international affairs, International Diplomacy, Raisina Dialogue, Writing

Raisina Files 2025 -The Reckoning: Regression or Renaissance?

Ed Samir Saran and Vinia Mukherjee

Editors’ Note

“later that night i held an atlas in my lap ran my fingers across the whole world and whispered where does it hurt?

it answered everywhere everywhere everywhere.”

Warsan Shire

That there can be no peace without development is a universal truism. The two, perhaps the loftiest and noblest of human aspirations, are perpetually interdependent: Conflict impedes progress; and the lack of economic opportunity can contribute to conflict. Today, as humanity’s excesses wage a war on the planet—causing extreme weather events, food insecurity, threats to health, and massive displacements—both peace and development will be the casualties unless we turn around.

The Reckoning: Regression or Renaissance? confronts the many obstacles that come in the way of our pursuit of peace, progress, and sustainable development, and offers insights into our choices. It is indeed a moment of reckoning, and this collection of essays engages with the debates that are crucial to the decisions that we will have to make.

As if climate change has not been enough to bring the world to its precarious state, there is more. There is still no end in sight to either the war in Ukraine or the conflict in Yemen, and tensions continue to simmer in the Middle East and Indo-Pacific. The COVID-19 pandemic caused the biggest setback in poverty reduction in decades, economic inequities persist in many places, and demographic shifts and ageing populations are giving birth to even newer challenges. 

Genevieve Donnellon-May sets her sights on the Pacific, which is facing the dual challenge of navigating great-power competition and addressing pressing domestic concerns. Ensuring economic development, security cooperation, and environmental sustainability will be keys to peacebuilding in the region.

If peace is the aim, one region that has long been haunted by its absence is Africa. Davis Makori reminds us not just of this fact—that, following a brief period of optimism, armed conflict continues to be the scourge of the continent—but more importantly, that it is the civilians who bear the brunt of the constant state of war. The imperatives for Africa are early-warning systems, community-focused protection mechanisms, and UN reform to address the fundamental imbalance in the global peace and security architecture.

Europe is another theatre of conflict, and the domestic nostalgia for a glorious era of peace and prosperity, now lost, has become more intense. Velina Tchakarova lists a litany of challenges impeding Europe’s rediscovering of its old self: declining birth rates and an ageing population; dependency on other countries for energy supply; and growing security threats.

Agatha Kratz tackles the subject of Europe too, this time in the context of its relationship with China. Brussels and other member state capitals are showing a “newfound activism” against China, including launching trade defence cases and tightening investment rules. In the coming days, while EU-China relations could stabilise, there will still be no meaningful change in bilateral ties.

Kate O’Shaughnessy, in her piece, writes about the Indian Ocean region and how it looks much more unstable than it did only a decade ago. For the international community to engage meaningfully in the region and create an impact, it must include the voices of island states and address the issues that matter most to them—climate change, maritime domain awareness, regional economic integration, and human capacity building.

Listening to what small and developing states have to say will be critical, because in many ways, the Global South will be the fulcrum of change.

In global governance of healthcare, for example, the year opened with pivotal shifts as the United States withdrew from the World Health Organization, provoking uncertainty about global health security, disease control efforts, climate resilience programmes, and pandemic preparedness. Ayoade Alakija, however, in her essay, sees the opportunity: the disproportionate power the US is ceding may now be re-distributed, and emerging economies of the Global South should increase their agency and autonomy.

The Global South will also need to step up in the area of international trade, where South-South cooperation can help these countries compete on equal footing with the Global North. For Kekeli Ahiable, expanding access to markets will create growth that in turn can pull over 700 million people in developing economies out of extreme poverty.

Part of the trade imperative for the Global South is to gain access to low-carbon technologies to accelerate the energy transition—a task that is complex, as Lydia Powell writes. Efforts to nurture a low-carbon future must balance the emphasis on mitigation with the adaptation needs of the Global South, while considering their right to human well-being, often neglected in North-led prescriptions for climate change.

Mannat Jaspal also examines themes around energy transitions, and writes that, while the proportion of fossil fuels in the energy mix will decline, they will not disappear entirely even in net-zero scenarios. A key to decarbonising is technology—and there’s the rub: The gap between the required deployment of low-carbon technologies and current patterns is significant, and of the technologies that need to be deployed by 2050, the best results so far are primarily in less complex and more commercially viable applications.

