PECIAL REPORT
A SUMMATION OF VACCINE PLATFORMS
PAGE 15
SYNERGIA FOUNDATION
JANUARY 2021 | EDITION I | WEEKLY
PITSTOPS IN BIDEN’S ROAD TO ASIA E X P E R T
Prof. Rockford Weitz Director of Maritime Studies Program. The Fletcher School, Tufts University
I N S I G H T S
Prof. Fu-Kuo Liu Director of Taiwan Center for Security Studies
Tobby Simon President of Synergia Foundation
MUST READ DIGITAL SPOOKS 11
THE FRUITS OF NORMALISATION 13
SYNERGIA FOUNDATION
P
p1
EDITION I JANUARY 2021
SYNERGIA FOUNDATION
Source: NOMURA
Rockford Weitz is a professor of practice, entrepreneur coach, and director of the Maritime Studies Programme at the Fletcher School of Tufts University. He also serves as President of the Institute for Global Maritime Studies Inc., a non-profit seeking practical solutions to global maritime challenges, and President & CEO at Rhumb Line International LLC, a consultancy providing strategic advice to entrepreneurs and start-ups. He participated in a virtual forum jointly held by Synergia Foundation and the Taiwan Centre for Security Studies (TCSS) along with Mr. Tobby Simon, President and Founder Synergia Foundation and Prof. Fu-Kuo Liu, Director of TCSS.
Rebuilding alliances afresh The Biden administration has first to get its own house in order before it can mend fences with allies using traditional tools of diplomacy
A
change in the U.S. perspective on its Pacific relationship may be perceptible once Mr. Biden assumes office. While during President Trump’s tenure, the U.S. more or less pursued a unilateral policy concerning China, the new administration would make it a more multilateral approach. Mr. Trump has so far been the most revolutionary foreign policy president in modern U.S. history. Though it’s too early to tell, Mr. Biden would most likely make it a priority to put a better, more diplomatic foot forward that is more consistent with the
U.S. policies over the last 25 years. The U.S. State Department will be once again focused on rebuilding alliances through traditional tools of policymaking. Under the Trump administration, the White House drove the foreign policy while ignoring the conventional interagency processes. Twitter became an official forum to put out policies, keeping the President in the spotlight at all times. Though there has been a fractured mandate, Mr. Biden is up to the task of helping bridge the divide and bring coherence into policies. There may be a complete
shift back to the policies pursued before the Trump era. Alternately, the traditional approaches will return with some changes that would incorporate certain aspects of President Trump’s policies that have been mainly popular with the American public. THE ROAD AHEAD The Biden administration has a lot on its plate- tackling COVID-19, managing the economic and domestic fallout, and dealing with international security and trade issues, along with the engagements with Hong Kong and Taiwan. The number one priority
p2
EDITION I JANUARY 2021
right now is to get a hold of the COVID crisis, which will take a lot of the administration’s attention. For the first 100 days, the administration will focus on the rolling out of the vaccination programme, the largest in American history, and the additional fiscal stimulus. The Biden Team comprises experienced people and will hit the ground running. From a foreign policy perspective, the Biden administration’s first goal would be to rebuild alliances and enhance diplomatic cooperation across the world, certainly in the Indo-Pacific and the North Atlantic. One of the global priorities is climate change, so the new administration will be rejoining the Paris Agreement and working to push that forward. BUILDING CONSENSUS There will be fewer barriers internationally, and more
SYNERGIA FOUNDATION
barriers domestically, but because of Mr. Biden’s long experience in the Senate, one can be cautiously optimistic that he will bridge some gaps with the Republican-controlled Senate, regardless of the outcome in the January Georgia election runoff. There are enough
moderate Republicans who want to collaborate with Mr. Biden to work towards genuine progress. There could be a return to some of the Obama administration’s policies, but the Indo-Pacific regional dynamics have changed significantly since 2016. This will require
some updates. The Trump Administration can be credited with pushing boundaries, even if their policies were neither coherent nor consistent. This allows Mr. Biden to comprehend better what is possible and take it further, but only more smartly and thoughtfully. In terms of security, it was a multipolar world before Mr. Trump. Due to China’s actions, especially during 2020, the bipartisan political view in the U.S. is that it is a strategic competitor. Therefore, there will be a push to build alliances to balance the Chinese in the Indo Pacific region. The enhanced cooperation within the QUAD countries is one of the more significant developments of 2020, which is going to continue under the new administration. Hopefully, there will be more diplomacy and more non-military investments by the U.S. government.
EDITION I JANUARY 2021
SYNERGIA FOUNDATION
p3
The enhanced cooperation within the QUAD countries is one of the more significant developments of 2020, which is going to continue under the new administration. Hopefully, there will be more diplomacy and more non-military investments by the U.S. government
MARKET WOES There is lesser optimism around trade since it has become a political issue. It’s an unclear path forward that depends on the relationship with the Senate and how they can move their trade agenda forward. There will be areas of cooperation, particularly concerning I.P. enforcement and any unfair Chinese trade practice. Here, the U.S. and its alliances will form a more united front under a Biden administration. In the context of the ongoing Hong Kong turmoil, Britain’s silence has been surprising as has the relatively subdued reaction of the other players in the Pacific. These countries realise that besides diplomacy, they can do nothing much externally. On the other hand, Mr. Biden’s rhetoric promises some diplomatic costs, which
will reduce its relevance as an independent financial entity and hence, profitable to the Chinese economy. However, with so many competing priorities, the extent of change remains uncertain. CHANGING GEARS U.S. arms supply to Taiwan will continue, along with diplomatic support albeit in a quieter and more coordinated manner, and less in-theface of the Chinese. There could be more polite language in the future, but with a practical approach in terms of foreign policy as Mr. Biden is a long-term supporter of Taiwan. The U.S. had crafted its foreign policy norms during the Cold War. These continued to be pushed after the collapse of the Soviet Union, without making adjustments for the changing environment. The U.S. needs a more
sustainable and durable foreign policy since it will no longer be in a unipolar world in the long term. The UN has been almost silent during 2020 on many major issues. There’s a lot of appetite for more cooperation among the U.S. and its partners and allies. This provides room for building something that’s a much more credible response than what we’ve seen so far. THE ASIA PACIFIC AXIS The approach towards China would not differ much under the Biden administration, but it would be less rhetorical and more focused. There is a strong bipartisan consensus to continue pushing against China after it flexed its muscles in 2020 — in the boundary dispute with India, skirmishes with the Vietnamese, and around Taiwan, to name a few. China has been
aggressive in the airspace as well, so here is where the United States can come in and push back. The U.S. has to leverage the various existing alliances along with the potential for new partnerships to build a more coherent U.S.-Asia policy. The prime issue would involve maritime security cooperation. It will include, for example, port visits by U.S. naval vessels, some humanitarian assistance, disaster relief, etc. On the global agenda, Mr. Biden wants to push forward with climate change, which would be another area of potential cooperation in the Indo-Pacific region. The QUAD would see greater engagement since it enjoys bipartisan support. The Biden Administration will build upon the gains of the last four years and continue with a military plus diplomatic approach. It could also set the stage for expanding this partnership into the economic arena. To the U.S., Asia looks very complicated. It is a challenging operating environment, what with trying to figure out what is the right form of engagement. With the Trump Administration changing the norms both internationally and domestically, the transition period for the new administration is going to be rough. Asia provides a real opportunity as this is where all the action is economically.
