Pub Date : 2023-05-26DOI: 10.1080/14736489.2023.2201537
C. Colley
ABSTRACT The Sino-Indian rivalry traces its origins to the founding of each state in the late 1940s. Over the past decade Indian concerns over Chinese activities in South Asia have significantly increased. While New Delhi has sought to counter Beijing in South Asia, a key question is to what extent has China responded to India in the same region? Do we find evidence of a tit-for-tat rivalry escalation process in South Asia where both China and India are actively trying to counter each other? The central argument in this article is that China is not actively engaging in a direct form of rivalry reciprocity with India. While certain activities by Beijing in the region are designed to enhance Chinese influence and power, there is less evidence that these are a direct response to India. This is in contrast to New Delhi’s behavior in the region where we do find evidence of Indian leaders directly responding to China. This articles’ main contribution is to demonstrate that maintenance in asymmetrical positional rivalries does not require clearly identifiable points of escalation, or follow a linear path of a tit-for-tat action-reaction cycle.
{"title":"An action-reaction cycle in the Sino-Indian rivalry?","authors":"C. Colley","doi":"10.1080/14736489.2023.2201537","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14736489.2023.2201537","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The Sino-Indian rivalry traces its origins to the founding of each state in the late 1940s. Over the past decade Indian concerns over Chinese activities in South Asia have significantly increased. While New Delhi has sought to counter Beijing in South Asia, a key question is to what extent has China responded to India in the same region? Do we find evidence of a tit-for-tat rivalry escalation process in South Asia where both China and India are actively trying to counter each other? The central argument in this article is that China is not actively engaging in a direct form of rivalry reciprocity with India. While certain activities by Beijing in the region are designed to enhance Chinese influence and power, there is less evidence that these are a direct response to India. This is in contrast to New Delhi’s behavior in the region where we do find evidence of Indian leaders directly responding to China. This articles’ main contribution is to demonstrate that maintenance in asymmetrical positional rivalries does not require clearly identifiable points of escalation, or follow a linear path of a tit-for-tat action-reaction cycle.","PeriodicalId":56338,"journal":{"name":"India Review","volume":"22 1","pages":"249 - 281"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2023-05-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48254733","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-05-26DOI: 10.1080/14736489.2023.2201540
A. Kurian, C. Vinodan
ABSTRACT United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO) strives to increase the number of natural World Heritage Sites to protect it from the onslaught of climate change and anthropogenic disturbances. The international community at the Paris Agreement on climate change in 2015 recognized reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation and the role of conservation, sustainable management of forests, and enhancement of forest carbon stocks in developing countries as one of the best low cost panacea for global environmental problems. India, in its Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) promised to increase its forest cover as an effort toward the mitigation of climate change. All these efforts are directed toward saving our Earth from the worst impacts of global warming. In the midst of these efforts, the conservation of Western Ghats is one of the central hotspots of biodiversity and deserves special attention. Thus, this paper looks into the questions how the Heritage Tag and Western Ghats Ecology Expert Panel (WGEEP) report causes intricacies in the conservation of Western Ghats? And why local inhabitants are so much apprehensive about the conservation of their region? This study proves that negligence in addressing the concerns and participation of affected stakeholders, from the framing of the conservation projects to its implementation, leads anti-conservation movements. Additonally, such conservation projects will never break ground and will remain on paper.
