The South China Sea dispute is based on both maritime as well as territorial claims. The Paracel Islands, the Spratly Islands, Macclesfield Bank and Scarborough Shoal, and the Pratas Islands are the four contested geographic features in the South China Sea, with the Paracel Islands, claimed by China, Taiwan, and Vietnam and the Spratly Islands, claimed in their entirety by China, Taiwan, and Vietnam, and in part by the Philippines, Malaysia, and Brunei being the most hotly contested. This maritime dispute has at its roots in Beijing’s contentious ‘nine-dash line’, that was Beijing’s cartographic assertion submitted to the UN in 2009. The controversial line lays claims on the maritime and territorial features that are in compliance with the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). However, its bully-like actions have led to discord in the region. There have been overlapping claims in the South China Sea with China seeking to become the hegemon in the disputed regional topography.

The South China Sea Arbitration

There are six nations that contest all or parts of the oil and gas rich South China Sea, which has led to a series of confrontations between the Dragon and others over the competing claims.

The Philippines in January 2013 put forth a case against China’s belligerent activities and expansive claims in the SCS. An arbitral tribunal was constituted for the hearing of the case under the UNCLOS and final decision in 2016 was in Philippines’ favour; the resource rights in the South China Sea had to be clarified. China’s contentious nine-dash line became the subject of disapproval and the tribunal ruled against it, clearly stating that China was claiming historic rights to the resources within the jurisdiction of its aforementioned nine-dash but in actuality, these claims were nullified with China becoming a signatory of the UNCLOS in 1996 due to its discordancy with the Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZs) of other coastal states.

The tribunal also ruled that the 200-nautical-mile EEZ entitlements of the Philippines and, by conclusion, the other coastal states in the region, are unfettered by the nine-dash line or any claimed EEZ in the Spratly Islands.

China denounced the decision as “null and void” having “no binding force,” it largely kept to its letter if not its spirit in the first year after the award. The United States and its allies, members of ASEAN and India directly or indirectly pressured Beijing to accept the ruling and comply with the UNCLOS. Another reason could have been China’s disinterest in direct confrontation in the region.

China’s Outright Claims Over the South China Sea

Beijing’s venture into the disputed South China Sea has been a part and parcel of its long-term strategy to establish its hegemony over the near and far regions and expand and deepen its sphere of influence, both overland and in the seas. Recently, the dragon’s firing of medium-range missiles into the SCS and its ever-increasing military exercises is an avowal in order to show its sovereignty over the disputed waters.

Even though its untoward claims have no legal basis, as pointed out by Hague Tribunal, which is by and large ignored and disobeyed by China, does not stop it from emerging as a formidable trouble-fomenting power in the South China Sea. What started in the guise of a cooperative mechanism for engaging with the countries in the periphery of the disputed SCS has turned into brazen bullying by Beijing.

Historically, post one-year anniversary of the UNCLOS tribunal’s ruling, as international attention faded, China started strengthening its claims and encroaching upon the EEZs of the coastal states; deepening the purview of its maritime claims and increasing its military and naval presence apart from objecting to the presence of US navigation and laws of free movement. It was greatly engaged in consolidating its grand and objectionable territorial claims engaging in reclamation of physical geographical features on which lay its belligerent claims. Its militarisation of the region and installations at Mischief Reef through naval and aerial facilities and setting up of artificial islands has been a well-known factor.

Beijing has been an aggressive bully in the region trying to establish rules and laws that favour its grandiose plans. It has always maintained that it has full control over the region and has stakes and claims, as in the case of its assertion on a recent White Paper – “China exercises its national sovereignty to build infrastructure and deploy necessary defensive capabilities on the islands and reefs in the South China Sea.”

Conclusion

Beijing through its deplorable actions has been able to outrightly build a forceful maritime presence in the South China Sea, strengthening its surveillance and intelligence capabilities; its aerial capabilities have also helped it to gain a strong foothold over the region, thus, bringing it closer to the realisation of its broad strategic goals of hegemony of the region, sans any respect for the laws of the sea or the international rules-based order. The other adversaries have also been subdued by China’s overwhelming presence in the region and even, the US credibility, action and capability has been undermined with Chinese sovereign control over the contested territory being somewhat fait accompli. Chinese downright assertions over the South China Sea have antagonised the neighbouring states with the ASEAN being virtually helpless in the face of adversity that Beijing has thrown on to them. Moreover, in the present scenario in a world ravaged by COVID-19, it is difficult to control the bully and prevent it from infringing on the rights of other rightful contenders of the South China Sea resources.