p4
EDITION I JANUARY 2021
SYNERGIA FOUNDATION
EXPERT QUESTIONS Suresh K Goel
Q
Would the change in the American President alter only the visuals or does one expect any real variation in the U.S. relations in Asia, which mostly centres on China? Mr. Rockford: No matter who is in charge in the United States, there are fewer tools now than maybe there were in the past. So, soft power opportunities are significant. But what’s interesting about it is that it’s less what the U.S. does internationally and more about what the U.S. needs to fix — its broken political dysfunction. The best way to provide a credible alternative to the Chinese worldview, for example, is to focus on having the U.S. be more effective itself and avoid gridlock and dysfunction in our political system. If Mr. Biden can build some significant bridges across the aisle so that there’s a more coherent bipartisan sense of where America wants to be in the world, then that will be a lot better. It’s been said before, but I think it’s worth repeating that it’s very important for the Biden administration to build international credibility by getting the COVID crisis in the country under control. It has been a huge embarrassment to America that we couldn’t tackle this pandemic even though we have enormous technical capability. From my perspective, it’s been a failure of clear communication at the national level, and I do think Mr. Biden will be better at that. You can’t lead by example if you’re a bad example.
A
John Jojin
Q
What is your take on the Biden administration’s approach to Russia; would there be a reset in the relationship? What would dominate the overall approach to foreign policy in terms of real politics vs value orientation? Mr. Rockford: I think the administration will have some response to Russia, especially given the recent cyber attack. The important thing is to balance how much time we spend on Russia. Russia is a distraction. It’s a very powerful military, but it’s not a real economic competitor. The policy of containing Russia will continue, and possibly reset, but I think that the relationship will come down to Mr. Biden’s relationship with President Putin. I believe that the U.S. is going after priorities, and its priority right now is focusing on the Indo-Pacific. Technically Russia is a Pacific power, but it’s not a real political power of weight. It has important relationships in the region, obviously with India and Vietnam, but it can be engaged productively. Yet, there’s just not enough tension there.
A
Synergia Foundation
Q
On the Biden administration searching for a multilateral approach to world issues rather than a unilateral one, who would the key partners for this model be? Mr. Rockford: Mr. Rockford: I think it’ll be more than one or two. I think it’ll be NATO allies and Indo-Pacific allies, and then the emerging partnership with India. I believe Mr. Biden will try to take a global approach and build the
A
Conference of Democracies. Those democracies are global, and they are essentially centred in the North Atlantic, Indian Ocean, and Pacific. Yet I think he will try to navigate the way of building some consensus in that way as a counter to the autocracies around the world. Prof. Yang Shin-Yue, NHU
Q
Why does the U.S./ West overlook the Tsai regime’s authoritarian oppression in Taiwan? Mr. Rockford: I think it’s about what tools could it really deploy and I’m not really sure right,? And so I think that that’s probably why.
A
Synergia Foundation
Q
I’m just playing out a scenario here. The United States, over time, could give up on its insistence on maintaining a dominant strategic position in Asia, if not in the world, and reach an understanding with China, just as Great Britain did with the U.S. after World War II. Asian countries would then assume that Beijing’s growing military power will eventually detach Asia from the U.S. and lead them perhaps to switch allegiance to China. What then? Mr. Rockford: That’s a big fundamental question. I think it’s of course theoretically possible. The head of the Security Studies Program at MIT, Barry Posen, wrote a book called Reframed, and in that, articulated restraint as a grand strategy. There is a possibility for a restraining U.S. policy where it still seeks to play a signifi-
A
cant role in the global commons, but it is kind of a reset. For example, under the current U.S. - Japan Security Alliance, if the Japanese islands are invaded, the U.S. is in the frontlines, and the Japanese support them. One of the things that Mr. Posen argues is that it probably should be reversed: for an invasion of their home islands, the Japanese should be on the frontline, and the U.S. should be supporting. It’s just a reversal of that Cold War era’s outdated alliance structure, and I think that those kinds of conversations can happen. They take decades to come to fruition, but this is going to be that great multipolar challenge if every regional power in Eurasia wants to have its sphere of influence, and so where is the Chinese boundary of influence? I like to use geography with my students; there’s a reason why the Indo-China Peninsula is called the Indo-China Peninsula, right? It’s where India’s sphere of influence and China’s sphere merge in South East Asia. I try to encourage my students to try to put themselves in China’s shoes, so that way the U.S. is very lucky. We have the best geography of any great power. We have two huge oceans. We have three weak neighbours - Canada, Mexico, and Cuba. China has 14 neighbours, and two of them are nuclear powers- India and Russia. Japan is the third-largest economy in the world and has a very capable military. It’s a tough neighbourhood. Fundamentally, you can’t change geography, and I think the U.S. would benefit a lot from the multilateral institutions that were built after World War II. I do think they need some reform, and that’s a real opportunity.
EDITION I JANUARY 2021
SYNERGIA FOUNDATION
p5
Time for course correction The last few decades have witnessed a gradual decline in U.S. influence thus changing the global geopolitical landscape ceding geopolitical space to new entrants Nations expect a lasting commitment in international exchanges, not a short-lived one that is politically expedient Prof. Fu-Kuo Liu is the Director of the Taiwan Centre for Security Studies. He is also Research Associate of the Centre for International Relations, National Chengchi University. Previously, he was the Chairman of the Research and Planning Committee of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and a Visiting Scholar at the Brookings Institution.
