 Welcome again to the International Affairs Capsule of Shankar AIS Academy. This time we'll talk about America is back. Diplomacy is back. These are the words with which President Joe Biden started addressing the State Department for the first time. As you know the State Department is the Foreign Affairs Ministry of the Government of the United States. So this was his first visit to the State Department and he made use of that opportunity to outline some fundamental aspects of his foreign policy. We have already talked about his statements before the election, then the executive orders he issued on the day he was sworn in and in the next few days about 30 of them. All of them have given some indication or the other of the way his foreign policy will be shaped. But this particular address he gave to the diplomats in the presence of his new Secretary of State, Mr. Blinken, Anthony Blinken, who is a very well-known professional diplomat. He spelt out the contours of his foreign policy, not exhaustively, but from the point of view of immediate priorities of his foreign policy. So we have to take into account the statements he has done before the elections, statements he have done at the time of issuing the executive orders, and then also the statements made by his Secretary of State as well as Secretary of Defense. So all these we take into account, we will see a clear perspective of Mr. Biden's policy. Of course, we all know that the whole purpose of his foreign policy is to repair and rebuild because in the last four years American foreign policy has been rather less or in a sense confused. And so his idea is to bring back into the global stage, that's what he, why he said America is back. And also he said that diplomacy is back because United States is now going to engage the world in a different ways. If you look at this whole perspective from India's point of view, we will find that he gives prominence to India only in the context of Indo-Pacific as well as China. It is not that India does not figure anywhere else, but if you look through his speech you will find, though he did not mention India at all. We can of course see that his thinking about the Indo-Pacific and China, India is very much part of it. Of course he is not mentioning India is not particularly significant because his defense secretary, Young Lloyd Austin and his Secretary of State have spoken about India in the context of the Quad, the Quadrilateral we have spoken about earlier. And the Quad security dialogue has been mentioned specifically in those statements. And both of them have also spoken to their counterparts, that is the Secretary of State as well as the National Security Advisor have already spoken to their counterparts in India. Anyway, India apart, he dealt with several issues. Of course the pandemic, the climate crisis and nuclear proliferation, etc. We already know his positions. But what he's felt out clearly this time were about Myanmar, Russia and China. Myanmar because it is a new issue, mostly unexpected that it came up at this time. And therefore he devoted some attention to Myanmar. His specific emphasis there was democracy. But here there's a problem because the democracy that we had in Burma or Myanmar, they normally use the word Burma for Burma, not Myanmar. Americans normally refer to it as Burma. So the cool that took place very recently, upstaged a government which was not really democratic. The military had a very important role in it. And the civilian component of the army was dormant rather than dominant. So he did not take that into account. But he characterized the administration in Burma as democratic. And therefore he said force should not be used to upstage democratic regimes. He expressed concern about the situation. And in a democracy force should not be used. And it should not seek to overrule the will of the people. So this is more metaphorical, but in strict terms, the government was not a majority rule government or a democracy of the kind that we are used to. So what he said was that he should ask the military to relinquish power, the release the prisoners, which means Ong San Suu Kyi, the state counselor, the president, and several others who are in house arrest. And he also said that the telecommunication should be restored and refrain from violence. So he has characterized the Burmese government as a classic democracy. And he used the words which would normally be used in the sense of a democratic government being upstaged. So there is a lack of clarity there, because countries like India, China, Thailand have reacted differently. They are asking for both the sections that the army as well as people's representatives to be working together. And they are not talking about some democracy, pure and simple. So there is a little difference there. And countries like India, China, Thailand, etc. would not demand restoration of democracy in the way it was. But they have talked about the importance of respecting the elections and working out a formula between them. So there is a slight difference in perception when it comes to Myanmar. Then he spoke about the importance of alliances and allies. And he said that United States will resume the pattern of cooperation, because American alliances are our greatest asset. Leading with diplomacy means standing shoulder to shoulder. So in diplomacy, the countries which will stand shoulder to shoulder with the United States will be its allies. So this is a fundamental difference between President Trump and President Biden. Because President Trump did not treat his allies with respect. He wanted to withdraw U.S. troops from Germany and also reduce the funding of NATO in various ways. He has irritated his allies, not only in Europe but also in Asia. And so he said that he would certainly go back to the allies and give them the most important positions in their calculations. Specifically, he also said he was halting the withdrawal of American troops from Germany that President Trump