Need to work on reducing trade imbalance between Russia, India urgently: EAM Jaishankar addresses IRIGC-TEC session
External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar highlighted the significant increase in India-Russia bilateral trade, which surged from USD 13 billion in 2021 to USD 68 billion in 2024-25. However, he emphasized the urgent need to address the growing trade imbalance, which has widened from USD 6.6 billion to USD 58.
Need to work on reducing trade imbalance between Russia, India: Jaishankar amid US Tariff row S. Jaishankar, Union Minister of External Affairs, while giving his opening remarks at the 26th Session of the India-Russia Intergovernmental Commission, said that the two nations need to work on reducing trade imbalance urgently. "Over the last four years, our bilateral trade in goods has increased, as you have noted, more than five-fold from USD 13 billion in 2021 to USD 68 billion in 2024-25 and it continues to grow. However, a major trade imbalance has accompanied the growth; it has increased from USD 6.6 billion to USD 58.9 billion which is about nine times. So we need to address that urgently," said the External Affairs Minister.The development comes amid strain in India's ties with the US over New Delhi's procurement of crude oil from Russia.Ties between Washington and New Delhi faced fresh strain on the trade front, as government sources confirmed that the US team would not travel to India for the sixth round of bilateral trade negotiations scheduled for August 25.The setback comes just days after Trump imposed an additional 25 per cent tariff on Indian goods, raising the total levy to 50 per cent, along with an unspecified penalty for India's continued oil imports from Russia.
Earlier on August 13, the Foreign Ministry of Russia had said that EAM Jaishankar and Russian FM Sergey Lavrov's meeting would discuss key issues on the bilateral agenda, as well as key aspects of cooperation within international frameworks.On Monday, Russian President Vladimir Putin had called Prime Minister Narendra Modi and shared his insights about the recent meeting in Alaska with US President Donald Trump over the Ukraine conflict. PM Modi said India has consistently called for a peaceful resolution of the Ukraine conflict and supports all efforts in this regard. He thanked the Russian President for the phone call and for sharing his perspective on the Alaska meeting.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NDTV
11 minutes ago
- NDTV
Putin Demands Donbas Surrender, No NATO, No Western Troops In Ukraine: Report
Moscow: Russian President Vladimir Putin is demanding that Ukraine give up all of the eastern Donbas region, renounce ambitions to join NATO, remain neutral and keep Western troops out of the country, three sources familiar with top-level Kremlin thinking told Reuters. The Russian president met Donald Trump in Alaska on Friday for the first Russia-U.S. summit in more than four years and spent almost all of their three-hour closed meeting discussing what a compromise on Ukraine might look like, according to the sources who requested anonymity to discuss sensitive matters. Speaking afterwards beside Trump, Putin said the meeting would hopefully open up the road to peace in Ukraine - but neither leader gave specifics about what they discussed. In the most detailed Russian-based reporting to date on Putin's offer at the summit, Reuters was able to outline the contours of what the Kremlin would like to see in a possible peace deal to end a war that has killed and injured hundreds of thousands of people. In essence, the Russian sources said, Putin has compromised on territorial demands he laid out in June 2024, which required Kyiv to cede the entirety of the four provinces Moscow claims as part of Russia: Dontesk and Luhansk in eastern Ukraine - which make up the Donbas - plus Kherson and Zaporizhzhia in the south. Kyiv rejected those terms as tantamount to surrender. In his new proposal, the Russian president has stuck to his demand that Ukraine completely withdraw from the parts of the Donbas it still controls, according to the three sources. In return, though, Moscow would halt the current front lines in Zaporizhzhia and Kherson, they added. Russia controls about 88% of the Donbas and 73% of Zaporizhzhia and Kherson, according to U.S. estimates and open-source data. Moscow is also willing to hand over the small parts of the Kharkiv, Sumy, and Dnipropetrovsk regions of Ukraine it controls as part of a possible deal, the sources said. Putin is sticking, too, to his previous demands that Ukraine give up its NATO ambitions and for a legally binding pledge from the U.S.