HISTORY AND MEANING

Niccolo Machiavelli was a 15th-century Italian political scientist who was a minister of the king. His most celebrated work is The Prince, in which he identified how a prince should gain and maintain power. He gives a hardcore realistic standpoint, in which he professes to conquer new land to strengthen the kingdom. Further, he states that one needs to be vigilant to rising minority revolts. Also, in case of any threat to power, the leader should wipe it off in a single stroke. The last key teaching that he gives is that a leader should rather be feared than loved.

This basic understanding of what Machiavelli teaches will helps us work out what role Machiavellianism play today in our society where the ‘American Dream’ has surpassed the boundaries of American and everyone is trying to get the biggest share of the pie. This dream has surpassed the corporate world and has become more evident in politics, even though politics and Machiavellianism go hand in hand; today we are seeing that at an unprecedented level.

COPORATE WORLD AND MACHIAVELLI

The private world has become the bloodline of the world economy and to say that it is the most important economic aspect would be an understatement. Private entities have existed for a long time in human history but it is in the last century that it has become a major phenomenon. Today, Machiavellianism has seeped into the corporate world. There have been numerous books and scholarly articles depicting how the corporate world has become a vicious cycle in which those at the top remain there along with those at the bottom subjugated to lower positions. There have been rising cases of money laundering to preserve the money and consequently power. Today the ‘American Dream’ has become synonymous to doing anything and everything to attain success. It is a world with the main incentive profit and greed. There have been cynical depictions in movies and books about how the common man is screwed just to gain profit. All this added with the corporate rivalries.

The rivalry between Bill Gates and Steve Jobs is one of the most brutal ones even though most of the new generation doesn’t even know about it. Further, the controversy surrounding the founding of Facebook was another instance where greed trumped morality. Usually, we do not identify the corporate world with what we usually refer to as Machiavellian, maybe because it seems more sophisticated than politics and more importantly, we are a part of it, even unknowingly at times. The power that the corporate world possesses is something that few can dream of, but this blanket that the private world is given is what makes it scarier. All it takes is one huge blunder and the whole economy will collapse. The 2008 Crisis was the prime example, where the American banks gave house loans and mortgages at a rate which was basically non-returnable and then we saw the markets crashing; the ripple effect of which was felt across the globe. This corporate espionage of the ‘American Dream’ puts all of us in morally ambiguous situations and this is what Machiavelli feared.

POLITICS AND MACHIAVELLI

One possibly cannot write down the whole dynamic between politics and Machiavelli. The very foundation of Machiavellianism was based on politics. What we see today is that the politicians are implementing what Machiavelli taught in a near-perfect manner. All of his tenets of greed, conquering more, restricting minority revolts are being implemented in a way that maybe even Machiavelli wouldn’t have thought. It was during the European Wars of Religion when both sides had consensus on only one thing, i.e. Machiavelli is responsible for such wars and distrust. And that has continued for centuries that followed. Coming to the current century, the Arab Spring is the biggest example of this theory. There was a string of leaders who had forced their rule for decades were finally being thrown over after years of repression. Further, examples go beyond one can think of.

Within India, BJP’s recent strategy of turning Congress MLAs on their side can also be seen as a similar tactic. In India, it is Kautilya who provides similar teachings and has come to be rightly known as the ‘Machiavelli of India’. Now, from this, it established that politics cannot survive without the theories of Machiavelli. Even if one person is strictly against it, he/she will simply not be able to sustain power in a world where 99 others are staunch disciples. This has put even politics a morally questionable vocation. It is also true that such political thought and tactics existed long before Machiavelli was even born, but it is to his credit that he was able to understand all of it and present it to the people.

POPULAR CULTURE AND MACHIAVELLI

It is impossible for a human trait, which has sustained itself for nearly 600 years does not get affected by pop culture. Ever since his book The Prince came out, scholars worried about the impact that this book will have. The first time that we saw such a character was when Shakespeare wrote Macbeth and was able to include the word Machiavellian in his text. The play was applauded by thousands and that’s when Machiavellian became a part of the folklore.

After that, we have seen books, movies, TV series and even journalism including the term and creating a representation which presents the character. The book along with its US and UK series adaptation of House of Cards is one of the prime examples. The main character keeps breaking the fourth wall, clarifying to the reader and viewers, how devious his plans were. TV shows like Game of Thrones feature a prominent character with Machiavellian traits. A few of these characters are referred to as anti-heroes because, at the end of the day, we can relate to these characters and their lust for power. We understand why that particular character is doing what he/she is doing even if we don’t align with their moral leanings.

One of the prime examples is Breaking Bad lead character, Walter White, who is a normal Chemistry high school teacher at the very start, is diagnosed with cancer, and eventually by the end of the series, and becomes a mastermind drug lord, who will backstab his own family and closest ally, just to earn money. The former teacher even goes to the length of killing just to maintain his power at the very top of the drug ring. In many polls, Walter White has been chosen as the favourite TV character of millions. The depiction is Machiavellian in its purest form, since he is feared and loathed by all the characters in the show, and still loved by the viewers.

