October 15, 2025
- Phone :+917814622609
- Email :[email protected]
- Student Dashboard
Syllabus: General Studies Paper 2
Context:
The current controversy over AUKUS — the trilateral security pact between Australia, the United Kingdom and the United States, has revealed the hazards of group diplomacy.
- Today, the world has a whole spectrum of groups — from the European Union at one end to the African Union at the other — with varying shades of cooperation.
- Groups with acronyms such as North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and numerical groups from a notional G-2 to a real G-77 which has more than a 100 members exist.
Relevance of multilateral groupings
- Many of the newly founded groupings do not have regional, ideological or thematic homogeneity to lend them a reason for forming a group. The time, the money and the energy spent on convening summits do not seem justified.
- Lack of agenda: Finding the agenda for these organisations and groups is another difficult exercise. E.g the growing agenda of the United Nations includes everything from peace on earth to celestial bodies and even UFOs.
- Undermining genuine organizations: BRICS undermined the relevance of another, less ambitious, group of India, Brazil and South Africa (IBSA), which had several common interests. As candidates for permanent membership of the Security Council, they had specific ideas on UN reform and on South-South cooperation.
- A Goldman Sachs economist found similarities among fast growing economies such as China, Russia, India and Brazil and recommended massive western investments in these countries.
- The countries concerned formed an intergovernmental group called BRIC and later BRICS, with South Africa added as a representative of the African continent.
- China quickly assumed the leadership of BRICS and tried to seek changes in the international economic system by establishing a bank, with the possibility of credit for its members.
- Lack of consensus on critical issues: The recent BRICS summit had Afghanistan on its agenda and the diverse group was able to reach a conclusion only with different conditions. Russia and China were more sympathetic to the Taliban than the others.
- At the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) summit, delegations found some common elements of concern with dramatically different approaches.
- The SCO started off as a friendly group of China and some of the former Republics of the Soviet Union, but with the addition of India, Pakistan and Iran, it became a diverse group and it could not reach agreement.
- The Quad and AUKUS
- New Delhi’s reluctance to directly engage China has driven the U.S. to new alliances such as a second Quad and then AUKUS.
- US, Afghanistan, Uzbekistan, Pak announce new Quad group for Afghan peace process
- The U.S. wants to fortify itself with allies against China.
- But the negative reaction of France to AUKUS has raised the issue of loyalty among allies.
- AUKUS is a new trilateral security partnership for the Indo-Pacific, between Australia, the UK and the US (AUKUS).
- The major highlight of this arrangement is the sharing of US nuclear submarine technology to Australia.
India’s experiences with groupings
- Decreasing relevance of South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC): India joined the Association with a number of conditionalities such as the exclusion of bilateral issues, decision-making by voting, and holding of meetings without all members being present.
- But despite the imperative for cooperation in vital fields, SAARC became an arena for India bashing, particularly by Pakistan.
- India boycotted the SAARC Summit that was proposed to be held in Pakistan.
- SAARC became a liability as it was clear that the region was not mature enough to have a regional instrumentality.
- Bay of Bengal Initiative for Multi-Sectoral Technical and Economic Cooperation (BIMSTEC), an international organisation of seven South Asian and Southeast Asian nations which are dependent on the Bay of Bengal: Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Nepal, Sri Lanka, Myanmar and Thailand.
- The group remained dormant for many years till it was revived a few years ago as an alternative to SAARC.
- Though it has an ambitious agenda for sectoral cooperation, it has not gained much momentum.
- Indian Ocean Rim Association (IORA): The organisation was first established as the Indian Ocean Rim Initiative in Mauritius in March 1995 and formally launched on March 6-7 1997 (then known as the Indian Ocean Rim Association for Regional Cooperation). It also has not achieved much significance.
- On the other hand, India is not a member of the two active groups, Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) and Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG). India has major stakes in them. We campaigned actively for membership of these two bodies, but gave up when we made no headway.
- India tried to acquire membership of Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR), NSG, the Wassenaar Arrangement and the Australia Group. It got membership of MTCR, Wassenaar and the Australia Group. India missed NSG’s membership due to opposition from China.
- The Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) is for the control of nuclear-related technology.
- The Australia Group (AG) is for control of chemical and biological technology that could be weaponized.
- The Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR) is for the control of rockets and other aerial vehicles capable of delivering weapons of mass destruction.
- The Wassenaar Arrangement on Export Controls for Conventional Arms and Dual-Use Goods and Technologies.
The proliferation of alliances and groups will be a matter of close scrutiny by many countries in the light of the new trend initiated by the U.S. Collective bargaining is the strength of group diplomacy but it cannot be effective without commitment to a common cause. It stands to reason that India should also reconsider the plethora of groups we are in and rationalise them after a reality check.
The Hindu Link:
© 2025 Civilstap Himachal Design & Development
