Latest news with #ShubhajitRoy
Indian Express
7 days ago
- Politics
- Indian Express
Jawed Ashraf at Idea Exchange: ‘Managing foreign policy isn't just analysis behind closed doors… It now plays out on your phone screen, shaped by people's voices'
Former Indian ambassador to France and High Commissioner to Singapore Jawed Ashraf on Operation Sindoor and its aftermath. Session moderated by Diplomatic Editor Shubhajit Roy Shubhajit Roy: After the recent India-Pakistan hostilities, where is India placed when it comes to the global narrative on the war on terrorism? I think the short term tends to overwhelm the long term and our perspectives, especially when we go through a very intense experience. Some may feel disappointed with the global response, or this narrative of equating the aggressor and the victim, hyphenation and mediation. We will get past this to focus on terrorism. Pahalgam was not just about terrorism, or Jammu and Kashmir; it really was meant to reinforce the idea of the impossibility of people living together, a war of religions to reinforce the idea of two-nation theory besides the short-term objective of derailing the situation in Jammu and Kashmir at the start of the tourist season. Our response was inevitable. We have come to this point after a very long journey of trying everything possible bilaterally and internationally. From 2016 onwards, there has been a progressive escalation in our response. Uri happened, we had a surgical strike, Pulwama happened, we had Balakot. It was meant to be a signal for deterrence but now this obviously triggered a kind of response which was perhaps not expected by Pakistan or the international community. We have achieved our objective and it would be important for the world to understand our position and approach. The first is that we have said that we can take responsibility for our security and that we will take control of the levers of post-attack developments and not wait for international mediation. Second, we are telling the world that we are prepared to use force in order to achieve it, and that there can be no shield of security for terrorists in Pakistan. That we are willing to take acceptable risks and costs. This is beside the hard decisions like the Indus Waters Treaty. As the Prime Minister stated in his address, apart from saying that if you hit, we'll hit back harder, apart from saying that we will not be deterred by nuclear blackmail, we've also said we now erase the distinction between terrorists and state sponsors. Now we also have to bring terrorism emanating from Pakistan back at the centre of our conversations with the international community, which perhaps because of the great geopolitical shifts, particularly China's rise and the Indo-Pacific, wasn't getting the same level of attention, and to make them realise that Pakistan-based terrorism is a problem for them as much as it is for us. When all-party delegations are going out, it is not the government but the people of India speaking to the world and conveying a message of national consensus and priority on terrorism. Shubhajit Roy: With the diplomatic steps, India has already exhausted the lower steps of the escalatory ladder. If there is another terror attack, then we are operating from a much higher escalatory ladder level. Where does this lead to? There has to be strategic ambiguity on this issue. First, what would be the scale, nature and target of a terrorist attack that will trigger a response of this nature from us is going to be something that we don't declare. Second, the response itself doesn't have to be of the same kind. There will always be an element of surprise. It could be asymmetric. Deterrence is a function of what we achieve on the ground and what we create in the mind of the adversary regarding the current outcome and future resolve. Pakistan appears to have convinced itself about a different outcome and, as in the past, Pakistan may be emboldened to test the new doctrine at some point in the next few years. We will have to have a much higher level of readiness, and in terms of response time, being able to compress it even further. Technology and new age warfare enable it. It also means that we'll have to invest more in the right kind of defence capabilities and equipment, while keeping an eye on the north and our increasingly contested seas. Strengthen our capacity to deny success to terrorism. We will have to preserve international economic confidence despite heightened risks. Our diplomacy will have to manage enhanced international concerns and temptation to mediate between the two countries. On international support | If we start believing that if we are hit by terrorism from Pakistan, the entire world will come down like a ton of hot bricks on Pakistan, then it is romanticism and naïveté… India needs to build its own capabilities A key concomitant will be the clarity of deterrence message. At the same time, it may be useful at some point to have some kind of a back-channel with Pakistan to convey our resolve and to minimise the risks of surprises. Major powers do that. Shubhajit Roy: US President Donald Trump announced the ceasefire and has continued to make statements. What should India do to tackle a very enthusiastic American president who is keen to sort of play the peacemaker's role? We are dealing with a President with no precedence in living memory. He has completely upturned the polity and institutional structure of the US. He has also completely changed the terms of US responsibility and role in the world and its engagement with other powers. In his first term, too, President Trump spoke about mediation. What we see is a desire to look for instant successes, to project the impact of his personal power in shaping the course of countries, the idea that everyone is susceptible to pressure and amenable to deal-making and bargains. Our approach will be not to get trapped in a war of words. It will be institutional and long-term. It has been