T
he Asia-Pacific region bore the brunt of President Donald Trump’s ‘America First’ policy. The American withdrawal from the TransPacific Partnership (TPP) and its disinclination from a greater regional collaboration was a marked drawdown from the American enthusiasm of 2016 when it worked with many countries to cobble together regional trade organisations and mechanisms. This was crowned by President Trump’s absence from the ASEAN Summit of 2018, which naturally sent a very negative message to his allies. The lesson drawn is that in democracies, where a change of top leadership is inevitable, continuity of policies is at times at the mercy of individual whims and fancies; someone unexpected may come in and change the rules of the game. This experience has made
Source: The Wall Street Journal
many long-term and close allies of the U.S. wary of their commitments to the incumbent administration lest they make a big promise which their successor is unable or unwilling to honour. Nations expect a lasting commitment in international exchanges, not a short-lived one that is politically expedient. Japan and South Korea, with the most at stake, were especially concerned by this turn of events, although being democracies themselves, they understood the policy shifts with the change of guard. While some course alternations are acceptable, the basic course of the policy should remain stabilised keeping the national inter-
ests of both parties in mind. THE EAST ASIAN POLICY The region is banking on President-elect Joe Biden to bring things back on track, and his first sentence in his speech after winning the elections is encouraging, “America is back up.” Another cause of deep suspicion is the trend of bringing in a new team in the Cabinet every time a new Presidency is sworn in, even if the president has been elected for the second term. With frequent changes in the principal actors involved in thrashing out important international policies, the credibility and the longev-
ity of the policy suffers. On the other hand, China, with its No. 1 made president for life, provides greater reassurance of long-term policies being adhered to. At present, hostility towards China is strong in the U.S. and cuts across the political divide. The new administration may not find it easy to shift gears in its Chinese policy, especially concerning trade, technology, and geopolitical and military competition. That said, Mr. Biden is a seasoned politician and has considerable experience in handling foreign affairs. His nominated team reflects his thought process and is expected to manage external affairs with greater diplomacy and tact, rather than be confrontationist with China. The promise of fresh talks and accommodation between the two geopolitical giants, in contrast to confrontation, provides a glimmer of hope to smaller countries of the Asia-Pacific, who are the biggest sufferers of this face-off. In the case of Taiwan, while many people are grateful for the strong support shown by President Trump for their country, strategically they fear that in the clash of titans, it is they who would become the frontline.
p6
EDITION I JANUARY 2021
There are serious discussions in Taiwan on whether a further strengthening of the U.S.–Taiwan strategic partnership would be in the island nation’s best interest in the long term. Regarding the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) versus the QUAD, even if America’s proposal is more vocal, we haven’t seen something as well implemented as the BRI. China has been forthcoming by implementing its proposals and investing with its regional partners of BRI. Can the incoming Biden Administration give a similar outlook to the QUAD along with its partners Japan, India, and Australia? In Asia, there is a feeling that Mr. Biden should first focus on managing good relations with China and stabilising them. People do understand that there is strategic competition, so number one on the agenda should be to tackle the China policy. The next should be the South China Sea, which is a hot issue for the region. Asia doesn’t want to see the U.S. and China moving their military aircraft and naval vessels almost on a weekly basis. Of course, what would be much more forthcoming for the entire region is for the U.S. to gradually build on its credibility by engaging with the regional countries once again. In about a month or so, there shall be the new administration shaping up a new future and the possibility, perhaps, for some hopeful development. After Mr. Trump’s distracting practices in the international scene and his interventions in diplomatic efforts, this may be the time to rethink and revert to the normal course and to more diplomatic ways to manage a difficult situation.
SYNERGIA FOUNDATION
EDITION I JANUARY 2021
SYNERGIA FOUNDATION
p7
EXPERT QUESTIONS Dr. Wei F. Lee, PHYCOS International Taiwan
Q
It seems that economics and trade would be the essential issues for Taiwan, the U.S., and China. What would be the attitude of the Biden administration towards the RCEP and TPP? Moreover, will there be a more friendly dialogue formed in the future among Taiwan, China, and U.S. to entertain the mutual interests of regional and global economies? Prof. Liu: Last month, 15 countries signed up for RCEP. We are concerned because although Taiwan is one of the leading economies in Asia, for political reasons, we have not been able to engage in any sense of the FTA with our regional partners after signing up. Early on, the TPP transformed into the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP). If the RCEP is dominated by China, perhaps we would need to shift to the hope of CPTPP, because Mr. Biden has already promised, unlike Mr. Trump, that he would reengage with the 11 partners and rejoin the FTA community. However, negotiation takes time, and some countries have said that they don’t have enough time to engage with the U.S. They are not quite sure if after negotiating with Mr. Biden, the next government or another consideration may dominate the initiative and thereby change the policy. Regional politics always played a significant role here and has stopped Taiwan’s involvement in all kinds of possibilities outside the CPTPP. If we can find the right way to engage, by leaving the official line, it would be possible. Both the Taiwanese industry and people are already finding their own ways to engage with these 15 countries. Most of them have already relocated their operations from China to South East Asia, or India. Unfortunately, India is
A
not in RCEP. Definitely, we need to go via informal channels to make Taiwan’s industries more accessible in the region. But I can sense that since we don’t have favourable relations with the other countries at the moment, it makes our government think that engaging with RCEP or CPTPP is almost impossible for now. Mr. Rockford: It’s something that the Biden administration would like to do, but they have other things they have to do first, so I’m not optimistic that they’re going to be able to build a coherent trade policy engagement that would open the path for Taiwan to join. That kind of new TPP will be a long-term prospect now. The U.S. Trade Representative could start those conversations, but the real political capital required to push it through won’t happen in the first year of the administration. Perhaps it will be possible in the second year of his presidency. Hon Min Yau
Q
In terms of security developments in the Indo-Pacific region, is this issue more structure-driven as the result of China’s increasing power lately? For example, I’m referring to the Indian border disputes, and what could be the future trajectory to the SinoIndian relations? In addition, how likely could there be multilateral approaches within the United Nations and beyond? What would be the experts’ views on Mr. Biden’s protection strategy, as this issue is traditionally considered a zero-sum game? Prof. Liu: The U.S. has been pushed to form an alliance as a mechanism to counter increasing Chinese presence and influence in the region. Looking from the other side, even if a lot of people are worrying about strategic competition, I see this more as healthy competition, be-
A
cause if they engage with the strategic competition, lining up with different partners, they do not have to go by engaging directly. What we have seen over the last couple of years is a military presence and showing-off in the South China Sea and Taiwan Strait as well as in the East China Sea. Fortunately, the U.S. and China have not really confronted each other directly. At least there is a certain line they will not cross. Mr. Biden is a more flexible diplomat. People don’t really think that he would be able to make any great changes in his first year as president. He probably will manage it through time, but Mr. Trump leaves a legacy of constraints for the next president. If there is consistency with this current course, it would offer more zero-sum games, but if Mr. Biden is manipulating different strategies, I think the tone would be different. Dushyant Chopra, CEO Drishtikone Media
Q
What are the foreseeable changes and attitudes in the U.S.’s and Taiwan’s India Policy? Prof Liu: This is a critical policy we have to formulate in the coming years. India has had difficult relations with China and Taiwan as well. We have not had such a good relationship since 2016. There would be a lot of room for common interests to develop among India and China and Taiwan — we have already worked on these efforts for the last two decades, like India and Taiwan working on industrial efforts. The incoming U.S. administration would be encouraging such collaboration between like-minded allies and friends in the region. I’m hoping that India and Taiwan would grow and move into different areas. Recently, India came up with the ‘necklace of diamonds’ strategy. We may have a lot of room to not just deepen our existing economic and industrial
A
cooperation, but going much beyond that. I heard about the unfortunate industrial incident in Bangalore where a Taiwanese company was beset by labour demonstrations, and the factory was destroyed. Hopefully, this incident is a single and unique one. Structurally, this is something that Taiwan is looking into and will be hoping to set up goals in different policy areas. Prof. Yang Shin-Yueh, NHU
Q
Why isn’t there a Taiwan-U.S. free trade agreement yet, amid the socalled strong support from the U.S.? Prof. Liu: Even under President Donald Trump, Taiwan had garnered strong support, but TaiwanU.S. Free Trade Agreement has not been able to move forward. We need to overcome the American pork issue first. Our government is thinking of a different strategy, to go beyond domestic opinion and accept the pork with ractopamine contained in it. Our legislative wing, which is our Parliament, is preparing to discuss and make the final decision. For an important policy to come through, it has to be passed not just by the president, but also our legislative wing. Mr. Biden already has pressing domestic issues which would be his priority. So, negotiating for any FTA will have to wait. This has frustrated many people in Taiwan because our government opened up the support market for American import, even if it has to some extent sacrificed the potential risk to people’s health. And now, the U.S. has said that it is not going to consider trade in the first year or even second year of the new presidency. It was an entry ticket for Taiwan to get into FTA with the U.S., but because of political compulsions, it may not happen anytime soon.