This sort of dynamic is visible in most of the movies that we watch today but rarely understand. Such characters have been so deeply embedded in our pop culture that we see them as just another character. Maybe the problem is not as deep as some of Machiavelli’s critics would like to be viewed as and it is just a natural inclination towards watching and reading characters that are as complex as the viewers and readers themselves. Nonetheless, whether positive or negative, one can never deny the role and influence of Machiavelli and his teachings in pop culture today.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, I will be stating two things. First, understanding Machiavelli is not just important for political scientists, but also economists, philosophers, practitioners of psychology and sociology and all of us. Because, whether we like it or not, Machiavelli and his teachings exist in every part of our life, in one form or the other. Secondly, Machiavelli and his teachings are not as cynical as they sound and they can easily be used for the benefit of those who it is meant to repress. Back in his days, Machiavelli was eventually banished when a change in power happened. The king he had his loyalty to, was dethroned and the new one didn’t fancy having him around. It is at that time that he wrote The Prince and some scholars say the purpose of his book wasn’t to help the king or the leader but rather the people. He wanted people to know how the leader could unlawfully dominate them and lead them to their ruin. He wanted the people to know this so that they could identify the signs and fight such a leader in whatever capacity they could. He provided them with the material that was needed to save them from their ruin. As Machiavelli himself used to say –

“In order to escape from hell, give the people the way to it so that they could run away from it.”

Featured Illustration: RYAN INZANA

The post ROLE OF MACHIAVELLI IN TODAY’S TIME appeared first on WISER WORLD.

BACKGROUND

To better understand the Kosovo problem, first, let us delve into the background of the region. The region was previously together known as Yugoslavia and was internationally non aligned until the end of the cold war. In 1991, when the Soviet Union got dissolved, even Yugoslavia saw the rise of the nationalistic movement. The main actors were Croatia, Serbia, Montenegro, Bosnia & Herzegovina and Albania. All the countries are now independent but the most violent revolutions were in Croatia and Bosnia. It is important to keep in mind that Serbia had been the major power of Yugoslavia and it didn’t want Yugoslavia to be disintegrated, to maintain its power in the region. Further, Serbia made attempts to gain territories in both Croatia and Bosnia but had been mostly unsuccessful. Croatia too had tried to gain ground by using its military over regions with mostly ethnic Croats but again had faced criticism from the international community. Same goes with Serbia. Now coming to Kosovo, it is a comparatively small tract of land in between Serbia and Albania. It had, historically, been a part of Yugoslavia but upon its breakdown, had been claimed to be a part of Serbia by the Serbian government. The residents of the region did not recognize themselves as part of Serbia. 95% of the residents in the region are native Muslim Albanians which is the other neighbour of Kosovo. This places Kosovo between two belligerent states and makes the whole situation much more complicated.

Ethnic composition of Kosovo

THE KOSOVAN WAR

The Kosovo conflict began in 1974, when Tito, the then head of the former Yugoslavia, officially integrated Kosovo within Yugoslavia, making it an autonomous region. However, this autonomy was only in the paper as most of the political and economic aspects of Kosovo were controlled by Yugoslavia. It was only Tito and his ideology of unification and integration which kept the region from breaking down but all that changed when Tito died in 1980. After nearly a decade and half of the political discrimination faced by the Albanians in Kosovo, resistance started. By the end of the millennium Yugoslavia was a shadow of itself. Kosovo, however, had gone through two years of atrocities and war crimes. By 1998, two factions were formed in Kosovo, both fighting for independence from Serbia, although by different means. The more famous was the Kosovo Liberation Army which used violent means and a militia to fight the Serbian army. The other faction led by Ibrahim Lugoba was Democratic League of Kosovo which preferred the rather peaceful approach. Eventually, the Serbian or Yugoslavian army had come into conflict with the KLA. The Serbian army had been humbled for the majority of 1998 and this led to a rise in war crimes against Albanians residing in Kosovo. An increase in rape, executions, killings of prisoners of war and even ethnic cleansing was visible. Thousands from the Kosovo side and nearly 1500 Serbians had died. More than 600,000 people had left the region, crying for their lives, creating one of the biggest European refugee crises since the Second World War. Initially, there was a very less foreign intervention, that too indirect, but in the next few months, such massacres happened that the international community could not remain silent.  The massacre in Prekaz, Klecka and Ljubenic had shocked the international community, but it was on 15th January 1999, in Racak province that 45 people including women and children were killed, which prompted NATO to join in.

