Tag: India

  • Canada-India Relations Reach a Boiling Point

    Canada-India Relations Reach a Boiling Point

    On a geopolitical level, India’s biggest concern now is Canada, a country far from its borders but a dream destination for Indian youth seeking education, jobs, and migration. Thousands of Indians migrate to Canada every year to settle there. However, for the Indian government, this outflow of Indians—often occurring without the government’s notice and through illegal means—has become a source of threat and is creating a crisis between the two states. Indian-origin separatists, extremists, and anti-India propagandists have found a home in Canada, using the hassle-free immigration system to obtain Canadian citizenship and launch attacks against India.

    In the past, the Indian government largely ignored extreme rhetoric coming from Canada. However, since Hindu nationalist Narendra Modi came to power, these extremists have become targets of coordinated operations, raising alarm within the Canadian government. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, known for his fondness for the Sikh diaspora—particularly the community leading separatist movements in India—has grown increasingly concerned. 

    Over the past year, tensions between Canada and India have intensified in the wake of the shooting of Sikh extremist Hardeep Singh Nijjar, who was born in India and later became a Canadian citizen. He was killed outside a Sikh temple in Surrey, British Columbia. Nijjar had advocated for the establishment of an independent Sikh nation, known as Khalistan, to be carved out of India’s Punjab state. Supporters of this cause have faced accusations from the Indian government regarding their involvement in serial killings and various terrorist attacks. As a prominent leader and advocate for extreme Khalistan movements, Nijjar was wanted by Indian authorities and had been designated a terrorist in July 2020 for his alleged involvement in Khalistani-related violence. It is widely believed that his killing was orchestrated by India’s secret service agency, RAW.

    Nijjar is not the only Khalistani activist abroad thought to have been targeted by the Indian government. Last November, U.S. investigators reported foiling an attempt by an Indian official to murder Gurpatwant Singh Pannun, a fiery Sikh separatist and dual citizen of the U.S. and Canada, known for calling for attacks on Indians and Hindus living overseas. Other prominent Sikh Khalistani activists in the U.S., Canada, and the U.K., who spread anti-Hindu and anti-India rhetoric, have also reported receiving warnings of threats to their lives.

    It is a humiliation for Canada that one of its citizens was killed by a foreign country on its own soil. Given that the Sikh population in Canada is an important voting bloc and Khalistan supporters have influence among Canadian politicians, the Canadian government cannot ignore the issue. In September, Prime Minister Trudeau took the unusual step of publicly stating that there was credible information linking Indian government agents to Nijjar’s murder. Canada responded by taking tough action against Indian diplomats. Now, Canadian police have accused Indian diplomats of carrying out criminal activities in Canada, including planned homicide, extortion, intimidation, coercion, and harassment. In a subsequent press conference, Trudeau reinforced the accusations, stating that Canada now had clear and compelling evidence that agents of the Indian government had engaged in, and continued to engage in, activities posing a significant threat to public safety.

    As a follow-up, Canada expelled six Indian diplomats, including India’s high commissioner to Canada, accusing them of involvement in threatening behavior. India retaliated by expelling six senior Canadian diplomats. On Monday night, India announced that it was withdrawing six senior diplomats from Canada over safety concerns. However, Canadian officials who briefed several news outlets stated that Canada had expelled the Indian diplomats first.

    Canada now has the highest population of Sikhs outside their home state of Punjab. The growing Sikh population in Canada shows an affinity for the Khalistan movement, seeking to establish a Sikh nation in South Asia, similar to how Muslims formed Pakistan. The Canadian government appears to be supportive of this, even as there are concerns about threats to the Hindu population in the country. Canada also seems eager to escalate the situation to the international level.

    Canada has stated that its investigation into the Nijjar killing and the alleged broader campaign of violence by India is ongoing, and it is collaborating with the Five Eyes, an intelligence-sharing alliance comprising the U.S., the U.K., Australia, Canada, and New Zealand. This situation could have significant geopolitical implications. India is viewed as a rising superpower and has become an important security and economic ally for Western countries such as the U.S., the U.K., France, and Italy. However, Canada remains significant to these countries, while India still maintains a strong relationship with Russia. If the West continues to escalate the issue, it may push India to strengthen its ties with its long-time ally and reliable partner, Russia.

  • Kashmir Opts Out of Bharatiya Janata Party

    Kashmir Opts Out of Bharatiya Janata Party

    India’s ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) has once again failed in its mission to conquer Jammu and Kashmir, a Muslim-majority state, as the people opted for an alliance between the region’s largest party, the National Conference, and India’s opposition party, the Indian National Congress, to form a government. Jammu and Kashmir, which elected its assembly after 10 years, will witness Omar Abdullah, the leader of the National Conference and a prominent figure from the Abdullah dynasty, returning to power. This marks a significant political win for the opposition INDIA alliance, strengthening its broader political strategy to weaken the BJP’s dominance in Indian politics.