A:
p8
EDITION I JANUARY 2021
SYNERGIA FOUNDATION
TOBBY S I MON PRESIDENT & FOUNDER SYNERGIA FOUNDATION
T
o start, one must understand multilateralism. In its basic form, it’s about rule-based behaviour. In the current context, we are operating on regional multilateralism, which has taken on a competitive characteristic where Asia has now become a more contested environment. The U.S. and its allies are trying to use multilateralism as part of their broader strategy to sustain the prevailing order, whereas China is attempting to use it as part of its attempt to change one or more ways to suit its interests. So basically, multilateralism has become a sublimated form of contestation over the form and function of Asia’s international order. What would be its consequences? It would weaken the policy impact of existing institutions leftwards and promote a zero-sum approach as the international policy among Asian states. During the Cold War, except for ASEAN, the region lacked multipolar institutions. This slowly changed as the Cold War expanded and more importantly, as the trade and investment networks that were accelerating in the 1980s began to draw countries and people into the region into increasingly interdependent relationships. As a result, we had APEC in 1889 April, which was a ministerial summit to advance trade liberalisation. This became more functional later, where even in areas of security it was mentioned. Today there is a new norm
Contested multilateralism in Asia Soon we will see zero-sum thinking playing a larger role in the way states approach their international engagement in the region of contested multilateralism in Asia. While Asia’s multilateral institutions have been inspired by liberal ideas, the region has now become more contested. Second, rather than encouraging large-scale collaborative efforts, the current era will see narrow ad hoc collaboration on specific issues and problems, and everybody is going to take a decision that best suits them, even in the short term. This will finally lead to zero-sum thinking playing a larger role in the way states approach their international engagement in Asia. This becomes the sort of platform on which competitive or contested multilateralism will form in Asia. Lasting peace and stability will only be achieved in Asia
provided China, the United States, Japan, India, and Russia join forces in an economic and security concert of powers. This scenario envisages economic independence and regional integration, underpinned by multilateral institutions altering the discourse in the course of interstate relations from the competition, and zero-sum games to cooperation and win-win games. Additionally, Asian countries are no more dependent on the U.S. as it was in the past in areas of trade, leading technology, and military. China has made significant progress in technology, especially in quantum computing, AI, etc., and this is going to play a huge role in the Asia Pacific. The race for the vaccine
has been spoken about before, and who can control the pandemic will be very crucial in defining who takes the lead in Asia in the future. We have to accept that America has fallen behind China in terms of their comparative influence in the region, seen by many as Ground Zero in the conflict between two major superpowers. America is a participant in neither the CCEP nor transit PPTP, or its earlier incarnation, the Trans-Pacific Partnership. Many issues are coming up here, and it is left to be seen how the new Biden administration works and how the Chinese would react to it. The most important thing is trust or the lack of it thereof. US AND ASIA The challenge in most democratic governances is that they change every four or five years, and one doesn’t know what will happen next. Every country in Asia and elsewhere will take a muchcalibrated approach. They would be very careful to see who they would want to align with unless they are old strategic partners. But everyone will be looking at what is best
EDITION I JANUARY 2021
SYNERGIA FOUNDATION
UNITED NATIONS: HIGHLIGHTS OF 75 YEARS
p9
EXPERT OPINION Hon Min Yao
Q
In terms of security development in the Indo-Pacific region, is this issue more structure-driven as the result of China’s increasing power lately? For example - I’m referring to the Indian border disputes - what could be the future trajectory to the Sino- Indian relations? In addition, how likely could there be multilateral approaches within the United Nations and beyond? What would be the expert view regarding Mr. Biden’s protection strategy as this issue is traditionally considered as a zero-sum game?
A
Tobby Simon: The challenges that we have on the border with China will continue. China has the stated purpose of demonstrating who is the boss in the region, and I don’t think they will pull back. It could also be unlikely that the U.S. has any sort of deep bandwidth to interfere since they would have bigger problems elsewhere. They would try to stay off this. The U.S. will be very restrained.
A for them, including India. China and India remain adversaries in the long run. Who would be friends in the future? It’s too early to say, and how American politics will unfold in a fractured mandate that President Biden inherits is another question to contemplate. He might have to respond to compulsions within his own country, where even now Donald Trump has a 47 to 48 per cent following. It is hard to balance economics and geography when it comes to assessing India’s or other smaller countries’ positions, in a situation where one is either with them or against them. The Indian government has taken a stance that they shall not join the RCEP as of now and there are very valid reasons because the trade figures are skewed in terms of our ability to export and their need to import. To change that, we will have to make domes-
tic modifications to become more competitive. Pertaining to taking sides, India is working towards its self-interest and the ability to compete with economies that started the process of manufacturing, invested heavily in artificial intelligence, quantum computers, etc., so they are ahead of us in technology. As of now, it would be difficult for us to go into the market and compete. The bigger challenges, however, are showstoppers like the pandemics in the future. What would a COVID 3.0 look like? We could also instead have global warming-related issues, and many of the diseases that affected the Southern hemisphere could come into the northern region. Is the world going to talk about conflicts alone, or will we try to come together to solve these problems because it impacts all of us the same?
Amb. Vijay Kumar: It’s too early to look at how the Biden administration would impact Indo-Asia policy. What we do is wait, whether it is RCEP or anything else. But we are hopeful that Mr. Biden would continue with what Mr. Trump and Britain had done. One can see America finding out the difference between Mr. Trump and Mr. Biden now as well.
