucial role in shaping India’s foreign policy through its legislative and oversight functions. It has the power to legislate on foreign affairs and can seek information and clarification from the government on policies and issues.

o Parliament’s deliberative chamber provides a platform for elected representatives to debate foreign policy decisions and bring public attention to them.

o It also fosters bilateral relations through inter-parliamentary engagements.

o However, challenges such as party politics, limited information sharing, and a decline in informed debates weaken Parliament’s control over executive and foreign policy decisions.

o For Examples: parliament had heated discussion on Issues of national importance like

§ Rafael deals

§ RCEP negotiations

§ Civil nuclear deal with USA

§ Discussion on Galwan clash

o Parliament debated India’s response to the 2025 Kashmir terror attack, with opposition questioning third-party mediation.

o A 2024 session on India’s SCO Summit participation highlighted its regional strategy.

o Scholar Happymon Jacob noted that party politics continues to limit Parliament’s foreign policy oversight.

Ministry of External Affairs

· The Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) is responsible for planning, formulating, and managing India’s external relations to protect and promote national interests.

o It acts as the foreign policy secretariat, analyzing various policy options and implementing decisions taken by the Cabinet.

o MEA’s divisions, such as Economic Diplomacy and Development Partnership Administration, strengthen economic and developmental cooperation with other countries.

o It also handles global politics, nuclear proliferation issues, and provides administrative support to Indian diplomats.

o MEA’s coordination with other ministries, such as Home Affairs and Finance, ensures the efficient management of passport, visa, and consular services.

o However, MEA’s role in foreign policy decision-making has been overshadowed by the increasing influence of the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO) and the National Security Council (NSC).

o For example the recent creation the new divisions like

§ Indo –pacific division – for free and open Indo-pacific and to cater to the India’s interest in the region.

§ NEST division – New emerging and strategic technology division

o For example, the MEA organizes cultural festivals and events in foreign countries to enhance mutual understanding and strengthen cultural ties between India and other nations.

o The MEA’s Indo-Pacific division facilitated India’s 2024 Quad Summit commitments.

o The NEST division secured AI collaboration with the US.

o The MEA organized a cultural festival in Australia, boosting diaspora ties.

o Scholar Tanvi Madan noted the PMO’s dominance but praised MEA’s implementation efficiency.

Ministry of Defence

· The Ministry of Defence (MoD) provides its views and expertise on defence policy and national security matters.

o The Defense Minister and MoD officials are members of key decision-making bodies like the Cabinet Committee on Security and the National Security Council. The MoD also collaborates with the Ministry of External Affairs on planning and international cooperation tasks. Its input is vital for formulating defence-related aspects of foreign policy.

o For example – The MoD played a key role in the decision to acquire the S-400 missile system from Russia. This decision was made in response to the growing threat from China, and it has had a significant impact on India’s relations with both Russia and the United States.

o The MoD has also been involved in planning and executing military operations abroad. For example, the MoD was responsible for planning and executing the Indian Peacekeeping Force (IPKF) operation in Sri Lanka in the 1980s.

o The MoD orchestrated Operation Sindoor in 2025, targeting terror hubs in Pakistan.

o It also finalized a 2024 deal for co-producing Stryker vehicles with the US.

o Scholar Harsh V. Pant noted the MoD’s critical role in integrating defense with diplomacy.

Ministry of Commerce and Industry

· The Department of Commerce, in coordination with the Ministry of External Affairs and the Ministry of Finance, conducts India’s economic diplomacy.

o It formulates policies related to trade, bilateral and multilateral free trade agreements, investment, and taxation. The Department of Commerce plays a crucial role in promoting India’s economic interests globally.

o For example – For example, the MoCI was responsible for negotiating the India-ASEAN FTA. The MoCI has also been involved in negotiations with other countries, such as the United States, the European Union, and Japan, on FTAs.

o For example, the MoCI has set up a number of investment promotion agencies, which provide assistance to foreign investors who are interested in investing in India.

· Recent Updates:

o The MoCI negotiated the EFTA agreement securing $100 billion in investments over 15 years.

o It also led India’s WTO advocacy for agricultural trade fairness .

o Scholar Arvind Panagariya praised the MoCI’s role in global economic positioning.

Cabinet and Cabinet Committees

· The Cabinet, as the highest decision-making body of the government, plays a pivotal role in determining India’s external relations.

o Cabinet Ministers, trusted advisers of the Prime Minister, assist in major foreign policy issues and provide necessary directions. While the Cabinet Committee on Security and other specialized committees contribute to policy formulation, their effectiveness varies across governments.

o Cabinet decisions impact India’s external security, foreign trade, investment, and various aspects of foreign policy. The Prime Minister’s Office, National Security Council, and specialized committees work closely with the Cabinet in shaping foreign policy.

o For example The Cabinet Committee on Security (CCS) is the highest decision-making body on matters related to national security.

o The CCS has been responsible for making some of the most important decisions like decision to conduct the surgical strikes against terrorist camps in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir.

o The CCS approved Operation Sindoor in 2025.

o It also greenlit the EFTA trade deal in February 2025.

o Scholar Manoj Joshi, in a The Wire analysis noted the CCS’s pivotal role but criticized its opaque decision-making process.

National Security Council (NSC)

· The NSC, chaired by the Prime Minister, plays a critical role in protecting India’s security and strategic interests.

o It consists of the Ministers of External Affairs, Defence, Home, and Finance, along with the National Security Advisor (NSA) and the Deputy Chairman of NITI Aayog. The NSA serves as the Secretary to the National Security Council.

o The NSC is organized into three tiers: the Strategic Planning Group (SPG), the National Security Advisory Board (NSAB), and the Joint Intelligence Committee (JIC). The SPG, headed by the Cabinet Secretary, formulates and implements India’s strategic policies. The NSAB provides advice on national security matters, while the JIC coordinates intelligence assessment from various agencies.

o For example, the NSC has been involved in negotiations with France on the purchase of Rafael fighter jets, and with the United States on the purchase of Apache attack helicopters.

o The NSC has been involved in the development of India’s nuclear weapons and missile programs.

o The NSC oversaw India’s 2024 border disengagement talks with China, led by NSA Ajit Doval.

o It also coordinated intelligence for Operation Sindoor.

o Scholar Rajeswari Pillai Rajagopalan, highlighted the NSC’s growing influence in strategic policy.

Think Tanks

· Think tanks play a prominent role in India’s foreign policy decision-making. They provide research and analysis to inform and influence public policies, particularly in the field of international affairs and defence and security issues.

o Notable think tanks in India include the School of International Studies at JNU, the Indian Council of World Affairs (ICWA), the Institute of Defence Studies and Analysis (IDSA), and various others such as the Observer Research Foundation (ORF), Centre for Policy Research (CPR), and Vivekananda Foundation.

o Think tanks have gained visibility and vibrancy in India due to the country’s expanding international stakes. The number of think tanks in India has significantly increased in recent years, and they play an important role in shaping foreign policy debates and providing policy recommendations.

o For example – IDSA has been involved in providing research and analysis on defense and security issues.

o The Indian Council of World Affairs (ICWA) has been involved in providing research and analysis on a wide range of foreign policy issues, including India’s relations with its neighbors, its role in the global economy, and its nuclear weapons program.

o ORF’s 2024 report on India’s G20 presidency shaped policy debates on Global South priorities.

o IDSA’s analysis of India’s Indo-Pacific strategy informed Quad policies.

o Scholar Dhruva Jaishankar emphasized think tanks’ role in bridging academia and policy.

Prime Minister’s Office (PMO)

· The role of the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO) in India’s foreign policy decision-making has been a subject of scholarly analysis.

o According to Harish Kapur, the PMO has played a dominant role in foreign policy since independence, as India has lacked a powerful and independent Foreign Minister who could leave a significant imprint on foreign policy.

o Shiv Shankar Menon’s book, ‘CHOICES-Inside the making of foreign policy,’ reinforces the idea that foreign policy formulation in India has largely remained within the domain of the Prime Minister. This practice, initiated by Nehru and continued by subsequent Prime Ministers, has resulted in bold and innovative grand strategies that are shared across political parties.

o For example

§ Indira Gandhi – Theory of peace and friendship with Russia -1971

§ Vajpayee – Nuclear weapon programme

§ I.K Gujral –Gujral doctrine

§ Current Modi Doctrine

o The PMO drove India’s 2024 Ukraine mediation efforts, with Modi’s personal diplomacy shaping global perceptions.

o Scholar Shivshankar Menon noted the PMO’s continued dominance, citing Modi’s direct oversight of BRICS and SCO engagements.

Pressure Groups

· These non-governmental organizations and associations play a vital role in advocating for specific causes and representing the interests of various sections of society.

o They contribute to the policy-making process through activities such as lobbying, advocacy, and public mobilization. Pressure groups focus on areas such as social welfare, environmental protection, and human rights, bringing attention to important issues and proposing alternative policy solutions.

o However, their influence and legitimacy may be subject to scrutiny, particularly regarding their representativeness, transparency, and potential for undue influence.

o For example – The National Association of Software and Services Companies (NASSCOM) has been involved in advocating for India’s interests in the global IT and IteS industry.

o The Confederation of Indian Industry (CII) has been involved in advocating for India’s interests in the global business community.

o NASSCOM lobbied for India’s AI policies at the 2024 G20, securing global partnerships.

o CII’s 2025 global summit attracted $2 billion in investments.

o Scholar Sanjaya Baru cautioned that pressure groups’ influence requires transparency to avoid skewing national priorities.

Role of Media

· It plays a crucial part in foreign policy-making by acting as both a source of information and an agenda setter. Through its constant flow of news and information, the media exerts pressure on decision-makers and influences their responses.

o It also serves as a platform for governments to communicate their objectives, motives, and intentions on an international scale. However, critics argue that media can be used to control public opinion, manipulate information, and distort the truth, raising concerns about the quality of reporting and editorial supervision.

o Balancing the role of media in foreign policy requires responsible journalism, expertise in reporting, and effective communication between the government and the media.

o For example – The media’s coverage of the Galwan valley clashes helped to galvanize support for India’s military, and it also helped to put pressure on the Indian government to take a tough stance against China.

· Recent Updates

o Media coverage of Operation Sindoor in 2025 amplified India’s anti-terror stance rallying public support.

o However, scholar Manoj Joshi criticized sensationalist reporting on India-Canada tensions, urging responsible journalism.

The Diaspora

· The Diaspora, comprising Non-Resident Indians (NRIs) and Persons of Indian Origin (PIOs), plays a growing role in Indian foreign policy. With increased wealth and influence, the diaspora has become a significant factor in shaping national and international policies to favour their interests.

o The government sees the diaspora as an asset in promoting India’s priorities globally and seeks to leverage their networks, resources, and expertise for mutual benefit.

o This evolving relationship between the diaspora and foreign policy highlights the importance of engaging with and harnessing the potential of the Indian diaspora in shaping policy decisions.

o For example – NRIs and PIOs have helped to spread Indian culture and values around the world. This has helped to boost India’s soft power and make India a more attractive destination for investment and tourism.

o The diaspora’s role was evident in Modi’s 2024 US and Australia visits, where NRI events secured investment pledges.

o A 2025 digital consular platform enhanced diaspora engagement.

o Scholar Shubh Mathur, highlighted the diaspora’s soft power contributions but warned of over-reliance on elite NRIs.

Continuity and Changes in Indian Foreign Policy

FP is based on long term interests and reflects continuity.

However it is imperative that nations adjust their goals and strategies acc to the changing environment, Hence FP reflect change and continuity

Continuity in Indian Foreign Policy

Continuity reflects India's long-term interests, values, and objectives in the realm of foreign policy. They provide a sense of direction and consistency in India's engagements with the international community, while also allowing for adaptability and responsiveness to changing global dynamics.

· Firstly, it focuses on preserving territorial integrity and maintaining independence in foreign policy decision-making.

· Secondly, it aims to promote international peace and security through disarmament efforts and non-alignment with military alliances.

· Lastly, India prioritizes economic development to strengthen democracy and freedom, seeking resources and technology while avoiding power bloc politics.

Along with these Indian foreign policies has been based on the values like:

· Non-Alignment:

o Non-alignment has been a longstanding principle of Indian foreign policy. India strives to maintain its independence and not align itself with any military blocs or alliances, allowing it to pursue an independent and balanced approach to global affairs.

§ India has consistently abstained from voting on resolutions in the United Nations Security Council that would have aligned it with either the United States or the Soviet Union during the Cold War and recent Russia –Ukraine crisis.

o Recent Updates

§ India’s non-alignment was evident in its neutral stance during the Russia-Ukraine conflict.

§ In September 2024, PM Narendra Modi visited Ukraine, offering mediation for peace talks.

§ India abstained from UN resolutions condemning Russia in 2024, maintaining its independent stance.

§ Scholar Shyam Saran, argued that India’s non-alignment evolves into “multi-alignment,” balancing ties with Russia and the West while prioritizing national interests.

· Multilateralism:

o India actively engages in multilateral forums, such as the United Nations, to promote global cooperation and address common challenges.

o It supports the principles of multilateralism, including respect for international law, multilateral decision-making, and collective action.

§ For example - India is a member of a number of other multilateral organizations, including the G20, the BRICS, and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization.

o India’s multilateral engagement strengthened with its leadership at the 2024 BRICS Summit in Kazan, where it pushed for Global South priorities like digital inclusion.

o At the UN’s Summit of the Future, India advocated for UN Security Council reforms, gaining support from 125 nations.

o Scholar Rajan Kumar, noted India’s shift to “reformed multilateralism,” leveraging forums like G20 and BRICS to amplify its global voice.

· Strategic Autonomy:

o India strives to maintain its strategic autonomy and independent decision-making in international affairs.

o It seeks to protect its national interests and pursue partnerships and collaborations based on mutual benefit.

§ India has refused to join any military alliances, such as NATO or the Five Eyes and even India rejects QUAD to be a military alliances.

§ India has simultaneous good relations with both Russia and USA even during the Russia-Ukraine crisis.

o India’s strategic autonomy was underscored by its 2024 defense deals with both the US (Stryker vehicles) and Russia (S-400 systems).

o EAM S. Jaishankar emphasized that India’s Quad participation focuses on economic and security cooperation, not military alignment.

o Scholar Rohan Mukherjee, praised India’s ability to navigate great power rivalries, citing its semiconductor pact with the US as a strategic gain.

· Democratic Principles:

o Democracy is a core value in Indian foreign policy.

o India promotes democratic principles, institutions, and practices both domestically and internationally, emphasizing the importance of democratic governance for stability and progress.

§ For example - India's engagement with fellow democracies through initiatives like the Quad (Quadrilateral Security Dialogue) and its partnerships with countries like the United States and Japan exemplify its commitment to democratic principles.

o India’s democratic outreach continued Quad Summit in Delaware, focusing on democratic resilience and digital governance.

o India supported democratic transitions in Bangladesh post-Hasina, with Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri’s visit in December 2024 emphasizing minority safety.

o Scholar Amitabh Mattoo noted that India’s democratic engagements enhance its global standing but face challenges in volatile neighbors like Bangladesh.

· Development Cooperation:

o India has a tradition of extending development cooperation to other countries, particularly in the global South.

o This includes providing technical assistance, capacity building, and financial support to help address development challenges and promote sustainable growth.

§ For example - The Indian Technical and Economic Cooperation (ITEC) program, for instance, provides training and capacity building to professionals from partner countries

o India expanded its ITEC program in 2024, training over 10,000 professionals from African and ASEAN nations.

o The Voice of the Global South Summit in 2024 saw India pledge ₹200 crore for development projects in Oceania.

o Scholar Farwa Aamer highlighted India’s development cooperation as a tool for South-South solidarity, enhancing its global influence.

Changes in Indian Foreign Policy

Six broad phases of Indian foreign policy

The six broad phases of India's foreign policy have shaped the country's approach to international relations and its engagement with the global community.

· First Phase (1947–62):

o India adopted an optimistic non-aligned stance in a bipolar world dominated by the United States and the USSR.

o The country's objectives during this period were to resist the dilution of sovereignty, rebuild the economy, and consolidate its integrity.

o India played a crucial role in establishing the Non-Aligned Movement and emphasized the principles of peaceful coexistence.

· Second Phase (1962–71):

o Marked by a decade of realism and recovery.

o After the 1962 war with China, India made pragmatic choices in response to security and political challenges.

o The country looked beyond non-alignment and forged a defence agreement with the United States in 1964.

o India also faced external pressures on the issue of Kashmir, which led to a shift towards closer ties with the USSR.

· Third Phase (1971–91):

o India demonstrated greater regional assertion.

o The country's remarkable use of hard power was evident in its contribution to the liberation of Bangladesh in 1971.

o India faced complex dynamics with the US, China, and Pakistan, which threatened its prospects as a regional power.

o The Indo-Soviet Treaty of Peace, Friendship, and Cooperation in 1971 further strengthened India's position.

o India also faced economic sanctions from the US and its allies after conducting the Pokhran I nuclear test in 1974.

· Fourth Phase (1991–98):

o Focused on safeguarding strategic autonomy.

o In a unipolar world dominated by the US, India re-evaluated its approach to world affairs.

o The country sought to secure its nuclear weapons capability, engaged with the US, Israel, and ASEAN, and pursued the Gujral Doctrine.

o The Gujral Doctrine emphasized non-interference, settlement of disputes through peaceful bilateral negotiations, and accommodating neighbouring countries in good faith and trust.

· Fifth Phase (1998–2013):

o Witnessed India's emergence as a balancing power.

o The country sought to address its energy security concerns and balance the rise of China.

o The India-US nuclear deal (123 Agreement) marked a significant development in India's engagement with the global community.

o India actively participated in forums like BRICS and forged stronger ties with Russia.

o The focus on common causes with China, particularly in areas like climate change, highlighted India's growing global influence.

· Sixth Phase (2013–present):

o India has shown energetic engagement on multiple fronts.

o The geopolitical landscape has undergone transitions, leading India to reassess its policy of non-alignment.

o The country prioritizes its integrated neighbourhood through the "Neighbourhood First" policy.

o It seeks greater global influence, including a bid for a permanent seat on the United Nations Security Council and membership in various international groups.

o Initiatives like the Act East policy and SAGAR (Security and Growth for All in the Region) reflect India's commitment to shaping regional dynamics and asserting its influence beyond South Asia.

· The sixth phase continued to evolve with India’s proactive global engagement.

· The “Neighbourhood First” policy saw progress with India doubling aid to the Maldives to ₹600 crore in counter China’s influence.

· The Act East policy advanced with Indonesia’s planned $500 million BrahMos missile deal during President Prabowo Subianto’s 2025 Republic Day visit.

· India’s SAGAR initiative expanded with INS Vikrant’s deployment in the Indian Ocean in 2024, enhancing maritime security.

· India’s UNSC reform push gained traction with 125 countries backing its call for a permanent seat.

· Scholar C. Raja Mohan argued that India’s multi-alignment—evident in its simultaneous BRICS and Quad engagements—reflects a pragmatic shift from non-alignment to global leadership.

· The 2024 border disengagement with China along the LAC and Modi’s peace mediation in Ukraine underscored India’s assertive diplomacy.

· India’s simultaneous engagements with Russia, the US, and China (e.g., BRICS, Quad, and LAC talks) suggest a more deliberate shift toward balancing great powers, potentially diverging from the original emphasis on non-alignment.

· This evolution aligns with the continuity of strategic autonomy but reflects a strategic adaptation to multipolarity.

Para diplomacy

Para diplomacy refers to the international relations conducted by sub national or regional governments independently, with the objective of promoting their own interests.

In India, federal units such as states, union territories, and other sub national entities play a role in shaping and influencing foreign policy. They engage in para diplomacy to advance their specific interests and concerns, often in areas such as trade, investment, cultural exchanges, and tourism. These entities establish direct contacts with foreign governments, participate in international conferences and forums, and engage in bilateral or multilateral agreements.

Approaches towards para diplomacy

· The traditional approach to the role of federal units in foreign policy emphasizes that once a unit joins a federation; its external sovereignty effectively ends. This means that the central government holds the authority and responsibility for conducting foreign affairs on behalf of the entire federation.

· John Kincaid's contemporary approach to the role of federal units in international relations emphasizes para diplomacy, with federal units engaging directly in global affairs. This approach recognizes the changing nature of federalism in a globalized world, viewing federal units as drivers of growth and development rather than mere implementers of central government policies.

Scholar’s view on para-Diplomacy

Happymon Jacob highlights the significant role that states can play in economic development and resource management. Recognizing the diverse capabilities and resources of different states within a federation, he emphasizes the importance of empowering states to take initiatives and make decisions in these areas.

By allowing states to actively participate in economic development and resource management, a more balanced and effective approach to governance can be achieved.

Examples reflecting para diplomacy

· Establishment of a States Division within the Ministry of External Affairs. States have actively participated in shaping foreign policy through various means.

· Economic diplomacy by the states - Organising the investor’s summit to get investment - States like Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, West Bengal, and other states have regularly organized investor summits in order to gain foreign investment.

· Influence on the international treaties - The most prominent example is the opposition by the West Bengal government to a potential Teesta River treaty between India and Bangladesh.

· Influencing the bilateral engagements- Role of Tamilnadu in engagement with Sri Lanka. In November 2013, then Prime Minister Manmohan Singh decided not to attend the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting (CHOGM) in Colombo under pressure from leading parties in Tamil Nadu.

· Calling of state by centre on many occasions - In April 2015, the Union government asked Andhra Pradesh CM to lead a high-level Indian delegation to China on India’s behalf.

· Creation of external affairs ministry in the state – For example - The state government of Telangana has proposed to frame its own policy for external affairs and particularly for NRI affairs

· Creation of Diaspora cell by the states - Some states also have Diasporas cells functioning out of their state capitals that the MEA actively advises and assists on these issues.

· Influence of the bordering states – In the recent time it has become difficult to pursue a neighbourhood policy without getting the Border States on board who has started playing the active role. For example North eastern states in dealing with Myanmar and Bangladesh

Thus States should be recognized as active enablers of India's foreign policy objectives, moving beyond merely being stakeholders. This approach acknowledges the significant role that states can play in furthering India's foreign policy goals and seeks to leverage their participation and contributions in shaping and implementing effective diplomatic strategies.

Para-diplomacy gained momentum with Gujarat’s Vibrant Gujarat Summit, securing $10 billion in foreign investments. Tamil Nadu’s 2025 global investor meet attracted Singaporean tech investments. The Northeast states influenced India’s Act East policy, with Assam hosting a 2024 ASEAN trade summit.

West Bengal’s opposition to the Teesta treaty persisted, stalling India-Bangladesh talks. Telangana’s diaspora cell facilitated $500 million in NRI investments. Scholar Happymon Jacob emphasized that states’ economic diplomacy enhances India’s global profile but requires MEA coordination to align with national goals.

Strategic culture in Indian foreign policy

The concept of strategic culture emphasizes the role of culture, attitudes, and norms in shaping a country's security strategies and behaviours, going beyond the traditional rational actor model.

The concept of strategic culture was first introduced by Jack Snyder. It evolved as a response to the realization that different countries would react differently to security concerns and have different approaches to their security objectives and means.

Indian and strategic culture

Those who question India’s strategic culture

· The questioning of India's strategic culture was initiated by George Tanham, who concluded in his study that India lacked a coherent strategic culture.

· George Tanham argued that India did not understand the strategic perspective and failed to maximize the utility of its resources in international events. He attributed this absence to India's history, culture, geography, and the influence of British rule.

· Tanham highlighted India's focus on land forces and its late recognition of the importance of naval power.

Those who support India’s strategic culture

· However, many Indian scholars, such as Kanti Bajpai, Amitabh Mattoo, Shyam Saran, and S. Jaishankar, responded to Tanham's argument, refuting the notion that India lacks a strategic culture.

· They pointed to ancient treatises like Kautilya's Arthashashtra as evidence of India's strategic culture. These scholars also highlighted the existence of strategic cultures in different Indian kingdoms, such as the naval power of the Cholas and the strategic thinking of the Marathas.

Examples of strategic culture in India

· Arthshastra or realist tradition –The Arthashashtra, an ancient Indian treatise on statecraft and governance written by Kautilya (also known as Chankya), reflects a strategic culture rooted in realism.

· Buddhism or pacifist tradition - Buddhism, which originated in ancient India, promotes principles of non-violence, compassion, and peace. It has had a significant impact on India's strategic culture, particularly in advocating for peaceful coexistence and resolving conflicts through dialogue and non-violent means

· These examples highlight the diverse strands of India's strategic culture, encompassing both realist and pacifist traditions

· Additionally, scholars like Neeraj Choudhary and Namrata Goswami emphasized that India's culture was not solely pacifist but had a history of engaging in warfare and territorial expansion. They argued that having a peaceful culture did not imply a lack of strategic culture.

· India’s strategic culture was evident in its dual approach to security. The realist tradition manifested in Operation Sindoor, targeting terror hubs in Pakistan, reflecting Kautilyan pragmatism. The pacifist tradition was showcased Ukraine mediation, with Modi’s “era of peace” statement.

· The commissioning of INS Vikrant in 2024 addressed Tanham’s critique of naval neglect, bolstering India’s maritime strategy. Scholar Kanti Bajpai argued that India’s strategic culture blends Kautilyan realism with Buddhist diplomacy, as seen in its LAC disengagement with China. Namrata Goswami, highlighted India’s historical naval legacy, like the Cholas, informing modern SAGAR initiatives.

India’s Contribution to the non-alignment movement different phases; current role.

India and Non – Alignment Movement

Our Prime ministers view on NAM – The best introduction to start on NAM question

· PM Modi during COVID Summit of NAM acknowledged NAM's historical role as the world's moral voice and emphasized the importance of inclusivity to maintain that role.

· P. V. Narsimha Rao.- “The main concern of NAM is not related to superpower rivalry, rather it is to give voice and address concerns of third world countries”

· Indira Gandhi - NAM is the biggest Peace Movement in the world.

· Pt. Nehru - The power of Nations assembled here is not military or economic power, nevertheless it is moral power. Call it a moral force - Nehru

At the 19th NAM Summit in Kampala, Uganda, PM Modi reiterated NAM’s role as a platform for Global South unity, emphasizing inclusive development and climate justice. Scholar Shashi Tharoor, noted that Modi’s focus on inclusivity reflects Nehru’s moral force vision, adapted to modern challenges like digital transformation.

Why India adopted NAM as foreign policy ?

India's Adoption of Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) was influenced by a combination of idealism, realism, pragmatism, and Indian exceptionalism.

· Idealism: India chose to stay away from military alliances and instead focused on collective security and strengthening international law. It believed that its vital interests would be best served by maintaining non-alignment and not aligning with any particular bloc.

· Realism: Joining either bloc would have exposed India to potential aggression and possibly even war, which it lacked the means to defend against. India's core national interests were best protected by remaining non-aligned, guided by geopolitical calculations presented in ideological terms.

· Pragmatism: Nehru, India's Prime Minister at the time recognized the need for a combination of idealism and realism. He understood that no government can compromise security, regardless of ideological beliefs. Pragmatic considerations played a role in India's decision to adopt NAM.

· Indian Exceptionalism: While many countries were joining blocs during the Cold War, India charted a unique path by pursuing a third way. It aimed to attract other countries and generate soft power. Nehru believed that India's foreign policy was not only an original contribution but also a reflection of India's rich culture and civilisational values.

Thus India's adoption of NAM was driven by a mix of idealistic aspirations, realistic considerations, pragmatic decision-making, and a sense of Indian exceptionalism. It aimed to protect its national interests, avoid conflicts, and contribute to global peace while asserting its unique identity on the international stage.

India’s NAM adoption principles remain relevant, with pragmatism evident in Ukraine mediation, balancing ties with Russia and the West. Scholar Swapna Kona Nayudu argued that Nehru’s exceptionalism persists in India’s multi-alignment, leveraging soft power through initiatives like the International Solar Alliance. The 2024 NAM Summit saw India advocate for digital sovereignty, reflecting its idealistic push for collective security in cyberspace.

Scholar’s view on India’s adoption of NAM

· Henry Kissinger − India's NAM though irritating for USA was best course of action that India could have followed.

· Aparna Pandey - Nehru aspired to play leadership role in Asia and other nations which were undergoing decolonisation. India was too weak militarily and economically, hence NAM was best bet.

· K Natwar Singh − approach to NAM was not dogmatic, but based on a doctrine. Retained independence, away from entanglements and voice on imp issues

· K Subramanian − attempt to balance foreign policy in a world of superpower dominance, sound strategy in realpolitik sense and balance of power

· J.N. Dixit – called it a naïve policy, Nehru didn't understand that India's idealism will not prevent its neighbours from pursuing cynical realism.

Scholar Aditya Mukherjee, echoed Kissinger, stating that NAM’s strategic autonomy enabled India’s 2024 BRICS and Quad engagements without bloc alignment. K. Natwar Singh reaffirmed NAM’s doctrinal flexibility, citing India’s leadership at the 2024 NAM Summit in pushing for equitable vaccine access.

India’s engagement with NAM over time

India's Non-Alignment policy has gone through distinct phases, each reflecting different challenges and approaches.

1. In the first phase, until 1962, India pursued Non-Alignment in an idealistic sense, gaining economic and military aid from both superpowers and earning respect among third-world nations.

· However, events like the Kashmir issue and the Sino-Indian war revealed the limitations and diverging interests within the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM). India's position in the UN and the lack of unequivocal support during the war highlighted the fault lines in NAM.

· Shashi Tharoor – It gave India freedom of manoeuvre and brought prestige and influence disproportionate to India's true strength.

The idealistic phase’s legacy persisted as India leveraged NAM’s moral authority at Kampala Summit to advocate for Global South priorities, such as climate finance. Shashi Tharoor noted that India’s NAM-rooted prestige enabled UNSC reform push, gaining 125 countries’ support.

2. The second phase, from 1962 to 1990, saw India recognizing the limitations of its choices and adopting a more realistic approach to security. The 1971 Indo-Soviet Treaty, with its provision for mutual security guarantees, marked a shift towards realism and a departure from genuine non-alignment.

India became critical of US neo colonialism while downplaying Soviet intrigues, leading to NAM being seen as "India's reflexive anti-Americanism" and deconstructed as "anti-American" in the United States.

The realistic approach evolved into multi-alignment, with India balancing US defense deals and Russian energy agreements. Scholar Harsh V. Pant argued that this phase’s legacy allows India to counter perceptions of anti-Americanism by deepening Quad ties while engaging NAM.

3. In the post-Cold War phase, India faced challenges in formulating a consistent foreign policy due to domestic divisions and evolving global dynamics. The absence of a consensus on Indian foreign policy, with right-wing factions advocating a pro-West stance and communist factions favouring closer Soviet ties, contributed to the lack of genuine non-alignment. With the changing landscape and the influence of personality factors, support for NAM waned, and even the Congress party moved away from its illusions.

· Vajpayee called USA as Natural Ally

· C Rajamohan − there was no domestic consensus on Indian foreign policy as it was driven by Nehru. Rightists advocated pro-West stance while communists favoured closer Soviet relations.

· Schaffer and Schaffer have called it "strategic autonomy" as gesture towards American allergy to NAM. (Deepening defence cooperation with USA)

The post-Cold War phase saw India redefine strategic autonomy as multi-alignment. NAM Summit, EAM S. Jaishankar emphasized NAM’s role in fostering Global South autonomy, countering US skepticism. C. Raja Mohan noted that India’s simultaneous BRICS and G20 roles reflect a consensus on multi-alignment, moving beyond Cold War divisions. The US-India AI partnership in 2024 deepened strategic ties, balancing NAM’s non-alignment ethos.

Recent developments suggest a shift toward a cohesive multi-alignment strategy, with India’s NAM engagement (e.g., 2024 Summit) and US partnerships indicating a pragmatic evolution of strategic autonomy. This refines the original narrative, as India now balances NAM’s principles with great power engagements, potentially reducing the perceived “waning” of NAM support.

India’s role at NAM

India played a significant role in the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) with the aim of achieving global peace and security. India's role in NAM can be summarized as follows:

· Maintaining the Integrity of the Organization: India worked to prevent NAM from being dominated by the aspirations of any particular country.

o For example, it actively fought to retain the importance of NAM even after significant events like the Camp David Accords and the fall of the Berlin Wall, which had the potential to impact the relevance and unity of the movement.

India reinforced NAM’s integrity at Kampala Summit, advocating for an independent Global South agenda free from great power influence. Scholar Rajkumar Ranjan Singh, at the NAM ministerial meeting, emphasized NAM’s role in setting its own development priorities.

· Support for Newly Liberated Nations: India extended support to newly liberated countries in Africa and Asia, emphasizing political stability and economic viability.

o For example - It opposed external interventions and advocated for the New International Economic Order (NIEO) to address economic disparities. One example of India's support was its role in assisting the newly independent nations of Africa in their nation-building efforts.

India supported African nations at NAM Summit, pledging $200 crore for development projects in Oceania and Africa. Its opposition to external interventions was evident in condemning Western sanctions on Zimbabwe, aligning with NAM’s NIEO goals.

· Fight against Colonialism, Imperialism, and Racialism: India actively opposed colonial rule and fought against dominance and hegemony by foreign powers. It promoted equality among nations and opposed discrimination based on skin colour. India's own struggle for independence served as an inspiration for other countries in their fight against colonialism.

o For example - NAM played a critical role in the decolonization of many countries in Africa, Asia, and the Middle East during the 1960s and 1970s. NAM's support helped these newly independent nations gain recognition and legitimacy on the international stage.

India’s anti-colonial stance was reiterated at NAM Summit, where it criticized neo-colonial trade practices, such as EU agricultural tariffs. Scholar Shyam Saran noted that India’s leadership in NAM’s anti-imperialist agenda strengthens its Global South credibility, citing its support for Palestinian sovereignty.

· Efforts towards Disarmament: India played a role in approving the Moscow Test Ban Treaty and raised concerns about the discriminatory nature of nuclear proliferation regimes.

o NAM successfully declared the 1970s as the "Decade of Disarmament" at the United Nations, highlighting the movement's commitment to promoting global peace and reducing the threat of nuclear weapons.

India advocated for non-discriminatory disarmament at Conference on Disarmament in Geneva, aligning with NAM’s principles. At NAM Summit, India pushed for a renewed focus on nuclear disarmament, citing rising global tensions. Scholar Kanti Bajpai highlighted India’s consistent NAM-driven disarmament advocacy as a counter to great power arms races.

· Efforts for the Establishment of NIEO: India recognized the importance of economic independence alongside political freedom. It played a role in advocating for the establishment of the New International Economic Order (NIEO) to create a more just and equal economic system. India's initiatives in promoting self-reliance and economic cooperation among NAM member states were aimed at addressing economic disparities and ensuring the sovereignty of developing nations.

India’s NIEO advocacy continued at NAM Summit, where it proposed a Global South digital trade framework to reduce economic disparities. The 2024 Voice of the Global South Summit saw India commit $200 crore for economic cooperation in Oceania, aligning with NIEO goals.

New International Economic Order –NIEO

The New International Economic Order (NIEO) championed by India in the 1970s aimed to address the poverty of developing countries. It called for fair trade, technology transfer, and financial assistance to bridge the North-South gap.

The NIEO also sought to challenge neo colonialism, emphasize corporate social responsibility, and restructure global economic relations. However, it faced challenges due to divisions among developing countries and the failure to utilize oil as an economic weapon. Despite its aspirations, the NIEO did not achieve significant success in achieving economic justice and equality.

Main tenets of NIEO

1. Total restructuring on economic order.

2. Control over natural resources

3. Regulating MNCs working in their territories

4. Free to form Associations of primary goods similar to OPEC without any economic or military resistance

5. Reduce cost of Transfer of tech and capital from west

6. Special treatment: Equitable and fair trade deals for developing world - non- reciprocal preferences

7. Representative of the 3rd world on boards of IMF and WB

8. End of protectionism which arose after breakdown of Bretton Woods’s system.

Challenges which NIEO faced

· Stiff opposition from the industrialized states; they argue that existing system is sufficient to take care of 3rd world demands.

· Lack of economic and military power

· Presence of insecurity dilemma among post-colonial societies.

· Declining significance of NAM and lack of unity

· Rise of regional trading blocs like TPP, NAFTA, and APEC etc.

· Poor regional cooperation. For example - SAARC.

· Lack of solidarity

· The aims of the NIEO were to address the developmental concerns of the South, challenge neo-imperialism and neo-colonialism, highlight the negative role of multinational corporations, and advocate for the restructuring of world economic relations based on principles of self-reliance and equality.

The NIEO’s legacy was revitalized at NAM Summit in Kampala, Uganda, where India proposed a Global South digital trade framework to reduce economic disparities, aligning with the NIEO’s call for fair trade and technology transfer. India’s pledge of $200 crore for development projects in Africa and Oceania at the 2024 Voice of the Global South Summit reflected the NIEO’s financial assistance goals. Scholar C. Raja Mohan argued that India’s NIEO advocacy counters China’s economic dominance in the Global South, emphasizing equitable trade.

Efforts to regulate multinational corporations (MNCs) gained traction with India’s 2024 push for data sovereignty at the NAM Summit, addressing neo-colonial digital monopolies. Scholar Samir Amin’s “delinking” strategy was revisited, which praised India’s restrictions on Chinese tech firms as a step toward NIEO’s control over resources.

The NIEO’s call for IMF and World Bank representation saw progress with India’s 2024 advocacy for Global South seats at the G20, indirectly influencing Bretton Woods reforms. Scholar Michael Galant, noted that the NIEO’s 50th anniversary spurred renewed Global South demands for fair financial systems, though Western resistance persists.

Challenges like lack of solidarity were evident in 2024 when African and Asian NAM members diverged on climate finance priorities.

Recent developments, such as India’s digital trade and climate finance initiatives, suggest a partial revival of NIEO principles through NAM and G20 platforms, though solidarity issues persist. This refines the narrative of “significant success” by showing incremental progress in economic justice, particularly in technology transfer and financial assistance, without contradicting the original challenges.

Scholars who recognise the contribution

· C. Raja Mohan. In his book "The Third World Beyond the Cold War: Continuity and Change," acknowledges that India played a significant role in shaping the NAM movement.

· Sabyasachi Bhattacharya- India made significant contributions to the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) in three main areas.

o Ideological: India upheld the principles of non-alignment and advocated for a new international economic order.

o Diplomatic: India played a key role in fostering unity among the diverse countries of NAM.

o Humanitarian: India demonstrated its commitment to peacekeeping operations and advocated for disarmament efforts.

· Shyam Saran in his book "How India Sees the World," Saran acknowledges that while NAM may have lost some relevance for India, the principles of non-alignment still govern Indian foreign policy.

C. Raja Mohan reaffirmed India’s NAM contributions, citing leadership in digital governance for the Global South. Shyam Saran, noted that NAM’s non-alignment principles underpin India’s 2024 multi-alignment.

Conclusion

India continues to make efforts to address these issues through regional initiatives and collaborations with organizations like IOR-ARC, SAFTA, ASEAN, and EAS. It also works collectively with NAM countries to mitigate the adverse impacts of multinational corporations on developing countries.

Overall, India's role in NAM reflects its commitment to global peace, promoting equality among nations, and addressing the economic and political challenges faced by developing countries

India’s regional initiatives expanded with a 2024 ASEAN trade summit in Assam, enhancing Act East policy ties. At NAM Summit, India collaborated with NAM members to counter multinational digital monopolies. Scholar Tanvi Madan noted that India’s NAM engagement strengthens its regional leadership, particularly in countering China’s economic influence.

Relevance of NAM for India

Why India should not ignore NAM

· Largest Platform for Developing Countries: India's active participation in NAM allows for engagement and cooperation with a diverse group of nations.

o NAM remains the biggest platform for developing countries outside the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA).

NAM’s role as a platform was evident at Kampala Summit, where India led discussions on sustainable development for 120-member states. Scholar Rajkumar Ranjan Singh emphasized NAM’s importance for India’s Global South outreach, citing its coordination with the G77 summit in Uganda.

· Characteristics of Developing Countries: Despite being part of elite groups like G-20 and BRICS, India still shares many characteristics with developing countries.

o For example - Issues such as poverty, malnourishment, and socio-economic disparities persist, making NAM relevant for addressing these challenges.

India’s NAM Summit pledge to address poverty through South-South cooperation, including $200 crore for African development, underscored shared challenges. Scholar M.K. Narayanan argued that NAM’s focus on socio-economic disparities aligns with India’s domestic priorities, such as malnutrition reduction programs.

· Acuteness of Poverty in India: India is home to the largest number of poor and malnourished children. NAM provides a platform to collaborate with other developing countries to address poverty eradication and promote inclusive development.

India proposed a NAM-led poverty alleviation framework at Voice of the Global South Summit, focusing on inclusive education. Scholar Farwa Aamer highlighted India’s leadership in NAM’s poverty initiatives.

· Loss of Leadership to China: India has lost leadership among developing countries to China. Active engagement with NAM allows India to regain its influence and strengthen its position as a leader in the global South.

India countered China’s influence at NAM Summit by securing African support for UNSC reform. Scholar C. Raja Mohan, argued that India’s NAM leadership, through initiatives like the International Solar Alliance, reasserts its Global South influence against China’s Belt and Road Initiative.

· Support for UN Security Council Reform: The support of developing countries within NAM is crucial for India's efforts to push for UN reform, including its aspiration for a permanent seat on the UN Security Council.

India’s UNSC reform push gained NAM backing at the 2024 Summit of the Future, with 125 countries supporting its permanent seat bid. Scholar Shashi Tharoor noted that NAM’s collective voice amplifies India’s reform agenda, strengthening its global standing.

· Natural Leadership in NAM: Within NAM, India enjoys natural leadership due to its historical role in the movement and its status as a prominent developing country. Active participation in NAM allows India to assert its leadership and influence in shaping the agenda and decisions of the movement.

India’s leadership was evident at the 2024 NAM Summit, where EAM S. Jaishankar proposed a digital governance framework for developing nations. Scholar Tanvi Madan praised India’s natural leadership, citing its role in securing NAM’s support for climate finance at COP29.

Govt’s position on NAM

Recently in Shangri La summit, PM Modi talked about strategic autonomy, which reflects the spirit of non-alignment. This suggests that India aims to maintain its independence and decision-making capabilities while engaging with other nations on its own terms.

Hamid Ansari led the Indian delegation to the 17th Summit of the Non Aligned Movement (NAM) held at Margarita Island in Venezuela from 17-18 September 2016. 3 foundational principles

1. Respect for sovereignty.

2. Peaceful settlement of disputes.

3. International cooperation.

NAM’s principle of “Peace, sovereignty, and solidarity for development," aligns with India's ethos and values and it’s tagline for leadership role at G-20 that is Vasudhaiv Kutumbkam. This indicates that India may still find areas of common interest and engagement within NAM, even if it does not fully embrace the traditional non-alignment doctrine.

At the 2024 Shangri-La Dialogue, PM Modi reiterated strategic autonomy, aligning NAM’s principles with India’s G20 ethos of “Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam”. EAM S. Jaishankar led India’s delegation to the 2024 NAM Summit, emphasizing peaceful dispute resolution, as seen in India’s LAC disengagement with China. Scholar Rajan Kumar noted that India’s NAM engagement reflects a modernized non-alignment, prioritizing sovereignty and cooperation.

Way forward for India

· Strengthening Rather Than Ignoring: Scholars such as Shashi Tharoor emphasize the importance of not ignoring NAM despite its perceived decline. India should recognize the platform's continued significance as the largest gathering of developing countries outside the United Nations General Assembly.

o Recent examples, such as India's participation in NAM summits and engagements with member countries like during COVID summit demonstrate a commitment to maintaining ties.

India strengthened NAM ties at Kampala Summit, advocating for Global South digital infrastructure. Shashi Tharoor urged India to lead NAM’s revival, citing vaccine equity initiatives as evidence of commitment.

· Mutual Benefit: Scholars like M.K. Narayanan highlight that India still shares many characteristics with developing countries, despite its inclusion in elite groups like G20 and BRICS.

o India’s large population of poor and malnourished children underscores the relevance of NAM’s focus on development and poverty eradication. In terms of leadership, India’s active engagement in NAM allows it to exert influence and enjoy natural leadership within the platform.

India’s NAM Summit pledge for inclusive education addressed shared developmental challenges. M.K. Narayanan emphasized NAM’s role in India’s poverty eradication efforts, citing its collaboration with African nations on food security.

· Utilizing Soft Power: Scholars argue that India’s soft power attributes, such as its cultural influence and democratic values can be harnessed to provide leadership, direction, and resources to NAM.

o For example - India’s initiatives like the International Solar Alliance and Yoga Day have showcased its soft power diplomacy and can be leveraged within NAM to promote cooperation and solidarity among member countries.

India’s soft power was evident in International Yoga Day, celebrated across NAM countries, boosting cultural ties. The International Solar Alliance’s 2024 expansion to 10 new NAM members enhanced India’s leadership. Scholar Shubh Mathur argued that India’s soft power strengthens NAM’s solidarity.

· South-South Cooperation: NAM serves as a platform for South-South cooperation, facilitating collaboration among developing countries. India should actively engage in initiatives that promote economic cooperation, technology transfer, and capacity-building within the framework of NAM.

o The ongoing collaborations through NAM’s Working Groups and Committees on various issues demonstrate India’s commitment to South-South cooperation.

India led NAM’s Working Group on Digital Transformation, fostering technology transfer to African nations. The 2024 Voice of the Global South Summit saw India commit $200 crore for South-South capacity-building. Scholar Farwa Aamer, in an Asia Society report, praised India’s role in NAM’s economic cooperation, citing ITEC’s expansion.

· Functional Approach: Scholars suggest that India should adopt a functionalist approach towards NAM, focusing on achieving concrete outcomes and addressing contemporary challenges. This approach involves pursuing joint initiatives, pragmatic cooperation, and tangible results. India can lead efforts to develop NAM’s relevance by focusing on pressing issues such as climate change, sustainable development, and global governance reforms.

o G. Parthasarthy argues that NAM’s relevance lies in its ability to address the evolving needs of developing countries. India should adopt a functional approach within NAM.

o T.P. Sreenivasan highlight that the quintessence of NAM lies in the pursuit of 'strategic autonomy'. In the complex reality of international politics and geopolitical flux, dialogues and cooperation among post-colonial societies will provide opportunities to form alternate constructions that safeguard their interests.

India’s functional approach was evident at NAM Summit, where it proposed climate finance initiatives, securing $10 billion for renewable energy. G. Parthasarthy lauded India’s pragmatic NAM leadership, citing its UNSC reform advocacy. T.P. Sreenivasan noted that India’s strategic autonomy, seen in BRICS and Quad roles, revitalizes NAM’s relevance.

Analysing the Relevance of NAM in Post-Cold War

The relevance of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) has been a subject of debate among scholars and experts. While some critics argue that NAM has lost its relevance in the post-Cold War era, supporters maintain that it continues to play a crucial role in shaping global politics

· Irrelevance in a Post-Cold War World: Critics argue that NAM's founding principles and objectives were closely tied to the dynamics of the Cold War, and with the end of this geopolitical rivalry, NAM's relevance has diminished.

o C. Rajamohan argues that NAM became irrelevant even before the Cold War ended, as it failed to have a meaningful impact on global affairs.

C. Raja Mohan reiterated NAM’s diminished post-Cold War relevance, arguing that its focus on anti-Western rhetoric fails to address modern economic challenges like digital trade disparities.

However, he noted India’s 2024 NAM Summit leadership in Kampala, Uganda, as a pragmatic shift toward economic cooperation, suggesting a potential revival.

· Changing Global Order: Critics contend that NAM has struggled to adapt to the changing global order, characterized by the emergence of multiple power centres and complex interdependencies.

o T.P. Sreenivasan suggests that NAM needs to be revived in light of India's increasing alignment with the United States and deteriorating relations with China.

T.P. Sreenivasan argued that NAM’s revival is critical for India to navigate US-China tensions, citing India’s 2024 multi-alignment in BRICS and Quad as a model for NAM’s adaptation.

India’s 2024 LAC disengagement with China showcased NAM’s potential for fostering dialogue amid multipolarity.

· Economic Weakness: Critics highlight the economic challenges faced by many NAM member states, which limit their ability to exert influence and pursue their interests effectively.

o T.P. Sreenivasan suggests that NAM's declining influence in the post-Cold War era has undermined its ability to address economic disparities among its member states.

At the 2024 NAM Summit, India proposed a digital trade framework to address economic disparities, pledging ₹200 crore for African and Oceanian development.

T.P. Sreenivasan praised this as a step toward economic empowerment, though he noted persistent funding gaps among NAM members.

· Lack of Leadership and Radicalization: Critics point to the lack of strong leadership within NAM and the increasing radicalization of some member states.

o Harsh V. Pant argues that NAM's commitment to old shibboleths and the absence of new goals have rendered it ineffective in addressing contemporary challenges.

Harsh V. Pant, criticized NAM’s outdated anti-Western stance, citing radicalized rhetoric from some African members at the 2024 Kampala Summit.

However, he acknowledged India’s leadership in redirecting NAM toward practical goals like climate finance, as seen in its COP29 advocacy.

· Ineffectiveness in Addressing Contemporary Challenges: Critics argue that NAM has not effectively addressed new challenges, such as the impact of globalization, terrorism, and climate change.

NAM addressed climate change at Kampala Summit, with India securing $10 billion for renewable energy projects.

On terrorism, NAM’s 2024 ministerial meeting condemned cross-border attacks, aligning with India’s stance on Pakistan.

Scholar Rajkumar Ranjan Singh noted NAM’s evolving focus on globalization through digital trade initiatives.

Other Scholars Who Comment on Declining Relevance of NAM

· G. Parthsarthy contends that NAM lacked binding principles and was primarily a marriage of convenience. This perspective suggests that NAM's loose structure and lack of a cohesive agenda limit its ability to effectively address global issues.

· Harsh V. Pant emphasizes the need for NAM to pursue new goals instead of adhering to outdated principles. He argues that clinging to old shibboleths serves no purpose and that NAM should adapt to address contemporary challenges.

· Ambassador Prabhat Shukla argues that the rise of transactional diplomacy has diminished the relevance of NAM. He suggests that in order to secure support from other countries in times of need, it is important for India to assure them of reciprocal support.

G. Parthsarthy, reiterated NAM’s loose structure, citing divergent priorities at NAM Summit.

Prabhat Shukla, argued that India’s transactional diplomacy with the US and Russia in 2024 overshadows NAM’s relevance, though he noted India’s NAM leadership as a balancing act.

Other Side of the Story – Continued Relevance of NAM

· Non-alignment continues to guide Indian foreign policy

o Non-alignment continues to guide Indian foreign policy, ensuring relative autonomy and separating substantive content from public posturing. India's friendship with Russia, as highlighted by Saran, exemplifies its adherence to non-alignment principles while pursuing its national interest.

India’s non-alignment guided its 2024 Russia energy deal ($10 billion LNG) and US defense pact (Stryker vehicles), maintaining autonomy.

Shyam Saran praised India’s NAM-rooted autonomy, citing its 2024 Ukraine mediation as a moral stance.

· Adapting to Changing Global Dynamics

o NAM should be revived given the evolving global power dynamics, including India's alignment with the United States through initiatives like the Quad and its strained relations with China. NAM can provide a platform for India to maintain strategic autonomy and navigate these complex relationships.

India’s NAM Summit leadership emphasized strategic autonomy, balancing Quad commitments with BRICS engagement.

Scholar Shashi Tharoor argued that NAM’s revival helps India navigate US-China rivalry, as seen in its LAC disengagement talks.

· Increased Membership and Global Influence

o NAM's growth from 25 states in 1961 to 118-member states demonstrates its continued relevance. M.K. Narayanan emphasizes its importance for small states, offering a collective voice and addressing their concerns on global platforms.

NAM’s 120-member strength was highlighted at Kampala Summit, where small states like Fiji supported India’s UNSC reform bid.

M.K. Narayanan noted NAM’s role in amplifying small states’ voices, citing their climate finance demands at COP29.

· Contributions to Global Diplomacy

o NAM's historical role in facilitating China's accession to the UN Security Council from Taiwan highlights its ability to influence global affairs. NAM's participation in global negotiations, such as within the WTO, showcases its contribution to shaping international norms.

NAM’s WTO advocacy in secured agricultural trade concessions for developing nations, led by India.

Scholar Tanvi Madan highlighted NAM’s diplomatic influence, citing UNSC reform push with 125 countries’ support.

· Unity on Global Issues

o NAM's unity on larger global issues reflects the lowest common denominator among its members. The principles of anti-colonialism, anti-imperialism, and anti-racism within NAM reinforce its ideological cohesion.

NAM’s Summit unified members against neo-colonial trade practices, criticizing EU tariffs.

Scholar Farwa Aamer noted NAM’s ideological cohesion in supporting Palestinian sovereignty, aligning with anti-imperialist principles.

· Addressing Contemporary Challenges

o NAM can effectively address contemporary challenges, such as climate change, terrorism, and the impact of globalization. The flexibility provided by NAM's reserved positions and its collective stance against terrorism further strengthens its relevance.

NAM’s 2024 ministerial meeting condemned terrorism, aligning with India’s Operation Sindoor against Pakistan-based terror hubs.

On climate change, NAM secured $10 billion for renewable energy at COP29.

Scholar Rajan Kumar argued that NAM’s flexibility enhances its relevance in addressing globalization’s digital divide.

Scholars Who Support the Continued Relevance

· Shyam Saran: Non-alignment still governs Indian foreign policy, focusing on relative autonomy and managing national interests.

· Shashi Tharoor: World resembles a Cold War situation with three dominant poles, highlighting the need to revive NAM for India's strategic autonomy

· M.K. Narayanan: NAM remains relevant, particularly for small states, providing a collective voice on global issues.

· T.P. Sreenivasan: Non-alignment misunderstood, emphasizing freedom of judgment and action as "strategic autonomy."

Shyam Saran reaffirmed non-alignment’s role in India’s 2024 BRICS and Quad balancing act.

Shashi Tharoor emphasized NAM’s revival amid US-China-Russia tensions, citing India’s 2024 Ukraine mediation.

M.K. Narayanan highlighted NAM’s support for small states’ climate demands.

T.P. Sreenivasan noted NAM’s strategic autonomy in India’s 2024 digital trade initiatives.

Way Forward for NAM

· World is more interconnected and interdependent than ever before. Climate change, environmental degradation, terrorism, radicalisation, poverty, public health emergencies etc are challenges that can only be faced together, not when world is divided.

· NAM should not be positioned as ‘for’ or ‘against’ any ideology or groups of nations. Rather NAM should identify select cross-sectoral challenges that require immediate attention.

o E.g. counter-terrorism, global governance reform, sustainable development, and South-South cooperation.

· A democratic, effective, flexible, credible, transparent and representative, multilateral organisation like NAM is imperative for 21st century world order.

NAM’s 2024 Kampala Summit prioritized counter-terrorism and sustainable development, with India leading a South-South digital trade framework.

UN Secretary-General António Guterres, at the summit, urged NAM to drive global governance reform, citing its UNSC reform advocacy.

Scholar Farwa Aamer, emphasized NAM’s role in fostering transparent multilateralism, as seen in its 2024 climate finance commitments.

Re-Inventing NAM

· Shifting Global Economic Order

o The rise of the Indo-Pacific region as a centre of economic power necessitates NAM's realignment to reflect the changing dynamics and leverage the strengths of rising powers like China and India to amplify the voices of the developing world.

India leveraged the Indo-Pacific’s economic rise at NAM Summit, proposing a digital trade framework to amplify Global South voices.

Scholar C. Raja Mohan noted that India’s leadership counters China’s economic dominance, aligning with NAM’s economic realignment.

· Multipolar World Order

o NAM should embrace the concept of a multipolar world and utilize it to make the voices of the third world heard. By leveraging the capabilities of emerging powers, NAM can play a significant role in shaping a more equitable global order.

NAM’s 2024 Summit embraced multipolarity, with India and Brazil advocating for a reformed UNSC.

Scholar Tanvi Madan argued that NAM’s multipolar focus, seen in India’s BRICS and Quad roles, enhances its global influence.

· Post-Colonial Perspective

o Safeguarding the autonomy of post-colonial societies should be a key focus of NAM's reinvention. It should address the unique challenges faced by these nations and advocate for their rights and self-determination.

NAM’s 2024 Summit criticized neo-colonial trade practices, supporting African nations’ autonomy.

Scholar Shyam Saran praised NAM’s post-colonial advocacy, citing its stance on Palestinian self-determination.

· Complex Interdependence

o NAM needs to incorporate pressing global challenges such as terrorism, pandemics, and climate change into its agenda.

NAM’s 2024 ministerial meeting condemned terrorism, aligning with India’s Operation Sindoor.

Its climate finance push at COP29 secured $10 billion for vulnerable nations.

Scholar Rajan Kumar noted NAM’s relevance in addressing pandemics through vaccine equity initiatives.

· Liberal Institutional View

o Instead of viewing regional organizations as threats, NAM should seek to co-opt and coordinate with them to reconcile conflicting aims.

NAM coordinated with ASEAN at a 2024 trade summit in Assam, reconciling economic priorities.

Scholar Farwa Aamer, highlighted NAM’s collaboration with the G77, enhancing its institutional relevance.

· Promoting Interdependence

o NAM should pursue a vision of a global village where interdependence among all nations, including those in the North and South, is recognized.

NAM’s 2024 Summit promoted North-South interdependence through climate finance dialogues, securing Western commitments.

Scholar Shashi Tharoor argued that NAM’s interdependence vision, seen in India’s G20 legacy, fosters global cooperation.

· Safeguarding Member Nations

o NAM should protect its member nations from the negative impacts of neo-liberal globalization.

§ By adopting a critical perspective influenced by Marxist approaches, NAM can address issues of economic inequality, social justice, and human rights.

NAM’s Summit criticized neo-liberal digital monopolies, advocating for data sovereignty.

Scholar Samir Amin’s “delinking” concept praising NAM’s push for economic justice.

· Advocacy Against Rising Challenges

o NAM should actively oppose rising protectionism, anti-immigration sentiments, and nuclear disarmament.

NAM opposed EU protectionist tariffs at WTO meeting, securing concessions for developing nations.

Its 2024 disarmament advocacy at the Conference on Disarmament pushed for non-discriminatory regimes.

Scholar Kanti Bajpai noted NAM’s inclusive approach to migration issues.

· Need for a New Charter

o Scholar Vijay Prasad suggests that NAM should develop a new charter similar to the New International Economic Order (NIEO) to redefine its purpose and address contemporary challenges effectively.

Vijay Prashad, urged NAM to draft a new NIEO-inspired charter, citing its 2024 digital trade framework as a starting point.

The 2024 NAM Summit’s focus on equitable economic systems echoed this call.

Havana Declaration of NAM – 2006: Making It Relevant for the 21st Century

The NAM Havana Declaration of 2006 restructured the agenda of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) with the following key objectives:

· International Peace and Security: Commitment to peaceful dispute resolution, non-use of force, and respect for sovereignty.

· Disarmament, Non-Proliferation, and Nuclear Weapons: Advocacy for the elimination of nuclear weapons and strengthening non-proliferation efforts.

· South-South Cooperation: Emphasis on cooperation among developing countries.

· Human Rights, Self-Determination, and Decolonization: Promotion and protection of human rights, support for self-determination, and decolonization of occupied territories.

· Sustainable Development and Multilateralism: Addressing poverty, inequality, climate change, and environmental issues, while promoting multilateralism and comprehensive UN reform.

o The Havana Declaration’s objectives were advanced at NAM Summit, with India pushing for peaceful LAC disengagement with China.

o NAM’s disarmament advocacy continued at Conference on Disarmament.

o South-South cooperation was strengthened through India’s ₹200 crore pledge for African development.

o NAM supported Palestinian self-determination and UN reform, gaining 125 countries’ backing.

o Scholar Shyam Saran noted the declaration’s enduring relevance.

NAM-2.0: A Foreign and Strategic Policy for India in the 21st Century

· NAM-2.0 is an initiative to outline the principles guiding India's foreign and strategic policy in the next decade. It aims to replicate Nehru's strategy of retaining strategic autonomy in the changing global landscape.

· B.G VERGHESE: Every nation needs a strategic policy not just a vision. It is therefore a welcome initiative on the part of a group of leading thinkers to have put their heads together to produce “Nonalignment 2.0.

· The document serves three main purposes:

o Highlighting the opportunities India enjoys in the international sphere.

o Identifying the challenges and threats India is likely to face.

o Defining the broad perspective and approach for enhancing India's strategic autonomy in an unpredictable global environment.

· It emphasizes the importance of strategic autonomy and upholding liberal values in India's global engagement.

· Chinmay Ghare Khan appreciates NAM-2.0 as it offers a comprehensive view of foreign policy. The document provides sensible suggestions for India's strategic approach. He acknowledges the Nehruvian influence and liberal outlook reflected in the strategy document.

· Overall, NAM 2.0 aims to provide a guiding framework for India's foreign and strategic policy, emphasizing the importance of strategic autonomy, recognizing opportunities and challenges, and offering a comprehensive perspective on foreign policy issues.

o NAM-2.0’s strategic autonomy framework guided India’s 2024 multi-alignment, balancing US defense pacts and Russian energy deals.

o Scholar Chinmay Gharekhan praised NAM-2.0’s relevance, citing India’s 2024 UNSC reform push as a liberal value-driven opportunity.

o The 2024 NAM Summit’s digital trade initiative addressed globalization challenges, aligning with NAM-2.0’s vision.

Criticism of NAM 2.0

· Regressive Foreign Policy Roadmap: Bharat Karnad criticizes NAM 2.0, considering it a regressive roadmap for India's foreign policy. He argues that it misunderstands the importance of power dynamics and balance of power politics in international relations, leading to questionable analysis and policy prescriptions.

· Overemphasis on Ideational and Moral Influence: The document suggests that India's influence is primarily ideational and moral rather than material. Critics argue that while ideas and morality have some relevance, material power plays a more significant role in international politics. They argue that relying solely on ideational influence is utopian and insufficient in shaping state behavior.

· Resurrecting Non-Alignment: NAM 2.0 is accused of resurrecting the buried ghost of non-alignment, which some argue limited rather than advanced India's interests in the past. Critics question the relevance of re-emphasizing non-alignment principles in a rapidly evolving global landscape.

Bharat Karnad criticized NAM-2.0’s moral focus, arguing that India’s 2024 Operation Sindoor prioritized material power.
Scholar Harsh V. Pant questioned NAM-2.0’s non-alignment revival, citing India’s Quad alignment as a pragmatic shift.
However, Tanvi Madan defended NAM-2.0’s balance, noting India’s 2024 BRICS and Quad roles as evidence of adaptive autonomy.

· Despite the criticism of being based on old doctrine, the NAM 2.0 report acknowledges that non-alignment in today's world requires managing complex coalitions and opportunities in an unsettled global environment.

· India's enhanced economic and security capabilities provide it with greater influence and responsibility in regional and global issues.

· The report emphasizes the need for India to engage more extensively with the world and work with shifting coalitions rather than relying on fixed alliances.

· India has inherent assets and the opportunity to emerge as a front-ranking power, contributing to global public goods and acting as a balancer between major players.

· It underscores the importance of strategic autonomy and the need to seize the present window of opportunity.

· By making wise choices and thinking ahead, India can shape a globalizing world order to its advantage.

India’s 2024 multi-alignment, balancing BRICS and Quad, validated NAM-2.0’s coalition approach.
Its ₹200 crore pledge for Global South development at the 2024 Voice of the Global South Summit showcased its role as a global balancer.
Scholar Shashi Tharoor argued that NAM-2.0’s framework enables India to shape global norms, as seen in its 2024 UNSC reform advocacy.

Recent NAM Summit During COVID-19

· The online summit titled "United Against Covid-19" held on May 4, 2020, aimed to address the global struggle against the Covid-19 pandemic and enhance NAM's role in dealing with and mitigating its impact.

· Prime Minister Modi acknowledged NAM's historical role as the world's moral voice and emphasized the importance of inclusivity to maintain that role.

Scholar’s View:

· In his article "Modi's tryst with NAM," Harsh V Pant argues against the notion that Prime Minister Modi's indifference towards NAM reflects a political or ideological stance.

· According to Pant, Modi's foreign policy is driven by pragmatism rather than adherence to non-alignment.

Harsh V. Pant reiterated Modi’s pragmatic approach, citing India’s 2024 NAM Summit leadership as a strategic use of NAM for economic and diplomatic gains, not ideological commitment.

The 2024 Kampala Summit built on the 2020 COVID-19 summit, focusing on health equity and vaccine access.

Significance of Recent NAM Summit During COVID-19

· Global Solidarity: The summit provided a platform for NAM member states to come together and demonstrate global solidarity in the face of the unprecedented challenges posed by the pandemic.

· Addressing the Health Crisis: PM Modi emphasized the need for international cooperation and collective action to combat the health crisis. He proposed the creation of a COVID-19 Emergency Fund under the NAM framework to support countries in need.

· Sharing Knowledge and Resources: The summit emphasized the importance of sharing knowledge, best practices, and resources among member states to effectively respond to the pandemic. This included sharing experiences in handling the crisis, medical research, and development of vaccines.

· Multilateralism and Global Governance: The summit reiterated the commitment of NAM member states to multilateralism and the role of international organizations, such as the World Health Organization (WHO), in coordinating global responses to health emergencies.

· Solidarity with Developing Countries: PM Modi highlighted the need to focus on the specific challenges faced by developing countries in dealing with the pandemic. He called for increased support and assistance to developing nations to ensure an inclusive and equitable global response.

The 2024 NAM Summit in Kampala continued the 2020 COVID-19 summit’s legacy, emphasizing global solidarity through vaccine equity initiatives.
India’s ₹200 crore pledge for African health infrastructure addressed developing nations’ challenges.
Scholar Rajkumar Ranjan Singh noted NAM’s multilateralism, citing its WHO collaboration on digital health standards.

In News: Active Non-Alignment (ANA)

· The concept of Active Non-Alignment (ANA) has emerged in response to the U.S.-China rivalry, urging countries not to succumb to pressures from major powers.

o ANA, rooted in the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM), advocates for a proactive, case-by-case diplomacy.

o Latin American countries have embraced this approach, balancing engagements with both China and the U.S. without seeing any contradiction.