    The INDIA coalition, comprising the Jammu and Kashmir National Conference (JKNC), Indian National Congress (INC), and Communist Party of India (Marxist) (CPI(M)), secured a majority in the election, winning 49 of the 90 seats. While the BJP, which contested alone, improved its seat tally and vote percentage, it failed to reach the crucial majority and ended up with 29 seats. The Jammu and Kashmir People’s Democratic Party (PDP), another major regional party, faced significant humiliation, winning only 3 seats.

    Elections were held in Jammu and Kashmir from 18 September to 1 October 2024, in three phases, to elect 90 members of the Jammu and Kashmir Legislative Assembly. The results were announced a week later, on 8 October 2024, with almost 63% voter turnout. This election holds significant importance as it is the first assembly election in over a decade and the first since the territory’s special status was revoked and its statehood withdrawn. Additionally, Jammu and Kashmir elections always attract international interest due to the region’s Muslim majority, which has historically leaned toward secessionism, often with support from Pakistan and China. The elections have been marred by terrorist attacks in the past, and this assembly election was similarly held under the threat of terrorism and insurgency.

    The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), which has redefined Kashmir’s political landscape, did everything in its power to secure a majority in the state assembly, considering it a crucial objective. They poured significant resources into the region and carried out extensive infrastructure developments. No other state has received the level of attention from the BJP’s central government that Jammu and Kashmir has. The party also delimited constituencies in a way that was seen as favorable to them and introduced provisions such as granting nomination powers to the Lieutenant Governor. The BJP’s election strategy was clear: to maximize the number of seats from the Jammu division, which has a Hindu majority, while splitting the votes in the Kashmir division, which might favor the National Conference (NC)–Indian National Congress (INC) alliance, by supporting multiple independent candidates. However, this strategy failed. Although the BJP increased its vote percentage and number of seats in the Jammu division, it could not reach its target as other players, such as the National Conference, Aam Aadmi Party, and independents, gained ground. Meanwhile, the JKNC-INC alliance successfully prevented vote splitting.

    At the same time, It’s a strong comeback for the Jammu and Kashmir National Conference (JKNC) and its leader Omar Abdullah, who is set to assume the Chief Minister’s post for the second time. He has been out of power for nearly a decade and was even humiliated by his loss in the parliamentary election conducted almost six months ago, where he was defeated by an independent candidate in a crushing manner. However, this time, the people of the Kashmir Valley rallied behind him, and he won from both seats he contested.

    The resurgence of Kashmiri sentiment and the downfall of the People’s Democratic Party (PDP), which was the main challenger to the JKNC and its alliance with the Indian National Congress (INC), significantly contributed to the JKNC’s election victory. Despite the INC’s relatively poor performance—contesting 38 seats and winning only 6, a drop from 12 in the previous election—the dramatic collapse of the PDP, which won only 3 seats, down from 28 in the last election when it was the largest party, played a pivotal role.

    Other national parties, like the Communist Party of India (Marxist), retained their only seat with Yusuf Tarigami’s victory, while the Aam Aadmi Party made its debut in Jammu and Kashmir by securing its first seat. Most local parties, except for the JKNC, faced a complete collapse in this election.

    The victory of the JKNC, without any possibility of political maneuvering, is an undeniable setback for the BJP’s hard work. It is expected that the Jammu and Kashmir state government will increasingly clash with the central government, as JKNC and its leader, Omar Abdullah, hold policies and demands that are in stark contradiction to those of the BJP. The JKNC has always emphasized Kashmiri pride in contrast to the BJP’s pan-Indian vision. The JKNC demands the restoration of statehood, the reinstatement of the special constitutional status, and an end to BJP rule in the region, particularly through the Lieutenant Governor’s authority—none of which are likely to be accepted by the BJP.

    As a result, political confrontations between these governments are expected in the coming days, although Omar Abdullah has referred to Prime Minister Modi as a gentleman and has expressed hope for a good relationship with the Union government.

  • Why Is South Asia So Involved in the Israel-Palestine Conflict?

    Why Is South Asia So Involved in the Israel-Palestine Conflict?

    There are countless problems to be fixed in the poor South Asian countries, including India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Maldives, and Nepal. Even though they have different positions and perspectives, they all struggle with poor living conditions, lack of employment, corruption, political dynasties, and more. While these issues dominate the daily lives of their populations, they are increasingly focused on a different concern: the Israel-Palestine conflict, which they seem to adopt as their own. In India, society is divided between pro-Israel and pro-Palestine supporters, and it has become a heated topic in Pakistan, where pro-Israel sentiment is almost unthinkable, but people have taken to the streets in support of Palestine. On September 29, pro-Hezbollah protesters clashed with police in the streets of Karachi, Pakistan’s largest city, after demonstrators attempted to reach the U.S. Consulate. The police fired tear gas as protesters threw stones and attempted to breach barriers. A similar wave of unrest is also rising in Bangladesh. Why? Why are these countries so deeply involved in this conflict?