A
Amb. Saurabh Kumar: As students of the subject, we have to understand where the U.S. - China relationship lies. The biggest problem is that this country has given the world the COVID pandemic. If we don’t ask them, then we might face another one soon. Mr. Trump might not have behaved in the right style, but asking questions does help. I noticed that most of the speakers here said we should avoid the zerosum game, but why should we avoid it? If it is necessary, it has to be done. If we frame ourselves this way, then we play into China’s narrative. It’s not a question of being strong, but of taking things as they are.
EDITION I JANUARY 2021
SYNERGIA FOUNDATION
p11
Digital spooks The SolarWinds hacking operation serves as a cautionary tale on the gaps in cybersecurity strategies and deterrence, both from a domestic and international perspective
SYN ERG IA F OU NDATION
I
RES EA RC H
T EAM
n what is being dubbed as the ‘hack of the decade’, the United States government and several private firms have recently unearthed a massive breach in their cybersecurity systems. Initially detected by cybersecurity company FireEye, analysts believe that the intrusion emanated from a ‘highly sophisticated actor’, sponsored by Russia. As targeted entities
scramble to assess the extent to which data has been compromised, it would be instructive to analyse the modus operandi of these digital spies. What clearly emerges is the need to create an evidence-based framework for attributing cyberattacks and identifying threat vectors that endanger critical cyber processes. BACK DOOR ENTRY While orchestrating the months-long intrusion, the hackers did not directly attack their intended targets. Instead, they planted mal-
ware in the codes of a thirdparty company named SolarWinds, which supplied network monitoring and management software to the targeted enterprises. By exploiting a software update to install this malicious code, the attackers were able to infiltrate the systems of several organisations. This technique of gaining backdoor access to the networks of a company through one of its vendors is known as a ‘supply chain’ attack. The hackers were able to avoid detection for a long time, as their ‘trojanised’ updates seamlessly blended
in with other legitimate processes of SolarWinds. This also helped to thwart the forensic or antivirus tools commonly deployed in such cases. In fact, it was so carefully designed that experts believe a dry run may have been conducted in 2019, wherein an ‘innocuous code’ was changed to monitor possible security responses. Following this, the actual attack was carried out. In any case, the hackers had enough time to extract a significant volume of data from nearly 18,000 customers of SolarWinds. This includes Fortune 500
p12
EDITION I JANUARY 2021
SYNERGIA FOUNDATION
Assessment
Damages related to cybercrime could reach $6 trillion by 2021
Russia and China pose the greatest espionage and cyberattack threats to American national security
According to a survey conducted in June 2020, 80% of the respondent organizations had a breach caused by one of their vendors
(Cybersecurity Ventures)
(2019 Worldwide Threat Assessment)
(Opinion Matters for BlueVoyant)
companies as well as key government departments in the United States, such as defence, homeland security, energy, agriculture, treasury, and commerce. It remains to be seen whether this data theft translates to a larger and more disruptive cyberattack targeting critical infrastructure in America and the rest of the world.
and several other breaches traced to Russia, suspicions about its involvement run high this time around. Complicating this rhetoric, however, U.S. President Donald Trump has hinted that China may be involved in the attack. In doing so, he has directly contradicted the statement put out by his Secretary of State, without citing any evidence to bolster his claim. While this may merely be a reflection of his personal brand of politics, it points to a more serious gap in the international rules-based order, where cyberattacks can be politically attributed to states without any coherent data to back it up. In the interests of global stability, it is important to formalise best practices on state attribution, specious allegations are not levelled against nation-states to further geopolitical motives. A robust international framework that fixes the degree of state involvement through probative methods is the need of the hour. Only then can the targeted institution pursue lawful countermeasures against the sponsoring state, based on axioms of proportionality. In other words, the rules of engagement in cyberspace are premised on an accurate and evidence-based regime for state attribution.
SMOKING GUN U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has blamed Russia for the attack. Joining him in these accusations are the intelligence committees of the U.S. House of Representatives and the Senate chairs. The widespread consensus is that the nature of the cyber-intrusion smacked of previous attacks carried out by the SVR, a powerful Russian external intelligence agency. The level of stealth required to exploit inherently trusted software and institute computer-to-computer communication is believed to be the hallmark of this shadowy state agency. In fact, Russian military hackers have been previously accused of employing the supply chain method to target companies in Ukraine. Together with the strong allegations of Russian meddling in the 2016 U.S. elections
SEALING THE BREACH In the immediate future, all the affected firms — both public and private will need to investigate the scale and scope of this attack. They will have to isolate the compromised servers and eradicate the malicious code from their networks. SolarWinds has recommended that all its customers update the existing software platform, which has a ‘patch’ for this malware. For those unable to do so, it has suggested the blocking of internet egress from SolarWinds servers. The coming months will also be a test for the ‘logging’ capabilities of affected firms. This refers to the ability to go back and scrutinise a network for the full impact of a breach. According to the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, this will prove to be a highly complex and challenging task. From a long-term perspective, countries need to formulate an effective cybersecurity strategy. This should be premised on the timely sharing and analysis of threat intelligence between the public and private sectors. It should also involve a judicious mix of defensive and offensive capabilities so that cyber deterrence can emerge as a meaningful norm in the digital domain.
The SolarWinds hack is yet another example of how attackers have an asymmetrical advantage once they bypass the defence systems of cyber networks. They can remain undetected for months on end while conducting reconnaissance and accessing specific targets, with valuable information being extracted in the process. Governments and private enterprises need to build defensive capabilities that deter hackers from breaching their systems in the first place. For instance, many firms have invested in deception technologies that lure hackers into a decoy environment. This not only deflects their attack but also allows the targeted firm to study their assault techniques in a controlled environment. Finally, it is critical to establish international norms that govern cyber activity and attach punitive consequences for illegal hacking. In particular, it has to be clarified whether an espionage operation such as the SolarWinds hack, that does not cause physical damage or injury, can constitute a ‘use of force’ under Article 2(4) of the U.N. Charter. This will help to determine the range of response measures that can be legally pursued.
EDITION I JANUARY 2021
SYNERGIA FOUNDATION
p13
The fruits of normalisation Will Mr. Biden continue with the Trump legacy of gaining diplomatic milestones in the Middle East by dangling carrots in front of Arab nations?