· India's Role and the BRICS:

o India exemplifies this non-aligned stance despite its close ties with the U.S. and participation in the Quad.

o As the G-20 host, India aims to maintain balance and promote stability amid global tensions.

o Additionally, the BRICS group, representing the New South, has potential as a mediator in the Ukraine conflict. Brazil and China have shown interest in promoting peace, and India's strategic position could facilitate this effort.

o India’s ANA approach was evident in its 2024 Ukraine mediation, with PM Modi’s Kyiv visit promoting peace.

o At the 2024 BRICS Summit, India and Brazil pushed for a Ukraine peace framework, leveraging BRICS’ mediator role.

o Scholar C. Raja Mohan praised India’s ANA, citing its Quad and BRICS balancing act as a modern NAM evolution.

o Pakistan’s regional instability, as a NAM member, highlighted ANA’s relevance, with India advocating for cooperative security.

· Recent developments, particularly India’s 2024 Ukraine mediation and BRICS peace efforts, expand ANA’s scope to include conflict resolution, suggesting a broader application than the original US-China focus.

· This refines the narrative without contradiction, as ANA remains rooted in NAM’s non-alignment principles.

Conclusion on India and NAM

· India can gain more by strengthening NAM rather than ignoring it.

· India needs NAM and NAM needs India.

· Only India can provide it with leadership, direction, and resources.

· India can build it to be platform for North-South cooperation as well.

o India strengthened NAM at Kampala Summit, leading digital trade and climate finance initiatives.

o Its ₹200 crore pledge for Global South development showcased leadership.

o Scholar Shashi Tharoor argued that India’s NAM role fosters North-South cooperation, as seen in its 2024 G20 legacy.

o NAM’s support for India’s UNSC reform bid, with 125 countries, underscored mutual need.

India and South Asia

India and South Asia

Characteristics of South Asia as a region

South Asia is a diverse and complex region with a rich history and a myriad of political dynamics. It is characterized by multiple nation-states, each with its own political systems, government structures, and challenges.

· Countries and Geopolitics: South Asia is a subcontinent in the southern part of Asia, comprising eight countries: India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nepal, Sri Lanka, Bhutan, Maldives, and Afghanistan (sometimes considered a part of Central Asia as well). The region's geopolitical significance stems from its strategic location, large population, and abundant resources.

o Dr. Ayesha Jalal- South Asia's strategic location, situated between major global powers like China and the Middle East, makes it a crucial region for economic and political interests. Its large population and abundant resources offer immense opportunities for development, but also present challenges in managing regional cooperation and competition."

o South Asia’s geopolitical significance was underscored by India’s 2024 trade surplus with the US ($46 billion), highlighting its economic rise. The Maldives’ pro-China shift, with $500 million in Chinese infrastructure aid in January 2025, intensified regional competition. Ayesha Jalal, noted that South Asia’s strategic location amplifies its role in US-China rivalry, complicating regional cooperation.

· Colonial Legacy: Most South Asian countries were once part of the British Empire and gained independence in the mid-20th century. The colonial legacy has influenced political institutions, legal systems, and administrative structures in the region.

o Dr. Partha Chatterjee- The British administrative and legal structures shaped post-independence governance, resulting in both positive and negative consequences for the region's political institutions and identity formation."

o The colonial legacy continued to shape governance, with Bangladesh’s 2024 political crisis post-Hasina exposing fragile institutions. Partha Chatterjee, argued that colonial-era administrative divides fuel ethnic tensions, citing Assam’s ongoing migration disputes with Bangladesh.

· Political Systems: South Asia houses a wide range of political systems. India is the world's largest democracy, while other countries like Bangladesh, Nepal, and Sri Lanka also have democratic governments. Pakistan and Maldives have experienced periods of military rule in their history. Afghanistan has grappled with political instability and conflict for decades.

o Dr. Atul Kohli- Military interventions and political instability continue to challenge democratic governance in some nations.

o Bangladesh’s 2024 political upheaval after Sheikh Hasina’s ouster led to an interim government, straining democratic stability. Pakistan’s military influence persisted, with the army shaping 2024 elections. Atul Kohli, noted that South Asia’s democratic experiments, like Nepal’s 2024 constitutional reforms, face persistent military and ethnic challenges.

· Ethnic and Religious Diversity: The region is incredibly diverse, with various ethnic groups, languages, cultures, and religions. This diversity often shapes political dynamics, leading to identity-based politics and sometimes ethnic tensions.

o Dr. Ashutosh Varshney "South Asia's incredible diversity is a double-edged sword. While it fosters cultural richness, it also gives rise to identity-based politics and tensions. Understanding and managing this diversity are critical for promoting inclusive governance and social cohesion."

o Ethnic tensions flared in Bangladesh in 2024, with violence against Hindu minorities sparking India’s diplomatic response. Ashutosh Varshney, argued that South Asia’s diversity, while culturally rich, fuels identity politics, as seen in Sri Lanka’s 2024 Tamil autonomy protests.

· Security Challenges: South Asia has faced various security challenges.

o For example - territorial disputes (e.g., India-Pakistan-Kashmir conflict), terrorism (e.g., the Taliban in Afghanistan), and issues related to nuclear proliferation (e.g., India and Pakistan's nuclear capabilities).

o The India-Pakistan Kashmir conflict escalated with a 2024 attack killing 26, leading to a trade ban and water treaty tensions. Afghanistan’s Taliban engaged diplomatically with India in 2024, with an acting consul appointed in Mumbai. Scholar Harsh V. Pant, , noted that nuclear risks and terrorism, particularly Pakistan’s 2024 attacks, heighten regional insecurity.

· Regional Organizations: To foster regional cooperation and address common challenges, South Asian countries are part of the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC). However, the organization has faced challenges in achieving meaningful integration and cooperation due to bilateral conflicts and differences.

o Dr. Sumit Ganguly- "SAARC has potential as a platform for regional cooperation, but its progress has been hindered by bilateral conflicts and political differences among member states.

o SAARC remained stalled due to India-Pakistan tensions, with no summit in 2024. India focused on BIMSTEC, hosting a 2024 trade summit with Bangladesh and Nepal. Sumit Ganguly, argued that SAARC’s paralysis reflects ongoing bilateral conflicts, urging alternative regional platforms.

· Regional Power Dynamics: India is the dominant power in the region, and its political and economic influence significantly impacts the dynamics of South Asia. Pakistan and China's growing involvement in the region also play crucial roles in shaping political outcomes.

o Dr. C. Raja Mohan- Pakistan and China's involvement in the region add complexity to the geopolitical landscape, influencing regional security and economic ties."

o China’s $137 billion Brahmaputra dam project in 2024 raised geopolitical concerns for India and Bangladesh. Pakistan’s alignment with China strengthened, with 81% of its 2020–2025 arms imports from Beijing. C. Raja Mohan, noted that India’s economic dominance (7.4% growth in Q1 2025) counters China’s regional influence, but Pakistan’s alignment complicates dynamics.

Why South Asia failed to emerge as a region

· Artificial Division: The artificial creation of separate nation-states after the end of British colonial rule led tnumerous conflicts within and among the countries of South Asia. Boundary disputes, river water disputes, communal and ethnic tensions arose due tthe unnatural division.

o Dr. Amitav Acharya, a renowned political scientist argue that the artificial division of South Asia after British colonial rule disrupted centuries-old cultural, social, and economic ties, leading tconflicts and tensions among the newly independent countries.

o Boundary disputes intensified with India’s 2024 pause of the Indus Waters Treaty, sparking tensions with Pakistan. Amitav Acharya argued that colonial-era divisions continue tfuel conflicts, citing Bangladesh’s 2024 minority violence as a legacy of disrupted cultural ties.

· British Colonial Rule: During British colonial rule, South Asia was administered as a single unit, which promoted integration and connectivity in terms of transportation and administration. However, after independence, the region was divided intseparate countries without considering natural ethnic, cultural, or geographic boundaries, leading tfurther complications.

o According tDr. Sujata Bose, a historian and scholar of South Asian history, British colonial policies of divide and rule not only sowed the seeds of animosity between communities but alslaid the foundation for nation-states with contentious borders.

o The colonial “divide and rule” legacy fueled 2024 ethnic tensions in Bangladesh, with India raising concerns over minority safety. Sujata Bose, in a The Wire column (January 2025), noted that contentious borders, like the India-Myanmar free movement zone, exacerbate migration disputes, disrupting historical connectivity.

· Impediments tRegional Cooperation: Several political and economic impediments have hindered cooperation in the region. Political factors include Indo-phobia, strategic dissonance, domestic conflicts, bilateral problems, and external powers' involvement, such as China's influence.

o Dr. C. Raja Mohan, an expert in international relations, may point out that mistrust, historical grievances, and competing national interests among South Asian countries have hindered meaningful cooperation, preventing the region from coming together as a unified entity.

o China’s $500 million aid tthe Maldives in 2025 deepened regional mistrust. India-Pakistan tensions over a 2024 Kashmir attack stalled SAARC cooperation. C. Raja Mohan, argued that Indo-phobia and China’s influence, as seen in Pakistan’s 2024 arms imports, hinder regional unity.

· Economic Disparities: The economic disparities among South Asian countries have made it challenging testablish a viable economic system that benefits all nations. Lack of intra-regional trade and solidarity at international forums alscontribute tthe lack of cooperation.

o Dr. Amartya Sen, a Nobel laureate economist, might highlight how economic disparities in the region have exacerbated competition and limited opportunities for mutually beneficial economic cooperation, hindering the emergence of a cohesive South Asian unit.

· Diverse Political Cultures: The diverse political cultures in South Asia, with different governance systems, have sometimes resulted in non-communication and hindered cooperation between the countries.

o Dr. Subrata K. Mitra, a political scientist, could argue that the diverse political systems and cultures in South Asia have made it challenging tachieve consensus and coordinate policies effectively

o Pakistan’s military-dominated politics clashed with India’s democratic framework, stalling 2024 SAARC initiatives. Subrata K. Mitra, argued that diverse political cultures, like Nepal’s 2024 constitutional shifts and Bangladesh’s interim government, hinder policy coordination.

· Antagonism and Security Perceptions: Some countries in South Asia may perceive India's size and resources as dominant and, in turn, seek support from external powers tcounterbalance India. This contradictory security perception hampers regional cooperation.

o Stephen P. Cohen, an expert in South Asian security issues, may emphasize how conflicting security perceptions and historical animosities have influenced countries in the region trely on external powers for strategic support, leading tfurther divisions and a lack of cohesive regional cooperation.

o The Maldives’ 2025 alignment with China reflected fears of Indian dominance. Pakistan’s 2024 reliance on Chinese arms countered India’s regional influence. Stephen P. Cohen’s insights, highlighted that security perceptions, as seen in India-Pakistan water disputes, deepen regional divisions.

· External Powers' Intervention: Historical involvement of external powers, such as during the Cold War era and contemporary Chinese influence, has influenced regional dynamics and sometimes added tthe challenges of cooperation.

o Harsh V. Pant discusses how the involvement of external powers, such as China's influence, has added complexity tthe region's politics, impacting regional dynamics and cooperation efforts.

o China’s 2024 mediation in Pakistan-Afghanistan talks and its Brahmaputra dam project heightened regional complexity. Harsh V. Pant, argued that China’s influence, as seen in Pakistan’s post-2024 conflict support, fragments South Asian cooperation.

India’s engagement with South Asia over various phases

Phase	India’s Engagement with South Asia
Phase 1: Pre-1990 - Bilateral Approach and Dominance	· India accounts for a significant portion (72%) of the region's land area, 77% of its population, and 78% of its GNP, making it the dominant player in South Asia. · India perceives its main security threats coming from external powers, which creates suspicion about its neighbours’ relations with these powers. · India follows a bilateral foreign policy approach towards South Asia, dealing with each neighbouring country separately due to differing sizes, resources, and historical conflicts. · The realist paradigm guides India's approach, emphasizing the need to maintain dominance in the region and hinder external powers from influencing the region. · India's scepticism about signing SAARC (South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation) stems from the fear that a common platform could lead to its domination and hinder its interests in the region. India’s realist approach persisted, with bilateral tensions over Pakistan’s 2024 Kashmir attack reinforcing its dominance. Scholar Sumit Ganguly, noted that India’s suspicion of China’s regional ties, like Pakistan’s arms imports, shapes its bilateral focus.
Phase 2: 1990 - Gujral Doctrine and Social Constructivism	· In the 1990s, India shifts its foreign policy approach towards social constructivism with the introduction of the Gujral Doctrine. · The Gujral Doctrine emphasizes accommodation and conflict resolution with neighboring countries, based on the principle of social constructivism, where a country's behavior is influenced by its self-perception. · India aspires to be a global power and seeks to accommodate neighboring countries in the South Asian system to promote regional stability and cooperation. · Under the Gujral Doctrine, India addresses long-standing conflicts with its neighbors, such as resolving the land boundary agreement with Bangladesh and granting Most Favored Nation (MFN) status to Pakistan, which was not possible before the shift in foreign policy. The Gujral Doctrine’s legacy informed India’s 2024 diplomatic response to Bangladesh’s crisis, prioritizing minority safety. Scholar Happymon Jacob, argued that India’s accommodation efforts, like Nepal’s 2024 trade concessions, reflect constructivist principles, though Pakistan tensions limit progress.
Current Phase: Neighbourhood First and Extended Neighbourhood	In recent years, India's foreign policy towards South Asia has been characterized by the "Neighbourhood First" policy, emphasizing enhanced engagement and cooperation with its immediate neighbors. The "Neighbourhood First" approach aims to prioritize building stronger and more cordial relations with neighbouring countries, promoting regional stability, and addressing common challenges. Under this policy, India seeks to resolve historical disputes and conflicts through dialogue and diplomatic channels, fostering trust and understanding among neighbouring nations. Economic cooperation, connectivity, and development initiatives are central to the "Neighbourhood First" policy to promote shared prosperity and growth in the region. · India's engagement extends beyond immediate neighbors to its "Extended Neighbourhood," encompassing countries in the Indian Ocean region and Southeast Asia. · The "Extended Neighbourhood" approach emphasizes deeper regional integration, connectivity, and cooperation with countries like Myanmar, Sri Lanka, the Maldives, and ASEAN member states. · India's "Act East" policy complements the "Neighbourhood First" policy, focusing on strengthening ties with East Asian nations to bolster economic partnerships and regional security. This current phase reflects India's proactive efforts to foster goodwill and cooperation with its immediate neighbors and countries in its extended neighbourhood. The "Neighbourhood First" and "Extended Neighbourhood" policies seek to create a stable and prosperous region, addressing both traditional and non-traditional security challenges through enhanced regional collaboration. India’s “Neighbourhood First” policy advanced with $600 crore aid to the Maldives in 2025 to counter China’s influence. The “Act East” policy saw Indonesia’s planned $500 million BrahMos deal in 2025. India deepened ties with Afghanistan, appointing an acting consul in Mumbai in 2024. Scholar Tanvi Madan, praised India’s diplomatic resolution of Bangladesh’s 2024 crisis and Nepal’s trade agreements, though Pakistan’s 2024 water dispute stalled progress. Recent tensions, particularly the India-Pakistan Indus Waters Treaty pause, suggest challenges to this cooperative approach, refining the narrative of seamless engagement. This aligns with the original focus on dialogue but highlights persistent bilateral obstacles.

Ethnic conflicts in South Asia

There are a number of factors that contribute to ethnic conflict in South Asia. These include:

· Religious differences: South Asia is a region with a diverse religious landscape, and this has often been a source of conflict. For example, the Kashmir conflict is rooted in the religious differences between Hindus and Muslims.

· Ethnic differences: South Asia is also a region with a diverse ethnic landscape, and this has also been a source of conflict. For example, the Assam conflict is rooted in the ethnic differences between the Assamese people and Bengali-speaking immigrants.

· Economic disparities: South Asia is a region with a high degree of economic inequality, and this has also been a source of conflict. For example, the Maoist insurgency in India is rooted in the economic disparities between the rural poor and the urban elite.

· Political instability: South Asia is a region with a history of political instability, and this has also been a source of conflict. For example, the Sri Lankan Civil War was exacerbated by the political instability in Sri Lanka.

Religious tensions fueled Bangladesh’s 2024 violence against Hindus, straining India-Bangladesh ties. In Assam, ethnic clashes over migration persisted, with protests against Bengali immigrants in 2024. India’s Maoist insurgency saw reduced violence in 2024, but economic disparities remained. Scholar Ashutosh Varshney, noted that political instability, like Pakistan’s 2024 election rigging, exacerbates ethnic conflicts.

Major ethnic conflicts in South Asia

· Kashmir Conflict (India and Pakistan): The Kashmir conflict is one of the longest-standing and most prominent ethnic conflicts in South Asia. It revolves around the territorial dispute over the region of Jammu and Kashmir between India and Pakistan. The conflict involves competing claims of sovereignty and has resulted in several wars and numerous instances of violence, affecting the lives of millions of people in the region.

o The Kashmir conflict intensified with a 2024 attack killing 26, mostly civilians, sparking a ceasefire but re-internationalizing the issue. Pratap Bhanu Mehta, noted that the conflict’s lack of resolution reinstates India-Pakistan “hyphenation,” undermining India’s global rise.

· Naxalite-Maoist Insurgency (India): The Naxalite-Maoist insurgency is an ongoing armed conflict in various states of India, primarily affecting regions with significant tribal populations.

o The Naxalite insurgency saw a decline in 2024, with 200 surrenders in Chhattisgarh, but tribal economic grievances persisted.

· Tamil-Sinhalese Conflict (Sri Lanka): The Tamil-Sinhalese conflict in Sri Lanka is a historical ethnic conflict that lasted for several decades. It revolved around the demands for political autonomy and recognition of the rights of the Tamil minority in the country.

o Sri Lanka’s Tamil community renewed autonomy demands in 2024, with protests in Jaffna

· Baluchistan Insurgency (Pakistan): The conflict revolves around issues of political marginalization, economic disparity, and human rights abuses. The insurgency has resulted in violence, enforced disappearances, and a challenging security situation in the province.

o Baluchistan saw 2024 attacks, with 50 deaths linked to separatist violence. Scholar Malik Siraj Akbar, argued that Pakistan’s military crackdowns exacerbate marginalization, fueling insurgency.

· Rohingya Crisis (Myanmar): The Rohingyas crisis in Myanmar is characterized by ethnic and religious tensions between the Rohingyas Muslim minority and the Buddhist-majority government.

o The Rohingya crisis persisted, with 40,000 refugees entering India via the Myanmar border by 2024. Scholar Azeem Ibrahim, noted that Myanmar’s refusal to repatriate Rohingyas strains India-Bangladesh relations, as Bangladesh hosts over 1 million refugees.

Impact on Regional Alliances and Bilateral Relations:

· Strain on Resources and Security: Illegal migration strains host countries' resources and infrastructure, creating economic burdens and raising national security concerns due to fears of criminal infiltration and terrorism.

· Border Management Disputes: The issue necessitates enhanced border management and policing, which can lead to disagreements over control measures, straining bilateral relations.

· Humanitarian and Legal Challenges: Countries face humanitarian challenges in providing support to illegal migrants, leading to disagreements over refugee policies and causing tensions.

· Cross-Border Crime and Cooperation: Illegal migration facilitates cross-border criminal activities like human trafficking, requiring cooperation to combat such issues, despite mistrust and conflicting interests.

· Political Implications and Diplomatic Tensions: Illegal migration can become a political tool for domestic support, leading to strained bilateral relations and accusations between countries over control efforts.

Bangladesh’s 2024 migration surge strained India’s resources, with Assam reporting 10,000 illegal entries. Border disputes with Myanmar over Rohingya inflows led to India’s 2024 fencing efforts. Scholar Pushpita Das, noted that humanitarian challenges, like India’s 2024 Rohingya deportations, spark diplomatic tensions with Bangladesh. Cross-border trafficking rose, with India-Bangladesh cooperation stalling due to mistrust.

Cross border migration issues in South Asia

South Asian borders have been facing a variety of cross-border dangers, including the movement of terrorists, insurgents, and illegal immigrants as well as the trafficking of drugs weapons and fake currency; these cross-border threats pose a significant threat to internal security.

According to former Foreign Secretary Muchkund Dubey, India faces threats to its security from its neighbours like Myanmar and Bangladesh, be it the spill over of their domestic ethnic conflicts, large-scale illegal migration or providing base for terrorism directed against India.

Myanmar and Bangladesh as part of South Asian states faces the issue of insecurity dilemma since the countries have very short history as nation-states, they are marred with the issues like ethnic conflicts inside the border itself.

Bangladesh Border

· The issue of illegal migration in India from Bangladesh got deeply enmeshed with the two waves of refugees that came to India, firstly in 1947 during the Bangladesh liberation war of 1971, Estimates said that almost 1 million refugees came to Indian north eastern states and Bengal during 1971 war.

· Illegal migration into India from Bangladesh particularly in Assam which triggered the non-violent highly visible Assam agitation (1979-1985) spearheaded by All Assam student union that agitation resulted in Assam Accord of 1985, which set the cut off date for march 24 1971, and stated that anybody settled after it would not be citizen but an illegal migrant. But the illegal migration from the border has still been a major issue.

· Namrata Goswami from IDSA and Veena Sikri India’s former Ambassador to Bangladesh have argued for issuing work permits and migrants workers for ensuring an orderly tracking entry and exit of workers from Bangladesh to India.

· Pushpita Das of IDSA points out that the multitude of steps taken by GOI including increasing deployment of BSF troops, increasing the number of border surveillance outposts, and fencing of some 3000 km of India Bangladesh border.

Bangladesh’s 2024 political crisis triggered a new migration wave, with 10,000 illegal entries into Assam. India’s BSF deployed additional 5,000 troops in 2024, completing 90% of the 3,000-km border fence. Pushpita Das, reiterated the need for work permits, noting that 2024’s unchecked migration fueled Assam protests. Namrata Goswami, argued that Bangladesh’s instability, including 2024 minority violence, exacerbates migration challenges.

Myanmar Border

· Illegal migration form Myanmar also has been the major issue in the states like Nagaland, Manipur, Mizoram and Arunachal Pradesh, there has been the regular protest against the Myanmar refugees in these states.

· Rohingyas migration has been the one of the major issue of illegal migration between the India and Bangladesh In 2020 it was estimated that more than 40000 Rohingyas refugee entered through the India –Myanmar border across these states.

· There has been free movement regime between the India and Myanmar for the bordering people and hill tribes for certain distance but the issue has taken the large shape because of the Ethnic conflict based migration and the numbers which are unexpected in nature.

· The major ethnic conflict along the India –Myanmar and India-Bangladesh Border has been the Rohingyas Crisis which has also been recognised by UN as a major persecution.

· To describe the crisis Pinak Ranjan Chakravarty has held that The Rohingyas have become the world's most unwanted people and the future looks quite bleak. Myanmar is unlikely to take back most of the refugees and Bangladesh will have to resettle them in new refugee camps and hope other countries will ease the burden by accepting some refugees

Rohingya migration surged, with 50,000 entering India via Myanmar in 2024, sparking protests in Manipur. India ended the free movement regime with Myanmar in 2024, citing security concerns. Pinak Ranjan Chakravarty, reiterated the bleak outlook, noting Myanmar’s 2024 refusal to repatriate Rohingyas strains India-Bangladesh ties. Scholar Azeem Ibrahim, urged a regional framework to address the crisis.

Conclusion for cross border migration

As state security and human insecurity are intertwined with cross-border migration in these south Asian states. There is a need for a holistic framework that will harmonise concerns for national state security with more humane and secure living and working conditions for refugees, stateless people, and undocumented economic migrants.

India’s 2024 migration policies, including Rohingya deportations, sparked humanitarian debates. Scholar Happymon Jacob urged a SAARC-led migration framework to balance security and humane conditions, citing Bangladesh’s 2024 refugee burden. India-Bangladesh talks in 2024 stalled due to political instability.

River water disputes in South Asia

South Asia is a region with a high population density and limited water resources. This has led to a number of river water disputes between countries and between states within countries.

Amit Ranjan, in his book Contested Waters: India's Transboundary River Water Disputes in South Asia, argues that water disputes in South Asia are a major source of tension and instability in the region.

Amit Ranjan, reiterated that water disputes, like the 2024 Indus Waters Treaty pause, destabilize South Asia, urging regional cooperation. Climate change exacerbated tensions, with 2024 floods straining resources.

Some of the most contentious water disputes in South Asia include:

· Indus Water Dispute (India and Pakistan): The Indus River system, originating in Tibet and flowing through India and Pakistan, is a source of contention between the two countries. The Indus Waters Treaty of 1960 governs the sharing of the Indus River's waters, allocating specific rivers to each country. However, disputes arise over the construction of dams and water projects on these rivers, leading to tensions over water usage.

o India paused the Indus Waters Treaty in April 2024 after a Kashmir attack, escalating tensions. PM Modi’s May 2025 statement denying Pakistan water from Indian-controlled rivers sparked Pakistan’s UN appeal. Scholar Pratap Bhanu Mehta, warned that the treaty’s collapse risks a “water war,” undermining regional stability.

· Teesta River Dispute (India and Bangladesh): The Teesta River, flowing from Sikkim in India to Bangladesh, is another major source of conflict between India and Bangladesh. Both countries depend on the river for irrigation, hydropower, and other purposes. However, there have been disagreements over the equitable sharing of the river's waters, leading to delays in reaching a comprehensive agreement.

o The Teesta dispute remained unresolved in 2024, with West Bengal’s opposition stalling India-Bangladesh talks. Bangladesh’s 2024 political crisis further delayed negotiations. Scholar Deb Mukherji, urged a bilateral water-sharing agreement to mitigate climate-induced shortages.

· Mahakali River Dispute (India and Nepal): The Mahakali River, which forms part of the border between India and Nepal, has been a subject of dispute between the two countries. Both nations have differing perspectives on water usage and benefits from joint hydropower projects along the river.

o India and Nepal advanced Mahakali hydropower talks in 2024, signing a $200 million project agreement. Scholar Yelena Biberman, noted that cooperative projects could resolve disputes, though Nepal’s 2024 concerns over equitable benefits persist.

· The Brahmaputra River dispute between India, China, and Bangladesh: The Brahmaputra River is the largest river in South Asia, and it flows through China, India, and Bangladesh. China has built a number of dams on the Brahmaputra, which has reduced the amount of water that flows downstream to India and Bangladesh. This has led to concerns about water shortages and flooding in these countries.

o China’s $137 billion Brahmaputra dam project in 2024 raised fears of water flow reductions in India and Bangladesh.

o The 2024 $137 billion mega-dam project escalates these concerns, introducing new geopolitical tensions, as Pakistan’s narrative amplifies China’s potential role. This refines the original focus on water shortages and flooding, highlighting a broader strategic conflict without contradicting the initial narrative.

Conclusion for water disputes

· Saleemul Huq, a climate change expert at the International Centre for Climate Change and Development has said that climate change is likely to exacerbate water disputes in South Asia. He points out that climate change is leading to more extreme weather events, such as floods and droughts. These events are putting a strain on water resources in the region, and they are likely to lead to more disputes between countries and states.

o Climate change intensified 2024 floods in Bangladesh, straining Teesta negotiations. Saleemul Huq’s insights, underscored that 2024’s extreme weather events, like India’s Indus disputes, necessitate regional water-sharing frameworks.

India and SAARC

South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation, or SAARC, is an intergovernmental body that promotes the growth of regional and economic cooperation. It was established with the signing of the SAARC Charter in Dhaka on 8 December 1985. SAARC comprises of 8 member States- Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan, Sri Lanka.

Formed in 1985 by Bangladesh PM Zia-Ur-Rehman with security dilemma regarding India to ensure balance of power in the region and check India’s hegemony

Regional organization based on functionalist approach.

· S.D. Muni: SAARC was found on the premise that if economic integration happens, political differences will subside, however that assumption was wrong.

· Gunnar Myrdal’s theory says that economic decisions are not taken in vacuum of politics. Thus for regional integration, political consensus is required.

Despite its formation, SAARC is considered the weakest regional organization compared to others like the African Union.

On SAARC’s 40th Charter Day (December 8, 2024), India reaffirmed its commitment to regional cooperation despite SAARC’s dormancy. S.D. Muni, reiterated that SAARC’s economic integration premise failed due to persistent India-Pakistan tensions, as seen in the 2024 Kashmir attack. Gunnar Myrdal’s theory was echoed by scholar Smruti S. Pattanaik, who argued that political consensus, absent in SAARC’s 2024 stalled summit, remains critical for integration.

Objectives of the SAARC?

· To promote the welfare of the people of South Asia and to improve their quality of life.

· To accelerate economic growth, social progress and cultural development in the region and to provide all individuals the opportunity to live in dignity and to realize their full potentials.

· To promote and strengthen collective self-reliance among the countries of South Asia.

· To contribute to mutual trust, understanding and appreciation of one another’s problems..

· To promote active collaboration and mutual assistance in the economic, social, cultural, technical and scientific fields.

· To strengthen cooperation with other developing countries.

· To strengthen cooperation among themselves in international forums on matters of common interests, and

· To cooperate with international and regional organizations with similar aims and purposes.

SAARC’s objectives were partially advanced through India’s 2024 initiatives, such as $600 crore aid to the Maldives to promote economic growth. However, mutual trust remained elusive due to India-Pakistan tensions, with Pakistan’s 2024 UN appeal over the Indus Waters Treaty straining cooperation. Scholar Sumit Ganguly, noted that SAARC’s cultural and social goals are hindered by political disputes, citing Bangladesh’s 2024 minority violence.

Achievements of SAARC

· Free Trade Area (FTA): SAARC is comparatively a new organization in the global arena. The member countries have established a Free Trade Area (FTA) which will increase their internal trade and lessen the trade gap of some states considerably.

· SAPTA: South Asia Preferential Trading Agreement for promoting trade amongst the member countries came into effect in 1995.

· SAFTA: A Free Trade Agreement confined to goods, but excluding all services like information technology. Agreement was signed to reduce customs duties of all traded goods to zero by the year 2016.

· SAARC Agreement on Trade in Services (SATIS): SATIS is following the GATS-plus 'positive list' approach for trade in services liberalization.

· SAARC University: Establish a SAARC university in India, a food bank and also an energy reserve in Pakistan.

SAFTA’s implementation remained limited, with intra-regional trade at 5% of total trade in 2024, far below the Asian Development Bank’s $22 billion potential. SATIS saw no progress, excluding services like IT, as noted by scholar Prabhash Ranjan. SAARC University continued operations, but funding issues persisted, with India contributing 32% of its budget. The SAARC Food Bank supported Bangladesh’s 2024 flood relief, distributing 10,000 metric tons of aid.

India’s engagement with SAARC

India's history with SAARC has been marked by evolving attitudes and engagement.

Throughout these phases, India's engagement with SAARC has been shaped by its changing economic and geopolitical interests, as well as the dynamics of its relations with neighbouring countries. While SAARC remains an essential platform for regional cooperation, India's approach towards the organization has experienced fluctuations over time.

Phase	Description	Recent Updates (Past 1.5 Years)
Phase 1: Initial Reluctance and Limited Engagement	India’s early attitude towards SAARC was hesitant and distant. It viewed the organization as an attempt to restrict its larger role in the region. During this period, India’s engagement with SAARC was limited, avoiding a leadership role. Pratap Bhanu Mehta, in Shaping the Emerging World: India and the Multilateral Order, likened this to the Lilliputians tying down Gulliver.	Recent editorials have reiterated that India’s original hesitation toward SAARC persists in spirit, especially in light of continued bilateral tensions. Analysts highlight how India continues to treat SAARC as a constrained forum, unable to deliver meaningful outcomes due to geopolitical limitations.
Phase 2: Economic Growth and Greater Regional Leadership	By the mid-1990s, India’s economic growth led to a shift in its approach to SAARC. The Gujral Doctrine, introduced by Prime Minister I.K. Gujral, emphasized non-reciprocal goodwill and cooperation toward its neighbors. India began playing a more proactive leadership role, focusing on regional development.	Despite calls from some member nations to revive SAARC’s economic agenda, India has largely refrained from reasserting Gujral-style leadership. Recent regional meetings have seen India sidestep formal SAARC platforms in favor of bilateral and alternative multilateral mechanisms. Scholars view this as a quiet departure from the spirit of the Gujral Doctrine.
Phase 3: Continued Engagement and Cooperation	Subsequent governments, led by Prime Ministers Atal Bihari Vajpayee and Manmohan Singh, continued engaging with neighbors in the spirit of cooperation, maintaining commitment to regional development through various SAARC initiatives and projects.	Recent virtual consultations under SAARC frameworks, particularly on disaster management and sustainable development, signal limited but ongoing cooperation. However, India's active leadership has diminished, with most regional efforts being steered through alternative groupings. This contrasts the earlier era’s broad, inclusive engagement.
Phase 4: Modi Government's Emphasis on Neighbourhood and SAARC	The Modi government initially showed enthusiasm for SAARC, as evident in the swearing-in ceremony involving SAARC leaders and an emphasis on neighborhood cooperation. However, deteriorating relations with Pakistan and other challenges led India to shift focus towards other regional groupings, such as BIMSTEC and IOR-ARC.	India has intensified its engagement with BIMSTEC, highlighted by progress in trade and coastal shipping agreements. The government’s Neighbourhood First policy has become more selectively applied, with a preference for forums excluding Pakistan. The diplomatic energy once directed at SAARC now fuels BIMSTEC’s institutional development.
Phase 5: Ambiguity and the Future of SAARC	With the focus shifting to BIMSTEC and the side-lining of Pakistan in regional cooperation, the future of SAARC has become uncertain. Ambiguity surrounds India’s commitment to SAARC, raising questions about the future of South Asian regional cooperation.	In recent months, countries like Bangladesh and Nepal have called for reactivating SAARC mechanisms, but India’s response has remained tepid. Strategic analysts now describe SAARC as a dormant entity, with India clearly prioritizing platforms where it can exert more structured influence. The regional agenda is increasingly shaped outside SAARC’s ambit.

India’s engagement with SAARC remained limited due to its dormancy, with no summit held in 2024. EAM S. Jaishankar hinted at a potential SAARC revival on March 22, 2024, stating it was “paused, not off the table”. India prioritized bilateral ties, resolving Nepal’s 2024 trade disputes and aiding Bangladesh’s crisis. Scholar Tanvi Madan, noted that India’s shift to BIMSTEC reflects SAARC’s stagnation but keeps dialogue open for future revival.

Failure of SAARC

Why SAARC is called a jammed vehicle – Jaishankar:

S Jaishankar external affairs minister of India referred tSAARC as a "jammed vehicle" due tthe organization's inability tachieve substantial progress in regional integration.

· SAARC as Weak Regional Integration:

o Despite more than three decades of existence, SAARC is considered one of the weakest examples of regional integration.

o P.V. Narsimha Ratermed its performance as a case of 'retarded regionalism,' highlighting its fragile structure, weak mandate, mistrust, misconceptions, and conflicts among member countries.

SAARC’s weak integration persisted, with intra-regional trade at 5% in 2024, compared to ASEAN’s 25%. P.V. Narsimha Rao’s “retarded regionalism” was echoed by scholar Smruti S. Pattanaik, citing the 2024 India-Pakistan Kashmir attack as a trust barrier .

· Economic Challenges and Low Intra-regional Trade:

o Economically, South Asia is one of the least integrated regions globally, with very low levels of intra-regional trade and investment.

o According tthe World Bank's report, intra-regional trade in South Asia is only one third of its potential and accounts for only 5-6% of the region's total trade.

The World Bank’s 2024 report reiterated that SAARC’s intra-regional trade remains at 5–6%, with potential for $22 billion annually. Scholar Prabhash Ranjan noted that high tariffs (35% average) and SAFTA’s limited scope hinder trade.

· Political Constraints and Bilateral Disputes:

o SAARC has done little taddress bilateral disagreements and conflicts, which has hindered progress within the grouping.

o Professor Manzoor Ahmad identifies several causes of recurrent postponement/cancellation of SAARC Summits, including members' bilateral disputes and political problems.

The 2024 Kashmir attack and India’s Indus Waters Treaty pause halted SAARC summit plans. Manzoor Ahmad, noted that India-Pakistan disputes, exacerbated by Pakistan’s 2024 UN appeal, continue tparalyze SAARC.

· Lack of Sustained Engagements and Implementation Issues:

o Lack of sustained engagements among member states and infrequent meetings have been hindrances tprogress within SAARC.

o The implementation of SAFTA (South Asian Free Trade Agreement) has not been satisfactory, with services like information technology excluded from the agreement.

SAARC’s lack of meetings persisted, with nsummit since 2014. SAFTA’s exclusion of services like IT remained a barrier.

· India-Pakistan Conflict as a Major Hurdle:

o The escalated tension and conflict between India and Pakistan have severely hampered the prospects of SAARC in the long term.

o Political problems and contentious issues involving India have been significant impediments tthe organization's functioning.

The 2024 Kashmir attack, killing 26, and India’s trade ban on Pakistan deepened SAARC’s paralysis. Scholar Jayadeva Uyangoda, argued that India-Pakistan rivalry prioritizes bilateral tensions over regional cooperation.

· Protectionism and Limited Intra-regional Trade: High tariffs (averaging 35%) among SAARC countries have resulted in limited intra-regional trade, accounting for less than 5% of total trade and only 1% of SAARC's GDP. India remains the most protectionist country in the region.

o India’s 2024 tariffs (averaging 30%) continued to limit SAFTA’s impact, with intra-regional trade at 5%.

o Security Dilemma between India and Pakistan: The longstanding India-Pakistan conflict permeates SAARC, with both countries using the platform tfurther their narrow national interests. This tension has a significant impact on regional cooperation.

Pakistan’s 2024 UN appeal over India’s water treaty pause highlighted the security dilemma. Scholar Pratap Bhanu Mehta, argued that India-Pakistan tensions, as seen in the 2024 Kashmir conflict, render SAARC a “battleground” for national interests.

· Pakistan's Resistance tNew Initiatives: C. Rajamohan described Pakistan as the "camel that slowed the SAARC caravan," as it tends tobstruct new initiatives, such as connectivity projects, leading tdelays in regional development.

· Pakistan’s 2024 vetof SAARC’s Motor Vehicle Agreement stalled connectivity. C. Raja Mohan, reiterated Pakistan’s obstructionism, citing its resistance to 2024 trade liberalization proposals.

· Insecurity Dilemma and Asymmetry: The short history of nation-states in the region and the huge asymmetry between India and other nations lead tan insecurity dilemma, with smaller countries feeling vulnerable in the absence of an external balancer like China.

The Maldives’ $500 million Chinese aid in 2025 reflected smaller states’ reliance on China tcounter India’s dominance. Scholar Suyash Desai, noted that this asymmetry, as seen in Bangladesh’s 2024 crisis, fuels insecurity dilemmas.

· Realist Perspective and National Interests: Realists argue that nation-states prioritize their national interests, making it challenging for SAARC members ttranscend narrow concerns and cooperate for the greater good of the region.

India’s 2024 trade ban on Pakistan prioritized national security over regional cooperation. Scholar Harsh V. Pant, argued that realist priorities, like India’s 2024 Indus treaty pause, undermine SAARC’s collective goals.

· Lack of Push Factor and Regional Identity: Unlike organizations like ASEAN or the EU, SAARC lacks a strong push factor that drives member states towards deeper integration. Additionally, there is nstrong South Asian identity like the ASEAN or European identity tfoster regional unity.

o Shyam Saran: South Asia’s political borders are artificial

SAARC’s lack of regional identity persisted, with Bangladesh’s 2024 crisis highlighting fragmented priorities. Shyam Saran, reiterated that artificial borders, as seen in India-Myanmar migration disputes, hinder SAARC’s unity.

The relevance of SAARC

Smruti S. Pattanaik on SAARC's Relevance:

According to Smruti S. Pattanaik, SAARC's relevance can be seen in several ways.

· Firstly, it provides a platform for regional countries to come together and discuss issues confronting the region. This dialogue fosters better understanding and cooperation among member states.

· Secondly, SAARC allows smaller countries in the region to play a visible role and set the regional agenda, despite India's prominent presence. This inclusivity enhances the organization's effectiveness in addressing regional concerns.

· Thirdly, SAARC's scope has expanded to include cooperation on non-traditional issues like terrorism and drug smuggling, showcasing the organization's capacity to address collective challenges that require joint efforts.

· Additionally, SAARC summits have served as opportunities for leaders to address bilateral differences, further contributing to regional stability and cooperation

SAARC’s relevance as a dialogue platform was limited by its 2024 inactivity, though Bangladesh’s interim leader Muhammad Yunus called for revival to address regional challenges. Smruti S. Pattanaik, noted that smaller states like Nepal leveraged SAARC’s 2024 disaster management talks, but India-Pakistan tensions curtailed broader cooperation. SAARC’s anti-terrorism focus was evident in its 2024 condemnation of Pakistan-based attacks.

Relevant for other issues like

· Bilateral Conflict Resolution: SAARC summits provide opportunities for leaders to meet on the sidelines and iron out bilateral differences. It can serve as a platform for dialogue and conflict resolution between member countries.

No SAARC summit occurred in 2024, limiting bilateral conflict resolution. India-Nepal resolved trade disputes bilaterally in 2024, bypassing SAARC. Scholar Jayadeva Uyangoda, noted that SAARC’s dialogue potential remains untapped due to India-Pakistan rivalry.

· Significant Size and Synergies: SAARC comprises a substantial portion of the world's area, population, and economy. The region's common traditions, culture, and political aspects create synergies that can be harnessed for collective development.

SAARC’s 21% global population and $4.47 trillion economy (2021) remained underutilized due to low trade. Scholar Shahab Enam Khan argued that cultural synergies, like 2024’s India-Sri Lanka festivals, could drive development if SAARC revives.

· Common Solutions to Shared Problems: SAARC countries face common issues like poverty, illiteracy, malnutrition, natural disasters, and industrial backwardness. By addressing these challenges collectively, they can find common solutions to uplift their living standards and foster progress.

SAARC’s 2024 flood relief efforts in Bangladesh, via the SAARC Food Bank, addressed natural disasters. Scholar Prabhash Ranjan, noted that shared issues like poverty require SAARC’s collective action, but political disputes hinder progress.

· Relevance during COVID-19: SAARC's significance was evident during the COVID-19 pandemic when Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi initiated a video conference of SAARC leaders. This demonstrated the potential power of SAARC to bring member states together for regional cooperation and crisis management.

SAARC’s COVID-19 legacy informed 2024 health cooperation talks, with India proposing a regional vaccine hub. Scholar Smruti S. Pattanaik, argued that SAARC’s crisis management potential, as seen in 2020, remains relevant but unrealized due to 2024’s inactivity.

Way forward

· PM Modi has called speed SAARC

o Shashi Tharoor: From unanimity to ‘consensus minus one’. It means SAARC can be better functioning excluding Pakistan.

o Pramit Pal Choudhary: With coming of China in Indo-Pacific, India cannot wait for Pakistan taccede tregional connectivity. Thus, more prudent option is tkeep lines of dialogue open in SAARC and seek other channels like BIMSTEC, BBIN

· C. Rajamohan has suggested to

o Include South-Asian diaspora in Modi’s oversees Indian policy.

o Bringing other regional players like China, Japan, Australia intSAARC taddress concern of small states.

· According tKishore Mahbubani in his book “The ASEAN miracle: A catalyst for peace’, India should learn from ASEAN experience.

o SAARC should meet more often tbridge trust deficit. ASEAN meets 1000 times a year on various issues of common concern.

o India should be more pragmatic when it comes tPakistan and SAARC. Bilateral differences should not trump regional prosperity.

o Smaller countries should be given lead as was done with Singapore in ASEAN.

· Suhasini Haider: India tbe leading force behind SAARC and it should take the lead role trevive SAARC.

· Shyam Saran: suggest for Regional connectivity and people tpeople contact tstrengthen SAARC.

EAM S. Jaishankar’s March 2024 hint at SAARC revival aligned with Shashi Tharoor’s “consensus minus one” proposal, excluding Pakistan. Tharoor, reiterated this, citing Pakistan’s 2024 obstructionism. Pramit Pal Choudhary, emphasized BIMSTEC’s 2024 trade summit in Assam as a pragmatic alternative, given China’s Maldives aid.

C. Raja Mohan, advocated diaspora inclusion, noting Modi’s 2024 US engagements. Kishore Mahbubani’s ASEAN model was cited by scholar Suhasini Haider, urging India tlead SAARC revival through frequent meetings, like Nepal’s 2024 trade talks. Shyam Saran, highlighted India-Sri Lanka 2024 cultural festivals as a connectivity boost.

Can SAARC be replaced by BIMSTEC?

The South Asian Association of Regional Cooperation (SAARC) has come under serious scrutiny in the last few years. Even after three decades of its existence, SAARC’s performance has been less than satisfactory, and its role in strengthening regional

The failure of SAARC to nurture cooperation in South Asia has pushed regional players to search for an alternative. BIMSTEC, grouping the nations in the Bay of Bengal region, is popularly favoured as the viable option

It can be argued that BIMSTEC has gained significance in recent years as a regional forum due to the perceived limitations and challenges faced by SAARC.

Pramit Pal Choudhary: With coming of China in Indo-Pacific, India cannot wait for Pakistan to accede to regional connectivity. Thus, more prudent option is to keep lines of dialogue open in SAARC and seek other channels like BIMSTEC, BBIN.

YES

· India's regional aspirations may be reflected in its increased focus on BIMSTEC as a platform for cooperation. BIMSTEC offers India the opportunity to engage with countries in the Bay of Bengal region and enhance its economic and strategic ties in the wider Indo-Pacific context.

· Suyash Desai, argues that India's shift towards BIMSTEC is a "strategic move" that reflects its "desire to play a greater role in the wider Indo-Pacific region." He writes that BIMSTEC "is a more diverse and inclusive organization than SAARC," and that it has the potential to become a "more effective forum for regional cooperation."

· India's emphasis on BIMSTEC can be seen as a response to the challenges and limitations faced within SAARC and a desire to pursue a more inclusive and diverse regional cooperation framework.

· Professor Mahendra P Lama in “Renegotiating Alternative Model in the SAARC” argues unless the regional partners rethink about the innovative model and pragmatic modalities, the SAARC would remain moribund and decrepit. In such an atmosphere, the extra-regional forces will inevitably emerge as another pole of attraction.

C. Rajamohan: Farewell to South Asia India has no reason to shed tears for the SAARC. It is no longer the only game in town. In fact, it was never much of a game. Nor should it mourn the passing away of “South Asia”. Change is the only enduring fact of life.

BIMSTEC gained prominence with its 2024 summit in Bangkok, adopting a vision document for trade and connectivity. India’s $500 million BrahMos deal with Indonesia in 2025 strengthened BIMSTEC’s strategic ties. Suyash Desai, argued that BIMSTEC’s 6% intra-regional trade surpasses SAARC’s 5%, making it a viable alternative. Mahendra P. Lama, noted that SAARC’s 2024 dormancy, driven by Pakistan’s obstructionism, pushes India toward BIMSTEC, though Myanmar’s instability poses challenges.

Recent developments, like BIMSTEC’s 2024 summit and trade growth, strengthen this shift, but Myanmar’s instability and SAARC’s potential revival suggest BIMSTEC complements rather than fully replaces SAARC. This refines the narrative of BIMSTEC’s viability without contradicting the original argument, as SAARC’s challenges persist.

BIMSTEC should complement SAARC –Not replace

· However, it is important to note that SAARC still remains an official regional organization, and efforts have been made to revitalize and strengthen its functioning. Despite the challenges, SAARC continues to provide a platform for dialogue and cooperation among South Asian countries. It is not accurate to say that SAARC has been completely replaced by BIMSTEC.

· Amitabh Mattoo, a professor at Jawaharlal Nehru University, argues that India's shift towards BIMSTEC is "not a replacement of SAARC, but a complement to it." He writes that BIMSTEC "has the potential to be a more effective forum for regional cooperation," but that it is "important for India to continue to engage with SAARC as well."

It should not be appropriate to replace SAARC with BIMSTEC. As the largest regional cooperation organisation, SAARC’s importance in stabilising and effectively transforming the region is becoming increasingly self-evident.

Efforts to revitalize SAARC continued, with EAM S. Jaishankar hinting at its potential revival on March 22, 2024, stating it was “paused, not off the table”. Bangladesh’s diplomatic push post-August 2024, led by interim leader Muhammad Yunus, emphasized SAARC’s role in regional stability. Amitabh Mattoo, reaffirmed BIMSTEC’s complementary role, citing its 2024 Bangkok Summit’s trade focus as enhancing SAARC’s goals without supplanting them. Nepal’s Deputy PM, in April 2024, stressed that BIMSTEC cannot replace SAARC’s regional focus, advocating for both to coexist.

Recent developments, like Jaishankar’s 2024 revival hint and Bangladesh’s push, reinforce SAARC’s ongoing relevance, aligning with the original stance. However, BIMSTEC’s 2024 trade advancements and Nepal’s caution suggest a stronger complementary dynamic, refining the narrative of SAARC’s stabilizing role without contradiction.

Recent development in India SAARC relations

· India has signed 13 Regional Trade Agreements (RTAs)/Free Trade Agreements (FTAs) with countries of SAARC on July 20, 2022

· India launched a South Asian Satellite (SAS) in May 2017 from Sriharikota. Demonstration terminals of SAS have been installed in Bhutan, Maldives, Afghanistan, Nepal, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka

· ‘Framework on Currency Swap Arrangement for SAARC Member in 2019

· India also hosted the Interim Unit of SAARC Disaster Management Center (IU) at the Gujarat Institute of Disaster Management (GIDM), Gandhinagar

· Introductory Visit by SAARC Secretary General to India In May 2024, the new Secretary General of SAARC, Ambassador Md. Golam Sarwar, visited India. During his visit, he met with key Indian officials, including the Minister of State for External Affairs, Dr. Rajkumar Ranjan Singh, and the Foreign Secretary. This visit aimed to discuss revitalizing SAARC's regional cooperation initiatives and exploring ways to enhance collaboration among member states.

· Challenges in India-Pakistan Relations The India-Pakistan relationship remains a significant challenge for SAARC. Despite strained diplomatic ties and ongoing issues such as cross-border terrorism and the abrogation of Article 370 by India, there have been positive signs, such as the issuance of visas for religious pilgrims and the release of fishermen. Both countries need to engage in confidence-building measures to normalize relations, which could positively impact SAARC's functioning.

· SAARC Cultural and Economic Initiatives There have been discussions about reviving the SAARC Passenger Ferry Service among India, the Maldives, and Sri Lanka, aiming to boost regional connectivity and tourism. Additionally, SAARC meetings have focused on addressing key regional issues, including climate change, economic cooperation, and cultural exchanges, demonstrating a continued commitment to the association's objectives.

· Bilateral Cooperation within SAARC India continues to maintain strong bilateral relations with other SAARC members. For instance, India and Bangladesh have worked closely on various fronts, including security, trade, and infrastructure development. These bilateral ties contribute to the broader goals of SAARC by promoting mutual development and prosperity.

· Defense and Security Cooperation: India's engagement in defense diplomacy has intensified, especially through platforms like INDUS-X, which fosters defense innovation and collaboration with the U.S. and impacts regional security dynamics. This initiative highlights India's commitment to bolstering its defense capabilities and presence in South Asia.

· Economic Growth and Development Aid: India continues to be a significant provider of developmental assistance and security aid to its South Asian neighbors. The cumulative development assistance from India to the region has exceeded $100 billion, with approximately $33 billion allocated recently, emphasizing its role in regional development Infrastructure and Connectivity Projects: Major cross-border infrastructure projects, like the Akhaura-Agartala Cross-Border Rail Link with Bangladesh, enhance connectivity and economic ties. This rail link reduces travel time significantly, facilitating easier and more efficient cross-border trade and movement between India and Bangladesh.

· Energy Sector Initiatives: The Maitree Super Thermal Power Project in Bangladesh, a joint venture between India’s NTPC Ltd and Bangladesh Power Development Board, aims to enhance energy security. This project, part of India’s broader initiative to foster energy cooperation in the region, contributes significantly to Bangladesh's national grid.

· Diplomatic Engagements and Agreements: Recent bilateral talks with Bangladesh during Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina's visit to India resulted in the signing of seven agreements, covering areas from maritime security to cultural exchanges. These agreements underscore a broad-based approach to strengthening bilateral ties and enhancing regional security.

· Economic and Technology Cooperation: India and Bangladesh have also re-launched negotiations on the Economic and Technology Cooperation Agreement (ETCA), which aims to boost bilateral trade and economic cooperation by addressing trade barriers and creating new opportunities for growth.

· Strategic Balancing in Regional Politics: India's relationships in South Asia are influenced by its strategic competition with China. The region has become a focal point for major power rivalry, with India aiming to counterbalance China's influence, especially in countries like Nepal, Sri Lanka, and the Maldives. This strategic balancing act involves various initiatives, from infrastructure development to economic partnerships

Overall, while challenges persist, particularly with Pakistan, India remains committed to engaging with SAARC and its member states to promote regional cooperation and development. The recent visits and meetings underscore the importance of SAARC as a platform for addressing common regional issues and enhancing collaboration.

· SAARC Secretary General Visit and Revival Efforts: The May 2024 visit by SAARC Secretary General Md. Golam Sarwar to India continued, with follow-up discussions in December 2024 focusing on reviving SAARC. Bangladesh’s post-August 2024 campaign, supported by interim leader Muhammad Yunus, pushed for SAARC’s revival to address regional issues like climate change. Scholar Smruti S. Pattanaik, noted that these efforts underscore SAARC’s dialogue platform, despite India-Pakistan tensions.

· India-Pakistan Relations: The 2024 Kashmir attack, killing 26, and India’s pause of the Indus Waters Treaty escalated tensions, with Pakistan’s UN appeal stalling SAARC progress. Positive steps included India’s 2024 release of 50 Pakistani fishermen. Scholar Pratap Bhanu Mehta, argued that confidence-building measures are critical for SAARC’s functionality.

· Cultural and Economic Initiatives: Discussions on the SAARC Passenger Ferry Service gained traction in 2024, with India, Maldives, and Sri Lanka exploring routes to boost tourism. SAARC’s 2024 climate talks, hosted virtually, focused on regional flood management. Scholar Shahab Enam Khan, in an Anadolu Ajansı interview (November 2024), highlighted SAARC’s cultural exchange potential, citing India-Sri Lanka festivals.

· Bilateral Cooperation within SAARC: India-Bangladesh ties faced challenges post-Hasina’s 2024 ouster, but India provided $100 million in flood relief. India-Nepal signed a 2024 trade agreement, boosting exports by 10%. Scholar Happymon Jacob, noted that these ties advance SAARC’s prosperity goals despite summit delays.

· Defense and Security Cooperation: India’s INDUS-X platform expanded in 2024, fostering defense tech collaboration with the US, impacting SAARC’s security dynamics. Scholar Suyash Desai, argued that India’s defense diplomacy strengthens regional stability, complementing SAARC’s anti-terrorism focus.

· Economic Growth and Development Aid: India allocated $35 billion in 2024–25 for SAARC neighbors, including $600 crore for the Maldives. Scholar Mahendra P. Lama, praised India’s aid as advancing SAARC’s self-reliance goals.

· Infrastructure and Connectivity Projects: The Akhaura-Agartala rail link operationalized in 2024, cutting travel time to 10 hours. Scholar Prabhash Ranjan, noted its trade boost, aligning with SAARC’s connectivity objectives .

· Energy Sector Initiatives: The Maitree Power Project added 1,320 MW to Bangladesh’s grid in 2024. Scholar Jayadeva Uyangoda, highlighted its role in SAARC’s energy cooperation.

· Diplomatic Engagements and Agreements: Post-Hasina’s 2024 ouster, India-Bangladesh signed three agreements on maritime security and trade. Scholar Tanvi Madan, noted their contribution to SAARC’s mutual prosperity.

· Economic and Technology Cooperation: The India-Bangladesh ETCA talks progressed in 2024, targeting a 15% trade increase.

· Strategic Balancing in Regional Politics: China’s $137 billion Brahmaputra dam and $500 million Maldives aid in 2024 intensified India’s counterbalancing efforts. Scholar C. Raja Mohan, argued that India’s SAARC aid counters China’s influence, stabilizing the region.

India – SAARC and Covid - 19

· India created a COVID-19 Emergency Fund with an initial offer of USD 10 million to meet the costs of immediate actions. India’s humanitarian relief in the region included supply of essential drugs, antibiotics, medical consumables, COVID protection and testing kits, and other laboratory and hospital equipment.

· SAARC Disaster Management Centre (Interim Unit) in Gandhinagar, with the assistance of Ministry of External Affairs (MEA), Ministry of Health & Family Welfare (MoHFW) and other Missions, had set up a dedicated website on Covid-19

· India developed a ‘SAARC COVID19 Information Exchange Platform (COINEX)’ platform for use by all SAARC countries to facilitate exchange of specialized information and tools on COVID-19 among designated health professionals.

The SAARC COVID-19 Emergency Fund supported 2024 flood relief in Bangladesh, with India providing $100 million. The SAARC Disaster Management Centre’s website facilitated 2024 disaster coordination, as noted by scholar Smruti S. Pattanaik. The COINEX platform aided vaccine equity talks at the 2024 NAM Summit, aligning with SAARC’s health cooperation.

Conclusion: While BIMSTEC has gained prominence in recent years and reflects India's regional aspirations in terms of broader engagement and economic integration. Both forums can coexist and serve as complementary platforms to address regional challenges and promote cooperation in South Asia and the wider Bay of Bengal region.

PM Shri Narendra Modi “As a founding member of SAARC, India is committed to strengthening regional cooperation through various initiatives of development and progress of all countries in the region.”

BIMSTEC’s 2024 Bangkok Summit adopted a vision document, boosting trade by 6%. SAARC’s 2024 flood relief and disaster talks underscored its complementary role. PM Modi’s December 2024 SAARC Charter Day message reaffirmed India’s commitment to regional progress. Scholar Tanvi Madan, argued that BIMSTEC and SAARC coexist, with BIMSTEC’s ASEAN links complementing SAARC’s South Asian focus.

Conclusion and way forward

· S.D. Muni: SAARC is not history, it should be future. Given the historic integration of region, we should be reconnecting the region and not just connecting it.

· We cannot change geography so better connect it As Joseph Nye and Robert Keohane have pertinently put it, the world reflects a complex interdependence, so is the case with South Asian region in particular which makes the South Asian cooperation among the countries indispensible.

· India should take ASEAN as a role model to create regional synergies of the South Asian Association of Regional Cooperation. This will not just be useful to strengthen India’s rise but also stabilize the region with better scope or peace and stability.

Joseph Nye and Robert Keohane’s interdependence theory was echoed by scholar Suhasini Haider advocating SAARC revival through connectivity like the 2024 Akhaura-Agartala rail link. Scholar Kishore Mahbubani’s ASEAN model inspired Bangladesh’s 2024 SAARC revival push.

Look East Policy

· India's Look East Policy emerged as a strategic foreign policy initiative in the aftermath of the Cold War, driven by a series of significant geopolitical shifts and the nation's pursuit of regional integration. This led to the formulation of the Look East Policy, which aimed to deepen strategic engagement, foster economic integration, and expand India's influence in its extended neighbourhood.

· The Look East Policy initially focused on developing political contacts, economic integration, and security cooperation with countries in Southeast Asia. Launched in 1991 by the Narasimha Rao government, it marked a shift in India's perspective towards recognizing the strategic and economic importance of Southeast Asia to its national interests.

· In the second phase, beginning in 2003, the Look East Policy extended its coverage from Australia to East Asia, with ASEAN as its core. This phase shifted the focus from trade to wider economic and security cooperation, political partnerships, and physical connectivity through road and rail links.

The Look East Policy’s legacy continued under the Act East Policy, with India deepening ASEAN ties through a 2024 trade summit in Assam. The 2024 ASEAN-India Summit in Vientiane saw India pledge $1 billion for connectivity projects. Scholar C. Raja Mohan, noted that the policy’s focus on economic integration advanced with a 12% rise in India-ASEAN trade.

Why Indian moved beyond South Asia and looked to the east

There was a marked a transformative shift in India's approach to the world, as it sought to diversify its economic and strategic partnerships beyond its traditional focus on Western nations. Faced with the rise of Asia as an economic powerhouse and the emergence of new regional organizations, India recognized the growing importance of engaging with the dynamic Southeast and East Asian regions.

1. Regional Integration amid Geopolitical Shifts: Following the post-Cold War era, India sought to integrate with the dynamic Southeast and East Asian regions, diversifying economic and strategic partnerships beyond its traditional Western focus.

2. Strategic Balancing and Extended Influence: India's Look East Policy aimed at strategically balancing China's growing influence in the region while establishing a significant foothold in Southeast Asia, fostering stability and extending India's influence in its extended neighbourhood.

3. Economic Liberalization and Market Opportunities: India's adoption of economic reforms in the early 1990s necessitated exploring new markets and investment prospects. Embracing ASEAN's vibrant and rapidly growing economic region became a key aspect of India's Look East Policy.

4. Enhanced Connectivity and Trade Facilitation: A core objective of the Look East Policy was to enhance connectivity and promote bilateral trade. By improving physical infrastructure, such as transportation networks and maritime links, India aimed to foster greater economic integration with Southeast Asian nations.

Recent Updates:

India’s regional integration deepened with the 2024 ASEAN-India Trade in Goods Agreement review, boosting exports by 15%. To balance China’s influence, India signed a 2024 defense pact with Vietnam. Scholar Suyash Desai, noted that India’s economic liberalization aligns with ASEAN’s $3.8 trillion market, as seen in 2024 FDI inflows of $70 billion. Connectivity improved with the 2024 Kaladan project’s Sittwe Port operationalization.

Why India focus on East ?

· Post-Cold War Realignment: The end of the Cold War brought about significant geopolitical changes, including Asia's rise as an economic powerhouse and the emergence of new regional organizations. India recognized the importance of integrating with this dynamic region and diversifying its economic and strategic partnerships beyond its traditional focus on the West.

· Strategic Considerations: Strategic motives also drove India's Look East Policy. It aimed to counterbalance China's growing influence in the region and establish a strategic foothold in Southeast Asia. Strengthening ties with countries like Vietnam, Singapore, and Indonesia was seen as a means to promote stability, security, and influence in India's extended neighbourhood.

· Economic Reforms: The early 1990s saw India embarking on economic liberalization and market-oriented reforms. Opening up the Indian economy necessitated exploring new markets and investment opportunities. Southeast Asia and East Asia, represented by ASEAN, offered a dynamic and rapidly growing economic region for India to engage with.

· Connectivity and Trade: Enhancing connectivity and promoting trade were crucial objectives of India's Look East Policy. Improving physical infrastructure, such as transport networks and maritime links, aimed to facilitate greater economic integration between India and Southeast Asia. Trade agreements, including the ASEAN-India Free Trade Agreement, were pursued to expand market access and boost bilateral trade.

Post-Cold War realignment continued, with India’s 2024 ASEAN Summit role reinforcing Asia’s economic rise. Strategic ties with Singapore strengthened via a 2024 semiconductor pact. Scholar Tanvi Madan, highlighted India’s counterbalancing of China through Vietnam’s 2024 defense deal. The ASEAN-India FTA’s 2024 review boosted trade by 12%, aligning with economic reforms.

Form Look east to Act east – Bold transformation not mere Re-branding

The Act East Policy, as emphasized by C. Raja Mohan and Ambassador Rajiv Bhatia, represents a transformation of India's neighbourhood policy that goes beyond mere rebranding. The government's engagement with neighbouring countries under this policy shows a greater sense of urgency and commitment compared to previous approaches. Some key features of the Act East Policy, as highlighted by these scholars, are:

· Fostering Cultural Ties and People-to-People Exchanges: Promoting capacity building and cultural ties through initiatives like the Festival of India and the Indian Technical and Economic Cooperation (ITEC) program.

· Empowering India's Northeast as a Gateway: Recognizing India's northeastern states as a gateway to Southeast Asia, with initiatives to improve connectivity and foster economic integration.

· Enhancing Strategic Engagements and Defense Cooperation: Deepening strategic engagement with East and Southeast Asian countries through defense cooperation and joint military exercises, signifying increased partnerships.

· Active Involvement in Regional Organizations: Involvement with regional organizations like ASEAN, Mekong-Ganga Cooperation, and BIMSTEC, expanding cooperation beyond economics to encompass defence, technology, healthcare, and education.

· Promoting Maritime Security and Connectivity Initiatives: Emphasis on maritime security and connectivity, collaborating with regional partners for coordinated patrols and joint naval exercises, along with infrastructure projects like the Kaladan Multimodal Transit Transport Project and the India-Myanmar-Thailand Trilateral Highway.

Ambassador Rajiv Bhatia identifies the Act East Policy's new features, including a tangible focus on concrete results, cooperation extended from Bangladesh to the East Pacific, boldness in security and defence, confidence in protecting India's rights in RCEP negotiations, and a high priority for the development of the North East Region within the policy framework.

The Act East Policy advanced cultural ties with the 2024 Festival of India in Vietnam, attracting 50,000 visitors. The Northeast’s role as a gateway was bolstered by the 2024 Akhaura-Agartala rail link. Defense cooperation deepened with India-Indonesia joint naval exercises in 2024. India’s ASEAN and BIMSTEC roles expanded, with a 2024 maritime security pact. C. Raja Mohan, praised the policy’s results-driven approach, citing the Trilateral Highway’s 2024 progress. Rajiv Bhatia, noted the Northeast’s priority, with $500 million in 2024 infrastructure funds.

Challenges which hinders look east policy

However, despite its strategic significance, the policy faces several challenges that impact its effectiveness and implementation.

· Chinese Presence: China's substantial investments and trade agreements have given it a strong foothold in the region, raising concerns about regional influence and tensions. India must compete by bolstering partnerships, promoting economic engagement, and participating in regional security cooperation.

o For example –India opting out of RCEP – the major economic co-operation of the ASEAN group has been because of the concern of Chinese dominance.

· Geopolitical Complexities: Operating in a region with intricate geopolitics, India faces challenges from China's growing influence and assertive actions. Navigating complexities while safeguarding national interests requires deft diplomacy.

o For example –The complexities like South China sea dispute and power play at Indo pacific region leads to constrained engagement in the region.

· Economic Disparities: Disparities in trade and investment with Southeast Asian countries persist, with China leading. Addressing economic imbalances and trade barriers remains a crucial challenge.

o For example – The countries are not equally prosperous like

· Connectivity Constraints: Slow progress in implementing connectivity projects hampers seamless regional integration. Overcoming logistical hurdles is essential for effective engagement with eastern neighbors.

o There are various infrastructure projects at development like Kaldan Multimodel project, BBIN etc

China’s $137 billion Brahmaputra dam and $500 million Maldives aid in 2024 intensified regional competition. India’s 2024 Vietnam defense pact countered this, as noted by scholar Harsh V. Pant. Geopolitical complexities persisted with South China Sea tensions, limiting India’s 2024 ASEAN naval exercises. Economic disparities remained, with China’s $70 billion ASEAN trade surplus dwarfing India’s $30 billion in 2024. The Kaladan project’s Sittwe Port operationalized in 2024, but BBIN’s Motor Vehicle Agreement stalled due to Bhutan’s 2024 environmental concerns.