    The answer is clear and specific: religion. South Asia is deeply intertwined with religion. Both the population and administration are heavily influenced by religious beliefs. The region, which is the birthplace of prominent religions like Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism, and Sikhism, is also home to around 600 million Muslims. Clashes between followers of Indian religions and Islam, as well as intra-Islamic conflicts, are common in these countries. Since Palestine is an emotional issue for Muslims globally, it has always featured prominently in South Asian society and politics. The Islamic countries in the region—Pakistan, Bangladesh, and the Maldives – harbor strong animosity toward Israel. Every incident in Gaza and the West Bank brings people to the streets, sparking anti-Israel protests. Calls for tougher actions by their governments against Israel, as well as protests against Western embassies and consulates, are common in these nations. Fundamentalist and terrorist groups unite in their anti-Israel stance, advocating for the boycott of Israeli products. Politicians in these countries are often reluctant to engage with Israeli officials because, regardless of their achievements, they risk being labeled as anti-religious or anti-national. The ongoing events in Gaza and Lebanon have further fueled hatred towards Israel among the population. Many Pakistanis believe that, as a nuclear power, Pakistan could do more to support groups fighting the holy war against Israel by supplying weapons, and they are willing to join the fight. A similar sentiment prevails in Bangladesh. Many believe that if the current conflict escalates into regional wars, people from Pakistan and Bangladesh, who are largely poor, unemployed, but deeply religious, could be recruited by these groups.

    In India, the situation is more complex. The socialist, communist, and Islamist parties, which rely on the votes of the more than 15 million-strong Muslim population, have consistently raised the Israel-Palestine issue in the public sphere. The Indian National Congress (INC), the grand old socialist party that led the government for most of independent India’s history, supported the two-state solution, recognizing both Israel and Palestine. However, the party and its government gave a clear preference to Palestine and its leaders, who were often celebrated as revolutionaries, with the Indian media also contributing to India’s pro-Palestine stance.

    However, when Narendra Modi and his Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), a Hindu nationalist party, came to power in 2014, the situation changed dramatically. While the government did not abandon the two-state solution, it shifted away from its pro-Palestine stance and gave more support to Israel. Modi, who developed a personal friendship with Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu, strengthened the relationship on a national level as well. Consequently, the Indian government became more aggressive in countering pro-Palestine narratives, promoting India’s historical ties with Jews, and pushing a more pro-Israel perspective.

    Cities in India that once saw massive rallies in solidarity with Palestine now witness almost no demonstrations for the cause. As the public became more educated about the Israel-Palestine conflict from its roots, many began to see Palestine as primarily an Islamist issue. As a result, Islamist organizations in India no longer receive the widespread public support they once did, causing significant disappointment among the country’s Muslim population

    This evolving landscape of distrust and fundamentalism has become another major concern in the region. South Asia has no direct connection to the Israel-Palestine conflict beyond religious ties, but it is now causing further divisions within societies, most visibly in India. India’s shifting stance towards Israel has generated significant discontent among its Islamic neighbors, causing their hatred for Israel to also evolve into hostility towards India. This is clearly evident in social media spaces, where Indian groups and those from neighboring Islamic countries are often in conflict. As always, this deepens the divisions within societies that are already fractured by religious views. Therefore, we can say that, aside from Israel and its immediate neighbors, South Asia is also heating up under the mounting tensions between Israel and Hezbollah.

  • Can Modi and BJP Conquer Jammu and Kashmir?

    Can Modi and BJP Conquer Jammu and Kashmir?

    Jammu and Kashmir, India’s northernmost and predominantly Muslim territory, has long posed a challenge for the Indian government due to increased terrorist attacks and Islamist extremism. International media, which have consistently supported secession efforts in Kashmir, often celebrate each clash between extremists and the Indian military, thereby garnering overseas backing for these movements. However, for the Indian government and its people, Kashmir is an emotional issue, deeply rooted in history, and they are unwilling to give it up. While previous union governments in New Delhi granted Kashmir certain privileges and special status, partly in response to international pressure, the current Hindu nationalist government under Narendra Modi and the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) has taken a different approach. They revoked Kashmir’s special constitutional status and made it a union territory to promote assimilation, sparking significant displeasure at the international level, particularly from Muslim-majority countries.

    It has long been the BJP’s goal to form a government single-handedly in the state, though the Muslim majority largely opposes them. Ten years ago, the BJP formed a coalition government with the PDP, a local party, but the alliance quickly collapsed due to internal disunity. The union government subsequently made Jammu and Kashmir a union territory with direct administration. Nevertheless, the BJP understands that securing a majority government in the state is crucial for making key decisions and avoiding court interventions. Having achieved seemingly impossible victories in other Indian states through well-engineered election strategies, the BJP is now fighting hard in the ongoing assembly elections.

    The BJP is confident this time, with several positive factors working in its favor, starting with the fact that the party is stronger now. In addition to securing the Hindu vote, it has made inroads among minority groups such as Sikhs, Buddhists, and even some Muslim factions. The party’s electoral performance has also improved significantly. In the last assembly election, the BJP’s best performance saw them winning 25 out of 87 seats. This time, with constituencies redrawn and the total number of seats increased to 90, the party needs 45 seats to secure a majority.