a consistent Indian position that there is no room for third-party mediation in Jammu and Kashmir. Many would recall late Shri Jaswant Singh's comment in 2001, that we are two countries that speak the same language, we don't need an interpreter to speak to each other. We'll get past this and focus on some of the positive agenda with other countries, including the US. Shubhajit Roy: Over the last 20 years, recent governments have spent a fair amount of political capital on mobilising a global opinion in India's favour. Post Operation Sindoor, do you think India has been able to get the world on its side? It's a very different world that we live in. It's a fragmented world. Everyone is preoccupied with their own set of problems. The US itself doesn't have the will or the capacity to underwrite the international system. China or anyone else is not even close to doing that anyway. We are at a stage where people may agree on the principles and there was universal condemnation of the terrorist attack in Pahalgam. But sympathy, solidarity and support do not always translate into concrete measures. So, when it comes to our military action or when it comes to those countries to take concrete action, that's where sometimes the drift starts taking place as countries start calculating their own interests. We have to work on mobilising complete support in terms of understanding what the nature of Pahalgam attack was and the whole history of cross-border terrorism from Pakistan, not just in our bilateral context but its global footprint. We have enough evidence to show that almost every terror attack has some links to Pakistan. We have to absolutely make it clear with solid historical evidence that it has nothing to do with the so-called unresolved issue of Jammu and Kashmir, because that issue predates the rise of rampant terrorism and is fundamental to the self-conception of the State of Pakistan. The Mumbai terror attack and others are evidence of that. Aakash Joshi: Did India lose the information war? Whether we have won or lost the information war is a matter of perception and which audience we are talking about. This was the first war we fought in an era of ubiquitous social media and AI. There was a war in a parallel digital universe. It makes perceptions difficult to evaluate. Sometimes we feel that we have only won when the score — in tennis terms — is 6-0. If at times there are views that are contrary to ours, we sometimes overemphasise that point of view, and therefore feel that we have lost this. I have found in my personal experience through decades that the Western media, particularly the Anglo-Saxon media, has not been sympathetic to us generally, notwithstanding who is in power in India. On Mediation on Kashmir | We are two countries that speak the same language, we don't need an interpreter to speak to each other. We'll get past this and focus on some of the positive agenda with other countries, including the US During this conflict, it was extraordinary that the focus was entirely on the so-called air battle and supposed losses on the Indian side and not on the unprecedented event of nine terror hubs, two of them the most guarded and secure, being hit or the military assets or virtually all air force runways in Pakistan being targeted successfully in our retaliatory response to their military action. I think the perceptions have improved considerably in the last few days. That will also be the key task of the all-party missions. Beyond that, it has to be a sustained campaign. But this also points to a longer-term challenge of narrative building and perception management in diplomacy. To me, today, the biggest task of diplomacy is not the traditional roles of political officers or trade officers in embassies abroad but public diplomacy and strategic communication using both human contacts and digital instruments. Rakesh Sinha: How difficult will it be to deal with Pakistan under Field Marshal Asim Munir? Hypothetically, it's too early but I would say historically, if you see, he may assert his authority, he may even, like his previous field marshal, Ayub Khan, take complete control, take power. In a world which has become far more driven by realpolitik and pragmatism, that would be accepted. Even in October 1999, when General Musharraf took power, the US was able to reconcile with it very quickly. Will that lead to a more assertive, aggressive approach towards India, given his hard ideological belief? Or will he try to build some level of normalcy, restore some stability, if not friendship and reconciliation? Musharraf was the architect of Kargil and was in office when major terrorist attacks took place. But he also pursued peace later. Shahid Pervez: Do you think any battlefield solution could ever resolve the conflict between India and Pakistan? First, let's separate India-Pakistan conflict from the focus on terrorism. Experience around the world suggests that terrorism cannot be eliminated by military means alone. There has to be a combination of so many factors. India and Pakistan had disputes going back to 1948, but the experience of terrorism has evolved gradually, and has been perfected as an instrument of state policy over the past four decades starting with Punjab and then it really went into a different level in Jammu and Kashmir. We have to strengthen early stages of counter-terrorism — predictive, preventive, pre-emptive and protective, besides punitive and persuasion (international) to deny success and raise the cost. Change will happen only if there is a perception in Pakistan that the cost of terrorism is more than the returns from it, and in some way the international community will also have to exert pressure to bring about a change in the internal dynamics in Pakistan. Can there ever be a resolution of issues between India and Pakistan? Efforts have been made in the past by successive Prime Ministers. I don't think that any time in the world you should ever think there is