India-U.S. Relations: Between Courteous Acquaintance and Civilizational Dissonance

 Ajay Jha 

Source Link

In the realm of international diplomacy, India and the United States are often described as natural partners. Yet, beneath the photo-ops and defense agreements lies a complex reality: this is not a relationship of equals in cultural perception or mutual understanding. Rather, it is a courteous acquaintance often marred by deep civilizational dissonance and misaligned expectations.

The Illusion of Natural Alliance

In Washington’s strategic calculus, India is often viewed through the lens of utility: a counterweight to China, a lucrative defense market, and a potential ideological ally. From this vantage, the U.S. finds it frustrating when New Delhi does not toe the line—be it on Russia, Iran, or global trade rules. But India does not see itself as a junior partner in any Western coalition. It sees itself as a civilizational state—an ancient, enduring entity with its own norms, systems, and path to modernity.

Civilizational Memory vs. Modern Superpower

India’s worldview is shaped not merely by the last 75 years of independence, but by thousands of years of philosophical, cultural, and social evolution. Baked into Indian Statecraft are concepts like dharma, which emphasizes moral duty and balance. There is also pluralism, and relational diplomacy, which emphasizes mutual respect and strategic autonomy. This contrasts sharply with America’s liberal-internationalist worldview, rooted in Enlightenment values such as liberty and free markets. Included is missionary zeal, and a tendency to universalize one’s experience.

This civilizational self-awareness makes India uniquely resistant to pressure. When the U.S. imposes moral lectures or sanctions threats (as with CAATSA over Russian defense deals), India sees not principled diplomacy but a form of modern-day imperial overreach.

Can India's fast-growing defence firms challenge the global biggies?

Source Link

Bharat forge chairman and Managing Director Baba Kalyani summed up the key takeaway from Operation Sindoor at the recently held Confederation of Indian Industry (CII) annual business summit. “Executed with strategic clarity and precise coordination, it showcased not only the operational brilliance of the Indian armed forces but also the growing strength of India’s indigenous defence manufacturing ecosystem.”

The operations were a defining moment for India’s fast-growing defence manufacturing sector. The prospect of more orders prompted some to announce capital expenditure plans. “We have to take responsibility to build equipment fast so that we can provide our armed forces much more than what they have today and what they need in future,” Kalyani added. Pune-based Bharat Forge is one of India’s leading private sector defence manufacturers.

Almost on cue, Dassault Aviation and Tata Advanced Systems announced four production transfer agreements to make fuselage of the Rafale fighter jet at a new facility in Hyderabad. The partnership is a significant achievement for India’s aim of becoming a major defence manufacturing hub. It marks a significant first for the €6.2 billion French aerospace company as the Hyderabad facility, to be set up by Tata Advanced Systems, will be the first factory outside France to manufacture Rafale fuselage. 

The partnership has the potential to boost the country’s defence and aerospace ecosystem and encourage other biggies to explore manufacturing tie-ups with Indian companies. At present, indigenous manufacturing is primarily driven by partnerships between government-run Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) and industry.

India Hits China with Tariffs on Key Imports, Counters Fertilizer Blockade Head-On

Source Link

India is no longer playing nice when it comes to Beijing’s economic muscle-flexing. In a strong dual-front response to China's trade provocations, the Indian government has imposed anti-dumping duties on six critical chemical imports while also scrambling to respond to a silent but significant squeeze on specialty fertilizers.

 With the bilateral trade deficit touching a staggering $99.2 billion, the message from New Delhi is clear: economic sovereignty comes before anything else.

The Directorate General of Trade Remedies (DGTR) recently concluded detailed investigations that confirmed what many domestic producers have long alleged—cheap Chinese chemicals were flooding the Indian market and undercutting local industries. Acting on these findings, the Ministry of Commerce moved fast,

 levying duties ranging from $20.87 per kg to over $2,000 per tonne. These tariffs will stay in place for the next five years.

Key Sectors Targeted in Duty Crackdown

The list of chemicals affected reads like a who’s who of industrial essentials. PEDA, critical to herbicide production, now carries duties up to $2,017.9 per tonne. Acetonitrile, a solvent crucial in pharma manufacturing, gets slapped with up to $481 per tonne in duties, while Vitamin A Palmitate—used widely in nutritional supplements—draws a fresh tariff of $20.87 per kg.

At 80, the U.N. Is Down But Not Out

Richard Gowan

Source Link

A U.N. peacekeeper in a blue helmet is seen in profile as he holds the pole of a blue U.N. flag in front of a razor wire border fence. Three other blue-helmet troops are visible behind him, holding rifles and peering at the camera. 

The landscape beyond the fence is a dusty hill spotted with sparse plants.U.N. peacekeeping troops from the Indian contingent secure the Lebanese border with Israel, seen on the outskirts of of Kfarchouba on Aug. 26, 2023. Marwan Naamani/Picture Alliance via Getty Images

My FP: Follow topics and authors to get straight to what you like. Exclusively for FP subscribers. Subscribe Now | Log In

The United Nations celebrates its 80th birthday in a state of advanced disarray. Signed by the representatives of 50 states on June 26, 1945, 

the organization’s charter set out to “save succeeding generations from the scourge of war.” Today, the U.N. has 193 members, but amid ongoing bloodshed in Ukraine and Gaza and elsewhere, none of them—including the five veto powers in the Security Council—can pretend that it is succeeding.

The war between Israel and Iran has only highlighted the organization’s limitations. The Security Council has met repeatedly to discuss the crisis;

 ambassadors have traded barbs; and China, Russia, and Pakistan drafted a resolution condemning the U.S. attacks on Iranian nuclear sites. But this is all little more than diplomatic performance art, and nobody really believes that the U.N. has the authority to halt the war.