India’s dharmic landscape is witnessing significant alteration with patterns emerging that raise concerns about national security, social cohesion and sovereignty. These patterns include proliferation of churches, legal actions related to religious conversions, children rescued from missionary organizations and increased scrutiny of missionary bodies under Foreign Contribution Regulation Act (FCRA).
Shambhavi Thite In recent years, there has been a growing effort to portray Islamophobia and anti-semitism as synonymous forms of prejudice. Though well-meaning, this analogy ignores their quite different histories, intentions, and outcomes. Not only another type of prejudice, anti-semitism is a centuries-old hatred spun into the fabric of Western and Middle Eastern civilizations by religious demonisation, economic conspiracies, and violent scapegoating. From medieval blood libels to the Holocaust, Jews have been persecuted for who they are—a people wrongly accused of dominating media, banks, and governments not for anything they have done. Though equally destructive in its consequences, Islamophobia usually results from modern geopolitical concerns, security fears, and responses to radicalism. Understanding these differences is essential—not to rank suffering but rather to face every type of hate with the historical and contextual knowledge it requires. While a major problem, Islamophobia usually results from geopolitical conflicts, terrorism, and radical Islamist movements rather than from a basic theological hate. Major Islamist terror events like 9/11 and later acts of violence by groups like ISIS and Al-Qaeda have been intimately associated with the rise of anti-Muslim attitudes in many Western countries. Unlike anti-semitism, which presents Jews as all-powerful conspirators, Islamophobia is mostly molded by security concerns and cultural anxiety rather than a natural, unprovoked animosity against Muslims. While anti-Muslim discrimination should be categorically denounced, conflating it with anti-semitism obscures the unique challenges faced by Jewish communities. It disregards the specific historical and ideological sources of every type of discrimination. Anti-semitism: A Constant, Systemic Hatred For millennia, anti-semitism has been ingrained in religious, political, and economic machinations that have excluded and attacked Jewish populations all over. From medieval blood libels and the Spanish Inquisition to the Dreyfus Affair and the Holocaust, Jews have been unfairly accused of dictating media, financial organizations, and international governments. As shown by the emergence of online hate speech targeting Jews following the October 7 Hamas attack on Israel, these conspiracy theories still feed current anti-semitism (The New York Times). Clear expression of modern anti-semitism is the continuous brutality against Israeli people by Hamas, including intentional killing, kidnapping, and torture of men, women, and children. These crimes are rooted in a strongly ingrained worldview that denigrates Jewish people and rejects the validity of Jewish sovereignty; therefore, they transcend political or territorial boundaries. While ostensibly separating Jews from Zionists, Hamas’s 2017 charter has often spread antisemitic discourse based on historical clichés of Jewish conspiratorialism and cruelty. Targeting citizens—a breach of international law—reflects an ideological dedication to the destruction of Israel, which functions as a front for the more general denial of Jewish self-determination. This violence must be viewed in the context of anti-semitism, which has historically justified the persecution of Jews through group guilt and demonization. The reaction of the world community to these crimes will be a crucial test of whether anti-semitism is actually given the same importance as other kinds of racial and ethnic hatred. Moreover, anti-semitism results from ideas of a far right or white supremacist nature as well. However, extremist Islamist rhetoric also plays a significant role. For decades, Islamist parties like the Muslim Brotherhood have spread antisemitic tales linking Jews to malevolent conspirators running worldwide affairs (Fathom Journal). Independent of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, this enmity toward Jews highlights even more how anti-semitism is a hate-driven ideology rather than a response to political events. Anxiety About Radical Islamism: Reversing Extremism Although sincere anti-Muslim discrimination ought to be denounced, most of what is labelled as “Islamophobia” nowadays results from a response to radical Islamism and extreme violence rather than from a natural hostility against Muslims. Unlike anti-semitism, which has historically attacked Jews regardless of their beliefs or behaviour, modern animosity toward Islam is often motivated by issues connected to terrorism, the application of Sharia law, and the larger sociopolitical influence of Islamist extremism. Contextual analysis is necessary to grasp the different