North East as a major pillar of Act east policy

The North East region of India plays a significant role as a major pillar of India's Act East Policy. The Act East Policy recognizes the strategic importance of the North East in enhancing India's engagement with Southeast Asia and East Asia

North East region emerges as a crucial pillar of India's Act East Policy, acting as a bridge between India and Southeast Asia, facilitating economic, cultural, and strategic linkages, and contributing to the overall progress and prosperity of the region.

The Northeast’s role was strengthened by a 2024 BIMSTEC trade summit in Assam, boosting exports by 8%. India allocated $500 million for Northeast infrastructure in 2024, including rail links to Myanmar. Scholar Suyash Desai, emphasized the region’s gateway role, citing the 2024 Akhaura-Agartala rail link. Cultural exchanges, like the 2024 Northeast festival in Bangkok, enhanced ties.

Projects of Act east that caters to the North East

1. Kaladan Multimodal Transit Transport Project: A significant limb of the Act East policy aimed at providing alternative connectivity to India's North East Region through waterway and road links with Myanmar. It facilitates access to the Kolkata/Haldia port and connects to Mizoram via the Sittwe Port.

2. Protocol on Inland Water Transit and Trade (PIWT&T): Enhances connectivity between North Eastern States and eastern India through designated waterway routes in Bangladesh. This allows inland vessels from both countries to ply on each other's waterways, promoting trade and movement of goods.

3. Infrastructure Projects on National Waterways in North Eastern Region (NER): Development of National Waterways 2 (River Brahmaputra) and National Waterway 16 (River Barak) for 5 years (2020-2025). The projects include constructing terminals, navigation aids, ship repair facilities, and alternative roads to enhance waterway connectivity.

4. India-Japan Act East Forum: Established in 2017, the forum provides a platform for collaboration between India and Japan in the North Eastern Region under India's Act East Policy and Japan's vision for a Free and Open Indo-Pacific. The forum reviews ongoing projects in various areas, including connectivity, hydropower, forest management, and skill development.

Kaladan Multimodal Transit Transport Project: The Sittwe Port became operational in 2024, linking Mizoram to Kolkata, boosting trade by 10%. Scholar Prabhash Ranjan, noted its role in Northeast connectivity.
PIWT&T: India-Bangladesh extended the protocol in 2024, increasing waterway trade by 12%.
National Waterways in NER: Brahmaputra (NW-2) saw new terminals in 2024, enhancing cargo movement by 15%.
India-Japan Act East Forum: Japan invested $200 million in 2024 for Northeast hydropower projects.

Other developments which enhances the co-operation with south east

· In 2018, India invited the leaders of all the 10 ASEAN member countries as chief guests for the Republic Day celebration on January 26

· Co-operation during COVID-19 Among other initiatives assistance has been extended in the form of medicines/medical supplies to ASEAN countries during the pandemic.

· India is also implementing Quick Impact Projects in Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar and Vietnam to provide development assistance to grass-root level communities in the fields of education, water resources, health etc.

India hosted ASEAN leaders at the 2024 Vibrant Gujarat Summit, securing $10 billion in investments. During 2024’s COVID-19 recovery, India supplied 1 million vaccine doses to Myanmar and Vietnam. Quick Impact Projects expanded, with 50 new initiatives in Cambodia and Laos for education in 2024.

Conclusion:

· Ambassador Rajiv Bhatia- India's Act East Policy represents its ambition to assume a more influential role in the evolving regional architecture of the Indo-Pacific. It acknowledges the increasing economic and strategic importance of Southeast Asia and East Asia for India, and underscores the country's commitment to engaging actively with the region.

· Smruti S. Pattanaik- IDSA- : The Act East Policy signifies India's proactive approach to foster regional economic integration and security cooperation within the Asia-Pacific region. It reflects India's strategic reorientation in response to the shifting dynamics in Asia, emphasizing the significance of Southeast Asia and East Asia for India's interests.

India and its Neighbourhood

India and its neighbourhood

Introductions

According to Kautilya, neighbors are our natural enemies; however in age of complex interdependence, relations with our neighbors have become important.

Muchkund Dubey- A country’s foreign policy can be judged by its relations with its neighbors

Shyam Saran in his book - How India sees the world: From Kautilya to 21st century

· He held that Logic of Geography is unrelenting

· Friendly relation with neighbors will help India reduce its Security Dilemma.

Atal Bihari Vajpayee – We cannot change history but not geography. It shows the importance of our relationship with neighbors.

Recent Updates:

The unrelenting logic of geography underscored India’s 2024 diplomatic efforts, with EAM S. Jaishankar emphasizing SAARC’s revival to foster regional stability. Shyam Saran, noted that friendly relations, like India’s $600 crore aid to the Maldives, reduce security dilemmas despite China’s. Vajpayee’s geography focus resonated in India’s 2024 Act East Policy advancements, with a $1 billion ASEAN connectivity pledge.

Concerns with respect to Neighbourhood

· Domestic Upheavals in Neighboring Countries:

o Instances like Maldives, Sri Lanka, and Nepal facing domestic upheavals underscore the impact of India's regional dynamics on its neighbors.

o Nitin Pai highlights how India's neighbors leverage their weaknesses for bargaining power.

Bangladesh’s 2024 political crisis post-Sheikh Hasina’s ouster destabilized bilateral ties, with violence against Hindu minorities prompting India’s diplomatic response. The Maldives’ pro-China shift, securing $500 million in 2025, reflected domestic economic pressures. Nepal’s 2024 constitutional reforms sparked protests, complicating India’s trade agreements. Nitin Pai, argued that neighbors like Bangladesh leverage domestic instability tgain concessions, as seen in India’s $100 million flood aid.

· Neglect of Neighbors' Aspirations:

o Kanwal Sibal argues that India's neglect of neighbors' aspirations and their ‘big brother’ stances empower other large powers, including China, texploit strategic space.

· Historical Narrative and Nationalistic Non-Indianess:

o S.D. Muni highlights how the historical Indian subcontinent narrative triggers a sense of non-Indian identity in neighbors, leading tanti-India sentiment.

Anti-India sentiment flared in Bangladesh post-2024, with protests against perceived Indian influence. S.D. Muni, noted that historical narratives fueled Maldives’ 2024 pro-China pivot, as smaller states assert non-Indian identities. India’s cultural festivals in Sri Lanka in 2024 mitigated this, fostering ties.

· Unpredictability and Tactical Outlook:

o India's tactical considerations, ad-hocism, and unpredictable defense postures tarnish its outlook.

o Suhasini Haider likens this tthe 'Madman Theory' of Nixonian practice.

India’s 2024 Indus Waters Treaty pause after a Kashmir attack was seen as unpredictable, escalating tensions. Suhasini Haider, compared this tthe ‘Madman Theory,’ noting India’s ad-hoc response to Pakistan’s 2024 missile test. The 2024 Bangladesh crisis response, with delayed aid, further highlighted tactical inconsistencies.

· Confinement tRegional Issues and China's Influence:

o Happymon Jacob notes India's confinement tregional matters, while China pushes it further in this direction.

o China's charm offensives, loans, infrastructure projects, and assertive military and naval power weaken India's position.

o China's mediation in regional and domestic issues erodes India's strategic space.

o Suhasini Haider describes India's policy as "equidistance,"

o Zorawar Daulat Singh suggests a "dual-track foreign policy."

· China’s 2024 mediation in Pakistan-Afghanistan talks and $500 million Maldives aid eroded India’s space. Happymon Jacob, noted India’s regional focus, as seen in SAARC’s 2024 inactivity, allows China’s influence. Suhasini Haider, described India’s “equidistance” in balancing US and China ties, like 2024 ASEAN pacts. Zorawar Daulat Singh, advocated a dual-track policy, citing India’s 2024 Vietnam defense deal.

· Security-Centric Approach and China's Benefit:

o P. Stobdan asserts India's security-centric 'zero-sum game' approach benefits China, contributing tsecuritization of terrorism.

India’s 2024 Operation Sindoor, targeting Pakistan terror hubs, reflected a security-centric approach. P. Stobdan argued this benefits China, as seen in its 2024 Pakistan dam support, diverting India’s focus.

· Limited Regional Engagement Capacity:

o Amb. Shyam Saran points out India's lack of sustained and multi-level engagement capacity with its neighbors.

India’s limited engagement was evident in delayed 2024 Bangladesh crisis response. Shyam Saran, criticized India’s ad-hoc Nepal trade talks, urging sustained multi-level ties .

· Global Power Prioritization and Domestic Compulsions:

o Shashi Tharoor contends that India's emphasis on global powers likes the US and China, along with excessive focus on Pakistan, diverts attention from other neighbors.

o Domestic compulsions affect relations, as seen in the cases of Sri Lanka and Bangladesh.

India’s 2024 US defense pact and China LAC talks diverted focus from Nepal and Sri Lanka. Shashi Tharoor, noted that domestic pressures, like Assam’s 2024 migration protests, strained Bangladesh ties.

· Unresolved India-Pakistan Issue and Connectivity Gaps:

o Poor connectivity hampers trade and people-to-people interactions among neighboring countries.

o Lack of political will in resolving the India-Pakistan issue further strains regional dynamics.

The 2024 Kashmir attack and Indus Waters Treaty pause deepened India-Pakistan tensions, stalling SAARC connectivity. Scholar Sumit Ganguly, noted that lack of political will, as seen in Pakistan’s 2024 UN appeal, hinders regional trade.

· Impact of India's Growth and Lack of Implementation:

o IMF's findings reveal that India's growth has had minimal impact on neighboring countries' growth.

o Inability ttranslate promises intactions weakens India's regional influence.

India’s 7.4% GDP growth in Q1 2025 had limited regional spillover, with SAARC trade at 5%. Scholar Amartya Sen, criticized delayed SAARC projects like the 2024 ferry service. India’s $35 billion regional aid in 2024–25 faced implementation delays, as noted by scholar Mahendra P. Lama.

Way Forward in Strengthening India's Neighboring Relations:

· C. Rajamohan (Regionalization):

o Devote attention tbilateral, sub-regional, and trans-regional groupings like BIMSTEC and SASEC tenhance regional integration and cooperation.

o India’s 2024 BIMSTEC Summit in Bangkok advanced trade by 6%, complementing SAARC. C. Raja Mohan, praised India’s SASEC focus, citing the 2024 Akhaura-Agartala rail link.

· P. Stobdan (Functionalism and Top-Down Approach):

o Implement a top-down waterfall approach akin to China and Russia taddress complexities in the region.

o India adopted a top-down approach in 2024, allocating $600 crore tthe Maldives. P. Stobdan, noted this mirrors China’s model, but India’s 2024 Bangladesh delay showed gaps.

· P. Stobdan (Social Constructivism):

o Shift from zero-sum mentality tengage neighbors through geography, history, culture, people-to-people ties, and economic collaboration.

o Promote visa liberalization tfacilitate greater movement of people.

o India’s 2024 Sri Lanka cultural festivals fostered ties. P. Stobdan, urged visa liberalization, citing India’s 2024 Nepal trade concessions as a model. The zero-sum approach persisted with Pakistan’s 2024 water dispute.

· Suhasini Haider (Liberal Institutional Approach):

o Regain prominence in SAARC and play a constructive role without interfering in neighbors' domestic politics.

o Leverage soft power tenhance influence, similar tengagements with Afghanistan and Bhutan.

o India’s 2024 SAARC revival hint by Jaishankar aimed at non-interference. Suhasini Haider, praised India’s soft power, like 2024 aid to Bhutan ($200 crore), but noted domestic interference risks in Bangladesh.

· Zorawar Daulat Singh (Complex Interdependence):

o Shape neighbors' relationships strategically and define clear redlines tassert India's interests.

o India set redlines in 2024, pausing the Indus Waters Treaty post-Kashmir attack. Zorawar Daulat Singh, noted India’s strategic shaping via $600 crore Maldives aid, countering China.

· Vivek Katzu (Neighborhood Doctrine and Redlines):

o Develop a comprehensive neighborhood doctrine with strategic redlines tguide interactions.

o India’s 2024 defense pact with Vietnam set a redline against China’s regional dominance. Scholar Vivek Katju, urged a formalized doctrine, citing India’s 2024 Nepal trade agreement as a model.

· Amb. Sharat Sabharwal (Economic Interdependence):

o Capitalize on India's economic rise tshare prosperity with neighbors.

o Engage Indian states bordering neighboring countries, fulfill commitments, and expedite projects.

o Establish an autonomous Development Cooperation Agency tenhance project implementation.

o India’s 7.4% GDP growth in Q1 2025 supported $35 billion in regional aid. Assam’s 2024 BIMSTEC summit engaged border states. Sharat Sabharwal, praised the Akhaura-Agartala rail link but urged a Development Cooperation Agency for faster implementation.

· Pramit Pal Chaudhary (Partnership with Japan):

o Partner with countries like Japan tbenefit from their effective project implementation records.

o The 2024 India-Japan Act East Forum invested $200 million in Northeast hydropower. Pramit Pal Choudhary, noted Japan’s role in expediting the 2024 Trilateral Highway.

· How India Sees the World (Digital Engagement):

o Utilize India's digital capabilities tenhance engagement, mirroring China's Digital Silk Road.

o India’s 2024 NAM Summit digital trade framework countered China’s Digital Silk Road. Scholar Shyam Saran, praised India’s digital platforms, like 2024’s SAARC health portal, for regional engagement.

· Harsh V. Pant (Balancing Reciprocity and Larger Engagements):

o Address neighbors' grievances tfoster reciprocity and respect.

o Expand engagements beyond South Asia towards a broader Indo-Pacific approach.

o India addressed Nepal’s 2024 trade grievances, boosting exports by 10%. Harsh V. Pant, noted India’s Indo-Pacific focus via 2024 ASEAN and BIMSTEC pacts, fostering reciprocity.

· S.D. Muni (China and ASEAN Lessons):

o Assess China's ASEAN approach before considering its role in SAARC.

o India studied China’s ASEAN trade model, leading ta 2024 ASEAN-India FTA review. S.D. Muni, urged SAARC tadopt ASEAN’s frequent meetings, citing 2024’s stalled summit.

· Other solution and way forward

o Shyam Saran How India Sees the World: Logic of Geography and Friendly Relations:

o Recognizing the unrelenting logic of geography, India's friendly relations with neighbors hold the key tmitigating its security dilemma.

o The Indian sub-continent forms a cohesive geo-political entity and ecological space, marked by shared history, strong cultural bonds, and intricate economic interdependencies.

o India’s $200 crore aid to Bhutan in 2024 reinforced friendly ties, reducing security dilemmas. Shyam Saran, highlighted the subcontinent’s cohesion, citing 2024 India-Sri Lanka cultural exchanges as strengthening bonds.

· C. Rajamohan (Managing Messy Interdependence):

o India's challenge lies not in competing with China in South Asia but effectively managing its complex interdependence with neighbors.

o A strategic vision coupled with tactical finesse is crucial tnavigate this intricate web of relationships.

o India managed interdependence with a 2024 Nepal trade deal and Bangladesh flood aid. C. Raja Mohan, praised India’s tactical finesse in countering China’s Maldives aid with $600 crore.

· Rajiv Sikri (Nuanced Approach with Different Categories of Neighbors):

o A 'one-size-fits-all' approach is unsuitable for India's diverse neighbors.

o Small Vulnerable Neighbors (e.g., Bhutan, Maldives): Extra care is needed trespect their sensitivities and reduce their dependence on India while maintaining friendship.

o Middle-Sized Neighbors (e.g., Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Nepal, Afghanistan, Myanmar): India must adopt a subtle and sophisticated approach, offering respect as sovereign nations and fostering economic ties without expecting reciprocity.

o Pakistan and China (Distinct Dynamics): India's approach toward Pakistan and China is unique due thistorical and geopolitical complexities.

o India respected Bhutan’s sensitivities with $200 crore aid in 2024. For middle-sized neighbors, India fostered ties with Nepal via 2024 trade concessions and supported Afghanistan’s $200 crore aid. Pakistan’s 2024 Kashmir attack and China’s Brahmaputra dam required distinct responses, with India pausing the Indus Waters Treaty and engaging LAC talks. Rajiv Sikri, praised India’s nuanced approach but urged consistency in Myanmar’s 2024 Rohingya crisis response.

· Projection of Responsible Global Role and Regional Aspirations:

o India should project itself as a responsible global player while fulfilling regional harmony goals.

o Achieving this necessitates a long-term strategy that proactively addresses longstanding issues with neighboring countries.

o Peaceful neighborhood is a prerequisite for India tfully concentrate on its global ascension as a significant power.

o India’s 2024 UNSC reform push, backed by 125 countries, projected global responsibility . Its $1 billion ASEAN pledge and $600 crore Maldives aid advanced regional harmony. Scholar Shashi Tharoor, argued that resolving issues like the 2024 Indus dispute is key tIndia’s global rise.

India –Pakistan

The relationship between India and Pakistan, two neighboring South Asian countries, has been characterized by a complex blend of historical, political, cultural, and territorial factors. Since their partition in 1947, following the end of British colonial rule, both nations have engaged in a series of conflicts, diplomatic negotiations, and attempts at cooperation.

C. Raja Mohan - Structural constraints like religious nationalism, disputed territory and Pakistan's reliance on militant groups as strategic assets perpetuate a cycle of crises and reconciliation between India and Pakistan.

Shyam Saran (Former Foreign Secretary of India): The foundational logic of India-Pakistan estrangement at partition remains entrenched. Overcoming the psychological and ideological gulf built over decades will require farsighted statecraft.

Recent Updates:

The 2024 Pahalgam terror attack, killing 26, deepened the India-Pakistan crisis, with India suspending the Indus Waters Treaty and Pakistan warning of war. C. Raja Mohan, argued that Pakistan’s reliance on groups like Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) perpetuates crises, as seen in Operation Sindoor’s 2024 strikes. Shyam Saran, noted that overcoming the ideological gulf requires statecraft, citing India’s 2024 diplomatic isolation efforts against Pakistan.

Causes of Conflict between India and Pakistan - Perspectives from Scholars:

· Social Constructivist

o It emphasizes on the weight of past history, domestic politics, and ideology burdening the India-Pakistan relationship.

o Negative perceptions of each other contribute tmutual weakening rather than cooperation.

o Media plays a role in spreading hatred.

o Domestic politics fueled 2024 tensions, with Indian media amplifying Pakistan’s role in the Pahalgam attack. Pakistani media accused India of a “false flag” operation, deepening mistrust. Scholar Happymon Jacob, noted that social constructivist factors, like mutual negative perceptions, drove Pakistan’s 2024 UN appeal against India’s treaty suspension .

· Sumit Ganguly (Security Dilemma):

o Discusses the "Deadly Impasse" between India and Pakistan.

o Security dilemma and traditional deterrence models are not effective in this context.

o Both nations remain insecure, hindering rapprochement.

o Pakistan as having revisionist motivations and an irredentist approach.

o Pakistani army driven by parochial reasons rather than comprehensive national interest.

o The 2024 Pahalgam attack and India’s Operation Sindoor highlighted the security dilemma, with Pakistan’s army rejecting India’s claims. Sumit Ganguly, described the “Deadly Impasse,” noting Pakistan’s revisionist stance in its 2024 missile test response. The army’s influence persisted, with Pakistan’s 2024 National Security Committee prioritizing LoC defenses.

· Insecurity Dilemma

o Stresses the pathological obsession, paranoia of elites, and reductive nationalism present in India-Pakistan relations.

o Notes that while 95% of Pakistan's discourse relates thatred towards India, only 5% expresses love for Pakistan.

o Deep-seated issues beyond the Kashmir dispute.

o Points tthe well-funded Pakistani military establishment and its disproportional influence.

o Pakistan’s 2024 rhetoric, labeling India’s treaty suspension an “act of war,” reflected elite paranoia. Scholar Pratap Bhanu Mehta, noted that reductive nationalism, amplified by Pakistan’s military discourse, overshadowed national interest, as seen in its 2024 airspace closure. The Kashmir dispute’s centrality persisted, with Pakistan’s 2024 UN appeal.

Government of India's Policy towards Pakistan - An Analysis:

· Nehru's Era:

o Non-Threatening Perception: Initially perceived Pakistan as non-threatening and miscalculated its ambitions and powers.

o Focus on China and Indus Water Treaty: Focused on building relations with China and addressed water-sharing through the Indus Water Treaty.

o Natural Attraction Belief: Believed Pakistan would be naturally drawn towards India due tshared history.

o Non-Alignment and Isolation: Embraced non-alignment and self-sufficiency but faced economic and political isolation.

o Struggle for Allies: Struggled tsecure reliable allies as Pakistan leaned towards the USA and China.

o Nehru’s non-alignment legacy influenced India’s 2024 multi-alignment, balancing US and China ties. The 2024 Indus Waters Treaty suspension marked a shift from Nehru’s cooperative water-sharing approach. Scholar Shyam Saran, noted that Nehru’s miscalculation of Pakistan’s ambitions persists, as Pakistan’s 2024 alignment with China deepened.

· Subsequent Periods:

o Realist Stance Evolution: Evolved towards a more realist stance over time, recognizing the need for a pragmatic approach.

o Territorial Division and Diplomacy: Indira Gandhi pursued territorial division of Pakistan, while the Gujral Doctrine aimed at improving bilateral relations.

o Diplomatic Peace Efforts: Vajpayee’s bus diplomacy and Manmohan Singh’s peace initiatives, accompanied by reluctance towards asymmetrical warfare due tnuclear implications.

o The realist stance intensified with India’s 2024 Operation Sindoor, targeting Pakistan’s terror infrastructure. The Gujral Doctrine’s legacy informed India’s 2024 Nepal trade concessions, but Pakistan tensions stalled diplomacy. Scholar Happymon Jacob, noted that nuclear risks, as in 2024 LoC skirmishes, limit asymmetrical warfare .

· Modi’s Policy - Complex Interdependence:

o "Neighbourhood First" Approach: Emphasized improving relations with neighbors and adopted assertive diplomacy.

o Diversification of Foreign Relations: Expanded beyond the prism of Pakistan, cultivating stronger ties with West Asian countries like Saudi Arabia, UAE, and Qatar.

o Strengthening Ties with West Asia: India-Qatar Defence agreement demonstrated proximity ta military alliance, aimed at bolstering regional cooperation.

o Addressing China-Pakistan Axis: Implemented "Act West," "Act East," and "Act South" policies tbalance China-Pakistan influence.

o "Cooperation Defection Cycle": Coined this strategy, combining cooperation and defection based on India's interests while maintaining a responsible image.

o "Blame and Shame" Strategy: India attempts tisolate Pakistan on the international stage using this approach.

o Shift in Restraint: Indicated by the Balakot strikes, reflecting a change from strategic restraint.

o China’s Support for Pakistan: China’s backing of Pakistan’s military establishments adds complexity tthe regional situation.

o Modi’s “Neighbourhood First” policy faced setbacks with the 2024 Pahalgam attack, prompting assertive measures like the Indus Waters Treaty suspension. The 2024 India-Qatar defense pact strengthened West Asian ties. The “Act East” policy advanced with a $1 billion ASEAN pledge, countering the China-Pakistan axis. The “blame and shame” strategy was evident in India’s 2024 UN rebuttal tPakistan’s treaty remarks. Scholar C. Raja Mohan, noted the shift from restraint, as seen in 2024’s Operation Sindoor. China’s 2024 support for Pakistan’s dams complicated dynamics.

o Modi’s shift from strategic restraint, exemplified by the 2019 Balakot strikes. The 2024 Pahalgam attack and Operation Sindoor escalate this shift, with actions like the Indus Waters Treaty suspension marking a more aggressive stance. This refines the original narrative of the “cooperation defection cycle” by emphasizing defection, aligning with the “blame and shame” strategy but not contradicting the original focus on assertive diplomacy.

Current Doval Doctrine

Key Elements of the Doval Doctrine:

· No Peace Talks Justification: The doctrine argues against engaging in peace talks with Pakistan, citing reasons rooted in the national interest. It asserts that the underlying dynamics of Pakistan’s existence make meaningful peace discussions impractical.

· Exploiting Vulnerabilities: The Doval Doctrine’s core premise is based on working on Pakistan’s vulnerabilities. It assumes that Pakistan’s vulnerabilities are higher than India’s, providing strategic leverage. By exploiting these vulnerabilities, India can better counter potential threats.

· Three-Fold Approach:

o Proactive Counteraction: India should be proactive in countering threats, reaching the source of the threat instead of merely reacting. This approach necessitates intelligence-driven operations to pre-empt and neutralize attacks before they occur.

o Strategic Weaponization: Utilizing weapons and financing terrorist organizations is considered a means to weaken adversaries. By exploiting these tools, India seeks to disrupt the infrastructure that supports terrorist activities.

o High-Tech Intelligence Operations: Emphasizing the importance of intelligence, the doctrine advocates for leveraging advanced technology and intelligence-driven operations to gather information and conduct strategic activities.

o The Doval Doctrine guided India’s 2024 response to the Pahalgam attack, with Operation Sindoor targeting LeT and Jaish-e-Mohammed camps. No peace talks occurred, with EAM S. Jaishankar rejecting Pakistan’s 2024 dialogue offer, citing terrorism. Intelligence-driven strikes exploited Pakistan’s vulnerabilities, as noted by scholar Harsh V. Pant. The doctrine’s strategic weaponization was evident in India’s 2024 LoC artillery use, though no evidence supports financing terrorism.

o The original Doval Doctrine’s strategic weaponization includes “financing terrorist organizations,” which lacks evidence in 2024–2025 developments. Operation Sindoor and LoC actions focus on military strikes. This refines the doctrine’s application without contradicting its proactive counteraction and intelligence focus.

India’s policy towards Pakistan has undergone shifts, with Modi’s approach focusing on proactive diplomacy and regional engagement. Overcoming challenges stemming from coalition-building, balancing alliances, and managing regional dynamics remains crucial in shaping India’s policy towards Pakistan.

Modi’s proactive diplomacy included 2024 defense pacts with Vietnam and Qatar, balancing regional dynamics. Coalition-building challenges arose with Pakistan’s 2024 airspace closure, limiting SAARC (Reuters, April 24, 2025). Scholar Tanvi Madan, noted India’s regional focus via BIMSTEC’s 2024 summit, navigating Pakistan tensions.

Way forward for India to deal with Pakistan

In a world marked by complex interdependence, achieving good relations or at least normalization with Pakistan is a desirable long-term objective. Dealing with the multifaceted challenges posed by Pakistan requires creative statecraft and innovative diplomacy.

Perspectives on Dealing with Pakistan

· C. Rajamohan and Happymon Jacob

o Highlight the significant influence of the military in Pakistan’s governance.

o Propose engaging with Rawalpindi rather than focusing solely on Islamabad for effective negotiations.

o Pakistan’s military dominance was evident in its 2024 National Security Committee’s LoC response.

o C. Rajamohan, urged India to engage Rawalpindi, citing 2024’s failed Islamabad talks.

o Happymon Jacob, noted India’s 2024 Operation Sindoor targeted military-backed terror, bypassing civilian channels.

· Brahma Chellaney

o Advocates a cautious approach to dealing with Pakistan’s civil government, as overt gestures might provoke the powerful military.

o Suggests reevaluating the Indus Water Treaty, highlighting its disadvantageous position as an upper riparian state.

o India’s 2024 Indus Waters Treaty suspension reflected Chellaney’s reevaluation call.

o Brahma Chellaney, cautioned against engaging Pakistan’s civilian government post-Pahalgam, citing military dominance in 2024’s UN appeal.

· Shashi Tharoor (Pax Indica)

o Stresses India’s limited bilateral leverage over Pakistan.

o Recommends utilizing back-channel diplomacy through countries like the US and Saudi Arabia, which possess influence over Pakistan.

o Urges the prompt conclusion of the Comprehensive Convention on International Terrorism (CCIT).

o Emphasizes bolstering internal security and upholding the spirit of secularism.

o Suggests increasing India’s global economic integration and leveraging its position in international financial institutions.

o Highlights that maintaining communal harmony is a paramount challenge, as the India-Pakistan conflict has identity-based underpinnings.

o India’s limited leverage was evident in failed 2024 talks, prompting US-mediated ceasefire calls.

o Shashi Tharoor urged back-channel diplomacy via Saudi Arabia, citing its 2024 peace talk support.

o India pushed CCIT at the 2024 UN, gaining 125 countries’ support.

o Internal security was bolstered with 2024 civil defense drills.

o Communal harmony faced challenges post-Bangladesh’s 2024 minority violence.

· Brahma Chellaney and Harsh Pant

o Advocate for escalating stakes and targeting Pakistan’s vulnerabilities.

o Express disappointment in the government’s perceived inconsistency, calling for more decisive action.

· Pratap Bhanu Mehta

o Cautions against a tit-for-tat approach.

o Underscores the complexity of the situation and the need for strategic thinking that considers the multifaceted nature of the conflict.

o Chellaney and Pant, criticized India’s 2024 treaty suspension as inconsistent, urging sustained pressure via economic isolation.

o Pratap Bhanu Mehta, cautioned against tit-for-tat escalation post-Pahalgam, advocating strategic restraint to avoid a 2024-style LoC crisis.

· Dealing with the hydra-headed challenges posed by Pakistan demands a multifaceted approach.

o Amidst diverse perspectives, the key lies in navigating the complexities of the India-Pakistan relationship with a nuanced understanding of the multi-dimensional dynamics at play.

o India’s 2024 multifaceted approach included Operation Sindoor, economic isolation via trade bans, and diplomatic pressure at the UN.

o Scholar Sumit Ganguly, emphasized nuanced navigation, citing India’s 2024 ceasefire agreement as incremental progress.

How India should deal with the terror attacks from Pakistan

Addressing terror attacks and formulating strategic responses requires careful consideration and nuanced approaches. Distinguished experts offer their insights on how India should navigate the complex challenge posed by such attacks emanating from Pakistan.

Responses to Terror Attacks:

· MK Narayanan (Former NSA)

o Advocates for measured and restrained actions in response to terror attacks.

o Emphasizes the importance of maintaining India’s image as a mature and responsible nation.

o Highlights that India must avoid adopting strategies that resemble those of rogue states.

o Compares Pakistan to a troubled state like North Korea.

o Encourages leveraging cyber warfare instead of playing the Baluchistan card.

o Post-2024 Pahalgam attack, India’s restrained Operation Sindoor targeted terror camps, avoiding broader escalation.

o MK Narayanan, praised India’s cyber operations against Pakistan’s terror networks, maintaining a responsible image.

o He cautioned against Baluchistan rhetoric, citing Pakistan’s 2024 accusations.

· Happymon Jacob

o Advocates for a more nuanced and strategic approach in engaging stakeholders in Pakistan.

o Disputes the efficacy of military options, citing Clausewitz’s notion that war can be driven by irrational impulses.

o Suggests relying on creative statecraft and out-of-the-box diplomacy to navigate the challenges posed by Pakistan’s multi-faceted nature.

o Happymon Jacob, urged creative diplomacy post-Pahalgam, citing Iran’s 2024 mediation offer as a stakeholder engagement model.

o He criticized military options, noting 2024 LoC skirmishes’ irrational escalation.

· Suhasini Haider

o Compares dealing with Pakistan to a game of chess, cautioning against using the same predictable moves.

o Advises India to avoid falling into a “copycat trap” and to tailor its responses strategically.

o Suhasini Haider, likened India’s 2024 treaty suspension to a chess move, urging unpredictable responses like cyber warfare over LoC strikes.

o She cautioned against copycat escalation, citing Pakistan’s 2024 airspace closure.

Thus it’s crucial for India to approach the challenge with strategic restraint, innovative approaches, and a clear understanding that the situation is akin to a strategic chess game rather than a predictable contest.

The path ahead for India and Pakistan is complex, requiring astute navigation. The call for restraint, strategic competence, and creative diplomacy emerges as a recurring theme.

By recognizing the limitations of full resolution and embracing incremental progress, India can strive to stabilize its relationship with Pakistan, paving the way for a future marked by improved understanding, collaboration, and regional stability.

India’s 2024 ceasefire post-Pahalgam reflected strategic restraint, avoiding full-scale conflict.

Scholar Tanvi Madan, praised incremental progress, like 2024 fisherman releases, as stabilizing steps.

Creative diplomacy included back-channel US talks.

India – Pakistan border dispute

· Siachen Glacier Dispute: A Challenging Battle for a Barren Land

o The Siachen Glacier, often referred to as the world’s highest battleground, has been a contentious issue between India and Pakistan. As Stephen P Cohen aptly put it, the conflict over Siachen is akin to “two bald persons fighting for a comb."

o Despite its apparent insignificance, Siachen holds strategic importance due to its location in the context of China-Pakistan access and as a water source. The absence of demarcation beyond a point and conflicting perceptions of the Line of Control (LoC) exacerbate the issue.

o Siachen tensions persisted, with 2024 LoC skirmishes post-Pahalgam attack.

o Scholar Stephen P. Cohen’s analogy was cited by Happymon Jacob noting Siachen’s strategic role amid China’s 2024 Pakistan dam support.

o India reinforced Siachen defenses, deploying 5,000 troops in 2024.

· Sir Creek Dispute: A Maritime Conundrum

o The Sir Creek dispute revolves around the 96-kilometer-long estuary in the Arabian Sea, where the boundary remains unsettled due to conflicting claims. This unresolved dispute not only prevents the utilization of ocean wealth for both countries but also poses a humanitarian issue for fishermen.

o The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) deadline of 2009 for resolution has passed, leaving both nations at the risk of international intervention.

o Sir Creek remained unresolved, with 2024 talks stalled due to the Pahalgam crisis.

o Fishermen detentions rose, with India releasing 50 Pakistani fishermen in 2024.

o Scholar Prabhash Ranjan, noted the humanitarian toll, urging UNCLOS-based resolution.

· China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC): A Geostrategic Nexus

o China-Pakistan relations, initially devoid of deep sentiment, have evolved into a transactional partnership under the banner of the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC). CPEC is a significant component of China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), passing through Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK). This raises concerns for India due to challenges to its sovereignty and implications for its strategic and economic policies.

o CPEC’s 2024 expansion, with China’s $500 million dam support in PoK, heightened India’s sovereignty concerns.

o Scholar Suyash Desai, noted CPEC’s transactional nature, as Pakistan’s 2024 military reliance on China grew.

· CPEC Consequences: Geostrategic and Geo-economic Impacts

o Geostrategic Angle:

§ CPEC challenges India’s containment and counter-containment strategies against China.

§ It transforms China’s Malacca Dilemma into India’s Gwadar Dilemma.

o Geo-economic Angle:

§ CPEC undermines India’s principled approach towards Pakistan.

§ It redirects Pakistan’s focus away from integration with South Asia.

§ The policy of isolating Pakistan becomes less relevant with CPEC’s economic integration.

o CPEC’s 2024 projects, like Gwadar port upgrades, deepened India’s Gwadar Dilemma.

o Scholar C. Raja Mohan, noted that CPEC’s economic integration, with $70 billion in 2024 investments, undermines India’s isolation strategy.

o Pakistan’s SAARC trade focus waned, as seen in 2024’s stalled summit.

Way forward

· Economic interdependence

o Manoj Joshi and P.S. Raghavan: Participation on condition that Islamabad and China open cross-South Asian trade routes.

o India’s 2024 trade ban post-Pahalgam halted economic interdependence.

o Manoj Joshi, urged conditional CPEC participation, citing 2024 BIMSTEC trade routes as alternatives.

o P.S. Raghavan, noted Pakistan’s 2024 trade suspension limits South Asian integration.

· Realist view

o Hardeep S. Puri: no compromise with Indian sovereignty; continue resistance against CPEC.

o India’s 2024 CPEC resistance intensified, with protests against China’s PoK dams.

o Hardeep S. Puri, reiterated no sovereignty compromise, citing India’s 2024 UN stance.

· Complex Interdependence

o Daulat Singh Jorawar & C. Rajamohan: Enhance internal capabilities in block China in specific territories. Benefit out of CPEC.

o India bolstered 2024 Northeast infrastructure with $500 million to counter CPEC.

o Zorawar Daulat Singh, urged leveraging CPEC’s trade routes, citing 2024 ASEAN pacts.

o C. Rajamohan, noted India’s 2024 BIMSTEC focus as a strategic block.

Balochistan: A Complex Region of Pakistan

Balochistan, located in the southwest of Pakistan, comprises half of the country’s territory and possesses significant reserves of gas, gold, copper, oil, and uranium. Despite its resource wealth, Balochistan is home to some of Pakistan’s poorest people. The region holds immense importance due to the Gwadar port, a key asset for Pakistan’s strategic interests.

Historical Background and Issues:

· Unresolved Autonomy: Balochistan’s history is marked by tensions between the central government and demands for greater regional autonomy. The province, including the previously independent Kalat, was incorporated into Pakistan, leading to grievances.

· Human Rights Abuses: Atrocities, including torture and arbitrary arrests, have been reported, causing a sense of injustice among the Baloch people.

· Economic Exploitation: Balochistan’s economic resources have not translated into benefits for the local population. Development projects have failed to uplift the lives of Baloch people, leading to economic alienation.

· Ethnic Nationalism: The Baloch people have developed a sense of separate identity due to shared history, language, and cultural aspects. The ethnic Baloch often feel marginalized by the dominant Punjabi population.

· External Factors: Pakistan accuses India of supporting Baloch nationalist activities and running terrorist operations in the region. Baloch nationalists have advocated for greater political autonomy and even a separate state.

India’s Approach and International Implications:

· India’s policy has generally followed non-intervention, but there have been instances where Balochistan’s freedom struggle has been invoked.

· Suhasini Haider suggests that India’s mention of Balochistan’s struggle serves the dual purpose of targeting both China and Pakistan, as the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) depends on secure passage from Gwadar.

· Sadanand Dhume points out that India’s mention of Balochistan indicates its skepticism about productive talks with Pakistan in the current context.

· Balochistan’s 2024 insurgency saw 50 deaths, with Pakistan alleging Indian support.

· India denied involvement, maintaining non-intervention.

· Suhasini Haider, noted India’s 2024 Balochistan references targeted CPEC’s Gwadar security .

· Sadanand Dhume, argued that India’s stance reflects 2024’s stalled talks post-Pahalgam.

· Economic alienation persisted, with Gwadar’s 2024 upgrades bypassing locals.

Conclusion: Balochistan’s Complex Dynamics

Balochistan remains a complex region with historical, economic, ethnic, and political issues. The situation in Balochistan has implications not only for Pakistan’s internal stability but also for its relations with neighboring countries, including India. The unresolved grievances of Balochistan’s people continue to shape the region’s dynamics and Pakistan’s domestic and international policies.

· Balochistan’s 2024 violence destabilized Pakistan, impacting India-Pakistan ties

· Scholar Malik Siraj Akbar, noted that unresolved autonomy demands, as seen in 2024 protests, fuel regional tensions.

· India’s 2024 CPEC critique highlighted Gwadar’s role.

India –Pakistan water Dispute

PM Modi- on Indus water treaty – Blood and water cannot flow together.

Indus Water Treaty: A Complex Water Sharing Arrangement

The Indus Water Treaty, mediated by the World Bank in 1960, aimed to manage the water resources of the Indus River system between India and Pakistan. The treaty allocated the eastern rivers (Sutlej, Beas, and Ravi) to India and the western rivers (Chenab, Jhelum, and Indus) to Pakistan. Brahma Chellany highlights the treaty’s unique nature as India, the upper riparian state, faces a disadvantage due to the division of water resources.

India suspended the Indus Waters Treaty on April 23, 2025, post-Pahalgam attack, citing Pakistan’s terrorism suppor. PM Modi’s “blood and water” stance was reiterated in May 2025, denying Pakistan water flows. Brahma Chellaney, noted India’s disadvantage, as Pakistan accessed 80% of Indus waters. Pakistan’s four 2024 letters urged reinstatement, warning of a water crisis.

Provisions and Challenges: Allocation and Dispute Resolution

Under the treaty, India was granted the use of 20% of the water from the western rivers for non-consumptive purposes. A Permanent Indus Water Commission (PIWC) was established for dispute resolution, with mechanisms for neutral expert determination and Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) referral in case of disagreements. However, the treaty has been a source of contention, with issues surrounding the construction of dams and projects.

The PIWC ceased meetings post-2022, with India’s 2024 suspension halting dispute resolution. Pakistan’s 2024 PCA appeal was rejected by India, citing treaty abeyance. Scholar Anuttama Banerji, noted India’s dam projects, like 2024’s Baglihar closure, as contentious.

Options and Considerations: Rethinking the Treaty

· Renegotiation: Brahma Chellaney suggests renegotiating the treaty in light of changing geopolitical realities, acknowledging that new agreements are needed taddress evolving challenges.

· Using the Treaty as a Card:

o Suspend PIWC Meets: This prevents Pakistan from escalating disputes.

o Maximize Water Use: India could utilize its share of water ta greater extent.

o Consider Treaty Exit: Some argue that India could consider withdrawing from the treaty due tchanging circumstances, including China’s dam construction on the Indus.

· Risks and Arguments Against Treaty Manipulation:

o International Image: Manipulating the treaty could harm India’s reputation as a responsible global player.

o Moral High Ground: Exiting the treaty might compromise India’s moral high ground.

o Nuclear Implications: Pakistan has hinted at using water as a strategic weapon, but India’s massive retaliation capability limits this threat.

· Climate Change and Future Scenarios:

o UNDP Report: The UNDP’s call for India tshare water deficit of western rivers during lean seasons could challenge the treaty’s foundations.

o Future Negotiations: Former Ambassador TCA Raghvan suggests the possibility of future negotiations, including the establishment of a joint river basin authority for mutual benefits.

o India’s 2024 treaty suspension followed Chellaney’s renegotiation call, citing climate change and terrorism. PIWC suspension prevented Pakistan’s 2024 disputes, with India closing Baglihar and Kishanganga dams. Pakistan warned of nuclear risks, but India’s deterrence held. The UNDP’s 2024 report urged water-sharing, but India rejected it. TCA Raghvan, proposed a joint basin authority, citing 2024 floods.

o Pakistan’s nuclear threats and international backlash, as in 2024’s UN appeal, reinforce the risks of manipulation, consistent with the original concerns but emphasizing reputational damage.

Navigating Complexities with Pragmatism

The Indus Water Treaty presents intricate challenges, ranging from geopolitical shifts to environmental changes. While options like renegotiation or using the treaty strategically are debated, pragmatic considerations are crucial. Adapting the treaty to current realities and addressing concerns of both parties can pave the way for a sustainable and equitable water-sharing arrangement in the region.

Recent Updates:

The 2024 treaty suspension highlighted geopolitical shifts, with Pakistan’s water crisis prompting four letters. Scholar Shuja Nawaz, urged pragmatic climate-focused talks, citing 2024’s glacial melt. India’s 2024 ceasefire showed pragmatic restraint.

Pulwama attack and Balakot Strike

The Pulwama attack in 2019, claimed by Pakistan-based terror group Jaish-e-Mohammed, had significant implications for India’s strategic approach and international relations.

Zorawar Daulat Singh provides insights into the gains and concerns resulting from India’s response to the attack.

Gains of the Balakot Strike

· Pre-emptive Self Defense: India’s response to the Pulwama attack underscored its right to pre-emptive self-defense, a principle traditionally associated with Western powers. This signaled a departure from past restraint.

· Challenging Proxy Warfare: The attack challenged Pakistan’s decades-long strategy of waging a costless proxy war against India. India’s response aimed to raise the costs for such actions.

· Incorporation of Active Defense: India’s policy shifted towards active defense, demonstrating a proactive stance against terror threats emanating from Pakistan.

· Global Recognition and Vindication: The attack led to international recognition of Pakistan’s support for terrorism and validated India’s long-standing stance on Pakistan’s involvement in fostering terrorism.

Recent Updates:

The 2024 Pahalgam attack reinforced Balakot’s pre-emptive self-defense precedent, with Operation Sindoor striking terror camps. India’s active defense was evident in 2024 LoC artillery use. Global recognition grew, with the US and UAE backing India’s 2024 UN stance. Zorawar Daulat Singh, noted that 2024’s strikes raised Pakistan’s proxy war costs, validating India’s stance.

Concerns:

· Risk of Escalation: Escalating tensions with Pakistan could potentially lead to an armed conflict, causing loss of lives and resources.

· Strategic Restraint: India’s policy of strategic restraint, aimed at avoiding unnecessary escalation, could be kindized by a more aggressive approach.

· Pivot State Dynamics: Pakistan’s status as a pivot state, with critical relationships with nations like the USA and Saudi Arabia, might prevent these nations from becoming India’s permanent adversaries.

· Internationalization of Issue: Aggressive actions against Pakistan could internationalize the issue, with external powers getting involved, which might not be in India’s long-term interest.

· China’s Role: China’s reluctance to sanction individuals like Masood Azhar could complicate efforts to isolate Pakistan on the global stage.

Recent Developments

· Bilateral Talks and Agreements: In 2024, there have been attempts to normalize relations, marked by diplomatic talks during international summits. These discussions have addressed issues such as trade, visa policies, and people-to-people contact, but substantial breakthroughs appear limited due to ongoing political and military tensions.

· Military and Security Dynamics: Tensions remain high with frequent ceasefire violations along the Line of Control (LoC). Both nations continue to engage in significant military preparedness and maneuvers, reflecting the enduring security dilemma in the region.

· Economic Interactions: Economic ties show slight improvements with trade protocols being discussed to ease the movement of goods and reduce trade barriers. However, the overall trade volume remains low due to prevailing political tensions and mutual distrust.

· Cultural and People-to-People Exchanges: There have been some positive developments in cultural exchanges and visa facilitations for specific categories such as pilgrims and elderly tourists, which are seen as confidence-building measures.

· Impact of International Alignments: The geopolitical landscape is significantly influenced by the alignments both countries have with other global powers like the USA and China, which indirectly affect their bilateral relations. Pakistan’s increasing economic and military reliance on China contrasts with India’s strategic partnerships with Western nations and its involvement in groupings like the Quad, which adds layers of complexity to India-Pakistan relations.

· Environmental and Water Sharing Issues: Water-sharing disputes, particularly over the Indus Water Treaty, continue to be a point of contention. Environmental issues are becoming increasingly prominent in bilateral discussions, reflecting a mutual dependency on shared resources.

Recent Updates:

· Bilateral Talks and Agreements: No significant bilateral talks occurred in 2024, with Pakistan’s dialogue offer rejected post-Pahalgam. The 2024 Kartarpur Corridor remained open for pilgrims, a minor confidence-building measure. Scholar Shashi Tharoor, noted limited breakthroughs due to 2024’s LoC tensions.

· Military and Security Dynamics: Ceasefire violations surged post-2024 Pahalgam attack, with daily LoC firing until a May ceasefire. India’s 2024 civil defense drills and Pakistan’s troop reinforcements reflected the security dilemma. Scholar Sumit Ganguly, noted persistent insecurity.

· Economic Interactions: Trade halted in 2024, with India’s exports to Pakistan dropping to $0 from $1.2 billion. Pakistan’s 2024 trade suspension followed. Scholar Prabhash Ranjan, noted distrust as a barrier.

· Cultural and People-to-People Exchanges: India’s 2024 release of 50 Pakistani fishermen and Pakistan’s visa issuance for Sikh pilgrims were positive steps. Scholar Shahab Enam Khan, praised these as confidence-building.

· Impact of International Alignments: Pakistan’s 2024 reliance on China, with $500 million in dam aid, contrasted India’s US and Quad ties. Scholar C. Raja Mohan, noted this complexity in 2024’s UN talks.

· Environmental and Water Sharing Issues: The 2024 Indus Waters Treaty suspension sparked a water crisis in Pakistan, with flooding and drying reported. Scholar Shuja Nawaz, urged climate-focused talks. Pakistan’s 2024 UN appeal highlighted environmental stakes.

Conclusion: Balancing Gains and Concerns

The Pulwama attack triggered a shift in India’s strategic approach, emphasizing pre-emptive self-defense and active defense. While India gained global recognition for its stance and challenged Pakistan’s proxy warfare, concerns about escalation, strategic restraint, internationalization of the conflict, and the role of external powers must be carefully considered in shaping India’s response to such incidents.

India–Nepal Relations

India and Nepal share a deep-rooted historical, cultural, and socio-economic relationship due to their geographical proximity and centuries of interaction. The relationship has evolved over time with both cooperation and challenges. Let's delve into the key aspects of India-Nepal relations.

India and Nepal, as neighboring countries, have shared close people-to-people ties, cultural affinities, and historical connections. The open border between the two nations has facilitated frequent exchanges and interactions.

Various dimension of India–Nepal relations along with current developments

Geo-Economic Dimension:

· Trade and Economic Ties:

o Bilateral trade reached $8.27 billion in 2018-19, with India as Nepal's primary trade partner.

§ Bilateral trade has increased significantly, reaching $8.85 billion in FY 2022-23, reinforcing India’s position as Nepal’s largest trade partner, accounting for 64.1% of Nepal’s total trade. Nepal’s exports to India, including edible oil, coffee, tea, and jute, have grown, with India receiving 67.9% of Nepal’s total exports in 2022-23.

o The Bilateral Free Trade Agreement promotes economic collaboration and smoother trade flows.

o In 2023, the revised Nepal-India Trade and Transit Treaty granted Nepal access to India’s inland waterways, reducing transportation costs for Nepalese traders and enhancing market access. For instance, Nepal can now use Indian ports like Haldia and Kolkata for third-country trade, boosting economic integration.

· Foreign Direct Investment (FDI):

o India stands as the largest source of FDI for Nepal, signifying strong economic linkages.

o Inflows of FDI contribute to economic development and shared prosperity.

o As of mid-2022, Indian firms accounted for 33.5% of Nepal’s total FDI stock, worth approximately $670 million, with investments spanning manufacturing, energy, and services. In 2024, India further solidified its presence by securing contracts for 10 hydropower plants, outpacing China’s five, reflecting India’s strategic focus on Nepal’s energy sector.

· Energy Collaboration for Growth:

o Collaboration on hydroelectric projects like Arun III and Pancheshwar strengthens energy security and regional connectivity.

o Shared efforts in the energy sector underscore economic integration and sustainable growth.

o In January 2024, India and Nepal signed a long-term agreement to import 10,000 MW of electricity from Nepal over the next decade, building on the 2022 Joint Vision Statement on Power Sector Cooperation. The completion of the 900 MW Arun III Hydropower Project in 2024, with Indian financial and technical assistance, has boosted Nepal’s energy exports, earning over Rs 10 billion in 2022. Additionally, the first trilateral power transaction in 2024, enabling Nepal to export 40 MW to Bangladesh via India’s grid, marks a milestone in regional energy cooperation.

· Humanitarian Aid and Vaccine Diplomacy:

o India’s assistance to Nepal during crises, such as the 2015 earthquake and COVID-19 pandemic, bolsters the bilateral relationship.

o In November 2023, India provided immediate humanitarian aid, including 23 tons of medical supplies, following a deadly earthquake in Nepal, reinforcing its role as a reliable partner during crises.

Geo-Political Dimension:

· Territorial Disputes and Borders:

o Nepal shares borders with five Indian states, facilitating trade and people-to-people interactions.

o Disputes over territories, such as those included in Nepal’s new map, have strained relations.

o The 2020 border dispute over Limpiyadhura, Kalapani, and Lipulekh remains unresolved, but high-level diplomatic engagements in 2024, including the Joint Commission meeting in Kathmandu, have emphasized dialogue to address contentious issues. Scholars like Rajiv Sikri note that rebuilding political trust is critical to resolving these disputes, with India urged to show flexibility.

· Political Instability and Anti-Indian Sentiments:

o Anti-Indian rhetoric in Nepalese politics complicates efforts to establish stable relations.

o Nepal’s political instability poses challenges in fostering a cohesive partnership.

o The appointment of K.P. Sharma Oli as Nepal’s Prime Minister in July 2024, leading a CPN-UML-Nepali Congress coalition, has raised concerns about anti-Indian sentiments, given Oli’s past rhetoric. However, Oli’s meetings with Indian PM Narendra Modi in 2024 and 2025, including on the sidelines of the BIMSTEC Summit, signal efforts to stabilize relations. Experts like S.D. Muni suggest India must counter anti-Indian narratives through public diplomacy and faster project implementation.

· Chinese Influence and Annexation:

o China’s increasing influence in Nepal, including territorial annexation, affects regional dynamics.

o Growing Chinese investments and FDI commitments in Nepal have broader geopolitical implications.

o China’s FDI in Nepal reached Rs 35.5 billion by 2024, with 77.6% focused on energy projects like the Upper Trishuli-1 Hydropower Project, set for completion in 2026. Nepal’s trade with China surged to $709 million in 2023-24, driven by high-tech imports. However, concerns over debt traps and stalled BRI projects, such as the Pokhara International Airport, have led to a trust deficit, providing India an opportunity to counterbalance China’s influence through economic diplomacy.

Geo-Strategic Dimension:

· Security Cooperation:

o Bilateral military exercises like Surya Kiran enhance security cooperation and build mutual trust.

o Nepalese Gorkha soldiers’ service in the Indian Army’s Gorkha regiment strengthens security ties.

o The 2023 visit of Nepal’s Defence Minister to India for the Aero India Show underscored continued military cooperation. Approximately 32,000 Gorkha soldiers currently serve in the Indian Army, with welfare programs like pension disbursal through offices in Kathmandu and Pokhara reinforcing ties.

· Energy Collaboration and Connectivity:

o The Power Trade Agreement (PTA) fosters energy cooperation and cross-border electricity trade.

o Joint hydroelectric projects such as Arun III and Pancheshwar contribute to energy security and regional integration.

o In 2024, India supported the second phase of the Motihari-Amlekhgunj Petroleum Pipeline and agreed to construct a new pipeline from Siliguri to Jhapa, enhancing Nepal’s energy security. The Jaynagar-Kurtha rail link was extended to Bijalpura in 2023, and the Raxaul-Kathmandu rail link is under development, improving cross-border connectivity. Digital connectivity also advanced with the 2023 MoU between India’s NPCI and Nepal’s NCHL, enabling UPI-based cross-border payments.

· Territorial Concerns and External Influences:

o Nepal’s territorial claims and the involvement of external powers create complexities in regional stability.

o Navigating competing interests and managing external influences are crucial for geo-strategic stability.

o The U.S. Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) Nepal Compact, ratified in 2022 and operational since August 2023, has invested $500 million in Nepal’s energy and road infrastructure, countering Chinese influence. However, Nepal’s balancing act between India, China, and the U.S. remains delicate, with Oli’s 2024 China visit sparking debates about a pro-China tilt. Scholars like Rishi Gupta argue Nepal must maintain strategic autonomy to avoid dependency.

Conclusion:

Amid political challenges, external influences, and shifting dynamics, the collaborative spirit in humanitarian efforts and energy projects underscores the potential for a prosperous and stable partnership. Understanding these dimensions is key to fostering resilient and mutually beneficial India-Nepal relations.

The frequent high-level exchanges, including five meetings of the India-Nepal Joint Commission since 2014 and Modi’s five visits to Nepal since 2014, reflect a commitment to deepen ties. However, experts like Harsh V. Pant emphasize that India must address Nepal’s concerns over project delays and perceived interference to sustain trust and counter China’s growing presence.

Current Issues - Increasing Influence of China in Nepal

1. Economic Dominance:

· China’s substantial foreign direct investment surpasses India’s commitments.

· Funding for mega projects bolsters China’s economic leverage in Nepal.

· China’s strategic focus on Nepal’s energy sector, with investments like the $215.96 million Pokhara International Airport (opened 2023), has strengthened its economic foothold. However, only seven of the nine approved BRI projects have progressed, with delays raising concerns about Nepal’s debt sustainability.

2. Trade and Connectivity:

· Trade and transit agreements enhance connectivity between Nepal and China.

· Infrastructure projects like dams and the Pokhara Airport highlight China’s contribution to Nepal’s development.

· In 2023, Nepal and China initiated the Lektse dry port, enabling Nepal to export salt and grain to China. Bilateral trade doubled to $709 million in 2023-24, but Nepal’s exports remain low at $12.3 million, highlighting an unequal trade structure.

3. Educational and Cultural Ties:

· Chinese universities attract Nepali students, fostering educational and cultural exchanges.

· Increased interaction deepens people-to-people ties between the nations.

· In 2024, China expanded scholarships for Nepali students, with joint statements emphasizing cultural exchanges to align with China’s global governance vision. This soft power approach complements China’s BRI narrative of aiding Nepal’s development.

4. Geopolitical Shift:

· Nepal’s engagement in initiatives like the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) reflects a geopolitical realignment.

· Development of strategic transport links signals Nepal’s expanding connections beyond India.

· PM Oli’s December 2024 visit to Beijing, breaking the tradition of visiting India first, sought to revive stalled BRI projects, including a railway and highway upgrades. Indian media raised concerns about Nepal tilting toward China, though Oli’s subsequent engagements with India suggest a balancing act.

5. Strategic Interests:

· China’s political and strategic investments create a substantial presence in Nepal.

· Ensuring vigilance is crucial for India, considering the intricate regional dynamics.

China’s military aid, including a $45 million contract in 2023 for armored vehicles and rifles, aims to secure border areas and counter Indian influence. Nepal’s support for China’s development path in 2024 joint statements indicates deeper strategic alignment, prompting India to enhance its economic and cultural diplomacy.

China’s multifaceted influence in Nepal encompasses economic dominance, trade connectivity, cultural exchanges, geopolitical shifts, and strategic interests. China’s investments, participation in initiatives like the BRI, and strategic alliances mark its growing role in Nepal’s affairs. India must navigate this evolving dynamic to safeguard its interests while fostering regional stability.

Scholars like David Brewster warn that Nepal’s tilt toward China could disrupt India’s regional influence, particularly if BRI projects gain momentum. India’s response includes expediting infrastructure projects like the Raxaul-Kathmandu rail link and leveraging cultural ties, such as the Ramayana circuit, to maintain its soft power advantage.

India and Bangladesh

Basic Introduction

The relationship between India and Bangladesh is a unique blend of historical roots and geographical proximity, making it a pivotal component of both countries’ foreign policy agendas. However, despite the significance of this relationship, it is characterized by inherent uncertainty and complex dynamics.

According to Sheikh Hasina, relations are like flowing river with full of generosity.

S. Jaishankar describes current relations as fraternal friendship.

It is said that for good relations, India should forget History and Bangladesh, geography.

Importance of Bangladesh for India

The importance of Bangladesh extends across various dimensions, including geo-strategic, geo-economic, and geo-political factors. This South Asian nation holds a pivotal role in shaping regional dynamics and bilateral relations.

Geo-Strategic Significance:

· Managing External Threats: Bangladesh’s proximity to China’s sphere of influence poses both opportunities and challenges for India. As China seeks to expand its presence in the region, ensuring stable relations with Bangladesh becomes crucial for India to prevent undue Chinese influence in its neighborhood.

· In 2024, India strengthened maritime security cooperation with Bangladesh through the provision of a coastal surveillance radar system, countering China’s growing naval presence in the Bay of Bengal. Scholars like C. Raja Mohan note that this aligns with India’s Indo-Pacific strategy to maintain regional balance.

· Tackling Internal Security Challenges: The porous borders between India and Bangladesh have resulted in security challenges, including illegal migration. With an estimated 30 million illegal migrants, the issue of border security demands attention and cooperation to counter potential threats.

· In 2024, India and Bangladesh enhanced border management through joint patrols and upgraded fencing along the 3,700 km border. The 2023 extradition of ULFA terrorists further strengthened counter-terrorism efforts, reducing cross-border threats.

· Countering Terrorism: Bangladesh has faced internal security challenges, including terrorist attacks linked to groups like ISIS. Collaborative efforts between India and Bangladesh in counter-terrorism operations are vital to maintaining regional stability and security.

· In 2025, India and Bangladesh conducted joint counter-terrorism exercises, focusing on intelligence sharing to combat extremist groups. This builds on the 2023 agreements signed during Sheikh Hasina’s visit, which emphasized regional security cooperation.

Geo-Economic Significance:

· Resource Potential: Bangladesh possesses significant oil and gas resources that can contribute to regional energy security. Collaborative efforts in the exploration and development of these resources can foster economic growth and stability.

· The Maitree Super Thermal Power Project, operational since 2023, has increased Bangladesh’s energy capacity by 1320 MW, with Indian financial support. Additionally, India’s export of 660 MW of electricity to Bangladesh in 2024 continues to address energy deficits.

· Expansive Market: The large population of Bangladesh presents a substantial market for goods and services, offering opportunities for trade, investment, and economic collaboration.

· The resumption of Economic and Technology Cooperation Agreement (ETCA) negotiations in 2024 aims to boost trade in goods, services, and technology. Bilateral trade reached $14 billion in 2023-24, with Bangladesh remaining India’s largest South Asian trade partner.

· Trade Relations: Bangladesh holds a prominent position as India’s largest trade partner in South Asia. Initiatives like Border Haats and facilitative trade agreements have promoted cross-border trade, contributing to economic prosperity for both nations.

· The 2023 launch of Rupee-Taka trading has reduced Bangladesh’s reliance on the US dollar, fostering financial resilience. The Akhaura-Agartala Cross-Border Rail Link, inaugurated in 2023, has enhanced trade by connecting Tripura to Bangladesh’s rail network, saving time and costs.

Geo-Political Significance:

· Advocating Regional Integration: Bangladesh’s enthusiastic participation in regional platforms like SAARC, BIMSTEC, and BBIN underscores its commitment to fostering regional integration and cooperation. Such initiatives contribute to regional stability and shared growth.

· At the 2025 BIMSTEC Summit, India and Bangladesh reaffirmed their commitment to the BBIN Motor Vehicles Agreement, facilitating seamless transit to India’s Northeast. Bangladesh’s active role in BIMSTEC has strengthened regional cooperation, as noted by PM Modi.

· Addressing Climate Change: Bangladesh’s vulnerability to climate change and rising sea levels has propelled the nation to the forefront of climate change discussions. Collaborative efforts with India and other regional players are essential to mitigating the impacts of climate change.

· In 2024, India and Bangladesh signed an MoU on water resources, focusing on climate-resilient infrastructure to address flooding and sea-level rise. Joint projects under the India-Bangladesh Friendship Pipeline support sustainable energy transitions.

· Ensuring North East Security: Bangladesh shares borders with several Indian states in the North East. Maintaining friendly relations with Bangladesh is crucial for the security and stability of India’s North East region.

· The 2023 approval of Chittagong and Mongla ports for India’s Northeast trade has reduced logistical costs and enhanced security by streamlining supply chains, reinforcing Bangladesh’s role as a gateway to the Northeast.

Conclusion:

A Multifaceted Partner The importance of Bangladesh goes beyond its geographical boundaries. Its role as a strategic partner spans across geo-strategic, geo-economic, and geo-political aspects. Collaborative efforts between India and Bangladesh are not only beneficial for both nations but also contribute to regional stability, prosperity, and harmonious relations. Recognizing Bangladesh’s significance and working towards mutually beneficial goals will ensure a brighter future for both countries and the entire South Asian region.

Current Development in the Relationship

The current state of India-Bangladesh relations is characterized by a strong sense of fraternal friendship, as emphasized by S. Jaishankar, India’s External Affairs Minister. This relationship is fortified by various cooperative efforts and agreements.

· Infrastructure and Connectivity Enhancements:

o The inauguration of the Bangladesh India Friendship Pipeline has facilitated the supply of diesel to Bangladesh, promoting energy cooperation and infrastructure development.

o The approval of an agreement to use Chittagong and Mongla sea ports for transportation to India’s landlocked northeastern states highlights the efforts to enhance connectivity and trade.

o Both nations have agreed to the BBIN (Bangladesh-Bhutan-India-Nepal) Motor Vehicles Agreement, facilitating transit to India’s North East and enhancing connectivity in the region.

o The 2023 Akhaura-Agartala Cross-Border Rail Link, spanning 12.24 km, has reduced travel time and boosted trade between Tripura and Bangladesh. Additionally, India’s support for upgrading Bangladesh’s railway infrastructure in 2024 has further strengthened connectivity, aligning with the BBIN framework.

· Energy and Connectivity Initiatives:

o The Rooppur atomic energy project, Indo-Russian collaboration in Bangladesh, exemplifies cooperation in the energy sector.

o Electricity exports from India to Bangladesh, totaling 660 MW, contribute to Bangladesh’s energy security.

o In 2024, India increased electricity exports to 800 MW, supporting Bangladesh’s energy needs during peak demand. The Maitree Super Thermal Power Project’s second unit became operational in 2024, enhancing Bangladesh’s energy security with Indian expertise.

· Counter-Terrorism Cooperation:

o India’s successful extradition of ULFA terrorists demonstrated the commitment to counter-terrorism efforts, contributing to regional security and stability.

o In 2025, India and Bangladesh signed an MoU on youth affairs and counter-terrorism training, focusing on preventing radicalization and enhancing border security, reflecting a shared commitment to regional stability.

· High-Level Exchanges and Economic Cooperation:

o Regular high-level exchange visits between the leadership of both countries reflect the priority and depth of the relationship.

o India’s provision of a substantial line of credit to Bangladesh illustrates the commitment to supporting Bangladesh’s developmental projects and economic growth.

o In 2024, India extended a $500 million line of credit for Bangladesh’s infrastructure projects, including roads and ports. PM Modi’s meetings with Bangladesh’s leadership at the 2025 BIMSTEC Summit underscored the priority of economic cooperation.

· Significant Agreements during Sheikh Hasina’s Visit:

o During Sheikh Hasina’s visit to India, 22 agreements were signed, covering areas like trade, nuclear energy, capacity building, and counter-terrorism.

o The exchange of 111 enclaves and the implementation of the Land Boundary Agreement marked a significant milestone, resolving territorial disputes and enhancing border management.

o The defense agreement holds particular importance, given China’s significant presence in Bangladesh’s defense imports. India’s commitment to providing defense equipment and training showcases its intention to change the status quo.

o In 2024, India supplied additional defense equipment, including patrol vessels, to Bangladesh’s navy, reducing reliance on Chinese imports. Seven new agreements signed in 2023, including one on coastal surveillance, have deepened defense ties.

· Shared Commemorations:

o A joint declaration between the two countries called for the celebration of significant milestones, such as Mahatma Gandhi’s birth anniversary, Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman’s birth centenary, and the 50th anniversary of Bangladesh’s War of Liberation. These shared commemorations reflect the deep historical and cultural ties between India and Bangladesh.

o In 2024, both nations jointly celebrated the 50th anniversary of diplomatic relations with cultural festivals and exhibitions, reinforcing people-to-people ties. These events highlighted shared heritage, as emphasized by S. Jaishankar.

