Connect with us

South Asia

Diversifying Vaccine Campaigns: Dhaka’s Diplomatic Maneuvers for Alternative Sources

Published

on

Whilst the Covid-19 pandemic broke out at the end of December 2019, health experts around the globe forecasted that the only sustainable en route to tackle this human catastrophe was – en masse vaccinations to reach the herd immunity. Since then, efforts kicked off to come up with a vaccine and within a short time, several vaccines were developed. Vaccines are now being administered all over the world; however, poorer and developing countries fare far behind to procure vaccine doses due to the rise of – ‘vaccine nationalism’ in different parts of the developed world, ‘vaccine hegemony’ of the Global North and ‘profit driven vaccine monopoly of big pharmas’.

Amidst this ‘global divide’ on vaccine procurements, Bangladesh flags a largely successful ‘vaccine diplomacy’ campaign to ensure vaccine doses from multiple sources from the very outset of the vaccine production. Despite being a developing country with limited resources, Bangladesh fares pretty well on managing the repercussions of pandemic astonishingly. However, due to the sudden sweep over of Covid-19 cases in India and Bangladesh, and Dhaka’s sole dependency on the Serum Institute of India – Bangladesh’s mass vaccination campaign is set to suffer a major setback in recent times.

 A Sweep Over of ‘New Wave’ and Vaccine Crisis

Recently, Bangladesh has witnessed a significant increase in the number of COVID-19 cases and deaths during the second wave of coronavirus.  A ‘new variant’ of Coronavirus is spreading like wildfire in the neighboring India as well to alarm the entire South Asian region. Henceforth, the uncertainty of receiving 68 million shots of vaccine under a global arrangement called COVAX on due time and the sudden halt of getting 30 million Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccines from the Serum Institute of India – has compelled Bangladesh to look for alternative sources.

India’s decision to halt vaccines export to other countries comes as a big blow to Bangladesh due to its sole reliance on vaccines provided by the Serum Institute of India. Currently, India is grappling with an unprecedented Covid-19 crisis, where Delhi is witnessing more than 300,000 cases and over 3,000 deaths per day. Till date, it has recorded a staggering total of 18 million infections and 200,000 deaths. Therefore, following the rise of internal demand, it is not surprising why the Indian government has halted the export of vaccines to other nations. As per an agreement signed in December last year, Dhaka was supposed to receive 30 million doses of Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine (Covishield) from Serum. Although Serum was supposed to provide 5 million doses per month, Bangladesh has received only 7 million doses in two installments while another 3.2 million was sent as a gift from Delhi.  

Bangladesh commenced on mass inoculation from 7 February with the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine, and so far, around 6 million people have received the first jab. As official figures suggest, around 3.5 million people are yet to get their second dose; whilst the government only has approximately 2 million doses in hand. According to the health officials, at the current rate of use, the vaccine stock of the country could run out within the midweek of May. This is, indeed, a big blow for the country in its fight against the deadly pandemic.

Desperate Campaign towards Exploring Other Vaccine Sources

Although the Bangladeshi government has made arrangements to bring 30 million doses of Covid-19 vaccines from Serum Institute of India and announced that the country will procure 68 million shots of vaccine under a global arrangement called COVAX, these are not enough for the eight most populated nation of the world. Till recent times, Dhaka has been solely relying on the AstraZeneca vaccine, the official data confers that only 2% of its 170 million people are fully vaccinated. Therefore, right at this juncture, Dhaka needs to procure more vaccines as soon as possible, and from alternative and sustainable sources.

In doing so, the government has recently given nod to both China’s Sinopharm and Russia’s Sputnik V vaccine to mitigate the ongoing vaccine crisis. Like India, China has also offered five lakh doses of Sinopharm vaccine as a gift for Bangladesh on May 12, 2021. Bangladesh and Russia are cooperating and coordinating to manufacture vaccines in Bangladesh by sharing the ‘know how’ technology of producing vaccines.  Furthermore, Dhaka has joined the China-led initiative, called “China-South Asia Platform for Covid-19 consultation, Cooperation, and Post-Pandemic Economic Recovery that aims to ensure vaccine and oxygen supply among the countries of South Asia (except India). All these diplomatic efforts and engagements should be seen as a good opportunity from Bangladesh’s perspective.

