The parliamentary elections in Bangladesh were held recently on 12 February 2026. The elections marked one of the most significant political transitions in Bangladesh in decades. The victory of the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP), led by Tarique Rahman, put an end of the Interim government by Muhammad Yunus and opened a new chapter in Bangladesh’s domestic politics and foreign relations.
Two years after a mass uprising that toppled the government of Sheikh Hasina, the country saw the leadership of Muhammad Yunus. Now it is in the hands of Rahman, whose party won 212 of the 300 seats in the parliament. While the election was somewhat exceptional and mostly about governance, democratic reforms, and economic recovery, however, it reignited an old question back into focus— how are relations between India and Bangladesh likely to evolve in the future? To a large extent the answer depends on the perception of India among the general population in Bangladesh.
Why India-Bangladesh Relation Became a Sensitive Issue
India has long been a crucial factor for Bangladesh’s political discourse, and Bangladesh is equally important for India. India-Bangladesh cooperation on trade, energy connectivity, and security extended very efficiently during Sheikh Hasina’s tenure. However, critics inside Bangladesh argued that Dhaka had become too dependent on New Delhi. According to many opposition leaders, India was perceived as a state backing the previous government politically and diplomatically. As a result, public sentiment towards India often became negative and begun to shape political conversation.
Anti-Indian remarks became new normal
Anti-India statements and even actions were frequently reported throughout these 18 months period. The most provocative remarks were related to India’s seven Northeastern states. At a protest rally, NCP leader Hasnat Abdullah said “seven sisters will be separated from India,”. Even the interim leader did not refrain from criticising India. In his speech during his visit to China, he specifically described India’s Northeast region as “landlocked” and suggested China to expand its presence in the region, and also Bangladesh could serve as a vital gateway to the ocean. He also added, “Bangladesh can provide huge potential for economic prosperity for the seven sister states, Nepal and Bhutan.” More shocking statement came after a terror attack in Pahalgam district of Jammu and Kashmir, when a retired Major General ALM Fazlur Rahman wrote on social media that, “If India attacks Pakistan, then Bangladesh should occupy all Northeastern states”. Even in his farewell speech, Muhammad Yunus made a point of mentioning the region. Following the political turmoil and transition, there were also incidents targeting minority Hindu communities. Several homes, businesses and temples belonging to Hindus were vandalised by mobs. On 18 December, a Hindu man named Dipu Chandra Das was reportedly lynched and burned by a mob after accusations of blasphemy in Bangladesh. During his tenure, Bangladesh witnessed a significant surge in anti-India sentiment.
Simultaneously, in India, certain politicians and civil society members have expressed a range of offensive remarks targeting Bangladeshis, with some referring to Bangladeshi migrants in derogatory terms such as “termites.” Such language has naturally sparked outrage in Bangladesh and raised concerns about communal tensions and the perception of Bangladeshis in India. Adding fuel to that was the death of Sharif Osman Hadi, who was a key figure in Bangladesh’s 2024 student-led uprising. He was a vocal critic of Indian influence in Bangladeshi politics. So, a claim that India was involved has circulated, adding another layer of sensitivity to India–Bangladesh relations leading Indian authorities to temporarily close visa centres in some areas.
A Political Recalibration in Bangladesh
In 2024, turmoil gripped Bangladesh and it wasn’t long before headlines across major media outlets reported the exile of Sheikh Hasina. Bangladesh did not hold an election during this period of 18 months as reforms were being prepared and political tensions were settling.
The BNP secured a clear parliamentary majority, allowing Rahman to form the government and begin shaping Bangladesh’s domestic and foreign policy priorities. Determined to restore democracy, he stated, “this victory belongs to Bangladesh, belongs to democracy,”. Leaders from around the world, including Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, congratulated Rahman on social media and later spoke with him to reaffirm India’s commitment to close bilateral ties. In response, the BNP expressed gratitude to India for acknowledging the outcome.
Following his electoral victory, Tarique Rahman signalled that Bangladesh would pursue constructive ties with India while prioritizing its own national interests first. He emphasized that Dhaka seeks cooperation with all neighbours but expects relations to be based on mutual respect, fairness, and reciprocity. Rahman stated that, “The interests of Bangladesh and its people comes first and it will determine our foreign policy.”
Rahman, the son of former Prime Minister Khaleda Zia and former President Ziaur Rahman, recently lost his mother. Indian Foreign Minister S Jaishankar, representing India attended the funeral, which General Mirza Fakhrul Islam Alamgir, BNP secretary took it as a “a positive gesture”. Mentioning about Sheikh Hasina he also stated that “in the long run, she will not remain relevant in politics. Relations between India and Bangladesh can and should move forward beyond her” and “we want to build even better ties.”
BNP’s 31-point agenda presents an opportunity to specify that issues such as trade balance, water sharing, border management, and regional connectivity would likely be approached from a more interest-driven perspective. Rahman’s remarks suggested that his government is likely to focus on recalibrate the relationship in order to project foreign policy that is less aligned with any single external partner.
The new government seems to have adopted a relatively practical approach toward India. Rahman now faces the burden of repairing the strain in relations that developed during the period of the Interim government. Analysts highlighted that the leadership in Dhaka appears to be interested in stabilizing relations rather than escalating tensions. Recently Foreign Minister Dr Khalilur Rahman commented that “We aim to maintain good relations with all countries, especially our neighbours, based on respect and mutual benefit.” There are some early signs of a thaw in relations or at least positive shift from both sides in that direction.
Mixed Public Sentiment
Bangladeshi public outlook towards India are rarely uniform. They tend to reflect several domestic political considerations and broader regional dynamics. People in Bangladesh generally recognize India’s geographic and economic importance. Ranging from trade routes, energy cooperation, to border management, these issues make engagement unavoidable. However, issues such as water sharing, border incidents, and trade imbalances continue to generate uncertainty and fuel a culture of finger-pointing among the general people.
Certain political groups or members and civil society actors remain doubtful of India’s intentions and influence in Bangladeshi politics. People blame India for supporting Hasina. Reflecting this sentiment Humaiun Kobir, foreign affairs adviser noted that, “people in Bangladesh see India as complicit with Sheikh Hasina’s crimes.” Another indication of the tense relations came recently in January, when the Bangladesh withdrew from the ICC Men’s T20 World Cup 2026 after its cricket board opposed travelling to India. There are very few signs of warm or enthusiastic sentiment towards India among ordinary Bangladeshis at the grassroots level.
However, at present, to a large extent, the focus of the general public priorities tend to focus more on governance, jobs, and global integration rather than ideological positions on India. Although, scepticism towards India still exists, but such priorities have not manifested in anti-India action. For the time being, the outlook is generally mixed, though not entirely hostile.
What the Election Means for India
From New Delhi’s standpoint, the election and the new administration presents both challenges and opportunities. During interim government in Bangladesh, there were repeated calls urging India to hand over Hasina and senior members of Awami League who left the country after the uprising. However, India has yet to respond publicly. The new government may raise the issue to address domestic political expectations.
India seems to be adjusting to a leadership that has historically had a more complicated relationship with it. However, with all changes, there is an opportunity to restructure relations on a broader institutional foundation rather than depending heavily on personal ties with former leaders. Strategic observers and regional analysts believe that the relationship could enter a more interest-driven and somewhat conditional phase, based on economic cooperation and strategic necessities rather than political alignment.
Regional Implications
The political transformation in Bangladesh also has implications beyond India. Strategically, Bangladesh occupies an important position between South and Southeast Asia. Its foreign policy decisions certainly influence regional dynamics involving neighbouring states. This is particularly significant for India, as Bangladesh lies close to the Siliguri Corridor, which is a crucial land link to the seven Northeastern states. Aa a result, New Delhi remains sensitive to Dhaka’s growing engagement with China and Pakistan.
The recent Bangladesh election is widely seen as ending the Awami League’s long alignment with India and initiate potential closeness with Pakistan. China at the same time has intensified its diplomatic connections and investment in Dhaka. Constantino Xavier, a senior fellow at New Delhi think-tank Centre for Social and Economic Progress, said that, “China is steadily building its influence both in the open and behind the scenes, benefiting from the crisis in India-Bangladesh relations”. China’s, the Bay of Bengal, and regional connectivity initiatives further enhance evolving power dynamics. Hence, the election attracted significant attention from both international and regional actors concerned about geopolitical alignment.
Conclusion
One month after the 2026 elections, the outlook for India among Bangladeshis and its new administration appears to be evolving but not drastically changing. Political authority may fluctuate, and debates about sovereignty and influence might still continue, but ground realities—geography, trade, and security still bind the two neighbours together. The 2026 elections therefore revived this discussion, particularly among the new generation of voters, who were prominent during the 2024 protests.
The real test of India-Bangladesh relations will come in the months ahead. If the new government can address domestic interests and expectations while managing relations with India, practically, the post-election period may lead to repositioning partnerships. Therefore, one month after election… it would be too soon to comment on how Bangladesh’s foreign policy towards India will evolve, however, early indications suggest that Dhaka is very likely to pursue a balanced foreign policy and a careful adjustment rather than a dramatic change in attitudes towards India.
About the Author
Trishnakhi Parashar is an enthusiastic and dedicated learner with a Master’s degree in International Relations/Politics from Sikkim Central University. Her academic journey is further enriched by a certification in Human Rights and Duties, a Postgraduate Diploma in Human Resource Management from Tezpur University, and a Diploma in International Affairs and Diplomacy from Indian Institute of Governance and Leadership.
Having begun her career at Tech Mahindra, Trishnakhi transitioned into the research field to pursue her deep-rooted passion for international affairs. She is currently interning at Global Strategic and Defence News, where she continues to refine her analytical skills. Her core interests include international relations, terrorism, diplomacy, and geopolitics—fields she explores with rigor and critical insight. Trishnakhi is committed to meticulous research and driven by a determination to contribute meaningfully to global discourse. With a vision to carve out her own niche, she aspires to leave a lasting impact on contemporary international issues.
The parliamentary elections held in Nepal on 5 March 2026 represent one of the most consequential political developments in the country since the democratic transition of the early 1990s. The results have produced a dramatic restructuring of Nepal’s political landscape, signalling a generational shift in leadership and a profound transformation in public attitudes toward governance. The rise of the Rastriya Swatantra Party (RSP), led by Balendra Shah popularly known as Balen has challenged the long-standing dominance of traditional political forces such as the Nepali Congress and the Communist Party of Nepal (Unified Marxist–Leninist). For India, Nepal’s closest neighbour and one of its most strategically important partners in South Asia, the outcome of these elections carries far-reaching geopolitical, economic and diplomatic implications. The emergence of a new political leadership in Kathmandu offers opportunities for renewed engagement but also introduces uncertainties in the evolving dynamics of India–Nepal relations.
The 2026 elections were conducted in a highly charged political environment shaped by the youth-led protests of September 2025. These demonstrations, often referred to as the Gen-Z movement, were triggered by deep frustration among younger citizens over corruption, unemployment, political patronage, and perceived authoritarian tendencies within the ruling establishment. The immediate spark came from the government’s controversial attempt to restrict social media platforms, which many young Nepalis interpreted as an attempt to suppress dissent. What began as online mobilisation rapidly evolved into large-scale protests across the country. The demonstrations escalated into violence during the “Day of Rage” protests of 8–9 September 2025, resulting in the deaths of 76 people and injuries to more than 2,000 others. The crisis ultimately forced the resignation of Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli and the dissolution of parliament. An interim administration led by former Chief Justice Sushila Karki oversaw the transition to fresh elections, promising to restore political stability while responding to the demands of the protest movement.
The elections thus became more than a routine democratic exercise; they represented a referendum on Nepal’s established political order. For more than three decades, the country’s politics had been dominated by a limited group of leaders and parties, primarily the Nepali Congress and various communist factions. While these parties played a central role in Nepal’s democratic transition and the abolition of the monarchy in 2008, their prolonged dominance gradually produced widespread dissatisfaction. Frequent changes in government, factional infighting, corruption scandals and limited economic progress eroded public confidence in traditional leadership. Over the past two decades, Nepal witnessed fourteen changes of government, reflecting chronic political instability that hindered policy continuity and economic development. The Gen-Z protests brought these grievances into sharp focus, highlighting a generational demand for accountability, transparency, and new leadership.
Against this backdrop, the Rastriya Swatantra Party emerged as a powerful political alternative. Founded in June 2022 by media personality Rabi Lamichhane, the party quickly gained traction among urban voters, professionals and young citizens seeking a break from conventional political practices. Its emphasis on clean governance, institutional reform, and economic modernisation resonated strongly with voters disillusioned by the failures of traditional parties. The entry of Balendra Shah into the party’s leadership further strengthened its appeal. Shah, a civil engineer, former rapper and the widely popular mayor of Kathmandu, had already built a reputation as a reform-oriented administrator who challenged entrenched interests. His ability to communicate directly with young voters through social media and grassroots engagement transformed the RSP’s campaign into a nationwide movement for political renewal.
The electoral results reflected the depth of this transformation. The RSP delivered a stunning performance, capturing the overwhelming majority of directly elected seats and emerging as the dominant force in proportional representation. The party’s projected overall tally of around 180 seats in the 275-member House of Representatives places it close to a two-thirds majority an achievement rarely seen in Nepal’s democratic history. The outcome simultaneously marked the collapse of traditional parties. The Nepali Congress, once the leading political force in the country, was reduced to a small parliamentary presence, while the Communist Party of Nepal (Unified Marxist–Leninist) suffered an even more dramatic decline. The symbolic centrepiece of this political upheaval occurred in the eastern constituency of Jhapa-5, where Balendra Shah defeated former Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli, a veteran leader who had dominated Nepali politics for decades. The result was widely interpreted as a clear rejection of the old political elite.
The rise of the RSP reflects broader structural changes within Nepali society. Demographic shifts have significantly increased the political influence of younger voters. Nearly one million first-time voters participated in the 2026 elections, many of whom belonged to the digitally connected generation that organised the protests of 2025. For this generation, ideological debates that once defined Nepal’s political competition have become less relevant than issues of governance, employment and economic opportunity. Their political preferences are shaped less by traditional party loyalties and more by expectations of efficiency, accountability, and transparency. This transformation in voter priorities compelled even established parties to alter their campaign strategies, emphasising economic development and service delivery rather than ideological narratives.
For India, these political developments carry significant implications. India and Nepal share a unique and deeply interconnected relationship shaped by geography, history, culture and economics. The two countries share an open border of more than 1,700 kilometers, enabling the free movement of people and goods. Millions of Nepali citizens work in India, while large numbers of Indian pilgrims and tourists travel to Nepal each year. Economic ties are equally strong. India is Nepal’s largest trading partner, its principal source of investment and the primary market for its hydropower exports. The two countries also cooperate closely in areas such as energy connectivity, infrastructure development, and disaster management. Given this depth of interdependence, political changes in Kathmandu inevitably influence India’s strategic environment.
One of the most immediate implications of the election results is the possibility of greater political stability in Nepal. The country’s history of fragile coalition governments has often complicated policy implementation and slowed economic reforms. A strong parliamentary majority for the RSP could provide a rare opportunity for stable governance and long-term planning. For India, political stability in Nepal is generally viewed as beneficial because it reduces uncertainty in bilateral projects and facilitates sustained cooperation. Several major Indian-backed infrastructure initiatives, including hydropower projects such as Arun-3 and cross-border electricity transmission lines, had slowed during the political turmoil of 2025. The emergence of a stable government may enable these projects to regain momentum, strengthening regional energy connectivity and supporting Nepal’s economic growth.
