Context:

The recurring arrests of Indian fishermen by the Sri Lankan Navy in the Palk Bay region underscore a complex and unresolved bilateral issue, rooted in historical practices, ecological concerns, and geopolitical sensitivities. The most recent incidents in early 2025 have intensified the diplomatic and political discourse between the two neighbours.

Background and Origin of the Dispute

The core of the India–Sri Lanka fishing dispute lies in the contested fishing rights in the Palk Bay, a narrow strip of sea separating Tamil Nadu from northern Sri Lanka. The 1974 and 1976 maritime boundary agreements, particularly the ceding of Katchatheevu Island to Sri Lanka, formalized the International Maritime Boundary Line (IMBL). While Indian fishermen were permitted traditional access to the island for specific purposes, the agreements curtailed their fishing activities across the newly delineated boundary.

However, Tamil Nadu fishermen have historically fished in these waters, and the IMBL has not fully erased traditional patterns. The situation is worsened by ecological pressures on Indian fishing grounds, pushing fishermen into Sri Lankan waters.

Key Issues Involved

• Violation of IMBL and Traditional Rights:Indian fishermen often assert customary fishing rights across the IMBL, which clashes with Sri Lanka’s assertion of sovereignty over its territorial waters. Many crossings occur unintentionally due to poor navigation, engine failures, or inclement weather.
• Bottom Trawling and Environmental Concerns:The use of bottom trawlers by Indian fishermen is a major point of contention. This method, which scrapes the seabed, damages marine ecosystems and depletes resources, affecting both nations' long-term fisheries sustainability. Sri Lanka has banned bottom trawling and views it as ecological exploitation and illegal fishing.
• Security and Sovereignty Sensitivities:Sri Lanka perceives these incursions not only as violations of maritime boundaries but also as potential national security threats, recalling past concerns over Tamil militant movements operating from the sea.
• Recurrent Arrests and Humanitarian Concerns:The frequent arrests, imprisonment, and imposition of heavy fines on Indian fishermen have humanitarian and political implications. Often, fishing boats are not returned even after the release of the crew, causing further livelihood losses.

Efforts at Resolution

• Diplomatic Engagement:The issue has prompted high-level political intervention, with the Tamil Nadu government urging the Union Government for effective measures and the convening of a Joint Working Group (JWG) to address the issue diplomatically.
• Livelihood-Based Approaches:Both countries have discussed alternatives to resolve the crisis humanely, including exploring sustainable fishing practices, alternate employment, and deep-sea fishing training.
• Technological Interventions:Use of GPS-based tracking systems and awareness programs aim to prevent inadvertent border crossings and encourage responsible fishing.
• People-to-People Dialogues:Calls for direct interaction between fishermen communities from both nations have been made, suggesting that grassroots engagement may ease tensions and promote mutual understanding.

International Legal Framework

• UNCLOS (1982):Provides legal clarity on maritime boundaries and responsibilities, but emphasizes mutual respect for sovereign rights and sustainable resource use.
• UN Fish Stocks Agreement (1995):Encourages cooperation in conserving transboundary fish stocks, suggesting the role of Regional Fisheries Management Organizations (RFMOs) in managing shared marine resources.

Conclusion

The India–Sri Lanka fishing dispute in the Palk Bay is not merely a bilateral maritime boundary issue; it is a convergence of historical rights, ecological degradation, livelihood dependence, and strategic concerns. While both countries have taken steps towards conflict management, a long-term solution lies in cooperative marine resource governance, joint monitoring, and community-centric diplomacy. Resolving this issue through dialogue, sustainable practices, and mutual sensitivity is essential to safeguard both bilateral relations and the rights and livelihoods of coastal communities.

In News:

Context:

India and the United States have reaffirmed their commitment to fully realise the 123 Civil Nuclear Agreement, marking a major push to revive progress two decades after the pact was signed in 2007.

Key Gains for India

• Technology Transfer & Localisation:The partnership envisions joint construction of US-designed nuclear reactors in India, incorporating large-scale localisation and technology transfer, reversing the US's usual "manufacture-at-home" stance.
• Upgrading India’s Nuclear Capacity:India aims to shift from PHWRs (Pressurised Heavy Water Reactors) to globally dominant PWRs (Pressurised Water Reactors). This will allow India to scale capacity addition and modernise its nuclear fleet.
• Entry into Small Modular Reactors (SMRs):
  • SMRs (30–300 MWe) are compact, scalable reactors viewed as essential for future clean energy demands.
  • India’s Department of Atomic Energy is exploring collaboration with Holtec International (USA) for joint manufacturing and deployment.
  • Holtec's SMR-300, supported by the US Department of Energy with $116 million, is under design review in the UK and Canada.
• Strategic Counter to China:India–US joint ventures in SMRs could counter China’s rising influence in the Global South through its aggressive SMR diplomacy.

Economic & Industrial Impacts

• Holtec plans a nuclear technology campus in Pune and a specialty manufacturing plant in India.
• Existing facility in Dahej, Gujarat, can double workforce if plans are approved.
• Legal reforms in India are being considered to attract investments from Western and Middle Eastern markets into the nuclear sector.

India: Leading the Next Phase of Global Outsourcing (Deloitte Report)

Key Findings from Deloitte’s ‘The Outsourcing Compass’ (2025)

• Growing Demand:
  • 81% of global organizations plan to increase outsourcing over the next 3–5 years.
  • India continues to lead as a global outsourcing hub, with a projected rise as the world’s 3rd-largest economy by 2027.
• Shift in Outsourcing Models:
  • Transition from back-office services to strategic, high-value functions like product development, AI/GenAI support, and brand management.
  • 98% of firms depend on Indian service providers for AI and GenAI capabilities.
• Modern Contracting Approaches:
  • 36% prefer outcome-based contracts over traditional FTE-based models.
  • AI-specific clauses are being added to outsourcing contracts to enhance tracking and cost control.
• Strategic Collaborations & Cost Efficiency:
  • Strategic-niche partnerships yield 10–25% annual cost savings; some report 15–35% savings.
  • 70% of organizations work with non-traditional providers to access innovative technologies.
• Evolving Operating Models:
  • 55% use Global Business Services (GBS) centers for oversight; execution by third-party providers.
  • 35% adopt Build-Operate-Transfer (BOT) models to scale up while retaining control.
• Robust Governance Structures:
  • 45% of mature outsourcing firms operate Vendor Management Offices (VMOs) to manage risks and enhance effectiveness.