Importantly, Bangladesh should even go beyond Beijing and Moscow’s assistance to ensure timely vaccination. Bangladesh can head towards different channels of diplomatic initiatives to procure alternative vaccine sources. On his recent diplomatic visit to Bangladesh, John Kerry asserted that US would provide vaccines to other countries, including Bangladesh following Washington reach a certain level in their vaccinations. Furthermore, the US chamber of commerce argued that the surplus AstraZeneca vaccines could be provided to India, Brazil and other pandemic stricken states. Thus, it is the right time for Dhaka to maneuver its diplomatic efforts to avail some of those vaccines. In doing so, Bangladesh commendably approached several Western countries for help, including the United States, United Kingdom and Canada. In this regard, the Foreign Ministry of Bangladesh is hoping to secure 4 million doses of the AstraZeneca vaccine from the United States in the coming days.

Lessons to Ponder About 

Now, at this potential critical crisis, Bangladesh needs to assess few important lessons to withstand this unrelenting pandemic. Firstly, it is understandable that Dhaka’s dependence on one single source for such an important initiative was based on visible factors as such WHO has ‘only approved’ Oxford vaccine on that time. However, at this critical juncture, there is no option without seeking alternative sources. Because, the way in which India abruptly halted the vaccine consignments is a sort of breach of trust and agreement from a country that proclaimed to be a time-tested friend. However, it is equally important to understand that India took this action in the context of the grappling with the deep crisis they are facing. Thus, to avoid a similar situation in future, Dhaka should remain cautious to ‘not to put all its eggs in one basket’ again. Secondly, even if India did provide the 30 million vaccines on schedule, this would still be absolutely inadequate to create the required herd immunity for Bangladesh. That is why it was imperative to look into alternative sources of the vaccine from now on.

Thirdly, there is a timely need to assess the efficacy rate of ‘non-western’ vaccines. That’s why, the experts of global South apprehended that Russian and Chinese vaccines have become the ‘victims’ of vaccine monopoly of global North, particularly due to the notorious reluctance of the vaccine producers of the West. Thus, scholars speculate that WHO, under Western influence, didn’t authorize those vaccines in fear of losing the Western monopoly. As pandemic is relentlessly spreading, it is, therefore, imperative to look for other ‘non-western’ vaccines as well to keep up the pace of massive vaccinations. In this regard, the Chinese and Russian vaccines should get particular attention, as such these vaccines fares pretty well in respective regions. Finally, Bangladesh has long had the capacity to manufacture vaccines. The time has come to initiate the manufacture of ‘homegrown’ vaccines with the Russian assistance. Hence, the progression of talks with Russia over sharing the ‘know how’ technology to produce vaccines should be followed up in all earnest. It will be a significant move for Dhaka if it can successfully manage to produce vaccines at home. By doing so, Bangladesh can become a major vaccine manufacturing country, not just for itself, as well as for the global market in the days ahead.

Hassan Ahmed Shovon, an independent researcher and graduate student from Department of International Relations, University of Dhaka.

Continue Reading
Comments

South Asia

India’s Unclear Neighbourhood Policy: How to Overcome ?

Published

on

India has witnessed multiple trends with regards to its relations with its neighbours at a time vaccine diplomacy is gaining prominence and Beijing increasing the pace towards becoming an Asian superpower, whereby making these reasons valid for New Delhi to have a clear foreign policy with respect to its neighbourhood.

Introduction

The Covid Pandemic has led to increased uncertainty in the global order where it comes to power dynamics, role of international organisations. New Delhi has tried to leave no stone unturned when it comes to dealing with its immediate neighbours.  It has distributed medical aid and vaccines to smaller countries to enhance its image abroad at a time it has witnessed conflicts with China and a change in government in Myanmar. These developments make it imperative for New Delhi to increase its focus on regionalism and further international engagement where this opportunity could be used tactically amidst a pandemic by using economic and healthcare aid.

According to Dr. Arvind Gupta, New Delhi has to deal with threats coming from multiple fronts and different tactics where it is essential for New Delhi to save energy using soft means rather than coercive measures.. India under Vaccine Maitri has supplied many of COVAXIN doses to Nepal, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka where many have appreciated this move. The urgency of ensuring humanitarian aid during these periods of unprecedented uncertainty are essential in PM Modi’s Security and Growth For All ( SAGAR) initiative, which focusses on initiating inclusive growth as well as cooperation in the Indian Ocean Region.

This pandemic witnessed various threats coming in India’s neighbourhood through multiple dimensions which include maritime, land, cyber as well as air threats where adversaries are using these to put pressure on New Delhi to settle land as well as marine disputes as per their terms.  These encirclement strategies have made it necessary for India to open up various options such as holding maritime joint exercises with like-minded countries, developing partnerships, providing economic as well as healthcare support to weaker countries plus having a clear insight about changing global dynamics and acting as per them.

This piece will discuss about various changing tactics, pros and cons which India has with respect to developing its national security vis-à-vis its neighbourhood, why should it prioritise its neighbourhood at the first place?