Energy cooperation represents one of the most promising areas of India–Nepal partnership. Nepal possesses enormous hydropower potential, estimated at more than 40,000 megawatts of economically feasible capacity. However, the country has struggled to develop this resource due to political instability, regulatory challenges, and infrastructure constraints. In recent years, India has become an important partner in Nepal’s hydropower development, both as an investor and as a market for electricity exports. Nepal has already begun exporting several hundred megawatts of electricity to India, and this figure is expected to increase significantly in the coming years. A government committed to economic modernisation and infrastructure development could accelerate hydropower projects, benefiting both countries through increased energy trade and regional energy security.
At the same time, the new political landscape in Nepal also presents diplomatic challenges for India. The RSP’s leadership has occasionally expressed strong nationalist sentiments and criticised what some Nepalis perceive as India’s “big brother” approach in bilateral relations. Issues such as border disputes, economic dependence, and political interference have periodically generated tensions between the two countries. The territorial disagreements involving Kalapani, Lipulekh and Limpiyadhura remain particularly sensitive. These disputes intensified in 2020 when Nepal published a revised political map incorporating the contested territories. Although both sides have since attempted to manage the issue through diplomatic channels, it continues to influence public perceptions in Nepal.
Balendra Shah’s political rhetoric has sometimes emphasised Nepal’s need for greater strategic autonomy in its foreign policy. This emphasis reflects a broader trend among younger Nepali leaders who seek to diversify the country’s international partnerships. While such an approach does not necessarily imply hostility toward India, it suggests that the new government may pursue a more assertive and independent diplomatic posture. For India, this means that managing relations with Nepal will require greater sensitivity to Nepali public opinion and a willingness to engage with emerging political actors who may not share the traditional patterns of bilateral engagement.
Another important dimension of Nepal’s foreign policy is its relationship with China. Over the past decade, China has expanded its economic presence in Nepal through infrastructure investments, trade and development assistance. Many of these initiatives are linked to the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), under which China has financed projects such as highways, airports and hydropower facilities. The expansion of Chinese influence in Nepal has occasionally generated strategic concerns in New Delhi, particularly because Nepal occupies a critical geographical position between the two Asian powers. India traditionally regarded Nepal as part of its immediate strategic neighbourhood, and the increasing involvement of external actors has altered the regional balance.
The new government in Kathmandu is likely to continue Nepal’s long-standing strategy of balancing relations between India and China. This approach reflects Nepal’s geopolitical reality as a small state located between two major powers. By maintaining constructive relations with both neighbours, Nepal seeks to maximise economic opportunities while preserving its political autonomy. However, the way this balancing strategy is implemented will influence India’s strategic calculations. If Nepal deepens its economic engagement with China through large-scale infrastructure projects or expanded security cooperation, India may view these developments with caution.
At the same time, the presence of a strong and popular government in Nepal could create opportunities for more constructive regional diplomacy. A leadership that enjoys broad domestic support may be better positioned to pursue pragmatic economic partnerships with both neighbours without being constrained by internal political rivalries. For India, engaging proactively with the new Nepali leadership could help build mutual trust and reduce misunderstandings that have periodically affected bilateral relations.
Economic cooperation will remain a central pillar of India–Nepal relations in the coming years. Beyond hydropower, the two countries are working to strengthen connectivity through cross-border railways, highways, and integrated check posts. Improved transport infrastructure has the potential to boost trade, tourism, and investment. Nepal’s strategic location between India and China also creates opportunities for it to function as a transit hub linking South Asia with the Himalayan region and beyond. If managed effectively, this connectivity could contribute to broader regional economic integration.
Another important aspect of bilateral relations is the movement of people across the open border. The India–Nepal border is one of the most unique international frontiers in the world, allowing citizens of both countries to travel, work and reside freely in each other’s territory. This arrangement has fostered deep social and cultural connections but has also created occasional security concerns related to smuggling and illegal activities. Maintaining the benefits of open borders while addressing emerging security challenges will remain an important priority for both governments.
Ultimately, the 2026 elections in Nepal represent a historic turning point in the country’s democratic evolution. The rise of the Rastriya Swatantra Party and the defeat of established political elites demonstrate the power of generational change and public demand for accountable governance. Whether this transformation leads to lasting institutional reform or simply inaugurates, another phase of political experimentation remains uncertain. Much will depend on the ability of the new leadership to translate its electoral mandate into effective governance and economic progress.
For India, the moment calls for careful diplomatic recalibration. The political landscape in Nepal has changed significantly, and the assumptions that guided bilateral relations in the past may no longer be sufficient. Rather than viewing Nepal’s political transformation with apprehension, India has an opportunity to engage constructively with the new leadership and support Nepal’s aspirations for stability and development. By strengthening economic cooperation, respecting Nepal’s sovereignty and addressing sensitive issues through dialogue, India can help ensure that the evolving relationship remains mutually beneficial.
In this sense, the 2026 elections mark not only a domestic political shift within Nepal but also a critical moment for regional diplomacy. As Nepal navigates a new phase of political leadership and policy priorities, the future of India–Nepal relations will depend on the ability of both countries to adapt to changing circumstances while preserving the deep historical ties that have long connected them. If managed wisely, this period of transformation could open the door to a more balanced, cooperative, and forward-looking partnership between the two neighbours.
About the Author
Sonalika Singh began her journey as an UPSC aspirant and has since transitioned into a full-time professional working with various organizations, including NCERT, in the governance and policy sector. She holds a master’s degree in political science and, over the years, has developed a strong interest in international relations, security studies, and geopolitics. Alongside this, she has cultivated a deep passion for research, analysis, and writing. Her work reflects a sustained commitment to rigorous inquiry and making meaningful contributions to the field of public affairs.
Japan’s unwavering dedication to Official Development Assistance (ODA) is a testament to its transformative influence on the global stage. Since its inaugural participation in the Colombo Plan during the 1950s, Japan has embarked on a journey of progress, innovation, and exemplary leadership in international development. The strategic expansion and diversification of Japan’s ODA initiatives, notably observed in the 1960s and 1980s, propelled the nation to emerge as a pivotal donor, second only to the United States by 1989. Milestones such as the introduction of ODA loans, the establishment of the Japan Overseas Cooperation Volunteers program, grant aid, and the creation of the Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA) underscored Japan’s commitment to global development.
In subsequent decades, Japan further solidified its position as a top donor, evidenced by establishing the ODA Charter in 1992 and the inception of the Tokyo International Conference on African Development (TICAD) process in 1993. Initiatives like the inaugural Pacific Islands Leaders Meeting 1997 showcased Japan’s dedication to fostering peace, prosperity, and sustainable development across diverse regions. Entering the 21st century, Japan’s ODA efforts evolved to address emerging global challenges, highlighted by the revision of the ODA Charter in 2003 and the establishment of the Development Cooperation Charter in 2015. Embracing the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development in 2015 further reinforced Japan’s commitment to global development goals, reaffirming its role as a responsible member of the international community. Guided by principles such as human security and self-help efforts, Japan’s development cooperation transcends mere financial assistance, embracing a holistic approach encompassing grant aid, technical cooperation, and loan aid. Its proactive participation in peace talks, ceasefire monitoring, and economic development projects demonstrates its commitment to tackling the underlying causes of conflict and creating long-term peace.
This paper explores Japan’s ODA policies and their application in post-conflict settings. By examining Japan’s interventions in conflict-ridden regions such as Yemen, the Philippines, and Sri Lanka, we seek to illuminate how Japan’s multifaceted approach contributes to the well-being of affected populations, facilitates reconciliation, and cultivates stable and prosperous environments conducive to lasting peace. This research endeavors to underscore Japan’s pivotal role in shaping the future of conflict-ridden regions, serving as a testament to its enduring pursuit of peace and development on a global scale.
From Vision to Action: Japan’s ODA Journey and Its Global Impact
Japan’s Official Development Assistance (ODA) program embodies a multifaceted approach to international development guided by historical, geopolitical, economic, and humanitarian considerations. This comprehensive strategy underscores Japan’s commitment to addressing global challenges while promoting peace, prosperity, and human dignity. Historically, Japan’s ODA initiatives are deeply rooted in its acknowledgment of past wrongs and its determination to contribute positively to the international community. Shaped by its involvement in World War II and its colonial past, Japan’s sense of responsibility drives efforts to foster reconciliation and goodwill through ODA. Notably, Japan’s substantial contributions to Southeast Asian countries like the Philippines demonstrate a tangible commitment to the region’s post-war reconciliation and economic development.
Geopolitically, Japan strategically leverages ODA as a tool for diplomacy, enhancing its influence and soft power on the global stage. A prime example is Japan’s active African engagement through platforms like the Tokyo International Conference on African Development (TICAD). By extending significant aid and forming partnerships with African nations, Japan aims to strengthen diplomatic ties and mitigate the influence of other major regional powers. Similarly, Japan’s diplomatic overtures through ODA are crucial in conflict-ridden regions like Yemen and Sri Lanka. Japan’s humanitarian aid and support for peacebuilding in Yemen contribute to its diplomatic presence in the area, fostering goodwill and stability. Japan’s investment in infrastructure development and capacity-building initiatives in Sri Lanka stimulates economic growth. It reinforces diplomatic relations, positioning Japan as a critical partner in the country’s post-conflict reconstruction efforts.
Economically, Japan’s ODA initiatives are aligned with its strategic interests, fostering market access for Japanese businesses while promoting economic growth in recipient countries. For instance, Japan’s investment in infrastructure projects in Bangladesh and Indonesia stimulates local development and creates opportunities for Japanese companies to engage in lucrative contracts, reinforcing economic cooperation. Similarly, in Yemen and Sri Lanka, Japan’s investment in infrastructure development projects, such as port facilities and transportation networks, supports economic growth and opens avenues for Japanese businesses to invest and operate in these regions, thereby enhancing economic cooperation between Japan and the recipient countries.
Humanitarian principles drive Japan’s ODA response to global crises and disasters. Following events like the 2011 earthquake and tsunami in Japan, Japan swiftly provided humanitarian assistance and reconstruction aid to affected areas, showcasing its commitment to alleviating suffering and supporting recovery efforts. Moreover, in conflict-affected regions like Yemen and Sri Lanka, Japan’s humanitarian aid is crucial in addressing the urgent needs of vulnerable populations, including refugees and internally displaced persons. By providing essential assistance and support, Japan upholds humanitarian values and promotes human dignity, contributing to efforts for peace and stability in these regions.
Ethical imperatives underpin Japan’s ODA approach, emphasizing fairness, justice, and compassion principles. Japan’s contributions to international organizations such as the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) exemplify its commitment to humanitarian assistance, irrespective of political considerations. This ethical stance reinforces Japan’s responsibility as a responsible global citizen dedicated to collectively addressing pressing global challenges. In Yemen and Sri Lanka, Japan’s adherence to Moral principles is demonstrated through its support for conflict resolution efforts, respect for human rights, and provision of humanitarian aid, regardless of political affiliations or interests. Japan’s ODA program manifests its global citizenship and responsibility to promote peace, prosperity, and human dignity worldwide. By integrating historical, geopolitical, economic, and humanitarian considerations into its ODA initiatives, Japan plays a significant role in shaping the future of international development and fostering a more equitable and sustainable world. Through its engagements in conflict-affected regions like Yemen, the Philippines, and Sri Lanka, Japan demonstrates its commitment to addressing complex challenges and promoting peace and stability on a global scale.
JAPAN ODA RECIPIENTS AND OVERVIEW OF THE CASES
Japan’s Official Development Assistance (ODA) has supported countries grappling with conflict and instability, including the Philippines, Yemen, and Sri Lanka. Each case presents unique challenges and complexities rooted in diverse historical, political, and socio-economic factors. In the Philippines, the conflict stems from a combination of historical grievances, ethnic tensions, and socio-economic disparities. The insurgency led by groups such as the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) and the New People’s Army (NPA) has its roots in historical marginalization, political grievances, and the quest for self-determination among minority groups, particularly in the Muslim-majority areas of Mindanao.
Similarly, Yemen’s conflict is characterized by a complex interplay of political, religious, and socio-economic factors. The Houthi insurgency, supported by Iran, has led to a protracted civil war, exacerbated by sectarian tensions, political fragmentation, and external interventions by regional powers. Economic instability and widespread poverty have further fueled grievances and perpetuated the cycle of violence. In Sri Lanka, the conflict has been primarily driven by ethnic tensions between the majority Sinhalese and minority Tamil communities. Decades of discrimination, political marginalization, and grievances over language rights and land ownership have fueled the separatist aspirations of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), leading to a prolonged civil war that lasted nearly three decades.
Unraveling the Course and Stages of Conflict
The conflicts in the Philippines, Yemen, and Sri Lanka have followed distinct trajectories, each marked by periods of violence, attempts at peace negotiations, and ongoing humanitarian crises. In the Philippines, the conflict has been characterized by intermittent bouts of intense fighting and efforts at peace negotiations. The Bangsamoro peace process, initiated in the 1990s, has witnessed numerous agreements and setbacks, reflecting the intricate nature of addressing historical grievances and striving for sustainable peace. Similarly, the government’s attempts to address the communist insurgency have seen periods of ceasefire agreements followed by renewed hostilities, highlighting the challenges of reconciling competing interests and ideologies.
Yemen’s conflict escalated dramatically after the Houthi insurgency in 2014, leading to a devastating civil war and humanitarian disaster. Despite efforts by regional and international actors to broker ceasefires and peace agreements, the conflict has persisted with little signs of resolution. Widespread famine and disease outbreaks have exacerbated the suffering of Yemeni civilians, prolonging the cycle of violence and instability. In Sri Lanka, the conflict unfolded over decades, culminating in the military defeat of the LTTE in 2009. Reconstruction efforts, attempts at reconciliation, and political reforms have characterized the post-war period. However, challenges persist in addressing deep-rooted socio-economic disparities and ensuring meaningful political representation for minority groups.
To address these conflicts, countermeasures have been implemented with varying degrees of success. The government has pursued a comprehensive approach in the Philippines, combining military operations with diplomatic engagement and peace talks. Efforts to promote economic development and social inclusion in conflict-affected areas have been integral to long-term stability and peacebuilding efforts. Similarly, countermeasures have focused on humanitarian assistance, diplomatic engagement, and peace negotiations in Yemen. International actors, including Japan, have provided significant humanitarian aid to alleviate the suffering of Yemeni civilians. Diplomatic initiatives to foster dialogue and reconciliation among warring factions have been ongoing, albeit with limited success amidst continued violence and political instability. In Sri Lanka, post-war efforts have involved reconstruction, reconciliation initiatives, and political reforms. The government has prioritized infrastructure development and economic revitalization alongside efforts to address grievances among minority communities. International support, including Japan’s ODA, has played a crucial role in promoting lasting peace and stability in the country.
The conflicts in the Philippines, Yemen, and Sri Lanka present complex challenges requiring comprehensive approaches that address the root causes of conflict, promote dialogue and prioritize humanitarian assistance and socio-economic development. Japan’s ODA has supported these efforts, reflecting its commitment to fostering peace, stability, and prosperity in conflict-affected regions.
Comparative Analysis Of Japan’s ODA in Post-Conflict Countries
HOW MUCH AID IS GIVEN?
Japan’s approach to providing aid to Yemen, the Philippines, and Sri Lanka reflects a nuanced strategy tailored to each country’s specific needs and contexts. Japan has swiftly responded to the urgent humanitarian crisis in Yemen, allocating 1.8 million US dollars in Emergency Grant Aid for the dire food situation. Focusing on immediate relief highlights Japan’s responsiveness to pressing needs in conflict-affected regions.
