Search

Begin New Search Topic Bilateral Relations Political Geography India

21. Assessing the Role of the PLA Southern Theater Command in a China-India Contingency

Author:
Suyash Desai
Publication Date:
02-2023
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
China Brief
Institution:
The Jamestown Foundation
Abstract:
Soon after Xi Jinping assumed charge as the Central Military Commission (CMC) Chairman in November 2012, he set the stage for a sweeping military restructuring. On February 1, 2016, the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) moved away from the old Soviet-inspired Military Regions (MR) system to the U.S.-inspired Theater Command (TC) model. Under this new model, the seven Military Regions—Shenyang, Beijing, Jinan, Nanjing, Guangzhou, Chengdu and Lanzhou—were reorganized into five geographic TCs, each with a specific “strategic direction” (战略方向). [1] Following the force restructuring, the three TCs that concern India are the Western Theater Command (WTC) along with Tibet and Xinjiang Military Districts (TMD and XMD), the Southern Theater Command (STC) and the Central Theater Command (CTC). WTC’s 76th and 77th Group Armies (GA) under the PLA Army’s (PLAA) jurisdiction are mandated to ensure the security of China’s land boundaries with Central Asian states, India, Nepal, and Bhutan. The TMD and XMD were retained to oversee security on the Chinese border with the Indian state of Arunachal Pradesh and the Union Territory of Ladakh, respectively. In addition to the PLAA, the PLA Air Force (PLAAF), the PLA Rocket Force (PLARF) and the PLA Logistic Support Force (JLSF) are also significant services under the WTC command, while the PLA Navy (PLAN) plays a minor role at Pangong Tso in the Aksai Chin region. Elsewhere, PLAN forces under the STC’s jurisdiction are responsible for securing Chinese interests not only in the South China Sea but also possibly in the Indian Ocean Region and the Western Pacific Ocean. The CTC is mandated to protect the capital but also acts as an anchor to provide additional troops to other theaters in case of a contingency, including WTC. This is an important division of responsibilities for the Chinese armed forces after Xi’s recent military reforms. [2] However, recent developments have highlighted that the STC’s 75th Group Army could also play an important role in securing the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial integrity in Tibet, especially in the eastern sector bordering the Indian state of Arunachal Pradesh. Furthermore, the troops from the STC’s 75th Group Army could be used for rotation in the Tibetan theater, and the 75th GA’s artillery could be mobilized during a contingency with India. The four major reasons that the STC’s 75th GA could play such a role are improving connectivity between Tibet and the Southwestern Chinese province of Yunnan, minor changes to the 75th GA’s force composition, recent military exercises by STC’s 75th GA in Tibet and historical precedent.
Topic:
Bilateral Relations, Armed Forces, People's Liberation Army (PLA), and Regional Security
Political Geography:
China, South Asia, India, and Asia

22. The Emerging Era of Minilateralism in Indian Foreign Policy and Its Impacts on South Asian Politics

Author:
Attiq ur-Rehman
Publication Date:
01-2023
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
South Asian Studies
Institution:
Department of Political Science, University of the Punjab
Abstract:
The contemporary trends of Indian foreign policy cannot be studied without understanding the extension of New Delhi’s strategic collaborations with different stats beyond its traditional bilateral and multilateral cooperative frameworks. The prevalence of a minilateral approach to New Delhi's foreign relations has started focusing on creating different trilateral and quadrilateral engagements with diverse states to address the emerging security challenges of contemporary global power politics. These security challenges are fundamentally linked with the emerging role of China in the international system and New Delhi’s longstanding confrontational ties with Beijing. The position of the United States, and its strategic support to New Delhi, cannot be ignored in the evolving India-China confrontations in economic and strategic domains. The continuation of cooperation against common security threats originating from China has witnessed a bilateral Indo-US strategic collaboration against China in the broader Asian balance of power. Thus, the increasing shadows of minilateralism on Indian foreign policy cannot be treated separately from South Asian regional politics, where India has created a security dilemma parallel to introducing various new trends in the regional arms race of South Asia. This new strategic alignment of New Delhi with the international community tries to counter the increasing role of China in the South Asian region, where Pakistan provides a gateway to China for its South Asian entry. Therefore, the central theme of this paper revolves around the newly evolved era of minilateralism in New Delhi's foreign relations and their impacts on the politics of nuclearized subcontinent due to Islamabad's strong trading ties with China. This paper is an academic endeavour to provide a comprehensive understanding of New Delhi's increasing reliance on minilateralism and its relevance with the decades-long India-Pakistan rivalry.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Bilateral Relations, Conflict, Regional Security, and Minilateralism
Political Geography:
Pakistan, South Asia, and India

