The Contemporary Relevance of Disarmament and Arms Control with special reference to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty
Vanshika Sharma
Disarmament and Arms Control have over the years become distinctive and highly significant concerns in the International Arena and politics since the 20th Century. The horrors of the First and then the Second World War, made the need for the adoption and implementation of the two principles of Disarmament and Arms Control the need of the hour. The order, peace, and stability of the International Political scenario strongly depend on the success of these two principles, which have been in recent times used interchangeably with one another, despite having essential differences between each other. In general terms, Arms Control expects to restrict the number of weapons and to manage their use by the ethics of bilateral or multilateral arrangements or treaties, whereas, Disarmament focuses on putting a complete end to the whole weapon owning system.
According to Hans Morgenthau, “Disarmament implies the reduction or elimination of armaments, whereas, Arms Control envisages regulating the armaments race to create a measure of military stability”.
In the 21st Century, Security and Defence have played important roles in determining the actions and behaviour of Nations, projected through their Foreign policies. The constant threats of a potential war, or military invasion, that the Nations are under every day have pushed them away from the adoption of complete disarmament. On the other side, has made the Nations realize the importance and the need for Arms Control, which they are looking forward to including as their foreign policy goal.
The concepts of Disarmament and Arms Control have pulled in within themselves a high degree of intellectual debates, where the one school advocates for the adoption of the Arms Control concept, citing Disarmament to be an essentially idealistic goal to be achieved. According to the supporting proponents of the Arms Control race, the achievement and the possibility of acquiring a world without arms and weapons is a highly impossible and utopian idea.
ARMS RACE AND ARMS CONTROL
Arms Race has been identified and viewed by several political thinkers as a potential determinant behind the instigation of war as well as a threat to world peace and stability. The two most prominent Political Thinkers, Couloumbis and Wolfe have gone ahead in dividing the Arms Control into two categories namely:
NEED FOR ARMS CONTROL
DISARMAMENT:
Disarmament even though being an idealist concept has over the years inculcated within itself several types and categorizations that have led to it becoming a very important international relations concept. Disarmament turned into a more dire and convoluted issue with the accelerated development and improvement of the atomic weapons usage, capable of mass destructions. Since the first nuclear bomb explosion in 1945, the earlier conflict that arms races were monetarily pointless and driven definitely to war was supplanted by the contention that the future utilization of atomic weapons in amount undermined the proceeded with presence of human advancement itself. During the post-World War II period, there were conversations at a few levels pointed toward restricting and controlling the usages of arms and weapons.
NEED FOR DISARMAMENT
MAJOR INITIATIVES OF DISARMAMENT SINCE THE SECOND WORLD WAR
Since the Second World War, a large variety of arms control measures were put forth by nations to protect the world order from the threats of another devastating war. The first in line was ‘The Baruch Plan’ of 1946, which suggested the formation of a United Nations Atomic Development Authority, that would keep nuclear energy under the control of the international order. Although the suggestion was never adopted, it laid the foundation on which the nations could deliberate and discuss the need for disarmament. ‘The Gromyko Plan’, put forth by the Soviet foreign Affairs Minister was rejected by the US Administration. ‘The Rapacki Plan’ that suggested the need to prevent the deployment of nuclear weapons inro Central Europe also failed to gather the support of the international community. The developments in this context came in 1959, with the adoption of the Antarctica Treaty, which aimed at restricting the procurement of arms and weapons. Several Multilateral and Bilateral Treaties were signed by the world governments, to secure itself and the world from the threat of another devastating world war.
Some of the important treaties signed bilaterally are:
NUCLEAR NON- PROLIFERATION TREATY:
The NPT is a landmark international treaty whose goal and objective is to forestall and prohibit the spread of atomic weapons and weapon technology, to advance collaboration in peaceful usage of nuclear power, and further achieving the objective of accomplishing atomic disarmament and general and complete disarmament. The Treaty addresses the solitary restricting responsibility in a multilateral arrangement to the objective of disarmament by the atomic weapon States. Opened for signature in 1968, the Treaty went into power in 1970. On 11 May 1995, the Treaty was broadened uncertainly. An aggregate of 191 States has joined the Treaty, including the five atomic weapon States. A larger number of nations have endorsed the NPT than some other arms limit and demobilization arrangement, a demonstration of the Treaty's importance.
The Treaty is viewed as the foundation of the worldwide atomic limitation system and a fundamental establishment for the quest for atomic disarmament.
NPT serves as a building measure between States parties, by setting up a shield framework under the obligation of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).
The Treaty advances participation in the field of peaceful atomic innovation and equivalent admittance to this innovation for all States parties, intending to forestall the redirection of fissile material for weapons use.
The NPT is structured and pillared on three important principles namely;
There are only six nations who have chosen to not abide by the NPT from the start: India, which completed an atomic test in 1974; Pakistan, which directed atomic tests consecutive with India in 1998; Israel, which has neither affirmed nor rejected that it has atomic weapons; South Sudan; Cuba; and North Korea.
There are positive instances of nations that joined the NPT despite the fact that they at first gained atomic weapon capacity or were near acquiring it. South Africa joined the NPT in 1991 after it had destroyed its small arms stockpile. Argentina and Brazil consented to the Treaty during the 1990s after they had commonly consented to stop their weapons-related exercises. Belarus, Kazakhstan, and Ukraine became NPT member nations after they surrendered the atomic weapons they had acquired in 1991, following the breakdown of the Soviet Union.
ISSUES AND HURDLES IN ACHIEVING DISARMAMENT:
Vanshika is a MA student in the Department of International Studies, Political Science and History, CHRIST (Deemed to be University), Bengaluru
"Views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not reflect the position of the University
Disarmament and Arms Control have over the years become distinctive and highly significant concerns in the International Arena and politics since the 20th Century. The horrors of the First and then the Second World War, made the need for the adoption and implementation of the two principles of Disarmament and Arms Control the need of the hour. The order, peace, and stability of the International Political scenario strongly depend on the success of these two principles, which have been in recent times used interchangeably with one another, despite having essential differences between each other. In general terms, Arms Control expects to restrict the number of weapons and to manage their use by the ethics of bilateral or multilateral arrangements or treaties, whereas, Disarmament focuses on putting a complete end to the whole weapon owning system.
According to Hans Morgenthau, “Disarmament implies the reduction or elimination of armaments, whereas, Arms Control envisages regulating the armaments race to create a measure of military stability”.
In the 21st Century, Security and Defence have played important roles in determining the actions and behaviour of Nations, projected through their Foreign policies. The constant threats of a potential war, or military invasion, that the Nations are under every day have pushed them away from the adoption of complete disarmament. On the other side, has made the Nations realize the importance and the need for Arms Control, which they are looking forward to including as their foreign policy goal.
The concepts of Disarmament and Arms Control have pulled in within themselves a high degree of intellectual debates, where the one school advocates for the adoption of the Arms Control concept, citing Disarmament to be an essentially idealistic goal to be achieved. According to the supporting proponents of the Arms Control race, the achievement and the possibility of acquiring a world without arms and weapons is a highly impossible and utopian idea.
ARMS RACE AND ARMS CONTROL
Arms Race has been identified and viewed by several political thinkers as a potential determinant behind the instigation of war as well as a threat to world peace and stability. The two most prominent Political Thinkers, Couloumbis and Wolfe have gone ahead in dividing the Arms Control into two categories namely:
- Arms Reduction or Partial Reduction relies on mutually agreed sets of arms and weapons usages, that could be based on regional or worldwide premises.
- Arms Limitation encompasses the distinctive international treaties and accords that are designed to restrict the brunt of any war as well as to prohibit the sudden outbreak of any accidents.
NEED FOR ARMS CONTROL
- The need for Arms Control has over the years has been all the more felt since the devastations caused by the two World Wars.
- It has been seen as a major step needed toward the strengthening of domestic as well as international ties and relations.
- The promotion of peace and security that is dreamed of the all the nations of the world, could be achieved only once all the nations come together to limit or restrict their arms acquisitions. National, as well as International prosperity and stability, can be acquired with the adoption of arms control.
DISARMAMENT:
Disarmament even though being an idealist concept has over the years inculcated within itself several types and categorizations that have led to it becoming a very important international relations concept. Disarmament turned into a more dire and convoluted issue with the accelerated development and improvement of the atomic weapons usage, capable of mass destructions. Since the first nuclear bomb explosion in 1945, the earlier conflict that arms races were monetarily pointless and driven definitely to war was supplanted by the contention that the future utilization of atomic weapons in amount undermined the proceeded with presence of human advancement itself. During the post-World War II period, there were conversations at a few levels pointed toward restricting and controlling the usages of arms and weapons.
NEED FOR DISARMAMENT
- The fundamental aim of Disarmament is to avoid war at any cost. The limited acquisition of weapons and arms, under Arms Control, raises the possibility of warheads being used in the future.
- It increases the psychological tensions, and insecurities within states, rather than improving and guaranteeing international peace and security.
- A reduction or a complete prohibition on the usage and procurement of arms relaxes the tension and strains imposed on the economy of nations, which are under the constant burden of improving and keeping up with arms and weapons made using new and advanced technology.
- Disarmament also would guarantee more resources allocated towards the social sectors of the economy, which have been over the years neglected to provide funds to build the nation's militaries.
MAJOR INITIATIVES OF DISARMAMENT SINCE THE SECOND WORLD WAR
Since the Second World War, a large variety of arms control measures were put forth by nations to protect the world order from the threats of another devastating war. The first in line was ‘The Baruch Plan’ of 1946, which suggested the formation of a United Nations Atomic Development Authority, that would keep nuclear energy under the control of the international order. Although the suggestion was never adopted, it laid the foundation on which the nations could deliberate and discuss the need for disarmament. ‘The Gromyko Plan’, put forth by the Soviet foreign Affairs Minister was rejected by the US Administration. ‘The Rapacki Plan’ that suggested the need to prevent the deployment of nuclear weapons inro Central Europe also failed to gather the support of the international community. The developments in this context came in 1959, with the adoption of the Antarctica Treaty, which aimed at restricting the procurement of arms and weapons. Several Multilateral and Bilateral Treaties were signed by the world governments, to secure itself and the world from the threat of another devastating world war.
Some of the important treaties signed bilaterally are:
- Open Skies Treaty, signed in 1992, entered into force in 2002, allowed unarmed reconnaissance flights between NATO and Russia.
- Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty I (START I), signed 1991, entered into force 1994, expired 2009 (START I was a successor to the expired SALT agreements.), provided limitations on strategic offensive arms.
- START II, signed 1993, ratified 1996 (United States) and 2000 (Russia), terminated following Russian withdrawal 2002, prohibited intercontinental ballistic missiles with multiple independently targetable re-entry vehicles.
- New START Treaty, signed by Russia and the United States in April 2010, entered into force in February 2011, reduced strategic nuclear missiles by half.
- Partial Test Ban Treaty signed and entered into force in 1963, prohibited nuclear weapons testing in the atmosphere.
- Outer Space Treaty signed and entered into force in 1967, prohibited the deployment of weapons of mass destruction, including nuclear weapons, in space.
- Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty signed 1968, entered into force 1970, prohibited countries without nuclear weapons from acquiring them while committing nuclear-armed states to eventual disarmament.
- Strategic Arms Limitation Treaty (SALT I), signed and ratified 1972, in force 1972–1977, the limited introduction of new intercontinental ballistic missile launchers and submarine-launched ballistic missiles.
- Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty signed and entered into force 1972, terminated following U.S. withdrawal 2002, restricted anti-ballistic missiles.
- Biological Weapons Convention signed 1972, entered into force 1975, prohibited production of biological weapons SALT II signed 1979, never entered into force, limited production of long-range and intercontinental ballistic missiles.
- Chemical Weapons Convention signed 1993, entered into force 1997, prohibited production and stockpiling of chemical weapons.
- The Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty signed in 1996, has not entered into force. It prohibits nuclear weapons testing.
NUCLEAR NON- PROLIFERATION TREATY:
The NPT is a landmark international treaty whose goal and objective is to forestall and prohibit the spread of atomic weapons and weapon technology, to advance collaboration in peaceful usage of nuclear power, and further achieving the objective of accomplishing atomic disarmament and general and complete disarmament. The Treaty addresses the solitary restricting responsibility in a multilateral arrangement to the objective of disarmament by the atomic weapon States. Opened for signature in 1968, the Treaty went into power in 1970. On 11 May 1995, the Treaty was broadened uncertainly. An aggregate of 191 States has joined the Treaty, including the five atomic weapon States. A larger number of nations have endorsed the NPT than some other arms limit and demobilization arrangement, a demonstration of the Treaty's importance.
The Treaty is viewed as the foundation of the worldwide atomic limitation system and a fundamental establishment for the quest for atomic disarmament.
NPT serves as a building measure between States parties, by setting up a shield framework under the obligation of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).
The Treaty advances participation in the field of peaceful atomic innovation and equivalent admittance to this innovation for all States parties, intending to forestall the redirection of fissile material for weapons use.
The NPT is structured and pillared on three important principles namely;
- Non-Proliferation
- Disarmament,
- Right to peacefully use Nuclear Technology.
There are only six nations who have chosen to not abide by the NPT from the start: India, which completed an atomic test in 1974; Pakistan, which directed atomic tests consecutive with India in 1998; Israel, which has neither affirmed nor rejected that it has atomic weapons; South Sudan; Cuba; and North Korea.
There are positive instances of nations that joined the NPT despite the fact that they at first gained atomic weapon capacity or were near acquiring it. South Africa joined the NPT in 1991 after it had destroyed its small arms stockpile. Argentina and Brazil consented to the Treaty during the 1990s after they had commonly consented to stop their weapons-related exercises. Belarus, Kazakhstan, and Ukraine became NPT member nations after they surrendered the atomic weapons they had acquired in 1991, following the breakdown of the Soviet Union.
ISSUES AND HURDLES IN ACHIEVING DISARMAMENT:
- The greatest issue related to disarmament is the ratio according to which nations should disarm themselves. The attempts made by nations have mostly been unsuccessful and have not yielded any fruits as it is extremely difficult to encourage nations to arrive at decisions that would suit the interests of all.
- The constant fear and insecurity that is housed within the nations. In the era, where security has taken the steering of the nation, disarmament is left with no other choice but to take the back seat. Nations are in perpetual fear of aggression or war or military invasion. Thus, to keep themselves safe, nations have resorted to increasing their military and arms grip.
- There is a never-ending sense of mistrust between nations. The intentions of nations are under constant suspicion, and so in this kind of atmosphere, disarmament cannot be achieved.
- The greatest issue in achieving the concept of disarmament is the fact that all the attempts made towards accomplishing it are politically driven. The trust for acquiring world dominance and supremacy within nations leads to the ultimate results of increased arms accumulation.
- The ever-evolving and advancing military technologies have made the possession of arms easier and desirable by nations. The nations have indulged themselves into a race of getting control over the high quality of arms produced using new technologies along with aiming to improve upon their existing arms with improving on then using the superior technology made available to them.
- The lobbying of the arms industry has played a very dominant part in the policy planning and execution of decisions related to arms and weapons. The production and consumption of arms and weapons have become one of the greatest contributors to the GDP of many nations.
- Power rivalries along with the insincerity possessed by the leaders of the nations too have served as a major obstacle in the way of achieving disarmament.
- The idea of a disarmed world is a Utopian and Idealistic concept.
- The absence of any legal or bounding force on the implementation of the disarmament treaties serves as a hurdle in the way of achieving a disarmed world.
- It is not guaranteed that Disarmament would bring about world peace and stability and its success highly depends upon nations following and abiding by the provisions of the treaty.
Vanshika is a MA student in the Department of International Studies, Political Science and History, CHRIST (Deemed to be University), Bengaluru
"Views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not reflect the position of the University
Aggrandizement of the dystopian mystery and incarceration of Uighurs- Impediments by United States, United Kingdom and India
Lakshmi Karlekar
The Xinjiang Uighur Autonomous Region of People’s Republic of China has generated tensions and gained the attention against China’s forceful attempt of eroding and penetrating into the traces of Uighur culture by reflecting on instrumental dimensions on whether it is indeed Chinese Nationalism promotion or not. As the sixth largest region in China, it possesses 2.19 trillion tonnes of coal reserves, 1/4th of oil and natural gas reserves and geological surveys point the availability of mineral resources which are vital for the procurement by the PRC to further assert its authority. Due to the Criss cross connectivity it is indeed Asia’s central pivot.
Recently, the Uighurs in United States are expressing their scepticism against China who are forcing the detained family members to denounce the presence of re-educational camps. A case of Samira Imin who was distressed to see her father Iminjan Seydin on We Chat claimed that he was not detained and his daughter was deceived by anti-China forces. Francisco Bencosme the Asia Pacific Advocacy Manager at Amnesty International stated that the increasing outflow of videos portray harassment for forceful confessions.
Premier Xi Jinping has articulated Xinjiang as a part of China’s dreams. The vision stands to unite the people of all ethnic groups and leading to a decisive victory in building a moderately society in all respects and in the drive to secure all socialism with Chinese characteristics for a new era. In reality, it is divided on communal lines and ensures the deprivation of the local nationalists- Muslims. Perceiving them as a threat, China has seen immense human right violations and has constructed an ever-enlarging re-educational camp which spurts suppression, oppression by generating psychological fears, violent tendencies among the minorities and here in the clear case of Uighurs. PRC and National discourse assimilation have seen a sign of aggression and no smooth absorption of the region by the central apparatus.
These religious suppressions with inequitable development have spurred the demand of their voice to be heard. Currently, the world being frozen in the fears of rising China which has contaminated its image abroad has made nations to give top priority and focus on China and now it has generated an international stage for the Uighurs to seek a support system.
Internal Security Dimension
Xinjiang has a strong national security that has garnered ethnic political mobilisation. In the name of ethnic cleansing of 1.8 million in detention centre the Chinese game has been brutal, hard and highly cautious. To harbour and protect the Xinjiang internal security situation in control, the Chinese government faces a lot of international pressure to treat them equally and with dignity but the realist dominating country seems to disagree and work in its own fashion and make these non-anticipated nationalists to dance to their tunes.
Wherein, President Xi Jinping claims that he has brought the situation under control but has used education as a weapon to enculturate people and fuel extremism and massive indoctrination can be seen through the unheard voices of those escaping from these dreadful prisons and from the secret documents being highlighted by the United Work Front Department. The recent report of Law Institute of State-run Chinese Academy of Social Sciences viewed that the country faces grim terror threats building on lines of State- centric verses local nationalism. The Institution of National Security Commission has also taken account of it.
Re-educational camps
Torture and mental manipulations are common at these camps where they are evicted and separated from families being detained for years. Recently, a report from space agency has revealed that there is an increase in sulphur dioxide in the atmosphere hovering above China which is mainly emitted by the mass burning of bodies. The local media has witnessed that President Xi Jinping has been very clear by the complete folding of the fallacy of blind spots, but the true picture cannot be hidden by the satellite imagery shown below. Paradoxically it has led to resilience and cultural insecurity among the Muslim community.
The state has promoted bilingual education to curb the rise of further extremist movements. But again, these seem like myriad realities waving off the tragedy it has made and it seems China is attempting to repeat the pages and recreate the historical narratives of Monoculture, once being prevalently practiced by Hitler at his Nazi Holocaust camps. The Education Commission since 2002, has promoted Chinese (Mandarin) as a common language of learning which still showcases racist threads being bound together against Muslims. The idea is that if heavier reliance is casted upon it then there will be a sense of assimilation. This has led to a cause of resentment as the local language is deemed to be less important in nature leading to absence of acceptance of diversity.
At the camps the Uighurs are forced to memorize the Communist ideology and the detainees force pledge their precious loyalty to Chinese Communist Party and need to renounce Islam. Adding to the misery, they also face sexual abuse. Even the Human Right Organisation, UN officials are attempting and urging China to crackdown the prevalence of these vocational training centres as closely guarded grid management systems. Internet is being used widely for state propaganda which the Uighur activists are terming as “trapped in a virtual cage” scenario. The social media is also sponsored by the state and its deliverances are highly censored.
Bingtuan- A myth or reality
Also known as Xinjiang Production and Construction Code (XPCC), it combines production training and duty performance energy response. XPCC has sought assimilation for example, the 60th anniversary at National Museum of China featured 160 cultural relics building on lines of multiculturalism adaptation. It is here where we see propaganda of Assimilation by President Xi Jinping where he states All Chinese Nationalists must unite and must be closely connected heart by heart. President Xi Jinping added that they must be united as the seeds of pomegranate and this comparison can be linked to Mao’s vision of nationalities unification. China has attempted to preserve these minority dialectics and traditions of Xinjiang. It is a question that is it an eye-washing to divert the attention and purify his image or is it to cover the deep dare secrets of promotion of one culture.
Resorting to Terrorism
Initially, the Islamic Criticism led by Iran, Pakistan, Central Asia, Middle Eastern countries had sought international cooperation when the Uighurs joined hands with Islamic state militants in Iraq and Al-Qaeda making it an international concern. The militant movement with the creation of East Turkmenistan and building porous borders have made the young students and people travelling across borders frequently as easy victims of radicalisation. President Xi Jinping believes in the toxicity of religious extremism and advocated for using the tools of dictatorship to eliminate them is definitely a serious matter that needs to be addressed. Since 9/11, the Chinese government has curbed the terrorist activities and justified on the grounds of Global War on Terrorism. In 2016, the UNHRC cautioned China that it is responsible for the arbitration of Muslims but China cleverly garnered support from more than 60 countries who praise the country and showcase their loyalty with no opposition. Not even single Muslim country in Organization of Islamic Cooperation stood for the cause of the Uighurs, Kazakhs and Uzbeks and sincerely appreciate the Chinese efforts when it hijacked the Turkestan Islamic Movement.
De-radicalisation Propaganda
With heightened and tightened security, the situation can be termed as “Xi’s great wall of steel”. At the internal level, there are speculations about how there are many different approaches adopted be regional party chiefs as it leads to promotion to higher ranks. China has streamlined to serve the people who are dedicated and have an undying spirit towards the nation and seeks to provide religious counselling and dispel extremist ideology and have external support from de-radicalising governmental agencies.
Link to Belt and Road Initiative
Previously, there was a Centre-Periphery relation within China. But of late, BRI addresses xenophobia and there is tension seen between nation -state and trans-national making it a poly-centric vision due to the geo-strategic significance of this land locked territory that shares borders with vital nations.
International responses
The European Union has even called for China to practice religious freedom. US has also imposed visa restrictions on the Chinese officials who are believed to be hand in glove to complicit the detention of Muslims. They have also banned the export of cotton used by forced labour camps.
The US Senate may also push for the Uighur Human Rights Act gaining momentum to derail to the hostile project of BRI. But for China Xinjiang is a crucial much more than Tibet unless we see Russia’s turning the play card.
In the case of India which has laid claims on Aksai Chin which is administered by China as part of the Hotan Prefecture, Xinjiang also has been pivotal for the CPEC project for which India stands strong opposition.
Lakshmi is a MA student in the Department of International Studies, Political Science and History, CHRIST (Deemed to be University), Bengaluru
"Views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not reflect the position of the University
The Xinjiang Uighur Autonomous Region of People’s Republic of China has generated tensions and gained the attention against China’s forceful attempt of eroding and penetrating into the traces of Uighur culture by reflecting on instrumental dimensions on whether it is indeed Chinese Nationalism promotion or not. As the sixth largest region in China, it possesses 2.19 trillion tonnes of coal reserves, 1/4th of oil and natural gas reserves and geological surveys point the availability of mineral resources which are vital for the procurement by the PRC to further assert its authority. Due to the Criss cross connectivity it is indeed Asia’s central pivot.
Recently, the Uighurs in United States are expressing their scepticism against China who are forcing the detained family members to denounce the presence of re-educational camps. A case of Samira Imin who was distressed to see her father Iminjan Seydin on We Chat claimed that he was not detained and his daughter was deceived by anti-China forces. Francisco Bencosme the Asia Pacific Advocacy Manager at Amnesty International stated that the increasing outflow of videos portray harassment for forceful confessions.
Premier Xi Jinping has articulated Xinjiang as a part of China’s dreams. The vision stands to unite the people of all ethnic groups and leading to a decisive victory in building a moderately society in all respects and in the drive to secure all socialism with Chinese characteristics for a new era. In reality, it is divided on communal lines and ensures the deprivation of the local nationalists- Muslims. Perceiving them as a threat, China has seen immense human right violations and has constructed an ever-enlarging re-educational camp which spurts suppression, oppression by generating psychological fears, violent tendencies among the minorities and here in the clear case of Uighurs. PRC and National discourse assimilation have seen a sign of aggression and no smooth absorption of the region by the central apparatus.
These religious suppressions with inequitable development have spurred the demand of their voice to be heard. Currently, the world being frozen in the fears of rising China which has contaminated its image abroad has made nations to give top priority and focus on China and now it has generated an international stage for the Uighurs to seek a support system.
Internal Security Dimension
Xinjiang has a strong national security that has garnered ethnic political mobilisation. In the name of ethnic cleansing of 1.8 million in detention centre the Chinese game has been brutal, hard and highly cautious. To harbour and protect the Xinjiang internal security situation in control, the Chinese government faces a lot of international pressure to treat them equally and with dignity but the realist dominating country seems to disagree and work in its own fashion and make these non-anticipated nationalists to dance to their tunes.
Wherein, President Xi Jinping claims that he has brought the situation under control but has used education as a weapon to enculturate people and fuel extremism and massive indoctrination can be seen through the unheard voices of those escaping from these dreadful prisons and from the secret documents being highlighted by the United Work Front Department. The recent report of Law Institute of State-run Chinese Academy of Social Sciences viewed that the country faces grim terror threats building on lines of State- centric verses local nationalism. The Institution of National Security Commission has also taken account of it.
Re-educational camps
Torture and mental manipulations are common at these camps where they are evicted and separated from families being detained for years. Recently, a report from space agency has revealed that there is an increase in sulphur dioxide in the atmosphere hovering above China which is mainly emitted by the mass burning of bodies. The local media has witnessed that President Xi Jinping has been very clear by the complete folding of the fallacy of blind spots, but the true picture cannot be hidden by the satellite imagery shown below. Paradoxically it has led to resilience and cultural insecurity among the Muslim community.
The state has promoted bilingual education to curb the rise of further extremist movements. But again, these seem like myriad realities waving off the tragedy it has made and it seems China is attempting to repeat the pages and recreate the historical narratives of Monoculture, once being prevalently practiced by Hitler at his Nazi Holocaust camps. The Education Commission since 2002, has promoted Chinese (Mandarin) as a common language of learning which still showcases racist threads being bound together against Muslims. The idea is that if heavier reliance is casted upon it then there will be a sense of assimilation. This has led to a cause of resentment as the local language is deemed to be less important in nature leading to absence of acceptance of diversity.
At the camps the Uighurs are forced to memorize the Communist ideology and the detainees force pledge their precious loyalty to Chinese Communist Party and need to renounce Islam. Adding to the misery, they also face sexual abuse. Even the Human Right Organisation, UN officials are attempting and urging China to crackdown the prevalence of these vocational training centres as closely guarded grid management systems. Internet is being used widely for state propaganda which the Uighur activists are terming as “trapped in a virtual cage” scenario. The social media is also sponsored by the state and its deliverances are highly censored.
Bingtuan- A myth or reality
Also known as Xinjiang Production and Construction Code (XPCC), it combines production training and duty performance energy response. XPCC has sought assimilation for example, the 60th anniversary at National Museum of China featured 160 cultural relics building on lines of multiculturalism adaptation. It is here where we see propaganda of Assimilation by President Xi Jinping where he states All Chinese Nationalists must unite and must be closely connected heart by heart. President Xi Jinping added that they must be united as the seeds of pomegranate and this comparison can be linked to Mao’s vision of nationalities unification. China has attempted to preserve these minority dialectics and traditions of Xinjiang. It is a question that is it an eye-washing to divert the attention and purify his image or is it to cover the deep dare secrets of promotion of one culture.
Resorting to Terrorism
Initially, the Islamic Criticism led by Iran, Pakistan, Central Asia, Middle Eastern countries had sought international cooperation when the Uighurs joined hands with Islamic state militants in Iraq and Al-Qaeda making it an international concern. The militant movement with the creation of East Turkmenistan and building porous borders have made the young students and people travelling across borders frequently as easy victims of radicalisation. President Xi Jinping believes in the toxicity of religious extremism and advocated for using the tools of dictatorship to eliminate them is definitely a serious matter that needs to be addressed. Since 9/11, the Chinese government has curbed the terrorist activities and justified on the grounds of Global War on Terrorism. In 2016, the UNHRC cautioned China that it is responsible for the arbitration of Muslims but China cleverly garnered support from more than 60 countries who praise the country and showcase their loyalty with no opposition. Not even single Muslim country in Organization of Islamic Cooperation stood for the cause of the Uighurs, Kazakhs and Uzbeks and sincerely appreciate the Chinese efforts when it hijacked the Turkestan Islamic Movement.
De-radicalisation Propaganda
With heightened and tightened security, the situation can be termed as “Xi’s great wall of steel”. At the internal level, there are speculations about how there are many different approaches adopted be regional party chiefs as it leads to promotion to higher ranks. China has streamlined to serve the people who are dedicated and have an undying spirit towards the nation and seeks to provide religious counselling and dispel extremist ideology and have external support from de-radicalising governmental agencies.
Link to Belt and Road Initiative
Previously, there was a Centre-Periphery relation within China. But of late, BRI addresses xenophobia and there is tension seen between nation -state and trans-national making it a poly-centric vision due to the geo-strategic significance of this land locked territory that shares borders with vital nations.
International responses
The European Union has even called for China to practice religious freedom. US has also imposed visa restrictions on the Chinese officials who are believed to be hand in glove to complicit the detention of Muslims. They have also banned the export of cotton used by forced labour camps.
The US Senate may also push for the Uighur Human Rights Act gaining momentum to derail to the hostile project of BRI. But for China Xinjiang is a crucial much more than Tibet unless we see Russia’s turning the play card.
In the case of India which has laid claims on Aksai Chin which is administered by China as part of the Hotan Prefecture, Xinjiang also has been pivotal for the CPEC project for which India stands strong opposition.
Lakshmi is a MA student in the Department of International Studies, Political Science and History, CHRIST (Deemed to be University), Bengaluru
"Views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not reflect the position of the University
#EndSARS: The Movement against Police brutality in Nigeria
JOGITA RAJBONGSHI
#EndSARS started as a social media campaign to raise awareness against the human rights abuses and extortions by the SARS officials and demanded its total disbandment. The protest's start could be traced back to 2017 when the killing of a 34-year-old man by SARS officials in Ughelli went viral on the social media platform. The viral video gathered severe criticisms against the SARS officers who were accused of harassing and physically abusing the civilians. As an instant reaction, the Nigerian government declared the video fake. It arrested the journalist who filmed it, which further aggravated the country's youth, who then initiated the hashtag trend on Twitter to demonstrate their protest against the unit. The hashtag trend became so popular worldwide that many celebrities and activists rallied for support on Twitter, Instagram, and Facebook. In just a couple of days, hundreds of people displayed their grievances towards SARS and demanded the Nigerian government to dismantle the unit.
Created in the year 1992, the Special Anti-Robbery Squad (SARS) unit was formed to combat the increasing violent crimes in Nigeria, especially armed robberies and kidnapping. Prior to its formation, anti-robbery units existed as separate entities in various states' criminal investigation departments. However, with the rise of bandits and criminal activities in the early 1990s, Police Officer Danladi Midenda was given the task to unite all the existing anti-robbery squads around the capital city into one unit in order to break the network of the armed gangs. In the first few years since its inception, the crime rate has reduced drastically. They operated in plainclothes and did not carry arms in public. Their primary duty was to monitor radio communications and facilitate successful arrests of criminals. Till 2002 SARS operated only in Lagos, but soon it spread out to all the other 36 states in the country. SARS was incorporated as one of the 14 units under the Nigerian Police Force Criminal Investigation and Intelligence Department. Invigorated by immense power, the unit digressed from its main function of carrying covert operations to extorting money and terrorizing civilians. Over time SARS came to be recognized as a powerful entity that had lost its credibility and acted with impunity. Often, the government had announced structural changes to the unit and had promised the citizens to reform or disband the unit. However, seldom changes have ever been made to the unit that had terrorized civilians for decades. The Inspector-General of the Nigeria Police Force in 2017 announced the reorganizing of the units. In 2018, their acting President Yemi Osinbajo ordered an investigation and revamped the unit, but contention against the officials continued throughout the year. A report issued by Amnesty International showed that from January 2017 to May 2020, the SARS officers were involved in at least 82 cases of extortion and abuses. It further mentioned that every year the Nigeria Police Force is responsible for several extrajudicial executions or other unlawful killings and forced disappearances.
On 20th October last year, the military cracked down on a peaceful demonstration of the protestors in Lekki, a district in Lagos' capital city. Those protesters were suppressed by the military, and curfews were imposed in nine states across the country. While these demonstrations were peaceful, the police had responded with brutality; they shot tear gas and water cannon to disperse the gatherings. This deployment of the army resulted in the increased hostility between the two groups, which later resulted in the death of forty-nine persons across the country. The military crackdown led to riots in many parts of the state. The hooligans vandalised government properties and looted stores and malls. They even raided several warehouses where COVID-19 relief materials were stored. Nigerian protesters have accused the government of targeting SARS critics and trying to suppress the movement. In the capital city of Lagos, as a result of the raids, the government has banned demonstrations and has placed restrictions on social media platforms that protesters were using to spur the movement and highlight instances of police brutality.
Seeing the increasing intensity of the protest, the government disbanded SARS and announced to replaced it with a new Special Weapons and Tactics (SWAT) team. However, for these #EndSARS protesters, the restructuring and the re-naming of the unit are not enough. They are concerned about how the personnel would be deployed into the new SWAT team, and like earlier times, all notorious activities would again be not addressed. What they want is justice and accountability on the part of the government to end corruption and bribery. Protesters demanded the government to address these issues and fire all SARS personnel involved in corruption and other violent activities.
Jogita is a MA student in the Department of International Studies, Political Science and History, CHRIST (Deemed to be University), Bengaluru
"Views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not reflect the position of the University
#EndSARS started as a social media campaign to raise awareness against the human rights abuses and extortions by the SARS officials and demanded its total disbandment. The protest's start could be traced back to 2017 when the killing of a 34-year-old man by SARS officials in Ughelli went viral on the social media platform. The viral video gathered severe criticisms against the SARS officers who were accused of harassing and physically abusing the civilians. As an instant reaction, the Nigerian government declared the video fake. It arrested the journalist who filmed it, which further aggravated the country's youth, who then initiated the hashtag trend on Twitter to demonstrate their protest against the unit. The hashtag trend became so popular worldwide that many celebrities and activists rallied for support on Twitter, Instagram, and Facebook. In just a couple of days, hundreds of people displayed their grievances towards SARS and demanded the Nigerian government to dismantle the unit.
Created in the year 1992, the Special Anti-Robbery Squad (SARS) unit was formed to combat the increasing violent crimes in Nigeria, especially armed robberies and kidnapping. Prior to its formation, anti-robbery units existed as separate entities in various states' criminal investigation departments. However, with the rise of bandits and criminal activities in the early 1990s, Police Officer Danladi Midenda was given the task to unite all the existing anti-robbery squads around the capital city into one unit in order to break the network of the armed gangs. In the first few years since its inception, the crime rate has reduced drastically. They operated in plainclothes and did not carry arms in public. Their primary duty was to monitor radio communications and facilitate successful arrests of criminals. Till 2002 SARS operated only in Lagos, but soon it spread out to all the other 36 states in the country. SARS was incorporated as one of the 14 units under the Nigerian Police Force Criminal Investigation and Intelligence Department. Invigorated by immense power, the unit digressed from its main function of carrying covert operations to extorting money and terrorizing civilians. Over time SARS came to be recognized as a powerful entity that had lost its credibility and acted with impunity. Often, the government had announced structural changes to the unit and had promised the citizens to reform or disband the unit. However, seldom changes have ever been made to the unit that had terrorized civilians for decades. The Inspector-General of the Nigeria Police Force in 2017 announced the reorganizing of the units. In 2018, their acting President Yemi Osinbajo ordered an investigation and revamped the unit, but contention against the officials continued throughout the year. A report issued by Amnesty International showed that from January 2017 to May 2020, the SARS officers were involved in at least 82 cases of extortion and abuses. It further mentioned that every year the Nigeria Police Force is responsible for several extrajudicial executions or other unlawful killings and forced disappearances.
On 20th October last year, the military cracked down on a peaceful demonstration of the protestors in Lekki, a district in Lagos' capital city. Those protesters were suppressed by the military, and curfews were imposed in nine states across the country. While these demonstrations were peaceful, the police had responded with brutality; they shot tear gas and water cannon to disperse the gatherings. This deployment of the army resulted in the increased hostility between the two groups, which later resulted in the death of forty-nine persons across the country. The military crackdown led to riots in many parts of the state. The hooligans vandalised government properties and looted stores and malls. They even raided several warehouses where COVID-19 relief materials were stored. Nigerian protesters have accused the government of targeting SARS critics and trying to suppress the movement. In the capital city of Lagos, as a result of the raids, the government has banned demonstrations and has placed restrictions on social media platforms that protesters were using to spur the movement and highlight instances of police brutality.
Seeing the increasing intensity of the protest, the government disbanded SARS and announced to replaced it with a new Special Weapons and Tactics (SWAT) team. However, for these #EndSARS protesters, the restructuring and the re-naming of the unit are not enough. They are concerned about how the personnel would be deployed into the new SWAT team, and like earlier times, all notorious activities would again be not addressed. What they want is justice and accountability on the part of the government to end corruption and bribery. Protesters demanded the government to address these issues and fire all SARS personnel involved in corruption and other violent activities.
Jogita is a MA student in the Department of International Studies, Political Science and History, CHRIST (Deemed to be University), Bengaluru
"Views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not reflect the position of the University
Myanmar's coup d’état
SIMRON TANDI
On February 1, 2021, Myanmar woke up to the dawn of a demolished democracy as the military coup re-established itself after a delicate interval of ten years. The citizens were appalled when they discerned that the living icon of Myanmar's democracy, Aung San Suu Kyi, is under detention. This distressing event did not take much time to garner international criticism. The global adherents and defenders of democracy expressed their concerns and mourned over the apparent death of Myanmar's democracy. The coup was a response to Myanmar's November 2020 election results, an emphatic win for Aung San Suu Kyi. Tatmadaw, the Burmese army, including the senior military general Min Aung Hlaing were not satisfied with the election results and brought the military's dominance into effect once again after a decade's break. The coup's initiation stopped the country's passenger flights as per reports from Myanmar's government agency in charge of air travel. All roads to the International airport in Yangon faced road blockage on February 1 2021, as per the US Embassy reports in Myanmar.
Fragility in Civilian rule has always been a feature of Myanmar's short-lived democracy. Undemocratic militaristic hands have penned their political history from 1962 to 2011. Myanmar's military-drafted constitution was approved in a referendum in May 2008 and published in September 2008. The elections in 2010 paved the way for the victory of the military-backed Union Solidarity and Development Party. Only government-sanctioned political parties could register themselves for the election. The National League for Democracy, otherwise known as the NLD Party, was announced illegal during the election and Aung San Suu Kyi was under house arrest until the election ended. In 2011, NLD planned to register itself as a political party after some unanticipated reforms. Suu Kyi's NLD's democratically elected government was the first to replace a half-century-long military junta rule in Myanmar. The current rebirth of the coup seems much like a historical repetition of the firm military administration.
Myanmar coup has called for international attention, with appeals being made to the UN Security Council to contemplate the event and consider sanctions, arms embargoes, and travel bans as methods to pressure Myanmar to return to democracy. The United States did not hold itself back from sanctioning Myanmar and requested the UN to respond with similar severity. Biden announced that the executive order issued would leash Myanmar's generals from accessing $1 billion in US assets. He said that further, the new sanctions would empower his administration to freeze the United States' assets that benefitted Myanmar's military leaders while sustaining the health care support and other citizen-benefitting areas. The use of live ammunition against protestors by Myanmar security forces invited condemnation from Human Rights supporters. While Biden is taking a staunch standpoint towards Myanmar, there is a need for strategic cooperation with the international community to pressure the junta.
When on the one hand, the UK, the USA, and the European Union hold similar stances towards the Myanmar coup, China and Russia have adopted a subtle policy of holding back critical statements for the coup. China called the coup a "cabinet reshuffle", and China's ambassador, Chen Xu, said that the recent events in Myanmar are the country's internal affairs. Pro-democracy protesters in Myanmar have expressed their disappointment in China's lack of condemnation towards the coup, gathering with banners and placard in front of the Chinese embassy in Yangon. One of the many deprecatory placards read, "Myanmar's military dictatorship is made in China," as the protestors accused China of aiding the junta by flying in technical personnel and troops. Beijing responded by saying that it had no former idea about the political transition in Myanmar and dismissed all allegations on China as "ridiculous" rumours.
The military coup in Myanmar left India with "deep concern" as the Ministry of External Affairs stated, "We believe that the rule of law and the democratic process must be upheld. We are monitoring the situation closely". The coup sets the scene for a complex dynamic of setbacks and setups for India's Foreign Policy. So, far New Delhi has not followed the usual footsteps of using sanctions as a diplomatic tool to pressure Myanmar due to the north-eastern states' frangible security concerns. Previously Myanmar's military administration had sent India a letter mentioning the reasons for removing the elected government. Anurag Srivastava, the External Affairs Ministry spokesperson, while affirming the letter's arrival, chose to conceal the letter's content with silence during a news briefing. He said that as India and Myanmar are immediate neighbours sharing close cultural and people-to-people ties and are mutually dependent on trade, economy, security, and defence sectors, India will closely assess Myanmar's events.
There had been a telephonic dialogue between Modi and Biden on February 8. On February 9, a similar telephonic conversation took place between External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar and his US counterpart Antony Blinken. Anurag Srivastava further disclosed that India and the US have mutually decided for being in close contact while exchanging assessments on the current scenario in Myanmar. A discussion also took place between Jaishankar and his Australian counterpart Marise Payne, highlighting the increasing coordination among Quad members over the Myanmar coup.
It cannot be ignored that being a neighbour to Myanmar, India has shared close ties with its civilian and military administration. Hence, a balance must be aimed at to avoid any unforeseen counterattacks. With Biden and the EU tackling the coup with a strict attitude and the opportunist China seeking a personal benefit from the coup, India has to set its footsteps with a lot of contemplative discretion. The recent coup amidst an economy-distressing pandemic creates an opportunity for India to play a climacteric role in the Indo-Pacific region, an expanse of the territory where neither expansionist China nor western hegemonies have relinquished their self-interest. Thus, the yet-to-be-unfolded political, militaristic and economic consequences from the gripping coup holds a series of diplomatic twists that most status quo supporters will least appreciate.
