Author: Anil Khosla

Posted on

533: LEARNING FROM ISRAELI DEFENCE FORCES (PART II: Lessons from Notable Operations Conducted by the Israeli Defence Forces)

 

My Article published on the Chanakya forum Website

on 16 Nov 24

 

Pic: Courtesy Internet

 

The Israel Defence Forces (IDF) has conducted numerous military operations since its establishment in 1948.  Given Israel’s complex security environment, these operations combine defensive actions, counterterrorism efforts, and strategic pre-emptive strikes to maintain security. These operations are primarily driven by the need to protect Israel from external threats, insurgent groups, and regional conflicts.

 

Notable Operations Conducted by Israeli Defence Forces.

 

The Israel Defence Forces (IDF) has conducted numerous military operations since its establishment in 1948. Given Israel’s complex security environment, these operations combine defensive actions, counterterrorism efforts, and strategic pre-emptive strikes to maintain security. These operations are primarily driven by the need to protect Israel from external threats, insurgent groups, and regional conflicts.

 

1948 Arab-Israeli War (War of Independence). This war was to defend the newly created State of Israel against the invasion of Arab armies (Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Lebanon, Iraq, and others) following the UN’s partition plan. Israel successfully defended itself and expanded its borders beyond the original UN partition plan, although Jerusalem remained divided.

 

1956 Suez Crisis (Operation Kadesh). Israel, alongside Britain and France, aimed to seize control of the Suez Canal after Egypt’s President Nasser nationalised it. Israel also sought to eliminate the threat of Egyptian-fed Fedayeen fighters in the Sinai Peninsula. Israel captured the Sinai Peninsula but withdrew under international pressure, especially from the U.S. and Soviet Union.

 

1967 Six-Day War. Israel carried out a pre-emptive strike against Egypt, Syria, and Jordan, who were mobilising forces near Israel’s borders. The aim was to neutralise immediate military threats. A decisive Israeli victory resulted in the capture of the Sinai Peninsula, Gaza Strip, West Bank, East Jerusalem, and the Golan Heights.

 

1973 Yom Kippur War. A surprise attack by Egypt and Syria during Yom Kippur, a major Jewish holiday, was aimed to reverse Israeli territorial gains from the Six-Day War. Israeli forces defending the attack initially suffered significant losses but ultimately repelled the attacks, maintaining its territorial control. The war led to the eventual peace treaty with Egypt.

 

Operation Entebbe (1976). One of the IDF’s most famous operations, this mission involved the rescue of hostages from a hijacked Air France plane in Uganda. Commandos from Sayeret Matkal, the elite Special Forces unit, flew over 2,500 miles to execute the mission, successfully freeing 102 hostages. The operation is considered one of the most daring hostage rescues in history.

 

Operation Opera (1981). In this pre-emptive airstrike, the Israeli Air Force bombed Iraq’s Osirak nuclear reactor near Baghdad to prevent Saddam Hussein from acquiring nuclear weapons. The successful strike eliminated the threat of Iraq developing nuclear capabilities and showcased Israel’s proactive defence strategy.

 

1982 Lebanon War (Operation Peace for Galilee). The objective of this operation was to expel the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), which was launching attacks on northern Israel from southern Lebanon. The IDF succeeded in driving the PLO out of Lebanon, but the operation evolved into a long-term military occupation of south Lebanon, leading to a protracted conflict with Hezbollah.

 

First Intifada (1987–1993). The aim was to suppress the Palestinian uprising (Intifada) in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, which involved widespread protests, strikes, and violent clashes with the IDF. The Intifada led to the Oslo Accords in 1993, marking the first direct negotiations between Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO).

 

Operation Defensive Shield (2002). This operation was launched during the Second Intifada and aimed to dismantle terrorist infrastructure in the West Bank. The IDF entered major Palestinian cities to arrest militants, gather intelligence, and destroy weapons caches. It was one of the largest ground operations conducted by the IDF since the 1982 Lebanon War.  The IDF regained control of key West Bank cities and reduced terrorist activity, but the conflict continued for several years.