23. Korea’s Indo-Pacific Strategy and its Implications for Bilateral Cooperation between India and South Korea

Author:
Shahana Chattaraj
Publication Date:
07-2023
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Korea Institute for International Economic Policy (KIEP)
Abstract:
South Korea officially launched the Indo-Pacific Strategy on 28 December 2022 highlighting the importance of the region and its significance in the current era. The detailed report on South Korea’s Indo-Pacific Strategy is based on the fundamental principles of cooperation with an emphasis on tolerance, trust and mutual benefit. The strategy emphasised the promotion of freedom, peace and prosperity in the Indo-Pacific region through the joint establishment of a rule-based order and cooperation on human rights (MOFA 2022). The Indo-Pacific Strategy proposed by the South Korean government is a 37-page document that is considered to be the country’s comprehensive regional strategy and will shape the future foreign policy towards the Indo-Pacific region. The target areas of the Indo-Pacific Strategy can be understood as the North Pacific, Southeast Asia, South Asia, Oceania, African countries along the Indian Ocean, Europe and Central and South America as highlighted in the report.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, International Cooperation, Bilateral Relations, and Regional Politics
Political Geography:
India, Asia, South Korea, and Indo-Pacific

24. A Blind Spot of Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan into Relation with India: The Second Reign Since August 2021

Author:
Mohammad Khalid Khawrin
Publication Date:
06-2023
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
AUSTRAL: Brazilian Journal of Strategy International Relations
Institution:
Postgraduate Program in International Strategic Studies, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul
Abstract:
India, from a humanistic perspective, has significantly contributed to Afghanistan's development and aids. The inductive research method was applied in the study. The nature of the data was in qualitative form in the secondary mood. The data was analyzed through the narrative analysis technique. The results showed that the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan (IEA) is in state-making process. Afghanistan is complicated and unstable and that how it develops politically will determine how India and Afghanistan will interact in the future. It is recommended that IEA clarify and formalize its internal and external politics, policies, commitment to Islamic human rights, and responsibility to the state.
Topic:
Development, Bilateral Relations, Foreign Aid, and Taliban
Political Geography:
Afghanistan, South Asia, and India

25. From Non-Alignment to Realignment

Author:
Akhil Ramesh and Cleo Paskal
Publication Date:
09-2023
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Comparative Connections
Institution:
Pacific Forum
Abstract:
The US and India expanded cooperation across various domains in the second reporting period of 2023. The two moved to materialize projects and initiatives that were conceived in the first quarter, in wide-ranging domains with significant geopolitical and geoeconomic scope including defense cooperation, critical and emerging technologies, and infrastructure development. While New Delhi continued to straddle groupings such as BRICS, Shanghai Cooperation Organization, and the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue, the US-India partnership broke ground on more initiatives than any of India’s other bilateral relationships. Modi and Biden visited each other’s capitals and reaffirmed their commitment to a rules-based international order. The rousing reception Modi received in Washington and the continued US preeminence in most major trade and technology initiatives conceived by India highlighted the growing partnership between the two democracies. And the two leaders, while facing elections next year, seem willing to work together on common global priorities—sometimes at domestic political costs. Also, while taking place outside the May-August reporting period, the enormous groundwork Delhi laid over the summer (and earlier), plus the absence of Xi Jinping and Vladimir Putin, transformed the G20 meeting that took place in September into an event that showcased India’s leadership in finding common ground between the priorities of the Global South and the US. The result was potentially transformative geoeconomic initiatives that could reshape geopolitics, and encourage, for example, the conditions necessary for a free, open and inclusive Indo-Pacific. This wasn’t the India of nonalignment; this was an India shaping a realignment, with tacit US support.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, International Cooperation, Bilateral Relations, and Realignment
Political Geography:
South Asia, India, North America, and United States of America

26. The BRICS Expansion: Challenges for Consensus, Promises of Influence

Author:
Al Jazeera Center for Studies
Publication Date:
09-2023
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Al Jazeera Center for Studies
Abstract:
The BRICS bloc has expanded to include six new member states, but this expansion may deepen and complicate differences within it and weaken its ability to make influential decisions collectively
Topic:
Bilateral Relations, Economy, Alliance, BRICS, and Consensus
Political Geography:
Russia, China, India, and Brazil