Why India Remains Preferred:

• A skilled digital workforce, thriving startup ecosystem, policy stability, and advancements in cybersecurity and vendor governance bolster India’s position.

Context:
On January 20, U.S. President Donald Trump, upon beginning his second term, issued an executive order imposing a 90-day freeze on foreign assistance. The directive aimed to reassess the efficiency and alignment of U.S. foreign development programs with its foreign policy priorities. This decision led to an immediate halt in operations of the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), with the majority of its 10,000 personnel placed on administrative leave and project funding suspended worldwide.

What is USAID?

• Established in 1961 under President John F. Kennedy through an Act of Congress, the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) functions as an independent agency responsible for administering civilian foreign aid and development assistance.
• Its core mission is to promote democratic values, global peace, and prosperity while advancing American national security and economic interests.
• USAID operates in over 100 countries, partnering with governments, NGOs, private firms, and international organizations.
• It offers financial support, technical assistance, and capacity-building across key sectors such as health, education, food security, economic development, humanitarian relief, environmental sustainability, and governance.
• Prominent initiatives include:
  • PEPFAR: A flagship HIV/AIDS prevention and treatment program.
  • Feed the Future: Focused on combating hunger and improving food security.
  • Power Africa: Aimed at expanding electricity access across Africa.
  • Water for the World Act: Enhancing water, sanitation, and hygiene infrastructure.
• In 2024, USAID disbursed $44.2 billion globally, which accounted for approximately 0.4% of the U.S. federal budget. Notably, the agency contributed to around 42% of all humanitarian aid tracked by the United Nations that year.

Rationale and Political Overtones

The Trump administration justified the freeze as a review for improving programmatic efficiency and ensuring alignment with U.S. strategic interests. However, critics argue the move is politically motivated, targeting Biden-era programs. Elon Musk, heading the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), labeled USAID a "criminal organization," while Secretary of State Marco Rubio indicated a broader plan for restructuring.

Global Impact of the Freeze

The abrupt suspension of USAID operations threatens development and humanitarian efforts across numerous vulnerable regions. Top recipients like Ukraine, Ethiopia, Somalia, Syria, and Yemen face the sudden withdrawal of critical support in health, food security, disaster relief, and infrastructure.

The United Nations has warned that halting support for HIV/AIDS programs alone could result in over six million deaths within four years. In several African and Middle Eastern nations, the absence of aid could derail long-term projects aimed at poverty alleviation, maternal and child health, vaccination drives, and crisis response mechanisms.

Moreover, the withdrawal risks diminishing the U.S.’s diplomatic influence in the Global South, potentially creating a vacuum for geopolitical competitors such as China, which may expand its presence through initiatives like the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI).

Impact on India

USAID's involvement in India dates back to 1951, when President Truman signed the India Emergency Food Aid Act. Over the decades, it evolved from providing food aid to supporting economic reforms, infrastructure, and public health initiatives. However, India’s dependency on USAID has significantly declined in recent years.

In 2024, USAID allocated approximately $79.3 million to India, primarily focused on healthcare, including HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, maternal and child health, and immunization programs. This constituted only about 0.2% to 0.4% of USAID’s global disbursement.

While the immediate impact on India may be limited due to reduced reliance and growing self-sufficiency, some ongoing health and sanitation projects could face temporary disruptions. The Indian government and implementing agencies have been directed to suspend USAID-funded operations, raising concerns about the continuity of services for vulnerable populations.

Conclusion and the Way Forward

The freeze on USAID funding reflects a shift in U.S. foreign aid philosophy and signals potential isolationist tendencies. While India may be resilient, many developing nations in Africa, the Middle East, and Asia could witness significant humanitarian and developmental setbacks.

To mitigate the impact, affected countries must:

• Enhance domestic resource mobilization to sustain critical development programs.
• Deepen partnerships with multilateral institutions like the UN, World Bank, and WHO.
• Encourage private sector participation through Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) initiatives.
• Foster South-South cooperation to promote shared growth models.

The episode underscores the urgent need for the Global South to diversify funding sources and build internal capacities to safeguard developmental progress from geopolitical uncertainties.

In News:

India and France, bound by a deep-rooted strategic partnership since 1998, have expanded cooperation across defence, nuclear energy, space, trade, and culture. In a significant move reflecting shared values and mutual respect, Prime Minister Narendra Modi was invited by French President Emmanuel Macron to co-chair the Artificial Intelligence (AI) Action Summit in Paris in 2024—marking a pivotal moment in global AI governance and Indo-French relations.

Enduring Strategic Relations

India-France relations are anchored in the principles of strategic autonomy and reciprocal respect. France has consistently stood by India in challenging times—refusing sanctions post-Pokhran-II nuclear tests in 1998 and maintaining diplomatic engagement during the Emergency in 1976. President Macron’s participation in India’s 2024 Republic Day celebrations underscores the warmth in bilateral ties.

Robust Defence and Technological Cooperation

Defence cooperation forms the backbone of the relationship. Key initiatives include:

• Rafale Fighter Jets: Procurement of 36 Rafales and discussions on 26 Rafale-M jets for the Indian Navy.
• P-75 Scorpene Submarines: Expansion plans include three additional submarines.
• Next-gen Jet Engine Development and a dedicated DRDO office in Paris (2023) to bolster technology collaboration. France’s unique support for Make in India and technology transfer sets it apart, coupled with training programs for Indian personnel.

