What to Read in The Indian Express( Topic and Syllabus wise)

Editorial 1 : A Much-Needed Thaw

Context: Thaw in India-China ties.

 

Introduction: The talks in Beijing between Indian Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri and senior Chinese officials including Foreign Minister Wang Yi are a welcome step in the ongoing normalisation of India-China relations. India and China are once again engaging in dialogue, signalling a potential return to their pre-Galwan relationship.

 

Four Pillars of Stability (1988-2020)

• From 1988 onwards, India-China relations came to rest on four pillars that undergirded a fair degree of military and diplomatic stability.
• Summitry: Until Galwan, the top leadership of India and China would meet regularly, bilaterally and multilaterally, often more than once a year.
• Border Negotiations: Running parallel to summitry were the border negotiations. In one form or another, talks on a final territorial settlement have run for over 30 years, with few interruptions.
• Confidence Building Measures (CBMs): Since the two militaries could clash at the border, they had worked out a series of CBMs to reduce the risk of serious escalation
• People-to-people (P2P) ties: Beyond these state-to-state measures, Delhi and Beijing encouraged P2P — tourism, cultural and academic links, and trade — to anchor ties at the societal level as well.

 

Post Galwan

• The Galwan Valley clash in June 2020 marked a significant departure from the prior stability, resulting in casualties and heightened military tensions.
• Following subsequent stand-offs (Doklam 2017, Yangtse 2022), trust between the two nations eroded, leading to increased militarization along the border.

 

Factors Driving Normal Diplomacy

• Economic
  1. Economically, India and China need each other.
  2. Growth: India’s economy is stubbornly stuck on a 30-year growth path of 7% per annum. China’s economy is languishing at 5% per annum and could further slowdown.
  3. To grow, Indian businesses need Chinese products including in many key areas like pharmaceuticals, electronics, and also infrastructure.
  4. Chinese businesses need to diversify in a world where Western protectionism against them is growing. Looking ahead, India is a potentially huge market for China.
• Military
  1. Militarily, the two countries are in a stalemate.
  2. It is clear after Galwan that both sides are prepared to maintain huge military deployments.
  3. But given the terrain and climate, neither side can likely ever win an outright victory on the border. Plus, both confront other military challenges.
  4. India faces the risk of a two-front war (China-Pakistan).
  5. China’s primary focus remains on Taiwan, the South China Sea, and Japan.
• Political
  1. Politically, both India and China must constantly worry about the US.
  2. India-US Differences: Over immigration, trade, relations with Pakistan and Bangladesh, US commentary on India’s democratic record, American accusations over a putative Indian assassination plot, and Indian accusations of unchecked Sikh militant activity on US soil.
  3. For China, the US’ weaponisation of trade and technology are likely to continue under Trump. China must also worry about America’s naming and shaming of its policies in Tibet and Xinjiang.
  4. India and China face a common challenge — how to enhance their bargaining power with the US.
  5. Answer lies in signalling US that they have other strategic choices and partners if pushed too hard.

 

Future Prospects: Will the détente last?

• Despite normalization efforts, past border clashes (Depsang 2013, Doklam 2017, Galwan 2020, Yangtse 2022) highlight the fragility of peace.
• Unresolved Territorial Disputes: Sovereignty concerns make land disputes difficult to resolve.
• National Identity and Historical Grievances: Both India and China carry deep-rooted memories of colonialism and victimhood, fuelling nationalistic sentiments.

 

Way Forward: Potential Pathways to Stability

• Economic Collaboration: Expanding trade and investment could foster deeper interdependence.
• Increased Diplomatic Engagements: Continued summits, military dialogues, and CBMs could rebuild trust.
• Strategic Bargain between PM Modi and President Xi.

 

Conclusion

The drivers of the current thaw in relations are structural. Economic need, military realities, and political worries over the US are long-term factors that won’t easily go away. India-China relations should, therefore, continue to soften and normalise even if a long-term border and strategic agreement appears difficult to achieve.