27. The Conventional Wisdom About the Chinese Military Challenge: Incomplete and Unpersuasive

Author:
Steven Kosiak
Publication Date:
11-2023
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft
Abstract:
Now possessing the world’s largest economy and backed up by an increasingly capable military, in recent years China has grown into an ever more significant and complex concern for the United States, its friends and allies, and others in the Indo–Pacific region. It has become not only stronger and more capable but, in a variety of areas, including the South China Sea and the Taiwan Straits, more assertive. In this light, it is only prudent that the United States remain engaged in the region and, along with its allies, maintain robust military capabilities. At the same time, however, it is difficult to understand some of the main features of what has emerged as the conventional wisdom concerning the magnitude, scope and shape of the challenge China represents, particularly in its military dimensions. Among other things, shortcomings in the conventional wisdom include the unsettling degree to which mainstream assessments of the Chinese military challenge have: • devoted enormous attention to various Taiwan contingencies and, by comparison, remarkably little attention to the Chinese military’s capacity — or lack thereof — to directly conquer or coerce any of the major powers in the region; • equated defending Taiwan, and other relatively small nearby economies, with preventing Chinese regional hegemony, without providing significant analytical support for the presumption; • argued that Taiwan is defensible, in part because of the vulnerability of seaborne invasion forces to precision-guided munitions, as well as the difficulties inherent strategies aimed at punishing adversaries into submission (e.g., through bombardment or blockade) — while seeming to ignore the logical inferences of those conclusions for the defensibility of the major powers in the region, which are larger, economically stronger and generally located much farther from China; • analogized the challenge posed by China today to the threats posed by Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan in World War Two and the Soviet Union during the Cold War in ways that — because of differences in, among other things, geography, technology, nationalism, and China’s role in the global economy (including its great dependence on international trade) — may do more to obscure than illuminate the challenge. These analytical shortcomings need to be addressed through additional, more rigorous and better focused research and analysis. While clearly needed, however, it seems unlikely that this additional analysis will come close to fully redeeming the conventional wisdom about the Chinese military challenge as articulated today, including the necessity of some key components of the U.S. military’s existing force structure, modernization and other plans. Taken together, the gaps, weaknesses, blind spots, and analytical leaps upon which the conventional wisdom rests appear too pervasive and deep for such to be the case. Given this reality, rather than the current U.S. strategy, embracing something akin to the Active Denial strategy proposed by a Quincy Institute panel in 2022 would seem to represent a more prudent approach. 1 This strategy embraces some cuts to force structure — especially among ground forces — yielding significant budgetary savings. But it retrains robust air, naval and other forces that would leave the U.S. military with a powerful capacity to deter and, if need be, counter Chinese aggression in the Indo–Pacific and, specifically, to support key U.S. allies and friends in the region. And better addressing the areas noted above could go far towards facilitating the refinement of this more restrained strategy, and ensuring that it is both as effective as possible and can be supported at an affordable and sustainable price.
Topic:
Nationalism, Bilateral Relations, Hegemony, Influence, and Military
Political Geography:
China, India, Asia, and United States of America

28. A Historical Evaluation of China’s India Policy: Lessons for India-China Relations

Author:
Vijay Gokhale
Publication Date:
12-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Abstract:
The violent clash in the Galwan valley in eastern Ladakh in 2020 fundamentally altered the dynamics of the India-China relationship. China’s increasing transgressions and attempts at coercion in the border areas since 2008–2009 have put the boundary question to the center of the India-China relationship. The salience of this question has also increased because the geopolitical backlash to China’s actions in 2020 has been greater than in previous instances, and because India’s policymakers and strategic community are no longer willing to give Beijing the benefit of the doubt regarding its intentions and actions. This has prompted a comprehensive relook in India at the past, present, and future of the relationship. While much of this has focused on the relationship from the Indian perspective and on trying to understand India’s China policy, the current chill in ties has highlighted the necessity of understanding China’s India policy. Thus, using Chinese sources, this paper analyzes the drivers of that policy and the options available to Indian policymakers to engage with, adapt to, and mold it. This paper argues that from the time of Mao Zedong’s rise to the helm of the Chinese Communist Party and the founding of the People’s Republic of China in 1949, China’s India policy has been shaped by its view of the larger great power strategic triangle of China, the Soviet Union (later Russia), and the United States. As this triangle has evolved, this has had a direct effect on the India-China relationship. For much of the past seventy years, China was the weakest corner of the triangle and therefore driven by goals of security and status. In that context, it saw India—another large, developing country in Asia—as a competitor for security and status alike. As a result, China always looked at India through the lens of its own relations with the Soviet Union and the United States. It did not view India on its own merits, or credit it with agency, but as unequal as well as untrustworthy. China’s objective during the Cold War was to keep India as neutral as possible. In the post–Cold War period, the goal evolved to limit through containment and coercion India’s capacity to harm China’s strategic goal of hegemony. This paper analyzes China’s India policy in three phases. In the first phase between 1949 and 1962, China viewed the United States as its primary adversary and its core objective was to keep India neutral and away from the U.S. camp on matters of concern to Beijing. Flowing from this was the secondary objective of utilizing India’s influence in the developing world to build “Asian solidarity” to stem U.S. inroads into Asia.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Bilateral Relations, Territorial Disputes, and Military
Political Geography:
China, India, and Asia