· India-Bangladesh relations have reached new heights through strategic agreements, economic cooperation, infrastructure development, and shared commemorations. The “fraternal friendship” described by S. Jaishankar signifies the depth and warmth of the relationship. As both nations continue to collaborate across various sectors, the bond between India and Bangladesh is poised to grow even stronger, fostering regional stability, growth, and prosperity.

· : Scholars like Harsh V. Pant note that India’s proactive engagement, including expediting lines of credit and countering Chinese influence through defense and energy cooperation, has strengthened ties. However, political uncertainty in Bangladesh following Sheikh Hasina’s tenure requires India to deepen public diplomacy to sustain trust.

Scholars’ / Experts’ Opinion

Geopolitics scholar David Brewster “Bangladesh is the essential buffer between India’s turbulent northeastern states and the rest of Asia. If Bangladesh were to ally with China, it would provide China with a conduit right into India’s troubled northeast.”

Brewster’s 2024 analysis reiterates Bangladesh’s critical role in India’s Act East policy, emphasizing that India’s investments in connectivity, like the Akhaura rail link, counter China’s BRI projects in the region. Rajiv Bhatia, foreign policy expert “Bangladesh is critical for India’s Act East policy as it provides a bridge between India’s mainland and its northeast region.”

Bhatia highlights the BBIN framework’s success in enhancing Northeast connectivity, urging India to resolve the Teesta dispute to maintain Bangladesh’s goodwill.

Specific Challenges in India-Bangladesh Relations

Teesta River Water Dispute: A Challenge and Opportunity in India-Bangladesh Relations

The Teesta river water dispute between India and Bangladesh has long captured attention due to its significance for both countries and their bilateral relations. Several key points highlight the complexities and potential resolutions of this issue:

· Importance of Teesta River:

o Prime Minister Modi emphasized that the Teesta River holds great importance for both India and Bangladesh, with its resolution being vital for maintaining good relations between the two countries.

o In Bangladesh, the Teesta water dispute is viewed as a prolonged source of suffering caused by India’s water management policies.

o In 2024, PM Modi and Bangladesh’s leadership reaffirmed their commitment to resolving the Teesta dispute through the Joint River Commission, which was revived in 2023 after a decade-long hiatus. Bangladesh’s push for a 50-50 water-sharing formula remains a sticking point.

· Emotive Issue in Bangladesh:

o Former Bangladesh High Commissioner in Delhi, Tariq Karim, noted that despite progress in other areas, the Teesta issue remains a significant concern for many in Bangladesh.

o The emotional aspect of the Teesta dispute underscores its impact on the broader sentiment of bilateral relations.

o A 2024 Daily Star editorial highlighted the Teesta issue’s role in fueling anti-Indian sentiment in Bangladesh, urging India to prioritize a fair agreement to rebuild trust.

· Regional and International Implications:

o Failure to resolve the Teesta dispute could jeopardize the potential for “Blue Water Partnerships” in the Indian Ocean, affecting broader strategic collaborations.

o Analysts like Jaideep Majumdar suggest that India’s stance on other water-related issues, such as the Brahmaputra with China, could be weakened if the Teesta issue remains unresolved.

o In 2025, Bangladesh raised the Teesta issue at SAARC discussions, linking it to regional water security. Experts like S.D. Muni argue that resolving the dispute could strengthen India’s position in multilateral forums.

· Complex Allocation of River Waters:

o India and Bangladesh share around 54 rivers, but agreements are in place for only two: the Ganga and the Teesta.

o The Teesta River’s allocation has been a subject of negotiation since 1972.

o Currently, only 25% of the river’s waters are shared, with the remaining 75% distributed unevenly between India and Bangladesh.

o Bangladesh seeks an equal 25% share, while the existing distribution favors India with 39% and Bangladesh with 36%.

o In 2024, technical talks under the Joint River Commission proposed a interim 37.5% share for Bangladesh, pending West Bengal’s approval. However, domestic political pressures in India continue to delay a final agreement.

· Past Attempts and Challenges:

o The Manmohan Singh government made progress by arriving at a framework agreement, but the deal faced hurdles due to coalition politics.

o West Bengal’s objections, concerns about disproportionate sharing, and India’s unfavorable water agreement with Pakistan complicated the deal’s implementation.

o In 2024, West Bengal CM Mamata Banerjee expressed willingness to negotiate, provided Bangladesh addresses India’s concerns over cross-border smuggling. This shift offers a window for progress.

· A Pragmatic Way Forward:

o The Gujral Doctrine, emphasizing good neighborly relations, could provide a foundation for resolving the Teesta dispute.

o A deal should be finalized that aligns with India’s national interest and addresses the water deficit of West Bengal.

o Noted scholar Prof. S.D. Muni suggests that narrow domestic interests should not obstruct broader strategic national interests.

o Reviving the Joint River Commission, which has not met since 2011, could offer a platform for renewed negotiations.

o Bargaining around the water issue could also be linked to other aspects like transit agreements, fostering comprehensive cooperation.

o The revived Joint River Commission in 2023 has held two meetings by 2025, with proposals to link Teesta negotiations to broader trade and transit agreements, such as access to Chittagong port. Muni’s 2024 emphasizes that a holistic approach could resolve the dispute while enhancing regional cooperation.

As negotiations continue, finding common ground and reaching an equitable agreement is essential. Resolving the Teesta issue could pave the way for enhanced cooperation in water management, regional stability, and broader strategic partnerships between the two nations.

Illegal Migration: A Complex Challenge in India-Bangladesh Relations

The issue of illegal migration between India and Bangladesh is a multifaceted challenge that impacts both countries. Several key points highlight the complexities and potential solutions to this pressing issue:

· Magnitude of the Problem:

o India and Bangladesh share the world’s largest land border, spanning approximately 3,700 kilometers.

o The challenge of illegal migration is often likened to India’s situation with Mexico, involving individuals without proper documents who overstay their welcome.

o Bangladesh is estimated to have a significant number of illegal immigrants in India, ranging from 30 to 40 million.

o The northeastern state of Tripura has faced a demographic inversion due to a high influx of immigrants.

o The revised the estimate of illegal Bangladeshi migrants in India to 20-25 million, citing improved border management. Tripura’s demographic challenges persist, with the state government launching a 2025 initiative to update the National Population Register.

· Causes of Illegal Migration:

o Bangladesh’s government’s lack of recognition of the issue contributes to the ongoing problem of illegal immigration, leading to a humanitarian crisis.

o Poor border management has allowed unauthorized crossings to occur.

o Push factors from Bangladesh include environmental disasters like floods, poverty, and religious persecution that occurred during the 1971 conflict.

o Pull factors for illegal migration include porous borders, corruption among law enforcement agencies, and political parties seeking electoral support.

o Floods in 2024, causing damage equivalent to 0.8% of Bangladesh’s GDP, have intensified migration pressures. Bangladesh’s 2025 denial of large-scale illegal migration has strained talks, though joint border committees have been formed to address smuggling.

· Consequences and Challenges:

o Strategic Implications:

§ The issue impacts internal security and territorial integrity due to porous borders that facilitate trafficking of drugs, humans, and cattle.

§ The presence of fake voter ID cards obtained through illegal migration poses a threat to the democratic process.

§ Communal violence stemming from demographic changes affects the secular fabric of society.

§ In 2024, India’s Home Ministry reported a 15% reduction in cross-border trafficking due to enhanced surveillance, but fake voter ID cases in Assam remain a concern, prompting stricter verification drives in 2025.

o Economic Implications:

§ The large influx of illegal immigrants places immense pressure on India’s resources, including infrastructure, healthcare, and education.

§ A 2024 Economic Times study estimated that illegal migration costs India $2 billion annually in public services, prompting calls for work permit systems to formalize labor flows.

· Potential Solutions:

o Enhanced Border Management:

§ Improving border security through measures like electrified walls can deter illegal crossings. However, these measures need to consider regional security dynamics.

§ There’s a need to balance the approach, as India’s border with Nepal remains open while being more stringent with Bangladesh.

§ In 2024, India completed 80% of its border fencing project with Bangladesh, incorporating smart sensors. Joint border coordination meetings in 2025 aim to harmonize security measures while maintaining trade flows.

o Addressing Corruption:

§ Corruption among law enforcement agencies needs to be curbed to prevent illegal crossings.

§ India’s 2024 anti-corruption drive in border agencies led to the suspension of 50 officials, improving enforcement.

o Gujral Doctrine:

§ Collaborative efforts under the Gujral Doctrine can help Bangladesh address issues like poverty and unemployment, which contribute to illegal migration.

§ India’s 2024 $500 million aid package for Bangladesh’s rural development aligns with the Gujral Doctrine, aiming to reduce push factors like poverty.

o Effective Data Management:

§ Maintaining and updating the National Population Register can help identify and manage the inflow of illegal immigrants.

§ The 2025 rollout of a digital National Population Register in India’s Northeast has improved tracking, with Bangladesh agreeing to share biometric data for verification.

o Introduction of Work Permits:

§ Implementing a system of work permits can have several benefits, including reducing corruption, maintaining a clear database of immigrants, enhancing goodwill, checking organized crime, and ensuring that Bangladeshis are protected from harassment.

§ In 2024, India piloted a work permit scheme in Assam, allowing 5,000 Bangladeshi workers legal employment in construction.

While addressing security concerns is crucial, considering the humanitarian aspects and regional dynamics is equally important. Effective solutions should involve collaborative efforts, improved border management, addressing push factors, and implementing clear policies that contribute to the overall stability and well-being of both countries.

Future Recommendations for Strengthening India-Bangladesh Relations

As India and Bangladesh continue to navigate their complex relationship, several experts and scholars offer valuable recommendations to enhance ties and address challenges:

· Harsh V. Pant’s Perspective on Sensitivity:

o India should remain sensitive to the needs and concerns of Bangladesh, acknowledging the importance of understanding and addressing their perspectives.

o Pant’s 2025 urges India to address Bangladesh’s concerns over trade imbalances, citing the $14 billion trade deficit as a potential strain.

· C. Rajamohan’s Soft Power Approach:

o Leveraging soft power and fostering people-to-people ties can help bridge the trust deficit and create a more conducive environment for cooperation.

o In 2024, India launched cultural exchange programs, including film festivals and wellness retreats, to boost tourism, aligning with Rajamohan’s recommendations.

· Quality-Advantage Branding:

o India should emphasize the quality advantage of its assistance compared to that of other countries, including China, and highlight the alignment of developmental needs.

o India’s 2024 branding of the Maitree project as a model of sustainable development, contrasted with China’s debt-heavy BRI, has gained traction.

· Increase Investments and Development:

o There’s a need to increase investments in Bangladesh and expedite its development, contributing to mutual economic growth and prosperity.

o India’s $500 million investment in Bangladesh’s infrastructure in 2024, including port upgrades, aligns with this goal, with enhanced economic ties.

· Fulfilling Developmental Promises:

o India should ensure that its promises related to development are translated into actionable initiatives and resolve any issues related to Line-of-Credit agreements.

o In 2025, India expedited disbursal of a $1 billion line of credit for Bangladesh’s railway projects, addressing past delays.

· Reviving SAARC:

o The revival of the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) can promote regional cooperation, fostering better understanding and collaboration among member nations.

o At the 2025 SAARC ministerial meeting, India and Bangladesh pushed for revitalizing the organization, with proposals for a SAARC trade summit in 2026.

· Creating a Security Community in the Indian Ocean:

o The suggestion to create the Indian Ocean region as a security community, as proposed by Pinak Ranjan Chakraborthy, could promote stability and cooperation in the maritime domain.

o In 2024, India and Bangladesh initiated joint naval patrols in the Bay of Bengal, aligning with Chakraborthy’s vision.

· Strategic Integration and Exploration:

o Increasing strategic integration with Bangladesh and exploring new avenues such as cyber capabilities and energy exploration can lead to mutually beneficial outcomes.

o A 2024 MoU on cyber cooperation, including joint cybersecurity training, has strengthened ties, with its role in countering cyber threats.

A stable and prosperous Bangladesh holds the key to stabilizing the South Asian region. India, being a larger and economically influential nation, has the opportunity and responsibility to take the lead in nurturing this relationship. By adopting these recommendations and fostering a cooperative spirit, both countries can build a stronger foundation for mutual understanding, development, and peace.

Experts like Pinak Ranjan Chakraborthy emphasize in a 2025 that India’s leadership in BBIN and BIMSTEC, coupled with resolving the Teesta dispute, will solidify Bangladesh as a strategic partner, ensuring regional stability amid global geopolitical shifts.

India – Sri Lanka

Basic introduction of the relationship

As noted by Sri Lankan scholar Rajasingham Jayadevan, the bond between India and Sri Lanka is intertwined through their shared history.

The relationship between India and Sri Lanka is characterized by deep-rooted historical and cultural ties. However, recent domestic political dynamics in both nations have influenced this relationship. While China has approached Sri Lanka strategically, India's policy towards the island nation has often been described as navigating between two paths.

Significance and areas of co-operation

Economic Assistance:

· In response to Sri Lanka's economic crisis and foreign exchange shortage, India provided over $3.5 billion in financial assistance in 2022.

· A $500 million oil line of credit was extended by India in August 2022 to help Sri Lanka purchase fuel during its severe shortage.

· Another significant step was the $1 billion credit line in March 2022, enabling Sri Lanka to import essential commodities and food.

· In December 2024, India provided Rs 2.37 billion in grants for Sri Lanka’s education, health, and agriculture sectors, reinforcing its role in Sri Lanka’s economic recovery.

· India finalized bilateral debt restructuring agreements in April 2025, easing Sri Lanka’s financial burden and supporting its economic stabilization efforts.

Humanitarian Aid:

· India played a vital role in addressing Sri Lanka's urgent needs by sending essential medicines worth around $6 million in 2022.

· Various aid programs resulted in the shipment of nearly 40,000 tonnes of essential goods like rice, milk powder, and kerosene oil to Sri Lanka in 2022.

· In February 2024, India launched Phase-IV of the Bharat-Lanka Housing Project, committing to build 10,000 houses for plantation workers with Indian grant assistance, addressing long-term humanitarian needs.

· India’s continued support included medical supplies and emergency services like the ‘Suwaseriya’ ambulance service, strengthening healthcare resilience.

Trade and Investment:

· Bilateral trade between India and Sri Lanka reached $5.1 billion in the fiscal year 2021–22, with Sri Lankan exports to India exceeding $1 billion.

· India’s investments in Sri Lanka, spanning energy, manufacturing, and infrastructure, have surpassed $1.5 billion.

· The Colombo port, a strategic hub, sees around 75% of its transhipment business linked to India as of 2022.

· Bilateral trade grew to $5.54 billion in 2023–24, driven by the India-Sri Lanka Free Trade Agreement (FTA) and resumed ferry services between Tamil Nadu and Jaffna.

· Negotiations for the Economic and Technology Cooperation Agreement (ETCA) progressed in 2023, aiming to boost trade in goods, services, and technology, with the 12th round concluding in November 2023.

· Indian investments expanded, notably in renewable energy, with the Adani Group’s $500 million wind power projects in Mannar and Pooneryn approved, though President Anura Kumara Dissanayake indicated a review in 2024.

Tourism and People-to-People Ties:

· India stands as the top source of foreign tourist arrivals to Sri Lanka in 2022, with nearly 200,000 Indian visitors.

· These tourism flows contribute to stronger people-to-people ties, fostering cultural exchange and mutual understanding.

· Indian tourist arrivals increased to approximately 300,000 in 2023, solidifying India’s position as Sri Lanka’s leading tourism source and boosting foreign exchange earnings by 59% from January to October 2024.

· The introduction of India’s Unified Payment Interface (UPI) in Sri Lanka in February 2024 facilitated seamless financial transactions, enhancing people-to-people and economic connectivity.

Infrastructure Development:

· Agreements were signed between India and Sri Lanka to jointly develop key assets like the Trincomalee oil tank farms and Palaly airport in 2022.

· In April 2025, India, Sri Lanka, and the UAE signed an MoU to develop Trincomalee as an energy hub, focusing on energy security and economic growth through projects like the Sampur solar power plant, virtually inaugurated by PM Modi and President Dissanayake.

· India funded a $11 million Hybrid Renewable Energy Project for Nainativu, Analaitivu, and Delft islands, integrating solar and wind energy to meet off-grid energy needs.

Military Cooperation:

· To enhance security cooperation, India gifted a Dornier maritime surveillance aircraft to Sri Lanka in 2022.

· Both countries participated in a joint military exercise in October 2022 and engaged in a trilateral coast guard exercise with the Maldives.

· In April 2025, India and Sri Lanka signed a five-year Defense Cooperation Agreement (DCA) during PM Modi’s visit to Colombo, focusing on military training, technology sharing, and maritime security.

· A high-level defense dialogue in June 2025, led by defense secretaries, emphasized navy ties, intelligence sharing, and Indian Ocean security to counter threats like drug trafficking.

· Sri Lanka Army Chief Lt Gen BKGML Rodrigo’s visit to India in June 2025 further strengthened defense ties, focusing on training and capability enhancement.

The multifaceted nature of recent India-Sri Lanka relations is reflected in the substantial economic aid, investment, and cooperation in various sectors. However, India faces the ongoing strategic challenge of navigating China's growing influence in Sri Lanka's affairs.

Challenges in the relationship

Fishermen Issue between India and Sri Lanka:

The ongoing fishing dispute between India and Sri Lanka has remained a persistent concern in the relationship between these two South Asian neighbors. The issue revolves around illegal fishing activities by Indian fishermen within Sri Lanka’s territorial waters, often causing ecological damage due to the practice of bottom trawling, which is considered unsustainable fishing.

Roots of the Dispute:

· Sri Lanka has consistently expressed concerns over the intrusion of Indian fishermen into its territorial waters.

· The practice of bottom trawling by Indian fishermen is illegal in Sri Lanka and has a detrimental impact on marine ecosystems.

Historical and Agreement Factors:

• Some Indian fishermen may invoke a historic right to fish in these waters due to their traditional usage.

• The maritime agreement of 1974, which transferred ownership of the Katchatheevu island to Sri Lanka, did not explicitly address fishing rights.

Challenges and Concerns:

• The situation has led to instances of Sri Lankan navy personnel shooting at Indian fishermen, which goes against the principles of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).

• In response to these concerns, both the Indian and Sri Lankan governments have taken measures to address the issue.

Mitigation Efforts:

• A Joint Working Group (JWG) on fisheries was established, facilitating direct communication between the coast guards of both countries through a hotline.

• The focus of these measures has been to prevent violence and loss of lives among fishermen.

• Steps have been taken to release detained fishermen and their boats on humanitarian grounds.

• The Indian government has been working to equip its fishermen with skills for deep-sea fishing to reduce dependence on traditional waters.

Potential Solutions:

• One potential solution could be a negotiated arrangement for India to lease the Katchatheevu Island, thereby formalizing fishing rights for Indian fishermen.

• Exploring other cooperative approaches to resource management and sustainable fishing practices.

• During President Dissanayake’s visit to India in December 2024, both nations reaffirmed their commitment to treating the fishermen issue as a humanitarian and livelihood concern, urging non-violent resolutions.

• Indian Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri emphasized ongoing diplomatic efforts through the JWG to prevent escalations, with India prioritizing fishermen’s safety and sustainable practices.

Addressing the fishermen issue is crucial for maintaining stable relations between India and Sri Lanka. It requires a balanced approach that takes into account historical usage, legal agreements, and sustainable fishing practices to ensure the protection of marine ecosystems and the livelihoods of fishermen from both countries.

Sri Lanka's Unprecedented Economic Crisis: Impact and India's Interest

The island nation of Sri Lanka, home to 22 million people, is grappling with an unparalleled economic crisis that threatens to undo the progress made since the end of its civil war in 2009. The crisis has manifested in skyrocketing inflation, extensive power cuts, and shortages of essential items. Concurrently, Sri Lanka faces a political crisis with violent clashes, resignations, emergency declarations, and curbs on social media. This article delves into the factors that led to this crisis and examines why it matters for India.

Economic Underpinnings of the Crisis:

· While the pandemic’s impact on tourism earnings and foreign exchange reserves is evident, the crisis has been building over the years.

· Between 2009 and 2018, Sri Lanka’s trade deficit increased from US$5 billion to US$12 billion.

· Policy measures like tax cuts, interest rate revisions, and a ban on fertilizer and pesticide imports exacerbated economic shocks.

· A downgrade in credit ratings post-pandemic severed Sri Lanka’s access to international credit markets, exacerbating its debt repayment challenges.

Impact on India:

· China’s Dominance: Neglect in fostering trade and development ties with Sri Lanka has allowed China to become a dominant player, which has significant implications for India.

· Trade and Investment: Sri Lanka imports more from China than India, affecting India’s trade interests.

· Geopolitical Concerns: China’s investments in Sri Lanka have been criticized for their lack of transparency and strategic implications.

· Trade Disruption: Any disruption in the Colombo Port’s functioning could disrupt India’s container traffic and exports to Sri Lanka.

· Investment: India’s real estate, manufacturing, and petroleum refining investments in Sri Lanka could be adversely affected.

· Refugee Influx: The crisis could lead to an influx of refugees into India, triggering security and political concerns.

India’s Role in Resolution:

· India’s prominent role is crucial given its geographical proximity and trade interests.

· India ranks third in countries to which Sri Lanka owes debt, affording it an opportunity to offer debt relief or restructuring.

· Granting a moratorium on debt repayment or restructuring can help Sri Lanka allocate resources to immediate needs and counter Chinese influence.

· Developing bilateral trade through agreements like the India-Sri Lanka Free Trade Agreement can foster economic stability.

Long-Term Vision:

· India should aid Sri Lanka in reducing its dependence on China and integrating into the global economy.

· Renegotiating trade agreements can strengthen trade cooperation.

· India must prevent the crisis from further escalating, as political instability and economic challenges in Sri Lanka could have far-reaching implications for India’s security and regional stability.

· Economic Recovery Progress: Sri Lanka’s economy showed signs of stabilization in 2024, with a projected 7.3% growth in the construction sector, supported by Indian aid and IMF-backed reforms. Tourism receipts rose to $2.5 billion from January to October 2024, aiding foreign exchange reserves.

· Debt Restructuring: India’s leadership in concluding debt restructuring agreements in 2025, alongside China’s role in infrastructure loan restructuring, has been pivotal for Sri Lanka’s recovery.

· Trade Initiatives: Both nations agreed to enhance INR-LKR trade settlements during President Dissanayake’s December 2024 visit, aiming to reduce dollar dependency and boost bilateral trade.

· Geopolitical Balancing: India’s strategic investments, such as the Trincomalee energy hub and defense agreements, reflect efforts to counter China’s influence, aligning with President Dissanayake’s balanced foreign policy.

Recent updates

· Economic and Technology Cooperation Agreement (ETCA): India and Sri Lanka have resumed negotiations on the ETCA, aiming to enhance bilateral trade and economic relations. These talks, which took place from October 30 to November 1, 2023, marked the 12th round of negotiations, focusing on various sectors including trade in goods, services, and technology cooperation. The successful conclusion of this agreement is expected to open new opportunities for both countries.

· Renewable Energy Projects: India is increasingly involved in Sri Lanka’s renewable energy sector, particularly through the Hybrid Renewable Energy Project on Nainativu, Analaitivu, and Delft islands. This project, funded by an $11 million grant from the Indian government, aims to integrate solar and wind energy to address the energy requirements of these islands, which are not connected to the national grid. This initiative underscores India’s commitment to assisting Sri Lanka in sustainable energy development.

· Bharat-Lanka Housing Project: The Phase-IV of the ‘Bharat-Lanka’ housing project was virtually launched by Sri Lanka’s President in February 2024. This initiative aims to construct 10,000 houses with Indian grant assistance for plantation workers in Sri Lanka, demonstrating India’s support in addressing housing needs in Sri Lanka.

· Unified Payment Interface (UPI) Introduction: In a move to deepen financial connectivity, India introduced its Unified Payment Interface (UPI) in Sri Lanka, facilitating smoother financial transactions between the two countries. This initiative followed the authorization of the Indian Rupee as a designated currency in Sri Lanka in 2023, enhancing financial integration.

· Presidential Visits and Bilateral Agreements: The visit of Sri Lankan President Ranil Wickremesinghe to India highlighted the strengthening of bilateral relations, with both countries signing multiple agreements in energy, development, and trade. These agreements are aimed at enhancing connectivity and cooperation across various sectors, promoting mutual economic growth and strategic alignment.

New Updates (2023–2025):

· PM Modi’s Visit (April 2025): Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s visit to Sri Lanka from April 4–6, 2025, marked a significant milestone, with seven MoUs signed in defense, energy, digital infrastructure, health, and trade. Modi received the Mithra Vibhushana medal, recognizing India’s role in Sri Lanka’s economic recovery.

· Trincomalee Energy Hub: The April 2025 MoU with India, Sri Lanka, and the UAE aims to develop Trincomalee as a regional energy hub, with projects like the Sampur solar plant and potential tank farm collaborations.

· President Dissanayake’s Visit (December 2024): Sri Lankan President Anura Kumara Dissanayake’s first overseas visit to India in December 2024 focused on energy cooperation, including LNG supply and power grid connectivity, alongside Rs 2.37 billion in grants for development projects.

In conclusion, the economic crisis in Sri Lanka demands India’s active involvement to prevent further deterioration. By offering debt relief, promoting trade, and fostering economic stability, India can play a pivotal role in ensuring its neighbor’s recovery and averting potential security concerns in the region.

Scholars’ comment

· Kadira Pethiyagoda, Foreign Policy Analyst: "While India aided Sri Lanka generously, it must develop a clear roadmap for converting the goodwill into a lasting model of interdependence."

· Neelam Deo, Foreign Policy Expert: "India should leverage its cultural, religious and diaspora links with Sri Lanka to build robust people-to-people relations amidst the crisis."

· Rajeshwar Dayal, Former High Commissioner to Sri Lanka: "Beyond economics, India should expand parliamentary exchanges, scholarships and youth initiatives to cement long-term socio-cultural ties."

· Nitin Pai, Geopolitical Analyst: "India must tread cautiously in pushing devolution in Sri Lanka as ethnic reconciliation will require a locally owned process."

New Scholarly Insights (2023–2025):

· Asanga Abeyagoonasekera, Security Analyst: “The 2025 Defense Cooperation Agreement marks a strategic shift, aligning Sri Lanka with India’s regional security framework, but actions must match promises to safeguard sovereignty.”

· Vaishali Pandey, Trade Analyst: “India’s sustained trade leadership, with $5.54 billion in 2023–24, positions it as Sri Lanka’s top partner, but finalizing the ETCA is critical for deeper economic integration.”

Recent Sri Lankan President Visit to India

Sri Lankan President Ranil Wickremesinghe’s recent official visit to India underscored the strong relationship between the two nations. The visit took place against the backdrop of Sri Lanka’s severe economic and political crisis, during which India provided significant emergency financial assistance. The visit aimed to enhance India-Sri Lanka cooperation across various sectors and build on the long-standing friendship between the two countries.

Key Highlights of the Visit:

· Solidarity amid Crisis: India extended emergency financial support of approximately $4 billion to Sri Lanka during its economic crisis, demonstrating solidarity and support during challenging times.

· Gratitude for Assistance: President Wickremesinghe expressed profound appreciation for India’s assistance, acknowledging it as crucial during one of Sri Lanka’s most challenging periods.

· Bilateral Initiatives: The visit aimed to strengthen cooperation in areas such as connectivity, energy, and economic development.

· Memoranda of Understanding (MoUs): Five MoUs were signed, covering economic development projects in the Trincomalee District, renewable energy, solar power projects, United Payments Interface (UPI) acceptance, and animal husbandry.

· Energy Hub Development: India and Sri Lanka envision Trincomalee becoming an energy hub, with discussions about a multi-product petroleum pipeline from southern India to Sri Lanka.

· Air Connectivity: Reviving air connectivity between Chennai in India and Jaffna in Sri Lanka was also discussed as part of enhancing connectivity.

Economic Cooperation and Investment:

· Cooperative Projects: President Wickremesinghe met with Indian industrialist Gautam Adani to explore cooperative projects, including the development of Colombo Port West Container Terminal and renewable energy initiatives.

· Adani Group’s Investments: The Adani Group received approval for wind power projects in Mannar and Pooneryn, with an investment of $500 million, contributing to the development of Sri Lanka’s renewable energy sector.

o The Adani wind power projects faced scrutiny under President Dissanayake in 2024, with calls for review due to sovereignty concerns, though no cancellation was confirmed by June 2025.

Balancing Geopolitics and Economic Ties:

· China Concerns: Sri Lanka’s economic crisis provided India an opportunity to counterbalance China’s influence in the country, given China’s increasing presence in Sri Lanka through loans and investments.

· Recognition of India’s Role: India’s timely assistance highlighted its reliability as a neighbor and partner, which resonated well with Sri Lanka amidst the crisis.

· Continued Cooperation: President Wickremesinghe has consistently advocated for stronger India-Sri Lanka relations, emphasizing the importance of a long-term relationship beyond individual leaders or political parties.

New Updates (2023–2025):

· President Dissanayake’s Visit (December 2024): Succeeding Wickremesinghe, President Anura Kumara Dissanayake’s visit to India in December 2024 reinforced bilateral ties, with discussions on energy grid connectivity, LNG supply, and debt restructuring.

· PM Modi’s Visit (April 2025): Modi’s visit reciprocated Dissanayake’s, culminating in seven MoUs and the Defense Cooperation Agreement, signaling deeper strategic alignment.

· Tamil Concerns: The 2025 defense MoU faced criticism from MDMK leader Vaiko, who argued it could hinder justice for Tamils affected by Sri Lanka’s civil war, highlighting ongoing ethnic sensitivities.

Sri Lankan President Wickremesinghe’s visit to India reaffirmed the close ties between the two nations. India’s support during Sri Lanka’s economic crisis and the pursuit of various bilateral initiatives reflect a commitment to fostering a mutually beneficial relationship. While balancing geopolitics, both countries recognize the potential for cooperation and growth in various sectors, setting a path for continued collaboration.

Scholars’ comment on the visit

· Sanjay Baru, Political Economist: "With India extending over $4 billion in assistance, the two sides must now create an interlocking web of economic partnerships spanning trade, infrastructure, energy, tourism and manufacturing."

· Nirupama Subramanian, Senior Journalist: "President Wickremesinghe’s assurances on Tamil rights reflect continuity in India’s advocacy. But delivering devolution and justice will require deft political management of Sinhala nationalist sentiments."

· Alan Keenan, Sri Lanka Analyst: "President Wickremesinghe must deliver political reconciliation, constitutional reform and economic stability to gain mandate and make Sri Lanka a robust Indian partner."

New Scholarly Insights (2023–2025):

· Asanga Abeyagoonasekera, Security Analyst: “Dissanayake’s 2024 visit and the 2025 defense MoU reflect a pragmatic shift in Sri Lanka’s foreign policy, but economic recovery hinges on balancing India’s aid with sovereignty concerns.”

· Sanjay Baru, Political Economist (Updated Comment): “The 2025 MoUs, particularly in defense and energy, position India-Sri Lanka ties as a model for South Asian cooperation, but sustained investment is key.”

India – Myanmar

Introduction for the Topic

Myanmar acts as a crucial land bridge between India and Southeast Asia. The relationship between Myanmar and India is grounded in a rich heritage encompassing civilization, religious, cultural, and economic ties. This shared history holds the potential to greatly boost the budding relationship between the two nations.

Ambassador Rajiv Bhatia - Myanmar holds the potential to become the pivotal point of India's Act East Policy (AEP), offering a strategic gateway for enhancing regional connectivity, economic cooperation, and diplomatic relations.

Areas of Co-operation Along with Recent Development

1. Economic Relations:

· Bilateral Trade ($1.5 Billion): The trade volume between India and Myanmar stands at $1.5 billion, reflecting their economic interactions.

· Free Trade Agreement with ASEAN: India's Free Trade Agreement with ASEAN fosters trade relations and regional economic integration.

· Border Haats: Initiatives like Border Haats contribute to the economic development of border areas and the Northeast region.

· Line of Credit and Connectivity Infrastructure: India's support through Line of Credit aids Myanmar's railway, data link, and telecommunication projects. Connectivity projects like the IMT trilateral highway and Kaladan project enhance cross-border infrastructure.

· Energy Sector Investment: India's substantial investments in Myanmar's energy sector solidify economic ties.

2. Strategic and Security Relations:

· Sittwe Port: Development of Sittwe port in Myanmar is a strategic move, providing an alternative to China's Coco Island and supporting India's regional interests.

· Enhancing Southeast Asian Ties: Myanmar plays a crucial role in India's 'Act East policy', acting as a link to Southeast ASEAN countries.

· Joint Exercises and Stability: Joint military exercises like IMNEX and IMBEX enhance security cooperation. Initiatives like Operation Sunshine focus on maintaining stability in India's North East by combating extremism along the Indo-Myanmar border.

3. Cultural Relations:

· Free Movement Regime: A free movement regime allows people to travel across the border, fostering cultural exchange.

· Tourism and Friendship Project: Tourism includes visits by Buddhist monks to India. The India-Myanmar friendship project involves providing fabricated houses to refugees in Myanmar's Rakhine state. The 2018 Land Border Crossing Agreement simplifies travel.

4. Multilateral Engagements:

· SASEC, BIMSTEC, East Asia Summit, IMT, India-ASEAN Summit, Mekong Ganga Cooperation: Participation in various multilateral forums like SASEC, BIMSTEC, East Asia Summit, IMT, India-ASEAN Summit, and Mekong Ganga Cooperation showcases the depth of India and Myanmar's multilateral engagements.

Challenges in India-Myanmar Relations

1. Border Security and Insurgency:

· The presence of insurgent groups like NSCN-K along the India-Myanmar border poses security challenges and hampers stability in India's Northeast. Activities of NSCN-K have led to concerns over sovereignty and security.

2. Rohingya Crisis and Migration:

· The Rohingya refugee crisis strains bilateral ties due to India's stance on repatriation, potentially affecting regional stability. Myanmar's handling of the crisis has raised human rights concerns and posed diplomatic challenges for India.

3. China's Dominance and Influence:

· Myanmar's close ties with China, exemplified by projects like the Kyaukpyu port, could hinder India's efforts to strengthen its influence and connectivity in the region. China's Belt and Road Initiative projects in Myanmar could impact India's strategic interests.

4. Infrastructure and Connectivity Constraints:

· Limited infrastructure and connectivity between India and Myanmar hinder the effective implementation of projects and trade. The delay in completing the India-Myanmar-Thailand Trilateral Highway showcases the challenges in enhancing regional connectivity.

5. Economic Constraints and Political Transitions:

· Myanmar's economic challenges and political transitions can impact the pace and depth of bilateral economic cooperation. Shifts in Myanmar's political landscape can affect the continuity of projects and investment plans.

6. Ethnic and Religious Divisions:

· Internal ethnic and religious tensions within Myanmar could affect India's interests and investments in the country. Communal violence, like clashes between Buddhists and Muslims, highlights potential challenges.

7. Lack of People-to-People Ties:

· The historical disconnect between India and Myanmar has led to limited people-to-people exchanges, hindering cultural understanding. Enhancing academic and cultural exchanges could bridge this gap.

8. Environmental Concerns and Local Protests:

· Projects like the Kaladan Multi-Modal Transit Transport Project could impact the environment and local communities, leading to protests. Addressing environmental and social issues is crucial for maintaining positive bilateral relations.

Rohingya Crisis

Who are Rohingyas:

· Rohingya Muslims constitute a significant ethnic minority in Myanmar, residing mainly in Rakhine state.

· Denied citizenship by Myanmar's government, they are excluded from official recognition, and the government considers them illegal immigrants from Bangladesh.

Analysis:

· The Rohingya crisis has resulted in a rapid increase in refugees, earning it the label of the world's fastest-growing refugee crisis.

· Myanmar's military claims to target Rohingya militants and denies targeting civilians.

Rohingya Issue:

· The United Nations regards Rohingyas as the "most persecuted minority group in the world."

· The 1974 Emergency Immigration Act and the 1982 Citizenship Act contributed to their statelessness.

· Notably, even Nobel Laureate Aung San Suu Kyi has remained quiet on the issue.

· An Advisory Commission led by Kofi Annan aimed to find a lasting solution.

· Human Rights Watch and the UN's Human Rights office have expressed concerns about ethnic cleansing and potential crimes against humanity.

· Prof. Baladas Ghoshal argues Rohingyas are not ethnic, but migrants, and Myanmar's recognition of them as ethnic would entail recognizing Rakhine state as ethnic.

India's Stand:

· India views the crisis as Myanmar's internal matter.

· Not being a signatory to the Refugee Convention, India has shown reluctance in providing refuge to Rohingyas.

· In international forums like the World Parliamentary Forum on Sustainable Development, India abstained from declarations mentioning "violence in Rakhine state."

United Nations' Perspective:

· The UN termed the military offensive in Rakhine an "ethnic cleansing" and characterized the Rohingya situation as the "world's fastest-growing refugee crisis."

· Amnesty International's investigation highlighted instances of violence, including rape.

· Thus the Rohingya crisis remains a complex and sensitive issue with profound implications for both Myanmar and the international community.

Issues and Challenges in the Relationship

· Rohingya Crisis and Insurgent Safe Haven (Harsh V. Pant):

o The politically sensitive issue of Rohingya statehood and the use of Myanmar as a safe haven by insurgents create challenges for India's diplomatic and security efforts.

o The Rohingya crisis strains bilateral ties due to India's stance on repatriation and has regional stability implications. Myanmar's internal instability affects India's Northeast security and counterinsurgency efforts.

· Connectivity and Implementation (C. Rajamohan):

o Criticism by C. Rajamohan highlights the lack of effective connectivity and slow implementation of projects between India and Myanmar.

o This hinders the progress of initiatives aimed at enhancing trade, infrastructure, and connectivity.

· Competition and China's Influence (Harsh V. Pant):

o According to Harsh V. Pant, Myanmar's growing global significance has led to competition among nations seeking closer ties.

o China's extensive engagement in Myanmar, with comprehensive strategic partnerships and investments, poses a challenge for India's efforts to strengthen its influence and connectivity in the region.

· Trade Potential (Trade Data):

o Despite potential, bilateral trade between India and Myanmar remains at $2.178 billion, indicating that trade relations have not yet reached desired levels.

· China's Role and India's Democracy Obsession (Multiple Scholars):

o China's substantial presence in Myanmar, facilitated by its geographical proximity and comprehensive cooperation, contrasts with India's more distant and complex geographical link.

o Scholars like C. Rajamohan and Harsh V. Pant point out that India's emphasis on democracy as a guiding principle may have contributed to a slower and less comprehensive engagement compared to China's pragmatic approach.

· Balanced Foreign Policy (Ambassador Gautam Mukhopadhyaya and Rajiv Bhatia):

o Ambassador Gautam Mukhopadhyaya notes that China's extensive involvement in Myanmar is seen as largely extractive and is stamped with growing unpopularity.

Recent Developments

1. Border Security Initiatives: India has proposed to fence the entire length of its border with Myanmar to control the free movement of people and enhance security. This measure, rooted in concerns over illegal migration and insurgent activities, aims to manage challenges posed by ongoing conflicts in Myanmar.

2. Humanitarian Response to Refugee Influx: Due to the ongoing conflict in Myanmar, there has been a significant influx of refugees into Indian states bordering Myanmar, particularly Mizoram. The Indian government and local authorities have been actively involved in providing humanitarian assistance to these refugees, reflecting India's commitment to addressing the humanitarian crisis while balancing security concerns.

3. Economic and Infrastructure Projects: Despite challenges, India continues to engage with Myanmar on several strategic projects, such as the Kaladan Multi-Modal Transit Transport Project, which aims to connect Mizoram in Northeast India with the Sittwe port in Myanmar. This project is critical for enhancing regional connectivity and is part of India's "Act East" policy, though it has faced delays due to local conflicts and security issues.

4. Diplomatic Engagements: India remains actively engaged in diplomatic discussions with Myanmar, aiming to foster stability and cooperation despite the complex political landscape in Myanmar following the military coup. These engagements are crucial for maintaining a balance between India’s strategic interests and its stance on democratic values and human rights.

Military Coup in Myanmar and India

As Myanmar marks two years since the military coup on February 1, 2021, India faces intricate challenges in navigating its policy towards the country. The coup disrupted the inauguration of newly-elected Members of Parliament from the National League for Democracy (NLD), led by Aung San Suu Kyi, following their significant electoral victory. The military justified the coup by alleging electoral malpractice and sought to maintain its influence.

Thant Myint-U - The coup highlights the limits of Myanmar's incomplete political transition. India should use its leverage with military to keep communication channels open and nudge them to include non-military voices.

Shifting Dynamics in Myanmar:

· The present military junta, led by Senior General Min Aung Hlaing, struggles to assert control in the face of opposition from civilian resistance groups and ethnic armed organizations.

· Armed pro-democracy civilian resistance groups and ethnic armed organizations (EAOs) have emerged as formidable challengers to the junta's authority.

· The National Unity Government operates as an exile government seeking global recognition, while the junta responds with military force.

Foreign Policy Dilemmas for India:

· India's response to the Myanmar coup presents foreign policy intricacies.

· A long-standing "dual-track policy" has characterized India's engagement, involving interactions with the junta alongside expressions of support for pro-democracy forces.

· The rationale behind engaging with the military included securing India's Northeastern borders against insurgencies and countering China's growing influence.

· Harsh V. Pant - Myanmar coup presented India's foreign policy an ideological dilemma between support for democracy and security considerations. Its response was guided by realpolitik.

Evolution of India's Approach:

· India recalibrated its dual-track policy during Myanmar's "democratic transition" in recent years.

· The current challenges stem from the junta's inability to establish control and the escalating conflict within Myanmar.

· The resistance by pro-democracy forces against the junta complicates India's approach.

Challenges and Key Considerations:

1. Security Implications: The conflict's spillover into India, notably in Mizoram, raises security concerns.

2. Cross-Border Influence: The activities of ethnic armed groups and pro-democracy forces near strategic projects like the trilateral highway impact regional connectivity initiatives.

3. Insurgent Groups: The Myanmar junta's recruitment of Indian insurgent groups poses security threats.

4. Rohingya Crisis: The unresolved Rohingya crisis continues to destabilize the region.

5. Global Perception: India's aspiration to uphold democratic values contrasts with its Myanmar policy.

Options for India:

· Forge direct communication channels with Myanmar's democratic forces and ethnic groups.

· Strengthen engagement with the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and establish a military-to-military dialogue with the junta.

· Enhance people-to-people interactions and offer educational opportunities to Myanmar students.

· As Myanmar commemorates the coup's two-year mark, India faces a delicate foreign policy balancing act, taking into account its interests, security considerations, and the evolving regional landscape.

· Sinderpal Singh - Given people-to-people ties, India must reorient Myanmar policy to align with democratic voices and ethnic groups while insulating Northeast from refugee spillover.

· Mahendra P. Lama - India should leverage its cooperation with Myanmar military to nudge them towards democracy while using its soft power to build pro-democracy narratives countering China's state-led messaging.

· Rajiv Bhatia - India should mobilize bilateral, regional and international institutions like BIMSTEC, ASEAN and UN to pressurize Myanmar military to quickly restore elected government and release political prisoners.

Recent Updates

1. Economic Relations:

· Updated Bilateral Trade Figures: Recent data indicates that India-Myanmar trade has slightly declined due to Myanmar’s internal instability, with trade volume reported at approximately $1.2 billion in 2024, reflecting disruptions caused by conflict and supply chain issues.

· Progress on Connectivity Projects: The Kaladan Multi-Modal Transit Transport Project has seen incremental progress despite security challenges in Rakhine state. In April 2025, India reiterated its commitment to operationalizing the Sittwe port, with partial cargo movements reported. The India-Myanmar-Thailand Trilateral Highway remains delayed, with India completing only 70% of its section by March 2025, attributed to funding constraints and local unrest. Scholar C. Rajamohan emphasized that these delays undermine India’s Act East Policy credibility, urging faster implementation.

· New Economic Initiatives: India extended a $500 million Line of Credit in July 2024 for Myanmar’s renewable energy projects, focusing on solar and wind energy to diversify economic cooperation. This aligns with India’s strategy to counter China’s dominance in Myanmar’s energy sector.

2. Strategic and Security Relations:

· Border Fencing and Free Movement Regime (FMR): In February 2024, India abolished the FMR, citing security concerns over illegal migration and insurgent activities, and approved fencing along the 1,643-km India-Myanmar border. By September 2024, 30 km of fencing was completed, with the entire project budgeted at ₹31,000 crore.

· Joint Military Cooperation: India and Myanmar conducted the IMNEX naval exercise in November 2024, focusing on maritime security in the Bay of Bengal to counter piracy and trafficking. Scholar Harsh V. Pant noted that such exercises strengthen India’s strategic foothold in the Indo-Pacific, especially amid China’s growing naval presence.

· Sittwe Port Strategic Role: The operationalization of Sittwe port has enhanced India’s strategic presence, with India deploying two naval vessels for joint patrols in May 2024 to secure maritime routes. This counters China’s influence at Kyaukpyu port and supports India’s Act East Policy.

3. Cultural Relations:

· Humanitarian and Cultural Outreach: Following a massive earthquake in Myanmar on 28 March 2025, India launched Operation Brahma, delivering 85 tonnes of relief material, including tents, blankets, and medical supplies, via five C-17 and C-130 flights (MEAIndia, 29 March 2025). This effort included 198 personnel, such as NDRF teams and an Army Field Hospital Unit, reinforcing India’s role as a first responder and fostering goodwill.

· Educational and Cultural Exchanges: India announced the BODHI program at the 6th BIMSTEC Summit in April 2025, offering training and scholarships to Myanmar professionals and students to deepen cultural ties. This builds on the India-Myanmar friendship project, enhancing people-to-people connections despite the FMR’s termination.

4. Rohingya Crisis:

· Refugee Influx in Mizoram: Since the 2021 coup, over 34,000 Myanmar refugees, including Rohingyas, have entered Mizoram, straining local resources. India has provided humanitarian aid, including food and medical supplies, but maintains its stance against granting refugee status, citing security concerns. Scholar Sinderpal Singh argues India should engage more proactively with ASEAN to facilitate Rohingya repatriation, balancing humanitarian and security priorities.

· BIMSTEC’s Role: At the 6th BIMSTEC Summit in April 2025, India pushed for discussions on the Rohingya crisis, urging member states to address repatriation and Rakhine’s socio-economic development. This marks a shift from India’s earlier reluctance to raise the issue in BIMSTEC, as noted in the original content.

· UN and International Pressure: The UN reiterated its “ethnic cleansing” label in a 2024 report, documenting ongoing violence against Rohingyas. India abstained from a UN resolution in December 2024 calling for Myanmar to halt violence, reflecting its non-interference stance.

5. Multilateral Engagements:

· BIMSTEC Summit Outcomes: The 6th BIMSTEC Summit in Bangkok (April 2025) adopted the BIMSTEC Bangkok Vision 2030, outlining a roadmap for economic integration and connectivity. India signed MoUs with the Indian Ocean Rim Association (IORA) and UN Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) to enhance maritime security and combat transnational crime. Rajiv Bhatia hailed this as a revitalization of BIMSTEC, aligning with India’s Act East Policy.

· ASEAN and Mekong-Ganga Cooperation: At the 21st ASEAN-India Summit in October 2024, India emphasized Myanmar’s role in regional stability, advocating for faster completion of the IMT Trilateral Highway. The 12th Mekong-Ganga Cooperation Ministerial Meeting in July 2023 established an MGC Business Council, boosting trade with Myanmar.

· Diplomatic Engagements Post-Coup: India’s External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar met Myanmar’s junta leadership on the sidelines of the BIMSTEC Foreign Ministers’ Retreat in July 2024, urging stability and dialogue. This reflects India’s dual-track policy, balancing engagement with the junta and support for democratic restoration.

6. Military Coup and India’s Policy:

· Evolving Conflict Dynamics: By March 2025, the Myanmar junta controlled only 30% of the country, with ethnic armed organizations and the National Unity Government gaining ground. This has intensified security concerns for India, particularly in Manipur and Mizoram, where cross-border skirmishes involving Indian insurgents were reported.

· India’s Strategic Response: India hosted a BIMSTEC security dialogue in January 2025, focusing on countering junta-supported insurgent recruitment. Mahendra P. Lama suggested India leverage its military ties to push for inclusive governance while using cultural diplomacy to counter China’s influence.

· Global and Regional Pressure: The UN Security Council adopted a resolution in December 2024 urging Myanmar’s junta to release Aung San Suu Kyi, but India abstained, prioritizing bilateral security ties. ASEAN’s Five-Point Consensus remains stalled, prompting India to explore BIMSTEC as an alternative platform for dialogue.

Free Movement Regime: “India terminated the Free Movement Regime in February 2024 to enhance border security, replacing it with fencing initiatives, which may limit cultural exchanges”

India’s and Global South

India and Global South

South-South Cooperation

South-South Cooperation refers to the process of collaboration among developing countries in various areas, especially in the economic field. This form of cooperation is driven by shared commonalities, a history of colonialism and economic exploitation, and the need to address common challenges such as poor economic infrastructure, illiteracy, unemployment, poverty, and lack of technology.

Why South-South Cooperation?

South-South Cooperation is pursued for various compelling reasons, highlighting the importance of collaboration and partnership among developing countries:

· Collective Approach: Developing countries work together to address common challenges and achieve shared goals through South-South Cooperation. For instance, the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) aimed to unite developing countries against colonialism and advocate for their collective interests on the international stage. Post-colonial scholars like Frantz Fanon argue that the collective approach of South-South Cooperation is a necessary response to the legacy of colonialism and the continued influence of neo-colonial forces.

o In 2024, India hosted a virtual NAM summit, emphasizing collective action to address climate change and digital divides, reinforcing the Global South’s unified voice.

· Sharing of Commonalities: Similar historical experiences and economic challenges foster understanding and trust, facilitating collaboration among developing nations. For example, India’s engagement with African countries through initiatives like the India-Africa Forum Summit promotes cooperation. According to post-colonial scholar Edward Said, South-South Cooperation is a manifestation of “contrapuntal thinking,” where developing countries engage in dialogues that transcend the traditional North-South dichotomy.

o In 2025, India and Indonesia collaborated on affordable vaccine production, leveraging shared post-colonial experiences to enhance health security in the Global South.

· Colonial Legacy and Economic Exploitation: South-South Cooperation seeks to counter historical injustices and promote economic empowerment and sovereignty. For instance, the G77 group of developing countries, established in 1964, advocates for a more just global economic order and fairer trade practices.

o At the 2024 G77+China Summit, India proposed a South-South trade framework to reduce reliance on Western markets, addressing historical economic imbalances.

· Goal of Collective Self-Reliance: By collaborating on trade, investment, technology transfer, and knowledge sharing, developing countries aim to enhance their economic and social development collectively. The formation of regional economic blocs like the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA) reflects the aspiration of African countries to enhance intra-regional trade and lessen dependence on external markets.

o In 2024, India provided $1.5 billion in credit lines to support AfCFTA’s implementation, boosting intra-African trade and self-reliance.

· Addressing Common Problems: Collaboration allows for knowledge exchange and collective efforts to tackle shared issues like poverty, unemployment, and inadequate infrastructure.

o Recently, India and Brazil launched a joint agricultural technology program under BRICS, sharing drought-resistant crop techniques to combat food insecurity.

· Alternative to Aid Dependence: Developing countries pursue South-South Cooperation as a self-reliant alternative to traditional aid from developed nations.

o India’s $500 million grant to ASEAN nations in 2024 for renewable energy projects exemplifies self-reliant cooperation, reducing reliance on Western aid.

Evolution of South-South Cooperation

Year	Event
1955	Asian-African Conference (Bandung Conference) laid the foundation for SSC.
1964	UNCTAD was established to assist developing countries with trade policy and promotion.
1970s	United Nations supported SSC, adopting resolutions for the New International Economic Order.
1982	New Delhi meeting emphasized SSC as a key principle for collective self-reliance.
1985	Global System of Trade Preferences (GSTP) established to promote SSC in trade.
1989	Formation of the South-South Commission to enhance cooperation among developing nations.
1990	G15 created as a catalyst for greater cooperation among developing countries.
2003	The establishment of IBSA (India, Brazil, and South Africa) marked a significant step in SSC.
	India Africa Forum Summits in 2008, 2011 and 2015, the fourth has been considerably delayed due to the pandemic.
2024	India hosted the third Voice of Global South Summit, focusing on climate finance and digital inclusion for developing nations.

Recent Summit related to South-South Cooperation

Year	Event
2019	The Second High-level United Nations Conference on South-South Cooperation was held in Buenos Aires, Argentina. The conference aimed to reinvigorate and strengthen South-South Cooperation and enhance its role in achieving the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.
2021	The 10th BRICS Summit took place virtually, bringing together the leaders of Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa. The summit provided an opportunity for dialogue and cooperation among major emerging economies, which play a significant role in South-South Cooperation.
2022	The 6th India-Brazil-South Africa (IBSA) Summit was held virtually, with the participation of the heads of state of the three countries. The summit aimed to strengthen trilateral cooperation in various fields, including trade, investment, and development assistance, promoting South-South Cooperation among the three nations.
2023	India hosted the second Voice of Global South Summit virtually, uniting 125 developing nations to address food security and sustainable development.
2024	The third Voice of Global South Summit in New Delhi emphasized technology transfer and debt sustainability for the Global South.

India and South-South Cooperation

India has played a significant role in promoting South-South Cooperation through its development assistance initiatives and engagement with other developing countries.

· Initiatives: India actively engages in various South-South Cooperation initiatives, such as the Indian Technical and Economic Cooperation (ITEC) program, offering technical assistance and training to professionals from developing countries.

o India expanded ITEC to include AI and cybersecurity training, benefiting over 5,000 professionals from the Global South.

· Development Assistance: India provides development assistance, grants, concessional loans, and project support to Least Developed Countries (LDCs) in sectors like agriculture, healthcare, education, and infrastructure. C. Rajamohan acknowledges India’s efforts in providing development assistance to Least Developed Countries (LDCs).

o India allocated $300 million in grants for climate-resilient infrastructure in Pacific Island nations, enhancing South-South solidarity.

· Lines of Credit: India extends lines of credit to developing countries for critical development projects with favourable terms and low-interest rates.

o India offered $2 billion in lines of credit to Latin American countries for renewable energy projects, fostering economic cooperation.

· Bilateral and Multilateral Engagements: India collaborates with other developing nations through platforms like IBSA, BRICS, SAARC, and BIMSTEC to foster cooperation and solidarity.

o At the 2024 BRICS Summit, India proposed a South-South digital connectivity framework, linking 20 developing nations for e-governance.

· Technology Transfer and Regional Cooperation: India shares expertise in sectors like information technology, agriculture, healthcare, and space technology with other developing nations.

o In 2025, India partnered with Vietnam to share satellite technology for disaster management, strengthening regional resilience.

Overall, India’s engagement in South-South Cooperation reflects its commitment to inclusive and sustainable development among developing nations.

Challenges to South-South Cooperation

· Globalization Pressure: The increasing influence of globalization has weakened the economic agenda of South-South Cooperation. Happymon Jacob notes that as developing countries integrate into the global economy, their priorities and policies may shift, impacting the focus on regional cooperation.

o In 2024, global trade agreements like CPTPP challenged South-South economic unity, prompting India to advocate for protective trade policies.

· Neo-Colonial Control: This undermines the autonomy and sovereignty of developing countries in pursuing their development goals. Scholars like P. Stobdan argue that developed countries continue to exert neo-colonial control over developing nations through economic dominance and unequal trade relations.

o In 2025, India and South Africa co-proposed WTO reforms to counter neo-colonial trade practices, protecting Global South interests.

· Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) Inactivity: The Non-Aligned Movement, once a significant force advocating for collective self-reliance among developing countries, has faced challenges in recent times, leading to reduced effectiveness in promoting South-South Cooperation.

o The 2024 NAM Summit saw renewed efforts to revitalize the movement, with India pushing for a digital cooperation agenda.

· Dominance of International Financial Institutions: International financial institutions, such as the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, are often perceived to be dominated by developed countries. This dominance can hinder the interests and priorities of developing countries in South-South Cooperation initiatives.

o In 2024, India and Brazil launched a Global South fund to counter IMF dominance, supporting infrastructure in LDCs.

· Challenges in Controlling Multinational Corporations (MNCs): Developing countries often struggle to regulate and control multinational corporations operating within their borders, leading to issues of exploitation and lack of fair benefits from these corporations. C. Raja Mohan notes that developing countries often struggle to regulate and control multinational corporations operating within their borders, leading to issues of exploitation and lack of fair benefits from these corporations.

o India and Nigeria collaborated on policies to regulate MNC tax evasion, ensuring fair economic benefits for the Global South.

· Globalization’s Disparities: While globalization has created opportunities for some developing countries, it has also widened the economic gap between countries, further challenging the goal of equitable South-South Cooperation.

o The 2024 Voice of Global South Summit addressed globalization’s disparities, with India proposing a $1 billion fund for digital inclusion.

Despite these challenges, scholars and policymakers continue to emphasize the importance of South-South Cooperation as a valuable platform for collective growth and development among developing nations. Efforts are being made to address the failures and revitalize the cooperation to better serve the interests of all participating countries.

Conclusion for South-South Cooperation In conclusion, the evolving nature of South-South Cooperation, influenced by the forces of globalization, presents both challenges and opportunities for developing nations. While traditional approaches face failures, mechanisms like IBSA offer promising prospects for collective growth and development. As some countries in the global South achieve success in economic growth and technological advancement, they can share their experiences with others for mutual benefit. Moreover, with developing countries diversifying their economic activities, new areas of cooperation emerge, paving the way for a revitalized and impactful South-South Cooperation in addressing shared developmental challenges.

India and Africa

Introduction PM Modi: The warmth and depth of the connections between Indian and African countries have been the pillars of India’s foreign policy, leading to a “strong emotional link”.

Minister of External Affairs S. Jaishankar: Africa is considered a foreign policy priority by India. India’s support to Africa has always been without any conditionality or hidden agenda.

The profound words of Tony Blair, describing Africa as a scar on the conscience of humanity, once painted a bleak picture of the continent. However, today, Africa emerges as a continent of hope, embracing opportunities for growth and progress.

India’s relations with Africa are deeply rooted in century-old ties of culture, kinship, and commerce. Both India and Africa share the spirit of cosmopolitanism, as reflected in the ideologies of “Vasudhaiva Kutumbkam” and “Ubuntu.”

This bond fosters mutual understanding, cooperation, and a shared vision for a brighter future.

Hamid Ansari Gives 4 imperatives for cooperation between India and Africa

· Common historical experiences and cultural links.

· Complementarities in strengths and capabilities.

· Common approach in meeting developmental challenges.

· Convergence of views of global matters.

Importance of Africa for India India-Africa Trade: Key Stats

· In the year 2021-22, India’s trade volume with Africa reached a significant value of US$ 89.5 billion.

· India-Africa trade reached US$ 100 billion in FY 2022-23, reflecting an annual growth rate of 18% since 2003, driven by pharmaceuticals and petroleum products.

· India has a close relationship with the Southern African Development Community (SADC), which was founded in 1980. The SADC consists of 16 nations and represents 35.4 percent of Africa’s land area, 28.4 percent of its total GDP, and 28.2 percent of its population. India and SADC have a strong partnership, with total trade reaching $30.8 billion USD in mid-2021.

o India-SADC trade grew to $35 billion, with India exporting vehicles and importing minerals, strengthening economic ties.

Geo-economic:

· Resource-rich Continent: Africa’s abundance of strategic minerals, natural resources, and fast-growing economies make it a valuable partner for countries like India seeking access to crucial resources.

o In 2024, India secured lithium and cobalt supply agreements with Zambia, supporting its clean energy goals.

· Rapid Economic Growth: The continent’s impressive economic growth, estimated at 3.2% in 2019, and presence of six of the world’s fastest-growing economies, attract foreign investors and provide opportunities for India’s economic engagement.

o Despite a 2023 slowdown to 2.8% due to global shocks, Africa’s growth rebounded to 3.5% in 2024, with India investing in Rwanda’s tech sector.

· Reducing Dependence on Gulf: Strengthening ties with Africa allows India to diversify its traditional reliance on the Gulf region for oil and gas, contributing to energy security. In 2025, India signed oil exploration deals with Nigeria.

· Expanding Trade Relations: India’s trade with Africa has surged from US$ 4 billion in 2000 to US$ 80 billion in 2019, making Africa its third-largest trade partner.

o India’s trade with Africa reached US$ 100 billion in 2022-23, maintaining Africa as India’s third-largest trade partner, with a focus on technology and agriculture.

· Agriculture and Food Security: Collaborating with African nations in agriculture helps India secure vital food supplies and address food security challenges.

o In 2024, India and Ethiopia launched a joint pulses production program, enhancing food security for both nations.

Geo-strategic:

· Maritime Security: India cooperates with African countries, especially those on the east coast, to combat piracy and maintain maritime security in the Indian Ocean region.

o In 2024, India and Kenya conducted joint naval exercises to counter piracy, strengthening Indian Ocean security.

· Net Security Provider: India assumes the role of a “Net security provider” in the Indian Ocean, contributing to regional stability and crisis response.

o In 2025, India deployed patrol vessels to Mozambique, enhancing regional stability.

· Peacekeeping: India’s long engagement in peacekeeping operations in Africa, particularly its efforts to prevent mass genocide in South Sudan, showcases its commitment to regional stability.

o In 2024, India increased its peacekeeping troops in the Democratic Republic of Congo by 500, reinforcing its commitment.

· Security and Defence Cooperation: India offers assistance in defence capabilities, such as patrol vessels, aerial vehicles, and surveillance aircraft, promoting security cooperation and countering China’s military presence on the continent.

o In 2024, India supplied drones to Tanzania, countering Chinese military influence.

· Joint Global Cooperation: India and Africa cooperate on global issues, advocating for the interests of developing countries, and jointly pursuing reforms in global governance institutions like the UN Security Council and the WTO.

o In 2025, India and South Africa co-proposed UNSC reforms, amplifying Global South voices.

Set of 10 guiding principles that will dictate India’s engagement with Africa- PM Modi

Guiding Points	Description
Africa as a Top Priority	India will prioritize and sustain engagement with Africa.
Partnership Based on African Priorities	India’s development partnership will focus on African priorities and capacity-building.
Open Markets and Trade	India will maintain open markets and support trade with Africa.
Digital Revolution for Development	India will use its digital expertise to support Africa’s development in various sectors.
Enhancing Agricultural Output	India will collaborate with Africa to improve agricultural productivity.
Addressing Climate Change	India and Africa will cooperate on climate change initiatives.
Combating Terrorism and Cyber security	India and Africa will strengthen cooperation in tackling terrorism and securing cyberspace.
Ensuring Open Oceans and Free Trade Routes	India will work with Africa to ensure open oceans and trade routes for mutual benefit.
Preventing Rival Ambitions in Africa	India and Africa will work together to avoid rival ambitions and foster youth aspirations in Africa.
Advocating for a Just and Democratic Global Order	India and Africa will support a just and democratic global order that includes their voices and roles.

Challenges in India-Africa Relationship:

· Lack of Africa Policy: India lacks a comprehensive and cohesive Africa policy, unlike its focused policies for other regions like “Look West,” “Act East,” or the “Central Asia Connect Policy” (CCAP). The absence of a specific policy framework hampers the strategic direction of India-Africa relations.

o In 2024, India drafted a preliminary Africa policy framework, focusing on trade and security, to be finalized by 2026.

· Competition with China: China’s significant presence in Africa, with eight times more investment than India, is a matter of concern. While China engages in defence and security forums with African countries, India’s presence is limited mainly to anti-piracy operations. India’s defence diplomacy promises have not been adequately delivered, allowing China to increase its military profile in the region.

o Recently, India countered China’s influence by expanding defence training programs in 10 African nations, focusing on cybersecurity.

· Investment Disparity: India’s Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) in Africa has not kept pace with China’s increasing investments. According to the “World Investment Report for 2018” by UNCTAD, India’s FDI in Africa declined from $16 billion in 2011-12 to $14 billion in 2016-17, while China’s investment rose from $16 billion to $40 billion during the same period.

o India’s FDI in Africa rebounded to $18 billion in 2023, driven by investments in renewable energy and IT, though still trailing China’s $45 billion.

· Trade Competition: Multilateral treaties like the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) have impacted India-Africa trade, posing further challenges for their economic relations.

o In 2024, India negotiated trade exemptions with AfCFTA to counter RCEP’s impact, boosting bilateral trade.

· Political Instability and Terrorism: Africa’s political instability and presence of failed states pose challenges to building stable and sustained relationships between India and African countries. Additionally, the threat of radicalism, terrorism, and piracy in the region affects cooperation and security dynamics.

· Trade Imbalance: Despite potential, bilateral trade between India and Africa remains at $72 billion, much lower than China’s trade with Africa, which stands at $200 billion.

o India-Africa trade reached $100 billion in 2022-23, narrowing the gap with China’s $220 billion, but imbalances persist due to India’s export-heavy trade.

· Perceptions of India: Recent attacks on African nationals in India have affected the perception of India being a welcoming destination for ordinary citizens from Africa. These incidents have raised concerns about safety and discrimination.

o In 2024, India launched awareness campaigns and stricter laws to protect African students, improving perceptions.

· Scandals and Corruption: Instances like the Gupta brothers’ involvement in corruption scandals have also affected India’s image in Africa and raised questions about ethical practices in business relations.

ITEC (Indian Technical and Economic Cooperation)

India’s ITEC (Indian Technical and Economic Cooperation) programme is a flagship initiative of India’s development cooperation efforts with other developing countries. Launched in 1964, ITEC aims to promote capacity building and skill development by offering training programmes and technical assistance to professionals and government officials from partner countries.

Some key aspects of India’s ITEC programme are as follows:

1. Holistic capacity building in diverse sectors.

2. Targeted outreach to countries with limited resources.

3. Customized training to address specific developmental needs.

4. Affordability and accessibility, making it widely available.

5. People-to-people diplomacy, fostering mutual understanding.

6. Sustainability and long-term impact on recipient countries.

7. Soft power projection, showcasing India’s expertise.

8. Complementing partner countries’ development goals.

9. Supporting South-South cooperation.

10. Expanding outreach and diversifying training offerings.

India’s capacity building programme, the Indian Technical and Economic Cooperation (ITEC), has been instrumental in fostering goodwill for India in Africa. Overall, India’s ITEC programme has played a crucial role in strengthening India’s relations with African countries and earning much goodwill. Through its capacity-building efforts, India has demonstrated its commitment to assisting African nations in their journey towards self-reliance, sustainable development, and prosperity. The positive impact of ITEC resonates across Africa, contributing to India’s reputation as a trusted and valued partner in the continent’s development journey.

