Topic 1 : An election debate not joined
Introduction: India might be polarised on various domestic issues in this general election, but there is hardly any political argument on foreign policy. This could be one of the biggest successes of PM Modi’s government, at the same time a cause of concern.
Current NDA government’s edge over opposition over foreign policy issue
- PM Modi’s stewardship of India’s foreign policy has been impressive.
- Coming to power with a full majority in the Lok Sabha in 2014 and improving on it in 2019, Modi has enjoyed great command over his party and government and a freer hand in running foreign policy.
- All his predecessors since Rajiv Gandhi had to run coalition governments in which all policies, including external affairs, were under continuous disputation.
- The steady accretion of economic salience has made India an attractive partner for many countries and offered valuable commercial levers to boost Indian diplomacy.
- At the same time, a favourable global geopolitical environment has created new strategic opportunities to transform key relationships.
- A professional diplomat — Subrahmanyam Jaishankar — as the foreign minister has given India a definitive edge in international relations.
Concerns over opposition parties’ lack of debate over India’s foreign policy
- The lack of a foreign policy debate today is less about a genuine consensus than declining interest in world affairs within the demoralised Opposition.
- Ironically, the more India has become global, the less engaged its political class is with international affairs.
1. Congress party is following government’s line over major foreign policy issues
- The main opposition party, Congress, has been unwilling to challenge the main trends of the government’s foreign policy.
- During his visits abroad in the last two years, Congress leader Rahul Gandhi chose to focus more on India’s domestic divisions than express any difference with the Prime Minister on foreign policy issues.
- Asked repeatedly about the Russian invasion of Ukraine, Rahul backed the government’s position.
- There was a brief moment when the Congress seemed to question the government’s unstinting support to Israel in the immediate aftermath of the brutal October 7 terror attacks by Hamas.
- But the party soon tied itself into knots on the questions of terrorism and the “Palestinian cause”.
2. Left Parties’ influence over foreign policy issues are declining
- The loss of the Left voice on foreign policy has compounded the defensive orientation of the Congress.
- During the first term of the UPA government (2004-09), the Left parties had shaken India’s foreign policy to its core.
- They opposed the historic civil nuclear initiative and pulled out of the coalition, accusing the Congress of sacrificing India’s strategic autonomy by drawing close to the US.
- The left’s arguments found interesting resonance in the BJP and triggered a rare and intense debate on a major foreign policy question — India’s relationship with the US.
- The Manmohan Singh government barely survived amidst an unprecedented and coordinated attack from the CPM and the BJP.
- Although the Left parties were out of the UPA coalition, its influence on foreign policy endured in the second term of the UPA (2009-14).
- The Manmohan Singh government slowed down the engagement with the US.
- Over the last decade of NDA rule, India has moved closer than ever before to the US, and in PM Modi’s words, Delhi has shed its “historic hesitations” in engaging Washington.
- The Left critique has become less audible amidst the rapid decline in its parliamentary clout and intellectual influence.
The drawbacks in India’s foreign policy formulations
- The last decade has seen a dramatic expansion of popular interest in foreign policy.
- The rapid proliferation of think tanks, the increasing contribution of retired bureaucrats, and the explosion of social media engagement with Indian diplomacy have created the basis for a genuine democratisation of foreign policy discourse.
- However, much of the output tacks to the government line, some tend to be hyper-nationalistic, and a bit of partisan sniping does break into the discourse to complete the picture.
- In the end, though, it is the burden of the political class to lead a purposeful discourse.
- The story of India’s changing foreign policy in the last three decades has been about the political leadership — Rajiv Gandhi, P V Narasimha Rao, Inder Kumar Gujral, Atal Bihari Vajpayee, Manmohan Singh, and Narendra Modi pushing the foreign policy establishment in new directions.
- As the political parties prepare their manifestos, it might be unreasonable to expect them to devote too much attention to foreign policy.
- Yet, the fact that we are at a hinge moment in global politics demands serious reflection on the role of a rising India in a rapidly changing world.
Four big ideas that need Indian political parties’ attention
1. The need for a diagnosis of the changing international order
- First is the need for a diagnosis of the changing international order — marked by the return of great power rivalry.
