Image Credits: Gettyimages
India is a prospective superpower in the modern period, especially in the Global South where it has the third-largest purchasing power parity and the fifth-largest nominal GDP. India's foreign policy has always emphasised equality, harmony, and mutual gain, and thus advocated for non-alignment for a long time.
Nevertheless, India is moving towards a multi-alignment strategy, which includes signing the Logistics Exchange Memorandum of Cooperation and establishing a global North-South transport corridor with Russia for enhanced commercial connectivity (a modified version of the Logistics Support Agreement that the United States has with countries for better synergy between the Armed Forces of partners). Hence, it may be claimed that by ensuring the geopolitical landscape is balanced in a way that favours its own interests, India is transitioning from non-alignment to multi-alignment.
US v/s China conflict and its effects on the Multilateral forums
After the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, the United States emerged as the sole superpower in the world. The US dominated the post-Cold War era in several ways such as :
Military Dominance: having the most powerful military in the world backed by the largest defence budget and most advanced tech base.
Economic Dominance: US has the world’s largest economy, having a preponderance of the US dollar around the globe helping it to influence global finance.
The US has a strong democratic tradition, and its political system has been emulated by other countries. The US also significantly influences international organisations like the United Nations and NATO.
Despite having unparalleled military, economic and technological capabilities, An Asian juggernaut named China is challenging the dominance of the US.
In recent years the rise of China as a global power is a serious concern for US’s monopoly in different areas like military, economic, technological, and global influence China is upgrading and modernising its military with an increase in naval power and advancing its military technologies such as hypersonic missiles, which are capable for challenging US supremacy in Asia-Pacific region. China’s economy is growing at an alarming rate, projected to overtake the US in the upcoming years, currently standing as the world’s second-largest economy empowering it to influence global trade and investment. China is leading the rest of the world by making a significant stride in AI, quantum computing, and 5G networks.
China has been expanding its global influence through initiatives such as the Belt and Road Initiative, which aims to build infrastructure and improve connectivity between China and other countries. It has also been increasing its participation in global governance institutions, such as the United Nations and the World Trade Organization. There is a push for competitive major power hegemony and geopolitical change in the international system. So as of now, There are prominently two axes - the USA and China, where the US trying to defend its undisputed supremacy in global geopolitics since post cold war era whereas, on the other hand, China is challenging its predominance, to become the superpower in today’s scenario..
US-China relations have been undoubtedly a complex and conflicted one. There are several issues where they appear to be at odds, including the South China issue, the one-China policy, the abolition of Hong Kong's special status, and the designation of China's treatment of the Uyghurs as genocide. This is likely because China's political narrative favours autocracy or a totalitarian regime over democracy for a strong political structure, as well as the country's expansionist tendencies and disregard for a rules-based order. China is now the second largest donor about 14% of the total U.N.'s regular and peacekeeping budgets in terms of assessed contributions, or mandated dues. The United States and other countries have been using the U.N. for years to demonstrate their dominance, and China is only now doing the same. As a result, they are affecting the functioning of multilateral groupings by their wolf warrior diplomacy - 'Safeguarding the interests of the country and the people,’ which serves as the lofty mission of China’s diplomacy as stated by “People’s Daily.” China seems to adopt the strategy, more vehemently, in response to covid 'blame game' and blind race to power against the West. Additionally, Chinese nationals also hold leadership positions in the UN agencies. As of April 2020, 7 UN leaders were Chinese nationals who wouldn’t dare to go against their autocratic or communist regime. The conflict between the US and China is having a significant impact on global forums, particularly those focused on trade, security, and human rights. Here are a few examples
The trade war between the two world's largest economies creates the instability in the global market and affects the global forum for trade i.e WTO which is struggling to find a common ground between the two and to ensure fair trade practices.
The US and China are the deciding players in global security and their growing tussle in the Indo-Pacific region raised concern for potential military conflict. Affecting the UNSC, where two countries oppose each other's stances. Many a time such as North Korea’s nuclear program resulted in deadlocks in the functioning.
The working of UNGA also gets hampered by the clashes between the two on various topics such as China's treatment of its Uighur Muslim minority and its crackdown on pro-democracy protesters in Hong Kong.
Overall, the conflict between the US and China is creating challenges for global forums that rely on cooperation and consensus-building.
Image Credits: Global Governance Project
Are global forums/agencies paralyzed?
Multilateral forums are the organisations where countries around the globe come together to discuss and coordinate on the issues that affect them. Examples of such forums include the United Nations (UN), the World Trade Organization (WTO), and the International Monetary Fund (IMF). But Are these organisations really doing justice to the reason for their formation? For example the UN's raison d'etre talks about peace and security, the prevention of wars, and assurance of a better future for the world. Has the UN delivered on its lofty promises? A chain of failure in taking any decisive action in matters like human rights protection (in Cuba, Venezuela, and China), International security, and peace by the UN and its dysfunctional organs such as (UNHRC and UNSC) have proven it, that is a big “NO”.