All this time, the Kosovo region was formally under the Serbian government. Even though in name, Yugoslavia still existed, a lot of people think that the war in Kosovo was just an indirect fight between Serbia and Albania who, historically had been at loggerheads. Initially, NATO wanted Kosovo to remain a part of Yugoslavia, but eventually, after the prolonged fighting, NATO supported the claim of full independence by Kosovo. NATO gave an ultimatum to the Serbian/ Yugoslavian forces to leave the region or be bombed. Soon, the Serbian forces withdrew under military pressure from the west. Nonetheless, the Serb President Slobodan Milosevic refused to recognize Kosovo as a country and some reports claimed that the terror attacks by nongovernmental forces were given the green light by Milosevic himself. All this prompted further NATO bombings in Yugoslavia, mainly the key cities of Serbia. Eventually, on June 10, 1999, the UN Security Council passed UNSCR 1244 which made the Kosovo region as a UN governed until stability was reached. The UN forces were welcomed with open arms as for the first time in nearly two decades, hopes of stability and peace were visible. The Kosovo war had officially ended but there have been small escalations between the countries, especially in the north of Kosovo.

POST WAR KOSOVO

Kosovo People after declaration of independence | Credit: Andrew Testa for NYT

Soon after the war ended in Kosovo changes were visible. In 2001 the organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe supervised the first-ever elections for the Kosovo assembly. As a result, Ibrahima Rugova became the President and Bajram Rexhepi was elected the Prime Minister. It was in 2006 that for the first time since 1999 talks happened between ethnic Serbian and Kosovo leaders to decide the future of Kosovo. There was a lot of back and forth during and after these talks. Plans were proposed by the United Nations but were constantly rejected by the Serbs. An important step forward was the formation of European Union Rule of Law Mission in Kosovo which reassured the region that in the future, Kosovo will be supported by the European Union. All this led to the declaration of independence by Kosovo on 17th February 2008 which was followed by recognition all over the globe including NATO, EU and OECD. It is to be noted that throughout these years, several clashes broke out between the Serbian and UN forces. Eventually, Kosovo was able to form its force, trained by NATO and the number stood at 2500. Another important development was the ruling of the International Court of Justice that the declaration of independence did not violate any international law. The biggest escalation since the end of the war was the North Kosovo Crisis which initially started after clashes in 2011 and ended in 2013. The escalation started after Kosovo police entered Serbian controlled territory without previous consultation. Even though the escalation ended, even today North Kosovo is a key area of conflict. Ever since then, the EU has been mediating talks between the two countries, with a minimal positive outcome. Serbia has maintained its stance of recognizing the Kosovo government but not the country. Debates have been going on whether Kosovo is a country in itself. In the UN, 97 countries already recognize Kosovo as a sovereign country but the Veto of Russia prevents the region from gaining UN membership.

CONCLUSION AND WHAT THE FUTURE HOLDS

The future of Kosovo has been subject to fierce debates and at this point, one can only guess. Serbia has always been vigilant of the fact that Kosovo might become a part of Albania which will only make it’s rival much stronger, economically as well as culturally. Most recently, discussions had been going on between Serbia and Kosovo regarding a land swap where the Serbian majority region in the north of Kosovo will be transferred to Serbia and a small Albanian Muslim majority region in the south of Serbia will go the other way. This land transfer is not concrete in any way and as things stand the transfer might not happen at all. Further, looking at the future of Kosovo, one can predict a few possibilities. The most likely of which is that UN forces remain in Kosovo for about 8-10 years so that Kosovo gets membership status in the UN, it becomes economically stable and can host a stronger armed force. Other than this, it is also likely that UN forces withdraw sooner than expected which might open up room for conflicts to escalate with Serbia. The last possibility in the foreseeable future is that Kosovo integrates itself within Albania. This is the least likely outcome as Kosovo has started to establish relations with other countries and hopes to be much more stable. Lastly, one point that needs to be raised is whether the idea of Kosovo being a country is sustainable in such a hostile region. Economically, Kosovo is not anywhere close to being stable even though it’s been more than a decade since its independence. Kosovo will be highly dependent on building foreign trade relations due to its lack of resources. Even in that case, Kosovo doesn’t have a port which can facilitate trade. Moving on, the armed force of Kosovo is nowhere near to that of Serbia. In case of a UN withdrawal, it is almost assured that Serbia will be able to swipe Kosovo and take back control. Lastly, a key to maintaining long term stability, Kosovo needs to build an impeccable political system. Before independence and even afterwards, there have been cases of large level corruption which have disrupted the workings of the region. The system needs to assure that there is no consolidation of power with one institution up to a level that the people have to fight another enemy within the country. On the ending note, Kosovo has been able to fight its way through to independence due to the sheer determination of its people and cultural integrity, and that itself should be the way ahead.                                        

The post BREAKING DOWN THE HISTORY OF THE KOSOVO CRISIS appeared first on WISER WORLD.