had ordered. Surprisingly though, when he started talking about the adversaries of the United States, he mentioned Russia first rather than China. This is a little bit surprising because if United States is looking at their adversaries, we would have thought that he would put China as number one. Of course he has said that that is the most serious competition that they have, but he has dwelt at length on Russia in rather strong terms. Of course he gave the good news that he has agreed with Russia to extend the existing START treaty. This is arms limitation treaty for five years. Because arms limitations treaties were all in danger because these bilateral treaties that is United States and Russia treaties which were created during the Cold War have become somewhat redundant because it is not a matter between Russia and the United States anymore. There are other players in the nuclear game, particularly China. So President Trump's view was that these bilateral treaties may not be of much significance since China is not part of this arrangement. Because as you know, arms limitation is basically balancing numbers of arms. When you have a capacity to destroy each other, what is the need to accumulate weapons beyond their requirement? And that was the logic of arms limitation. If you have the capacity to kill each other 20 times, why not reduce it to 10 times or 5 times? And that was the idea of a reduction. And countries like us did not consider this important because if they have already capacity to destroy the world, what is the point in reducing something or the other just to save their funding situation? So we did not give much importance, but any limitation of arms, any reduction of arms is welcome and that is why the world accepted it. So having said that this has been extended for five years, which means there is time to negotiate this further. And then he accused Russia of several aggressive actions, as he called them. First of all, he talked about interfering in the elections in the United States, which has actually been established in many ways by various commissions. But of course, Donald Trump did not accept that. So interfering with elections was one of the points that he made. And he also talked about cyber attacks, which have been mounted by Russia. And then he spoke of the internal situation of poisoning and arresting rebel leader, Mr. Navalny. And he asked that such activities should be stopped. So he gave specific indication that Russia will continue to be an adversary of the United States. This, as you can imagine, creates a certain problem for us because we have very good relations with Russia. Not that this would be linked, but in the process of our purchasing arms from Russia, etc., the United States might look at us with some concern. Of course, he did not spell it out, but it is clear that this kind of a confrontational approach to Russia may also mean some concern about India's relations and India's purchase of arms from Russia. Then he came to what he called the most serious competitor. So it's a slightly diluted expression than what Trump would use in the sense that he's not talking about China as an adversary, but as a competitor. And so the impression is that a pragmatic approach will be used, not the Trump approach of a sledgehammer, but more a gentle approach to China. But at the same time, he made it very clear that when it comes to certain matters, he will take on, that's the word he used, take on directly the challenges to security, prosperity and democratic values. And he also said that he'll confront economic abuses, aggressive and coercive action. And then he said that he'll push back attacks on human rights, intellectual property. So various areas in which the United States is concerned, security, prosperity, democratic values, aggressive and coercive action, economic abuses, and various of the various these issues in which he specifically spelt out that he'll confront China, take on China, that's what he used, the word he used. In this context, you did not mention Quad, maybe because he's speaking specifically of China rather than about Indo-Pacific or Asia as a whole. But he immediately followed it up with readiness to work with Beijing. This is an interesting formulation, that is it is not an altogether confrontational relationship. But with those conditionalities, that is China does not spoil United States principles or try and work against it. Whenever it meets the interests of the United States, he said that he is willing to work with China. Here again, we didn't find any mention of India, unlike the Trump administration, when the Secretary of State Pompeo talked about Chinese flexing of muscles. He not only included the South China Sea and Southeast Asia and Taiwan and Hong Kong, but also the Himalayas. So here again, there is a slight dilution of that position as far as India is concerned. But earlier, before President Biden spoke about China, a significant remark was made by Secretary of State Blinken. He said that President Biden will continue Trump's policy on China. That is probably the only policy of Trump that he is willing to continue. And there he had mentioned, Secretary Blinken had mentioned the South China Sea, Indo-Pacific, strategic approach to Quad. And there he also mentioned India, US, Japan and Australia. But in Mr. Biden's statement, he talked about China's issues with China, plus he also talked about readiness to work with China if American interests are involved. So it's a very significant statement, which will also be demonstrated as we move on. He mentioned Paris Agreement again, because he had announced that he would join Paris Agreement that has already been done. And he has appointed John Kerry as the climate change person. And work must have started in talking to other countries, etc. But here there is one disturbing thought, which he expressed. And he said in our pursuit of limitation of greenhouse gases, etc. Not only that, United States will pursue its