    The increase in seat numbers is expected to boost the BJP’s chances, as more seats have been added in the Hindu-majority Jammu region. Six additional seats were allocated to Jammu, while only one was added to the Kashmir region, bringing the total number of seats in Jammu to 37. If the BJP can secure over 30 seats in Jammu, they would only need 15 or fewer from Kashmir. For the BJP, it is relatively easy to garner support from independent candidates and smaller parties, and they also anticipate nominations from the Lieutenant Governor. The BJP has also found an opportunity in the division among the opposition. Although the Indian National Congress (INC) has joined forces with the National Conference (NC), Kashmir’s largest party, they have been unable to bring the influential JKPDP into the alliance, which is expected to split the vote.

    Another positive factor is the increasing tendency of people in Kashmir to move away from traditional political parties like the NC, JKPDP, and INC, and support independent candidates, as seen in recent elections. Improved security is also expected to benefit the BJP, as more people in the Kashmir Valley may feel safe enough to vote for the party, which they previously avoided due to fear and threats. Additionally, the BJP is optimistic about the impact of development projects and significant infrastructure investments across various sectors in the state.

    The BJP faces considerable challenges as well. First, the Islamist population in Jammu and Kashmir is determined to defeat BJP candidates by supporting any viable alternative. Defeating the BJP is their main objective. As a result, the BJP faces threats even in the Hindu-majority Jammu region. With major national parties, including the Indian National Congress (INC), BSP, and AAP, contesting in Jammu, they could potentially garner Hindu votes in conjunction with support from the Islamist vote, allowing them to win over the BJP. Any losses for the BJP in Jammu region could undermine its dream of securing a majority, especially if the INC attempts to unite all parties except the BJP to form a government.

    There are also internal issues. Local protests against candidates chosen by the central BJP leadership could lead to votes shifting toward the opposition. Additionally, the INC-NC alliance poses a significant threat to the BJP in the Kashmir region. If terrorist attacks increase near the polling dates, it could further damage the BJP’s chances.

    It’s clear that, without significant support from the Muslim population, the BJP is unlikely to secure a majority in Jammu and Kashmir. While the party has emphasized infrastructure development, security improvements, and welfare programs in the region, the core issue remains religion, as the Kashmir issue is deeply rooted in religious divisions. The BJP is countering this by consolidating non-Muslim votes and attempting to attract liberal and nationalist Muslim voters. If the BJP succeeds with this tactic, it could finally achieve a majority in Jammu and Kashmir. Otherwise, the result will likely follow the usual pattern of favoring coalition governments.

  • Is the Maldives Swimming Back to India?

    Is the Maldives Swimming Back to India?

    Tiny islands, with limited resources and facing significant climate threats, cannot survive without the support of the mainland. The Maldives has come to realize this now. When tourism revenue was flowing, and China appeared strong, they believed they no longer needed India. However, they forgot that India is their best option for survival. Now, they are working to improve and rebuild their lost relationship with India. Before Malé transformed into a striking concrete block in the sea, Indian cities, especially Thiruvananthapuram and Kochi, served as their gateway to the world. While various interest groups, including Sri Lanka, sought to destabilize the islands through terrorist attacks, India provided security, allowing them to live peacefully. Today, they are once again seeking India’s support, much like a child who, after straying away with wealthy friends, ultimately realizes where true safety lies and returns to their family. 

    Maldives President Mohamed Muizzu, who rose to power last year on an “India Out” and pro-Islamic platform, and surrounded himself with politicians known for anti-India rhetoric, is now preparing for a diplomatic trip to New Delhi, according to his aides. This marks a significant shift for Muizzu, who had previously avoided the traditional ceremonial first overseas visit to New Delhi and, in April, ordered the withdrawal of a small Indian military contingent that had been operating reconnaissance aircraft provided by India. By May, the Maldives had signed a defense agreement with China. Additionally, the Maldives chose not to renew a 2019 hydrographic survey agreement with India and withdrew from several other cooperative agreements. Earlier this year, Maldivian deputy ministers were caught making derogatory remarks about Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi and his efforts to boost tourism in Lakshadweep, a neighboring Indian archipelago.

    While the Indian government remained silent, the backlash from Indian citizens was swift. Calls to boycott the Maldives spread, threatening the country’s tourism-dependent economy, which heavily relies on Indian visitors. Despite this, Muizzu stood firm, accusing critics of trying to “Bully” the Maldives. However, without Indian tourists, the Maldives faces a potential economic crisis.

    President Muizzu’s planned visit to New Delhi could indicate a significant shift and a desire to repair relations. While it’s premature to label this a complete policy reversal, it certainly represents a positive step for India-Maldives ties. The recent resignation of two junior ministers who ridiculed Prime Minister Modi suggests that Muizzu is eager to foster a healthy relationship with New Delhi. However, this effort is unlikely to come at the expense of his pro-China stance. The Maldives cannot afford to deteriorate its relationship with China, especially given its substantial debt to the country, which is not easily repayable.