THE MUSLIM WOMEN (PROTECTION OF RIGHTS ON MARRIAGE) BILL or TRIPLE TALAQ BILL

Muslim women celebrate the passing of Triple Talaq Bill from Lok Sabha

Going by the chronological order, the first bill that caught the attention of the public eye was the Muslim women bill, which criminalized the act of triple talaq as a mean of divorce by a Muslim man. The Supreme Court pronounced Triple Talaq to be unconstitutional and following suit, the Indian government made Triple Talaq a crime, where if a Muslim man pronounced a divorce in form of triple talaq through a verbal or written contact, he would be imprisoned for a time going up to three years along with a fine. Further, the custody of a minor child from the marriage would go to the mother and the man would have to provide allowance as declared by the magistrate. Like any act, this one also had two sides in which the government proclaimed this act to be protecting the basic fundamental rights of Muslim women and saw it is a method of women empowerment and community inclusion. On the other hand, criticism came from various opposition members as well as legal experts. The most common argument was made of taking a civil dispute i.e. marriage or divorce and mixing it up with criminal intent by creating a cause for imprisonment. They also claimed that imprisoning the Muslim man would only make things more difficult for the wife and therefore, a civil arrangement had to be prepared to tackle the issue. In this case, Shashi Tharoor in his claims in Lok Sabha perfectly encapsulates his opposition to the bill when he says,

“The bill conflates civil law and criminal law by criminalizing the Triple Talaq which is an ‘irregular’ form of divorce, already declared null and void in our country post the Supreme Court’s decision on the Shayara Bano v Union of India case.”

Despite the criticism, the bill was passed on 25th and 30th July by Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha respectively and as of now, it stands in retrospective effect from 19 September 2018.

THE JAMMU AND KASHMIR (REORGANISATION) BILL or THE REVOCATION OF ARTICLE 370

New map of Jammu and Kashmir releaseed by Government of India

After the Triple talaq bill, came the reorganization of Jammu and Kashmir act which was done via the revocation of article 370 and 35A from the Indian constitution. The move was considered to be a prime objective of the BJP government and the same was done on 5th August 2019 when a presidential resolution to scrap the articles was moved by Amit Shah and a bill which reorganized the state of Jammu-Kashmir was introduced. The act became effective from 31st October 2019 and is seen as a rather poorly implemented move. The background to the Kashmir issue is well known among the general Indian population but still, some may not have the best idea of article 370. The basic elements included a special status to the state wherein, it had its constitution and administrative autonomy. More importantly, citizens from the rest of India could not purchase land or property in the state. Just before the bill was introduced, Kashmir had been in a state of lockdown under section 144 preventing civil assemblies. All this happened under President’s rule which had been there since 20 June 2018. What caused an uproar, was the house arrest of major politicians of the state like Omar Abdullah and Mehbooba Mufti. A large number of paramilitary troops were deployed citing terrorist threat. It was this air of tension that worsened the distrust between the Kashmiris and the central government. Going to what exactly has changed with this bill; one has to look at the statutory provisions. The act creates two new union territories i.e., Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh. Jammu & Kashmir will have its legislative assembly, much like Delhi and Ladakh will be administered by a lieutenant governor. Leh and Kargil will also come under Ladakh.

Another important aspect is that foreign investment will be allowed along with the right of citizens outside of J&K to buy land will be created. Lastly, the laws passed by the central government will also apply to the two union territories. The central government defended this move by claiming that it will open up the economy of the region as the foreign investment will open up new educational and job opportunities. Further, the allowance to buy property will help boost the local real estate market. Nonetheless, there has been a lot of criticism against the move made by the BJP and more importantly, the way it has been implemented. The criticism has not only come from within the country but outside as well. Pakistan has been vocal about the lack of respect towards international law and other countries have also raised concern. Former J&K chief minister Omar Abdullah calls it an ‘insult being heaped on an injury.’ The Kashmir lockdown, which was initially done under threat of terrorism, has been ongoing for more than a year. This lockdown was much more stringent initially where total media and communication blackout was installed but now the restrictions have been reduced, but the lockdown continues. More than 4000 have been arrested. In an opinion piece in the Washington Post, claims have been made that this is Modi 2.0 darkest moment, citing concern over the future of fundamental rights of Kashmiris. However, the Dalit immigrants and Kashmiri women got freedom from the stringent rules enforced on them as the former was not allowed to choose any job other than that of menial labour while latter would lose its Kashmiri status if she married anyone outside of Kashmir.

CITIZENSHIP AMENDMENT ACT (CAA)