Japan’s commitment spans over two decades in the Philippines, particularly in Mindanao, with a total aid of USD 515 million since 2002, supporting over 100 projects. This long-term engagement underscores Japan’s dedication to fostering sustainable development and peace in the region. The diverse range of projects across various sectors indicates a comprehensive approach to addressing multifaceted challenges. Sri Lanka benefits from Japan’s multifaceted aid strategy, with recent contributions including a US$ 547,443 grant for the Skavita Humanitarian Assistance and Relief Project and substantial funding exceeding US$ 43 million for mine clearance activities. The varied projects, from livelihood initiatives to infrastructure development, showcase Japan’s commitment to addressing a spectrum of challenges in post-conflict recovery.
Comparatively, Japan’s aid in Yemen is characterized by immediate and focused interventions to alleviate pressing humanitarian needs. In the Philippines, the long-term commitment is evident, emphasizing sustained development across diverse sectors. Sri Lanka experiences a mix of immediate relief and ongoing support, showcasing Japan’s adaptability in tailoring aid strategies to the unique circumstances of each country.
SCOPE OF AID
When examining the scope of Japan’s help to the Philippines, Yemen, and Sri Lanka, it is clear that Japan takes a flexible and comprehensive strategy customized to each country’s specific requirements. Japan’s aid primarily focuses on political transition support, normalization initiatives, and socio-economic development projects in the Philippines. The multifaceted approach addresses the complex challenges of Mindanao’s peace and development process. Japan’s aid is strategically aligned with the region’s advancement and stability, encompassing various aspects of political and socio-economic transformation.
Similarly, Yemen benefits from Japan’s aid across a broad spectrum of sectors, reflecting a comprehensive strategy to address immediate needs and contribute to long-term reconstruction and development. Sectors such as food security, healthcare, education, water, sanitation, economic stability, governance, and environmental protection are all encompassed. This broad scope demonstrates Japan’s commitment to meaningfully impacting the vulnerable populations in Yemen and the country’s overall reconstruction, with a holistic approach covering various facets of humanitarian and developmental needs.
Likewise, in Sri Lanka, Japan’s aid covers an extensive range of sectors, reflecting a commitment to addressing immediate needs and contributing to long-term development. From demining operations and economic recovery through livelihood projects to the improvement of transportation networks, enhancement of power supply, water supply and sewage management, policy development, institutional reform, human resource development, climate change adaptation, disaster risk reduction, and improvement of social services including health and education, Japan’s aid spans across diverse areas. This comprehensive approach underscores Japan’s commitment to fostering holistic development and resilience in Sri Lanka, with interventions that touch various aspects of the country’s socio-economic landscape.
PURPOSE OF AID
Japan’s Overseas Development Assistance (ODA) to Sri Lanka, Yemen, and the Philippines underscores a comprehensive commitment to addressing immediate humanitarian needs, fostering long-term development, and contributing to peace-building efforts in conflict-affected regions. Japan’s aid is multifaceted (ODA) to Sri Lanka is meticulously crafted to address various developmental challenges while fostering long-term sustainability and prosperity. Through multifaceted programs and projects spanning infrastructure development, energy transformation, social services enhancement, and disaster risk reduction, Japan exemplifies a steadfast commitment to supporting Sri Lanka’s journey toward comprehensive growth and resilience. Initiatives such as the Program for Strengthening Transport Network receive significant allocations, demonstrating Japan’s dedication to bolstering Sri Lanka’s economic foundations. Additionally, investments in projects like the Promoting a Free and Open Maritime Domain underscore Japan’s commitment to enhancing Sri Lanka’s disaster resilience with substantial allocations for projects such as the New Bridge Construction Project over the Kelani River and the Light Rail Transit System in Colombo.
Furthermore, through programs focused on policy development, institutional reform, and human resource development, Japan facilitates the creation of robust governance structures and nurtures local expertise, exemplified by projects such as the Project for Capacity Development on Effective Public Investment Management. With a keen emphasis on climate change adaptation and disaster resilience, Japan’s ODA initiatives equip Sri Lanka with the tools and capacities necessary to mitigate risks and respond effectively to natural calamities. Through these strategic investments and partnerships, Japan underscores its unwavering dedication to advancing Sri Lanka’s development agenda and fostering enduring collaboration for the mutual benefit of both nations.
Similarly, Japan’s Overseas Development Assistance (ODA) to Yemen is not just a strategy but a lifeline. It’s a comprehensive approach that tackles urgent humanitarian needs, fosters long-term stability, and drives development in this conflict-ridden nation. Through a series of programs and projects, Japan is making a tangible difference, elevating Yemen’s humanitarian situation, supporting national reconstruction efforts, and empowering local communities to build resilience amidst ongoing challenges. Japan’s approach to ODA for the Republic of Yemen is unique. The ‘Rolling Plan By Japan for the Republic of Yemen’ is a multifaceted strategy that balances immediate humanitarian aid with long-term development assistance. It’s not just about giving aid but investing in critical sectors such as food security, healthcare, education, and infrastructure redevelopment. This approach underscores Japan’s commitment to addressing Yemen’s complex challenges and sets it apart from other nations.
Moreover, Japan’s commitment extends to human resource development through initiatives like the “Program for Human Resource Development in Yemen.” This initiative focuses on strengthening governance, promoting economic recovery, and advancing regional development through comprehensive training initiatives. With a generous allocation of funds, Japan aims to cultivate a skilled workforce capable of driving Yemen’s progress across vital sectors. Japan’s commitment to Yemen is not just words but actions. Its transformative grant aid projects, such as ‘The Project for the Rehabilitation of Aden Intra-Urban Roads’ and ‘Project for Preventing Oil Spill from the Floating Storage and Offloading Safer,’ are making a real difference. These projects are about infrastructure, stability, and environmental preservation. They are tangible proof of Japan’s commitment to Yemen’s future. Furthermore, Japan’s 10 million US dollars in Emergency Grant Aid, administered through the World Food Program, highlights its commitment to addressing the dire food crisis in Yemen. This assistance aligns with Japan’s mission to respond to urgent humanitarian needs and support peace efforts mediated by the United Nations. Through active collaboration with international organizations and concerned nations, Japan underscores its dedication to fostering peace, stability, and sustainable development in Yemen, offering hope for a brighter future amid adversity.
Japan’s Overseas Development Assistance (ODA) to the Philippines embodies a multifaceted approach aimed at fostering socio-economic development, enhancing infrastructure, and supporting peace-building efforts, particularly in conflict-affected areas like Mindanao. Under the Rolling Plan By Japan for the Philippines, Japan has implemented several key projects across critical sectors. One such project is the Rehabilitation of Houses in Marawi. Japan collaborated with UN-Habitat Philippines to construct 462 permanent houses in Barangay Patani, Marawi City, providing hope to those displaced during the 2017 Marawi Siege. With a generous grant of USD 10 million (PHP 500 million), Japan’s commitment to revitalizing Marawi City underscores its dedication to supporting the Mindanao Peace Process and fostering regional development. Another significant initiative is the Massive Water Project for BARMM, culminating in Maguindanao. Japan partnered with the International Labour Organization (ILO) to complete a level II ground source electric water pump system, benefiting approximately 70 households. This initiative, part of the ILO-Japan Water and Sanitation Project, reflects Japan’s commitment to addressing water needs in remote areas of Mindanao, contributing to livelihoods and community resilience. Additionally, Japan’s support for livelihood and education, such as the JICA-supported Pond for Aquaculture of Tilapia, has provided former MILF combatants with sustainable income opportunities, promoting economic empowerment and contributing to the successful normalization of conflict-affected communities. Beyond these initiatives, Japan’s aid to the Philippines encompasses a wide range of projects that promote socio-economic development, disaster management, and human resource development, strengthen the partnership between Japan and the Philippines, and contribute to peace, stability, and prosperity across the nation.
Overall, Japan’s aid to Sri Lanka, Yemen, and the Philippines exemplifies a holistic approach to addressing the multifaceted challenges of post-conflict recovery. Through targeted interventions spanning demining, economic recovery, infrastructure development, and governance support, Japan fosters peace, reconciliation, and sustainable development in conflict-affected regions, thereby contributing to broader regional stability and prosperity.
HOW AID IS UTILIZED?
Japan’s aid is channeled in Yemen through specific infrastructure rehabilitation and environmental protection projects. For example, Japan has contributed to rehabilitating urban roads in Yemen’s major cities, such as Sana’a and Aden, to improve transportation networks and support economic activities. Additionally, Japan has supported preventive measures against oil spills in Yemen’s coastal areas, highlighting its commitment to addressing environmental challenges and promoting sustainable development.
Japan’s aid is strategically utilized in the Philippines through flagship programs like the “Japan-Bangsamoro Initiatives for Reconstruction and Development” (J-BIRD). Through J-BIRD, Japan has supported the rehabilitation of houses in Marawi City, which was heavily affected by conflict, to facilitate the return of displaced residents and promote stability in the region. Furthermore, Japan has invested in extensive water projects in the Bangsamoro Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (BARMM), addressing the region’s critical need for access to clean water and sanitation facilities.
In Sri Lanka, Japan’s aid is tailored to address various challenges, including post-conflict recovery, economic development, and disaster resilience. For instance, Japan has supported the SHARP initiative for demining in conflict-affected areas, facilitating the return of displaced populations and enabling reconstruction efforts. Additionally, Japan has partnered with the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) on livelihood projects to empower vulnerable communities and promote economic opportunities. Furthermore, Japan’s investment in critical infrastructure projects, such as road construction and airport development, contributes to long-term economic growth and regional connectivity. Overall, Japan’s aid utilization in these countries demonstrates a flexible and adaptive approach, focusing on addressing specific needs and promoting sustainable development.
IMPACT OF THE AID?
Japan’s aid to Yemen is a beacon of hope, reaching out to the country’s most vulnerable populations in their time of need. With unwavering commitment, Japan is set to assist 20,000 displaced Yemenis, providing critical cash assistance for their immediate needs, including food, shelter, healthcare, and other essentials. This aid is not just about relief; it’s about restoring dignity and hope. An additional 3,000 internally displaced persons (IDPs) will gain access to vital legal support, while 5,000 IDP families will be guided to specialized services. Japan’s generous contribution will enable the UNHCR to foster peaceful coexistence, social cohesion, and improved living conditions for the displaced and host communities through swift infrastructure projects benefiting nearly 50,000 individuals. Japan’s solidarity is not a one-time gesture but a testament to its enduring partnership with the UNHCR and its steadfast commitment to addressing Yemen’s pressing humanitarian and protection needs. Kazuhiro Higashi, Charge d’affaires at the Embassy of Japan, underlines the importance of cash assistance as a dignified support form, allowing displaced Yemenis to prioritize their most urgent needs in a profound crisis. As Yemen enters its ninth year of conflict, this initiative stands as a beacon of hope, a symbol of Japan’s unwavering commitment to making a positive impact in the face of adversity.
The impact of Japan’s aid is particularly profound in the context of Yemen’s devastating conflict, which has inflicted severe economic hardship, eroded development gains, and disproportionately affected vulnerable groups, especially women and girls. With an estimated 21.6 million Yemenis requiring humanitarian assistance and protection services in 2023 and over half of the displaced population in dire need, Japan’s support extends beyond mere assistance; it extends a promise of resilience, offering a glimmer of hope amid the daunting challenges that persist in Yemen’s enduring crisis.
Similarly, Japan’s extensive cooperation with the Mindanao peace process is a testament to its unwavering commitment to peace and development in the region. With a substantial contribution totaling USD 515 million (PHP 26 billion) since 2002, Japan has been pivotal in advancing various facets of Mindanao’s peace and development agenda. This commitment is reflected in over 100 projects designed to support the political transition, advance the normalization process, and foster socio-economic infrastructure development. The impact of Japan’s aid is profound and far-reaching. Through initiatives such as the “Japan-Bangsamoro Initiatives for Reconstruction and Development” (J-BIRD), Japan has contributed over 50 billion yen towards specific projects. These include enhancing administrative capabilities, uplifting livelihoods, promoting industrial and infrastructure development, and improving access to education and healthcare. These projects have directly impacted more than 350 villages, fostering economic growth and stability in the region. Furthermore, Japan’s active engagement on the ground is more comprehensive than just financial aid. It includes the deployment of embassy staff members as socio-economic development advisors, who play a crucial role in the success of the projects. This, along with its participation in international monitoring and contact groups, underscores its commitment to ensuring the success of peace-building efforts in Mindanao. In addition to focusing on the peace process, Japan’s aid extends to other critical sectors. For instance, its investments in transportation infrastructure, such as the Metro Manila Railway Networks, have significantly improved the region’s connectivity. Its support for disaster management has enhanced the Philippines’ resilience to natural calamities. And its human resource development scholarships have empowered the country’s workforce. These investments further contribute to the overall socio-economic development of the Philippines. Overall, Japan’s aid to the Philippines has had a transformative impact, fostering peace, stability, and prosperity in Mindanao while strengthening the partnership between the two nations. Japan’s steadfast commitment to the region continues to be a beacon of hope, paving the way for a brighter future for the people of the Philippines.
IMPACT OF AID
In assessing the impact of Japan’s aid in the Philippines, Yemen, and Sri Lanka, it is evident that the aid initiatives have generated significant and diverse positive outcomes across various sectors. In the Philippines, rehabilitating houses in Marawi and establishing a potable water system in Maguindanao showcase tangible improvements in the lives of those affected by the 2017 Marawi Siege. These projects contribute to physical reconstruction and symbolize hope and stability, emphasizing Japan’s commitment to Mindanao’s reconstruction and rehabilitation. The livelihood and education initiatives, particularly the JICA-supported Pond for Aquaculture, exemplify Japan’s focus on fostering sustainable income sources and disseminating knowledge, contributing to peace and harmony in Mindanao.
In Yemen, Japan’s aid has significantly impacted various fronts. Cash assistance for food, shelter, and healthcare directly benefits internally displaced persons, addressing immediate humanitarian needs. Infrastructure projects, such as rehabilitating urban roads and preventive measures against oil spills, improve living conditions for displaced and host communities. The long-standing involvement in demining activities has ensured the safe return of families to their homes and eliminated the threat posed by landmines and unexploded ordnance.
Similarly, Japan’s robust commitment to aiding Sri Lanka’s development is evident through its multifaceted assistance initiatives across various sectors. One notable example is the Program for Strengthening Transport Network. Japan’s investment in road construction and urban transportation upgrades has alleviated traffic congestion, facilitating smoother mobility and economic prosperity. Japan’s support for the Bandaranaike International Airport Development Project and establishment an Oil Spill Incident Management Training Program underscores its dedication to bolstering Sri Lanka’s maritime and aviation infrastructure. Furthermore, Japan’s contributions to the Program for Improving Power Supply, including projects like the Habarana-Veyangoda Transmission Line Construction Project, highlight its commitment to transforming Sri Lanka’s energy landscape toward sustainability and efficiency. In the social services realm, Japan’s healthcare assistance, exemplified by the Health and Medical Service Improvement Project, has elevated healthcare standards and accessibility, positively impacting the well-being of Sri Lankan citizens. Moreover, Japan’s collaborative efforts with international organizations, such as the Eastern and North Central Provincial Road Project supported by the World Bank, demonstrate its commitment to leveraging partnerships for maximizing developmental impact. Overall, Japan’s aid to Sri Lanka encompasses a comprehensive approach that addresses critical infrastructure, energy, healthcare, and social welfare needs, fostering sustainable development and resilience in the nation.