 

2006 Lebanon War.  Israel’s response to the abduction of two Israeli soldiers by Hezbollah militants led to an escalation in hostilities. The war aimed to neutralise Hezbollah’s missile threat and dismantle its infrastructure in southern Lebanon. The war ended in a ceasefire brokered by the UN, but Hezbollah remained a potent force in Lebanon. The conflict was marked by heavy rocket fire in northern Israel and significant destruction in Lebanon.

 

Operation Cast Lead (2008–2009). This operation was in response to persistent rocket fire from Hamas in Gaza by launching a major offensive aimed at crippling Hamas’ military infrastructure and stopping rocket attacks. The three-week operation targeted Hamas infrastructure in the Gaza Strip after years of rocket attacks on southern Israel. The IDF used airstrikes, naval bombardments, and ground operations to weaken Hamas’ military capabilities and rocket-launching systems. The IDF achieved its goal of reducing Hamas’ rocket capabilities, but the operation resulted in significant civilian casualties in Gaza and international criticism.

 

Operation Pillar of Defence (2012). The operation was aimed at halting rocket fire from Gaza into Israel, and this operation focused on degrading Hamas’ rocket infrastructure and eliminating critical militant leaders. The operation primarily relied on precision airstrikes and targeted attacks. The operation ended with a ceasefire brokered by Egypt, with Hamas significantly weakened but still in control of Gaza.

 

Operation Protective Edge (2014). One of the more recent and significant operations was a 50-day military campaign against Hamas in Gaza. It was triggered by a sharp escalation in rocket fire from Gaza. The IDF carried out airstrikes and ground operations, and the Iron Dome missile defence system played a crucial role in protecting Israeli civilians from rocket attacks. The target was Hamas’ rocket fire and the extensive tunnel network used for smuggling and cross-border attacks from Gaza into Israel. The IDF conducted extensive air and ground operations in Gaza, inflicting heavy damage on Hamas’ infrastructure.

 

Operation Northern Shield (2018-2019). Focused on neutralising Hezbollah’s cross-border tunnels from Lebanon into northern Israel, this operation aimed to eliminate a strategic threat posed by Hezbollah, the Lebanese-based militant group backed by Iran. The IDF uncovered and destroyed several attack tunnels during this operation.

 

Operation Black Belt (2019). A brief but intense military campaign against Islamic Jihad in Gaza followed the targeted killing of one of its senior leaders. The operation involved precision strikes in preventing rocket fire on Israeli communities, and the use of the Iron Dome was central to Israel’s defence.

 

Operation Guardian of the Walls.  The operation was in response to escalating violence between Israel and Palestinian militants in Gaza following tensions in East Jerusalem. Hamas and Islamic Jihad launched thousands of rockets into Israel. The IDF carried out extensive airstrikes, targeting militant leaders, rocket launchers, and tunnel networks. A ceasefire was reached after 11 days of fighting.

 

Operation Breaking Dawn (2022). In response to threats from Islamic Jihad in Gaza, this operation involved airstrikes targeting military commanders and infrastructure. It was a short but intense campaign aimed at preventing an imminent threat from the group, while Israel’s Iron Dome intercepted over 95% of rockets fired from Gaza.

 

Cyber and Covert Operations. The IDF has also been involved in covert and cyber operations, mainly targeting Iranian nuclear facilities and military infrastructure. While many of these operations are highly classified, there have been reports of cyber-attacks, such as the Stuxnet virus, which disrupted Iran’s nuclear enrichment process.

 

Ongoing Operations. The IDF is involved in ongoing security operations, particularly in Gaza, West Bank, Lebanon and Iran. These include counterterrorism missions, targeted airstrikes, and border defence. The Iron Dome missile defence system plays a crucial role in intercepting rockets fired from Gaza and other hostile entities.

 

Lessons Drawn from Operations Conducted by Israeli Defence Forces

 

The operations conducted by the Israel Defence Forces (IDF) over the decades have provided crucial lessons for Israel and militaries worldwide. These lessons span strategic, tactical, and operational insights, especially given Israel’s unique geopolitical challenges and the nature of modern warfare.

 

Pre-emptive Action and Deterrence. Operation Opera (1981) demonstrated the effectiveness of a pre-emptive strike when Israel destroyed Iraq’s Osirak nuclear reactor. The lesson here is that preventing adversaries from acquiring weapons of mass destruction can neutralise existential threats before they materialise. It also underscores the importance of intelligence and timely decision-making in military strategy.

