Search

This paper assesses the role of the BASIC countries — Brazil, South Africa, India, and China — in UN climate change negotiations. The paper explores the formation and evolution of the group, and focuses on how the four major developing countries of China, India, Brazil, and South Africa have coordinated their positions and acted jointly to achieve an agreed outcome with other players in the recent UN Climate Change Conferences in Copenhagen and Cancun, based on an analysis of their country profiles and negotiation positions on a wide range of climate issues. The paper argues that the emergence of the BASIC Group is a reflection of the ongoing power shift from EU–US agreement to BASIC–US compromise in UN climate negotiations since the early 1990s. The rise of BASIC also has its roots in recent global market dynamics and further reflects the power transformation in the economic dimension of the international system. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

India is seen as an exceptional power among some policymakers and academics — a bastion of certain normative values standing for the marginalised in the global South. Examples of India's supposed moral foreign policy abound. However, a closer examination of India's foreign policy since its independence in 1947 suggests that India's foreign policy calculations tend to be infused with classical realism. Case studies of India's position on non-alignment during the Cold War, India's relations with Israel and South Africa, and its position within IBSA all point to realpolitik rather than any attempt to change the status quo in favour of some notion of ‘Southern solidarity’. This article concludes that the future of India's foreign policy will be determined even less by ideological underpinnings and more by situational factors such as its economic imperatives and its regional security situation. This historical overview of India's foreign policy sees the triumph of realism over idealism. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The United States–India nuclear agreement, announced in 2005, was a first step in the process to normalise India's international nuclear relations despite the fact that India is not a party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. Africa is largely seen as a uranium supplier rather than nuclear power producer in the world nuclear order. The position that African states take towards Africa–India nuclear cooperation, uranium supply to India in particular, is informed by two seemingly contrasting factors, namely economic and political pragmatism on the one hand, and non-proliferation imperatives and norms on the other. The African Nuclear Weapons Free Zone Treaty, also referred to as the Pelindaba Treaty, prohibits uranium and nuclear-related exports to states without comprehensive safeguards of their nuclear facilities, but the case of India is still open for interpretation. Africa and India's shared post-colonial consciousness, manifesting in their historical ties, membership of the Non-Aligned Movement and South–South cooperation, is often regarded as another factor facilitating Africa–India nuclear relations. A more critical view points to the different notions of post-coloniality in Africa and India, resulting in different approaches to nuclear non-proliferation that constrain their nuclear relations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Regional powers such as China, India, Russia, and to a lesser degree Brazil and South Africa, now occupy a significant role on the world stage. The United States, while still enjoying superpower status, has taken note. At the same time, the transnational nature of the challenges facing the world will require multilateral and bilateral co-operation perhaps unprecedented in modern history. How will the United States respond to these new requisites within the context of this changed world? While it is too early to assess the Obama administration's foreign policy substantively, it looks to be adopting an approach emphasising the building of consensus and multilateralism in its international engagement. Moreover, there is reason to expect that it will actively seek a more constructive set of relationships with regional powers. United States domestic political constraints may yet hamper Obama in this new approach, as might the type of response the new administration receives from old and new powers to its overtures. Whether the changes are more in tone than substance remains to be seen. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the relations of India and Pakistan with Africa. It cites that India has introduced multifaceted policy initiatives and keeps diplomatic relations with 26 states in Africa. It notes that the interaction of Pakistan with Africa in peacekeeping operations of United Nations (UN) is the former's major contribution to the latter. It states that Pakistan's effort to Africa had been outperformed by India due to lack of significant policy.

The article discusses the relations between India and South Africa. It notes that the relations of India and South Africa started in the 17th century, in which both are committed to inclusive economic development, social justice and democracy by establishing the joint ministerial commission (JMC) in 1995. It states the discords on the relations of the two countries are arms deal corruption and nuclear issue as India refused to sign proliferation agreements.