Technology is also key in the domain of quantum research, the subject of a contribution by Linda Nhon and Andreas Kuehn, written in the context of the race between the United States and China. As the new Trump administration prepares to define policies that will shape the US science and technology leadership trajectory in the next four years and beyond, it needs a clear vision of how the country can reach quantum superiority.

Technological imperatives are similarly present in the domain of Artificial Intelligence (AI), the subject of an exposition by Trisha Ray. She notes that building and deploying AI at scale requires capital, infrastructure, and manpower that right now, only highly centralised entities like tech giants and rich governments can marshal. She gives us four models for how states will likely nurture ‘sovereign AI’, or AI that uses a country’s own resources.

While the subjects of quantum computing and AI may be relatively new, what we have been tackling for some years now are the challenges posed by the proliferation of social media and its use for malicious activities. Anulekha Nandi and Anirban Sarma discuss the perpetual dilemma in the governance of social media—once not too long ago heralded as the ‘public sphere’ ideal: finding the sweet spot between free speech and security.

This same dilemma finds its place in the gargantuan task of counterterrorism. Naureen Chowdhury Fink, in her essay, explores the intersection of technology, gender, and counterterrorism. She uses the case of ISIS and how it used gendered narratives in its search for legitimacy during the years of building its ‘caliphate’, and underlines the importance of considering this nexus when crafting sustainable and effective prevention and response strategies.

Two other geographies that we cover in this volume are Latin America and the Arctic. Dawisson Belém Lopes writes that even as China’s economic footprint may be expanding across Latin America, US hegemony remains palpable. More importantly, however, countries in the region are navigating the US-China power struggle “with pragmatic ambivalence” while maintaining their diplomatic approach.

And what of the so-called “great game” in the Arctic—home to vast reserves of energy sources and rare-earth minerals as well as important trade routes? Alexander Sergunin and Valery Konyshev surmise that the Arctic players, motivated by their common interests, will likely work to resolve their tensions not by force but through negotiations and arbitration.

We close the journal with the question of how we can have meaningful reforms in current international financial institutions. Karim El Aynaoui, Hinh T. Dinh, and Akram Zaoui argue that what is needed is a “paradigm shift” in the relationship between these institutions and developing countries. Rather than relying primarily on international assistance, developing nations should leverage technical expertise to mobilise private capital—both foreign and domestic—for development. In turn, IFIs must prioritise technical assistance, institution-building, and private capital mobilisation to help countries achieve sustainable and resilient growth.

Each of the 16 essays in this volume gives us enough to mull on where we want to head next. The reckoning will not just be about who gets to mine the Terbium in the Kvanefjeld plateau of Greenland, or whether or not China succeeds in claiming the Scarborough Shoal. It is about entire island states that will disappear; the millions in Africa who have been dependent on UN humanitarian assistance for 20 years. Our sound judgement is being called upon not just for the ‘great games’ but for the every single day: Do we keep hurting and wither, or do we create a new era?

Read the journal here.

Standard
BRICS, India, India-Russia, international affairs, world order, Writing

5 ways in which India-Russia relationship will shape the world in 2025

The ability to partner with nations that are deeply divided by geopolitics has been a feature of Indian diplomacy since Independence. The India-Russia relationship serves not just the two countries in question, but the world

Foreign policy trends in 2025 will be shaped by shifts in great power relationships. A new administration in the US could upend its relations with old allies in Europe and intensify rivalry with China. In an uncertain world, India plays a leading role in maintaining balance. The global community is watching New Delhi’s efforts to restore stability to its troubled relationship with China, and wonders whether the Indo-US dynamic will recapture the energy that characterised it in Donald Trump’s first term. In spite of all this, the most consequential bilateral relationship in 2025 will be between India and Russia.

The strength of ties between New Delhi and Moscow matters to both countries. It touches core mutual areas: Trade in energy, technological co-development, and strategic interests. Russia remains India’s most accommodating partner when it comes to high-tech supplies. While the West — France and the US in particular — are relaxing rules for trade with India in dual-use tech, there is still a long way to go before New Delhi’s undersea and long-range requirements are satisfied by the West. This is where Moscow steps in.

The global community is watching New Delhi’s efforts to restore stability to its troubled relationship with China, and wonders whether the Indo-US dynamic will recapture the energy that characterised it in Donald Trump’s first term.