    The Maldives urgently requires international support as it grapples with rising debt, declining revenue, and dwindling foreign reserves. Running a budget deficit, the island nation has been seeking external assistance and grants. Many worry that without a viable growth strategy, the Maldives could follow in the footsteps of Sri Lanka, which experienced a severe economic collapse two years ago. Last week, credit rating agency Moody’s downgraded the Maldives, indicating that default risks have markedly increased due to persistently low foreign exchange reserves. The agency also pointed out that the prospects for a rapid recovery look bleak.

    For India, having a Chinese puppet on their maritime shore is unacceptable, so they are prepared to negotiate. Even before the announcement of the upcoming visit, both Malé and New Delhi signaled a desire to improve ties. Last month, India’s Foreign Minister S. Jaishankar visited Malé, marking the first high-level visit since Muizzu was elected. Jaishankar’s visit was followed by consultations between the two countries on joint defense projects and security in the Indian Ocean this month. Muizzu’s upcoming visit signals a softening of his anti-India stance. Many political experts believe this is part of a broader effort to improve China-India relations and reduce China’s influence in the Indian Ocean as China focuses more on the South China Sea. Nonetheless, this represents a positive move from the Maldives.

  • Is China Working to Resolve Tensions with India?

    Is China Working to Resolve Tensions with India?

    China and India, two ancient civilizations, have maintained contact for centuries, once enjoying a historically strong relationship. However, the modern-day People’s Republic of China and the Republic of India now face one of the most strained diplomatic situations in the world. The source of tension can be traced to Tibet, which once served as a buffer zone between the two nations. Following China’s annexation of Tibet and its improved accessibility in the Himalayan region, territorial disputes have escalated, leading to military standoffs, a full-scale war, and deadly clashes, including the infamous Galwan Valley incident. China’s territorial claims over India’s states of Arunachal Pradesh, Sikkim, and Ladakh- areas it views as part of Tibet-have been met with strong resistance from India, which insists on the McMahon Line, a boundary drawn between British India and Tibet, as the legitimate border. China’s refusal to recognize this line has fueled enmity, leading to volatile borders and a rising power struggle.

    China’s efforts to entrap India’s neighbors through debt diplomacy, combined with India’s strengthening of strategic partnerships with China’s adversaries, have deepened the animosity. But what if these two heavyweights could once again set aside their differences? Both nations, with immense potential, stand to benefit greatly from cooperation, as they did in the past. There’s no doubt that competing against each other is taking a toll on both, as reflected in their economic realities. So, is it time for these two countries to finally put an end to their conflict?

    The tensions between China and India peaked during the Galwan Valley incident in Ladakh in 2020. Chinese interference disrupted Indian roadwork, sparking a violent clash. Without the use of firearms, as mandated by prior agreements, the confrontation resulted in casualties. While officials managed to de-escalate the situation eventually, the incident – coinciding with the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic – further eroded India’s trust in China. India responded by imposing restrictions on Chinese businesses and banning popular apps like TikTok, which had generated significant revenue from India. This sudden ban severely impacted China’s economic interests and led to backlash. In India, campaigns to boycott Chinese products gained momentum, pushing the country toward alignment with the U.S. and Europe – an alliance it had traditionally avoided.

    India, however, also faced challenges due to the absence of Chinese-made goods, which had previously ensured lower prices in the market. Ultimately, the relationship between the two nations deteriorated, and animosity increased. However, as years have passed since the incident, it appears both countries have moved forward. China, having experienced slowed growth due to the pandemic, corruption, and market restrictions, is now facing economic challenges. In search of a large market to regain its momentum, China views India as its best option, especially as Western nations and Japan continue to exert pressure. China has only a territorial dispute with India, and if that issue is resolved, there are no other major conflicts between the two. With a population of 1.5 billion, India presents an opportunity for China to regain its pace and work toward its goal of surpassing the U.S. economy. For India, which is not fully ready to embrace the West, resolving the issue with China would allow it to focus on internal problems, particularly as many of its neighbors are embroiled in political turmoil that poses challenges for India.

    Reports are now emerging that both countries are warming up to diplomatic talks to resolve their issues. On Friday, September 13th, China’s Foreign Ministry announced that it had withdrawn from four areas, including Galwan Valley, in accordance with India’s demands. The Ministry also stated that India and China held several meetings in Russia, their mutual ally, and agreed to create favorable conditions for further discussions and to build trust. The latest meeting occurred as part of the BRICS high-ranking officials’ gathering, with India’s National Security Advisor Ajit Doval and Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi leading the talks. India’s External Affairs Minister, S. Jaishankar, confirmed on Thursday that 75% of the disengagement issue has been resolved. Mr. Wang, a member of China’s Politburo, had previously stated that China is facing a turbulent global environment and views India as one of its best partners for cooperation, with the two ancient civilizations standing together. Both sides have conducted over 20 corps commander-level talks, and China appears to have high expectations from India. However, for India, the situation is challenging, as it is a democracy and the opposition frequently accuses Prime Minister Modi of not doing enough to address border issues, alleging that he is allowing China to take advantage.