no alternative future. Sukalp Sharma: With Operation Sindoor, there was a lot of overt messaging. What would be more effective are covert operations, to actually eliminate the terror leadership and also have plausible deniability while not actually going up the escalation ladder in military terms. What is your view? It's the responsibility of the government to tell its people you are not helpless, you are not defenceless. That does not mean whatever doctrine the Prime Minister has articulated rules out one or the other or a combination of multiple instruments. The government is not defining what our retaliatory measures will be in the future. Sukalp Sharma: What should India do in terms of probably convincing the Chinese to decouple from Pakistan in a bilateral relationship, since they supplied weapons to them? For the first time, we have a major power right on our border with which we also have problems. It's a unique situation. Clearly, our experience with China has not been a very positive one. As the asymmetry is growing between India and China, their need for accommodation is perhaps less, coupled with the fact that there may be deep-rooted suspicions in China that we may be part of a future alliance to contain China. It sees India as a barrier or an obstacle to its global ambitions. It would want to have a countervailing power against India, which in this case is Pakistan, but it would also try to build similar relationships in our neighbourhood. So we face a problem with China at several levels — from bilateral to economic to geopolitical. We have to keep trying to engage with them, at least to lessen the tensions and reduce mistrust. At the same time, we need to strengthen our military capabilities in a way that we are prepared genuinely for a two-front situation. Our current defence spending to GDP ratio is very low. Military reforms and modernisation have to be accelerated. A genuinely autonomous and self-reliant Indian defence innovation and industrial base has to be built. Muzamil Jaleel: In situations like the current heightened India-Pakistan tensions, the Kashmir issue will always be cited. How should the Government address this? There are two different things we are dealing with. One is the issue with regard to Pakistan, and the other is the issue with regard to the people of Jammu and Kashmir. We have to be able to create a sense of belonging, integration, opportunity, dignity, equality, security, and to be able to advance for them a life of peace and prosperity. On china | It would want to have a countervailing power against India, which in this case is Pakistan, but it would also try to build similar relationships in our neighbourhood. So we face a problem with China at several levels When an incident like this happens, we have to be careful as people not to make the entire population culpable or complicit. Since 2019, there is progress in economic development and integration, connectivity, education skills, investments, social infrastructure. But there is a larger question of the hearts and minds there. This time we saw an extraordinary and united response to terrorism from the people of Jammu and Kashmir. It should be a source of great strength for us. Prime Minister Modi spoke about it. This is going to be a long process. It has to be a political process, social process, economic process. For the long-term solution, though, discussions with Pakistan will be needed. Both tracks — Pakistan and domestic — are required. Timing and sequence are a matter of judgement and strategy. Saptarshi Basak: Which countries of consequence would you say are truly India's friends today? If you are a country with a DNA of strategic autonomy and a deep belief in independence, then you have to also accept that you won't have ironclad friends, as China is to Pakistan. Second, there is just no way we will sign up to allow our security to be the responsibility of some other country. Another country that has the same problem is France with its own belief in strategic autonomy. A country with strategic autonomy always stands by itself. The second point is, we cannot judge friendships only on the basis of one issue, however important it is. People forget that President Trump had praised Pakistan at the State of the Union address for counterterrorism cooperation… If we start believing that if we are hit by terrorism from Pakistan, the entire world will come down like a ton of hot bricks on Pakistan, then it is romanticism and naïveté. Which is why a country like India needs to build its own capabilities, use relationships for that purpose, and maintain its resolve. I think diplomacy relies a lot on rhetoric. The danger lies in believing rhetoric is reality. Vandita Mishra: Ever since Operation Sindoor, we have constantly been told that foreign policy, security policy is at a different level from domestic politics, that there is a distance between the two and that should be maintained. Do you think under this regime that distinction can be maintained? I've always seen around the world that foreign policy invariably, particularly in democracies, has a bearing on domestic policy, and domestic politics has a bearing on foreign policy. Even at the level of the states. There are a number of occasions where some foreign policy choices have been made based on certain compulsions in states, especially when there are coalition governments. Many of your policies with regard to your neighbouring countries invariably have a link to the politics in that state. Second, the more integrated you are with the world, the more the domestic politics and foreign policy will get intertwined. The challenge of managing foreign policy and security policy has become even greater because it is no longer restricted to a set of reasoned analysis and arguments that are made behind closed doors with patience and time. It now plays out on your phone screen. It is now shaped on a real-time basis by the voices and the views of people.