29. Russia and India: A New Chapter

Author:
Rajan Menon and Eugene Rumer
Publication Date:
09-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Abstract:
Russian-Indian relations are undergoing a major change. Throughout the Cold War, the relationship rested on three pillars: Soviet arms sales to India; shared public-sector-heavy economic philosophy and extensive Soviet aid; and the Soviet Union–India vs. United States–Pakistan–China geopolitical alignment. The fall of the Soviet Union, the rise of India and China, the U.S.-China tensions, the deepening of U.S.-India ties, and the Russian-Chinese partnership intensified by Russia’s break with the West and the war against Ukraine have had a profound effect on Russian-Indian relations. Of the three pillars of the Moscow–New Delhi relationship, only one remains: the arms trade. Russia remains a major supplier of weapons to India, and Russian equipment still makes up a vast portion of Indian Armed Forces’ force structure; but Russia is facing competition in the Indian arms market. India’s desire to diversify its supply of weapons and develop its own defense industry has resulted in declining Russian arms deliveries to India in recent years. Russia’s break with the West because of its war against Ukraine has accelerated its pivot toward China. Against the backdrop of U.S.-China and China-India tensions, Russia’s position as China’s junior partner will make it harder for Russia to preserve partnership with India. Moscow’s leverage versus both New Delhi and Beijing is shrinking as they have greater capabilities of their own than they had previously and have new partners that offer more than Russia. Still, the Russian-Indian partnership will continue. For India, Russia remains an important supplier of weapons and, most recently, oil. India has not joined the West’s sanctions on Russia. By doing so, it has demonstrated its independent foreign policy. For Russia, India is an important market for arms and oil. The Indian-U.S. security relationship is relatively new, whereas India-Russia ties have endured for over two generations. India has no reason to forsake the benefits of this relationship. Nor does Russia. It has been said that Moscow plays a weak hand well, but sustaining strong security ties with both China and India will become more difficult for it. The question is how China will react to Russian arms sales to India, and what Russia will do if pressed by China to curtail them. For reasons of geographic proximity, economic ties, and personal relations between Presidents Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping, the odds favor Beijing over New Delhi to have a bigger say in Moscow.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Cold War, History, Bilateral Relations, Partnerships, Geopolitics, and Russia-Ukraine War
Political Geography:
Russia, South Asia, Eurasia, Ukraine, India, and United States of America

30. An Analysis on India's Foreign Economic Relations and Its Implications for Korea-India Cooperation

Author:
Jeeyon Janet Kim, Hyoungmin Han, Hyeyoon Keum, and Jonghun Pek
Publication Date:
03-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Korea Institute for International Economic Policy (KIEP)
Abstract:
Economic exchanges between Korea and India have been expanding since the signing of the Korea-India CEPA, which took effect in 2010, and the promotion of the New Southern Policy (NSP) by Korea, but the level of exchange still remains insufficient considering the potential of the two countries. We aim to contribute to deepening Korea-India trade cooperation by analyzing India's foreign trade investment relations. Part II and III examine India's recent trade and investment structure with major countries including Korea, and Part IV analyzes India's status on the global production networks. In conclusion, Part V presents various implications for Korea-India trade cooperation.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Economics, International Cooperation, Bilateral Relations, and Trade
Political Geography:
South Asia, India, Asia, and South Korea