Background

India’s Neighbourhood is filled with many complexities and a lot of suspicion amongst countries, some viewing India because of its size and geography plus economic clout as a bully where it is wanting to dominate in the region putting others aside. This led to New Delhi play an increased role in nudging ties first with its neighbours with whom it had multiple conflicts as well as misunderstandings leading to the latter viewing Beijing as a good alternative in order to keep India under check.

Ever since PM Modi has taken charge at 7 RCR, India’s Neighbourhood First Policy has been followed increasingly to develop relations, to enhance understandings and ensure mutual cooperation as well as benefit with its neighbours. The relations with Islamabad have not seen so much improvement as compared to other leaders in the past. Even though former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif was invited for PM Modi’s 1st Swearing In ceremony in 2014, terrorist activities have never stopped which could be seen through Pathankot, Uri and Pulwama terror attacks which killed many of the Indian soldiers. Even though surgical strikes were conducted on terror camps in retaliation to these bombardments, Islamabad has not changed its heart at all about its security or regional demands. New strategies and friendships are being developed where Beijing has played a major role in controlling power dynamics.

The Belt and Road initiative, first time mentioned during President Xi’s 2013 speech in Kazakhstan, then officially in 2015,  lays emphasis of achieving a Chinese Dream of bringing countries under one umbrella, ensuring their security, providing them with infrastructure projects such as ports, railways, pipelines, highways etc. The main bottleneck is the China Pakistan Economic Corridor when it comes to India’s security threats, passing through disputed boundaries of Gilgit and Baltistan in Pakistan Occupied Kashmir till Gwadar. Other projects have been initiated in Chittagong, Hambantota, Gwadar , Kyapkyou. These projects form a String Of Pearls in the Indo Pacific where New Delhi is being balanced against through economic plus development incentives being given to the member countries under the project. That’s why in the recent past, New Delhi is asserting its influence in the region, looking at new dimensional threats where Beijing’s threats in the maritime domain in the islands in East as well as South China seas are not being seen favourably in many countries such as ASEAN, US, Australia and Japan which is giving India an opportunity to look towards countries with a common threat. Amidst this great power struggle between Washington and Beijing, New Delhi is stuck between a rock and hard place i.e., having a clear and strong foreign policy with its neighbours.

In this region, India has a sole threat which is mainly Beijing where the latter has achieved prowess technologically and militarily where New Delhi lags behind the latter twenty fold. So, there is a need for improvising military technology, increase economic activities with countries, reduce dependence on foreign aid, ensure self-reliance.

Situation

South Asia is backward when it comes to economic development, human development and is a home to majority of the world’s population which lives below poverty line. The colonial rule has left a never-ending impact on divisions based on communal, linguistic and ethnic grounds. Even, in terms of infrastructure and connectivity, New Delhi lags behind Beijing significantly in the neighbourhood because the latter is at an edge when it comes to bringing countries under the same umbrella. Due to these, many initiatives have been taken up by New Delhi on developing infrastructure, providing humanitarian aid to needy countries.

There have been numerous efforts made by India with respect to reaching out to the Neighbours in 2020 through setting up of the SAARC Covid Fund where many Neighbourhood countries such as Nepal, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka gave contributions to ensure cooperation, joint scientific research, sharing information, healthcare kits where the countries contributed USD $ 18 million jointly towards this fund where New Delhi made an initial offer of USD $ 10 million.

New Delhi has even mustered ties with the Association of Southeast Asian countries during the pandemic under its Act East Policy where proper connectivity through the Northeast could be useful in easing movement of goods but currently, the infrastructure in Northeast needs more improvement where issues such as unemployment, poor connectivity are prevalent whereby disconnecting it from rest of the other states. This region could play an important role in linking Bangladesh, Myanmar to New Delhi along with the proposed India-Thailand –Myanmar Trilateral Corridor. Focus has also been laid to develop inland waterways, rail links and pipelines to ease connections between countries, making trade free and more efficient.

India is focussing on developing the Sittwe and Paletwa ports in Myanmar under the Kaladan Development Corridor, at the cost of INR 517.9 Crore in order to provide an alternative e route beneficial for the Northeast for getting shipping access

Summing Up

 These above developments and power display by a strong adversary, give good reasons for New Delhi to adopt collective security mechanisms through QUAD, SIMBEX and JIMEX with a common perception of having safe and open waters through abiding to the UNCLOS which China isn’t showing too much interest in, seen through surveillance units, artificial islands being set up on disputed territories which countries likewise India are facing in context to territorial sovereignty and integrity. These developments make it important for India to look at strategic threats by coming together with countries based on similar interest’s vis-à-vis Chinese threat.