historical paths and society reactions to these two kinds of discrimination since this difference defines them. High-profile Islamist terror acts, including 9/11, the Charlie Hebdo murder, and the Manchester Arena bombing, have mostly coincided with the explosion in Islamophobia across Western countries. Along with organizational actions like Al-Qaeda and ISIS, these events have stoked public fears about radical Islam. Prejudice of any kind is disgusting, but dismissing these problems as mere bigotry fails to recognize the actual security risks posed by radical groups. Jews have historically faced persecution regardless of their behaviour. On the other hand, most of the hostility directed at Muslims in the West results from concerns about Islamist extremism rather than from a general contempt of the religion itself (The Jerusalem Post). Encouragement of serious debates on religious tolerance, security, and the complexity of modern global politics depends on an awareness of this vital difference. The term “Islamophobia” is misused in the suppression of Islamist extremism criticism The fact that the modern “Islamophobia” story is so often used as a weapon to stifle reasonable criticism of radical Islam raises some very alarming questions. While it’s vital to combat real anti-Muslim bias, the term Islamophobia is increasingly used to silence discussions about Islamist ideology and its intellectual roots. This misreading of religious tolerance and security shapes the conversation such that even well-founded criticisms of extreme ideas are written off as bigotry. One prominent illustration of this phenomenon is the way detractors of the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement against Israel are sometimes accused of Islamophobia. Rooted in a mix of Islamist and far-left activity, the BDS movement aims to minimize the Jewish state under the cover of human rights campaigning. But resistance to BDS is a reaction to a political objective that fits parties renowned for their animosity toward Israel and, at times, Jews in general, not a statement of anti-Muslim feeling. Combining Islamophobia with BDS compromises free speech by deterring honest discussion on the consequences of the movement (The Conversation). This more general trend of characterizing any criticism of Islamist militancy as Islamophobic has alarming results. It discourages attempts to properly fight
PLA Navy seeks to expand Chinese Communist control beyond traditional Indo-Pacific areas and change power dynamics vis-à-vis Australia, New Zealand and their Western allies. Ayadoure Stalin China’s recent naval activities in Tasman Sea have caught the attention of many across Indo-Pacific. This unusual move by People’s Liberation Army (PLA) marks a significant display of naval strength, indicating Beijing’s strategic aim to disrupt current balance of power in the region. Considering Tasman Sea’s closeness to Australia and New Zealand countries that have traditionally held sway in South Pacific China’s actions imply a broader geopolitical strategy that could alter security landscape in the area. Tasman Sea has traditionally remained outside China’s naval exercises domain making this recent manoeuvre an unusual and deliberate display of force. PLA Navy’s growing presence in these waters marks a departure from its conventional areas of military operations, primarily concentrated in South China Sea, East China Sea and Taiwan Straits. This geographic shift indicates Beijing’s desire to expand its operational reach into broader Indo-Pacific, demonstrating its ability to project power beyond its immediate maritime periphery which in itself is controversial and expansionist. China’s decision to operate in this region should not be viewed in isolation but as part of its broader maritime strategy which seeks to counter Western presence in the Pacific. While official Chinese statements may downplay significance of these drills, the message to Australia, New Zealand and their allies is apparent: China will assert its presence in waters traditionally dominated by Western powers. Western presence in South Pacific Tasman Sea has typically been outside the realm of China’s naval exercises, making this recent manoeuvre a notable and intentional show of strength. PLA Navy’s increasing activity in these waters departs from its usual military operations which are mainly focused on South China Sea, East China Sea, and Taiwan Straits. This shift suggests that Beijing aims to expand its operational reach into wider Indo-Pacific showcasing ‘communist military strength’ beyond its immediate accepted maritime boundaries. China’s choice to engage in this region should be considered part of its larger maritime strategy which aims to counter Western influence in the Pacific. Although official Chinese statements may downplay the importance of these drills, the message to Australia, New Zealand, and their allies is clear: China is prepared and capable of asserting its presence in waters that have traditionally been under Western