New Zealand hails 'breakthrough' in trade talks with India, but no timeline for deal
New Zealand's deputy prime minister said on Friday that talks over a free trade agreement between his country and India were ongoing, but he didn't provide a timeline for when the two nations could eventually sign a deal.
Winston Peters, who is on a two-day visit to India, said that the negotiations were 'going with real meaning now," calling them 'a breakthrough in our economic relationship.'
India and New Zealand began negotiations in March for a trade pact, and had aimed to sign a deal in 60 days. The deal will significantly bolster economic ties between the two countries, but it has faced delays because of differences over tariffs on dairy products.
Bilateral trade between India and New Zealand stood at $1.7 billion in the 2023-24 financial year.
Talks between India and New Zealand were taking place amid global trade tensions, after U.S. President Donald Trump's decision to impose now-paused reciprocal tariffs on imported goods from several countries, including India.
Earlier this month, India and the United Kingdom clinched a trade deal. India is also engaged in trade talks with Washington.
Peters, who met with India's Group of 20 emissary, Amitabh Kant, in New Delhi, said that India was New Zealand's 12th-largest partner in trade and 'we are determined that we're going to work to change that.'
"Our strengths, from food and beverage products to agriculture, forestry, horticulture, education and tourism are world class. And our innovation in areas like outer space and renewable energy will find a welcoming partner in India," he said.
Peters said that the relationship between the two countries extended to defense and security, calling it a 'priority for New Zealand in the Indo-Pacific."
"During a time of great uncertainty, instability and disorder, we have taken steps to work more closely on matters of defense and security with India," he said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
an hour ago
- The Guardian
Khurshid Ahmad obituary
My friend Khurshid Ahmad, who has died aged 93, was a pioneering scholar admired for helping to develop the field of Islamic economics as an academic discipline. In 1973 he founded the Islamic Foundation in Leicester, a centre dedicated to research, education and training that has published more than 400 books and papers. It is now housed at the Markfield Conference Centre in Markfield, Leicestershire. Khurshid believed that conventional banking methods produce various forms of injustice, and he was deeply opposed to the charging of interest to people who borrow money. Much of his work was based on trying to find alternatives to interest-charging that were compliant with ethical Islamic principles. Khurshid was born in Delhi, in India, to Nazir Ahmad Qureishi, a journalist and businessman, and Sarwar Jahan. He attended the Anglo-Arabic school in Delhi, then, following the birth of the state of Pakistan in 1947, migrated with his family to Lahore. After gaining a degree in economics from Karachi University, followed by a master's in Islamic studies, he taught economics in Karachi at the Urdu College and Karachi University. He moved to the UK in 1968 to do a PhD, and after setting up the Islamic Foundation, he served as its chairman until his retirement in 2017. He was awarded a number of honorary doctorates, including by Loughborough University and the University of Malaya in Malaysia. Khurshid's wife, Azra (nee Mohebullah), whom he married in 1967, died in 2015. He is survived by their sons, Haris, Salman and Umer, and daughters, Asma, Salma and Fariha, and by his brother, Anis.