Indian Express
11-05-2025
- Business
- Indian Express
Philipp Ackermann at Idea Exchange: ‘Pahalgam is a game changer in many ways. It is an attack on the heart of India'
German Ambassador Philipp Ackermann on 25 years of the Indo-German partnership, investment, immigration, skilled Indian manpower and the impact of Pahalgam in the neighbourhood. The session was moderated by Diplomatic Editor Shubhajit Roy. Shubhajit Roy: Give us a sense of how the Indo-German relationship has progressed over the last 25 years. One of the most interesting formats in this partnership are the intergovernmental consultations that happen every second year. These set a road map which is about stock-taking and also forward-looking. During my tenure, we have made a huge effort to deepen and intensify partnerships. Two things have changed over the last four years. First is migration. Germany is very interested in getting skilled labour from India in a fair and legal way. We work with the government through a mobility agreement to recruit people who are willing to go to Germany, have the appropriate qualifications and would like to work in Germany, at least for a couple of years. Then we have 50,000 Indian students, the biggest non-German group among foreign students. And the number is growing by 10 per cent every year. You get a good education for lesser money than you would anywhere in the Anglo-Saxon world. Second is the military strategic cooperation. We have done joint exercises with Indian Air Force (IAF) in Coimbatore last year. We have seen frigates and a provision ship coming into Indian ports. There is a very regular exchange of high-level defence generals. That also comes along with a renewed commitment to arms and product exchanges that was not always easy because the German government had a very restrictive policy towards arms exports to non-NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organisation) members. That has changed. We now have a regular flow of German products and joint ventures with Indian companies in the armament sector. A submarine deal might be seeing the light of the day in the coming months. Next we will work together very closely on space. This partnership is dynamic. Shubhajit Roy: Migration has been a subject of debate in Europe and the US. Does the rise of the anti-migrant AfD (Alternative for Germany) as a political force jeopardise this dynamic? It's a very pertinent question as 20 per cent of German voters voted for a far-Right party. Migration has been a contentious topic in Germany for the last six years. It started with the Syrian refugee crisis in 2015 where we accepted a million Syrian refugees. It then continued with the Ukraine crisis where over one million Ukrainian refugees came to Germany. There is a constant flow of asylum seekers into Europe, not only Germany, from African, Asian and Middle Eastern countries. People felt overwhelmed by this influx of migration and thought their social welfare systems were undermined. There is a perception that migration leads to more crime in Germany. On INDIANS IN GERMANY | Germany is interested in getting skilled labour from India in a fair and legal way. We work with the government through a mobility agreement to recruit people. Then we have 50,000 Indian students But I think what the government has to do and has succeeded to a certain extent in doing is to distinguish between migration that is really attractive for the labour market in Germany and asylum seekers as well as economic refugees who want a better life and get in illegally. If we want to keep our level of prosperity, we need skilled labour to fill vacancies. At the same time, the government has to reduce illegal immigration and work with the social welfare system so that people feel more secure and less overwhelmed psychologically. Thirty per cent of Germans now have at least one non-German parent. So Germany has turned into an immigration country par excellence. The new migrants are often from non-European cultural backgrounds. That's something the population has to cope with. I think our democratic institutions can work with it. Shubhajit Roy: India has been partnering with Germany on skill development. Indian professionals are exploring prospects beyond Berlin, Frankfurt and Munich. When a Brown Indian goes to an all-White village or a town, is there a problem? You cannot generalise the Indian diaspora in Germany, it's very differentiated. But what is remarkable about the three lakh Indians in Germany is that their average salary is higher than the Germans. That means they have ambition and a readiness to adapt, go the extra mile. The English-speaking IT engineer in Munich, Frankfurt and Berlin works in a start-up and can easily float through restaurants and bars. Indian skilled labour is also in high demand at what we call the German Mittelstand or medium-sized enterprises — we call them the hidden champions — that produce niche products. They are located outside cities. Here the Indian employee has to learn German as everybody may not understand English, particularly in the eastern part of Germany. But it seems as if Indians like Germany much better than Germans like Germany by now. When students go to Dresden or the eastern parts, we fear about them getting exposed to racism. But our empirical experience is that they have a great time. A girl student told me she had the