Anti-CAA protests at Shaheen Bagh

Pakistani Hindus celebrating passage of CAA in Delhi

The act which caused one of the biggest student and national protest in recent Indian history, CAA was brought to create a crucial amendment in the citizenship laws of the country. To give a little background, one also needs to keep in mind NRC or the National Registry of Citizens. Even though NRC has been on the agenda for a long time, and even previous Prime Ministers have suggested having a proper registry of citizens but no sort of exclusion from the country of the citizens was suggested before. It was under Modi 2.0 that NRC is being seen as a threat to democracy. In NRC, one will have to prove in the form of document that one’s ancestor was presiding in India with the date of March 24, 1971, given as the final date. NRC has only been implemented in Assam and a lot of flaws have been seen but that is another issue as the rules for it were set under former PM Rajiv Gandhi and it was implemented under Supreme Court of India’s supervision. Amit Shah had previously claimed that NRC will be implemented throughout India. Coming back to CAA, in terms of its provisions, the key to understanding it is the simple fact that as per the new system, only Hindu, Sikh, Buddhist, Jain, Parsi and Christian can get citizenship, for which they will have to prove religious persecution against their community in Pakistan, Bangladesh or Afghanistan. The government has defended the move by claiming that it protects the minority rights of those in neighbouring countries. The key exclusion here is that of Muslims as the said countries are theocratic states with Islam being their official religion. This caused a huge uproar which started in Assam but eventually protests moved to Delhi, where student clashes with the Delhi police reported in Jamia Milia Islamia University and JNU. Reports also came of police brutality against students who were not even protesting. The protests eventually moved to Delhi University and further solidarity protests came from all over the country including students from IITs, NLUs, IIMs and even foreign universities showing solidarity. Eventually, most of the states had some form of protest going on against the act, the most famous of which came up in Shaheen Bagh in Delhi where the community, lead by women had been protesting. Criticism which has even been identified internationally, by various countries and organizations with Office of the UN High commissioner for Human Rights is the most vocal.

Looking at the criticism, the finding is that when NRC and CAA are put together, if a Hindu loses citizenship due to exclusion from the registry, he/she can get back the citizenship under CAA and for that matter, anyone belonging to the religions state above, can gain their citizenship back, except Muslims. A Muslim who has been excluded from the NRC won’t have citizenship and will be transferred to a refugee camp which a few have compared to the Nazi concentration camp. This argument is made by the opposition whereas the government maintains that NRC and CAA are completely different and bringing them together is bending the law. The Modi 2.0 government also maintains that CAA is only for the refugees and not those who already live in India. Ex-Minister in Rajiv Gandhi’s cabinet and present Governor of Kerala, Dr Arif Mohammed Khan maintains that CAA and NRC are progressive moves and that violent protests are an act of terrorism. The COVID pandemic has slowed down the protests and it seems that the government will be able to properly implement it. The Supreme Court has also refused to put a stay on the matter.

CONCLUSION

To say that the Modi 2.0 has been bold would be an understatement. Just looking at these acts, one can see how the BJP government wants to embed its ideology within India and it has been successful so far. A lot of other things like the construction of Ram Mandir, the RTI act, handling of the COVID crisis are discussions in themselves. The idea of this article solely was to bring to light the facts regarding the three of Modi 2.0 government’s most controversial acts. What one can do at this point is to try to form their own opinions and conclusions after knowing all the facts and try to understand what the next four years have to offer.

The post MODI 2.0: THE THREE CONSEQUENTIAL ACTS OF THE FIRST YEAR appeared first on WISER WORLD.

CULTURAL, ECONOMIC AND POLITICAL LINKS

As vast the relationship between India and Maldives is, there are a few special characteristics which define the relationship in a summarized sense. First, talking about the cultural relationship, mention has to be made of the immense use of soft power by India to advance its relationship with the Maldives. The cultural development between the two countries has come from various forms of capacity building. India has assured a good relation with Maldivian students and provided them with a high level of skills training and capacity building. Scholarships and easy access for them is a key positive in the relation between the two countries. The Maldives has based its economy highly on tourism and India has not shied away from help. The Indian Cultural Centre was established in July 2011 in Male and it has brought the countries much closer than before. The Indian diaspora in the Maldives forms a crucial part of the population in the Maldives with a population of around 26,000. Around 30% of the doctors and 25% of teachers are of Indian origin.

This sustenance of Indians in the Maldives has increased the spread of their respective cultures. Even though cultural relations have been always on the rise, the economic and political relations are also to be considered. Politically talking, India has always stepped up whenever there is uncertainty within the Maldives. The 1988 Operation Cactus was the biggest example of Indian aid in times of a crisis. Back in 88, 80 armed militias from the PLO of Tamil Eelam had landed in the island country and had been working on taking over the government. India sent troops and was able to eliminate the threat. This brought the two countries closer than ever. After that, in 2014 during the water crisis in Male, India sent its ships to help produce freshwater. The most recent political crisis was back in 2015 when the first democratically elected president of Maldives, Mohammed Nasheed was arrested on terror charges. India along with the US voiced their displeasure on the arrest. The new President Abdulla Yameen had strained the relations with India, claims the current foreign affairs minister of Maldives, Abdulla Shahid. After Yameen’s defeat in 2018, the political relations were again restored. Maldives FM says that he is confident of the positive relations and this restoration was visible during the COVID crisis.

India, at the very start of the crisis, provided 6.2 tonnes of medical-aid to the Maldives, followed by constant medical and pharmaceutical help.  The economic relations are even more in-depth and have been helpful for both countries. The 1981 Comprehensive Trade agreement has helped the Maldives prosper in the years. Annually, bilateral programmes have been agreed upon where development of infrastructure, health, communication and labour has prospered in the Maldives. Coming back to the 1981 agreement, the export of essential commodities, which was initially modest, have now reached new highs. In 2014, trade stood at 677 Cr Indian Rupees and in 2019 India’s export to the Maldives stood at 212 Million dollars, which clearly shows how trade has developed in the past few decades.