References:

Council on Foreign Relations. (n.d.). Territorial Disputes in the South China Sea. Council on Foreign Relations.

Kumar, A., & Chari, S. (2020, September 6). China creating a flashpoint in South China Sea. Sunday Guardian Live.

Kuok, L. (2019). How China’s actions in the South China Sea undermine the Rule of Law. Global China.

Tsirbas, M. (2016, June 2). What Does the Nine-Dash Line Actually Mean? The Diplomat.

The post IN PURSUIT OF ESTABLISHING HEGEMONY OVER SOUTH CHINA SEA 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.

India-US, Foreign Office Consultations

Historically, India has always chosen to tread the neutral path when it has been faced with the decision of choosing a side in geopolitics, especially during the Nehruvian years, that is immediately after it attained independence, where it followed a strict policy of non-alignment. However, in recent times as India has chosen to increase its influence and emerge as an important geopolitical leader in the South-Asian region, it has substantially increased its cooperation and strengthened its ties with the United States. The latest developments between the two nations include a set of Foreign Office Consultations. The virtual meeting took place between the Foreign Secretary, Harsh Vardhan Shringla, and the US Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs, David Hale. Given the current situation where the virus is surging by leaps and bounds in both countries, the two representatives agreed to further strengthen the health partnership, including in the areas of pharmaceuticals and vaccine development.

They further agreed to ensure the enhancement of mutually beneficial trade and people-to-people ties. During this discussion, the Indian delegation addressed the issues regarding the VISA facilitation post-COVID, especially keeping in mind professionals and students. Following this, the two representatives moved on to address the elephant in the room, the Indo-Pacific, that has come to be seen as one of the most strategically important regions in the world, with 75% of world trade passing through the region. Keeping in mind India’s geographic proximity to the region and the US’ trade and military interests, both nations have persevered in the past to ensure a free open and inclusive Indo-Pacific, against China’s predatory approach. The following consultation acted as a testimony to India-US joint initiatives in the Indo-Pacific in the future. Lastly, the United States emphasised the US-India cooperation in the United Nation, especially after India was elected as a non-permanent member of the United Nations Security Council for the year 2020-21.

India-European Union Summit

India’s increased engagement in the Western Indian Ocean regions has led to the country cooperating and investing in strategic relationships with several European Nations. The 15th meeting of the India-European Union summit is scheduled to be held virtually. The meeting was co-chaired by the Indian Prime Minister, Narendra Modi, the President of the European Union, H.E Charles, and the President of the European Commission, H.E Ursula Von Der Leyen. The summit that is to be held in the coming days will mainly focus on India-EU cooperation covering political and security relations and at the same time will look into avenues of trade and investment. The summit would mainly be addressing the issues of development during the COVID 19 pandemic and contemporary global matters.

Working Mechanism for Consultation and Coordination on India-China border Affairs

India has been locking horns with the Chinese Republic over several issues. Most recent of these has been the border situation, at the Galwan Valley. On the 10th of July, 2020. The 16th meeting of the Working Mechanism for Consultation and Coordination on India-China Border Affairs was held. The Indian delegation was led by the Joint Secretary (East Asia) from the Ministry of External Affairs. Meanwhile, the Chinese delegation was led by the Director-General of the Boundary and Oceanic Department of the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Before deliberating over the future steps in regards to the de-escalation in violence at the border regions, the two delegations looked back at the agreements between the two nations. The first of these agreements were between the two foreign ministers on the 17th of June, following which there was an agreement reached between special representatives on the 5th of July. The recent consultation essentially reviewed the situation at the India-China border including the progress made in terms of the ongoing disengagement of troops. It was decided that another meeting of the WMCC will be conducted in the future, followed by a meeting of the Senior Commanders, which will discuss further steps to ensure a complete disengagement and de-escalation in a timely manner. 

