Latest news with #BECA
AllAfrica
18 hours ago
- Business
- AllAfrica
Modi's American embrace backfires badly on India
India-US ties have entered a fraught and intricate phase, marked by tensions that challenge India's long-cherished strategic autonomy. Once overly hyped as a burgeoning partnership of mutual benefit, the Indo-US relationship is now strained by diplomatic pressures, economic threats and a shifting global order. India's signing of four foundational US defense agreements—the Logistics Exchange Memorandum of Agreement (LEMOA), the Communications Compatibility and Security Agreement (COMCASA), the Industrial Security Annex (ISA) and the Basic Exchange and Cooperation Agreement (BECA)—positioned it as a strategic partner and ally. However, these agreements, coupled with increasing US trade pressure under President Donald Trump, have raised serious questions about India's ability to maintain an independent foreign policy. This article critically examines the trajectory of US-India relations, the carrot-and-stick approach of Trump's policies, the myth of India's strategic autonomy and the challenges India faces in navigating a multipolar world. It argues that Prime Minister Narendra Modi's pro-American tilt has miscalculated India's strategic and economic capacity, risking its autonomy and global standing. During the Cold War, India's non-aligned stance allowed it to balance relations with the Soviet Union and the West, maintaining strategic autonomy while fostering ties with Moscow. The post-Cold War era, however, saw a pivot toward the US, driven by shared concerns about China's rise and India's aspirations to become a global power. Key milestones included the 2008 US-India Civil Nuclear Agreement under President George W Bush, which legitimized India's nuclear program, and enhanced defense cooperation under President Barack Obama. During Trump's first term (2017–2021), intelligence-sharing agreements and defense technology transfers deepened ties, while the Biden administration facilitated fighter jet engine technology transfers in 2023. These developments, coupled with India's active role in the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (Quad) alongside the US, Japan and Australia, signaled a strategic alignment with Washington. The four foundational defense agreements, signed between 2016 and 2020, were pivotal. LEMOA enabled mutual logistics support, COMCASA facilitated secure communications, ISA allowed technology transfers, and BECA enhanced geospatial intelligence sharing. These agreements granted India access to advanced US defense systems, but they also tethered its military and strategic apparatus to Washington's orbit. Modi's government framed this as a step to counter China and elevate India's global stature. However, the cost of this alignment has become increasingly apparent, as it undermines India's non-aligned heritage and exposes it to US pressures, particularly under Trump's second term. Trump's first term was characterized by a 'carrot' approach, enticing India with defense cooperation, technology transfers and diplomatic gestures like the 'Howdy Modi' event in 2019. These moves were designed to pull India into the US-led Indo-Pacific framework to counter China. The US also enticed India by vowing it would encourage American companies to shift manufacturing from China to India during the Covid-19 pandemic, though firms like General Motors, Ford, and Harley-Davidson exited India, citing economic challenges. Despite these setbacks, the narrative of a robust US-India 'friendship' was carefully cultivated. In contrast, Trump's second term has adopted a 'stick' approach, marked by economic and diplomatic coercion. Trump has criticized India's oil and arms purchases from Russia, threatening tariffs first of 25% and now 50% on Indian goods and additional penalties. This pressure stems from India's continued engagement with Russia and its role in the BRICS grouping, which Trump perceives as an anti-American bloc. By leveraging tariffs and public criticism, Trump aims to curb India's economic autonomy and align its policies with US interests, particularly in ongoing trade negotiations with China. For instance, Trump's push for India to open its agricultural market to US products—such as genetically modified corn, soybeans, dairy, and fruits—threatens India's domestic producers. His demand that India halt Russian oil purchases in favor of pricier US alternatives further strains India's economy. Trump's rhetoric has also been humiliating. He has called India's economy 'dead' for not aligning with US economic interests and threatened 150–250% tariffs on India's pharmaceutical exports, a critical sector. Additionally, his deportation