So, specific impacts vary based on the unique contexts of each country; Japan’s aid consistently demonstrates a commitment to addressing immediate needs, fostering long-term development, and creating positive changes in social, economic, and environmental dimensions. The multifaceted approach in each country underscores Japan’s adaptability and commitment to tailoring its aid efforts to the specific challenges and opportunities present in each region.
CONCLUSION
In a world marked by evolving challenges, Japan’s dedication to international development and its support for post-conflict countries stand as a beacon of hope and progress. Through its unwavering commitment to official development assistance (ODA), Japan has not only extended a helping hand to nations like Yemen but has also showcased a comprehensive approach to addressing global issues. As we navigate this ever-changing landscape, the importance of ODA in tackling pressing global concerns, from environmental conservation to health crises and humanitarian needs, remains undeniable. While some donor countries may face economic constraints and “aid fatigue,” Japan’s commitment to international cooperation and development assistance continues to shine brightly. As a leading donor nation, Japan understands its pivotal role in promoting peace and prosperity on the world stage. By strengthening ties with developing countries, Japan elevates its global stature and advances its broader national interests. Drawing from its experience of post-war reconstruction and abundant financial and technological resources, Japan is uniquely positioned to support other nations’ economic development actively. In a world where the significance of ODA is rising, Japan’s steadfast commitment to international contribution through foreign policy and development assistance takes on even greater importance. Japan’s leadership in reaffirming the necessity of support for the ongoing efforts of post-conflict countries underscores its role in shaping a more prosperous, peaceful, and inclusive global community.
About the Author
Khushbu Ahlawat is a research analyst with a strong academic background in International Relations and Political Science. She has undertaken research projects at Jawaharlal Nehru University, contributing to analytical work on international and regional security issues. Alongside her research experience, she has professional exposure to Human Resources, with involvement in talent acquisition and organizational operations. She holds a Master’s degree in International Relations from Christ University, Bangalore, and a Bachelor’s degree in Political Science from the University of Delhi.
The nature of global power is undergoing a profound transformation. Historically, geopolitical influence was determined by territorial expansion, military strength, and industrial production. In the twenty-first century, however, technological capabilities—particularly artificial intelligence and algorithmic systems—are increasingly shaping global hierarchies. Algorithms now influence financial markets, digital communication, public administration, and even strategic decision-making in governments and militaries. As societies become more dependent on data-driven technologies, control over algorithmic systems has emerged as a new dimension of sovereignty.
Algorithmic sovereignty refers to a nation’s ability to design, regulate, and deploy algorithmic systems according to its own legal frameworks, political priorities, and social contexts. These systems determine how information flows across digital platforms, how automated decisions are made in sectors such as finance or healthcare, and how governments manage critical infrastructure. For instance, AI-powered recommendation algorithms on social media platforms shape public discourse and influence political mobilization, demonstrating how algorithmic systems increasingly affect democratic processes.
Recent technological developments illustrate how algorithms are becoming embedded in national governance systems. India’s AI-enabled drone defence network “Indrajaal”, capable of protecting large geographic areas from drone threats, demonstrates how AI is becoming central to national security infrastructure. Similarly, modern military command systems such as the Indian Army’s SAKSHAM AI command-and-control platform integrate real-time data and automated analysis to enhance battlefield awareness.These examples highlight that algorithms are no longer confined to the commercial technology sector; they are now integral to national security, governance, and strategic autonomy.
Global Competition for Algorithmic Sovereignty
The strategic importance of artificial intelligence has triggered intense global competition among major powers. Governments increasingly recognize that AI capabilities will shape economic productivity, technological leadership, and geopolitical influence. As a result, countries are investing heavily in AI infrastructure, research, and industrial policy to secure leadership in the emerging digital order. The global race for AI dominance has become comparable in significance to earlier technological rivalries such as the nuclear or space races of the twentieth century.
The United States currently maintains a significant advantage in the global AI ecosystem, driven largely by the technological capabilities of private companies. American firms such as Google, Microsoft, and Nvidia dominate cloud computing infrastructure, advanced semiconductor technologies, and foundational AI models used worldwide. These companies shape the architecture of the global digital economy, giving the United States significant influence over technological standards and innovation networks. Recent developments continue to reinforce this leadership: massive investments in AI data centres and infrastructure are expanding global computing capacity and consolidating the position of major American technology companies.
China has emerged as the most determined challenger to American technological dominance. Through coordinated industrial policy and massive public investment, Beijing has prioritized artificial intelligence as a strategic technology. China’s national AI strategy aims to establish the country as the global leader in AI innovation by the end of this decade. Meanwhile, the European Union has taken a regulatory approach by introducing comprehensive legislation such as the AI Act and promoting digital autonomy initiatives. Across the world, governments are recognizing that algorithmic control is not merely a technological matter but a core element of geopolitical competition.
India’s Algorithmic Dilemma: Innovation Without Control
India occupies a distinctive position in the global digital landscape. Over the past decade, the country has developed one of the most advanced digital public infrastructures in the world. Platforms such as Aadhaar, the Unified Payments Interface (UPI), and the broader Digital India ecosystem have transformed financial inclusion and public service delivery. These initiatives demonstrate India’s capacity to deploy digital technologies at massive scale, creating systems that serve hundreds of millions of citizens.
However, despite these achievements, India still depends heavily on foreign companies for advanced AI technologies. Many of the foundational machine learning models used by Indian startups and enterprises are developed and controlled by global technology firms. This dependence creates structural vulnerabilities, as critical digital infrastructure may rely on algorithmic systems that are designed outside the country’s regulatory or strategic control. For example, global technology companies continue to invest heavily in AI infrastructure within India, highlighting both the country’s growing technological significance and its continued reliance on foreign AI ecosystems.
India’s linguistic and cultural diversity also presents a unique technological challenge. AI models trained primarily on Western datasets often fail to accurately interpret Indian languages or local contexts. To address this gap, India has begun developing indigenous AI models tailored to its own linguistic landscape. Platforms such as Sarvam AI and the government-supported BHASHINI language initiative, which supports dozens of Indian languages, illustrate attempts to build localized AI capabilities. These initiatives represent early steps toward creating algorithmic systems that reflect India’s social realities rather than imported technological assumptions.
Algorithmic Governance and Democratic Accountability
As algorithmic systems become embedded in governance structures, the question of accountability becomes increasingly critical. Artificial intelligence now assists governments in a wide range of administrative functions, including welfare distribution, law enforcement, urban planning, and public health management. While such systems can improve efficiency and decision-making, they also raise significant concerns regarding transparency, bias, and democratic oversight. Algorithms are often described as “black boxes,” meaning that even experts sometimes struggle to fully understand how complex machine-learning systems reach their conclusions. When such opaque systems are used in governance, citizens may find it difficult to challenge decisions that affect their rights and opportunities.
In democratic societies, the legitimacy of governance depends on transparency and accountability. Algorithmic systems must therefore operate within regulatory frameworks that ensure fairness, explainability, and public oversight. Several countries have already begun developing policies to address these concerns. The European Union’s AI Act, for example, introduces risk-based regulations for AI systems used in critical sectors such as healthcare, finance, and law enforcement. The legislation requires transparency in high-risk AI applications and imposes strict obligations on developers to prevent discriminatory outcomes. Such initiatives highlight the growing recognition that algorithmic systems must be governed by ethical and legal frameworks rather than left solely to market forces.
India is also beginning to address these challenges. The Digital Personal Data Protection Act and ongoing discussions around AI governance frameworks indicate that policymakers are increasingly aware of the risks associated with algorithmic decision-making. Government initiatives promoting responsible AI emphasize principles such as transparency, fairness, and inclusivity. For example, India’s Responsible AI for Youth programme aims to introduce students to ethical AI development, fostering a generation of technologists who understand both the opportunities and responsibilities associated with artificial intelligence.
The issue of algorithmic accountability becomes even more critical in the context of social media and digital platforms. Algorithms used by major online platforms determine which content is amplified and which remains invisible. In several countries, these algorithms have been accused of amplifying misinformation, political polarization, and harmful narratives. India has witnessed similar challenges, particularly during major political events when online platforms become key arenas of political mobilization and information dissemination. Ensuring transparency in how these algorithms function is therefore essential for protecting democratic discourse.
Another important dimension of algorithmic governance relates to public sector decision-making. AI systems are increasingly used to analyze large datasets in areas such as healthcare diagnostics, agricultural planning, and disaster response. While these technologies can improve efficiency and predictive capabilities, they must be carefully designed to avoid reinforcing existing social inequalities. For instance, AI-based credit scoring systems may unintentionally discriminate against marginalized communities if they rely on incomplete or biased datasets.
Strengthening algorithmic governance therefore requires a combination of regulatory frameworks, institutional capacity, and public awareness. Governments must invest in independent oversight mechanisms capable of auditing algorithmic systems and ensuring compliance with ethical standards. Universities and research institutions also play an important role by developing interdisciplinary expertise in technology policy, ethics, and law. By integrating democratic accountability into the design and deployment of algorithmic systems, India can ensure that technological innovation remains aligned with the values of an open and inclusive society.
Building India’s Path to Algorithmic Sovereignty
Achieving algorithmic sovereignty will require sustained investment in technological infrastructure, research, and human capital. Artificial intelligence systems depend on advanced computing infrastructure, including high-performance processors and large-scale data centres capable of training complex machine learning models. Recognizing this need, India has launched the IndiaAI Mission, a national initiative designed to expand computing capacity, support AI startups, and develop indigenous large language models tailored to the country’s needs.
At the regional level, several Indian states are also investing in AI ecosystems. Telangana, for example, has introduced a comprehensive AI roadmap that includes high-performance computing infrastructure, startup accelerators, and AI research hubs designed to position the state as a global centre for artificial intelligence innovation. These initiatives demonstrate how regional governments and private-sector partnerships are contributing to the development of a domestic AI ecosystem capable of competing in global technology markets.
Equally important is the development of talent and innovation networks that support AI research and entrepreneurship. Government initiatives now aim to train millions of citizens in AI-related skills, expanding the country’s technological workforce and enabling wider participation in the digital economy. Combined with investments in open-source AI platforms and collaborative research networks, these efforts could enable India to build a robust technological ecosystem that balances innovation with democratic governance and strategic autonomy.
Strategic Opportunities for India in the Global AI Order
While the rise of artificial intelligence presents significant challenges, it also offers unprecedented opportunities for countries capable of leveraging their technological and demographic strengths. India possesses several structural advantages that could enable it to emerge as a major actor in the global AI ecosystem. With a large pool of highly skilled engineers, a rapidly expanding startup ecosystem, and one of the world’s largest digital markets, India has the potential to become a global hub for AI innovation.
One of India’s most significant strengths lies in its digital public infrastructure. Initiatives such as Aadhaar, UPI, and the Open Network for Digital Commerce (ONDC) demonstrate how government-supported digital platforms can enable large-scale innovation. These systems operate as public digital goods, allowing startups and businesses to build new services on top of shared infrastructure. Extending this model to artificial intelligence could enable the creation of an “AI public infrastructure”, where shared datasets, computing resources, and algorithmic tools are accessible to researchers and entrepreneurs across the country.
India’s startup ecosystem is already playing an important role in developing indigenous AI solutions. A growing number of technology companies are focusing on areas such as natural language processing, healthcare diagnostics, agricultural analytics, and financial technology. Startups working on multilingual AI tools are particularly significant in the Indian context, as they address the linguistic diversity that global technology platforms often struggle to accommodate. These innovations not only strengthen domestic technological capabilities but also create solutions that could be exported to other developing countries facing similar challenges.
The global demand for AI solutions tailored to emerging economies represents a major opportunity for India. Many developing countries share similar challenges related to linguistic diversity, infrastructure limitations, and resource constraints. AI technologies designed specifically for these contexts could enable India to position itself as a leader in “Global South AI solutions.” By exporting affordable and scalable digital technologies, India could expand its technological influence while supporting development partnerships across Asia, Africa, and Latin America.
Another strategic opportunity lies in international collaboration. As artificial intelligence becomes a central issue in global governance, countries are increasingly forming alliances to establish shared technological standards and research initiatives. India’s participation in international forums such as the Global Partnership on Artificial Intelligence (GPAI) and its cooperation with countries like the United States, Japan, and members of the European Union reflect growing engagement in shaping global AI norms. These partnerships can facilitate knowledge exchange, joint research projects, and the development of interoperable technological ecosystems.
At the same time, India must ensure that international collaboration does not undermine its technological autonomy. Strategic partnerships should complement domestic innovation rather than replace it. By investing in indigenous research institutions, strengthening university-industry collaboration, and expanding access to advanced computing infrastructure, India can build the foundations of a resilient AI ecosystem capable of competing at the global level.
Ultimately, the future of the global technological order will be shaped by how countries navigate the opportunities and risks associated with artificial intelligence. Nations that succeed in combining innovation, governance, and strategic foresight will play a decisive role in shaping the digital economy of the future. For India, the challenge is not merely to adopt AI technologies developed elsewhere but to actively participate in designing the algorithms, platforms, and governance frameworks that will define the next phase of global technological development.
By leveraging its demographic strengths, entrepreneurial ecosystem, and digital infrastructure, India has the potential to emerge as a major architect of the algorithm-driven world order. Achieving this vision will require sustained investment, institutional coordination, and a clear strategic commitment to technological sovereignty. If these conditions are met, India can transform the challenge of algorithmic dependence into an opportunity for technological leadership and global influence.
Conclusion
The rise of artificial intelligence is reshaping the foundations of global power. In the digital age, sovereignty is no longer defined solely by territorial control or military capabilities but by the ability to design and govern technological infrastructures that shape economic and political life. Algorithms increasingly influence how societies function, from financial systems and healthcare networks to national security and democratic communication.
For India, the pursuit of algorithmic sovereignty represents both a strategic challenge and an opportunity. The country has already demonstrated its ability to build large-scale digital infrastructure capable of serving millions of citizens. The next phase of technological development will require extending this success into the domain of artificial intelligence and algorithmic governance.
By investing in domestic research, strengthening digital infrastructure, and building responsible regulatory frameworks, India can ensure that its technological future remains aligned with its democratic values and developmental priorities. In an increasingly algorithm-driven world, nations that control the design and governance of digital technologies will shape the rules of the global order. For India, ensuring algorithmic sovereignty is therefore not merely a technological ambition—it is a strategic imperative for the decades ahead.
About the Author
Khushbu Ahlawat is a research analyst with a strong academic background in International Relations and Political Science. She has undertaken research projects at Jawaharlal Nehru University, contributing to analytical work on international and regional security issues. Alongside her research experience, she has professional exposure to Human Resources, with involvement in talent acquisition and organizational operations. She holds a Master’s degree in International Relations from Christ University, Bangalore, and a Bachelor’s degree in Political Science from the University of Delhi.
Electoral Politics and Digital Democracy in India: Source Internet
Introduction
Over the past decade, India has witnessed a profound transformation in the nature of its electoral politics as digital technologies and social media platforms have become central to political communication and democratic participation. The rapid expansion of internet access, the widespread availability of affordable smartphones, and the proliferation of social networking platforms have fundamentally altered how political actors engage with citizens. Platforms such as WhatsApp and X (Twitter) have evolved into powerful political arenas where campaigns are organized, narratives are constructed, and public opinion is shaped. In a country that conducts the world’s largest democratic elections, the integration of digital communication tools has allowed political actors to reach voters with unprecedented speed and precision. Unlike traditional campaign methods that relied heavily on mass rallies, television advertising, and print media, digital platforms enable continuous interaction between politicians and voters, allowing political communication to occur instantly and across geographic boundaries. This transformation has also been facilitated by initiatives aimed at expanding digital connectivity, including government programs designed to increase internet access and digital literacy across rural and semi-urban areas.