COMPLICATIONS WITH THE ENTRY OF CHINA

In the friendly relationship with India, China entered as a wild card, with the exceptional claims of helping the Maldives grow, economically and infrastructure wise. Once, Yameen came into power in 2014, he made sure that there was a lack of cooperation with India and an inclination towards China. The successive government has accepted that Yameen tried to play both India and China but failed spectacularly. This connotation is partly true. Back in 2014, as a part of its Belt and Road Initiative, China offered loans to the Maldives to help them develop infrastructure. The lack of foresight has come back to haunt the Maldives who had created a huge debt. Currently, the government says that they still owe $600M and with an economy highly dependent on tourism, in the time of a pandemic, find it very difficult to pay the debt off. Reaching this position was difficult as well. It was Indian Prime Minister, Narendra Modi who had put his ‘Neighbour First’ policy into good use by providing the Maldives $1.4B in financial assistance. The situation of Maldives can be seen in parallel to that of Sri Lanka. India’s southern neighbour also took a loan from China to increase its infrastructural capabilities but when it was unable to pay back the loan, China got a 99-year lease over a  crucial Lankan port.

One could say that India has saved the Maldives from a similar situation but the future is known to none. The current Maldives Foreign Minister has said that they will be reconsidering their current agreements with China.  Nonetheless, he has also at times stated that Beijing has been very generous in social development projects, mainly in the housing sector. In terms of rethinking, Maldives wants to bring China to the negotiation table to find a way out and pave the way for future partnerships. Keeping in mind the previous agreements playing highly in Chinese favour, such future partnerships do not sit well with the Indian government who has expressed concerns. Nonetheless, the Maldives foreign minister has always claimed that India is the closest friend of Maldives. At this point, it can be inferred that China is a short term partner of Maldives, whereas India has always been considered a long term ally. India cannot throw caution in the wind and start diplomatic cold war with the Maldives to force its way out of Chinese relations. For a country like the Maldives, having strategic partners in the geographical proximity is the way forward. They also claimed that the Maldives will be looking to develop relations not only with India and China but also the USA and UAE. India will need to keep Maldives’ natural growth in mind in its future endeavours with the Maldives.

CONCLUSION

India’s relationship with the Maldives has been a natural one for decades and except for a few hiccups in between, it is widely claimed that India is the most crucial partner of Maldives. India needs to realise this and assure long term stability with them. India also needs to keep in mind that the Maldives will be growing in terms of diplomatic power by trying to increase its bilateral partnerships. At this point, India needs to continue doing what it has been for the past few decades and sustaining a long term partnership won’t be difficult. The Indian government needs to keep in mind what Maldives FM thinks the relationship is based on. He says, “It is not a relationship based on size or economy, but one based on ideas and principles.”

The post INDIA AND MALDIVES: A NATURAL RELATIONSHIP appeared first on WISER WORLD.

Relations Post COVID Pandemic

The ongoing pandemic has created a time of uncertainty, but one certain thing is that once the pandemic ends, there will be an air of distrust in the global market towards China, and their economic, as well as political prowess, will take a hit. This is seen as an advantage for India and a favourable condition for the USA in a cold conflict which has been going on for the better part of the last two years. This has been fueled further by Donald Trump who has continuously referred to COVID as the ‘Chinese Virus’ in his official briefings.  Trump has been asking his allies within Europe to take a similar stance of blaming China for the health and economic distress. India has played the ball with caution and not followed suit by joining America’s call for blaming the situation fully on to China. Rather, India had been in close contact with health officials from both China and the USA during the early stages of the pandemic. This aligned with India’s long-existing value of international cooperation.  Nonetheless, some things need to be kept in mind when India will be forming their policy about the two countries after the pandemic ends, or possibly slows down. First of all, one needs to expect that the relationship between China and the USA will remain sour. This comes from a simple deduction that China has ambitions that go far beyond India, Russia or South Asia for that matter. China is trying to take up the position of a superpower in the international community as is understood by the international community. Further, the USA has already noticed this ambition and has been trying to keep it in check. Whether it is in the form of a trade war or simple political jargon, the USA is trying to retaliate. India, in this scenario, needs to keep its patience. There is no doubt that India has economic interests in both countries, but it will not be hard to argue that India tends to side with America, when it comes to making a choice between the two. An important aspect of post-COVID relations is the economy. For now, we see that China has already started recovering from the pandemic in economic terms as China has started recovering the losses it incurred during the early months of the pandemic. The same cannot be said about India or even the USA. Even though it is clear that the two countries are still going through the pandemic and have not reached their respective peaks, the current signs show that it won’t be soon that they start to recover economically. As Modi has always claimed that the purpose of foreign policy will be to achieve economic prowess, it can be argued that India needs to make use of its foreign policy to economically recover from COVID. A point for worrying is that India will not be able to compete with China in terms of economic recovery on its own because of the simple lack of skill labour capacity. China’s labour socialism has developed labour skill at a level which India, at this point cannot compare with, statistically speaking. Global economists agree that national labour capacity will be the key for recovery post COVID. Even though Modi’s use of the term ‘Atma-Nirbhar’ may be good for showing a certain national self-dependence, on the ground, India cannot compare with China. Similarly, the USA is in a stronger position in terms of labour capital than India, but it is too early to judge that against China. On the other hand, various international politics scholars also believe that India’s bargaining power will increase in a more than likely limited cold war between USA and China, post-COVID. This stems from the simple fact that India has a huge consumer market in which both countries would want to invest in. Therefore, India needs to make use of its market. Lastly, in a post COVID world, India needs to focus on the global flow of labour and capital, with its established strategic partners in Europe, Middle East and South-East Asia. The USA might not be as equally dependent but they too will need to foreign cooperation. A few days back PM Modi invited American investment in India and that is a positive move. Since India has been trying to move away from China, in terms of economic dependence at least, Modi makes the right move by inviting increased cooperation and investment from America.