 

Precision and Technology. Investing in precision-guided munitions and intelligence allows for targeted strikes with minimal collateral damage, which is crucial in asymmetric warfare, where civilians are often in close proximity to combatants. During Operation Cast Lead (2008–2009) and Operation Pillar of Defence (2012), Israel’s use of precise airstrikes targeted key Hamas infrastructure while minimising harm to civilians. This lesson has been adopted by modern militaries, where precision and technology are prioritised to avoid international criticism and maintain ethical warfare practices.

 

Protection Through Defensive Systems. Active defence systems, such as missile interceptors, can save lives and reduce the need for offensive actions. The Iron Dome missile defence system, used in operations like Protective Edge (2014) and Breaking Dawn (2022), demonstrated the ability to intercept short-range rockets and reduce civilian casualties. This enabled Israel to minimise the pressure for rapid escalation, allowing more strategic responses. The success of the Iron Dome has led other nations to explore similar systems, reinforcing the importance of layered defence in modern conflict.

 

Intelligence-Driven Warfare. Accurate and real-time intelligence is crucial to the success of military operations, especially in identifying critical enemy infrastructure and high-value targets. The targeted assassination of key terrorist leaders, such as in Operation Black Belt (2019) and Operation Breaking Dawn (2022), highlighted how actionable intelligence can destroy the enemy leadership and prevent retaliatory attacks. This underscores the critical role of intelligence agencies, such as Mossad and Aman, in modern warfare and the blending of military and intelligence operations.

 

Urban Warfare Challenges. Combat in dense urban environments requires specialised tactics and technologies to deal with the challenges of non-conventional warfare, such as booby traps, tunnels, and combatants embedded among civilians. During Operation Defensive Shield (2002) and the later Gaza operations, the IDF learned the complexity of fighting in cities and refugee camps, leading to the development of new urban warfare doctrines and equipment. The experience in urban warfare has influenced militaries worldwide to prioritise counter-insurgency training, urban combat techniques, and unmanned systems (such as drones) to reduce risk to soldiers in such environments.

 

Asymmetric Warfare and Counterinsurgency. Asymmetric threats from non-state actors require adaptability and a multi-pronged approach that includes military, political, and economic measures. In combating groups like Hezbollah and Hamas, the IDF has had to adjust from traditional state-to-state warfare to dealing with insurgents and terrorists using guerrilla tactics. Operations like Northern Shield (2018-2019), which targeted Hezbollah’s cross-border tunnels, exemplified how Israel has adapted to non-conventional threats. The IDF’s approach to counterinsurgency has shaped the doctrine of militaries dealing with non-state actors by emphasising intelligence, targeted strikes, and humanitarian considerations.

 

The Importance of Public Relations and International Perception. In modern conflicts, information warfare and managing public perception are nearly as important as battlefield success. In operations like the 2010 Gaza Flotilla Raid and Operation Protective Edge (2014), Israel faced widespread international criticism despite military success. Israel learned the importance of domestic and international strategic communication to justify its actions and manage the fallout. This lesson underscores the role of media strategy, humanitarian law compliance, and the importance of diplomatic channels during and after military operations.

 

Hybrid Warfare and Multi-Domain Operations. Modern warfare involves multiple domains (land, sea, air, cyber, and space), and victory often requires dominance in all of them simultaneously. Operation Northern Shield (2018-2019) involved ground forces and cyber and intelligence elements. The IDF has increasingly adopted a multi-domain approach, leveraging electronic warfare, cyber operations, and intelligence to support traditional military manoeuvres. The shift towards hybrid warfare has led many global militaries to integrate cyber defence and electronic warfare capabilities into their broader military strategies.

 

Resilience and Civilian-Military Integration. Civilian resilience and readiness are essential to enduring long-term conflict. This includes managing public expectations, integrating reservists, and maintaining high morale. During operations like Operation Protective Edge (2014), Israeli civilians faced heavy rocket fire, but resilience was maintained thanks to the Iron Dome and effective civil defence systems. Reservists were critical in bolstering the IDF’s ranks during intense military operations. The importance of a resilient home front, effective communication, and preparedness for protracted conflict are vital elements other nations have adopted from Israel’s experience.

