India should join other middle powers to protect the global rule of law

India’s greatest economic and diplomatic challenge in the short and medium term is the change in the global geopolitical system that is now underway. It began with the emergence of a government in the United States (US) that is transactional, amoral, and disdainful of the rule of law and multilateralism in international relations.

 

It has intensified with the war between Iran and the US and Israel, which has no justification under the rule of law agreed upon in the United Nations (UN) Charter. This is not the first time the US has acted in this manner. But unlike most of his predecessors, President Donald Trump made no attempt to secure UN approval and ignored altogether any sort of prior discussion, even with US allies.

 

The principal medium-term, geopolitics-related challenge that India will face is the drift of the US towards becoming an isolated and arrogant global power, or, more accurately, a global bully. This is a sad deterioration from the steady improvement in India-US relations started by President George W Bush and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh with the nuclear deal in 2008.  India can no longer count on continued strengthening of relations with the US. In fact, it must be ready to accept the risks of sudden deterioration driven by a mercurial Trump, constrained only a little by his friendship with Prime Minister Narendra Modi.

 

This challenge from the largest economic and military power in the world reminds me of what sometimes happened in the villages of India dominated by a single household with vast landholdings. While the accepted jajmani system generally ensured social stability, an occasional head of the dominating household over-asserted his power. This led to some organised resistance, mainly from the middle-level households in the village. That is what we need in the global geopolitical system, and that is what India must quietly pursue.

 

There are some signs of growing connectivity between the middle-power countries. One sign of this is the recent free-trade agreements that India has signed with the United Kingdom, the European Free Trade Association (EFTA), and Australia, as well as the negotiations with the European Union, which have been concluded, and the ongoing negotiations with the Mercosur group in South America. These agreements reduce India’s dependence on the US and perhaps even on China.

 

One request that is pending is for India to join an agreement titled the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership, or the CPTPP. This is a grouping of 12 countries that account for 15 per cent of the world economy. It does not include any of the great powers. But it includes middle-level powers like the UK, Japan, Mexico, Australia, and Canada.

 

Some other middle powers are considering joining. It is under consideration by India, though there are some parts of it, particularly on agriculture, that will be a major challenge for India to accept. From the broader perspective of countering the over-assertive powers of the US, and potentially of China, India must accept the compromises of the CPTPP. A strengthening of India’s economic relationships with middle-power countries will be a basis for a related strengthening of diplomatic cooperation.

 

These new trade agreements are also important for what India must aim at to cope with the uncertainty of trade policy fomented by the US. Post-2000, infotech services were the major driver of export growth, with their share rising to $225 billion today and employing about 8 million white-collar skilled workers.  The slowing down of this export growth and the decline in related employment growth from 8 per cent per year in the five years from 2010 to 2015 to less than half now are not just attributable to the trade policies of Mr Trump, but to a change in the nature of the infotech sector, with the rapid development and expansion of artificial intelligence (AI) services. In the long-term, India’s strong promotion of AI domestically may correct the current slowdown. But in the short- and medium-term, India must rely more on manufactured product exports for maintaining its export earnings at a reasonable level. The trade agreements that it has signed with the middle-income powers will support this boost to goods exports. More than that, it will provide a basis for boosting growth in the states that are below the national average but which have the capacity to provide blue-collar workers for manufacturing plants.

 

A more difficult question is what India can do to cope with the disruption that is arising from the attack on Iran by the US and Israel and the spread of the war to the entire Gulf area. The immediate impact of the West Asia war is through the sharp rise in oil and gas prices, constraints in the movement of these through the Gulf, and a potential drop in remittances to India from West Asia, which amount to about $50 billion. The more serious impact of war will be felt if it continues well beyond the 5-6 weeks that the US says is enough to achieve its goals of destroying Iran’s missile, nuclear and naval capacity.

 

The most serious impact of this will be on India, China and most other Asian countries because of their heavy dependence on oil and gas supplies from the Gulf area. The impact of such an extension and broadening of the war will drastically reduce India’s prospects of becoming a developed state by 2047. The answers to what India can and should do depends heavily on how long the war will last. If the US withdraws from the war in a few weeks, the economic impact of the war may get diluted, provided Israel also steps down from its goal of breaking the religion-based ruling power of Iran. But at present there is no way of predicting the future of the war. 

 

One thing that is essential is to prevent the war from escalating beyond the Gulf region and dragging on over a prolonged period. This is where a group of middle-power states, whose political and military influence cannot be ignored, can play a role. If they can use their significant political power to assert the importance of the international rule of law with the US and the other great military powers, they may help in reducing the risks of an extended war.

 

It will not be easy to persuade all middle powers to condemn the illegal attack launched by the US and Israel on Iran, though even the European allies of the US are noticeably discreet in supporting the action. However, it may be possible to persuade them to use their influence to restrict the scale of expansion and to become a neutralising, war-reduction force.

 

This is why the world needs effective action by middle-level powers. My hope is that India, which is pushing the agenda for peace and is a significant economic and military power in the world, can take a lead in moving beyond the many trade agreements it has negotiated with the middle-power countries to promote an informal peace-making coalition and reassertion of the global rule of law among these influential states.

desaind@icloud.com