High-Level Summit of the United Nations Economic and Social Council

The Prime Minister recently delivered the keynote address at a high-level summit of the United Nations Economic and Social Council on the 17th of July. PM Narendra Modi had previously addressed the member nations of the council in 2016 at the 70th anniversary of the ECOSOC. This time around the Prime Minister delivered his address at the Valedictory session, where he was joined by the Prime Minister of Norway and the UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres. The summit attracted a diverse set of representatives from several nations. The Conference that celebrated the 75th anniversary of the United Nations, bears the theme of ‘Multilateralism after COVID 19: What kind of United Nations do we need at the 75th anniversary’. The session that primarily focused on bolstering leadership through global cooperation and international institutions, was the first opportunity the Indian Prime Minister had to address member nations since India got elected to the United Nations Security Council. The Summit acts to India’s advantage as it aligns with India’s Security Council priority, wherein India has emphasised the need for reformed multilateralism in a post-COVID-19 world. The session also recalled India’s role as a holder of the inaugural Presidency of the Economic and Social Council.

International Appointments

Jawed Ashraf, the Indian Ambassador to the French Republic has been concurrently accredited as the Ambassador to Principality of Monaco. At the same time Dr Vidya P Nair, who currently serves as a Director in the Ministry of External Affairs, has been designated as the next Ambassador to Turkmenistan. Lastly, Shri Hemant Harishchandra Kotalwar, presently Joint Secretary on deputation to NCSC has recently taken up the position of the next Ambassador to the Czech Republic.

Conclusion

India has for long followed an inward-facing forward policy, that did not prioritise bilateral relations and strategic partnerships and adopted a neutral stance on geopolitical matters. However, that is not the case anymore. With the given situation that the country finds itself in regards to the Chinese Republic, and the leadership position it has assumed after the Indian Prime Minister addressed nations at the Shangri-La dialogue, India has further increased its relations with European Nations and further strengthened its bilateral relations with the United States, to an extent where India has been promoted to the status, generally granted to treaty allies. With India’s burgeoning interest in geopolitics, India’s current foreign policy decisions will shape the position it assumes in the post-pandemic world order. 

Read Also: INDIA’S FOREIGN POLICY REPORT – EDITION #3

The post INDIAN FOREIGN POLICY REPORT – EDITION #2 appeared first on WISER WORLD.

Confinement in homes, and lack of steady incomes, seems to have been fostering tensions and frustration in households and strain due to concerns over health and security. The lockdown is also putting women in isolation with violent partners, with nowhere to turn to for help. In India, the National Commission for Women has reported a 200 per cent increase in the reporting and stress call numbers of domestic violence on their helpline in the month of June alone.

Even before the lockdown was imposed, domestic violence was one of the most prevalent violations of human rights and a key impediment to the implementation of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) with one in three women have experienced it at some point in their lives. Economist Amartya Sen has estimated in 1990 that more than 100 million women are ‘missing’ — that includes those that never lived because of sex-selective abortions and infanticide, child neglect and maltreatment. That number was revised in 2015 to 136 million – this just shows how females have been subject to violence, at times even before they are born, at an alarmingly high rate.

Furthermore, it is essential to address that violence against women not only affects individuals, but also households, families and communities. However, the only way to change this stark reality is to hold the aggressors accountable and ensure that the problematic social norms that perpetuate the instances of violence are also tackled in an inclusive manner. The SDGs act as an apt framework to work off of, in order to shape a violence-free world – here’s how:

SDG 1: No Poverty

Women’s work – in agriculture, in communities, and at home, fuels economies and yet, isn’t regarded as ‘economic activity’. The exposure of females to incessant discrimination and mistreatment at the workplace makes them vulnerable and susceptible to gender-based violence. Women and girls are four per cent more likely to live in poverty and poor living conditions, a risk that rises up to twenty-five per cent as we factor-in other inequalities. Financial independence for women creates new opportunities and avenues for them to reject typical gender norms and leverage independence against violent partners. It also helps them to create a mentality of freedom and a sense of self for themselves. As a result, the reduction in poverty proves to be a catalyst towards enabling women in societies.