Simron is a MA student in the Department of International Studies, Political Science and History, CHRIST (Deemed to be University), Bengaluru
"Views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not reflect the position of the University
On February 1, 2021, Myanmar woke up to the dawn of a demolished democracy as the military coup re-established itself after a delicate interval of ten years. The citizens were appalled when they discerned that the living icon of Myanmar's democracy, Aung San Suu Kyi, is under detention. This distressing event did not take much time to garner international criticism. The global adherents and defenders of democracy expressed their concerns and mourned over the apparent death of Myanmar's democracy. The coup was a response to Myanmar's November 2020 election results, an emphatic win for Aung San Suu Kyi. Tatmadaw, the Burmese army, including the senior military general Min Aung Hlaing were not satisfied with the election results and brought the military's dominance into effect once again after a decade's break. The coup's initiation stopped the country's passenger flights as per reports from Myanmar's government agency in charge of air travel. All roads to the International airport in Yangon faced road blockage on February 1 2021, as per the US Embassy reports in Myanmar.
Fragility in Civilian rule has always been a feature of Myanmar's short-lived democracy. Undemocratic militaristic hands have penned their political history from 1962 to 2011. Myanmar's military-drafted constitution was approved in a referendum in May 2008 and published in September 2008. The elections in 2010 paved the way for the victory of the military-backed Union Solidarity and Development Party. Only government-sanctioned political parties could register themselves for the election. The National League for Democracy, otherwise known as the NLD Party, was announced illegal during the election and Aung San Suu Kyi was under house arrest until the election ended. In 2011, NLD planned to register itself as a political party after some unanticipated reforms. Suu Kyi's NLD's democratically elected government was the first to replace a half-century-long military junta rule in Myanmar. The current rebirth of the coup seems much like a historical repetition of the firm military administration.
Myanmar coup has called for international attention, with appeals being made to the UN Security Council to contemplate the event and consider sanctions, arms embargoes, and travel bans as methods to pressure Myanmar to return to democracy. The United States did not hold itself back from sanctioning Myanmar and requested the UN to respond with similar severity. Biden announced that the executive order issued would leash Myanmar's generals from accessing $1 billion in US assets. He said that further, the new sanctions would empower his administration to freeze the United States' assets that benefitted Myanmar's military leaders while sustaining the health care support and other citizen-benefitting areas. The use of live ammunition against protestors by Myanmar security forces invited condemnation from Human Rights supporters. While Biden is taking a staunch standpoint towards Myanmar, there is a need for strategic cooperation with the international community to pressure the junta.
When on the one hand, the UK, the USA, and the European Union hold similar stances towards the Myanmar coup, China and Russia have adopted a subtle policy of holding back critical statements for the coup. China called the coup a "cabinet reshuffle", and China's ambassador, Chen Xu, said that the recent events in Myanmar are the country's internal affairs. Pro-democracy protesters in Myanmar have expressed their disappointment in China's lack of condemnation towards the coup, gathering with banners and placard in front of the Chinese embassy in Yangon. One of the many deprecatory placards read, "Myanmar's military dictatorship is made in China," as the protestors accused China of aiding the junta by flying in technical personnel and troops. Beijing responded by saying that it had no former idea about the political transition in Myanmar and dismissed all allegations on China as "ridiculous" rumours.
The military coup in Myanmar left India with "deep concern" as the Ministry of External Affairs stated, "We believe that the rule of law and the democratic process must be upheld. We are monitoring the situation closely". The coup sets the scene for a complex dynamic of setbacks and setups for India's Foreign Policy. So, far New Delhi has not followed the usual footsteps of using sanctions as a diplomatic tool to pressure Myanmar due to the north-eastern states' frangible security concerns. Previously Myanmar's military administration had sent India a letter mentioning the reasons for removing the elected government. Anurag Srivastava, the External Affairs Ministry spokesperson, while affirming the letter's arrival, chose to conceal the letter's content with silence during a news briefing. He said that as India and Myanmar are immediate neighbours sharing close cultural and people-to-people ties and are mutually dependent on trade, economy, security, and defence sectors, India will closely assess Myanmar's events.
There had been a telephonic dialogue between Modi and Biden on February 8. On February 9, a similar telephonic conversation took place between External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar and his US counterpart Antony Blinken. Anurag Srivastava further disclosed that India and the US have mutually decided for being in close contact while exchanging assessments on the current scenario in Myanmar. A discussion also took place between Jaishankar and his Australian counterpart Marise Payne, highlighting the increasing coordination among Quad members over the Myanmar coup.
It cannot be ignored that being a neighbour to Myanmar, India has shared close ties with its civilian and military administration. Hence, a balance must be aimed at to avoid any unforeseen counterattacks. With Biden and the EU tackling the coup with a strict attitude and the opportunist China seeking a personal benefit from the coup, India has to set its footsteps with a lot of contemplative discretion. The recent coup amidst an economy-distressing pandemic creates an opportunity for India to play a climacteric role in the Indo-Pacific region, an expanse of the territory where neither expansionist China nor western hegemonies have relinquished their self-interest. Thus, the yet-to-be-unfolded political, militaristic and economic consequences from the gripping coup holds a series of diplomatic twists that most status quo supporters will least appreciate.
Simron is a MA student in the Department of International Studies, Political Science and History, CHRIST (Deemed to be University), Bengaluru
"Views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not reflect the position of the University
London Based Innovation Accelerator Building Bridges with the Middle East: Lessons from UK’s Start-Up Ecosystem
GAYATHRI SREEDHAR
Inspired by the Silicon Valley’s growth-friendly entrepreneurial ecosystem for quite some time now, the British government and ambitious start-ups have shown a keen inclination towards nurturing domestic innovation. Taking after the venture capitalists and entrepreneurs of the Bay Area, pioneers from the United Kingdom have demonstrated that they now have much to teach tech innovators all over the world as well, particularly in regions where entrepreneurship is less emboldened.
Evincing the same is the announcement in early February by Plexal, an innovation center based in East London, about partnering up with Oman’s start-up development and corporate innovation company, Al Jabr, to launch a rapid innovation accelerator initiative. Plexal is a specialist in forging connections between industry, academia, investors, start-ups and scale-ups to tackle contemporary challenges in the society. Its newest ambition is to guide Oman navigate local challenges created by the pandemic.
Initiated by the UK-Oman Digital Hub, the virtual programme will connect digital innovators in Oman with counterparts in the United Kingdom through mentoring and workshops. The primary objective of the programme is to facilitate Omani entrepreneurs up their game, particularly to develop further in the post-pandemic world. Plexal, the co-working space created by property-developer Delancy, is set to help them in development of technology-led solutions and with traversing through the impediments of the New Normal.
Spanning across six weeks, the mentors from the U.K. who will be sharing knowledge with Omani entrepreneurs include a diverse group of contributors. Helen Panzarino, Rapid Innovation Program Director at the Centre for Financial Technology and David Ripert, CEO of Poplar Studios are among them,
The innovation teams from East London and Muscat’s industry innovation initiatives, Plexal and Al Jabr, with sufficient support from the British Embassy in Muscat, has analysed the response to the pandemic from start-ups in the U.K., and the impact of the coronavirus pandemic on the society and businesses of Oman to design the programme. The study unravelled that the most successful innovation has primarily been taking place across three areas of need: digitization of businesses, digitizing communities, and digitizing education.
With challenges presented by the pandemic that has taken lives in every country across the globe also come opportunities. While dealing with the threat that the world collectively is posed with, Oman, as a nation, is looking ahead to its future. It considers the development of an innovation-led entrepreneurial economy rather essential to sustenance and development when faced with uncertainties. Additionally, considering the speculated fall in demand for oil, the program provided by Plexal is of utmost importance as a life-guard.
While it is questionable what creative solutions the UK-based innovation centre could possibly offer to entrepreneurs in an environment that is distinct from theirs, culturally, politically and economically, Andre Roughan, the managing director of Plexal, seemed rather optimistic about the implications.
First, the initiative is bound to strengthen ties between the two states. Roughan says, “We are closely aligned with the government. One by-product of that is that we have been on the trail of inbound trade missions.” An interesting detail is that one among the inbound trade missions was from Oman, as a result of which, a working relationship ensued between the sultanate and the U.K. The pandemic has placed enormous pressure on economies and society, but it has also encouraged open innovation across borders- long may it continue.” The programme could enable opportunities for start-ups to work together beyond the defined period of six-weeks.
Second, the response to the Covid-19 situation from the start-ups in the U.K. has been “swift, effective and nothing short of heroic,” as Roughan further marks. “Plexal is excited to share what we have learnt with Oman and explore local solutions.” The British innovation community has proved significantly resilient during a global public health emergency so far. Technology, in particular, has played a major role in helping businesses continue to operate and find customers throughout multiple lockdowns. Moreover, businesses of all sizes have found a way to enter new markets and grow despite challenges. The program will incorporate lessons learnt from the experience.
Third, a mix of local and universal can prove productive because in the words of Roughan, “some issues relating to product development are generic and some are very specific.” While the employing of essentially British solutions to address situations and problems specific to Oman might seem counterintuitive, it can yield substantial progressive results.
In addition to providing a supportive backing to Oman, the U.K. also has much to benefit from the program. The links established with Oman, and in extension, the Middle-East, will serve well for British start-ups, and may even function as an important door to future prosperity, considering the lack of adequacy of the trade deal and other relations with EU following BREXIT. On this note, “we needed a very capable local partner,” states Roughan. “And we found that in Al Jabr.”
Gayathri is a MA student in the Department of International Studies, Political Science and History, CHRIST (Deemed to be University), Bengaluru
"Views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not reflect the position of the University
The future of American Democracy
Dr. John Dean
Strikes me that Trump is the symptom, not the cause, of a greater U.S. problem. This is what makes Biden's job so tough. The challenge of his leadership.
It’s almost too easy to aim at Trump; let the district attorneys & America’s independent courts do that. This is not Biden's business, and he would be very wrong, to pursue it. (Particularly since McConnell & co; are now in the process of extracting themselves from Trump’s control.)
On January 5, in the wake of the Georgia senatorial election, the DC Republicans in the Senate & the Congress really began to get the message that Trump was a liability. On January 6, it was manifestly clear how big a liability.
Now the Republicans need to cleanse themselves of association with mob rule and Trump's demagoguery, his Proud Boys, Boogaloo guys and much else if the American Republicans are to remain a truly national party. IF. Time will tell if they are able to do it. (And if Ted Cruz & his like doesn't sink them.)
So what’s Biden to do? He’ll execute executive orders trying to reverse much of Trump's damage — environmental, the runaway of Covid-19, immigration, and the list goes on. Then Biden gets his cabinet approved. Then let the Senate have their impeachment trial; but Biden must stay well clear of it. Then provide stimulus to keep all those displaced families financially afloat. That’s the first wave.
After this, in my opinion there should be a huge infrastructure plan. This will help with global warming, underwrite new technologies, create jobs, make the US more competitive economically. Gosh, just let people drive to work in better conditions.
All these changes are important, but I think the creation of the new jobs is crucial to forming a consensus that America is headed in the right direction. Populism at its best. People with jobs and a stake in the country are not likely to become a violent mob, no matter what resentments they have. Perhaps this resentment was the source of the grievance that inspired the insurgent mob of 6th January, 2021.
America will never have total unity. Look at t realistically and I think one finds that it’s ever been more disunited than united. But I've the impression that there's now a chance for a convergence of aims, for common objectives left, right and centre. (A new populism?)
IF Biden can just get people talking to each other, for each & everyone to realize their own big Win in the total win-win. And maybe even experience the pleasure of some forward momentum after all the slimy sliding & slipping backwards and sideways. A lot could be accomplished.
Having said this, strikes me that the existence of an all-American bad cocktail of logical distrust must be noted.
In many ways American remains an impulsive, stubborn, uneducated, unenlightened nation. Tragically so sometimes. Subject to the whims & quirks of Mother Nature, the pandemic, Covid-19 -- blended with a recalcitrant & long-standing belief from a crucial part of the American population who trust their "gut feelings" more than they do Science. (Probably T's idea of drinking bleach was not original with him, but he thought it was golly-gee great.)
I assume we agree that reason, logic, Science is the way out of the Covid-19 quagmire that can cripple all other forms of American progress right now. America and elsewhere. Okay. But can the USA get to that crucial percentage of people who actually take the vaccine? And who have access to the vaccine? And who can pay for it? And a vaccine that isn't hobbled by new variants & mutations of Covid-19? Plagues tend to be persistent.
Perhaps most of all, are there enough Americans who accept the validity of Science? Not that Science is perfect. But isn’t it the best way right now for solving these immediate, dug-in, obstinate problems? Can people accept a Scientific solution in the context of a contestatory, competitive, emotional-intuitive democracy?
Hey, another challenge for the nation and its leadership.
Much remains to be done.
From Dr. John Dean ,University of Versailles,France(with special thanks to Jon Sackson & the SJC Alumni Gang).
"Views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not reflect the position of the University
Strikes me that Trump is the symptom, not the cause, of a greater U.S. problem. This is what makes Biden's job so tough. The challenge of his leadership.
It’s almost too easy to aim at Trump; let the district attorneys & America’s independent courts do that. This is not Biden's business, and he would be very wrong, to pursue it. (Particularly since McConnell & co; are now in the process of extracting themselves from Trump’s control.)
On January 5, in the wake of the Georgia senatorial election, the DC Republicans in the Senate & the Congress really began to get the message that Trump was a liability. On January 6, it was manifestly clear how big a liability.
Now the Republicans need to cleanse themselves of association with mob rule and Trump's demagoguery, his Proud Boys, Boogaloo guys and much else if the American Republicans are to remain a truly national party. IF. Time will tell if they are able to do it. (And if Ted Cruz & his like doesn't sink them.)
So what’s Biden to do? He’ll execute executive orders trying to reverse much of Trump's damage — environmental, the runaway of Covid-19, immigration, and the list goes on. Then Biden gets his cabinet approved. Then let the Senate have their impeachment trial; but Biden must stay well clear of it. Then provide stimulus to keep all those displaced families financially afloat. That’s the first wave.
After this, in my opinion there should be a huge infrastructure plan. This will help with global warming, underwrite new technologies, create jobs, make the US more competitive economically. Gosh, just let people drive to work in better conditions.
All these changes are important, but I think the creation of the new jobs is crucial to forming a consensus that America is headed in the right direction. Populism at its best. People with jobs and a stake in the country are not likely to become a violent mob, no matter what resentments they have. Perhaps this resentment was the source of the grievance that inspired the insurgent mob of 6th January, 2021.
America will never have total unity. Look at t realistically and I think one finds that it’s ever been more disunited than united. But I've the impression that there's now a chance for a convergence of aims, for common objectives left, right and centre. (A new populism?)
IF Biden can just get people talking to each other, for each & everyone to realize their own big Win in the total win-win. And maybe even experience the pleasure of some forward momentum after all the slimy sliding & slipping backwards and sideways. A lot could be accomplished.
Having said this, strikes me that the existence of an all-American bad cocktail of logical distrust must be noted.
In many ways American remains an impulsive, stubborn, uneducated, unenlightened nation. Tragically so sometimes. Subject to the whims & quirks of Mother Nature, the pandemic, Covid-19 -- blended with a recalcitrant & long-standing belief from a crucial part of the American population who trust their "gut feelings" more than they do Science. (Probably T's idea of drinking bleach was not original with him, but he thought it was golly-gee great.)
I assume we agree that reason, logic, Science is the way out of the Covid-19 quagmire that can cripple all other forms of American progress right now. America and elsewhere. Okay. But can the USA get to that crucial percentage of people who actually take the vaccine? And who have access to the vaccine? And who can pay for it? And a vaccine that isn't hobbled by new variants & mutations of Covid-19? Plagues tend to be persistent.
Perhaps most of all, are there enough Americans who accept the validity of Science? Not that Science is perfect. But isn’t it the best way right now for solving these immediate, dug-in, obstinate problems? Can people accept a Scientific solution in the context of a contestatory, competitive, emotional-intuitive democracy?
Hey, another challenge for the nation and its leadership.
Much remains to be done.
From Dr. John Dean ,University of Versailles,France(with special thanks to Jon Sackson & the SJC Alumni Gang).
"Views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not reflect the position of the University
Democracy and Jihad: The African Story
ANAGHA
After the Scramble for Africa in the year 1885 and through the colonial period, indigenous African ethnic communities remained alienated from a unified national identity. While most African countries are not failed states today, they have struggled to restore and deliver democracy. The overpowering drive to establish democracy has led to continuing (more often than not) violent protests. In this ambience of growing distrust between neighbouring states, with internal politics and external influences triggering minute conflicts in the African continent, the position of the military in these countries has evolved into a dual facetted problem. Conflicts in Africa have three distinct yet interlinked levels. Local level conflicts take birth from regional clan affiliations and in-turn rise into national level communal riots. The internationalization of these conflicts in the absence of a functioning state governance have led to large level multi-dimensional attacks on sovereignty and security (Eklow, 2019).
The Stockholm international peace research institute database (2017) indicates that, on average, Africa spends more than the world average on its military. The per capita military expenditure has increased by 26.8 per cent in Africa. (Khera, 2018) This jubilant military spending has an impact on the economic growth of developing African countries which are new democracies. In the year 2020 alone, countries like Algeria, and Burkina Faso have called out for democratic elections where insecurity and overshadowing threat of communal violence have resulted in limited voter turnout eroding predecessor models of ethnic and religious coexistence. Moreover, because of the rising tensions between existing governments and the escalating opposition, fuelled by destructive militia, these elections largely remain elections without the people who are ultimately alienated from their own system. Encashing upon this movement for equity, global terrorists groups like al- Qaeda and the Islamic state have turned Africa into a springboard for global terrorism in modern history. Today, al-Qaeda and ISIS continue to use Africa as an important locale of operations. The African countries have come under the spectacle of the international society because of their involvement with these internationally active terror organizations mainly after the global war on terror began.
Here, consider the case of Nigeria where troop deployment and peace talks with local authorities have failed to curb kidnapping, village raids and burning of homes by neighbouring tribes who maintain camps in the Rugu forest. In crippling convergence to this bloodshed, the security forces open fire on unarmed demonstrators near and around Lagos killing hundreds of citizens victimised by police brutality disguised in the form of the special anti robbery squad(SARS). The terror spread by security forces in Nigeria adds to the horror of elections which are a charade of rampant vote buying. The military in this case casts a negative role impacting the lives of hundreds of victimized civilians caught in the cross fire between the SARS and the rising revolt. The state exists to deliver human security and the protection of fundamental rights and duties. A flawed system of governance implies to a society which lacks transparency, responsiveness and accountability. This when added to the existing competition between elites for national power have exacerbated local fault lines. The limitations of the military in Nigeria and Kenya are not fundamentally economic but find their basis in the lack of motivation to deal with these Jihadist attacks. Like in these cases, the limitations of the ineffective security forces in African countries stem from their lack of national identity without which soldiers lack the motivation to risk their lives. In the Lake Chad Basin—mostly in Nigeria but also in Chad, Cameroon, and Niger—the radical Jihadis are primarily factions of Boko Haram, some with links to the Islamic State, others to al-Qaeda. The rise of radical Islam gives the militia a common identifying group and calls for mass movements against the state forces which lack both financing and a bonding nationalistic identity.
While jihadist groups are the main contributors of violence, community-based militia and government forces often penetrate equally bad attacks. (Bloomberg, 2020) Local Militia who operate outside the legal systems, fill the gap between the end of military operations and solidification of local powers. The presence of poorly trained and under-equipped forces in Africa add to the rising instability and insecurity in the region. A prevailing culture of impunity within the security forces ultimately provides the state personnel to commit gross human rights violations. This lack of a strong leadership and the resulting indecisiveness has led to the military and the state police forces overshadowing the state jurisdiction.
Here, consider the case of Mali where international pressure and military intervention have become the focal points of distress for the governmental security forces. While the transitional government in Mali has signalled for a dialogue with the jihadist groups, France which has a major influence in Mali, has shown major discomfort with the decision calling for a fight against the Jihadists. In addition to this, the country is to host a unit of Greek special forces too. The military planning and action capability mission of the EU plans to gradually support the resumption of the joint security and defence activities in Mali with the aim of achieving stability in Sahel and the wider region. This conflict between the government and the foreign stake holders challenges the very existence of state sovereignty and undermines the power of the government. Mass killings and crimes against humanity are inflicted upon the civilian population by both the state forces as well as the foreign forces in order to assert their supremacy.
The over powering military and their consequent rise to power can be observed in Mali's neighbour Burkina Faso- which is the coup capital of Africa after witnessing 10 attempts—the most on the continent. After several attempts of restoring democracy in the country, presidential and legislative elections for Burkina Faso were held in November 2020. These elections saw around 3000 polling stations which remained closed preventing 350,000 people from voting (republicworld.com, 2020). Broad based military operations accompanied by gross human rights violations alienate local populations from fostering a parochial culture. Therefore, there exists a need to bridge the gap between the key segments of the militia and the population that suffers at their whimsy. To add to the impounding growth of regional chaos, the lack of a functioning judicial system and a strong police system have led to clan based grievances developing into internationally condemned violations of human rights.
Formal police and military forces in countries like Somalia operate as clan militia because they lack proper integration as national forces. The access to small arms and light weapons turn these spilling conflicts into overpowering and transgressing battles. The thread from extremism and radicalism requires security cooperation from regional powers. Gilbert M, (1995) has suggested in his work that militaries might become irrelevant in African politics when most of the deep seated conflicts are resolved or successfully managed. However, in the contemporary scene, separating the role of the military and it’s intervention from the entangled arena of politics seems linked to conquest and relinquishment of power. A call for national dialogue on the allocation of power would benefit the law makers, the subjects of these law and the law enforcement agencies. The disproportionate political space for the military in Africa falls out of the periphery of nations where the mere notion of nation building is incomplete and contested. Militaries may not necessarily be mechanisms to restore status quo.
Creating democracy may therefore be linked to the military’s ability to relinquish power. It is only logical to assume that, in a world system powered by arms race where military is a symbol of state power the mechanisms of demilitarization stands as a contributing factor to instability in the balance of power dynamics. Disengagement of the military may however impact building on conflicts that spill across boundaries. With social and demographic pressures such as unemployment and severe droughts, massive humanitarian crisis seems to be broiling in most African states. The lack of proper training, the overpowering of the military and the non existence of a transparency have led to African countries being prone to military coups and have led the military to oppressive and violent.
The African continent faces new threats that may range beyond its current or feasible military capacity. With the increasing presence of foreign powers in the African continent and the intensifying trade war between the United States and China; African countries are prone to becoming a battleground for international great power politics. With the strong repulsion of the global community to terrorism, it is becoming increasingly prudent for the African countries to confront jihadist movements. The position of the state military is pivotal in this security set-up. It is therefore of importance to carefully analyze the allocation of power in this context.If improvements in human security, economies, politics, education, conflict resolution, and wealth distribution are not addressed, then the continent will continue to experience history repeating itself involving Jihadist terrorism in Africa. Despite decades of civilian democracy in Africa, inequality in distribution of power and resources have been a result of disintegration of governance from the core principles of democracy. Internal stability and establishment of strong leadership will lead to security from cross border threats thereby bringing the continent to peace and cooperation. This article via its findings concludes that, while allotment of sufficient funds and training opportunities for the state forces may lead to a stronger military, what appears to be the central game changer in dealing with the notion of ethnic and religious extremism is the idea of a inclusive national identity. The current pan-African drive towards democracy may result in the culmination of a national identity within each country dissolving tormenting terror groups into the cusp of peaceful coexistence.
ANAGHA is a MA student in the Department of International Studies, Political Science and History, CHRIST (Deemed to be University), Bengaluru
"Views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not reflect the position of the University
After the Scramble for Africa in the year 1885 and through the colonial period, indigenous African ethnic communities remained alienated from a unified national identity. While most African countries are not failed states today, they have struggled to restore and deliver democracy. The overpowering drive to establish democracy has led to continuing (more often than not) violent protests. In this ambience of growing distrust between neighbouring states, with internal politics and external influences triggering minute conflicts in the African continent, the position of the military in these countries has evolved into a dual facetted problem. Conflicts in Africa have three distinct yet interlinked levels. Local level conflicts take birth from regional clan affiliations and in-turn rise into national level communal riots. The internationalization of these conflicts in the absence of a functioning state governance have led to large level multi-dimensional attacks on sovereignty and security (Eklow, 2019).
The Stockholm international peace research institute database (2017) indicates that, on average, Africa spends more than the world average on its military. The per capita military expenditure has increased by 26.8 per cent in Africa. (Khera, 2018) This jubilant military spending has an impact on the economic growth of developing African countries which are new democracies. In the year 2020 alone, countries like Algeria, and Burkina Faso have called out for democratic elections where insecurity and overshadowing threat of communal violence have resulted in limited voter turnout eroding predecessor models of ethnic and religious coexistence. Moreover, because of the rising tensions between existing governments and the escalating opposition, fuelled by destructive militia, these elections largely remain elections without the people who are ultimately alienated from their own system. Encashing upon this movement for equity, global terrorists groups like al- Qaeda and the Islamic state have turned Africa into a springboard for global terrorism in modern history. Today, al-Qaeda and ISIS continue to use Africa as an important locale of operations. The African countries have come under the spectacle of the international society because of their involvement with these internationally active terror organizations mainly after the global war on terror began.
Here, consider the case of Nigeria where troop deployment and peace talks with local authorities have failed to curb kidnapping, village raids and burning of homes by neighbouring tribes who maintain camps in the Rugu forest. In crippling convergence to this bloodshed, the security forces open fire on unarmed demonstrators near and around Lagos killing hundreds of citizens victimised by police brutality disguised in the form of the special anti robbery squad(SARS). The terror spread by security forces in Nigeria adds to the horror of elections which are a charade of rampant vote buying. The military in this case casts a negative role impacting the lives of hundreds of victimized civilians caught in the cross fire between the SARS and the rising revolt. The state exists to deliver human security and the protection of fundamental rights and duties. A flawed system of governance implies to a society which lacks transparency, responsiveness and accountability. This when added to the existing competition between elites for national power have exacerbated local fault lines. The limitations of the military in Nigeria and Kenya are not fundamentally economic but find their basis in the lack of motivation to deal with these Jihadist attacks. Like in these cases, the limitations of the ineffective security forces in African countries stem from their lack of national identity without which soldiers lack the motivation to risk their lives. In the Lake Chad Basin—mostly in Nigeria but also in Chad, Cameroon, and Niger—the radical Jihadis are primarily factions of Boko Haram, some with links to the Islamic State, others to al-Qaeda. The rise of radical Islam gives the militia a common identifying group and calls for mass movements against the state forces which lack both financing and a bonding nationalistic identity.
While jihadist groups are the main contributors of violence, community-based militia and government forces often penetrate equally bad attacks. (Bloomberg, 2020) Local Militia who operate outside the legal systems, fill the gap between the end of military operations and solidification of local powers. The presence of poorly trained and under-equipped forces in Africa add to the rising instability and insecurity in the region. A prevailing culture of impunity within the security forces ultimately provides the state personnel to commit gross human rights violations. This lack of a strong leadership and the resulting indecisiveness has led to the military and the state police forces overshadowing the state jurisdiction.
Here, consider the case of Mali where international pressure and military intervention have become the focal points of distress for the governmental security forces. While the transitional government in Mali has signalled for a dialogue with the jihadist groups, France which has a major influence in Mali, has shown major discomfort with the decision calling for a fight against the Jihadists. In addition to this, the country is to host a unit of Greek special forces too. The military planning and action capability mission of the EU plans to gradually support the resumption of the joint security and defence activities in Mali with the aim of achieving stability in Sahel and the wider region. This conflict between the government and the foreign stake holders challenges the very existence of state sovereignty and undermines the power of the government. Mass killings and crimes against humanity are inflicted upon the civilian population by both the state forces as well as the foreign forces in order to assert their supremacy.
The over powering military and their consequent rise to power can be observed in Mali's neighbour Burkina Faso- which is the coup capital of Africa after witnessing 10 attempts—the most on the continent. After several attempts of restoring democracy in the country, presidential and legislative elections for Burkina Faso were held in November 2020. These elections saw around 3000 polling stations which remained closed preventing 350,000 people from voting (republicworld.com, 2020). Broad based military operations accompanied by gross human rights violations alienate local populations from fostering a parochial culture. Therefore, there exists a need to bridge the gap between the key segments of the militia and the population that suffers at their whimsy. To add to the impounding growth of regional chaos, the lack of a functioning judicial system and a strong police system have led to clan based grievances developing into internationally condemned violations of human rights.
Formal police and military forces in countries like Somalia operate as clan militia because they lack proper integration as national forces. The access to small arms and light weapons turn these spilling conflicts into overpowering and transgressing battles. The thread from extremism and radicalism requires security cooperation from regional powers. Gilbert M, (1995) has suggested in his work that militaries might become irrelevant in African politics when most of the deep seated conflicts are resolved or successfully managed. However, in the contemporary scene, separating the role of the military and it’s intervention from the entangled arena of politics seems linked to conquest and relinquishment of power. A call for national dialogue on the allocation of power would benefit the law makers, the subjects of these law and the law enforcement agencies. The disproportionate political space for the military in Africa falls out of the periphery of nations where the mere notion of nation building is incomplete and contested. Militaries may not necessarily be mechanisms to restore status quo.
Creating democracy may therefore be linked to the military’s ability to relinquish power. It is only logical to assume that, in a world system powered by arms race where military is a symbol of state power the mechanisms of demilitarization stands as a contributing factor to instability in the balance of power dynamics. Disengagement of the military may however impact building on conflicts that spill across boundaries. With social and demographic pressures such as unemployment and severe droughts, massive humanitarian crisis seems to be broiling in most African states. The lack of proper training, the overpowering of the military and the non existence of a transparency have led to African countries being prone to military coups and have led the military to oppressive and violent.
The African continent faces new threats that may range beyond its current or feasible military capacity. With the increasing presence of foreign powers in the African continent and the intensifying trade war between the United States and China; African countries are prone to becoming a battleground for international great power politics. With the strong repulsion of the global community to terrorism, it is becoming increasingly prudent for the African countries to confront jihadist movements. The position of the state military is pivotal in this security set-up. It is therefore of importance to carefully analyze the allocation of power in this context.If improvements in human security, economies, politics, education, conflict resolution, and wealth distribution are not addressed, then the continent will continue to experience history repeating itself involving Jihadist terrorism in Africa. Despite decades of civilian democracy in Africa, inequality in distribution of power and resources have been a result of disintegration of governance from the core principles of democracy. Internal stability and establishment of strong leadership will lead to security from cross border threats thereby bringing the continent to peace and cooperation. This article via its findings concludes that, while allotment of sufficient funds and training opportunities for the state forces may lead to a stronger military, what appears to be the central game changer in dealing with the notion of ethnic and religious extremism is the idea of a inclusive national identity. The current pan-African drive towards democracy may result in the culmination of a national identity within each country dissolving tormenting terror groups into the cusp of peaceful coexistence.
ANAGHA is a MA student in the Department of International Studies, Political Science and History, CHRIST (Deemed to be University), Bengaluru
"Views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not reflect the position of the University
Fissures in Sino-Russo Relations?
MOHAMMED YAQOOB SALEEM
The Russo-Chinese relationship under Putin and Xi Jinping have fairly been good, characterised by mutual economic development and close security cooperation. The Kremlin began to move closer to China after sanctions were imposed by the West on Russia for its actions in Crimea and Eastern Ukraine. President Xi Jinping has called Vladimir Putin his ‘best friend’ and when President Xi visited Moscow in 2018, he was seen making pancakes with President Putin. China is the largest investor in Russia and the Chinese view Russia as an important source of raw materials for their industries and an even more important market for their finished goods. As the Covid-19 pandemic ravaged lives and economies across the globe, China was criticised by the West for not being transparent in sharing the data related to the pandemic but Russia though suffering profoundly from the pandemic expressed support to China with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov issuing a statement condemning the criticism of China on handling of the pandemic.
Recently, there seem to be some fissures appearing in the Russo-Sino bonhomie. Russia earlier this week announced that it would be withholding the sale of S-400 Triumf mobile air defence system to China. This move by Russia, comes in the backdrop of claims that the Chinese had been spying on Russia trying to extract military secrets relating to hydroacoustics that helps to navigate and monitor submarine activity underwater. Russia’s handling of the espionage warfare with China and this incident in particular is something new because according to Mark Galeotti, a senior associate fellow at Royal United Services Institute, Russia usually, expels the Chinese agents after a word with the ambassador and the local assets are arrested on different charges and the whole matter is handled very discreetly. This was part of Russia’s narrative to portray China as a trusted partner against the West which is considered the antagonist. But with this incident, it can be perceived that Russia is growing suspicious of Chinese activities.
The agreement for the sale of 33 Russian fighter jets to India which was concluded in late June has upset the Communist Party of China and the Chinese media outlets have criticised Russia for this step. For Russia, warm relations with India go back to the cold war era and Russia cannot ignore the fact that India is a very lucrative market for its arms industries. India will also be receiving the S-400 defence systems by the end of 2021. Apart from the sale of aircrafts and anti-aircraft defence systems, Russia has also agreed to upgrade India’s existing aircrafts. Moscow has declared that it could supply India with a large number of weapons in a short period of time. Despite Beijing’s advice to not entertain India’s arms requests, Russia has gone ahead and signed arms sales agreement with India which has irked the Chinese Government. There has also been growing outrage on Chinese social media platforms like Weibo and WeChat where the netizens have accused Russia of benefitting from India-China border tensions.
As China’s border disputes with its neighbouring countries have increased after the outbreak of the pandemic, Russia also seems to be embroiled in the dispute. On July 2nd, Russia celebrated the 160th anniversary of the founding of the city of Vladivostok. This was criticised on social media by Chinese diplomats and Chinese state media officials claiming that Vladivostok was historically part of China known as ‘Haishenwei’. A tweet made Zhang Heqing, a Chinese diplomat in Pakistan read “Isn’t this (Vladivostok) what in the past was our Haishenwei?”. Though the Chinese Government has not endorsed any claims made on the social media, it has also not refuted these claims publicly. There were no comments made by the Russian Government. Both China and Russia have settled their outstanding border disputes through an agreement signed in 2008 and have enjoyed a stable border since then.
Russia has become more dependent than ever on China for investments and technology for its economic development since the annexation of Crimea. Russia and China both view Washington as a threat to their national interest and this has driven both of them to band together and any attempt to drive a wedge in between China and Russia by the West would be considered naïve. Though both the countries enjoy strategical relationship with each other, Beijing has now understood that Kremlin’s support to Chinese external activities reaches only to a certain extent. While there are some strains in the bilateral relations, it is too soon to assume that Russo-Sino relationship will be heading for the worse.
MOHAMMED YAQOOB SALEEM is a MA student in the Department of International Studies,Political Science and History, CHRIST (Deemed to be University), Bengaluru
"Views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not reflect the position of the University
Post Pandemic Global Paradigm Shift and East Asia : Implications for India(Webinar Report)
Reported by Lakshmi Karlekar
The Department of International Studies, Political Science and History in association with the Consulate General of Republic of Korea in Chennai, Indo-Korea Science and Technology and Centre and Innovation Centre of CHRIST (Deemed to be University).
The webinar was attended by Fr Jose CC, Pro- Vice Chancellor of CHRIST (Deemed to be University), Dr Madhumati Deshpande, Dr Manoharan N, Dr Barnali Chanda along with the distinguished speakers- Dr. Young Seup Kwon, Consul General of the Republic of Korea, Chennai, Dr. Seung Cheol Lee (IKST), Mr. Tomoyuki Yamato, YAMATO LLC, Dr. Victor Teo, Hong Kong University and Dr. Jabin T Jacob, Shiv Nadar University.
Dr Manoharan welcomed the guests of honour and the panellists. Fr Jose CC gave the Presidential address where he focussed on the Black Swan Strategy which acts as a paradigm shift to Learn from East Asia. Strong identity, unity, financial prudence is strong connecting characteristic of India and welcomed each delegate whole heartedly.
The following is the lecture given by the eminent speakers:
1.Dr. Young Seup Kwon, Consul General of the Republic of Korea, Chennai
Dr Guydeuk Yeon welcomed the General Consulate of Korea, based in Chennai, Dr Yongseup Kuon who shed light on how Corona pandemic’s effect on India and Korea. The WHO preparation to deal with outbreak has been very vital in this case. Korea has been controlling COVID-19 based on previous experience-SARS&MARS and has hence been successful in curbing it to a very large extent which previously none could afford to do. Thematic and trans missionary trends are seen in the COVID-19 patterns. Everything is working in normalcy in Korea when the world is battling with COVID-19 and an example for the same can be where Online shopping is normal and the Internet infrastructure has increased here. Revamp for post corona is the need of the hour for all the nations who have to prove their medical capacity- Self-reliance, assuring, reassuring, offshoring and outsourcing.
Further the panellists highlighted on the Conflict between US and China where US is critique of China’s actions and inactions on the spread and containment in the initial stages. Protectionism and extreme nationalism are important. Enhancement of multilateral organisation and its rules is crucial in nature. It promotes international co-operation. This meant that bilateral relations and stability in Asia is crucial when these 2 warring nations which create a security dilemma and threat to its neighbouring countries, hence development of Asia relations- India and Korea, India and Japan are the need of the hour.
Investment by East Asian countries in ASEAN show their potentiality and vigour in economic parameters. On the other hand, countries like India see what best they can do to become manufacturing hub like China, never the less, India has a strong point-Young worker which it can tap on this resource as a key to economic development. ASEAN’s transformation to a Global manufacturing hub will be highly beneficial to China.
Also, Agriculture is a peak sector in China wherein it is highly competitive and constitutes to 44% with no compensatory mechanism. The relations between Korea and India can be deduced in 2 phases namely -before and after wherein before they were reduced over dependence and curtailed by China’s expansion which was coupled by Trade and Investment with China-lateral expansion. The relation currently has moved to a positive note wherein we can see that Tamil Nadu, Kerala, Andhra Pradesh-have 200plus companies-7000plus Koreans working in South India, Largest expatriate community in Chennai. Anantapur, Andhra Pradesh-Kia motors which itself shows the reliance of their bilateral relations and how conducive it is. India and Korea to include 50 billion $ investment, example- Mahindra is also investing in Korea with the motive that the Manufacturing sector has to be competitive and productive in nature.
Dr Manoharan N thanked Dr Yongseup Kuon for gracing the webinar and imbibing the students on how Korea is now the emerging power in East Asia and also cordially welcomed him to graciously visit Christ (Deemed to be University).
2. Dr. Seung Cheol Lee (IKST)
Dr Manoharan N introduced Seung Cheol Lec- Director of Indo-Korean Institute of Chinese Technology worked with Indian researchers closely. The panellist began his talk by stating that Physical meeting is not possible and the pandemic has reinstated Research, experiment-endless communication and after the pandemic, the importance of India would have increased subsequently due to its increased capabilities in diverse arenas. India requires sufficient experience, research and Korea can help us to achieve a desirable demand. Mutual compliment will change the world post the corona world spurred by invention of new things is necessary here- collaboration with India. Must not lose the manufacturing capacity as the West do not have test kits to be effective and here is why we see that Korea has few companies’ bio medical and essential kits and can prohibit from panic buying. Professor Jabin T Jacob appreciated the panellists for his insights.
3. Mr. Tomoyuki Yamato, YAMATO LLC
Dr Manoharan N welcomed Mr. Tomoyuki YAMATO,CEO,YAMATO LLC/ Founding Partner & Director, WORLD1 Group presented on the following points-
4. Dr. Victor Teo, Hong Kong University
Prof Jabin J Jacob welcomed Dr Victor Teo who is working at University of Hong Kong- Assistant Professor- Department of Japanese Studies, also a Visiting Prof at Pyeong Hong University of Chinese Studies.
Dr Teo thanked Dr Barnali C and Dr Manoharan N for inviting him and spoke on Implications of the pandemic of China and North Korea closes border for the pandemic due to lack of medical capacity. Closed for Ebola also which broke out in Africa-short of trade and hard currency but this want be the case for PRK.
Dr Victor Teo spoke on Post Pandemic & Global Paradigm Shift in the flowing terms-
5. Dr. Jabin T Jacob, Shiv Nadar University
Dr Jabin T Jacob questioned the panellists on the following aspects:
Followed by this was a question and answer round wherein questions regarding Intellectual Property Rights, Research capabilities, supply chain of medical necessities combating increased costs, border issues between Indian and china, South China Sea posing a territorial dispute challenge which were answered.
The Vote of Thanks was given by Dr Madhumati Deshpande. The webinar concluded on a successful note and students are eagerly waiting for another opportunity to learn and develop their knowledge.
Lakshmi is a MA student in the Department of International Studies,Political Science and History, CHRIST (Deemed to be University), Bengaluru
The Department of International Studies, Political Science and History in association with the Consulate General of Republic of Korea in Chennai, Indo-Korea Science and Technology and Centre and Innovation Centre of CHRIST (Deemed to be University).
The webinar was attended by Fr Jose CC, Pro- Vice Chancellor of CHRIST (Deemed to be University), Dr Madhumati Deshpande, Dr Manoharan N, Dr Barnali Chanda along with the distinguished speakers- Dr. Young Seup Kwon, Consul General of the Republic of Korea, Chennai, Dr. Seung Cheol Lee (IKST), Mr. Tomoyuki Yamato, YAMATO LLC, Dr. Victor Teo, Hong Kong University and Dr. Jabin T Jacob, Shiv Nadar University.
Dr Manoharan welcomed the guests of honour and the panellists. Fr Jose CC gave the Presidential address where he focussed on the Black Swan Strategy which acts as a paradigm shift to Learn from East Asia. Strong identity, unity, financial prudence is strong connecting characteristic of India and welcomed each delegate whole heartedly.
The following is the lecture given by the eminent speakers:
1.Dr. Young Seup Kwon, Consul General of the Republic of Korea, Chennai
Dr Guydeuk Yeon welcomed the General Consulate of Korea, based in Chennai, Dr Yongseup Kuon who shed light on how Corona pandemic’s effect on India and Korea. The WHO preparation to deal with outbreak has been very vital in this case. Korea has been controlling COVID-19 based on previous experience-SARS&MARS and has hence been successful in curbing it to a very large extent which previously none could afford to do. Thematic and trans missionary trends are seen in the COVID-19 patterns. Everything is working in normalcy in Korea when the world is battling with COVID-19 and an example for the same can be where Online shopping is normal and the Internet infrastructure has increased here. Revamp for post corona is the need of the hour for all the nations who have to prove their medical capacity- Self-reliance, assuring, reassuring, offshoring and outsourcing.