This digital transformation first became highly visible during the 2014 Indian General Election, often described by political analysts as India’s first “social media election.” The campaign strategy of Narendra Modi and the Bharatiya Janata Party demonstrated how digital platforms could be used to mobilize support, amplify political messaging, and shape national narratives. The use of social media to broadcast speeches, engage supporters, and promote campaign slogans marked a significant shift from traditional electoral strategies. By the time of the 2019 Indian General Election, digital campaigning had become even more sophisticated, with political parties operating extensive networks of online volunteers, data analytics teams, and social media managers. During the 2024 Indian General Election, the integration of artificial intelligence, meme culture, targeted advertising, and real-time digital engagement further expanded the scope of online political communication. Political leaders increasingly used short videos, live streams, and interactive digital campaigns to engage young voters who form a significant portion of India’s electorate.
At the same time, the rise of digital campaigning has also intensified debates about the implications of social media for democratic governance. Scholars of digital politics argue that while social media platforms have enhanced citizen participation and expanded access to political information, they have also introduced new challenges related to misinformation, algorithmic bias, and the commercialization of political communication. The ability of political actors to micro-target voters using personal data has raised concerns about privacy and transparency in electoral processes. Consequently, understanding how digital technologies are reshaping electoral politics is essential for evaluating both the opportunities and the risks associated with the evolving landscape of digital democracy in India.
Social Media and the Transformation of Election Campaign Strategies
Social media platforms have fundamentally transformed the strategies used by political parties during election campaigns in India. Campaigns that once depended on physical rallies and traditional media coverage now rely heavily on digital communication strategies that operate continuously throughout the electoral cycle. Political parties today maintain dedicated “digital war rooms,” where teams of strategists monitor social media trends, analyze public sentiment, and design messaging campaigns aimed at influencing voters. These digital teams track online conversations, identify emerging political issues, and craft responses that can quickly gain traction on social media platforms. The ability to respond instantly to political developments allows parties to shape narratives before they are widely reported in mainstream media. For instance, leaders from major political parties frequently use X (Twitter) to make policy announcements, criticize opponents, and respond to breaking news events, thereby transforming the platform into a key arena of political competition.
A prominent example of digital campaigning occurred during the 2019 Indian General Election with the viral hashtag #MainBhiChowkidar, promoted by supporters of Narendra Modi. Millions of social media users adopted the slogan in their online profiles, creating a large-scale digital campaign that reinforced the political narrative of anti-corruption and national security. The campaign was amplified across platforms such as X (Twitter) and Facebook through short videos, graphics, and coordinated posts by party leaders and volunteers. In response, opposition parties such as the Indian National Congress used digital platforms to highlight issues such as unemployment, economic inequality, and agrarian distress, attempting to counter the ruling party’s narrative by promoting alternative hashtags and campaign messages. Another significant example is the Bharat Jodo Yatra led by Rahul Gandhi between 2022 and 2023. Although the campaign involved a physical march across several states, social media played a crucial role in amplifying its message by broadcasting speeches, sharing images of public interactions, and mobilizing supporters nationwide. Daily updates, short clips, and photographs from the march were widely circulated on digital platforms, helping the campaign maintain continuous visibility in national political discourse. Supporters and volunteers also used hashtags and online discussion forums to promote the campaign’s themes of social unity and economic justice. Digital media therefore allows political campaigns to combine physical mobilization with online engagement, creating hybrid campaign strategies that extend their reach far beyond traditional campaign methods while sustaining political momentum throughout the electoral cycle.
WhatsApp and Grassroots Political Mobilization
While elite political debates often unfold on platforms like X (Twitter), the messaging application WhatsApp has emerged as the most influential tool for grassroots political mobilization in India. With hundreds of millions of users spread across urban centers, semi-urban towns, and rural villages, WhatsApp allows political campaigns to communicate directly with voters through decentralized networks of messaging groups. These groups frequently function as localized political communication channels where party workers distribute campaign materials, share political updates, organize community meetings, and coordinate voter outreach activities. Political parties have developed sophisticated hierarchical messaging structures in which national-level campaign teams create standardized campaign content that is circulated to state-level coordinators, who then forward it to district leaders and grassroots volunteers. This layered communication model enables political messages to travel rapidly across thousands of communities, ensuring that campaign narratives reach even remote constituencies within hours. In many cases, these groups also include local influencers such as community leaders, teachers, or small business owners who help legitimize and further disseminate political messaging among their social networks.
The role of WhatsApp networks became particularly evident during the 2019 Indian General Election, when political parties reportedly operated tens of thousands of WhatsApp groups to coordinate campaign activities and maintain continuous communication with supporters. These groups were used to circulate short videos, policy explanations, campaign posters, and speeches from political leaders, often translated into multiple regional languages to reach diverse voter bases. During the 2024 Indian General Election, WhatsApp groups were widely used to highlight government welfare initiatives such as the Pradhan Mantri Ujjwala Yojana and PM Kisan Samman Nidhi, which provide cooking gas subsidies and financial assistance to farmers. Campaign workers circulated testimonials from beneficiaries, short explanatory videos, and infographics to illustrate how these programs affected local communities. In addition, WhatsApp was frequently used to mobilize voters by sharing reminders about voter registration deadlines, polling dates, and booth locations. In several states, party volunteers also used WhatsApp to coordinate transportation for elderly voters and to organize local campaign events. This form of localized digital communication allows political parties to tailor their messaging to specific communities, languages, and socio-economic groups, thereby strengthening grassroots mobilization and transforming WhatsApp into a powerful instrument of electoral politics in contemporary India.
Public Discourse, Polarization, and Regulatory Challenges
The growing influence of social media has significantly reshaped public discourse in India, creating both new opportunities for democratic participation and new challenges for political stability. Platforms such as X (Twitter) have become key spaces where journalists, activists, political leaders, and citizens debate public policy issues in real time. Many major political controversies now emerge and gain momentum on social media before reaching mainstream news outlets. For example, debates surrounding the Citizenship Amendment Act and the 2020–2021 Indian Farmers’ Protest gained widespread visibility through viral hashtags, live video streams, and online campaigns. Activists used social media platforms to coordinate protests, share real-time updates from demonstration sites, and mobilize supporters across different regions of the country and the Indian diaspora abroad. Similarly, discussions surrounding policies such as the Farm Laws of 2020 and debates on unemployment, inflation, and governance frequently trend on digital platforms, shaping national conversations even before they appear in television debates or newspaper editorials. These developments illustrate how digital platforms have expanded the scope of democratic engagement by enabling citizens, journalists, and civil society groups to participate actively in political debates and hold political leaders publicly accountable.
However, the rapid spread of political content on social media has also intensified concerns about misinformation, hate speech, and digital manipulation. False rumors, edited videos, and misleading narratives often circulate widely on encrypted platforms such as WhatsApp, making it difficult for regulators to track their origin or verify their authenticity. During several election cycles, viral messages containing unverified claims or communal narratives have spread quickly within private messaging groups, sometimes influencing public perceptions and local political tensions. Scholars studying digital democracy argue that algorithm-driven content distribution on platforms like X (Twitter) can create “echo chambers,” where users are primarily exposed to viewpoints that reinforce their existing ideological preferences, thereby deepening political polarization. Concerns have also emerged regarding the use of coordinated online campaigns, automated bots, and AI-generated political content during elections. In response, the Election Commission of India has introduced guidelines requiring political parties to disclose digital campaign expenditures and label AI-generated political advertisements during election periods. Fact-checking organizations such as Alt News and BOOM Live have also become crucial actors in identifying and debunking viral misinformation. Despite these efforts, regulating digital political communication remains extremely challenging because encrypted messaging networks and decentralized content sharing make monitoring and enforcement difficult. As a result, balancing the protection of free expression with the need to maintain electoral integrity continues to be one of the most complex policy dilemmas confronting India’s evolving digital democracy.
Conclusion
The rise of social media has fundamentally transformed electoral politics in India by reshaping how political campaigns are conducted, how citizens engage with political information, and how public narratives are formed. Digital platforms have expanded the reach of political communication, enabling leaders to connect directly with voters and mobilize supporters across geographic and social boundaries. Platforms such as WhatsApp and X (Twitter) have created new opportunities for citizen participation by allowing individuals to share opinions, debate policy issues, and engage directly with political leaders. In many ways, these platforms have democratized political communication by reducing the barriers that once limited access to national political discourse. Political actors now operate in an environment where speeches, campaign rallies, and policy announcements can be instantly broadcast to millions of citizens, generating immediate public responses and online debates. Moreover, digital media has enabled regional leaders, grassroots activists, and civil society groups to gain visibility in national political conversations, thereby broadening the scope of democratic engagement beyond traditional political elites.
At the same time, the growing reliance on digital platforms for electoral communication introduces significant risks that must be addressed to safeguard democratic institutions. The spread of misinformation, the use of coordinated digital propaganda campaigns, and the emergence of artificial intelligence–generated political content raise serious concerns about the integrity of electoral processes. Instances of viral misinformation during elections have demonstrated how quickly unverified claims can shape public perceptions, particularly when shared within private messaging networks. In response, institutions such as the Election Commission of India have begun developing guidelines to regulate online political advertisements and monitor digital campaign practices. Technology companies are also under increasing pressure to strengthen content moderation systems and improve transparency in political advertising. Strengthening digital literacy among citizens, improving transparency in online political advertising, and developing robust regulatory frameworks will therefore be essential for ensuring that digital technologies strengthen rather than undermine democratic governance. As India continues to expand its digital infrastructure and internet connectivity, the influence of social media on political life is likely to grow even further. Ultimately, the future of digital democracy in India will depend on how effectively political institutions, technology companies, and civil society organizations collaborate to balance technological innovation with the core democratic principles of transparency, accountability, and inclusive participation.
About the Author
Khushbu Ahlawat is a research analyst with a strong academic background in International Relations and Political Science. She has undertaken research projects at Jawaharlal Nehru University, contributing to analytical work on international and regional security issues. Alongside her research experience, she has professional exposure to Human Resources, with involvement in talent acquisition and organizational operations. She holds a Master’s degree in International Relations from Christ University, Bangalore, and a Bachelor’s degree in Political Science from the University of Delhi.
INS Vikrant has had a bigger effect on India’s maritime imagination than most other ships. Vikrant, which the Indian Navy bought from Britain and turned into a Majestic-class carrier in 1961, was more than just a new ship. It became a strategic tool that changed the balance of power in the Indian Ocean, especially during the 1971 war that led to the creation of Bangladesh.
The name lives on in the INS Vikrant, India’s first aircraft carrier built in India. There is a story about changing doctrine, industrial ambition, and strategic independence, as well as naval gear, between these two ships.
The Beginning of a Maritime Vision
Vikrant (R11) went into service while India was still working on its security policy. The trauma of 1962 had shown weaknesses on land, but India’s geography—being a peninsula and sitting on important sea lanes—meant that the focus had to be on the sea. Aircraft carriers gave us reach, a way to scare off enemies, and the ability to change plans.
Most postcolonial governments had trouble keeping their navies up and running, but India’s decision to run a carrier showed that it wanted to do more than just protect its coastline; it wanted to project power throughout the Indian Ocean. Vikrant had a lot of mechanical problems in its early years, like boiler problems that slowed it down for a short time. Still, these limits didn’t make it any less important strategically. It was clear by the end of the 1960s that Vikrant would soon be in trouble.
The Eastern Theatre
In 1971, during the Indo-Pakistani War, Vikrant was sent to the Bay of Bengal to block East Pakistan’s navy. Vikrant was very important in the east, even though speed limits kept it from working in the west. Its Sea Hawk fighter jets attacked ports like Chittagong, Cox’s Bazar, and Khulna, cutting off supply lines and leaving Pakistani troops alone.
The psychological side was just as important as the tactical side. The fact that a carrier was off the east coast showed that the navy was better than the rest. The Pakistani navy knew what Vikrant was up to and sent the submarine PNS Ghazi to stop it. Ghazi’s strange sinking off the coast of Visakhapatnam got rid of the main underwater threat, which made it possible for Vikrant to start its operations.
The blockade made the resistance in the eastern theater fall apart faster. Pakistan’s eastern command gave up in just thirteen days. The birth of Bangladesh was not just a naval victory; if Vikrant hadn’t been in charge of the sea routes, the campaign might have gone more slowly or had a different outcome.
Symbol and School of Belief
Vikrant’s legacy lives on after 1971. It started carrier aviation in India by training many generations of naval aviators and including the idea of sea control in its doctrine. It helped the Navy become known as a blue-water force that could operate far from shore for long periods of time.
Vikrant stood for individuality in a world that was divided during the Cold War. India kept its strategic options open by working with both Soviet and Western suppliers while still being able to make its own decisions. Running a carrier required good planning, technical know-how, and the ability to work well with others. These skills helped the entire defense establishment.
Vikrant’s hull was taken out of service in 1997 and then turned into a museum in Mumbai. It was torn down in 2014. By that time, though, its symbolic capital could not be taken away.
IAC-1: Industrial claim
The commissioning of the new INS Vikrant (IAC-1) in 2022 marked a historic change from being a buyer to being a builder. The warship, which was built at Cochin Shipyard, shows that the area has been able to design and build things for decades.
The new Vikrant is more than just a tribute to the old one in terms of strategy. It shows that India wants to protect the sea routes that run from the Strait of Hormuz to the Malacca Strait, which are important for its trade and energy imports.
People are still talking about carrier capability around the world, even though there are anti-ship missiles and drone warfare. But geography plays a big role in how India thinks. Marine security is not an option because there are more than 7,500 kilometers of coastline and large exclusive economic zones. Carriers can do more than just fight in traditional ways. They can also respond in flexible ways, like with disaster relief, deterrence patrols, and power projection.
A Continental Mindset for Maritime Legacy
People have long thought of India as a continental power that is obsessed with its borders. Vikrant disagreed with this point of view. It made officials realize that the ocean that surrounds the subcontinent is an important part of its future.
This change is shown in the current Indo-Pacific framework by maritime alliances, which are shown by exercises and strategic talks. Vikrant’s legacy includes making it normal for India to be a net security provider in the Indian Ocean region.
Memory, Metal, and Meaning
Warships are made of steel, but they also stand for something. The first Vikrant stood for determination at a key moment in India’s strategic history. The second one builds on that determination in a time of technological change and waters that are up for grabs.
In this sense, legacy does not mean remembering the past. It is a continuation of the goal. INS Vikrant is a good example of a guiding principle in India’s strategic thinking: sovereignty is protected not only at borders but also beyond them. For example, it enforced a blockade in 1971 and built ships in India in 2022.
As fighting at sea heats up in the Indo-Pacific, the name “Vikrant,” which means “brave,” is still appropriate. It reminds us that India’s maritime story is still being written and that the ocean is still very important to its safety, wealth, and strategic independence.
Federalism has long been one of the foundational pillars of the constitutional and political architecture of India. Designed as a union of states with a strong central authority, India’s federal framework attempts to balance national unity with regional autonomy. The Constitution distributes legislative, administrative, and fiscal powers between the Union and the states through the Union List, State List, and Concurrent List. This institutional arrangement was created to accommodate India’s immense diversity—linguistic, cultural, and economic—while maintaining a cohesive national governance structure. Over the decades, federalism has allowed state governments to pursue region-specific policies while remaining part of a unified national political system.