The Guardian
an hour ago
- The Guardian
In Australia's post-US future, we must find our own way with China
Thanks to US regional strategic primacy, Australia has been virtually immune from the threat of direct military attack since the defeat of Japan in 1945. Now that is changing. In future it will no longer be militarily impossible for China to attack Australia directly. And not just China: other major regional powers, especially India and eventually perhaps Indonesia, will have the potential to launch significant attacks on Australia. That does not mean we now face a serious threat of Chinese military attack. Today the only circumstance in which Australia could credibly find itself under attack from China would be if Australia joined the US in a war with China over Taiwan. Reports that Australia is a target of Chinese cyber and intelligence operations do not show that Beijing poses a military threat to us, any more than our cyber and intelligence operations targeting China provide evidence that we pose a military threat to them. It is harder to say whether China might become militarily aggressive towards us in future. We cannot assume that it will from its military buildup alone, because countries often expand their armed forces to defend themselves rather than to attack others. But, equally, we cannot rule out the possibility that China might decide to use armed force against Australia in decades to come. Some aspects of China's naval buildup, especially its sustained investment in aircraft carriers, which would have no useful role in a US-China war over Taiwan, suggest that it wants to be able to conduct long-range power-projection operations, which could encompass Australia. Nonetheless, it does seem unlikely. For one thing, it is a little hard to imagine what China's purpose might be in attacking Australia, given that we are not an easy country to invade. And if we get our defence policy right it should be possible for us to raise the cost to the point that it is not worth China's while. This all means that, while we should not ignore it, we should not allow the distant possibility of a Chinese military threat to dominate our thinking about China. There are many other dimensions to what is a very important, complex and ultimately inescapable relationship. It is also a relationship of a completely unfamiliar kind. Other than our two great allies, Australia has never before encountered a country as large, as powerful, as influential in our region, as important to us economically, and with close heritage connections with such a large proportion of our population, as China. Once we abandon the illusion that the US is going to manage China for us, we will realise that we have no choice but to find our own way. This will not be comfortable or easy. China is ruthless, demanding and completely transactional – though no more than other great powers. Over the past decade, in Canberra and around the country, exaggerated fears and a desire to stay in step with Washington have crowded out serious thinking about China itself and how the complex range of interests we have in our relationship with it can best be balanced. We have less deep expertise on China now than we had 30 years ago. That has to change. Our second big task is to rethink our relationship with the US. In the decades before the mid-1990s, there was an assumption that – in a Whig-view-of-history way – Australia was gradually but ineluctably emerging from dependence to independence as we left our colonial and imperial past behind and embraced our Asian future. That died away around the time John Howard became prime minister in 1996, when it seemed to many people that the future was America's, and that Australia's future was to become ever more tightly entwined with it, strategically, economically and culturally. This was the time when a US-Australia free trade agreement seemed both essential and sufficient to guarantee Australia's economic future, and when America's place as the world's dominant military power seemed unchallengeable. The economic illusions of that era were soon overtaken by the hard realities of China's rise but the strategic illusions have survived. Indeed, they were strengthened by the 'war on terror' and have been intensified again by the rising fear of China. So we clung on and stopped imagining we could do anything else. Sign up to Five Great Reads Each week our editors select five of the most interesting, entertaining and thoughtful reads published by Guardian Australia and our international colleagues. Sign up to receive it in your inbox every Saturday morning after newsletter promotion It is often said, for example, that the intelligence relationship is so close and so important to both sides as to be indissoluble. Don't bet on that. US access to Pine Gap as a location for its satellite ground station is valuable but far from essential. Our access to US intelligence under the Five Eyes arrangements is very beneficial and, in some ways, irreplaceable, in that it provides intelligence we could not get in other ways. But that does not mean we could not get by without it. We certainly could. As things get tough with Washington over the months and years ahead, there will be a temptation to try to placate Donald Trump and earn his favour by meeting his demands for increased defence spending, or by siding with the US in its economic war by cutting links with China. There may be good reasons to increase defence spending but trying to buy Trump's favour is not one of them. Likewise, that futile goal would in no way offset the many powerful arguments against joining a US-led anti-China economic coalition. There are no favours we can do Trump which will keep the US strategically engaged in Asia and committed to Australia's defence. We need to bear these cold realities clearly in mind as we think about our future relations with Washington. The first step is to recognise that the end of the alliance as we have known it for so long does not mean the end of the relationship. We have been close allies for so long that it is hard to imagine what other form our relationship might take. But with careful management, a new, beneficial post-alliance relationship can evolve, just as our relations with Britain evolved