Further the panellists highlighted on the Conflict between US and China where US is critique of China’s actions and inactions on the spread and containment in the initial stages. Protectionism and extreme nationalism are important. Enhancement of multilateral organisation and its rules is crucial in nature. It promotes international co-operation. This meant that bilateral relations and stability in Asia is crucial when these 2 warring nations which create a security dilemma and threat to its neighbouring countries, hence development of Asia relations- India and Korea, India and Japan are the need of the hour.
Investment by East Asian countries in ASEAN show their potentiality and vigour in economic parameters. On the other hand, countries like India see what best they can do to become manufacturing hub like China, never the less, India has a strong point-Young worker which it can tap on this resource as a key to economic development. ASEAN’s transformation to a Global manufacturing hub will be highly beneficial to China.
Also, Agriculture is a peak sector in China wherein it is highly competitive and constitutes to 44% with no compensatory mechanism. The relations between Korea and India can be deduced in 2 phases namely -before and after wherein before they were reduced over dependence and curtailed by China’s expansion which was coupled by Trade and Investment with China-lateral expansion. The relation currently has moved to a positive note wherein we can see that Tamil Nadu, Kerala, Andhra Pradesh-have 200plus companies-7000plus Koreans working in South India, Largest expatriate community in Chennai. Anantapur, Andhra Pradesh-Kia motors which itself shows the reliance of their bilateral relations and how conducive it is. India and Korea to include 50 billion $ investment, example- Mahindra is also investing in Korea with the motive that the Manufacturing sector has to be competitive and productive in nature.
Dr Manoharan N thanked Dr Yongseup Kuon for gracing the webinar and imbibing the students on how Korea is now the emerging power in East Asia and also cordially welcomed him to graciously visit Christ (Deemed to be University).
2. Dr. Seung Cheol Lee (IKST)
Dr Manoharan N introduced Seung Cheol Lec- Director of Indo-Korean Institute of Chinese Technology worked with Indian researchers closely. The panellist began his talk by stating that Physical meeting is not possible and the pandemic has reinstated Research, experiment-endless communication and after the pandemic, the importance of India would have increased subsequently due to its increased capabilities in diverse arenas. India requires sufficient experience, research and Korea can help us to achieve a desirable demand. Mutual compliment will change the world post the corona world spurred by invention of new things is necessary here- collaboration with India. Must not lose the manufacturing capacity as the West do not have test kits to be effective and here is why we see that Korea has few companies’ bio medical and essential kits and can prohibit from panic buying. Professor Jabin T Jacob appreciated the panellists for his insights.
3. Mr. Tomoyuki Yamato, YAMATO LLC
Dr Manoharan N welcomed Mr. Tomoyuki YAMATO,CEO,YAMATO LLC/ Founding Partner & Director, WORLD1 Group presented on the following points-
- Conducting projects in India since 2010. Relocated to Bengaluru with family from Singapore in 2016
- Experienced global M&A/ restricting projects at Bain & Company/Roland Berger.
- Promoting “ Innovation in India” program for new market entrants, facilitating collaboration with local industries & institutes to convert Japanese “WOW Value” into India
- Supporting METI/JETRO, MAFF, etc.
- WORLD1 Group is a Japan-India cross-border, cross cultural professional firm & international trading firm. Assigned Business support desk (India) of Osaka BDA
- The first-ever METI IDEAthon @ Bengaluru, January 2019
- Academia collaboration for 2W R&D since July 2019
- India is “Another Phase” for Japan Cos-
- Phase 1- 1970: Extended “sales and marketing” to Western countries
- Phase 2- 1990- Extended “manufacturing” point to East and SE Asia
- Phase 2+ - 2010- Capturing coming up market through local establishments
- Phase 3- 2020- “Innovation in India” to explore the globe further by leveraging the core- research and development.
- Certain localization required to enjoy “ Beauty of India” highlighting on the importance of Innovation
- Japanese “Art in Detail” meets “JUGAD” in India- “WOW value”
- How I see Post-Corona Paradigm Shift- Japan will continue working as balancer in between US vs China- Culture always keep things vague (like India). Off-balancing from China cannot happen such immediate pace- East Asians are siblings in industry, regardless contradiction/complication in politics. India & Japan can create another value centre under Post-Corona, i.e. digitization of analogue manufacturing, cyber world for “vague” human being, etc.- Dialogue in between India & Japan shouldn’t focus on ourselves only, but keep eyes open to the globe.
4. Dr. Victor Teo, Hong Kong University
Prof Jabin J Jacob welcomed Dr Victor Teo who is working at University of Hong Kong- Assistant Professor- Department of Japanese Studies, also a Visiting Prof at Pyeong Hong University of Chinese Studies.
Dr Teo thanked Dr Barnali C and Dr Manoharan N for inviting him and spoke on Implications of the pandemic of China and North Korea closes border for the pandemic due to lack of medical capacity. Closed for Ebola also which broke out in Africa-short of trade and hard currency but this want be the case for PRK.
Dr Victor Teo spoke on Post Pandemic & Global Paradigm Shift in the flowing terms-
- US-China Trade War: 2018-2019
- Leadup to Taiwan Presidential Elections in January 2020
- Hong Kong Unrest 2019
- Public Relations Nightmare
- Political Legitimacy
- Governance & Emergency Procedures- Good governance
- Medical Infrastructure
- Crisis Opportunity
- Absolute Control=Absolute Accountability
- China’s booming economic growth: 6.8% in Q1 in China but the Export rate is plunging
- China’s exports plunged following coronavirus outbreak
- Example Yiwu- Major Losses/ Under capacity Issues
- Economic Implications of China’s Rise
- Massive Unemployment- Coronavirus pandemic hit jobs- 8.6 million school leavers-14.6% employment among them
- Manufacturing in major economies
- Economic forecasts downgraded for 2020
- U-Turn: Street Vendor Economy
- Xi: “Bottom-line thinking” watch out for black swans & grey rhinos’ Unpredictable international environment”
5. Dr. Jabin T Jacob, Shiv Nadar University
Dr Jabin T Jacob questioned the panellists on the following aspects:
- Is it right to shift many international manufacturing hubs away from China to other Asian countries post the pandemic?
- Can India’s criticism on China be valid? (Owing to the fact that India is in a glass house and throwing stones on other can backfire on itself)
- How successful is India in terms of binding with cooperative federalism?
Followed by this was a question and answer round wherein questions regarding Intellectual Property Rights, Research capabilities, supply chain of medical necessities combating increased costs, border issues between Indian and china, South China Sea posing a territorial dispute challenge which were answered.
The Vote of Thanks was given by Dr Madhumati Deshpande. The webinar concluded on a successful note and students are eagerly waiting for another opportunity to learn and develop their knowledge.
Lakshmi is a MA student in the Department of International Studies,Political Science and History, CHRIST (Deemed to be University), Bengaluru
POPULISM AND FOOD IN THE AGE OF PANDEMIC
Roger Porter
The term “populism” has long been a contested one, with critics focusing on its relation to political movements as well as to styles of leadership and the relation of governments to the governed. In these initial remarks I will make a fairly simple distinction between populism of the far right and populism of the left. In whatever form it takes the notion of populism inevitably speaks to mass movements organized against ruling powers, and devolves into an “us” versus a “them,” usually attacking or (in the case of far-right populism) scape-goating those whom the movement wishes to demonize.
In the American context the notion of populism became embodied in the Populist Party, also called the Populist Party, of 1892. It seemed at first a leftist group, since it advocated economic regulation and nationalizing the railroads, but it was hostile to immigrants, regarding them as cheap labor that would displace American workers. The party was also known to support Jim Crow laws and to advocate white supremacy.
Of course, these themes resonate in many ways with the current administration—in its anti-immigrant stance, its xenophobia and racism, its hostility to the rule of law equally applied, and in its authoritarian personality cult which brooks no restraints on its exercise of power, whether it violates the Constitution or not.
Populism often perceives society as divided into competing, even hostile groups: the “pure people” versus a corrupt elite. The right-wing version tends to establish a nativist or nationalist position, with threats perceived to the people who “belong”; hence its hostility to outsiders, defined not only as foreigners but those among its own citizens deemed less worthy than “the pure people”—the deserved ones perceived as victims of the “others” from certain ethnic backgrounds who would claim an unjustified status and seek to dispossess those who were there first. For right-wing populists the phrase “American first” thus has a double meaning.
For right wing populism the enemy can also be a corrupt elite who do not comprehend the needs of the “real” folk. Of course, the leaders of this movement are themselves inevitably the elite, however much they profess to be ordinary, hardly different from those whom they claim to serve though they may not in any real sense. Right-wing populist leaders argue that they alone represent “the people,” however false such claims may be. Because leaders of such movements depend on arousing paranoia in their followers in order to maintain their hold on power, those populist movements frequently invoke and depend upon conspiracy theories to solidify their claim to save the people from such disruptive forces as elites favoring immigrants, the free press, or politicians who might seem to undermine the ruler’s legitimacy. In all such cases the movement must resist the notion of a complex, pluralist society, the very hallmark of a democratic polity.
As I’ve said, both forms of populism emphasize “the people,” but left-wing populism sees the people as sovereign, capable of understanding and addressing their plight without needing a strong-armed authoritarian leader to guide or indeed to control them. Left wing populism, of the sort recently identified with Berne Sanders, and during the last century with the progressive Wisconsin Senator Robert La Follette, also champions the little people, but its enemies tend to be unbridled and unregulated capitalism, while its goals center on social justice and frequently on some form of income redistribution. A common distinction that’s made between right and left versions is that the former can be considered as “exclusionary,” the latter as “inclusionary.” “Inclusionary” populism defines “the people” as embodying marginalized groups and minorities, whereas right-wing populism tends to place those entities outside legitimacy. But both versions focus on certain groups as oppressed, and both see the elites as the real villains, though they have different ways of defining what constitutes elitism. For the right elites tend to be those who champion progressive ideas; for the left the elites tend to be those whose financial power constrain those in the lower or middle classes.
The question of President Donald Trump’s identity as a populist is a vexing one. In many ways he epitomizes the very essence of right-wing populism, in that he purports to celebrate and defend the forgotten “little people” against globalist, wealthy, corrupt elites out to harm “his” people. In his speech at the 2016 Republican convention he promised to serve the “forgotten men and women of our country.” Trump embodies such commonplace populist traits as extoling his unique healing virtues (“I alone can fix it [the broken system in Washington],” as he flaunts his self-proclaimed role as the uniquely competent protector holding back a sea of incompetence threatening to undermine true American virtues (circa 1950). Trump’s populism insists that he represents exactly what his followers do, however vastly different from them he is in terms of wealth and status. Nevertheless, everything he does in terms of policy benefits not those folks but the wealthy; his tax cuts of 2017 did almost nothing for the people he constantly claims to serve. His allegiance to them is entirely mythic. And in a cruel irony the right-wing populist Trump does exactly what he condemns elites for doing, namely excluding citizens from full participation in democracy and usurping the power of the state to his own ends. As has been well documented, the swamp Trump promised to drain has bubbled up into his entire administration. His populist language has scarcely disguised the fact that his administration has served the needs not of his devoted followers and the working class, but instead his wealthy friends, his businesses, his own family, and his sycophantic political devotees. Nothing of course could be more indicative of how supposed populism betrays the very people it purports to benefit than his attempts to dismantle the existing health care system, even as the number of insured Americans has climbed during his presidency.
The rest of my remarks will necessarily be framed within the context of United States issues during the Covid-19 pandemic. It is well known that America has had the largest number of Corona virus cases and deaths of any country in the world--33 percent of all cases, though we have only five per cent of the world’s population. The overwhelming number of deaths have occurred in our communities of color: African-Americans and Hispanics. In some American states those groups account for only 18 percent of the total population, but over 70 percent of the deaths from the disease. It is crucial to emphasize the egregious inaction, denial, and political calculations of our President; his wanton ignoring of the disease until too late; his firing of epidemiologists, scientists, and others who called attention to the lack of availability of protective hospital equipment and ventilators; his failure to provide enough testing, thus allowing the virus to spread rampantly; his dismissal of his own administration’s guidelines for safety; his promotion of bogus cures and panaceas; his proliferation of and deceptions and outright falsehoods; his cheer-leading designed to hide truths about how the disease is transmitted, especially among communities of color; his refusal to take responsibility for public health and his shifting blame wherever he can; his skepticism about science; and his racism that reveals his seeming indifference to the mortality of minorities, not to mention his naming the outbreak “the Chinese Virus,” which led to bigoted attacks on Asian-Americans and brought not a peep of protest from Trump. This is the same phenomenon that makes Trump and his populist followers equate a fear of a virus “from abroad” with a fear of invasion by Muslims, Mexicans, and from liberals within.
Throughout the spring of 2020 there were outrageous protests from Trump supporters refusing to follow guidelines designed to flatten the curve. These protesters, overwhelmingly white, refused masks and endangered themselves as well as others around them; they staged political-style rallies, and in many instances even carried assault rifles. They cried their freedoms had been violated, and denounced mitigation efforts as “tyranny” constraining their rights to shop as they pleased. They declared that guidelines for safety had been established by elites, academics, scientists, and Trump’s political rivals attempting to bring down the economy and thereby defeat him for re-election. We had the spectacle of the President exhorting his people to take to the streets to “liberate” their cities. In effect Trump was saying his white supporters will not be enslaved to a quarantine, perhaps as so many Black people, needed as essential workers, had to be. Trump praised those demonstrators, because he needed the re-opening of the country to validate his concern for the economy over human life. He has, of course, been notoriously silent on the astronomical death totals, as if those lives count for less than his beloved stock market figures. Such demonstrations included the shooting of a store employee who asked a customer to wear a face mask.
At the heart of numerous such aggressions lies the core of the populist issue in America. The word “epidemic” comes from the Greek “epi” [among] and “demos” [people]. An epidemic, especially a pan-demic (all the people), literally reflects our current mantra: “We are all in this together,” and recalls the American precept “We the people.” But even in the midst and the context of the pandemic there appears a visible cleavage in “the people,” especially, as I have suggested, in how each group—left and right—differently defines elites, and thus differently defines populists. The left sees elites as those with excessive wealth, who exercise unrestrained power while threatening the common good; for the left, populists are the mass of people who ideally form a social contract, a community where everyone strives to work for the benefit of all. Freedom here means an inclusive respect for all people.
The right, on the other hand, defines elites as out-of-touch intellectuals who favor immigration, seek to aid and protect the disadvantaged because of their minority status or poverty, and write for the press. The right disdains appeal for universal health care, and an expanded safety net. For the right populists are largely white, rural, lower middleclass blue-collar workers, and American first-ers, suspicious of international alliances, of identity politics, of science and expertise and of any who do not look and sound like them. You may remember that during Trump’s 2016 campaign he said, “I love the un-educated.” Trump’s populists believe both in the power of authoritarianism as embodied in their leader, and ironically that government is not to be trusted, which makes them adore the Trump who “governs” by dismantling government, an especially deadly position when the pandemic cried out for a clear national policy, applied early on, which of course would have saved tens of thousands of lives.
This right-wing populism regards its freedom to do anything it pleases, as stemming from a condition of innately superior whiteness. Freedom is freedom only for themselves. For such populists individual liberty is more important than life itself. This too is ironic, since the very people who constitute Trump’s mainly rural base are disproportionately prone to chronic illnesses, given their lower rates of health insurance, often their distance from grocery stores selling fresh and nutritious vegetables and fruits, their dependence on opiates, and their resistance to guidelines about healthy eating.
In his blatant appeal to the underclass, Trump has really been preparing for a moment such as now, when the “un-educated” resist the warnings of science and other experts, and above all, are swayed by conspiracy theories. These include such absurdities as that the virus is a hoax, that death figures are inflated by scientists and Democrats, even that the dreadful images from hospital intensive care units appearing each night on TV are fabricated. Trump resembles his supporters who are impervious to facts, and they in turn follow him because his position never threatens their beliefs—though of course the disease itself will and has already threatened them a great deal.
This right-wing populism is dangerously close to fascism. As the Irish writer Fintan O’Toole has written, for Trump natural “winners” (i.e., the powerful and the rich—"real men”) do not get sick, only losers (i.e., the poor, Blacks, Hispanics) do. This is why he displays so little empathy for the dead, so many of whom are from those groups for which he has little regard. For Trump populists of the left are expendable.
Let me turn now to issues of food in the time of pandemic, and I’ll try to connect these issues to what I’ve been saying so far.
I will begin with something not widely known outside the U.S. We have long had a robust program of food stamps which allow impoverished Americans to get groceries at considerable discounts. Over five million of the poorest children in the U.S. depend on the program. But during the pandemic this program has been decimated by the Trump administration. In addition, Trump’s administration has cancelled food programs for children. As a result, nearly twenty percent of young children now go hungry, and many families do without enough food in order to buy needed medicine, or to pay their rent. Many of those children have depended on lunches at school, but of course those meals no longer exist since schools are closed.
Republicans have opposed proposals to make food more available to Americans suddenly out of work. Why? Paul Krugman, the Nobel Prize economist, argues that Trump and his followers believe that increasing food aid will reduce incentives to work and increase laziness among the poor, which is preposterous since most of those who suffer are not even able to get work because so many businesses have failed; and if workers do elect to return to work it could be fatal for them. Trump is reluctant to help the poor lest they demand a stronger safety net, thus running up against right wing resistance to the social contract.
In addition, we have seen pictures of mile-long lines of cars, driving to so-called food banks, desperate to get free food since their incomes have disappeared. It is alarming for us in America to see such images, reminiscent of the poor lining up at soup kitchens during the Great Depression of the 1930s.
On another note about populism, the food supply chain is beginning to break down, in part because some of the greatest concentrations of Corona virus cases have appeared in meat-packing plants, which are manned almost entirely by Blacks and Hispanics. They work close to one another, and the infections spread rapidly. Trump recently ordered these seemingly disposable people back to work, but many quit (populists ultimately revolt if their lives are at stake and no one seems to care). Trump wants to “liberate” these food factories, but as a result those who work there will infect not only one another but many others in their towns and communities. What Trump overlooks is that public health and the economy are tied together—they are one and the same thing, and to deny that is suicidal.
The restaurant industry in America, as everywhere, is in dire shape. Unlike with airlines, there has been no government bailout for restaurants, despite the fact that in the U.S. they employ over eleven million people. The closing, uncertain survival, and perhaps ultimate demise of so many restaurants will have profound effects on urban life. Not only are people deprived of the pleasures of dining out, neighborhoods, which become lively and livable when restaurants are in their midst, will lose their attractiveness, thus bringing other community businesses down in their wake. Again, minority workers will suffer out of proportion: many of the kitchen staff jobs are serviced by African-Americans and Hispanics, who will either lose their jobs or, if restaurants open too soon and they return out of economic necessity, risk illness or death.
There are new possible models for restaurants: greater space between tables, fewer customers allowed in, dining-in places transformed to take-out or even to food shops. One restaurant in Amsterdam has diners sit in “personal quarantine greenhouses,” cozy little spaces for a single table; their waiters wear gloves and face shields, and serve dishes on long boards to diners. Is this our new dystopian universe? Will food no longer be something that gives us pleasure, but rather gives us pause? Does every bite taken have to come with a warning? I don’t mean that food itself will be contaminated, but that the conditions for consumption must be constantly wondered about. In this dystopian scenario the very things that make urban living so attractive may disappear, or be less attractive to us. At the very least, populism in the best sense of the term demands we do whatever is necessary to protect the safety and welfare of all of us. But I deeply worry about the joy that will continue to leach out our lives, and the grave loss of life, livelihood, and love of cooking that will affect both restaurateur and their customers.
Meanwhile, on a happier note, as we stay sheltered in place, we have learned to become home cooks, not at all a bad thing. Many people have suddenly started to bake, emptying store shelves of flour and yeast. Americans have become addicted to home-made banana bread, Russian rye bread, and baguettes. Are Indians making chapati, dosa, and paratha in home ovens? Are the people of El Salvador baking beloved pupusas in their own kitchens? Are Iranians frying sangak on hot pebbles on their stoves? Call this a new gastro-populism, certainly a domestic self-sufficiency that momentarily may help alleviate the absence of our favorite dining places and give us rewarding ways to quarantine.
We might think ever more seriously about Alice Waters’ important plan to have all grade schools in America plant gardens, so children may learn exactly where their produce comes from. Such culinary self-reliance may be just the thing that’s needed in these times. Call it a version of gastronomical populism.
Perhaps we will have returned to our grandmothers’ ways, when the entire family gathered around the home table. We can do this now only with those in our own household, or if we are eating alone, in a family of one. But there are far worse ways to spend our days, and I hope when we finally return to a semblance of normal, if we ever do, we can retain some of these practices as not only compensations, but deep satisfactions, even profound enticements.
Roger Porter is a Emeritus Professor of English and Humanities at Reed College,Portland,United States
The term “populism” has long been a contested one, with critics focusing on its relation to political movements as well as to styles of leadership and the relation of governments to the governed. In these initial remarks I will make a fairly simple distinction between populism of the far right and populism of the left. In whatever form it takes the notion of populism inevitably speaks to mass movements organized against ruling powers, and devolves into an “us” versus a “them,” usually attacking or (in the case of far-right populism) scape-goating those whom the movement wishes to demonize.
In the American context the notion of populism became embodied in the Populist Party, also called the Populist Party, of 1892. It seemed at first a leftist group, since it advocated economic regulation and nationalizing the railroads, but it was hostile to immigrants, regarding them as cheap labor that would displace American workers. The party was also known to support Jim Crow laws and to advocate white supremacy.
Of course, these themes resonate in many ways with the current administration—in its anti-immigrant stance, its xenophobia and racism, its hostility to the rule of law equally applied, and in its authoritarian personality cult which brooks no restraints on its exercise of power, whether it violates the Constitution or not.
Populism often perceives society as divided into competing, even hostile groups: the “pure people” versus a corrupt elite. The right-wing version tends to establish a nativist or nationalist position, with threats perceived to the people who “belong”; hence its hostility to outsiders, defined not only as foreigners but those among its own citizens deemed less worthy than “the pure people”—the deserved ones perceived as victims of the “others” from certain ethnic backgrounds who would claim an unjustified status and seek to dispossess those who were there first. For right-wing populists the phrase “American first” thus has a double meaning.
For right wing populism the enemy can also be a corrupt elite who do not comprehend the needs of the “real” folk. Of course, the leaders of this movement are themselves inevitably the elite, however much they profess to be ordinary, hardly different from those whom they claim to serve though they may not in any real sense. Right-wing populist leaders argue that they alone represent “the people,” however false such claims may be. Because leaders of such movements depend on arousing paranoia in their followers in order to maintain their hold on power, those populist movements frequently invoke and depend upon conspiracy theories to solidify their claim to save the people from such disruptive forces as elites favoring immigrants, the free press, or politicians who might seem to undermine the ruler’s legitimacy. In all such cases the movement must resist the notion of a complex, pluralist society, the very hallmark of a democratic polity.
As I’ve said, both forms of populism emphasize “the people,” but left-wing populism sees the people as sovereign, capable of understanding and addressing their plight without needing a strong-armed authoritarian leader to guide or indeed to control them. Left wing populism, of the sort recently identified with Berne Sanders, and during the last century with the progressive Wisconsin Senator Robert La Follette, also champions the little people, but its enemies tend to be unbridled and unregulated capitalism, while its goals center on social justice and frequently on some form of income redistribution. A common distinction that’s made between right and left versions is that the former can be considered as “exclusionary,” the latter as “inclusionary.” “Inclusionary” populism defines “the people” as embodying marginalized groups and minorities, whereas right-wing populism tends to place those entities outside legitimacy. But both versions focus on certain groups as oppressed, and both see the elites as the real villains, though they have different ways of defining what constitutes elitism. For the right elites tend to be those who champion progressive ideas; for the left the elites tend to be those whose financial power constrain those in the lower or middle classes.
The question of President Donald Trump’s identity as a populist is a vexing one. In many ways he epitomizes the very essence of right-wing populism, in that he purports to celebrate and defend the forgotten “little people” against globalist, wealthy, corrupt elites out to harm “his” people. In his speech at the 2016 Republican convention he promised to serve the “forgotten men and women of our country.” Trump embodies such commonplace populist traits as extoling his unique healing virtues (“I alone can fix it [the broken system in Washington],” as he flaunts his self-proclaimed role as the uniquely competent protector holding back a sea of incompetence threatening to undermine true American virtues (circa 1950). Trump’s populism insists that he represents exactly what his followers do, however vastly different from them he is in terms of wealth and status. Nevertheless, everything he does in terms of policy benefits not those folks but the wealthy; his tax cuts of 2017 did almost nothing for the people he constantly claims to serve. His allegiance to them is entirely mythic. And in a cruel irony the right-wing populist Trump does exactly what he condemns elites for doing, namely excluding citizens from full participation in democracy and usurping the power of the state to his own ends. As has been well documented, the swamp Trump promised to drain has bubbled up into his entire administration. His populist language has scarcely disguised the fact that his administration has served the needs not of his devoted followers and the working class, but instead his wealthy friends, his businesses, his own family, and his sycophantic political devotees. Nothing of course could be more indicative of how supposed populism betrays the very people it purports to benefit than his attempts to dismantle the existing health care system, even as the number of insured Americans has climbed during his presidency.
The rest of my remarks will necessarily be framed within the context of United States issues during the Covid-19 pandemic. It is well known that America has had the largest number of Corona virus cases and deaths of any country in the world--33 percent of all cases, though we have only five per cent of the world’s population. The overwhelming number of deaths have occurred in our communities of color: African-Americans and Hispanics. In some American states those groups account for only 18 percent of the total population, but over 70 percent of the deaths from the disease. It is crucial to emphasize the egregious inaction, denial, and political calculations of our President; his wanton ignoring of the disease until too late; his firing of epidemiologists, scientists, and others who called attention to the lack of availability of protective hospital equipment and ventilators; his failure to provide enough testing, thus allowing the virus to spread rampantly; his dismissal of his own administration’s guidelines for safety; his promotion of bogus cures and panaceas; his proliferation of and deceptions and outright falsehoods; his cheer-leading designed to hide truths about how the disease is transmitted, especially among communities of color; his refusal to take responsibility for public health and his shifting blame wherever he can; his skepticism about science; and his racism that reveals his seeming indifference to the mortality of minorities, not to mention his naming the outbreak “the Chinese Virus,” which led to bigoted attacks on Asian-Americans and brought not a peep of protest from Trump. This is the same phenomenon that makes Trump and his populist followers equate a fear of a virus “from abroad” with a fear of invasion by Muslims, Mexicans, and from liberals within.
Throughout the spring of 2020 there were outrageous protests from Trump supporters refusing to follow guidelines designed to flatten the curve. These protesters, overwhelmingly white, refused masks and endangered themselves as well as others around them; they staged political-style rallies, and in many instances even carried assault rifles. They cried their freedoms had been violated, and denounced mitigation efforts as “tyranny” constraining their rights to shop as they pleased. They declared that guidelines for safety had been established by elites, academics, scientists, and Trump’s political rivals attempting to bring down the economy and thereby defeat him for re-election. We had the spectacle of the President exhorting his people to take to the streets to “liberate” their cities. In effect Trump was saying his white supporters will not be enslaved to a quarantine, perhaps as so many Black people, needed as essential workers, had to be. Trump praised those demonstrators, because he needed the re-opening of the country to validate his concern for the economy over human life. He has, of course, been notoriously silent on the astronomical death totals, as if those lives count for less than his beloved stock market figures. Such demonstrations included the shooting of a store employee who asked a customer to wear a face mask.
At the heart of numerous such aggressions lies the core of the populist issue in America. The word “epidemic” comes from the Greek “epi” [among] and “demos” [people]. An epidemic, especially a pan-demic (all the people), literally reflects our current mantra: “We are all in this together,” and recalls the American precept “We the people.” But even in the midst and the context of the pandemic there appears a visible cleavage in “the people,” especially, as I have suggested, in how each group—left and right—differently defines elites, and thus differently defines populists. The left sees elites as those with excessive wealth, who exercise unrestrained power while threatening the common good; for the left, populists are the mass of people who ideally form a social contract, a community where everyone strives to work for the benefit of all. Freedom here means an inclusive respect for all people.
The right, on the other hand, defines elites as out-of-touch intellectuals who favor immigration, seek to aid and protect the disadvantaged because of their minority status or poverty, and write for the press. The right disdains appeal for universal health care, and an expanded safety net. For the right populists are largely white, rural, lower middleclass blue-collar workers, and American first-ers, suspicious of international alliances, of identity politics, of science and expertise and of any who do not look and sound like them. You may remember that during Trump’s 2016 campaign he said, “I love the un-educated.” Trump’s populists believe both in the power of authoritarianism as embodied in their leader, and ironically that government is not to be trusted, which makes them adore the Trump who “governs” by dismantling government, an especially deadly position when the pandemic cried out for a clear national policy, applied early on, which of course would have saved tens of thousands of lives.
This right-wing populism regards its freedom to do anything it pleases, as stemming from a condition of innately superior whiteness. Freedom is freedom only for themselves. For such populists individual liberty is more important than life itself. This too is ironic, since the very people who constitute Trump’s mainly rural base are disproportionately prone to chronic illnesses, given their lower rates of health insurance, often their distance from grocery stores selling fresh and nutritious vegetables and fruits, their dependence on opiates, and their resistance to guidelines about healthy eating.
In his blatant appeal to the underclass, Trump has really been preparing for a moment such as now, when the “un-educated” resist the warnings of science and other experts, and above all, are swayed by conspiracy theories. These include such absurdities as that the virus is a hoax, that death figures are inflated by scientists and Democrats, even that the dreadful images from hospital intensive care units appearing each night on TV are fabricated. Trump resembles his supporters who are impervious to facts, and they in turn follow him because his position never threatens their beliefs—though of course the disease itself will and has already threatened them a great deal.
This right-wing populism is dangerously close to fascism. As the Irish writer Fintan O’Toole has written, for Trump natural “winners” (i.e., the powerful and the rich—"real men”) do not get sick, only losers (i.e., the poor, Blacks, Hispanics) do. This is why he displays so little empathy for the dead, so many of whom are from those groups for which he has little regard. For Trump populists of the left are expendable.
Let me turn now to issues of food in the time of pandemic, and I’ll try to connect these issues to what I’ve been saying so far.
I will begin with something not widely known outside the U.S. We have long had a robust program of food stamps which allow impoverished Americans to get groceries at considerable discounts. Over five million of the poorest children in the U.S. depend on the program. But during the pandemic this program has been decimated by the Trump administration. In addition, Trump’s administration has cancelled food programs for children. As a result, nearly twenty percent of young children now go hungry, and many families do without enough food in order to buy needed medicine, or to pay their rent. Many of those children have depended on lunches at school, but of course those meals no longer exist since schools are closed.
Republicans have opposed proposals to make food more available to Americans suddenly out of work. Why? Paul Krugman, the Nobel Prize economist, argues that Trump and his followers believe that increasing food aid will reduce incentives to work and increase laziness among the poor, which is preposterous since most of those who suffer are not even able to get work because so many businesses have failed; and if workers do elect to return to work it could be fatal for them. Trump is reluctant to help the poor lest they demand a stronger safety net, thus running up against right wing resistance to the social contract.
In addition, we have seen pictures of mile-long lines of cars, driving to so-called food banks, desperate to get free food since their incomes have disappeared. It is alarming for us in America to see such images, reminiscent of the poor lining up at soup kitchens during the Great Depression of the 1930s.
On another note about populism, the food supply chain is beginning to break down, in part because some of the greatest concentrations of Corona virus cases have appeared in meat-packing plants, which are manned almost entirely by Blacks and Hispanics. They work close to one another, and the infections spread rapidly. Trump recently ordered these seemingly disposable people back to work, but many quit (populists ultimately revolt if their lives are at stake and no one seems to care). Trump wants to “liberate” these food factories, but as a result those who work there will infect not only one another but many others in their towns and communities. What Trump overlooks is that public health and the economy are tied together—they are one and the same thing, and to deny that is suicidal.
The restaurant industry in America, as everywhere, is in dire shape. Unlike with airlines, there has been no government bailout for restaurants, despite the fact that in the U.S. they employ over eleven million people. The closing, uncertain survival, and perhaps ultimate demise of so many restaurants will have profound effects on urban life. Not only are people deprived of the pleasures of dining out, neighborhoods, which become lively and livable when restaurants are in their midst, will lose their attractiveness, thus bringing other community businesses down in their wake. Again, minority workers will suffer out of proportion: many of the kitchen staff jobs are serviced by African-Americans and Hispanics, who will either lose their jobs or, if restaurants open too soon and they return out of economic necessity, risk illness or death.
There are new possible models for restaurants: greater space between tables, fewer customers allowed in, dining-in places transformed to take-out or even to food shops. One restaurant in Amsterdam has diners sit in “personal quarantine greenhouses,” cozy little spaces for a single table; their waiters wear gloves and face shields, and serve dishes on long boards to diners. Is this our new dystopian universe? Will food no longer be something that gives us pleasure, but rather gives us pause? Does every bite taken have to come with a warning? I don’t mean that food itself will be contaminated, but that the conditions for consumption must be constantly wondered about. In this dystopian scenario the very things that make urban living so attractive may disappear, or be less attractive to us. At the very least, populism in the best sense of the term demands we do whatever is necessary to protect the safety and welfare of all of us. But I deeply worry about the joy that will continue to leach out our lives, and the grave loss of life, livelihood, and love of cooking that will affect both restaurateur and their customers.
Meanwhile, on a happier note, as we stay sheltered in place, we have learned to become home cooks, not at all a bad thing. Many people have suddenly started to bake, emptying store shelves of flour and yeast. Americans have become addicted to home-made banana bread, Russian rye bread, and baguettes. Are Indians making chapati, dosa, and paratha in home ovens? Are the people of El Salvador baking beloved pupusas in their own kitchens? Are Iranians frying sangak on hot pebbles on their stoves? Call this a new gastro-populism, certainly a domestic self-sufficiency that momentarily may help alleviate the absence of our favorite dining places and give us rewarding ways to quarantine.
We might think ever more seriously about Alice Waters’ important plan to have all grade schools in America plant gardens, so children may learn exactly where their produce comes from. Such culinary self-reliance may be just the thing that’s needed in these times. Call it a version of gastronomical populism.
Perhaps we will have returned to our grandmothers’ ways, when the entire family gathered around the home table. We can do this now only with those in our own household, or if we are eating alone, in a family of one. But there are far worse ways to spend our days, and I hope when we finally return to a semblance of normal, if we ever do, we can retain some of these practices as not only compensations, but deep satisfactions, even profound enticements.
Roger Porter is a Emeritus Professor of English and Humanities at Reed College,Portland,United States
Russia’s emerging interests in the Eastern Mediterranean
P. Aneetta Thomas
Russia’s presence in the Eastern Mediterranean region exists prior to its intervention in Syria. It’s long-standing ties with the Republic of Cyprus as an offshore investment haven has been significant since the latter’s EU membership in 2004. Despite its infamous involvement in Syria, it has bolstered energy and maritime agreements with the incumbent Syrian government while developing ties with Egypt through its energy as well as economic channels, thereby, constantly trying to improve its strategic alignment in the region. Turkey’s ambitious military involvement in Libya has turned the tide by drawing Russia closer to the region. Russia has succinctly established its ambitions to wield leverage in the region by proactively engaging in ceasefire talks in Libya which is evident from the five-nation alliance spanning Greece, Cyprus, Egypt, UAE and France against Turkey ensuing a skewed rapprochement with Russia which supports the alliance ambitions in Libya’s state of affairs.
The region apparently through the Eastern Mediterranean Gas Forum (EMGF) is fundamentally set to rival Russia’s key energy market - Europe, explaining thus, the upswing in its activities. Tacit cooperation with EMGF countries economically enables Russia to dictate the rules of the game, a major energy player whose presence in exploration projects in the offshore projects of the region is already visible. Hence, the simmering instability created by Turkey has been capitalized by Russia through its explicit support for the five-nation alliance both diplomatically and militarily in Libya which boasts of significant untapped hydrocarbons, an area of interest for Russia.
Russia’s deepening ties with the region comes at a time when the oil prices have been depressed due to the pandemic and its market rivals (Saudi Arabia and UAE) proxy stronghold in Libya has been waning due to Turkey-backed GNA’s (Government of National accord) significant strategic gains recently against Khalifa Haftar’s April 2019 offensive. This comes against the backdrop of the Eastern Mediterranean region seeking to establish itself as an energy hub amidst ongoing maritime delimitation agreements providing a fertile ground for Russia to showcase its energy prowess. Besides, the region seems quite neutral in taking an anti-China paradigm, as it remain a major beneficiary of the OBOR project, an another political standpoint for Russia to enhance its influence.
As USA engages in blaming Russia’s military presence in the region amid lukewarm response form NATO and EU, Russia’s strategic strides in terms of negotiating with Turkey on the Syrian and Libyan front, showcases its astute political will in carving a vital influence in the Eastern Mediterranean. Meanwhile, Germany seeks to balance the geopolitical interests of Greece, Cyprus, France, Italy, Egypt, Israel with that of Turkey. However, Germany seems to falter given its lingering interests in Nord Stream 2 project reflecting its inability to hinder Russia from broadening the crisis in Libya. Russia’s active interests in the region showcases its drive to balance its rivals namely China, Turkey and EU that has significantly earmarked its geopolitical interests in the Eastern Mediterranean by converging on energy and infrastructure prospects to gain strategic foothold in the region.
Aneetta is a MA student in the Department of International Studies,Political Science and History, CHRIST (Deemed to be University), Bengaluru
"Views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not reflect the position of the University
Russia’s presence in the Eastern Mediterranean region exists prior to its intervention in Syria. It’s long-standing ties with the Republic of Cyprus as an offshore investment haven has been significant since the latter’s EU membership in 2004. Despite its infamous involvement in Syria, it has bolstered energy and maritime agreements with the incumbent Syrian government while developing ties with Egypt through its energy as well as economic channels, thereby, constantly trying to improve its strategic alignment in the region. Turkey’s ambitious military involvement in Libya has turned the tide by drawing Russia closer to the region. Russia has succinctly established its ambitions to wield leverage in the region by proactively engaging in ceasefire talks in Libya which is evident from the five-nation alliance spanning Greece, Cyprus, Egypt, UAE and France against Turkey ensuing a skewed rapprochement with Russia which supports the alliance ambitions in Libya’s state of affairs.
The region apparently through the Eastern Mediterranean Gas Forum (EMGF) is fundamentally set to rival Russia’s key energy market - Europe, explaining thus, the upswing in its activities. Tacit cooperation with EMGF countries economically enables Russia to dictate the rules of the game, a major energy player whose presence in exploration projects in the offshore projects of the region is already visible. Hence, the simmering instability created by Turkey has been capitalized by Russia through its explicit support for the five-nation alliance both diplomatically and militarily in Libya which boasts of significant untapped hydrocarbons, an area of interest for Russia.
Russia’s deepening ties with the region comes at a time when the oil prices have been depressed due to the pandemic and its market rivals (Saudi Arabia and UAE) proxy stronghold in Libya has been waning due to Turkey-backed GNA’s (Government of National accord) significant strategic gains recently against Khalifa Haftar’s April 2019 offensive. This comes against the backdrop of the Eastern Mediterranean region seeking to establish itself as an energy hub amidst ongoing maritime delimitation agreements providing a fertile ground for Russia to showcase its energy prowess. Besides, the region seems quite neutral in taking an anti-China paradigm, as it remain a major beneficiary of the OBOR project, an another political standpoint for Russia to enhance its influence.
As USA engages in blaming Russia’s military presence in the region amid lukewarm response form NATO and EU, Russia’s strategic strides in terms of negotiating with Turkey on the Syrian and Libyan front, showcases its astute political will in carving a vital influence in the Eastern Mediterranean. Meanwhile, Germany seeks to balance the geopolitical interests of Greece, Cyprus, France, Italy, Egypt, Israel with that of Turkey. However, Germany seems to falter given its lingering interests in Nord Stream 2 project reflecting its inability to hinder Russia from broadening the crisis in Libya. Russia’s active interests in the region showcases its drive to balance its rivals namely China, Turkey and EU that has significantly earmarked its geopolitical interests in the Eastern Mediterranean by converging on energy and infrastructure prospects to gain strategic foothold in the region.
Aneetta is a MA student in the Department of International Studies,Political Science and History, CHRIST (Deemed to be University), Bengaluru
"Views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not reflect the position of the University
Hold your patriotic horses and look at India's role in the border dispute with China
Akshath
Where did things go wrong?
India's border with China spans across three main sectors: The Ladakh region in the west, Sikkim in the middle, and Arunachal Pradesh in the east. The border is known as the "Line of Actual Control (LAC)", but there have been debates from both sides over the same. China claims control over Aksai Chin - the region near Ladakh - while India has included it in its official maps. But following the 1962 Indo-China War, the region has been administered by China.
A history of conflict
First mentions of the LAC came in 1959 in letters addressed to India's first Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru, from China's first Premier, Zhou Enlai. Through these letters, it was revealed that China laid claim to the region of Aksai Chin, which India had not formally recognized. In short, India and China followed two separate demarcations that were made earlier - the Johnson Line and the Macartney–MacDonald Line respectively.
The Johnson Line showed Aksai Chin as a part of India - like it is shown in Indian maps today - while the Macartney–MacDonald Line showed it as a part of China, with the LAC separating it and Ladakh. After Mr. Nehru refused to accept the LAC, China attacked India in 1962, but eventually withdrew its troops behind the LAC. Several border skirmishes followed in the coming decades, but the two countries mutually agreed to a LAC in 1996. Despite this, the dispute has still dragged on.
This brutally short history of the border dispute between India and China just shows how complex the situation actually is. But it's worth looking at the political situations that more or less led to the skirmishes in the Galwan Valley now.
Contrasting ideologies
Things were very different back in 1947. Mr. Nehru was to lead a newly formed independent India and one of his first decisions was to ally with China. India was the second country to recognize China following the country's entry into communism. India backed China for permanent membership in the Security Council. It was safe to say that Mr. Nehru wanted to have cordial relations with China. But one thing to note is that Mr. Nehru was an idealist. He felt good relations between India and China would foster peace. China had different ideas. While it would be an exaggeration to say that China took advantage of Mr. Nehru's soft stance in 1962, it would be ignorant to not take it into consideration.
Fast-forward to 2020 and things are not very different. Mr. Nehru was never a nationalist, but Narendra Modi is. But the idealism still lingers. We as a country are still driven by the fact that Kashmir is ours, despite the Line of Control (LoC) and the Line of Actual Control (LAC) carving out nearly half the region for our neighbors. Ignore Pakistan. They would be nothing without China. But there is no scope to ignore China. Because the Chinese are realists.
The Kashmir issue has always been a topic for every election. But it has seldom been related to China. Pakistan is our fierce rival and almost throughout our independent history, the Kashmir issue has been about them. Whether our leaders have been paying attention to China or are just choosing to ignore public discourses on it, we'll never know. But in this case, ignorance is not bliss.