control. Provocative Display of Power China’s naval expansion in Tasman Sea is more expansionist as part of a larger plan of President Xi Jingping to alter regional security landscape. Deployment of Chinese warships in this unexpected area goes beyond a simple military exercise; it represents a calculated display of power that fulfils several strategic goals. Firstly, it tests responses of Australia and New Zealand assessing their speed and effectiveness in addressing perceived threats nearby. This gives China insight into Western regional allies’ military readiness and strategic collaboration. Secondly, it conveys a strong message to smaller Pacific nations that China was the ‘big brother’ capable of wielding diplomatic and military influence in their waters. China’s activities in Tasman Sea might not be limited to mere displays of strength. Violation of territorial waters treaties, coercive actions and other aggressive manoeuvres cannot be ignored. Given China’s history of using its naval power for intimidation such as island-building in the South China Sea or conducting military drills near Taiwan these concerns are valid. Shadow of Gunboat Diplomacy China’s naval activities in Tasman Sea reflect its Gunboat Diplomacy, a tactic historically used by it to exert influence through naval presence. This strategy has been apparent in Beijing’s approach to territorial disputes in South China Sea, its assertive stance in Taiwan Straits and its growing resistance to US Pacific Command operations. China aims to bolster its claims over Indo Pacific waters by employing Gunboat Diplomacy, intimidate rivals and deter outside interventions. Deployment of PLA Navy assets in Tasman Sea extends this strategy, signalling Australia, New Zealand and their allies that western powers may not be able to negate China’s influence in wider Indo-Pacific region. China is contesting supremacy of US Pacific Command. Historically, Washington has maintained a robust naval presence in Indo-Pacific to counterbalance China’s expanding military reach. However, Beijing’s ability to conduct operations far from its shores indicates a growing desire to quickly expand its arc of influence thereby challenge U.S.-led regional security frameworks. Implications for the Indo-Pacific PLA presence in Tasman Sea raises important questions about the future of regional security and strategic balance in the Indo-Pacific. Australia, New Zealand and their allies will likely see China’s actions as a wake-up call, leading to discussions on effectively counterbalancing Beijing’s increasing military assertiveness. Several potential responses could arise: First, strengthening regional alliances Australia and New Zealand may look to enhance their defence cooperation with like-minded partners including US, Japan, and India through frameworks like Quad and AUKUS. Secondly, enhancing maritime surveillance both nations might prioritize increased investments in maritime domain awareness capabilities to monitor Chinese naval activities better. Thirdly, diplomatic pushback Canberra and Wellington could use diplomatic channels to garner support from Pacific island nations, ensuring they do not fall under China’s influence. Fourthly, increased military preparedness expect to see greater defence spending and military exercises aimed at showcasing regional resolve against possible Chinese encroachments. China’s recent activities inTasman Sea are not likely to be a one-off event. Instead, they indicate a more significant shift in Beijing’s military strategy one aimed at challenging the current security framework in the South Pacific. Through economic pressure, diplomatic initiatives and increased naval presence, China is gradually working to reshape the Indo-Pacific to its advantage. China’s PLA navy operations in Tasman Sea represent a notable shift from its usual military focus indicating a bold move into waters traditionally under Western control. (Author is an UGC Junior Research Fellow at Centre for Indo Pacific Studies, School of International Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi)China Extends to Tasman Sea
Foreign influence peddling is not new to India. From colonial trade networks to modern soft power strategies, external forces have long sought to shape the nation’s socio-political landscape. In the present era, dominance is not limited to dominance through military strength but exercised via economic dependencies, cultural narratives and policy interventions to try and subjugate communities to slavery of ultra-modern variety. In Indian context, foreign influence is often orchestrated through a meticulously structured network of private corporations, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), think tanks and academic institutions with funding streams strategically directed to shape public discourse and policy formulation. And, in most cases, it’s an operation of the deep state. At the heart of this intricate web, the common patron is United States Agency for International Development (USAID).