There is a need for India to develop and harness its strength through connectivity and its self reliance initiative ( Aatmanirbharta ) so that there is no dependence on any foreign power at times of need . Proper coordination between policy makers and government officials could make decision making even easier, which is not there completely because of ideological differences, different ideas which makes it important for the political leadership to coordinate with the military jointly during times of threats on borders. Self-reliance could only come through preparedness and strategy.

Continue Reading

South Asia

India is in big trouble as UK stands for Kashmiris

Published

on

 A London-based law firm has filed an application with British police seeking the arrest of India’s army chief and a senior Indian government official over their alleged roles in war crimes in Indian-administered Kashmir.

Law firm Stoke White said it submitted extensive evidence to the Metropolitan Police’s War Crimes Unit on Tuesday, documenting how Indian forces headed by General Manoj Mukund Naravane and Home Affairs Minister Amit Shah were responsible for the torture, kidnapping and killing of activists, journalists and civilians – particularly Muslim – in the region.

“There is strong reason to believe that Indian authorities are conducting war crimes and other violence against civilians in Jammu and Kashmir,” the report states, referring to the territory in the Himalayan region.

Based on more than 2,000 testimonies taken between 2020 and 2021, the report also accused eight unnamed senior Indian military officials of direct involvement in war crimes and torture in Kashmir.

The law firm’s investigation suggested that the abuse has worsened during the coronavirus pandemic. It also included details about the arrest of Khurram Parvez, the region’s most prominent rights activist, by India’s counterterrorism authorities last year.

“This report is dedicated to the families who have lost loved ones without a trace, and who experience daily threats when trying to attain justice,” Khalil Dewan, author of the report and head of the SWI unit, said in a statement.

“The time has now come for victims to seek justice through other avenues, via a firmer application of international law.”

The request to London police was made under the principle of “universal jurisdiction”, which gives countries the authority to prosecute individuals accused of crimes against humanity committed anywhere in the world.

The international law firm in London said it believes its application is the first time that legal action has been initiated abroad against Indian authorities over alleged war crimes in Kashmir.

Hakan Camuz, director of international law at Stoke White, said he hoped the report would convince British police to open an investigation and ultimately arrest the officials when they set foot in the UK.

Some of the Indian officials have financial assets and other links to Britain.

“We are asking the UK government to do their duty and investigate and arrest them for what they did based on the evidence we supplied to them. We want them to be held accountable,” Camuz said.

The police application was made on behalf of the family of Pakistani prisoner Zia Mustafa, who, Camuz said, was the victim of extrajudicial killing by Indian authorities in 2021, and on behalf of human rights campaigner Muhammad Ahsan Untoo, who was allegedly tortured before his arrest last week.

Tens of thousands of civilians, rebels and government forces have been killed in the past two decades in Kashmir, which is divided between India and Pakistan and claimed by both in its entirety.

Muslim Kashmiris mostly support rebels who want to unite the region, either under Pakistani rule or as an independent country.

Kashmiris and international rights groups have long accused Indian troops of carrying out systematic abuse and arrests of those who oppose rule from New Delhi.

Rights groups have also criticized the conduct of armed groups, accusing them of carrying out human rights violations against civilians.

In 2018, the United Nations human rights chief called for an independent international investigation into reports of rights violations in Kashmir, alleging “chronic impunity for violations committed by security forces”.

India’s government has denied the alleged rights violations and maintains such claims are separatist propaganda meant to demonize Indian troops in the region. It seems, India is in big trouble and may not be able to escape this time. A tough time for Modi-led extremist government and his discriminatory policies. The world opinion about India has been changed completely, and it has been realized that there is no longer a democratic and secular India. India has been hijacked by extremist political parties and heading toward further bias policies. Minorities may suffer further, unless the world exert pressure to rectify the deteriorating human rights records in India.

Continue Reading

South Asia

S. Jaishankar’s ‘The India Way’, Is it a new vision of foreign policy?

Published

on

S. Jaishankar has had an illustrious Foreign Service career holding some of the highest and most prestigious positions such as ambassador to China and the US and as foreign secretary of India. Since 2019 he has served as India’s foreign minister. S. Jaishankar also has a Ph.D. in international relations from JNU and his academic background is reflected in this book.

His main argument is simplistic, yet the issues involved are complex. Jaishankar argues that the world is changing fundamentally, and the international environment is experiencing major shifts in power as well as processes. China is rising and western hegemony is declining. We are moving away from a unipolar system dominated by the US to a multipolar system. Globalization is waning and nationalism and polarization is on the rise (p. 29). The old order is going away but we cannot yet glimpse what the future will look like. This is the uncertain world that Dr. Jaishankar sees.