of Indian illegal immigrants via military aircraft and his repeated claim of halting India-Pakistan airstrikes in India's Operation Sindoor have embarrassed New Delhi. A particularly egregious slight was Trump's plan to host Modi alongside Pakistan's army chief at a White House dinner, an invitation Modi declined. These actions reflect a broader pattern of American exceptionalism, where the US seeks to subordinate India's ambitions to its hegemonic interests. What Modi fails to grasp is that friendship with America is like the Cuscuta plant (commonly known as dodder or amarbel in Hindi) — once it entwines itself around a tree, it eventually destroys its host. India has long prided itself on strategic autonomy, rooted in its non-aligned policy and balanced relations with global powers. Its participation in BRICS and continued trade with Russia and Iran bolster this narrative. However, the deepening US partnership, particularly through defense agreements, has eroded this autonomy. The US increasingly views India as a 'vassal state'—a nation that, while formally independent, aligns its foreign policy with a dominant power. The 2019 US pressure to halt Iranian oil imports, which India complied with, and current demands to reduce Russian oil purchases highlight this dynamic. India's compliance risks transforming it into a subordinate partner, undermining its multipolar aspirations. Modi's pro-Western tilt has exacerbated this vulnerability. By prioritizing US ties over regional partnerships like China's Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) or the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) trade bloc, India has isolated itself from alternative economic frameworks. The 2020 Galwan Valley clash with China, which greatly strained India-China relations, was a strategic misstep. Modi's decision to abandon earlier understandings from the 2018 Wuhan and 2019 Mahabalipuram summits with China, coupled with India's withdrawal from RCEP, reflects an overreliance on the US. This has left India economically exposed, particularly as US tariffs loom and trade deficits grow. India's strategic miscalculations under Modi's leadership are stark. Despite being the world's fifth-largest economy, with a GDP of approximately US$3.5 trillion in 2025, India lacks the economic and military heft of the US or China. Modi's government projected India as a $10 trillion economy by 2025, capable of rivaling China, but economic growth has fallen short. Unlike China, which adopted a 'Hide Your Strength, Bide Your Time' strategy until its economy surpassed $10 trillion, India has prematurely positioned itself as a global power. This hubris has invited US scrutiny, as rising powers challenging the hegemon are rarely tolerated. Modi's pro-Western orientation was partly fueled by Western media and leaders who lauded him as a global statesman, a narrative designed to draw India into the US-led order. India's strategic location in the Indian Ocean and its 1.4 billion population made it an attractive partner to counter China. However, this flattery obscured the risks of aligning too closely with the US. Modi's rejection of BRI and RCEP, driven by fears of Chinese economic dominance, has backfired. India's trade deficit with China has ballooned, and its absence from these frameworks has limited its regional influence. Meanwhile, the US has exploited India's alignment without offering reciprocal benefits, as evidenced by the withdrawal of American companies and now escalating tariffs. At the core of US-India tensions lies American exceptionalism—the belief that the US is the preeminent global power tasked with upholding its so-called rules-based order. Trump's 'America First' policy amplifies this, prioritizing US economic and strategic interests over allies' aspirations. India's own sense of exceptionalism, rooted in its ancient civilization and emerging power status, clashes with this framework on the global stage. India's pursuit of a multipolar world, through BRICS and ties with Russia and Iran, challenges US hegemony, making it a target for coercion. Henry Kissinger's adage— 'It may be dangerous to be America's enemy, but to be America's friend is fatal'—rings especially true for India. The US seeks to limit India's autonomy, ensuring it remains a subordinate partner rather than an independent power. Trump's pressures—on trade, oil purchases, and agricultural markets—are designed to align India's policies with US interests, even at the cost of India's economic and strategic sovereignty. India faces a precarious future with limited options, each fraught with risks. The first is to maintain the status quo, enduring US insults and pressures while hoping for a shift in