 

The IDF’s operations reflect Israel’s emphasis on maintaining regional security and responding to threats pre-emptively or in retaliation. The IDF continues to adapt to modern threats, including cyber warfare, missile defence, and asymmetric warfare, with non-state actors such as Hezbollah, Hamas, and Islamic Jihad. The Israeli operations highlight the need for a dynamic and adaptive military in the face of evolving threats, focusing on intelligence and technology and minimising collateral damage while maintaining strategic deterrence. The IDF’s experiences have influenced modern military strategies worldwide, especially in counterterrorism, urban combat, and technological warfare.

 

Your valuable comments are most welcome.

 

633
Default rating

Please give a thumbs up if you  like The Post?

 

For regular updates, please register your email here:-

Subscribe

 

 

References and credits

To all the online sites and channels.

References

  1. Jewish Virtual Library, “Israel Defense Forces: Wars & Operations”, https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/israel-s-wars-and-operations
  1. Israeli Air Force website, https://www.idf.il/en/mini-sites/israeli-air-force/
  1. By the Center for Preventive Action, “Israeli-Palestinian Conflict”, Global Conflict Tracker, 06 Oct 2024.
  1. Army University Press, “Israeli Conflicts”, https://www.armyupress.army.mil/Books/CSI-Press-Publications/Israeli-Conflicts/
  1. Editors of Encyclopedia Britannica, “Arab-Israeli wars”, Britannica, 09 Sep 2024.
  1. Dr Jack Watling and Nick Reynolds, “Occasional Papers – Tactical Lessons from Israel Defense Forces Operations in Gaza”, RUSI, 11 Jul 2024.
  1. Brief, “Lessons from Israel’s war in Gaza”, Rand Corporation.
  1. Daniel Byman, “Lessons from Israel’s Last War in Lebanon”, CSIS Brief, Center for Strategic and International Studies, 02 Oct 2024.
  1. Report, “Lessons from Israel’s Forever Wars”, Reports and Papers Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard Kennedy School.
  1. Raphael S. Cohen, David E. Johnson, David E. Thaler, Brenna Allen, Elizabeth M. Bartels, James Cahill, Shira Efron, “Lessons from Israel’s Wars in Gaza”, RAND Research Summary, 18 Oct 2017.

Disclaimer:

Information and data included in the blog are for educational & non-commercial purposes only and have been carefully adapted, excerpted, or edited from reliable and accurate sources. All copyrighted material belongs to respective owners and is provided only for wider dissemination.

Posted on

532: REVERSE GLOBALISATION: CONTEMPORARY STRATEGIC ECONOMIC POLICIES & TRENDS

 

 

My Article published on the Indus International Research Foundation website on 14 Nov 24.

 

Inflation, public debt, and geopolitical tensions have shaped recent strategic economic policies. Governments are taking a cautious approach to monetary policies to gradually ease inflation, ensure fiscal sustainability, and promote economic growth. Internationally, the financial focus has increasingly turned to fostering resilience through reshoring, friend-shoring, and decoupling trade policies that diversify supply chains amid shifting global dynamics. In response to the fragility revealed during the pandemic and recent geopolitical tensions, nations are incentivising local and allied-country manufacturing to reduce reliance on single sources like China. These strategic shifts aim to fortify economies against future disruptions.

 

Strategic Economic Policies.

 

Strategic economic policies are initiatives and frameworks that governments use to shape their national economy in ways that promote long-term goals, enhance competitiveness, safeguard critical industries, and adapt to global economic shifts. These policies address specific economic, social, and political objectives, often encompassing trade, technology, workforce development, and environmental sustainability.  These include:-

 

    • Industrial Policy. Support for critical industries, such as renewable energy, semiconductors, or biotech, often through subsidies, tax incentives, or direct government investment. These policies aim to foster innovation and secure leadership in high-growth sectors.

 

    • Trade Policy. Tariffs, trade agreements, and export controls can protect domestic industries, open new markets, and safeguard national interests. Trade policy also includes mechanisms like friend-shoring and decoupling to strengthen alliances and reduce dependencies on rivals.