best time of her life in Jena. Second, Indian students make great apprentices. So, a baker in Germany has a diploma, as do a plumber and a roofer. We offer vocational training but don't find enough apprentices of German origin. So smaller establishments in the Black Forest, a picturesque part of rural Germany, hire apprentices from India. Young people from Haryana and Uttarakhand go to the Black Forest and live in little villages, learning the art of baking or plumbing. It is surprising how well the blending works. The owner or the employers take their Indian recruits to football matches over the weekend, to village parties, and the latter find another family there. Indian apprentices must be a couple of thousands by now and show that once you get into a closely knit social structure, it's much easier to find acceptance. Shubhajit Roy: How do you see India's response to the Pahalgam terrorist attack? Is it different from the 26/11 terror attacks in Mumbai? The Pahalgam attack was horrifying for its selective killings. It should be called a terrorist attack and has had an impact on the consciousness. You cannot help but feel strongly when you see the families and spouses of those who have been killed. It's heartbreaking to see the young and newly-married lose their husbands. Pahalgam is a game changer in many ways and there's an enormous amount of solidarity that has gone out to India. I was in Kashmir last year and compared to what it was 15 years ago, I saw tourists everywhere. So basically, Pahalgam is an attack on the heart of India. I am a diplomat. So I feel that the language of diplomacy is the best language to speak. Both governments know that de-escalation is the question of the hour. Shubhajit Roy: Conservative leader Friedrich Merz was elected Chancellor in an unprecedented manner in a second round of voting. What does he think of India and this region? He has been very active in foreign policy before. So, what are the big tasks? His big tasks are dealing with the extremist party inside the country, migration, a stagnating economy and trans-Atlantic relations. The Americans, in our historical thinking, have saved us as leaders of the NATO alliance that's not only economic but also value-based. That has changed in the last three months because the new American government has decided to give this alliance up to a certain extent. This means we have to redefine trans-Atlanticism, set up a relationship with Washington but also become more independent from it. What do you do with the global economy? That's where we see India as our strategic partner. India's private sector is hugely successful internationally. We feel that India will be a big part of these free trade, global economy, supply chain economies. Maybe more than the US from what we are seeing now. Therefore, I think our investment in India will be huge. There might be big investments in India by German companies in the pipeline, for the coming years. You will see more business coming to India. On CHANGED DYNAMIC WITH US | There is a difference of value system between the current US and German governments. We feel our definition of freedom is different from what the American government puts on the table right now Very soon, we are looking at a phone call between Prime Minister Narendra Modi and the new Chancellor. We hope that your foreign minister S Jaishankar will come to Germany next month, and we hope that our minister, once he has settled a bit, will plan a trip to India in the second half of this year. India is mentioned in the coalition treaty a couple of times and there is a clear commitment to make this partnership even more intense or dynamic than it has ever been. So prepare for German attention. Anil Sasi: What do you make of the problems at companies like Volkswagen, which have fallen behind in the electrical vehicle (EV) race? There have been layoffs at Thyssenkrupp and Porsche. To what extent is this reflective of the larger problems that German industry is facing? The big ships of German economy are in particularly difficult times right now, be it the car manufacturers or the chemical industry. Volkswagen has much better first quarter numbers this year than one would have expected. Their new car, after their new EV policy, is apparently quite good. I'm no expert but all these industries have a competitor who is very difficult to beat, and that's China. It has learnt so much over the last couple of decades and its cars are way cheaper and pretty good. The German industry has to figure out how to get ahead of the curve. We have to be much more innovative, creative and inventive. Anil Sasi: What do you have to say about US Vice-President J D Vance's and Elon Musk's support to AfD? I think we have to live with it. We are used to criticism from outside. You remember the financial crisis, where Germany was very strict with austerity measures, and we became the bad man? There is a difference of value system between the current American government and the German government as it stands right now. We feel that our definition of freedom is different from what the American government puts on the table right now. But you should not forget that trans-Atlanticism will be one of our lifelines, foreign policy-wise, and there will also be a time after Donald Trump. Shubhajit Roy: Do you see this as a foreign interference in your democratic