Life under Mr. Modi
Our Hindu nationalist Prime Minister was less of a leader and more of a traveler in his first term, as he forged alliances with a number of countries around the world, including China. This warming up to China continued in his second term too. He did not invite representatives of Taiwan and Tibet - two highly contested regions China claims control over - for his inauguration like he did in his first term and took Chinese President Xi Jinping on a guided tour of Mahabalipuram, during the latter's visit to the country in October 2019. India has also maintained its neutrality in the US-China conflict, despite its support for investigations into China's role in the spread of COVID-19.
But there have been shortfalls. The abrogation of Article 370 and 35A was a major one. China, along with Pakistan, did not approve of the move and called the formation of Ladakh as a union territory "unacceptable". Kashmir is an internationally disputed region, that is claimed by three nuclear powers. Unilaterally taking a decision on the region was bound to ruffle some feathers. The removal of the Articles gave any Indian citizen the right to own property in the region. Irrespective of whether China's and Pakistan's claims are legitimate or not, the impending consequences of such a highly sensitive and controversial move should have been clearly thought through.
"Aatmanirbhar Bharat" is the trend now. An amazing piece of oration, devoid of any facts and true sentiment, delivered by Mr. Modi drilled in the self-reliant spirit into Indians. But now that very speech could potentially cause a problem for the Prime Minister. His government has been on a "Make in India" campaign since 2014. But it has had nowhere close to the impact Mr. Modi would have liked, with reasons ranging from delays to just plain complicated bureaucracy. And now he faces a challenge. With the "boycott China" voice becoming louder, what can India do? There is no way India can forgo Chinese products simply because it doesn't have the manufacturing capability. But can the Prime Minister deliver this message to his people and potentially threaten his political stronghold?
Boycott the "boycott" campaign China is India's largest trading partner. India's imports from China make up nearly 14% of India's total imports. Our country's exports to China, on the other hand, just make 5% of all our exports. In short, we are not in a position to "boycott" China. The Chinese economy will hardly be affected even if we do ban all their products. Exports to India and imports from India just make up 3% and 4% of the Chinese economy respectively. China is the largest manufacturer in the world, by far. Almost every single country in the world relies on China in some way or the other.
But that's not all. Chinese FDI in India stood at $4.1 billion in 2019 and major Indian startups like BigBasket, MakeMyTrip, Flipkart, Byju's, Swiggy, Zomato, Ola, Oyo, PayTM and Snapdeal all have parts of their companies owned by Chinese MNCs. There are a number of Indian companies with offices in China and thousands of Indians employed in Chinese companies. The economic relationship between the two countries is so intertwined. But that is the nature of global trade and that is why we are seeing more and more Indian startups succeed every year. A massive decision like banning trade with China could be potentially disastrous.
There have also been calls to ban Chinese restaurants and restaurants serving Chinese food in India. The absurdity of such a statement cannot be emphasized enough. These restaurants are owned by Indians and they employ Indians too. Moreover, the vegetables and food grains used by these restaurants are all grown in India. A ban on restaurants will affect potentially millions across a number of sectors. It is time to quell this "boycott" talk.
So what next?It's important that India doesn't commit the same mistakes it has in the past. Since the 1970s, China has built itself into a manufacturing giant. The entire global economic system relies on China, without whom it will collapse. China has worked towards being in the position it is right now and that is why it has the power to make controversial political moves like in the South China Sea, Hong Kong, and now in the Galwan Valley. India needs to understand that being idealistic and patriotic in its approach won't get it anywhere.
That being said, India doesn't have to accept defeat either. The Modi government needs to be rigorous in its diplomacy and at the same time effectively stop this anti-China sentiment blanketing the country. Yes, China is the aggressor and it needs to be taught a lesson. But potentially endangering millions of lives isn't the way to do so. India needs to start being practical in its approach, else things might turn ugly. Mr. Modi now has the chance to break away from the traditional approach started by Mr. Nehru and be realistic in handling a difficult situation with easily one of the smarter world powers. But the real question is: after prioritizing patriotism over practicality for 70 years, will the nation let him?
Akshath is a MA student in the Department of International Studies,Political Science and History, CHRIST (Deemed to be University), Bengaluru
"Views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not reflect the position of the University
Where did things go wrong?
India's border with China spans across three main sectors: The Ladakh region in the west, Sikkim in the middle, and Arunachal Pradesh in the east. The border is known as the "Line of Actual Control (LAC)", but there have been debates from both sides over the same. China claims control over Aksai Chin - the region near Ladakh - while India has included it in its official maps. But following the 1962 Indo-China War, the region has been administered by China.
A history of conflict
First mentions of the LAC came in 1959 in letters addressed to India's first Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru, from China's first Premier, Zhou Enlai. Through these letters, it was revealed that China laid claim to the region of Aksai Chin, which India had not formally recognized. In short, India and China followed two separate demarcations that were made earlier - the Johnson Line and the Macartney–MacDonald Line respectively.
The Johnson Line showed Aksai Chin as a part of India - like it is shown in Indian maps today - while the Macartney–MacDonald Line showed it as a part of China, with the LAC separating it and Ladakh. After Mr. Nehru refused to accept the LAC, China attacked India in 1962, but eventually withdrew its troops behind the LAC. Several border skirmishes followed in the coming decades, but the two countries mutually agreed to a LAC in 1996. Despite this, the dispute has still dragged on.
This brutally short history of the border dispute between India and China just shows how complex the situation actually is. But it's worth looking at the political situations that more or less led to the skirmishes in the Galwan Valley now.
Contrasting ideologies
Things were very different back in 1947. Mr. Nehru was to lead a newly formed independent India and one of his first decisions was to ally with China. India was the second country to recognize China following the country's entry into communism. India backed China for permanent membership in the Security Council. It was safe to say that Mr. Nehru wanted to have cordial relations with China. But one thing to note is that Mr. Nehru was an idealist. He felt good relations between India and China would foster peace. China had different ideas. While it would be an exaggeration to say that China took advantage of Mr. Nehru's soft stance in 1962, it would be ignorant to not take it into consideration.
Fast-forward to 2020 and things are not very different. Mr. Nehru was never a nationalist, but Narendra Modi is. But the idealism still lingers. We as a country are still driven by the fact that Kashmir is ours, despite the Line of Control (LoC) and the Line of Actual Control (LAC) carving out nearly half the region for our neighbors. Ignore Pakistan. They would be nothing without China. But there is no scope to ignore China. Because the Chinese are realists.
The Kashmir issue has always been a topic for every election. But it has seldom been related to China. Pakistan is our fierce rival and almost throughout our independent history, the Kashmir issue has been about them. Whether our leaders have been paying attention to China or are just choosing to ignore public discourses on it, we'll never know. But in this case, ignorance is not bliss.
Life under Mr. Modi
Our Hindu nationalist Prime Minister was less of a leader and more of a traveler in his first term, as he forged alliances with a number of countries around the world, including China. This warming up to China continued in his second term too. He did not invite representatives of Taiwan and Tibet - two highly contested regions China claims control over - for his inauguration like he did in his first term and took Chinese President Xi Jinping on a guided tour of Mahabalipuram, during the latter's visit to the country in October 2019. India has also maintained its neutrality in the US-China conflict, despite its support for investigations into China's role in the spread of COVID-19.
But there have been shortfalls. The abrogation of Article 370 and 35A was a major one. China, along with Pakistan, did not approve of the move and called the formation of Ladakh as a union territory "unacceptable". Kashmir is an internationally disputed region, that is claimed by three nuclear powers. Unilaterally taking a decision on the region was bound to ruffle some feathers. The removal of the Articles gave any Indian citizen the right to own property in the region. Irrespective of whether China's and Pakistan's claims are legitimate or not, the impending consequences of such a highly sensitive and controversial move should have been clearly thought through.
"Aatmanirbhar Bharat" is the trend now. An amazing piece of oration, devoid of any facts and true sentiment, delivered by Mr. Modi drilled in the self-reliant spirit into Indians. But now that very speech could potentially cause a problem for the Prime Minister. His government has been on a "Make in India" campaign since 2014. But it has had nowhere close to the impact Mr. Modi would have liked, with reasons ranging from delays to just plain complicated bureaucracy. And now he faces a challenge. With the "boycott China" voice becoming louder, what can India do? There is no way India can forgo Chinese products simply because it doesn't have the manufacturing capability. But can the Prime Minister deliver this message to his people and potentially threaten his political stronghold?
Boycott the "boycott" campaign China is India's largest trading partner. India's imports from China make up nearly 14% of India's total imports. Our country's exports to China, on the other hand, just make 5% of all our exports. In short, we are not in a position to "boycott" China. The Chinese economy will hardly be affected even if we do ban all their products. Exports to India and imports from India just make up 3% and 4% of the Chinese economy respectively. China is the largest manufacturer in the world, by far. Almost every single country in the world relies on China in some way or the other.
But that's not all. Chinese FDI in India stood at $4.1 billion in 2019 and major Indian startups like BigBasket, MakeMyTrip, Flipkart, Byju's, Swiggy, Zomato, Ola, Oyo, PayTM and Snapdeal all have parts of their companies owned by Chinese MNCs. There are a number of Indian companies with offices in China and thousands of Indians employed in Chinese companies. The economic relationship between the two countries is so intertwined. But that is the nature of global trade and that is why we are seeing more and more Indian startups succeed every year. A massive decision like banning trade with China could be potentially disastrous.
There have also been calls to ban Chinese restaurants and restaurants serving Chinese food in India. The absurdity of such a statement cannot be emphasized enough. These restaurants are owned by Indians and they employ Indians too. Moreover, the vegetables and food grains used by these restaurants are all grown in India. A ban on restaurants will affect potentially millions across a number of sectors. It is time to quell this "boycott" talk.
So what next?It's important that India doesn't commit the same mistakes it has in the past. Since the 1970s, China has built itself into a manufacturing giant. The entire global economic system relies on China, without whom it will collapse. China has worked towards being in the position it is right now and that is why it has the power to make controversial political moves like in the South China Sea, Hong Kong, and now in the Galwan Valley. India needs to understand that being idealistic and patriotic in its approach won't get it anywhere.
That being said, India doesn't have to accept defeat either. The Modi government needs to be rigorous in its diplomacy and at the same time effectively stop this anti-China sentiment blanketing the country. Yes, China is the aggressor and it needs to be taught a lesson. But potentially endangering millions of lives isn't the way to do so. India needs to start being practical in its approach, else things might turn ugly. Mr. Modi now has the chance to break away from the traditional approach started by Mr. Nehru and be realistic in handling a difficult situation with easily one of the smarter world powers. But the real question is: after prioritizing patriotism over practicality for 70 years, will the nation let him?
Akshath is a MA student in the Department of International Studies,Political Science and History, CHRIST (Deemed to be University), Bengaluru
"Views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not reflect the position of the University
CAPITALISM AND COVID-19
Nikhil Jois K.S
COVID-19 or Coronavirus pandemic has upended global economy, disrupted “normal” functioning of societies across 193 nations around the world and in turn has resulted in nature reeling due to prolonged absence of humans from the mainstream. This global and undoubtedly challenging pandemic has resulted in many questions being raised about the models of growth which enjoyed legitimacy ever since the fall of the Berlin wall. I would rather call it a growth model rather than development model due to the very reasons I would eventually mention below.
Ever since the fall of Soviet Union as the bulwark of Communism around the world against what Karl Polanyi called, “satanic mills of capitalism”, technocratic capitalist growth model or Neo liberalism has gained legitimacy across the world. The philosophy of Neo liberalism gained prominence in the earlier industrial west as a reaction to the upsurge of Communist East in the peak hours of cold war.
First, Neo Liberalism argued for the privatization of risk factor, as in, the transferring of responsibility over the risk to the private from the State as collective. This bearing of risk by the individual would, as it theorized, result in enhancement of prosperity for the collective. The effective and efficient maximization of wealth was possible through a minimal intervention from the State and maximum input from the private, which it assumed to be a rational.This maximization of prosperity was thus possible through exploitation of resources across the board which required restraint from the State. The State was not expected to impose regulations which would distort the “efficient” functioning of the market. The exploitation would in turn result in consistent regeneration of capital which would enhance the living conditions of the labor.
However, this orthodoxy has come under serious scrutiny following the spread of coronavirus across the countries. It has re-ignited the questions about legitimacy of the State as an institution through its defense of the public. It has exposed the inherent flaws in the current growth model. The legitimacy of the State has come under serious scrutiny following the upsurge in the casualties due to the pandemic especially when there is an acute shortage of medical facilities and weak health infrastructure. American president recently stated that government intervention is not government take over indicating that the State intervention has come to a necessity and an obligatory thing at this crucial juncture. The modicum of social justice was absent in the neo liberal philosophy, as in, the share between capital and labor being balanced. Now, the debate for welfare state or providing essential services to the general public there-by keeping social contract sacrosanct has been re-ignited. Next, the exploitative means of maximizing profits not only degraded environment but seriously weakened the very fundamental promise of better life
Washington Post reported that the federal government of the United States of America has so far spent more than 2.5 trillion dollars at a time when unemployment benefit claims has hit 4.4 million and economic growth rate is projected to be at -25.0% for the second quarter. In India, Narendra Modi took the helm of affairs promising a reduction in entitlement spending while now has phased in one lakh crore rupees of investment in to the economy.
Summing up, this pandemic has given us few features. They are the de legitimization of capital, need for de privatization of risk factor and the rise of the State as a benefactor. However, these features may also pose a serious set of challenges in itself. These vague alternative imaginations for the post pandemic scenario would possibly result in heightened suspicion, kicking in of fear psychosis, a potentially hegemonic and demagogic State and surge in isolationist tendencies among the nations.
Concluding, this pandemic is a serious wake up call for the public policy institutes, universities, parliaments and palaces to exhibit audacity to self-critique our long held growth and living models and to work towards reforming the same.
Nikhil is a HEP student in the Department of International Studies,Political Science and History, CHRIST (Deemed to be University), Bengaluru
"Views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not reflect the position of the University"
COVID-19 or Coronavirus pandemic has upended global economy, disrupted “normal” functioning of societies across 193 nations around the world and in turn has resulted in nature reeling due to prolonged absence of humans from the mainstream. This global and undoubtedly challenging pandemic has resulted in many questions being raised about the models of growth which enjoyed legitimacy ever since the fall of the Berlin wall. I would rather call it a growth model rather than development model due to the very reasons I would eventually mention below.
Ever since the fall of Soviet Union as the bulwark of Communism around the world against what Karl Polanyi called, “satanic mills of capitalism”, technocratic capitalist growth model or Neo liberalism has gained legitimacy across the world. The philosophy of Neo liberalism gained prominence in the earlier industrial west as a reaction to the upsurge of Communist East in the peak hours of cold war.
First, Neo Liberalism argued for the privatization of risk factor, as in, the transferring of responsibility over the risk to the private from the State as collective. This bearing of risk by the individual would, as it theorized, result in enhancement of prosperity for the collective. The effective and efficient maximization of wealth was possible through a minimal intervention from the State and maximum input from the private, which it assumed to be a rational.This maximization of prosperity was thus possible through exploitation of resources across the board which required restraint from the State. The State was not expected to impose regulations which would distort the “efficient” functioning of the market. The exploitation would in turn result in consistent regeneration of capital which would enhance the living conditions of the labor.
However, this orthodoxy has come under serious scrutiny following the spread of coronavirus across the countries. It has re-ignited the questions about legitimacy of the State as an institution through its defense of the public. It has exposed the inherent flaws in the current growth model. The legitimacy of the State has come under serious scrutiny following the upsurge in the casualties due to the pandemic especially when there is an acute shortage of medical facilities and weak health infrastructure. American president recently stated that government intervention is not government take over indicating that the State intervention has come to a necessity and an obligatory thing at this crucial juncture. The modicum of social justice was absent in the neo liberal philosophy, as in, the share between capital and labor being balanced. Now, the debate for welfare state or providing essential services to the general public there-by keeping social contract sacrosanct has been re-ignited. Next, the exploitative means of maximizing profits not only degraded environment but seriously weakened the very fundamental promise of better life
Washington Post reported that the federal government of the United States of America has so far spent more than 2.5 trillion dollars at a time when unemployment benefit claims has hit 4.4 million and economic growth rate is projected to be at -25.0% for the second quarter. In India, Narendra Modi took the helm of affairs promising a reduction in entitlement spending while now has phased in one lakh crore rupees of investment in to the economy.
Summing up, this pandemic has given us few features. They are the de legitimization of capital, need for de privatization of risk factor and the rise of the State as a benefactor. However, these features may also pose a serious set of challenges in itself. These vague alternative imaginations for the post pandemic scenario would possibly result in heightened suspicion, kicking in of fear psychosis, a potentially hegemonic and demagogic State and surge in isolationist tendencies among the nations.
Concluding, this pandemic is a serious wake up call for the public policy institutes, universities, parliaments and palaces to exhibit audacity to self-critique our long held growth and living models and to work towards reforming the same.
Nikhil is a HEP student in the Department of International Studies,Political Science and History, CHRIST (Deemed to be University), Bengaluru
"Views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not reflect the position of the University"
With Sanders out of the race, will November 2020 be less ideological and more pragmatic?
Saagar Kote
With Bernie Sanders' exit from the race to the White House, the Democratic Party has now been relieved of the pressures of fighting in an almost pure ideological campaign against President Trump. Joe Biden doesn't seem to possess the same love for Socialism that Sanders does. Throughout his hard fought campaign to be the Democratic Party's nominee, Sanders showed commitment to a total restructuring of the healthcare system in the United States. He even went to the extent of calling himself a 'Democratic Socialist', a term that is not easily accepted in mainstream America. Biden on the other hand offers a contrasting scenario, a scenario without promises of total restructuring and an all out war against the 'Billionaires' who have been on the receiving end of Sanders' wrath. It could even be said that the Democratic primaries of 2020 were in a way a fight for the soul of the Democratic Party.
With the outbreak of COVID-19 in the United States, President Trump now has a situation on his hand that will not only challenge his administration's ability to handle a national crisis, but also ask fundamental questions about the state of Healthcare in the United States. Joe Biden has been relentless in attacking the President for his lack of commitment and action during such a national crisis. A very important point to talk about is the contrast in the campaigns of Sanders and Biden. Bernie Sanders made it visibly clear that his ultimate aim was to wage a war against the billionaires of the United States who in his opinion were the major reason for America's lackluster performance in the field of Public Health, Transport, labour management, etc. Biden on the other hand chose his own path without any references to a class war. It is important to debate Trump's feelings about both the front-runners of the Democratic Party.
Trump has not been soft in expressing his antagonism towards both Democrats. However, political logic should tell us that Trump's Ukraine Scandal and the allegations surrounding it indicates his insecurity vis-à-vis Joe Biden as a Presidential Candidate. It is perhaps Trump's feeling that Joe Biden will be a tougher opponent to beat due to his lack of core ideological commitments as opposed to Sanders. Sanders would have made it easier for Trump to talk about 'America First' and target him for his grand socialist agenda without a clear plan as to how he was going to achieve them. Joe Biden seems to have a clear plan as it was visible during the Democratic Primaries and Debates. Biden was able to corner Sanders on several fronts, especially on Sanders' blind commitment to certain ideological goals and the lack of a pragmatic or realistic approach to policy. It was quite clear from the debates that Bernie Sanders was not able to refrain from making ideologically motivated comments. Most of his justifications relied primarily on ideological issues. There were moments in certain debates where Sanders got repetitive and couldn't stand the volley of questions from Biden and the other candidates.
The focus of Biden's campaign is to counter Trump with an already available framework. To get the system to work, rather than turning it upside down with promises of a working class revolution. Biden will also be relying on his performance as Vice President in the Obama administration. Trump's major challenge now would be to keep his appeal alive given the fact that Biden doesn't have a hardline stance on any issue. Biden has been promoting himself as someone who can appeal to both sides of the economic divider, as someone who can make changes in taxation policies without hurting the 'Billionaires' to the level of Bernie Sanders. Biden didn't shy away from addressing issues that have been at the core of Sanders' campaign, but he hasn't been ideologically motivated when has done so. His campaign sticks to simplicity and pragmatism, this approach will make life difficult for Trump as Biden will continue expanding his voter base. However, Biden will have the difficult challenge of winning over
the voter base of Sanders which has so far been motivated by ideologically derived promises and grand socialist plans to transform the economy. Sanders' exit from the race only goes to prove that the United States as a society is perhaps not yet ready to accept Socialism as a functional governing ideology.
With Sanders dropping out of the race to the White House, it is probably safe to say that November 2020 will be less ideological and more pragmatic. The people can expect the campaign to be based primarily on ongoing problems and not grand accusations on Socialism or Crony Capitalism. This also makes it difficult to predict a winner. In the absence of core ideological questions and debates, the focus will be on performance and practical questions on Healthcare, Foreign Policy, Economy.
Saagar Kote is a PhD scholar in the Department of International Studies,Political Science and History, CHRIST (Deemed to be University), Bengaluru
"Views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not reflect the position of the University"
With Bernie Sanders' exit from the race to the White House, the Democratic Party has now been relieved of the pressures of fighting in an almost pure ideological campaign against President Trump. Joe Biden doesn't seem to possess the same love for Socialism that Sanders does. Throughout his hard fought campaign to be the Democratic Party's nominee, Sanders showed commitment to a total restructuring of the healthcare system in the United States. He even went to the extent of calling himself a 'Democratic Socialist', a term that is not easily accepted in mainstream America. Biden on the other hand offers a contrasting scenario, a scenario without promises of total restructuring and an all out war against the 'Billionaires' who have been on the receiving end of Sanders' wrath. It could even be said that the Democratic primaries of 2020 were in a way a fight for the soul of the Democratic Party.
With the outbreak of COVID-19 in the United States, President Trump now has a situation on his hand that will not only challenge his administration's ability to handle a national crisis, but also ask fundamental questions about the state of Healthcare in the United States. Joe Biden has been relentless in attacking the President for his lack of commitment and action during such a national crisis. A very important point to talk about is the contrast in the campaigns of Sanders and Biden. Bernie Sanders made it visibly clear that his ultimate aim was to wage a war against the billionaires of the United States who in his opinion were the major reason for America's lackluster performance in the field of Public Health, Transport, labour management, etc. Biden on the other hand chose his own path without any references to a class war. It is important to debate Trump's feelings about both the front-runners of the Democratic Party.
Trump has not been soft in expressing his antagonism towards both Democrats. However, political logic should tell us that Trump's Ukraine Scandal and the allegations surrounding it indicates his insecurity vis-à-vis Joe Biden as a Presidential Candidate. It is perhaps Trump's feeling that Joe Biden will be a tougher opponent to beat due to his lack of core ideological commitments as opposed to Sanders. Sanders would have made it easier for Trump to talk about 'America First' and target him for his grand socialist agenda without a clear plan as to how he was going to achieve them. Joe Biden seems to have a clear plan as it was visible during the Democratic Primaries and Debates. Biden was able to corner Sanders on several fronts, especially on Sanders' blind commitment to certain ideological goals and the lack of a pragmatic or realistic approach to policy. It was quite clear from the debates that Bernie Sanders was not able to refrain from making ideologically motivated comments. Most of his justifications relied primarily on ideological issues. There were moments in certain debates where Sanders got repetitive and couldn't stand the volley of questions from Biden and the other candidates.
The focus of Biden's campaign is to counter Trump with an already available framework. To get the system to work, rather than turning it upside down with promises of a working class revolution. Biden will also be relying on his performance as Vice President in the Obama administration. Trump's major challenge now would be to keep his appeal alive given the fact that Biden doesn't have a hardline stance on any issue. Biden has been promoting himself as someone who can appeal to both sides of the economic divider, as someone who can make changes in taxation policies without hurting the 'Billionaires' to the level of Bernie Sanders. Biden didn't shy away from addressing issues that have been at the core of Sanders' campaign, but he hasn't been ideologically motivated when has done so. His campaign sticks to simplicity and pragmatism, this approach will make life difficult for Trump as Biden will continue expanding his voter base. However, Biden will have the difficult challenge of winning over
the voter base of Sanders which has so far been motivated by ideologically derived promises and grand socialist plans to transform the economy. Sanders' exit from the race only goes to prove that the United States as a society is perhaps not yet ready to accept Socialism as a functional governing ideology.
With Sanders dropping out of the race to the White House, it is probably safe to say that November 2020 will be less ideological and more pragmatic. The people can expect the campaign to be based primarily on ongoing problems and not grand accusations on Socialism or Crony Capitalism. This also makes it difficult to predict a winner. In the absence of core ideological questions and debates, the focus will be on performance and practical questions on Healthcare, Foreign Policy, Economy.
Saagar Kote is a PhD scholar in the Department of International Studies,Political Science and History, CHRIST (Deemed to be University), Bengaluru
"Views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not reflect the position of the University"
Who is Responsible for Internal Security?
N. Manoharan
Neither ‘security’ nor ‘internal security’ is defined anywhere in the Constitution. However, five related terms that find mention are ‘pubic order’ (List II, Entry 2), ‘war’, (Article 352), ‘external aggression’ (Article 352), ‘armed rebellion’ (Article 352), and ‘internal disturbance’ (Article 355). The Government of India’s Report of the Committee on Centre-State Relations (2000) defines ‘Internal Security’ as, “security against threats faced by a country within its national borders, either caused by inner political turmoil, or provoked, prompted or proxied by an enemy country, perpetrated even by such groups that use a failed, failing or weak state, causing insurgency, terrorism or any other subversive acts that target innocent citizens, cause animosity between and amongst groups of citizens and communities intended to cause or causing violence, destroy or attempt to destroy public and private establishment.”
The Indian Constitution accords ‘federal exclusivity’ to handle external security and ‘federal supremacy’ to maintain internal security. Either way, the Centre has a role to play. Pertaining to internal security, the Union List has 25 entries, as against five entries in the State List and 11 entries in the Concurrent List. This apart, a number of articles of the Constitution suggest that the Centre enjoys more powers than the States on internal security matters: 245-254, 256-258, 312, 339, 352, 353, 355, 356, and 365. In short, constitutionally, the division of powers is in favour of the Centre than States in the internal security arena. Reiterating this, the Supreme Court, in S. R. Bommai’s case, observed: “A review of the provisions of the Constitution shows unmistakably that while creating a federation, the Founding Fathers wished to establish a strong Centre. In the light of the past history of this sub-continent, this was probably a natural and necessary decision. In a land as varied as India is, a strong Centre is perhaps a necessity.”
The need for the deployment of the Central forces occurs when there is a “war”, “external aggression”, “internal disturbance” or “in aid of the civil”. Since the “defence of India and every part thereof” is Centre’s responsibility under Entry 1, List I, it has blanket power of deployment of “armed forces of the Union” in any State for the defence of the country. Under Article 355, the Centre can deploy its forces to protect a State against “external aggression and internal disturbance” even when the State concerned does not take the Centre’s help and unwilling to receive the Central forces. In case of a State’s opposition to the deployment of armed forces of the Union, constitutionally, the right course is first to issue directives under Article 355 to the concerned State, and in the event of the State not complying with the directive of the Central Government, the Centre can take further action under Article 356. Though prior consultation with the State Government is not obligatory, the Sarkaria Commission suggested that it “is desirable that the State Government should be consulted, wherever feasible, and its cooperation sought by the Union Government.” The civil power in the State will continue to function even after the deployment of the armed forces of the Union, though the superintendence, control and administration of the Central forces while on such deployment is vested with the Union (Entry 2A, List I).
Can the Centre withdraw its forces unilaterally from a disturbed state? The same logic applies: as long as the disturbance continues, the Centre is obligated to keep its forces, though it is not unconstitutional if it is done. But, the Centre may scale down the force level depending on the situation, which is usually done in consultation with the concerned state. This ‘consultation’, however, is not taking place in the case of West Bengal. As Sarkaria Commission pertinently observed, any unilateral action “may not be politically proper”.
It should be noted that the threat matrix to India’s internal security is such that it is beyond the capability of the States of India to counter them effectively. Although the State police forces are considered as the “first responders”, they are the weakest link in the entire response chain. With their restricted territorial jurisdiction and limited resources, the State police forces have been finding it difficult to deal with internal security threats that have inter-State and global dimensions. Therefore, Centre’s role has become inevitable in case the situation goes beyond control.
Although the State police forces are considered as the “first responders”, they are the weakest link in the entire response chain. With their restricted territorial jurisdiction, meagre resources and limited capabilities, the State police forces have been finding it difficult to deal with internal security threats, which have inter-State and global dimensions. In the modernisation of police forces, the State governments are found wanting. The issue is, as a Parliamentary Committee rightly points out, “… when it comes to the control and superintendence of police forces, the States do not want to yield even an inch of their jurisdiction. But at the same time when it comes to improve and strengthen their police forces, they simply raise their hands expressing their inability to do so because of financial constraints.”
Internal security is indeed a national issue requiring national solutions. Yet, states and local governments cannot be ignored. Effective response to internal security challenges requires considerable collaboration and cooperation between a wide range of federal, State, and local agencies. As Sarkaria Commission pertinently observed, “the very purpose of deployment of the armed forces of the Union – to restore public order – cannot be achieved without the active assistance and co-operation of the entire law enforcing machinery of the State Government.” None other than the Centre could do the coordination on a national issue. The federal interdependence of the Centre and the States in matters of internal security is often lost sight of in the political gamesmanship which is often practised. It is important to de-politicise security.
N. Manoharan is Associate Professor, CHRIST (Deemed to be University), Bengaluru
"Views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not reflect the position of the University"
Neither ‘security’ nor ‘internal security’ is defined anywhere in the Constitution. However, five related terms that find mention are ‘pubic order’ (List II, Entry 2), ‘war’, (Article 352), ‘external aggression’ (Article 352), ‘armed rebellion’ (Article 352), and ‘internal disturbance’ (Article 355). The Government of India’s Report of the Committee on Centre-State Relations (2000) defines ‘Internal Security’ as, “security against threats faced by a country within its national borders, either caused by inner political turmoil, or provoked, prompted or proxied by an enemy country, perpetrated even by such groups that use a failed, failing or weak state, causing insurgency, terrorism or any other subversive acts that target innocent citizens, cause animosity between and amongst groups of citizens and communities intended to cause or causing violence, destroy or attempt to destroy public and private establishment.”
The Indian Constitution accords ‘federal exclusivity’ to handle external security and ‘federal supremacy’ to maintain internal security. Either way, the Centre has a role to play. Pertaining to internal security, the Union List has 25 entries, as against five entries in the State List and 11 entries in the Concurrent List. This apart, a number of articles of the Constitution suggest that the Centre enjoys more powers than the States on internal security matters: 245-254, 256-258, 312, 339, 352, 353, 355, 356, and 365. In short, constitutionally, the division of powers is in favour of the Centre than States in the internal security arena. Reiterating this, the Supreme Court, in S. R. Bommai’s case, observed: “A review of the provisions of the Constitution shows unmistakably that while creating a federation, the Founding Fathers wished to establish a strong Centre. In the light of the past history of this sub-continent, this was probably a natural and necessary decision. In a land as varied as India is, a strong Centre is perhaps a necessity.”
The need for the deployment of the Central forces occurs when there is a “war”, “external aggression”, “internal disturbance” or “in aid of the civil”. Since the “defence of India and every part thereof” is Centre’s responsibility under Entry 1, List I, it has blanket power of deployment of “armed forces of the Union” in any State for the defence of the country. Under Article 355, the Centre can deploy its forces to protect a State against “external aggression and internal disturbance” even when the State concerned does not take the Centre’s help and unwilling to receive the Central forces. In case of a State’s opposition to the deployment of armed forces of the Union, constitutionally, the right course is first to issue directives under Article 355 to the concerned State, and in the event of the State not complying with the directive of the Central Government, the Centre can take further action under Article 356. Though prior consultation with the State Government is not obligatory, the Sarkaria Commission suggested that it “is desirable that the State Government should be consulted, wherever feasible, and its cooperation sought by the Union Government.” The civil power in the State will continue to function even after the deployment of the armed forces of the Union, though the superintendence, control and administration of the Central forces while on such deployment is vested with the Union (Entry 2A, List I).
Can the Centre withdraw its forces unilaterally from a disturbed state? The same logic applies: as long as the disturbance continues, the Centre is obligated to keep its forces, though it is not unconstitutional if it is done. But, the Centre may scale down the force level depending on the situation, which is usually done in consultation with the concerned state. This ‘consultation’, however, is not taking place in the case of West Bengal. As Sarkaria Commission pertinently observed, any unilateral action “may not be politically proper”.
It should be noted that the threat matrix to India’s internal security is such that it is beyond the capability of the States of India to counter them effectively. Although the State police forces are considered as the “first responders”, they are the weakest link in the entire response chain. With their restricted territorial jurisdiction and limited resources, the State police forces have been finding it difficult to deal with internal security threats that have inter-State and global dimensions. Therefore, Centre’s role has become inevitable in case the situation goes beyond control.
Although the State police forces are considered as the “first responders”, they are the weakest link in the entire response chain. With their restricted territorial jurisdiction, meagre resources and limited capabilities, the State police forces have been finding it difficult to deal with internal security threats, which have inter-State and global dimensions. In the modernisation of police forces, the State governments are found wanting. The issue is, as a Parliamentary Committee rightly points out, “… when it comes to the control and superintendence of police forces, the States do not want to yield even an inch of their jurisdiction. But at the same time when it comes to improve and strengthen their police forces, they simply raise their hands expressing their inability to do so because of financial constraints.”
Internal security is indeed a national issue requiring national solutions. Yet, states and local governments cannot be ignored. Effective response to internal security challenges requires considerable collaboration and cooperation between a wide range of federal, State, and local agencies. As Sarkaria Commission pertinently observed, “the very purpose of deployment of the armed forces of the Union – to restore public order – cannot be achieved without the active assistance and co-operation of the entire law enforcing machinery of the State Government.” None other than the Centre could do the coordination on a national issue. The federal interdependence of the Centre and the States in matters of internal security is often lost sight of in the political gamesmanship which is often practised. It is important to de-politicise security.
N. Manoharan is Associate Professor, CHRIST (Deemed to be University), Bengaluru
"Views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not reflect the position of the University"
Prime Minister Rajapaksa’s India Visit and the Ethnic Issue
N. Manoharan
The recent five-day visit (7-11 February 2020) of Sri Lankan Prime Minister Mahinda Rajapaksa to India is significant in the India-Sri Lanka relations. It comes within few months of visit of his brother and President Gotabaya Rajapaksa. Several issues were deliberated at various levels during the visit, the most important being ethnic issue in Sri Lanka.
On the settlement of the ethnic issue, India has consistently maintained that it stood in favour of “a politically negotiated settlement acceptable to all sections of Sri Lankan society within the framework of an undivided Sri Lanka and consistent with democracy, pluralism and respect for human rights.” For India, the full implementation of the 13th Amendment provisions as an interim arrangement and going beyond it for the permanent settlement is practical. This was reiterated by Indian Prime Minister.
But, the Sri Lankan state thought differently after the decimation of the LTTE. Mahinda Rajapaksa, when he was President, initially promised to look “beyond 13th Amendment” through All Party Representative Committee (APRC). But, in military triumphalism, he changed stance and started denouncing that “there is no ethnic issue, but only development issue.” At a later date, he went to the extent of constituting a Parliamentary Select Committee (PSC) to look into the existing 13th Amendment framework that devolved powers to provinces. But, this faced challenge from the outset. Apart from non-participation of Opposition parties in PSC, Sinhala hardline parties like Janata Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP), National Freedom Front (NFF) and Jathika Hela Urumaya (JHU) wanted to do away with the existing 13th Amendment that made provisions for provinces. Ironically, a dominant section of the then Rajapaksa government supported this stance of the hardline parties, in the form of “13th Amendment Minus” arrangement. India was disappointed at the turn of things.
However, with the change of government in 2015 things looked positive. The new President Sirisena presented a plan for a new constitution in January 2016 and subsequently a Constituent Assembly was established in March 2016 to draft a new constitution. The Steering Committee of the Constituent Assembly headed by Prime Minister Ranil Wickremasinghe submitted an interim report in November 2017. The report touched on several aspects like principles of devolution, state land, provincial subjects, second chamber, electoral system, and public security. Although the interim report talks of “aekiya raajyaya” and “orumiththa nadu” (respectively Sinhala and Tamil terms for undivided and indivisible country), opposition to the draft has already emerged from the Buddhist clergy and Sinhala hardliners. India also has been pushing for ethnic reconciliation in the post-conflict Sri Lanka both at bilateral and multilateral levels. New Delhi firmly believes that without ethnic reconciliation, it is difficult to find a lasting political solution. India’s stand at the Human Rights Council was forward-looking and positive: to push the reconciliation process seriously so that the war-affected Sri Lankan society could rebuild itself in a sustainable manner. But with the coming back of Mahinda Rajapaksa as Prime Minister and brother Gotabaya Rajapaksa as the President, things are back to square one. “National interest” is being invoked for certain dos and don’ts, especially on the ethnic reconciliation and long-term political settlement.
It should be noted that India has always stood by Sri Lanka in its difficult times and extended its unambiguous support to safeguarding the latter’s unity, territorial integrity and sovereignty. Looking at the trajectory of ties since independence, these bilateral ties have matured and, in the present context, serve as a model of good neighbourly relations. No wonder Mahatma Gandhi once rightly referred to Sri Lanka as India’s “daughter state”. Undermining domestic ethnic harmony and interests of the neighbourhood in the name of “national interests” is not in the long-term interest of the island state.
N. Manoharan is Associate Professor, CHRIST (Deemed to be University), Bengaluru
"Views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not reflect the position of the University"
The recent five-day visit (7-11 February 2020) of Sri Lankan Prime Minister Mahinda Rajapaksa to India is significant in the India-Sri Lanka relations. It comes within few months of visit of his brother and President Gotabaya Rajapaksa. Several issues were deliberated at various levels during the visit, the most important being ethnic issue in Sri Lanka.
On the settlement of the ethnic issue, India has consistently maintained that it stood in favour of “a politically negotiated settlement acceptable to all sections of Sri Lankan society within the framework of an undivided Sri Lanka and consistent with democracy, pluralism and respect for human rights.” For India, the full implementation of the 13th Amendment provisions as an interim arrangement and going beyond it for the permanent settlement is practical. This was reiterated by Indian Prime Minister.
But, the Sri Lankan state thought differently after the decimation of the LTTE. Mahinda Rajapaksa, when he was President, initially promised to look “beyond 13th Amendment” through All Party Representative Committee (APRC). But, in military triumphalism, he changed stance and started denouncing that “there is no ethnic issue, but only development issue.” At a later date, he went to the extent of constituting a Parliamentary Select Committee (PSC) to look into the existing 13th Amendment framework that devolved powers to provinces. But, this faced challenge from the outset. Apart from non-participation of Opposition parties in PSC, Sinhala hardline parties like Janata Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP), National Freedom Front (NFF) and Jathika Hela Urumaya (JHU) wanted to do away with the existing 13th Amendment that made provisions for provinces. Ironically, a dominant section of the then Rajapaksa government supported this stance of the hardline parties, in the form of “13th Amendment Minus” arrangement. India was disappointed at the turn of things.
However, with the change of government in 2015 things looked positive. The new President Sirisena presented a plan for a new constitution in January 2016 and subsequently a Constituent Assembly was established in March 2016 to draft a new constitution. The Steering Committee of the Constituent Assembly headed by Prime Minister Ranil Wickremasinghe submitted an interim report in November 2017. The report touched on several aspects like principles of devolution, state land, provincial subjects, second chamber, electoral system, and public security. Although the interim report talks of “aekiya raajyaya” and “orumiththa nadu” (respectively Sinhala and Tamil terms for undivided and indivisible country), opposition to the draft has already emerged from the Buddhist clergy and Sinhala hardliners. India also has been pushing for ethnic reconciliation in the post-conflict Sri Lanka both at bilateral and multilateral levels. New Delhi firmly believes that without ethnic reconciliation, it is difficult to find a lasting political solution. India’s stand at the Human Rights Council was forward-looking and positive: to push the reconciliation process seriously so that the war-affected Sri Lankan society could rebuild itself in a sustainable manner. But with the coming back of Mahinda Rajapaksa as Prime Minister and brother Gotabaya Rajapaksa as the President, things are back to square one. “National interest” is being invoked for certain dos and don’ts, especially on the ethnic reconciliation and long-term political settlement.
It should be noted that India has always stood by Sri Lanka in its difficult times and extended its unambiguous support to safeguarding the latter’s unity, territorial integrity and sovereignty. Looking at the trajectory of ties since independence, these bilateral ties have matured and, in the present context, serve as a model of good neighbourly relations. No wonder Mahatma Gandhi once rightly referred to Sri Lanka as India’s “daughter state”. Undermining domestic ethnic harmony and interests of the neighbourhood in the name of “national interests” is not in the long-term interest of the island state.
N. Manoharan is Associate Professor, CHRIST (Deemed to be University), Bengaluru
"Views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not reflect the position of the University"
China and the Coronavirus Epidemic
MOHAMMED YAQOOB SALEEM
China has enforced a travel ban to Wuhan and restricted travel between the provinces amid the Coronavirus breakout. On Jan 8, Researchers on further investigations found that Coronavirus pathogen was behind 59 people in Wuhan suspiciously falling ill. The Authorities declared an Animal and Seafood Market in Wuhan as the epicenter. The market was immediately closed and sanitation was carried out. But the virus that broke-out in China has spread close to 12 countries including the US, Australia, South Korea, Japan and France. The Virus has claimed 56 lives and more than 1900 people in Wuhan are feared to have been infected. Airports and Railway stations are put on a high alert and intense screening is being carried out. This breakout comes when China was preparing to celebrate its Lunar New Year, spoiling the festive season for 1.9 billion people. The WHO has issued a statement praising China for identifying the strand of the Virus and sharing it with the WHO but, did not declare the Corona Virus as Global Health Emergency. China has commissioned a hospital to be built within 6 days in Wuhan for treating the infected. Learning from the SARS (Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome) that broke out in 2003, China has proactively countered the situation at hand. It also raises a question on the credibility of the data provided by the Chinese Government. There is also a possibility that the Chinese Authorities are projecting deflated figures regarding the number of deaths and infected cases to prevent anxiety among its people.
What is Coronavirus?
The Coronavirus has been named for its protruding tentacles coming out of its membranes resembling the Sun’s Corona. There is no vaccine to treat this virus however, the genetic sequence of this virus has been discovered by the Chinese scientists and this can speed up the process of building a vaccine to fight this virus. The Coronavirus affects the lungs and causes respiratory disorders. Coronavirus is primarily believed to have originated from animals and then transmitted to people. The Virus has now spread among people and even the medical professionals treating the infected patients have contracted the virus making it even more difficult to treat it. The symptoms of the Coronavirus resemble that of a flu in its mild form and include gastro-intestinal problems in its severe form.