 

    • Innovation and R&D Policy. Government funding and tax incentives for research and development can accelerate technological advances and maintain a competitive edge in AI, 5G, and green tech sectors.

 

    • Workforce Development and Education. Investing in education and workforce training aligns skills with market needs, addressing tech, healthcare, and manufacturing gaps. This boosts employment and productivity in strategic industries.

 

    • Sustainability and Environmental Policy. Incentives for renewable energy, carbon taxes, and green investments are designed to transition the economy towards sustainability, address climate change, and capture economic benefits from emerging “green” industries.

 

    • Infrastructure Investment. Strategic investments in transportation, digital infrastructure, and energy grids support productivity and resilience. Recently, emphasis has grown on building secure digital infrastructure, including 5G networks and cyber security.

 

    • Capital and Investment Policy. Policies to attract foreign direct investment (FDI) in strategic sectors while protecting sensitive areas from foreign control, such as financial regulations or screening of FDI in national security sectors.

 

Strategic economic policies are especially significant in facing challenges like globalisation, geopolitical competition,  and technological disruption. They allow governments to take proactive measures that guide their economies toward resilient and sustainable growth.

 

Reverse Globalisation

 

“Reverse globalisation” refers to a slowdown or reversal of globalisation trends, where countries move away from increased international integration and, instead, emphasise national and regional independence. This shift is often driven by political changes, economic protectionism, supply chain disruptions, or cultural movements against global homogenisation. Several influences encourage reverse globalisation.

 

Economic Nationalism. Countries may favour domestic industries over foreign competition through tariffs, subsidies, or trade restrictions. Examples include the U.S.-China trade war and the push for “Made in [Country]” policies to boost local economies and jobs.

 

Supply Chain Reconfiguration. Recent supply chain vulnerabilities, especially highlighted during the COVID-19 pandemic, have driven companies to “reshore” or “nearshore” manufacturing. This shift is often motivated by the need for resilience and security rather than solely cost efficiency.

 

Immigration and Labour Policies. Reverse globalisation often includes stricter immigration policies, as seen in countries aiming to prioritise local employment. Countries might enact more stringent visa policies or limit foreign workers to reduce reliance on global labour.

 

Digital and Information Sovereignty. Reverse globalisation also affects technology and information policies, with countries creating data localisation laws and internet restrictions to safeguard digital sovereignty. Examples include China’s Great Firewall, the EU’s GDPR, and India’s data localisation requirements, all of which attempt to control information flows.

 

Political Populism and Nationalism. A rise in nationalism and populist politics has fuelled reverse globalisation. Leaders who emphasise “taking back control” often support policies that reduce international dependencies. Brexit is a prime example; the UK voted to leave the EU, a move partially driven by nationalist sentiments.

 

Environmental Concerns and Localism. Environmental movements argue that reducing global trade can lower carbon emissions by minimising the need for long-distance shipping and production. This has led to a push for local sourcing and sustainable production practices, sometimes aligning with anti-globalisation ideals.

 

Reverse globalisation reflects a complex recalibration rather than a complete abandonment of globalisation. The world remains interconnected in many essential ways, but often with a renewed focus on autonomy and resilience.

 

Recent Strategic Economic Policies

 

Recent economic policies indicate a broader trend toward economic resilience and diversification, with long-term strategies to sustain growth amidst uncertainty. Decoupling, friend-shoring and reshoring are strategic economic policies that reduce reliance on nations viewed as strategic competitors, especially in high-stakes areas like technology, energy, and critical supply chains.

 

Decoupling. “Decoupling” refers to reducing or severing economic interdependence between countries, particularly with rivals, to avoid vulnerabilities. It often focuses on critical industries like technology, energy, and defence. For example, in recent years, the U.S. and some of its allies have sought to decouple parts of their technology supply chains from China. This may involve encouraging companies to source components or raw materials from domestic or allied suppliers rather than potential strategic rivals. Decoupling involves measures like:-

 

    • Restricting Technology Transfer. Limiting the export or sharing of technology could enhance a competing nation’s capabilities.
    • Diversifying Supply Chains. Shifting manufacturing and sourcing from a competitor country to other nations or domestic markets often involves “friend-shoring.”
    • Restricting Investments. Regulating or prohibiting investments in specific sectors or companies within another nation.