Expanding Frontiers: AI and Innovation

The Paris AI Summit marked a strategic milestone, with India’s role highlighting its growing global influence in emerging technologies. India presented its flagship IndiaAI Mission—a ?10,371 crore initiative focused on “Making AI in India and Making AI for India,” promoting equitable AI access and innovation.

The Summit, following the UK (2023) and South Korea (2024) AI summits, focused on:

• Public Interest AI
• Future of Work
• Innovation & Culture
• Trust in AI
• Global AI Governance

India advocated responsible AI, inclusive governance, and greater representation of the Global South, emphasizing AI's role in sustainable development and reducing the global AI divide.

Multilateral Engagement and Global Cooperation

India co-chairs the Global Partnership on Artificial Intelligence (GPAI) for 2024, reinforcing its commitment to ethical and collaborative AI development. Through the Paris Summit, India contributed to the Leaders' Statement, participated in steering committees, and called for AI democratization aligned with Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

Beyond AI: Economic and Cultural Synergies

Bilateral trade surpassed $15 billion in 2023–24, with Indian exports at $7.14 billion and imports at $7.97 billion. Key developments:

• India-France CEOs Forum: Focus on defence, renewable energy, pharma, and startups.
• India-France Innovation Year 2026 and inauguration of a new Indian consulate in Marseille.
• Triangular Development Cooperation Initiative: Joint projects in the Indo-Pacific focused on climate and SDG targets.
• Joint visit to the ITER fusion energy project, reflecting shared aspirations for clean energy.

Conclusion

The India-France partnership has matured into a multifaceted global alliance—from defence and climate action to AI leadership and sustainable development. The co-chairing of the AI Summit symbolizes India's rising stature in tech diplomacy and affirms the enduring strategic trust between two democratic powers. For UPSC aspirants, this partnership exemplifies strategic depth, technological collaboration, and global engagement driven by shared values and autonomy.

In News:

The Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) has once again become the epicenter of a severe humanitarian and geopolitical crisis. In early 2025, the M23 militia, a Tutsi-led rebel group allegedly backed by Rwanda, captured Goma, the capital of North Kivu province.

This strategic and mineral-rich city lies on the eastern border with Rwanda and has historically been a flashpoint in the region. The recent offensive has escalated the violence, displacing over 7,00,000 people, killing more than 2,900, and risking a wider regional conflict.

Historical Roots of the Conflict

The current instability can be traced back to colonial and post-independence ethnic tensions in the Great Lakes region. Under German and Belgian colonial rule, power structures in Rwanda favored the minority Tutsi population, generating long-standing resentment among the Hutus. Following Rwanda’s independence in 1962, a Hutu-majority government took power, culminating in the 1994 Rwandan Genocide, where nearly 800,000 Tutsis and moderate Hutus were killed.

Post-genocide, around 2 million Hutus, including militia members responsible for the killings, fled into eastern Congo (then Zaire), leading to the formation of over 120 armed groups, including the Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda (FDLR), a Hutu militia. Rwanda intervened in Congo in 1996 and 1998, triggering the First and Second Congo Wars, which resulted in millions of deaths and regional destabilization.

Emergence and Role of M23

The M23 (March 23 Movement) was formed in 2012 by former fighters of the Tutsi-led National Congress for the Defence of the People (CNDP), who rebelled after accusing the DRC government of violating a 2009 peace deal meant to integrate them into the national army. Led by SultaniMakenga, M23 initially captured Goma in 2012 but retreated after international pressure.

Resurfacing in 2022, M23 cited non-implementation of the agreement and vowed to protect Tutsi interests against groups like the FDLR. Since then, they have gained control of key mining regions, particularly Rubaya, rich in coltan, a critical mineral used in electronic devices. The UN estimates that M23 earns $800,000 per month from coltan production taxes, indicating that economic motives are as significant as ethnic ones.

The 2025 Escalation

On January 27, 2025, M23 rebels entered Goma and seized control of the airport by the following evening. By January 30, they had captured the city despite sporadic resistance from government forces and allied militias. The group then began advancing southward towards Bukavu, the capital of South Kivu province. The UN has confirmed reports of Rwandan troop incursions into South Kivu, while Burundian forces have joined Congolese troops in resisting the offensive.

Regional Dynamics and Rwanda’s Involvement

The Congolese government, along with the UN and Western powers, accuses Rwanda of backing M23 militarily and logistically. A 2022 UN expert report provided "solid evidence" of Rwandan troops fighting alongside M23, though Rwanda continues to deny these allegations. President Paul Kagame justifies his government's position as defensive, blaming the DRC for its alliance with the FDLR, which threatens Tutsis across the region.

Neighboring Burundi, led by President ÉvaristeNdayishimiye, has warned that Rwanda’s ambitions could spark a wider war, even threatening Burundi’s sovereignty. Uganda, meanwhile, plays a balancing role—supporting Congolese efforts against Islamic State-linked militants, while allegedly allowing M23 safe haven, as per UN reports.

Strategic and Economic Importance of Goma

Goma is not just a city; it is a strategic trade and transport hub at the heart of the DRC’s mineral wealth, particularly coltan, of which the DRC supplies nearly 40% of the world’s demand. The region is crucial for smartphone and electronics manufacturing due to coltan’s utility in capacitors.

Thus, the control of Goma and surrounding territories represents not only a military advantage but also a significant economic resource for M23 and its alleged sponsors.

Humanitarian Impact and Global Concerns

The humanitarian toll of the conflict is staggering. With over a million people displaced since M23’s resurgence, the DRC’s fragile state apparatus is further strained. Corpses reportedly lay unburied in Goma after the assault, reflecting a deep crisis of governance, security, and human rights.

Given the ethnic complexities, resource conflicts, and regional rivalries, there are growing fears of the conflict escalating into a full-fledged regional war, drawing in Rwanda, Burundi, and Uganda.

In News:

India's foreign policy has undergone a strategic shift towards West Asia, driven by imperatives of energy security, economic integration, and geopolitical balance.