US leadership post-2028. However, even a Democratic administration is unlikely to deviate significantly from the current hegemonic approach, leaving India vulnerable to continued American coercion. For example, in April 2021—less than 100 days after Biden entered the White House—the US Navy's USS John Paul Jones conducted a Freedom of Navigation Operation (FONOP) near the Lakshadweep Islands, inside India's Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), asserting navigational rights and freedoms in a move widely seen as a breach of India's sovereignty. The second option is to diversify partnerships with Russia, the European Union, the UK and emerging market economies to bolster strategic autonomy. This requires economic reforms to boost domestic consumption and replace US trade with alternative markets. However, this path risks short-term economic losses and demands bold policy shifts, which Modi's government has been reluctant to pursue. Montek Singh Ahluwalia, who served as the Deputy Chairman of the Planning Commission of India under Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, frequently highlighted the political challenges in implementing bold economic reforms in India. One of his notable observations was that 'There is a strong consensus in India for weak economic reforms,' reflecting the cautious, incremental approach often adopted due to political and social resistance to more radical changes. So Modi can't undertake radical reforms immediately. The third option involves accepting the US tariff in the short term while investing in military and economic capabilities to reduce dependence over time. This requires long-term planning and resilience, which India's current economic constraints may not support. A fourth, more radical option is to pivot toward regional frameworks like BRI and RCEP, deepening ties with China and the Global South. This would require overcoming domestic political resistance and addressing security concerns with China, a challenging prospect given the 2020 Galwan armed confrontation. However, such a move could enhance India's economic prospects and regional influence, leveraging its strategic location in the Indian Ocean. Finally, a theoretical but implausible option is to wage a trade war with the US, akin to China's approach. India lacks the strategic resources, technology and economic power to sustain such a trade war, making this unfeasible. Instead, India must adopt a pragmatic approach, learning from China's strategy of understated strength and strategic timing. In sum, the US-India relationship, once hailed as a strategic partnership, has devolved into a complex game of coercion and dependency. Trump's carrot-and-stick approach—enticing India with opening up the US economy, defense and technology transfers in the first term and imposing economic and diplomatic pressures in the second term—has exposed the fragility of India's strategic autonomy. Modi's pro-Western policy, driven by an overestimation of India's capabilities and an underestimation of US hegemonic ambitions, has placed India in a vulnerable position. To navigate this crisis, India must recalibrate its foreign policy, balancing relations with the US, China, Russia and other regional powers while accelerating domestic economic reforms. Failure to do so risks reducing India to a vassal state, undermining its aspirations to be an independent global power. The path forward demands diplomatic finesse, economic resilience and a sober reassessment of India's place in a multipolar world.
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
5 days ago
- Politics
- First Post
Diplomacy over drama: India's ties with America go beyond Trump
India and the United States are bound not merely by trade statistics or transient political postures. They are linked, at a deeper level, by a civilisational affinity that transcends regimes, rhetoric, and rogue leaders read more I am going to begin this column with a joke. A man was being beaten in the public square of a town, but the more he was beaten, the more he kept laughing. Finally, someone watching the proceedings asked him why he was laughing. The man answered: 'These people are beating me because they think I am Dhiru. But I am actually Viru.' The joke may sound facetious, but it is both an illustration of the essence of Vedantic wisdom—that you are not what you (or others) think you are, Tat tvam asi—and of the principle that it is futile to beat the wrong person! STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD My worry is that, in our reaction to Donald Trump's (DT) tantrums, we may lose sight of the fact that India has diplomatic relations with the United States of America, and not with a