Defence Alliances Post the Galwan Clash

The ‘Boycott China’ movement of Indians may reflect that Indians might want to move towards self-dependence but such transformation is to be considered as a long term solution. The crux remains that India needs to maintain its economic relation with China as long as it practically can. If things boil beyond control, India needs to think of an economic plan while at the same time it thinks about its border measures.

Conclusion

India, China and the USA will become a much more interesting international dynamic in the coming years with China’s growing ambition. Nonetheless, India’s priority has to be to economically recover from COVID. Improving economic ties with the West is the clear cut answer to that along with an increased focus on entrepreneurial self-dependence. Moving on, a closer defensive relation with the US also seems to be the way ahead, without severing economic ties with China, for as long as possible. India needs to be more vigilant on the border if it doesn’t want to be walked over by China again. Such strategic partnerships will help India to grow economically, as well as maintain its existing influence over South Asia and possibly expand upon it, in the years to come.

The post INDIA, USA AND CHINA: A COMPLICATED TRIAD appeared first on WISER WORLD.

The Process of the Presidential Election

Before talking about the two candidates, it is important to understand how the election process works since it is very different from that of India. The election for the President of the USA is done separately from the legislative (The Senate and House of Representatives). The two main parties, Republicans and Democrats have small primaries and caucuses which are meetings of sorts in various states all over the country to decide the candidate from their party. When the two candidates are chosen, debates and campaigning is done, followed by voting. An electoral college is formed by the states of America and elections are held. Different states have different strengths for their college, keeping in mind the population of the particular state. The total number of seats is 538 and to become the President, a candidate needs to cross 270 seats. Since the division of seats is done on population, states like California and New York carry much more weight. The process from this point is more confusing. If a candidate wins the majority of the seats in a particular state, instead of the number of seats he has won goes into his account, but rather it is the total number of seats in the state that go into his account and it is said that he has ‘won the state’. For example, California has the most number of seats with 55 and hypothetically, if Biden wins 38 seats in the state, he gets the majority of the state. Not only that, in the total count he will get 55 seats to his name. Overall, whichever candidate reaches 270 seats in the college becomes the President. Now, let us look at the candidates.

 As of now, we have two candidates. Donald Trump from the Republican Party and Joe Biden from the Democratic Party as the leading candidates. The campaign has not gone into full swing as of now and the presidential debates are yet to be held. All this said; let’s look at the two candidates.

 The Incumbent – DONALD TRUMP

Starting with the incumbent Donald Trump; he has had little to no opposition when it comes to being endorsed by the Republican Party. The main reason behind this is the simple fact that he is the incumbent and has maintained a certain level of support in his key demographics. He has higher approval ratings than any other politician from the Grand Old Party (GOP) or the Republicans. Nonetheless, not every member has shown unequivocal support. Former presidential candidate from the Republican Party, Mitt Romney had voted to convict Trump during the infamous impeachment trials of early 2020. The economy has played to his advantage, at least before the pandemic and Trump does not shy away from taking the credit. Nonetheless, there are a few things that have played a role in the fall of his approval ratings. At the forefront, we have the mismanagement of the coronavirus outbreak in America. Currently, 4.1 million people have contracted the disease and considering that Trump has previously ridiculed the ability of the virus to spread and not impose restrictions has reflected the lack of leadership. Second, we have an issue that has not been at the forefront of Presidential elections for the last 3-4 races. The issue of race and institutionalized racism has taken America by a storm and Trump has not managed to control it. He has not openly talked about facing the issue of race but has called the protestors thugs and terrorists. Even though bold stances like this worked in 2016, they do not seem to be effective this time around when the issue is as sensitive as a race. With these things in mind, let’s look at the Democratic nominee and former Vice President under the Obama administration, Joe Biden.