CCP is positioning itself not just as a regional power but as the central player in an emerging new world order. With every move, Beijing is sending a clear signal: the era of Western dominance is drawing to an end, and China’s moment has arrived. In recent years, Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has embarked on a series of bold, strategically transformative initiatives that are not only reshaping global order but also redefining the very concept of national security. Seizing the moment, Beijing has advanced a comprehensive strategy aimed at strengthening its position while challenging post-Cold War world order that has long been dominated by Western powers. The scope of Beijing’s ambitions has expanded to unprecedented levels—ranging from large-scale infrastructure projects spanning continents to advancements in technology and energy. Each initiative showcases a determined effort to reposition China at the centre of a new global hierarchy. Unfolding, an era of calculated moves, technological breakthroughs, and strategic posturing, all of which are poised to fundamentally shift global power dynamics and shape international landscape for decades to come. It started with a quiet, yet signifiant move into the heart of Africa. Under Belt and Road Initiative, a series of 30 clean energy projects has begun to take shape across the continent, weaving a complex web of CCP influence in countries long neglected by the West. Solar farms, wind turbines, and hydroelectric plants are rising where darkness and poverty once reigned, promising economic growth and energy independence. To many, it seems like the kind of philanthropy the world needs—Beijing is playing the role of the benevolent superpower, offering solutions where others have failed. Yet, as Beijing’s footprint expands, its motives become clearer. This is not just about lighting up villages or building infrastructure—it’s about creating a sphere of influence. The “Green Silk Initiative,” as some have called it, is a tool for political leverage, an economic dependency cloaked in the rhetoric of environmentalism and mutual benefit. For the CCP, Africa’s energy future is not just about growth; it’s about aligning a vast continent with its own vision for the global order, a vision that has no place for Western hegemony. Simultaneously, high in the Tibetan plateau, another monumental CCP project is taking shape—one that threatens to reshape the region’s future and leave its critics scrambling for answers. The CCP’s proposed hydropower dam, set to generate 300 billion kilowatt-hours annually, is poised to become the world’s largest hydropower project, with an estimated cost of $137 billion. Beyond the eye-popping numbers, the scale of this project has sparked intense controversy. Tibetan exiles and environmental groups warn that the dam could irrevocably damage fragile ecosystems and desecrate landscapes that have been sacred for centuries. The Dalai Lama, exiled since the CCP’s occupation of Tibet, has repeatedly voiced concerns, cautioning that such large-scale developments, masked as progress, would scar a land steeped in ancient culture and unparalleled natural beauty. For many, the dam is not simply an energy project—it is a symbol of cultural and ecological destruction, a stark manifestation of a regime willing to sacrifice the sacred in its relentless pursuit of power. The ambitions of the CCP, however, extend far beyond energy and infrastructure, reaching into the very heart of technological advancement. The unveiling of the CR450 high-speed train serves as a striking demonstration of China’s emerging engineering prowess, as well as a symbol of its strategy to dominate the global transportation landscape. The CR450, now recognised as the world’s fastest train, is more than a marvel of modern engineering—it is a direct challenge to the West’s technological supremacy. Designed to connect major cities across China with unprecedented speed and efficiency, the train cuts through the landscape with such force that it feels less like a transportation system and more like a statement. The rapid development and deployment of such projects place Beijing not only at the cutting edge of infrastructure but in a strategic position to export its technology globally, further entrenching its economic and political reach across the globe. This is not a game of pure infrastructure, however. As much as the CCP seeks to dazzle the world with its technological feats, it also seeks to control the future of energy and power itself. The “Artificial Sun” project, another CCP innovation, has captured the global imagination. Under the banner of the Celestial Fusion programme, Chinese scientists recently set a world record by sustaining plasma for an unprecedented 1,066 