What to Read in The Hindu Editorial( Topic and Syllabus wise)

Editorial 1: Renewed focus

Context

India and Japan demonstrated the resilience of their relationship amid global uncertainties.

Introduction

Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s visit to Japan marked a key milestone in India-Japan relations, combining bilateral agreements, strategic cooperation, and multilateral engagement. The 15th Annual Summit with PM Shigeru Ishibafocused on Next-Gen partnerships, economic security, and technology collaboration, reinforcing ties amid shifting geopolitical dynamics in the Indo-Pacific region.

Bilateral Agreements and Strategic Cooperation

• Prime Minister Narendra Modivisited Japan for a two-day 15th Annual Summit with Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba before attending the SCO Summit in Tianjin.
• The two sides issued over a dozen documentsfocused on updating agreements with a “Next-Gen”
• Japanese businessesraised their investment target in India to $68 billion, signing around 170 MoUs with Indian partners.
• Key documents included a Joint Statement, a 2035 Vision Statementcovering eight areas such as economic security, mobility, and green technology transition, and a “Next-Gen State-Prefecture Partnership” to strengthen grassroots ties and boost direct flight connectivity.
• The 2008 Security Partnershipwas updated to include annual NSA-level dialogues, greater Quad and Indo-Pacific cooperation, and discussions on UN Security Council reforms.
• Economic Security Partnershipinitiatives aim to build resilient supply chains and secure critical infrastructure, leveraging Japanese technology in semiconductor manufacturing in India.
• Collaboration on India’s High-Speed Rail “Bullet Train”and semiconductor projects was highlighted, including site visits in Miyagi province.
• The joint statementcondemned North Korea’s missile tests and nuclear program and addressed cross-border terrorism, though Pakistan was not explicitly mentioned.

Geopolitical Context and Regional Significance

• The summit carried strong geopolitical undertones, particularly given recent S. tariffsaffecting India’s economy.
• Modi’s visit to Japanpreceded talks with Chinese President Xi Jinping aimed at normalizing relations after a four-year stand-off.
• Japan’s concernsover East China Sea tensions and disrupted S. trade negotiations underscored the importance of strengthening ties with India.
• Both leaders conveyed that despite global geopolitical instability, the India-Japan relationshipremains robustand steadily growing.

 Quad and Multilateral Engagement

• Leaders emphasized the significance of the upcoming Quad Summitin India, reaffirming India’s commitment to multilateral cooperation.
• Cooperation in economic security, technology, and infrastructuredemonstrates India and Japan’s intent to collaborate beyond bilateral frameworks, impacting regional stability.
• The meetings underscored Indiaand Japan’s alignment on Indo-Pacific security and supply chain resilience amid global strategic challenges

Conclusion

The summit underscored the resilience and growth of India-Japan ties, highlighting collaboration in infrastructure, technology, and security. Amid global uncertainties, both nations reaffirmed commitment to regional stability, Quad cooperation, and multilateral frameworks, signaling a robust partnership that balances bilateral ambitions with broader geopolitical strategy.

 

Editorial 2: Ukraine as a battle between America and Washington

Context

The limited concrete steps Donald Trump has taken toward peace reflect the influence of ‘permanent Washington’ interests, which constrain the fulfillment of his campaign promises.

Introduction

The Alaska summit on August 15, 2025, was shaped less by a direct U.S.-Russia or U.S.-Europe diplomatic contest, and more by the question of how much Mr. Trump would concede to Russia. While he agreed to Putin’s conditions—no ceasefire without a permanent peace agreement and no NATO presence in Ukraine—this fell short of Trump’s 2024 campaign promise to end the war immediately.

Limits of U.S. Presidential Power and the Domestic Contest Shaping Global Security

• Potential Path to Peace: Trump could have satisfied his base by offering incentives to Moscow to halt its advance while leveraging arms and intelligence support to influence Kyiv.
• Limits of Presidential Power:His failure to secure peace highlights the constraints on the U.S. President in implementing the platform on which he was democratically elected.
• Domestic Power Struggle:These constraints stem from an internal contest in the U.S., likely to shape future global security more than internal struggles in any other country.
• America-First vs. Permanent Washington:The struggle pits the anti-interventionist, America-First campagainst the entrenched interests of ‘permanent Washington’, the very establishment Trump rose to power criticizing.
• Implications for Global Policy:This domestic contest will also influence S. responses to major global shifts, including India’s rise and other strategic developments.

From 2024 on

• Trump’s 2024 Campaign Promise:During the 2024 presidential campaign,  Trump pledged to end the Ukraine war “on my first day in office” and even “before I enter office”, a notable stance given the widespread Western media opposition to peace talks with Russia.
• Public Support for Peace:Trump’s position aligned with public sentiment: a Quincy Institute survey in early 2024 found that 66% of Americans supported a negotiated end to the war, even if it required compromises with Russia.
• Shift Toward Domestic Priorities:This reflects a broader American trend favoring the curtailment of global military interventions and a reallocation of resources domestically. In fact, six of the last eight U.S. presidential elections were won by candidates advocating a less interventionist foreign policy.
• Anti-Interventionist Philosophy:The stance supports allowing other major powers like India, China, and Russia to maintain regional influence while the S. focuses on its own hemisphere and domestic priorities.

The Trump approach versus factors

Theme	Analysis
Anti-Interventionism and MAGA	Central to Trump’s ‘Make America Great Again’ (MAGA) movement; championed by Vice-President J.D. Vance and Republican candidate Vivek Ramaswamy. Trump’s election win seen as a popular endorsement of peace, marking a clear divergence from Joe Biden’s foreign policy.
Diplomatic Optics and Narrative	Despite a clear mandate and Russia’s straightforward demands, Trump’s approach has been inconsistent. He made some progress in optics: challenged Ukraine’s deification (criticizing Zelenskyy) and reduced Russia demonisation (Alaska Summit), helping to re-normalise U.S. diplomacy with rivals.
Concrete Policy Actions	Actions toward peace have been limited: briefly halted weapons shipments and intelligence sharingwith Ukraine, but continued funding Kyiv’s defense, implemented secondary sanctions on India for Russian oil purchases, and entertained post-war security guarantees for Ukraine, which were largely unfeasible.
Domestic Power Struggle	Trump’s dithering reflects a contest between MAGA supporters and ‘permanent Washington’, a coalition of commercial and ideological interests prioritizing military action, spending, and global hegemony, represented by neo-con politicians and establishment civil servants embedded in his administration.
Internal Conflicts	The struggle often unfolds within individuals, including Trump himself, balancing anti-interventionist pledges with entrenched U.S. foreign policy norms.

A clash

• Alaska Summit as an Example:The summit highlighted the clash between two forces within S. foreign policy, resulting in a compromised outcome.
• Trump’s Objectives: Trump achieved his desired optics—a red carpet welcome for Mr. Putin, reminiscent of Cold War-era summits, portraying himself as a peacemaker-statesman and fulfilling his promises to the American public.
• Impact on Russia and the War:While no concessions were granted to Russia, the arrangement allowed the war to continue, ensuring the ongoing influence of ‘permanent Washington’ interests.

Conclusion

The war in Ukraine represents the closest the world has ever approached a global nuclear crisis. Moving away from this precipice will not hinge on intricate international negotiations alone. Within the United States, complex domestic power struggles are unfolding, and ultimately, the resolution will be shaped less by the rivalry between America and Russia than by internal contests within Washington itself. Similarly, many of the major geo-strategic battles in the coming decades are likely to be influenced as much by domestic American politics as by external conflicts.