What some overheated commentary on the India-Russia relationship misses is that it is of deep importance for the West as well. The BrahMos missile, co-developed by India and Russia, has been given to the Philippines to fend off the Chinese. In other words, it is only through India that Russian technology can be used to preserve the rules-based order. And it is only because it is India that no Chinese veto is permitted by Moscow on such sales.

This is but one example of the unique nature of the relationship between India and Russia. Their closeness will have deeper implications in 2025, a year in which it will be recognised as a global public good. Here are five ways in which this relationship is vital for the preservation of global order.

First, it serves as a bridge between the rest of the world and a Russian polity that has been alienated by, and has set out to further alienate, the Western ecosystem. India’s commitment to multilateralism and the global order anchors Russia, its close partner, to a system that it otherwise seeks to disrupt. India can do this because it is not seen as agitating for any one political or geopolitical position. It is a boundary nation that transcends systems, and provides an ability to connect — even integrate — separate universes.

Second, the India-Russia relationship prevents the Russian bear from totally entering the dragon’s den. A Russia locked into servitude to Beijing’s interests would be profoundly inimical for the world order, the West in particular. India’s outstretched hand grants Russia the ability to manoeuvre and allows it to avoid capitulating completely to China’s demands. It has become increasingly clear — at BRICS and elsewhere — that avoiding becoming a junior partner to its giant neighbour is a priority for Moscow. Russia expects a partnership of equals. India provides one, China does not. Europe must realise that when peace eventually returns to the continent, it will be with Russia as an equal of the European Union, and not subordinate to it.

India’s outstretched hand grants Russia the ability to manoeuvre and allows it to avoid capitulating completely to China’s demands.

Third, trade between India and Russia in fossil fuels is designed to be compliant with sanctions meant to limit Russian profits. This too provides broader benefits to the world. It brings valuable price stability and predictability to energy markets, which is vital for the West and for Europe in particular. It is no exaggeration to say that the energy trade component of the Indo-Russian relationship prevents Europe from slipping further into political disorder.

Fourth, the relationship allows for new possibilities in the crucial Arctic region. Without India’s increasing strategic presence in the Arctic, in partnership not just with Russia but also with European and Nordic friends, a new Russia-China axis would have shaped the region’s future. This would have spelt disaster for the ecology and security of global supply chains. India’s growing role instead opens better options. A Chennai-Vladivostok corridor, co-owned by Russia and India, might be a first step towards a more effective and inclusive connectivity and governance architecture for the region.

Finally, India’s presence in groupings with growing power and influence like BRICS and the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation ensures that these are not weaponised against the West. As External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar has put it, India is non-Western, it is not anti-Western. This moderate and reasonable attitude shapes the actions and positions of such groupings. The entry of New Delhi’s candidates — and Western friends — such as the UAE, Egypt and Vietnam into BRICS as either members or partners has further moderated that grouping. The presence of these countries, and India’s leadership, ensures BRICS serves more as a complement to legacy, Western-led multilateral groupings than as a challenge.

India’s presence in groupings with growing power and influence like BRICS and the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation ensures that these are not weaponised against the West.

The ability to partner with nations that are deeply divided by geopolitics has been a feature of Indian diplomacy since Independence. It is only now, however, that this ability will be revealed as essential to prevent the fracturing of a stressed global order. The India-Russia relationship serves not just the two countries in question, but the world. The policy community in both India and the West is keenly aware of this relationship’s pivotal importance. Scepticism in the West’s Russophobic media and think tank ecosystem does not change that reality.

Source : The Indian Express, December 20, 2024

Standard
Global Governance, Global order, international affairs, Writing

Global Dynamics in a Year of Domestic Contestation and Political Shifts

Karim El Aynaoui, Paolo Magri, Samir Saran

Foreword

In 2024, two devastating conflicts intensified: the war in Ukraine, and the escalating crisis in Gaza. In Ukraine, the conflict reshaped global alliances, with NATO reclaiming a pivotal role as Europe reexamined and bolstered its defence and security strategies. In the Middle East, the crisis in Gaza expanded to involve Lebanon, exacerbating an already dire humanitarian situation as blockades and military operations worsened civilian suffering. Both conflicts underscored the fragility of international norms, the challenges to achieving lasting resolutions, and the interplay between local grievances and broader geopolitical rivalries. Together, they emphasise the urgent need for diplomatic engagement, humanitarian relief, and sustainable frameworks for peace.