{"title":"World heritage tag and genealogy of WGEEP report: The intricacies in Western Ghats conservation","authors":"A. Kurian, C. Vinodan","doi":"10.1080/14736489.2023.2201540","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14736489.2023.2201540","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO) strives to increase the number of natural World Heritage Sites to protect it from the onslaught of climate change and anthropogenic disturbances. The international community at the Paris Agreement on climate change in 2015 recognized reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation and the role of conservation, sustainable management of forests, and enhancement of forest carbon stocks in developing countries as one of the best low cost panacea for global environmental problems. India, in its Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) promised to increase its forest cover as an effort toward the mitigation of climate change. All these efforts are directed toward saving our Earth from the worst impacts of global warming. In the midst of these efforts, the conservation of Western Ghats is one of the central hotspots of biodiversity and deserves special attention. Thus, this paper looks into the questions how the Heritage Tag and Western Ghats Ecology Expert Panel (WGEEP) report causes intricacies in the conservation of Western Ghats? And why local inhabitants are so much apprehensive about the conservation of their region? This study proves that negligence in addressing the concerns and participation of affected stakeholders, from the framing of the conservation projects to its implementation, leads anti-conservation movements. Additonally, such conservation projects will never break ground and will remain on paper.","PeriodicalId":56338,"journal":{"name":"India Review","volume":"22 1","pages":"309 - 332"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2023-05-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43880764","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-05-26DOI: 10.1080/14736489.2023.2201538
Harshwardhani Sharma, Uttam Kumar Pegu
ABSTRACT This paper presents a study of Indian media. Utilizing the Propaganda Model formulated by Herman and Chomsky in the book Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of Mass Media (1988), the paper aims to critically assess the news patterns and media performance of the mainstream Indian media. The contribution of the paper will be the application of the propaganda model in the context of Indian media. For this study, we have analyzed the media coverage of two events – India’s ban on Chinese apps and the Pulwama attack. We focus on how Indian Media has helped the Government to establish the propaganda of nationalism during both events, which is explained by Herman and Chomsky in the five filters of news production. We investigate how the anti-China sentiment and the Pulwama attack have been used by the Government to divert attention from their failure of governance, and mismanagement of the COVID-19 pandemic. The corporate media is playing its part in the machinations of the ruling BJP party. We conclude that the plurality of voices amongst journalists is in decline.
{"title":"Is the liberal media dead?: A critical analysis of Modi’s Government and the performance of Indian Media","authors":"Harshwardhani Sharma, Uttam Kumar Pegu","doi":"10.1080/14736489.2023.2201538","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14736489.2023.2201538","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This paper presents a study of Indian media. Utilizing the Propaganda Model formulated by Herman and Chomsky in the book Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of Mass Media (1988), the paper aims to critically assess the news patterns and media performance of the mainstream Indian media. The contribution of the paper will be the application of the propaganda model in the context of Indian media. For this study, we have analyzed the media coverage of two events – India’s ban on Chinese apps and the Pulwama attack. We focus on how Indian Media has helped the Government to establish the propaganda of nationalism during both events, which is explained by Herman and Chomsky in the five filters of news production. We investigate how the anti-China sentiment and the Pulwama attack have been used by the Government to divert attention from their failure of governance, and mismanagement of the COVID-19 pandemic. The corporate media is playing its part in the machinations of the ruling BJP party. We conclude that the plurality of voices amongst journalists is in decline.","PeriodicalId":56338,"journal":{"name":"India Review","volume":"22 1","pages":"219 - 248"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2023-05-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48314589","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-05-26DOI: 10.1080/14736489.2023.2201541
Rakesh Ankit
ABSTRACT
S.K. Patil, quintessential Congressman of Bombay city and cabinet minister in three central governments from 1957 to 1963 and 1964 to 1967, was the kind of figure in Indian politics, who personified Rajni Kothari’s Congress “system” of clients-patrons and chains-links. A Patelite, Patil was a thorn in Nehru’s side. A leader of the business community, he identified with a network politics involving capital. He was an indifferent administrator, but an influential party apparatchik and his career peaked in 1964–1967, when he was a part of the all-important Congress “syndicate.” Afterward, however, he struggled for relevance in the turbulent decade of the 1970s. In this research article based on Patil’s personal papers, I offer these fragments from his political life as interesting prisms through which to view (a) aspects of intra-party and inter-ministerial conflictual culture, (b) issues concerning the top-down character of governance with implications for public policy and (c) the complex opposition to it, both inside and outside, thereby repaying this visit to an individual’s trajectory in contemporary history with parallels for current politics.