SDG 4: Quality Education

An estimated 246 million girls and boys experience school-related violence every year and one in four girls say that they never feel comfortable using school washrooms, according to a survey on youth conducted across four regions by the United Nations. Quality education is essential to ending violence against women. Educated girls are more likely to make their decisions towards family planning and managing finances, it is fundamental for the development of aspirations and skills, and children of educated women are more likely to have been safeguarded against malnutrition and illiteracy. Educational exposure also enables women to get access to leadership and decision-making opportunities. Hence, it propels them into a cycle of development that helps them create barriers to economic violence at home or in their communities.

SDG 5: Gender Equality

According to a 2018 report by United Nations Development Program (UNDP) in India, 18 per cent of women and girls aged between 15 and 49 years of age have experienced physical or sexual violence by an intimate partner or family member in the past twelve months. Further, someone is known to them – every day kills more than 137 women around the world. These figures represent a fraction of the discrimination against women in terms of opportunities, wealth, inheritance, safe access to public spaces, lack of decent work, and safe and healthy environments of living, learning, working, and engaging with their communities. These inequalities leave them extremely vulnerable to gender-based violence.

SDG 8: Decent Work and Economic Growth

Unsafe and poor working environments affect women regardless of their age, location, income, careers, or social standing. As of 2020, 18 countries have laws that enable husbands in preventing their wives from going to work. UN Women estimates that the economic costs of violence and harassment amount to US$12 trillion every year. As of 2018, 59 countries do not have laws protecting women from sexual harassment in the workplace. Economic growth cannot be achieved without the inclusion of women and their contribution to sustainable development in an empowering work environment.

SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities

In developing countries, concerns of safety and restricted access to public transport reduce the probability of women participating in the labour market by 16.5 per cent. As the processes of urbanization and industrialization catch up to tier two and tier three cities, the UN estimates that more than 5 billion people will reside in cities by 2030. This becomes an essential notion to address in the light of crimes against women that are prevalent in most urban regions. Further, there is widespread human rights abuse in many industries, such as fast fashion, many of which employ women in majorities. Women may be subject to exploitation in such circumstances and need to be safeguarded against such instances.

SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

In 37 countries, rape perpetrators are exempt from legal prosecution if they are married to, or subsequently marry the victim. Improving access to justice for survivors, and strengthening the legal framework against violators is an essential step towards making justice accessible for women – be it against violence, sexual misconduct at the workplace, or any crime against them. It is further imperative for women to mobilize and advocate support for their personal rights and those of their communities. This can be done digitally, individually, or at any level.  

Conclusion

At this point in time, COVID-19 is already testing humanity in unprecedented capacities. The shadow pandemic that we have had to face additionally is a mirror to the kind of societies we have built for ourselves so far. As we emerge from the pandemic, we must renew the outlooks towards inequalities and factor them into our responses to create a more equitable and sustainably sound world.

The post HOW DO THE SDGS PUSH THE NARRATIVE AGAINST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE? appeared first on WISER WORLD.

Some major updates to cover in today’s Indian Foreign Policy Report are as follow:

India’s Mission Sagar in the Indian Ocean Region

With that spirit in mind, India has recently launched, ‘Mission Sagar’ on the 10th of May. The mission is India’s way of assisting nations in the Indian Ocean Region, in their fight against COVID-19. In this mission, assistance was provided by the INS Kesari, that sailed to the Maldives, Mauritius, Madagascar, Comoros, and Seychelles, to deliver material assistance and in particular, medical assistance to Mauritius and Comoros. The successful completion of the mission can be seen as a major milestone, in terms of India’s new foreign policy of increased engagement in the Indo-Pacific and the Western Sectors of the Indian Ocean. The mission is also in line with the Prime Minister’s policy of SAGAR (Security and Growth for all in the Region). Mission Sagar is one particular example of increased Indian activities in the spheres of maritime security, cooperation, and navigation security, as the country transitions from a passive maritime actor to an exceptionally active one, with an equally important say in the Indo-Pacific, one of the most coveted and disputed regions in the world.

