| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
115892
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2012.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
India's ties with Iran have become an irritant in the India-US relationship. Several scholars have alleged that the US is influencing India's Iran policy. This article examines three cases in which the US is said to have influenced India's position: the Iran-Pakistan-India (IPI) pipeline; India's votes against Iran at the International Atomic Energy Agency; and the Reserve Bank of India's guidelines of December 2010, which stopped oil payments to Iran through the Asian Clearing Union. The article concludes that while American pressure on India in each of these cases was tremendous and might have had some influence on India's position, this alone was not the decisive factor that determined India's stance. Given its well-documented tradition of maintaining strategic autonomy in its foreign policy, India would not have taken the positions it did if it had fundamental disagreements with the US on these issues.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
122924
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2011.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This essay examines how the definition of food security has evolved over the years and the causes of food insecurity. It looks at the state of food security in India and the US. It analyzes the food assistance programmes or short-term responses (other than the long-term goals of increasing agricultural productivity, controlling population growth, etc.) of the Indian and American governments to the problem of food insecurity and the challenges they face in implementing these responses. It identifies the target groups for these schemes and the eligibility requirements. Further, the essay analyzes the steps the US and India have taken to attain and maintain food security at the domestic level and makes an assessment of how far they have succeeded. Finally, it compares the programmes and policies of the two governments and concludes that the US has been more effective in dealing with food insecurity than India mainly because its mechanisms target the groups better and deliver the benefits more efficiently.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
153096
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Russia has re-emerged as a major player in the Middle East once again, mainly because of its military intervention in the Syrian civil war in September 2015. This article throws light on Russia’s civilizational links with the region and what its aims in the region have been over the years, including the during Cold War. While Russia’s foreign policy towards the Middle East was passive in the tumultuous years following the fall of the Soviet Union, over the last few years, it has begun reorienting and recalibrating its policy towards the region. This article discusses Russia’s current aims in the region and its global ambitions, linking these to its intervention in the Syrian civil war, paying particular attention to the close ties that Russia has with Syria. This article attempts to explore whether Russia’s presence in the region is sustainable. It also explains the consequences of Russia’s intervention for the region and for Russia itself.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 4 |
ID:
100511
|
|
|
| 5 |
ID:
163775
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The Eurasian supercontinent has again assumed importance in world politics in the context of the declining power of the USA, the rise of India and China and Russia’s return to global geopolitics. At the same time, ‘connectivity’ has become the catchphrase in the supercontinent, thanks to China’s aggressive pushing of its Belt Road Initiative (BRI). This article examines India’s approaches to connectivity projects in Eurasia, including those in its immediate neighbourhood. It argues that India’s approach to connectivity-related cooperation ideas in the region like the BRI is not uniform despite the economic advantages some of these projects offer. India appears to view such projects to a significant extent through the prism of geostrategic and security interests. Finally, it examines the implications of India’s approach to connectivity for India as well as the broader region.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|