The Chinese Authorities have taken strict measures to contain this outbreak. Public transports have been stopped and large public gatherings have been banned. People have been ordered to wear masks at all times in order to prevent the spreading of the virus. The Governments around the world are strictly screening the patients arriving from China and monitoring them.
Impact of the Coronavirus Outbreak:
China’s already declining population might be affected even more if this epidemic continues to spread. The Lockdown will also halt the economic activities of the country leading to severely affect the global supply chain. The Chinese Government will be diverting a large part of its resources towards containing this outbreak which might cause a slump in its ambitious BRI. The virus has already spread to many other countries. There has been a shortage of masks and protective gears owing to the outbreak. Children and the Elderly with weak immune system are vulnerable to this virus.
Climate Change angle:
With Climate Change and raising global temperatures many more viruses that are trapped in the frozen soil are expected to be exposed to the atmosphere. Increasing surface temperature of oceans may lead to bacteria boom in oceans and affecting the marine life and our seafood! The world must either act towards stopping climate change or face the outbreak of dangerous pathogens.
The author is a first year MA in International Studies student, Department of International Studies and History, CHRIST (Deemed to be University), Bangalore
"Views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not reflect the position of the University"
China has enforced a travel ban to Wuhan and restricted travel between the provinces amid the Coronavirus breakout. On Jan 8, Researchers on further investigations found that Coronavirus pathogen was behind 59 people in Wuhan suspiciously falling ill. The Authorities declared an Animal and Seafood Market in Wuhan as the epicenter. The market was immediately closed and sanitation was carried out. But the virus that broke-out in China has spread close to 12 countries including the US, Australia, South Korea, Japan and France. The Virus has claimed 56 lives and more than 1900 people in Wuhan are feared to have been infected. Airports and Railway stations are put on a high alert and intense screening is being carried out. This breakout comes when China was preparing to celebrate its Lunar New Year, spoiling the festive season for 1.9 billion people. The WHO has issued a statement praising China for identifying the strand of the Virus and sharing it with the WHO but, did not declare the Corona Virus as Global Health Emergency. China has commissioned a hospital to be built within 6 days in Wuhan for treating the infected. Learning from the SARS (Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome) that broke out in 2003, China has proactively countered the situation at hand. It also raises a question on the credibility of the data provided by the Chinese Government. There is also a possibility that the Chinese Authorities are projecting deflated figures regarding the number of deaths and infected cases to prevent anxiety among its people.
What is Coronavirus?
The Coronavirus has been named for its protruding tentacles coming out of its membranes resembling the Sun’s Corona. There is no vaccine to treat this virus however, the genetic sequence of this virus has been discovered by the Chinese scientists and this can speed up the process of building a vaccine to fight this virus. The Coronavirus affects the lungs and causes respiratory disorders. Coronavirus is primarily believed to have originated from animals and then transmitted to people. The Virus has now spread among people and even the medical professionals treating the infected patients have contracted the virus making it even more difficult to treat it. The symptoms of the Coronavirus resemble that of a flu in its mild form and include gastro-intestinal problems in its severe form.
The Chinese Authorities have taken strict measures to contain this outbreak. Public transports have been stopped and large public gatherings have been banned. People have been ordered to wear masks at all times in order to prevent the spreading of the virus. The Governments around the world are strictly screening the patients arriving from China and monitoring them.
Impact of the Coronavirus Outbreak:
China’s already declining population might be affected even more if this epidemic continues to spread. The Lockdown will also halt the economic activities of the country leading to severely affect the global supply chain. The Chinese Government will be diverting a large part of its resources towards containing this outbreak which might cause a slump in its ambitious BRI. The virus has already spread to many other countries. There has been a shortage of masks and protective gears owing to the outbreak. Children and the Elderly with weak immune system are vulnerable to this virus.
Climate Change angle:
With Climate Change and raising global temperatures many more viruses that are trapped in the frozen soil are expected to be exposed to the atmosphere. Increasing surface temperature of oceans may lead to bacteria boom in oceans and affecting the marine life and our seafood! The world must either act towards stopping climate change or face the outbreak of dangerous pathogens.
The author is a first year MA in International Studies student, Department of International Studies and History, CHRIST (Deemed to be University), Bangalore
"Views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not reflect the position of the University"
Angela Merkel hosts Libyan Peace Conference
MOHAMMED YAQOOB SALEEM
On Sunday 19th January, the German Chancellor Angela Merkel hosted leaders from more than a dozen countries at Berlin to find a long-lasting solution to the civil war which has taken thousands of lives, displaced millions and has been ravaging Libya since 2011. Some of the leaders who attended the conference include Mike Pompeo, Vladimir Putin, Recep Erdogan, Emmanuel Macron, Angela Merkel and the UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres. The leaders came together and agreed not to intervene in the Libyan Civil war and placed a stricter arms embargo on Libya. Many foreign mercenaries are also engaged in the civil war. The UN recognized Government of National Accord (GNA) led by Fayez-al-Sarraj is supported by Turkey who earlier this year passed a resolution in its Parliament to deploy its troops in Libya and support the GNA. The GNA is also supported by Qatar and Italy. While on the other side, Khalifa Haftar who is the head of Libyan National Army was earlier a General under Gaddafi is being supported by UAE, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and France. Although Russian mercenaries are present in Libya, President Putin claims that they are not paid and regulated by the Russian Government. Haftar with his self-styled Libyan National Army controls more than half of the Libyan territory and has placed control over many of the oil fields in Libya. He runs his Government from Benghazi which is present on the eastern coast of Libya. Haftar seems to have an upper hand in the war against the GNA which is based in Tripoli. Libya is the largest producer of oil in Africa. Both the warring parties get a major share of their revenue from oil exports. Many analysts see this conference as the first of many steps to bringing the civil war to an end in Libya. Both Fayez Al-Sarraj and Khalifa Haftar were present at the Berlin conference but were not part of the proceedings and were kept informed about the developments in the meeting. The officials made sure that both the Libyan leaders do not cross each other’s paths. They were also kept at separate hotels. The leaders of other nations held a one on one meeting with Al-Sarraj and Haftar separately and both the Libyan leaders refused to come to the discussion table with each other.
One might wonder as to why Libya is making the news and why so many countries are involved in this country’s civil war?
There are two main reasons and besides these there are many other factors that have made Libya what it is today. First, the power vacuum created in Libya after the death of Muammar Gaddafi led to the setting up of various military factions and secondly, Libya is an oil rich country which has attracted the interests of many countries. These two factors have mainly contributed for the civil war and the presence of foreign mercenaries in Libya. Other factors include Turkey’s geo-strategic interests in the Mediterranean Sea, fight against the ISIS, Egypt’s proximity to Libya; Jordan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia and UAE’s drive to combat Islamic extremism (GNA’s acceptance of Muslim Brotherhood in its political makeup); Italy’s growing influx of immigrants and so on. It also leads us to think, whether these countries will sincerely keep up their commitments made during this summit and find a solution that would bring a long-lasting peace to Libya. All these conflicts showcase the importance of International Relations and Area Studies in today’s world in order to find peaceful settlement of disputes between nations and take a step towards global co-operation and world peace.
The author is a first year MA in International Studies student, Department of International Studies and History, CHRIST (Deemed to be University), Bangalore
"Views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not reflect the position of the University"
On Sunday 19th January, the German Chancellor Angela Merkel hosted leaders from more than a dozen countries at Berlin to find a long-lasting solution to the civil war which has taken thousands of lives, displaced millions and has been ravaging Libya since 2011. Some of the leaders who attended the conference include Mike Pompeo, Vladimir Putin, Recep Erdogan, Emmanuel Macron, Angela Merkel and the UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres. The leaders came together and agreed not to intervene in the Libyan Civil war and placed a stricter arms embargo on Libya. Many foreign mercenaries are also engaged in the civil war. The UN recognized Government of National Accord (GNA) led by Fayez-al-Sarraj is supported by Turkey who earlier this year passed a resolution in its Parliament to deploy its troops in Libya and support the GNA. The GNA is also supported by Qatar and Italy. While on the other side, Khalifa Haftar who is the head of Libyan National Army was earlier a General under Gaddafi is being supported by UAE, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and France. Although Russian mercenaries are present in Libya, President Putin claims that they are not paid and regulated by the Russian Government. Haftar with his self-styled Libyan National Army controls more than half of the Libyan territory and has placed control over many of the oil fields in Libya. He runs his Government from Benghazi which is present on the eastern coast of Libya. Haftar seems to have an upper hand in the war against the GNA which is based in Tripoli. Libya is the largest producer of oil in Africa. Both the warring parties get a major share of their revenue from oil exports. Many analysts see this conference as the first of many steps to bringing the civil war to an end in Libya. Both Fayez Al-Sarraj and Khalifa Haftar were present at the Berlin conference but were not part of the proceedings and were kept informed about the developments in the meeting. The officials made sure that both the Libyan leaders do not cross each other’s paths. They were also kept at separate hotels. The leaders of other nations held a one on one meeting with Al-Sarraj and Haftar separately and both the Libyan leaders refused to come to the discussion table with each other.
One might wonder as to why Libya is making the news and why so many countries are involved in this country’s civil war?
There are two main reasons and besides these there are many other factors that have made Libya what it is today. First, the power vacuum created in Libya after the death of Muammar Gaddafi led to the setting up of various military factions and secondly, Libya is an oil rich country which has attracted the interests of many countries. These two factors have mainly contributed for the civil war and the presence of foreign mercenaries in Libya. Other factors include Turkey’s geo-strategic interests in the Mediterranean Sea, fight against the ISIS, Egypt’s proximity to Libya; Jordan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia and UAE’s drive to combat Islamic extremism (GNA’s acceptance of Muslim Brotherhood in its political makeup); Italy’s growing influx of immigrants and so on. It also leads us to think, whether these countries will sincerely keep up their commitments made during this summit and find a solution that would bring a long-lasting peace to Libya. All these conflicts showcase the importance of International Relations and Area Studies in today’s world in order to find peaceful settlement of disputes between nations and take a step towards global co-operation and world peace.
The author is a first year MA in International Studies student, Department of International Studies and History, CHRIST (Deemed to be University), Bangalore
"Views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not reflect the position of the University"
Analyzing the British vote and Brexit
Aswathy K
Britain voted to leave the EU in 2016. Since then, it has embroiled the UK, leading to further divisions within the union. Taking into account the recent victory of the Tories in the Recent Elections, the Conservative government with its stronghold in England, plans to lead the country into Brexit on 31st January and the regional nationalist parties in Northern Ireland and Scotland (such as the Scottish Nationalist Party, Sinn Féin and the Social Democratic and Labour Party) have gained additional seats in the Parliament as compared to the previous elections. It is evident that Brexit was the main issue on the ballot. If one compares the results of the EU Referendum of 2016 and the UK Parliamentary elections of 2019, one observes how much they resemble each other. Also, one witnesses that voting was based on regional lines (Scotland and Ireland voted remain while England and Wales voted to leave). Generally, less developed areas in the field of employment, education, and income voted to remain. Thus, a major portion of the working class voted to leave, along with social and economic conservatives. This explains why Labour took a middle road in terms of Brexit to not lose its traditional power base. But that was to no avail as the Brexit issue dominated the elections compared to traditional differences on government spending and taxes. In a way, Brexit is a counter to liberal globalization’s goal of free market, integration, and cooperation. Capitalist stronghold, the Liberal Democrats, are one of the only few parties which have openly opposed Brexit. On the other hand, the vote differed not on the basis of class divisions like Marxists presume most actions to be. Why did the working-class vote against their own interests (the Conservative Party is not known for being pro-proletariat) and how does the vote reflect Nationalism(s): British, Scottish and Irish.
The EU and National Sovereignty
The European Union is not only an economically integrating force but also one that has certain political powers. Earlier, liberals dissuaded any imposition of the state on economics. But as the social fallouts became evident especially with counter theories such as Marxism gaining momentum, liberal theory of political economy itself went through changes. It adapted itself into the welfare state, a phenomenon that is common in Europe but which still has not penetrated the capitalist stronghold of America. The welfare state is generally seen by the public favorably. But when an extra-national authority has control over your taxes with no visible benefits, people become apprehensive. Especially important is the case of Factortame which proved to the UK that they did not have full control over their policies. Also, many British feel that the UK funds are being wasted on East Europe while the UK reaps no benefits from being a member of the EU.
Migration
Many developing countries oppose the free market on the basis that it might be made a dumping ground as developed countries exploit its resources. On the other hand, developed countries oppose full integration on the basis of another form of relocation itself- migration. As national borders are mellowed in the face of globalization, people become more immobile. Though migration boosts the economy, native population view it unfavorably. The economic insecurity perspective states that migration is seen as leeching on the finite jobs available in a country. One reasoning states that due to austerity reforms of the 2010s, many were economically left behind and wrongly blamed immigration for it. This brings into the picture why the working class in a developed country is not in favor of the open market. Their concerns differ from those in developing countries. The latter is concerned about exploitation by external powers, developed countries with good labour laws need not fear. Here the concern is about competition for jobs. The Brexit discussion around migration is not concerning the Syrian refugee crisis as many presume it to be but more to do with the migration from Eastern Europe. The refugee crisis just existed as a possibility while the latter shows the probability of a huge influx of people competing for lower-end jobs. On the other hand, migration in high skill jobs is seen as filling a vacuum.
One of the major and immediate consequences of Brexit will be the rupture of international trade, especially shortages of food and medicine. Foreign investment will dry up and optimal output will decrease. All this spells economic slowdown. Even though economic consequences are generally forecasted to be bad (I have found “evidence” for both harsh economic consequences and for smooth sail and this stage, I am unable to remove fact from propaganda). But still, the most vulnerable population, the very same mentioned above which lags behind, seems to have voted against its own economic interests. There is a possibility of having higher competition due to a large inflow of migration but equally that of high unemployment after Brexit. Which begets the question whether people voted primarily based on economic interests or was something else at play.
Nationalism and Cultural Backlash
The election of a Tory government with a majority only in England just confirms the fears of Scotland and Northern Ireland that England can singlehandedly decide the future of the nation without the need to listen to the others. In a way, the competition between the Tories and the Labour Party was confined within England, and to an extent, Wales. Yet these two are considered the major parties of the UK. Though Brexit might get over, another problem of secessionist movement will start in Scotland and Northern Ireland. They are tired of being ignored and don't want to pay for the immediate damage Brexit will bring about. For e.g. Brexit means European companies will shift basis from the UK, leading to unemployment. The government will have to invest in unemployment benefits which will mean a rise in taxes. And this will have to be paid by Scots and Irish citizens too. A hard Brexit will mean a hard border between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland. It will make trade more regulated and costly. This has a great chance of hurting the long-fought peace that existed in Northern Ireland after the Belfast Agreement.
Nationalism can be divided into two categories: one such as the Scottish one where overlooked and oppressed groups want to take power into their own hands, another where once predominant group act against progressive forces which have taken power away from them (the cultural backlash thesis). The working class is a pre-dominant force but in the end, the working class in the UK voted against their own economic interests because they saw themselves as British first and the proletariat second. As stated before, developing countries have serious reasons for not embracing the free market. Not to say that the concern around migration in developed countries is not genuine but they sometimes get expressed with racist undertones.
The author is a first year MA in International Studies student, Department of International Studies and History, CHRIST (Deemed to be University), Bangalore
"Views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not reflect the position of the University"
Britain voted to leave the EU in 2016. Since then, it has embroiled the UK, leading to further divisions within the union. Taking into account the recent victory of the Tories in the Recent Elections, the Conservative government with its stronghold in England, plans to lead the country into Brexit on 31st January and the regional nationalist parties in Northern Ireland and Scotland (such as the Scottish Nationalist Party, Sinn Féin and the Social Democratic and Labour Party) have gained additional seats in the Parliament as compared to the previous elections. It is evident that Brexit was the main issue on the ballot. If one compares the results of the EU Referendum of 2016 and the UK Parliamentary elections of 2019, one observes how much they resemble each other. Also, one witnesses that voting was based on regional lines (Scotland and Ireland voted remain while England and Wales voted to leave). Generally, less developed areas in the field of employment, education, and income voted to remain. Thus, a major portion of the working class voted to leave, along with social and economic conservatives. This explains why Labour took a middle road in terms of Brexit to not lose its traditional power base. But that was to no avail as the Brexit issue dominated the elections compared to traditional differences on government spending and taxes. In a way, Brexit is a counter to liberal globalization’s goal of free market, integration, and cooperation. Capitalist stronghold, the Liberal Democrats, are one of the only few parties which have openly opposed Brexit. On the other hand, the vote differed not on the basis of class divisions like Marxists presume most actions to be. Why did the working-class vote against their own interests (the Conservative Party is not known for being pro-proletariat) and how does the vote reflect Nationalism(s): British, Scottish and Irish.
The EU and National Sovereignty
The European Union is not only an economically integrating force but also one that has certain political powers. Earlier, liberals dissuaded any imposition of the state on economics. But as the social fallouts became evident especially with counter theories such as Marxism gaining momentum, liberal theory of political economy itself went through changes. It adapted itself into the welfare state, a phenomenon that is common in Europe but which still has not penetrated the capitalist stronghold of America. The welfare state is generally seen by the public favorably. But when an extra-national authority has control over your taxes with no visible benefits, people become apprehensive. Especially important is the case of Factortame which proved to the UK that they did not have full control over their policies. Also, many British feel that the UK funds are being wasted on East Europe while the UK reaps no benefits from being a member of the EU.
Migration
Many developing countries oppose the free market on the basis that it might be made a dumping ground as developed countries exploit its resources. On the other hand, developed countries oppose full integration on the basis of another form of relocation itself- migration. As national borders are mellowed in the face of globalization, people become more immobile. Though migration boosts the economy, native population view it unfavorably. The economic insecurity perspective states that migration is seen as leeching on the finite jobs available in a country. One reasoning states that due to austerity reforms of the 2010s, many were economically left behind and wrongly blamed immigration for it. This brings into the picture why the working class in a developed country is not in favor of the open market. Their concerns differ from those in developing countries. The latter is concerned about exploitation by external powers, developed countries with good labour laws need not fear. Here the concern is about competition for jobs. The Brexit discussion around migration is not concerning the Syrian refugee crisis as many presume it to be but more to do with the migration from Eastern Europe. The refugee crisis just existed as a possibility while the latter shows the probability of a huge influx of people competing for lower-end jobs. On the other hand, migration in high skill jobs is seen as filling a vacuum.
One of the major and immediate consequences of Brexit will be the rupture of international trade, especially shortages of food and medicine. Foreign investment will dry up and optimal output will decrease. All this spells economic slowdown. Even though economic consequences are generally forecasted to be bad (I have found “evidence” for both harsh economic consequences and for smooth sail and this stage, I am unable to remove fact from propaganda). But still, the most vulnerable population, the very same mentioned above which lags behind, seems to have voted against its own economic interests. There is a possibility of having higher competition due to a large inflow of migration but equally that of high unemployment after Brexit. Which begets the question whether people voted primarily based on economic interests or was something else at play.
Nationalism and Cultural Backlash
The election of a Tory government with a majority only in England just confirms the fears of Scotland and Northern Ireland that England can singlehandedly decide the future of the nation without the need to listen to the others. In a way, the competition between the Tories and the Labour Party was confined within England, and to an extent, Wales. Yet these two are considered the major parties of the UK. Though Brexit might get over, another problem of secessionist movement will start in Scotland and Northern Ireland. They are tired of being ignored and don't want to pay for the immediate damage Brexit will bring about. For e.g. Brexit means European companies will shift basis from the UK, leading to unemployment. The government will have to invest in unemployment benefits which will mean a rise in taxes. And this will have to be paid by Scots and Irish citizens too. A hard Brexit will mean a hard border between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland. It will make trade more regulated and costly. This has a great chance of hurting the long-fought peace that existed in Northern Ireland after the Belfast Agreement.
Nationalism can be divided into two categories: one such as the Scottish one where overlooked and oppressed groups want to take power into their own hands, another where once predominant group act against progressive forces which have taken power away from them (the cultural backlash thesis). The working class is a pre-dominant force but in the end, the working class in the UK voted against their own economic interests because they saw themselves as British first and the proletariat second. As stated before, developing countries have serious reasons for not embracing the free market. Not to say that the concern around migration in developed countries is not genuine but they sometimes get expressed with racist undertones.
The author is a first year MA in International Studies student, Department of International Studies and History, CHRIST (Deemed to be University), Bangalore
"Views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not reflect the position of the University"
Crimean Bridge: Russia’s symbolic defiance against Europe and US
Yaqoob Saleem
As the people in India are protesting against the controversial Citizenship Amendment Act which was passed by the Parliament, Russia in the West has defied the European and US sanctions by taking another step in the direction towards integrating Crimea to the Russian Mainland. Vladimir Putin on Monday (23rd Dec), inaugurated the rail corridor of the Crimean Bridge which is built across the Kerch Strait by giving the green signal and travelling in the three-coach rail from the city of Kerch in Crimea.
This move drew criticism from Europe and US who never recognised Russia’s annexation of Crimea, stating that it undermined Ukrainian sovereignty. The Crimean Bridge which is 19 km long, connects the Crimea peninsula to mainland Russia directly bypassing the Ukrainian territory. Earlier, Russians had to rely on air and sea routes to ship supplies to Crimea but, with the rail link established, the connectivity between the two regions will increase. The Road link of this Bridge was inaugurated by Putin last year (2018) when he drove a lorry across the bridge connecting Russia and Crimea. This Railway route will help carry 13 million tons of cargo and close to 14 million passengers. The rail route connects Sevastopol to St Petersburg in Russia and also links Moscow to Simferopol, which is Crimea’s administrative capital. The journey from St. Petersburg takes 44 hours. A one-way journey costs $56. The construction of the Crimean Bridge was started in 2014 and it took 5 whole years to complete it. Approximately $3.6bn was spent on its construction and the Bridge was built by a company owned by Arkady Rotenberg who is a close ally of Vladimir Putin. Rotenberg, who is a Russian Oligarch is under sanctions from the US and EU and so are his companies. President Putin praised the construction workers for completing the mammoth project in such a short period. Putin also highlighted that this project was undertaken and completed purely on technological self-reliance.
This Bridge is seen as a boon to Crimea as well as Russia. The Bridge which enhances the connectivity between the two regions will boost the economy of Crimea by bringing in more tourists to the port city of Sevastopol which overlooks the Black Sea and reduce logistical hurdles for Russia. Sevastopol is a popular tourist destination in the Crimean Peninsula. Crimea was handed over to Ukraine in 1954 by Khrushchev when Ukraine was a part of the erstwhile USSR. The inauguration of the bridge also spurred Vladimir Putin’s approval rating in Russia which was seen to be on a decline.
The Ukrainians were not happy about the rail link and showed disregard towards the presence of Russian President in Crimea. On Dec 9, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky met Putin in Paris and categorically stated that Crimea was an integral part of Ukraine. Many Ukrainians see this bridge as a symbol of Russian control over the Crimean Peninsula. Crimea was annexed by Russia in 2014 due to strategic reasons mainly. Since the annexation, Russia has spent heavily on developmental projects and subsidies in this region. In the view of this inauguration, the EU extended the economic sanctions on Russia by an additional six months.
The author is a first year MA in International Studies student, Department of International Studies and History, CHRIST (Deemed to be University), Bangalore
"Views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not reflect the position of the University"
As the people in India are protesting against the controversial Citizenship Amendment Act which was passed by the Parliament, Russia in the West has defied the European and US sanctions by taking another step in the direction towards integrating Crimea to the Russian Mainland. Vladimir Putin on Monday (23rd Dec), inaugurated the rail corridor of the Crimean Bridge which is built across the Kerch Strait by giving the green signal and travelling in the three-coach rail from the city of Kerch in Crimea.
This move drew criticism from Europe and US who never recognised Russia’s annexation of Crimea, stating that it undermined Ukrainian sovereignty. The Crimean Bridge which is 19 km long, connects the Crimea peninsula to mainland Russia directly bypassing the Ukrainian territory. Earlier, Russians had to rely on air and sea routes to ship supplies to Crimea but, with the rail link established, the connectivity between the two regions will increase. The Road link of this Bridge was inaugurated by Putin last year (2018) when he drove a lorry across the bridge connecting Russia and Crimea. This Railway route will help carry 13 million tons of cargo and close to 14 million passengers. The rail route connects Sevastopol to St Petersburg in Russia and also links Moscow to Simferopol, which is Crimea’s administrative capital. The journey from St. Petersburg takes 44 hours. A one-way journey costs $56. The construction of the Crimean Bridge was started in 2014 and it took 5 whole years to complete it. Approximately $3.6bn was spent on its construction and the Bridge was built by a company owned by Arkady Rotenberg who is a close ally of Vladimir Putin. Rotenberg, who is a Russian Oligarch is under sanctions from the US and EU and so are his companies. President Putin praised the construction workers for completing the mammoth project in such a short period. Putin also highlighted that this project was undertaken and completed purely on technological self-reliance.
This Bridge is seen as a boon to Crimea as well as Russia. The Bridge which enhances the connectivity between the two regions will boost the economy of Crimea by bringing in more tourists to the port city of Sevastopol which overlooks the Black Sea and reduce logistical hurdles for Russia. Sevastopol is a popular tourist destination in the Crimean Peninsula. Crimea was handed over to Ukraine in 1954 by Khrushchev when Ukraine was a part of the erstwhile USSR. The inauguration of the bridge also spurred Vladimir Putin’s approval rating in Russia which was seen to be on a decline.
The Ukrainians were not happy about the rail link and showed disregard towards the presence of Russian President in Crimea. On Dec 9, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky met Putin in Paris and categorically stated that Crimea was an integral part of Ukraine. Many Ukrainians see this bridge as a symbol of Russian control over the Crimean Peninsula. Crimea was annexed by Russia in 2014 due to strategic reasons mainly. Since the annexation, Russia has spent heavily on developmental projects and subsidies in this region. In the view of this inauguration, the EU extended the economic sanctions on Russia by an additional six months.
The author is a first year MA in International Studies student, Department of International Studies and History, CHRIST (Deemed to be University), Bangalore
"Views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not reflect the position of the University"
INDIA AND THE RCEP: A GOOD RIDDANCE OR A MISSED OPPORTUNITY?
Kritika Chhapolia
The Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership aims to be the biggest free trade agreement in the world as it will comprise almost half of the world population and 39% of the world’s GDP, according to the New Zealand Ministry of Foreign Affairs. RCEP aims to create an integrated market with 16 countries, making it easier for products and services of each of these countries to be available across this region. The negotiations are focused on the following: trade in goods and services, investment, intellectual property, dispute settlement, e-commerce, small and medium enterprises, and economic cooperation.
The RCEP is mostly concerned with the standardisation of tariff in the region. If signed in the present state, it will include the ten members of ASEAN along with China, New Zealand, Australia, South Korea and Japan. India had repeatedly endorsed this free trade agreement in its initial stages but has recently made the decision to not join it. This has led to a lot of speculation and discussion among economists, who are trying to measure the appropriateness of this decision.
According to news reports, the major guiding force behind India’s decision to not join the RCEP was the fear that allowing free trade with China would lead to cheap Chinese goods dominating the Indian as well as neighbouring markets. This would impose a very lopsided competition for domestic Indian goods, which will probably not be able to survive. This would also seriously hamper NDA government’s ‘Made In India’ initiative. China will be able to dump its goods in India and Indian industries will decline. India had expressed concerns about allowing the same level of tariff reduction for all countries, at the beginning of the negotiations too. This apprehension regarding the import surge from China has also been expressed by other parties to the agreement.
Another major concern has been the growing trade deficit of India with the ASEAN countries. According to the NITI Aayog, after India’s free trade agreements with Japan and South Korea too, its trade deficit with these countries almost doubled. Therefore, India is right to be apprehensive of the proposed free trade agreement. The current trade deficit of India is $105 million with the proposed signatories to the RCEP and this could further increase if India joined the RCEP. India would also lose out on the revenue generated from import tariffs.
Moreover, all countries protect certain sectors that are crucial to their economy by imposing high tariffs and the service sector is one of them. India, owing to its growing pool of human resources wanted entry for its tertiary sector workers and professionals into the ASEAN countries. However, these countries do not allow much liberalisation in this sector and protect it through ‘sensitive lists’, based on the details on the Indian Commerce Ministry’s website. India will be providing these countries much more market access than it would gain out of the deal.
The adverse effect of the agreement on Indian farmers also cannot be neglected. The then commerce minister Nirmala Sitharaman, in 2017, mentioned in the Rajya Sabha that India's agricultural exports have declined to $33.87 billion in 2016-17 from $43.23 billion in 2013-14 and import of agricultural commodities (including plantation and marine products) in 2016-17 rose to $25.09 billion from $15.03 billion in 2013-14. This is an indication of the fact that FTAs are not benefiting farmers, but instead the Indian agricultural produce is unable to find a market in other countries. This has lead to increasing farmer debts and consequent suicides, which could be exacerbated by the RCEP.
The dairy sector also has its apprehensions and believes that import of skimmed milk powder from New Zealand could price out around 100 million farmers and snatch their livelihood away from them, as addressed in The Economic Times. Without protecting the Indian agriculture sector, the deal will cause more harm than benefit. India has also negotiated that the freeze year for the tariff rates be 2019, instead of 2014, as suggested by other signatories. This demand of India has been deemed unreasonable, but the tariff rates were comparatively very low then, and this freezing of tariff rates makes the deal unfavorable for India.
Despite these looming concerns over RCEP, there is no doubt that India would accrue benefits from the deal, if it is passed in a revised form. A free trade agreement would allow a lot more foreign direct investment to flow to and from the Indian market, which will be a very welcome event, owing to the current economic slowdown in the country. It would allow India to improve its economic and strategic position in the Asia-Pacific region and would complement its Act East Policy. India would also get the chance to reduce trade costs by streamlining the rules and regulations through the free trade agreement. The RCEP is set to take over as the world’s largest free trade agreement, in the light of the failure of the Trans Pacific Partnership, and India should not stay out of such a historic trade agreement. It could help India cement its position as a major global economy and be of immense use in the future of the economy.
Since the year-end deadline for the RCEP is approaching, there is immense pressure on the Indian policymakers to make an informed decision. It does not seem to be wise to stay out of this trade agreement, but there need to be serious reforms in the existing terms. Moreover, this external stimulus needs to be balanced with improved and increased domestic production so that Indian goods are able to cope up in the global market that RCEP would create. In the absence of such reforms, the worst fears regarding the impact of the RCEP would come true. India needs to negotiate further and reach a favourable consensus to join the RCEP before it is too late.
The author is a final year EPS student, Department of International Studies and History, CHRIST (Deemed to be University), Bangalore
"Views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not reflect the position of the University"
The Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership aims to be the biggest free trade agreement in the world as it will comprise almost half of the world population and 39% of the world’s GDP, according to the New Zealand Ministry of Foreign Affairs. RCEP aims to create an integrated market with 16 countries, making it easier for products and services of each of these countries to be available across this region. The negotiations are focused on the following: trade in goods and services, investment, intellectual property, dispute settlement, e-commerce, small and medium enterprises, and economic cooperation.
The RCEP is mostly concerned with the standardisation of tariff in the region. If signed in the present state, it will include the ten members of ASEAN along with China, New Zealand, Australia, South Korea and Japan. India had repeatedly endorsed this free trade agreement in its initial stages but has recently made the decision to not join it. This has led to a lot of speculation and discussion among economists, who are trying to measure the appropriateness of this decision.
According to news reports, the major guiding force behind India’s decision to not join the RCEP was the fear that allowing free trade with China would lead to cheap Chinese goods dominating the Indian as well as neighbouring markets. This would impose a very lopsided competition for domestic Indian goods, which will probably not be able to survive. This would also seriously hamper NDA government’s ‘Made In India’ initiative. China will be able to dump its goods in India and Indian industries will decline. India had expressed concerns about allowing the same level of tariff reduction for all countries, at the beginning of the negotiations too. This apprehension regarding the import surge from China has also been expressed by other parties to the agreement.
Another major concern has been the growing trade deficit of India with the ASEAN countries. According to the NITI Aayog, after India’s free trade agreements with Japan and South Korea too, its trade deficit with these countries almost doubled. Therefore, India is right to be apprehensive of the proposed free trade agreement. The current trade deficit of India is $105 million with the proposed signatories to the RCEP and this could further increase if India joined the RCEP. India would also lose out on the revenue generated from import tariffs.
Moreover, all countries protect certain sectors that are crucial to their economy by imposing high tariffs and the service sector is one of them. India, owing to its growing pool of human resources wanted entry for its tertiary sector workers and professionals into the ASEAN countries. However, these countries do not allow much liberalisation in this sector and protect it through ‘sensitive lists’, based on the details on the Indian Commerce Ministry’s website. India will be providing these countries much more market access than it would gain out of the deal.
The adverse effect of the agreement on Indian farmers also cannot be neglected. The then commerce minister Nirmala Sitharaman, in 2017, mentioned in the Rajya Sabha that India's agricultural exports have declined to $33.87 billion in 2016-17 from $43.23 billion in 2013-14 and import of agricultural commodities (including plantation and marine products) in 2016-17 rose to $25.09 billion from $15.03 billion in 2013-14. This is an indication of the fact that FTAs are not benefiting farmers, but instead the Indian agricultural produce is unable to find a market in other countries. This has lead to increasing farmer debts and consequent suicides, which could be exacerbated by the RCEP.
The dairy sector also has its apprehensions and believes that import of skimmed milk powder from New Zealand could price out around 100 million farmers and snatch their livelihood away from them, as addressed in The Economic Times. Without protecting the Indian agriculture sector, the deal will cause more harm than benefit. India has also negotiated that the freeze year for the tariff rates be 2019, instead of 2014, as suggested by other signatories. This demand of India has been deemed unreasonable, but the tariff rates were comparatively very low then, and this freezing of tariff rates makes the deal unfavorable for India.
Despite these looming concerns over RCEP, there is no doubt that India would accrue benefits from the deal, if it is passed in a revised form. A free trade agreement would allow a lot more foreign direct investment to flow to and from the Indian market, which will be a very welcome event, owing to the current economic slowdown in the country. It would allow India to improve its economic and strategic position in the Asia-Pacific region and would complement its Act East Policy. India would also get the chance to reduce trade costs by streamlining the rules and regulations through the free trade agreement. The RCEP is set to take over as the world’s largest free trade agreement, in the light of the failure of the Trans Pacific Partnership, and India should not stay out of such a historic trade agreement. It could help India cement its position as a major global economy and be of immense use in the future of the economy.
Since the year-end deadline for the RCEP is approaching, there is immense pressure on the Indian policymakers to make an informed decision. It does not seem to be wise to stay out of this trade agreement, but there need to be serious reforms in the existing terms. Moreover, this external stimulus needs to be balanced with improved and increased domestic production so that Indian goods are able to cope up in the global market that RCEP would create. In the absence of such reforms, the worst fears regarding the impact of the RCEP would come true. India needs to negotiate further and reach a favourable consensus to join the RCEP before it is too late.
The author is a final year EPS student, Department of International Studies and History, CHRIST (Deemed to be University), Bangalore
"Views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not reflect the position of the University"
A NEW ECONOMIC FRAMEWORK in GANDHI’S WAY
Anirudh Bharadwaj & Pragya Srivastava
Gandhiji, a social reformer, through his economic ideas wanted to build a credible India. Although his ideas were guided more by social and cultural values of decentralization, non-violent economy, self- sufficiency, curtailment of concentration of wealth and focus on agro-based economy, the economic importance of these ideals cannot be denied; especially considering the fact that he wasn’t a member of any formal committee but influenced all decisions taken by the Planning Commission (Koshal & Koshal, 1973). Questions have been raised over the relevance of Gandhi’s economic policy in today’s world of globalization, privatization and liberalization but more than anything ideals propagated by him have become relevant wherein the solutions to economic disparities can be found in the traditional framework based on Gandhiji’s idea of Trusteeship (Singh & Goit, 2009). Gandhian archetypal of economic working was largely ignored by the bureaucrats and now steadily they are incorporating Gandhi’s insistence on inclusive growth which is seen in discrete policies despite facing the criticism of being non-violable for decades. This is a testament that answers to modern economic problems can be found in traditional Gandhian framework which speaks about the viability of his ideas.
Even though time and again, Gandhiji’s ideologies have been criticized on the grounds that his teachings are very much in lieu of Marxian principles of class struggle and ultimate rule of the proletariat, this isn’t true and one cannot deny the fact that he was an ardent supporter of social capitalism. In his Theory of Trusteeship, Gandhiji denies being either a socialist or a communist. He professes that ‘everything belonged to god and was from god. Therefore, it was for His people as a whole, not for a particular individual. When an individual had more than his proportionate portion, he became a trustee of that portion for God’s people’ (Gandhi, 1960).
The underlying principle of Gandhism lies in the fact that man by nature is very good. That the notion of Hobbes in his State of Nature of Man which said that man is solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short isn’t true. This is also similar to the modern-day notions of the Nobel Laureate Muhammad Yunus who in his book, ‘A World Of Three Zeroes’ states that the modern-day economic system is broken and also totally negates the neoclassical theory of economics which considers man as being indifferent and for ‘selfishness’ to be the highest virtue in what he termed as the ‘Capitalist Man’. He always believed that the ‘Real Man’ who is a part of the integrated society is always motivated to work for others beyond his own petty selfishness (Yunus, 2017). This ideology is the driving force behind Yunus’s concept of Grameen Bank which provides credit at zero percent collateral and interest rate but still has an impressive 96% payback rate. A variety of multinational corporations like Danone have supported the Grameen Bank and this model has also expanded to some of the biggest nations which traditionally championed capitalism like France and USA.This is a blot on all those who criticize the Gandhian way of life as being too altruistic and too utopian.
Thus, not only is the social capitalism model very relevant and implementable but it also self-sustaining. With our country having an exorbitantly high unemployment rate of 6.1% which is the highest in the last 45 years according to the latest Periodic Labor Force Survey (PLFS), a revamping of our entire economic framework needs to be done. But any great social change has always needed the backing of a powerful principle and ideology and this is where we must incorporate the ways of the Father of our Nation. In accordance to his principles of uplifting the rural economy which is the backbone of our country, policymakers should invest more into developing a self-sustaining model of credit creation as well as the promotion of Entrepreneurship, MSME’s and most importantly, traditional handicrafts which are essentially the job creating spheres of any economy.
While expounding Gandhian ideals in the contemporary world it becomes important to truly understand the economic augmentation according to a substructure of prevailing social conditions and time. He provides a chassis which ends exploitation, takes care of man’s need not greed, ends the eternal conflict between labor and capital and moves towards an apparatus which favors the worst-off. In retrospect of the prevailing economic conditions where unemployment statistics are towering, Gandhiji’s proposition of social capitalism should be the cardinal value which ushers the policymakers of today towards a buoyant economy.
The first author is a Second year EPS student, Department of International Studies and History, CHRIST (Deemed to be University), Bangalore and the second author is a second-year student pursuing a BA(Hons) in Political Science from Hindu College, Delhi University, India
"Views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not reflect the position of the University"
Gandhiji, a social reformer, through his economic ideas wanted to build a credible India. Although his ideas were guided more by social and cultural values of decentralization, non-violent economy, self- sufficiency, curtailment of concentration of wealth and focus on agro-based economy, the economic importance of these ideals cannot be denied; especially considering the fact that he wasn’t a member of any formal committee but influenced all decisions taken by the Planning Commission (Koshal & Koshal, 1973). Questions have been raised over the relevance of Gandhi’s economic policy in today’s world of globalization, privatization and liberalization but more than anything ideals propagated by him have become relevant wherein the solutions to economic disparities can be found in the traditional framework based on Gandhiji’s idea of Trusteeship (Singh & Goit, 2009). Gandhian archetypal of economic working was largely ignored by the bureaucrats and now steadily they are incorporating Gandhi’s insistence on inclusive growth which is seen in discrete policies despite facing the criticism of being non-violable for decades. This is a testament that answers to modern economic problems can be found in traditional Gandhian framework which speaks about the viability of his ideas.
Even though time and again, Gandhiji’s ideologies have been criticized on the grounds that his teachings are very much in lieu of Marxian principles of class struggle and ultimate rule of the proletariat, this isn’t true and one cannot deny the fact that he was an ardent supporter of social capitalism. In his Theory of Trusteeship, Gandhiji denies being either a socialist or a communist. He professes that ‘everything belonged to god and was from god. Therefore, it was for His people as a whole, not for a particular individual. When an individual had more than his proportionate portion, he became a trustee of that portion for God’s people’ (Gandhi, 1960).
The underlying principle of Gandhism lies in the fact that man by nature is very good. That the notion of Hobbes in his State of Nature of Man which said that man is solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short isn’t true. This is also similar to the modern-day notions of the Nobel Laureate Muhammad Yunus who in his book, ‘A World Of Three Zeroes’ states that the modern-day economic system is broken and also totally negates the neoclassical theory of economics which considers man as being indifferent and for ‘selfishness’ to be the highest virtue in what he termed as the ‘Capitalist Man’. He always believed that the ‘Real Man’ who is a part of the integrated society is always motivated to work for others beyond his own petty selfishness (Yunus, 2017). This ideology is the driving force behind Yunus’s concept of Grameen Bank which provides credit at zero percent collateral and interest rate but still has an impressive 96% payback rate. A variety of multinational corporations like Danone have supported the Grameen Bank and this model has also expanded to some of the biggest nations which traditionally championed capitalism like France and USA.This is a blot on all those who criticize the Gandhian way of life as being too altruistic and too utopian.
Thus, not only is the social capitalism model very relevant and implementable but it also self-sustaining. With our country having an exorbitantly high unemployment rate of 6.1% which is the highest in the last 45 years according to the latest Periodic Labor Force Survey (PLFS), a revamping of our entire economic framework needs to be done. But any great social change has always needed the backing of a powerful principle and ideology and this is where we must incorporate the ways of the Father of our Nation. In accordance to his principles of uplifting the rural economy which is the backbone of our country, policymakers should invest more into developing a self-sustaining model of credit creation as well as the promotion of Entrepreneurship, MSME’s and most importantly, traditional handicrafts which are essentially the job creating spheres of any economy.
While expounding Gandhian ideals in the contemporary world it becomes important to truly understand the economic augmentation according to a substructure of prevailing social conditions and time. He provides a chassis which ends exploitation, takes care of man’s need not greed, ends the eternal conflict between labor and capital and moves towards an apparatus which favors the worst-off. In retrospect of the prevailing economic conditions where unemployment statistics are towering, Gandhiji’s proposition of social capitalism should be the cardinal value which ushers the policymakers of today towards a buoyant economy.