Bi-annual Exchange of Prisoner List Between India and Pakistan

As India has constantly tried to increase its presence on the international stage, it has found itself at an impasse with its neighbours on a multitude of issues. However, amidst this highly taut and tense environment, India and Pakistan recently exchanged a list of prisoners on the 1st of July. The exchange of lists is in accordance with the 2008 agreement, where the nations exchange a list of prisoners bi-annually, which is on the 1st of January and the 1st of July. The Indian lists contain 265 Pakistani civilians and 97 fishermen. On the other hand, the list issued by Pakistan contains 54 Indian civilians and 270 fishermen. Furthermore, to expedite the process, the Indian government has provided the nationality verification details of 7 civilians and 106 fishermen. Lastly, to show India’s commitment to the bilateral process, the central government has asked the Pakistan authorities to confirm the nationality status of 88 Pakistani prisoners in Indian custody.

India-China Dialogue Between Special Representatives

As mentioned earlier, India finds itself in an extremely precarious position when it comes to both its neighbours. However, the statement is especially true regarding its relationship with China over the Actual Line of Control. The escalation in violence in the Galwan Valley and the loss of life of Indian and Chinese soldiers was the first since 1975. This extremely volatile situation has both the governments scratching their heads as to what needs to be done next to diffuse the simmering atmosphere. China has chosen to strike a blow against India when it is busy dealing with the surge in casualties as a result of the COVID pandemic. However, in the last few months, India has chosen to follow a hardline stance against the Chinese. This has visibly resulted in increased violence on the border regions and has led to a campaign within the Indian polity advocating the ban of all Chinese products and applications.

However, recently there was a dialogue between the special representatives of the two countries. During the conversation, Ajit Doval, India’s National Security Advisor and H.E Wang Yi, State Councillor and Minister of Foreign Affairs for China, had an in-depth exchange of views on the border issue. During the discussion, several important points were highlighted, the first among them being that peace and tranquillity were essential for the further development of bilateral relations. Hence, it was agreed upon to disengage and pull back all troops from the Line of Actual Control and complete de-escalation on the India-China border. Secondly, both sides agreed to respect the Line of Actual Control and vowed to not take any unilateral action in the region.

India-Russia Bilateral Relations

In a further effort to strengthen bilateral relations, the Indian Prime Minister had a telephonic conversation with the President of the Russian Federation, wherein they discussed several strategic topics of interest to both nations. Mr Modi also used this opportunity to congratulate the President on the successful completion of the parade, marking the 75th anniversary of the end of the Second World War. More importantly, Mr Modi felicitated President Putin on the recent constitutional vote, through which President Putin has consolidated his power till 2036. The Prime minster further recalled the participation of an Indian contingent in the parade in Moscow, as a sign of friendship. Lastly, the Indian Government expressed their enthusiasm for hosting President Putin, later in the year during the bilateral summit.

India’s Participation at the ‘Strengthening Consensus for Peace’ in Afghanistan

Afghanistan over the last many decades has been turned into a complete war zone, with the presence of uninvited international actors. However, in the last two years, there have been constructive steps taken by both the Afghan government and the United States of America to bring the Taliban to the negotiation table in an effort to end the violence and bring lasting peace to the region. Lately, the Islamic Republic hosted a regional meeting, by the name of, ‘ Strengthening Consensus for Peace’. The meeting was chaired by the Afghan President, H.E Dr Mohammad Ashraf Ghani. The conference recorded participation by 20 countries and international organizations. During the conference, India expressed support for establishing a constitutional order in Afghanistan and unequivocally stated the importance of putting an end to terrorist sanctuaries and safe havens for destructive forces in Afghanistan.

Indian Nomination to the United Nations Security Council

Lastly, India recently secured its position as a non-permanent member of the United Nations Security Council, with a vote of 184 out of 192. However, to fill in the seat of the Ambassador/Permanent Representative to the United Nations and other international organizations in Geneva, Shri Mani Pandey, who currently serves as the Additional Secretary in the Ministry of External Affairs has been appointed.