SY N ERGIA F OU N DATION R ES EA RC H
A
T EAM
s the sun sets on the Presidency of Mr. Trump, The White House announced the normalisation of yet another Arab country’s relationship with Israel-Morocco. To sugar-coat the deal, the United States agreed to recognise “Moroccan sovereignty over Western Sahara.” Additionally, direct flights will be allowed, along with tourism and business exchanges. The U.S. is the first country to ink such a deal. This disputed region, hotly contested by the Moroccan government and the erstwhile Polisario Front declared itself the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic (SADR) in 1976 but has remained recognised by only a few countries and excluded from the UN. Moroccan officials have responded to only opening “liaison” offices in Israel, not an embassy, and deny that the agreement is based on full diplomatic relations. The deal does not come as a big surprise since ties between Israel and Morocco have been strong in the past - Morocco was once a hub of Jews, and there is already more than $30 million in annual trade between the two countries. THE WESTERN SAHARA IMBROGLIO This recognition could, how-
Source: News reports/statista
ever, intensify the conflict between Morocco and the Polisario Front rebels of SADR, with Algeria supporting the independence and self-determination of the Sahrawis. The Polisario leaders, while condemning the deal, have said that their struggle will continue. The move could also damage ties with Algeria, which is rich in gas and oil. Few are likely to follow Washington’s lead since it sends out a two-fold message. First, that fights for self-determination come to nought, and second, that taking territory by force through talks of money and trade is an apparent solution to de-
President Trump ensured the normalisation of relations with Israel came with transactional benefits for the Arab partners. — UAE got a $23 billion arms package; Sudan was removed from the State Sponsors of Terrorism list and gained more financial help cade-long conflicts. Washington’s latest move has been in contradiction to its earlier stance on the issue of Western Sahara. In October, the U.S. government
commended the UN Security Council on extending the mandate of the United Nations Mission for the Referendum in Western Sahara (MINURSO). Now with its offer of recognising Moroccan sovereignty, it is in breach of the UN resolutions and accepted international norms. The UN, on its part, has failed to resolve the issue since the early 1990s, has now been activated by the recent developments, and has called for a closed-door meeting on the situation. TRUMP’S LEGACY The Biden presidency has the option to use the good-
p14
EDITION I JANUARY 2021
SYNERGIA FOUNDATION
Assessment The Abraham Accords has changed the region’s geopolitics, not by driving forward the Palestinian peace process, but by allowing Israel access to the Arabian Peninsula and the Persian Gulf. Most of the agreements, like those with Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates, appear as strategic gambits against the two nonArab powers, Iran and Turkey.
will generated between Israel and its Arab neighbours by Trump’s Abraham Accords to build the right environment for exerting pressure on Israel for a two-state solution acceptable to the Palestinians and the wider Arab world. However, given Mr. Biden’s inclination to re-enter the Iran nuclear deal, this would demand a precarious balancing act for American diplomacy. Washington views Iran and China as the greatest threat to the stability (and its pre-eminence) in the Gulf Region. Building a robust Israel-Sunni Arab axis would be a good way to hold off the Iran - led Shia arc, and put the brakes on China’s increasing influence in the region. President Trump ensured the normalisation of relations with Israel came with transactional benefits for the Arab partners. — UAE got a $23 billion arms package; Sudan was removed from the State Sponsors of Terrorism list and gained more financial help; and now, Morocco gets its claim over Western Sahara American backing. Is-
rael’s embattled Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu also gets a boost to his sagging ratings while the Trump administration could rightly claim a major diplomatic coup. So, it is a win-win situation for all the protagonists, less for the Palestinians. It will be interesting to see if the Biden administration will be prepared to compensate the remaining Arab nations who wish to normalise ties with Israel while keeping the relationship with Mr. Netanyahu on an even keel. GCC & ISRAEL Most Arab nations in the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) now fall under two brackets: those more influenced by Iran, and those who aren’t, when it’s a question of improving ties with Israel. Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon fall in the second category, as does Algeria. Tunisia and Kuwait are not as likely, seeing as they are more constrained by public opinion (Kuwait has a Palestinian community estimated at 4,50,000, a little smaller than the Kuwaiti
population). Qatar has also indicated that it will not enter into any such agreement. This leaves Oman as the next likely country to join the club with Israel. Oman has little room to manoeuvre as it not only is facing an economic crisis due to the drop in oil prices but also has Abu Dhabi as its main trading partner. The biggest reward for Israel, though, would be recognition by a recalcitrant Saudi Arabia. Given the conditioned anti-Israel propaganda in the country since the 1960s and its status as the self-proclaimed custodian of the two holy mosques in Mecca and Medina, the very idea of normalisation puts Riyadh in a tough spot. This would open them up for criticism from Iran and Turkey, accusing them of betraying the umma by selling out the Palestinians. There have been rumours, however, of the Saudi Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman (MBS) hosting Mr. Netanyahu and the U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo. Saudi Arabia denies that this meeting ever took place.
Israel and several GCC members view Iran’s growing influence as the biggest threat, and this provides a fertile ground for collaboration between them. Israel also backed the blockade against Qatar, a country with which it had established trade links in 1996. Doha, nevertheless, is useful for Israel to help in mediation between Hamas and the Palestinian Authority. Amidst all the prevailing confusion in the Middle East, Saudi Arabia stands out as the most politically and economically influential Arab state. Saudi-Israeli ties could open a door for Israel into other Arab or Muslim-majority states, which could further diminish the chances of the Palestinians getting their right to self-determination.
EDITION I JANUARY 2021
SYNERGIA FOUNDATION
p15
A Summation of Vaccine Platforms subhead here like this subhead here like this subhead here like this subhead here like this subhead here like this subhead here like this subhead here like this subhead here like this one might require booster shots over time. To date, there have been a few adenovirus-based vaccines in clinical and pre-clinical trials, like those against HIV, Ebola virus, influenza virus, etc., that are currently under human clinical trials. However, there is a potential issue if the body decides to react to the vector itself. Therefore, the booster shots of adenoviral vector vaccines become problematic. Since adenoviral vectors are based on natural viruses (that some people could already be exposed to) and the immune system could target the vector. As a result, the vaccines might not be effective for everyone.