United Nations: A redundant body?
“The UN was not created to take mankind to heaven, but to save humanity from hell”
−Dag Hammarskjöld
So, as far as the UN is concerned, all the 193 members have witnessed its modus operandi, whether it is its failure in handling a series of international aggression like in Rwanda, Libya, and Syria, or the currently going Ukraine-Russia war, where the UN has completely failed to mediate the war. The trajectory of the UNSC’s dysfunctionality and systemic failure created the conditions that rendered it ineffective in the face of the 2022 Russia-Ukraine crisis. Therefore, this crisis strengthens the case for the dismantling and radical overhaul of the UN Security Council as an institutional framework. UN-like global platforms are hamstrung because of the concentration of excessive power in limited centres since 1945.
For example, in UNSC it is termed P5. These P5 countries are the permanent members of the UNSC ( USA, China, UK, Russia, and France) these are given the power of veto on any "substantive" resolution if any one of them finds the resolution unsuitable uses their vetoing power in an autocratic manner to serve their own interests which ultimately makes its working lethargic, nullifying its goals of maintaining international peace and law and upholding International law. Unjust use of the veto may lead to human rights violations and could be the reason for wars, for example, Kashmir and Palestine conflicts, and might be undemocratic for the other 10 non-permanent members. This threatens the indivisibility principle of any multilateral forum. For Instance, China vetoes the declaration of warrant terrorists like Abdul Rahman Makki, Sajid Mir as global terrorists in the UNSC, failing the UN to fulfil the goal of international peace and security. Similarly, Britain and France misused the veto against Egypt in the Suez crisis, and Russia and USA do the same for resolutions condemning Syria and Iran respectively. Each of them has misused the veto over a period of time resulting in the deadlock in consensus building. Following are a few ways by which the UN can enhance its relevance as a multilateral forum.
Strengthening its peacekeeping and conflict resolution capabilities: The UN should focus on improving its peacekeeping operations and conflict resolution capabilities to address the growing number of conflicts and security challenges around the world. This can be achieved by providing better training, equipment, and resources to UN peacekeeping missions.
Reforms to the Security Council: The UN Security Council should be reformed to reflect the changing global power dynamics. This could include expanding the number of permanent and non-permanent members, improving the decision-making process, and ensuring greater transparency and accountability by expanding its membership towards inclusion of G4 countries.
Addressing global challenges: The UN should focus on addressing global challenges such as climate change, poverty, inequality, and terrorism. This can be achieved by creating a more coordinated approach between member states and ensuring that the UN is adequately resourced to tackle these issues
Engaging civil society: The UN should engage more with civil society and non-governmental organisations to ensure that their voices are heard in the decision-making process. This could involve creating more opportunities for civil society to participate in UN meetings and consultations.
Embracing technology: The UN should embrace new technologies to enhance its effectiveness and efficiency. This could include using big data and artificial intelligence to analyse global trends and identify potential threats or using digital platforms to engage with citizens around the world.
WTO & ITS CONTEMPORARY REALITIES
“The WTO operates the global system of trade rules and helps developing countries build their trade capacity” and provides a platform for its members to negotiate trade agreements and to resolve the trade disputes they face with each other.
Above mentioned, is the definition and function of the WTO on its site, but does this organisation really stick to it?There are a number of instances where it shows an inclination towards developed nations. For instance, on the basis of agreement on agriculture, it persistently objects and criticises the Indian scheme to subsidise its farmer for their extra income, and during the Russia-Ukraine war when India wanted to export its wheat at low cost to combat the global shortage and food crises, WTO inhibits justifying that its the violation of its base price rule set by it in 1986. On the other hand, USA and Europe give 50 and 20 times more subsidies to their farmers which have never been restricted clearly showing predilection towards developed nations and wringing the developing countries like India. Developed countries flex their power and maintain the control over developing countries via WTO. It seems like their objective is only to improve the standard of living for people in the west, and not of everyone acknowledging the saying that “All people are equal but some people are more equal than others”. Hence, urgent revision of its policies is required.
In addition, there are many other international forums like BRICS, SCO, G7, etc whose functioning is hampered by developed nations, leading to the tussle between developed and developing world. Rising protectionism and unilateralism in global trade and monetary bodies is a serious concern to look upon. There are mainly three reasons for the ineffectiveness of these multilateral forums: globalisation disillusionment, inadequacy to follow the rules to face new challenges, and lack of good narratives to support the concept.
Image Credits: Lowy Institute
Indian stance and strategies in this global turmoil Indian foreign policy has changed from a non-alignment strategy (a strategy of remaining neutral with the US and USSR blocs) to a multi-engagement strategy in the post-cold war era (India has friendly relations with almost all great powers and the developing world). Adopting the non-alignment doctrine proved to be a good step taken by contemporaneous leaders. When India became independent, the Cold War was still in its early stages. The main reason behind the strategy was that India wanted to maintain its independence and not align itself with any of the two major superpowers, the United States or the Soviet Union. India's leaders believed that by not aligning with either side, they could pursue their own foreign policy goals and maintain their sovereignty.