transient individual who will, within the next two years hopefully, become part of a short chapter of history that both Indians and Americans may wish to forget. I accept that it is tempting in today's age of 24-hour news cycles and Twitter-driven diplomacy to see history through the narrow prism of personality. But to reduce Indo-American ties to the temperament of one man is to profoundly misread both the long arc of history and the deeper convergences that bind the world's oldest democracy with its largest. India and the United States are bound not merely by trade statistics or transient political postures. They are linked, at a deeper level, by a civilisational affinity that transcends regimes, rhetoric, and rogue leaders. This is not to deny the reality of immediate irritants—especially around trade imbalances, technology transfer, and intellectual property disputes—but to place them in their proper context: as negotiable issues within a long-term, strategic relationship. Trump, in the grand sweep of India–US relations, is, in my view, a transient nuisance, a temporary disruptor, not a permanent roadblock; an aberration, not an irrevocable defining force for all time. His leadership style is at odds with the strategic patience that true diplomacy demands. He has reduced alliances to balance sheets, and friends to negotiable assets. Yet, despite his provocations, the structural foundations of the India–US partnership remain intact. Defence cooperation expanded, foundational agreements like BECA and COMCASA were signed, and strategic dialogues deepened. That such progress occurred even during Trump's erratic presidency is testimony to the resilience of the relationship. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD The goal of our diplomacy then must be not to throw the baby—which is the long-term perspective of Indo–American relations—out with the bathwater of a notoriously eccentric and unstable individual. How we do this will be the real test of our diplomacy. There are two aspects to this. First, our reaction to his unpredictable and often obnoxious behaviour. This should be responded to not with emotionalism but with a firmness infused with dignity, self-esteem and strategic autonomy. Dignity, because that befits our civilisational ethos; self-esteem, because we are not a pushover, nor are we at his mercy; and, above all, strategic autonomy because, as a sovereign nation, we shall not be dictated to by anyone—however powerful he may think he is—in deciding how we conduct our foreign policy and the choices we make in our national interest. Second, we should, through this temporary squall, continue to focus on the long-term convergences and mutually beneficial dividends that are the foundation of Indo–American relations. A substantive India–US trade agreement has long been awaited. Both countries have much to gain. The US is India's largest trading partner in goods and services, and India is a rising economic power with a rapidly growing consumer base and a sophisticated IT and pharma sector. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD A comprehensive agreement could address tariff barriers, ease investment flows, unlock supply chains, and enhance collaboration in sectors such as defence, hi-tech, clean energy, digital services, and healthcare. There may be Trump-engineered setbacks to such an agreement—including news even as I write this of even higher tariffs—but the conclusion of a trade deal must remain one of our pivotal goals. We should also focus on our strengths within the US. In contemporary times, the Indian-American diaspora—now over 4.5 million strong—serves as a living bridge. It is a community that excels in business, medicine, technology, and politics. From Silicon Valley boardrooms to Capitol Hill chambers, the Indian-American presence affirms the compatibility—and complementarity—of our two democracies. There are geopolitical synergies as well, given the relentless Chinese pursuit of hegemony in the Pacific region and elsewhere. Perhaps the senseless arbitrariness of Trump should make us smell the coffee, and put our own house in order. We need to diversify our trade markets, negotiate new destinations for our goods, and reduce dependence on any one country for our critical needs. We also need to do far more on the Ease of Doing Business arena, and make our economy more competitive, while continuing to upgrade our military infrastructure. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Trump will come and go, but India must emerge stronger and more dynamic at the end of it. The writer is a former diplomat, an author, and a politician. Views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect Firstpost's views.