-led military alliance that it will not expand further eastwards, as well as for limits on the Ukrainian army and an agreement that no Western troops will be deployed on the ground in Ukraine as part of a peacekeeping force, the sources said. Yet the two sides remain far apart, more than three years after Putin ordered thousands of Russian troops into Ukraine in a full-scale invasion that followed the annexation of the Crimean peninsula in 2014 and prolonged fighting in the country's east between Russian-backed separatists and Ukrainian troops. Ukraine's foreign ministry had no immediate comment on the proposals. President Volodymyr Zelenskiy has repeatedly dismissed the idea of withdrawing from internationally recognised Ukrainian land as part of a deal, and has said the industrial Donbas region serves as a fortress holding back Russian advances deeper into Ukraine. "If we're talking about simply withdrawing from the east, we cannot do that," he told reporters in comments released by Kyiv on Thursday. "It is a matter of our country's survival, involving the strongest defensive lines." Joining NATO, meanwhile, is a strategic objective enshrined in the country's constitution and one which Kyiv sees as its most reliable security guarantee. Zelenskiy said it was not up to Russia to decide on the alliance's membership. The White House and NATO didn't immediately respond to requests for comment on the Russian proposals. Political scientist Samuel Charap, chair in Russia and Eurasia Policy at RAND, a U.S.-based global policy think-tank, said any requirement for Ukraine to withdraw from the Donbas remained a non-starter for Kyiv, both politically and strategically. "Openness to 'peace' on terms categorically unacceptable to the other side could be more of a performance for Trump than a sign of a true willingness to compromise," he added. "The only way to test that proposition is to begin a serious process at the working level to hash out those details." Trump: Putin Wants To See It Ended Russian forces currently control a fifth of Ukraine, an area about the size of the American state of Ohio, according to U.S. estimates and open-source maps. The three sources close to the Kremlin said the summit in the Alaskan city of Anchorage had ushered in the best chance for peace since the war began because there had been specific discussions about Russia's terms and Putin had shown a willingness to give ground. "Putin is ready for peace - for compromise. That is the message that was conveyed to Trump," one of the people said. The sources cautioned that it was unclear to Moscow whether Ukraine would be prepared to cede the remains of the Donbas, and that if it did not then the war would continue. Also unclear was whether or not the United States would give any recognition to Russian-held Ukrainian territory, they added. A fourth source said that though economic issues were secondary for Putin, he understood the economic vulnerability of Russia and the scale of the effort needed to go far further into Ukraine. Trump has said he wants to end the "bloodbath" of the war and be remembered as a "peacemaker president". He said on Monday he had begun arranging a meeting between the Russian and Ukrainian leaders, to be followed by a trilateral summit with the U.S. president. "I believe Vladimir Putin wants to see it ended," Trump said beside Zelenskiy in the Oval office. "I feel confident we are going to get it solved." Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said on Thursday that Putin was prepared to meet Zelenskiy but that all issues had to be worked through first and there was a question about Zelenskiy's authority to sign a peace deal. Putin has repeatedly raised doubts about Zelenskiy's legitimacy as his term in office was due to expire in May 2024 but the war means no new presidential election has yet been held. Kyiv says Zelenskiy remains the legitimate president. The leaders of Britain, France and Germany have said they are sceptical that Putin wants to end the war. Security Guarantees For Ukraine Trump's special envoy Steve Witkoff was instrumental in paving the way for the summit, and the latest drive for peace, according to two of the Russian sources. Witkoff met Putin in the Kremlin on August 6 with Kremlin aide Yuri Ushakov. At the meeting, Putin conveyed clearly to Witkoff that he was ready to compromise and set out the contours of what he could accept for peace, according to two Russian sources. If Russia and Ukraine could reach an agreement, then there are various options for a formal deal - including a possible three-way Russia-Ukraine-U.S. deal that is recognised by the U.N. Security Council, one of the sources said. Another option is to go back to the failed 2022 Istanbul agreements, where Russia and Ukraine discussed Ukraine's permanent neutrality in return for security guarantees from the five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council: Britain, China, France, Russia and the United States, the sources added. "There are two choices: war or peace, and if there is no peace, then there is more war," one of the people said.