The launch of theIndia-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor (IMEC)at the G20 Summit 2023 marks a key initiative aimed at reshaping global trade while deepening India’s engagement with the Middle East and Europe.

Importance of the Middle East for India

• Energy Security:The Middle East supplies over 53% of India’s crude oil (as of January 2025). Long-term energy agreements, such as the LNG deal with Qatar (until 2048) and India-UAE green hydrogen MoUs, ensure stable energy flows. Strategic ties mitigate disruptions due to OPEC+ cuts and geopolitical tensions.
• Trade and Economic Ties: India’s trade with the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) reached USD 161.59 billion in FY 2023–24. The UAE is India’s third-largest trading partner, with exports worth USD 35.6 billion. A proposed India-GCC Free Trade Agreement and operationalization of IMEC can enhance regional integration.
• Diaspora and Remittances:Over 66% of India’s 1.34 crore NRIs live in Gulf nations. India was the world’s top remittance recipient in 2022, with USD 111 billion, a major share from the Middle East. Labor reforms in the region (e.g., Saudi Arabia’s Nitaqat) influence migrant welfare.
• Geopolitical and Strategic Autonomy: India balances relations across regional fault lines — Iran-Saudi and Israel-Arab states — while maintaining strategic autonomy. Defense cooperation includes naval exercises (e.g., Al-Mohed Al-Hindi with Saudi Arabia) and connectivity via Chabahar Port in Iran.
• Food and Maritime Security: The Gulf is a major destination for Indian agricultural exports (e.g., UAE imports worth USD 1.9 billion in FY 2022–23). Strategic waterways like the Red Sea and Arabian Sea are crucial for trade, though increasingly vulnerable to piracy and regional conflict.

IMEC: A Strategic Connectivity Corridor

• IMECenvisions linking India to Europe through the Middle East via multimodal transport and digital-energy corridors, bypassing the Suez Canal. It aims to counter China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI).
• Key stakeholders include India, UAE, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Israel, and the EU. The Intergovernmental Framework Agreement (2024) lays the foundation for implementation, targeting USD 600 billion in infrastructure investment by 2027.
• Objectives include trade facilitation, supply chain diversification, digital connectivity, and green energy collaboration. However, the Israel-Gaza conflict and regional instability have delayed execution.

Challenges

• Energy volatility due to OPEC+ decisions and Red Sea disruptions.
• Geopolitical unrest in Yemen, Gaza, and Iran-Israel tensions.
• Maritime insecurity, with piracy and Houthi attacks raising shipping costs.
• Labor rights issues, including migrant exploitation.
• Strategic competition from China, with over USD 273 billion invested in the region since 2005.

Policy Recommendations

• Co-develop energy infrastructure (e.g., Saudi Aramco’s stake in Indian refineries).
• Diversify trade via an India-GCC FTA and sectoral cooperation (IT, defense, fintech).
• Enhance maritime and digital connectivity through IMEC and joint port development.
• Secure labor migration with skill pacts and expanded protection schemes.
• Strengthen counter-terrorism and defense cooperation, including intelligence sharing.

Conclusion

India’s West Asia strategy is multifaceted—balancing energy diplomacy, trade, diaspora ties, and strategic connectivity. IMEC offers a transformative opportunity to position India as a central link in global supply chains, but its success depends on stable regional geopolitics and coordinated implementation.

In News:

The President of Indonesia, visited India as the Chief Guest for the 76th Republic Day in January 2025. This marked the 75th anniversary of diplomatic ties, reaffirming the commitment to deepen cooperation in economic, strategic, cultural, and defense domains.

Historical Foundations

• Ancient Civilizational Links: Trade and cultural exchanges date back to the 2nd century BCE, reflected in the influence of Hinduism and Buddhism on Indonesian society (e.g., Ramayana, Mahabharata, Borobudur, Prambanan).
• Modern Diplomatic Ties:
  • Formalized in 1950, with a Treaty of Friendship in 1951.
  • Collaborated in the 1955 Bandung Conference and co-founded the Non-Aligned Movement (1961).
  • Indonesia’s first President Sukarno was the Guest of Honour at India’s first Republic Day in 1950.
• Cold War and Beyond:
  • Relations cooled in the 1960s but revived in the 1980s.
  • The 1991 'Look East' Policy and the 2014 'Act East' Policy revitalized ties.
  • Strategic Partnership in 2005; upgraded to a Comprehensive Strategic Partnership in 2018.

Key Pillars of Cooperation

• Economic and Trade Relations
  • Trade Volume: Reached USD 38.8 billion (2022–23), targeted to increase to USD 50 billion by 2025.
  • Key Imports: India imports coal, palm oil, and nickel.
  • Investment: Indian investments in Indonesia total USD 1.56 billion in infrastructure, textiles, and energy.
• New Developments:
  • MoU on Local Currency Settlement Systems to reduce dependency on USD.
  • Focus on resolving trade barriers via forums like WGTI and BMTF.
  • Cooperation in critical minerals like nickel and bauxite.
  • BPCL to invest USD 121 million in the Nunukan gas block.
• Military Exercises: Garuda Shakti (Army), Samudra Shakti (Navy), and participation in Milan, Komodo, Super Garuda Shield, etc.
• Key Agreements:
  • 2018 Defense Cooperation Agreement.
  • White Shipping Information Exchange (WSIE).
  • Proposal for Bilateral Maritime Dialogue and Cyber Security Dialogue.
  • Joint vision on maritime cooperation under SAGAR (Security and Growth for All in the Region).
  • BrahMos Deal: Talks underway for Indonesia’s acquisition of BrahMos missiles (~USD 450 million).
• Cultural Diplomacy: Shared heritage of Hindu-Buddhist traditions; India assisting in restoring Prambanan temple.
• Tourism & Connectivity: Direct flights since 2023; India is the second-largest source of tourists to Bali.
• New Initiatives:
  • Cultural Exchange Programme (2025–2028).
  • India reaffirmed the Kashi Cultural Pathway for heritage restoration and repatriation of artifacts.
• Science, Technology, and Space
  • ISRO supports Indonesia’s satellite ambitions; agreement on Biak Tracking Station.
  • Renewed MoU on STEM cooperation.
  • Areas of collaboration: Quantum tech, high-performance computing, and digital public infrastructure.
• Energy and Health Security
  • Collaboration on biofuels under the Global Biofuels Alliance.
  • Joint initiatives on mid-day meals and public distribution systems.
  • MoUs on digital health, capacity building, and traditional medicine.