 

Reshoring. Reshoring brings manufacturing and production activities back to a company’s home country or a region closer to home. This trend has gained traction recently as companies and governments seek to reduce their dependence on distant foreign suppliers, especially after the COVID-19 pandemic exposed vulnerabilities in global supply chains. Concerns about trade tensions, geopolitical risks, and the drive to secure critical industries (like semiconductors and pharmaceuticals) have further fuelled the reshoring movement. Key motivations for reshoring include supply chain resilience, local economic Incentives, better labour and quality control, sustainability, and consumer demand. For example, several countries are enacting policies to bolster semiconductor manufacturing domestically.

 

Friend-shoring. “Friend-shoring is an economic and trade strategy in which countries or businesses shift production and sourcing to nations with similar political values or solid diplomatic relations rather than relying on countries with potential geopolitical or economic conflicts. The goal is to enhance supply chain security, reduce reliance on politically unstable or adversarial regions, and build resilience by working with reliable partners. “Friend-shoring” is a more collaborative approach, aiming to secure critical supply chains by relocating them to nations with shared values or alliances. The idea is to build resilient networks within trusted partner countries to reduce risks from unpredictable or adversarial states. For instance, nations might establish manufacturing facilities or resource procurement operations in allied countries, creating a network of trade partners that align economically and politically. This strategy has gained traction as global supply chains have faced challenges from trade disputes, the COVID-19 pandemic, and regional tensions. It’s a middle ground between total globalisation and complete “reshoring” (bringing production back to the home country), allowing countries to balance security concerns with cost efficiency by collaborating with allied nations.

 

Nearshoring.  Nearshoring is a strategy where companies relocate their manufacturing or services closer to their primary market, often to neighbouring countries. This approach has gained traction due to its potential benefits and strategic advantages. By positioning suppliers closer to consumers, businesses can significantly shorten delivery times. This improves customer satisfaction and enhances inventory management by decreasing the time products spend in transit​Nearshoring can lead to reduced logistics and transportation costs, especially when compared to distant locations like China. Proximity allows companies to minimise shipping expenses and inventory holding costs. Many nearshoring destinations offer access to a skilled and competitive labour force. The workforce is generally well-trained and capable of meeting production standards, which can be crucial for maintaining quality while reducing costs.​ Nearshoring also helps diversify supply chains, reducing reliance on a single location. This is particularly important in times of geopolitical tensions or natural disasters.​

 

Decoupling aims to safeguard national security, protect sensitive industries, and reduce exposure to risks posed by economic interdependence with rival nations. However, the complex process can have widespread economic implications, affecting trade, innovation, and global supply chain resilience. Reshoring, friend-shoring, and nearshoring offer a compelling alternative to traditional offshore manufacturing. They reflect a broader trend toward regionalising supply chains and securing economic independence in an increasingly uncertain global landscape. These policies reflect a wider shift toward financial security and strategic resilience, prioritising political and security considerations in trade and supply chain decisions.

 

Your valuable comments are most welcome.

 

633
Default rating

Please give a thumbs up if you  like The Post?

 

For regular updates, please register your email here:-

Subscribe

 

 

References and credits

To all the online sites and channels.

 

References:

  1. Medhora Rohinton P, “Is Globalization in Reverse?” Centre for International Governance Innovation, 09 Feb 2017.
  1. Schneider-Petsinger Marianne, “The New Era of Reglobalisation.” Chatham House, 2023.
  1. Dhingra, S., & Sampson, T. “Brexit and the Future of Global Trade.” VoxEU.org.
  1. Cerdeiro, Diego A., Rui Mano, Johannes Eugster, Dirk V. Muir, and Shanaka J. Peiris. “Sizing Up the Effects of Technological Decoupling.” International Monetary Fund, March 12, 2021.
  1. Tellis, Ashley J. “Interdependence Imperiled? Economic Decoupling in an Era of Strategic Competition.” National Bureau of Asian Research, November 9, 2023.
  1. Golichowski, M., & Satapathy, N. (2024). “How reshoring is transforming the way supply chain models function”. EY Global.
  1. Weissman, R. “Is There Momentum for Reshoring in 2024?”, Octopart.
  1. Kraft, D. “Reshoring: Why It Matters and How Companies Are Adapting”. Harvard Business Review. (2024).
  1. Graham, N., & Rashid, M. “Is ‘friend-shoring’ really working?” Atlantic Council. (2023).
  1. Yellen, J. “Remarks on Friend-Shoring.” U.S. Department of the Treasury. (2022).

