|
|
|
Sort Order |
|
|
|
Items / Page
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
193205
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The growing India-Japan engagements are not only focused on economic issues, but also cover a wide range of interests, including regional security, political, and maritime security concerns. Both countries are consolidating strategic partnerships to address the risks and vulnerabilities posed by the evolving regional balance of power. Through their embeddedness with China, both India and Japan form an intrinsic part of the Indo-Pacific geopolitical security architecture. The key transformation of relations between these two states in the region is in response to the geopolitical change brought about by China’s rapid ascension. In this regard, the article further explains how both countries are systematically strengthening a strategic partnership and gradually reinforcing economic, political, security, and strategic cooperation against China. This article seeks to address how both states would restrain rising China’s strategic maneuvering in the Indo-Pacific region through an analysis of the India-Japan alignment, with the main focus of this study being on analyzing how both India and Japan are now investing in a long-term strategy to balance China’s hegemonic policies.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
193204
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This article examines how and to what extent ethnic diversity underpinned intergovernmental relations (IGR) in deeply divided societies like India. Central to this is the vertical and intermediating roles of political actors, structures and processes of Indian federalism in defining the ways in which ethnic diversity is territorially managed. Unlike Canada or Belgium which have more formal and robust structures of IGR, the inconsequential roles of formal structures of IGR in India unduly leverage centralizing actors, structures and processes in the territorial management of ethnic diversity. Given that these centralizing actors, structures and processes are contingent on political expediency, the dynamic ideas, interests and strategies of centralizing and regionalist actors are particularly salient in defining not only the contours and outcomes of IGRs but also the ways in which “unity in diversity” are negotiated and balanced within the overarching framework of “self-rule and shared rule.”
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
193203
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Scholarly writings on the politics of economic reforms in India have neglected the exponential spike in private wealth and plutonomic tendencies in the post-reform period. This article maps the political economy of the staggering rise and growth of superrich in India. It traces the roots of the state-capital relationship in the colonial period and provides the main contrast between the political economy of the pre-reform and post-reform periods. It does so by analyzing key variables that have facilitated, or continue to facilitate, the flow of private wealth in India. It also examines three major drivers of superrich wealth in India–rent-seeking, entrepreneurship, and inheritance. The article makes two arguments. Firstly, the state’s dramatic turn in support of private capital/wealth accumulation began quite earlier but assumed formal and dynamic forms only after the implementation of economic reforms in 1991. Secondly, the rise of India’s superrich has not simply been a function of merit and entrepreneurial skills as is popularly believed. It is a peculiar combination of other factors that are leading to enormous resources and capacity concentrated in the hands of the superrich and their ability to exert considerable influence on India’s domestic and global policies. Above all, the indispensability of the state’s support has been one of the key factors explaining why some people become and continue to grow rich in India.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 4 |
ID:
193207
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
By conducting discourse analysis on Chinese textual materials around 1962, this paper tries to inductively explore the national identities of Chinese people during the 1962 Sino-Indian border conflict. It finds that China perceived itself as a persistent and resilient nation in the ongoing fight against invasion and oppression. The predominant social discourse around 1962 showed a strong enmity and resistance toward the imperialism which was then imposed on India. These national identities have formed a natural response as maintaining a tough stance toward incursion and repression, and have contributed to China’s resolution to defense its territory with resorting to military force, even though it might not be beneficial in terms of diplomatic relations and economic interests.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 5 |
ID:
193206
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
In the post-COVID19 global order, rising geopolitical tensions in Eastern Europe and East Asia reflect the boiling tensions States face on multiple fronts. Within this, the United States is on two fronts as a major player and supporter of its allies that are directly facing hostility. Since the start of 2020, China’s hard, military power maneuvering in the South China Sea, deteriorating political relations with Japan and Australia, and the Himalayan standoff against India have seemingly further substantiated the need for the formulation of The Quad, a proposed quadrilateral arrangement with a varying mandate of operations. The proposed structure would constitute India, Japan, Australia, and the United States.The grouping has repeatedly been touted as not as “anti-China.” However Chinese interpretation of the mutual intent has equated them to being an “Asian NATO.” Keeping this in mind, I draw upon Duncan Snidal and Felicity Vabulas’ works on Informal Intergovernmental Organizations (IIGOs) and considers the inherent pitfalls that states may incur while negotiating through the contours of such a structure. Particularly in regards to strategic autonomy, asymmetry in resource contribution and control, and agreeing on a set of fundamental driving philosophies that are certain enough to tie the parties together for the foreseeable future. I focus on contemporary international relations theory, secondary research in the subject countries’ Indo-Pacific policies, and the more significant geopolitical trends of securitization in Asia.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|