    It is expected that if India joins forces with China and Russia, they could form a powerful bloc capable of dominating Asia. Central Asia, Southeast Asia, and smaller Asian countries would likely be pressured to align with this bloc, while Islamic countries in the West, frustrated with the United States’ approach in Gaza, might also join as allies. Such a powerful bloc could emerge. However, many believe that resolving the territorial disputes and establishing a definitive border will be challenging. The territorial claims, extending back centuries and even thousands of years, complicate efforts at resolution. Nonetheless, economic interests can sometimes outweigh other concerns.

  • Why Is Putin Seeking Mediation from China and India in the War?

    Why Is Putin Seeking Mediation from China and India in the War?

    The Russia-Ukraine war is now in a stalemate, with neither side able to advance. Russia, once seen as the Goliath aiming to capture Ukraine, is now humiliated, unable to move forward, while Ukraine has even crossed into Russian territory. What many expected to be an easy victory for Russia, with the war ending in a few months, has turned into a protracted conflict, and no one expects a quick resolution – unless Putin resorts to nuclear weapons, launching the endgame. This unexpected prolongation is a challenge for all involved, but it affects Russia more than Ukraine.

    Ukraine has already endured massive losses, with many of its men killed, its women fleeing to the West, and its buildings reduced to rubble. However, they remain resilient, bolstered by Western money and munitions. Russia, on the other hand, is under heavy Western sanctions and losing its strength. While not fully economically collapsed, its economy is suffering and becoming increasingly reliant on China and other allies. Meanwhile, countries that once followed the Kremlin are now recognizing its weakness and beginning to distance themselves. All of this highlights that Russia is the biggest loser in this war, and though they need to end it, their pride remains an obstacle.

    Extensive discussions were held between Putin and Western leaders to avoid war. However, a confident Putin seemed intent on humiliating them, and we all remember how Macron was belittled during his meeting with Putin in Moscow. Putin initiated the war, but no one anticipated this outcome. Ukraine is fighting fiercely, and Western nations remain steadfast in their support.

    Initially, Putin disregarded peace talks and negotiations, but now he appears ready to end the war. Interestingly, he is not engaging with Western leaders, but instead reaching out to countries like Brazil, China, and India – key BRICS nations, except for South Africa – who are attempting to establish an alternative power bloc. Putin mentioned a preliminary agreement reached between Russian and Ukrainian negotiators in the early weeks of the war during talks in Istanbul, which was never implemented, as a potential basis for new negotiations. However, it seems neither side is proposing a realistic plan they can agree on, raising doubts about Putin’s true intentions.

    Zelenski is now more confident and is reportedly planning larger operations following the incursion near Kursk. It is expected that the current U.S. Vice President, Kamala Harris, will become the next president, so there will likely be no significant policy change regarding support for Ukraine. Putin’s recent moves may be aimed at shifting the narrative, portraying Ukraine as the aggressor and Russia as willing to settle.

    China’s involvement will not be effective with Ukraine, as China remains firmly aligned with Russia and the Kremlin won’t find much common ground with Brazil despite its leftist president. India, which maintains strong relationships with both Russia and the West, is another potential mediator suggested by Russia. India has shown its neutrality through visits by Prime Minister Modi and other officials to both Russia and Ukraine. Modi’s criticism of the war during his visit to Moscow was well-received in the West. However, the chances of India intervening are slim, as India is one of the few countries benefiting from the war, securing cheaper oil and gas from Russia. India’s foreign minister has stated that this is a bilateral issue, and India would only help with peace talks if requested, otherwise it will not interfere.

    So, It is clear that neither China, India, nor Brazil are likely to intervene. Putin is likely aware of this, making his actions a strategic move to convince both the Russian public and the world that Russia is not responsible for prolonging the war and is willing to negotiate.

    As the war stretches into its third year, the Russia-Ukraine conflict increasingly resembles a personal battle between Putin and Zelensky. Both leaders, unwilling to compromise and driven by their egos, seem inclined to prolong the war, despite the suffering and losses on both sides. Peace talks could tarnish their images, and Putin cannot imagine conceding to Zelensky. However, as Russia begins to suffer more, they may deflect blame and place it on Ukraine. The invitations to India and China can be seen as part of this strategy to shift the narrative.

  • Why Can’t the Indian Government Fix Manipur?

    Why Can’t the Indian Government Fix Manipur?

    India’s northeast, a hilly region inhabited by various tribal communities, has long been plagued by ethnic clashes. The territory has experienced ongoing tensions between different tribes but has been held together primarily through strong intervention from New Delhi. With foreign powers, including China and the United States, showing interest in the region, the Indian government has often sought peaceful solutions to resolve these conflicts. As part of these efforts, the Union government has accommodated numerous demands, granting various rights, authorities, and even statehood to different tribes. 

    However, there have been several instances where demands for separate rights, administrative systems, and statehood have led to significant unrest, and the central government has at times struggled to intervene, as these conflicts are deeply rooted in generational tribal animosities. This hostility often extends to the central government itself when it attempts to intervene. National political parties used these disputes to gain influence in the region, escalating ethnic clashes to the political level. Many states in the region are now ruled by national parties in alliance with tribal parties, forcing the government to weigh political interests when trying to neutralize ethnic tensions.