SY N ERG IA F OU N DATION R ESEA RC H
A
T EAM
s of mid-December 2020, 57 vaccine candidates are in clinical research for COVID-19, around 40 are in Phase I–II trials and 17 in Phase II–III trials. Of all these, BioNTech and Pfizer, Moderna, the University of Oxford (in collaboration with AstraZeneca), and the Gamaleya Institute’s Sputnik V, announced successful results from the Phase III vaccine trials, and are currently in use. Per the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, most of the platforms of vaccine candidates for COVID-19 are focused on the spike protein on the virus and its variants as the main antigen of COVID-19 infections. The three popular and most successful platforms for the vaccine are such: the adenovirus vectored platform, the mRNA platform, and the subunit protein platform. The mRNA platform is a new technology and has not been used previously in immunization, whereas the other two are fairly tried and tested methods of delivering vaccines. THE ADENOVIRAL VECTORED VACCINES Three vaccines use this plat-
mRNA BASED VACCINES form: CoronaVac (formerly PiCoVacc) from Sinovac Biotech and the Sinopharm vaccine (efficacy 86 per cent) in China, Sputnik V (formerly Gam-COVID-Vac) from The Gamaleya Research Institute in Russia and the Health Ministry of the Russian Federation (efficacy of 92 per cent), and AZD1222 (previously ChAdOx1) from AstraZeneca and the Oxford Vaccine Group at the University of Oxford (to be potentially sold in India as Covishield from Serum Institute of India and AstraZeneca and has an efficacy of 70 per cent overall). The Sinopharm and Sino-
vac vaccines use inactivated formulations of the virus, Sputnik V uses two different adenoviruses, and the Oxford vaccine uses a chimpanzee adenovirus. All of these vaccines also follow the twodose regime. Here, the vaccine component (which is the inactivated part of the virus) is loaded into vectors, which is one of the common cold viruses (or the adenovirus), or an inactivated COVID-19 virus or viral protein itself. Since they are weak or inactivated variants of the virus, according to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS),
This features the vaccines by Moderna, and Pfizer - BioNTech. Moderna’s COVID-19 vaccine mRNA-1273 had shown preliminary evidence of 94 per cent efficacy in Phase III trials, while PfizerBioNTech’s vaccine is shown to be 95 per cent effective. Both the Moderna and the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccines require two shots: the interval between Moderna doses is 28 days; for the Pfizer vaccine, it is 21 days. Both vaccines require an elaborate cold chain, yet the Moderna vaccine will be easier to use than Pfizer’s since Moderna’s can be shipped at -20°
p16
EDITION I JANUARY 2021
SYNERGIA FOUNDATION
TYPES OF VACCINES These vaccines use antigenic protein from the disease causing virus without any genetic material . They are relatively safer as there is no genetic material and they cannot replicate inside the body. They focus the immune response on the most important part of the virus for protection. These vaccines require multiple doses for long term immunity. They require adjuvants which are ingredients that help create a stronger immune response.
Created by Nikitha Ramesh using BioRender.com References avaialable at https://sites.bu.edu/covid-corps
@epiCOVIDcorps
Celsius but Pfizer’s must be shipped and stored at -70° Celcius. This design is a novel one, it is a minimal vector vaccine. Here, a genetic molecule called messenger RNA (mRNA) is synthesized and this instructs to create the virus spike protein. When injected into the cells, the vaccine causes them to make these spike proteins, which get released into the bloodstream and bring about a response from the immune system. While traditional vaccines are made up of inactive viruses or their structural components, these mRNA vaccines are made up of genetic material that allows cells to build the viruses’ proteins themselves. The mRNA vaccines have many advantages, such as being quicker and easier to manufacture and being more durable against pathogens that are likely to mutate, like
the coronaviruses. However, mRNA vaccines can potentially cause adverse reactions in the body since they are replicating molecules, there are stability issues, and could break down quite quickly. Apart from the mRNA vaccines, India’s ZydusCadila also has established trials in an inactivated DNA platform with ZyCoV-D. Zydus shall apply for Phase III trials which it plans to conduct on 39,000 participants in December. The plasmid DNA is introduced into the host cells, where it is translated into the virus protein. SUBUNIT VACCINES One upcoming vaccine trial that is promising is the NovaVax vaccine, NVX-CoV2373. Similar to the pre-existing platform that was used in the essential Hepatitis B vaccine, a subunit vaccine only
includes certain components from the COVID-19 virus. Since the antigens alone are not enough to bring about an immune response, non-immunogenic materials known as adjuvants are incorporated into the vaccine. Subunit vaccines are grown using living organisms such as yeast or E.coli bacteria. This makes them more expensive to produce than chemically-synthesized vaccines, but they are ideally safer since no vectors are used that could bring about the immune response to them. For example, for the hepatitis B vaccine, it is grown by inserting the genetic code for the antigen into yeast cells. While the earlier firms use technologies based on genetic material that directs the protein production instead of delivering the proteins directly, developers of protein vaccines like subunit vaccines must develop their
version of the spike protein that closely mimics the naturally occurring one. Those extra steps make protein vaccines slower to develop. Novavax launched a Phase II trial in South Africa in August and the following month, launched a Phase III trial with up to 15,000 volunteers in the United Kingdom. It is expected to deliver results in early 2021. They also entered into an agreement with the Serum Institute of India that would enable them to produce nearly 2 billion doses a year. This is to be potentially sold in India as Covavax. Protein-based vaccines are also always effective compared to the newer, largely unproven approaches, one example being the successful hepatitis B vaccine. The others are ones like the flu vaccine approved in 2013 and the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines for cervical cancer in the 2000s. Why Novavax’s work hasn’t made much of a splash is because aside from starting their research late and thereby still expecting results, the company had focused on making vaccines for more than 20 years prior but has never brought one to market. Being a small company that was nearly bankrupt when the pandemic began, they must now rely mostly on contract manufacturers to meet their vaccine goals. While most companies are working with this technology, Novavax is the only one to have launched a Phase III trial. Additionally, tests show that the vaccine is stable for many weeks at 2°C to 8°C. Therefore theoretically, it seems like the ideal vaccine. But more shall be known once the results of the trials are released.