The Nominee – JOE BIDEN

Joe Biden was relatively late to coming forward with his candidature if we compare it to the likes of Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders, who had been talking about their campaign for long before the start of the democrat party’s caucuses.  This lack of early preparation was seen during the Iowa caucus and the primary in New Hampshire in which Biden didn’t perform very well. But eventually, things started to fall in place, with the regular debate over Sanders electability and Warren’s early withdrawal, Biden was eventually selected to be the Democratic presidential nominee. All this proposes the question that is Biden the best that Democrats have to offer, to go against Trump. Now even though a lot of voters think that his policies may not be as radical or as glaring as those of Sanders and Warren, he has been gaining the popular vote time and again. The political scientists within the party say that people just consider Biden to be more electable. Even though there are some question marks over his leadership ability and his ability to talk to people in a sense which creates a different political wave (something Trump did pretty well in 2016). Nonetheless, we have seen during the Obama presidency what Biden is capable of in terms of team management and keeping his administration smooth. Further, Biden is gaining more edge in political leadership after he had openly criticised the current President over his handling of the pandemic and the protests. All this is something that the political scientists have talked about the two leaders and there are differences in opinion. But one thing that is not as subjective is the polling data that various news agencies have collected.

Status of Polling Data and Opinion Polls

The latest polling data, as of 9th June by RealClearPolitics shows a lead in favour of Biden by 6 points as he stands on 46%, as opposed to Trump’s 40% approval rate. Similarly, NPR (+8), NY Times (+14), Fox News (+12) and Quinnipiac(+15) all suggest Biden having a huge lead over the president. It is important to mention that the past few months have shown Trump’s worst approval ratings during his tenure, going down to 38%. He, without a doubt, will improve his ratings and consequently improve his numbers in the poll. So, it is not advisable to consider Biden to be the new President, just yet. Also, a data as general as this one is not usually considered to be a clear indicator of who will be winning, as was seen back in 2016 when Hilary had an advantage of 4-5% by the same data  To better understand the polling data we need to divide the data into two different categories. The first is the situation in the swing states and secondly, the situation of the key demographics and the handling of various issues. An important note is that a lot of states are considered to be predominantly Red (Republican) and Blue (Democrats) states. This division is done, keeping in mind the dominance of the said party in the state in the previous elections as well as the general polling data. The states which do not fall under this category are the swing states. In the upcoming election, seven states have been identified by most of the political scientists as the swing states. These are Arizona, Florida, Wisconsin, North Carolina, Georgia, Michigan and Pennsylvania. Different networks consider different states to be swing states but on average these 7 states have been the most common. It is important to note that Trump won all of these states back in 2016. It is also worth mentioning that Biden has led the state of Texas which has been predominantly a red state, and so Trump is expected to win the state back even though a lot of journalists have started to consider Texas to be a swing state. Data between 17th and 22nd June collected by NY Times/Siena poll shows a huge advantage for Biden.  Comparing the current numbers to that of 2016, we see that Trump has completely lost Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania, which he won by margins of less than 1 point, and is now trailing by 11, 11 and 10 respectively. Moving on North Carolina and Arizona have shown a smaller advantage as Biden leads by 9 and 7 points respectively. Florida is an interesting state which is considered vital for Trump’s re-election and he won it narrowly in 2016 by 1.6 but is currently trailing by 6 points. All this said, one has to keep in mind two things. First that most of these polls showed an advantage for Hilary as well but she lost these battleground states but second, her advantage was not as big as that of Biden. One would not be surprised if Trump manages to cut down the advantage in these swing states and also manage to win one or two conservative states, but will this be enough for him to regain presidency?

Going by the same source, looking at the key demographics, Biden leads by 74 points with black voters, 39 points with Hispanic voters, 34 points with young voters (18-29), 22 points and 18 points with independent voters. This shows a key advantage that will play in the favour of Biden. Back in 2016, Trump won the election with a huge advantage, running up to 70 points, with independent voters, men, older voters and white people. This time the gap has cut so much that Biden leads in 3 of Trump’s key demographics i.e. independent, men and older voters. This seems like a much more negative trend than one would have predicted. Moving on, key issues like COVID and racial issues have highly favoured Biden. People have started to doubt Trump’s leadership in these two aspects and considering that these are the two main issues of 2020 for America, Biden does seem to be favoured. On the other hand, Trump is preferred when it comes to immigration, economy and job creation. Trump has made it a point to claim the growth of the US economy before the pandemic to his benefit and that seems to be in his favour.

Conclusion

Even though we are just 3-4 months before the elections happen, all of these are predictions and pre-election polls. A lot of things like the presidential debates, widespread campaigning and the actual Election Day turnout, all can change the way things stand today. This was seen back in 2016 to work in favour of Trump but that was because the difference between the two candidates was too small. That may not be the case this time but nothing can be said with certainty. Kanye West has pulled out of the race and it will be fair to say that he did not have much ground before as well. As of now, even though the polls indicate one thing, anything can happen. There is without a doubt a bit of uncertainty and just like 2016, the door is still open for both candidates to win the White House. 

The post USA POLITICS – ANALYSES OF THE USA’s ELECTION 2020 appeared first on WISER WORLD.