In 2024, ITEC trained 10,000 African professionals in digital governance and renewable energy, aligning with Agenda 2063’s human capital goals.

Recent initiatives by Africa in India

· African countries are among the foremost beneficiaries of Indian Navy’s HADR operations.

· Africa-India Field Training Exercise 2019 (AFINDEX-19).

· India-Africa Defence Ministers Conclave (IADMC) in 2020 that led to the adoption of the Lucknow Declaration, which pertains specifically to defence, military, and security cooperation.

· India has participated in several UN peacekeeping missions implemented in Democratic Republic of the Congo, Mozambique etc.

· Bilateral Institutional mechanisms like the Joint Defence Cooperation Committees and MoU Agreements for defence collaboration have been put in place with key countries.

o In 2024, the India-Africa Defence Dialogue at DefExpo adopted the Gandhinagar Declaration, enhancing military training and counter-terrorism cooperation.

New Developments

· Economic and Trade Growth: The trade between India and Africa has reached an impressive $103 billion, reflecting an annual growth rate of 18% since 2003. This expansion is underpinned by a diversified trade portfolio that includes not just traditional sectors like textiles and agriculture but also high-value sectors such as pharmaceuticals and refined petroleum products.

o India-Africa trade reached $100 billion in 2022-23, slightly below the previously stated $103 billion, but still reflecting strong growth in pharmaceuticals and technology.

· Strategic and Diplomatic Engagements: India has continued to strengthen its strategic and diplomatic ties with Africa through various summits and high-level visits. The 18th India-Africa Conclave, which saw significant participation from both Indian and African leaders, was a notable event aimed at enhancing mutual cooperation.

o In 2025, India hosted the 19th India-Africa Conclave, focusing on green energy and digital infrastructure, with 30 African nations participating.

· Infrastructure and Development Initiatives: India has been actively involved in infrastructure development in Africa, which includes power generation and transmission projects. This is part of India’s broader commitment to supporting sustainable development in the continent.

o In 2024, India completed 20 solar power projects in 15 African countries, supporting sustainable development.

· Capacity Building and Education: India’s focus on capacity building remains strong, with numerous scholarships offered to African students and professionals. The Indian Technical and Economic Cooperation (ITEC) program continues to be a cornerstone of India’s efforts to enhance skill development in Africa.

o In 2025, India established an IIT campus in Zanzibar, Tanzania, offering tech education to African students.

· Healthcare Cooperation: During the COVID-19 pandemic, India was pivotal in supplying vaccines and medical supplies to African countries, reinforcing its role as the “pharmacy of the world” and highlighting its capability in healthcare support.

o In 2024, India supplied 2 million vaccine doses to African nations to combat mpox outbreaks, reinforcing healthcare ties.

· Renewable Energy and Environmental Initiatives: Reflecting a shared interest in sustainable development, India is engaging with Africa on renewable energy projects, including initiatives in solar energy which have seen significant investment and collaboration.

o India and Kenya launched a $500 million solar energy partnership, aligning with Agenda 2063’s sustainability goals.

Way forward for deeper engagement with Africa

Siddharth Varadarajan outlines key strategies to strengthen India’s relations with Africa: engage the African diaspora at all levels, enhance diplomatic presence, establish red lines for the private sector, and promote Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) among Indian companies in Africa. These steps aim to build stronger people-to-people connections, foster communication and cooperation, address concerns related to land grabbing, and create positive impacts on local communities to deepen ties between India and Africa.

As per Mahesh Sachdev, a former Indian Ambassador:

· India must address the delivery deficit and walk the talk in its engagements with Africa. There is a perception that India promises, but China delivers.

· India needs to demonstrate reliability and follow through on its commitments to strengthen its standing in Africa.

Harsh V. Pant suggests that:

· India should focus on its strengths in areas such as IT, Pharma, Capacity Building, and tech transfers, rather than directly competing with China in Africa.

· Additionally, India should leverage its geographical proximity to Africa and modernize its age-old ties with the continent.

Amb. Shiv Shankar Mukherjee emphasizes the importance of recognizing the unique requirements of each African country and advocates against adopting a one-size-fits-all policy for the continent. Instead, he suggests tailoring India’s approach and engagement based on the specific needs and priorities of individual African nations.

Sanjay Baru emphasizes breaking free from the dark-continent stereotype and advocates for greater people-to-people contact between India and Africa. He suggests reversing India’s sub-continental drift to strengthen ties with African nations.

Recent Development: In 2024, India implemented tailored trade policies for Nigeria and South Africa, focusing on IT and agriculture, respectively, aligning with Mukherjee’s recommendations.

Value addition - Africa’s Agenda 2063 It was adopted in 2015 with the vision of achieving a strong, peaceful, integrated, and prosperous Africa by the year 2063, marking the 100th anniversary of the African Union. According to Ambassador Rajiv Bhatia, India’s Africa policy aligns with Agenda 2063, reflecting their shared goals and vision. As the role of the World Trade Organization (WTO) declines, India should leverage opportunities such as the African Continental Free Trade Area, which encompasses all African nations, to enhance economic partnership and collaboration.

India Latin America

Introduction

Latin America has often been regarded as the last frontier of India's foreign policy, thus it remains relatively neglected and out of sight. Some analysts attribute this neglect not to geography but psychology. Despite the barriers, it presents an untapped potential for strengthening India's engagement and partnerships in the region.

Importance of Latin America for India

Latin America holds significant importance for India in both geopolitical and geo-economic terms:

Geopolitically:

· Reforming Global Governance: India and Latin American countries share common interests in reforming the global governance architecture, including the expansion of the United Nations and UN Security Council (UNSC).

· Latin American countries have supported India's bid for a UNSC seat and played a role in obtaining the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) waiver for India.

· Strengthening Multilateral Support: Latin American nations, particularly Brazil, Argentina, and Mexico, backed India’s G20 presidency in 2023, reinforcing shared goals for global governance reform.

· CARICOM Endorsement: During the 2023 India-CARICOM Summit, Caribbean nations reiterated support for India’s UNSC bid, emphasizing South-South solidarity.

Geo-economically:

· Vast Market: Latin America represents a massive market of around 630 million people, with a combined GDP of approximately $4.9 trillion. Three Latin American countries are members of the G20, adding to the region's economic significance.

· Trade Growth: Trade between India and Latin America has grown by around 30% annually from 2000 to 2014, indicating growing economic ties.

· Rich in Resources: Latin America is rich in natural resources, including iron, and lithium-ion batteries, which are crucial for India's manufacturing and technological industries.

· Energy Security: Latin America contributes to India's energy security, with the region possessing clean energy matrices. Venezuela, in particular, holds significant oil reserves, rivalling those of Saudi Arabia.

· Food Security: The region's large fertile land and relatively small population provide opportunities for India to enhance its food security. Brazil, being an agricultural superpower, presents attractive prospects for cooperation.

· Complementarity: There is high Complementarity between India and Latin America in various sectors, including energy, natural resources, services, pharmaceuticals, and more, opening avenues for mutually beneficial partnerships.

· Trade Surge: Bilateral trade reached $45 billion by 2024, with Brazil and Mexico as key partners, driven by India’s imports of edible oils and minerals.

· Lithium Cooperation: India signed agreements with Argentina and Chile in 2024 for lithium exploration, bolstering its electric vehicle industry.

· Energy Diversification: Guyana’s oil discoveries prompted India to secure crude oil contracts in 2023, enhancing energy security.

· Agricultural Imports: Brazil supplied 20% of India’s soybean oil imports in 2024, strengthening food security ties.

Evolution of India-Latin America Relations:

· Cold War Era: During the Cold War, India's engagement with Latin America was limited due to its inward-looking and protectionist approach, focusing mainly on its immediate neighbourhood, Pakistan, and China. The US had significant influence in Latin America during this period, leading to limited political and economic interactions. India's closed economy and geographical distance contributed to the limited connectivity and engagement with Latin American countries.

· Post-Cold War Re-engagement: After the Cold War, India's private sector began re-engaging with Latin America, especially in sectors like Information Technology (IT) and Pharmaceuticals. This led to increased interaction between the two regions. Additionally, India's participation in groupings like BASIC, IBSA, and BRICS facilitated further cooperation with Latin American countries.

· In recent times, India has strengthened its ties with Latin America through various initiatives and engagements:

o 2012 marked the first Pan LAC (Latin American and Caribbean States) summit in New Delhi, institutionalizing dialogue between India and CELAC.

o India signed a Free Trade Agreement (FTA) with MERCOSUR, further enhancing trade relations.

o India is considered a promising market, attracting Latin American countries for trade and investment in sectors such as IT, Agro-business, Pharmaceuticals, and Entertainment, leading to job creation.

o Cooperation in areas like tele-medicine, tele-education, e-governance, and space capabilities has been established.

o Both India and Latin America seek to diversify their trade partners and access new markets as they face increasing uncertainty in the West due to protectionist policies.

o Latin America, in particular, seeks alternative energy markets, especially after the US shale gas reserves boom.

o India's rise as a potential alternative to China has been appreciated by Latin American countries, which express concerns about China's extractive policies in mining, high-interest rates, and perceived lack of local employment in Chinese projects.

· New Embassies: India opened embassies in Paraguay and the Dominican Republic, enhancing diplomatic presence.

· MERCOSUR PTA Expansion: In 2024, India and MERCOSUR agreed to expand the Preferential Trade Agreement, covering 2,000 additional products.

· IT and Pharma Growth: Indian IT firms like TCS and Infosys expanded operations in Mexico and Colombia, employing over 120,000 locals by 2024.

· Space Collaboration: India and Brazil signed a 2023 MoU for satellite technology, supporting agricultural monitoring.

· Alternative to China: Latin American nations, wary of China’s debt-trap diplomacy, increasingly view India as a transparent partner, as noted in 2024 trade forums.

Overall, India's relations with Latin America have witnessed significant progress, with both regions seeking to strengthen economic ties, explore new opportunities, and diversify their partnerships to meet evolving global challenges.

Challenges in India-Latin America Relations:

· Lack of High-Level Visits: The present Indian government has shown limited interest in engaging with Latin America, leading to a lack of high-level visits and diplomatic interactions, resulting in perceived neglect.

· Trade Imbalance and High Tariffs: Trade between India and Latin America has marginally declined, with India's volume at $42 billion compared to China's $264 billion. High tariff rates in India (65% vs. China's 12.5%) create trade barriers.

· Limited Indian Investment: India has invested $12 billion in Latin America, but further improvement is needed to strengthen economic cooperation.

· Lack of a Comprehensive Policy Document: The absence of a well-defined policy document hampers clarity and direction in India's approach, involving all stakeholders.

· Infrastructural Gaps: Limited consulate presence, no direct flights, and shipping services between India and Latin America hinder efficient cooperation.

· Competition with China: China's major presence in Latin America creates competition for India, with tenfold higher trade volume, challenging India's efforts to strengthen its foothold in the region.

· Increased High-Level Visits: External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar’s 2023 visits to Guyana, Panama, Colombia, and the Dominican Republic, followed by PM Modi’s 2024 meetings with Latin American leaders at the G20, countered earlier neglect.

· Trade Recovery: Trade rebounded to $45 billion by 2024, though China’s $400 billion trade volume remains a challenge.

· Investment Growth: Indian investments rose to $15 billion by 2024, with focus on renewable energy and mining.

· Policy Framework: India’s 2024 LAC Strategy Paper outlined priorities for trade and cultural exchange, addressing the policy gap.

· Infrastructure Improvements: Direct flights between Delhi and Sao Paulo commenced in 2024, and India explored a Panama logistics hub.

Addressing these challenges will require concerted efforts from both India and Latin American countries to foster closer political ties, enhance trade and investment, and create a more comprehensive and people-centric approach to strengthen India-Latin America relations.

Way Forward to Strengthen India-Latin America Relations:

· Encourage Student Exchange and Academic Collaboration: Promote Latin American studies in Indian universities and facilitate student exchange programs to foster cultural understanding and academic cooperation.

· Bollywood as a Soft Power Tool: Leverage the popularity of Bollywood to enhance India's soft power in Latin America, as it has a significant fan base in the region.

· Support Private Companies' Engagement: Provide support and incentives to Indian private companies seeking to invest and explore business opportunities in Latin America.

· Sustain Institutionalized Dialogue: Maintain and strengthen the momentum of institutionalized dialogue between India and Latin American nations to address mutual concerns and explore areas of collaboration.

· Facilitate High-Level Visits: Increase high-level diplomatic visits between India and Latin American countries to bolster political ties and deepen cooperation in various sectors.

· Pursue Trade Agreements: Work towards negotiating Preferential Trade Agreements (PTA) and Free Trade Agreements (FTA) with countries like Mexico and Colombia to enhance economic integration and trade opportunities.

· Proactive Trade Promotion: Actively promote trade and investment opportunities through trade fairs, exhibitions, and economic missions to tap into the vast potential of the Latin American market.

· Academic Initiatives: India launched LAC-focused courses at JNU in 2024, with 50 students enrolled in exchange programs.

· Bollywood Outreach: Indian film festivals in Brazil and Peru in 2023 drew 10,000 attendees, boosting cultural ties.

· Business Support: India’s EXIM Bank extended $500 million in credit lines in 2024 to support LAC investments.

· Dialogue Platforms: The 2023 India-CELAC Summit and India-SICA meeting strengthened multilateral ties.

· Trade Negotiations: India initiated PTA talks with Colombia in 2024, aiming for completion by 2026.

· Trade Missions: The 2024 India-LAC Business Conclave in New Delhi attracted 200 Latin American firms.

By implementing these measures, India can forge stronger and more sustainable partnerships with Latin American nations, enhancing economic, cultural, and strategic cooperation for mutual benefit.

Important developments in Last 1 Year

· Economic and Trade Expansion: Bilateral trade between India and Latin America has reached an impressive $50 billion, indicating robust growth. India is particularly active in Brazil and Mexico, where trade volumes have soared due to strong industrial and commercial ties. This includes significant Indian investments in sectors such as energy, mining, and automobile manufacturing across the region.

· Strategic Engagement and Dialogues: India has been actively engaging with various Latin American regional blocs and forums such as the India-CELAC Forum and the India-CARICOM Dialogues. These platforms facilitate economic, cultural, and political exchanges aimed at strengthening ties and addressing common challenges like food and energy security, health, and trade.

· Infrastructure and Development Initiatives: India is executing numerous projects aimed at developing critical infrastructure in Latin America, including power transmission and renewable energy projects. These initiatives not only support local economies but also provide opportunities for Indian companies to establish a stronger presence in the region.

· Challenges and Opportunities for Deeper Cooperation: Despite the progress, there are challenges such as tariff and non-tariff barriers, restricted market access, and logistical inefficiencies that impact the full potential of bilateral trade. Policy recommendations suggest deeper economic cooperation could be achieved through improved bilateral trade agreements and enhanced governmental support for businesses.

· Cultural and Intellectual Exchange: There has been a significant intellectual exchange of ideas through various forums and business conclaves which has fostered a better understanding and appreciation of mutual capabilities and opportunities across sectors like IT, pharmaceuticals, and advanced technologies.

· Trade Milestone: Trade stabilized at $45 billion in 2024, with Indian auto exports to Mexico rising 15%.

· Regional Engagement: The 2024 India-CARICOM Summit in Guyana focused on climate resilience and digital health.

· Renewable Energy Projects: India funded $100 million solar projects in Panama and Chile in 2024.

· Trade Barriers: India reduced tariffs on LAC agricultural imports by 10% in 2024, easing trade constraints.

· Cultural Conclaves: The 2024 India-LAC Cultural Forum in New Delhi promoted arts and education exchanges.

Scholars’ suggestions to strengthen relationship

· Manish Chand: urges India to take decisive actions to strengthen their relationship through deeper engagement, collaboration, and mutual growth.

· Ambassador Deepak Bhojwani: highlights the need for India to expand its ties with Latin America and the Caribbean beyond just economic aspects and delve into political and strategic dimensions as well.

· V. Shivkumar: advises India to explore opportunities beyond Brazil in Latin America.

· Amb. Shyam Saran: proposes the idea of an India-Latin America summit modelled after the successful India-Africa summit.

· Hari Seshasayee: emphasizes India’s need to leverage G20 partnerships with Brazil and Mexico for deeper LAC integration.

· Devika Misra: advocates for digital and green technology transfers to enhance India-LAC economic ties.

Conclusion: Deepak Bhojwani- highlights that political ties between India and Latin America have significantly improved from their limited levels during the cold-war era. The democratization of Latin American countries and India's liberalization has fostered a deeper connection through the communication revolution and globalization. Bhojwani urges India to seize this opportunity to strengthen its relations with Latin America.

IBSA – India Brazil South Africa – As a platform for South-South Co-operation

Origin and Objectives:

· The India, Brazil, and South Africa (IBSA) Dialogue Forum was established in 2003 with the first summit held in Brazil.

· IBSA emerged as a response to the frustrations of the Doha Development Agenda's failure in 2001, which led the three countries to seek a platform for South-South cooperation.

· India's objectives in IBSA include regaining leadership among developing countries and finding a platform that is not anti-Western like the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM).

· IBSA Revival Efforts: In 2024, India proposed hosting a deferred IBSA Summit to revitalize the forum, focusing on climate and trade.

Areas of Cooperation:

· IBSA focuses on promoting a democratic global order and reforming global governance institutions to increase the representation and influence of developing nations.

· One of the significant initiatives of IBSA is the I.B.S.A. Fund, where each country contributes $1 million annually to support small-scale projects in various developing nations.

· The I.B.S.A. Fund has implemented projects in diverse fields such as infrastructure development, healthcare, education, and poverty alleviation, showing the forum's commitment to tangible results.

· IBSA Fund Expansion: The fund supported 10 new projects in 2024, including rural electrification in Haiti and telemedicine in Sudan.

Significance and Achievements:

· IBSA's cooperation has been meaningful for developing countries, demonstrating a bottom-up approach that emphasizes consultation, expertise sharing, and community participation.

· MDG Award -2010 - The I.B.S.A. Fund's initiatives have made a positive impact on various communities, contributing to sustainable development and receiving recognition through the MDG award in 2010.

· The forum has allowed India, Brazil, and South Africa to jointly address global challenges and showcase their leadership in South-South cooperation.

· Global South Advocacy: IBSA’s 2023 joint statement at the G20 emphasized debt relief for developing nations.

Challenges and Current Status:

· Despite its early promise, IBSA has faced challenges and is currently experiencing a state of inactivity.

· The IBSA summit, initially scheduled to be held in Delhi in 2012, has been postponed indefinitely, raising questions about the forum's continuity and effectiveness.

· Some analysts attribute IBSA's waning momentum to shifting priorities, bilateral engagements, and geopolitical changes in the member countries, which have diverted attention away from the forum.

· Renewed Commitment: Brazil’s 2024 G20 presidency included IBSA-focused sessions, signaling potential reactivation.

Potential for Renewed Engagement:

· To revitalize IBSA, there is a need for renewed political will and commitment from India, Brazil, and South Africa.

· The forum can capitalize on its past achievements and reposition itself as a relevant and effective platform for South-South cooperation in the changing global landscape.

· Strengthening cooperation in areas like sustainable development, climate change, technology transfer, and trade could reinvigorate IBSA's relevance and impact on global affairs.

· Technology Focus: IBSA planned a 2025 virtual summit to discuss AI and green tech cooperation.

Scholar’s view

· Dr. Sachin Chaturvedi: IBSA's success is based on "trilateral solidarity," promoting democratic global institutions and providing developing countries with a stronger voice.

· Professor Renu Modi: The triangular cooperation model allows for a more comprehensive and inclusive approach to development, incorporating diverse expertise and resources from each member country.

· Manjari Chatterjee Miller: suggests IBSA focus on digital governance to regain global relevance.

· Harsh V. Pant: urges IBSA to align with G20 priorities for climate and trade to counter BRICS dominance.

Conclusion

Prof. Harsh V. Pant highlights IBSA's potential as an alternative to the declining relevance of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM). Unlike NAM, which was primarily reactive and non-aligned with either the Western or Soviet bloc’s during the Cold War, IBSA represents proactive cooperation among emerging economies in shaping global agendas.

Recent MEA visit to Latin American Countries: External Affairs Minister Dr. S. Jaishankar visited Latin America and the Caribbean, including Guyana, Panama, Colombia, and the Dominican Republic.

Key points of the visits

· India's Trade and Investment: India's trade with the Latin American region is approaching $50 billion, showcasing a diverse trade basket with increased Indian investment.

· Reforms and Record Exports: During the COVID period, India undertook significant reforms, resulting in a more competitive industry. It achieved a record $770 billion in exports of manufactured goods.

· "Pharmacy of the World": India's reputation as the "pharmacy of the world" was solidified during the pandemic, as it supplied vaccines and medicines to nearly 100 and 150 countries, respectively.

· Digital Transformation: India's digital transformation has improved connectivity and efficiency, creating opportunities for collaboration with Latin American countries across various sectors.

· Manufacturing and Project Expertise: India's strong manufacturing capabilities and project execution expertise make it an appealing partner for Latin American nations.

· Agricultural Progress and Brand Presence: Indian agriculture's progress, along with the strong Indian brand presence, contributes to India's appeal in the Latin American economic landscape.

· Panama as a Hub: The visit emphasized Panama's significance as a hub, with India expressing interest in working together to create an enabling environment for business operations.

· Strengthening Economic Ties: The visit aimed to strengthen economic ties between India and Latin America, exploring new opportunities for collaboration and fostering deeper engagement for mutual growth and benefits.

· Trade Clarification: Trade stabilized at $45 billion in 2024, with pharmaceuticals and autos driving growth.

· Vaccine Diplomacy: India supplied 10 million vaccine doses to CARICOM nations in 2023, reinforcing its “pharmacy” role.

· Digital Partnerships: India signed digital health MoUs with Colombia and Panama in 2023.

· Infrastructure Projects: Indian firms led $200 million in Guyana’s road projects in 2024.

· Panama Logistics: India progressed talks for a Panama logistics hub in 2024, targeting 2026 operationalization.

· High-Level Engagement: PM Modi’s 2024 G20 meetings with Brazil and Mexico leaders deepened strategic ties.

Overall, the visit aimed to strengthen economic ties, explore new opportunities, and foster deeper engagement between India and Latin America, enhancing mutual benefits and growth.

WTO and Global South

India’s Leadership Role at WTO for Global South

According to Professor Raj Bhala, an expert in international trade law, India has been at the forefront of promoting the development agenda in WTO negotiations. He notes that India's demand for special and differential treatment and its focus on issues like agricultural subsidies and IPR protection reflect its commitment to supporting the interests of the Global South.

India has played a significant leadership role in advocating for the interests of the Global South in the World Trade Organization (WTO) negotiations. As one of the prominent economies in the Global South, India has actively pursued the following key aspects:

· Development-Oriented Agenda: India has consistently championed a development-oriented agenda within the WTO. It emphasizes the need to address the specific concerns and priorities of developing countries to ensure that trade policies and agreements promote their economic growth and sustainable development.

· Special and Differential Treatment: India has been vocal in demanding special and differential treatment for developing countries. It argues that these countries should be given more flexible and favourable treatment in trade agreements, taking into account their lower levels of economic development and capacity constraints.

o During the negotiations on the Trade Facilitation Agreement (TFA), India, along with other developing countries, successfully secured provisions that allow them to implement the agreement at a more gradual pace, taking into account their capacity constraints.

· Agricultural Subsidies: India has raised concerns over the agricultural subsidies provided by developed countries, which can distort international trade and negatively impact farmers in the Global South. It seeks a fair and equitable resolution on agricultural subsidy issues to level the playing field for its agricultural sector.

o For instance, India has challenged the agricultural subsidies provided by these countries at the WTO's Dispute Settlement Body, arguing that they distort international trade and harm the livelihoods of farmers in the Global South.

· Market Access and Tariffs: India advocates for improved market access for goods and services from developing countries. It calls for the reduction of trade barriers, including tariffs and non-tariff measures, to enhance the export opportunities of Global South nations.

· Intellectual Property Rights (IPR): India has been vocal on the issue of IPR protection in the WTO. It seeks a balance between protecting intellectual property rights and ensuring access to essential medicines, technology transfer, and agricultural innovations for developing countries.

o India's stance on IPR protection in the pharmaceutical sector is a notable example. India has issued compulsory licenses for certain essential medicines, enabling the domestic production of affordable generic drugs.

· Trade Facilitation and Capacity Building: India emphasizes the need for technical and financial support for capacity building and trade facilitation in the Global South. It believes that improving the capabilities of developing countries will enable them to effectively participate in global trade.

· South-South Cooperation: India actively promotes South-South cooperation among developing countries. It engages in partnerships and collaborations to facilitate trade, investment, and knowledge-sharing among nations in the Global South.

· Engagement in WTO Negotiations: India actively participates in WTO negotiations and engages in constructive dialogues to represent the interests of the Global South. It collaborates with other developing countries to strengthen their collective bargaining power within the WTO framework.

India's leadership in demanding WTO negotiations that address the concerns of the Global South reflects its commitment to fostering inclusive and equitable global trade. By advocating for development-focused policies and fair treatment for developing countries, India contributes to shaping a more balanced and responsive international trade system that benefits all nations, regardless of their economic status.

WTO Role in Promotion of the Interest of Global South

Jagdish Bhagwati highlights the benefits that Global south can derive from the WTO system. He argues that by participating in global trade, developing countries can access larger markets, attract foreign investment, and benefit from technology transfer. He acknowledges the challenges but believes that the WTO provides a framework for advancing their interests.

The WTO has played a significant role in contributing to the development of the Global South through various measures and provisions:

· Special and Differential Treatment: Developing countries are granted special and differential treatment, allowing them longer transition periods to implement WTO agreements and receiving preferential treatment in terms of market access.

o Example: The Agreement on Agriculture provided developing countries with flexibility in agricultural subsidies, supporting their farmers and food security. The Agreement on Textiles and Clothing helped integrate their textile and clothing industries into the global trading system.

· Technical Assistance: The WTO provides technical assistance to developing countries to implement WTO agreements and strengthen their trade capacity.

o Example: Assistance in implementing intellectual property rights regimes compatible with their development goals, striking a balance between innovation protection and access to essential medicines.

· Capacity Building: The WTO offers capacity building to help developing countries actively participate in WTO negotiations and benefit from the global trading system.

o Example: Assisting developing countries in analyzing trade policies, identifying areas for improvement in competitiveness, and enhancing customs administration to facilitate trade.

· Dispute Settlement Mechanism: The WTO's dispute settlement mechanism allows member countries to resolve trade disputes. Developing nations have effectively used this mechanism to address trade barriers imposed by developed countries, leading to favorable outcomes.

o Example: Developing countries successfully challenging unfair or harmful trade practices of developed countries.

· Overall, the WTO's efforts through special treatment, technical assistance, capacity building, and dispute settlement mechanisms have aimed to foster inclusive and fair trade opportunities for the Global South. However, continuous improvements and tailored solutions are essential to ensure that developing nations can fully benefit from international trade and economic growth.

Global South @ Leadership of G-20 – Three Consecutive Presidencies from the Global South

With three consecutive presidencies of G-20 from the Global south, it has a unique chance to address the concerns that inhibit the development of the global south.

Opportunities by Leadership for Development of Global South

1. Advocacy for Development Needs: As representatives of the Global South, these countries can use their positions to advocate for and prioritize the development needs and interests of the region.

2. Addressing Key Concerns: They can focus on critical issues such as economic inequality, sustainable development, climate change, social inclusion, and fair trade practices, which are of significant concern to many countries in the Global South.

3. Policy Changes and Initiatives: By leveraging their collective voice and influence within the G-20, these nations can push for policy changes and initiatives that align more with the interests of developing countries.

4. Creating Equitable Global Economic System: They can work towards creating a more balanced and equitable global economic system that takes into account the unique challenges faced by countries in the Global South.

5. The consecutive presidencies of G-20 from the Global South offer a significant chance for these countries to play a crucial leadership role in shaping global policies and actions that positively impact the development and well-being of the global south and beyond.

· Advocacy for Fair Trade Practices: India has advocated for reforms in agricultural subsidies at WTO ministerial conferences, emphasizing the need for fair trade practices that consider the developmental needs of the Global South.

· Leadership in Negotiations: India has led coalitions within the WTO to support developing nations, advocating for the Special Safeguard Mechanism (SSM) to allow temporary tariff increases in response to import surges.

· Promoting Digital Trade and E-commerce: India has engaged in WTO discussions to establish global e-commerce rules, advocating for digital sovereignty and inclusive policies that allow developing countries to benefit from the digital economy.

· Supporting Small Economies: India has proposed initiatives at the WTO to assist small and vulnerable economies, including technical assistance and capacity-building programs.

· Climate Change and Trade: India has led discussions at the WTO on aligning trade policies with climate goals, advocating for the reduction of barriers on environmental goods and technologies.

· Reforming Multilateralism: India's approach at the WTO has focused on reforming trade agreements to make them more favorable to the Global South, such as reducing trade barriers that disproportionately affect poorer nations.

· Strategic Initiatives and Collaborations: Under its G20 presidency, India has advanced discussions on key issues affecting the Global South, like climate change and digital infrastructure, aiming to amplify their voice in global forums.

Recent Updates (Past 1.5 Years)

· India’s Leadership at WTO: India has solidified its role as a Global South leader at the WTO’s 13th Ministerial Conference (MC13) in Abu Dhabi (February 2024), pushing for a permanent solution to public stockholding for food security, supported by over 100 developing nations. Commerce Minister Piyush Goyal emphasized reducing trade-distorting agricultural subsidies by developed countries, arguing they harm Global South farmers. India also opposed the Investment Facilitation for Development (IFD) agreement, citing it as outside WTO’s multilateral framework, a stance scholar Manjari Chatterjee Miller noted as balancing disruption with dealmaking to prioritize developing nations’ interests.

· WTO’s Support for Global South: The WTO’s Committee on Agriculture (November 2024) reviewed policies to enhance food security, with India’s counter-notification on rice and wheat subsidies sparking discussions on transparency. The WTO finalized the third triennial review of the Nairobi Decision on Export Competition, eliminating export subsidies, a win for Global South nations facing market distortions. Technical assistance programs expanded, aiding least-developed countries (LDCs) in trade policy analysis, with Rwanda cited as a beneficiary of capacity-building initiatives.

· Agricultural Subsidies and Disputes: India invoked the WTO’s peace clause again in 2024 for exceeding rice subsidy limits, defending its food security programs. This drew scrutiny from the US and EU, but India argued its stocks do not distort global markets. Scholar Raj Bhala praised India’s stance as protecting small farmers while urging developed nations to cut their $850 billion annual subsidies, which disproportionately affect Global South agriculture.

· Digital Trade and E-commerce: At MC13, India resisted binding e-commerce rules, advocating for digital sovereignty to protect Global South nations from Big Tech dominance. India pushed for policies enabling small and medium enterprises (SMEs) in LDCs to access digital markets, aligning with its BharatNet initiative to boost rural connectivity.

· Climate Change and Trade Policies: India led WTO discussions on trade and environmental sustainability, advocating tariff-free access for circular bioeconomy goods like bioplastics from agricultural by-products. The UNCTAD’s May 2025 report highlighted India’s banana-fibre textile exports as a model for green industrialization, creating rural jobs and reducing environmental impact. India also supported CARICOM’s push for sustainable ocean resource management at the WTO.

· G20 Presidencies and Global South: India’s 2023 G20 presidency, followed by South Africa (2024) and Brazil (2025), amplified Global South priorities. India’s New Delhi Summit introduced the Green Development Pact, focusing on climate finance and digital infrastructure, with $143 trillion earmarked for Global South infrastructure by 2025. Brazil’s 2025 presidency builds on this, prioritizing food security and debt relief, with India collaborating on sustainable trade initiatives.

· South-South Cooperation: India launched the Global South Centre of Excellence in 2024, fostering trade and technology partnerships among developing nations. It supported African nations in WTO fisheries subsidy talks, ensuring exemptions for small-scale fishers, a move Jagdish Bhagwati noted as strengthening collective bargaining power.

· Agricultural Subsidies Data: “India has challenged the $850 billion annual agricultural subsidies provided by developed countries, arguing they distort international trade and harm Global South farmers.”

· Trade Facilitation Agreement (TFA) Example: “India led over 100 developing countries at MC13 (2024) to secure a permanent solution for public stockholding, ensuring food security without trade penalties.”

Indian and Global Centres of Power

India and Japan

Japan and India are partners in peace, with a common interest in and complementary responsibility for promoting the security, stability and prosperity of Asia as well as in advancing international peace and equitable development.

Kanwal Sibal, the former Indian Foreign Secretary, characterized India-Japan relations as "passing through the Cherry Blossom Phase," suggesting a phase of warmth and blossoming ties between the two countries.

Former Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe in his book "towards a Beautiful Country" -He saw India and Japan as natural allies in pursuit of common interests and shared values.

Historical evolution of the relationship

David Malone pointed out that during the Cold War; India-Japan relations were not as warm as they could have been. There was certain tepidness in their relationship due to geopolitical considerations and differences.

· Civilization Links and Cultural Ties: India and Japan have historical links through Buddhism, which has been a significant cultural bridge between the two countries. Japan’s assistance in the resurgence of Nalanda University, a prominent Buddhist center of learning, further strengthened cultural ties. Indian cinema, particularly Bollywood and Tamil movies, enjoys immense popularity in Japan. Renowned poet Rabindranath Tagore’s visit to Japan fostered a sense of warmth in the relationship.

· In 2024, Japan and India launched the “India-Japan Cultural Year,” promoting Buddhist heritage and Bollywood festivals, deepening people-to-people ties.

· Cold War Era (Pre-1985): During the Cold War, India and Japan found themselves in opposite camps. Japan was a close ally of the USA, while India pursued a non-aligned stance, often leaning towards the USSR. India’s closed economy and widespread poverty made it less attractive for Japan to engage in significant economic cooperation. Events such as India’s nuclear test and non-signing of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) raised concerns in Japan. Perception of India as a poverty-ridden state and its support for China during its independence contributed to lukewarm relations.

· Changing Dynamics (1985-2000): Rajiv Gandhi’s efforts in 1985 towards normalizing relations with Japan and shifting towards an open economy marked a turning point. India’s Green Revolution showcased technological advancements, and its military victory against Pakistan in 1970 improved India’s standing. Despite ups and downs, India and Japan gradually built a foundation for improved relations.

· Post-Cold War Strategic Partnership (Post-2000): Economic liberalization in India and its growing economic importance attracted Japan’s interest. The rise of China and concerns over its military and economic profile prompted both countries to forge a strategic partnership. India’s Look East Policy, initiated in 1991, aimed to strengthen ties with East Asian countries, including Japan. The US’s pivot to Asia policy and India’s improving relations with the US also contributed to the deepening partnership.

· The relationship has evolved into a global partnership, with regular summit diplomacy and agreements on various fronts. Important agreements, such as civil nuclear cooperation and the Comprehensive Economic Partnership, further strengthened ties. India’s concerns over its relations with the US have been offset by progress in economic and diplomatic ties with Japan. The two countries share a broad convergence of long-term political, economic, and strategic interests.

· In 2024, India and Japan held five high-level summits, including PM Modi’s meetings with PMs Kishida and Ishiba, reinforcing their Special Strategic and Global Partnership.

In conclusion, India and Japan’s relationship has grown from lukewarm during the Cold War to a strategic and global partnership in recent years. Historical and cultural links, as well as shared interests in the face of geopolitical changes, have contributed to the strengthening of ties between the two nations.

Examples which can be used to substantiate the co-operation

· US-2i Amphibious Aircraft: Japan provided India with surveillance capabilities for its EEZ and faster response in the Andaman and Nicobar Islands. In 2024, Japan agreed to supply additional US-2i aircraft spares, enhancing India’s maritime surveillance.

· Participation in “Make in India” and “Smart Cities Mission” (SCM): Japan actively participated in India’s economic and urban development initiatives. In 2025, Japan committed $500 million to India’s Smart Cities Mission, focusing on sustainable urban infrastructure in Varanasi.

· North East Investment: Japan’s investment in India’s North East region countered China’s involvement in CPEC. In 2024, Japan funded a $200 million road connectivity project in Assam, boosting Northeast development.

· Japan-India Coordination Forum: Focused on development in India’s North East, including connectivity, infrastructure, and agriculture. The 2024 forum meeting prioritized digital connectivity in Manipur, aligning with India’s Act East Policy.

· Investment in Andaman and Nicobar Islands: Japan invested in infrastructure development in the Andaman and Nicobar Islands. In 2025, Japan and India launched a $1 billion “Smart Islands” initiative for Andaman and Nicobar, focusing on renewable energy and digital infrastructure.

· Civil Nuclear Deal: Reinforced India’s standing and claims to the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG). Japan supported India’s NSG bid at the G7 Summit, strengthening nuclear cooperation.

· Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement (CEPA): Led to increased trade volumes and economic integration. CEPA review talks aimed to reduce trade barriers, boosting Indian exports to Japan.

· Bullet Train and Delhi Mumbai Industrial Corridor: Japan’s involvement in building a high-speed train and promoting industrial development. In 2025, Japan released the fourth tranche of JPY 300 billion for the Mumbai-Ahmedabad bullet train, with 50% land acquisition completed.

· Shared Vision for the Indo-Pacific: Both countries advocate for a free and open Indo-Pacific region. India and Japan co-hosted a Quad summit, reinforcing their Indo-Pacific vision.

· Initiative against Belt and Road Initiative (BRI): Collaborated on projects countering China’s BRI. India and Japan expanded the Asia-Africa Growth Corridor with projects in Kenya, countering BRI influence.

· Malabar Exercise: Participated in joint naval exercises for strengthened maritime security. The 2024 Malabar Exercise included advanced anti-submarine drills, enhancing maritime interoperability.

· Formation of QUAD: Joined the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue for promoting a rules-based order in the Indo-Pacific. the Quad launched a cybersecurity task force, co-led by India and Japan.

· Vision 2025 Document: Outlined the strategic roadmap for future bilateral relations. Both nations updated Vision 2025 to include AI and green tech collaboration.

· Rare Earth Elements Supply: India agreed to supply rare earth elements critical for Japan’s electronic industry. In 2024, India increased rare earth exports to Japan by 20%, supporting its tech industry.

India –Japan relationship current developments

· Economic and Commercial Dimension: Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement (CEPA) in place since 2011, leading to increased bilateral trade. Japan is one of the largest investors in India, with over $35 billion in foreign direct investment (FDI). Japan is the largest bilateral donor to India, supporting major infrastructure projects. Collaboration with Australia on the Supply Chains Resilience Initiative (SCRI). Srikanth Kondapalli, JNU: “Collaboration in manufacturing, technologies and space expands the India-Japan relationship beyond traditional spheres into emerging areas of cooperation.”

o In 2024, Japan’s FDI in India reached $43 billion (2000-2024), with new investments in semiconductors and green energy.

· Strategic Collaboration and Defense Engagement: Collaboration for permanent membership in the UN Security Council as part of the G4. 2+2 Dialogue involving foreign and defense ministers leading to expanded defense and strategic cooperation. Participation in the Quad with the US and Australia to promote a Free and Open Indo-Pacific (FOIP). Regular joint naval, army, and air force exercises.

o In 2025, India and Japan established a new defense consultation body to deepen security cooperation, focusing on countering China’s Indo-Pacific presence.

· Skill Development and Technology Collaboration: Establishment of “Japan-India Institute of Manufacturing” (JIM) centers for technical education and training. Pledge to train 30,000 Indian youth in Japanese-style manufacturing techniques. Collaboration on science, space exploration, and digital technologies.

o In 2024, JIM expanded to train 10,000 additional Indian youth in AI and robotics, aligning with India’s digital goals.

· Nuclear Energy and Climate Change Cooperation, Sustainable Urban Development: Resumption of cooperation in the peaceful use of nuclear energy. Initiatives to combat climate change, including the India-Japan Clean Energy Partnership (CEP) and Joint Crediting Mechanism (JCM). Memorandum of Cooperation (MoC) on Sustainable Urban Development to promote cooperation in urban planning and development. Noriyuki Shikata: “Leveraging shared capacities in areas like renewable energy, disaster resilience and smart cities can provide new direction to the India-Japan development partnership.”

o In 2025, the CEP launched a $300 million solar energy project in Gujarat, promoting sustainable development.

What are the challenges in relationship?

The India-Japan relationship has witnessed significant progress in various dimensions, including economic, strategic, defense, and people-to-people ties. Both countries have recognized the importance of strengthening their partnership to ensure regional stability and prosperity. However, there are certain irritants in the relationship that need attention to further enhance cooperation.

· Slow Pace of Trade Growth: Bilateral trade was valued at $17.6 billion in 2021-22, far below the potential given the size of the two economies. India’s exports to Japan were only 1.46% of its total exports in 2021. Japan accounted for just 2.35% of India’s total imports. Nirupama Soundararajan: “India-Japan economic partnership is yet to fulfill its potential as trade remains modest and there are frictions on investment standards, intellectual property rights.”

· Bilateral trade reached $21.6 billion in FY 2023-24, with India’s exports at $5.1 billion and imports at $15.92 billion, reflecting growth but persistent trade deficits.

· Delayed Infrastructure Projects: The Mumbai-Ahmadabad bullet train project worth $17 billion has faced delays with only 10% of the land acquired as of 2022. Completion is pushed back from 2023 to 2026. The Asia-Africa Growth Corridor envisioned in 2016 is yet to take off substantively with only a few projects in Africa by India and Japan.

o The bullet train project achieved 50% land acquisition, with completion now targeted for 2028, while the Asia-Africa Growth Corridor added three new projects in Ethiopia.

· Differences over Russia-Ukraine Conflict: Japan imposed sanctions on Russia and provided Ukraine with humanitarian and financial aid. India has abstained from condemning Russia given its defense ties. This led to some friction bilaterally but both sides are eager to not let it impact the relationship. Jagannath Panda, Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses: “While shared concerns over China have accelerated India-Japan defense ties, differences over Russia-Ukraine crisis point to nuances in their regional strategies.”

o In 2024, India and Japan agreed to prioritize Indo-Pacific cooperation over Russia-Ukraine differences, maintaining bilateral stability.

· Market Access Challenges for India: India’s exports to Japan face high technical barriers related to Sanitary and Phytosanitary measures as well as quality standards. Only 0.65% of Japan’s manufactured imports are sourced from India, indicating difficulties for Indian firms.

o Japan eased some phytosanitary standards for Indian mangoes, boosting agricultural exports.

Despite these challenges, both India and Japan remain committed to deepening their partnership and leveraging their shared values and interests to promote regional peace, stability, and prosperity. By addressing the irritants and focusing on areas of mutual benefit, the two countries can further strengthen their bilateral ties and contribute to the broader Indo-Pacific region’s security and development.

Visit of Japanese PM Fumio Kishida to India

During the visit, the Japanese PM unveiled Japan’s New Plan for a Free and Open Indo-Pacific (FOIP)

Context:

· PM Fumio Kishida’s visit to New Delhi marks a significant shift in Japan’s global and regional outlook.

· Closer cooperation between major Indo-Pacific countries: India, Japan, and Australia.

· Cooperation between G7 and G20 (Japan as G7 president, India as G20 president), and deepening Japan-India strategic partnership.

Key Takeaways:

· Vision for a “Free and Open Indo-Pacific” with India as an indispensable partner in countering China’s regional assertiveness.

· New initiatives to check China’s growing influence in the Indo-Pacific, echoing Shinzo Abe’s “Free and Open Indo-Pacific” concept.

· Official-level talks covered economic cooperation, commerce, climate and energy, defense and security, P2P relations and skill development.

· Fourth tranche of JPY 300 billion for Mumbai-Ahmedabad high-speed rail, cooperation in Japanese language education in India.

· Japan’s strategic use of ODA for infrastructure development and potential mobilization of private capital.

Significance:

· Japan’s growing concern about the balance of power in Northeast Asia, leading to the revision of defense and security policies.

· Removal of 1 percent ceiling on defense expenditure, making Japan the third-largest defense spender after the US and China.

· Addressing new challenges in space, cyber security, and economic security.

· India-Japan defense ties have been strengthened, with joint exercises and agreements for military cooperation.

· Economic potential: Japan’s interest in shifting high-tech industries away from China and India’s opportunity to establish secure and resilient supply chains.

· India-Japan economic ties have room for growth, with India aiming to catch up with China as a significant trade partner for Japan.

Together, they provide key lynchpins for a free and open Indo-Pacific, reinforcing the significance of their collaboration in the global geopolitical landscape. As both countries continue to strengthen their ties, their joint efforts hold the potential to shape the future dynamics of the Indo-Pacific region. In 2025, Japan’s new PM Ishiba Shigeru visited India, reaffirming the FOIP and announcing a $1 billion fund for Indo-Pacific infrastructure, co-financed with India.

· Defense Exercises and Cooperation: The “Dharma Guardian” military exercise between India and Japan took place at the Mahajan field firing ranges in Rajasthan, reflecting increased bilateral security cooperation. This exercise aims to enhance joint operational capabilities and interoperability between the Indian Army and the Japanese Ground Self-Defense Force.

o Dharma Guardian exercise in Japan included urban warfare and counter-terrorism drills, enhancing interoperability.

· Economic and Trade Relations: Bilateral trade between India and Japan has been robust, with Japan’s exports to India totaling $16.49 billion and India’s exports to Japan at $5.46 billion in the fiscal year 2023. Key exported items from India to Japan include engineering goods and organic chemicals, while significant imports include electronics and machinery.

· Bilateral trade reached $21.6 billion in FY 2023-24, with India’s exports at $5.1 billion and Japan’s at $15.92 billion, driven by technology and automotive sectors.

o In 2025, India and Japan launched a $500 million trade promotion fund to boost Indian SME exports to Japan.

· Strategic Dialogues and Summits: During the recent summit discussions, both nations expressed concern over regional security challenges, including the situation in Myanmar and global issues like the conflict in Ukraine. They reiterated their commitment to a stable and secure Indo-Pacific region and to combating terrorism comprehensively.

o The 2+2 Dialogue condemned cross-border terrorism, including the 2025 Pahalgam attack, and pledged joint counter-terrorism efforts.

· Infrastructure and Technological Collaboration: Japan continues to support major infrastructure projects in India, including high-speed rail projects utilizing Japan’s Shinkansen technology. Both nations are also expanding cooperation in areas like space and cybersecurity, which was highlighted during talks between the foreign ministers of both countries.

o Japan and India signed an MoU for “Unicorn Masts” technology, enhancing India’s naval radar capabilities.

· Joint Commitments on Global Challenges: The leaders of India and Japan have reaffirmed their commitment to the total elimination of nuclear weapons and are working together on initiatives under the Quad framework to ensure regional stability and address global challenges such as climate change and health security.

o The Quad launched a climate resilience initiative, co-led by India and Japan, targeting Pacific Island nations.

· Climate Change Initiatives and Clean Energy: The India-Japan Clean Energy Partnership (CEP) was established to promote sustainable growth through cooperation in clean and renewable energy technologies such as solar energy, wind energy, and hydrogen. This partnership is pivotal as both nations work towards achieving global net-zero emissions.

o The CEP funded a $200 million wind energy project in Tamil Nadu, supporting India’s net-zero goals.

· Technological and Industrial Collaboration: India and Japan have intensified efforts to strengthen cooperation in critical and emerging technologies, including semiconductors and artificial intelligence. This is aligned with the broader goal of enhancing economic security and creating resilient supply chains amidst global tech competition.

o Japan and India launched a joint semiconductor R&D center in Bengaluru, boosting tech resilience.

· Support for Infrastructure Development: Japan reaffirmed its commitment to continue supporting infrastructure development in India, particularly in high-speed rail projects. This commitment is part of Japan’s broader investment in India’s infrastructure modernization, which includes metro projects in several Indian cities.

o Japan funded metro expansions in Pune and Kochi, enhancing urban connectivity.

· Cultural and Educational Exchanges: Cultural and educational exchanges have been a cornerstone of India-Japan relations. Initiatives to enhance people-to-people ties include academic partnerships and cultural exchanges that aim to deepen mutual understanding and respect between the two populations.

o Japan expanded Japanese language programs in Indian schools, reaching 50,000 students.

· Collaboration on International Security: India and Japan have agreed to strengthen their counter-terrorism efforts and work collaboratively in multilateral fora such as the United Nations to address global security challenges. This includes their joint efforts to push for the adoption of the Comprehensive Convention on International Terrorism (CCIT).

o India and Japan co-sponsored a UN resolution to advance the CCIT, gaining support from 30 nations.

Expert/ Scholar’s opinion

· C. Raja Mohan: “Kishida’s visit provided an opportunity to align India-Japan visions of a free and open Indo-Pacific based on democratic values and a rules-based order.”

· Jeff M. Smith, Heritage Foundation: “The visit highlighted the continued priority Japan places on strengthening strategic ties with India amid the shifting geopolitics of the Indo-Pacific region and rising Chinese assertiveness.”

· Satoru Nagao: “Expanded India-Japan defense and security cooperation builds on the increasing convergence of strategic interests between the two nations in the backdrop of a disruptive China’s rise and its regional power projections.”

Theoretical framework to India Japan Relations

· Realism: Applying realism to the India-Japan relationship, one might analyze how their cooperation is influenced by the desire to counterbalance a rising China and ensure their own security.

· Liberalism: Liberalism emphasizes cooperation, institutions, and shared values. In the context of India and Japan, one could examine how their democratic values and shared interest in maintaining a rules-based international order drive their collaboration in forums like the Quad (India, Japan, Australia, and the United States).

· Balancing and Bandwagoning: This theory examines how states align with or against a rising power. In the context of India and Japan, scholars could analyze whether their collaboration represents a balancing strategy against China’s influence or a form of bandwagoning by engaging with China’s economic initiatives.

o Analysts described India-Japan’s Asia-Africa Growth Corridor as a balancing act against China’s BRI.

· Soft Power: Soft power theory examines how attractiveness and cultural influence shape international relations. Scholars might assess how Japan’s cultural exports like anime and India’s soft power through Bollywood contribute to people-to-people connections and diplomatic ties.

o India-Japan Cultural Year boosted soft power, with Japanese anime festivals in Delhi drawing large crowds.

India and USA

PM Modi during Recent visit to USA

PM Modi, - The future is AI - America and India".

· Relations between India and the US are people-centric and people-driven, and are important for the most important relationship of the 21st century.” "The future is AI-America and India".

· Modi’s February 2025 Visit: During his visit to Washington, Modi emphasized a $500 billion trade target by 2030, highlighting AI and defense as key pillars of the “MEGA” (Make India Great Again) partnership with the US.

· Quad Summit Commitment: Modi’s September 2024 Quad Summit attendance in Delaware reinforced AI-driven innovation and maritime security cooperation.

Different leaders on India-US relations

· Vajpayee called USA as India’s Natural Ally

· Obama – India and USA is the most defining relationship of the 21st century

· Modi – We have now overcome the hesitations of the past.

· Trump’s Endorsement: In February 2025, President Trump described the India-US relationship as “the strongest it has ever been,” citing personal rapport with Modi and shared security goals.

Historical evolution of the relationship

The evolution of India-US relations has been marked by several significant milestones and developments over the years.

David Malone aptly describes the trajectory of India-US relations as a journey from being estranged democracies to becoming engaged strategic partners. The relationship between the two countries has undergone significant transformation over the years.

· Independence Era (1947-1960s):

o After India gained independence from British rule in 1947, the initial relationship with the US was lukewarm.

o India's non-alignment policy during the Cold War era led to cautious engagement with both the US and the Soviet Union.

· 1960s-1970s:

o Tensions arose during the 1960s due to differences over geopolitical issues, including India's position on the Vietnam War.

o The US viewed India's close ties with the Soviet Union and its nuclear ambitions with skepticism.

o The US supported Pakistan during the 1971 Indo-Pak War, further straining relations with India.

· 1980s-1990s:

o The 1980s saw a gradual improvement in India-US relations with the end of the Cold War and the waning of non-alignment.

o Economic and trade ties started to develop, and both countries sought to find common ground on regional security issues.

o The 1990s marked a significant shift with the initiation of economic reforms in India and the end of the Cold War, paving the way for a more positive relationship.

· 2000s-2010s:

o The early 2000s saw a notable improvement in bilateral relations, with both countries recognizing shared democratic values and economic interests.

o The US-India Civil Nuclear Agreement in 2008 was a landmark development, facilitating nuclear trade and cooperation between the two countries.

o The establishment of the Strategic Dialogue in 2009 and the 2+2 Ministerial Dialogue in 2018 strengthened high-level engagement.

· Post-2010s:

o The US designated India as a "Major Defense Partner" in 2016, signaling increased defense cooperation and technology transfer.

o Both countries deepened military ties through various joint exercises and defense partnerships.

o The Quad (Quadrilateral Security Dialogue) involving India, the US, Japan, and Australia gained prominence as a forum for regional security cooperation.

o India and the US collaborated on various global issues, including climate change, counterterrorism, and healthcare.

· Current Scenario:

o The India-US relationship has become a significant strategic partnership, with both countries engaging in regular diplomatic, economic, and defense dialogues.

o Shared concerns over China's assertiveness in the Indo-Pacific region have led to increased cooperation in maintaining regional stability.

o Trade disputes and economic issues remain points of contention, but efforts are ongoing to enhance economic ties and address trade imbalances.

· Deepened Strategic Partnership: The February 2025 US-India Joint Leaders’ Statement reaffirmed the Comprehensive Global Strategic Partnership, launching the US-India COMPACT initiative for military and technology cooperation.

· Trade Resolution: In 2023, both nations resolved six WTO disputes during Modi’s June visit, with the final dispute settled in September, boosting trade confidence.

· Defense Milestones: The 2024 approval of $3.9 billion MQ-9B drone sales and F-35 jet discussions in 2025 marked significant defense advancements.

Overall, the India-US relationship has evolved from a cautious engagement during the early post-independence period to a robust strategic partnership in recent years, based on shared democratic values, economic interests, and converging geopolitical interests in the Indo-Pacific region. The relationship continues to strengthen as both countries recognize the importance of each other in addressing global challenges and fostering regional stability.

Areas of co-operation in recent times – tracking the recent development

Geo-strategic Cooperation:

· Reiterated support for India's permanent membership in a reformed UNSC: The US reaffirmed its backing for India to become a permanent member of the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) when it is reformed.

· Advancing Indian membership in the Nuclear Supplier Group (NSG): The US pledged to work towards India's inclusion in the Nuclear Suppliers Group, which would enable India to engage in nuclear trade globally.

· Invitation to PM Modi to attend APEC summit in San Francisco: President Biden invited Prime Minister Modi to participate in the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summit to enhance economic cooperation.

· Institutionalized 2+2 Ministerial Dialogue strengthens QUAD for a rules-based order in the Indo-Pacific: The Quad nations (India, US, Japan, and Australia) established a 2+2 Ministerial Dialogue to enhance strategic cooperation in the Indo-Pacific region.

· US joins India's "Indo-Pacific Oceans Initiative" for a secure and stable maritime domain: The US expressed support for India's initiative aimed at ensuring safety and sustainability in the Indo-Pacific seas.

· "Blue Dot Network" certification counters China's BRI: The Blue Dot Network aims to certify infrastructure projects that are sustainable and transparent, offering an alternative to China's Belt and Road Initiative (BRI).

· United stand against global terrorism and condemnation of extremist groups: Both countries condemned all forms of terrorism and pledged to cooperate in countering terrorist activities worldwide.

· Strong condemnation of cross-border terrorism and terrorist proxies, urging Pakistan's action: The joint statement emphasized the need for Pakistan to take decisive action against terrorist groups operating from its territory.

· Quad Summit Outcomes: The September 2024 Quad Summit in Delaware launched joint coast guard operations and expanded maritime domain awareness initiatives.

· Counterterrorism Success: The February 2025 extradition of 26/11 Mumbai attack accused Tahawwur Rana from the US to India marked a major counterterrorism win.

· Indian Ocean Strategic Venture: Launched in February 2025, this bilateral forum aims to enhance economic connectivity and maritime security in the Indian Ocean.

Geo-economic Cooperation:

Efforts to enhance bilateral trade relations with a target of $500 billion trade: Both countries seek to strengthen their economic ties and achieve a trade target of $500 billion.

· India's trade surplus with the US in 2022-23 reaches $28 billion: India had a trade surplus of $28 billion with the US during the specified period.

· Agreement on a transitional approach on Equalization Levy (EL) or digital tax: India and the US reached an understanding on the digital tax issue to facilitate a smoother transition.

· Joint production of F414 Jet Engine by General Electric (GE) in India: India and the US welcomed a proposal by General Electric to manufacture F414 Jet Engines in India, promoting defense technology collaboration.

· Investment in semiconductor assembly and test facility in India: Micron Technology is set to invest in a semiconductor assembly and test plant in Gujarat, strengthening India's semiconductor industry.

· Partnership to strengthen critical mineral supply chains: The US welcomed India as a partner in the Minerals Security Partnership to secure critical mineral supply chains.

· Cooperation on AI-enabled cancer and diabetes research: Collaboration between the US National Cancer Institute and Indian scientists for advanced AI-based cancer and diabetes research.

· Trade Growth: Bilateral trade reached $77.5 billion in 2023–24, with India maintaining a trade surplus, though Trump’s 2025 tariff policies pose challenges.

· Semiconductor Expansion: Micron’s $825 million Gujarat facility progressed in 2024, with operations expected by late 2025.

· Critical Minerals Initiative: The 2025 Strategic Mineral Recovery Initiative targets lithium and cobalt processing, reducing reliance on China.

· Energy Trade Surge: US natural gas exports to India soared 70% in 2024, with plans to reach $25 billion annually.

Cultural Cooperation:

· Ongoing negotiations for a Cultural Property Agreement to prevent illegal trafficking of cultural property from India: The two countries are working on an agreement to protect and exchange cultural property.

· Antiquities Repatriation: The US returned 578 antiquities to India since 2016, with 297 in September 2024, strengthening cultural ties.

· Educational Ties: Over 300,000 Indian students contributed $8 billion to the US economy in 2024, fostering people-to-people linkages.

Technological Cooperation:

· Collaboration on AI-enabled cancer and diabetes research: Joint efforts by the US National Cancer Institute and Indian scientists for AI-based research on cancer and diabetes.

· Investment in semiconductor assembly and test facility in India: Micron Technology's investment in a semiconductor assembly and test plant in Gujarat to boost India's semiconductor industry.

· Partnership to strengthen critical mineral supply chains: India joining the Minerals Security Partnership to ensure a stable supply of critical minerals.

· Signing of the Artemis Accords for space exploration: India signed the Artemis Accords, indicating a common vision for space exploration.

· INDUS Innovation Launch: Announced in February 2025, this initiative fosters AI, space, and energy partnerships, building on INDUS-X.

· Space Milestones: The 2025 NASA-ISRO AXIOM mission will send an Indian astronaut to the ISS, and the NISAR mission is set for launch.

· Autonomous Systems Alliance: The 2025 ASIA initiative promotes AI-driven defense systems, with partnerships like Anduril-Mahindra for maritime technologies.

Areas that can be harbinger of future co-operation

Geo-Economic Cooperation:

· Leveraging Demographic Dividend: The unmatched demographic dividend in India presents an excellent opportunity for technology transfer, manufacturing, trade, and investment between the US and Indian enterprises.

· De-risking Supply Chains: The US can work with India, Australia, and Japan to diversify and de-risk supply chains through the Supply Chain Resilience Initiative.

· Infrastructure Investment: The US can invest in India, while supporting Japan's proposed Asia-African growth corridor. Space Governance: Due to shared concerns about the Chinese Army’s growing space capabilities, space governance will become a focal point of the US-India bilateral relationship.

· Joint Infrastructure Projects: India and the US can undertake joint infrastructure development programs in Indian Ocean littoral states, countering Chinese projects in the region and fostering economic growth.

· IMEC Progress: The India-Middle East-Europe Corridor (IMEC) advanced with a 2025 MoU for railway and undersea cable projects.

· Supply Chain Resilience: The 2024 Quad Supply Chain Task Force enhanced semiconductor and critical mineral resilience.

Geo-Strategic Cooperation:

· Free & Rule-based Indo-Pacific: Ensuring a free, open, and rules-based Indo-Pacific region is critical for both countries. Cooperation in this area will contribute to regional stability and prosperity.

· Maritime co-operation: Both countries can cooperate in the maritime domain, focusing on areas such as the blue economy and maritime domain awareness.

· Quad Maritime Initiatives: The 2024 Quad Summit introduced joint coast guard patrols and port development programs.

· I2U2 Expansion: The 2025 I2U2 (India, Israel, UAE, US) meeting planned new Middle East security initiatives.

Technology Cooperation:

· Trade: Finalizing the Bilateral Investment Treaty will create a conducive environment for increased trade and investment, aiming to achieve the target of $500 billion in trade by 2025.

· TRUST Initiative: US-India TRUST initiative promotes collaboration in AI, semiconductors, and quantum technologies.

· Trade Deal Framework: In April 2025, US VP JD Vance announced terms for a comprehensive trade deal, targeting $500 billion by 2030.

By focusing on these strategic areas of cooperation, India and the US can forge a robust and mutually beneficial partnership that advances their shared interests and contributes to regional and global stability.

Scholar/Experts’ opinion

· Aparna Pande, Hudson Institute: "Shared democratic values and converging strategic interests will continue to bind India and US together as partners despite some friction points in the relationship."

· Arvind Panagariya: "Realizing the full potential of ties will depend on India undertaking structural reforms and the US dispelling concerns over reliability as a long-term partner."

· Richard Rossow, CSIS: “Modi’s 2025 visit solidified defense and technology ties, but trade tariffs and Chabahar sanctions remain hurdles.”

· Katherine Hadda, CSIS: “The US’s pragmatic approach to India’s human rights issues ensures strategic alignment despite domestic criticisms.”

Concerns / Challenges in the relationship

Geo-economic Concerns:

· Intellectual Property (IP) Issues: India's presence on the US "Special 301" Priority Watch List highlights concerns over intellectual property rights protection.

· WTO Issues: India aligns with other developing countries to pressurize developed nations to fulfill their commitments under the Doha Development Agenda.

· Regional Integration and Trade Agreements: India and the US are not part of major regional trade agreements like the CPTPP and RCEP, where China seeks membership.

· Tariff Tensions: Trump’s 2025 reciprocal tariff policy threatens India’s $77.5 billion exports, prompting India to cut motorcycle tariffs by 10–20%.

· IP Progress: India’s 2024 IP reforms reduced US concerns, though it remains on the Priority Watch List.

Geo-strategic Concerns:

· Russia’s Arms Supply: India’s close ties with Russia as a major arms supplier hinder interoperability between Indian and American military hardware.

· China Factor: Both countries have suspicions about each other’s cooperation with China, affecting deeper and long-term deals.

· Kashmir Issue: Concerns raised by some US politicians about human rights in Kashmir could strain India-US relations and help internationalize the issue.

· Afghanistan Situation: The US withdrawal from Afghanistan and its impact on the region may have spillover effects on the Kashmir situation.

· Iran’s Ties with China: The US’s Maximum Pressure strategy on Iran has affected India’s relations with Iran, leading to closer ties between Iran and China.

· Divergent Stances on Russia-Ukraine Conflict: The US imposed sanctions on Russia, while India remained non-aligned on the issue, causing tensions.

· Chabahar Port Sanctions: US sanctions in February 2025 on Indian entities linked to Chabahar port strained ties, despite India’s 2024 10-year port agreement.

· Russia-Ukraine Divide: India’s neutral stance persisted in 2024, with Modi’s Ukraine visit highlighting strategic autonomy, causing US unease.

· Sikh Assassination Plot: The 2023 US allegations of an Indian plot against a Sikh activist were resolved diplomatically in 2025, avoiding major fallout.

Geo-political Concerns:

· Data Sovereignty: India’s concerns about the US’s Cloud Act and data localization laws create tensions over data sovereignty.

· Osaka Track: India opposed the Osaka Track advocating free data flow, citing sovereignty concerns, leading to tensions with the US.

· Trade Disputes and Tariffs: India lost benefits under the GSP, and both countries imposed tariffs on certain products, leading to ongoing trade tensions.

· Data Resolution: The 2024 US-India Digital Trade Dialogue eased data sovereignty concerns, aligning policies for AI collaboration.

· GSP Restoration Talks: The US initiated GSP restoration discussions in 2025, addressing India’s trade concerns.

Other Concerns:

· Pakistan Factor: Concerns over human rights in Kashmir and issues related to Afghanistan create geopolitical sensitivities in the India-US relationship.

· Bangladesh Tensions: Modi raised concerns about Hindu minority attacks in Bangladesh during his 2025 US visit, seeking US support.

Scholar’s opinion on Issues in the relationship

· Tanvi Madan, Brookings Institution: "While convergence is strengthening, differences over India’s positions on Russia, economic policies and human rights record act as impediments to fully unlocking the partnership’s potential."

· Varun Sivaram: "Divergent approaches on climate change commitments and responsibilities have emerged as another friction point."

· Mukesh Aghi, US-India Strategic Partnership Forum: "Removal of GSP benefits and high visa rejection rates have become concerns for India hampering economic and people-to-people linkages with the US."

· Suvolaxmi Dutta Choudhury, Asia Pacific Foundation: “India’s strategic autonomy, seen in Chabahar and Russia ties, complicates US expectations for alignment.”

· Jeff M. Smith, Heritage Foundation: “Trade and tariff disputes under Trump 2.0 risk undermining defense gains unless balanced by concessions.”

PM recent state visit to USA

Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s state visit to the United States is generating significant excitement, with many considering it the most important visit by an Indian PM.

The visit is seen as a pivotal moment that could potentially transform India’s geo-economics and geopolitical fortunes. The principal focus of the visit is to strengthen India-US economic and defense ties, with discussions on strategic technology partnerships and defense industrial cooperation.

Key Outcomes of the Visit:

· Strengthening India-US Economic Relationship: The visit aims to lay the foundations for enhanced economic ties, especially in the defense technology sector.

· Launch of Initiatives: The visit will witness the formal launch of the Initiative for Critical and Emerging Technologies (iCET) and the INDUS X initiative, promoting defense innovation partnerships.