processes? You have to sit at the table to sort out disagreements. We've seen how the meeting between the US President and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy went at the White House. But then a couple of weeks later they found a common understanding. So I'm very confident that our relations will be okay with the current US government. We have to invest in this relation because America is important for us. But we have also to see that the old interdependence, where we worked closely together and where the Americans were the leaders of Western alliance, has, to a certain extent, come to an end. I would also critically say that our countries, mine included, had become a little comfortable with Americans looking after international security and us paying for humanitarian aid and development cooperation. This will have to change now. We are now talking about war in Europe because our neighbour Russia is on an expansive course and is looking to swallow the Baltic states. So we have to restructure our armed forces as well as European defence policy. Aakash Joshi: News about global conflicts, be it Israel-Palestine or the Ukraine conflict, are now on social media. Does that make the job of diplomacy and conversation harder? It is certainly more difficult for diplomats. Everybody gets agitated very quickly through this instant media consumption. So people are much more upset, much more opinionated and much more involved. We have a huge fake news problem in Europe. There are channels and trolls; the Russians are very active in this field. We have seen elections being manipulated by this. Getting the facts right or straight is much more difficult than it used to be, even in countries like mine, where you have a very strong public broadcast system. On China | We feel that China is overstepping lines internationally. We feel we have to engage in a dialogue to make China understand that what it does in the south and East Asia is, in many ways, not acceptable Kaushik Das Gupta: One of the biggest losers in the German election was the Greens party. Will this weaken some of Germany's green commitments in light of the energy crisis at hand? The new Minister of Economics and Energy has now changed, she is from the conservative party. During the handover of ministries, the new minister went to the dais and said, 'I'd like to thank you, my dear predecessor, because what you did after the energy crisis is just enormously successful.' What did he do? He changed our energy mix dramatically. So now 60 per cent of all electricity in Germany is from renewables. And that has happened in a couple of years because of the Russians (they stopped gas supply in 2022). The fact that she acknowledges his achievement shows that in general there is no fundamental change in the climate and energy policy of Germany. As for why did the Greens do so badly, I think they have not found the right way of communication. But they still got 11 per cent. Monojit Majumdar: The AfD has got 20 per cent of the vote. History has shown us that whenever we have kept groups following extreme ideologies out of the national discourse, we have found it difficult to engage them or find a middle ground. Is there a way out? There's an ongoing debate in Germany on whether we have to include them (AfD) or put up a firewall to not work with them. They have a nationwide 20 per cent; in Eastern states they have 30 per cent, which is a third of all voters. My personal take on this is to look at what they say and what they do. We will not be able to tolerate parties that reflect Nazi ideology. Now when they say that people with dark skin cannot be citizens of Germany, then we have to be very cautious and restrictive before reaching out to them. What will happen in the future? It's difficult to imagine that they will disappear. But parties can change and may be have to differentiate between their own members too. Devyani Onial: Germany has its first digital ministry now. Why did you feel the need for that and how do you see it vis-a-vis the digitalisation in India? The new ministry is very timely because compared to India, we are in the stone age in many ways. We are a completely cash-driven society. Let me give you two reasons why it is so difficult to push digitisation in Germany. One is data protection. This would never fly in Germany because people would be afraid that everything is transparent and that the government can see everything you do. The second reason is we are a federal state like India. State governments have a very strong executive power and aligning them with the central government is difficult. Shubhajit Roy: China has had a unique, robust relationship with Germany. Many would argue that China's rise has been aided by the Germans. How does Germany see this challenge? China has learnt a lot from the German industry, which has been investing in China for the last 30 years very successfully. Now China is a competitor. We see the aggressiveness in its immediate neighbourhood with concern. We feel that China is overstepping lines internationally. We feel that we have to engage in a dialogue to make China understand that what it does in the south and East Asian neighbourhood is, for us, in many ways, not acceptable. So China will stay an economic partner, there is no doubt. The new government will have to deal with China under these different hats.