{"title":"Bombay “city boss,” Congress party treasurer, and union cabinet minister from Nehru to Indira: Sadashiv Kanoji Patil (1898–1981)","authors":"Rakesh Ankit","doi":"10.1080/14736489.2023.2201541","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14736489.2023.2201541","url":null,"abstract":"<p><b>ABSTRACT</b></p><p>S.K. Patil, quintessential Congressman of Bombay city and cabinet minister in three central governments from 1957 to 1963 and 1964 to 1967, was the kind of figure in Indian politics, who personified Rajni Kothari’s Congress “system” of clients-patrons and chains-links. A Patelite, Patil was a thorn in Nehru’s side. A leader of the business community, he identified with a network politics involving capital. He was an indifferent administrator, but an influential party apparatchik and his career peaked in 1964–1967, when he was a part of the all-important Congress “syndicate.” Afterward, however, he struggled for relevance in the turbulent decade of the 1970s. In this research article based on Patil’s personal papers, I offer these fragments from his political life as interesting prisms through which to view (a) aspects of intra-party and inter-ministerial conflictual culture, (b) issues concerning the top-down character of governance with implications for public policy and (c) the complex opposition to it, both inside and outside, thereby repaying this visit to an individual’s trajectory in contemporary history with parallels for current politics.</p>","PeriodicalId":56338,"journal":{"name":"India Review","volume":"60 44","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2023-05-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"50167188","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-05-26DOI: 10.1080/14736489.2023.2201539
K. Varigonda
ABSTRACT This paper studies the impact of social movements on the Indian state’s developmental paradigm. Adopting from Varigonda’s (2020) framework, the paper argues that the impact of social movements on state policy and its implementation is primarily determined by three key factors: the collective action repertoires of social movements; the politicization of the Indian state’s developmental paradigm; and the openness of state input structures. This framework is tested through a comparative study of two movements that have emerged against two examples of the Indian state’s developmental paradigm: a proposed nuclear plant at Kovvada and a proposed thermal plant at Sompeta, both in Andhra Pradesh. The Sompeta agitation was successful in impeding the thermal plant’s inception while the movement in Kovvada eventually petered out. The paper demonstrates how the variation in the impact of the two movements can be attributed to the social movement in Sompeta benefitting from stronger collective action repertoires; greater politicization of the state’s developmental paradigm; and more open state input structures, vis-à-vis the movement in Kovvada.
{"title":"Theorizing social movements against the Indian state’s developmental paradigm: A comparative study of the Kovvada and Sompeta movements","authors":"K. Varigonda","doi":"10.1080/14736489.2023.2201539","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14736489.2023.2201539","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This paper studies the impact of social movements on the Indian state’s developmental paradigm. Adopting from Varigonda’s (2020) framework, the paper argues that the impact of social movements on state policy and its implementation is primarily determined by three key factors: the collective action repertoires of social movements; the politicization of the Indian state’s developmental paradigm; and the openness of state input structures. This framework is tested through a comparative study of two movements that have emerged against two examples of the Indian state’s developmental paradigm: a proposed nuclear plant at Kovvada and a proposed thermal plant at Sompeta, both in Andhra Pradesh. The Sompeta agitation was successful in impeding the thermal plant’s inception while the movement in Kovvada eventually petered out. The paper demonstrates how the variation in the impact of the two movements can be attributed to the social movement in Sompeta benefitting from stronger collective action repertoires; greater politicization of the state’s developmental paradigm; and more open state input structures, vis-à-vis the movement in Kovvada.","PeriodicalId":56338,"journal":{"name":"India Review","volume":"22 1","pages":"282 - 308"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2023-05-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47138781","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-03-15DOI: 10.1080/14736489.2023.2180919
A. Mukherjee
Abstract This article examines the reasons underlying the re-emergence of the Quad in 2017 and the areas of convergence and divergence between U.S. and Indian views of it especially during the Trump administration. While doing so, it makes the following arguments. First, the current iteration of the Quad emerged because of changing threat perception regarding China among all four Quad countries. Second, President Trump’s hard line, bordering on adversarial, position vis-à-vis China was positively received by other members of the Quad and encouraged them to shed their inhibitions. In addition, Trump’s delegative style of leadership on the Quad allowed senior and mid-level officials to creatively engage with the other powers. Third, all this notwithstanding, there were still significant divergences, stemming from strategic and diplomatic worldviews, between the perspectives of the Quad countries on the future direction and purpose of the grouping. Put another way, the Quad will always be a work in progress because of the divergences between its member states and its inherently flexible design. The article concludes by analysing the prospects for the Quad.