after it withdrew from Asia in the late 1960s. We continued to have close and productive defence and security links, drawing some strength from our shared history together. Singapore offers another instructive model. It is not a US ally but it has an excellent relationship with Washington, including deep defence links. We should aim for a post-alliance relationship like that with the US in the years ahead – and we should be building it now. That does not mean severing ties with Washington but it does mean changing the relationship fundamentally. Above all, it means acknowledging that the security undertakings in Anzus can no longer be the foundation of our strategic policy, or of our relationship with the US. The Canberra establishment is shocked by any suggestion that we should walk away from the Anzus commitments. They think we can and must depend on the US more than ever in today's hard new world. But that misses the vital point. It is not Australia but the US that is walking away from the commitments it made in the Anzus treaty in very different circumstances 75 years ago. That was plain enough under Joe Biden. It is crystal clear today under Trump. This is the lesson we must draw from Washington's failure to defend Ukraine, from its crumbling position in Asia and from US voters' decisive rejection of the old idea of US global leadership to which we still cling. Our best path now is to recognise this and start acting accordingly. Hugh White is emeritus professor of strategic studies at ANU. This is an edited extract of Hard New World: Our Post-American Future, published today in Quarterly Essay
TTG
2 hours ago
- TTG
Agents to gain India booking boost as Virgin Atlantic signs deal with IndiGo
Laura Millar Writer Virgin Atlantic announced the new partnership with the fast-growing low-cost carrier this weekend in Delhi, where it also marked 25 years of its own service from Heathrow to the city. The deal with IndiGo includes Virgin's fellow SkyTeam members Air France-KLM and Delta Air Lines, with the airlines saying they would 'build an industry-leading partnership to offer travellers broader access, smoother journeys, and a more consistent experience, linking dozens of cities in the US, Canada, Europe and India' as travel to the country continues to flourish. In 2024, India experienced a 1.4% growth in international arrivals, reaching 9,657,003, with the UK representing more than 10% of that, placing the country as the third largest source market. 'In real terms, this IndiGo partnership means more passenger capacity and potentially more destinations in the country,' said Virgin Atlantic's chief commercial officer Juha Jarvinen. 'We currently have access to 36 destinations here, and from 1 July we'll be adding the IndiGo codeshare to our flights from Manchester to the US. Having a foothold here is immensely important to us, and Virgin Atlantic is the fifth largest airline to fly between Europe and India.' 'In real terms, this means more passenger capacity and potentially more destinations in the country' 'This is only the beginning; we firmly believe that India is the right place for Virgin Atlantic and our partners, especially with regards to how quickly India is growing,' he said. The airline currently offers five daily flights from the UK, translating to around a million seats annually. 'India today is our third largest passenger market, and second biggest in terms of cargo so it is clearly a massive opportunity for us,' Jarvinen added. 'But at the same time, we need to make sure we localise ourselves; we will customise our offering on board and on the ground. With those five daily flights – two daily to Delhi, two daily to Mumbai and one daily to Bengaluru – that lays the foundation.' The London-Delhi route is seen as eminently successful, having doubled operation to two daily flights in 2023, with load factors hovering around 90% in all cabins. The airline uses a mixture of aircraft on the route, the A350-1000 being the biggest, with capacity for nearly 400 passengers. While Upper Class remains popular with business travellers, Jarvinen added the increasing development of the Indian economy – recently announced as seeing Q4 GDP growth of 7.4% – and the growing wealth of the population had meant a corresponding rise in premium leisure and VFR traffic. Speaking to TTG at The Oberoi in New Delhi, Jarvinen also revealed that while the airline is happy with the three cities it currently serves and the frequency of direct flights it offers to India, Virgin is always exploring new options. 'With the new partnership with IndiGo, we have opportunities to grow together,' he said. Trade focus Jarvinen said the growth of the SkyTeam partnership with IndiGo has positive implications for UK agents selling into India. 'We are very committed to omnichannel distributions. The travel trade is very important to us today, and will still be in the future, so whichever products we sell, they will always be available through the trade and we are also working with NDC [New Distribution Capability] solutions. These will definitely be through a carrot rather than stick approach – we will give a better offering through NDC, including ancillary services and dynamic pricing,' he added. Since launching in 2005, IndiGo has become one of the fastest growing airlines in the world, with 400 aircraft transporting 118 million passengers last year alone, and further moves planned to grow international routes. Jarvinen said that in terms of client perception, IndiGo's original status as a low-cost carrier was unlikely to deter Virgin Atlantic customers perhaps more inclined towards a full-service airline. 'IndiGo today is at the very least a hybrid, meaning they have many of the principles of an LCC, but now they already have at least two class products on their domestic flights. They call their business cabin IndiGoStretch, which I believe is actually a better business product than many European airlines have, with a bigger seat,' he said. 'They will then obviously evolve that concept to their long-haul flights when they come, and we are of course eager to see their own A350s coming in 2027, so we'll see what kind of product they offer then. But they are definitely moving much more into a mainstream service.'