policies, but also we can challenge and quoting him. We can challenge other nations, other major emitters, which incidentally includes India. So he said that we can challenge them and try to bring them in line with the policy of the United States. And this is of course the proverbial difference between developed and developing countries. Developed countries have to reduce emissions because they are luxury emissions. While for the developing countries, they are survival emissions. The basic debate between development and the environment for which many compromises were found earlier, but all that disappeared at the time of the Paris Agreement. So here we may have some problems with the United States position. And the campaign that they will now follow will perhaps be somewhat in conflict with what we ourselves want to pursue. Because we want per capita emissions to be taken into account. And also the special responsibility of the developed countries. These are two principles which we hold very dear. Then he moved on to a general policy on what is called securitization of foreign policy. What he said that the foreign policies would be aligned with national security priorities. This of course need not be stated because every country naturally aligns its foreign policy with security concerns. And that is where the importance of the alliance, alliances coming, the allies coming. Because where you deploy your forces, what equipment you buy, all this will relate to security considerations. And as I mentioned, of course, he again talked about the troops being withdrawn. He will not withdraw the troops from Germany and he will strengthen NATO. But our external affairs minister has also been speaking recently about securitization of foreign policy. So we may not have any dispute with that. And with all the threats that we have from media sources, we also approach foreign policy with the concern about security. But another important announcement that he made was about Yemen. As you know, there has been a war going on in Yemen since 2015. This is a leftover of the Arab revolution. We changed many governments in many countries. And Yemen where the revolution came a little early and it resulted in the change of the president. The two parties, basically the Shias and the Sunnis, continue to have a confrontation all these years. It is virtually divided into two, it has two presidents in position. And they have been continuing rather fierce war in that country, creating a threat not only to the people, the innocent people inside the country, but also threats to the area through which a lot of shipping takes place via the Gulf of Aden and so on. But nobody took much interest in this outside the region. On the one side it was Saudi Arabia, the Sunni leadership and the other side was Iran. So these two countries were virtually having a proxy war in this area, which resulted in a huge humanitarian crisis. The UN and others were expressing concern about this. But at the same time, since the big powers were not involved, this was considered a kind of civil war and much attention was not given. This is also because of the United States special interest in Saudi Arabia. Normally, United States, particularly President Trump, would not have liked to displease Saudi Arabia to any extent, particularly since he was selling a huge amount of weapons to Saudi Arabia. And also in the case of the murder of Khashoggi, the journalist, Mr. Trump had taken a very soft position also because of that. So it was clear that some of these weapons which went to Saudi Arabia were also being used in the Yemen war. And this was a concern for the Democratic Party as well as Democratic forces in the United States. And Mr. Biden decided to deal with it and declare a policy right at this moment. And so he has said that he will try to end the war in Yemen and said that relevant arms supplies, he didn't say to whom, where, by whom, etc., but the relevant arms supplies relating to the Yemen war will be stopped. But in the same breath, he said, but he will continue to assist countries in Saudi Arabia to defend its sovereignty. And he also said that whatever policies that United States will pursue in Yemen or in Saudi Arabia will not be at the expense of our existing good relations, which is, he did not mention Israel, but that's probably what he meant. And this is significance because the United States was instrumental in bringing about reconciliation between some Arab countries and Israel because Saudi Arabia has not done that, but UAE has done it. And therefore, this significant announcement may appear to be rather causing some concern in Saudi Arabia. But it's very clear that this is only in the context of the Yemen war that the President was speaking. So these were the main elements in the statement that he made. But he also made some policy relating to the other countries and particularly the third world, as he's called it. Third world, that world is normally not very much used these days. But what he said was a little bit interesting because he said that he would, if necessary, he did not say it in so many words, but he implied that the United States will take preventive action in these developing countries so that anything that happening in those countries do not have an impact on the United States, whether it is trade, whether it is health or whether it is internal disturbances, it is violation of human rights. So since the world is all one these days, you cannot be unconcerned about any disturbing elements in the third world countries, as he called it. That means his interest will not only be in allies in strengthening them, etc. He will also keep an eye on the third world, as he said. And he said that America cannot afford to be absent any longer from this region. So here there is a little bit of a warning here that America will be conscious of negative developments in other countries. And if necessary, there will be intervention, humanitarian intervention, threat to