Indian Express
07-05-2025
- Politics
- Indian Express
Daily Briefing: India strikes back
In the most expansive and widespread retaliation by India in recent years, the Indian armed forces attacked nine terror sites in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK) in the intervening night of Tuesday and Wednesday. Here's what you should know: Codenamed 'Operation Sindoor', ostensibly a reference to only men being singled out based on their faith before being killed in Pahalgam, the retaliation comes two weeks after the April 21 terror attack. The high-precision missile strikes targeted locations in Bahawalpur and Muridke in Pakistan's Punjab and Muzaffarabad and Kotli in PoK. These cities are home to terror camps belonging to Jaish-e-Mohammad and Lashkar-e-Taiba. The strikes saw unanimous support from leaders across party lines, who hailed the armed forces. Pakistan, meanwhile, resorted to a sharp escalation in ceasefire violations along the Line of Control, hours after the Indian strikes. Cross-border shelling in the Rajouri and Poonch districts and the Uri and Tangdhar sectors in the Kashmir Valley forced residents of frontier villages to flee or hide in underground bunkers. At least three civilians have been killed and five others injured in the firing, per Army sources. Flight operations have been hit across Indian airports, particularly those close to the India-Pakistan border or in the vicinity of key Indian Air Force bases. Airports in Srinagar, Amritsar, Jammu, Leh, and Dharamshala have suspended civilian flights. At least 20 flights were cancelled at the Delhi airport this morning. A real-time flight tracker, Flightradar24, showed no airplanes flying north of Delhi or over western India and Pakistan. Meanwhile, India will conduct nationwide mock drills today to assess and enhance civil defence mechanisms in the event of a hostile event. The drills will be carried out in 244 categorised Civil Defence Districts. Does your home fall in the district, and how will the drills impact your life? Read all about it here. On that note, here's what else is brewing today. India, UK sign trade pact India and the United Kingdom have sealed the long-awaited free trade agreement (FTA) to enhance bilateral trade, create jobs and boost investments in both countries. Once the deal comes into effect, UK tariffs on several commodities, including footwear, textiles, automobile components, and electrical machinery, will be eliminated. India, on its part, will significantly cut tariffs on whiskey and gin and slash automobile duties from 100 per cent to 10 per cent. The recent volley of tariffs unleashed by United States President Donald Trump and the ensuing global uncertainty have pushed countries to negotiate trade deals with partners. India also wants to sign pacts with the US and the European Union. Don't miss my colleague Shubhajit Roy's explainer on the agreement's geo-economic significance. Must Read Reshaping the Republic: In an ongoing Express series tracking landmark cases, today's spotlight is on Sajjan Singh, a landowner in Rajasthan. Singh's 1964 case against the state's land ceiling laws raised a pertinent question, which remains contentious even today: What is the extent of Parliament's power to amend the Constitution? Read on. Rules: Satellite communication firms like Elon Musk's Starlink, Amazon's Kuiper and Eutelsat OneWeb are looking to roll out their services in Indian markets. However, the government has some conditions: manufacture in India, store data locally, cooperate with law enforcement, and more. And Finally… Two players locked in a silent battle over a chessboard might not make great TV. Add in the unpredictable length—a tense three-hour duel that could still end in a draw—and it's easy to see why chess has struggled to break into mainstream broadcasting. But with India's chess scene exploding and a new wave of young prodigies taking on the world's best, the question is shifting: Can chess evolve into a broadcast-friendly spectacle, or is it destined to remain in online streaming? My colleague Amit Kamath may have some answers. I leave you with the latest episode of the '3 Things' podcast. Today's lineup: an update from the LoC, the significance of Mission Sankalp and another NEET scandal.