    While such scenarios are common in the northeast, Manipur has now become the focal point, with a deadly clash between two ethnic groups escalating into what resembles a civil war. Despite efforts, the situation remains unresolved. As horrifying news continues to emerge from Manipur, the issue has become a national concern, with international media criticizing the Indian government, which now appears ineffective. Why is this happening?

    Two ethnic groups, the Meitei and the Kuki-Zo, are fighting each other with weapons, each attempting to control their territories, attacking, and ousting the other. Women are increasingly targeted in these clashes. The conflict between the Meitei and Kuki-Zo has a long history, dating back centuries, with frequent clashes. The situation has worsened now, and the Hindu nationalist BJP government, in power at both the national and state levels, has failed to quell the violence The national government is protecting the state government and its Chief Minister, Biren Singh, who is from the Meitei community. The government is now accused of supporting the Meitei, the original and majority Hindu community, against the Kuki-Zo, who are predominantly Christian. Earlier media reports outside India highlighted the Hindu-Christian nature of the conflict, though both ethnic groups include people from various religions, including Islam. The latest wave of attacks, which made headlines in May 2023, followed a High Court verdict that granted reservations to the Meitei community, which was expected to affect the Kuki-Zo people. Experts believe this was only one factor contributing to the escalation. Since then, the violence has resulted in at least 221 deaths, over 1,000 injuries, 60,000 people displaced, and numerous homes and buildings burned.

    These ethnic clashes have become a serious political debate in Indian Parliament, with opposition parties and even BJP-affiliated organizations criticizing the central government’s inaction. The state government has undoubtedly failed, but the central government has not taken steps to address the situation, such as removing Chief Minister Biren Singh, who is accused of exacerbating the conflict. The opposition is pointing fingers at Narendra Modi, alleging that he is indifferent to the state’s plight.

    In the political arena, there is growing concern about why the central government is allowing the situation to escalate. Despite the Indian Army being one of the most powerful in the world, its deployment in the region has been minimal. The central government has permitted the state government to manage the situation, although experts believe that a military intervention might draw international attention, as the Kuki-Zo are ethnically linked to Myanmar and could attract foreign influence, potentially worsening the conflict.

    The Kuki-Zo are now demanding a separate state, which could further inflame tensions from Meiteis if statehood is granted. Such developments would likely lead to increased demands for more states from the region, creating more tribal nature. Additionally, removing Biren Singh could cause discontent among the Meitei population. Therefore, the central government is currently focusing on conducting negotiations between the conflicting parties.

    While addressing the crisis at the central level appears to be the most viable option, the central government faces an uphill battle as both ethnic groups remain entrenched in their positions. Resolving this issue cannot be achieved simply by attempting to appease all parties involved. Instead, the central government might develop temporary measures to address the immediate concerns, though a permanent solution will undoubtedly be a protracted process.

    It is noteworthy that the Indian judiciary is increasingly assuming a more proactive role than the government itself. On July 31, the Supreme Court demanded a comprehensive breakdown of around 6,000 FIRs related to the violence in Manipur. The court was deeply shocked to learn that it took 14 days for the police to register even a zero FIR concerning the brutal assault and public humiliation of two women. During the hearing on August 1, the Supreme Court criticized the police investigations as slow and described the situation as an absolute breakdown of the constitutional machinery. The court’s intervention is hoped to accelerate peace negotiations and bring about a resolution.

  • Geopolitics of the Deepening Singapore-India Partnership

    Geopolitics of the Deepening Singapore-India Partnership

    While Singapore maintains defense ties with the United States, its foreign policy has long been guided by pragmatism, fostering relationships with nations across the spectrum, including pariah states like North Korea. Despite its broad diplomatic outreach, Singapore places particular emphasis on its ties with the U.S. and its allies, serving as a major hub for American and European businesses in Asia. At the same time, with a large Chinese-origin population, Singapore – like Hong Kong – has also functioned as a key gateway for Chinese businesses to the global market.

    However, as the South China Sea emerges as a hotspot for geopolitical tensions, Singapore may soon be pressured to choose sides. Given its defense partnership with the U.S., it is likely to align with Washington over Beijing. Interestingly, Singapore also seems to be forging closer ties with India, a nation wary of China but less inclined to align closely with the United States. Both countries are working to deepen their relationship, with political experts speculating about the potential involvement of the U.S. in this evolving dynamic, as Washington seeks to bolster alliances in the region.

    Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, who views Singapore as a model of development is looking positive to these efforts, engaging with key Singaporean leaders to deepen their partnership. Singapore’s increasing affinity for India prompts the question: is a broader geopolitical realignment occurring in the region?

    On the pivotal recently concluded two-day visit, Prime Minister Modi and Singapore’s leaders elevated their bilateral relationship to a comprehensive strategic partnership, signing four Memorandums of Understanding (MoUs), including a key agreement on semiconductor cooperation. As India seeks to bolster its semiconductor industry, Singapore’s expertise and resources could prove more valuable than munitions in the coming years. The agreements aim to nurture talent in chip design and manufacturing, while encouraging Singaporean tech investments in India. They also explored potential collaboration in areas such as technology, sustainability, and innovation.