seconds. This achievement, presented with immense fanfare by the Chinese state, positions the China as a leader in the race for clean, limitless energy. But in many ways, the artificial sun represents more than just a scientific breakthrough. For many critics, it is a carefully choreographed piece of state-sponsored propaganda, designed to project power and technological dominance. CCP is positioning itself not just as a global economic power but as a potential monopoly on the energy sources of the future. The implications of such a shift cannot be understated. The ability to control global energy markets and dictate terms for future energy access will fundamentally reshape the power structures of the 21st century. Beijing’s naval ambitions, too, have grown exponentially. The unveiling of the Type 075 amphibious assault ship is a powerful signal of the CCP’s People’s Liberation Army (PLA) growing military might and its intent to dominate the seas. This vessel, one of the largest of its kind, is capable of deploying large forces quickly and efficiently across vast stretches of the ocean. The message is clear: CCP is ready to assert itself as a maritime power capable of protecting its interests in critical regions such as the South China Sea, where tensions with Southeast Asian nations and the United States have been escalating for years.The Type 075, with its cutting-edge technology and imposing size, epitomises Beijing’s broader naval ambitions to challenge both South Asian and Western naval presences in the region. More than just a weapon, the ship serves as a floating symbol of Beijing’s power projection—an embassy on water, reinforcing the message
Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s visit to the United States in February 2025 represents a significant milestone in the evolution of the India-U.S. relationship. This visit was not only a display of high-level diplomacy but also a demonstration of both nations’ commitment to addressing contemporary challenges while harnessing emerging opportunities in multiple domains. With a focus on strategic defense, innovative technologies, economic reforms, and multilateral cooperation, the visit set the stage for a renewed and expansive partnership between the two democracies. This report outlines the key engagements, strategic dialogues, and transformative initiatives that were announced during the visit. It aims to provide a comprehensive overview of the discussions and agreements reached, highlighting the broad range of issues that are set to shape the future of bilateral relations.
The report smacks of selective amnesia, prejudiced frameworks, overlooks rising crimes on Hindus, seeks to bring about divisiveness. India Hate Lab’s (IHL) 2024 report on Hate Speech Events claims that hate speech incidents increased significantly in the country and Hindu nationalist organizations, ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) were behind these crimes. A closer examination however throws up methodological flaws in the ‘agenda’ based study laced with prejudices, dubiousness of the publishing institute. The report’s inconsistent data collection, selective incident framing, turbulent agenda of IHL and its parent group, Center for the Study of Organized Hate (CSOH) have to fore.
Dr. Jay Prakash Yadav Japan’s National Day embodies a legacy shaped by cultural wisdom and strategic foresight. Since Buddhism’s arrival from India in 552 AD, Japan has integrated its principles into governance. The history of cultural friendship between India and Japan dates to AD 552, the time when Japan was introduced to Buddhism. It was the time when Japan began to drink from the Indian spring of culture, sharing the Buddhist ideals of wisdom and compassion, faith and sacrifice, purity and enlightenment. India resulted in ushering in of a new era. Since then, Buddhism has remained the core and culmination of our friendship and will continue for generations to come. Japan drew its first constitution based on the Buddhist principles of Panchasila, Triratna- Buddha, Dharma and Sangha thus gave a humanized face to the administrative system in Japan. India and Japan have a unique relationship devoid of ideological, cultural, or geographical disagreements. It is distinct and exudes warmth from giving deeds and feelings of support for one another in difficult times. Japanese culture and thinking have been influenced by Indian culture, which has been filtered through Buddhism. This is precisely why Japanese people feel very close to India. A global vision of peace, security, and shared prosperity founded on sustainable development is now shared by Japan and India. The foundation of the two nations’ international cooperation is their shared democratic principles and dedication to