Multilateral and Regional Cooperation

• ASEAN & Indo-Pacific: Commitment to ASEAN centrality and cooperation through IPOI, India-Indonesia-Australia Trilateral, and ASEAN-India outlook.
• Global Platforms: Collaboration in BRICS, G20, IORA, and advocacy for the Global South.
• Climate & Disaster Resilience:
  • Joint efforts under CDRI.
  • Indonesia invited to the International Solar Alliance and Big Cat Alliance.

Key Challenges

• Trade Imbalance: Heavy reliance on limited imports (coal, palm oil); imbalance persists as Indonesia’s trade with China is far greater (~USD 139 billion).
• Bureaucratic & Regulatory Barriers: Slow progress on infrastructure and investment due to permit and regulatory issues.
• Geopolitical Pressures: Indo-Pacific instability and China's expanding influence pose strategic challenges.
• Logistical Constraints: Inadequate connectivity infrastructure hinders deeper integration.

Way Forward

• Trade Diversification: Include sectors like tech, agriculture, and green energy.
• Defense Deepening: Expand joint exercises, maritime patrols, and intelligence-sharing.
• Enhance Connectivity: Boost air, sea, and digital linkages for trade and tourism.
• Green Collaboration: Advance renewable energy and sustainable mining ventures.
• Cultural & Educational Engagement: Promote student exchanges, scholarships (e.g., ITEC), and diaspora involvement.

Conclusion

India and Indonesia share deep-rooted civilizational links and are strategically aligned in the Indo-Pacific. Their evolving Comprehensive Strategic Partnership encompasses trade, defense, technology, and cultural diplomacy. Strengthening this partnership will not only boost bilateral growth but also ensure a stable, multipolar, and cooperative regional order.

Context:

• The India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor (IMEC), announced at the G20 Summit 2023 in New Delhi, is a transformative multi-modal connectivity initiative aiming to link India, the Middle East, and Europe through railways, ports, roads, energy pipelines, and digital infrastructure.
• Seen as a strategic counter to China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), IMEC marks a significant step in reshaping global trade routes and enhancing economic cooperation across continents.

Structure and Components of IMEC

• Corridors:
  • Eastern Corridor: Connects India to the Arabian Peninsula
  • Northern Corridor: Links the Gulf to Europe
• Key Infrastructure:
  • Rail and road networks
  • Shipping routes from Indian ports (e.g., Mumbai, Mundra, Kandla, JNPT) to UAE and onwards via rail to Saudi Arabia, Jordan, and Israel (Haifa Port)
  • Maritime link from Haifa to Piraeus Port in Greece, and further into Europe
  • Electricity grids, green hydrogen pipelines, and high-speed data cables
• Participating Nations: India, US, Saudi Arabia, UAE, France, Germany, Italy, European Union
• Support Mechanism: US-led Partnership for Global Infrastructure and Investment (PGII)

Significance of IMEC

For India

• Enhanced Global Connectivity:
  • Provides faster, cost-effective access to European markets
  • Reduces dependence on the Suez Canal, a known chokepoint
• Economic Gains:
  • Boosts the Make in India initiative through expanded market access
  • Enhances maritime security and tourism opportunities in the Mediterranean
• Strategic Leverage:
  • Strengthens ties with Middle East, US, and Europe
  • Reinforces India’s image as a global strategic partner
• Energy Security and Green Growth:
  • Facilitates the Green Grid Concept via power lines and hydrogen pipelines
  • Aligns with India’s clean energy and decarbonisation goals
• Digital and Cyber Infrastructure:
  • Supports data flow and communication resilience across the corridor

For the United States

• Strategic Counter to BRI:
  • Offers democratic nations an alternative to China’s BRI
• Reinforces Transatlantic Unity:
  • Addresses trust deficits post Ukraine war
  • Reaffirms US commitment to European allies
• Energy and Supply Chain Security:
  • Reduces reliance on adversarial energy routes
  • Diversifies regional supply chains
• Geopolitical Stability:
  • Encourages peaceful engagement among West Asian rivals
  • Deters alignment with China-led blocks
• Job Creation and Economic Growth:
  • Infrastructure investments boost local economies and employment

Strategic and Geopolitical Implications

• Acts as a balancing mechanism in global geopolitics against the influence of China’s BRI
• Built on diplomatic breakthroughs such as the Abraham Accords
• Promotes economic cooperation between traditional rivals (e.g., Israel, Saudi Arabia, UAE)
• Supports a rules-based international order centered on transparency, sustainability, and democratic values

Challenges to Implementation

• Geopolitical Instability: Conflicts such as Israel-Hamas, Iran-Saudi tensions, or political instability in West Asia can delay progress
• Infrastructure Bottlenecks:
  • High capital requirement and complexity of cross-border integration
  • Varying timelines and priorities among participating nations
• Competing Regional Interests:
  • Exclusion of key players like Turkey, Iran, and China may trigger pushback
  • Turkey’s rivalry with Greece and Israel may create diplomatic hurdles

Security Concerns: Risk of terrorism, piracy, and cyber threats in unstable regions

In News:

After 15 months of war triggered by Hamas' October 2023 attack on Israel, a ceasefire agreement has been brokered by Qatar, Egypt, and the US, marking a fragile but significant pause in one of the most destructive phases of the Israel-Palestine conflict.