    Modi also held discussions with Singaporean President Tharman Shanmugaratnam and Deputy Prime Minister Lawrence Wong, as well as former Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, where they focused on cooperation in green energy and FinTech.. In a significant gesture, both leaders visited AEM Holdings’ semiconductor facility, engaging with officials and marking a crucial step toward expanding trade opportunities between the two nations. Modi also met with 81-year-old Emeritus Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong, Singapore’s second prime minister.

    During his visit, the Indian leader engaged with top business leaders and CEOs, highlighting India’s recent economic reforms and policy initiatives aimed at enhancing its business environment. The discussions centered on fostering innovation across a range of industries, while exploring new pathways for collaboration and growth.

    India appears ready to open its extensive markets to Singaporean technologies, aiming to strengthen its relationship with Singapore while curbing Chinese influence, especially in the tech sector. Modi sees India’s large market as a valuable asset, using it to forge partnerships and counter China’s expanding role in the Indian Ocean. For Singapore, tapping into the Indian market presents substantial business prospects and is thought to align with a broader U.S. geopolitical strategy. Some believe the U.S. sees Singapore as a crucial intermediary capable of deepening ties with India more effectively than Washington could on its own. This potential alignment mirrors past U.S. efforts, such as investments in Malaysia, where American interests were successfully promoted. Although recent collaborations between Singapore and India might seem focused on business and technology, they also carry significant political weight.

  • Is India Responsible for Bangladesh Floods?

    Is India Responsible for Bangladesh Floods?

    Bangladesh, a densely populated country grappling with political uncertainties, was severely impacted by a massive flood that worsened over the weekend, affecting more than five million people. Flooding is common during the monsoon season in Bangladesh, which is situated at the delta of two major rivers, the Ganges and the Brahmaputra, along with numerous smaller rivers that flow into them or directly into the Bay of Bengal. However, this flood has garnered special attention due to accusations from netizens, the media, and some Bangladeshi politicians who blame India, claiming that the opening of large dams on rivers flowing into Bangladesh caused the disaster. This situation has strained relations between Bangladesh and India, despite both governments’ reluctance to escalate the issue, and it is clear that it has already harmed public perception in both countries.

    Photo Credit: Banglapedia

    Many districts in eastern Bangladesh have experienced severe flooding, one of the worst in the country’s history. Images and videos show widespread suffering in submerged areas, with all low-lying regions underwater. Public outrage has been directed at India after a viral video on social media purportedly showed water being released from the Dumbur Dam in Tripura, blaming it for the floods. However, the video actually shows the Srisailam Dam in Telangana, a southern Indian state. The Dumbur Dam, which has been accused by Bangladeshi media as the cause of the flooding, is situated on the transboundary Gomati River and is approximately 120 kilometers from the Bangladesh border. This river flows from Tripura in northeastern India into eastern Bangladesh, eventually merging with the Meghna River. Although the flow of water in the river has increased, India has stated that no floodgates were deliberately opened; rather, excess water from the Gomti reservoir was automatically released once it reached full capacity. India later clarified that while the water from the Gomti contributes to the flooding, the seasonal floods are primarily attributed to climate-related factors.

    The impact is severe because Bangladesh’s low-lying, densely populated areas are highly vulnerable to flooding. As the Dumbur Dam video went viral, Bangladeshis became concerned about other Indian dams that block rivers flowing into Bangladesh, fearing they might be used by India to cause flooding. While India argues that these dams actually protect low-lying Bangladesh from floods – common during the heavy monsoon rains when rivers swell – severe flooding in Bangladesh results when these swollen rivers meet India’s major rivers, which carry water from up to 2,000 kilometers away, including regions in India and Tibet. Interestingly, the longstanding dispute between Bangladesh and India over the Farakka Barrage focuses not on flooding but on the reduced water flow to Bangladesh.

    Since Wednesday night, the flooding has significantly worsened, submerging 11 districts and large areas of a city with nearly 1.5 million residents. Various groups are exploiting the crisis for their own agendas. Islamic factions opposed to India are spreading misinformation, blaming India for the suffering and loss of life, and inciting protests that have contributed to the fall of the Hasina government. Political parties, driven by anti-India sentiment, have joined the protests, and students, mostly millennials who are not influenced by the emotional legacy of the 1971 war and the nation’s founder, Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, are also expressing their frustration against India. Meanwhile, the Indian media is using the situation to advance anti-Bangladesh agendas, highlighting anti-Hindu and anti-India protests in Bangladesh to foster Hindu unity and increase animosity towards Islam in India.

    While India is being blamed for the crisis, Bangladesh, a climate-vulnerable country, is struggling to address the real causes. Under an interim government, it is challenging to implement effective climate policies or manage the situation, especially with elections delayed and an uncertain future ahead. If Bangladesh fails to confront its vulnerabilities and address the realities of its situation, it will face one of the most significant humanitarian crises.