pluralism, human rights, open society, and the rule of law. A wide convergence of India and Japan’s long-term political, economic, and strategic interests, aspirations, objectives, and concerns can be seen in their worldwide relationship. Japan and India see each other as partners who can and should respond to regional and global issues in a way that is consistent with their global cooperation. Thus, India’s strength, prosperity, and vibrancy are beneficial to Japan, and vice versa. It has been determined to strengthen the strategic focus of Japan-India’s global collaboration in light of the given circumstances and the state of the world. With a shared interest in and complementary roles in furthering global peace and equitable development as well as the security, stability, and prosperity of Asia, India and Japan are peace partners. In April 2005, during the then-Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi’s visit, it was decided that the two nations would deepen their cooperation and work toward a comprehensive and all-encompassing development of their bilateral relations, with a specific and pressing emphasis on bolstering economic ties by making the most of their economies’ potential and current complementarities. It was determined that both nations will work to establish stronger communication and cooperation in order to safeguard peace, stability, and prosperity in Asia; advance democracy and development; and investigate a new framework for tighter regional cooperation in Asia. Taking advantage of and expanding upon existing strategic convergences, two nations also decided to increase collaboration in a variety of fields, including energy, disarmament, non-proliferation, security, and the environment. In the context of globalization and the growing concern over the use of military power for achieving foreign policy objectives, the importance of soft power has increased considerably, and Buddhism offers many advantages. Buddhism has international appeal and is highly conducive to spreading among all nations, cultures, and civilizations because of its core teachings, which include equality, non-violence, and its dialogical approach. Furthermore, there is no more effective soft power tool for Asian nations that share a Buddhist spirituality. Buddhism has played a significant role in Japanese culture and religion for over 1500 years, despite its foreign appearance. It is currently Japan’s soft power diplomacy’s most enduring tenet. Through several private and government agencies, Japan has been from time to time at the forefront in restoring the Buddhist relics, developing the major Buddhist pilgrim sites in various countries including India. Japan has thus rendered a great service to Buddhism and the land of its birth by rediscovering, reclaiming, and keeping alive the ‘wonder that was India. India has now woken up and is using Buddhism as the focal point of its soft-power campaign throughout Asia to highlight its strong Buddhist credentials. During the past one-decade, Indian policy-makers are making conscious efforts to utilize its allure for fostering deeper engagement with Asian countries – especially in the east and southeast, as part of its “Act East” policy. This involves not just sprucing up and showcasing Buddhist sacred sites and monuments, but also establishing people-to-people contacts and promoting cultural exchanges via tourism. (Author is Assistant professor at Dr. B.R. Ambedkar University of social sciences, Mhow, Madhya Pradesh and Scholar of Buddhist Studies.)
The United States Agency for International Development (USAID) was established in 1961 during the Cold War, ostensibly to provide humanitarian aid and foster economic development. However, over the decades, it has evolved into a tool of American geopolitical manoeuvring, often acting against the very interests of the nations it claims to help. While USAID publicly promotes democracy, economic growth, and stability, its interventions have repeatedly served as instruments of subversion, funding extremist organizations, undermining local governance structures, and advancing ideologically driven agendas that disrupt sovereign nations. While USAID has worked extensively with national governments to implement development programs, it has often bypassed official state mechanisms, choosing instead to fund non-governmental organizations (NGOs) that operate with limited oversight. This approach has created parallel administrative structures, leading to dependency and weakened governance in several countries. Governments in Asia, Africa, and Latin America have repeatedly raised concerns over USAID’s influence, with some nations outright expelling the agency due to allegations of political interference and covert destabilization efforts.