{"title":"With a little help from China: the Trump administration and the reinvigoration of the Quad","authors":"A. Mukherjee","doi":"10.1080/14736489.2023.2180919","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14736489.2023.2180919","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This article examines the reasons underlying the re-emergence of the Quad in 2017 and the areas of convergence and divergence between U.S. and Indian views of it especially during the Trump administration. While doing so, it makes the following arguments. First, the current iteration of the Quad emerged because of changing threat perception regarding China among all four Quad countries. Second, President Trump’s hard line, bordering on adversarial, position vis-à-vis China was positively received by other members of the Quad and encouraged them to shed their inhibitions. In addition, Trump’s delegative style of leadership on the Quad allowed senior and mid-level officials to creatively engage with the other powers. Third, all this notwithstanding, there were still significant divergences, stemming from strategic and diplomatic worldviews, between the perspectives of the Quad countries on the future direction and purpose of the grouping. Put another way, the Quad will always be a work in progress because of the divergences between its member states and its inherently flexible design. The article concludes by analysing the prospects for the Quad.","PeriodicalId":56338,"journal":{"name":"India Review","volume":"22 1","pages":"207 - 217"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2023-03-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44871918","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-03-15DOI: 10.1080/14736489.2023.2180921
S. Bhatnagar
ABSTRACT The gradual elevation of India-US relations over the past few decades highlights a significant convergence of interests, a similarity in dominant political discourse and a converging geopolitical environment that has aided this elevation. This article explores engagements between India and the US within the Af-Pak arena, reflected in policy discourse and public pronouncements in both countries. It does so through a critical discourse analysis and examination of personal, national interest, and broader structural calculations that have driven Indian and American policy engagement reflected in their policy positions with regards to Afghanistan and Pakistan.
{"title":"Navigating the Af-Pak arena: India-US relations under the Trump administration","authors":"S. Bhatnagar","doi":"10.1080/14736489.2023.2180921","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14736489.2023.2180921","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The gradual elevation of India-US relations over the past few decades highlights a significant convergence of interests, a similarity in dominant political discourse and a converging geopolitical environment that has aided this elevation. This article explores engagements between India and the US within the Af-Pak arena, reflected in policy discourse and public pronouncements in both countries. It does so through a critical discourse analysis and examination of personal, national interest, and broader structural calculations that have driven Indian and American policy engagement reflected in their policy positions with regards to Afghanistan and Pakistan.","PeriodicalId":56338,"journal":{"name":"India Review","volume":"22 1","pages":"184 - 195"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2023-03-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46837327","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-03-15DOI: 10.1080/14736489.2023.2180912
Surupa Gupta
ABSTRACT While India and the United States’ relations on the strategic and political fronts improved during 2017–2020, trade relations between the two countries noticeably worsened. Ever since their relations began to improve in the 1990s, deep divisions have existed between the two on trade issues such as market access in goods and services, intellectual property rights, and industrial policy. Given the focus on their strategic relations, successive administrations sought to manage these economic differences without public escalation of conflicts. The Trump administration’s approach deviated from this practice. While it continued to use the multilateral trading system to resolve some conflicts, it also resorted to using public shaming, tariff escalations and withdrawal of concessions in its relations with India. Although the Modi administration’s trade policy was similarly nationalist, its response to US actions were cautious. Evidence from the Modi-Trump period (2017–2020) shows that while both nationalist leaders pursued protectionist policies, the power capabilities of the states they led and the level of mutual economic dependence shaped their actions, their choice of instruments, and their ability to compel change in the other’s policies.
{"title":"Economic nationalism and India-US trade relations during the Modi-Trump years","authors":"Surupa Gupta","doi":"10.1080/14736489.2023.2180912","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14736489.2023.2180912","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT While India and the United States’ relations on the strategic and political fronts improved during 2017–2020, trade relations between the two countries noticeably worsened. Ever since their relations began to improve in the 1990s, deep divisions have existed between the two on trade issues such as market access in goods and services, intellectual property rights, and industrial policy. Given the focus on their strategic relations, successive administrations sought to manage these economic differences without public escalation of conflicts. The Trump administration’s approach deviated from this practice. While it continued to use the multilateral trading system to resolve some conflicts, it also resorted to using public shaming, tariff escalations and withdrawal of concessions in its relations with India. Although the Modi administration’s trade policy was similarly nationalist, its response to US actions were cautious. Evidence from the Modi-Trump period (2017–2020) shows that while both nationalist leaders pursued protectionist policies, the power capabilities of the states they led and the level of mutual economic dependence shaped their actions, their choice of instruments, and their ability to compel change in the other’s policies.","PeriodicalId":56338,"journal":{"name":"India Review","volume":"22 1","pages":"128 - 138"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2023-03-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42056155","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-03-15DOI: 10.1080/14736489.2023.2180914
Kate Sullivan de Estrada
ABSTRACT From early 2017 to early 2021, Donald J. Trump’s disengagement of the United States from international institutions, later amplified by the pressures of the COVID-19 pandemic, produced a weakening of multilateralism at the global level. The overlapping leadership of Narendra Modi diverged on the issue of multilateralism, producing a dynamic of US retreat and redoubled Indian efforts at reform. Despite their common recourse to populism in their respective countries, the United States and India present disparate cases of how populist leaders engage with multilateralism. Trump prioritized national sovereignty and framed international institutions as an imposition on US freedoms, while Modi envisioned international institutions as an avenue through which to remake multilateralism, elevate India’s reputation, and reap domestic political dividends. Trump’s protectionist and inward-looking policy narratives appealed to communities disadvantaged materially and socially by hyperglobalisation and financial crisis, while Modi’s efforts at elevating India’s profile and engagement in multilateral forums resonated with long-standing elite desires for India to enact leadership in global governance. They drew popular support, too. Finally, China’s rising global influence encouraged India to increase its own influence within existing multilateral institutions and develop new avenues of multilateral action, while Trump’s nationalist response was to turn away, and inward.