Disclaimer:

Information and data included in the blog are for educational & non-commercial purposes only and have been carefully adapted, excerpted, or edited from reliable and accurate sources. All copyrighted material belongs to respective owners and is provided only for wider dissemination.

 

Posted on

531: INDIA IN THE CROSSROADS OF TRUMP 2.0

 

 

Pics courtesy Internet

 

My Article Published on The EurasianTimes Website on 07 Nov 24.

 

Donald Trump’s return will have many implications for India regarding economics, security, and global alignments. Trump is more of a businessman and generally favours bilateral trade deals over multilateral ones. He may advocate a more transactional approach in his second tenure, focusing on trade deficits. His previous administration’s tariff policies targeted many trading partners, including India, which saw increased duties on certain exports. India might face pressure to expand its markets to American goods, particularly in the agriculture, pharmaceuticals, and technology sectors. Trump’s previous immigration policies impacted the H-1B visa program, which disproportionately affected Indian workers in the tech sector. A return to these policies could limit Indian talent mobility, impacting both individuals and companies. India’s IT sector might find the U.S. less accessible for skilled migration, though Trump has sometimes indicated support for highly skilled immigration.

 

 

Security Repercussions for India

Trump’s “America First” approach sometimes means stepping back from global commitments, including military engagements abroad. If the U.S. were to reduce its military presence in Asia, this could shift greater responsibility to regional players. While India is enhancing its military capabilities, a significant U.S. pullback from the region could embolden China or other adversarial forces, increasing security pressure on India. India’s security landscape will be affected in several ways, especially concerning regional stability, defence partnerships, and counterterrorism.

 

Increased Demand for Strategic Alignment with the U.S. A Trump victory could mean heightened expectations for India to align with U.S. policies in the region, which could be at odds with India’s traditionally non-aligned stance. India might face pressure to take more decisive stances on issues like Taiwan, South China Sea disputes, and participation in regional blocs led by the U.S. India may have to weigh its economic and diplomatic ties with other countries, particularly Russia, against the U.S. demands for closer alignment.

 

China-India-U.S. Dynamics. Trump’s “Indo-Pacific” strategy strongly focuses on containing China, and a second term would likely deepen this agenda, intensifying U.S.-China competition. India would likely be asked to take a more assertive role in regional security, particularly in the Indian Ocean. While India could benefit from U.S. support in balancing China’s influence, it also risks being pulled into a more intense, potentially destabilising rivalry, which might strain its resources and complicate diplomatic relations with China.

 

Impact on the Quad Alliance. Trump has supported the Quad (U.S., India, Japan, and Australia), seeing it as a counterweight to China’s influence. His re-election could lead to an expanded Quad agenda, including more security collaboration in the Indian Ocean and South China Sea. This might benefit India’s strategic standing but could also draw it into more confrontation with China. The Quad’s increased visibility may create additional security risks, with China potentially reacting aggressively in the region, impacting India’s borders and maritime security.

 

Pakistan Policy. Trump previously adopted a tough stance on Pakistan, particularly regarding terrorism financing and harbouring militant groups that target Afghanistan and India. He may again apply pressure on Pakistan to dismantle terrorist networks. This would align with India’s security goals, potentially reducing cross-border terrorism. However, any diplomatic tension between the U.S. and Pakistan could destabilise, making Pakistan lean more heavily toward China and impacting India’s security environment.

 

Afghanistan’s Security Dynamics. Trump had strongly advocated withdrawing U.S. forces from Afghanistan. While a complete withdrawal has already taken place, his potential re-election could mean a lack of further U.S. engagement in Afghan stability, especially in containing Taliban and extremist groups. For India, this would mean facing an increasingly Taliban-influenced Afghanistan, leading to higher security risks, especially if terror groups resurge in the region.