- The ongoing war in Ukraine at the heart of Europe and the growing potential for one in Asia’s Taiwan Straits are rooted in the changing distribution of power among the major states.
- There must be a debate about the nature of this key variable that shapes the international system as well as India’s choices in dealing with it.
2. Managing the deglobalisation of global economy
- Second, if India’s challenge in the last three decades has been about adapting to the logic of globalisation, the task today is to make the best of the unfolding rearrangement of the global economic order.
- There is room for a productive contestation of ideas on how to raise India’s share of global trade in the coming years and deepen regional economic integration as the US and China change the commercial rules.
3. Dealing with belligerent China
- Third is the question of dealing with a China that has risen and presents challenges across all major policy areas in the functional domain — commercial, political, security, technological, and climate change.
- Assessments of Chinese power also affect our policies in the neighbourhood and extended neighbourhood, as well as our approach to other great powers and global institutions.
4. Finding a replacement of “non-alignment” and “strategic autonomy”
- Finally, the old tropes of “non-alignment” and “strategic autonomy” have become less relevant for an India that is on the rise and is well-placed to become the third-largest economy in the next few years.
Conclusion: An India with the ambition to become a developed nation by 2047 deserves a new strategic lexicon and a new geopolitical grammar. Can the political classes begin to deliver?
Topic 2 : Putin, again
Introduction: In a "year of elections" - in which many major countries including the US and India are going to the polls - the Russian presidential election stands out as a symbol of authoritarianism. The result of Russian election provides an imputes to world to think about significance of Putin for Russia.
Recent Russian election result and concerns regarding its credibility
- That Vladimir Putin won in a landslide - with 87 per cent of the vote, the largest margin for any leader since the col- lapse of the Soviet Union-comes as no surprise.
- The scale of the win points to Putin's complete control over the Russian state as well as the country's elites.
- All major opposition, including the media and civil society, was suppressed and Alexei Navalny, long seen as Putin's only viable challenger, died under mysterious circumstances earlier this year.
Has Putin’s rule made Russia better?
- As Putin embarks on his sixth term, a question must be asked: Is Russia better off as a result of Putin's rule?
- In this regard, too, the man who is set to surpass Joseph Stalin as the longest-serving Russian leader since Catherine the Great has, at best, a deeply mixed record.
- Before Putin began his expansionist drive - first with the annexation of Crimea and the prolonged war in Ukraine - he was regarded by sections in Russia as something of a "saviour".
- In the 1990s, in the aftermath of the Soviet Union's collapse, the erstwhile superpower was in free fall: It was riven by law-and-order issues, and its economy was spiralling as national assets were privatized for pennies on the dollar under Boris Yeltsin's leadership.
- Putin's early years, from 2000 onwards, were about bringing stability to Russia and, enabled by a huge rise in energy prices, reviving its economy.
- The hope was that this would be followed by democratization and Russia taking its place in global affairs as a responsible power.
- But the opposite has happened.
Putin’s record on foreign and domestic policy
- Putin's idea of "Russkiy Mir" - or a Russian zone of influence - is revanchist and harkens to Czarist notions of empire.
|
Revanchism is the political manifestation of the will to reverse the territorial losses which are incurred by a country, frequently after a war or after a social movement.
Russkiy Mir- It refers to the sphere of influence that Russia exerts, including military, political, and cultural aspects. This can be seen as an attempt to establish a "Pax Russica," similar to the historical "Pax Romana (Roman Empire)."
|
- Domestically, this has been accompanied by a clampdown on dissent as well as on the rights of linguistic, religious and sexual minorities.
- Putin has sought to justify his attack on Ukraine by citing NATO expansionism.
- But rather than halt the US-led alliance, it has pushed many countries - from Finland to Sweden and even Georgia - to seek NATO membership.
- The invasion has also cut off Russia from its partners and well-wishers in Europe, while making it a junior partner to China.
- It has made the world more volatile, and global supply chains have been disrupted.
- Even India, which has continued to engage with Moscow, is rapidly diversifying its arms suppliers.
Conclusion: Putin's victory, then, may well be a Pyrrhic one for Russia and its people. For the world Putin’s re-election was no surprise and it aspires no hope for the resolution of ongoing Russia-Ukraine conflict.