Mint
11 minutes ago
- Mint
Should rate-setting panel track headline or core inflation? RBI stirs debate
The central bank has initiated a process to gather opinions on whether monetary policy should track headline inflation or core inflation, which strips out the impact of fuel and energy price increases. The Reserve Bank of India (RBI) on Thursday released a discussion paper on its inflation-targeting framework seven months before the existing one comes up for renewal. The framework is reviewed every five years, with the last one happening in 2021, when the government, in consultation with RBI, set it at 4% with a tolerance band of +/-2%. The discussion paper asks four questions. First, whether headline inflation or core inflation would best guide the conduct of monetary policy, given evolving relative dynamics of food and core inflation and the continuing high weight of food in the consumer price basket. Second, whether the 4% inflation target continues to remain optimal for balancing growth with stability in a fast-growing, large emerging economy like India. Third, should the tolerance band around the target be revised in any way, including whether it should be narrowed, widened, or eliminated? Lastly, should the target inflation level be removed, and only a range be maintained within the overall ambit of maintaining flexibility without undermining monetary policy's credibility? The debate over whether core inflation should be the benchmark instead of the headline numbers has been ongoing for some time. It centres around monetary policy's handicap on food prices as they are caused by supply-side problems like food supply issues and not by demand, which can be controlled by interest rate changes. Food currently occupies a 46% weight in the headline consumer price index or CPI basket. In July 2024, the Economic Survey for 2023-24 suggested excluding food prices from India's inflation-targeting framework 'The debate on what should be the monetary policy target benchmark–headline inflation or core inflation (which excludes the volatile components of inflation, such as food and fuel from headline)–is premised on the issue of inclusivity vs stability," the discussion paper said. It said that headline inflation is favoured worldwide as a more representative measure of the overall price conditions. In fact, except for Uganda, all nations that target inflation look at headline inflation. The paper said the argument for targeting headline inflation emphasises that downplaying the role of food inflation in price stability can erode monetary policy credibility and de-anchor inflation expectations. According to the paper, there is also the argument that the current CPI base (2011-12) is outdated, and the share of food would decline considerably once it is revised to a more recent year. 'However, the continued dominance of food in Indian households' consumption basket is corroborated by the latest Survey of Household Consumption Expenditure 2023-24. It indicates that 90% of the lowest fractile rural households and 50 per cent of the lowest fractile urban households spend more than 50% of their monthly consumption on food and energy," it said. RBI said the quarterly path since inception of flexible inflation targeting showed that average inflation was at 3.9% during the first four years of the framework and very close to the target. It exceeded the target during 2020-2024 (and even went above the upper threshold level of 6%), driven by supply disruptions on account of the pandemic, geopolitical conflicts and adverse weather events, it said. The paper said that while there are arguments on both sides as to whether to raise or lower the target of 4%, justifications for pursuing the target and the framework stem from India's relative success in lowering inflation and responding to exogenous shocks. The discussion paper said that, like other countries, India may consider narrowing its current tolerance band to about 1-1.5%. Moreover, the recent consumer expenditure survey suggests that the share of food and beverages in the upcoming new CPI series could be lower, further lowering the volatility of headline inflation.
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
11 minutes ago
- Business Standard
Nuclear energy can help power India's economic growth, private push welcome
For decades, state control was justified by concerns over radiation safety, misuse of nuclear material, and strategic security Business Standard Editorial Comment Mumbai Listen to This Article The Union government's plans to end decades-long state monopoly over uranium mining, import, processing, and nuclear-power generation, opening the door for private firms to participate, mark a significant shift in the sector. The policy shift, first signalled in the Union Budget, builds on the country's ambitious goal of scaling up nuclear power capacity to 100 gigawatts (Gw) by 2047. Accordingly, Union Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman had announced a Nuclear Energy Mission with an allocation of ₹20,000 crore, aimed at raising nuclear-power capacity from the current 8.18 Gw. These recent developments mark a belated but necessary recognition of nuclear energy's role