Key Features of the Ceasefire Agreement

The agreement is based on a three-phase framework proposed by US President Joe Biden in June 2024 and endorsed by the UN Security Council:

Phase I (42 days)

• Complete ceasefire and withdrawal of Israeli forces from all populated areas in Gaza.
• Release of 33 Israeli hostages (women, elderly, injured) by Hamas.
• Release of 900–1,650 Palestinian prisoners, including minors and those detained since October 7, 2023.
• Daily entry of 600 humanitarian aid trucks into Gaza.
• Partial Israeli withdrawal from key corridors like Netzarim (splitting Gaza) and parts of the Philadelphi Corridor (Gaza-Egypt border).

Phase II

• Release of remaining hostages, primarily male soldiers.
• Complete Israeli military withdrawal from Gaza.
• Details to be negotiated during Phase I; no written guarantees for its execution.

Phase III

• Return of the remains of deceased hostages.
• Initiation of a multi-year reconstruction plan for Gaza under international supervision.

Challenges to Implementation

Fragile Political Consensus in Israel

• Far-right ministers (e.g., Itamar Ben-Gvir) oppose the deal, threatening to quit the government.
• Prime Minister Netanyahu faces pressure from both hawks demanding a full military victory and moderates seeking peace.

Hamas' Demands

• Seeks permanent ceasefire and complete Israeli withdrawal, making it unwilling to release all hostages without guarantees.
• Israel, in contrast, insists on neutralizing Hamas militarily.

Unclear Future Governance of Gaza

• Israel rejects both Hamas and the Palestinian Authority (PA) as future administrators.
• Global consensus supports Palestinian-led governance, but viable alternatives remain elusive.

Wider Geopolitical Impact

Reshaping West Asia

• Conflict escalated tensions with Hezbollah (Lebanon) and drew Israel into direct conflict with Iran.
• Iran’s influence weakened due to losses in Hezbollah and Syria.
• Assad regime in Syria collapsed, altering regional power dynamics.

Diplomatic Repercussions for Israel

• Despite military dominance, Israel faces global condemnation over civilian casualties.
• PM Netanyahu is under scrutiny at the ICC (war crimes) and ICJ (genocide allegations).
• Israel is now diplomatically isolated, particularly after the humanitarian toll in Gaza.

Humanitarian Crisis in Gaza

• Over 64,000 Palestinians killed (The Lancet, 2024), including large numbers of civilians.
• Massive destruction of infrastructure—schools, hospitals, homes—rendering Gaza nearly uninhabitable.
• Reconstruction hinges on sustained peace and international aid.

Conclusion

The ceasefire presents a rare opportunity for de-escalation in a deeply entrenched conflict. However, distrust between parties, domestic political constraints, and regional rivalries pose significant risks to its sustainability. A durable peace can only emerge through inclusive political dialogue, humanitarian prioritization, and movement toward a two-state solution.

In News:

The recent visit of Sri Lankan President Anura Kumara Dissanayake (AKD) to India marked a significant moment in bilateral relations, as it was his first foreign trip since assuming office. The visit underscored key diplomatic exchanges and collaborations between the two countries, showcasing both areas of agreement and divergence.

Key Takeaways from AKD's Visit

Assurance on Anti-India Activities: One of the primary concerns for India was the use of Sri Lankan territory for activities detrimental to its security, particularly the presence of Chinese “research vessels” at Sri Lankan ports. President AKD assured Prime Minister Narendra Modi that Sri Lanka would not allow its territory to be used in ways that threaten India’s interests. This assurance is crucial, as it signals Sri Lanka's stance on maintaining regional stability, despite AKD’s perceived pro-China inclinations.

Tamil Minority Issue: Divergent Views: A notable divergence in their discussions was the issue of the Tamil minority in Sri Lanka. India has long advocated for the full implementation of the 13th Amendment to Sri Lanka’s Constitution, which would grant greater autonomy to the Tamil minority. However, AKD resisted this, reaffirming his opposition to the amendment’s full implementation. While India emphasized the importance of reconciliation and holding provincial elections, AKD focused on unity, sustainable development, and social protection, sidestepping any definitive commitments on the Tamil issue.

Sri Lanka's Assertive Diplomatic Posture: AKD’s strong parliamentary mandate has allowed him to adopt a more assertive diplomatic stance. This is evident not only in his handling of the Tamil issue but also in his approach to dealing with major powers like India and China. His administration appears to be prioritizing a more independent foreign policy, signaling a shift from previous administrations.

Bilateral Cooperation and Development Initiatives

The visit saw significant agreements on bilateral cooperation, particularly in development and connectivity. Both nations acknowledged the positive impact of India’s assistance in Sri Lanka’s socio-economic growth. Key projects discussed include:

• Indian Housing Project: Phases III and IV.
• Hybrid Renewable Energy Projects across three islands.
• High-Impact Community Development Projects.
• Digital collaborations, such as the implementation of Aadhaar and UPI systems in Sri Lanka.

Additionally, discussions focused on enhancing energy cooperation, including the supply of LNG, development of offshore wind power in the Palk Strait, and the high-capacity power grid interconnection. The resumption of passenger ferry services between key Indian and Sri Lankan ports was also a priority.

Defence and Security Cooperation

The two leaders agreed to explore a Defence Cooperation Framework and intensify collaboration on maritime surveillance, cyber security, and counter-terrorism. This aligns with India’s strategic interests in the region, as it seeks to ensure stability in the Indian Ocean and strengthen its defense ties with Sri Lanka.

Strategic Continuity Amid Leadership Change

Despite a change in leadership, the core strategic interests between India and Sri Lanka remain aligned. India views Sri Lanka’s stability as crucial to regional security, and both countries are focused on a mutually beneficial partnership. AKD’s emphasis on economic recovery and tackling corruption within Sri Lanka, as seen in his actions against political figures like Speaker Asoka Ranwala, further signals his determination to build a strong foundation for his government’s future.