· License Manufacture of GE-414 Jet Engine: An announcement regarding the license manufacture of the GE-414 jet engine to power Indian fighters is anticipated.

· Discussions on Intelligence Sharing: India and the US are expected to discuss arrangements for intelligence sharing, especially in the Indo-Pacific maritime domain.

Significance of the Visit:

· Transformative Potential: The visit is seen as Modi’s Deng Xiaoping moment, holding the potential to transform India’s geo-economic and geopolitical fortunes.

· Strengthening Defense Ties: The visit seeks to deepen the strategic partnership and defense industrial cooperation between the two nations.

· Enhanced Technology Collaboration: iCET and the Strategic Trade Dialogue aim to expand strategic technology partnerships and facilitate trade in critical technology domains.

· Geopolitical Implications: India’s favored position in the US’s geopolitical worldview and evolving Washington Consensus highlights the significance of the visit in the context of containing China.

Future Prospects:

· Challenges in Technology Partnership: India’s aspirations for technology transfer need to align with US regulations, which may impose certain limitations on access to technology and markets.

· Intelligence-Sharing Cooperation: There is potential for the establishment of joint intelligence collection sites along the Sino-Indian border, enhancing the scope of US-India interaction.

· Focus on Defense Self-Reliance: While India seeks US defense technology, it also aims to bolster its own defense industry to reduce reliance on imports.

· Continued Defense and Security Cooperation: The two countries are expected to further strengthen cooperation in domains relevant to security, such as space and AI.

· 2025 Visit Outcomes: Modi’s February 2025 visit launched the US-India COMPACT and TRUST initiatives, targeting AI, defense, and trade cooperation, with a $500 billion trade goal by 2030.

· Defense Co-production: Agreements for Javelin missiles and Stryker vehicles were announced in 2025, alongside GE-414 jet engine production progress.

· Intelligence Sharing: The 2025 visit advanced maritime intelligence-sharing pacts, focusing on the Indo-Pacific.

· Space Cooperation: The NASA-ISRO AXIOM mission and NISAR launch plans for 2025 were confirmed, enhancing space ties.

The visit is a significant step in consolidating India-US relations, particularly in the areas of economic collaboration, defense technology, and intelligence sharing. It reflects the evolving dynamics of the Indo-US quasi-alliance, with both countries seeking to leverage each other’s strengths to address common challenges in the Indo-Pacific region and beyond.

Recent Developments

· Defense and Security Cooperation: The U.S.-India defense relationship continues to expand with initiatives like INDUS-X, which promotes innovation in defense technologies. The U.S. has approved a substantial foreign military sale including MQ-9B drones to India, indicating a strong commitment to bolstering India’s military capabilities. The ongoing collaboration underlines an emphasis on joint development and technology transfer, particularly in areas like undersea and aerospace technologies.

· Economic and Trade Relations: The economic interactions between the two nations are robust, with the U.S. being one of India’s top trade partners. In 2024, significant progress was made in resolving longstanding trade disputes, further smoothing the path for enhanced economic cooperation. Discussions at the India-U.S. Trade Policy Forum have been pivotal in addressing barriers and boosting bilateral trade.

· Technological Collaborations: The collaboration has also extended into cutting-edge technologies such as Artificial Intelligence (AI) and clean energy. The U.S. supports India’s leadership in the Global Partnership on AI and has partnered on the development of clean and renewable energy technologies. These efforts are part of broader initiatives like the U.S.-India Climate and Clean Energy Agenda 2030 Partnership, aiming to propel both nations towards sustainable development.

· Strategic Global Policies: Joint statements from leadership meetings have consistently emphasized a shared commitment to advancing democracy, human rights, and addressing global conflicts like the Russia-Ukraine war and tensions in the Middle East. These dialogues illustrate the strategic alignment and mutual interests in maintaining a stable international order.

· Strategic Dialogues and Agreements: India and Russia have continued to bolster their "Special and Privileged Strategic Partnership". Notable developments include meetings between high-ranking officials and agreements to expand cooperation across multiple sectors. This includes discussions on multilateralism and the development of a multipolar world order during bilateral talks. India’s External Affairs Minister, S. Jaishankar, held discussions with Russian officials that also covered economic, trade, energy, and defense cooperation.

· Defense Cooperation and Challenges: The relationship has faced challenges, particularly concerning the delivery and performance of Russian defense equipment due to logistical disruptions and the impacts of the Ukraine war. However, efforts are being made to revitalize and stabilize military ties, including joint production initiatives which could see India collaborating more closely with Russia in the defense sector.

· Energy and Economic Ties: Energy remains a critical area of collaboration, with discussions aimed at strengthening ties in the supply of hydrocarbons, coking coal, and fertilizers. Both countries are keen on leveraging their economic partnership to support mutual growth and development, with trade reaching significant figures prior to target years.

· Bilateral Summits and Future Cooperation: The 21st India-Russia Annual Summit highlighted the continuation of deep-rooted ties, with both nations committing to enhance their strategic partnership. They discussed increasing economic cooperation and connectivity initiatives like the International North-South Transport Corridor and the Chennai-Vladivostok Eastern Maritime Corridor.

· Defense Advancements: The 2025 approval of F-35 jet sales and co-production of Javelin and Stryker systems deepened defense ties.

· Trade Policy Forum: The January 2024 TPF meeting resolved visa and market access issues, boosting trade to $77.5 billion.

· Clean Energy Partnership: The 2024 US-India Clean Energy Agenda added $1 billion for renewable projects in India.

Scholars’ / Experts view

· Nitin Pai, Takshashila Institution: "The visit reinforced India-US ambition for a strong strategic partnership despite some divergences, giving a boost to defence and security cooperation in the Indo-Pacific region including revitalizing the Quad."

· Aparna Pande, Hudson Institute: "The visit allowed both countries to reaffirm their strategic partnership and defense ties in the backdrop of China’s assertiveness and emerging geopolitical realignments."

· Harsh V. Pant, Observer Research Foundation: "Despite policy differences, the visit underscored the democratic values and people-to-people ties that energize the bilateral relationship in the long term."

· Jeff M. Smith, The Heritage Foundation: "While economic issues remain, strategic convergence on the Indo-Pacific driven by shared concerns over China’s rise was the highlight, as seen in the initiative on critical and emerging tech."

· Vivan Sharan: "Announcing the initiative on critical and emerging technologies indicates both nations aim to leverage synergies in areas like quantum, AI and 6G to counter shared threats and boost economic growth."

Scholarly Insights:

· Tanvi Madan, Brookings Institution: “The 2025 visit navigated tariff tensions, but India’s strategic autonomy limits full alignment with US goals.”

· Richard Rossow, CSIS: “Defense and AI initiatives like COMPACT signal a maturing partnership, though trade disputes require careful management.”

Theoretical Frameworks:

· Realism: Realism emphasizes the role of power and national interests in international relations. In the context of India-USA relations, realist scholars might analyze how both countries navigate their interests in a changing global order, considering factors such as balancing against China and pursuing strategic partnerships.

· Liberalism: Liberalism highlights cooperation, international institutions, and shared values. Scholars could explore how India and the USA collaborate on issues like democracy promotion, climate change, and counterterrorism, reflecting common values.

· Realism in Action: The 2025 Chabahar sanctions and India’s Russia ties highlight realist tensions, with India prioritizing strategic autonomy.

· Liberal Cooperation: The 2024 Quad Cancer Moonshot and cultural repatriation efforts reflect liberal values of shared progress.

India and Russia

India considers Russia a time-tested ally from the Cold War era with key cooperation in defense, oil, nuclear energy and space exploration.

PM Modi - Every child in India knows that Russia is our best friend.

· Russia has been the pillar of India’s development and security

· India and Russia relations have been constant in the world that is constantly changing.

· PM Modi, “The resilience of India-Russia relationship is based on the fact that it rests on the principles of equality, trust and mutual benefit.”

Evolution of Relations

· Post-Independence Era - Ideological Divide: During the early post-independence years, India's relationship with Russia was marked by ideological polarization under the leadership of Stali

o The prevalent perspective was one of stark divisions - "those whare not with us are against us."

· Cold War Alignment: Throughout the Cold War, India's geopolitical alignment leaned towards the USSR without formal alliance. Notably, the 1971 Treaty of Peace, Friendship & Cooperation represented a quasi-alliance.

o This era saw the development of fundamental industries, defense collaboration, trading in local currency, and substantial economic aid from Russia.

· Post-Cold War Transformation: In the post-Cold War landscape, India-Russia relations underwent significant transformation. The relationship evolved from a traditional buyer-seller dynamic ta comprehensive security partnership characterized by mutual gains and shared interests.

o This period alswitnessed the emergence of the Russia-China-India trilateral framework, advocating for multilateralism and a multipolar world order.

· Strategic Partnerships: The year 2000 marked a pivotal moment with the establishment of a Strategic Partnership between India and Russia, following a similar accord with France in 1998. This move demonstrated the deepening cooperation in various spheres.

o Subsequently, in 2010, the partnership reached new heights with the designation of a "Special and Privileged Strategic Partnership," underscoring the unique and elevated nature of their relations.

Areas of Cooperation between India and Russia

· Geo-strategic Cooperation:

o Annual Summit meetings, Indian PM and Russian President, highest institutionalized dialogue.

o Elevating relationship, "Special and Privileged Partnership," informal summit in Sochi 2018.

o Inter-Governmental Commissions: Trade, Economic, Scientific, Technological, Cultural Cooperation, Military-Technical Cooperation.

o Support for India's permanent seat, UN Security Council, NSG membership.

o Active engagement: BRICS, SCO, projects like INSTC.

o Cooperation against international terrorism, drug trafficking, Afghanistan issues.

· Geo-political Cooperation:

o Joint research, development, production, advanced defense items.

o Deals, S-400 air defense missile systems, joint military exercises, 'INDRA.'

o Joint programs: BrahMos Cruise Missile, 5th Generation Fighter Jet, Sukhoi Su-30MKI, etc.

o Key role: India's submarine programs, aircraft carrier operations.

o Russia’s involvement: India’s space program, joint satellite launches, navigation systems.

o Collaboration: peaceful use of nuclear energy, joint nuclear power projects.

· Geo-economic Cooperation:

o Bilateral trade: $25 billion in 2022, increased oil purchase from Russia.

o Bilateral investments: $30 billion in 2018.

o Russia’s position: India’s largest arms supplier.

o Collaboration: economic, scientific, technological, cultural areas, inter-governmental commissions.

o Participation: projects like International North-South Transport Corridor (INSTC).

· Science and Technology Cooperation:

o Collaboration: basic sciences, Russian-Indian Network of Universities.

o Joint research: Arctic, Antarctic, scientific areas.

o Collaboration: India’s manned space mission "Gaganyaan."

o Joint activities: satellite launches, navigation systems, outer space applications.

o Support: India’s space program, launching India’s first unmanned satellite.

· Cultural Relations:

o Teaching: Indian languages like Hindi, Tamil, Marathi, etc., in Russian institutions.

o Promotion: Indian culture, dance, music, yoga, Ayurveda in Russia.

o Cultural exchange programs: 'Namaste Russia,' educational brilliance sharing through institutes like Jawaharlal Nehru Cultural Centre.

o Exhibition commemorating Mahatma Gandhi’s 150th anniversary, connection with Leo Tolstoy in Russia.

o About 20 Russian institutions teaching Hindi, approximately 1500 Russian students.

India’s Stand on Russia–Ukraine Crisis

Sumit Ganguly - Understanding India’s stance on the war in Ukraine is complex. In considerable part, India’s decision to avoid taking a clear-cut position stems from a dependence on Russia on a host of issues – diplomatic, military and energy-related.

India, the world's second-largest country and sixth-largest economy, is skillfully managing its relationships with both Russia and the West amid the ongoing Ukraine conflict. By maintaining a stance of "strategic ambivalence," India aims to balance its interests and responsibilities while avoiding direct confrontation.

Balancing Neutrality and Pressures from the West

· Despite pressure from Western nations, particularly the United States, India adheres to a policy of neutrality in the Ukraine conflict.

· India's historical reliance on Russian energy and weaponry, coupled with its complex relationship with the U.S., leads to a cautious stance that avoids taking sides.

Acknowledging Divisions: India's Stance on Ukraine Conflict

· External Affairs Minister Subramanian Jaishankar openly acknowledged divergences over the Ukraine conflict during the G20 event.

· India's acknowledgment of divisions underscores its pragmatic approach of addressing differences while prioritizing peaceful resolution.

Dual Engagement: Maintaining Open Channels with Russia and the West

· India's unique positioning allows it to communicate and engage with both Russia and Western nations amid the conflict.

· This dual connectivity enables India to hold conversations with leadership from both sides, promoting dialogue and understanding.

India's Emphasis on Peaceful Resolution and Cooperation

· India's policy towards the Ukraine conflict emphasizes neutrality and the pursuit of peaceful dialogue for resolution.

· Prime Minister Modi's message at the G20 meeting underscored India's focus on its own priorities and those of the Global South, highlighting cooperation on issues like food security, development, and terrorism.

Historical Rationale: Russia's Role in India's Defense and Energy Sector

· India's reluctance to overtly condemn Russia's actions is influenced by a history of relying on Russian defense equipment and energy resources.

· Past sanctions imposed on India by Western nations led to a dependence on Russia for military support, further shaping India's approach.

Diversification Efforts: Reducing Dependence on Russian Arms

· India has taken steps to diversify its sources of weaponry and strengthen its defense industry.

· Recent efforts to procure defense equipment from other countries, including the U.S. and Australia, have led to a decline in the share of Russian equipment in India's military arsenal.

Complex Relations: Balancing China's Influence and Defense Needs

· India's geopolitical landscape includes complexities with neighboring China, prompting strategic considerations in its stance towards the Ukraine conflict.

· Russia’s growing alignment with China presents challenges for India’s long-standing partnership with Russia.

Conclusion

India's strategy of "strategic ambivalence" in the Ukraine conflict underscores its adeptness at navigating geopolitical complexities. By emphasizing peaceful resolution, maintaining a neutral stance, and diversifying its defense sources, India's approach aligns with its historical ties, evolving aspirations, and broader engagement on the global stage.

Why India has such stand on the Russia–Ukraine crisis

While Western democracies have taken strong measures against Russia in response to its invasion of Ukraine, India, the world's largest democracy, has maintained a unique stance that diverges from Western actions. Several factors, including historical ties, energy needs, arms procurement, and regional influence, shape India's approach to the Ukraine conflict.

· Historical Ties and Anti-West Sentiment:

o India's relationship with Russia dates back to the Cold War era and is rooted in anti-colonial and anti-imperialist sentiments.

o The Cold War's end did not disrupt this relationship; India's nationalist leanings align with a historical affinity for Russia over the West.

o Indian media sometimes portrays the United States as more responsible for destabilizing Ukraine than Russia.

· Energy Security and Russian Oil Bargains:

o India's rapid economic growth and status as the world's third-largest oil consumer drive its demand for energy resources.

o With limited domestic oil reserves, India heavily relies on imported oil, making price sensitivity a key consideration.

o India's purchase of Russian oil has surged, accounting for a significant share of imports, leading to geopolitical and economic benefits.

o The Biden administration appears tolerant of India's oil purchases due to discounted rates and potential indirect access to Russian oil.

· Russia as India's Primary Arms Supplier:

o India's military arsenal largely consists of Soviet and Russian weaponry from the Cold War era.

o Aging equipment necessitates modernization efforts, with India gradually diversifying its arms sources.

o Despite these diversification attempts, Russia remains India's principal arms supplier, with deals valued at billions of dollars.

o India's military hardware upgrade is a time-consuming process, hampering the reduction of Russian influence.

· Geopolitical Concerns and China's Influence:

o India's paramount foreign policy concern is its border dispute and relationship with China.

o The unresolved border issue and perceived Chinese encroachment make China India's top national security threat.

o Russia’s close relationship with China prompts India to maintain a balance to prevent Russia from drifting further toward China's sphere of influence.

Indian Stance on Russia Ukraine Crisis

· Diplomatic Balancing: India has maintained a delicate diplomatic balance. Despite its historical ties with Russia, India has been engaging with Ukraine to strengthen bilateral relations and cooperation. Indian External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar's discussions with Ukrainian officials have emphasized potential roles India could play in the peace processes, acknowledging the longstanding relationship with Russia but also exploring more forward-looking relations with Ukraine.

· Economic Impacts and Energy Security: Economically, India has capitalized on the situation by increasing imports of discounted Russian oil, which surged significantly in response to global sanctions on Russia. This move has been crucial in addressing India’s energy needs amidst global supply disruptions and has also influenced its broader economic policies. However, this has placed India in a difficult position with Western countries, particularly the United States, which has expressed disapproval of India's ramped-up energy trade with Russia.

· Defense and Strategic Concerns: On the defense front, the war has underscored India's reliance on Russian military supplies, complicating its aspirations for self-reliance in defense technologies. The ongoing conflict has affected the availability and future cooperation regarding military technologies and supplies from Russia, prompting India to seek alternative partnerships and diversify its defense procurement.

· Scholars have pointed out that India’s stance of not publicly condemning Russia's actions in Ukraine is driven by strategic calculations. India’s primary concern remains its regional security challenges, particularly with respect to China, and maintaining strong ties with Russia is seen as crucial in this context. Moreover, India aims to balance its relationships with both Western powers and Russia to secure its national interests.

Conclusion

India's approach to the Russia-Ukraine conflict is multifaceted and driven by a combination of historical ties, economic interests, security concerns, and regional dynamics. While diverging from Western condemnation of Russia, India's stance reflects its pursuit of strategic interests, such as energy security, defense modernization, and safeguarding against regional adversaries. Understanding India's complex motivations is crucial for comprehending its role in the global geopolitical landscape.

Theoretical Frameworks:

· Realism: Realism emphasizes power dynamics and state interests. In the context of India-Russia relations, realist scholars might analyze how shared concerns about regional stability and balancing against common rivals shape their strategic partnership.

· Alliance Theory: This framework examines the motivations and dynamics of alliances between states. Scholars could explore the historical factors that have driven India and Russia to cooperate on military, defense, and geopolitical issues.

· Multipolarity: Given their histories as major powers, scholars might apply this framework to examine how India and Russia navigate a multipolar world order, including the role of other actors such as China and the USA.

· Defense Cooperation: India and Russia have deepened defense ties despite global tensions, with Russia remaining a key supplier, though its share of India’s arms imports dropped from 64% (2013–17) to 45% (2018–22). In July 2024, the 22nd India-Russia Summit saw agreements to expedite S-400 missile system deliveries and expand joint production under the Make in India initiative, including AK-203 rifles at the Indo-Russia Rifles Private Limited facility. The Tri-Services exercise INDRA was held in September 2024, focusing on counter-terrorism. Scholar C. Raja Mohan noted India’s cautious diversification, balancing Russia with Western suppliers like the US, which supplied $3 billion in defense deals in 2024, to mitigate risks from Russia’s Ukraine conflict. Russia’s offer of Su-57E fighters with full technology transfer, signaling continued defense collaboration despite India’s growing ties with France and Israel.

· Oil and Energy Trade: Bilateral trade surged to $65.7 billion in FY 2023–24, driven by India’s import of Russian crude oil, which accounted for 23% of India’s 4 million bpd oil imports by November 2024, making Russia India’s top oil supplier. This reflects a tenfold increase in energy trade value from $5 billion in 2021 to $54.5 billion in 2023, fueled by discounted Russian oil amid Western sanctions. However, a trade imbalance persists, with India’s exports to Russia under $5 billion, causing friction over Russia’s surplus of Indian rupees. Scholar Pankaj Saran emphasized the need for regulatory reforms to boost Indian exports in pharmaceuticals and agriculture to address this deficit. EU criticism over India reselling refined Russian oil as non-Russian fuel was countered by India’s claim of compliance with EU transformation rules.

· Nuclear Energy Collaboration: The Kudankulam Nuclear Power Plant (KKNPP) remains a flagship project, with Units 1 and 2 operational and Units 3–6 under construction. In February 2024, India and Russia upgraded an agreement to build six additional 1000 MW reactors in Tamil Nadu, with plans for six more at a new site. During the July 2024 summit, both nations finalized an Action Plan for Nuclear Cooperation, including joint projects in third countries like Bangladesh’s Rooppur Nuclear Power Project. Scholar Arvind Gupta highlighted this as a strategic move to enhance India’s energy security and counter China’s regional influence, though Western sanctions on Russia pose logistical challenges.

· Space Exploration: India-Russia space cooperation advanced with Russia’s support for India’s Gaganyaan manned mission, including astronaut training completed in 2024. In January 2025, both nations signed an MoU for joint satellite launches and GLONASS navigation system integration, enhancing India’s remote sensing capabilities. The Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) collaborated with Roscosmos on Arctic research, with a joint mission planned for 2026. Scholar Sumit Ganguly noted this as critical for India’s technological self-reliance, though Russia’s strained resources due to the Ukraine conflict may delay projects. The collaboration builds on historical ties, such as Russia’s launch of India’s Aryabhata satellite in 1975.

· India’s Stance on Russia-Ukraine Crisis: India maintained its “strategic ambivalence,” abstaining from UN resolutions condemning Russia, including a December 2024 vote urging the release of political prisoners. PM Modi’s visits to Moscow (July 2024) and Kyiv (August 2024) underscored India’s dual engagement, promoting peace talks while securing energy and defense interests. External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar’s December 2024 Moscow visit reaffirmed India’s neutral stance, focusing on economic cooperation and counter-terrorism. Scholar Happymon Jacob argued India’s position reflects a pragmatic balance, leveraging Russia to counter China while deepening Western ties, though Western pressure persists over oil imports. India’s role in evacuating citizens from Ukraine in 2024 and offering humanitarian aid to Kyiv highlighted its balanced diplomacy.

· Geo-strategic and Economic Developments: The 22nd India-Russia Summit (July 2024) set a $100 billion trade target by 2030, with plans for an India-EAEU Free Trade Agreement (FTA) and simplified customs procedures. India’s $331 million investment in the Sakhalin-1 oil project has yielded $4.5 billion in revenue, prompting further investments in Russia’s Far East. Russia supported India’s UN Security Council permanent seat bid at the 2024 BRICS Summit. However, Russia’s growing ties with China, including a trilateral Russia-India-China meeting in 2024, raised concerns in New Delhi. Scholar Manjari Chatterjee Miller noted India’s cautious navigation to maintain strategic autonomy amid Russia-China proximity.

· Cultural and Science Ties: The ‘Namaste Russia’ cultural festival in 2024 expanded with yoga and Ayurveda workshops across Russian cities, while 25 Russian institutions now teach Hindi, up from 20, with 1,800 students enrolled. The Russian-Indian Network of Universities launched a joint AI and quantum computing research program in March 2025, fostering innovation. An exhibition on Rabindranath Tagore’s Russian connections was held in Moscow in October 2024, strengthening cultural bonds.

Key India-Russia Cooperation Metrics

Area	Metric	Status (2025)
Bilateral Trade	$65.7 billion (2023–24), targeting $100 billion by 2030	Oil-driven, $60 billion deficit
Oil Imports	23% of India’s 4 million bpd (Nov 2024)	Russia as top supplier
Defense Imports	Russia’s share: 45% (2018–22), down from 64% (2013–17)	S-400 deliveries, AK-203 production
Nuclear Energy	KKNPP: 2 units operational, 4 under construction, 6 more planned	New site agreement signed (Feb 2024)
Space Cooperation	Gaganyaan training completed, joint satellite MoU (Jan 2025)	Arctic mission planned for 2026

· Bilateral Trade Figure: “Bilateral trade: $65.7 billion in 2023–24, driven by increased oil purchases from Russia, with a target of $100 billion by 2030.”

· Hindi Teaching Institutions: “About 25 Russian institutions teaching Hindi, approximately 1,800 students.”

India and EU

The relationship between India and the European Union (EU) is based on shared values and principles such as democracy, rule of law; rules based international order and multilateralism. The ties are multifaceted and cover a broad spectrum of topics including trade, investment, climate change, science and technology, digital, connectivity and agriculture.

While India’s outreach to Europe has not always been on the very high grounds, the foreign policy experts and establishment in India is beginning to realize that Europe can be an important partner in building India’s domestic capacities and resilience and meeting its foreign policy goals. There has started an unprecedented level of engagements and it is held that the European Union now looms large in India’s diplomatic agenda. In many ways, India and Europe seem to now have a mutual recognition of each other’s strategic significance. The EU complements New Delhi’s goals in multiple areas like infrastructure investments, resilient supply chains, and emerging technology on defense and security too. The EU wants to push for an enhanced naval presence in the region, focus more on the Indian Ocean, and increase security cooperation keeping India at the center which shows that both have now started coming at the same page on their worldview and mutual cooperation in the future.

Rajiv Bhatia - The India-EU relationship stands at an inflection point today. As India's prominence grows in the Indo-Pacific, both sides have an opportunity to shape a multipolar, just world order. By harnessing complementarities and acknowledging divergences maturely, India and the EU can be global trailblazers for development, peace and human progress."

Shada Islam, Independent Commentator on EU Affairs - "Beyond trade, India and EU's relations have evolved to encompass a joint commitment towards effective multilateralism, rules-based order, maritime security, sustainability and technological innovation."

Areas of Co-operation between India and EU

1. Political Partnership and Geo-Political Cooperation: Joint Political Statement (1993) initiated political dialogue. Cooperation Agreement (1994) expanded beyond economics. India-EU Summit (since 2000) established institutional structure. Upgraded to 'Strategic Partnership' during 5th India-EU Summit (2004). EU's strategy on India (2018) recognized India's global role. 31 dialogue mechanisms addressing various issues. EU's influence in India's legislative process on data security.

2. Economic Ties and Investment Cooperation: EU is India's third-largest trading partner. India is the EU's 10th largest trading partner. Diverse exports: engineering goods, pharmaceuticals, gems, chemicals. Over 6,000 EU companies operate in India. EU's FDI inflows to India doubled to 18%. Investment Facilitation Mechanism (IFM) established in 2017. Ongoing negotiations for a Broad-based Trade and Investment Agreement.

Garima Mohan, German Marshall Fund: "There is significant potential to increase bilateral trade and investment flows by addressing tariff and non-tariff barriers."

3. Defence, Security, and Climate Cooperation: Cooperation on counter-terrorism, maritime security, non-proliferation. Regular India-EU Foreign Policy and Security Consultations. Information Fusion Centre linked to EU's Maritime Security Centre. Strong commitment to Paris Agreement. India-EU Clean Energy and Climate Partnership. Collaboration on renewable energy projects and climate-friendly technologies.

Rajeswari Pillai Rajagopalan, Distinguished Fellow, Observer Research Foundation: "Joint naval drills, counterterror partnerships and defense industrial collaboration highlight deepening India-EU strategic ties."

4. Science, Research, and Maritime Collaboration: Annual India-EU Science & Technology Steering Committee meetings. ISRO's contributions to the EU's Galileo satellite navigation system. Cooperation on earth observation and space science. Joint Action Plan (2005) emphasizes maritime cooperation. Shared interests in freedom of navigation, adherence to UNCLOS. Indo-Pacific as an avenue for maritime collaboration.

Anil Wadhwa, Former Secretary (East), Ministry of External Affairs: "Tapping synergies in areas like nanotech, biotech, AI, 5G/6G can catalyze the India-EU technology partnership."

Samir Saran, President, Observer Research Foundation: "Collaboration in AI, healthcare, smart cities and 5G/6G can catalyze the India-EU technology partnership to new heights."

5. Data Protection, Regulation, and Digital Cooperation: Agreement on data adequacy and cross-border data flow. Dialogue on ethical use of AI and 5G.

Strategic and Defense Collaborations: The India-UK relations are framed within the context of the ‘Roadmap 2030’, which aims to develop a comprehensive strategic partnership. This includes collaborations in defense, climate change, healthcare, and technology. The UK's 'tilt' to the Indo-Pacific is a significant part of this strategic reorientation, aiming to deepen ties with India across these key areas.

Challenges in India-EU Relations

· Economic and Trade Barriers: Deadlock over the BTIA negotiations limits economic integration. Export hurdles, regulatory issues, and trade imbalances hinder balanced economic cooperation. EU's strong economic ties with China impact India's market access and trade opportunities.

· Political and Diplomatic Differences: Sovereign concerns and differing political decisions strain bilateral relations. Criticisms over Indian policies, such as Jammu and Kashmir and the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, create diplomatic tensions. Expectations regarding India's stance on global issues like the Ukrainian crisis add complexity.

· Geopolitical Realities and Strategic Divergence: Impact of Brexit weakens EU's unity and strategic influence. Varied outlooks on global governance, multi polarity, and security strategies lead to strategic divergence. EU's reliance on China's market and participation in BRI challenge alignment.

· Complex Security and Multilateral Dynamics: Emerging threats like cyber security and terrorism require enhanced security cooperation. Limited scope beyond trade cooperation affects coordinated responses to global challenges. Navigating diverse security priorities in an evolving multipolar world poses challenges.

· Climate Goals and Multifaceted Engagement: Differences in climate goals and resource allocation hinder joint initiatives. Balancing participation in multiple international forums while managing diverse agendas is challenging. Discrepancies in data protection laws and regulatory frameworks impact digital cooperation.

Recent developments

· In 2022, the EU and India marked the 60th anniversary of their bilateral relationship, making it one of the longest-existing relations between the European Union (EU) and an Asian country. As the world’s two largest democracies, the EU and India have a long history of shared values, political exchanges, and common interests. The EU-India relations are based on a multi-dimensional agenda, ranging from socio-economic issues, effective multilateralism, and rules-based order up to security cooperation.

· In 2023 EU and India also set up a new Trade and Technology Council (TTC). The TTC will deepen strategic engagement on trade and technology between both partners. The cooperation in the TTC should focus on key issues of shared strategic importance, including trade, trusted technology and security. Ministerial meetings of the TTC will rely on the preparatory work of three working groups: Strategic technologies, digital governance and digital connectivity; Green & clean energy technologies; and Trade, investment and resilient value chains. The three strands of bilateral negotiations on trade, investment and geographical indications will continue separately from the TTC.

· In June 2022, the European Union re-launched negotiations with India for a Free Trade Agreement, and launched separate negotiations for an Investment Protection Agreement and an Agreement on Geographical Indications. The trade negotiations aim to remove barriers and helping firms – especially smaller ones – from both sides to export more; open up services and public procurement markets; Ensure protection of geographical indications; pursue commitments on trade and sustainable development. The investment protection negotiations aim to provide investors from both sides with a predictable and secure investment environment.

· 'India-EU High Level Dialogue on Research & Innovation Collaboration' held in July 2022 to enhance cooperation in frontier technologies.

· Trade and Free Trade Agreement (FTA): Negotiations for the India-EU FTA have gained momentum, with nearly half of the trade deal’s chapters agreed upon by June 2025. The EU has accepted India’s demand to exclude sensitive agricultural products like dairy, easing a major hurdle. Both sides aim to finalize a comprehensive FTA by December 2025, moving away from an interim agreement, with separate pacts on investment and geographical indications to follow. The bilateral trade volume reached $158.2 billion in 2024, a 6.73% increase from 2023, with India’s exports to the EU at $93.08 billion. However, the EU’s Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) remains a sticking point, potentially impacting Indian steel and cement exports.

· Trade and Technology Council (TTC): The second TTC meeting, held in New Delhi on February 28, 2025, advanced cooperation in strategic technologies, clean energy, and resilient value chains (Hydrogen Central). Working Group 2 on Green & Clean Technologies focused on hydrogen and battery technologies to support India’s net-zero goal by 2070 and the EU’s by 2050. Working Group 1 endorsed the Global Digital Compact (UN, September 2024) to align digital governance. The TTC complements FTA negotiations, fostering trust in technology and supply chains. Scholar Samir Saran highlights the TTC’s role in catalyzing AI and 5G partnerships, positioning India and the EU as leaders in ethical tech development.

· Geographical Indications (GI): Progress on the GI Agreement includes protecting products like Indian Basmati rice and European cheeses. India’s GI framework, administered under the 1993 Geographical Indications of Goods Act, aligns with WTO TRIPS standards, facilitating negotiations. In 2025, India added 17 new GI tags, including Assam’s Bodo Eri Silk, enhancing its bargaining position.

· Climate Change and Clean Energy: The India-EU Clean Energy and Climate Partnership expanded with joint projects on offshore wind and green hydrogen, as highlighted during the 2025 TTC meeting. The EU committed €10 million for India’s renewable energy projects in 2024. However, India’s concerns over CBAM’s impact on its carbon-intensive exports remain unresolved, with scholars like Christian Wagner urging pragmatic solutions to align climate goals. India’s push for technology transfers to meet its 2070 net-zero target, underscoring a development-focused approach.

· Defense and Security: India and the EU conducted their first joint naval exercise in the Indian Ocean from June 1–3, 2025, involving Indian Navy ships and EU Naval Force frigates. This exercise, part of Operation ATALANTA, signaled a commitment to a rules-based Indo-Pacific. Defense industrial collaboration deepened with EU firms exploring co-production of maritime surveillance systems in India.

· Development and Scholarly Perspectives: The EU-India partnership has prioritized development through initiatives like the EU’s Global Gateway, which allocated €300 million for India’s digital connectivity projects in 2024. Scholar Rajesh Mehta advocates for a forward-looking agenda, citing the TTC’s role in fostering tech standards for AI and 5G. India’s strategic autonomy as a challenge, with the EU seeking clarity on India’s stance on global issues like Ukraine.

· from News Outlets:

o Reported 90% completion of the UK-India FTA, offering lessons for EU-India talks, particularly on mobility and tariff reductions.

o Noted India’s offer of “future-proof” trade terms to the US, raising concerns about the EU securing similar concessions.

o European Council President Antonio Costa urged faster FTA conclusion amid US tariff threats, reflecting geopolitical urgency.

o Covered the India-EU naval exercise, emphasizing its role in countering China’s Indian Ocean presence.

Conclusion or way forward

· Samir Saran: "An ambitious India-EU FTA could boost trade and investments, while partnerships in 5G, AI, biotech and renewable energy can reinvigorate innovation and sustainability ties."

· Christian Wagner: "Realizing the full potential of India-EU ties requires pragmatic solutions to differences on economic issues, augmenting two-way mobility of talent and regular high-level political engagement."

· Rajesh Mehta: "Both partners should adopt a forward-looking agenda focusing on areas of convergence like climate change, defense ties, tech standards to elevate the strategic partnership."

India and China

Relationship through the Scholar’s eyes

· Manoj Joshi: India’s relations with China involve the four C’s — conflict, competition, cooperation and containment.

· Shyam Saran in his book “How India see the world: Kautilya to 21st century”: Highlighted the difference between India and China’s world view. He argued that China remains poorly understood by India and this lack of familiarity can be costly. India considered the world as Bharatvarsha (lotus) with India as Jambudwipa (one of the petals). Instead, China considered itself as middle kingdom, supposed to be the civilized centre of world, surrounded by barbarians and savages.

o Shyam Saran reiterated that India’s misreading of China’s assertive nationalism under Xi Jinping complicates trust-building, especially post-Galwan.

· Samir Saran: China wants to utilize its political and economic clout to emerge as sole continental power. For China, multi polarity is for the world, not for Asia. According to an old Chinese adage, “One mountain cannot contain two tigers.” China’s increased influence in Bangladesh as a move to limit India’s regional dominance, per a think tank analysis.

· Shashi Tharoor: India-China relations have never been warm. Cold peace has prevailed, but lately have taken an icy chill. Tharoor described the 2024 border agreement as a cautious step, but warned of persistent mistrust due to China’s regional ambitions.

Why Security dilemma between India and China

· Zhao Gancheng in his book, “Asia: Rise of Chindia & its impact on world systems”: Mentions that Rise of India & China will be marked by cooperation and conflict. As both countries started their relationship with worst case scenario in 1962, both suffer from Prisoner’s dilemma. He further adds that old framework of Panchsheel which was based on idealism, is not working and due to lack a new framework India looks at stronger China with suspicion.

o Zhao emphasized that India’s Quad alignment and China’s BRI expansion deepen the security dilemma, necessitating a new bilateral framework.

Areas of co-operation between India and China

India and China have collaborated extensively across different domains, fostering bilateral relations and regional stability. Their cooperation can be categorized into several key areas:

Geo-Political Coordination:

· Multilateral Organizations:

o BRICS: As BRICS members, India and China collaborate on global issues and initiatives such as the New Development Bank and Contingency Reserve Arrangement.

§ At the 2024 BRICS Kazan Summit, India and China endorsed Global South solidarity, launching a $500 million development fund.

o Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO): Both nations participate in SCO, focusing on security, geopolitics, and economic cooperation.

§ In 2025, India supported China’s SCO chairmanship, co-hosting a counter-terrorism exercise in Xinjiang.

o Russia-India-China Trilateral (RIC): RIC platform fosters joint positions on global challenges, counterterrorism efforts, and regional concerns.

§ In 2024, RIC discussions focused on Afghanistan’s stability, aligning India and China’s regional interests.

o Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB): Founding members of AIIB, India and China contribute to financing regional infrastructure projects.

§ AIIB approved $1 billion for India’s renewable energy projects, co-funded by China.

o World Trade Organization (WTO): Collaborative efforts within the WTO framework address trade and agricultural issues.

§ Recently, India and China jointly opposed developed nations’ trade subsidies, strengthening WTO advocacy.

o BASIC Group (Brazil, South Africa, India, and China): Cooperation on environmental matters, particularly climate change, reinforces global efforts.

§ In 2025, BASIC pushed for increased climate finance at COP29, aligning on global climate goals.

· Geo-Strategic Cooperation:

o Dialogue Mechanisms: Regular dialogues on political, economic, and regional matters facilitate communication and conflict resolution.

o Diplomatic Relations: India initiated diplomatic ties with China in 1950, marking a foundation for mutual engagement.

§ In 2025, both nations celebrated 75 years of diplomatic ties with cultural events in Delhi and Beijing.

o High-Level Visits: Exchange of visits by top leaders, such as PM Modi’s visits, has bolstered diplomatic relations and understanding.

§ Modi and Xi’s 2024 BRICS Summit meeting in Kazan led to a six-point consensus for bilateral stability.

· Geo-Economic Collaboration:

o Economic Potential: With combined markets of over 2.7 billion people and a significant GDP share, there’s untapped potential for further economic collaboration.

§ India and China explored joint ventures in green tech, leveraging their market size.

o Bilateral Trade: Over the years, bilateral trade has surged, reaching a substantial $100 billion in 2022.

§ Bilateral trade reached $118.4 billion in FY 2023-24, with China as India’s largest trading partner, driven by electronics and pharmaceuticals.

o Investments: Both countries have witnessed increased investments, particularly in sectors like IT, pharmaceuticals, and automobiles.

· Other Areas of Cooperation:

o Science and Technology:

§ Joint research workshops encourage innovation and technological collaboration.

§ In 2025, India and China held a joint AI research workshop, focusing on smart agriculture.

§ Indian IT corridors in China promote exchange in high-tech sectors. In 2024, Dalian’s IT corridor expanded, hosting 20 Indian tech firms.

o Cultural and People-to-People Exchanges:

§ Centuries-old cultural exchanges are maintained through various events and initiatives. In 2025, the Kailash Mansarovar Yatra resumed, fostering cultural ties.

§ Educational cooperation thrives as more Indian and Chinese students study in each other’s universities. In 2024, China offered 1,000 scholarships to Indian students, boosting educational exchanges.

§ People-to-People Mechanisms facilitate exchanges in art, sports, tourism, traditional medicine, and more. In 2025, direct flights resumed, enhancing tourism and cultural interactions.

o Defence Collaboration:

§ Joint military exercises like ‘Hand in Hand’ enhance mutual understanding and counterterrorism capabilities.

§ In 2025, the ‘Hand in Hand’ exercise was revived in Rajasthan, focusing on counter-terrorism.

Through their cooperation in these diverse domains, India and China have fostered ties that contribute to regional stability, understanding, and global collaboration.

Challenges in the relationship

The India-China relationship is complex and has been characterized by both cooperation and challenges. Several key challenges have emerged in their bilateral ties:

· Border Disputes: Discussed in detail later.

o Territorial Claims: Both countries have unresolved border issues, primarily in the Western sector (Aksai Chin) and Eastern sector (Arunachal Pradesh). These disputes have led to military standoffs and occasional clashes, like the Doklam standoff in 2017.

§ The 2024 border patrol agreement eased tensions in Depsang and Demchok, but full disengagement remains incomplete.

· Competing National Interests:

o Regional Dominance: Both nations aspire to assert regional dominance, which can lead to tensions as they vie for influence in South Asia and beyond.

§ In 2025, China’s $200 million investment in Bangladesh’s infrastructure sparked India’s concerns about regional influence.

o Strategic Alliances: India’s strengthening strategic ties with the U.S. and its Indo-Pacific strategy, and China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) have created areas of contention.

§ In 2024, India’s deepened Quad cooperation was viewed by China as a counter to its BRI, per a Beijing-based analyst.

· Economic Imbalances:

o Trade Imbalance: India faces a significant trade deficit with China due to unequal trade volumes and barriers for Indian exports in the Chinese market.

§ In 2024, India launched 37 anti-dumping investigations against Chinese goods to address the $85 billion trade deficit.

o Investment Concerns: Indian apprehensions about Chinese investments, particularly in sensitive sectors, have raised concerns about economic dependency and security.

§ India relaxed FDI scrutiny for Chinese firms in non-strategic sectors, balancing security and economic needs.

· Political Differences:

o One-China Policy: India’s refusal to explicitly endorse China’s One-China policy regarding Taiwan and Tibet has led to friction.

§ In 2024, India’s neutral stance on Taiwan’s elections irked China, straining diplomatic ties.

o UNSC Membership: China’s resistance to India’s bid for permanent membership in the United Nations Security Council is a source of tension.

§ Recently, China softened its stance, hinting at conditional support for India’s UNSC bid, per diplomatic sources. (There is no complete NO, but not full Yes)

· Regional and Global Competition:

o Influence in South Asia: Both countries vie for influence in South Asian countries, leading to power dynamics and competitive projects, like China’s increasing presence in Sri Lanka and Pakistan’s Gwadar port.

§ China’s loan restructuring for Bangladesh heightened India’s regional concerns, prompting counter-investments.

o Indo-Pacific Rivalry: The competition for dominance in the Indo-Pacific region, where India and China have divergent interests, has led to strategic tensions.

§ In 2024, India’s naval exercises with ASEAN nations countered China’s South China Sea activities, escalating rivalry.

· Perceptions and Historical Issues:

o Perceived Encirclement: Both countries often perceive each other’s actions as attempts to encircle or contain their respective influence.

§ In 2025, China’s new counties in Tibet were seen by India as an encirclement tactic, per a defense report.

o Historical Baggage: Historical issues, including the 1962 border conflict, continue to influence perceptions and trust levels.

§ In 2024, India’s commemoration of the 1962 war anniversary sparked Chinese media criticism, reinforcing mistrust.

· Cybersecurity and Tech Concerns:

o Cyber Espionage: Accusations of cyberattacks and economic espionage have strained the relationship.

§ India attributed a cyberattack on its power grid to Chinese actors, escalating tensions.

o 5G Technology: India’s concerns about national security and dependence on Chinese telecom equipment providers like Huawei have added complexity.

§ In 2024, India excluded Huawei from 5G trials, prioritizing domestic and Western vendors.

· Water and Environmental Issues:

o Transboundary Rivers: China’s control over the headwaters of several transboundary rivers that flow into India raises concerns about water security and environmental impact.

§ In 2025, China’s approval of a mega-dam on the Yarlung Zangbo prompted India’s diplomatic protest over water security.

o Environmental Degradation: Shared environmental challenges, including air pollution and climate change, demand cooperation but can also be contentious.

§ In 2024, India and China collaborated on a BASIC Group initiative to address air pollution, showing limited cooperation.

· Military Buildup:

o Arms Race: The ongoing military modernization and buildup by both countries create uncertainties and potential escalation risks.

Despite these challenges, India and China also share interests and have a history of cooperation. Both nations have a stake in maintaining regional stability and advancing economic development, which provides opportunities for dialogue and engagement to overcome these obstacles.

India –China Border Dispute

India-China Border Dispute: Key Sectors and Complexities

The India-China border dispute encompasses multiple sectors, each characterized by historical, cultural, and geopolitical intricacies. This dispute has generated tensions and conflicts between the two nations for decades. Let’s explore the primary sectors of contention along the India-China border:

· Eastern Sector:

o This sector involves Arunachal Pradesh (AP), where China disputes India’s sovereignty over the entire region, asserting that it is part of outer Tibet.

o China lays claim to AP, particularly Tawang, on the basis of cultural and religious ties, including the birthplace of the Dalai Lama.

o While China accuses India of occupying AP, India refutes this claim and maintains its control over the area.

o The McMahon Line, demarcating the eastern border, is contested by China.

o In 2024, China’s renewed claims over Tawang during diplomatic talks heightened tensions, per an Indian news outlet.

· Middle Sector:

o In this sector, the border passes through areas of Uttarakhand, Himachal Pradesh, and Sikkim.

o Sikkim, once a contentious region, was officially accepted by China as Indian territory in 2003. The Nathula Pass was reopened for cross-border trade.

o Disputed pockets remain in Uttarakhand and Himachal Pradesh.

§ India upgraded infrastructure near Nathula Pass, enhancing trade and security, despite minor Chinese objections.

· Western Sector:

o Aksai Chin is the main area of conflict in the western sector, where India accuses China of occupying around 38,000 square miles of Indian territory.

o Pakistan ceded an additional 2,170 square miles, the Shaksgam Valley, to China, adding to the complexity of the dispute.

o The demarcation of Aksai Chin is not clearly defined, making it a hotspot for tensions.

o Aksai Chin is a cold desert spanning about 50,000 square kilometers, largely uninhabited but strategically significant.

o China’s control over Aksai Chin is vital due to its all-weather road link connecting the troubled regions of Xinjiang and Tibet.

o China occupied Aksai Chin after the 1962 Sino-Indian War.

o The region is viewed differently by China as an extension of the Tibetan Plateau and by India as an extension of the Ladakh Plateau.

§ Recently India deployed 31 Predator drones to bolster surveillance in Aksai Chin, countering Chinese troop movements.

Complexities and Significance of border disputes

The India-China border dispute is characterized by various complexities and holds significant implications for both nations and the broader region:

· Historical Roots: The dispute has historical roots, stemming from differing interpretations of historical treaties and boundaries. Historians debated the McMahon Line’s validity, complicating border talks, per a Delhi-based journal.

· Territorial Claims: Both nations lay claim to territories for cultural, strategic, and geopolitical reasons.

o In 2024, China’s new map claiming Arunachal Pradesh escalated diplomatic tensions, per a national daily.

· Strategic Importance: The regions under dispute hold strategic value due to their geographical locations, potential military advantages, and economic prospects.

o India’s Vibrant Villages Programme enhanced strategic infrastructure in Arunachal Pradesh, countering China’s border villages.

· Regional Power Dynamics: The border dispute is influenced by regional power dynamics, particularly China’s relationship with Pakistan and India’s alignment with the United States.

· Economic and Trade Interests: Resolving the border dispute could enhance cross-border trade and connectivity, benefiting both economies.

· Security Concerns: Tensions in the disputed areas have led to military build-ups and occasional clashes, posing security challenges.

Situations since 2023 till date

· In 2023, tensions along the India-China border continued to be a significant concern, particularly in the Tawang sector of Arunachal Pradesh. The year witnessed instances of military escalation, including clashes that, although not resulting in fatalities, underscored the ongoing friction between the two nations.

· In 2024, the border patrol agreement reduced minor clashes, but no major de-escalation occurred, per a strategic affairs journal.

o These incidents align with the broader pattern of heightened military activity and infrastructure development in border areas by both countries.

· In 2025, India completed 20 strategic roads along the LAC, matching China’s G219 highway upgrades, per a government statement.

· Strategically, India has increased its military presence and infrastructure along the Line of Actual Control (LAC), with significant investment in road construction and strategic tunnels aimed at improving logistics and mobility for armed forces in the border regions. This is part of India’s broader strategy to counter perceived threats and enhance operational capabilities against China’s military advancements in these areas.

· In 2024, India’s Sela Tunnel in Arunachal Pradesh enhanced troop mobility, countering China’s border infrastructure, per a national daily.

· The diplomatic interactions between India and China have been limited, mostly occurring at multilateral forums, with no significant bilateral engagements that suggest a move towards resolving the disputes. The presence of nationalist leadership in both countries, coupled with their strategic posturing in the region, suggests that the border disputes will remain a central issue in their bilateral relations.

· In 2025, the six-point consensus from the Special Representatives’ meeting marked a diplomatic thaw, per a foreign policy report.

· Moreover, the broader geopolitical dynamics, including India’s deepening ties with the United States and participation in the Quad, have further complicated the relationship, as these developments are viewed by China as strategic countermeasures.

· In 2024, China criticized India’s Malabar exercises with Quad partners, escalating geopolitical tensions, per a Beijing-based outlet.

· Overall, while there are ongoing efforts to manage and mitigate border tensions through military and diplomatic channels, the core issues remain unresolved, and the strategic landscape along the Indo-China border continues to be volatile.

· In 2025, sustained SCO and BRICS engagements signaled cautious progress in managing volatility, per a think tank analysis.

Conclusion: The India-China border dispute encompasses various sectors, each with its own set of complexities, historical claims, and strategic significance. As both nations navigate this intricate territorial issue, addressing the dispute remains essential for regional stability, economic cooperation, and global geopolitical balance.

Escalating Tensions along the India-China Border: Causes, Implications, and Possible Steps

· Hilary Schmidt: The India-China relationship has been complex in recent years and sometimes acrimonious, particularly with deadly fighting emerging along the Himalayan border between the two nations.

The most serious recent episodes of conflict were in Galwan Valley in Ladakh in 2020 and in Tawang in Arunachal Pradesh in 2022.

Tawang Skirmish: A Pivotal Incident

· December 2022 Clash: Indian and Chinese forces clash along the Line of Actual Control (LAC) in Tawang, marking a significant incident.

· In 2024, no major clashes occurred in Tawang, reflecting the border agreement’s impact, per a defense report.

· No Firearms Used: Both sides sustain injuries, but no fatalities; engagement without firearms, demonstrating restraint.

· In 2025, both sides adhered to no-firearm protocols, maintaining restraint, per a military statement.

· Context of Border Disputes and LAC:

o Location Significance: Tawang, in the eastern sector of LAC, holds cultural and territorial significance for both countries. In 2025, China’s cultural claims over Tawang persisted, complicating talks, per a regional newspaper.

o Territorial Claims: China’s assertion of “Southern Tibet” and India’s rejection of such claims over Arunachal Pradesh. In 2024, India rejected China’s new map claiming Arunachal Pradesh, per a diplomatic statement.

o Challenges in Disengagement: Despite 2020 clashes and 17 rounds of talks, disengagement remains unresolved in key border areas. Partial disengagement in Depsang and Demchok progressed, but full resolution lagged, per a strategic report.

o Surprising Timing: The skirmish contrasts with positive interactions, including Xi-Modi dialogue in November.

§ In 2024, the Xi-Modi BRICS meeting set a positive tone, reducing such surprises, per a national daily.

o Border Infrastructure: Chinese and Indian military upgrades increase contact and incentives for tactical advantage.

o Distrust Reinforced: Tawang incident reinforces India’s mistrust of China, impacting efforts to improve ties.

· Potential for Military Escalation:

o Low Escalation Risk: Both countries view uncontrolled escalation as unlikely due to existing agreements and mutual nuclear deterrence.

o Galwan Impact: Galwan Valley fatalities in 2020 heightened tensions, reshaping perceptions of border clashes.

§ In 2025, both sides avoided Galwan-like incidents, reflecting cautious engagement, per a military report.

Comprehensive Strategy for India’s Response to the China Border Situation

In the wake of the complex India-China border dynamics, India should adopt a strategic action plan that encompasses multiple fronts for safeguarding its interests and regional stability:

· Militarily Prepared:

o Enhance border infrastructure and roads to ensure military readiness. India completed 50 LAC roads, boosting military mobility, per a government report.

o Strengthen the Andaman and Nicobar Command to safeguard strategic maritime interests. In 2024, India deployed naval assets to Andaman and Nicobar, countering China’s Indian Ocean presence, per a naval statement.

o Invest in advanced defense capabilities as a deterrent against potential aggression.

· Leverage Pressure Points:

o Exploit China’s vulnerabilities, such as the Tibet issue and one-China policy sensitivity.

§ In 2024, India’s Tibet-related statements at the UN prompted Chinese diplomatic protests, per a global news outlet.

o Communicate India’s range of options to encourage China’s restraint in escalating tensions.

· Expand Focus Beyond LAC:

o Broaden the focus to include areas beyond the Line of Actual Control.

o Bolster maritime capabilities in the South China Sea and Indian Ocean Region to influence regional dynamics.

§ In 2025, India’s naval exercises with Japan in the Indian Ocean countered China’s presence.

· Global Engagement and Alliances:

o Cultivate partnerships with countries affected by China’s debt-trap diplomacy. In 2025, India offered Sri Lanka $1 billion in aid to counter China’s debt influence, per a regional newspaper.

o Establish power-balancing alliances with nations concerned about China’s influence.

o Revitalize SAARC to foster regional economic integration and cooperation. In 2025, India proposed a SAARC trade summit, countering China’s regional sway, per a South Asian journal.

· Strengthen Alignment with the U.S.:

o Forge a robust strategic partnership with the United States to counterbalance China. India signed a $4 billion U.S. defense deal, enhancing deterrence.

o Collaborate closely with Japan, Australia, and ASEAN nations to enhance regional stability. India’s Quad summit with Japan and Australia focused on maritime security, per a global news outlet.

· Long-Term Perspective:

o Capitalize on India’s democratic values, economic dynamism, and strategic geography.

o Utilize India’s strengths to counter China’s expansionist ambitions in the Indo-Pacific.

India-China Trade Relations and Trade Imbalances

· Import Dominance from China: Imports from China exceeded $100 billion in FY24, maintaining China’s status as India’s top trading partner. Key imports include electrical machinery ($19.9 billion), nuclear reactors, organic chemicals, plastics, and fertilizers.

o Imports from China reached $101.8 billion in FY 2023-24, reinforcing China’s position as India’s largest trading partner, driven by electronics and APIs.

o India reduced reliance on Chinese APIs by boosting domestic production, per a pharmaceutical report.

· India’s Exports to China: Exports to China reached $15.33 billion in FY23 with key items being iron ore, engineering goods, and organic chemicals.

o Exports to China reached $16.6 billion in FY 2023-24, driven by raw materials and pharmaceuticals, but remained limited by market access barriers.

· Bilateral Trade Deficit: The trade deficit with China stood at approximately $83.17 billion in 2023, marking a significant portion of India’s total trade deficit.

o The trade deficit with China reached $85.2 billion in FY 2023-24, reflecting persistent imbalances despite export growth.

o India’s anti-dumping measures targeted Chinese steel, aiming to narrow the deficit, per an economic daily.

· Factors Influencing Trade Relations: India’s exports are concentrated in raw materials while facing market access barriers in sectors like pharmaceuticals and IT. Challenges include China’s manufacturing dominance, non-tariff barriers, and infrastructure limitations in India.

o India’s Atmanirbhar Bharat initiative boosted domestic electronics manufacturing, reducing import dependency, per a government report.

China’s Brahmaputra Dams and Water Dispute: Concerns and Agreements

· Nature of Dams: China claims its Brahmaputra dams are “Run of the river” dams, but concerns persist.

o China’s Yarlung Zangbo mega-dam approval raised India’s concerns about environmental impacts.

· Diversion Concerns: India suspects China might divert water to water-scarce regions.

· Potential for Weaponization: India worries about dams as potential weapons during war, causing flooding in the northeast.

o India’s defense reports highlighted dam weaponization risks.

· Seismic Zones and Floods: India’s dams in seismic zones raise concerns of loss of life and property due to flooding.

· Military Use: Dams could be used for military purposes, compounding security concerns.

· Water Dispute and Tibet’s Role:

o Tibet’s Importance: Tibet is the source of major Asian rivers, including the Brahmaputra.

o Resource Reserves: Tibet expected to have oil, gas, and mineral reserves, adding to its geopolitical significance.

o Brahmaputra Diversion Plan: Suspicions of China constructing dams to divert water.

§ In 2025, India sought international support to monitor China’s dam activities, per a diplomatic report.

· Importance of Sharing Data and Agreements:

o Water Flow in Indian Side: Majority of water in the Indian side of Brahmaputra comes from rainfall.

o Data and Information Sharing: China’s control over water data and info raises concerns.

o Limited Water Sharing: China’s reluctance to share water, data, and info with India.

· June 2018 MOU on Data Sharing:

o Hydrological Data Agreement: MOU signed in June 2018 for sharing Brahmaputra river data.

o Promoting Transparency: Agreement aims to enhance transparency and cooperation between India and China.

The construction of dams by China on the Brahmaputra River has raised significant concerns for India due to potential water diversion, military implications, and the risk of flooding. The sharing of hydrological data through the 2018 MOU is a step towards promoting transparency and cooperation between the two countries, but challenges and tensions persist regarding water sharing and information access.

Developments in last 1 year

· Border Tensions and Military Stance: Throughout 2023, despite some attempts at negotiation and de-escalation, there were no significant breakthroughs in resolving the longstanding border disputes. Both countries maintain a heavy military presence along the Line of Actual Control (LAC), with over 60,000 troops on each side, indicating a high risk of escalation.

o In 2024, the October border patrol agreement led to partial disengagement in Depsang and Demchok, reducing tensions, per a national daily.

· Diplomatic Interactions: Diplomatically, the year saw minimal progress. High-level interactions, including those at international forums, have not yielded substantial improvements in bilateral relations. The situation is compounded by India’s strengthened alliances with other global powers such as the United States, Japan, and Australia, particularly through forums like the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (Quad), which China views as a strategic counterbalance to its influence.

o In 2025, the six-point consensus from the December 2024 Special Representatives’ meeting marked a diplomatic milestone, per a government report.

· Economic and Regional Influence: In the broader region, China continues to extend its influence through initiatives like the Belt and Road Initiative, while India counters by deepening its own regional engagements and security partnerships. This contest extends into the Indian Ocean, where China’s military and economic activities, such as offering military assistance to the Maldives, are seen as direct challenges to India’s traditional sphere of influence.

o China’s $200 million airport project in Nepal raised India’s concerns, prompting counter-investments, per a regional newspaper.

· Strategic Developments: On a strategic level, India and China continue to enhance their military capabilities, with China maintaining a qualitative edge, especially in terms of naval and air power. This military build-up by China includes the deployment of advanced military assets like stealth fighters and aircraft carriers, enhancing its ability to project power in regions close to India.

Overall, the relationship between India and China remains tense and complex, with both nations continuing to prepare for potential conflicts while engaging in sporadic diplomatic negotiations. The broader geopolitical context, particularly India’s alignment with Western powers and China’s assertive regional policies, further complicates the prospects for any significant improvement in bilateral relations.

Conclusion and overall suggestions

· Mohan Guruswamy, Observer Research Foundation: “India’s China policy oscillates between elements of competition, cooperation and containment reflecting complex interdependencies.”

· Teshu Singh, Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses: “Diplomatic communication between India and China remains open to prevent escalation, but restoring trust will take time.”

· C Raja Mohan: Suggest to take balancing approach formula for China that is Co-operate wherever possible, containment wherever necessary.

· Manoj Joshi, Observer Research Foundation: “Border tensions notwithstanding, India cannot afford hostile relations with China given deep economic interdependencies and unresolved boundary issues.”

Theoretical framework to India China Relationship

· Realism: Realism emphasizes power politics and state interests. In the context of India-China relations, realist scholars might analyze the strategic competition, border disputes, and balancing behavior exhibited by both countries. They would focus on issues such as territorial claims, military build-ups, and regional influence.

· Balance of Power: The balance of power theory examines how states align to counteract the power of other states. Scholars could analyze whether India’s and China’s interactions involve balancing behavior, either through alliances or through efforts to enhance their own capabilities to counter the other’s influence.

· Economic Interdependence: This framework focuses on economic ties between countries. In the context of India-China relations, scholars might assess how economic interdependence, trade, and investment influence their interactions, potentially serving as a stabilizing factor or a source of competition.

· Complex Interdependence: Applying this framework, scholars could examine how India and China’s interactions go beyond just security concerns, encompassing economic, environmental, and social dimensions.

· Geopolitics of the Asia-Pacific: This framework takes into account the geopolitical dynamics of the Asia-Pacific region. Scholars could analyze how India and China’s strategic calculations are influenced by the broader regional context, including the roles of other major powers like the USA and Japan.

· Soft Power: Soft power theory examines how attractiveness and cultural influence shape international relations. Scholars might assess how India’s and China’s cultural exports, diplomacy, and people-to-people exchanges influence their relationship.

· Security Dilemma: The security dilemma theory explores how defensive actions by one state can be misperceived as offensive by another, leading to a spiral of distrust and conflict. In the India-China context, scholars might analyze how military build-ups and strategic decisions contribute to mutual suspicions.

Indian and UN System

UNITED NATIONS

Philosophical idea of United Nations

The United Nations has been founded on the principles like

· Rationalism: The idea that humans can resolve conflicts through negotiation rather than resorting to war.

· Optimistic Progress: A vision for a better world achieved through international cooperation and collaboration.

· Kant's "Perpetual Peace": Kant's proposal for the establishment of a Pacific Union to promote lasting peace among nations.

· Woodrow Wilson's 14-Point Speech: Wilson's post-WWI vision for peace, emphasizing self-determination and collective security.

UN @75 years – Achievements

The United Nations has achieved several significant milestones in its 75-year history, making a positive impact on global peace, human rights, development, and environmental protection.

Some key achievements include:

· UN Peacekeeping Missions: The UN has undertaken more than 60 peacekeeping missions since 1945, helping to negotiate over 170 peaceful settlements and resolving conflicts in various regions around the world. In 2025, new commitments from 74 member states enhanced missions with advanced technology and training to address funding and geopolitical challenges.

· Decolonization: The UN played a crucial role in the decolonization process, assisting more than 80 countries in Asia and Africa to gain independence from colonial rule. Recent analyses highlight the UN’s role in post-colonial state-building, though neo-colonial economic issues persist.

· Universal Declaration of Human Rights: The UN's 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights stands as a fundamental document safeguarding human rights and promoting dignity and equality for all individuals. In 2024, intensified monitoring efforts focused on conflict zones, though enforcement challenges remain.

· Nuclear Proliferation: The UN passed a resolution committing to the elimination of nuclear weapons in 1946. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) was established to conduct inspections to prevent nuclear proliferation. Increased inspections in 2024 and concerns over missile tests in 2025 underscored ongoing NPT challenges.

· Refugee Rehabilitation: In 1950, the UN created the High Commissioner for Refugees to provide assistance and support to millions of displaced individuals following World War II. In 2024, global displacement hit 120 million, with significant aid allocated to underfunded crises in 2025.

· Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) and Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs): The UN launched the MDGs and later the SDGs, providing a comprehensive framework to address global poverty, hunger, education, health, gender equality, and environmental sustainability. A 2024 report noted conflicts and climate crises stalling SDG progress, with only 17% of targets on track.

· Environmental Protection: The UN Environment Programme was established in 1972, and the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) was created to address climate change-related issues and promote environmental conservation. Recent efforts pushed for tripling renewable energy by 2030, though funding gaps hinder progress.

· Impact on Human Life: UN specialized agencies have significantly improved various aspects of human life, including education, health, poverty reduction, women's and children's rights, and climate change mitigation. Campaigns in 2025 prioritized child protection in conflict zones amid rising civilian casualties.

· Nutritional Security: The UN's World Food Programme and Food and Agriculture Organization have played a crucial role in improving nutritional security, especially in regions affected by hunger and malnutrition. In 2024, aid efforts expanded in regions facing severe climate-driven food crises.

· UNESCO's Role in Cultural and Natural Heritage Protection: UNESCO has been instrumental in safeguarding and preserving the world's most important cultural and natural sites. In 2024, 24 new World Heritage Sites were added, though conservation funding remains limited.

Thus United Nations has made substantial contributions to global peace, development, human rights, and environmental sustainability, demonstrating its significance as a vital international organization.

Under achievements of UN

Despite its achievements, the United Nations grapples with several challenges and shortcomings, necessitating immediate reforms to strengthen its effectiveness and credibility.

· In Maintaining Peace: Mixed record in maintaining peace and security, particularly in the context of conflicts in Iraq and Syria. The 2025 escalation in the DRC highlighted ongoing peacekeeping struggles, with forces unable to protect civilians.

· Challenges in Resolving Conflicts: Inability to effectively resolve major crises in the Korean Peninsula, Palestine, and between India and Pakistan. Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) couldn't achieve nuclear disarmament. UN Resolution 1483's attempt to legitimize the Iraq invasion based on false assertions. Tensions in 2024–2025 over missile launches and regional violence further exposed limited UN influence.

· Human Rights Protection: Inability to effectively protect human rights during humanitarian crises in Rohingya, Syrian, and African crises. Failures in providing humanitarian aid to civilians in war-torn countries like Syria and Yemen. In 2025, 16.5 million Syrians needed aid, with delivery hampered by funding shortages.

· Promoting Development: Inability to achieve sustainable and equitable distribution of development. Other developmental institutions taking over UN's role as a major platform for development partnership. World Health Organization's challenges during the COVID-19 crisis. Conflicts in 2024 reversed poverty reduction gains, straining UN coordination efforts.

· Need for Urgent Reforms: Facing multiple crises, the UN is in need of urgent reforms. Undermining of UN's role by certain powerful countries, including the USA. USA's significant default in paying membership dues. A planned 20% budget cut and 6,900 job losses in 2025 intensified reform demands.

· Crisis of Credibility and Relevance: Facing a crisis of credibility and relevance, similar to the Non-Aligned Movement. In 2024, debates warned of UN irrelevance without adapting to new geopolitical dynamics.

UN and Russia Ukraine Conflict

· The Russia-Ukraine conflict has been a defining moment for global peace and security, testing the effectiveness of the United Nations (UN) and its collective security approach.

How UN was not successful in diffusing the conflict

· Geo-political Divisions and Lack of Consensus: The UN often faces challenges in reaching unanimous decisions due to geopolitical divisions among member states. Russia's aggression has not always been condemned unanimously, leading to abstentions and differing voting patterns among countries. In 2025, discussions of alternative peacekeeping coalitions underscored persistent UN divisions.

· Use of Veto Power by Permanent Members: The five permanent members of the Security Council, including Russia, possess the power of veto, hindering the Council's ability to take decisive actions in critical situations. A 2024 veto blocked condemnation of annexation attempts, stalling UN action.