The first author is a Second year EPS student, Department of International Studies and History, CHRIST (Deemed to be University), Bangalore and the second author is a second-year student pursuing a BA(Hons) in Political Science from Hindu College, Delhi University, India
"Views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not reflect the position of the University"
Gandhi And Kumarappa: A Gandhian Paradigm for Development
Mucheli Rishvanth Reddy
In his essay Three Disciples, B R Nanda wrote, "It would have been difficult to think of a more unlikely candidate for the discipleship of Gandhi in 1929 than J.C. Kumarappa”(Nanda , 2002). Looking at the phase of his life before and after meeting Gandhi shows that this proposition is beyond question.
Joseph Chellandurai Kumarappa’s age was 37 when he met Gandhi for the first time in 1927. At that time, Kumarappa was a graduate in Business Administration at Syracuse University in New York, Fellow of the Society of Incorporated Accountants and Auditors, Chartered Accountant with 10 years of legal practice in Bombay. He had no interest in politics and never had a glimpse of Gandhi. In 1928, he presented a thesis Public Finance and India’s Poverty at Columbia University for his Master’s Degree in Economics. With his thesis, Kumarappa “added his own contribution to…lineage with many an illustrious predecessor like DadabhaiNaoroji and R. C. Dutt”(Govindu & Malghan, 2016) whose works Poverty and Un-British Rule in India and The Economic History of India Under Early British Rule respectively explored the economic exploitation in India under British Rule.
Kumarappa wanted to publish his work Public Finance and India’s Poverty in India and when he was in search of a publisher, on the advice of his friend, he sent the manuscript to Gandhi. Kumarappa got an appointment to meet Gandhi on 30th May 1929. His first meeting with Gandhi is better described in his own words:
On the way up, I saw an old man seated under a tree on a neatly cleaned cow-dunged floor, spinning. Having never seen a spinning wheel before, I leaned on my walking stick and standing akimbo was watching, as there were still ten minutes for the appointment. This old man after about five minutes opened his toothless lips, and with a smile on his face enquired if I was Kumarappa. It suddenly dawned on me that my questioner might be no other than Mahatma Gandhi. So I, in my turn, asked him if he was Gandhiji; and when he nodded I promptly sat down on the cow-dunged floor regardless of the well-kept crease of my silk trousers! Seeing me sitting without stretched legs, more or less in a reclining position, someone from the house came rushing down with a chair for me, and Gandhiji asked me to get up and sit in the chair more comfortably. I replied that since he was seated on the floor I did not propose to take the chair(Kumarappa J. C., 1949).
One of Gandhi’s greatest achievements was his ability to identify the potential in people and nurturing the potential in them for a fruitful cause and to make them leaders. In the meeting, Gandhi understood the potential of Kumarappa and asked him if he can do a Gujarat Rural Economy survey with assistance from Gujarat Vidyapith, National University in Ahmedabad. Refusing Gandhi’s request is beyond question. Gandhi gave one advice on methodology “that the ‘Indian Economy had to be built by a method of securing rock bottom facts and drawing from them, by the most rigid process of reasoning, scientific conclusions which no amount of juggling could controvert’”(Nanda , 2002, p. 185).
Kumarappa went on to do the survey and the results of the survey revealed the deprivation that is prevalent in the Indian Villages. This survey brought out an ‘On ground Economist’ in Kumarappa.
Later when Gandhi commenced the salt march, he sent Kumarappa to help Mahadev Desai and write articles in his journal Young India. This brought out Journalist in Kumarappa. His sedition writings in the journal made Britishers put him behind the bars.Kumarappa used his time in Jail to study and understand Gandhian ideas. In his jail days in 1944, Kumarappa wrote the Economy of Permanence, which is an exploration into Gandhian Economic thought. Gandhi presented a “vision of a utopia in which economic behavior had a far secondary role to the philosophical and political purposes of his idea”(Rosen, Jan 1982) and this idea is reflected in Kumarappa’s work.
Exploring various types of Economics in Nature, he advocated two forms of Economies for mankind: The Economy of Gregation and Economy of Service. The economy of Gregation is “an extension from self-interest to group-interest and from acting on the immediate urge of present needs to planning for future requirements”(Kumarappa J. , 1945) like Honeybees that work for benefit of many.
The Economy of Service is when a living being works "neither for its present need nor for its personal future requirement, but projects its activities into the next generation, or generations to come, without looking for any reward”(Kumarappa J. , 1945). These two forms reflect a modern-day notion of Sustainable Development, which is the need of the hour. Gandhian Economic thought is very close to the environment. Gandhi advocated in protection and maintaining the permanence of Nature.
In 1928, Gandhi warned:
God forbid that India should ever take to industrialism after the manner of the West. The economic imperialism of a single tiny island kingdom (England) is today keeping the world in chains. If an entire nation of 300 millions took to similar economic exploitation, it would strip the world bare like locusts. Unless the capitalists of India help to avert that tragedy by becoming trustees of the welfare of the masses and by devoting their talents not to amassing wealth for themselves but to the service of the masses in an altruistic spirit, they will end either by destroying the masses or being destroyed by them(Gandhi M. , 1928).
The above warning clearly shows Gandhi’s vision to link Environment and Economics and not going in ‘the manner of the West’.
Kumarappa set to implement Gandhi's thoughts when he was appointed as secretary of All India Village Industries Association (AIVIA) in 1934 by Gandhi. AIVIA aimed “at rebuilding the village economy on sustainable lines, by promoting water conservation, community forest management and chemical agriculture”(Guha, 2018). Even after Independence, Kumarappa remained a strong voice against Nehruvian Economic ideas, which completely renounced Gandhian ideals of Self Sufficient and Self-Reliant Village Economy Model.
Conclusion
Based on the correspondence between Gandhi and Kumarappa, we can see an Economist, Environmentalist and an Ideal teacher in Gandhi. In 1948, burying "an urn containing the Mahatma's ashes in a pit in Sevagram Ashram….he murmured: ‘Instead of burying Gandhi deep in our hearts, we are burying him deep into the earth’”(Nanda , 2002, p. 190). Kumarappa died on 30th January 1960, a sad man with anguish and pain in him as Gandhi was when he died (the same day Gandhi was shot in 1948).
The author is a Second year EPS student, Department of International Studies and History, CHRIST (Deemed to be University), Bangalore
"Views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not reflect the position of the University"
In his essay Three Disciples, B R Nanda wrote, "It would have been difficult to think of a more unlikely candidate for the discipleship of Gandhi in 1929 than J.C. Kumarappa”(Nanda , 2002). Looking at the phase of his life before and after meeting Gandhi shows that this proposition is beyond question.
Joseph Chellandurai Kumarappa’s age was 37 when he met Gandhi for the first time in 1927. At that time, Kumarappa was a graduate in Business Administration at Syracuse University in New York, Fellow of the Society of Incorporated Accountants and Auditors, Chartered Accountant with 10 years of legal practice in Bombay. He had no interest in politics and never had a glimpse of Gandhi. In 1928, he presented a thesis Public Finance and India’s Poverty at Columbia University for his Master’s Degree in Economics. With his thesis, Kumarappa “added his own contribution to…lineage with many an illustrious predecessor like DadabhaiNaoroji and R. C. Dutt”(Govindu & Malghan, 2016) whose works Poverty and Un-British Rule in India and The Economic History of India Under Early British Rule respectively explored the economic exploitation in India under British Rule.
Kumarappa wanted to publish his work Public Finance and India’s Poverty in India and when he was in search of a publisher, on the advice of his friend, he sent the manuscript to Gandhi. Kumarappa got an appointment to meet Gandhi on 30th May 1929. His first meeting with Gandhi is better described in his own words:
On the way up, I saw an old man seated under a tree on a neatly cleaned cow-dunged floor, spinning. Having never seen a spinning wheel before, I leaned on my walking stick and standing akimbo was watching, as there were still ten minutes for the appointment. This old man after about five minutes opened his toothless lips, and with a smile on his face enquired if I was Kumarappa. It suddenly dawned on me that my questioner might be no other than Mahatma Gandhi. So I, in my turn, asked him if he was Gandhiji; and when he nodded I promptly sat down on the cow-dunged floor regardless of the well-kept crease of my silk trousers! Seeing me sitting without stretched legs, more or less in a reclining position, someone from the house came rushing down with a chair for me, and Gandhiji asked me to get up and sit in the chair more comfortably. I replied that since he was seated on the floor I did not propose to take the chair(Kumarappa J. C., 1949).
One of Gandhi’s greatest achievements was his ability to identify the potential in people and nurturing the potential in them for a fruitful cause and to make them leaders. In the meeting, Gandhi understood the potential of Kumarappa and asked him if he can do a Gujarat Rural Economy survey with assistance from Gujarat Vidyapith, National University in Ahmedabad. Refusing Gandhi’s request is beyond question. Gandhi gave one advice on methodology “that the ‘Indian Economy had to be built by a method of securing rock bottom facts and drawing from them, by the most rigid process of reasoning, scientific conclusions which no amount of juggling could controvert’”(Nanda , 2002, p. 185).
Kumarappa went on to do the survey and the results of the survey revealed the deprivation that is prevalent in the Indian Villages. This survey brought out an ‘On ground Economist’ in Kumarappa.
Later when Gandhi commenced the salt march, he sent Kumarappa to help Mahadev Desai and write articles in his journal Young India. This brought out Journalist in Kumarappa. His sedition writings in the journal made Britishers put him behind the bars.Kumarappa used his time in Jail to study and understand Gandhian ideas. In his jail days in 1944, Kumarappa wrote the Economy of Permanence, which is an exploration into Gandhian Economic thought. Gandhi presented a “vision of a utopia in which economic behavior had a far secondary role to the philosophical and political purposes of his idea”(Rosen, Jan 1982) and this idea is reflected in Kumarappa’s work.
Exploring various types of Economics in Nature, he advocated two forms of Economies for mankind: The Economy of Gregation and Economy of Service. The economy of Gregation is “an extension from self-interest to group-interest and from acting on the immediate urge of present needs to planning for future requirements”(Kumarappa J. , 1945) like Honeybees that work for benefit of many.
The Economy of Service is when a living being works "neither for its present need nor for its personal future requirement, but projects its activities into the next generation, or generations to come, without looking for any reward”(Kumarappa J. , 1945). These two forms reflect a modern-day notion of Sustainable Development, which is the need of the hour. Gandhian Economic thought is very close to the environment. Gandhi advocated in protection and maintaining the permanence of Nature.
In 1928, Gandhi warned:
God forbid that India should ever take to industrialism after the manner of the West. The economic imperialism of a single tiny island kingdom (England) is today keeping the world in chains. If an entire nation of 300 millions took to similar economic exploitation, it would strip the world bare like locusts. Unless the capitalists of India help to avert that tragedy by becoming trustees of the welfare of the masses and by devoting their talents not to amassing wealth for themselves but to the service of the masses in an altruistic spirit, they will end either by destroying the masses or being destroyed by them(Gandhi M. , 1928).
The above warning clearly shows Gandhi’s vision to link Environment and Economics and not going in ‘the manner of the West’.
Kumarappa set to implement Gandhi's thoughts when he was appointed as secretary of All India Village Industries Association (AIVIA) in 1934 by Gandhi. AIVIA aimed “at rebuilding the village economy on sustainable lines, by promoting water conservation, community forest management and chemical agriculture”(Guha, 2018). Even after Independence, Kumarappa remained a strong voice against Nehruvian Economic ideas, which completely renounced Gandhian ideals of Self Sufficient and Self-Reliant Village Economy Model.
Conclusion
Based on the correspondence between Gandhi and Kumarappa, we can see an Economist, Environmentalist and an Ideal teacher in Gandhi. In 1948, burying "an urn containing the Mahatma's ashes in a pit in Sevagram Ashram….he murmured: ‘Instead of burying Gandhi deep in our hearts, we are burying him deep into the earth’”(Nanda , 2002, p. 190). Kumarappa died on 30th January 1960, a sad man with anguish and pain in him as Gandhi was when he died (the same day Gandhi was shot in 1948).
The author is a Second year EPS student, Department of International Studies and History, CHRIST (Deemed to be University), Bangalore
"Views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not reflect the position of the University"
As the Mentor, So the Disciple
Shobita S
There is no doubt that the Iron man of India was the most trusted lieutenant and an ardent follower of Mahatma Gandhi. History bears evidence proving the intensity of Gandhi’s influence on Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel. The fellow barristers from Gujarat have always worked towards the same goal of unity and harmony. Patel’s entry into the nationalist movement, his course of actions during the freedom struggle and his decisions as a member of constituent assembly exhibits the deep-rooted Gandhian ideals in him.Thiscan be understood by a simple interpretation of Patel’s activities on three major issues at three different time periods of the nationalist movement.
Pre-Independence
he year 1918 marks the full-fledged entry of Patel into the nationalist movement through the Kheda Satyagraha in Gujarat. He was a principal figure in the absence of Gandhi, leading the farmers against unfair agricultural cess of British Raj and instilling the importance of collective action among peasants. When one tries to trace the roots of his interest and arrival in the struggle, it is evident that the Champaran agitation led by Gandhi in 1916had played the pivotal role. Similar movement like this which is considered Patel’s most famous intervention is the Bardoli Satyagraha of 1925 which earned him the title ‘Sardar’. The method used by him in this venture replicates that which was used by Gandhi along with a touch of his own strategic mind. Patel urged the farmers of Bardoli, who were suffering from famine, to refuse tax payment to the British as an effort against the 30% increase in the tax rate. He instructed the people to remain non-violent to the incitements of British and continue their protest until the cancellation of taxes. Patel added the aspect of his strategic mind by appointing volunteers at each village to signal the arrival of tax inspectors. On hearing the signal, all the villagers hid in the jungle, thus stopping the tax inspectors from seizure of properties. The outcome of his movement was a huge success leading to cancellation of taxes and making Patel one of the important leaders in the then political arena(Singh, 2013). While analyzing this course of events, it is observable that Patel had placed huge importance on farmers similar to Gandhi which later formed a significant part of Gandhi’s Constructive Programme(M.K.Gandhi, 1948).Thus one can realize that the beginning of Patel’s political career and methodology has been the fruit of Gandhian influence.
Independence
An event that shook entire India during independence was the partition. Though Patel and Gandhi seemed to have differences of opinion in this matter, Patel was more practical in it while Gandhi was more idealistic. Patel realized that if Congress rejected the May 16 plan of the Cabinet Mission, then the Muslim League would be called to form the government which would strengthen the possibility of partition.Thus, Patel convinced Gandhi and approved May 16 plan. Later, he was outraged by Jinnah’s Direct Action, induction of League ministers in to the government and re-validation of grouping scheme in the May 16 plan by British which was earlier rejected by Congress. He was aware of Jinnah’s popular support among Muslims and the possibilities of Hindu-Muslim war. He realized that if the central government continues to be weak and divided, the possibility of a united India along with princely states would remain a dream. He had perceived the existence of a defacto Pakistan in Punjab and Bengal. Thus, he convinced Gandhi and Congress over the partition. Though Patel seemed to take double standard as he initially called Pakistan as Jinnah’s mad dream and later supported partition, we find an underlying idea of establishing the Gandhian ideals of unity, peace and harmony in either decision. He initially tried to avoid partition to uphold unity and later approved it to sustain peace and harmony though the aftermath of partition was expected by none.(Singh, 2013)
Post-Independence
After Independence, Patel had a major tussle with Ambedkar over reservation for untouchables. Patel was aware of Gandhi’s mind during Poona Pact and perceived the chances of division among Hindus. Post-independence, Patel who was the Chairman of Advisory Committee on Fundamental Rights, Minorities and Tribes made maximum opposition to all the electoral ideas of Ambedkar. He reversed Ambedkar’s idea of qualified joint electorate ensuring 20% of Dalit votes as qualifier to acquire a reserved seat. The draft constitution provided neither separate nor qualified joint electorates and as a step further, in May 1948, Patel proposed to abolish reservation citing the violent outcomes of partition and abolition on untouchability by the constitution. In this matter, we find a direct correlation of Patel’s and Gandhi’s ideas.
As it is evident that Patel’s ideals have always been in tandem with Gandhi, it leads one to question if Patel was a blind disciple or a practical realist. He has followed Gandhi and his advice throughout his political career and also gave up the chance of becoming India’s first prime minister. At the same time, he has also tried to put Gandhi’s ideals, often considered idealistic, into practice which is evident in all the three scenarios considered above and was also successful to some extent. Thus, the answer to such question is left debatable
The author is a Second year EPS student, Department of International Studies and History, CHRIST (Deemed to be University), Bangalore
"Views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not reflect the position of the University"
There is no doubt that the Iron man of India was the most trusted lieutenant and an ardent follower of Mahatma Gandhi. History bears evidence proving the intensity of Gandhi’s influence on Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel. The fellow barristers from Gujarat have always worked towards the same goal of unity and harmony. Patel’s entry into the nationalist movement, his course of actions during the freedom struggle and his decisions as a member of constituent assembly exhibits the deep-rooted Gandhian ideals in him.Thiscan be understood by a simple interpretation of Patel’s activities on three major issues at three different time periods of the nationalist movement.
Pre-Independence
he year 1918 marks the full-fledged entry of Patel into the nationalist movement through the Kheda Satyagraha in Gujarat. He was a principal figure in the absence of Gandhi, leading the farmers against unfair agricultural cess of British Raj and instilling the importance of collective action among peasants. When one tries to trace the roots of his interest and arrival in the struggle, it is evident that the Champaran agitation led by Gandhi in 1916had played the pivotal role. Similar movement like this which is considered Patel’s most famous intervention is the Bardoli Satyagraha of 1925 which earned him the title ‘Sardar’. The method used by him in this venture replicates that which was used by Gandhi along with a touch of his own strategic mind. Patel urged the farmers of Bardoli, who were suffering from famine, to refuse tax payment to the British as an effort against the 30% increase in the tax rate. He instructed the people to remain non-violent to the incitements of British and continue their protest until the cancellation of taxes. Patel added the aspect of his strategic mind by appointing volunteers at each village to signal the arrival of tax inspectors. On hearing the signal, all the villagers hid in the jungle, thus stopping the tax inspectors from seizure of properties. The outcome of his movement was a huge success leading to cancellation of taxes and making Patel one of the important leaders in the then political arena(Singh, 2013). While analyzing this course of events, it is observable that Patel had placed huge importance on farmers similar to Gandhi which later formed a significant part of Gandhi’s Constructive Programme(M.K.Gandhi, 1948).Thus one can realize that the beginning of Patel’s political career and methodology has been the fruit of Gandhian influence.
Independence
An event that shook entire India during independence was the partition. Though Patel and Gandhi seemed to have differences of opinion in this matter, Patel was more practical in it while Gandhi was more idealistic. Patel realized that if Congress rejected the May 16 plan of the Cabinet Mission, then the Muslim League would be called to form the government which would strengthen the possibility of partition.Thus, Patel convinced Gandhi and approved May 16 plan. Later, he was outraged by Jinnah’s Direct Action, induction of League ministers in to the government and re-validation of grouping scheme in the May 16 plan by British which was earlier rejected by Congress. He was aware of Jinnah’s popular support among Muslims and the possibilities of Hindu-Muslim war. He realized that if the central government continues to be weak and divided, the possibility of a united India along with princely states would remain a dream. He had perceived the existence of a defacto Pakistan in Punjab and Bengal. Thus, he convinced Gandhi and Congress over the partition. Though Patel seemed to take double standard as he initially called Pakistan as Jinnah’s mad dream and later supported partition, we find an underlying idea of establishing the Gandhian ideals of unity, peace and harmony in either decision. He initially tried to avoid partition to uphold unity and later approved it to sustain peace and harmony though the aftermath of partition was expected by none.(Singh, 2013)
Post-Independence
After Independence, Patel had a major tussle with Ambedkar over reservation for untouchables. Patel was aware of Gandhi’s mind during Poona Pact and perceived the chances of division among Hindus. Post-independence, Patel who was the Chairman of Advisory Committee on Fundamental Rights, Minorities and Tribes made maximum opposition to all the electoral ideas of Ambedkar. He reversed Ambedkar’s idea of qualified joint electorate ensuring 20% of Dalit votes as qualifier to acquire a reserved seat. The draft constitution provided neither separate nor qualified joint electorates and as a step further, in May 1948, Patel proposed to abolish reservation citing the violent outcomes of partition and abolition on untouchability by the constitution. In this matter, we find a direct correlation of Patel’s and Gandhi’s ideas.
As it is evident that Patel’s ideals have always been in tandem with Gandhi, it leads one to question if Patel was a blind disciple or a practical realist. He has followed Gandhi and his advice throughout his political career and also gave up the chance of becoming India’s first prime minister. At the same time, he has also tried to put Gandhi’s ideals, often considered idealistic, into practice which is evident in all the three scenarios considered above and was also successful to some extent. Thus, the answer to such question is left debatable
The author is a Second year EPS student, Department of International Studies and History, CHRIST (Deemed to be University), Bangalore
"Views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not reflect the position of the University"
BLOOD DIAMOND - MOVIE ANALYSIS ON THE BASIS OF LIBERALISM, MARXISM AND REALISM
Shwetha Menon
Conflict resources or blood resources are resources that are born out of conflict areas. They are exported or sold from an area of conflict or war, essentially acting as a source of funding for the same conflict or war.
Many countries in the west of the African continent such as Liberia, Angola, Sierra Leone, Cote d’Ivoire following the end of the Cold War in the early 1990s, descended into a state of chaos with civil war breaking out in most of these countries. This, having coincided with the discovery and development of diamond resources in the region, proved to be a deadly combination. As conflicts escalated, the diamond industry in these regions was exploited for financing the war causes in the region. Rebel groups and warring factions gained control of diamond mines, proceeds from which were used to finance their causes through purchase of arms and ammunition. These diamonds therefore, having been born out conflict, become “blood diamonds”, leading us to the title. Blood Diamond is a political/war thriller film directed by Edward Zwick and written by Charles Leavitt. It stars Leonardo DiCaprio as Danny Archer, Jennifer Connelly as Maddy Bowen and Djimon Hounsou as Solomon Vandy. The story is set in the 1991-2002 civil war time in Sierra Leone, portraying the brutal conflict between the government forces and rebel forces that causes the loss of lives of countless innocent men, women and children. However, the central character of the story are the blood diamonds. It depicts the despicable atrocities committed by either factions of the war and beyond, specially surrounding the mining and trade of diamonds to fund their violence.
The plot begins by following the daily life of a Mende fisherman and his family in Sierra Leone, Solomon Vandy. However, as the insurgent soldiers (Revolutionary United Force or RUF) barge into his village, pillaging, plundering and murdering innocent lives, Solomon’s life is changed forever too. He is separated from his family and is taken to work at a diamond mine controlled by the RUF in Kono. He mines a large pink diamond at the mine, one he seeks to hide by burying but the camp is soon attacked by government forces. Solomon survives but is imprisoned. After a series of events, he meets ex-soldier and white Rhodesian diamond smuggler Danny Archer in prison, who has now learned about the pink diamond that is hidden. Archer promises Vandy that he “knows white people” and that in return for the diamond, Vandy shall be reunited with his family. Archer wants the diamond because it would help him leave the continent by it would fetch a large sum of money. Maddy Bowen, an American journalist who is trying to establish a connect between these blood diamonds and western diamond companies, joins their hunt after she discovers that Archer has connections with Van De Kaap. Following this plot line, the film successfully traces the poignant realities of political instability, political and economic exploitation of commoners, child soldiers, war crimes and finally, western capitalism and its indifference towards these realities that they exploit for their own good.
Liberal View
Although realism is considered a leading theory in international politics, liberalist ideologies also have often been at the forefront of international relations theories. (Baylis and Smith, 2007) Liberalism holds that humans are inherently good and that they have a tendency to progress in terms of their moral and material condition (Naaz, 2012). Throughout the movie, even when times are the worst, the audience are often reminded that there is hope. On their way to Kono, Archer and Vandy meet Benjamin Margai, a kind, compassionate man who runs a rehabilitation center for rescued child soldiers. In one of the scenes, Margai says to Archer, “My heart always told me that people were inherently good.”. He says that no matter what, despite what he has seen, he believed that a moment of love could change a man’s life. This is an expression of optimism and hope about human nature and more importantly, the understanding that humans are capable of change.
In another scene, when Solomon remembers his son, he expresses hope that when the war is over, his son will study hard and become a doctor. This also takes us back to one of the first few scenes of the movie where Solomon speaks to Dia, his son, on his way back from school. Dia speaks of what he learned about utopia and says, “Some day, when the war is over, our world will be a paradise.”
During one of the exchanges between Danny and Maddy at the bar, we get an insight into Maddy’s liberal perspective of the war. Once, as the interaction between them becomes heated, Maddy condemns Archer’s pessimist view of the people of Africa and the conflict in Sierra Leone. She truly believes that it is the system that is to be blamed, not the people for their truly devastated condition and that if the African people worked together, things would get better. It is also this sentiment that bites her when she is forced to write about the victims’ sufferings only. According to liberalism, bad human behaviour, which is responsible for injustice and war, is actually the result of corrupt social institutions and misunderstandings among leaders (Naaz, 2012). This belief is what motivates her to conduct an investigation and gather information from Danny about Van De Kaap and his association with blood diamonds, to push his corruption into public light. And she does succeed in doing so, her story revealed enough information about blood diamonds and the corrupt institutions that exploited their production to initiate the Kimberley Process Certificate, a process that verifies that the origin of diamonds sold in the market are truly conflict free.
Realist View
Realism is a theory in international relations that maintains that the principal actors in the international arena are states, each acting in its rational self-interest within an environment of international anarchy. No overarching or sovereign authority exists to control the actions of states or relations among or between them. (Basu, 2012)
The film is a political thriller that revolves around a raging civil conflict that is also far more complex than it seems. Hence, it is no surprise that when viewed through the realist perspective, most characters and plot driving events are driven by ego, self-interest and greed. Most of their actions are carried out not with concern for mutual cooperation or benefit but out of concern for what they are to receive in return. During one of the first scenes, Captain Poison begins to chop of arms of innocent men but when he comes across Solomon, he recruits him to work at the insurgent controlled mine, to their own benefit. Later, when he sees the pink diamond with Solomon, he threatens Solomon to hand it over to him. It is obvious that the Captain sought to keep it for himself and as we learn towards the end of the film, he had thought of it as his ticket out of the country (as he tells Solomon). In the same scene, the Captain says to , “You think I am the devil, but it is only because I have lived in hell.” This is a great insight, specially in the context of neo-realism. Kenneth Waltz's theory emphasizes the importance of the structure of the international system and its role as the primary determinant of state behaviour. (Baylis and Smith, 2007) This theory of Waltz is today known as having laid the foundations of neo-realism. It is reflective of a larger picture in which individuals, as well as nations are forced to adopt harsher modes of action due to pressure from the environment around them.
The situation is not very different for Danny either. During one of the conversations between Maddy and Danny where they drink palm wine, he tells her that his circumstances, having grown up with a terrible childhood without parents had made him so tough.
Also, very importantly, we see an interaction between Commander Zero and Archer in the beginning of the movie where we are presented a very insensitive way of interaction. They very casually talk of a deal of weapons (grenade launchers) in return for diamonds, all for the self-interest of either sides. Danny is even ready to go make a deal with the government.
Realists primarily emphasize on power, national interest, security and the centrality of the nation state. They believe in the constancy of human nature, which can be both good and evil. In the quest for security, nations try to build up resources. Realists do not believe that the imposition of normative values or patterns of ‘standard’ behaviour upon states is feasible or realistically sustainable.(Basu, 2012) In most instances of the movie, Danny is driven by his own motives - he tries to advance his own goals and achievements in an attempt to secure his own present and future. He tries to manipulate Solomon by promising his family to find the pink diamond, he asks Maddy to find Solomon’s family in return for sensitive details that Maddy needed for her investigation. He is rarely concerned with the morality of his actions, at least not in the first half of the plot. Talking about his time in Angola, Danny says, “We thought we were fighting Communism, but in the end, it was all about who gets what, ivory, oil, gold and diamonds. So, one day I decided, I’m going to get mine.”
Captain Poison also manipulates many people into working for him, by indoctrinating in them his beliefs. He even manipulates the child soldiers and sends them out to kill and die for him and the RUF.
There are multiple instances in the movie that hint at the belief that the African continent is inherently prone to violence and conflict. “How can my own people do this to each other?”, Solomon says, with a tone of sadness and hopelessness. “I know good people who say there is something wrong with us, inside our black skin. That we were better off when the white man ruled.” TIA - This is Africa is a term that is often used in the movie, also to hint at the pessimism that surrounds the idea of peace and political stability in Africa. It is a way of saying that Africa has no hope and the people of Africa condemned to this life of war, death and violence.
A realist would say that the conflicts in Africa are born out of inherent tendencies to conflict.
Marxist Perspective
Marxism is a critical theory of international relations that asserts that the international political system is integrated into the global capitalist system in pursuit of capital accumulation. Hence, colonialism bestowed sources for raw materials and to capture markets for exports, while decolonialization brought new and more opportunities in the form of economic dependence. (Basu, 2012) Marxism believes that not only do the capitalist bourgeoisie influence the economic spheres in a nation but they also extend their devious influence over the political spheres of a nation. The State therefore, is a mere puppet in the hands of the bourgeoisie that uses the State as a tool for exploiting the ‘proletariat’ or the working class for their own gains. And according to Marxism, the most important tool of exploitation here is war fought under the garb of nationalism. Marxism proposes that war is only an instrument of exploitation for the capitalist class.
In the movie, neither the RUF nor the government really works for the common people of the country. The RUF especially, is concerned primarily with the material gains from the war. It is only in their slogans that they really “fight for the people”. Marxist theories aim to expose a deeper, underlying-indeed hidden-truth. This is that the familiar events of world politics-wars, treaties, international aid operations-all occur within structures that have an enormous influence on those events. These are the structures of a global capitalist system. Any attempt to understand world politics must be based on a broader understanding of the processes operating in global capitalism. (Baylis and Smith, 2007) More deviously, therefore, we see the Van De Kaap Diamonds Company, a capitalist institution that exploits the ongoing war for their profiteering motives. The Company purchases diamonds at a cheaper rate from conflict areas and locks them up underground to prevent them from driving the price down in the market (which could happen if they flood the market directly), ultimately benefiting themselves from the stabilized high prices. They worry not one bit of the bloodshed that they finance, with every diamond they purchase.
This is a prime example for Marxist explanations on capitalist exploitation of wars.
The author is a final year HEP student, Department of International Studies and History, CHRIST (Deemed to be University), Bangalore
"Views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not reflect the position of the University"
Conflict resources or blood resources are resources that are born out of conflict areas. They are exported or sold from an area of conflict or war, essentially acting as a source of funding for the same conflict or war.
Many countries in the west of the African continent such as Liberia, Angola, Sierra Leone, Cote d’Ivoire following the end of the Cold War in the early 1990s, descended into a state of chaos with civil war breaking out in most of these countries. This, having coincided with the discovery and development of diamond resources in the region, proved to be a deadly combination. As conflicts escalated, the diamond industry in these regions was exploited for financing the war causes in the region. Rebel groups and warring factions gained control of diamond mines, proceeds from which were used to finance their causes through purchase of arms and ammunition. These diamonds therefore, having been born out conflict, become “blood diamonds”, leading us to the title. Blood Diamond is a political/war thriller film directed by Edward Zwick and written by Charles Leavitt. It stars Leonardo DiCaprio as Danny Archer, Jennifer Connelly as Maddy Bowen and Djimon Hounsou as Solomon Vandy. The story is set in the 1991-2002 civil war time in Sierra Leone, portraying the brutal conflict between the government forces and rebel forces that causes the loss of lives of countless innocent men, women and children. However, the central character of the story are the blood diamonds. It depicts the despicable atrocities committed by either factions of the war and beyond, specially surrounding the mining and trade of diamonds to fund their violence.
The plot begins by following the daily life of a Mende fisherman and his family in Sierra Leone, Solomon Vandy. However, as the insurgent soldiers (Revolutionary United Force or RUF) barge into his village, pillaging, plundering and murdering innocent lives, Solomon’s life is changed forever too. He is separated from his family and is taken to work at a diamond mine controlled by the RUF in Kono. He mines a large pink diamond at the mine, one he seeks to hide by burying but the camp is soon attacked by government forces. Solomon survives but is imprisoned. After a series of events, he meets ex-soldier and white Rhodesian diamond smuggler Danny Archer in prison, who has now learned about the pink diamond that is hidden. Archer promises Vandy that he “knows white people” and that in return for the diamond, Vandy shall be reunited with his family. Archer wants the diamond because it would help him leave the continent by it would fetch a large sum of money. Maddy Bowen, an American journalist who is trying to establish a connect between these blood diamonds and western diamond companies, joins their hunt after she discovers that Archer has connections with Van De Kaap. Following this plot line, the film successfully traces the poignant realities of political instability, political and economic exploitation of commoners, child soldiers, war crimes and finally, western capitalism and its indifference towards these realities that they exploit for their own good.
Liberal View
Although realism is considered a leading theory in international politics, liberalist ideologies also have often been at the forefront of international relations theories. (Baylis and Smith, 2007) Liberalism holds that humans are inherently good and that they have a tendency to progress in terms of their moral and material condition (Naaz, 2012). Throughout the movie, even when times are the worst, the audience are often reminded that there is hope. On their way to Kono, Archer and Vandy meet Benjamin Margai, a kind, compassionate man who runs a rehabilitation center for rescued child soldiers. In one of the scenes, Margai says to Archer, “My heart always told me that people were inherently good.”. He says that no matter what, despite what he has seen, he believed that a moment of love could change a man’s life. This is an expression of optimism and hope about human nature and more importantly, the understanding that humans are capable of change.
In another scene, when Solomon remembers his son, he expresses hope that when the war is over, his son will study hard and become a doctor. This also takes us back to one of the first few scenes of the movie where Solomon speaks to Dia, his son, on his way back from school. Dia speaks of what he learned about utopia and says, “Some day, when the war is over, our world will be a paradise.”
During one of the exchanges between Danny and Maddy at the bar, we get an insight into Maddy’s liberal perspective of the war. Once, as the interaction between them becomes heated, Maddy condemns Archer’s pessimist view of the people of Africa and the conflict in Sierra Leone. She truly believes that it is the system that is to be blamed, not the people for their truly devastated condition and that if the African people worked together, things would get better. It is also this sentiment that bites her when she is forced to write about the victims’ sufferings only. According to liberalism, bad human behaviour, which is responsible for injustice and war, is actually the result of corrupt social institutions and misunderstandings among leaders (Naaz, 2012). This belief is what motivates her to conduct an investigation and gather information from Danny about Van De Kaap and his association with blood diamonds, to push his corruption into public light. And she does succeed in doing so, her story revealed enough information about blood diamonds and the corrupt institutions that exploited their production to initiate the Kimberley Process Certificate, a process that verifies that the origin of diamonds sold in the market are truly conflict free.
Realist View
Realism is a theory in international relations that maintains that the principal actors in the international arena are states, each acting in its rational self-interest within an environment of international anarchy. No overarching or sovereign authority exists to control the actions of states or relations among or between them. (Basu, 2012)
The film is a political thriller that revolves around a raging civil conflict that is also far more complex than it seems. Hence, it is no surprise that when viewed through the realist perspective, most characters and plot driving events are driven by ego, self-interest and greed. Most of their actions are carried out not with concern for mutual cooperation or benefit but out of concern for what they are to receive in return. During one of the first scenes, Captain Poison begins to chop of arms of innocent men but when he comes across Solomon, he recruits him to work at the insurgent controlled mine, to their own benefit. Later, when he sees the pink diamond with Solomon, he threatens Solomon to hand it over to him. It is obvious that the Captain sought to keep it for himself and as we learn towards the end of the film, he had thought of it as his ticket out of the country (as he tells Solomon). In the same scene, the Captain says to , “You think I am the devil, but it is only because I have lived in hell.” This is a great insight, specially in the context of neo-realism. Kenneth Waltz's theory emphasizes the importance of the structure of the international system and its role as the primary determinant of state behaviour. (Baylis and Smith, 2007) This theory of Waltz is today known as having laid the foundations of neo-realism. It is reflective of a larger picture in which individuals, as well as nations are forced to adopt harsher modes of action due to pressure from the environment around them.
The situation is not very different for Danny either. During one of the conversations between Maddy and Danny where they drink palm wine, he tells her that his circumstances, having grown up with a terrible childhood without parents had made him so tough.
Also, very importantly, we see an interaction between Commander Zero and Archer in the beginning of the movie where we are presented a very insensitive way of interaction. They very casually talk of a deal of weapons (grenade launchers) in return for diamonds, all for the self-interest of either sides. Danny is even ready to go make a deal with the government.
Realists primarily emphasize on power, national interest, security and the centrality of the nation state. They believe in the constancy of human nature, which can be both good and evil. In the quest for security, nations try to build up resources. Realists do not believe that the imposition of normative values or patterns of ‘standard’ behaviour upon states is feasible or realistically sustainable.(Basu, 2012) In most instances of the movie, Danny is driven by his own motives - he tries to advance his own goals and achievements in an attempt to secure his own present and future. He tries to manipulate Solomon by promising his family to find the pink diamond, he asks Maddy to find Solomon’s family in return for sensitive details that Maddy needed for her investigation. He is rarely concerned with the morality of his actions, at least not in the first half of the plot. Talking about his time in Angola, Danny says, “We thought we were fighting Communism, but in the end, it was all about who gets what, ivory, oil, gold and diamonds. So, one day I decided, I’m going to get mine.”
Captain Poison also manipulates many people into working for him, by indoctrinating in them his beliefs. He even manipulates the child soldiers and sends them out to kill and die for him and the RUF.
There are multiple instances in the movie that hint at the belief that the African continent is inherently prone to violence and conflict. “How can my own people do this to each other?”, Solomon says, with a tone of sadness and hopelessness. “I know good people who say there is something wrong with us, inside our black skin. That we were better off when the white man ruled.” TIA - This is Africa is a term that is often used in the movie, also to hint at the pessimism that surrounds the idea of peace and political stability in Africa. It is a way of saying that Africa has no hope and the people of Africa condemned to this life of war, death and violence.
A realist would say that the conflicts in Africa are born out of inherent tendencies to conflict.
Marxist Perspective
Marxism is a critical theory of international relations that asserts that the international political system is integrated into the global capitalist system in pursuit of capital accumulation. Hence, colonialism bestowed sources for raw materials and to capture markets for exports, while decolonialization brought new and more opportunities in the form of economic dependence. (Basu, 2012) Marxism believes that not only do the capitalist bourgeoisie influence the economic spheres in a nation but they also extend their devious influence over the political spheres of a nation. The State therefore, is a mere puppet in the hands of the bourgeoisie that uses the State as a tool for exploiting the ‘proletariat’ or the working class for their own gains. And according to Marxism, the most important tool of exploitation here is war fought under the garb of nationalism. Marxism proposes that war is only an instrument of exploitation for the capitalist class.
In the movie, neither the RUF nor the government really works for the common people of the country. The RUF especially, is concerned primarily with the material gains from the war. It is only in their slogans that they really “fight for the people”. Marxist theories aim to expose a deeper, underlying-indeed hidden-truth. This is that the familiar events of world politics-wars, treaties, international aid operations-all occur within structures that have an enormous influence on those events. These are the structures of a global capitalist system. Any attempt to understand world politics must be based on a broader understanding of the processes operating in global capitalism. (Baylis and Smith, 2007) More deviously, therefore, we see the Van De Kaap Diamonds Company, a capitalist institution that exploits the ongoing war for their profiteering motives. The Company purchases diamonds at a cheaper rate from conflict areas and locks them up underground to prevent them from driving the price down in the market (which could happen if they flood the market directly), ultimately benefiting themselves from the stabilized high prices. They worry not one bit of the bloodshed that they finance, with every diamond they purchase.
This is a prime example for Marxist explanations on capitalist exploitation of wars.
The author is a final year HEP student, Department of International Studies and History, CHRIST (Deemed to be University), Bangalore
"Views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not reflect the position of the University"
The Theories of International Relations and Game of Thrones
Game of Thrones (GoT), the much-celebrated American fantasy drama television series is set in a feudal setup. The show follows a cataclysmic quest among several noble families to either gain control over the throne or attain independence from it, in the mythical lands of Westeros and Essos and also features a story arc of an impending threat to humankind from supernatural humanoid creatures. The show employs a plethora of fantasy and mystical allusions in its narrative, like dragons, resurrection, green sight, ice zombies, shadow demons and thus would give an impression that its not prevalent as a specimen to study International Relations, but it is clearly otherwise. The plot follows the major houses in the landmass of Westeros, namely the Starks, Lannisters, Baratheons, Targaryens, Greyjoys, Tyrells, Martells etc engaged in a bloody feudal tussle to claim the Iron Throne, both a physical seat of office and a metonym for the monarchy of Westeros. In addition to the noblemen, there exist other groups of characters like the Wildlings or ‘Free Folk’, who are thought of as barbarians and are thus segregated from the rest of the population using a wall, a Mongol like horde of warriors called the Dothraki and the Unsullied, a band of eunuch militia, all of whom impact the storyline in some way or the other.
REALISM:
GoT’s depiction of sex, violence, witty banter and ice zombies have proved the show’s mettle over time, but its bountiful portrayal of complex political theories has stepped up its ante. All the great Houses in GoT, impulsively act to further their National Interests and thus the portrayal of realism is central to the plot. Cersei Lannister’s assertion and the show’s most iconic dialogue, “When you play the Game of Thrones, you win or you die. There is no middle ground” lies in perfect sync with Realism’s depiction of an environment of international anarchy, with an absence of an overarching sovereign authority (Martin, A Game of Thrones, 1996). A state’s primary goal in such a situation is survival, and in order to achieve this goal the Houses in GoT often face a security dilemma, where a lord/lady can summon his/her bannermen in the event of an imminent war and can forge alliances and also betray them to achieve their own self interests. For instance, Tywin Lannister had turned against his King, Aerys II Targaryen and aided Robert Baratheon’s army in the sack of King’s Landing, when he saw it as an opportunity to cultivate his House’s interests with the new monarch and augmenting its power and influence in Westeros (Fandom, 2011). Tywin Lannister stands out as one of the skilled forerunners of the realist foreign policy as his decisions are based on power calculations as opposed to the Starks’ moral code of governance. He was able to lead his House to victory in the War of the Five Kings and consolidate his grandson’s position as the King by employing strategic alliances with the Boltons in the North, Freys in the Riverlands and the Tyrells in the Reach, which resulted in the successful routing of the secessionists. The relative level of power of Hose Tyrell, determined its relations with the other Houses throughout the run of the series. Tyrells had access to fertile lands and large armies and thus all Houses sought an alliance with them, beginning from Renly Baratheon, the Lannisters and finally Daenerys Targaryen. The Tyrell women, Olenna and Margaery are some other notable practitioners of realism, each acting for their rational self-interests.