Conclusion

President AKD’s visit highlighted the evolving dynamics of Sri Lanka’s foreign policy, marked by a more confident and independent approach in engaging with India. While challenges remain, especially regarding the Tamil issue, both countries have reaffirmed their commitment to deepening bilateral ties, with a focus on development, connectivity, and strategic cooperation.

In News:

The December 2023 visit of Bhutan’s King and Queen to India highlights the enduring and strategic partnership between the two nations. Amidst growing Chinese influence and Bhutan’s domestic challenges, the visit holds significant geopolitical relevance, reinforcing India-Bhutan relations and underscoring Bhutan's critical role in India’s regional security.

Reaffirmation of India-Bhutan Relations

The visit reaffirmed the strong, time-tested partnership between India and Bhutan, rooted in mutual trust and cooperation. India reiterated its commitment to Bhutan's socio-economic development, increasing its financial aid for the 2024-2029 period from ?5,000 crore to ?10,000 crore. Notably, Bhutan’s flagship Gelephu Mindfulness City Project, championed by King Jigme Khesar, received strong Indian backing, reflecting India’s willingness to align with Bhutan’s developmental priorities.

Strategic Areas of Cooperation

Clean Energy and Hydropower

Bhutan remains central to India’s renewable energy strategy, particularly in hydropower, a vital part of Bhutan's economy. Bhutan exports the majority of its hydropower to India, reinforcing bilateral ties in the energy sector. This cooperation aligns with India’s regional energy security goals, with both nations seeking to strengthen clean energy initiatives.

Infrastructure Development

The visit also emphasized infrastructure projects, vital for enhancing Bhutan's connectivity. These projects are strategically significant, considering Bhutan's geostrategic importance in the Himalayas. Infrastructure development further strengthens the ties between the two nations, with a focus on mutual benefits and regional stability.

Geopolitical Context: China’s Growing Influence

China-Bhutan Border Disputes

The border issue with China has been ongoing since 1984. In 2023, Bhutan and China signed an agreement to expedite the settlement and demarcation of their borders. China’s push for resolution is part of its broader strategy to reduce India’s influence in Bhutan. The disputed areas, particularly those near India’s Siliguri Corridor, hold strategic importance for New Delhi. Any territorial adjustments could undermine India’s access to its Northeastern states.

Chinese Influence and Economic Engagement

China has been constructing villages along disputed border areas, altering ground realities and establishing civilian hubs that could serve as military outposts. Additionally, China is offering economic incentives to Bhutan, including promoting tourism and investing in Bhutan’s telecom sector, seeking to draw the country into closer economic and diplomatic alignment.

India’s Role in Bhutan’s Security and Sovereignty

Strategic Dependence on India

Bhutan's small military relies heavily on Indian support for training and defense. The 2017 Doklam standoff, where Indian forces intervened to prevent China from constructing a road in disputed territory, underscored India's crucial role in safeguarding Bhutan’s territorial integrity.

Friendship Treaty

The India-Bhutan Friendship Treaty is the cornerstone of their bilateral relations, ensuring Bhutan's sovereignty while reinforcing India's role in Bhutan’s foreign and defense policies. India's increased financial support aims to counter China’s economic influence in Bhutan.

Challenges for Bhutan

Balancing India and China

Bhutan is navigating a delicate balance between preserving its historical ties with India and engaging with China, which offers economic benefits. However, Bhutan’s sovereignty concerns limit its ability to make independent diplomatic decisions.

Domestic Issues

Bhutan faces challenges such as youth migration and limited economic diversification. Over-reliance on hydropower and a lack of industrial development make it vulnerable to external pressures, particularly from China.

The Strategic Importance of Bhutan to India

Geopolitical Buffer

Bhutan's location is vital for India’s security, especially in relation to the Siliguri Corridor, a narrow land link connecting India’s Northeast. Any Chinese presence in Bhutan’s disputed regions could disrupt access to this crucial corridor.

Hydropower Collaboration

Bhutan’s hydropower exports are central to India’s renewable energy strategy, and their cooperation in this area ensures mutual benefits.

Way Forward

India must continue to prioritize Bhutan’s development needs, ensuring robust financial and infrastructural support. Proactive engagement is necessary to address Bhutan’s concerns, particularly in light of China’s growing influence. Additionally, India should support Bhutan’s economic diversification to reduce reliance on external actors.

In News:

Need for modification of the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) amidst changing geopolitical, environmental, and demographic realities.

Background of the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT)

• About IWT:
  • Signed in 1960 between India and Pakistan, brokered by the World Bank.
  • Governs the sharing of the Indus River system waters.
• Historical Context:
  • Origin in the Inter-Dominion Accord of 1948 post-partition.
  • Finalized after negotiations facilitated by the World Bank in 1951.
• Key Provisions:
  • Eastern Rivers (Ravi, Beas, Sutlej) allocated to India.
  • Western Rivers (Indus, Jhelum, Chenab) allocated to Pakistan, with limited use allowed for India (e.g., hydropower, irrigation).
  • Establishment of the Permanent Indus Commission (PIC) for cooperation and dispute resolution.

India’s Perspective

• Rationale for Modification:
  • Increased demographic and agricultural demands.
  • Need for sustainable water management.
  • Acceleration of hydropower projects on western rivers permitted by the treaty.
• Security Concerns: Cross-border terrorism impacting trust in treaty operations.

Pakistan’s Concerns

• Dependence on Indus System:  Critical for agriculture and drinking water as the lower riparian state.
• Potential Impacts of Modification:
  • Fear of reduced water availability.
  • Concerns over India’s hydropower projects altering water flow.

Current Challenges

• Hydropower Projects: Disputes over compliance with treaty provisions regarding hydropower construction.
• Technical Disputes: Divergent interpretations of treaty terms.
• Political Tensions: Strained bilateral relations with minimal diplomatic engagement.
• Climate Change Impacts: Altered precipitation patterns and glacial melt affecting water availability.