News18
5 days ago
- Politics
- News18
Trump Is A Phase: India-US Ties Are Bigger Than Him
Donald Trump will come and go, but India must emerge stronger and more dynamic at the end of it I am going to begin this column with a joke. A man was being beaten in the public square of a town, but the more he was beaten, the more he kept laughing. Finally, someone watching the proceedings asked him why he was laughing. The man answered: 'These people are beating me because they think I am Dhiru. But I am actually Viru." The joke may sound facetious, but it is both an illustration of the essence of Vedantic wisdom—that you are not what you (or others) think you are, Tat tvam asi—and of the principle that it is futile to beat the wrong person! My worry is that, in our reaction to Donald Trump's (DT) tantrums, we may lose sight of the fact that India has diplomatic relations with the United States of America, and not with a transient individual who will, within the next two years hopefully, become part of a short chapter of history that both Indians and Americans may wish to forget. I accept that it is tempting in today's age of 24-hour news cycles and Twitter-driven diplomacy to see history through the narrow prism of personality. But to reduce Indo-American ties to the temperament of one man is to profoundly misread both the long arc of history and the deeper convergences that bind the world's oldest democracy with its largest. India and the United States are bound not merely by trade statistics or transient political postures. They are linked, at a deeper level, by a civilisational affinity that transcends regimes, rhetoric, and rogue leaders. This is not to deny the reality of immediate irritants—especially around trade imbalances, technology transfer, and intellectual property disputes—but to place them in their proper context: as negotiable issues within a long-term, strategic relationship. Trump, in the grand sweep of India–US relations, is, in my view, a transient nuisance, a temporary disruptor, not a permanent roadblock; an aberration, not an irrevocable defining force for all time. His leadership style is at odds with the strategic patience that true diplomacy demands. He has reduced alliances to balance sheets, and friends to negotiable assets. Yet, despite his provocations, the structural foundations of the India–US partnership remain intact. Defence cooperation expanded, foundational agreements like BECA and COMCASA were signed, and strategic dialogues deepened. That such progress occurred even during Trump's erratic presidency is testimony to the resilience of the relationship. The goal of our diplomacy then must be not to throw the baby—which is the long-term perspective of Indo–American relations—out with the bathwater of a notoriously eccentric and unstable individual. How we do this will be the real test of our diplomacy. There are two aspects to this. First, our reaction to his unpredictable and often obnoxious behaviour. This should be responded to not with emotionalism but with a firmness infused with dignity, self-esteem and strategic autonomy. Dignity, because that befits our civilisational ethos; self-esteem, because we are not a pushover, nor are we at his mercy; and, above all, strategic autonomy because, as a sovereign nation, we shall not be dictated to by anyone—however powerful he may think he is—in deciding how we conduct our foreign policy and the choices we make in our national interest. Second, we should, through this temporary squall, continue to focus on the long-term convergences and mutually beneficial dividends that are the foundation of Indo–American relations. A substantive India–US trade agreement has long been awaited. Both countries have much to gain. The US is India's largest trading partner in goods and services, and India is a rising economic power with a rapidly growing consumer base and a sophisticated IT and pharma sector. A comprehensive agreement could address tariff barriers, ease investment flows, unlock supply chains, and enhance collaboration in sectors such as defence, hi-tech, clean energy, digital services, and healthcare. There may be Trump-engineered setbacks to such an agreement—including news even as I write this of even higher tariffs—but the conclusion of a trade deal must remain one of our pivotal goals. We should also focus on our strengths within the US. In contemporary times, the Indian-American diaspora—now over 4.5 million strong—serves as a living bridge. It is a community that excels in business, medicine, technology, and politics. From Silicon Valley boardrooms to Capitol Hill chambers, the Indian-American presence affirms the compatibility—and complementarity—of our two democracies. There are geopolitical synergies as well, given the relentless Chinese pursuit of hegemony in the Pacific region and elsewhere. Perhaps the senseless arbitrariness of Trump should make us smell the coffee, and put our own house in order. We need to diversify our trade markets, negotiate new destinations for our goods, and reduce dependence on any one country for our critical needs. We also need to do far more on the Ease of Doing Business arena, and make our economy more competitive, while continuing to upgrade our military infrastructure. top videos View all Trump will come and go, but India must emerge stronger and more dynamic at the end of it. The writer is a former diplomat, an author, and a politician. Views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect News18's views. view comments Location : New Delhi, India, India First Published: August 07, 2025, 14:43 IST News opinion Opinion | Trump Is A Phase: India-US Ties Are Bigger Than Him Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