LIBERALISM:
In the brutal feudal polity of GoT, overrun by civil war, turmoil and use of force, liberals are very difficult to find. Most characters are deeply conservative who believe in traditional values and detest democracy. But there are certain characters and incidents on the show, which reflect the world of Mill, Bentham and Kant, and the greatest contenders are the Wildlings or as they call themselves, the “Free Folk’. The Free Folk beyond the Wall don’t follow a hereditary system of governance and instead elect the ‘King Beyond the Wall’, don’t pay taxes, don’t bend the knee to anyone and have liberal attitudes to sexual and moral codes (Martin, A Clash of Kings, 1998). They have survived for thousand of years despite attempts by the Night’s Watch, the White Walkers and the Northerners to decimate them, which is testimony to the robustness of a liberated society. The traditionalists, i.e. the majority population of Westeros abhor such ideologies which propound democracy over aristocracy and thus deem the Wildlings as ‘savages with no loyalty’ and have segregated them by erecting a Wall. Similarly, the Ironborn who resemble the Vikings are also portrayed as proto liberals, who hold Kingsmoots to elect the most powerful man/woman as the Monarch. Lastly, the only men in the Seven Kingdoms who could be classified as consistent, striving liberals are fellow Brothers of the Night Watch, Jon Snow and Samwell Tarly. Jon’s response to immigration, alliances in the times of war, issues of social integration bring out the liberal in him and cements his belief that human nature is innately good and people have the capacity to improve their moral and material conditions and pave the way for progress. He unites the Wildlings, the Targaryen entourage and the Northern Houses to battle the White Walkers and the impending ‘Long Night’, which could be understood as an allegory for climate change in present sense (Dasgupta, 2019). He did so by fostering cooperation, trust and following a pragmatic foreign policy. Samwell Tarly was the first and last character on the show, to suggest democracy as a form of government in Westeros, which wasn’t meet with a very warm reception by the other characters.
MARXISM:
GoT is centred around a feudal society and is hence the breeding ground for the tenets of Marxism. Society is primarily divided into two classes, the Monarchs with their ministers and lords who own property and land, whom Marx would categorise as the Bourgeoisie and the majority of the population, who toil for their masters, i.e. the Proletariats. The Houses keep fighting each other throughout the length of the series to advance their own interests and get the have nots to fight their wars for them (Basu, 2017). Not only did the War of the Five Kings redraw the political map of Westeros, but it also brought immense suffering to the poor peasants. They were constantly raided and pillaged to feed the various armies and in case their lord was defeated, the rival forces sacked their granaries, raped their women and massacred them. There are many instances on the show, which bear close resemblance to a Proletariat Revolution like the Riot of King’s Landing, where the citizens disgruntled with the shortage of food and dissatisfied by King Joffrey’s tyrannous ways revolt almost capture the royal family; the activities of the Brotherhood Without Banners, who have no allegiance to any House and are protectors of the ‘small folk’ etc. The High Sparrow, the head of the Faith Militant aptly represents the Proletariat class, which lives on the verge of death due to the means of production being held by the Bourgeoise. During a heated conversation with Jaime Lannister, he says that even though they are insignificant in number, they can unite to topple an entire empire (Mishra, 2016). The High Sparrow gives the proletariats hope, as he promises a life without serfdom and as religion becomes the opium of the masses, the Faith Militant along with the citizens establish a dictatorship of the proletariats. Similarly, Daenerys Targaryen, after noticing the misery of the slaves in Slaver’s Bay, unleashes her dragons on the slave masters to restore the dictatorship of the proletariat. Lastly, the fourth episode of the concluding season was aired on May 5,2019- Karl Marx’s birthday (Balan, 2019). In the episode, Varys had reminded Tyrion Lannister that his loyalty truly lay with the people and not his Queen. Varys intended to rid the people off despotism and understood the class struggle really well.
The author is a final year HEP student, Department of International Studies and History, CHRIST (Deemed to be University), Bangalore
"Views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not reflect the position of the University"
Game of Thrones (GoT), the much-celebrated American fantasy drama television series is set in a feudal setup. The show follows a cataclysmic quest among several noble families to either gain control over the throne or attain independence from it, in the mythical lands of Westeros and Essos and also features a story arc of an impending threat to humankind from supernatural humanoid creatures. The show employs a plethora of fantasy and mystical allusions in its narrative, like dragons, resurrection, green sight, ice zombies, shadow demons and thus would give an impression that its not prevalent as a specimen to study International Relations, but it is clearly otherwise. The plot follows the major houses in the landmass of Westeros, namely the Starks, Lannisters, Baratheons, Targaryens, Greyjoys, Tyrells, Martells etc engaged in a bloody feudal tussle to claim the Iron Throne, both a physical seat of office and a metonym for the monarchy of Westeros. In addition to the noblemen, there exist other groups of characters like the Wildlings or ‘Free Folk’, who are thought of as barbarians and are thus segregated from the rest of the population using a wall, a Mongol like horde of warriors called the Dothraki and the Unsullied, a band of eunuch militia, all of whom impact the storyline in some way or the other.
REALISM:
GoT’s depiction of sex, violence, witty banter and ice zombies have proved the show’s mettle over time, but its bountiful portrayal of complex political theories has stepped up its ante. All the great Houses in GoT, impulsively act to further their National Interests and thus the portrayal of realism is central to the plot. Cersei Lannister’s assertion and the show’s most iconic dialogue, “When you play the Game of Thrones, you win or you die. There is no middle ground” lies in perfect sync with Realism’s depiction of an environment of international anarchy, with an absence of an overarching sovereign authority (Martin, A Game of Thrones, 1996). A state’s primary goal in such a situation is survival, and in order to achieve this goal the Houses in GoT often face a security dilemma, where a lord/lady can summon his/her bannermen in the event of an imminent war and can forge alliances and also betray them to achieve their own self interests. For instance, Tywin Lannister had turned against his King, Aerys II Targaryen and aided Robert Baratheon’s army in the sack of King’s Landing, when he saw it as an opportunity to cultivate his House’s interests with the new monarch and augmenting its power and influence in Westeros (Fandom, 2011). Tywin Lannister stands out as one of the skilled forerunners of the realist foreign policy as his decisions are based on power calculations as opposed to the Starks’ moral code of governance. He was able to lead his House to victory in the War of the Five Kings and consolidate his grandson’s position as the King by employing strategic alliances with the Boltons in the North, Freys in the Riverlands and the Tyrells in the Reach, which resulted in the successful routing of the secessionists. The relative level of power of Hose Tyrell, determined its relations with the other Houses throughout the run of the series. Tyrells had access to fertile lands and large armies and thus all Houses sought an alliance with them, beginning from Renly Baratheon, the Lannisters and finally Daenerys Targaryen. The Tyrell women, Olenna and Margaery are some other notable practitioners of realism, each acting for their rational self-interests.
LIBERALISM:
In the brutal feudal polity of GoT, overrun by civil war, turmoil and use of force, liberals are very difficult to find. Most characters are deeply conservative who believe in traditional values and detest democracy. But there are certain characters and incidents on the show, which reflect the world of Mill, Bentham and Kant, and the greatest contenders are the Wildlings or as they call themselves, the “Free Folk’. The Free Folk beyond the Wall don’t follow a hereditary system of governance and instead elect the ‘King Beyond the Wall’, don’t pay taxes, don’t bend the knee to anyone and have liberal attitudes to sexual and moral codes (Martin, A Clash of Kings, 1998). They have survived for thousand of years despite attempts by the Night’s Watch, the White Walkers and the Northerners to decimate them, which is testimony to the robustness of a liberated society. The traditionalists, i.e. the majority population of Westeros abhor such ideologies which propound democracy over aristocracy and thus deem the Wildlings as ‘savages with no loyalty’ and have segregated them by erecting a Wall. Similarly, the Ironborn who resemble the Vikings are also portrayed as proto liberals, who hold Kingsmoots to elect the most powerful man/woman as the Monarch. Lastly, the only men in the Seven Kingdoms who could be classified as consistent, striving liberals are fellow Brothers of the Night Watch, Jon Snow and Samwell Tarly. Jon’s response to immigration, alliances in the times of war, issues of social integration bring out the liberal in him and cements his belief that human nature is innately good and people have the capacity to improve their moral and material conditions and pave the way for progress. He unites the Wildlings, the Targaryen entourage and the Northern Houses to battle the White Walkers and the impending ‘Long Night’, which could be understood as an allegory for climate change in present sense (Dasgupta, 2019). He did so by fostering cooperation, trust and following a pragmatic foreign policy. Samwell Tarly was the first and last character on the show, to suggest democracy as a form of government in Westeros, which wasn’t meet with a very warm reception by the other characters.
MARXISM:
GoT is centred around a feudal society and is hence the breeding ground for the tenets of Marxism. Society is primarily divided into two classes, the Monarchs with their ministers and lords who own property and land, whom Marx would categorise as the Bourgeoisie and the majority of the population, who toil for their masters, i.e. the Proletariats. The Houses keep fighting each other throughout the length of the series to advance their own interests and get the have nots to fight their wars for them (Basu, 2017). Not only did the War of the Five Kings redraw the political map of Westeros, but it also brought immense suffering to the poor peasants. They were constantly raided and pillaged to feed the various armies and in case their lord was defeated, the rival forces sacked their granaries, raped their women and massacred them. There are many instances on the show, which bear close resemblance to a Proletariat Revolution like the Riot of King’s Landing, where the citizens disgruntled with the shortage of food and dissatisfied by King Joffrey’s tyrannous ways revolt almost capture the royal family; the activities of the Brotherhood Without Banners, who have no allegiance to any House and are protectors of the ‘small folk’ etc. The High Sparrow, the head of the Faith Militant aptly represents the Proletariat class, which lives on the verge of death due to the means of production being held by the Bourgeoise. During a heated conversation with Jaime Lannister, he says that even though they are insignificant in number, they can unite to topple an entire empire (Mishra, 2016). The High Sparrow gives the proletariats hope, as he promises a life without serfdom and as religion becomes the opium of the masses, the Faith Militant along with the citizens establish a dictatorship of the proletariats. Similarly, Daenerys Targaryen, after noticing the misery of the slaves in Slaver’s Bay, unleashes her dragons on the slave masters to restore the dictatorship of the proletariat. Lastly, the fourth episode of the concluding season was aired on May 5,2019- Karl Marx’s birthday (Balan, 2019). In the episode, Varys had reminded Tyrion Lannister that his loyalty truly lay with the people and not his Queen. Varys intended to rid the people off despotism and understood the class struggle really well.
The author is a final year HEP student, Department of International Studies and History, CHRIST (Deemed to be University), Bangalore
"Views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not reflect the position of the University"
Nishant Sharma
Dumping is exporting products below "ordinary value," often described as the cost at which they are sold on the home market. Since its founding, the GATT has permitted signatories to apply duty to offset dumping when it causes, or threatens to cause, material injury to an sector in a GATT member's land.
Agreeably, many experts are striving for its total dismantlement, raising the issue whether the issue of dumping itself is entirely serious to guarantee the continuance of the GATT anti-dumping system. Like any complex overarching regime, antidumping methods can in some instances produce distorted or undesirable results. However, it is contended that, as Jacob Viner put forth in his seminal 1923 study on this subject, dumping itself remains a "problem for international trade."
In general, the existence of price discrimination between national and export markets shows that the domestic market is distorted, such as import blocks, monopoly or cartel barriers or a certain combination of these factors, which allow domestic producers to maintain domestic prices above export prices. Under such conditions, dumping is a mechanism by which competitive results are determined not by the relative competitiveness of individual producers, in effect by distortion itself. Dumping, thus eases the operations and installations at higher utilization rates as compared to the open markets making them economical and a positive cost-benefit unrelated to their comparative costs. Dumping, on the one hand, deters investment in the foreign market and on the other, fosters increased investment in the protected market. Such a dynamics in the long run, leads to the previous lesser efficient yet protected and catelized firm to displace an efficient firm that is benefiting from the protected home market.
Since the effect of dumping may be to destroy the national industries for reasons not related to ordinary market competitiveness, the political consensus in support of the current liberal multilateral trading system may simply be threatened by allowing dumping to happen without regulation. The friction caused by the dumping of the dumping industry, which is seen at certain points in this century, can become particularly acute if it is injured or destruction of industries which are considered crucial for national economic well-being and national security.
Types of Dumping
The act of determining whether an instance of international trade is dumping is the job of the International Trade Commission. They weigh whether the domestic industry is suffering material injury as a result of the imports of the dumped or subsidized products. All the relevant economic factors are considered such as the domestic industry's output, sales, market share, employment, and profits. The above mentioned organization is assisted by the Enforcement and Compliance must make affirmative preliminary determinations for an investigation to go forward.
Persistent-dumping- This is international price discrimination that goes on indefinitely. Exporting firms benefit from this when demand in a foreign market is more elastic than the demand in the company’s home market.
Sporadic Dumping- This occurs when there is a temporary surplus of a specific product. Businesses will dump surplus goods in foreign markets without having to reduce prices in their domestic market.
Predatory Dumping- Used by manufacturers as a means of eliminating competition in a foreign market. High domestic prices are used to supplement the reduced revenue of exporting cheaper goods. By exporting goods at cheap prices exporters are able to drive off any competition in the area. Once competition has been eliminated, the firm can then raise the price of the product and generate more revenue. The importing country usually complains, because its market might end up being controlled by a foreign monopoly.
Anti-Dumping Tariffs and Countervailing Duties
Antidumping (AD) and Countervailing (CV) duties both, being are additional fees used by the United States Department of Commerce (DoC) to discourage demand for products deemed to be import sensitive. However they are just one of the mechanisms that the U.S. government uses to help ensure a level playing field between U.S. suppliers & manufacturers and importers who are either receiving subsidies from foreign governments or are selling their products at lower prices in the United States. When an accusation of dumping has been proved, the WTO may allow the placing of an anti-dumping tariffs. There are three main options when introducing an anti-dumping import duty. First is the ad valorem duty which is a % of the net EU frontier price. This is the most common form of import duty. The second option could be a specific duty which is a fixed value for a certain amount of goods, e.g. €100 per tonne of a product. Lastly, the government can also impose a variable duty a minimum import price (MIP). Importers in the EU do not pay an anti-dumping duty if the foreign exporter's export price to the EU is higher than the MIP 4. The lesser-duty rule is that duties can't exceed the level needed to repair the harm done to European industry by the unfair dumping practices — currently between 9-13% for a range of steel products imported into the EU from China. The development of China’s steel industry has been phenomenal in the past 30 years in terms of both the speed and the scale of the industry’s growth and development. Chiense crude steel production touched almost 823 million tonnes. This accounts to almost more than 50% of the global steel amounts in 2014 (Song and Liu, 2012). This has been a result of excessive production capacities leading to high output and a need to then dump these excess goods in foreign markets such as the EU for less than what it is worth for. China produces nearly a half of the world’s steel and aims at monopolizing it. There has been a total of over 40 anti-dumping investigations launched purely for steel exports from China.This trend, replicated to differing degrees worldwide, has led to accusations in the US and elsewhere that China is selling its steel at a loss, or more accurately in this case, keeping costs artificially low so that other producers cannot compete.
Counterfeit Dumping in Africa
African consumer economies are booming, a great press tale. It has a disastrous aspect, however. As a disposal plant for falsified products, Africa is viewed. There are many poor people who cannot support products but want them. They purchase if the cost is correct, even when they realize that a item has been stolen.' Nigeria, Africa's biggest customer economy, among the nations most affected by counterfeit goods. In 2011 a survey by the Nigerian Standards Organization discovered that approximately 85% of the products purchased in Nigeria were falsified and defective. It is estimated that 100,000 fatalities a year in Africa are related to counterfeit medicines. "40%-50% of pharmaceutical goods have been counterfeited in East and West Africa," states Yates. The effect of counterfeit and defective products always damages the economy and causes public incomes to decrease. As a result of fiscal evasion relating to the counterfeit and under-size products, the state spends between 540 and 900 billion shillings per year.
Issue of Identification of Injury:
Art 3 of the ADA provides for injury and causal link determination. The ADA has classified injury to mean one of the following concepts: Material Injury- A genuine injury to the domestic industry; Threat of Material Injury- A genuine threat of injury to the domestic industry and not an allegation or a conjecture. There is a third type of injuries classified under this arrangement; that refer to material retardation. This is the kind of injury that does not affect any existing industry but retards the development of one. In the African context, the lack of a good definition of third type of injury problematizes the issue of counterfeit dumping further. This arises due to the fact that Africa already lacks an industrial base for tertiary sector goods which further do not develop because of the stiff competition faced by the cheap dumped products. Therefore, there is a need of classification of such a form of dumping especially for underdeveloped countries such as the African ones.
Theoretical Underpinning: Neo-colonialism:
Neocolonialism, neo-colonialism, or neo-imperialism is the practice of using capitalism, globalisation and cultural imperialism to influence a developing country instead of the previous colonial methods of direct military control (imperialism) or indirect political control (hegemony). China has been pursuing a muti-faceted policy of undermining indigenous industries in African states to create an economic dependency in Africa towards China. Dumping of cheap (an often counterfeit) goods is a supplementary strategy employed by China to make sure that there does not develop an industrial elite in African nations that is powerful enough to influence policy makers. The primary strategy being indebting the African nations. These loans could be seen as “vanity” spending, to help get politicians elected or re-elected. Therefore, the strategy of dumping can be seen as one which ensuring that the political structure in African nation remains totally within the hold of China by making sure there does not exist any econo-political nexus.
Conclusion:
Dumping poses a serious threat not only to developing and under-developed countries but also to the existing world order. We have seen lately the emergence of trade war between two of the biggest powers in the contemporary world (US and China) emerging out of many issues but wherein the primacy is still occupied by the issue of dumping. In the context of African nations, dumping has become an essential tool of neo-colonialism which has impaired the development of a sustainable domestic industries thereby inflicting great damage on the economic stability of these nations. This has further deteriorated the existing power dynamic between African nations and China and created a dependency. From the study, it can be concluded that Africa needs a stronger anti-dumping laws and needs to lobby the international community to update the injuries clauses of the Anti-Dumping Agreement.
The author is a Second Year MA in International Studies student, Department of International Studies and History, CHRIST (Deemed to be University), Bangalore
"Views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not reflect the position of the University"
Dumping is exporting products below "ordinary value," often described as the cost at which they are sold on the home market. Since its founding, the GATT has permitted signatories to apply duty to offset dumping when it causes, or threatens to cause, material injury to an sector in a GATT member's land.
Agreeably, many experts are striving for its total dismantlement, raising the issue whether the issue of dumping itself is entirely serious to guarantee the continuance of the GATT anti-dumping system. Like any complex overarching regime, antidumping methods can in some instances produce distorted or undesirable results. However, it is contended that, as Jacob Viner put forth in his seminal 1923 study on this subject, dumping itself remains a "problem for international trade."
In general, the existence of price discrimination between national and export markets shows that the domestic market is distorted, such as import blocks, monopoly or cartel barriers or a certain combination of these factors, which allow domestic producers to maintain domestic prices above export prices. Under such conditions, dumping is a mechanism by which competitive results are determined not by the relative competitiveness of individual producers, in effect by distortion itself. Dumping, thus eases the operations and installations at higher utilization rates as compared to the open markets making them economical and a positive cost-benefit unrelated to their comparative costs. Dumping, on the one hand, deters investment in the foreign market and on the other, fosters increased investment in the protected market. Such a dynamics in the long run, leads to the previous lesser efficient yet protected and catelized firm to displace an efficient firm that is benefiting from the protected home market.
Since the effect of dumping may be to destroy the national industries for reasons not related to ordinary market competitiveness, the political consensus in support of the current liberal multilateral trading system may simply be threatened by allowing dumping to happen without regulation. The friction caused by the dumping of the dumping industry, which is seen at certain points in this century, can become particularly acute if it is injured or destruction of industries which are considered crucial for national economic well-being and national security.
Types of Dumping
The act of determining whether an instance of international trade is dumping is the job of the International Trade Commission. They weigh whether the domestic industry is suffering material injury as a result of the imports of the dumped or subsidized products. All the relevant economic factors are considered such as the domestic industry's output, sales, market share, employment, and profits. The above mentioned organization is assisted by the Enforcement and Compliance must make affirmative preliminary determinations for an investigation to go forward.
Persistent-dumping- This is international price discrimination that goes on indefinitely. Exporting firms benefit from this when demand in a foreign market is more elastic than the demand in the company’s home market.
Sporadic Dumping- This occurs when there is a temporary surplus of a specific product. Businesses will dump surplus goods in foreign markets without having to reduce prices in their domestic market.
Predatory Dumping- Used by manufacturers as a means of eliminating competition in a foreign market. High domestic prices are used to supplement the reduced revenue of exporting cheaper goods. By exporting goods at cheap prices exporters are able to drive off any competition in the area. Once competition has been eliminated, the firm can then raise the price of the product and generate more revenue. The importing country usually complains, because its market might end up being controlled by a foreign monopoly.
Anti-Dumping Tariffs and Countervailing Duties
Antidumping (AD) and Countervailing (CV) duties both, being are additional fees used by the United States Department of Commerce (DoC) to discourage demand for products deemed to be import sensitive. However they are just one of the mechanisms that the U.S. government uses to help ensure a level playing field between U.S. suppliers & manufacturers and importers who are either receiving subsidies from foreign governments or are selling their products at lower prices in the United States. When an accusation of dumping has been proved, the WTO may allow the placing of an anti-dumping tariffs. There are three main options when introducing an anti-dumping import duty. First is the ad valorem duty which is a % of the net EU frontier price. This is the most common form of import duty. The second option could be a specific duty which is a fixed value for a certain amount of goods, e.g. €100 per tonne of a product. Lastly, the government can also impose a variable duty a minimum import price (MIP). Importers in the EU do not pay an anti-dumping duty if the foreign exporter's export price to the EU is higher than the MIP 4. The lesser-duty rule is that duties can't exceed the level needed to repair the harm done to European industry by the unfair dumping practices — currently between 9-13% for a range of steel products imported into the EU from China. The development of China’s steel industry has been phenomenal in the past 30 years in terms of both the speed and the scale of the industry’s growth and development. Chiense crude steel production touched almost 823 million tonnes. This accounts to almost more than 50% of the global steel amounts in 2014 (Song and Liu, 2012). This has been a result of excessive production capacities leading to high output and a need to then dump these excess goods in foreign markets such as the EU for less than what it is worth for. China produces nearly a half of the world’s steel and aims at monopolizing it. There has been a total of over 40 anti-dumping investigations launched purely for steel exports from China.This trend, replicated to differing degrees worldwide, has led to accusations in the US and elsewhere that China is selling its steel at a loss, or more accurately in this case, keeping costs artificially low so that other producers cannot compete.
Counterfeit Dumping in Africa
African consumer economies are booming, a great press tale. It has a disastrous aspect, however. As a disposal plant for falsified products, Africa is viewed. There are many poor people who cannot support products but want them. They purchase if the cost is correct, even when they realize that a item has been stolen.' Nigeria, Africa's biggest customer economy, among the nations most affected by counterfeit goods. In 2011 a survey by the Nigerian Standards Organization discovered that approximately 85% of the products purchased in Nigeria were falsified and defective. It is estimated that 100,000 fatalities a year in Africa are related to counterfeit medicines. "40%-50% of pharmaceutical goods have been counterfeited in East and West Africa," states Yates. The effect of counterfeit and defective products always damages the economy and causes public incomes to decrease. As a result of fiscal evasion relating to the counterfeit and under-size products, the state spends between 540 and 900 billion shillings per year.
Issue of Identification of Injury:
Art 3 of the ADA provides for injury and causal link determination. The ADA has classified injury to mean one of the following concepts: Material Injury- A genuine injury to the domestic industry; Threat of Material Injury- A genuine threat of injury to the domestic industry and not an allegation or a conjecture. There is a third type of injuries classified under this arrangement; that refer to material retardation. This is the kind of injury that does not affect any existing industry but retards the development of one. In the African context, the lack of a good definition of third type of injury problematizes the issue of counterfeit dumping further. This arises due to the fact that Africa already lacks an industrial base for tertiary sector goods which further do not develop because of the stiff competition faced by the cheap dumped products. Therefore, there is a need of classification of such a form of dumping especially for underdeveloped countries such as the African ones.
Theoretical Underpinning: Neo-colonialism:
Neocolonialism, neo-colonialism, or neo-imperialism is the practice of using capitalism, globalisation and cultural imperialism to influence a developing country instead of the previous colonial methods of direct military control (imperialism) or indirect political control (hegemony). China has been pursuing a muti-faceted policy of undermining indigenous industries in African states to create an economic dependency in Africa towards China. Dumping of cheap (an often counterfeit) goods is a supplementary strategy employed by China to make sure that there does not develop an industrial elite in African nations that is powerful enough to influence policy makers. The primary strategy being indebting the African nations. These loans could be seen as “vanity” spending, to help get politicians elected or re-elected. Therefore, the strategy of dumping can be seen as one which ensuring that the political structure in African nation remains totally within the hold of China by making sure there does not exist any econo-political nexus.
Conclusion:
Dumping poses a serious threat not only to developing and under-developed countries but also to the existing world order. We have seen lately the emergence of trade war between two of the biggest powers in the contemporary world (US and China) emerging out of many issues but wherein the primacy is still occupied by the issue of dumping. In the context of African nations, dumping has become an essential tool of neo-colonialism which has impaired the development of a sustainable domestic industries thereby inflicting great damage on the economic stability of these nations. This has further deteriorated the existing power dynamic between African nations and China and created a dependency. From the study, it can be concluded that Africa needs a stronger anti-dumping laws and needs to lobby the international community to update the injuries clauses of the Anti-Dumping Agreement.
The author is a Second Year MA in International Studies student, Department of International Studies and History, CHRIST (Deemed to be University), Bangalore
"Views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not reflect the position of the University"
Maoists’ Spread beyond the ‘Red Corridor’
Dr N. Manoharan
Thunderbolts, elite commando force of Kerala Police, gunned down three suspected Maoists in forest areas of Attapadi Hills of Palakad on 28 October 2019. The incident confirms the reports that the Maoists have been spreading to the south of India beyond the so-called “red corridor”. They are also known to have been moving to the northeast and to urban areas of the country.
It is known that the Indian Maoists have good network with several key militant groups of the northeast India that commenced roughly since the mid-1990s. The linkage ranges from getting arms, ammunitions, communication devices to training from the northeast militant groups like National Socialist Council of Nagaland (NSCN-IM), anti-talk faction of the United Liberation Front of Asom (ULFA) led by Paresh Barua, People’s Liberation Army (PLA), People’s Revolutionary Party of Kangleipak (Prepak), Revolutionary People’s Front (RPF), Kamtapur Liberation Organisation (KLO), Gorkha Liberation Tiger Force (GLTF), Gurkha Liberation Organisation (GLO), Adibasi National Liberation Army, Adivasi People’s Army (APA), and National Democratic Front of Bodoland (NDFB). Chinese small arms find their way to the ‘Red Corridor’ mainly through these groups. It is through the northeast groups the Maoists have good access to militant groups of Myanmar. Maoists, in turn, are said to be providing explosives (ammonium nitrate) and funds to the northeast groups.
The mutual support between Naxals and northeast militant groups is not just restricted to material, but extends to moral aspects as well. While Naxals have strongly supported “people’s movements” of the northeast, the northeast militant groups have stood by “revolutionaries”. ULFA leader Paresh Baruah once remarked, “The Indian colonial government is also viewed as an enemy by the Maoists. Our enemy is also the same and so there is an understanding with them.”
But, what is more concerning is attempts by the Maoists to push the boundaries of the ‘Red Corridor’ and set up support bases in upper Assam and some of the tribal areas in the hilly interiors. The presence of Maoists is felt in pockets of Tinsukia, Dibrugarh, Lakhimpur, Dhemaji, Sivasagar, Golaghat and Karbi Anglong districts of Assam and Lohit district of Arunachal Pradesh (adjoining Tinsukia). The hub of Maoists activities is said to be in Sadiya area, situated in Assam-Arunachal Pradesh border. Maoists have found parts of the northeast of India as a new zone of “revolution” to establish what they call as “base areas”. In this regard, two major causes are being exploited: deprivation among the tea workers of Assam and anti-dam sentiments in Arunachal Pradesh. Since there is political vacuum in both cases, Maoists are more than willing to fill them. Interestingly, adivasis in tea gardens are descendants of migrants from present-day Jharkhand, Bihar, Odisha, Chhatisgarh and Madhya Pradesh during the British times. The Maoists have already set up local committees in these areas. From there it will become easy for them to link up to southern parts of Bhutan, where Nepali refugees are populated.
The Maoists have also been trying to extend their presence in southern India. Way back in 2013, the presence and movement of the armed cadres of CPI (Maoist) have been noticed on over two dozen occasions in Malappuram, Wayanad and Kannur in Kerala and Mysore, Kodagu, Udupi, Chikmagalur and Shimoga in Karnataka. Though adjoining areas of Tamil Nadu have not witnessed any movement of armed Naxal cadres, activities of its front bodies have increased in Erode district. As is their wont, the Maoists try to exploit the local grievances to gain influence. In the tri-junction area, they smelt an opportunity in the eviction of forest dwellers and tribals from the Western Ghats under the National Park Act and the government’s move to implement the Kasturirangan report on conservation of the Ghats. Significantly, Palakad and Mallapuram have been identified by the government of Kerala as Maoists-affected districts to receive security-related expenditure on LWE.
Maoists have also been trying to spread in the urban areas of India. Significant Maoist activities, especially of its front organisations, have been reported from places like Delhi, Gurgaon, NOIDA, Mumbai, Chennai, Kolkata, Bengaluru, Pune, Nagpur, Surat, Ahmedabad, Bhopal, Ranchi, Jamshedpur, Raipur, Durg, Patna, Hyderabad, Rourkela, Bhubaneswar, Guwahati and Chandigarh. The urban fronts comprise organisations involved in “revolutionary democratic” activities, opposition to “war on people”, displacement and “violence on women”, and in “cultural” activities. Also, significantly, CPI (Maoist) is systematically penetrating the student community as well as the workers in the unorganised sectors, which could have a large impact on the future course of the movement.
Due to depleting tribal cadre base, Maoists have found urban regions a good catchment area for replenishment. The main advantage with the urban cadres, which is absent in their tribal counterparts, is the “intellect” to take the movement forward. The urbanites may find life in the forest too difficult to sustain, yet the Maoists wish to cultivate them “to lead militant activities that are facing a leadership crisis due to depleting recruitment, elimination of the existing cadres due to security operations and large-scale surrenders by senior cadres.” Immense financial and human resources are being invested in running “urban activities and guidance on how to develop better coordination among the urban frontal organisations of the party.”
Overall, the spread of Maoists to the ‘new’ areas like northeast, south and urban areas of India may not be alarming, but is concerning. Coordination is called for at three levels – between the Centre and the States, among the States and among the security and intelligence agencies – to effectively counter the ‘red menace’.
The author is Associate Professor, Department of International Studies and History, CHRIST (Deemed to be University), Bangalore
"Views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not reflect the position of the University"
Thunderbolts, elite commando force of Kerala Police, gunned down three suspected Maoists in forest areas of Attapadi Hills of Palakad on 28 October 2019. The incident confirms the reports that the Maoists have been spreading to the south of India beyond the so-called “red corridor”. They are also known to have been moving to the northeast and to urban areas of the country.
It is known that the Indian Maoists have good network with several key militant groups of the northeast India that commenced roughly since the mid-1990s. The linkage ranges from getting arms, ammunitions, communication devices to training from the northeast militant groups like National Socialist Council of Nagaland (NSCN-IM), anti-talk faction of the United Liberation Front of Asom (ULFA) led by Paresh Barua, People’s Liberation Army (PLA), People’s Revolutionary Party of Kangleipak (Prepak), Revolutionary People’s Front (RPF), Kamtapur Liberation Organisation (KLO), Gorkha Liberation Tiger Force (GLTF), Gurkha Liberation Organisation (GLO), Adibasi National Liberation Army, Adivasi People’s Army (APA), and National Democratic Front of Bodoland (NDFB). Chinese small arms find their way to the ‘Red Corridor’ mainly through these groups. It is through the northeast groups the Maoists have good access to militant groups of Myanmar. Maoists, in turn, are said to be providing explosives (ammonium nitrate) and funds to the northeast groups.
The mutual support between Naxals and northeast militant groups is not just restricted to material, but extends to moral aspects as well. While Naxals have strongly supported “people’s movements” of the northeast, the northeast militant groups have stood by “revolutionaries”. ULFA leader Paresh Baruah once remarked, “The Indian colonial government is also viewed as an enemy by the Maoists. Our enemy is also the same and so there is an understanding with them.”
But, what is more concerning is attempts by the Maoists to push the boundaries of the ‘Red Corridor’ and set up support bases in upper Assam and some of the tribal areas in the hilly interiors. The presence of Maoists is felt in pockets of Tinsukia, Dibrugarh, Lakhimpur, Dhemaji, Sivasagar, Golaghat and Karbi Anglong districts of Assam and Lohit district of Arunachal Pradesh (adjoining Tinsukia). The hub of Maoists activities is said to be in Sadiya area, situated in Assam-Arunachal Pradesh border. Maoists have found parts of the northeast of India as a new zone of “revolution” to establish what they call as “base areas”. In this regard, two major causes are being exploited: deprivation among the tea workers of Assam and anti-dam sentiments in Arunachal Pradesh. Since there is political vacuum in both cases, Maoists are more than willing to fill them. Interestingly, adivasis in tea gardens are descendants of migrants from present-day Jharkhand, Bihar, Odisha, Chhatisgarh and Madhya Pradesh during the British times. The Maoists have already set up local committees in these areas. From there it will become easy for them to link up to southern parts of Bhutan, where Nepali refugees are populated.
The Maoists have also been trying to extend their presence in southern India. Way back in 2013, the presence and movement of the armed cadres of CPI (Maoist) have been noticed on over two dozen occasions in Malappuram, Wayanad and Kannur in Kerala and Mysore, Kodagu, Udupi, Chikmagalur and Shimoga in Karnataka. Though adjoining areas of Tamil Nadu have not witnessed any movement of armed Naxal cadres, activities of its front bodies have increased in Erode district. As is their wont, the Maoists try to exploit the local grievances to gain influence. In the tri-junction area, they smelt an opportunity in the eviction of forest dwellers and tribals from the Western Ghats under the National Park Act and the government’s move to implement the Kasturirangan report on conservation of the Ghats. Significantly, Palakad and Mallapuram have been identified by the government of Kerala as Maoists-affected districts to receive security-related expenditure on LWE.
Maoists have also been trying to spread in the urban areas of India. Significant Maoist activities, especially of its front organisations, have been reported from places like Delhi, Gurgaon, NOIDA, Mumbai, Chennai, Kolkata, Bengaluru, Pune, Nagpur, Surat, Ahmedabad, Bhopal, Ranchi, Jamshedpur, Raipur, Durg, Patna, Hyderabad, Rourkela, Bhubaneswar, Guwahati and Chandigarh. The urban fronts comprise organisations involved in “revolutionary democratic” activities, opposition to “war on people”, displacement and “violence on women”, and in “cultural” activities. Also, significantly, CPI (Maoist) is systematically penetrating the student community as well as the workers in the unorganised sectors, which could have a large impact on the future course of the movement.
Due to depleting tribal cadre base, Maoists have found urban regions a good catchment area for replenishment. The main advantage with the urban cadres, which is absent in their tribal counterparts, is the “intellect” to take the movement forward. The urbanites may find life in the forest too difficult to sustain, yet the Maoists wish to cultivate them “to lead militant activities that are facing a leadership crisis due to depleting recruitment, elimination of the existing cadres due to security operations and large-scale surrenders by senior cadres.” Immense financial and human resources are being invested in running “urban activities and guidance on how to develop better coordination among the urban frontal organisations of the party.”
Overall, the spread of Maoists to the ‘new’ areas like northeast, south and urban areas of India may not be alarming, but is concerning. Coordination is called for at three levels – between the Centre and the States, among the States and among the security and intelligence agencies – to effectively counter the ‘red menace’.
The author is Associate Professor, Department of International Studies and History, CHRIST (Deemed to be University), Bangalore
"Views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not reflect the position of the University"
CHINA’S DEBT TRAP DIPLOMACY
Anchal Bhowmick
According to a report by the International Monetary Fund, China has overtaken the United States as the world’s largest economy in terms of Purchasing Power Parity (PPP). The World Bank estimates that China is a 23.2 trillion dollar economy and has an ample amount of foreign exchange reserves which amounts to around 3 trillion dollars. Fortune 500, an annual list compiled and published by Fortune magazine, includes 30 Chinese companies. For at least a decade now, it can be seen that China is becoming friendly with the smaller and developing countries around the world and providing them with billions of dollars as loan for the construction of projects, most of which are commercially non-viable in nature. As a result of its non-viability, these countries cannot generate revenue in order to pay back to the Chinese companies and hence are forced to lease parts of their territories to the Chinese government for 99 years which later becomes the strategic base for the Chinese government to target its opponents like United States, India, Japan, Australia etc. This ‘practice’ or ‘pattern’ has the potential to repeat itself and in a report published by Harvard University’s Belfer Centre for Science and International Affairs, 16 developing countries from the Horn of Africa to the far flung Pacific Islands have been identified, which may become vulnerable to the Chinese intentions, which is often termed by geo-political experts as China’s Debt Trap Diplomacy or the Debt book Diplomacy. Now the obvious questions that can be raised are: Why is China providing loans to these smaller countries and why are these countries taking loans from China and not from the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank? Also, what are the intentions of China and what are the problems associated with it?
The answer to the first question is quite complex. China has taken loans from its Central Bank that amounts to three times more than its GDP. This is known as “Debt to GDP Ratio”. This Debt to GDP Ratio reached 257% in 2017 and the IMF anticipates that by 2020, China’s domestic credit to GDP Ratio will increase by 300%. In May, for the first time since 1998, Moody’s Investors Service downgraded China’s sovereign credit ranking. The money that China had taken as loan has been used for infrastructural development like building cities, towns etc. China has built cities under its program of ‘Go Cities’, even when it is not needed. As a result, in the present time, there are many cities in China which comprise residential complexes but nobody really lives there as those cities are costly to live in and most people lack money. Eventually, these cities have turned into ‘ghost cities’ which has become a matter of concern for the Chinese government, based on a report by Forbes. So, since they could not make profits in their own country, they started looking for prey outside China.
When the IMF and World Bank give loans, they take into consideration certain factors like the country’s condition, government stability, foreign exchange reserves and the country’s standing in the world community and also the loans from these institutions aim at short term viability but China on the other hand, does not consider these conditions for giving loan. The Chinese loans are opaque in nature, collateralized by strategically important natural assets with high long term value, even if they lack short term commercial viability.
One of the primary intentions of China is to reduce the importance of the World Bank and IMF which it essentially considers to be US dominated institutions and wants to promote the Chinese centric banks in the world. China is also trying to dominate the various banks so as to reduce the powers of the other players in the geopolitical arena. In the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, headquartered in Beijing, China has veto power in decision making. China has recently agreed to fund the African Development Bank with 2 billion dollars as a part of the African Growing Together Fund. The biggest shareholder of the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development is United States. This institution recently approved China’s application to join it and now China wants to replace United States as the biggest shareholder such that the bank completely becomes dependent on China. Similarly, with the aim of lessening shares of United States further in the Inter-American Development Bank (at present 30% share belongs to United States), China joined the bank as its 48th member contributing around 350 million dollars to fund development projects in the area. Another major intention is to get access to the untapped energy resources of the African, European and other Asian countries.
When new infrastructure projects are being undertaken with the help of Chinese loans, it mainly benefits China in all aspects due to the strict rules and regulations chalked out by the Chinese government to be followed by the ‘intended’ or ‘served’ state. The tender of carrying out any development project has to be given only to the Chinese companies and the Chinese labourers, based on a report by the New York Times. As a result, jobs are created only for the Chinese, soft loans are provided to the Chinese companies and on the other hand, the served country fails to pay back the loans and falls prey to the Chinese intentions. This is how China successfully acquires assets. The concept of ‘lease for 99 years’ has been devised by the Chinese, which acts as a befitting reply for its humiliation earlier by the Western powers which took away Chinese territories on lease for 99 years. In reality these acquisitions were believed to be permanent. China thus wants to hit back at the imperialism of the Western powers.
The ambitious One Belt One Road project of China is at the heart of this Debt Trap Diplomacy. More than the virtues of this project, experts all around the world are concerned about its vices. For now, it may not be a problem but in the near future, the threat of an economic crisis looms large. According to the Rhodium Group’s research, if the One Belt One Road project in most countries turns out to be non-profitable in nature, then the debt might turn into ‘Debt to Equity’ leading to further under development and thus, China might get an ‘economic shock’. This project has already started creating problems or is at least showing signs of economic crisis in many countries like Sri Lanka, Pakistan, Myanmar, Djibouti, Laos, Cambodia and many more.
The Hambantota port in Sri Lanka serves as the best example of the economic collapse. The Hambantota port until a decade ago was a small fishing town in southern Sri Lanka which has now become a geo-political flashpoint. In 2007, a Chinese state owned company came in to build a major port in this area financed by Chinese loans. However, this port flopped commercially and despite Sri Lankan President Maithripala Sirisena’s promises to reduce dependence on China, he had to hand over the strategically important territory to the Chinese for 99 years due to its mounting debt. This was a big blow to the United States, Japan and India. However, the Sri Lankan government has announced that it would not allow China to use the port for military purposes which might be at least a temporary setback for China. The conditions of other countries are as critical as Sri Lanka. Pakistan is facing a full blown debt crisis partly due to its corrupt leaders and partly because the loan provided by China for the China Pakistan Economic Corridor has ballooned to 62 billion dollars. Now Pakistan’s new government is considering asking the IMF for a ‘bail out’. Kenya’s crashing debt to China now threatens to turn its busy port of Mombasa (the gateway to East Africa) to another Hambantota. Chinese loans bumped Djibouti’s Debt to GDP Ratio from 50% to 85% between 2014 and 2016. Laos and Cambodia are so indebted to China that former Australian Foreign Minister Gareth Evans characterized them as “wholly owned subsidiaries of China”.
Taking lessons from the conditions of these countries, many other countries are trying hard to cut down the influence of China in their development projects. The Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohammad announced that his country was cancelling two multibillion dollar Chinese projects as Malaysia cannot repay the loans, according to a report by the reuters. Similarly, Myanmar is trying to renegotiate a $10 billion port project and Nepal wants to halt construction on two Chinese-built hydroelectric dams.