people, economy, all these issues, trade issues, immigration and the pandemic, of course. It is a benign intervention in the sense that he is talking about helping them. But at the same time, there is a ring of warning that the United States cannot wait for any of these crises to spread to the United States. Though they will probably, the United States will look at this, any such development with interest and try to prevent it permeating into the United States. So these were the fundamental points that he made, but it was generally a friendly speech to the world. In the United States, America is coming back. And there is a very clear signal to China, where China should not be unnecessarily aspiring to fill the vacuum of the United States. But of course, when he speaks this, he also is aware that he has many, many problems. From India's perspective, we need not read too much into his not mentioning India that has been mentioned by some commentators. But in my own article, I wrote that India was not mentioned among the allies because we are not an ally, we are only a friend. So we need not look at that as a concern. But like in climate change, like in general development issues, there may be on Russia, on Myanmar, etc. There may be differences between our perspective and US perspective. Otherwise, there is no cause for any concern in what he has said. And Russia also, our interest in Russia and our close relations may have some implications for what he has done. But so now we really know what are the dimensions of the foreign policy. And he has also given a very good signal to the diplomats, to American diplomats that he will be using them effectively. I believe President Trump did not even go to the State Department for one year and did not seek any advice from them on foreign policy. They probably understood about Trump's foreign policy when he read the tweet in the morning, what he was tweeting in the middle of the night and then act accordingly or not act accordingly. That was the policy that they followed. So what President Biden gave them the assurance that they will be at the center of his foreign policy, which is the right position. And he spoke also about the qualities of the Secretary of State, how they had worked together for many years. And he said that what the Secretary of State says will be what he says. So complete identity of use. So the American diplomats will also be happy with what America is going to do. So I think the world has a reason to feel comfortable that America is back, but he did not hold back any, any information. They clearly outlined where the friends are, where the adversaries are, and where the United States may need to intervene in one way or the other. And now we have to look for specific issues, which he will deal with. The immediate point is Obama, because there the demonstrations have started, pro-democracy demonstrations have started. The Security Council has demanded the release of the prisoners. And it all depends how much the western countries, particularly the America will be willing to use force in the sense of sanctions. They had sanctions for many years, but whether they'll reimpose sanctions or give the military some more chance to bring about peace. And they would want to avoid any conflict with China in Burma. So this probably will be a test case. And one other point I would mention is that in intervening Yemen in a peaceful way and trying to end the Yemen war, he may have given a slight hint to the Iranians that America will be reasonable with Iran. As far as the GCPO is concerned, which you are familiar with, the nuclear deal, the US position is that as soon as Iran goes to the implementation of the deal, in the sense that reduce enrichment, then the sanctions will be lifted. And so it is the chicken and the egg, which one will come first? United States want implementation first and Iran wants lifting of sanctions first. So this debate is going on and they will have to find a way. And also they will have to find a way how they bring in the question of the involvement of UAE and Saudi Arabia in these nuclear arrangements. Generally, talking about UAE, I'd like to mention another development which is not related to the United States, is they have dramatically announced that they will be giving dual citizenship to foreigners living in the UAE. This is very new. As you know, citizenship was not being given to any foreigner in most of these Gulf countries. They can live there, long visas are given, permit is given to work, etc. But no citizenship. But this initially there was some enthusiasm among the Indians, but they suddenly realized that India itself does not allow dual citizenship. So if any Indian acquires UAE passport, he will have to surrender the Indian passport. But there are some countries which allow dual citizenship. United States, UK and Israel is one of them. So my suspicion is that this has been brought into being basically to encourage Israel to send people to UAE and also to invest there because those who invest huge sums of money will have the advantage of dual citizenship. Because nobody is saying this, but this is my conjecture that may be the reason why they have come up with this. It doesn't apply to the Indians unless they take a UAE citizenship and surrender the Indian citizenship. That's no great advantage to India. Government of India has examined this issue many times and we have decided that according to our constitution this is not possible because dual loyalty is not possible. You can have dual passport, but how do you vote for two in two countries and how can you be loyal to two countries? This is something that we have not accepted. So these new UAE rules regarding dual citizenship created some kind of excitement in India in the initial stages. But now everybody has settled down because this will not benefit Indians in UAE. But it might benefit other countries which allow dual citizenship including Israel. I stop here at this point. Thank you.