In recent years, however, debates surrounding the future of Indian federalism have intensified as political centralization has become more visible in policy and governance. Conflicts over fiscal transfers, policy autonomy, and institutional roles have sharpened tensions between the Union government and several opposition-ruled states. For instance, multiple states have raised concerns over delays in financial transfers and the increasing use of cesses and surcharges by the Union government, which are not shared with states through the constitutional revenue-sharing formula. These developments have sparked renewed debates about whether India is witnessing a shift from cooperative federalism toward a more centralized model of governance.
Historical Foundations of Indian Federalism
India’s federal structure emerged from the political and administrative challenges faced during the transition from colonial rule to independence. The framers of the Constitution sought to construct a system that would preserve national unity while granting states meaningful autonomy in governance. Unlike classical federations such as the United States, India adopted what scholars often describe as a “quasi-federal” system. In this framework, the central government retains significant powers, including residuary legislative authority and the ability to intervene in state governance during emergencies. The intention behind this design was to prevent political fragmentation in a newly independent nation with deep social and regional diversity.
The functioning of Indian federalism has evolved significantly over time. During the early decades after independence, the dominance of a single political party across the Union and most states created a relatively harmonious federal system. Political scientist Rajni Kothari famously described this phase as the “Congress System,” where disputes between the centre and states were often resolved within party forums rather than through institutional confrontation. However, the rise of regional political parties since the late twentieth century has transformed the federal landscape. Today, states governed by different political parties often challenge central policies more assertively. Recent examples include calls by several southern states for a “federal reset” to recalibrate Union–state relations, reflecting growing concerns over centralization and demands for greater state autonomy.
Fiscal Federalism and the Politics of Resource Distribution
Fiscal federalism represents one of the most critical dimensions of centre–state relations in India. While states are responsible for delivering many public services—such as healthcare, education, agriculture, and infrastructure—their revenue-raising powers are relatively limited. As a result, states depend heavily on financial transfers from the Union government through mechanisms such as the Finance Commission of India, centrally sponsored schemes, and tax devolution. This structural imbalance has become a central issue in contemporary debates on federalism, particularly as states shoulder increasing responsibilities in welfare delivery, infrastructure development, and economic management. The design of India’s fiscal framework therefore plays a crucial role in determining how effectively states can meet their developmental obligations while maintaining fiscal stability.
Recent developments have intensified these tensions. The introduction of the Goods and Services Tax Council framework through the Goods and Services Tax (GST) created a unified national market but also reduced the independent taxation powers of states, increasing their dependence on central transfers. At the same time, the rising use of cesses and surcharges by the Union government has reduced the share of tax revenue available to states because these levies are excluded from the divisible tax pool. Fiscal disputes have become particularly visible in recent negotiations surrounding the Finance Commission and GST compensation mechanisms. Several state governments, including those of Tamil Nadu and Kerala, have expressed concerns that the growing reliance on such levies undermines the spirit of fiscal federalism by effectively shrinking the pool of revenues shared with states.
Another point of contention relates to the evolving criteria used by the Finance Commission for distributing tax revenues among states. Factors such as population, income distance, and fiscal discipline influence the allocation formula, often generating debate among states with differing economic capacities. For example, some southern states have argued that the use of population-based criteria disproportionately benefits more populous states while penalizing those that have successfully implemented population control measures. These debates illustrate the inherent complexity of designing a fiscal framework that balances equity with efficiency. As India continues to pursue ambitious development goals and expand social welfare programs, ensuring a transparent and equitable system of fiscal federalism will remain essential for sustaining cooperative centre–state relations and preserving the broader legitimacy of the federal structure.
Institutional Tensions: Governors, Agencies, and Political Authority
Institutional conflicts have also become a prominent feature of contemporary centre–state relations in India. One of the most debated issues concerns the role of governors, who are appointed by the Union government but serve as constitutional heads of states. In theory, governors are expected to function as neutral constitutional authorities who safeguard the Constitution and facilitate the smooth functioning of democratic institutions. In practice, however, several state governments have accused governors of interfering in legislative processes, delaying assent to bills, or influencing administrative decisions. These disputes have raised broader questions about whether the office of governor has increasingly become politicized, thereby affecting the balance between state autonomy and central authority within the federal system.
A prominent recent example occurred in the southern state of Tamil Nadu, where tensions between the state government and the governor led to repeated disputes over legislative procedures and university appointments. The governor withheld several bills passed by the state assembly, triggering political confrontation and legal intervention. Eventually, the Supreme Court of India ruled that governors cannot indefinitely delay decisions on bills passed by elected legislatures, reinforcing constitutional limits on gubernatorial discretion. The controversy intensified political debate across the country, with several regional leaders demanding reforms to clarify the powers and responsibilities of governors. Such disputes illustrate how constitutional offices can become arenas of political contestation, complicating the functioning of federal institutions.
Beyond gubernatorial disputes, tensions have also emerged around the role of central investigative and regulatory agencies operating within states. Institutions such as the Enforcement Directorate and the Central Bureau of Investigation have increasingly become part of political debates, particularly when investigations involve opposition leaders or state-level officials. Several state governments—including those in West Bengal and Punjab—have withdrawn general consent for CBI investigations, arguing that federal investigative powers are sometimes used in ways that undermine state autonomy. These developments have sparked broader discussions about institutional neutrality and accountability within India’s federal structure.
At the same time, disputes have also arisen over the functioning of administrative bodies that regulate sectors such as education, policing, and law and order. For instance, disagreements over control of university appointments and state-level bureaucratic authority have surfaced in states like Kerala and Delhi. In Delhi’s case, the long-running institutional struggle between the elected government and the Lieutenant Governor eventually required constitutional clarification by the Supreme Court regarding the division of powers within the National Capital Territory. Collectively, these developments demonstrate that institutional tensions are not merely procedural disputes but reflect deeper political struggles over authority, accountability, and the evolving nature of federal governance in India.
Welfare Policies, Governance, and the Politics of Central Schemes
Another dimension of centre–state tensions relates to the design and implementation of welfare policies in India. Many social welfare programs are implemented through centrally sponsored schemes, where both the Union government and the states share financial and administrative responsibilities. Programs such as Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana, Pradhan Mantri Kisan Samman Nidhi, and Ayushman Bharat illustrate how national initiatives seek to provide uniform welfare coverage across the country. While these programs aim to reduce regional disparities and expand social protection, states sometimes argue that centrally designed schemes limit their flexibility to tailor policies according to local economic and social conditions. As a result, the governance of welfare programs has increasingly become an arena where questions of administrative autonomy and political credit intersect.
Disputes over welfare programs and policy design have become increasingly visible in recent years. Several states have criticized the Union government for imposing policy changes without sufficient consultation, particularly in areas such as employment programs and social welfare funding. Fiscal pressures on states have intensified these concerns, as rising welfare commitments and borrowing limits restrict their ability to finance development initiatives. For instance, financial stress faced by smaller states has prompted requests for additional central support; the chief minister of Himachal Pradesh recently sought a special financial package to offset fiscal deficits and declining central grants. Such cases highlight how fiscal constraints and policy design intersect with political dynamics in shaping centre–state relations.
Another recurring source of tension involves the allocation of financial responsibility within centrally sponsored schemes. Many states argue that the required state contribution has increased over time, placing additional strain on their budgets. This issue has been particularly visible in the implementation of programs like Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act, where delays in wage reimbursements or disputes over funding shares have generated friction between state administrations and the Union government. State governments have often argued that delayed payments or administrative conditions attached to central funding complicate the implementation of welfare programs at the grassroots level.
Political competition also shapes how welfare policies are presented and implemented. In several instances, states have sought to rebrand or supplement centrally sponsored programs with their own initiatives to maintain political visibility and policy ownership. For example, governments in states such as West Bengal and Telangana have introduced parallel welfare schemes that emphasize regional priorities while operating alongside central programs. These dynamics illustrate that welfare governance in India is not only an administrative process but also a political negotiation over authority, accountability, and recognition. As welfare policies remain central to electoral politics and development strategies, the relationship between national initiatives and state-level governance will continue to shape the evolving balance of India’s federal system.
Regional Political Assertion and the Revival of Federal Debates
The growing tensions between the Union government and several state administrations have revived debates about the future of federalism in India. Regional political leaders increasingly emphasize the need to protect state autonomy while maintaining national cohesion within the constitutional framework. These discussions are particularly significant because India’s political system has historically relied on a balance between a strong central government and empowered states capable of addressing diverse regional needs. As political competition has intensified across states, many regional leaders have argued that preserving federal principles is essential not only for governance but also for sustaining democratic representation across India’s vast and diverse society.
Recent political developments illustrate this trend clearly. Several state governments have advocated the creation of new institutional forums to strengthen intergovernmental dialogue and ensure that states have greater influence in national policymaking. For instance, the chief minister of Tamil Nadu has repeatedly called for broader consultations through bodies such as the Inter-State Council, arguing that federal institutions should play a more active role in resolving disputes between the centre and states. Similarly, leaders in Telangana and West Bengal have advocated greater fiscal autonomy and policy flexibility in areas such as welfare spending and industrial development. These demands reflect a broader trend in which regional political actors seek to redefine the contours of federal governance.
At the same time, competition between states for investment and economic development has intensified what scholars describe as “competitive federalism.” In this framework, states attempt to attract domestic and international investment through policy innovation, regulatory reforms, and infrastructure development. States such as Gujarat, Karnataka, and Maharashtra have actively pursued investment summits and industrial policies designed to strengthen their economic competitiveness. This environment has encouraged states to experiment with governance models while simultaneously negotiating fiscal and regulatory autonomy from the centre. The resulting dynamic—characterized by both cooperation and competition—continues to shape the evolving trajectory of India’s federal political system and the broader debate about the balance of power within the country’s democratic framework.
The Future of Indian Federalism
The future of Indian federalism will depend largely on how effectively the political system manages the evolving balance between central authority and state autonomy. As India pursues ambitious national goals—ranging from economic growth and digital transformation to climate action and social welfare expansion—coordination between the Union and the states will become even more important. However, maintaining the legitimacy of this coordination requires ensuring that states retain meaningful policy autonomy and fiscal capacity. Strengthening institutions such as the GST Council and the Inter-State Council could provide platforms for dialogue and consensus-building, helping reduce political friction between different levels of government.
At the same time, the sustainability of India’s federal structure will depend on rebuilding trust between the centre and the states. Transparent fiscal transfers, consultation in policymaking, and respect for constitutional institutions are essential for preserving the spirit of cooperative federalism envisioned by the framers of the Constitution. The ongoing debates over centralization and autonomy should therefore not be viewed merely as political conflict but as part of the dynamic evolution of Indian democracy. If managed constructively, these debates could ultimately strengthen India’s federal framework—ensuring that national unity and regional diversity continue to coexist within one of the world’s most complex democratic systems.
About the Author
Khushbu Ahlawat is a research analyst with a strong academic background in International Relations and Political Science. She has undertaken research projects at Jawaharlal Nehru University, contributing to analytical work on international and regional security issues. Alongside her research experience, she has professional exposure to Human Resources, with involvement in talent acquisition and organizational operations. She holds a Master’s degree in International Relations from Christ University, Bangalore, and a Bachelor’s degree in Political Science from the University of Delhi.
Energy security has emerged as one of the central strategic concerns of the twenty-first century. Rapid industrialization, population growth, and technological expansion have sharply increased electricity demand across the world. For a rapidly developing country like India, ensuring reliable and sustainable energy supply has become a national priority. While coal continues to dominate India’s energy mix, concerns about climate change and carbon emissions have pushed policymakers to diversify toward cleaner energy sources. Nuclear energy, which produces large amounts of electricity with minimal greenhouse gas emissions, has therefore gained increasing importance in India’s long-term energy planning.
However, nuclear energy expansion depends fundamentally on the availability of uranium fuel. India possesses uranium reserves, but they are limited and often of relatively low grade compared with deposits found in countries such as Canada. This constraint has historically limited the operational efficiency of India’s nuclear reactors. Consequently, international uranium partnerships have become essential for sustaining nuclear power generation. A recent example is the 2026 Canada–India uranium agreement, under which Canadian mining company Cameco will supply about 22 million pounds of uranium between 2027 and 2035, valued at roughly $2.6 billion, to fuel India’s nuclear reactors. This agreement reflects India’s growing reliance on global uranium markets to secure energy stability while expanding its nuclear energy capacity.
Historical Context: From Nuclear Estrangement to Strategic Cooperation
The trajectory of nuclear cooperation between India and Canada reflects a complex history shaped by both technological collaboration and political tensions. In the early years after independence, Canada played an important role in developing India’s civilian nuclear program. Canadian assistance contributed to India’s early nuclear infrastructure, particularly through heavy-water reactor technology derived from Canada’s CANDU reactor system. These collaborations helped establish India’s early nuclear research and power generation capabilities and reflected a broader international commitment to the peaceful use of atomic energy during the mid-twentieth century. One of the most significant outcomes of this cooperation was the establishment of the CIRUS research reactor at the Bhabha Atomic Research Centre with Canadian technical assistance and support from the United States. This reactor played a critical role in advancing India’s nuclear research capabilities and training a new generation of Indian nuclear scientists and engineers. The early phase of Indo-Canadian nuclear collaboration therefore laid the institutional and technological foundations of India’s nuclear program, even though later geopolitical developments temporarily disrupted this partnership.
This cooperative relationship dramatically changed after India conducted its first nuclear test in 1974, known as the “Smiling Buddha” test. Canada and several Western countries viewed the test as a violation of earlier nuclear cooperation agreements and immediately suspended nuclear assistance to India. As a result, India remained largely excluded from global nuclear commerce for decades, particularly because it had not signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). A turning point occurred in 2008 when India secured a historic waiver from the Nuclear Suppliers Group following the India–United States civil nuclear agreement. This waiver allowed India to participate in international nuclear trade under safeguards monitored by the International Atomic Energy Agency. Canada subsequently signed a nuclear cooperation agreement with India that came into force in 2013, enabling the resumption of uranium trade. Recent diplomatic developments further highlight the normalization of nuclear relations. In 2026, during high-level talks between Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney, both countries announced a major uranium supply agreement alongside efforts to deepen trade and energy cooperation. This renewed engagement marks a significant shift from decades of estrangement to a strategic partnership focused on clean energy and resource cooperation.
India’s Uranium Challenge: Domestic Limitations and Growing Demand
Despite possessing uranium deposits in regions such as Jharkhand, Andhra Pradesh, and Rajasthan, India faces structural challenges in meeting domestic uranium demand. Much of India’s uranium ore is relatively low grade, which increases extraction costs and complicates mining operations. As India expanded its nuclear power infrastructure, the gap between uranium supply and reactor demand widened. Domestic production has therefore been insufficient to fuel all operating reactors at full capacity. While the Uranium Corporation of India Limited has undertaken efforts to expand mining operations and develop new uranium projects, production levels have not yet kept pace with the country’s rapidly growing nuclear energy ambitions. Environmental clearances, technological constraints, and the long gestation period associated with uranium mining projects further contribute to delays in increasing domestic output.
This limitation has compelled India to rely heavily on imported uranium. According to energy data, India currently imports over 70 percent of its uranium requirements from international suppliers. Countries such as Kazakhstan, Russia, and Canada have become key partners in meeting India’s nuclear fuel needs. For example, in FY2021 India imported more than 2,000 metric tonnes of uranium from Canada and Kazakhstan combined, illustrating the importance of global supply chains in sustaining India’s nuclear sector. In recent years, India has also sought to diversify its uranium import sources to reduce strategic vulnerability and ensure uninterrupted fuel supply for its reactors. Agreements with multiple uranium-exporting countries have allowed India to maintain reactor efficiency and stabilize fuel reserves. As India continues to expand its nuclear power program and construct additional reactors, securing reliable international uranium partnerships will remain essential for maintaining energy security and sustaining long-term nuclear development.