 

 

Repercussions on Military Cooperation

Trump’s administration fostered strong defence cooperation with India as part of a broader Indo-Pacific strategy to counterbalance China’s growing influence. However, Trump’s unpredictable alliance approach could lead India to exercise caution. The repercussions on military cooperation between the U.S. and India could be multifaceted, introducing new strategic dynamics.

Strengthened Defence Partnership. Trump’s administration previously prioritised India as a significant defence partner within the Indo-Pacific framework. A second term could intensify military cooperation. India may receive advanced technology and intelligence sharing, and joint exercises could increase frequency and complexity. However, this could also increase India’s security obligations in the Indo-Pacific, putting it on the front lines of any U.S.-China friction in the region.

 

Enhanced Defence Technology and Arms Transfers. Under Trump, the U.S. could prioritise India as a key buyer of advanced defence equipment, including drones, anti-missile systems, and surveillance technology. India has acquired U.S. assets like C-17 heavy lift aircraft, C-130 Special operation aircraft, Apache attack helicopter, Chinook heavy lift helicopter, and P-8I Poseidon surveillance aircraft. A second Trump term might accelerate such sales, particularly if the U.S. encourages India to purchase high-tech systems that enhance its capabilities against China.

 

Military Modernisation. Trump’s administration previously pushed for arms deals with India, and a second term could further expand India’s access to U.S. military technology. This could accelerate India’s modernisation efforts, potentially providing advanced systems and technologies. Trump’s administration might push for more defence manufacturing in India through programs like “Make in India.” The U.S. could support joint ventures and technology transfers to Indian companies, allowing India to produce components of high-tech defence systems locally. While this would strengthen India’s defence manufacturing sector, there might be strings attached, with the U.S. expecting greater access to India’s defence markets and influence over India’s arms export policies.

 

Counterterrorism and Intelligence Sharing. Trump’s stance on counterterrorism aligns with India’s interests, and military cooperation could extend to enhanced intelligence-sharing agreements. The U.S. has been a critical partner in sharing counterterrorism intelligence with India, which helps prevent potential terrorist attacks. India’s counterterrorism efforts could be bolstered if Trump maintains or deepens intelligence sharing. However, if his administration decides to limit or privatise specific intelligence-sharing mechanisms, India might face challenges acquiring timely information.

 

Cyber security and Space Warfare Collaboration. Trump has shown interest in cyber defence and space as critical domains of warfare. Cooperation in these fields could deepen under his presidency, with the U.S. assisting India in building its space-based surveillance and cyber security capacities. This could help India counter cyber threats from adversaries like China and strengthen satellite surveillance of sensitive border areas. However, tighter coordination in these domains might push India further into the U.S. strategic orbit, affecting its autonomy in setting space and cyber policies.

 

Joint Military Exercises and Training. Military exercises like the Malabar naval drills have seen increased engagement from all Quad members (U.S., India, Japan, and Australia), aiming to boost interoperability among the forces. With Trump in office, India may face opportunities for more profound joint training and exercises, extending into new domains like cyber and space warfare.

 

Conclusion. Trump’s second tenure could bring some alignment on shared geopolitical interests but might introduce new uncertainties, especially in trade and immigration policies. It could deepen the relationship between the U.S. and India regarding strengthened defence cooperation and intelligence, enabling India to access advanced defence technologies and participate more actively in joint exercises. However, India might face growing expectations to align with U.S. policies in Asia, potentially narrowing its strategic autonomy and requiring it to manage and navigate a delicate and complex regional security landscape. India must weigh these factors carefully, balancing cooperation with the U.S. against its regional interests.

 

Your valuable comments are most welcome.

 

633
Default rating

Please give a thumbs up if you  like The Post?

 

For regular updates, please register your email here:-

Subscribe

 

 

References and credits

To all the online sites and channels.

 

Disclaimer:

Information and data included in the blog are for educational & non-commercial purposes only and have been carefully adapted, excerpted, or edited from reliable and accurate sources. All copyrighted material belongs to respective owners and is provided only for wider dissemination.