Indian Express
27-04-2025
- General
- Indian Express
Bandung Conference at 70: Key facts for UPSC Exam
Take a look at the essential events, concepts, terms, quotes, or phenomena every day and brush up your knowledge for the upcoming UPSC civil services exams. Here's the knowledge nugget for today. Relevance: Conferences and declarations of the past are relevant to history and international relations, or to the subject they address. They become vital in current affairs when the topic calls for connecting the dots with the past. ) Why in the news? This year marks the 70th anniversary of the first Asia-Africa summit, which took place in Bandung, Indonesia from April 18 to 24, 1955. Key Takeaways : — Twenty-nine newly independent Asian and African countries came together in a historic gathering. — The conference marked a significant moment for the developing Global South, recently freed from colonial rule. — Held in Bandung (Indonesia), it sparked a new wave of South-South cooperation and solidarity. — The conference served as a precursor to the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM). — Conveners aimed to chart a new path of sovereign, independent, and collective action. — The goal was to address pressing challenges as newly independent nations. — Participants shared dissatisfaction with their marginalization on the global stage. — The countries signed a 10-point declaration or that co-opted the Five Principles or Panchsheel. A 10-point 'declaration on promotion of world peace and cooperation', called Dasasila Bandung (Bandung's Ten Principles, or Bandung Spirit, or Bandung Declaration) are as following: Respect for fundamental human rights, and for the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations Respect for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of all nations Recognition of the equality of all races and of the equality of all nations, large and small Abstention from intervention or interference into the internal affairs of another country Respect for the right of each nation to defend itself, singly or collectively, in conformity with the Charter of the United Nations Abstention from the use of arrangement of collective defense to serve the particular interests of any of the big powers, and abstention by any country from exerting pressures on other countries Refraining from acts or threats of aggression or the use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any country Settlement of all international disputes by peaceful means, such as negotiation, conciliation, arbitration, or judicial settlement as well as other peaceful means of the parties' own choice, in conformity with the Charter of the United Nations Promotion of mutual interests and cooperation; and Respect for justice and international obligations — Shubhajit Roy, in an Explained article of The Indian Express (2015) wrote: Official records show that the governments of India, erstwhile Burma, Indonesia, Pakistan and Sri Lanka co-sponsored the Bandung conference in 1955, bringing together 24 more nations from Asia, Africa and the Middle East. The Bandung Conference laid the foundation for the non-aligned movement during the Cold War, with leaders of developing countries banded together to avoid being forced to take sides in the Cold War contest. Nehru was at the forefront of this process, which led to the establishment of NAM, and his role has been hailed and recognised globally. — Anil Sooklal, South African High Commissioner to India, wrote in The Indian Express: The reluctance and continued hegemonic actions by the former colonial overlords and other Western powers in their interactions with countries in Africa, Asia and Latin America served as a key factor in bringing the leaders together. For South Africa, the Bandung Conference was a critical platform to bring global attention to the oppressive apartheid regime that governed the country through White minority rule. The African National Congress (ANC), the foremost liberation organisation championing the freedom of the country both within and internationally, sent two delegates to the conference —Moses Kotane and Maulvi Chachalia — to lobby support internationally for South Africa's freedom struggle. The core principles that catalysed the coming together of Asian and African leaders are as relevant today as they were in 1955. These included political independence, mutual respect for sovereignty, non-aggression and non-interference in internal affairs. BEYOND THE NUGGET: Panchsheel & The Brioni Declaration According to an Explained article of The Indian Express, — What China calls the Five Principles is known in India as Panchsheel, which was a key aspect of Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru's vision of the world and the relations between nations and neighbours. — India attained Independence from the British in 1947 after several decades of nationalist struggle. Two years later, the Chinese communists emerged victorious in the civil war, and Mao Zedong pronounced the People's Republic of China. Nehru was keen to establish good relations with China based on trust and mutual respect, and the Chinese appeared to reciprocate, at least initially. — In 1954, while inaugurating bilateral talks between India and China over Tibet, Chinese Premier Zhou Enlai proposed the Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence, which was favoured by Nehru. — The word Panchsheel traces its origin to the Buddhist concept of Pañcaśīla, which describes the five moral vows of Buddhism: abstinence from murder, theft, sexual misconduct, lying, and intoxicants. The Panchsheel Agreement, formally titled The Agreement on Trade and Intercourse with the Tibet Region, was signed on April 29, 1954, by N. Raghavan, India's Ambassador to China, and Zhang Han-Fu, China's Foreign Minister. The agreement's preamble laid down five guiding principles, known as the Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence: 1. Mutual respect for each other's territorial integrity and sovereignty 2. Mutual non-aggression 3. Mutual non-interference in internal affairs 4. Equality and mutual benefit 5. Peaceful coexistence The aim was to boost trade and cooperation between India and China. It included: Significantly, India formally recognized Tibet as the Tibet Region of China for the first time under this agreement. The Bandung Conference (1955) marked a pivotal moment in post-colonial global diplomacy. It became the precursor to the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) —a collective of nations that chose to remain independent from the Cold War blocs led by the United States and the Soviet Union. NAM was officially founded with the Brioni (Brijuni) Declaration on July 19, 1956, signed by: The declaration, signed on the Brioni Islands (now in Croatia), stated: 'Peace cannot be achieved via division, but via striving for collective security on the global scale… by the expansion of the area of freedom, as well as through the ending of domination of one country over another.' At the first NAM Summit in Belgrade, the Panchsheel principles were adopted as the movement's core philosophy.