Recent policy initiatives further highlight the urgency of addressing India’s uranium challenge. The government of India has launched a Nuclear Energy Mission aiming to expand nuclear capacity to 100 GW by 2047, a dramatic increase from the current installed capacity of roughly 9 GW. Achieving this ambitious target will require secure long-term uranium supplies, making international partnerships like the Canada–India uranium agreement increasingly vital for sustaining India’s nuclear ambitions. In addition to large-scale reactors, India is also exploring the development of advanced technologies such as small modular reactors (SMRs) and fast breeder reactors to enhance efficiency and diversify its nuclear energy portfolio. Institutions such as the Department of Atomic Energy and the Nuclear Power Corporation of India Limited are actively working to accelerate reactor construction and strengthen domestic nuclear infrastructure. Within this broader strategic framework, stable uranium imports from reliable partners will remain essential for enabling India’s long-term nuclear expansion and ensuring energy security.
The Canada–India Uranium Deal: Structure and Strategic Significance
The Canada–India uranium agreement represents one of the most significant developments in bilateral energy cooperation. Under the 2026 agreement, the Canadian uranium producer Cameco will supply approximately 22 million pounds of uranium ore concentrate (U₃O₈) to India between 2027 and 2035, with an estimated value of about $2.6 billion. The uranium will be used to fuel India’s fleet of nuclear reactors operated under civilian safeguards. This agreement builds on earlier cooperation, including a smaller five-year uranium supply contract signed in 2015, indicating a deepening long-term partnership between the two countries. The uranium sourced from Canada’s high-grade deposits in Saskatchewan’s Athabasca Basin—one of the richest uranium-producing regions globally—ensures high-quality fuel supply for India’s expanding nuclear power sector. In practical terms, this arrangement helps Indian reactors operate at higher capacity levels, improving electricity generation efficiency while reducing the risks associated with domestic uranium shortages.
The deal also reflects broader geopolitical and economic dynamics. In addition to uranium trade, India and Canada have sought to expand cooperation in critical minerals, clean energy technologies, and nuclear innovation such as small modular reactors (SMRs). The uranium partnership forms part of a wider effort by both governments to strengthen bilateral relations and diversify strategic economic ties. Recent diplomatic engagements between the two countries have emphasized deeper collaboration in areas such as energy transition technologies, research partnerships, and supply chains for critical resources. Both governments have also expressed interest in expanding academic and technological cooperation in nuclear science, including safety standards and regulatory frameworks. Moreover, recent diplomatic meetings have set an ambitious target of increasing bilateral trade to $50 billion by 2030, highlighting the broader economic significance of the partnership. In this sense, the uranium agreement not only strengthens India’s nuclear fuel security but also serves as a catalyst for broader strategic cooperation in energy, trade, and technology.
Implications for India’s Nuclear Energy Program and Clean Energy Goals
The availability of reliable uranium imports has significant implications for the nuclear power program of India. Nuclear reactors require a consistent and uninterrupted fuel supply to operate efficiently, and uranium shortages in the past forced several Indian reactors to function below their optimal capacity. With long-term supply agreements such as the Canada–India uranium deal, India can maintain steady reactor operations and increase electricity generation. Currently, India operates about 25 nuclear reactors and has several more under construction, reflecting the government’s commitment to expanding nuclear power infrastructure. Recent developments also illustrate this expansion: the Nuclear Power Corporation of India Limited has accelerated work on new pressurized heavy water reactors in states such as Rajasthan and Gujarat, while the Kudankulam nuclear power project in partnership with Russia continues to add new reactor units to the national grid. These projects demonstrate how secure uranium supplies enable India to scale up its nuclear energy capacity while maintaining operational stability.
Nuclear energy also plays an important role in India’s broader clean energy transition. Unlike fossil fuels, nuclear power generates electricity without emitting large amounts of carbon dioxide, making it an important component of India’s climate strategy. As India attempts to balance rapid economic growth with its commitments under the Paris Agreement, nuclear power offers a reliable base-load energy source that complements renewable energy systems such as solar and wind, which are often affected by weather variability. The long-term uranium supply from Canada therefore strengthens India’s ability to pursue both energy security and climate goals simultaneously. Furthermore, discussions between the two countries on advanced nuclear technologies, including small modular reactors, indicate that the partnership may extend beyond fuel supply into technological collaboration.
Scholars and energy analysts increasingly emphasize the strategic significance of such partnerships. For instance, nuclear policy expert Ashley J. Tellis has argued that reliable access to global nuclear fuel markets allows India to sustain its civilian nuclear program while maintaining strategic autonomy in energy planning. Similarly, analysts at the International Energy Agency highlight that nuclear power will remain an important pillar of India’s low-carbon energy mix if the country is to meet its long-term net-zero ambitions. Recent policy initiatives reinforce this trajectory: India has announced plans to expand nuclear capacity significantly by 2047 as part of its long-term energy transition strategy. Within this broader framework, international uranium partnerships—particularly with technologically advanced suppliers like Canada—play a critical role in ensuring that India’s nuclear energy expansion remains both sustainable and strategically resilient.
Conclusion
The Canada–India uranium partnership represents a significant milestone in the evolution of bilateral relations and global energy diplomacy. By ensuring a stable supply of uranium, Canada supports the nuclear energy ambitions of India while simultaneously strengthening economic and strategic ties between the two countries. The agreement demonstrates how international resource cooperation can address critical energy challenges faced by rapidly growing economies and underscores the importance of reliable supply chains in sustaining nuclear power programs. As India continues to expand its nuclear infrastructure to meet rising electricity demand and reduce dependence on fossil fuels, access to consistent uranium supplies will remain crucial for maintaining reactor efficiency and long-term energy planning. Moreover, the partnership reflects a broader shift toward strategic resource diplomacy in an increasingly complex global energy landscape. As countries compete for access to critical minerals and energy resources, long-term agreements such as the Canada–India uranium deal help ensure stability and predictability in fuel supply chains. The cooperation also signals growing trust between the two democracies and highlights the role of energy partnerships in strengthening broader geopolitical relationships. In the long run, such collaborations may pave the way for deeper engagement in nuclear research, technological innovation, and regulatory cooperation, thereby contributing to a more resilient and sustainable global nuclear energy framework.
Looking ahead, uranium diplomacy will likely play an increasingly important role in global energy politics as countries pursue cleaner energy pathways and attempt to meet climate commitments. For India, maintaining diversified uranium supply partnerships will be essential for sustaining its nuclear energy program and achieving long-term energy security. At the same time, the Canada–India partnership may open new avenues for broader collaboration in advanced nuclear technologies, reactor safety systems, and critical mineral supply chains. Such cooperation reflects a broader shift toward strategic energy partnerships that combine resource access with technological exchange and sustainable development goals. In this evolving global energy landscape, the Canada–India uranium agreement stands as a model of how resource diplomacy can contribute to energy resilience, geopolitical trust, and the pursuit of a low-carbon future.
About the Author
Khushbu Ahlawat is a research analyst with a strong academic background in International Relations and Political Science. She has undertaken research projects at Jawaharlal Nehru University, contributing to analytical work on international and regional security issues. Alongside her research experience, she has professional exposure to Human Resources, with involvement in talent acquisition and organizational operations. She holds a Master’s degree in International Relations from Christ University, Bangalore, and a Bachelor’s degree in Political Science from the University of Delhi.
The Two-Day International Conference on Changing Dynamics of India’s Narrative Diplomacy, was organized by the Faculty of Humanities, Social Sciences and Liberal Arts, Shree Guru Gobind Singh Tricentenary University in collaboration with the Indian Council of World Affairs and sponsored by the Indian Council of Social Science Research unfolded as a multidimensional academic engagement, on February 25-26, 2026. Bringing together scholars, practitioners and policymakers, the conference examined the ways in which India’s global image is increasingly shaped by narratives, perception-building and strategic communication. Through keynote lectures, panel discussions and thematic technical sessions, it highlighted that in an interconnected yet fragmented global order, countries compete not only for territory, trade, or military leverage but also for legitimacy, credibility and moral authority within discursive and digital spaces.
The conference began with a panel discussion titled “Narrative Diplomacy: Theory and Praxis”. The panellists, Dr. Artyom Garin, Dr. Aurora Martin, Dr. Titipol Phakdeewanich, Ms. Anamika Bhattacharjee and Ms. Cynthia Francis established the conceptual foundation of the conference by examining the evolving nature of diplomacy in the twenty-first century. They also emphasized that contemporary diplomacy extends beyond traditional statecraft into spheres such as storytelling, cultural memory, digital communication, diaspora engagement and human rights discourse. In this context, India’s civilizational heritage and pluralistic traditions were identified as important narrative assets. At the same time, they stressed that the effective articulation of such narratives requires credibility, adaptability and ethical grounding.
The Inaugural Session began with the rendition of Vande Mataram and the ceremonial lighting of the lamp. In her opening remarks, Dr. Nandini Basistha reflected on the transformation of diplomacy from conventional state-centric practices to what she described as a world of “many truths,” where global perceptions are shaped by cultural practices, food traditions, diaspora networks and digital media.
The Hon’ble Vice-Chancellor of SGT University, Prof. (Dr.) Hemant Verma delivered the inaugural address situating India’s narrative diplomacy within the changing geopolitical environment and emphasizing its growing relevance in global politics.
The Guest of Honour, Dr. Anwesha Ghosh, highlighted India’s cultural diplomacy through initiatives such as yoga, cinema, humanitarian outreach and vaccine diplomacy. The Keynote Address by Prof. Dr. Arvind Kumar provided a geopolitical overview of India’s emergence as a significant global actor, particularly through its role in institutions such as the G20. The Chief Guest, Dr. Vijay Chauthaiwale reflected on India’s diplomatic resurgence and emphasized trust-building and humanitarian engagement as key pillars of its global narrative. In the Presidential Address, Padma Bhushan Ram Bahadur Rai traced the historical evolution of India’s foreign policy, emphasizing the renewed sense of national confidence and civilizational pride in contemporary diplomatic discourse. The session also witnessed the release of the conference souvenir and the book Stories, Soft Power, and Strategy: India’s Narrative Diplomacy in the 21st Century. The inaugural proceedings concluded with a vote of thanks.
A special session titled “The Power of Perception: Narrative Diplomacy and Operation Sindoor” added a praxis-oriented dimension to the conference. It featured Dr. Hemang Joshi in conversation with Prof. (Dr.) Hemant Verma as they discussed how contemporary strategic operations unfold simultaneously across military, political and digital arenas. The “Operation Sindoor” was discussed not only as a security initiative but also as a symbolically resonant event demonstrating the importance of naming, framing, and communication in shaping public perception. The speakers highlighted the concept of narrative sovereignty, stressing that nations must proactively articulate their own perspectives rather than allowing external narratives to dominate. They also emphasized the responsibility of democratic institutions, political leadership, and the media in balancing transparency with strategic communication.
The technical sessions of the conference expanded these themes across a wide range of interdisciplinary perspectives. India’s Narrative Diplomacy: Theory and Praxis explored the philosophical and ethical foundations of India’s diplomatic narratives. Scholars discussed the role of concepts such as dharma, sustainability and constitutional ethics in shaping India’s international image. The papers highlighted that cultural practices including cuisine, environmental stewardship and democratic values contribute to a more nuanced global narrative. Another session titled The Narrative Diplomacy of Different Countries brought together eight papers examining narrative strategies across diverse geopolitical contexts. Presenters analyzed how different nations employ storytelling and symbolic communication to balance ideals with strategic interests, particularly in regions marked by political tensions and fragile neighbourhood relations. Several papers also emphasized the importance of indigenous epistemologies and sustainable development frameworks in shaping contemporary diplomatic practices. Bollywood and the Impact of Indian Cinema, examined the role of cinema as a powerful instrument of India’s soft power. Eight research papers stressed on Bollywood’s contribution to shaping global perceptions of India while also reflecting complex social debates within the country. Scholars discussed themes such as Indian Knowledge Systems, philosophical thought, gender representation, anti-caste discourse and national identity in cinematic narratives. Collectively, the session demonstrated that Bollywood transcends entertainment and functions as an influential cultural and diplomatic medium negotiating questions of identity, ideology and international representation.
Buddhist Heritage, Indology and the Indian Knowledge System comprised nine presentations exploring India’s civilizational heritage as a resource for contemporary diplomacy. Papers examined Buddhist diplomacy, ecological soft power, intellectual property strategies, educational traditions rooted in parampara and strategic thought. The discussions highlighted how ancient philosophical traditions can inform modern diplomatic practices by connecting cultural authenticity with strategic autonomy in a multipolar world.
The second day of the conference began with a panel discussion titled “Changing Dimensions of India’s Narrative Diplomacy.” The panel included Prof. S. D. Muni, Lt. Col. J. S. Sodhi, Dr. Sampa Kundu, Prof. Ramdas Rupavath, Prof. Dr. Alka Parikh, Prof. Saroj Kumar Verma, Dr. Ravi Rameshchandra Shukla, and Dr. Girisanker S. B. Nair. The panellists offered a multilayered understanding of India’s narrative diplomacy by integrating strategic, cultural and technological perspectives. Discussions emphasized the importance of adapting traditional diplomatic practices to a rapidly transforming global environment shaped by digital communication, geopolitical competition and emerging technologies.
The second day’s technical sessions further expanded the scope of the conference. The session Digital Storytelling and Social Media Diplomacy contained twelve papers examining the growing role of digital platforms in shaping diplomatic narratives. Scholars discussed language politics, Digital Public Infrastructure, misinformation and the ethical challenges associated with AI-driven communication. The session highlighted how digital technologies have transformed diplomatic engagement by enabling faster communication while simultaneously creating new vulnerabilities related to misinformation and data manipulation. Narratives of Food, Democracy, and Diaspora examined cultural practices and diaspora networks contribute to the formation of “Brand India.” Eight papers examined the interconnections between sustainable development, democratic values, diaspora engagement, and culinary diplomacy. Presentations also addressed developmental challenges such as poverty, health and education while reflecting on the opportunities and constraints involved in diaspora diplomacy within a multipolar global order. Challenges and Prospects of Narrative Diplomacy, featured eleven research papers analysing the evolving strategic landscape of India’s global engagement. Scholars discussed cultural partnerships such as India-Vietnam relations, maritime diplomacy, humanitarian assistance and disaster relief operations as examples of India’s responsible international leadership. Papers also addressed issues such as coalition governance, national identity, inclusive education and ethical traditions in shaping both domestic and international narratives. The session concluded with reflections on emerging challenges, particularly the role of artificial intelligence and digital technologies in transforming the production and circulation of knowledge. The last session was conducted in an online format, included more than fifty research papers and significantly expanded the thematic scope of the conference. Scholars explored topics such as democracy, Buddhism, Gandhian thought, diaspora diplomacy, digital transformation, internal security, and strategic autonomy within the broader framework of narrative diplomacy. Papers examined instruments of soft power including geographical indication tags, gastrodiplomacy, grassroots leadership initiatives, and the internationalization of India’s digital payment systems such as UPI. Several presenters critically analysed China’s narrative strategies, Indo-Pacific geopolitics, neighbourhood diplomacy, and India’s engagement with the Global South in multilateral institutions such as the United Nations Security Council. Discussions also addressed contemporary concerns including AI-driven disinformation, identity politics, coalition governance, and security challenges in border regions such as Ladakh and the Northeast.