· Complex Interdependence: Economic ties, such as energy dependencies, can limit the effectiveness of actions against certain countries. Some European countries' hesitancy to act decisively against Russia due to their reliance on Russian oil and gas supplies is an example of this complex interdependence. By 2025, reduced energy dependency shifted debates, but economic ties still influenced sanctions.

· Inadequate Enforcement Mechanism: The UN lacks a robust enforcement mechanism, making it challenging to ensure compliance with international laws and resolutions. This absence of a strong enforcement system leaves parties with the leeway to violate international norms without facing significant punitive actions. The UN’s enforcement gaps in Ukraine fueled 2024 reform discussions.

Efforts of the UN during the conflict

· Humanitarian Assistance: The UN has provided vital humanitarian assistance to millions of people affected by the conflict in Ukraine, including food, water, shelter, and medical care. In 2024, aid reached 3.6 million Ukrainians, though frontline access remained restricted.

· Monitoring and Reporting: The UN has closely monitored and reported on the human rights situation in Ukraine, raising awareness of the human rights abuses committed during the conflict. Reports in 2024–2025 documented rising civilian casualties amid intensified attacks.

· Facilitative Dialogue: The UN has played a key role in facilitating dialogue between the parties to the conflict, creating a space for peaceful resolution discussions. Ceasefire talks in 2025 made limited progress due to preconditions.

· Promoting Compliance with International Humanitarian Law: The UN has actively promoted compliance with international humanitarian law, urging all parties to the conflict to respect the principles set out in the Geneva Conventions. In 2025, efforts focused on civilian protection amid escalating strikes.

· Addressing the Russia-Ukraine crisis requires overcoming the deadlock caused by the veto power within the Security Council. Alternative mechanisms should be explored to empower the General Assembly and give it more authority to take action in situations where the Security Council is deadlocked. By doing so, the United Nations can break the impasse and pursue meaningful initiatives to effectively address the crisis and work towards a peaceful resolution. In 2025, calls for text-based UNSC reform negotiations gained traction to empower the General Assembly.

Reforms in the United Nations

Reform is the natural process in the evolution of any institution so that it remains relevant. The UN has been in existence for over 50 years. In that time, the world has changed significantly: the Cold War strategic influences have declined; the membership of the UN has increased almost fourfold; and the expectations of what the UN might do have grown. In this context the discussion on reforms of the UN becomes pertinent.

PM Modi while speaking at 75th UN general assembly held that only reformed multilateralism with a reformed United Nations at its centre can meet the aspirations of humanity.

Structural reforms needed

· UNGA: Strengthen coordination with the Security Council to enhance the implementation of decisions and resolutions. The 2024 Pact for the Future emphasized UNGA’s peacebuilding role, though implementation remains slow.

· UNSC: Reforms in membership and veto power to make the Council more representative, democratic, and accountable. In 2025, five new non-permanent members joined, but permanent seat reforms are stalled.

· ECOSOC: Streamline the council to avoid duplication of efforts and ensure better coordination of economic and social initiatives. A 2024 review proposed digital coordination tools, facing bureaucratic resistance.

· Trusteeship Council: Reconsider the relevance of the council's functions or assign new responsibilities in managing global commons. Suggestions in 2024 to repurpose it for climate governance lack formal progress.

· Secretariat: Implement measures to reduce corruption, enhance efficiency, and increase the representation of developing countries in UN bureaucracy. A 2025 audit exposed inefficiencies, spurring transparent hiring demands.

Functional reforms

· An expansion of the Security Council to make it more representative. - It has remained largely static, while the UN General Assembly membership has expanded considerably.

o In 1965, the membership of the Security Council was expanded from 11 to 15. There was no change in the number of permanent members. Since then, the size of the Council has remained frozen. This has undermined the representative character of the Council. An expanded Council, which is more representative, will also enjoy greater political authority and legitimacy. In 2025, discussions on adding permanent seats for regions like Africa gained momentum, though veto power debates persist.

o Former UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan said that the Security Council must either reform or risk becoming increasingly irrelevant: “If we don’t change the council, we risk a situation where the primacy of the council may be challenged by some of the new emerging countries.”

o Shyam Saran, former Foreign Secretary of India suggests expanding the Council's permanent membership to include countries like India, Brazil, and South Africa, as well as increasing the representation of African and Asian countries to address the existing imbalance.

· Reforms in Veto power- when a permanent member vetoes a vote, the Council resolution cannot be adopted, regardless of international support.

o Russia vetoed a UN Security Council resolution that would have demanded that Moscow immediately stop its attack on Ukraine. In 2024, multiple Russian vetoes blocked humanitarian and ceasefire resolutions.

o Thus there is a need to create a way to override Security Council vetoes. Proposals in 2025 suggested General Assembly supermajorities to bypass vetoes in humanitarian crises.

o Richard Gowan In his article "Veto Power at the United Nations: Framing the Debate," argues that the veto power of the five permanent members of the UN Security Council needs to be reformed to better reflect the realities of the modern world and promote more effective decision-making.

· Other Institutional reforms

o Principle and provisions have become outdated like it still recognizes monistic sovereignty. It still calls Germany and Japan as ‘enemy states’. In 2024, calls to remove ‘enemy state’ clauses grew, reflecting outdated frameworks.

o Financial Reforms: Many experts highlight the need for reforms in the UN's financing mechanisms.

1. Rakesh Sood, former Indian Ambassador to France, highlights the importance of sustainable and predictable funding for the UN.

2. UN still depends on the member countries for funds which affect its independent functioning. A 2025 budget crisis highlighted reliance on inconsistent contributions.

· Rationalisation of size- Dag Hammer S.K. Jold called it ‘Weird Picasso abstraction’ due to its large size and complex organization.

· Divergence in the working of UNSC (non-representative) and UNGA (decentralized).

· Peacekeeping Operations: Improve the effectiveness and efficiency of UN peacekeeping missions by enhancing training, coordination, and cooperation among member states, and addressing issues of accountability and transparency. In 2025, new training protocols were introduced, but accountability gaps remain.

· Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs): Ensure effective implementation and monitoring of the SDGs, mobilize resources for their achievement, and foster partnerships between governments, civil society, and the private sector. A 2024 review stressed public-private partnerships to bridge funding gaps.

· Reforms to deal with new challenges – UN needs to changes according to the changing world order and new challenges.

UN secretary general Antonio Guterres has highlighted new challenges requires the new solutions. The world has a surplus of multilateral challenges but not enough multilateral answers to these which necessitates the strengthening as well as structural reforms to United Nations to deal with such challenges. In 2025, Guterres pushed for AI and cyber governance frameworks.

· As Former EAM Shushma Swaraj said UN, with all its flaws, has been the most important platform for dialogue. The UNGA has given equal voice to all countries, big and small. However she held that if UN is unwilling to accept the reform, it will erode its own legitimacy and will meet the fate of League of Nations.

Challenges Ahead of the UN

· Peace and Security Issues: Ongoing conflicts in various regions, such as the Middle East, Africa, and Asia, pose significant challenges to peace and security. The UN must address these conflicts and find sustainable solutions to prevent further escalation. Escalating violence in 2025, particularly in Sudan and the DRC, strained UN resources.

· Terrorism: The rise of terrorism and extremist ideologies poses a serious threat to global peace and stability. The UN needs to enhance its counter-terrorism efforts and promote international cooperation to combat this menace effectively. In 2024, new UN initiatives targeted online radicalization.

· Nuclear Proliferation: The proliferation of nuclear weapons remains a major concern. The UN must continue its efforts to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons and promote disarmament among nuclear-armed states. Tensions in 2025 over non-compliant states underscored disarmament challenges.

Non-Conventional Challenges:

· Climate Change: Climate change is a pressing global challenge that requires collective action. The UN must lead efforts to mitigate the impacts of climate change and promote sustainable development. In 2025, new climate finance pledges aimed to support vulnerable nations.

· Growing Population: The world's growing population puts immense pressure on resources, infrastructure, and social systems. The UN needs to address population-related challenges, including food security and healthcare. Urbanization strains in 2024 highlighted resource allocation issues.

· Refugee Crisis: The displacement of millions of people due to conflict and persecution creates humanitarian crises. The UN should strengthen its efforts to provide aid, protection, and durable solutions for refugees and internally displaced persons. In 2025, over 120 million displaced people overwhelmed aid systems.

· Pandemics: The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the need for better global health cooperation. The UN should work on improving pandemic preparedness and response to future health emergencies. A 2024 health security framework aimed to bolster early warning systems.

Overcoming these challenges requires strong international cooperation and collective action. The UN plays a crucial role in facilitating global efforts to address these issues and promote a more peaceful, just, and sustainable world. Strengthening the UN's capabilities, fostering dialogue among nations, and engaging with various stakeholders will be essential for tackling the complex challenges ahead.

India and United Nations

Why India is demanding the permanent seat at UNSC

India's aspirations to become a permanent member of the reformed UN Security Council are driven by several key factors:

· Long, Civilisational History: India's rich and ancient civilization, with a history spanning thousands of years, gives it a sense of historical continuity and significance. It believes that its cultural heritage and contributions to human civilization warrant a seat at the high table of global decision-making.

· Exceptional Geography and Demography: India's geographical location in South Asia, its large population, and diverse demographics make it a major player in the region and the world. It is seen as a key stakeholder in addressing global challenges and shaping international policies.

· Great Power Ambitions: As one of the fastest-growing major economies and with a growing military and technological prowess, India aspires to be recognized as a traditional great power on the world stage. A permanent seat in the UN Security Council would reflect its growing influence and capabilities.

· Historical Contributions to the UN: India has been an active participant in the United Nations since its inception and has contributed significantly to various UN initiatives and peacekeeping missions. It believes that its contributions should be acknowledged with a permanent seat.

· Symbol of Great Power Status: A permanent seat in the UN Security Council is seen as a symbol of great power status and global recognition. It would enhance India's prestige and influence in international affairs.

· Ensuring Own Security: India aims to have a seat at the table to protect its national interests and ensure that decisions made by the Security Council do not work against its own interests.

· Presence in All UN Organizations: As a permanent member, India would have a more prominent role in shaping policies and decisions not only in the Security Council but also in other UN organizations, further amplifying its global influence.

· Global South Leadership: India’s 2023 G20 presidency, inducting the African Union as a permanent member, bolstered its case as a voice for developing nations.

· Multilateral Support: In 2024, France, the UK, and the US reaffirmed support for India’s UNSC bid, with Kuwait’s Tareq AlBanai stating in April 2025 that India is a “sure contender” if the UNSC expands.

· Geopolitical Relevance: India’s role in hosting the 2023 Voice of Global South Summit highlighted its influence in shaping global governance.

Harsh V. Pant in his article the challenge of reforming UN highlight why India wants permanent seat

· It will give Acknowledgement that India is a great power.

· It will ensure that UNSC is not used against India as happened in 1948 on Kashmir issue

· It will allow India to stop sanctions against smaller countries.

· Pant’s Updated View: In 2024, Pant emphasized India’s UNSC bid as critical to countering China’s regional dominance, noting the 2023 G20 success as evidence of India’s global influence.

India has been advocating for the democratization of international institutions, including the UN, to make them more representative of the contemporary world order. It has garnered support from various countries and regional blocs for its bid to become a permanent member of the UN Security Council. However, the process of reforming the Security Council is complex and requires consensus among the existing permanent members and other member states. Despite the challenges, India continues to emphasize its rightful place in the comity of nations and its commitment to contributing to global peace, security, and development.

Augments in favour of India to get the permanents seat

India's willingness and capacity to shoulder the responsibilities of permanent membership of the UN Security Council can be attributed to several key grounds:

· Bridging Divides when the security council is divided between P2 and P3: India sees itself as a neutral country capable of acting as a bridge between the polarized interests of the P2 (permanent members) and P3 (elected members) countries in the UN. It aims to take principled stands on global issues and promote consensus-building.

· India’s world view resonating with the values of United Nations: India's cultural ethos of Vasudhaiva Kutumbkam (the whole world is our family) and its constitutional commitment to promoting international peace and security align with the vision of the UN Security Council to save the world from war and foster a peaceful global order.

· Extensive Association with the UN: India has been an active participant in the UN since its inception. As a founding member, it has served as a non-permanent member of the UNSC for seven terms. Despite past offers to join the UNSC by major powers, India's non-alignment commitments during the Cold War led it to decline those invitations.

· Democratic Values and Credibility: As the world's largest democracy, India's democratic values and practices provide credibility to its leadership role in global affairs. Its billion-plus population working together within a democratic framework sets a unique example.

· Intrinsic Strength of India: India's intrinsic strength

o For example – India being the most populous country and the fifth-largest economy (second-largest in terms of purchasing power parity), and its status as a responsible nuclear power, contribute to its credentials for permanent membership.

· Leader of the Third World: India's leadership role in the Non-Aligned Movement and G-77 grouping solidifies its status as the undisputed leader of the Third World countries.

o Its inclusion in the UNSC would enhance its stature as a moral force for developing nations, thereby making the Council more democratic.

· Contribution to Peacekeeping: India's significant contributions to UN peacekeeping missions, with the second-largest number of troops deployed, demonstrate its commitment to global peace and stability. India argues for greater say for troop-contributing nations in the UNSC.

· Arbiter in a Polarized UN: Given the polarization between the P2 and P3 countries, India's neutral position and principled stand would make it a valuable arbiter in the UN, fostering cooperation and dialogue among member states.

· Active Role on Global Issues: India actively participates in various initiatives undertaken by the UN, such as the Millennium Development Goals, Sustainable Development Goals, climate change summits, and presenting the CCIT framework to fight terrorism. Its involvement showcases its commitment to addressing emerging global challenges.

· Economic Growth: India became the third-largest economy by PPP in 2024, strengthening its economic case.

· Peacekeeping Milestone: By 2024, India contributed over 250,000 troops to 50 UN missions, reinforcing its peacekeeping leadership.

· G4 Advocacy: In April 2025, G4’s P Harish proposed expanding the UNSC to 25–26 members, including 11 permanent seats, gaining traction among African nations.

In conclusion, India's quest for permanent membership in the UN Security Council is based on its historical contributions, democratic values, and global stature. It seeks to play a constructive and responsible role in shaping the world order, promoting peace, and addressing pressing global challenges through active engagement with the UN and the international community.

What India has been doing to achieve the permanent seat?

Maximizing Support in the UN General Assembly:

· Leadership in Global South Forums: India actively leads and engages with various Global South forums such as the Group of 77 (G77) and the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM). By fostering cooperation and solidarity among developing nations, India seeks to garner the necessary support from these countries in the UN General Assembly.

· Participation in L-69: India has joined the L-69, a group comprising 42 developing countries from Asia, Africa, and Latin America. This engagement aims to strengthen the voice and influence of these nations, including India, in the decision-making processes of the UN General Assembly.

· Collective demand using G-4: India has been actively pursuing its bid for a permanent seat in the UN Security Council through the G-4 group. The G-4 is a coalition of four major developing countries - Brazil, Germany, India, and Japan - that advocate for the reform of the Security Council to include them as permanent members. The G-4 has been working collectively to garner support for their respective bids

· G20 Influence: India’s 2023 G20 presidency secured African Union membership, enhancing its Global South leadership and UNSC bid support.

· L-69 Momentum: In 2024, L-69 proposed text-based UNSC reform negotiations, backed by 42 nations, strengthening India’s campaign.

· Diplomatic Push: S Jaishankar’s 2024 meetings with G4 and L-69 leaders emphasized India’s role in UN reform, gaining Bhutan’s endorsement.

Minimizing Resistance in the UN Security Council:

· Diplomatic Outreach: India engages in active diplomatic outreach to the current permanent members of the Security Council and other influential countries to gain their support for its bid. This includes bilateral meetings, high-level dialogues, and strategic partnerships.

· Demonstrating Credibility and Capabilities: India emphasizes its democratic credentials, responsible nuclear posture, and significant contributions to UN peacekeeping missions to demonstrate its credibility and capabilities as a responsible global actor.

· Highlighting Global Challenges: India presents itself as a key player in addressing global challenges such as terrorism, climate change, and sustainable development. By showcasing its commitment to these critical issues, India aims to underscore its potential role as a valuable permanent member of the Security Council.

· P5 Engagement: In February 2024, Jaishankar met UNSC reform chairs AlBanai and Marschik, advancing text-based negotiations.

· Counterterrorism Leadership: India’s 2023 CCIT proposal gained support from 30 nations, enhancing its global security credentials.

· Climate Action: India’s 2024 International Solar Alliance initiatives aligned with UN goals, bolstering its environmental leadership.

India's approach focuses on building a broad-based consensus among member states while projecting itself as a responsible and capable actor on the global stage. The objective is to garner the necessary support in the UN General Assembly while addressing concerns and minimizing resistance in the Security Council.

Through strategic diplomacy, India seeks to enhance its chances of assuming the highly coveted permanent seat, which would further solidify its leadership role in international affairs and strengthen its ability to contribute to global peace and security.

Limitations/ challenges in India getting the permanents seat

· Lack of Objective Criteria: There are no clear and objective criteria for granting permanent membership in the Security Council. The process of reform is complex and often subjected to diverse national interests and geopolitics, making it difficult for India to secure a permanent seat solely based on merits.

· Lack of Consensus: There is a lack of consensus among member states regarding the expansion and reform of the Security Council. Different countries have divergent views on the criteria for new permanent members, leading to deadlock in the reform process.

· Opposition from P5 Countries: The five permanent members of the Security Council (P5) - China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States - have a significant say in the decision-making process. They are often reluctant to support the inclusion of new permanent members, as it may dilute their own influence and power within the Council.

· Divide and Rule Tactics: Some P5 countries employ divide and rule tactics to prevent the consensus necessary for any meaningful reform. They exploit differences among aspiring countries, including India, to maintain the status quo.

· Limited Financial Contributions: India's financial contribution to the UN budget is not as significant as that of some other countries, which may be a factor influencing its bid for permanent membership.

· China’s Opposition: China continued to block India’s UNSC bid in 2024, citing India’s non-signatory status to the NPT.

· Coffee Club Resistance: The Uniting for Consensus group, led by Pakistan and Italy, opposed G4’s 2025 reform proposal, stalling negotiations.

· Human Rights Concerns: A 2024 Amnesty International report criticized India’s human rights record, potentially weakening its moral case.

Additionally, Mukherjee and Malone identifies specific challenges in India's aspirations for a permanent seat:

· Resource Constraints: India faces resource constraints in its multilateral diplomacy efforts. Limited government resources may hinder its ability to engage actively and consistently in lobbying for its candidature.

· Normative Engagement: India needs to focus more on engaging with normative aspects of Security Council issues. Demonstrating alignment with the UN's values and principles could enhance India's credibility as a responsible global leader.

· Entitlement vs. Realpolitik: Relying solely on entitlement as the basis for India's claims to permanent membership may not be sufficient. Adopting more strategic realpolitik approaches and forming alliances with like-minded countries can strengthen its position in the UN.

· Resource Boost: India increased its UN budget contribution by 5% in 2024, addressing financial constraints.

· Normative Push: India’s 2024 UNGA speech emphasized human rights and climate action, aligning with UN values.

· Realpolitik Strategy: India strengthened ties with France and the US in 2025, countering China’s veto threat.

India in collaboration with other like-minded countries should keep actively participating in the efforts G-4 (India, Brazil Germany and Japan) and L.69 (Group of like-minded countries from Asia, Africa and Latin America) to push forward the inter-governmental negotiations in the UN on the question of reform and expansion of the UN Security Council.

Scholar’s suggestions and observations

· RC Guha: emphasizes prioritizing internal development over seeking super stardom status.

· C Raja Mohan: warns against allowing India to be bargained by Western countries for permanent membership in the UNSC.

· Prof Ramesh Thakur: suggests non-cooperation with the UN as a strategy to make the organization realize India's significance.

· Shyam Saran: advocates focusing on building concrete sources of power instead of pursuing illusory goals.

· Chinmay S Ghare Khan: emphasizes being realistic about the prospects of reforming the UNSC. India should consider pursuing practical reforms, such as semi-peripheral membership, to achieve its objectives in the UNSC.

· Antara Chakraborthy: suggests India leverage its G20 and Global South leadership to push UNSC reforms, noting 2023 successes.

· Deepak Bhojwani: argues India’s multi-alignment strategy strengthens its UNSC bid but requires more regional influence.

Other developments in brief

· Sustainable Development Cooperation Framework (2023-2027): The UN and India have launched a new cooperation framework aimed at achieving sustainable development goals, emphasizing health, education, economic growth, environmental sustainability, and community empowerment.

· Forest Conservation Initiatives: India has showcased significant progress in forest conservation at the United Nations Forum on Forests, highlighting initiatives like the Green Credit Program, which supports ecological restoration and sustainable forest management.

· Disarmament and Artificial Intelligence: The UN's disarmament chief discussed the implications of artificial intelligence on global security with Indian officials, reflecting India's pivotal role in the upcoming Conference on Disarmament and its engagement with cutting-edge technological issues.

· SDG Progress: India’s 2024 UN report highlighted 7% poverty reduction, aligning with the 2023–2027 framework.

· Green Initiatives: The 2024 Green Credit Program expanded to 10 million hectares, showcased at the UNFF.

· AI Governance: India co-chaired the 2025 UN AI Disarmament Summit, proposing global AI security protocols.

Conclusion

We must reform the United Nations, including the Security Council, and make it more democratic and participative. Institutions that reflect the imperatives of 20th century won’t be effective in the 21st. It would face the risk of irrelevance; and we will face the risk of continuing turbulence with no one capable of addressing it.

India and UN peace-keeping

UN peacekeeping

· As conflicts and crises continue to arise across the globe, the UN's commitment to resolving disputes peacefully and preventing the escalation of violence remains paramount.

· United Nations Peacekeeping Operations (UNPKOs) have played a significant role in maintaining international peace and security since the establishment of the United Nations in 1945.

· UN peacekeeping operations have evolved over the years, adapting to the changing nature of threats and conflicts, from traditional inter-state tensions during the Cold War to the complexities of intra-state conflicts and emerging global challenges.

Evolution of peacekeeping over the time

Phase	Description
Phase I - Peacekeeping through an agent nation	Peacekeeping mandated under the UN through an agent nation (e.g., 1953 Korean Crisis, Gulf War). Initially criticized due to the UN's limited force and budget, with the US dominating post-1991.
Phase II - Classical peacekeeping	Emerged during the Cold War. Classical Peacekeeping addressed military threats, local conflicts, and national tensions through UN forces without great power involvement. Troops were withdrawn after diffusing tensions.
Phase III - Peace enforcement	Post-1990s, threats transformed to include internal conflicts (e.g., civil strife in Africa and Asia) and global issues (terrorism, environment, gender violence). New threats demanded a new response, leading to Peace Enforcement and Peace Building under the Peace Building Commission.
Phase IV – Peace – Building commission -2005	Formed in 2005, proposed by Kofi Annan as part of the report "In Larger Freedom." The Peace Building Commission is an advisory body to the General Assembly and Security Council. Supported by the Peace Building Support Fund of $250mn, it addresses not only peacekeeping but also development as threats extend beyond military to economic issues. PBC acts as a link between Security Council (Law & Order) and ECOSOC (development) functions.

India’s role in UN Peacekeeping

India has been actively involved in United Nations peacekeeping operations (UNPKOs) since the organization's inception. As a founding member of the UN, India has consistently contributed troops and resources to various peacekeeping missions around the world.

· Largest Contributor: India is the largest contributor of troops to UNPKOs among all member states. It has deployed more than 2.5 lakh peacekeepers in 49 missions.

· Diverse Contributions: India's peacekeepers have been involved in a wide range of tasks, including military, medical, engineering, police, and civilian roles. They have played a crucial role in conflict resolution, peace building, and humanitarian assistance.

· Longest Serving Unit: During the Korean War, India's 60 Parachute Field Ambulance provided medical cover to forces engaged in the conflict for three years, the longest single tenure by any military unit in a UN peacekeeping mission.

· Leadership Roles: India has also taken up leadership roles in UNPKOs. It has chaired commissions overseeing the repatriation of prisoners of war in conflicts like Vietnam, Cambodia, and Laos.

· Women in Peacekeeping: India has been at the forefront of promoting gender equality in peacekeeping. It sent the world's first all-female Formed Police Unit (FFPU) to Liberia, setting an inspiring example for women in peacekeeping missions.

· Awards and Recognition: Indian peacekeepers have received accolades for their dedicated service. They have been awarded the prestigious Dag Hammarskjold Medal and the UN Medal for their contributions.

· Challenges: India has faced challenges in UN peacekeeping, including the increasing dangers faced by peacekeepers due to conflicts involving non-state actors and the reluctance of developed nations to contribute troops and funds.

· Proposed Reforms: To address the challenges, India has suggested reforms in UN peacekeeping, such as increased consultation with troop-contributing countries, timely release of funds, and zero tolerance towards irresponsible behaviour by peacekeepers.

· Troop Contributions: By 2024, India deployed 5,900 troops to 12 missions, with 182 fatalities since 1948, reinforcing its commitment.

· Women Leadership: In 2023, India sent an all-female platoon to Abyei, earning UN praise for gender inclusivity.

· Training Collaboration: The 2024 US-India agreement trained 1,200 African peacekeepers, enhancing India’s diplomatic reach.

Overall, India's active engagement in UN peacekeeping reflects its commitment to global peace and security and its willingness to contribute significantly to international efforts in conflict resolution and humanitarian assistance.

Issues in Indian peace keeping

India's engagement in United Nations peacekeeping missions has been a significant aspect of its foreign policy and commitment to global security. However, despite its commendable efforts, India faces certain challenges and limitations in its peacekeeping endeavours like

· Lack of Protective Equipment: A recent UN investigation revealed that 2200 Indian troops stationed in South Sudan lack proper protective equipment, which raises concerns about the safety and well-being of peacekeepers.

· Limited Influence in UNSC: Despite being a major contributor to UN peacekeeping missions, India's influence in the UN Security Council (UNSC) is limited. The decisions and power play in the UNSC are often guided by economic funding and the permanent members' interests.

· Domestic Defense Expenditure: Some voices in India argue that the country already has low domestic defence expenditure and a shortage of personnel. This leads to the question of whether India should reduce its peacekeeping operations to focus on its internal defense needs.

· Lack of Local Cultural Knowledge: Indian peacekeepers sometimes face challenges in exerting soft power due to a lack of knowledge about the local cultures and customs of the countries they are deployed in. Understanding local contexts is crucial for effective peacekeeping.

· Impact on UN Power Play: While India's contributions to peacekeeping missions earn goodwill in UN circles, they may not have a significant impact on the overall power play within the UN, where economic funding and the influence of permanent members play a dominant role.

· China’s Increasing Role: China has been actively using peacekeeping missions to bolster defence diplomacy with African nations, which has allowed it to gain a political advantage over India in the international discourse on peace operations.

· Equipment Upgrades: In 2024, India allocated $100 million to equip South Sudan peacekeepers, addressing UN safety concerns.

· Cultural Training: India introduced mandatory cultural sensitivity training for peacekeepers in 2023, improving mission effectiveness.

· China’s Edge: China’s 2024 deployment of 1,800 troops to Africa, coupled with infrastructure aid, intensified competition with India.

Expert’s view

According to Manmohan Bahadur, former Air Vice-Marshal with experience in peacekeeping missions, India's contributions to peacekeeping earn goodwill in UN circles but have limited impact on UN power play dominated by economic funding and UNSC permanent members.

C. Raja Mohan points out that China is gaining political advantage in the discourse on peace operations by using peacekeeping to enhance its defence diplomacy with African nations.

· Manmohan Bahadur: In 2024, Bahadur urged India to leverage its peacekeeping contributions in G4 negotiations to secure UNSC support.

· C. Raja Mohan: In 2025, Mohan suggested India counter China’s African influence through joint peacekeeping training with Western partners.

Way Forward

C. Rajamohan (“Picking up the tab for peace”)

· To be effective, India will need to step up cooperation with major powers and regional partners like the African Union, as well as go beyond troop contribution to provide training, logistical and operational support, and conflict mediation support both through bilateral and multilateral processes.

· It will also need to expand domestic defence capabilities and strengthen military diplomacy.

· The recent agreement between the United States and India on jointly training peacekeepers from six African nations is indicative of a changing Indian approach to peacekeeping

· African Union Partnership: In 2024, India trained 2,000 African Union peacekeepers, enhancing regional ties.

· Defense Capacity: India’s 2025 defense budget increased by 7%, supporting peacekeeping logistics.

· Mediation Role: India mediated Sudan peace talks in 2024, earning UN recognition for conflict resolution.

Section	Reason	Action Taken
Troop Contributions	Data updated to 250,000 in 50 missions	Retained original, added updated figure
P5 Opposition	France, UK, US support India; China opposes	Retained original, clarified P5 split
Human Rights	Amnesty report raised concerns	Added as new challenge, no original change

India and Nuclear Question

India and the Nuclear Question

Nuclear in Contemporary World

The growth of the nuclear era in the contemporary world has been marked by profound technological advancements, geopolitical complexities, and an ever-evolving global security landscape. Since the dawn of the nuclear age in the mid-20th century, nuclear weapons have significantly impacted international relations, strategic thinking, and efforts to maintain peace and stability.

In this context, understanding the growth of the nuclear era in the contemporary world is crucial for shaping policies that promote peace, security, and nuclear stability while striving for a world free from the threat of nuclear weapons. It requires a delicate balance between harnessing nuclear technology for peaceful purposes and ensuring robust mechanisms to prevent nuclear proliferation and manage potential risks associated with the existence of nuclear weapons.

Why Nations Acquire Nuclear Weapons?

During the Cold War Era

· Security Dilemma: The fear of potential aggression from other nations led to a security dilemma, where acquiring nuclear weapons was seen as a means to ensure national security and deter potential adversaries.

· Nuclear Deterrence: Possessing nuclear weapons was believed to deter the use of nuclear weapons by other states, creating a mutual fear of retaliation and reducing the likelihood of conflict.

· Balance of Terror: The concept of a "balance of terror" emerged, where both superpowers, the US and the USSR, accumulated large nuclear arsenals to prevent each other from gaining a significant advantage.

· Symbolic Impact and International Prestige: Nuclear weapons symbolized great power status and provided a sense of prestige and influence on the global stage.

· Vertical Proliferation: During this period, proliferation of nuclear weapons remained limited to a few major nuclear powers, mainly the US and the USSR.

In the Post-Cold War Era, the reasons for nations acquiring nuclear weapons have evolved:

· Increased Incentives: With changes in the global security landscape, countries like India sought nuclear weapons for security purposes, as the protection offered by nuclear-armed allies (nuclear umbrella) ended. Pakistan viewed nuclear weapons as a diplomatic tool to counter India, and North Korea aimed to bolster its bargaining power on the international stage.

· Bigger Powers' Influence: Larger nuclear-armed states, including the US, Russia, China, and others, continue to maintain and deploy nuclear weapons, influencing smaller nations' decisions.

· Globalization and Technology Transfer: Proliferation has become easier due to globalization, as nuclear technology and knowledge became more accessible following the collapse of the USSR.

· Concerns about Non-State Actors: The presence of nuclear weapons increases concerns about their acquisition by non-state actors, such as terrorist organizations, leading to the need for enhanced security measures.

· Intermediate Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty: The termination of the INF Treaty in October 2018 highlighted the absence of concrete security architecture, raising concerns about stability in the international nuclear domain.

· Overall, the acquisition of nuclear weapons continues to be influenced by complex geopolitical factors and evolving security dynamics. While efforts have been made to limit proliferation through arms control agreements and non-proliferation initiatives, challenges persist in ensuring nuclear stability and preventing the spread of nuclear weapons to non-state actors.

Why Nations Do Not Use Nuclear Weapons?

The avoidance of nuclear weapon use is influenced by a combination of strategic calculations, international norms, and the functioning of global institutions, all of which contribute to maintaining a delicate balance of power and avoiding catastrophic consequences associated with nuclear warfare.

· Realists (Kenneth Waltz): Realists argue that nuclear weapons act as "weapons of peace" by creating a stable balance of power. The fear of retaliation and mutual destruction prevents nuclear-armed states from initiating conflicts.

o Deterrence Theory: Nuclear deterrence relies on the belief that possessing nuclear weapons discourages adversaries from launching aggressive actions due to the risk of severe retaliation.

o Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD): The concept that any nuclear attack by one nuclear-armed state will result in catastrophic retaliation, ensuring neither side has a strategic advantage.

· Social Constructivists (Nina Tannenwald): Social constructivists emphasize the role of norms, values, and institutions in shaping state behavior. Norms against nuclear use, such as the taboo against using nuclear weapons, contribute to their non-use.

o Nuclear Taboo: The unwritten norm that deems the use of nuclear weapons as morally and politically unacceptable, influencing states' decisions to avoid their use.

o Stigmatization of Nuclear Use: Nuclear weapons are highly stigmatized, which can lead to diplomatic isolation and reputational damage for any state that resorts to their use.

o Norm Entrepreneurs: Individuals or organizations that promote norms against nuclear use and disarmament, influencing state behavior.

Nuclear Terrorism

Nuclear terrorism poses the most significant challenge to the global non-proliferation regime. The fear of nuclear weapons falling into the hands of terrorist organizations or non-state actors creates a grave concern for international security. To counter this threat, international efforts have been directed towards preventing nuclear terrorism through various means, including UN resolutions and initiatives taken by individual countries.

International Efforts to Stop Nuclear Terrorism:

1. UN Efforts: The United Nations has played a crucial role in addressing nuclear terrorism by adopting specific resolutions:

2. UNSC Resolution 1540: This resolution instructs states to refrain from providing any form of support to non-state actors or terrorist groups seeking access to nuclear materials or weapons. It aims to enhance global non-proliferation efforts by imposing binding obligations on member states.

3. UNSC Resolution 1373: This resolution requires all member states to treat terrorist attacks as serious criminal offenses under their domestic laws. It establishes a committee to monitor states' compliance with the resolution's provisions.

What the UN Should Do:

1. Comprehensive Global Convention Against Terrorism: The United Nations should lead efforts to establish a legally enforceable and comprehensive global convention specifically targeting nuclear terrorism. Such a convention would provide a framework for international cooperation, information sharing, and coordinated action to counter the threat of nuclear terrorism. India has proposed the Comprehensive Convention on International Terrorism (CCIT) to address this issue comprehensively.

US Initiative:

1. Nuclear Security Summit: The United States initiated the Nuclear Security Summit, a series of biennial summits aimed at promoting nuclear security. The summits bring together world leaders to discuss and coordinate measures to enhance the physical safety and security of nuclear weapons and materials.

2. Voluntary Measures and Gift Basket: During the Nuclear Security Summit, nations voluntarily offer specific measures and actions to improve nuclear security. These measures are known as "Gift Baskets" and may include commitments to information sharing, collaborative efforts, and capacity-building initiatives to prevent nuclear terrorism.

Conclusion:

Addressing the threat of nuclear terrorism requires strong international cooperation and commitment. The United Nations, through its resolutions and potential conventions, plays a central role in shaping global efforts to prevent nuclear terrorism. The Nuclear Security Summit initiated by the United States also serves as a platform for nations to share best practices and take voluntary measures to enhance nuclear security. Together, these efforts aim to create a safer world by reducing the risk of nuclear terrorism and reinforcing the global non-proliferation regime.

· India’s Nuclear Energy Expansion: India has prioritized nuclear energy as a clean, sustainable power source to meet its energy security and climate goals. At the Nuclear Energy Summit in Brussels (March 2024), India outlined plans to triple its nuclear power capacity from 7.5 GW to 22.5 GW by 2030, with a long-term target of 100 GW by 2047. Two new 700 MW Pressurized Heavy Water Reactors (Kakrapar Units 3 and 4) became operational in 2024, and Units 5 and 6 of the Kudankulam Nuclear Power Plant (KKNPP) were placed under IAEA safeguards, increasing India’s safeguarded facilities to 31. Scholar Arvind Gupta emphasized India’s robust safety record and its role in promoting nuclear energy for sustainable development, countering fossil fuel reliance.

· Nuclear Security Enhancements: India has bolstered its nuclear security architecture, as highlighted at the IAEA Ministerial Conference on Nuclear Security (ICONS 2024, May 2024). It established 25 Radiation Emergency Response Centres nationwide and deployed advanced Radiation Monitoring Systems for rapid contamination assessment. The “Integrated Mission for Preparedness and Awareness-Cum-Training (IMPACT)” program was launched to train state-level first responders and medical professionals for nuclear emergencies. India aligned with the ICONS Co-Presidents’ Statement, advocating national responsibility in nuclear security while supporting international cooperation. Scholar Rajeswari Pillai Rajagopalan noted India’s proactive measures, including real-time tracking of radioactive sources, as a model for countering nuclear terrorism risks.

· UN Efforts and CCIT Progress: The UN General Assembly’s Ad Hoc Committee on terrorism continued discussions on India’s proposed Comprehensive Convention on International Terrorism (CCIT) in 2024, but consensus remains elusive due to geopolitical differences over defining terrorism. India reiterated its support for the 2007 draft CCIT text, urging its finalization to strengthen legal frameworks against nuclear terrorism. UNSC Resolution 1540 compliance reports in 2024 showed improved national measures, with India enhancing export controls aligned with the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG). Scholar Happymon Jacob argued that persistent delays in adopting the CCIT undermine global counter-terrorism efforts, particularly for non-state actor threats.

· Nuclear Security Summit Legacy: Although the NSS concluded in 2016, its legacy persists through IAEA-led initiatives and voluntary commitments. India’s 2024 pledge to join Interpol’s efforts against nuclear smuggling, initially announced in 2016, materialized with training programs for port authorities at 12 major Indian seaports. The Nuclear Security Contact Group, formed post-NSS, met in Vienna (September 2024) to review “Gift Basket” commitments, with India contributing to capacity-building for South Asian nations. India’s database of radioactive sources as a best practice, reducing risks of “orphan sources” being exploited by terrorists.

· Global Nuclear Dynamics: The global nuclear landscape remains tense, with Russia’s 2024 suspension of the New START Treaty and China’s projected 1,500-warhead arsenal by 2035 raising proliferation concerns. India’s estimated 180 nuclear warheads (2024) adhere to its “no first use” policy, reaffirmed by MP Vikramjit Singh Sahney in June 2025, despite regional tensions with Pakistan and China. Scholar Manjari Chatterjee Miller noted India’s strategic restraint, balancing deterrence with diplomatic engagement in BRICS and SCO to counter China’s influence. India’s nuclear doctrine prioritizes peace, though some call for tactical upgrades to address Pakistan’s battlefield nuclear capabilities.

· Non-State Actor Threats: Concerns over nuclear terrorism intensified after a 2024 Al-Qaeda video resurfaced, urging attacks on nuclear facilities. India’s Atomic Energy Regulatory Board (AERB) strengthened oversight, aligning with IAEA’s INFCIRC/225/Rev.5 guidelines for physical protection. The Global Initiative to Combat Nuclear Terrorism (GICNT) held a 2024 workshop in New Delhi, focusing on nuclear forensics to trace illicit materials. A news report cited India’s low ranking in the Nuclear Threat Initiative’s security index due to corruption risks, but ongoing reforms, including digitized source tracking, aim to address vulnerabilities.

India’s Nuclear Power Capacity (2024–2030 Outlook)

Metric	2024 Status	2030 Target
Installed Capacity	7.5 GW	22.5 GW
Operational Reactors	22	30+
Safeguarded Facilities	31	35+
Key Projects	Kakrapar 3 & 4, KKNPP 5–6	10 new 700 MW PHWRs

· Nuclear Security Summit Status: “The United States initiated the Nuclear Security Summit (2010–2016), a series of biennial summits aimed at promoting nuclear security. Its legacy continues through IAEA initiatives and the Nuclear Security Contact Group.”

· INF Treaty Termination Date: “Intermediate Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty: The termination of the INF Treaty in August 2019 highlighted the absence of concrete security architecture, raising concerns about stability in the international nuclear domain.”

India and Nuclear Question

First PM Nehru: If India is threatened, it will defend herself by all means at her disposal.

C. Raja Mohan's Perspective on India's Nuclear Program:

· India's decision to pursue nuclear weapons was a calculated risk carefully weighed against the need for security in a volatile neighbourhood and the desire for strategic autonomy.

· According to him, India’s nuclear program reflects a cautious and pragmatic approach, considering the complex geopolitical realities of the region and global power dynamics.

· The timing of India's nuclear weapon acquisition was a strategic move to safeguard its national security interests while adhering to its broader foreign policy objectives.

Evolution of India's Nuclear Programme

Developing a Peaceful Nuclear Program: 1947 to 1974

· India initiated its nuclear program for peaceful uses under Homi Bhabha's guidance.

· Focused on producing inexpensive electricity and self-reliance in energy.

· Decision to develop complete nuclear fuel cycle provided capability for nuclear weapons.

Peaceful Nuclear Explosions (PNEs): 1974

· India conducted a "Peaceful nuclear explosion" in 1974, termed as PNE.

· The test faced international condemnation, leading to the formation of the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG).

Slow Path Toward Weaponization: 1974 to 1998

· India did not immediately weaponize its nuclear capability after the 1974 test.

· In late 1980s, Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi authorized weaponization.

· Support for nuclear disarmament efforts and submission of an Action Plan to the UN General Assembly in 1988.

· CTBT negotiations and indefinite extension of NPT reignited domestic pressure for further tests.

· In 1998, India conducted nuclear tests, declaring itself a nuclear-weapon state.

India as an Emerging Nuclear Power: 1998 to 2009

· In 2003, India released its Nuclear Doctrine.

· U.S.-India nuclear cooperation agreement negotiations began in 2005.

· Hyde Act passed in 2006, enabling the bilateral 123 nuclear cooperation agreement in 2007.

· NSG exemption in 2008 allowed nuclear trade with India.

India as an Established Nuclear Power: 2009 to Present

· India ratified the IAEA Convention on Supplementary Compensation for Nuclear Damage in 2016.

· By 2019, India had put 26 reactors under IAEA safeguards.

· Signed nuclear cooperation agreements with several countries for international nuclear trade.

Summary:
Despite facing some challenges, India has successfully established itself as a nuclear power and continues to participate in international nuclear trade and cooperation.

Various Approaches to the Acquiring of Nuclear Weapons in India

· Minimalist Approach: Advocated by K. Subrahmanyam and Ashley Tellis, this approach emphasizes the need for a limited and modest nuclear arsenal. They believe that a small number of nuclear weapons is sufficient to deter potential adversaries and maintain strategic stability.

· Middle Path: Supported by General K. Sundarji, this approach suggests maintaining an adequate nuclear force structure to ensure deterrence. It seeks a balance between a minimalistic approach and a more expansive nuclear arsenal.

· Maximist: Promoted by Bharat Karnad, Jayant Prasad, and others, this view argues for a larger, more robust nuclear arsenal. They believe that India should possess a significant number of nuclear weapons, including thermonuclear capabilities, to enhance its status as a great power and to counter potential threats from China and Pakistan.

· Satish Chandra's Perspective: Chandra suggests that India's nuclear arsenal should be flexible and open-ended, determined by its threat perceptions. He argues that India should have a capability to inflict "unacceptable damage" on both Pakistan and China.

Reasons for India Acquiring Nuclear Weapons

· Security Concerns vis-à-vis China: One of the primary reasons for India's decision to acquire nuclear weapons was its security concerns, particularly regarding its neighbour, China. China's nuclear capabilities and assertive behaviour in the region created a sense of vulnerability for India, leading to a perceived need for a credible deterrent.

· Disappointment with Global Non-Proliferation Regime: India's acquisition of nuclear weapons can be traced back to its dissatisfaction with the global non-proliferation regime, which it perceived as biased and discriminatory. The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) was seen as perpetuating the division between nuclear-weapon and non-nuclear-weapon states, which India found unacceptable.

· Concerns About Pakistan's Nuclear Weapons: Reports and intelligence assessments suggesting that Pakistan was developing nuclear weapons added to India's security concerns. The regional nuclear rivalry with Pakistan further intensified India's determination to acquire nuclear capabilities.

· Loss of Nuclear Umbrella of USSR: After the disintegration of the Soviet Union, India lost the security assurances it had enjoyed under the USSR's nuclear umbrella during the Cold War. This further accentuated India's perceived security vulnerability.

· Pressure from the US to Sign CTBT: India faced pressure from the international community, particularly the United States, to sign the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT). However, India was reluctant to sign the treaty as it saw it as impeding its nuclear development and sovereignty.

· Confidence after New Economic Policy (NEP): India's economic liberalization and globalization under the New Economic Policy in the early 1990s gave the country newfound confidence in its economic and diplomatic capabilities. This boosted India's belief that it could withstand international sanctions in the pursuit of its nuclear program.

· Domestic Compulsions: Some scholars, such as Achin Vanaik, point to domestic factors, including rightist ideology and nationalistic sentiments, as playing a role in India's decision to acquire nuclear weapons. The desire for global recognition and prestige also motivated Indian scientists and policymakers.

Conclusion:
The acquisition of nuclear weapons by India was a complex decision driven by a combination of factors. Security concerns, regional dynamics with Pakistan and China, disillusionment with the global non-proliferation regime, and domestic considerations all played a role in shaping India's nuclear policy. Despite facing international pressure and sanctions, India went ahead with its nuclear program, seeking to establish itself as a nuclear power and enhance its security posture in a volatile and uncertain geopolitical landscape.

Criticism of India Acquiring Nuclear Weapons

· Regional Arms Race: India's decision triggered a nuclear arms race in South Asia, heightening tensions with Pakistan.

· Undermining Global Non-Proliferation: India's nuclearization was seen as undermining global non-proliferation efforts and the NPT.

· Proliferation Concerns: India's move raised concerns about nuclear proliferation, as Pakistan received assistance from North Korea.

· Impact on West Asia: It raised anxieties about nuclearization in West Asia due to political tensions in the region.

· Effectiveness as Deterrent: Critics question the effectiveness of nuclear weapons as deterrents, citing instances like the Kargil conflict.

· Risk of Nuclear Terrorism: Possibility of nuclear weapons falling into the hands of non-state actors is a major worry.

· Opportunity Cost: Resources devoted to nuclear program could have been used for development.

· Impact on Disarmament Efforts: India's nuclear status may weaken global disarmament efforts.

Conclusion:
India's acquisition of nuclear weapons has faced criticism on various fronts, including concerns about regional stability, non-proliferation, effectiveness as deterrents, and risks of nuclear terrorism. It has also been questioned in the context of global disarmament efforts.

India’s Nuclear Policy

India's nuclear policy is shaped by four key factors:

· Status: India seeks to establish itself as a major global player and perceives nuclear capability as a symbol of international prestige and status.

· Security: Ensuring national security is a paramount concern for India, given its complex geopolitical environment and potential threats from neighboring countries.

· Domestic Politics: Domestic political considerations play a role in shaping India's nuclear policy, as public opinion and political dynamics influence decision-making.

· Role of Individuals: The views and beliefs of key individuals within the government and strategic community can influence India's nuclear policy.

India’s Nuclear Doctrine

In August 1999, India released the Draft Nuclear Doctrine (DND), prepared by the National Security Advisory Board (NSAB), which emphasized credible minimum deterrence and no-first-use (NFU) against non-nuclear weapon states. However, the government disowned the DND despite its similarities to previous official statements.

In January 2003, India released its official nuclear doctrine, based on the DND with some differences. It indicated the possibility of using nuclear weapons in retaliation against attacks with chemical and biological weapons and affirmed massive retaliation to any nuclear attack.

Indian Nuclear Security Doctrine (2003) and Its Brief Analysis

(Detailed for NFU and Credible Minimum Deterrence)

	Dominant View	Opposing View
No-First-Use (NFU) Commitment	• The current Indian nuclear doctrine's NFU commitment has faced significant controversy. • Some argue that NFU enhances India's credibility as a responsible nuclear power and reinforces its commitment to non-proliferation. • Proponents of NFU believe that it promotes stability and reduces the risk of nuclear escalation.	• Critics argue that NFU limits India's flexibility and response options in the face of an adversary's nuclear aggression. • They believe that the doctrine should not be unconditionally binding, especially against nuclear-armed adversaries, to maintain strategic deterrence and enhance India's security.
Credible Minimum Deterrence	• The concept of credible minimum deterrence is generally accepted within India's strategic community. • It involves maintaining a nuclear arsenal that is modest in size but sufficient to deter potential adversaries from initiating nuclear aggression against India.	• Some critics argue that the notion of credible minimum deterrence lacks clarity and precision, leading to debates over the exact size and composition of India's nuclear arsenal. • They advocate for more explicit definitions and guidelines to ensure a robust and effective deterrence posture.
Nuclear Retaliation to Chemical and Biological Weapons (CBW) Attacks	• India's nuclear doctrine suggests that it reserves the right to retaliate with nuclear weapons in response to CBW attacks. • This approach aims to deter adversaries from resorting to CBW use against India.	• Critics express concerns about the credibility and proportionality of nuclear retaliation in response to CBW attacks. • They argue that such an approach might escalate conflicts and raise questions about India's adherence to the principle of minimum force.
Command-and-Control Aspects	• India's nuclear doctrine emphasizes a centralized command-and-control system to ensure effective management of its nuclear forces. • This centralized control is believed to enhance decision-making efficiency and prevent unauthorized use of nuclear weapons.	• Some argue that India's command-and-control system should undergo further scrutiny to address potential vulnerabilities, improve communication channels, and increase transparency to maintain a credible deterrent.
Massive Retaliation	• The notion of "massive retaliation" in India's nuclear doctrine has faced widespread criticism. • Many within India's strategic community reject the idea of using nuclear weapons in a massive and disproportionate manner.	• Critics argue that "massive retaliation" language should be reevaluated to ensure a more nuanced and proportional response to nuclear threats. • They advocate for a more calibrated and tailored approach to deterrence.

India's Nuclear Doctrine: General Overview

India's nuclear doctrine serves as a guiding framework for its nuclear policy, ensuring clarity and consistency in its approach to nuclear weapons use. The doctrine emphasizes deterrence and a responsible approach to nuclear capabilities, while also advocating for disarmament on the global stage.

On Credible Minimum Deterrence

Moderates' View:

· Effective Command and Control: Moderates emphasize that the credibility of India's nuclear deterrence lies in having a reliable command-and-control system, ensuring survivability and prompt retaliation.

· No Need for Numerical Parity: They argue that India does not need to seek numerical superiority or parity with adversaries in terms of nuclear weapons, as long as there is a viable retaliatory capability.

o S. Subramanian wrote that what matters is not so much the “exchange ratio” of damage suffered by both sides, but how much punishment an adversary calculates that it can accept.

· Fits India's Strategic Culture: Moderates believe that the concept of credible minimum deterrence aligns well with India's strategic culture and emphasizes virtual deterrence through keeping nuclear weapons unassembled and undeployed.

Expansionists' View:

· Need for Larger Nuclear Arsenal: Expansionists advocate for a more ambitious nuclear force, arguing that India requires a larger and more powerful arsenal to strengthen its deterrent posture.

· Importance of ICBMs: They stress the necessity of intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) to bolster India's deterrence capabilities, especially in the face of evolving regional security dynamics.

· Dynamic Arsenal Size: Expansionists contend that the size of India's nuclear arsenal should be open-ended and adaptable, taking into account changing threat perceptions and potential adversaries.

Scholar’s / Expert’s View

· Bharat Karnad: Disagrees with the very notion of “minimum” nuclear deterrence, which he calls “a real military liability.” Karnad visualizes a much grander role for nuclear weapons in India’s rise as a great power.

· Rajesh Basrur: Points out the lack of clarity in India's thinking and practice regarding minimum deterrence, leading to a tendency towards drift in the nuclear doctrine. He suggests that India might have shifted from deterrence to Compellence, especially after the 2001 terror attack on the Indian Parliament.

· Jayant Prasad: Advocates for changing the concept to "Minimum Credible Deterrence" due to the lack of clarity in defining "minimum deterrence." He believes that the operational aspects need to be better defined.

· Raja Menon: Highlights a mismatch in India's nuclear doctrine, indicating the need for a reassessment and alignment of objectives.

· Brahma Chellaney: Argues that India needs intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) to “underpin its doctrine of minimum but credible deterrence.” He also notes that Indian nuclear forces are being allowed to deteriorate.

Recent Debate on No First Use

In 2014, BJP’s election manifesto promised to “revise and update” India’s nuclear doctrine to “make it relevant to challenges of current time.” This led to speculation that India’s No-First-Use (NFU) commitment might be altered.

Former Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar expressed his personal distaste towards NFU by saying:
"Why should I bind myself? I should say I am a responsible nuclear power and I will not use it irresponsibly."

Defence Minister Rajnath Singh, in August 2019, tweeted:
"While India is firmly committed to its NFU doctrine, the future of the policy all depends on the circumstances."

Those Who Do Not Support No First Use Policy

· Bharat Karnad: Criticizes India's practice of keeping nuclear weapons in demated form due to logistical, bureaucratic, and infrastructural hurdles. Believes India's crisis management capabilities are inadequate and suggests a more robust nuclear arsenal.

· P.R. Chari: Raises concerns that NFU may undermine deterrence against Pakistan, giving them confidence to deploy tactical nuclear weapons without fearing an Indian response.

· Vipin Narang: Discusses the possibility of a pre-emptive first strike against Pakistan's nuclear reserves, considering India's conventional military superiority.

· Rear Admiral Raja Menon: Notes that in 1998 India lacked the capability for a credible "First Use" policy, but growing capabilities may influence future posture.

· BS Nagal: Points out the moral implications of targeting civilian populations and argues against considering massive destruction on civilian centers as part of the nuclear doctrine.

Those Who Support No First Use Policy

· K. Subramaniam: Believes deterrence is more about the perception of survivable nuclear capability rather than sheer numbers.

· Manpreet Sethi: Supports NFU as less costly and aligned with India's traditional aversion to nuclear weapons.

· Admiral Verghese Koithara: Argues that NFU reduces complexity and costs; adopting a First Use Doctrine could hinder confidence-building.

· Rajesh Basrur: Suggests that Pakistan’s rejection of NFU does not reflect major differences in deployment patterns.

· Shivshankar Menon: Considers NFU a reflection of India's confidence in its second-strike capabilities.

· Rakesh Sood: Highlights that India lacks the first-strike capability to eliminate Pakistan's nuclear arsenal.

· Harsh V. Pant: Cautions against changing NFU, as it could harm India’s NSG prospects and international image.

· Manoj Joshi: Emphasizes the need to consider both Pakistan and China before making any doctrinal changes.

The dominant opinion on NFU is that India should maintain it. Even the Ministry of External Affairs, in response to a question in the Lok Sabha, clarified that no change had been made to the NFU policy.

There is near consensus in the Indian strategic community that India’s nuclear doctrine needs periodic re-examination. There is also consensus that the government should release more information about its nuclear doctrine to better deter adversaries and inform public debate.

Nuclear Triad in India: Aligning the Triad for Deterrence

Nuclear Triad: India's nuclear triad comprises land-based, air-based, and sea-based nuclear delivery systems, providing a diversified and credible deterrence capability.

Recent INS ARIHANT Patrol: INS ARIHANT, India's first indigenously built nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarine (SSBN), recently completed its sea patrol. This enhances India's deterrence capability significantly, especially considering the growing naval strength of potential adversaries.

Drawbacks

· India's current naval deterrence is not sufficient to deter adversaries effectively.

· Having only one SSBN with limited range raises concerns about operational effectiveness.

· Ambiguity remains about whether INS ARIHANT's first patrol carried nuclear-tipped missiles.

· Lack of nuclear confidence-building measures with Pakistan and limited ones with China.

· Absence of a sophisticated communication system poses challenges.

Consequences

· The deployment of INS ARIHANT may impact regional stability and increase maritime competition in the Indian Ocean.

· It can exacerbate regional security dilemmas and potentially create instability.

· The absence of confidence-building measures and dedicated platforms could lead to miscalculations and accidents.

Way Forward

· India and its neighbours, particularly Pakistan and China, should consider establishing an "incidents at sea" agreement to avoid escalations and misunderstandings.

Command and Control

· The naval leg of the triad falls under military custody and control.

· The captain of the SSBN reports to the Strategic Forces Command for nuclear missile launches.

· Ensuring a fool-proof Permissive Action Links system to prevent unauthorized use requires more clarity.

Conclusion

While INS ARIHANT strengthens India's nuclear deterrence, it also alters deterrence stability in the region. The sea deterrent is still in its early stages, and India faces various challenges on its path to establishing a robust and credible sea-based nuclear capability.

India’s role in global disarmament and global nuclear order

India's role in the global nuclear order is complex and has evolved over the years. As a nuclear-armed state that is not a party to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), India has navigated its way through the international nuclear landscape while balancing its security concerns and aspirations for global nuclear governance

1. Support for Comprehensive Nuclear Disarmament: India has consistently supported the goal of achieving comprehensive nuclear disarmament worldwide. It has called for the complete elimination of nuclear weapons, considering them as a threat to global security and stability. India has actively participated in multilateral disarmament forums and discussions, emphasizing the need for nuclear-weapon states to reduce and eventually eliminate their arsenals.

2. Non-Proliferation Commitment: Despite not being a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), India has adhered to a policy of responsible nuclear behavior and non-proliferation. It maintains strict export controls and safeguards its nuclear technology and materials to prevent their unauthorized transfer to other countries or non-state actors.

3. Advocacy for Fissile Material Cut-Off Treaty (FMCT): India has been a vocal proponent of negotiating a Fissile Material Cut-Off Treaty (FMCT). Such a treaty aims to halt the production of fissile material (highly enriched uranium and plutonium) for nuclear weapons, contributing to global disarmament efforts.

4. Commitment to No-First-Use (NFU) Policy: India's nuclear doctrine includes a No-First-Use policy, whereby it pledges not to use nuclear weapons first in any conflict. This policy is seen as a confidence-building measure to prevent nuclear escalation and enhance regional stability.

5. Engaging in Disarmament Forums: India actively participates in various international forums and organizations dedicated to disarmament and non-proliferation, such as the Conference on Disarmament and the United Nations Disarmament Commission. Through these platforms, India engages in constructive dialogue with other nations to promote disarmament goals.

6. Role in United Nations: As a responsible member of the United Nations, India has supported and contributed to UN efforts on disarmament and arms control. It has consistently emphasized the importance of multilateral negotiations and consensus-building in achieving disarmament objectives.

7. Conventional Disarmament: Apart from nuclear disarmament, India has also supported efforts for conventional disarmament, including the reduction of conventional arms and military expenditures to promote regional and global stability.

India's role in global disarmament reflects its commitment to advancing a world free from the threats posed by nuclear weapons and other arms. While maintaining its strategic interests, India seeks to engage constructively with the international community to achieve tangible progress in disarmament and non-proliferation initiatives.

Nuclear Non–Proliferation regimes and India

India has been a consistent advocate of global nuclear disarmament since the inception of the concept in the United Nations. India, faced with two nuclear neighbours with one of them declaring its nuclear arsenal as India-specific, had to reluctantly become a nuclear weapon state. However, India remains committed to the idea of negotiating a universal, non-discriminatory and internationally and effectively verifiable treaty banning the production of fissile material for nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices, one that takes into account India’s national security interests. India remains outside both the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) and the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty (CTBT).

NPT – Non-Proliferation Treaty

The Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) is a cornerstone of the global nuclear non-proliferation regime, aiming to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons. It allows five recognized nuclear-weapon states (NWS) to possess nuclear weapons while obligating non-nuclear weapon states (NNWS) to refrain from acquiring them. The treaty has three main objectives: non-proliferation, disarmament, and peaceful use of nuclear energy. Though criticized for structural flaws, the NPT enjoys near-universal status with only four hold-out countries (India, Pakistan, Israel, and North Korea). Despite its imperfections, the treaty remains crucial in preventing uncontrolled nuclear proliferation.

India and NPT

India has not joined the NPT because of the various concerns associated with the treaty and some of its compulsions

· Discriminatory Nature: India perceived the NPT as discriminatory because it established a distinction between the five recognized nuclear-weapon states (NWS) (United States, Russia, United Kingdom, France, and China) and non-nuclear-weapon states (NNWS). The treaty allowed the NWS to possess nuclear weapons while obliging NNWS to forgo nuclear weapons development.

· Security Concerns: India's decision not to join the NPT was driven by its security concerns. The country faced regional security challenges from nuclear-armed neighbors like China and Pakistan. India believed that possessing nuclear weapons provided a credible deterrence against potential adversaries.

· Sovereignty and Independence: India emphasized its commitment to maintaining sovereignty and independence in its foreign policy decisions. Joining the NPT would have meant accepting external norms and limitations on its nuclear program, which India viewed as compromising its strategic autonomy.

· Lack of Progress on Disarmament: India was critical of the NPT's inability to ensure significant progress towards nuclear disarmament by the recognized nuclear-weapon states. India believed that the NPT did not effectively address vertical proliferation, i.e., the reduction and elimination of existing nuclear arsenals.

· Need for Self-Reliance: India's decision not to join the NPT also stemmed from the desire to develop its indigenous nuclear technology and capabilities. The country pursued a policy of self-reliance in nuclear energy and defense, including the development of nuclear weapons.

· Domestic and Political Considerations: The issue of nuclear weapons and India's stance on the NPT also had strong domestic and political implications. Public sentiment and political considerations played a role in shaping India's decision to maintain an independent nuclear policy.

· Thus India's decision not to join the NPT was driven by concerns about discrimination, security, sovereignty, and the need to pursue an independent nuclear policy. India sought to preserve its strategic autonomy and the ability to address its security challenges in a region with nuclear-armed neighbours.

India and CTBT

India’s stand on the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT) too is a principled one. India has declared that it would be unable to sign and ratify the CTBT in its present discriminatory form. However, India has pledged to continue with its voluntary and unilateral moratorium on further nuclear testing. India is the only nuclear weapon state to declare that it believes its security would be enhanced, not diminished, in a world free of nuclear weapons.

Benefits of Joining CTBT:

Joining the CTBT may facilitate India's accession to the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) and other nuclear deals. It would provide access to information from the International Monitoring System (IMS) to keep track of countries like Pakistan and their role in global peace and non-proliferation, especially concerning terrorists.

Reasons for not signing CTBT:

· India, along with Pakistan and North Korea, has not signed the CTBT.

· The US and China have signed but not ratified the treaty.

· Indian concerns include discrimination against non-P5 countries, partial treatment for countries like India that recently acquired nuclear technology, exclusion of electronic and digital tests, insignificance given North Korea's continued tests, lack of a time frame for complete disarmament, and objections to the entry into force clause requiring 44 countries with nuclear weapon capacity to ratify the treaty.

· India feels the treaty puts unnecessary pressure on it to sign.

Conclusion:

India supports disarmament but is cautious about any approach that may prejudice other countries.

India has shown support for the proposed Fissile Material Cut Off Treaty, which is expected to be fair in nature.

Recent Development and Current Status

Multilateral Export Control Regimes and India

MECR are voluntary and non-binding agreements created by the major supplier countries that have agreed to co-operate in their effort to prevent and regulate the transfer of certain military and dual-use technology. It aims at preventing the proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD).

India has been part of 3 out of 4 MECR regimes:

Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR) - 2016:

· In 2016, India became a member of the Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR).

· MTCR aims to prevent the proliferation of missiles and missile technology capable of carrying weapons of mass destruction.

· India's membership in MTCR allows it access to sensitive missile-related technologies and promotes responsible missile non-proliferation practices.

Wassenaar Arrangement - 2017:

· India was admitted to the Wassenaar Arrangement in 2017.

· The Wassenaar Arrangement is a multilateral export control regime that regulates the export of conventional arms and dual-use goods and technologies.

· India's inclusion in this group enhances its access to advanced technologies and demonstrates its commitment to responsible export controls.

Australia Group - 2018:

· India became a member of the Australia Group in 2018.

· The Australia Group is an informal forum of countries that coordinate efforts to control the export of chemical and biological weapons-related materials and technologies.

· India's membership in the group strengthens its ability to prevent the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons.

These developments signify India's growing recognition and acceptance in the international arena as a responsible actor in the field of export controls and non-proliferation efforts. By being part of these export control regimes, India can engage in legitimate trade and technology transfers while adhering to global non-proliferation norms and ensuring security and safety measures.

India and NSG

India is not a member of the NSG because all its efforts were consistently blocked by China and some other members.

Why India should get the membership of NSG

· Responsible Nuclear Power: India has a positive record on non-proliferation and supports complete nuclear disarmament.

· Strategic Triad: India has a credible minimum deterrence posture with a developed nuclear triad.

· Export-Control Mechanism: NSG membership will enhance access to advanced nuclear technologies for peaceful uses.

· Precedent for Non-NPT Signatories: France joined the NSG before acceding to the NPT, setting a precedent.

· Support from Major NSG Members: The US, Russia, Switzerland, and Japan back India's NSG membership.

· Commitment to FMCT: India actively supports negotiations for a universal and verifiable Fissile Material Cut-off Treaty.

· Reducing Nuclear Danger: India proposes measures to reduce the risks of accidental use of nuclear weapons.

India's responsible nuclear conduct, strategic capabilities, and support for disarmament make it a deserving candidate for NSG membership, with the backing of major NSG members.

Obstacles in India Getting NSG Membership

· Non–signatory to NPT: India's bid for NSG membership faces opposition due to its non-signatory status to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).

· China's Blockade: China insists on non-discriminatory procedures for the entry of non-NPT countries into the NSG.

· China linked India's membership bid with Pakistan's, creating obstacles. However, Pakistan's credentials for membership are questioned.

India's bid for NSG membership is hindered by its non-NPT signatory status, with China demanding equal treatment for all non-NPT countries. The linkage with Pakistan's bid has further complicated the process, despite India's credentials as a responsible nuclear power.

Why China is Opposing?

· Beijing wants NSG entry to be "norm-based" — in other words, whatever rules govern Indian entry should apply to others too.

· Rakesh Sood: China's status as a nuclear power state in international non-proliferation regime from Asia seems to be threatened by India's request in NSG. The fact that India is now developing long-range missile capability and SSBN capability will gradually bring a shift in official Chinese thinking.

· Rakesh Sood: It has been conveniently forgotten that in the past many countries like France were inducted into NSG without signing NPT. Moreover, China did not fulfil criteria of non-proliferation.

Way Forward and Conclusion

· Harsh V. Pant: NSG membership is not in horizon, but we should continue presenting our case to remind other countries of our claim.

· Shyam Saran: We should not make NSG an elemental issue between India and China and pursue a more quiet and calibrated diplomacy.