The core of both India's economic and diplomatic policies at the moment is multi-engagement rather than multilateralism because, in this 21st-century multipolar world, India’s stance is very critical that does let India align multilaterally. Multi-engagement with global powers directly impacts the process of transforming India into a world power, especially in the global south. It upholds the principle of International cooperation for peace, security, and sustainable development. In fact, more than 40 percent of India’s GDP originates from international trade which directly impacts the employment and prosperity of a vast number of Indian citizens. This gives the platform not only to India but also to many other developing nations to pitch in their national interests at the global level, also giving India the chance to play a role in international mediation and contribute to the creation of a framework for global issues. The principles of "Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam" and "Good Samaritan" serve as the foundation of Indian foreign policy.
Currently, India is balancing with its allies. For instance, In this Russia-Ukraine conflict, India involves itself in the RIMPAC military with the USA. On the other hand, Russia is a traditional partner of India with which has deep defence ties consequently participates in the VOSTOK exercise organised by Russia, and secondly, India signs currency swap agreements with Russia and 23 other countries to avoid preponderance of the US dollar, justifying its sagacious diplomacy and calculated multilateralism as its opening both fronts without aligning with anyone to secure it’s mutual interests. Apart from this India kept on importing cheap crude oil from Russia while the USA and the western world sanctioned it during the Russia-Ukraine war.
Addition to it, India developing ‘The International North-South Transport Corridor’ (INSTC) is a project to build multimodal transportation networks (road, rail, and ship routes) to move freight between India, Russia, Iran, Europe, and Central Asia where India heading towards engaging multilaterally to ensure effective connectivity with central Asian countries to avoid overdependence and there is numerous such example where India is backing its multi-alignment approach in a reformed way. Recently India abstained to vote in the UN general assembly for the resolution presented by Ukraine and its supporters, titled Principles of the Charter of the United Nations underlying a comprehensive, just, and lasting peace in Ukraine condemning the Russian invasion of Ukraine and requesting Moscow to remove troops from the country, In the face of pressure from the West.
One reason for choosing multi-engagement over multi-alignment is that India has often found it challenging to achieve its goals through multilateral negotiations, due to a range of factors such as power imbalances, differing national interests, and bureaucratic complexities. As a result, India has pursued bilateral engagements as a way of achieving its objectives more effectively
Another reason for India's multi-engagement approach is that it allows India to pursue a more diverse set of strategic interests, including economic, political, and security objectives. By engaging with a variety of partners in different contexts, India can pursue a range of different goals simultaneously, and also hedge its bets in case any particular engagement does not work out as planned. Instead of being sucked into any bloc, India is aiming to create new pillars of the new order by engagement and partnership with middle powers.
Forthcoming Opportunities
In today's scenario, opportunities originating directly from the crisis are fourfold. Firstly, although India itself has long advocated for changes to the multilateral order (such as more inclusivity in international organisations), the system's crisis appears to have ultimately led to a more universal understanding of the need for change. Given how crucial it is to maintain the ideal of international collaboration in multilateral relations as well as the subject's particular national relevance for India, India has to take the initiative at the UN General Assembly on this matter. Such a proposal made in accordance with Article 13 of the UN Charter would centre on the in-depth discussions on the conceptual foundation of international cooperation that has taken place over the last century in multilateral structures. India's contribution must draw from the rich veins of its cultural past.The Vedanta philosophy's emphasis on interstate cooperation as a continuation of the idea that ‘the world is one family,’ or ‘Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam’. India will significantly contribute to making multilateralism relevant for the 21st century As it is hosting the G20 presidency, where India will be setting the tone for its International relations for upcoming years. India's G20 priority will be to continue pressing for reformed multilateralism that creates a more accountable, inclusive just, equitable, and representative multipolar international system that is fit for addressing the challenges in the 21st century.
Secondly, important figures in the west, particularly in Europe, have started to see the need for new alliances and friends. This is especially so given that the US seems to be turning away from the very system that it had led in creating, and then served as a guarantor for.
Thirdly, there appears to be a growing understanding that sometimes chaotic globalisation is unacceptable in a world where production chains may be weaponized. It is necessary to create new, sustainable forms of globalisation that promote both prosperity and security. The time is right to discuss fresh concepts. India has always had a lot to give to the world, but it may be time for the world to recognize it.
India can adopt the strategy, but India wouldn’t be effective if it works alone even if it has the most innovative ideas for system reforms. Coalitions with other like-minded parties will be essential and will play a vital role. India might closely collaborate with the Alliance for reformed Multilateralism. which will consequently amplify India’s voice.
By Gaurav Rawat
Gaurav Rawat is a batch 2023 Hindu College, graduate. He always looks for opportunities to explore and learn the new things around him, he never likes to sit in vain and always wants to make something out of every moment. And being a sports enthusiast supplements his personality.
Comments