The year also marked the largest election year in modern history, with millions of people across Africa, Asia, Europe, and the Americas going to the polls to elect their representatives and leaders. In Latin America, at least six countries have voted in 2024, while in Africa, nearly 17 nations have already held or are about to hold elections at the time of writing.

In the African continent, these high-stakes elections have been accompanied by a troubling resurgence of military coups. While some nations achieved peaceful democratic transitions, others grappled with contested outcomes and coups d’état amid ongoing security crises, economic hardships, and climate challenges.

In India, home to the world’s largest electorate, the elections resulted in a broad continuity of leadership, albeit with a diminished mandate for the ruling party. In neighbouring Bangladesh, widespread post-poll protests overthrew Sheikh Hasina’s regime and upended the country’s stability. In the United Kingdom, elections ended 14 years of Conservative reign and brought the centre-left Labour Party to power. In France, the elections resulted in a closely contested outcome, leaving the ruling government with a fragile parliamentary majority and the daunting task of navigating a fragmented political landscape.

Meanwhile, Donald Trump’s decisive election victory in the United States threatens to undermine multilateral governance structures that are already under immense strain. Just as the US election results poured in, Germany’s coalition government collapsed, leaving a complex political situation that will likely take months to resolve. As the West looked on, the expanded BRICS grouping, fraught with internal divisions, held its 16th summit in October. Amid these shifts, regional actors are stepping in to reshape global governance by addressing critical gaps, both nationally and collectively. Morocco’s Atlantic initiatives and Africa’s broader cooperation schemes exemplify the rising impact of complementary frameworks in driving innovative solutions to global challenges.

Such domestic shifts will impact policymaking across the globe, in areas ranging from climate change to trade and security policy. With protectionist tendencies in vogue and the imposition of tariffs dominating the economic toolkits of nations, new leaderships are slated to recalibrate trade policies. At the same time, key global actors such as India, the US, and the EU are working to reduce their dependencies on the Chinese market. In Europe, far-right surges are impacting mainstream parties, which are tempted to adopt parts of the far-right agenda to appeal to voters, in the process potentially compromising sections of the ambitious European Green Deal. The advent of digital technologies, while increasing citizen engagement, has also exacerbated the threat of disinformation undermining elections. Meanwhile, migration remains a pivotal issue for many regions, including Europe and Africa, frequently used as a convenient scapegoat for deeper socio-economic and political challenges as countries navigate the complex implications.

Against this challenging global backdrop, the Italian Institute for International Political Studies (ISPI, Italy), the Observer Research Foundation (ORF, India), and the Policy Center for the New South (PCNS, Morocco) combined their efforts to produce the second edition of their Annual Trends Report. This report, framed in the overarching theme of ‘Global Dynamics in a Year of Domestic Contestation and Political Shifts’, aims to encapsulate the consequences of electoral outcomes and domestic contestations and what these might mean for the delivery of key global public goods—whether combating trends of disinformation, bringing peace in Ukraine and Gaza, advancing global climate action, or pursuing economic growth.

This edition divides these global public goods into five areas: global governance; security; economy and development; energy and climate change; and new technologies and digital transition. Each of these policy areas is examined by scholars from the three institutes, offering their diverse perspectives from three different continents. As countries adapt to fresh domestic (and global) realities, it is our hope that this collaborative effort will shed light on how political shifts across continents are impacting key policy areas, and enable policymakers to better navigate and prepare for their impact.

On a broader note, the ISPI-ORF-PCNS tripartite initiative aims to propose solutions to pressing global challenges through joint research, strategic deliberations, and engagement, supported by the pooled expertise of over 400 experts across three continents. To this end, our partnership involves a range of initiatives, from cooperation during our Flagship Forums to annual inter-staff dialogues and Young Fellows Exchange Programs that aim to shape the leaders of tomorrow.

In a world beset by divisions and competition, we hope that our effort epitomises a revival of international collaboration and connection.

We extend our deepest gratitude to Dr. Harsh V. Pant, Vice President, Studies and Foreign Policy at ORF and to Antonio Villafranca, Vice President for Research at ISPI for their scientific leads on the first two editions of this report. We also thank Shairee Malhotra, Deputy Director, Strategic Studies Programme at ORF, for her critical contribution and Oussama Tayebi and Nassim Hajouji at PCNS and Matteo Villa at ISPI for their vital efforts in coordinating the 2024 edition. This report reflects the strength of our partnership and shared mission.

Read the report here.

Standard