Conclusion

Looking at India’s foreign policy from a macro perspective, we come to see that India has consistently tried to create an environment of inclusiveness then whether it be in the Indo-Pacific or the Western sectors of the Indian Ocean Region. India’s willingness to corporate and emerge as a regional power is a visible thought of its efforts in Afghanistan and its strategic partnerships with countries like the Russian Federation and France. In the last two decades, China has developed by leaps and bounds and has emerged not as a regional power but as a global hegemon. This has overshadowed nations like India, owing to China’s aggressive policies. Hence, while India tries to extend its reach globally, it has locked horns with China recently in the Galwan Valley region. The Indian and the Chinese sides seem to be ideologically clashing with each other over the Indo-Pacific, one of the most disputed regions of the world. It is India’s capabilities to fight off both the COVID 19 and the Chinese aggression, that will define the India that emerges in the near future.

Also Read: INDIA’S FOREIGN POLICY REPORT – EDITION #2

The post INDIAN FOREIGN POLICY REPORT – EDITION #1 appeared first on WISER WORLD.

Ensuring inclusive and equitable quality education and promoting lifelong learning opportunities for all like the fourth Sustainable Development Goal (SDG 4) perfectly encapsulates the motto- “Leave no one behind”. However, India’s progress in attaining this goal is a mixed success story. With innumerable schemes like Samagra Shiksha Abhiyan, Mid-day Meal, Integrated Child Development Services (ICDS), Pradhan Mantri Kaushal Vikas Yojana (PMKVY), Beti Bachao, Beti Padao and the Right to Education (RTE) Act, we all expected modification in the sector with everyone getting free access to quality education and thus able to improve their living standards. But that is not the story here. Although India has made progress in getting children enrolled in educational institutions, it is still not enough. In fact, according to the Progress Report 2020, the Net Enrolment Ratio (NER) for primary education has decreased from 87.1% in 2015-16 to 82.5% in 2017-18. Similarly, for the upper primary, it has decreased from 74% to 72.6%. But still, India has come a long way since 1947 in terms of quantity of education and it’s doing better in that regard. What it really lacks in is the quality of education.

Despite implementing the Right to Education Act 2009, India’s performance is worse than the developing South-East Asian countries like Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand, and Vietnam with the mean years of schooling at 6.5 years according to the Human Development Report 2019. The learning outcomes are even worse. According to ASER Report 2018, only 44.2% of Standard V students and 69% of Standard VIII students in rural government schools can read a Standard II level text and this proportion has only decreased in the last 10 years. Between 2008 and 2018, the proportion of ‘division solvers’ in Standard V in rural government schools went down from 34% to 22.7% and that for the students in Standard VIII went down from 65.2% to 40%. These figures are just outrageous. There is a huge variation in the literacy and numeracy levels among these students which is the most critical constraint in the structure of the Indian Education system. The learning outcomes for rural private schools are no better than rural public schools. PISA is an international assessment that provides cross-national learning benchmarks and helps nations improving their learning levels. The last time India participated in PISA in 2009-10, it stood at the second last place. Imagine the learning deficits that have accumulated from years of low-quality education. When the time comes to look for employment, what are these young people trained in this mangy manner going to find?

With the reduction in profitability from agricultural activities, parents in rural areas have let their children study well beyond the age when they have themselves joined the workforce in hope that it will be a way out of their insecure farm life. However, when these children graduate, they will find that there are hardly any good jobs. It’s a disaster that is waiting to happen. Even if we look at the whole population instead of just these poorly educated rural children, the story remains the same. The Annual Employability Survey 2019 report by Aspiring Minds revealed that only 20% of the Indian engineers were found employable in the knowledge economy and a meagre 2.5% of them possess new-age skills in Artificial Intelligence (AI) that the industry actually requires. These figures can be justified if we look at the proportion of those above 5 years of age who are able to use the internet which is just 20.1%. Estimates suggest that only 2.3% of India’s workforce has undergone formal skill training compared to Germany’s 75% and South Korea’s 96%. The enrolment rate for tertiary education is merely 28.3% which points towards failed policies. This all has led to a large fraction of the workforce having insufficient work skills. If the employability remains so low, we cannot ensure a sustainable pool of students enrolled in schools as their trust in the system erodes.