Arguments for Modifying the Treaty

• Addressing Contemporary Challenges: Climate change, technological advancements, and increased water demand.
• Securing National Interests:
  • Clarifications on hydropower construction.
  • Improved dispute resolution mechanisms.

Risks of Modifying the Treaty

• Escalation of Tensions: Perceived unilateral actions by Pakistan.
• Political Sensitivities: Domestic opposition in both countries.

Way Forward: A Balanced Approach

• Engagement and Dialogue: Bilateral discussions with potential third-party mediation (e.g., World Bank).
• Cooperation over Conflict: Recognizing mutual benefits of collaboration in water management.
• Adaptation Measures: Incorporate provisions addressing climate change and technological advances.

In News:

Recently, the 16th BRICS Summit was held in Kazan, Russia.

Key Highlights:

Overview of the Bilateral Meeting between PM Modi and President Xi

• Location & Context: The meeting took place on the sidelines of the 16th BRICS Summit in Kazan, Russia (October 23, 2024), marking the first bilateral interaction between PM Modi and President Xi Jinping in nearly five years.
• Significance: The meeting focused on India-China relations, specifically the border dispute that arose following the 2020 standoff in Ladakh.
• Agreement on Border Disengagement: Both leaders welcomed an agreement for "complete disengagement" along the Line of Actual Control (LAC), which could pave the way for the resolution of issues that emerged after the Galwan Valley clashes in June 2020.

Key Points of the India-China Border Pact

• Resolution of Border Issues: The agreement addresses longstanding disputes, including in Depsang Plains and Demchok, where Chinese forces had encroached on Indian territory.
• Restoration of Patrolling: Both nations agreed to restore patrols to old patrolling points (PPs) along the LAC in these disputed areas.
• Next Steps: The Special Representatives (SRs) on the India-China boundary will meet soon to oversee the management of peace and tranquility in the border areas and explore mutually acceptable solutions.
• Diplomatic Mechanisms: Dialogue mechanisms at the foreign ministers and other official levels will be utilized to stabilize and rebuild bilateral relations, contributing to regional and global stability.

Strategic Importance of the Bilateral Meeting

• Maintaining Peace and Stability: PM Modi emphasized that differences between India and China should be managed carefully to ensure that broader peace and tranquility are maintained.
• Global Impact: Both leaders affirmed that stable India-China relations would have a positive impact on regional and global peace and contribute to a multipolar world.
• Long-Term Strategic Perspective: The leaders discussed progressing bilateral relations from a strategic perspective, enhancing communication, and exploring cooperation to address developmental challenges.

Key Takeaways from the 16th BRICS Summit

• Expansion and New Membership: The summit saw the inclusion of five new members—Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, the UAE, and Saudi Arabia (pending formalization). This expansion reflects BRICS’s growing influence as a forum representing the Global South.
• Focus on Multilateralism: Leaders emphasized multilateral cooperation to address challenges such as global security, economic growth, and sustainable development.
• Kazan Declaration: The declaration touched upon key issues:
  • Geopolitical Conflicts: It called for dialogue and diplomacy to resolve disputes like the Ukraine crisis and the West Asia conflict.
  • Sanctions and Trade: Criticized unilateral sanctions and their disruptive effects on global trade and development goals.
  • Grain Exchange: A proposal was made to establish a BRICS Grain Exchange, aimed at improving agricultural trade among member states.
  • Financial Integration: There was a push for greater financial integration through the use of local currencies for trade, exemplified by India’s UPI system as a successful model.

Importance of BRICS in the Global Context

• Global Influence: BRICS continues to be a key player in global geopolitics, representing 40% of the world’s population and 26% of global GDP (as of 2023).
• Strategic Goals: BRICS has consistently called for reform of international institutions like the UNSC, IMF, and World Bank, advocating for a more equitable global governance structure.
• Economic Collaboration: The New Development Bank (NDB), established in 2015, continues to play a vital role in funding development projects across BRICS countries, though the group’s influence in global finance remains limited compared to the World Bank.

Challenges Facing BRICS Expansion

• Geopolitical Contradictions: The inclusion of diverse new members (e.g., UAE, Egypt, Iran) could complicate decision-making due to geopolitical rivalries.
• Decision-Making Hurdles: Achieving consensus among an expanding membership will become more challenging. The expansion may dilute the cohesiveness of the group, as seen in other multilateral forums like the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) and G77.
• De-Dollarisation Efforts: While BRICS aims to de-dollarize trade and reduce reliance on the SWIFT system, efforts to develop alternatives like a BRICS payment system and BRICS currency are still in nascent stages.
• Economic Disparities: Economic gaps among members—China’s GDP is significantly larger than the combined GDP of other members—could also create imbalances in decision-making.

India’s Role and Strategic Positioning in BRICS

• Geopolitical Balancing: India's participation in BRICS is a strategic maneuver to balance its global position and strengthen ties with emerging economies, particularly in the Global South.
• Diplomatic Relations with Russia: India continues to prioritize its relationship with Russia, which remains crucial for regional security and energy cooperation.
• India-China Ties: The agreement on the India-China border represents a significant shift in relations, with potential for a reset in Sino-Indian ties.

Key Themes in the Kazan Declaration

• Global Governance: Calls for reforming global institutions to give developing nations more representation.
• Energy and Sustainability: Proposals for strengthening energy cooperation, including the creation of energy corridors and the promotion of sustainable energy practices.
• Security: Emphasized the need for universal security by addressing the security concerns of all nations and promoting dialogue over confrontation.

Conclusion: Future of India-China and BRICS Relations

• India-China Relations: The border disengagement pact is a critical step towards stabilizing the India-China relationship, with potential positive impacts on regional security and global geopolitics.
• BRICS’s Growing Influence: As BRICS expands, it faces internal challenges but remains a potent voice for the Global South, aiming to reshape global governance and financial systems.
• India’s Strategic Positioning: India is likely to play a pivotal role in BRICS, especially as the group’s focus shifts towards regional stability, economic cooperation, and de-dollarization in the coming years.