China’s policy may become successful and it might become a big economic power by the next century, but economic analysts also talk about greater chances of an economic crisis, stock market crash and conditions of severe unemployment due to the fact that China is ‘buying the whole world on the verge of a collapse’. The way China is acquiring assets is itself problematic and it is turning many countries against China. The Quad group has been formed mainly for the purpose of countering China as the members are feeling insecure about Chinese measures. From the Indian perspective, many argue that the opening of the coffers of Chinese foreign exchange reserves may be a blessing in disguise for India as India can find its much needed investments from China for the ‘Make In India’ and ‘Start Up India’ projects.
There are critics and defenders of the Chinese Belt and Road Initiative, however though both sides raise valid points, yet they miss out on the very significant political and economic realities in these countries. These smaller countries are hardly just vulnerable victims but in many cases they leverage their geo-political importance or natural resources to gain tremendous bargaining power. Like, the Philippines has warmed to Beijing under Rodrigo Duterte’s violent and dictatorial presidency, despite territorial disputes in the South China Sea as China has agreed to plan an energy cooperation pact with Duterte’s government and also sanctioned infrastructural loans. He is even willing to overlook maritime problems with China in exchange for China’s economic support and Duterte had very openly said that his government needs China. Thus, they are not always helpless victims of exploitation as these countries have learned to use China to serve their domestic political agendas and mitigate pressure from the western counterparts. China is not simply acting out of altruistic benevolence but has mainly enabled the illiberal regimes. Amid Western condemnation of the Rohingya crisis, Myanmar’s Aung San Suu Kyi has drawn China’s diplomatic and economic support and has visited China more than any other country as China represents both a political ally and a development partner. The same situation can be observed in case of Djibouti and Venezuela too. Pakistan had also sought China’s help to defend its territory against India and be more vocal regarding its claim of Pakistan Occupied Kashmir. So to oversimplify China’s commercial diplomacy in the name of ‘Debt trap’ might not be the right justification to the prevailing conditions, as it tends to overlook the motivation and the role of the different actors and ignores the agency of smaller countries involved in China’s commercial diplomacy. Hence, partner countries of China like Venezuela may find themselves overburdened by debt; but they are ‘hardly unwitting participants in some contemporary edition of the Great Game.’
The author is a First Year MA in International Studies student, Department of International Studies and History, CHRIST (Deemed to be University), Bangalore
"Views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not reflect the position of the University"
Is the pursuit of power more important than human life?
Kritika Chhapolia
According to the Guardian, 50000 people have been killed and 24 million people are in need of humanitarian aid after 4 years of a brutal civil war in Yemen. This is what Yemen looks like today. The roots of the conflict can be traced back to the arrival of the Arab Spring in Yemen in 2011 and the democratisation of the country. There has been a direct conflict in the region since 2014, when the Shia Houthi rebels overtook the capital Sanaa and caused the existing President Mansur Hadi to flee to Saudi Arabia. Since then, the situation has only worsened, especially for the civilians. What initially started out as an internal conflict between two religious factions, the Sunni government and the Shia minorities now has various sides: the Shia Houthi rebels, allegedly supported by Iran; the Sunni government of Yemen led by Hadi Mansur, which is supported by Saudi Arabia; the separatists in the South, supported by the UAE; and the terrorist groups, Al Qaeda and IS taking advantage of the lax security situation in the country.
A possible way to explain the involvement of all these players and their interest in the region is the realist proposition of international relations that centers around the perpetual need for power and propagating self-interest. The conflict between the Sunni Hadi government and the Shia Houthi rebels can be seen as a proxy war between Saudi Arabia and Iran, both of which aim to attain control of the Middle East region, taking on the role of the regional hegemon. They have been supporting opposing sides in a number of civil wars, like the Syrian and Iraq too. Saudi Arabia considers itself the leader of the Muslim world, partly on account of its control of the holy places of Mecca and Medina. Saudi Arabia has constantly tried to fix its position as the leader of the Gulf region, through efforts like the proposal to form a Gulf Union in order to strengthen ties between the Middle Eastern countries, in the wake of the political instability of Arab Spring and Arab Winter. The UAE, which was initially supporting Saudi Arabia’s contentions in Yemen, changed it stance and started supporting the Southern separatists. The terrorist groups are trying to further their own self interests in the region. None of them are concerned about the killing of civilians, the famine, the outbreak of cholera, the possible war crimes and the fact that Yemen is facing the worst humanitarian crisis ever. Hospitals and schools are being bombed, children are dying and yet the struggle for power continues unhindered.
According to the report by Human Rights’ Watch, the Houthi rebels have conducted unlawful air strikes, and indiscriminate artillery attacks on homes, markets, hospitals and schools alike. The Houthis, the UAE and the Saudi backed Yemeni government have all arbitrarily detained people, including children and kept them in poor conditions. The Houthis have also taken hostages, which is a war crime. In Aden, guards tortured, raped, and executed migrants and asylum seekers, including children, from the Horn of Africa in a detention center. The authorities denied asylum seekers an opportunity to seek refugee protection and deported migrants en masse to dangerous conditions at sea, according to the documentation by the Human Rights Watch. The Saudi-led coalition’s restrictions on imports have worsened the dire humanitarian situation. The coalition has delayed and diverted fuel tankers, closed critical ports, and stopped goods from entering Houthi-controlled seaports. Fuel needed to power generators to hospitals and pump water to homes has also been blocked.
Houthi forces have blocked and confiscated food and medical supplies and denied access to populations in need. They have imposed onerous restrictions on aid workers and interfered with aid delivery. The Houthis have detained students, human rights defenders, journalists, perceived political opponents, and members of the Baha’i religious community. A group of local journalists have been detained in Sanaa for more than three years. The Saudi-led coalition and Yemeni government forces have also harassed, intimidated, and arrested activists and journalists. Since May 2017, the coalition has restricted travel routes for journalists and international human rights organizations
United Nations, as an international organisation, is supposed to avoid such humanitarian issues and intense conflicts, but in the five years of direct conflict in Yemen, which involved a whole host of international players, including Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Morocco, Bahrain, Qatar, Sudan, the UAE and even the United States of America indirectly, the UN has failed to effectively curb the conflict or reach a solution. Though it has made some vague efforts in this direction, like the resolution demanding the withdrawal of the Houthis in 2016, which had no grave impact and the support extended to the Hodeidah agreement, the crisis continues to worsen with each passing day.
The role played by the USA in the conflict also talks about the perpetual need for the propagation of self interest. USA has been the largest supplier of arms and ammunition to Saudi Arabia as well as in providing military training. Saudi Arabia in turn made use of these weapons to carry out direct attacks in Yemen against the Houthi rebels, in turn, also killing a lot of civilians, including children. USA is dependent on Saudi Arabia for oil and Yemen is also home to a large faction of the Al Qaeda. Moreover, considering the USA's tensions with Iran, it would only gain by siding with Saudi Arabia. USA is, therefore, being held responsible for a lot of the human rights violations happening there, and there is immense international pressure on USA to stop being a party to it.
The recent striking of the Saudi oil fields by the Houthi rebels in Yemen raise very serious global concerns regarding the spread of the Yemen conflict outside Yemen. Most of the Middle Eastern countries are already a party in the conflict, the direct fighting just needs to go beyond the boundaries of Yemen. There needs to be a serious decision and intervention in Yemen, in order to find a long term solution for this problem. A federal government needs to be established with proper representation of all communities, including the Shia Muslims, as well as the Southern Yemeni population, to make sure that everyone’s interests are represented and a balance of power is reached. However, this transition needs to occur soon before the entire civilian population of Yemen is wiped out.
The author is a final EPS (Economics, Political Science,History) Student, Department of International Studies and History, CHRIST (Deemed to be University), Bangalore
"Views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not reflect the position of the University"
Cyber Warfare: An Area of Emerging Concern to Indian Security
Dr N Manoharan
In a layman’s understanding ‘Cyberspace’ (coined and first used by William Gibson in a science fiction Neromancer to describe his vision of a global computer network, linking all people, machines and sources of information in the world, and through which one could move or navigate as through virtual space) is a world of computers and the society gathered around it. It is characterised by blurred boundaries; there are no clear demarcations between civilian and military, state and non-state, and foreign and domestic as in other domains. It is those same characteristics that make it an ideal medium for committing malafide activities which can have repercussions for national and international security. Primary targets include critical national infrastructure network systems with electricity, air traffic control, financial markets and Government computer networks taking centre-stage.
Part of the problem is that the Internet’s organic evolution – open all-inclusive, decentralised environment – meant that security was not a consideration. The blurred boundaries and the anonymity provided by cyber-space make it difficult to pin responsibility for such attacks, which, going by current trends, will be perpetrated by individuals, networks, communities and organisations, with the state acting as a facilitator, and nationalistic fervour providing the motivation. Cyber threat has acquired dangerous proportions and impinges on national security when a state-criminal network-hacker nexus builds up.
Coming to the Indian context, cyber warfare has turned out to be one of the serious threats to Indian security. It is in fact considered as the “next generation of threats”. Statistically, India has always been among the top five targets of malicious activity on the Internet that ranges from virus, Trojan, malware, identity theft, hacking, cyber stalking, cyber squatting, spamming, email-bombing, email-spoofing, cyber defamation, web defacement, data diddling, web jacking, denial of service attack, key logging and Internet time theft. The threats we face range from individual criminal hackers to organised criminal groups, from terrorist networks to advanced nation states. Defending against these threats to our security, prosperity, and personal privacy requires networks that are secure, trustworthy, and resilient. Our digital infrastructure, therefore, is a strategic national asset, and protecting it—while safeguarding privacy and civil liberties—is a national security priority.
The present concern relates to cyberspace turning into “a force multiplier for terrorist networks in India and abroad, driven by the sophisticated use and unlimited access to Internet and computer technology.” Taking advantage of the anonymous nature of the Internet, terrorists use cyberspace for communications, geographic mapping, recruitment, fund raising and, most importantly, intelligence gathering. With increasing vigilance on the traditional channels of communications (such as tracking of e-mails, mobile phones, etc), terrorists have now resorted to using new tactics, for example, not sending e-mails but saving them as drafts in an encrypted manner or even through blogs. Many organised terror groups pitched against India host websites and use fixed Internet sites to communicate with their partners. There have been known incidents in India where terrorists have resorted to several other innovative techniques, such as using bulletin boards and other websites that provide free uploading services, and posting steganographed picture messages to pass on ‘confidential’ execution details.
On securing cyberspace, neither government nor the private sector nor individual citizens can meet this challenge alone; all have to work together to investigate cyber intrusion and to ensure an organized and unified response to future cyber incidents. It is also important to strengthen our international partnerships on a range of issues, including the development of norms for acceptable conduct in cyberspace; laws concerning cybercrime; data preservation, protection, and privacy; and approaches for network defense and response to cyber attacks.
While it is a challenge for law enforcement agencies to monitor every cyber café, it is here that cyber forensics based audits and evidence gathering can play a pivotal role in dissuading criminal use of the cyber cafés. Similarly, ISPs can use that technology to monitor the traffic data of the cyber cafés to a greater degree, and develop (real time) trends and patterns at the micro level. Cyber forensics can be applied to networks, and in case of any red flags or once the IP is tracked, it can help in imaging the hard disk and track the individuals responsible for the activity. The metadata of the files or any document can be analysed and matched with the log maintained by the cyber café. Some of these measures would require policy and legal changes to ensure compliance and prevent misuse.
Technologically, investigation agencies in India need to scale up in terms of acquiring more advanced equipment for digital investigations. The biggest operational challenge, however, is not the procurement of equipment for cyber forensics, but acquiring the requisite skills to effectively use that equipment for investigations. This calls for a two-layered training approach for the investigative agencies. At the first layer, there is an immediate need to inculcate a systematic cyber crime investigations culture, placing impetus on awareness about the amended cyber laws, their implications on cyber investigations and evidence chain management-across the ranks of the agencies. At the second layer (which is more operational in nature), the investigating officers should be trained on effective evidence chain management in digital investigations and related best practices, including monitoring and intelligence creation. At this stage, the focus is more on the integration of technologies for pattern analysis and effective intelligence gathering.
Beyond this, there needs to be centralised monitoring stations and large-scale data-mining capabilities to detect trends and patterns associated with suspicious activities and known threat sources. This requires massive infrastructure, as well as the partnership between government and corporate entities.
The author is Associate Professor, Department of International Studies and History, CHRIST (Deemed to be University), Bangalore
"Views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not reflect the position of the University"
In a layman’s understanding ‘Cyberspace’ (coined and first used by William Gibson in a science fiction Neromancer to describe his vision of a global computer network, linking all people, machines and sources of information in the world, and through which one could move or navigate as through virtual space) is a world of computers and the society gathered around it. It is characterised by blurred boundaries; there are no clear demarcations between civilian and military, state and non-state, and foreign and domestic as in other domains. It is those same characteristics that make it an ideal medium for committing malafide activities which can have repercussions for national and international security. Primary targets include critical national infrastructure network systems with electricity, air traffic control, financial markets and Government computer networks taking centre-stage.
Part of the problem is that the Internet’s organic evolution – open all-inclusive, decentralised environment – meant that security was not a consideration. The blurred boundaries and the anonymity provided by cyber-space make it difficult to pin responsibility for such attacks, which, going by current trends, will be perpetrated by individuals, networks, communities and organisations, with the state acting as a facilitator, and nationalistic fervour providing the motivation. Cyber threat has acquired dangerous proportions and impinges on national security when a state-criminal network-hacker nexus builds up.
Coming to the Indian context, cyber warfare has turned out to be one of the serious threats to Indian security. It is in fact considered as the “next generation of threats”. Statistically, India has always been among the top five targets of malicious activity on the Internet that ranges from virus, Trojan, malware, identity theft, hacking, cyber stalking, cyber squatting, spamming, email-bombing, email-spoofing, cyber defamation, web defacement, data diddling, web jacking, denial of service attack, key logging and Internet time theft. The threats we face range from individual criminal hackers to organised criminal groups, from terrorist networks to advanced nation states. Defending against these threats to our security, prosperity, and personal privacy requires networks that are secure, trustworthy, and resilient. Our digital infrastructure, therefore, is a strategic national asset, and protecting it—while safeguarding privacy and civil liberties—is a national security priority.
The present concern relates to cyberspace turning into “a force multiplier for terrorist networks in India and abroad, driven by the sophisticated use and unlimited access to Internet and computer technology.” Taking advantage of the anonymous nature of the Internet, terrorists use cyberspace for communications, geographic mapping, recruitment, fund raising and, most importantly, intelligence gathering. With increasing vigilance on the traditional channels of communications (such as tracking of e-mails, mobile phones, etc), terrorists have now resorted to using new tactics, for example, not sending e-mails but saving them as drafts in an encrypted manner or even through blogs. Many organised terror groups pitched against India host websites and use fixed Internet sites to communicate with their partners. There have been known incidents in India where terrorists have resorted to several other innovative techniques, such as using bulletin boards and other websites that provide free uploading services, and posting steganographed picture messages to pass on ‘confidential’ execution details.
On securing cyberspace, neither government nor the private sector nor individual citizens can meet this challenge alone; all have to work together to investigate cyber intrusion and to ensure an organized and unified response to future cyber incidents. It is also important to strengthen our international partnerships on a range of issues, including the development of norms for acceptable conduct in cyberspace; laws concerning cybercrime; data preservation, protection, and privacy; and approaches for network defense and response to cyber attacks.
While it is a challenge for law enforcement agencies to monitor every cyber café, it is here that cyber forensics based audits and evidence gathering can play a pivotal role in dissuading criminal use of the cyber cafés. Similarly, ISPs can use that technology to monitor the traffic data of the cyber cafés to a greater degree, and develop (real time) trends and patterns at the micro level. Cyber forensics can be applied to networks, and in case of any red flags or once the IP is tracked, it can help in imaging the hard disk and track the individuals responsible for the activity. The metadata of the files or any document can be analysed and matched with the log maintained by the cyber café. Some of these measures would require policy and legal changes to ensure compliance and prevent misuse.
Technologically, investigation agencies in India need to scale up in terms of acquiring more advanced equipment for digital investigations. The biggest operational challenge, however, is not the procurement of equipment for cyber forensics, but acquiring the requisite skills to effectively use that equipment for investigations. This calls for a two-layered training approach for the investigative agencies. At the first layer, there is an immediate need to inculcate a systematic cyber crime investigations culture, placing impetus on awareness about the amended cyber laws, their implications on cyber investigations and evidence chain management-across the ranks of the agencies. At the second layer (which is more operational in nature), the investigating officers should be trained on effective evidence chain management in digital investigations and related best practices, including monitoring and intelligence creation. At this stage, the focus is more on the integration of technologies for pattern analysis and effective intelligence gathering.
Beyond this, there needs to be centralised monitoring stations and large-scale data-mining capabilities to detect trends and patterns associated with suspicious activities and known threat sources. This requires massive infrastructure, as well as the partnership between government and corporate entities.
The author is Associate Professor, Department of International Studies and History, CHRIST (Deemed to be University), Bangalore
"Views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not reflect the position of the University"
MIGRATION AND MULTICULTURALISM
The Department of International Studies and History organised a Skype lecture by Professor Idesbald Goddeeris of KU Leuven on “Migration and Multiculturalism” for 1 MAIS class on 6 September 2019 between 11 AM to 12 PM at Council Room, Central Block, Christ (Deemed to be University). The speaker focussed his talk on European Identities and how migration has affected the continent. In a globalised set up, it is problematic to have a one-dimensional approach towards the population. With reference to Benedict Anderson’s “Imagined Communities”, it is necessary to understand that Europe is in a juxtaposition between collective and coercion identity. With the end of Cold War in 1989 with the fall of USSR, European Union allowed the skilled and enthusiastic people from Global South. This led to an issue of integration and inclusiveness where there was no reciprocity between migrants and citizens of a country. The effect of the migrant population can be seen by the influence over the style and food. The facilitator further highlighted the criticism via the notes of Paul S in his book which speaks about the tolerance and optimism towards multiculturalism. With the influx of Muslims which has led to more conflicts and the fear that the ideologies of West would collapse and deteriorate further by this population being a burden on the economy. With Europe being a Christian dominated society, it became inacceptable and incompatible to accommodate the Jews and the Muslims. But due to the opposition of the mass migration in Europe, the Europeans in the name of supernatural loyalty moved from religion incompetency to secularisation. Since 9/11 the threat of Al-Qaida has complicated the issue of Muslims across the world and has led to contradiction with the West in regard to dealing with the Muslims. The way the values of the Europeans has been structured are now been questioned such as on equality of women, to be modern in their dress code which is against the fundamentals of Islamic religion. Since the end of the colonial era, Europe has to now look for a stand to accept the diversity and respect their norms and values by giving them equal rights and freedom which would build a new idea of superiority in terms of having a unified society which would stand as a stepping stone for other nations to take inspiration and inculcate it. The lecture concluded by a question and answer session and Dr Madhumati Deshpande gave the Vote of Thanks.
Thus, the interaction was fruitful and we are looking forward to have a meet and great with his students. We would like to extend our heartfelt gratitude to the Department for arranging this enlightening talk.
Thus, the interaction was fruitful and we are looking forward to have a meet and great with his students. We would like to extend our heartfelt gratitude to the Department for arranging this enlightening talk.
Trump Disruption and India’s Foreign Policy
The Department of International Studies and History, CHRIST (Deemed to be University), organised a Guest Lecture on ‘Trump Disruption and India’s Foreign Policy’ by Dr. C Rajamohan, Foreign Policy Analyst and Director, Institute of South Asian studies NUS on August 14, 2019. Staff and students from Jain University and NAIS were in attendance, as well.
Dr. Rajamohan started the lecture by giving the example of Bangalore and its inter-connectivity with the world. The fact that policies in one part of the world have the capacity to directly impact a city in other part of the world, was brought out. This was placed in the context of dynamic American foreign policy, under the Trump Administration. Dr. Rajamohan divided his lecture under the four broad categories – to understand when and how the world changes, consequences of changes, effect on India and how can India cope up with this changing dynamics.
Dr. Rajamohan emphasized on the change in power distribution results in changes in the international order. And, according to the professor, this change in power distribution takes place through the workings of war (World Wars, Cold War), revolutions (Russian, Chinese, Iranian revolutions), economic crisis (Great Depression -1929, Financial Crisis – 2008), technological revolution (Industrial Revolution), and in recent times, due to climate change.
The speaker, then, touched upon various aspects of American foreign policy, transformed by Trump in the 21st century. Such as the policy of ‘Open Borders’, allowing migration which has taken a different character today, wherein the Trump administration is restricting it. At the same time, the famously American propagated ‘Globalization’, has been termed detrimental for America, wherein outsourcing has taken away American jobs. Hence, the imposition of huge tariffs as well as the on-going trade war with China, for want of fair trade as against free trade. Dr. Rajamohan emphasized Trump Administration’s particular dislike towards the multilateral organizations like World Trade Organization, and preference for bilateral negotiations. And these ongoing changes are structural in nature, thus, will not disappear with a new American administration.
In conclusion, Dr. Rajamohan talked about India coping with challenges of increased protection from West, decline of American hegemony, climate change and the need to strengthen maritime security. India needs to build its economy, as economy is the main aspect which enables a country to dictate a set of policies. At the same time, India needs to play an active role in the region as well as the world, and seek to influence it in times of uncertainty which lay ahead.
The lecture was followed by an engaging and interactive Q&A session. Dr. Rajamohan was presented with a vote of thanks by Dr. Priyanca Mathur, Jain University and memento by Fr. Jose CC, Pro Vice Chancellor, CHRIST (Deemed To Be University).
Dr. Rajamohan started the lecture by giving the example of Bangalore and its inter-connectivity with the world. The fact that policies in one part of the world have the capacity to directly impact a city in other part of the world, was brought out. This was placed in the context of dynamic American foreign policy, under the Trump Administration. Dr. Rajamohan divided his lecture under the four broad categories – to understand when and how the world changes, consequences of changes, effect on India and how can India cope up with this changing dynamics.
Dr. Rajamohan emphasized on the change in power distribution results in changes in the international order. And, according to the professor, this change in power distribution takes place through the workings of war (World Wars, Cold War), revolutions (Russian, Chinese, Iranian revolutions), economic crisis (Great Depression -1929, Financial Crisis – 2008), technological revolution (Industrial Revolution), and in recent times, due to climate change.
The speaker, then, touched upon various aspects of American foreign policy, transformed by Trump in the 21st century. Such as the policy of ‘Open Borders’, allowing migration which has taken a different character today, wherein the Trump administration is restricting it. At the same time, the famously American propagated ‘Globalization’, has been termed detrimental for America, wherein outsourcing has taken away American jobs. Hence, the imposition of huge tariffs as well as the on-going trade war with China, for want of fair trade as against free trade. Dr. Rajamohan emphasized Trump Administration’s particular dislike towards the multilateral organizations like World Trade Organization, and preference for bilateral negotiations. And these ongoing changes are structural in nature, thus, will not disappear with a new American administration.
In conclusion, Dr. Rajamohan talked about India coping with challenges of increased protection from West, decline of American hegemony, climate change and the need to strengthen maritime security. India needs to build its economy, as economy is the main aspect which enables a country to dictate a set of policies. At the same time, India needs to play an active role in the region as well as the world, and seek to influence it in times of uncertainty which lay ahead.
The lecture was followed by an engaging and interactive Q&A session. Dr. Rajamohan was presented with a vote of thanks by Dr. Priyanca Mathur, Jain University and memento by Fr. Jose CC, Pro Vice Chancellor, CHRIST (Deemed To Be University).
European Integration and International Economics
Rhea Antony
The Department of International Studies and History, CHRIST (Deemed to be University), organized a guest lecture on ‘European Integration and International Economics’, on 27th August, 2019. The lecture was delivered by Prof. Jan Lanser, a senior professor of International economics, at the Arnhem Business School, Han University. Students as well as staff from the Department of International Studies, were present for the event.
The speaker commenced his lecture by acquainting the audience with certain key aspects of his very own country, Netherlands. He alluded to certain key elements that are peculiar to Netherlands. In the process of doing this, he talked about the Dutch language, culture, economy; and their position in the world - economically and geographically.
Mr. Jan Lanser then advanced into the principle subject matter of the lecture by providing a brief overview of the European Union.
At the very onset of the lecture, Mr. Lanser clarified that when he talks about European integration, he is, in essence, only referring to the European Union. However, he further emphasized that, the EU is only a part of Europe and not the whole of Europe. And hence, he reminded the audience to consider this, throughout his talk.
He further ventured into the topic by introducing the various economic and political organizations that play a pivotal role in developing and maintaining relations between the states of the European continent. The underlying aim of each of the organizations that were mentioned during the talk was: European integration. However, Prof. Lanser, points out, that due to the multiplicity of organisations, and their very often overlapping roles, it was confusing even for a European to figure out a relatively optimal method of advancing towards an increased European integration.
There have been several rounds of discussion on whether the EU should be a federal state or an intragovernmental body or adopt a supranational identity. The existence of numerous international organizations in the region only further deepens this dilemma that Europe faces.
The speaker then progressed into providing the gathering with statistical data about the European Union. He used this data to also indicate the disparity in the GDP per inhabitant, across the European countries. This disparity deteriorates the relations between the European states, as certain countries in the bargain of aiding economically less advantaged states, often receive less than what they contribute.
Having mentioned the discord that such a disparity brings forth, the speaker then highlighted the reasons for BREXIT to have occurred. He points out to 3 core reasons: Net Contribution, Immigration and Sentiments, that drove the UK into BREXIT. He also enumerated the ways in which UK can leave the European Union and further reflects on the impact of each of them. He finally discussed the BACKSTOP as it poses a significant threat to UK’s position of wanting to exit from the Union.
The speaker very meticulously introduced the audience to several economic concepts that are complex to understand, when studied or read about individually. He constantly drew parallels as well as differences between Netherlands and India or Europe and India. This facilitated the entire process of comprehending the dilemma that Europe faces when it comes to integration. The session was an interactive one, where Prof. Jan Lanser, constantly kept the audience engaged with his witty remarks and personal anecdotes. There was more than sufficient scope for discussion and debate throughout his lecture.
The lecture was followed by a Q&A session. Prof. Jan Lanser was then presented with a vote of thanks and memento by Dr. Vineeth Thomas, Assistant Professor, CHRIST (Deemed to be University), Bangalore.
The Department of International Studies and History, CHRIST (Deemed to be University), organized a guest lecture on ‘European Integration and International Economics’, on 27th August, 2019. The lecture was delivered by Prof. Jan Lanser, a senior professor of International economics, at the Arnhem Business School, Han University. Students as well as staff from the Department of International Studies, were present for the event.
The speaker commenced his lecture by acquainting the audience with certain key aspects of his very own country, Netherlands. He alluded to certain key elements that are peculiar to Netherlands. In the process of doing this, he talked about the Dutch language, culture, economy; and their position in the world - economically and geographically.
Mr. Jan Lanser then advanced into the principle subject matter of the lecture by providing a brief overview of the European Union.
At the very onset of the lecture, Mr. Lanser clarified that when he talks about European integration, he is, in essence, only referring to the European Union. However, he further emphasized that, the EU is only a part of Europe and not the whole of Europe. And hence, he reminded the audience to consider this, throughout his talk.
He further ventured into the topic by introducing the various economic and political organizations that play a pivotal role in developing and maintaining relations between the states of the European continent. The underlying aim of each of the organizations that were mentioned during the talk was: European integration. However, Prof. Lanser, points out, that due to the multiplicity of organisations, and their very often overlapping roles, it was confusing even for a European to figure out a relatively optimal method of advancing towards an increased European integration.
There have been several rounds of discussion on whether the EU should be a federal state or an intragovernmental body or adopt a supranational identity. The existence of numerous international organizations in the region only further deepens this dilemma that Europe faces.
The speaker then progressed into providing the gathering with statistical data about the European Union. He used this data to also indicate the disparity in the GDP per inhabitant, across the European countries. This disparity deteriorates the relations between the European states, as certain countries in the bargain of aiding economically less advantaged states, often receive less than what they contribute.
Having mentioned the discord that such a disparity brings forth, the speaker then highlighted the reasons for BREXIT to have occurred. He points out to 3 core reasons: Net Contribution, Immigration and Sentiments, that drove the UK into BREXIT. He also enumerated the ways in which UK can leave the European Union and further reflects on the impact of each of them. He finally discussed the BACKSTOP as it poses a significant threat to UK’s position of wanting to exit from the Union.
The speaker very meticulously introduced the audience to several economic concepts that are complex to understand, when studied or read about individually. He constantly drew parallels as well as differences between Netherlands and India or Europe and India. This facilitated the entire process of comprehending the dilemma that Europe faces when it comes to integration. The session was an interactive one, where Prof. Jan Lanser, constantly kept the audience engaged with his witty remarks and personal anecdotes. There was more than sufficient scope for discussion and debate throughout his lecture.
The lecture was followed by a Q&A session. Prof. Jan Lanser was then presented with a vote of thanks and memento by Dr. Vineeth Thomas, Assistant Professor, CHRIST (Deemed to be University), Bangalore.
Comparative Foreign Policies of Rising Powers
Gandhi Tanvi Kaur Balbir Singh
On September 9th 2019, the Department of International Studies and History organized a guest lecture on ‘Comparative Foreign Policies of Rising Powers’ by Professor Deepa M. Ollapally, Research Professor of International Affairs and the Associate Director of the Sigur Center for Asian Studies at the Elliott School of International Affairs, George Washington University.
Professor Ollapally began the lecture by quoting Paul Kennedy’s 1987 work ‘The Rise and Fall of Great Powers’. She compared the countries considered as rising powers then, as compared to now, such as India, which was not included in his works. She stated that the label of ‘rising power’ is determined by multiple factors of the foreign policy like economic responsibilities and relations, military (defence) networks, cultural influences and future resources. One of such examples which utilizes these indicators is the Lowy Institute’s Asia Power Index, which ranks India as 4th, after China and Japan, in terms of exerting power.
Professor Ollapally stated that even though these ‘rising’ nations are different in nature but share certain commonalities. This includes having a strong sense of identity associated with their past, for example Russia remembers itself as a strong imperial power as against India which remembers itself as great civilizational power. And this sense of identity materializes inform of nationalism, which changes with time. For example, India’s civil and political nationalism is undergoing a change along the lines of communal nationalism.
Along with identity and constructivism, economic interdependence and military power plays an important part in associating a country as a rising power. And the fundamental question for these rising powers has been the trade-off between economic primacy and security aspirations in their foreign policy decisions. In this respect, the Professor talks about India and China, and their simultaneous rise along with the possibility of their co-existence. Both the nations have made enemies on their way to achieve growth. However, efforts are being made by them, wherein the economic narrative is given primacy over security matters. Such as India’s Look East Policy which seeks to have peaceful and prosperous relations between India and East Asian countries. Accordingly, both the nations, India and China, are making their presence felt in all the neighbouring states such as Sri Lanka, Maldives, Afghanistan, be it for security or economic reasons. China has launched the 2+1 initiative, wherein India and China has come together for cooperation in a third country, which is Afghanistan. This is considering India is the largest donor to the country and China is largest investor there.
Professor Ollapally closed the talk by stating that such co-operation is required considering that both the countries are aware of the lack of capabilities on their part, to indulge in a conflict. And also, they accord economic interests importance over military might. The lecture was followed by an engaging and interactive Q&A session. Dr. Vageshwari presented the Professor with a token of appreciation, which was followed by a vote of thanks by Dr. Madhumati.
On September 9th 2019, the Department of International Studies and History organized a guest lecture on ‘Comparative Foreign Policies of Rising Powers’ by Professor Deepa M. Ollapally, Research Professor of International Affairs and the Associate Director of the Sigur Center for Asian Studies at the Elliott School of International Affairs, George Washington University.
Professor Ollapally began the lecture by quoting Paul Kennedy’s 1987 work ‘The Rise and Fall of Great Powers’. She compared the countries considered as rising powers then, as compared to now, such as India, which was not included in his works. She stated that the label of ‘rising power’ is determined by multiple factors of the foreign policy like economic responsibilities and relations, military (defence) networks, cultural influences and future resources. One of such examples which utilizes these indicators is the Lowy Institute’s Asia Power Index, which ranks India as 4th, after China and Japan, in terms of exerting power.
Professor Ollapally stated that even though these ‘rising’ nations are different in nature but share certain commonalities. This includes having a strong sense of identity associated with their past, for example Russia remembers itself as a strong imperial power as against India which remembers itself as great civilizational power. And this sense of identity materializes inform of nationalism, which changes with time. For example, India’s civil and political nationalism is undergoing a change along the lines of communal nationalism.
Along with identity and constructivism, economic interdependence and military power plays an important part in associating a country as a rising power. And the fundamental question for these rising powers has been the trade-off between economic primacy and security aspirations in their foreign policy decisions. In this respect, the Professor talks about India and China, and their simultaneous rise along with the possibility of their co-existence. Both the nations have made enemies on their way to achieve growth. However, efforts are being made by them, wherein the economic narrative is given primacy over security matters. Such as India’s Look East Policy which seeks to have peaceful and prosperous relations between India and East Asian countries. Accordingly, both the nations, India and China, are making their presence felt in all the neighbouring states such as Sri Lanka, Maldives, Afghanistan, be it for security or economic reasons. China has launched the 2+1 initiative, wherein India and China has come together for cooperation in a third country, which is Afghanistan. This is considering India is the largest donor to the country and China is largest investor there.
Professor Ollapally closed the talk by stating that such co-operation is required considering that both the countries are aware of the lack of capabilities on their part, to indulge in a conflict. And also, they accord economic interests importance over military might. The lecture was followed by an engaging and interactive Q&A session. Dr. Vageshwari presented the Professor with a token of appreciation, which was followed by a vote of thanks by Dr. Madhumati.
Sri Lanka as a New Base for ISI against India
Dr N Manoharan
Multiple bomb blasts on Easter Day in Sri Lanka has established the fact that the island state has emerged as new hub for Islamic radicalisation. But, how many know that Pakistan’s ISI has been working for quite some time to establish Sri Lanka as a base against Indian interests?
The involvement of ISI in Sri Lanka against India emerged first in 2014 with the arrest of two Sri Lankan Muslims (Mohammed Sakir Hussain and Suleman Hussain) and an Indian Muslim (Thameen Ansari) in Chennai by the National Investigation Agency (NIA) for spying on behalf of Pakistan’s ISI. The arrestees confessed that their handlers were agents posted at Pakistani High Commission based in Colombo: Amir Zubair Siddiqui and Haji alias Siraj Ali, who were posted as visa counsellors.
This is not to suggest that Sri Lanka is conniving with Pakistan against India, but to say that the island state is being used as a base by the ISI. It should be pointed out that Sri Lanka never allowed its territory for any anti-India activities. Things may be happening without Colombo’s knowledge. However, some questions need to be answered: Why Sri Lanka has been chosen as a base by the ISI? What are the reasons for the involvement of Sri Lankans? What is the purpose behind the ‘Colombo module’ of ISI?
The ISI has been operating from some of the neighbouring countries of India like Nepal, Bangladesh, Afghanistan, Myanmar and even Maldives. The southern front of India remained unpenetrated for quite some time. Sri Lanka was the best base to do that for more than one reason:
One: given the proximity and similarity of language and appearance, Sri Lankan Tamils and Sri Lankan Muslims, who also speak Tamil, would not find it difficult to reach Tamil Nadu and mix-up with the local population. According to Sri Lankan Defence Chief, the mastermind of Easter bombing, Zahran Hashmi, has “transited Tamil Nadu” without being noticed. Presence of large number of Sri Lankan refugees is yet another facilitating aspect.
Two: Pakistan’s activities in Sri Lanka have not been seen with suspicion by the security establishment of the island state. Sri Lanka-Pakistan relations have been good without any irritants. Sri Lanka is ever grateful to Pakistan for all the military and diplomatic support during and after the Eelam War and thereafter.
There are various reasons for the involvement of Sri Lankan Tamils and Muslims in the spy ring. The primary motivation is monitory gain. Unemployed youth are easy targets. There is a theory that argues that part of the reason for the involvement of Sri Lankan Muslims in ISI’s spy network is their increasing radicalisation. But, the theory may explain if they are involved in spying western targets based in India, but not acting against Indian targets.
Pakistan obviously has denied the existence of an ISI base in Sri Lanka targeted against India as “speculative” and “malicious media campaign”. The denial is not surprising. Pakistani ISI has been assiduously pursuing the objective of establishing espionage networks for collection of India’s defence related information with reference to deployment/movement of armed forces, information relating to vital installations including sensitive information pertaining to the latest knowhow with reference to technological advancement etc. For this purpose, it has been able to organise resident agents and even allure the lower staff in sensitive organizations for collection and communication of sensitive information. When there is a roadblock there, it has moved on to tap ethnic similarities in the neighbourhood.
What is concerning is the security dimension of the espionage. There are two aspects to ISI spying. One is to just gather information about the enemy for the purpose of having information advantage. The second aspect is to collect information with the aim to inflict damage on the adversary. Reconnaissance of Kalapakkam nuclear plant site, NSG Hub in Chennai, Coast Guard installations on the eastern coast, Officers’ Training Academy (OTA) in Chennai, Nagapattinam Port, the Madras Regimental Centre in Wellington, harbours in Chennai and Ennore, DGP office and the High Court complex in Chennai and Vizag and Kochi ports have been carried out. Places like the Sulur Air Base, the Naval detachment in Karikal, naval installations located in the Andaman and Nicobar Islands were on the pipeline. But, by then the spies had been arrested. Going by the confessions of the arrestees, information gathering was meant for planning a terror attack. The first ever terror attack in Chennai in May 2014 was not unconnected to the larger ISI plot.
Moving ahead, whoever had been arrested is only a tip of the iceberg. It is important to find out how many more spies are on the prowl. This requires a thorough review and revamping of counter-intelligence capabilities of India. Counter-intelligence continues to be a weak spot in the Indian intelligence infrastructure. It is important to develop a totally different set of intelligence capabilities to cater to rapidly changing threat environment. This needs to be done at several levels—from training modules to doctrines to equipment to motivation. Intelligence at the state level requires modernisation. Human intelligence (HUMINT) requires more attention than just technical intelligence (TECHINT). Not the least, the intelligence flow has to be both ways: from the Centre to States and vice versa.
The author is Associate Professor, Department of International Studies and History, CHRIST (Deemed to be University), Bengaluru
"Views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not reflect the position of the University"
Dr N Manoharan
Multiple bomb blasts on Easter Day in Sri Lanka has established the fact that the island state has emerged as new hub for Islamic radicalisation. But, how many know that Pakistan’s ISI has been working for quite some time to establish Sri Lanka as a base against Indian interests?
The involvement of ISI in Sri Lanka against India emerged first in 2014 with the arrest of two Sri Lankan Muslims (Mohammed Sakir Hussain and Suleman Hussain) and an Indian Muslim (Thameen Ansari) in Chennai by the National Investigation Agency (NIA) for spying on behalf of Pakistan’s ISI. The arrestees confessed that their handlers were agents posted at Pakistani High Commission based in Colombo: Amir Zubair Siddiqui and Haji alias Siraj Ali, who were posted as visa counsellors.
This is not to suggest that Sri Lanka is conniving with Pakistan against India, but to say that the island state is being used as a base by the ISI. It should be pointed out that Sri Lanka never allowed its territory for any anti-India activities. Things may be happening without Colombo’s knowledge. However, some questions need to be answered: Why Sri Lanka has been chosen as a base by the ISI? What are the reasons for the involvement of Sri Lankans? What is the purpose behind the ‘Colombo module’ of ISI?
The ISI has been operating from some of the neighbouring countries of India like Nepal, Bangladesh, Afghanistan, Myanmar and even Maldives. The southern front of India remained unpenetrated for quite some time. Sri Lanka was the best base to do that for more than one reason:
One: given the proximity and similarity of language and appearance, Sri Lankan Tamils and Sri Lankan Muslims, who also speak Tamil, would not find it difficult to reach Tamil Nadu and mix-up with the local population. According to Sri Lankan Defence Chief, the mastermind of Easter bombing, Zahran Hashmi, has “transited Tamil Nadu” without being noticed. Presence of large number of Sri Lankan refugees is yet another facilitating aspect.
Two: Pakistan’s activities in Sri Lanka have not been seen with suspicion by the security establishment of the island state. Sri Lanka-Pakistan relations have been good without any irritants. Sri Lanka is ever grateful to Pakistan for all the military and diplomatic support during and after the Eelam War and thereafter.
There are various reasons for the involvement of Sri Lankan Tamils and Muslims in the spy ring. The primary motivation is monitory gain. Unemployed youth are easy targets. There is a theory that argues that part of the reason for the involvement of Sri Lankan Muslims in ISI’s spy network is their increasing radicalisation. But, the theory may explain if they are involved in spying western targets based in India, but not acting against Indian targets.
Pakistan obviously has denied the existence of an ISI base in Sri Lanka targeted against India as “speculative” and “malicious media campaign”. The denial is not surprising. Pakistani ISI has been assiduously pursuing the objective of establishing espionage networks for collection of India’s defence related information with reference to deployment/movement of armed forces, information relating to vital installations including sensitive information pertaining to the latest knowhow with reference to technological advancement etc. For this purpose, it has been able to organise resident agents and even allure the lower staff in sensitive organizations for collection and communication of sensitive information. When there is a roadblock there, it has moved on to tap ethnic similarities in the neighbourhood.
What is concerning is the security dimension of the espionage. There are two aspects to ISI spying. One is to just gather information about the enemy for the purpose of having information advantage. The second aspect is to collect information with the aim to inflict damage on the adversary. Reconnaissance of Kalapakkam nuclear plant site, NSG Hub in Chennai, Coast Guard installations on the eastern coast, Officers’ Training Academy (OTA) in Chennai, Nagapattinam Port, the Madras Regimental Centre in Wellington, harbours in Chennai and Ennore, DGP office and the High Court complex in Chennai and Vizag and Kochi ports have been carried out. Places like the Sulur Air Base, the Naval detachment in Karikal, naval installations located in the Andaman and Nicobar Islands were on the pipeline. But, by then the spies had been arrested. Going by the confessions of the arrestees, information gathering was meant for planning a terror attack. The first ever terror attack in Chennai in May 2014 was not unconnected to the larger ISI plot.
Moving ahead, whoever had been arrested is only a tip of the iceberg. It is important to find out how many more spies are on the prowl. This requires a thorough review and revamping of counter-intelligence capabilities of India. Counter-intelligence continues to be a weak spot in the Indian intelligence infrastructure. It is important to develop a totally different set of intelligence capabilities to cater to rapidly changing threat environment. This needs to be done at several levels—from training modules to doctrines to equipment to motivation. Intelligence at the state level requires modernisation. Human intelligence (HUMINT) requires more attention than just technical intelligence (TECHINT). Not the least, the intelligence flow has to be both ways: from the Centre to States and vice versa.
The author is Associate Professor, Department of International Studies and History, CHRIST (Deemed to be University), Bengaluru
"Views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not reflect the position of the University"