Time to make presence felt, India voice for Global South: S Jaishankar ahead of G7
India, whose Prime Minister has been invited to the G7 starting on Sunday, is eager to represent the Global South on the world stage, acting as a "bridge" between different countries, Foreign Minister Subrahmanyam Jaishankar said.India is not a member of the G7 -- which comprises Britain, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan and the United States -- but the world's most populous nation and one of its biggest economies has been invited to summits since 2019.advertisement"We have been an outreach country in the G7 for many years, and I think it brings benefits to the G7," he told AFP in Paris.
"There are very strong feelings in the Global South about the inequities of the international order, the desire to change it, and we are very much part of that," he added."It is important for us to organise ourselves and make our presence felt."The leaders of the G7 kick off a yearly summit in the Canadian Rockies on Sunday.They have invited Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, along with the leaders of Ukraine, Mexico, South Africa and South Korea, to attend at a time of global turmoil and a radical new US approach to world affairs.The member nations are also expected to deliberate on troubled relations with China and Russia.advertisementIndia is a leading member of BRICS -- a bloc of leading emerging economies that includes Russia and China, whose leaders are set to meet in early July.BRICS has growing economic clout and is increasingly seen as a G7 rival.Jaishankar said India had "the ability to work with different countries in a way without making any relationship exclusive"."To the extent that that serves as a bridge, it's frankly a help that we do to international diplomacy at a time when, mostly what you see are difficult relationships and excessive tensions," he added.NO NEED FOR 'MORE TENSION'The External Affairs Minister said India had been in favour of direct talks between Russia and Ukraine to end the conflict since 2022.But Jaishankar -- whose nation is a political ally of Russia and trades with Moscow -- said sanctions such as those against President Vladimir Putin's government did not work."Where sanctions are concerned, you could argue that it has not actually had much impact on policy behaviour," he said.Europeans are in favour of a plan for a "secondary" sanctions plan, including a 500-percent tariff on countries that buy Russian oil, gas and raw materials."The world does not need more tension, more conflict, more hostility, more stresses," the former Indian ambassador in Washington said.advertisementUS President Donald Trump is expected at the G7 summit in Kananaskis, Alberta.Modi is expected to meet him to push a trade deal with the United States -- India's largest trading partner -- before the July 9 deadline when Washington's punishing 26 percent tariffs are set to resume.Jaishankar said Trump "clearly, in many ways, represents a discontinuity"."He is definitely a very nationalistic person who puts his country's interests very strongly ahead," he added.'STABLE RELATIONSHIP' WITH CHINAAs for China, it was a balancing act, said the minister.India and China, the world's two most populous nations, are intense rivals competing for strategic influence across South Asia, and their 3,500-kilometre (2,200-mile) shared frontier has been a perennial source of tension.Their troops clashed in 2020, killing at least 20 Indian and four Chinese soldiers, and forces from both sides today face off across contested high-altitude borderlands.Despite both country's differences, "we are also today the major rising powers in the world", Jaishankar said."Where we (India) have to be strong and firm, we will be strong and firm. Where we have to forge a stable relationship, we are prepared to do that," he added.advertisementChina has also been a staunch partner of India's arch-enemy Pakistan.Pakistan used Chinese jets against India when the nuclear-armed foes fought an intense four-day conflict last month in which 70 people were killed, their worst standoff since 1999.The fighting was triggered by an April 22 attack on civilians in Jammu and Kashmir that New Delhi accused Pakistan of backing -- a charge Islamabad denies.But Jaishankar dismissed fears at the time of a nuclear escalation.These were "only the concerns of people who were completely uninformed," he said.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scroll.in
33 minutes ago
- Scroll.in
The paradox of English: It is both a foreign tongue and a deeply embedded Indian language
Alongside their offensive against Urdu, India's language nationalists appear to have turned their ire on English. That is what one could conclude from the declaration by Union Home Minister Amit Shah at a book launch in New Delhi on Thursday, when he predicted that 'soon a time would come when those speaking English will feel ashamed'. 'In our lifetime, we will see a society in which those speaking English will feel ashamed, that day is not far,' he said. 'I believe that the languages of our country are the ornament of our culture. Without them, we would not have been Bharatiya. Our country, its history, its culture, our dharma – if these have to be understood, it cannot be done in foreign languages.' Shah's statement quickly sparked a political backlash. Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha, Rahul Gandhi, countered forcefully: 'English is not a dam, it is a bridge. English is not shameful, it is empowering. English is not a chain – it is a tool to break the chains.' Other opposition figures, including Trinamool Congress leaders Derek O'Brien and Sagarika Ghose, echoed this sentiment, slamming the home minister for what they saw as a regressive and divisive stance. Echoes of Mulayam Singh Shah's remarks recall a moment 35 years ago when Mulayam Singh Yadav, who was then chief minister of Uttar Pradesh, launched his own crusade against English. In May 1990, Yadav infamously declared English to be 'the language of foreigners and the elite', blaming it for perpetuating socio-economic disparity and cultivating feelings of inferiority among non-English speakers. His one-point mission: Angrezi hatao. Banish English. In a curious twist, Yadav, a self-declared supporter of Urdu urged Urdu-speaking communities to unite with Hindi speakers to oppose English. Urdu, having only recently been granted official status as Uttar Pradesh's second language, was now being weaponised against a new linguistic rival. This contradiction is not out of character for Indian politics, where language often becomes a proxy for identity, power and culture. The disdain for English in