The conference concluded with a Valedictory session that brought together strategic, diplomatic, and academic reflections. The Chief Guest, Lt. Gen. Shokin Chauhan, provided a security-oriented perspective on narrative diplomacy. Drawing on his extensive experience in defence and international cooperation, he emphasized that contemporary conflicts increasingly unfold not only on physical battlefields but also within informational and cognitive domains. He argued that perception management, strategic communication and narrative framing have become essential components of national security. Highlighting India’s expanding global role, he noted that humanitarian assistance and disaster relief operations, peacekeeping missions, maritime security initiatives and evacuation operations contribute significantly to shaping India’s international narrative as a responsible and responsive power.
Lt. Gen. Chauhan further stressed that strategic narratives must be grounded in clarity of national interest while remaining aligned with democratic values and ethical responsibility. He cautioned that hybrid warfare, misinformation, and AI-driven disinformation campaigns present serious challenges to national narratives. Consequently, he advocated greater institutional preparedness, stronger inter-agency coordination, and increased intellectual investment in strategic studies to safeguard India’s global image in an increasingly contested information environment. The Guest of Honour, Ambassador Ashok Sajjanhar offered a diplomatic perspective based on decades of experience in international relations. He observed that India’s foreign policy has evolved from a largely state-centric approach to a more multidimensional model that integrates culture, diaspora engagement, digital diplomacy and economic partnerships. According to him, India’s civilizational depth, democratic framework, and pluralistic identity constitute enduring narrative strengths. However, he emphasized that these strengths must be communicated consistently and credibly across international platforms. Referring to India’s engagement with the Global South, multilateral institutions and Indo-Pacific partnerships he argued that narrative diplomacy must combine moral positioning with strategic pragmatism. He also highlighted the growing role of embassies and diplomatic missions as narrative hubs that engage with academia, think tanks, media organizations and civil society.
The valedictory deliberations reinforced the central insight of the conference: in the twenty-first century, nations compete not only through material capabilities but also through the credibility, coherence, and persuasive power of their narratives. The conference also included an award ceremony recognizing outstanding scholarly contributions presented during the event. Awards were presented in three categories. The Best Paper Award was conferred upon Dr. Mohd Shahzad, Ms. Devarati Mandal, Dr. Bijetri Pathak, Mr. Partha Debnath, and Dr. Amita Arora. The Best Graduate Paper Award was presented to Ms. Neha Kumari, Mr. Ashutosh Prasad, Mr. Prathamesh Kamble, Ms. Anamika Singh, Ms. Dona Martin, Mr. Mohd Zaid Irfan, and Mr. Santosh Kumar Sahoo. The Best Paper in the Intern Category was awarded to Mr. Daksh Singh and Ms. Surati Chaturvedi. The ceremony also recognized the contributions of the best interns across various organizing committees.
A key takeaway from the conference was that narrative diplomacy is not merely an academic concept but a comprehensive soft power architecture. It integrates Indian Knowledge Systems, cultural exports, digital infrastructure, humanitarian outreach and diaspora networks into a cohesive diplomatic vision. At the same time, participants acknowledged emerging challenges such as misinformation, data misrepresentation, geopolitical contestations and the disruptive potential of artificial intelligence. Several recommendations emerged from the deliberations. These included the establishment of a National Narrative Diplomacy Centre to facilitate cross-sectoral coordination between academia, policy institutions and diplomatic bodies expanding Digital Public Infrastructure and Indian Knowledge Systems through partnerships with the Global South; investing in counter-narrative strategies to address misinformation and AI-driven propaganda and leveraging diaspora networks to strengthen India’s engagement with regions such as Southeast Asia and the Indo-Pacific.
In conclusion, the International Conference successfully highlighted the transformative role of narratives in shaping India’s global presence. The discussions demonstrated that India’s diplomatic future lies in harmonizing civilizational heritage, democratic values, technological innovation and strategic communication. Over the course of two days, the conference not only enriched academic discourse but also generated meaningful insights for policy engagement and future research.
Latin America’s Role in Powering India’s Clean Energy Goals: Source Internet
Introduction
The global transition toward clean energy has fundamentally altered the geopolitical significance of natural resources. While fossil fuels dominated the twentieth century’s geopolitical rivalries, the twenty-first century is witnessing the emergence of critical minerals such as lithium, cobalt, nickel, and copper as the new strategic commodities shaping international economic and security relations. These minerals are indispensable for manufacturing electric vehicle batteries, renewable energy infrastructure, energy storage technologies, and advanced electronics. As countries accelerate their decarbonisation strategies to address climate change and meet their commitments under the Paris Agreement, access to these resources has become a central component of national security and economic policy.
For India, the challenge is particularly significant. The country aims to achieve net-zero emissions by 2070, expand renewable energy capacity to 500 GW by 2030, and rapidly electrify its transportation sector. These ambitions require massive quantities of lithium and copper, minerals that India lacks domestically in sufficient quantities. Consequently, the search for reliable external sources has become a priority within India’s strategic planning. Latin America has emerged as one of the most promising regions in this regard.
Latin America holds some of the largest reserves of lithium and copper in the world. The so-called “Lithium Triangle”—Argentina, Bolivia, and Chile—contains more than 60 percent of global lithium reserves, while countries such as Chile and Peru are among the world’s leading producers of copper. Historically, these resources were primarily integrated into global supply chains dominated by Western companies and later by China’s expanding mining investments. However, the evolving geoeconomic landscape has created new opportunities for countries like India to build partnerships with Latin American states.
This article examines how India’s engagement with Latin America’s critical mineral sector represents both an economic necessity and a strategic opportunity. It explores the historical evolution of global mineral geopolitics, the emergence of critical minerals as instruments of geoeconomic competition, the strategic significance of Latin America for India’s energy transition, and the challenges and opportunities that accompany this partnership. Ultimately, the article argues that India’s approach to Latin America must move beyond resource extraction toward a comprehensive framework of technological collaboration, environmental sustainability, and long-term economic cooperation.
Historical Evolution of Resource Geopolitics and the Rise of Critical Minerals
Resource geopolitics has long shaped global power structures. During the twentieth century, oil and natural gas dominated geopolitical calculations, influencing conflicts, alliances, and economic policies. The oil crises of the 1970s demonstrated how resource scarcity could destabilise global economies and reshape international relations. Scholars such as Daniel Yergin have described oil as “the prize” that determined geopolitical rivalries throughout modern history. However, the global energy transition is now redefining the strategic landscape. Renewable energy systems rely less on fossil fuels but depend heavily on critical minerals used in batteries, power grids, and renewable technologies. According to the International Energy Agency, demand for lithium could increase more than forty times by 2040 if countries pursue aggressive climate goals. Copper demand is also expected to rise significantly due to its use in renewable energy infrastructure, electric vehicles, and power transmission networks. Scholars increasingly describe this transformation as the “new geopolitics of energy transition.” Political economist Jeff Colgan argues that the shift toward renewable technologies will not eliminate resource politics but rather transform it by creating new dependencies. Instead of oil pipelines and tanker routes, global competition will revolve around mineral supply chains, refining capacities, and battery technologies. Historically, Latin America has played a crucial role in global resource extraction. During the colonial period, the region supplied silver, gold, and other minerals to European empires, shaping the global economic order. In the twentieth century, copper mining in Chile and Peru became central to industrial development, while multinational corporations dominated resource extraction industries. However, political movements across Latin America have often contested foreign control over natural resources, leading to nationalisation policies and stronger state involvement in mining sectors.
Today, the resurgence of interest in critical minerals has revived debates about resource sovereignty, environmental sustainability, and equitable development. Latin American countries are increasingly seeking to ensure that mineral extraction contributes to domestic economic development rather than merely serving external markets. This context shapes how India and other global actors engage with the region.
Latin America’s Strategic Importance in the Global Energy Transition
Latin America occupies a central position in the global critical mineral landscape. The Lithium Triangle—comprising Argentina, Bolivia, and Chile—contains vast lithium deposits embedded in salt flats and desert ecosystems, making it one of the most strategically valuable resource zones in the world. Lithium extracted from these regions is essential for producing lithium-ion batteries used in electric vehicles, renewable energy storage systems, and portable electronics.
Chile has long been one of the world’s largest lithium producers and also possesses extensive copper reserves. Peru is another major global supplier of copper, contributing significantly to global industrial supply chains. Bolivia, although possessing enormous lithium reserves, has historically struggled to develop large-scale extraction due to technological challenges and political debates over resource control. The strategic importance of these minerals has attracted intense global competition. China has emerged as a dominant actor in the critical mineral sector, investing heavily in mining operations, processing facilities, and battery manufacturing. Chinese companies have acquired stakes in major lithium projects in Argentina and Chile while also expanding their presence in Peru’s copper sector. These investments form part of China’s broader strategy to secure supply chains for its rapidly expanding electric vehicle and renewable energy industries.
The United States and European Union have also recognised the strategic importance of critical minerals. In recent years, Western governments have introduced initiatives to diversify supply chains and reduce dependence on Chinese processing capabilities. Programs such as the US-led Mineral Security Partnership aim to develop responsible and sustainable mineral supply chains by supporting mining projects in resource-rich regions. In this evolving geopolitical environment, Latin American countries have gained new bargaining power. As economist Ricardo Hausmann notes, countries rich in critical minerals have the opportunity to leverage global demand to negotiate better terms for development, including technology transfer, local industrialisation, and environmental safeguards.
India’s Strategic Engagement with Latin America’s Mineral Sector
India’s engagement with Latin America has expanded significantly in recent years, particularly in the context of securing critical mineral resources. Traditionally, India’s foreign policy toward Latin America focused primarily on trade and diplomatic cooperation. However, the accelerating energy transition has elevated the region’s importance within India’s strategic calculations. One of the most significant developments occurred in January 2024, when Khanij Bidesh India Limited (KABIL)—a joint venture of Indian public sector enterprises—signed an agreement with Argentina’s state-owned mining company CAMYEN SE. This agreement granted India rights to explore and develop lithium reserves in the Catamarca province, covering more than 15,000 hectares of lithium-rich brine blocks. The partnership marked India’s first direct mining investment in Latin America’s lithium sector. Further cooperation followed in February 2025, when India and Argentina signed an additional memorandum of understanding to deepen collaboration in exploration and resource development. At the same time, India initiated discussions with Chile to expand cooperation in both lithium and copper mining. Indian private companies have also begun exploring opportunities in Peru and Bolivia, reflecting growing interest in the region’s mineral potential. India’s strategy is not limited to securing raw materials. Policymakers increasingly emphasise the need to integrate mineral supply chains with domestic manufacturing initiatives such as the National Critical Mineral Mission (NCMM) and India’s electric vehicle ecosystem. By combining overseas resource acquisition with domestic processing and battery production, India aims to reduce its dependence on imported energy technologies.
Scholars argue that India’s approach differs from earlier extractive models often associated with traditional resource diplomacy, which often prioritized raw material extraction with limited benefits for host countries. According to strategic analyst Harsh V. Pant, India seeks to build mutually beneficial partnerships that combine resource access with development cooperation, technology transfer, and capacity building. This approach reflects India’s broader foreign policy emphasis on South–South cooperation, where economic engagement is framed as collaborative development rather than unilateral extraction. In the context of critical minerals, India has increasingly promoted joint exploration, knowledge exchange, and infrastructure development with partner countries.
Recent initiatives illustrate this evolving strategy. In January 2024, India’s state-owned consortium Khanij Bidesh India Limited (KABIL) signed an agreement with Argentina’s provincial mining company CAMYEN SE to explore five lithium-rich blocks in Catamarca province, covering about 15,703 hectares of lithium brine deposits—India’s first overseas lithium mining project. The partnership not only aims to secure lithium for India’s electric vehicle and renewable energy sectors but also promotes knowledge exchange and sustainable mining practices. Similarly, India has expanded dialogue with Chile and Bolivia on lithium and copper cooperation, while encouraging private companies to invest in mineral exploration and battery value chains across the region.
Beyond Latin America, India has also pursued multilateral collaboration to strengthen resilient supply chains. Its participation in initiatives such as the Minerals Security Partnership and domestic programs like the National Critical Mineral Mission reflects a strategy that integrates overseas resource access with domestic processing, recycling, and technological development. In this sense, India’s mineral diplomacy increasingly combines resource security with sustainable development partnerships, reinforcing its image as a collaborative actor in the emerging geoeconomics of the global energy transition.
Challenges, Environmental Concerns, and the Future of Sustainable Mineral Partnerships
Despite the opportunities presented by India–Latin America cooperation, the path forward is not without challenges. One major issue concerns the environmental impact of mineral extraction. Lithium mining in the Atacama Desert in Chile requires large quantities of water, potentially threatening fragile ecosystems and local communities. Similarly, copper mining operations in Peru have faced protests from indigenous groups concerned about environmental degradation and resource exploitation. Environmental scholars warn that the global energy transition must avoid reproducing the extractive injustices associated with fossil fuel industries. As Kate Raworth’s “Doughnut Economics” framework suggests, sustainable development requires balancing economic growth with ecological limits and social equity. Applying these principles to critical mineral extraction will be essential to ensure that the transition to clean energy does not create new forms of environmental harm. Political risks also shape the investment environment in Latin America. Changes in government policies, royalty structures, or mining regulations can significantly affect foreign investments. Bolivia, for example, has historically pursued a state-centric approach to lithium development, emphasising national control over resources. Chile has also debated reforms aimed at increasing state participation in the lithium sector.
Another challenge concerns global market volatility. Mineral prices fluctuate based on technological innovations, demand shifts, and geopolitical tensions. The rapid development of alternative battery technologies or recycling systems could alter the global demand for certain minerals. For India, this uncertainty underscores the importance of diversifying supply chains and developing domestic recycling capabilities. Nevertheless, these challenges also create opportunities for innovation. India could position itself as a leader in sustainable mining technologies, renewable-energy-powered extraction processes, and circular economy practices. Recycling lithium-ion batteries and recovering copper from electronic waste could significantly reduce dependence on new extraction while supporting environmental sustainability.
Conclusion
The global transition to clean energy is reshaping the geopolitical significance of natural resources. Critical minerals such as lithium and copper are emerging as the strategic commodities of the twenty-first century, underpinning renewable energy systems, electric mobility, and advanced technologies. As demand for these minerals grows rapidly, countries are increasingly competing to secure stable and diversified supply chains. For India, Latin America represents a crucial partner in achieving its clean energy ambitions and economic development goals. The region’s vast lithium and copper reserves provide an opportunity for India to strengthen its resource security while expanding its diplomatic and economic engagement beyond traditional partners. Recent agreements with Argentina and ongoing negotiations with other Latin American countries illustrate the growing strategic importance of this relationship.
However, successful cooperation will require more than simple resource extraction. India must adopt a comprehensive strategy that integrates technological collaboration, environmental sustainability, and long-term economic partnerships. By investing in responsible mining practices, supporting local development, and promoting knowledge exchange, India can position itself as a trusted partner in the global critical mineral economy. Ultimately, the future of the global energy transition will depend not only on technological innovation but also on the governance of resource supply chains. Latin America’s mineral wealth and India’s technological ambitions together offer the possibility of a new model of cooperative geoeconomics, one that supports sustainable development while addressing the pressing challenge of climate change.
About the Author
Khushbu Ahlawat is a research analyst with a strong academic background in International Relations and Political Science. She has undertaken research projects at Jawaharlal Nehru University, contributing to analytical work on international and regional security issues. Alongside her research experience, she has professional exposure to Human Resources, with involvement in talent acquisition and organizational operations. She holds a Master’s degree in International Relations from Christ University, Bangalore, and a Bachelor’s degree in Political Science from the University of Delhi.