Dr. Jaishankar also argues that India too has changed, it is more capable and more assertive. The liberalization program that began in 1991 has made the Indian economy vibrant and globally competitive and it is well on track to becoming the third biggest economy in the world, after China and the US.  The war of 1971 that liberated Bangladesh, the liberalization of the economy after 1991, the nuclear tests in 1998 and the nuclear understanding with the US in 2005, Jaishankar argues are landmarks in India’s strategic evolution (p. 4). So given that both India and the system have changed, Jaishankar concludes, so should India’s foreign policy.

But his prescription for India’s foreign policy, in the grand scheme of things, is the same as before – India should remain nonaligned and not join the US in its efforts to contain China. India will try to play with both sides it seems in order to exploit the superpowers and maximize its own interests (p. 9). But he fails to highlight how India can find common ground with China other than to say the two nations must resolve things diplomatically. He also seems to think that the US has infinite tolerance for India’s coyness. In his imagination the US will keep making concessions and India will keep playing hard to get.

Jaishankar has a profound contradiction in his thinking. He argues that the future will be determined by what happens between the US and China. In a way he is postulating a bipolar future to global politics. But he then claims that the world is becoming multipolar and this he claims will increase the contests for regional hegemony. The world cannot be both bipolar and multipolar at the same time.

There is also a blind spot in Jaishankar’s book.  He is apparently unaware of the rise of Hindu nationalism and the demand for a Hindu state that is agitating and polarizing India’s domestic politics. The systematic marginalization and oppression of Muslim minorities at home and the growing awareness overseas of the dangers of Hindutva extremism do not exist in the world that he lives in. He misses all this even as he goes on to invoke the Mahabharata and argue how Krishna’s wisdom and the not so ethical choices during the war between Pandavas and Kauravas should be a guide for how India deals with this uncertain world – by balancing ethics with realism (p. 63). Methinks his little digression in discussing the ancient Hindu epic is more to signal his ideological predilections than to add any insights to understanding the world or India’s place in it.  

One aspect of his work that I found interesting is his awareness of the importance of democracy and pluralism. He states that India’s democracy garners respect and gives India a greater opportunity to be liked and admired by other nations in the world (p. 8). Yet recently when he was asked about the decline of India’s democratic credentials, his response was very defensive, and he showed visible signs of irritation. It is possible that he realizes India is losing ground internationally but is unwilling to acknowledge that his political party is responsible for the deterioration of India’s democracy.

This is also apparent when he talks about the importance of India improving its relations with its immediate neighbors. He calls the strategy as neighborhood first approach (pp. 9-10). What he does not explain is how an Islamophobic India will maintain good relations with Muslim majority neighbors like Bangladesh, Maldives, and Pakistan.

The book is interesting, it has its limitations and both, what is addressed and what is left out, are clearly political choices and provide insights into how New Delhi thinks about foreign policy. So, coming to the question with which we started, does India have a new foreign policy vision? The answer is no. Dr. Jaishankar is right, there is indeed an India way, but it is the same old way, and it entails remaining nonaligned with some minor attitudinal adjustments.  

Continue Reading

Publications

Latest

china india pakistan china india pakistan
East Asia4 hours ago

Shi Maxian’s trap vs Thucydides’ trap

Many political theories and international interpretations have emerged to explain the form of the conflict between the United States and...

East Asia11 hours ago

China and Indo-Pacific democracies in the face of American boycott of Beijing Winter Olympics

Despite the US administration’s announcement of a boycott of the Winter Olympics in Beijing, with the “American Olympic Committee allowing...

New Social Compact14 hours ago

E-resilience readiness for an inclusive digital society by 2030

The COVID-19 pandemic has clearly demonstrated the link between digitalization and development, both by showing the potential of digital solutions...

Tech News16 hours ago

Maintenance Tips for Second-Hand Cars

With a shortage of semiconductors continuing to plague the automotive industry, many are instead turning to the second-hand market to...

New Social Compact16 hours ago

Delivering on Our Promise for Universal Education

On the International Day of Education, we call on world leaders to transform how we deliver on education. The clock...

Africa Today18 hours ago

Bringing dry land in the Sahel back to life

Millions of hectares of farmland are lost to the desert each year in Africa’s Sahel region, but the UN Food...

Middle East20 hours ago

“Kurdish Spring”: drawing to a close?

For decades, the Kurdish problem was overshadowed by the Palestinian one, occasionally popping up in international media reports following the...

Trending