some Indian political circles can be traced back to the 1950s and '60s, to socialist leader Ram Manohar Lohia and even earlier, to Mohandas Gandhi and the Indian National Congress. Gandhi viewed English as an alien imposition that had displaced indigenous languages from their rightful place in Indian society. At Independence, the Indian Constitution made Hindi the official language, but allowed English to continue for a transitional period of 15 years. This compromise was pragmatic, not sentimental. English was seen as a necessary link language in a culturally and linguistically diverse nation. However, the efforts to impose Hindi on South India in the 1960s sparked widespread resistance and deepened the North-South linguistic divide. Even today, English continues to be viewed by many as a colonial vestige, despite its extensive indigenisation. The Lohia doctrine Lohia considered English to be not just a colonial leftover, but a barrier to original thought and mass education. He argued that true educational reform and people-oriented governance were possible only if conducted in the people's languages. Recognising India's cultural diversity, Lohia made exceptions for South Indian states, allowing them to retain English for inter-state and central communication for 50 years. However, his nuanced vision was distorted by his followers. The anti-English frenzy gained renewed vigour in Uttar Pradesh and Bihar, leading to draconian steps like removing English from school curricula altogether. In Bihar in the 1970s, Chief Minister Karpoori Thakur reduced English to an optional subject, resulting in a generation of students branded as the 'Karpoori class' – matriculates without English proficiency. Mulayam Singh Yadav resurrected the campaign in the 1990s, giving it a political legitimacy that had long-lasting social consequences. Misplaced stereotypes Yadav's campaign also triggered unwarranted attacks on Christian institutions, which were accused of using English as a tool for religious conversion and elitist education. This conflation of English with Christianity mirrors the equally irrational equation in the Hindi heartland of Urdu with Islam. Such logic ignores the complex realities of Indian linguistic identity. English may have arrived with colonial Christians, but it soon became a key vehicle for political awakening and nation-building. It was through English that India's founding leaders – from Raja Rammohun Roy to Nehru – engaged with global currents of nationalism, democracy, liberty and modernity. The same language, intended by the British to produce obedient clerks, ended up producing freedom fighters, thinkers and reformers who led India's struggle for independence. More Indian than foreign? Despite its origins, English in India has long shed its colonial skin. It is the medium of scientific advancement, legal systems, administrative governance and higher education. It has played a vital role in the country's post-Independence progress – particularly in the globalisation era. Ironically, many politicians who publicly denounce English still prefer to send their children to English-medium schools. Even in the Hindi heartland, English remains a key administrative language. Today, English enjoys a paradoxical status: both a foreign tongue and a deeply embedded Indian language. English is also the mother tongue of the Anglo Indian community, a recognised minority in India, and serves as an official language in states like Nagaland. As globalisation continues to shape India's economic and cultural landscape, English remains the country's primary interface with the world. To treat it as a threat to Indian identity is to ignore the multifaceted reality of modern India. Language should be a medium of unity, not a tool of discord. English, like all Indian languages, must be valued for its integrative potential, not vilified for its past. The country does not need another round of linguistic chauvinism. Instead, India should recognise the multilingual richness of English – and the maturity to embrace it.
Deccan Herald
39 minutes ago
- Deccan Herald
Operation Sindhu: 827 Indian nationals brought back from Iran so far, says MEA
#OperationSindhu flight brings citizens home. 🇮🇳 evacuated 290 Indian nationals from Iran, including students and religious pilgrims by a charter flight. The flight arrived in New Delhi at 2330 hrs on 20 June and was received by Secretary (CPV& OIA) Arun Chatterjee. Government…
Hindustan Times
an hour ago
- Hindustan Times
Zelensky urges Western allies to allot 0.25% GDP for Ukraine's defense industry
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky called on Ukraine's Western partners to allocate 0.25% of their GDP towards helping Kyiv ramp up weapons production, reported Reuters. Ukraine is in immediate need of improved weaponry and better ammunition.(REUTERS) "Ukraine is part of Europe's security and we want 0.25% of the GDP of a particular partner country to be allocated for our defence industry and domestic production," Zelensky said. "We have launched a program 'Build with Ukraine' and in summer we will sign relevant agreements to start exporting our technologies abroad in the format of opening production lines in European countries," Zelensky said. This year Kyiv had secured $43 billion to finance its domestic weapon production, he added. As Russia is bigger and more equipped than Ukraine, and the strife between the two has been escalating in the past few weeks, Zelensky's country is in immediate need of improved weaponry and better ammunition. Kyiv plans to launch joint weapon production outside of the country and will start exporting some of its military production technologies, the President affirmed. In the remarks released for publication by his office on Saturday, Zelenskiy said Ukraine was in talks with Denmark, Norway, Germany, Canada, the United Kingdom, and Lithuania to launch joint weapon production. According to the report, Ukraine's 40% defence needs are presently covered with domestic production, and the government is on the lookout for ways to boost this production in the future. Zelensky attended the G7 summit in Canada last week. He especially wanted to meet US President Donald Trump to discuss the ongoing conflict between Russia and Ukraine, help impose stronger sanctions against Russia and urge increased military support for his country. This effort went in vain as Trump left the summit a day early to address the Israel-Iran conflict in Washington. The Ukrainian President is likely to attend the upcoming NATO summit, where he will be meeting several Western leaders. He would also make a second attempt to meet Donald Trump after the G7. With inputs from agencies