Editorial 2 : Support Our Defence Needs

Context: A wishlist from the armed forces for Budget 2025-26

 

Overview of Defence Budget Trends

• Declining Defence Allocation as a Percentage of Government Expenditure
  1. Defence spending has fallen from 13.81% of central government expenditure in 2020-21 to 13% in 2024-25.
  2. This reflects a multi-year trend of reduced prioritization of defence in the Union Budget.
• Declining Defence Allocation as a Percentage of GDP
  1. Defence spending as a percentage of GDP has dropped from 2.4% in 2020-21 to 1.9% in 2024-25.
  2. This is below the 2% benchmark recommended by NATO and the 3% threshold considered acceptable by international lending agencies like the IMF and World Bank.
• Comparison with Global Powers
  1. China, like India, spends less than 2% of its GDP on defence
  2. US spends more than 4%.

 

Capital Expenditure (Capex) Trends

• Increase in Capex Allocation
  1. Capital spending has risen by approximately Rs 40,000 crore over the past four years, from Rs 1,31,697 crore in 2020-21 to Rs 1,72,000 crore in 2024-25.
  2. This represents an average annual increase of 7%, which is insufficient for India’s ambitious military modernization and self-reliance (Atmanirbharta) goals.
• Disproportionate Allocation Among Services
  1. Army
     • Constitutes 84% of the military personnel (1.26 million out of 1.5 million) but receives only 22-28% of the capital budget.
     • Faces funding shortages for critical needs like artillery guns, attack helicopters, and personal protective gear.
  2. Navy
     • Receives 31-36% of the capital budget despite having only 5.5% of military personnel.
     • Struggles with shortages of warships, submarines, and other assets needed to secure India’s coastline, exclusive economic zone (EEZ), and sea lines of communication (SLOCs).
  3. Air Force
     • Receives the largest share of the capital budget (38-45%) but faces significant equipment shortages.
     • The defence ministry’s commitment to the “Make in India” policy makes aircraft even costlier. Each Sukhoi-30MKI fighter built in Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd’s (HAL’s) Nashik plant costs about Rs 100 crore more than the same fighter when it is built in Russia.

 

Defence Budget Allocation

• Breakdown of Defence Expenditure
  1. Sustenance and Operational Preparedness: 15% of the budget.
  2. Personnel Costs: 57% (including 30.7% for salaries and allowances, 22.7% for pensions, and 4.1% for civil organizations under the Ministry of Defence).
  3. Capital Expenditure: 27.7% allocated for modernization and arsenal upgrades.
• Shortfall in High-Tech R&D Funding
  1. Most modern militaries allocate 50-60% of their budget to capital expenditure to maintain a technological edge.
  2. India’s allocation of 27.7% to capex is insufficient for advanced R&D and modernization.

 

Accounting and Allocation Issues

• Lack of Clarity in Budget Groupings
  1. Allocations to the Border Roads Development Board (BRDB), Coast Guard, and Jammu & Kashmir Light Infantry (JAK LI) are categorized under MoD (Civil), despite their clear alignment with the Army and Navy.
  2. Capital budget allocations for the three services are now grouped together, making it difficult to differentiate between Army, Navy, and Air Force expenditures.
• Potential Intent Behind Opaque Groupings: The lack of transparency may be intentional, possibly to obscure the distribution of funds or to simplify budgetary presentations.

 

Key Challenges and Implications

• Inadequate Funding for Modernization: The 7% annual increase in capex is insufficient to meet the demands of India’s military modernization and self-reliance goals.
• Personnel Costs Dominating the Budget: Over half of the defence budget is spent on salaries, allowances, and pensions, leaving limited funds for modernization and operational preparedness.
• Strategic Implications: Falling defence spending as a percentage of GDP undermines India’s ability to counter regional threats, particularly from China and Pakistan.

 

Way Forward: Recommendations

• Increase Defence Spending: Raise defence spending to at least 2% of GDP to align with global benchmarks and address modernization needs.
• Reallocate Funds More Equitably: Ensure the Army receives a larger share of the capital budget to address its critical equipment shortages.
• Enhance Transparency in Budgetary Allocations: Clearly separate and categorize allocations for the Army, Navy, and Air Force to improve accountability and planning.
• Boost High-Tech R&D Investment: Allocate a higher percentage of the budget to capital expenditure to fund advanced R&D and maintain a technological edge.

 

Conclusion

India’s defence budget trends reveal a concerning decline in allocations as a percentage of both government expenditure and GDP. Despite modest increases in capital expenditure, the funding remains inadequate to meet the military’s modernization and operational needs. Addressing these issues require a strategic reallocation of resources, increased transparency, and a commitment to higher defence spending to ensure national security and operational readiness.