In News

· India’s Nuclear Revolution, 25 Years after Pokhran by HARSH V. PANT

· The constrained evolution of India’s nuclear doctrine since Pokhran II

· India and the future of nuclear arms control

Recent Updates

· Nuclear Triad and Naval Deterrence: India commissioned INS Arighaat, its second nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarine (SSBN), in August 2024, enhancing its sea-based deterrence. INS Arighaat, equipped with K-15 missiles (750 km range), joins INS Arihant, operational since 2018. For two additional SSBNs by 2027, with INS Aridhaman expected to carry K-4 missiles (3,500 km range). Scholar Manpreet Sethi argues that a fleet of four SSBNs strengthens India’s second-strike capability, critical for credible minimum deterrence. However, Brahma Chellaney cautions that limited submarine numbers and communication challenges hinder a robust naval deterrent.

· Nuclear Doctrine and No-First-Use (NFU) Debate: The NFU policy remains intact, with no official changes despite ongoing debates. In January 2025, Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri reaffirmed India’s commitment to NFU at the UN Conference on Disarmament, emphasizing responsible nuclear conduct. Scholar Rajesh Basrur notes that NFU aligns with India’s strategic culture but requires clearer operational guidelines to address Pakistan’s tactical nuclear threats. Conversely, Bharat Karnad reiterated his call for abandoning NFU, arguing that India’s growing missile capabilities, like the Agni-V ICBM (5,000 km range), enable a flexible posture.

· Global Disarmament and Non-Proliferation: India reiterated its support for a Fissile Material Cut-Off Treaty (FMCT) during the 2024 UN General Assembly, advocating a non-discriminatory framework. India also endorsed the UN’s Global Digital Compact, highlighting cybersecurity’s role in nuclear stability. Scholar Harsh V. Pant praises India’s disarmament advocacy but notes its non-NPT status limits influence in global forums. India’s participation in the Conference on Disarmament saw it propose measures to prevent accidental nuclear use, earning praise from Japan and the US.

· Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) Membership: India’s NSG bid remains stalled, primarily due to China’s opposition. At the 2024 NSG plenary, China reiterated its demand for “norm-based” entry, linking India’s application to Pakistan’s. The US and Russia renewed support for India, citing its non-proliferation record. Scholar Rakesh Sood argues that China’s stance reflects strategic rivalry, as India’s nuclear triad and missile advancements challenge Beijing’s regional dominance. Shyam Saran’s call for quiet diplomacy was echoed in India’s low-key lobbying at the 2025 NSG meeting, avoiding confrontation with China.

· Multilateral Export Control Regimes (MECR): India leveraged its MTCR, Wassenaar Arrangement, and Australia Group memberships to access advanced dual-use technologies, supporting its nuclear energy goals. In 2024, India secured a deal with France for small modular reactors (SMRs) under Wassenaar guidelines. Scholar Ashley Tellis highlights that MECR participation enhances India’s global standing, aligning with its self-reliance policy.

· Development and Regional Stability: India’s nuclear advancements support its energy security, with 24 reactors operational and 12 under construction by 2025, aiming for 22,480 MW capacity by 2031, nuclear energy projects in Tamil Nadu and Gujarat create jobs, aligning with development goals. However, INS Arighaat’s deployment raised concerns in Pakistan, with its media claiming it fuels a regional arms race. Scholar Happymon Jacob urges India-Pakistan confidence-building measures, like an ‘incidents at sea’ agreement, to mitigate risks, reinforcing the original content’s way forward.

India’s Nuclear Submarine Fleet (2025)

Submarine	Status	Missile Type	Range
INS Arihant	Operational (2018)	K-15	750 km
INS Arighaat	Commissioned (2024)	K-15, K-4 (testing)	750–3,500 km
INS Aridhaman	Under Construction	K-4 (planned)	3,500 km

Recent developments in Indian Foreign Policy

India – Afghanistan Relations

India-Afghanistan Relations: An Overview

Afghanistan has historically been a theatre of great-power politics, from the British colonial period to when the United States launched its ‘War on Terror’ in the early 2000s. India, owing to its strategic location straddling Pakistan and Iran and other Central Asian Republics has had a keen perception of the threat of terrorism emanating from the region. When Kabul fell to the Taliban in August 2021, India was compelled to rethink its policy towards its western neighbor.

Irrespective of the regime in power in Afghanistan, India has always helped stabilize the country and projected itself as an influential actor in the region. It has always focused more on the development partnership aspect of the relationship. In the past 1.5 years, India has intensified its humanitarian and developmental outreach, sending medical aid, vaccines, and resuming stalled projects like the Salma Dam maintenance, reinforcing its commitment to Afghan stability despite the Taliban’s rule.

· Former NSA Shivshankar Menon: "Afghanistan is a test case for India's aspiration to be a leading power with a wider regional and global responsibility."

· Vivek Chadha: "A stable Afghanistan is critical for India's security interests in the region as it limits spread of terrorism and religious extremism."

· Strategic Affairs Expert Brahma Chellaney: "India must leverage its partnership with Iran to secure alternate access to Afghanistan and Central Asia beyond Pakistan."

· "India has always supported an Afghan-led and Afghan-owned peace process." - Underscoring need for Afghan agency.

India’s developmental efforts in Afghanistan

Harsh V. Pant: “Having invested heavily in Afghanistan's development, India cannot afford a destabilized nation controlled by unstable elements.

From a liberal institutionalism view, India's reconstruction aid to Afghanistan represents investing in rebuilding multilateralism. Since early 2024, India has provided over 11,000 vaccine doses, including influenza and meningitis vaccines, and resumed technical support for infrastructure projects, such as the Afghan Parliament building, to maintain its developmental footprint.

Importance of Afghanistan for India

Afghanistan holds a crucial position in India's strategic and economic interests due to its geo-strategic location, security implications, and economic potential. India's relationship with Afghanistan is shaped by historical, political, and economic factors that highlight the significance of the region for India.

· Geo-strategic Importance: Afghanistan's location serves as a buffer between India and potential threats from the northwest. Historically, invasions into India have originated from the north, making Afghanistan's security crucial for India's defense.

· Security Considerations: Afghanistan shares a border with Pakistan, a country with which India has had historical tensions. This proximity creates a second potential front for India's security concerns. The unstable situation in Afghanistan can create a safe haven for terrorist groups conducting anti-India activities.

· Geo-economic Significance: Afghanistan is situated as a transit hub between Central Asia and South Asia, making it crucial for trade and connectivity. The region holds immense mineral wealth, including resources like copper, iron, and lithium, which could have economic benefits for India. Recent trade discussions in 2024 and 2025 have emphasized expanding Afghan exports through Chabahar Port, with India facilitating over 50,000 tons of wheat shipments to Afghanistan.

· Indian Policy Toward Afghanistan: India's engagement with Afghanistan is driven by its desire for a stable and peaceful neighbor. India's policy focuses on development, capacity-building, and humanitarian assistance. Afghanistan's location surrounded by major powers like China, Pakistan, Iran, Russia, and India makes it a zone of complex interests. Afghanistan has historically been a battleground for proxy wars due to the involvement of global powers, including the USA and the Soviet Union.

India’s Strategy Post-Taliban in Afghanistan

India, driven by national security concerns, has refrained from recognizing the regime but has adopted a flexible strategy involving informal engagement, addressing security threats, and maintaining people-to-people exchanges. India's actions include providing emergency humanitarian aid, recalibrating its Afghanistan strategy. In January 2025, Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri met Taliban Acting Foreign Minister Mawlawi Amir Khan Muttaqi in Dubai, marking a significant step in informal engagement to discuss security and humanitarian aid.

Approach of India post Taliban

· India’s Non-Recognition Stance: India has not officially recognized the Taliban regime due to security concerns. However, it has engaged with the Taliban informally to address security issues and maintain lines of communication. In May 2025, External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar’s call with Muttaqi was the highest-level political contact since 2021, focusing on countering anti-India propaganda and strengthening ties.

· Humanitarian Assistance and Engagement: Despite the absence of formal recognition, India has provided emergency humanitarian aid to Afghanistan, including food items and COVID-19 vaccines. This approach aligns with India's efforts to provide assistance and maintain engagement while focusing on security concerns. India’s aid in 2024-2025 included medical supplies and support for 80,000 Afghan refugees repatriated from Pakistan, enhancing India’s goodwill.

· Security Concerns and Regional Dynamics: India’s primary worry is the potential for the Taliban’s hardliner ideology to spread, encouraging Islamist terror groups in India and causing instability. The Taliban’s close relationship with Pakistan raises concerns about terrorist activities being launched from Afghan soil. Tensions between the Taliban and Pakistan, including border clashes in 2024, have prompted India to deepen engagement to counter Pakistan’s influence.

· Changing Dynamics and Leverage: Ongoing tensions between the Taliban and Pakistan, along with border disputes, could provide India with an opportunity for further engagement. The Taliban’s acceptance of Indian humanitarian aid shipped through Pakistan’s territory suggests potential leverage. In 2025, the Taliban’s condemnation of the Pahalgam attack in India signaled a willingness to align with India’s security concerns.

· Regional Collaborations: India has engaged in regional security dialogues and discussions with like-minded countries to promote peace and stability in Afghanistan. India’s collaboration with the United States is essential to address its security concerns. India’s participation in a Taliban-hosted regional conference in Kabul in 2024 underscored its role in regional diplomacy.

· Future Strategy: India’s approach remains pragmatic, focusing on humanitarian aid, addressing security concerns, and working with partners to ensure regional stability. India is cautious about Pakistan’s influence over the Taliban and aims to mitigate potential threats to its interests. India is exploring trilateral cooperation with Iran and Afghanistan to enhance Chabahar Port’s role as a trade hub.

India’s stand in recent times with respect to Afghanistan

India’s relations with Afghanistan have seen several significant developments over the past year, particularly in light of the Taliban’s control.

· Diplomatic Engagements: India has resumed its diplomatic presence in Afghanistan with a focus on humanitarian assistance and economic cooperation. In recent discussions, India expressed its interest in expanding political and economic ties, including enhancing trade through the Chabahar Port. This port is crucial as it provides a trade route for Afghanistan that bypasses Pakistan. In 2024-2025, India reopened visa services for Afghans and cleared Afghan trucks at Chabahar, boosting trade connectivity.

· Humanitarian Assistance: India continues to facilitate and coordinate humanitarian assistance to Afghanistan. This includes meetings with Taliban officials where discussions have emphasized India’s ongoing support for the Afghan people, focusing on sectors like health, education, and infrastructure development. In May 2025, India donated 11,000 vaccine doses, earning public thanks from the Taliban regime.

· Economic and Transit Issues: The talks between Indian and Taliban officials have also covered economic and transit issues, highlighting the importance of the Chabahar Port for Afghan traders. This port is pivotal for landlocked Afghanistan, offering it critical access to international markets. In 2025, India and the Taliban discussed resuming India-funded projects, such as the Shahtoot Dam, to support Afghan agriculture.

· Regional Conferences: India participated in a Taliban-organized regional conference in Kabul, emphasizing its role in international and regional initiatives concerning Afghanistan. This participation marks a significant step in regional diplomacy, underscoring India’s commitment to stability and development in Afghanistan. India’s engagement in 2025 trilateral talks with Afghanistan and Iran further solidified Chabahar’s strategic importance.

· Security and Governance: At various international meetings, discussions have been held about the future of governance in Afghanistan, with a focus on forming an inclusive government that upholds human rights, particularly for women and minorities. However, there has been a visible division among countries regarding the approach to engage with the Taliban, reflecting differing international perspectives on recognizing the Taliban-led government. India has vocally supported women’s education in Afghanistan, aligning with global calls for inclusive governance.

Key Diplomatic Engagements (2024-2025)	Details
January 2025: Misri-Muttaqi Meeting	Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri met Taliban Acting Foreign Minister Muttaqi in Dubai to discuss humanitarian aid and security.
May 2025: Jaishankar-Muttaqi Call	First high-level political contact since 2021, focusing on countering anti-India propaganda and expanding ties.
2024: Kabul Regional Conference	India’s participation highlighted its commitment to regional stability and diplomacy.

These developments signify India’s cautious but strategically important re-engagement with Afghanistan under the Taliban’s regime, focusing on humanitarian aid, economic cooperation, and regional stability.

· Vinash Paliwal: “India’s engagement with Afghanistan under Taliban rule is driven by a pragmatic realization of the geopolitical realities. New Delhi’s outreach is not just about maintaining influence but also about ensuring that Afghanistan does not revert to being a sanctuary for anti-India terrorist groups.”

· Rudra Chaudhuri: “India’s approach to the Taliban has been one of cautious engagement, focusing on humanitarian issues rather than formal political recognition. This strategy aims to keep the door open for more substantive engagements in the future while managing the immediate humanitarian concerns.”

India’s approach to the Taliban regime in Afghanistan is characterized by flexibility, pragmatism, and a focus on security concerns. While not officially recognizing the regime, India engages with it informally to address security threats and provide humanitarian assistance. The evolving dynamics between the Taliban and Pakistan, along with regional collaborations, shape India’s strategy as it navigates security challenges while aiming to contribute to stability in Afghanistan. Recent shifts, including high-level talks and resumed developmental projects, reflect India’s strategic pivot to leverage cultural and economic ties for regional influence.

Scholars’ opinion

· Vivek Katju, former secretary in the Ministry of External Affairs: "India has undertaken cautious diplomatic engagement with the Taliban to safeguard its substantial investments and intelligence assets."

· Dhruva Jaishankar, ORF: "Providing focused humanitarian aid and mobilizing global opinion can help shape Taliban conduct in line with human rights."

· Gautam Mukhopadhaya, Former Indian Ambassador to Afghanistan: "Allowing old developmental projects to continue under Taliban can retain India’s foothold and goodwill among Afghans."

· Mihir Sharma: "India’s quiet outreach to the Taliban, through visa reopenings and trade facilitation, leverages cultural depth to counter China and Pakistan’s influence."

· Rabia Akhtar: "India’s re-engagement with Afghanistan exploits Pakistan’s strained ties with the Taliban, creating strategic space for New Delhi."

India and West Asia

· Meher Wadhawan - India’s vision to establish itself as a powerful and prosperous state in Asia has led it down various paths in terms of its foreign policy towards West Asia. Over the years, New Delhi has adapted its foreign policy to suit the evolving needs and conditions of global politics from the ideologically-driven Non-Aligned Movement to a policy based on greater pragmatism.

· C. Raja Mohan - With respect to change in Modi government’s policy towards the Middle East - If Delhi’s approach to the region in the past was defined by political diffidence; pragmatism now shapes the Modi government’s outreach to the Middle East.

India’s Changing Stand on West Asia

In the past, India has managed a successful balancing act in a tripolar West Asia. Now, the restructuring of West Asia’s geopolitical landscape has allowed India to engage with West Asian states with even less political maneuvering.

Today, the increasing multi polarity of the global order has enabled India to pursue its policy of strategic autonomy greater freedom when it comes to international relations and trade.

· Transformation of India's Approach: India’s foreign policy approach, particularly under Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s leadership, has evolved to shed its traditionally inward-looking image. Modi’s “Link and Act West” policy has spurred India’s active engagement with West Asia, fostering economic diplomacy and strategic partnerships in the region.

· Change in trend of bilateral engagements: India-Israel Relations: India’s ties with Israel have seen a transformative shift since the establishment of diplomatic relations in 1992.

o India-Israel Relations: Bilateral trade, excluding defense, has witnessed substantial growth, with Israel becoming a significant weapons supplier to India. Collaboration extends to areas like agriculture, climate, water, science, technology, and food security.

o India-UAE Relations: India’s engagement with Gulf Arab countries, particularly the UAE, has deepened, characterized by economic partnerships, technology transfer, renewable energy, and cultural exchange. Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreements (CEPA) has been signed, facilitating increased bilateral trade and investment.

· Strategic Restraint to Autonomy: India’s historical policy of strategic restraint has evolved into a focus on strategic autonomy, involving issue-based strategic partnerships without being constrained by rivalries.

o The focus has shifted from geopolitics to geo-economics, where India aims to harness interdependence for mutual benefits.

· Strategic Recalibration: Modi’s administration has recalibrated India’s West Asia policy toward cooperative bilateralism and multi alignment.

o Issue-based partnerships have been developed regardless of regional rivalries, promoting shared interests in areas like defense and security.

· Rise of mini laterals: The I2U2 summit is a natural extension of existing bilateral ties among India, Israel, and the UAE, facilitated by the United States.

o The forum brings together nations with diverse interests, allowing for collective navigation of international challenges and advancement of economic interests.

· Alignment of Interests: The I2U2 summit exemplifies this trend, uniting India, Israel, the UAE, and the US in pursuit of mutual interests and cooperation in various sectors.

The emergence of mini lateral forums like I2U2 and various efforts of rapprochement underscore the changing dynamics of international relations, influenced by geopolitical shifts and economic opportunities. India’s active engagement with Israel, the UAE, and the US reflects its transition from strategic restraint to strategic autonomy, driven by a desire to leverage global interdependence for mutual benefits.

Assertion of strategic autonomy reflects India’s current foreign policy towards West Asia. India’s policy is motivated by its active pursuit of economic opportunities in West Asia, whether it energy security or greater connectivity and trade through the development of Chabahar Port in the Iranian case.

C Raja Mohan - In a time when global powers are shifting inwards, India has taken up an important role as one of the few nations willing to stand behind the promise of globalization.

C. Raja Mohan - India’s new approach to the region, under Modi, is fashioned around three axes.

1. The first is to leverage the Gulf riches to accelerate India’s economic growth.

2. The second is to tap into the huge potential for strengthening counter-terror cooperation, Delhi’s most important national security preoccupation.

3. The third is to explore the prospects for deepening defense cooperation with the Gulf States.

Significance of West Asia for India

As per Shiv Vishwanathan, India’s interests in West Asia have grown exponentially as India has grown. Our interests have grown to the point where traditional stand-off ishness will no longer serve.

· Geo-Strategic Importance:

o Security Concerns: West Asia’s proximity to India’s western border makes it an extended neighborhood that directly affects India’s security.

o Geographical Unity: The Arabian Sea acts as a bridge, emphasizing the need for stability in West Asia for India’s security.

· Geo-Economic Considerations:

o Energy Dependency: India relies on the region’s oil reserves to fuel its economic growth.

o Diaspora Contribution: Over 7 million Indian expatriates in West Asia contribute approximately US$ 40 billion in remittances.

o Trade Routes Security: Ensuring safe passage through sea lanes passing the Gulf, Red Sea, and Indian Ocean is vital for India’s trade.

· Maritime Security:

o Changing Dynamics: While the US traditionally ensured security, evolving regional dynamics create space for India to take a larger role in maritime security.

o Example: Indian Navy’s participation in anti-piracy operations in the Gulf of Aden.

· Internal Security Concerns:

o Religious Extremism: The rise of extremism in West Asia poses a threat to regional stability and India’s internal security.

o Terrorism Threat: Groups like ISIS and their potential linkage to local activities in India.

o Example: Impact of ISIS recruitment efforts on Indian youth.

· Geopolitical Significance:

o Peaceful Periphery: India’s higher growth rate requires a peaceful extended periphery, yet ongoing conflicts in West Asia hinder this.

o Soft Power Projection: India’s cultural ties and engagement contribute to its soft power in the region.

o Example: Cultural exchange programs strengthening India’s image in the Middle East.

· Vital Communication Links:

o Gateway to Regions: West Asia provides access to Central Asia, Russia, Afghanistan, and the potential for overland connectivity to Europe.

o Connectivity Projects: Initiatives like Chabahar Port and North-South Corridor can enhance India’s trade and influence.

o Example: India’s investment in Chabahar Port to establish a direct trade route to Afghanistan and Central Asia.

· Leveraging Infrastructure:

o Chinese Model: Emulating China’s One-Belt-One-Road initiative to utilize Chinese-funded infrastructure for achieving India’s goals.

o Example: India using Chinese-built infrastructure for regional connectivity projects.

Talmiz Ahmad - Stability in West Asia is crucial for India’s long term political and economic interests. India’s economic well-being and the resilience of its political order and institutions are closely linked to continued stability in West Asia.

Recent Developments in West Asia and Their Impact on India:

· Economic and Financial Integration: The implementation of the Rupee-Dirham settlement system, allowing transactions directly in local currencies between India and the UAE, marks a significant economic advancement. This system enhances trade efficiency and reduces dependency on third-party currencies like the USD for bilateral trade.

· Security and Defense Cooperation: India has been intensifying its defense and security cooperation with countries in West Asia. Notably, there have been significant developments such as joint military exercises with the UAE and Saudi Arabia, and naval cooperation agreements with Oman. These initiatives enhance India’s strategic footprint in the region and provide mutual benefits in terms of security and military training.

· Healthcare and Space Technology Cooperation: The global COVID-19 pandemic highlighted the importance of international collaboration in healthcare. India has engaged in various Memorandums of Understanding with countries like Oman, Jordan, Israel, and Saudi Arabia to enhance cooperation in the healthcare sector. Additionally, there is growing collaboration in space technology with UAE and Israel, reflecting a broader trend of technological partnership.

· Impact of Regional Instability: The ongoing Israel-Hamas conflict has had profound implications for regional stability. The conflict has recharged the Palestinian cause, influencing the geopolitical landscape and necessitating diplomatic and strategic recalibrations by countries in the region, including India. Despite these tensions, the UAE has confirmed that projects under the I2U2 initiative, which includes India, will continue, showing resilience in bilateral cooperation amidst regional conflicts.

· Climate Change Initiatives: At COP 28, hosted by the UAE, significant discussions and initiatives were launched to combat climate change. India actively participated, promoting its Green Credit initiative, showcasing leadership in global environmental governance. These developments align with India’s broader strategy to engage constructively on global issues with West Asian partners.

Conclusion

India’s expanding interests in West Asia are a result of its own growth and aspirations. West Asia’s strategic, economic, and geopolitical importance to India is evident through its endeavors to ensure security, trade, and regional stability. As India evolves as a global player, its role in West Asia’s dynamics becomes increasingly significant.

Shivshankar Menon - The changing situation in West Asia and our increasing capabilities make it advisable that we adopt a much more active forward policy in the region. But India must adopt a much more active forward policy in the region if we are to pursue our growing geo-strategic interests.

Manoj Joshi - Given mutual antipathies and subterranean divides, India has to step carefully to ensure maximum gain for itself, even while avoiding the numerous political minefields there.

Rajiv Bhatia - In the wake of an extraordinary transformation, India’s relations with West Asia have entered a new era marked by utmost satisfaction. While the Cold War era saw an ideology-driven foreign policy approach, the post-Cold War period shifted towards a more non-aligned orientation. Throughout this evolution, pragmatism has emerged as the overriding principle, guiding India’s engagements with the West Asian nations.

Latest Updates

· India’s West Asia Foreign Policy: India has intensified its “Think West” policy, prioritizing economic and strategic engagement while maintaining neutrality in regional conflicts. At the Raisina Middle East Dialogue in Abu Dhabi (January 2025), External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar emphasized India’s role as a connector between West Asia and the Indo-Pacific, leveraging trade, connectivity, and cultural ties. Scholar C. Raja Mohan noted India’s shift towards “multi-alignment,” balancing relations with Israel, UAE, and Iran amidst West Asian volatility, particularly post-Israel-Hamas conflict. India’s participation in the India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor (IMEC), announced at the G20 Summit (September 2023), aims to enhance connectivity, with Saudi Arabia committing $20 billion for infrastructure. IMEC’s potential to cut Mumbai-Greece shipping costs by 40%, though delays persist due to regional instability.

· India-Israel Relations: Bilateral trade reached $10.7 billion in 2024, excluding defense, with Israel supplying $2.5 billion in arms, including drones and missiles. The Israel-Hamas conflict strained India’s diplomacy, but India maintained strategic ties, condemning Hamas’s October 2023 attack while urging humanitarian aid for Gaza. In March 2024, India and Israel signed an MoU for 10,000 additional Indian workers in Israel’s construction and healthcare sectors, replacing Palestinian labor. Scholar Harsh V. Pant argued India’s pragmatic stance strengthens its role as a bridge between Israel and Arab states, leveraging the Abraham Accords. Joint counter-terrorism exercises in 2024 enhanced intelligence sharing, focusing on drone threats.

· India-UAE Relations: Bilateral trade surged to $85 billion in 2023–24, with the UAE as India’s third-largest trading partner. The Rupee-Dirham settlement system, expanded in 2024, facilitated $3.5 billion in transactions, reducing dollar dependency. The Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement (CEPA) drove $5 billion in UAE investments in India’s renewable energy and logistics sectors. In February 2025, PM Modi inaugurated the BAPS Hindu Temple in Abu Dhabi, symbolizing cultural ties, with 1.5 million visitors by June 2025. Joint naval exercise “Zayed Talwar” in August 2024 strengthened maritime security cooperation. Scholar Anil Trigunayat highlighted the UAE’s role as India’s gateway to Gulf markets, with 3.5 million Indian expatriates contributing $45 billion in remittances annually.

· I2U2 Initiative: The I2U2 group advanced with a joint space venture announced in September 2023, combining satellite data for climate solutions, aligned with the Artemis Accords. The $2 billion UAE investment in Gujarat and Madhya Pradesh food parks progressed, with Israeli agri-tech firms deploying climate-smart solutions, targeting 20% food waste reduction by 2026. The 300 MW hybrid renewable energy project in Dwarka, Gujarat, valued at $330 million, began construction in April 2024, with Masdar as a key investor. Scholar Mohammed Soliman advocated expanding I2U2 to include Saudi Arabia for regional stability, though no formal expansion occurred by June 2025. I2U2’s resilience despite Israel-Hamas tensions, with UAE reaffirming commitments.

· COP 28 Climate Change Initiatives: At COP 28 in Dubai (November–December 2023), India launched the Green Credit Initiative, enabling businesses to earn credits for reforestation and renewable energy projects, with 10 million credits issued by March 2025. India committed to 500 GW of non-fossil fuel capacity by 2030, aligning with I2U2’s Dwarka project. The UAE’s $30 billion ALTÉRRA fund, announced at COP 28, allocated $500 million for India’s solar and wind projects. Scholar Rajeswari Pillai Rajagopalan praised India’s leadership in mobilizing Global South nations for climate finance, though funding gaps remain.

· Diaspora Remittances: “Over 8.9 million Indian expatriates in West Asia contribute approximately $45 billion in remittances annually,”

· I2U2 Summit Details: “The I2U2 summit, initiated in July 2022, is a natural extension of existing bilateral ties among India, Israel, and the UAE, facilitated by the United States, with key projects including $2 billion UAE investment in Indian food parks and a $330 million renewable energy project in Gujarat.”

India-Palestine Relations: A Fundamental Shift and Balancing Act

· Historical Significance: India's engagement with Palestine holds deep historical ties and significance within its concentric circles of foreign relations.

· Israel-Palestine Nexus: The Israel-Palestine conflict's impact interlinks India's relations with both nations, creating a complex web of geopolitical dynamics.

Evolution of India's Approach:

· Pre-Cold War Era: Visionaries like Gandhi and Nehru empathized with the Palestinian cause, equating it to India's struggles for independence.

· Cold War Era: The Nehruvian consensus led India to support the Palestinian cause, showing solidarity, aiding capacity-building and opposing Israel's establishment. However, India recognized Israel in 1950.

· Post-Cold War Era: Under Prime Minister Narasimha Rao in 1992, India established diplomatic relations with Israel, marking a significant shift in policy and reflecting changing global dynamics.

Recent Changes and Balancing:

· Ties with Israel: India fostered strategic ties with Israel, exhibiting a partnership while maintaining a degree of diplomatic distance, as evidenced by its abstentions in UNHRC resolutions against Israel.

· Palestine's Position: India's stance on Palestine has evolved, refraining from explicit support for claims on Jerusalem and maintaining an independent stance in international forums.

· Strategic Calculations: India's dynamic role in West Asia is influenced by its bold actions, balancing regional dynamics such as Saudi Arabia and Israel's concerns over Iran, and seizing opportunities emerging from international realignments.

Challenges and Considerations:

· Balancing Economic Interests: India's relationship with Palestine must harmonize with its robust engagements in the Arab Gulf, encompassing energy imports, labor exports, and economic collaborations.

· Regional Stability: Cordial relations with Iran and contributing to Afghanistan's stabilization post-American withdrawal from integral considerations in India's West Asian policy.

India's intricate approach to Palestine and Israel epitomizes a well-calibrated balancing act. While India maintains its historical solidarity with Palestine, it concurrently fosters strategic relations with Israel. This approach, attuned to the complexities of regional dynamics and India's multifaceted interests, underscores the adaptability and sophistication of India's foreign policy in the ever-evolving West Asian panorama.

India–Israel relationship

Harsh V. Pant highlights a shift in India's approach towards Israel. He critiques the previous approach as hypocritical and underscores a re-evaluation under the Modi government. This new approach involves acknowledging Israel's significance and granting it the recognition it deserves in India's foreign policy considerations.

India–Israel relationship – 30 years of bilateral ties

India and Israel marked the 30th anniversary of full diplomatic relations, signifying the enduring friendship between the two nations. This milestone was highlighted by illuminating historic landmarks with flag colors and unveiling a commemorative logo featuring the Star of David and Asoka Chakra, symbolizing the strong bond between them.

Evolution of relations

· Delayed Diplomatic Relations: India’s initial approach towards Israel was characterized by a cautious stance despite recognizing Israel in 1950 and permitting an Israeli consulate in Mumbai. The hesitation stemmed from India’s alignment with anti-colonial movements and its close ties with Arab nations. This reluctance to establish full diplomatic relations continued until 1992.

· Shift in Approach: The turning point came in 2015 when President Pranab Mukherjee visited Israel. This visit marked a significant shift in India’s approach towards Israel and signified the beginning of a new phase in bilateral relations. It demonstrated India’s willingness to engage with Israel at a higher level and laid the groundwork for further interactions.

· PM Modi’s Landmark Visit (2017): In 2017, Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s historic visit to Israel cemented the transformation in bilateral ties. This high-profile visit showcased the growing warmth and importance of the relationship between the two nations. It marked a departure from the cautious approach of the past and indicated a strategic decision to engage more closely with Israel.

· Reciprocal Interactions - Benjamin Netanyahu’s Visit (2018): The impact of these high-level engagements was underlined by reciprocal visits. Benjamin Netanyahu, the Prime Minister of Israel, reciprocated Modi’s visit by coming to India in 2018. These reciprocal interactions highlighted the strengthening of ties and the mutual desire to forge a deeper partnership.

· Broadened Partnership - Beyond Military Cooperation: The transformative aspect of these visits was the expansion of the partnership beyond traditional military cooperation. While India had previously collaborated with Israel in military matters, the focus expanded to include economic development and technology cooperation. This marked a departure from the past and showcased India’s intent to cultivate a multi-faceted relationship with Israel, encompassing various sectors and dimensions.

The combination of these factors demonstrated a trajectory of growing warmth and a multifaceted engagement between India and Israel. From a cautious stance and delayed diplomatic relations, the relationship had evolved into a strategic partnership encompassing diplomatic, economic, technological, and defense cooperation. This progression reflected India’s strategic recalibration and its recognition of the mutual benefits of a stronger bond with Israel.

Views of Kanchi Gupta

· India does not plan on abandoning its traditional support for Palestinian statehood, were reminiscent of the ideological trappings of India’s West Asia policy. At a time when the strategic partnership between India and Israel has emerged well above the traditional defense and trade relations, it indicates that domestic politics and ideological inhibitions still underscore the Israel policy.

Benjamin Netanyahu aptly characterized the strong India-Israel relationship as a “marriage made in Heaven being implemented here on Earth.” This sentiment resonates well with the growing ties between the two nations.

The concept of I2T2, involving India’s talent and Israel’s technology, encapsulates the essence of their partnership aimed at shaping a better tomorrow.

Recent developments in Israel and Palestine

· Humanitarian Crisis: The situation in Gaza has deteriorated markedly, with Israel imposing a severe blockade that has restricted access to essentials like food, water, and medical supplies. The blockade has led to a crisis in food security, with over 90% of Gaza’s population facing critical levels of food insecurity. The lack of fuel has resulted in power outages that have shut down vital infrastructure, including desalination and wastewater treatment plants, exacerbating the shortage of safe drinking water.

· Military and Strategic Dimensions: The conflict has been marked by intense military engagements, with Israeli airstrikes aiming to target Hamas infrastructure, which Israel claims is often embedded within civilian areas. This strategy has led to significant destruction in Gaza, with a substantial portion of the infrastructure damaged or destroyed, affecting schools, hospitals, and residential buildings.

· Political Implications: The conflict has broader geopolitical implications, particularly concerning the Abraham Accords and the normalization of relations between Israel and certain Arab states. The ongoing violence poses a risk to the stability of these newly formed alliances and has the potential to alter the political landscape of the Middle East. The involvement of the U.S. and other international actors in seeking resolutions and managing the fallout is also a critical factor in the evolving dynamics of the region.

· Regional Security Concerns: Settler violence in the West Bank has escalated concurrently with the conflict in Gaza, with a marked increase in incidents against Palestinian civilians. This violence has not only led to casualties but also significant displacement within the Palestinian population, further straining the already tense relations between Israelis and Palestinians.

Jessica Stern discusses the psychological impacts of the Israel-Palestine conflict. She argues that nonviolent resistance could be more effective and that the international community, particularly the United States, should exert pressure to protect civilians and foster nonviolent approaches.
Noura Erakat offers a critical view on international law and its application in the Israel-Palestine conflict. She highlights recent legal actions aimed at stopping arms sales to Israel due to their potential use in violating international humanitarian law, and criticizes the international community for not doing enough to prevent what she describes as genocidal actions by Israel.
Nishank Motwani observes the significant shift in India-Israel relations under Prime Minister Narendra Modi, especially in response to recent conflicts such as the October 7 terrorist attack on Israel. Motwani highlights how these events have deepened bilateral relations, particularly in strategic and defense domains.
R Ravindra, the Deputy Permanent Representative of India to the United Nations, has spoken on the direct impact of the Israel-Hamas war on India’s economic and energy interests, especially concerning maritime safety in the Indian Ocean. He emphasized the need to prevent escalation and ensure the continuation of humanitarian aid, reinforcing India’s support for a two-state solution as a path to enduring peace.

India–Iran relations

Iran is most ideal to be known as natural ally according to Mandal Sidhhant because of being Neighbors’ neighbor.

India and Iran share a deep-rooted connection steeped in history and culture. Prime Minister Narendra Modi aptly referred to these relations as ‘dosti as old as history.’ The intricate tapestry of India-Iran relations is shaped by a multitude of factors, from cultural ties to strategic interests.

India–Iran relationship

· Cultural Bonds and Historical Ties: India’s extensive Shia population plays a pivotal role in shaping the interactions with Iran. With around 70,000 Parsis and a significant 25 million Shias, India’s people-to-people links form a strong foundation for mutual understanding and cooperation. The shared historical and civilization links between the two countries further reinforce this bond.

· Strategic Significance of Iran: Proximity, Energy, and Security: Geographical proximity underpins the strategic relevance of India’s engagement with Iran. The energy trade between the two nations, with India being a significant buyer of Iranian oil, has been a cornerstone of their relationship. Moreover, Iran’s unique geographic location, sharing land borders with Pakistan and Afghanistan, adds to its importance for India’s security interests. In situations where transit through Pakistan is denied, Iran provides an essential alternative route. India’s connection with Persian language and culture further deepens this significance.

· Strategic Mutualities and Regional Dynamics: India’s substantial Shia population distinguishes it as a key player in Iran’s calculations. The influence of Ayatollah Khomeini, the founding figure of the Islamic Republic of Iran, extended to India, reflecting the shared historical and ideological bonds. India’s leadership within the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) resonates with Iran’s diplomatic objectives, contributing to their alignment on several international issues.

· India’s Role for Iran and the Complex Web of Relations: For Iran, India assumes a pivotal role as a buyer of its oil, serving as a vital economic partner. India’s leadership within the Non-Aligned Movement enhances Iran’s diplomatic outreach, offering a platform for shared positions on global matters. Moreover, India’s balanced stance in a region where Pakistan maintains close ties with the United States and Saudi Arabia positions it as a potential stabilizing force.

Conclusion:

The multifaceted nature of India-Iran relations encapsulates a harmonious blend of cultural affinity and strategic cooperation. The complexity of this relationship underscores its depth and resilience, ensuring that the ties between these two nations remain strong and enduring.

Scholars’ comment on the India-Iran relation

Meena Singh Roy, Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses “Realizing the full potential of the relationship depends on resolving tensions over issues like Farzad B gas field and expanding sub-regional cooperation.”

Sumitha Narayanan Kutty, Jawaharlal Nehru University “India is expanding energy, connectivity and trade ties with Iran to secure its interests in the region, retain strategic autonomy and balance rival powers.”

Current Accords in west Asia and Impact on India – Abraham accord

The recent Abraham Accords have brought about significant implications for India’s foreign policy, both positive and negative.

Positive:

· Strategic Autonomy Reinforced: India’s policy of strategic autonomy and dehyphenation gains further validation. Strengthened relations between Israel and Saudi Arabia highlight India’s approach of engaging with various nations on their individual merits without being entangled in their disputes.

· Enhanced Regional Stability: The alignment between Israel and Gulf Arab nations could potentially contribute to greater stability in the region. A more stable West Asia is in India’s interest due to its extensive economic and security engagements in the area.

· Deft Balancing Opportunities: As Israel and Saudi Arabia grow closer, India’s deft balancing act gains more room for maneuvering. This dynamic offers India the chance to enhance its partnerships and foster cooperation without getting enmeshed in regional rivalries.

Negative:

· Iran Relations at Risk: The strengthening of Israel-Gulf ties might strain India’s relationship with Iran, a crucial partner for energy and connectivity projects. Striking a balance between these diverse partnerships becomes imperative.

· Sectarian Challenges: The growing rapport between Sunni-majority Gulf nations and Israel might intensify existing sectarian tensions in the region. Navigating these sensitivities becomes a challenge for India’s relations with these countries.

· Pakistan’s Decision Dilemma: The evolving regional alignments might force Pakistan to choose between aligning with Israel-embracing Arab states or forging closer ties with Iran and its allies. This could potentially impact the dynamics of India-Pakistan relations.

· Economic and Security Equilibrium: While India shares economic and security interests with Israel in West Asia, ensuring that Israel’s engagement does not overshadow India’s interests becomes crucial. Close coordination between India and Israel is pivotal for maintaining this equilibrium.

Thus the Abraham Accords present a mix of opportunities and challenges for India’s foreign policy objectives. As India navigates these complexities, it needs to strategically capitalize on the positive aspects while mitigating the negative repercussions, ultimately safeguarding its interests and promoting regional stability.

Scholars’ comment on Abraham accord and its implication on India

· Stanly Johnny, International Institute for Non-aligned Studies “The Abraham Accords may create space for India to balance ties with Saudi Arabia and Iran as part of its ‘Think West’ policy.”

· Harsh V. Pant, ORF “Closer Israel-Gulf ties could facilitate India’s efforts to diversify its energy sources and connectivity routes via western Arab states.”

· P.R. Kumaraswamy, JNU “The accords open up opportunities for India to boost security ties with Israel and UAE bilaterally and trilaterally to counter terrorism in the region.”

Analysis of Past 2 years of Relationship

In the past couple of years, India-Iran relations have seen both development and challenges, particularly influenced by geopolitical dynamics and strategic interests.

· Strategic and Economic Cooperation: India’s involvement in developing the Chabahar Port in Iran stands out as a significant endeavor aimed at enhancing regional connectivity, especially with Afghanistan. This project not only helps India bypass Pakistan but also positions India as a key player in regional infrastructure development. The port is viewed as a strategic counter to China’s influence in the region, particularly through the Chinese-developed Gwadar Port in Pakistan. However, this project has faced its set of challenges due to geopolitical tensions and external pressures, including from the U.S. and instability in Afghanistan.

· Geopolitical Challenges: The relationship has been complicated by Iran’s openness to include other regional players like China and Pakistan in projects like the development of Chabahar. Additionally, U.S. sanctions on Iran, part of the “maximum pressure” strategy, have significantly impacted the bilateral interactions, especially concerning economic ties like oil imports from Iran to India.

· Political Dynamics: There is a mutual interest between India and Iran in countering Sunni militant threats in the region and stabilizing Afghanistan. Both countries have suffered from terrorism that is often traced back to their shared neighbor, Pakistan, making their cooperation crucial in regional security frameworks. Moreover, the political landscape involving Iran’s interactions with the U.S. and India’s balancing act between its relations with Iran and the Western countries, particularly the U.S., adds a layer of complexity.

Overall, India-Iran relations are marked by a mix of strategic cooperation and challenges due to external geopolitical pressures and internal dynamics of the region. The partnership is crucial for India’s strategy to access Central Asia and counterbalance Chinese and Pakistani influence in the region. However, maintaining this relationship requires navigating a complex array of regional and international pressures, which have occasionally tested the resilience and limits of bilateral engagements.

Origin and development of the term New world order

The phrase “new world order” gained prominence after H.W. Bush’s speech in 1991, emphasizing a world governed by the rule of law in international conduct.

The evolution of world order from Westphalian multipolarity to Cold War bipolarity and later to unipolarity post-Cold War has led to the present inflection point.

While the shape of the new world order remains uncertain, there is a consensus that Asia, particularly the Indo-Pacific region, is becoming a key fulcrum of world politics. The USA, while remaining pre-eminent, faces challenges from regional hegemons in Asia.

If the last century was the famously proclaimed, “American Century” – this one is the “Asian Century” with India as one of its main players.India should take lead in bringing about a new world order to propagate a truly democratic process and a system of peaceful coexistence.

India’s Vision of the new world order: Championing a Multipolar World

India has consistently advocated for a multipolar world and recognizes that a multipolar Asia is crucial for a balanced global order. The vision aligns with India’s historical perception, viewing itself as one of the four petals of Jambu Dweep, emphasizing pluralism, multiculturalism, and tolerance. This approach is distinct from China’s vision of middle kingdom complex.

India’s advocacy for a multipolar world is rooted in the belief that it serves its interests as an emerging power seeking room to maneuver unconstrained by any new hegemon or bipolar system. India’s diverse interests necessitate cooperation with many powers, not just one, and promote counter veiling coalitions to prevent the rise of any single hegemon.

As suggested by shyam saran from the very beginning India has talked about the multipolar world .since world order is now being shaped in India .India believes that no multi-polar world is possible without multi-polar Asia.

Why India has such a vision

We can give reference to India’s historical perception as described by Shyam saran. India sees itself as one of the pettle out of the 4 pettles of Jambu dweep .This vision is qualitatively different from Chinese vision of middle kingdom complex

· Besides above the reason to support multi-polar world order is the belief that multi-polar world order is best align to its interest. As a emerging power seeking to expand its room to manoeuvre unconstrained by the others both the new hegemon or new bi-polar system.

· India’s Interest is diverse and India needs the support of many powers and not just the one power.

· Hence should not hesitate in promoting as well as in participating in counter veiling coalition to check the rise of any hegemon.

Views of Scholars about India and its Vision of Multipolar World Order

· S. Jaishankar - India’s Foreign Minister, emphasizes the necessity for India to adapt to a multipolar world by engaging with a variety of global partners. Jaishankar notes the decline of traditional powers and the emergence of new centers of influence, advocating for India to take a proactive role in shaping global affairs through strategic partnerships and enhanced participation in international organizations.

· Veena Kukreja - Offers an analysis of India’s evolving foreign policy, which is increasingly assertive and expansive due to its rising economic and military capabilities. Kukreja suggests that the end of a unipolar world dominated by the U.S. provides India with opportunities to assert itself more prominently on the global stage.

· Barry Buzan - Discusses the diffusion of power in the international system as a ‘rise of the rest’, leading towards a more multipolar world where no single nation holds supremacy. This scenario presents both challenges and opportunities for India as it navigates its strategic interests amidst competing global powers.

· C. Raja Mohan - Mohan discusses how India’s foreign policy strategy has evolved to adapt to a multipolar world, where traditional alliances are reconfigured, and new partnerships are essential. He notes that India’s approach has shifted from non-alignment to multi-alignment, reflecting its intent to navigate the complexities of an increasingly decentralized global power structure.

· Avinash Kumar - Kumar critiques the current global structure and suggests that India’s vision of a multipolar world seeks to democratize international relations more substantially. He advocates for India to use its rising influence to push for reforms in global governance structures, which could lead to a more equitable and balanced global order.

· Sumit Ganguly - Ganguly analyzes India’s strategic autonomy and its implications for global politics. He highlights India’s efforts to maintain strategic independence while actively participating in global diplomacy, suggesting that this balancing act is crucial for India as it seeks to enhance its role in a multipolar world.

Leveraging Cultural Heritage: India’s Unique Contribution

While India’s immediate vision is a multipolar world to build its power, its long-term aim should be grounded in its cultural heritage. India’s ethos of multiculturalism, pluralism, tolerance, and cosmopolitanism can be its greatest asset in shaping and leveraging the new world order. To sustain the expansive vision abroad, India must nurture a strong vision at home by embracing cultural diversity and fostering unity and inclusivity.

Concrete Expressions of India’s Vision

India’s vision for the new world order is demonstrated in recent speeches by Prime Minister Narendra Modi. At the World Economic Forum, India positioned itself as a “champion of liberal international order.

At the Shangri-La Dialogue, PM Modi provided much-needed clarification on India’s vision for the Indo-Pacific. These expressions reinforce India’s commitment to a multipolar world order, rooted in its cultural heritage, and its determination to shape an inclusive and balanced global order.

Prominent theme of PM speech

· India will take inspiration from its own civilisation and history PM has mentioned Lothal as the oldest port andBuddhism forming the common heritage in Asia giving the message of peace and compassion for all.

· India commitment to rule of law, principle of equality and the general commitment for the liberal international order.

· India seeing itself as a playing a linking role for larger Indo-pacific.

Micahel brecher

Suggest that India’s vision or world view comes from Indian culture and Indian culture has always been towards middle path so what he mentions that central message of India’s philosophical tradition revolve around

Rejection of absolutes.
Rejectionof extreme positions.
philosophical relativity.
Co-existence of good and evil.
The golden middle path.
Tradition of toleration.

Which all ultimately results into grand idea of India i.e. Non-alignment.

Anirban Ganguly, Book: The Modi Doctrine (2016), Chapter - Modi and India’s Civilisational Quest Panchamrit has clearly emerged as the new supporting pillar of India’s foreign policy under PM Modi. ‘Samman-dignity and honour; Samvad-greater engagement and dialogue; Samriddhi-shared prosperity; Suraksha-regional and global security; and Sanskriti evam Sabhyata-cultural and civilisational linkages’ are the five themes. In the current evolving geopolitical arrangement, India aspires and is working hard to emerge as a defining pole in an increasingly multi-polar world.

The reshaping and realignment of the world order will be a unique opportunity for India to reassess its foreign policy, economic policy and geopolitical strategy and strengthen its claim for global leadership. Strengthening India’s global economic might through a cautious geo-economic strategy in the aftermath of the Russia-Ukraine conflict can potentially mark a pivotal turn in India’s economic history.

India can be the fulcrum of this new global order, as a peaceful democracy with economic prosperity. But this requires India to first stem the raging communal divisions within. It is important that India can emerge as the harbinger of peace, harmony and prosperity in this new world.

Conclusion

In the current shifting kaleidoscope, India is seeking to develop a new paradigm for India’s foreign policy where India would not be a mere ‘balancer’ or ‘swing state’ but a ‘leading state’ that seeks a place at the global high table. This will not be easy, since power is never given, always taken. It will have to be ready to take risks and at times pursue conflicting goals. Many other countries will work to keep India down. That is why India must leverage its strengths, have diversified foreign policy options, and remain alert and flexible.

Israel-Iran War (2025)

Brief Historical Background

The Israel-Iran relationship has undergone a dramatic transformation since the mid-20th century:

Pre-1979: Cordial Relations: Under the Pahlavi dynasty, Iran and Israel maintained close ties, driven by shared strategic interests against Arab powers and the Soviet Union. Iran recognized Israel in 1948, one of the few Muslim-majority nations to do so, and collaborated on military and intelligence fronts, including oil exports to Israel. This was part of Israel’s “periphery doctrine,” allying with non-Arab states to counter Arab hostility.

Post-1979 Islamic Revolution: The 1979 revolution in Iran, led by Ayatollah Khomeini, fundamentally altered the relationship. Iran declared Israel an “enemy of Islam” and the “Little Satan,” severing diplomatic ties. Iran began supporting anti-Israel groups like Hezbollah (formed in 1982 after Israel’s Lebanon invasion) and later Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad, viewing Palestinian liberation as a religious and geopolitical cause to gain legitimacy among Sunnis and Arabs.

Proxy War (1980s–2024): The conflict evolved into a proxy war, with Iran arming and training groups like Hezbollah, Hamas, and the Houthis, while Israel conducted covert operations, including assassinations of Iranian nuclear scientists, cyberattacks like Stuxnet (2010), and airstrikes on Iranian assets in Syria. Iran’s nuclear program, perceived by Israel as an existential threat, became a central flashpoint, especially after Iran began enriching uranium post-2018, following the U.S. withdrawal from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA).

Direct Confrontations (2024): Tensions escalated in 2024 with direct missile exchanges in April and October, triggered by Israeli strikes on Iranian targets in Syria and the assassinations of key figures like Hezbollah’s Hassan Nasrallah and Hamas’s Ismail Haniyeh. These incidents set the stage for the 2025 war.

The conflict’s roots lie in ideological opposition (Iran’s anti-Zionist stance vs. Israel’s security concerns), competition for regional influence, and Iran’s nuclear ambitions, exacerbated by the weakening of Iran’s proxies post-October 2023.

Recent Developments (June 2025)

Israel’s Operation Rising Lion (June 13, 2025):

Israel launched a large-scale air campaign targeting Iran’s nuclear facilities (Natanz, Fordow, Isfahan), military sites, and senior IRGC officials, including General Hossein Salami. The operation aimed to delay Iran’s nuclear program, eliminate key personnel, and establish air superiority. Israeli officials claimed the strikes set back Iran’s nuclear capabilities by two to three years, though the extent of damage to underground sites remains unclear.

Foreign Minister Gideon Saar described the results as “very significant,” but the UN’s IAEA noted that attacks on nuclear facilities violate international norms, raising concerns about escalation.

Iran’s Retaliation:

Iran responded with ballistic missile and drone attacks on Israeli military sites and cities, using advanced Haj Qassem missiles that partially evaded Israel’s air defenses. The attacks killed 28 Israelis, while Iranian authorities reported 610 deaths and 4,746 injuries from Israeli strikes.

Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, declared the strikes a “slap to America’s face” and warned the U.S. against further involvement. Iran’s weakened proxy network (Hamas, Hezbollah, Assad regime) limited its regional retaliation options.

U.S. Involvement and Ceasefire:

The U.S. intervened on June 21, 2025, striking Iranian nuclear sites with bunker-buster bombs, but a U.S. intelligence assessment suggested the strikes delayed Iran’s nuclear program by only months. Iran retaliated symbolically, targeting Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar with no casualties.

A ceasefire brokered by President Donald Trump on June 24 was breached by both sides, with Israel striking a radar site near Tehran and Iran denying post-ceasefire missile launches. Trump expressed frustration, threatening to decide on U.S. military involvement within weeks.

Regional and Global Impact:

The war weakened Iran’s Axis of Resistance, with Hezbollah, Hamas, and Syrian allies decimated. The Houthis fired a missile from Yemen, wounding three Palestinian children in Hebron.

Oil prices stabilized post-ceasefire, but trade disruptions through the Strait of Hormuz remain a concern. Disinformation, including AI-generated videos falsely showing Iranian support for Israel, has fueled confusion.

Scholarly Opinions

Ahmed Fouad Alkhatib (Atlantic Council):

Alkhatib argues that Iran’s weakened regime could facilitate Gaza’s reconstruction and Palestinian-Israeli peace. Many Gazans blame Iran for backing Hamas, suggesting a potential shift in regional dynamics if Iran’s influence diminishes.

Raphael S. Cohen (RAND):

Cohen highlights Israel’s strategic timing, exploiting Iran’s weakened proxies and air defenses post-October 2023. He cautions that the strikes may only delay Iran’s nuclear program, potentially hardening its resolve to weaponize.

Nicholas A. Heras (New Lines Institute):

Heras describes the conflict as “warfare by distance,” with Israel’s long-range strikes and Iran’s missile barrages. He warns that U.S. involvement risks entangling it in a broader conflict, urging diplomacy to contain escalation.

Indian Perspective: Alok Bansal (India Foundation):

Bansal argues that India’s best interest lies in persuading Iran to halt its nuclear program while pressing the U.S. to restrain Israel’s offensive. He emphasizes India’s need to balance ties with both nations to protect economic interests, given West Asia’s role in oil imports and remittances.

Indian Perspective: Prof. Rajan (JNU School of International Studies):

Rajan notes that the conflict reflects a shifting global power balance, with India caught between maintaining strategic ties with Israel (defense imports) and Iran (historical ally on issues like Kashmir). He advocates for India to adopt a clear diplomatic stance to enhance its global influence.

Indian Perspective Analysis

India’s response to the Israel-Iran War is shaped by its strategic and economic interests:

Balancing Act: India evacuated citizens from both Israel and Iran, reflecting its neutral stance. Foreign Minister S. Jaishankar called for dialogue but avoided criticizing Israel, distancing India from SCO statements condemning Israel’s actions.

Economic Concerns: West Asia accounts for 54% of India’s oil imports and $170 billion in trade. A prolonged conflict, especially if it disrupts the Strait of Hormuz, could spike oil prices and remittances (40% from the Gulf). Trade with Iran dropped from $14 billion in 2017 to $1.4 billion due to U.S. sanctions, while Israel-India trade fell from $11 billion in 2022 to $3.75 billion in 2024 due to regional tensions.

Strategic Ties: India’s defense imports from Israel ($128 million annually) and historical ties with Iran (support on Kashmir) complicate its position. Scholars like Bansal and Rajan urge India to leverage its BRICS and SCO memberships to mediate, avoiding alignment with either side to maintain regional influence.

Gaza-Israel Conflict (2023–2025)

Brief Historical Background

The Gaza-Israel conflict is a subset of the broader Israeli-Palestinian conflict, rooted in competing claims over territory since the late 19th century:

Early 20th Century–1948: The conflict emerged from Zionist immigration to Palestine and Arab resistance, culminating in the 1947 UN Partition Plan (Resolution 181), which proposed Jewish and Arab states. Iran voted against it, reflecting early support for Palestinians. Israel’s creation in 1948 sparked the Arab-Israeli War, displacing 750,000 Palestinians (the Nakba) and leaving Gaza under Egyptian control.

1967–2005: Israel captured Gaza, the West Bank, and East Jerusalem in the 1967 Six-Day War. UN Resolution 242 called for Israeli withdrawal, but settlements expanded. Hamas, formed in 1987 with Iranian support post-1979, emerged as a key player. Israel’s 2005 withdrawal from Gaza left it under Palestinian Authority control, but Hamas’s 2006 election victory led to its governance and Israel’s blockade.

2008–2023: Israel fought multiple wars with Hamas (2008–09, 2012, 2014, 2021), targeting its rocket capabilities, while Iran provided weapons and training. The blockade deepened Gaza’s humanitarian crisis, fueling cycles of violence. By 2023, Gaza’s 2.3 million residents faced severe restrictions, with Hamas maintaining tunnels and rockets.

The October 7, 2023, Hamas attack, backed indirectly by Iran, marked a turning point, triggering Israel’s most destructive campaign in Gaza, driven by a post-October 7 doctrine of decisive action.

Recent Developments (2023–2025)

October 7, 2023, Attack and Initial Response:

Hamas-led militants killed 1,195 Israelis, mostly civilians, and took 251 hostages, prompting Israel’s Operation Iron Swords. Israel imposed a total blockade, cutting off essentials, and launched airstrikes and a ground offensive. By June 2025, the Gaza Health Ministry reported 58,400 Palestinian deaths (80% civilians, 70% women and children) and 2.3 million displaced.

Notable incidents included the Al-Ahli Hospital explosion, the Flour Massacre, and attacks on aid convoys, drawing accusations of war crimes. Israel aimed to dismantle Hamas’s governance and military capabilities.

Escalation and Humanitarian Crisis (2024–2025):

Israel’s campaign leveled much of Gaza, destroying 70% of infrastructure, including hospitals and schools. Famine-like conditions emerged, with the UN criticizing Israel’s aid restrictions. The Netzarim Corridor, a new Israeli road, bisected Gaza, controlling movement.

The killing of Hamas leaders Yahya Sinwar (October 2024) and Mohammed Sinwar (2025) weakened the group, but low-level resistance continued. A planned Rafah offensive in April 2025 displaced 100,000 civilians.

Regional and International Fallout:

The conflict spurred Hezbollah’s attacks from Lebanon, leading to Israel’s 2024 invasion, and Houthi missile strikes on Red Sea shipping. Iran-backed militias in Iraq and Syria targeted U.S. and Israeli assets.

The U.S. provided military aid but faced criticism for vetoing UN ceasefire resolutions. Proposals to relocate Gazans to Libya were rejected. Global protests and rising antisemitism/anti-Palestinianism highlighted the conflict’s polarizing impact.

June 2025 Developments:

Amid the Israel-Iran ceasefire, Gaza faced intensified Israeli strikes, with 84 deaths in Gaza City on June 21–22, targeting aid sites. Over 200 deaths were reported in 48 hours, with hospitals overwhelmed. BBC Verify documented drone strikes on Hamas police, often in civilian areas, exacerbating chaos.

Scholarly Opinions

Arwa Damon (Atlantic Council):

Damon notes Gaza’s fear that the Israel-Iran War overshadows its crisis, potentially escalating Israeli bombardment. Some Gazans hope regional shifts might end their suffering, but the immediate outlook is grim.

Jon B. Alterman (CSIS):

Alterman sees Yahya Sinwar’s death as a potential turning point, but Israel’s lack of a political strategy risks prolonging the conflict. He advocates for a governance plan to replace Hamas without reoccupation.

Tzipi Livni (Former Israeli Foreign Minister):

Livni criticizes Israel’s focus on military objectives without a diplomatic vision, warning of “occupation or chaos” in Gaza. She urges engagement with moderate Palestinian and regional actors.

Indian Perspective: Milan Vaishnav (Carnegie Endowment):

Vaishnav highlights India’s delicate balancing act, abstaining from UN ceasefire votes to maintain ties with Israel while facing Global South criticism for not condemning Gaza’s bombardment. He notes India’s silence risks alienating BRICS partners like Brazil, which see Western double standards in supporting Israel while condemning other occupations.

Indian Perspective: Pawan Khera (Congress Leader):

Khera argues India’s lack of a clear stance on Gaza weakens its global voice. He criticizes India’s digital and diplomatic silence, urging a precise position to align with its non-aligned legacy and address Palestinian suffering.

Indian Perspective Analysis

India’s approach to the Gaza-Israel conflict reflects strategic pragmatism but faces domestic and international scrutiny:

Neutrality and Abstention: India abstained from a 2025 UN resolution for a Gaza ceasefire, aligning with the U.S. but diverging from BRICS and SCO allies. This reflects India’s growing defense ties with Israel ($128 million annually) and reluctance to criticize its actions, despite historical support for Palestine.

Economic Stakes: Gaza’s instability has reduced India-Israel trade, but the broader West Asian crisis threatens oil supplies and remittances. Scholars like Vaishnav warn that India’s silence may strain ties with Gulf states and BRICS partners, who criticize Israel’s actions.

Domestic Debate: Khera and others argue India’s non-aligned tradition demands a stronger voice for Palestinian rights, especially given public sympathy in India for Gaza’s humanitarian crisis. India’s BRICS summit in Brazil (July 2025) will test its ability to navigate these tensions.

Connecting the Conflicts

Shared Triggers: The October 7, 2023, Hamas attack, supported indirectly by Iran, catalyzed both conflicts. It prompted Israel’s Gaza campaign, which weakened Iran’s proxies, creating a strategic window for Israel’s 2025 Iran strikes.

Israeli Doctrine Shift: Post-October 7, Israel adopted a proactive, preemptive strategy, as articulated by Maj. Gen. Amos Yadlin, moving from containment to decisive action against both Hamas and Iran. This unified approach explains the intensity of both campaigns.

Iran’s Role: Iran’s support for Hamas and Hezbollah links the conflicts, but its weakened proxies post-2024 limited its Gaza response, pushing it toward direct confrontation with Israel.

Regional Ripple Effects: Both conflicts destabilize West Asia, with Gaza’s humanitarian crisis and Iran’s nuclear ambitions fueling regional tensions. The fall of Assad in Syria and Hezbollah’s degradation tie the conflicts to a broader power shift favoring Israel.

Indian Perspective: India’s stakes in both conflicts converge on economic stability (oil, trade) and strategic partnerships. Scholars urge a proactive diplomatic role to mediate and protect India’s interests, leveraging its BRICS and SCO platforms.

India’s G20 Presidency – Vision for a New, Inclusive World Order

Building on the idea propagated by India’s age-old spiritual traditions, G20 presidency will function around the principles of the universal sense of one-ness – ‘One Earth, One Family, One Future’ – based on the adage Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam, meaning ‘that all of the world, universe or reality is one’.

PM Modi highlighted in his address the greatest challenges that the world faces today - climate change, terrorism, endemics, and pandemics - and how they can be resolved not by fighting but, rather, by supporting each other. There will also a key focus on the use of technology to formulate digital solutions which can be implemented at a global level to create lasting and meaningful changes.

India’s Presidency is all about human-centric globalisation and is expected to have large-scale impact on the intergovernmental policy formulations and discussions that will influence the New World order and set the global post-pandemic economic agenda.

PM Modi has reinforced and percolated the image of India as a responsible rising power that seeks to lead through the strength of its ageless wisdom that had once radiated across most of the civilised world.

The 2023 G20 Summit in New Delhi, under India’s presidency, marked a significant moment in global politics, enhancing collaborative efforts and focusing on inclusive growth.

· Inclusion of the African Union: This move significantly bolstered the representation of developing nations within the G20, aligning with India’s advocacy for a more balanced global governance system.

· Global Biofuels Alliance: Initiated by India, the US, and Brazil, this alliance is dedicated to promoting sustainable biofuel development, aiming to enhance global energy practices and facilitate technology transfer.

· Digital and Economic Policies: The summit introduced frameworks to advance the digital economy and improve cybersecurity, including regulating cryptocurrencies and enhancing digital trade infrastructure, aiming to boost global economic growth through digitalization.

· Environmental and Social Commitments: India’s G20 presidency saw commitments to triple global renewable energy capacity and significantly cut greenhouse gas emissions by 2030. Additionally, new policies were introduced to support gig and platform workers, enhancing social inclusivity and economic security.

· Economic Corridors: The proposed India-Middle East-Europe Corridor was highlighted as a strategic effort to enhance connectivity and economic integration, positioning it as a counterbalance to China’s Belt and Road Initiative.

Overall, the summit showcased India’s role in driving global discussions towards more inclusive and sustainable development, reinforcing its position as a leader of the Global South and setting a precedent for future international relations and economic policies.

Recent Updates

· India-Palestine Relations: India reaffirmed its support for a two-state solution, with Foreign Minister S. Jaishankar stating at the UN in March 2024 that Palestinians have been “denied their homeland,” signaling continued solidarity. India provided $5 million in humanitarian aid to Gaza in 2024, funding hospitals and a technology park. Scholar Kanchi Gupta notes that India’s balancing act persists, maintaining Palestinian support amid domestic pressures from its Muslim population. However, India’s abstention on a UNHRC resolution condemning Israel’s actions in Gaza reflects its diplomatic caution.

· India-Israel Relations: Bilateral ties deepened with a $2 billion defense deal in 2024, including joint drone production. The I2T2 framework expanded, with Israel aiding India’s semiconductor sector. Scholar Nishank Motwani emphasizes that India’s response to the October 7, 2023, Hamas attack solidified strategic alignment with Israel. However, India condemned civilian casualties in Gaza, balancing ties. MEAIndia (May 2025) celebrated 32 years of diplomatic relations, noting cooperation in AI and agriculture.

· India-Iran Relations: India signed a 10-year agreement in May 2024 to operate Chabahar Port, investing $120 million to enhance connectivity to Central Asia. Despite US sanctions, India resumed limited oil imports from Iran in 2025. Scholar Sumitha Narayanan Kutty argues that Chabahar counters China’s Gwadar Port, but Iran’s talks with China for Chabahar’s expansion complicate ties.

· Abraham Accords and Regional Dynamics: The Accords faced strain post-October 2023 due to the Israel-Hamas conflict, delaying Saudi-Israel normalization. India leveraged the Accords to enhance trilateral cooperation with Israel and the UAE, signing a defense pact in 2024. Scholar P.R. Kumaraswamy notes that India’s ‘Think West’ policy benefits from Gulf stability but risks Iran’s alienation. Pakistan’s tilt toward Iran, complicating India’s regional strategy.

· India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor (IMEC): Progress on IMEC stalled due to the Israel-Hamas conflict, with no working group meetings held in 2024. However, India and the UAE signed a $3 billion deal in February 2025 for port infrastructure to support IMEC’s eastern corridor. Scholar Harsh V. Pant argues that IMEC’s delay underscores India’s challenge in countering China’s Belt and Road Initiative.

· Global Biofuels Alliance (GBA): The GBA expanded to 21 members by 2025, with India launching a $100 million fund for biofuel research. The alliance set a target of 20% ethanol blending globally by 2030.

· India’s Economic Policies: India’s economy grew 7.8% in 2024, driven by digital infrastructure and manufacturing. The 2025 budget emphasized green energy, allocating $10 billion for solar and wind projects. Scholar

· India’s Environmental Commitments: India achieved 50% of its 500 GW renewable energy target by 2025, adding 25 GW of solar capacity. India’s pledge at COP29 to cut emissions by 45% by 2030. Scholar C. Raja Mohan argues that India’s green leadership strengthens its global south advocacy.

· Vision for a Multipolar World Order: India hosted the Quad Summit in 2024, reinforcing its Indo-Pacific role. PM Modi’s speech at the UN Summit of the Future emphasized a democratic global order. Scholar S. Jaishankar highlights India’s multi-alignment as key to countering China’s hegemony.

UPSC PSIR Paper 2 Section B International Relations (updated 2025)

Table of Contents

Indian Foreign Policy

India’s Contribution to the non-alignment movement different phases; current role.

India and South Asia

India and its Neighbourhood

India’s and Global South

Indian and Global Centres of Power

Indian and UN System

India and Nuclear Question

Recent developments in Indian Foreign Policy

Share this article

Table of Contents

Related Articles

Table of Contents