Economic Survey for 2024 – 25 pushes for deregulation and reforms as sure shot prescription for higher economic growth, resilience, employment, lower business costs amid global uncertainties. V. Anantha Nageswaran It will be over six months since the last Economic Survey when you lay your hands and cast your eyes on this document and this preface. In theory, there should not be much to write in this preface, given the short time lapse since the last Survey. In reality, there is. The world is perhaps evolving more rapidly than we realise. In the longer span of history, this is par for the course. But, we will leave that contemplation for another occasion. 2024 was a year of elections. Three big democracies went in for elections: India, America, and Indonesia. India returned the incumbent to office for a third term. The ruling party continued in Indonesia with a different leader at the helm. In America, there was a change in the presidency. The new President has been in office for less than two weeks now. The world has had an early inkling of policy changes that will affect the global movement of goods and labour. Europe faces both political and economic uncertainties. Europe’s biggest economic engine, Germany, experienced economic contraction for two successive years. Political uncertainty, too, is a factor since elections are due to be held in February this year. France has had political uncertainty due to developments in the wake of the snap elections called there. The United Kingdom had a change of government. After a long gap, the Labour Party came into office amidst fiscal pressures and a slowing economy. In general, Europe is facing competitiveness pressures amidst much higher energy costs caused, in part, by the transition towards renewable energy. To a large extent, these developments have affected the global economy. The Index of Global Economic Activity of the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas has been volatile since the pandemic began slowing at the end of 2023. The reopening of the Chinese economy after the Covid shutdown has not led to a spurt in economic growth rate as overcapacity and financial strains in the real estate sector have come to the fore. Due to weak aggregate demand, the economy is in deflationary mode. The absence of a significant policy stimulus to boost domestic consumption has seen excess capacity spill over into external markets. Chinese exports are thriving. China’s trade surplus in 2024 was nearly one trillion US dollars. Recent strength in the US dollar and rethinking in the Federal Reserve about the path of policy rates in America have caused emerging market currencies to weaken. Fiscal strains and low real rates relative to history have led to rapid erosion of value in some currencies compared to others. Borrowing costs for sovereigns are also rising as financial markets re-evaluate the outlook for inflation, policy rates and fiscal prudence. Several stock markets worldwide are at elevated levels and do not appear unduly concerned about economic growth and earnings uncertainties. Nor have financial stability risks fazed investors even though serious concerns are re-emerging about securitisation, leveraged loans. “The Future of European Competitiveness” Mario Draghi wrote: “The EU also benefitted from a favourable global environment. World trade burgeoned under multilateral rules. The safety of the US security umbrella freed up defence budgets to spend on other priorities. In a world of stable geopolitics, we had no reason to be concerned about rising dependencies on countries we expected to remain our friends. But the foundations on which we built are now being shaken. The previous global paradigm is fading. The era of rapid world trade growth looks to have passed, with EU companies facing both greater competition from abroad and lower access to overseas markets.” This is the global backdrop for India as it seeks to steady and sustain the growth momentum that the economy has experienced post-Covid. The passing of the era of rapid world trade growth clouds the outlook for India’s export growth because, historically, India’s export growth has been a high beta play on global export growth. This means domestic growth levers will be relatively more important than external ones in the coming years. The report on European competitiveness could easily have been written for India. Most of the challenges cited therein apply to India, except that India is an aspiring nation, and the European continent has the cushion of a higher per capita income. Europe is, by and large, ageing, but India has a more youthful demographic profile. That is an advantage, but it comes with a huge responsibility. One of the refrains in the Draghi report is the ‘China Challenge’ to European competitiveness. It is no less for India. Several commentators have recently written about the manufacturing colossus that China has become in the last six years. India faces limitations in producing critical goods at the scale and quality required to serve the infrastructure and investment needs of an aspiring economy. For instance, India has low production capacity in the solar energy sector for key components like polysilicon, ingots, and wafers. The production capacity of monocrystalline silicon ingot is expected to quintuple by 2035 from 2 GW in 2023, but it won’t be enough to meet the demand in the country. Several solar equipment manufacturers in the country significantly depend on Chinese supply chains and related services. The single-source concentration risk in several product areas exposes India to potential supply chain disruptions, price fluctuations, and currency risks. India’s task is cut out. It means going all out to attract, promote and facilitate further domestic and foreign investments that India needs to become a competitive and innovative economy. It will not be easy because competition for investment is not only with other emerging economies but advanced economies, too, who are determined to keep their businesses at home. Equally, investing in and strengthening domestic supply-chain capability and resilience will be the hallmarks of strategic and long-term thinking on the part of the private sector. Alternative sources of supply,