{"title":"US retreat, Indian reform: multilateralism under Trump and Modi","authors":"Kate Sullivan de Estrada","doi":"10.1080/14736489.2023.2180914","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14736489.2023.2180914","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT From early 2017 to early 2021, Donald J. Trump’s disengagement of the United States from international institutions, later amplified by the pressures of the COVID-19 pandemic, produced a weakening of multilateralism at the global level. The overlapping leadership of Narendra Modi diverged on the issue of multilateralism, producing a dynamic of US retreat and redoubled Indian efforts at reform. Despite their common recourse to populism in their respective countries, the United States and India present disparate cases of how populist leaders engage with multilateralism. Trump prioritized national sovereignty and framed international institutions as an imposition on US freedoms, while Modi envisioned international institutions as an avenue through which to remake multilateralism, elevate India’s reputation, and reap domestic political dividends. Trump’s protectionist and inward-looking policy narratives appealed to communities disadvantaged materially and socially by hyperglobalisation and financial crisis, while Modi’s efforts at elevating India’s profile and engagement in multilateral forums resonated with long-standing elite desires for India to enact leadership in global governance. They drew popular support, too. Finally, China’s rising global influence encouraged India to increase its own influence within existing multilateral institutions and develop new avenues of multilateral action, while Trump’s nationalist response was to turn away, and inward.","PeriodicalId":56338,"journal":{"name":"India Review","volume":"22 1","pages":"139 - 149"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2023-03-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45117819","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-03-15DOI: 10.1080/14736489.2023.2180918
V. Jha
Abstract Since the start of multilateral climate negotiations, India and the US have been on opposite sides of the aisle on the issue of responsibility for climate action. Following years of intense scrutiny, India found points of convergence with the US and worked closely with the Obama administration to help secure a global deal at the 2015 Paris Climate Conference. The Trump era, however, marked a period of stark divergence between India and the US on the issue of climate change. The US’ climate inaction at the multilateral level under the Trump administration was met with India’s proactive global leadership in the fight against climate change. At the same time, the bilateral relationship saw greater convergence on the issue of energy trade, particularly conventional sources of energy such as coal, oil and gas. This essay analyzes India-US climate relations during the Trump years and argues that the personal views of the political leadership and domestic interest groups affected the nature of this relationship, which is best described as divergence on climate change but convergence on energy security.
{"title":"No climate for cooperation: India-US climate relations during the Trump years","authors":"V. Jha","doi":"10.1080/14736489.2023.2180918","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14736489.2023.2180918","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Since the start of multilateral climate negotiations, India and the US have been on opposite sides of the aisle on the issue of responsibility for climate action. Following years of intense scrutiny, India found points of convergence with the US and worked closely with the Obama administration to help secure a global deal at the 2015 Paris Climate Conference. The Trump era, however, marked a period of stark divergence between India and the US on the issue of climate change. The US’ climate inaction at the multilateral level under the Trump administration was met with India’s proactive global leadership in the fight against climate change. At the same time, the bilateral relationship saw greater convergence on the issue of energy trade, particularly conventional sources of energy such as coal, oil and gas. This essay analyzes India-US climate relations during the Trump years and argues that the personal views of the political leadership and domestic interest groups affected the nature of this relationship, which is best described as divergence on climate change but convergence on energy security.","PeriodicalId":56338,"journal":{"name":"India Review","volume":"22 1","pages":"150 - 160"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2023-03-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44746038","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：