Modi's Individual Approach to Diplomacy Fails to Succeed... Is There a Way to Overcome This Issue? (paraphrased)
In 2014, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi envisioned a brighter future for bilateral ties with China, describing the relationship as moving from "INCH" (India and China) towards "MILES" (Millennium of Exceptional Synergy). However, over the years, this vision has been tested by various issues, and the effectiveness of personalized diplomacy, a method employed since 2014, has become a topic of discussion.
Personalized diplomacy, characterised by physical interaction, displays of affection, grand events, and the belief that friendship produced by these actions can help resolve issues, has been a central part of Modi's approach to China. Yet, as the writer suggests, acknowledging the reasons for our current situation might allow us to correct it.
One of the issues that arose in 2014 was the reported incursion of Chinese civilians into Indian territory in Demchok, Ladakh. These civilians were said to have prevented locals from working on an irrigation project, a dispute that was among the topics to be discussed by Modi and Xi.
However, clashes at Galwan in 2020 collapsed the sense of camaraderie promoted by the Prime Minister himself in his relations with China. The number of meetings between Modi and Chinese President Xi Jinping before the incident stands at 18.
The discussion about the effectiveness of personalized diplomacy since 2014 centers on increasing geopolitical tensions, mistrust, and the limitations of traditional diplomatic negotiation formats. The need for trust-building, dialog-oriented processes, and modular, pluralistic negotiation formats with regional anchoring but global perspectives is highlighted.
Meanwhile, the Indian government is grappling with finding its place in the world, with nations it considered friends or allies spurning it. The problem requires acknowledging its existence, which might be challenging for the current government due to its reliance on the performance of one individual.
Elsewhere, the writer suggests that President Donald Trump's harshness towards India on tariffs may be explained by his desire to make an example of one individual to make others comply without fighting. Trump forced Modi to stop buying oil from Tehran in his first term.
The writer, who is the chair of Amnesty International India, does not mention any new fact about the clashes at Galwan or the current status of relations between India and China. Neither does the writer provide any new insight about the effectiveness of personalized diplomacy or its use by other leaders.
Despite the giant rallies for Trump in Houston and Ahmedabad, the writer believes that our assumed closeness to him did not prevent us from understanding his character. The writer describes Trump as a selfish bully who looks after his own interests first and last.
In conclusion, the past decade has seen India's diplomatic approach to China evolve, with personalized diplomacy playing a significant role. However, the challenges faced in implementing this approach are clear, and the need for alternative, more effective strategies is increasingly evident.
Read also:
- Tobacco industry's suggested changes on a legislative modification are disregarded by health journalists
- Uncovering Political Ad Transparency: A Guide to Investigating opponent's Political Advertisements in the Digital Realm
- Elon Musk praises JD Vance's debate performance against Tim Walz
- Right-wing Israeli minister supports controversial plan for West Bank settlement expansion
){kind=link}