The Print
04-08-2025
- Business
- The Print
India sees the value of US defence ties, but MAGA-style tariffs threaten long-term stability
At the heart of India–US defence ties lies an architecture of agreements, joint exercises, and co-development initiatives that extend well beyond symbolism. The signing of foundational accords such as COMCASA (Communications Compatibility and Security Agreement), BECA (Basic Exchange and Cooperation Agreement), and the Industrial Security Annex have facilitated real-time intelligence sharing, logistical interoperability, and protected access to cutting-edge military technology. These treaties, once perceived as intrusive or incompatible with India's traditional non-alignment posture, are now actively deployed to bolster maritime surveillance, domain awareness, and air defence capabilities. Yet even as economic ties fray, the depth of security cooperation, and the numerous formal agreements that sustain it, offers India both an opportunity and a challenge. The key question is whether India can deepen its defence cooperation with the US, without ceding its strategic autonomy or aligning it with shifting political agendas. India's defence relationship with the US has been maturing over the last decade – from cautious engagement to structured partnerships, driven by shared strategic interest. What was once a purely transactional partnership, a buyer/seller relationship involving specific procurement contracts, has now assumed a pivotal role in the global geopolitical calculus. However, this evolving alliance is under stress, especially in light of President Donald Trump's sudden imposition of a 25 percent tariff on Indian exports, with additional as yet unspecified 'penalties' for importing oil from Russia. Operational collaboration has also deepened. India's acquisition of MQ-9B Predator drones, MH-60R multi-role naval helicopters, and the proposed co-production of GE-414 engines for indigenous fighter jets signal not just defence modernisation, but also a convergence in regional threat assessments, especially vis-à-vis China's assertive posture in the Indo-Pacific. Initiatives such as INDUS-X and iCET are moving beyond procurement to include co-development, startup incubation, and collaborative research in emerging technologies like Artificial Intelligence (AI), Quantum Computing (QC), and Autonomous Weapons Systems (AWS). These engagements point to a long-term strategic partnership rather than short-term expediency. However, there is a fly in the ointment. The July 30 announcement of 25 per cent US tariffs on Indian exports, couched vaguely in terms of India's ongoing defence and energy cooperation with Russia, reveals a recurring dilemma: how stable and reliable is US strategic posture and unconditional support when tested by domestic political imperatives or ideological shifts like MAGA? The tariffs, affecting nearly three-quarters of India's exports, suggest that economic retaliation may be used as a convenient foreign policy tool for strategic coercion. That the current proposed tariffs were triggered not by any rupture in defence ties, but by dissatisfaction over India's continued import of Russian oil and military platforms, underscores the complexity of American reliability. Also read: No one should force India into joining a battle that isn't ours. Strategic autonomy is crucial Targeting India's strategic autonomy This tension exposes the somewhat hypocritical duality of US diplomacy, in that it seeks convergence on strategic goals while retaining coercive tools to enforce alignment. For India, such moves raise critical questions and strike at the heart of its policy of strategic autonomy. Can the US-India defence partnership flourish in an environment where India's broader economic or foreign policy decisions invite punitive countermeasures? Will access to US platforms and supply chains be withdrawn or restricted, especially in times of conflict, if India continues to pursue a multi-pronged foreign policy that includes countries like Russia and Iran, which the US views as enemies? The answer probably lies in separating the institutional depth of security cooperation from the dynamic volatility arising out of political posturing. Unlike trade, which is often driven by electoral considerations and domestic imperatives like MAGA, defence collaboration is sustained by bureaucratic processes, institutional memory, and mutual threat recognition. The US Defence and State Departments, and India's Ministries of Defence and External Affairs, operate on longer timelines and are often shielded, though not immune, from the ups and downs arising out of political turnarounds. For example, platforms like the Reciprocal Defence Procurement (RDP), offset clauses, and co-development agreements are more likely to endure and evolve, perhaps with some tweaks, than suffer abrupt reversals. The 2+2 dialogue has endured many political hiccups. The MEA's statement — 'This partnership has weathered several transitions and challenges' — reflects the long-term nature of the relationship. Also read: India's response to Trump is an