According to a report tabled in the parliament by the Ministry of Human Resource Development (MHRD), we have over 100,000 schools with solitary teachers. At the national level, over 75 per cent of schools have a multi-grade situation with one teacher being coerced into teaching students of several grades in the same classroom. The high rate of teacher absenteeism, limited time spent on teaching when the teacher is in the class and generally poor quality of education are among important reasons for an abysmally low number of enrolments as reported by the NITI Aayog. In February 2015, Maharashtra held an evaluation test for teachers of government-run schools. Only a little over 1% primary teachers and 4.9% upper primary teachers who took the test passed. This is a furious figure and perfectly explains where the problem lies in our education system.

Talking about inclusion for everybody, India’s position is abominable in that too. Literacy rate of male population above 15 years of age is 82% while that of the female population is just 65% which is a stark difference. The reasons for females for not attending school being the classic ones – engaged in domestic activities, financial constraints, marriage or not interested in getting education. The enrolment rate of children with disabilities is mortifying with merely 1.18% in primary education, 0.56% in secondary education and 0.25% in higher secondary education. There is an urgent need to develop infrastructure to accommodate these children as hardly 22% of the schools have disabled-friendly toilets and only 33% have disabled-friendly ramps. Not only this but only 55 in 100 schools have basic handwashing facilities.

The Draft National Education Policy 2019 (DNEP) bought really good suggestions regarding the separation of regulators from operators and policymakers thus avoiding the conflict of interest, significant autonomy to the university system and Early Child Care and Education (ECCE) but it fails to address the real crisis which is teacher quality or rather teacher’s unaccountability. The underlying notion for all the reforms suggested is that there is a lack of resources which can be in connection with infrastructure, quantity of teachers or even quantity of trained teachers and this is a fundamentally mistaken idea. The real culprit is not the lack of inputs but the absence of accountability of schools, teachers and the system as a whole.

The new education policy also asked to double the public expenditure on education from 10.6% (2018-19) to 20%. It is not a sensible thing to do in the current circumstances of wastage of government resources. Public Schools with fewer than 50 students and an average of 29 students per school stood at 3.7 lakh schools in 2014-15. They represented 36% of all public schools. This is a catastrophic situation. This is too small a size for it to be pedagogically or even economically viable as the per-pupil salary expenditure becomes really high. At the point where the learning outcomes of these government schools are pitiably low, almost 80% of the public expenditure on education in 2018-19 is spent on teacher’s salaries. In a state like Uttar Pradesh, there is an increase of 15% in salaries each year where inflation is just 3-3.5%. All the capacity of the state to increase expenditure on education is being tapped by salaries alone. There is such an inefficient use of the government resources that any effort towards increasing education spending is like putting your money in a blackhole. What we need to do is put in place some new governance mechanisms to increase efficiency instead of increasing the budget itself.

The policy talks about the issue of small schools being economically suboptimal and suggests for consolidation of these schools by creating large school complexes. But this again won’t be beneficial for students if it is not done keeping in mind that these small schools cater to the needs of those living in isolated and remote areas. An independent study by Accountability Initiate (AI) maintained that Rajasthan saw a 6% decline in enrolment of backward social groups including Scheduled Castes (SCs), Scheduled Tribes (STs) and Other Backward Castes (OBCs) when small schools were merged. The study highlighted that the stakeholders in the process namely teachers, principals and parents were never consulted. If providing the required number of teachers for every school has become physically and economically unviable, we must seriously review the earlier approach of providing a school in every habitation within one or three kilometres or providing a school where 20 or more school-going children live. If they want to consolidate schools, they should provide the children with facilities to go to school.

CONCLUSION

India has a long way to go to provide quality education to all. It especially needs to focus on rural and backward regions’ education which is in poor health and needs an overhaul. India’s history is strewed with ambitious education policies that have not been fully implemented. The latest National Education Policy has a possibility of being similar to the previous policies in terms of poor implementation unless the government addresses the reasons behind the past policy implementation failures and makes conscious efforts to amend the mistakes. These points are important because in India what we tend to do is write policies and plans that say the right things but are unable to drive the intended changes.

The post QUALITY EDUCATION IN INDIA: A DISTANT DREAM? appeared first on WISER WORLD.