emotional one. Tariff damage is psychological India understands US duality India's recent strategic decisions suggest a pragmatic reading of this duality. While defence cooperation with the US has accelerated, India continues to diversify its military suppliers, including France (Rafale jets), Israel (missile defence), and Russia (S-400 systems). This hedging reflects India's understanding that a strategic partnership does not mean strategic dependence. The refusal to proceed with the proposed F-35 acquisition, despite its symbolic value, signals India's intent to avoid politically sensitive purchases that may jeopardise its diplomatic flexibility or trigger regional escalations. At the same time, India could astutely use its defence commitments as a bargaining tool. By advertising possible future purchases – from Predator drones and GE-414 engines to naval platforms – as strategic inducements, India has levers to secure tariff concessions, obtain market access, and reduce regulatory barriers in trade negotiations with the US. The trade-off is clear. Defence offsets, which require US firms to invest a portion of contract value in India, can be portrayed domestically in the US as job-creating and strategically aligned, softening opposition to trade waivers or procurement reciprocity. Yet this 'carrot' strategy can only go so far. US negotiators remain dissatisfied with India's high tariffs on agriculture, digital localisation policies, and resistance to GM crops, which are seen as barriers to open trade. Even if India were to boost its defence purchases from the US, these unresolved economic grievances will persist. More critically, India's energy and defence ties with Russia and its refusal to adhere to US-driven sanctions create minefields that defence collaboration alone may not be able to navigate. In essence, while defence cooperation may enhance trust, it cannot insulate India against broader disagreements in foreign policy or trade philosophy. Ensure no dependence on external factors This reality compels India to recalibrate its long-term defence-industrial strategy. Indigenous co-development of key platforms, innovation in avionics, and investment in domestic manufacturing are no longer optional, but strategic imperatives. Initiatives like Make in India and Atmanirbhar Bharat must overcome bureaucratic lethargy, ensuring that India's military modernisation does not remain dependent on external suppliers, however friendly. Defence diplomacy with other partners — EU (France, Germany, Italy), Japan, South Korea, and the ASEAN bloc — must be exploited to reduce dependence on the US and expand India's options. Despite the present turbulence, the US remains a vital partner for India on account of its defence ecosystem and technological edge. Diplomatic support, especially in multilateral forums like the Quad, are vital to India's long-term interests. Ultimately, the reliability of the US as a long-term security partner depends not only on consistency, but also on India's ability to maintain strategic autonomy without compromising the deepening defence relationship and operational interoperability. General Manoj Mukund Naravane PVSM AVSM SM VSM is a retired Indian Army General who served as the 28th Chief of the Army Staff. Views are personal. (Edited by Prashant)
Yahoo
20-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
State awards $750,000 to six organizations to establish pre-apprenticeship programs
May 19—Broadband infrastructure and home energy auditing programs are set to get a boost at Santa Fe Community College thanks to federal funding. Officials with the New Mexico Department of Workforce Solutions, or NMDWS, announced on Thursday that it has awarded $750,000 to six organizations so they can establish and deliver pre-apprenticeship opportunity programs, including the two at SFCC aimed at providing youth with training that could pave the way to well-paying careers in high-demand fields. NewSpace Nexus, Northern New Mexico College, Associated General Contractors of New Mexico, Associated Builders and Contractors Inc. NM Chapter, SFCC and STEM Boomerang LLC are the six organizations sharing a slice of the funding, officials said. The programs will provide students with hands-on training, instruction, mentorship and access to registered apprenticeship programs. The awardees will launch and expand pre-apprenticeship programs in the fields of semiconductor manufacturing, carpentry, construction, broadband, clean energy and high-performance computing. A driving goal of the programs, which will be implemented by the awarded organizations within a year, is to make New Mexico youth aware of potential career paths available in the state, said NMDWS Cabinet Secretary Sarita Nair in a statement. "Pre-apprenticeship has become one of our most successful initiatives, with over 700 participants coming through the program in two years," Nair said. The awards are being funded by the U.S. Department of Labor through the "SAEF2" grant and administered by the NMDWS's "Building, Energizing, and Connecting through Apprenticeships," or BECA, program. "Pre-apprenticeship programs play a vital role in strengthening New Mexico's workforce pipeline," Carla Kugler, president and CEO of ABC New Mexico, said in a statement. "By investing in these initiatives, we're building a stronger, more inclusive workforce that meets the needs of our state's growing economy."