p8
AUGUST 2020
pp15 9
SYNERGIA FOUNDATION EDITION V SEPTEMBER, 2020 SEPTEMBER, 2020
IT'S DAVID VS GOLIATH ON THE WORLD'S SOLAR POWER STAGE
SYNERGIA FOUNDATION FOUNDATION SYNERGIA
KAGAME’S LAND
FACEBOOK IN A FACE-OFF
Rwandans have learnt the Israeli art of pursuing eneA Tutsi-ruled Rwanda has mies to their last breath. Last Would India's 'One Sun One World One Grid' project be fructuous when China's alreadyyear, well another ahead? dissident leadprospered under BRI theis iron hand of Mr. Kagame, and is er was bundled into Kigali excess power bilaterally with SYNERGIA FOUNDATION jet.Nepal. Others have oftenspeech called an “Israel in Afri- in a private The social media platform faces allegations of not enforcing hate and fake news Bhutan and In August RESEARCH TEAM 2018, India an MoU andalso atsigned times purrules and siding with administrations for business interests ca.” It has one of the fastest- been jailed, for grid interconnections between foreign lands where growing economies in Africa sued inthe members of BIMSTEC (India, ndia’s 'One Sun One World diedMyanmar, mysterious and is reputedly one of the they have Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, One Grid' (OSOWOG) initiative Thailand Bhutan and Nepal). deaths. A former Rwandan best places to do business has started calling out for bids crafted its rules and algorithms to consequent public scrutiny resulted T.M. toVEERARAGHAV kickstart the programme. and a critic, Patrick the (in the World spy chief his favour. Despite a in strong denialworld of in promises to curb fake information However, some other grid The vision behind it is that ‘The any such “deal’ by its founder Mark and hate speeches, allegations that who fled tohave South Bank’s 2019 ‘Doing Business’ Karegeya interconnection plans been Consulting Sun NeverEditor, Sets’, as the grid plans Zuckerberg, the platform continues Facebook has been soft on President unsuccessful, such as that of Synergia Foundation report, it ranked 29th out of Africa, was strangled in a hoto face criticism. to be lit up by the sun at some Trump continue to this day. the Greater Mekong Subregion In fact, a civil rights audit congeographical location, globally, at tel room ininterconnection, 2004; a former 190 countries). (GMS) running ducted by two U.S.-based lawyers any given point of time. It aims to HATE SPEECH IN INDIA living in exile BelThailand, Laos, in Vietnam, However, all is not hunky- Ministerthrough concluded that “while the audit first connect India with Southeast process has been meaningful, and he power that platforms In India, Facebook has been at the and China. It is plagued by poor Asia, and then the Middle East and dory with this small East- gium drowned in a canal; anhas led to some significant improvelike Facebook have over centre of a controversy after The infrastructure and low volumes Africa to the west. The Ministry continued to live in obscurity als.” Mr. Kagame called him otheris Director, fugitive Minister African nation. This ments in the platform, we have also the dissemination of inWall Street JournalCentral published an of electricity despite having was been (H.R.Venkatesh Training and Research of New and Renewable Energy watched the company make painful formation and amoulding investigation claiming that the comin(MNRE) Kigali, faced number of a “manufactured hero [...] at BOOM Factcheck which is a signatory to the around since the late 1990s. The shot in Kenya, and a former ethnically torn nation, dehas invited proposals for decisions over the last nine months of public opinion is well pany’s public policy head for India International fact checking network. He shared idea of a South Asian energy grid, assassination attempts. Inreal-world made in Europe America”. making a long-term OSOWOG army chief was shot in2004, South spite its outward calm and with consequences that or and documented. This is precisely why South Asia, Ankhi Das, violated his thoughts with Synergia) proposed by SAARC in also roadmap figuringthat outthere two are seriousIn setbacks for civil there is a rising be hate speech rules and refused to act remains one of the 1996, heanddemand escaped to or Uganda 2007, herights”. was accused of fiAfrica. remains In 2014, progress, just that.a popular three cross-border projectsmechathat And there are now serious allea strong filter and censoring against posts put up by T. Raja Singh, and from there to Belgium nancing rebel groups in eastsinger Mihigo was armostBharatiya complex Can societies in gospel we expect neutrality from platforms like Facebook? gations of Facebook having a “deal” nisms to curb fakesoon, information, hate a legislator of the ruling can be initiated “preferably with President and that it has speeches, abusive content over politiJanata Party in the No, I doubt you can expect neutrality of the platform. I fear one withand each of the Middle East, where he was granted ernTrump Congo. rested for treason and died Africa and its contemporary social media platforms. southern state of CONCLUSION that nothing short of a league of nations led by the right South East and Africa regions, calRecently, asylum. During his initial court Telangana. in police politics and society continue Cambodian Buddhist leadership can bring about change incustody. Facebook. At the root consideringaIndia as the grid monk and human rights crusader The report alOften called a “Rwanhearings in Kigali, Mr. Rus• There is human the question of of theby problem is its business model that uses beings fulcrum for these identified pilots”. to be undermined forces Luon Sovath had to flee his country leges that no action whether there is even a need as raw material. dan Oskar Schindler” of esabagina accepted his role its control. after a smear campaign on Facebook was beyond taken despite for such a centralised grid. With While is quite a feat, there isby that led this to him being defrocked those within the or‘Schindler’s List’ fame, Paul in the creation of the NaMr. Kagame won powerthe advent of efficient batteries How can the issue be addressed? another that rivals it — China’s a government-controlled religious ganisation, pointing like the lithium-ion and others, Rusesabagina established a tional Liberation Front (NLF) out ful FACEBOOK, fight against misinformation is a multi-pronged battle GlobalAEnergy Interconnection benefactors council. New York Times investigathat friends his com- andThe Source: Synergia Foundation AND THE there is the capacity to store with at least five prongs that should engage simultaneously. (GEI) that is part of the Belt called tion revealed thatgroup government emRohingya non-profit the toCOMPANYassist Rwandan refugees ments—onthe Clintons, the Gates, energy cheaply and efficiently. India could be a prime source to funding, and cheaper supply the seen as a potential rivals to the These five prongs include media, policy (government), and Road Initiative is, ployees in the country(BRI). were GEI involved refugees were a clear No doubt, Mr. Kagamethe OWNED ‘Hotel Rwanda but said he never supported Eventually, with strong and and Tony Blair —and funds for investors, with the potential chains. World Bank and IMF. in the creation of than fake accounts and violation of the company’s policies tech platforms themselves, academicians universities) however, more aRusesabagina few steps MESSAGING has been a(orsaviour ofonlyin decentralised solar It’s projects posting videos on has Face- to to and couldgovlead to real-world violence. US$ 10 billion The annual Rwandan Foundation’. According itsattractviolence. finally, civil society. In other words, we need everyone. SERVICE, ahead doctored of India’s plan. China flowed in. While he was sucbook to malign who had Subsequent tothe thefact report, each country, there WHATSAPP, ARE Rwanda, making it may onebe no investments as per the Bank of China haswe theengage added advantage catch lies in thatwhich when with all these stakeholders that we already signedthe 31 monk, agreements with tax returns, thefor foundation ernment classifiedledThe the cessful in reducing poverty BACKBONE spent decades fighting to imports a NLF furore most by Opposition need for large power plants America’s A global head of energy India of its solar parof its renminbi (RMB) of the best-run willpowerful succeed. countries for GEI and set uphuman seven counFOR THE rights and oppose Prime Minister ties andmaterial activists, Facebook finally collected over $200,000 beaRULING terrorist and panel from Chinarunning due and renewable business. Aorganisation recent is increasingly being used and awhich comparatively offices worldwide. PARTY’S Hun Sen. banned Mr. Raja Singh. However, the tries in •Africa. RwanIt is clear that for India to cheaper cost. Solar cells analysis blamed by IRENAMEDIA found across the region. Malaysia's RMB tween 2005 it that for manyto the killings SOCIAL “clean” government, he is The fact that and the 2007. issue runs far deeper step up its goal of being and modules worth US$ 1,179.89 CAMPAIGN the costs for setting up solar PV use grew by 214% over the last dan troops, trained bythe INDIA’S SOLAR POWER SYNERGIA FOUNDATION monk’s reputation wasRusesabagina as there are allega- of In 2005, Mr. along its porous border with accused authoritariansolar power generator of the million were imported from China projects have dropped by about three years, Russia's by 56%, and ‘NEED TO DO MORE’ Americans, are greatly destroyed in a matter of tions that the company world, it needs to increase was theatU.S. DRC. in the first nine FY other 201980% in India between 2010 and Thailand’sHis by 50%. ASSESSMENT ism and excesses. army There are multiple facets play Presidays is awarded testimony to the has months been softofon in demand in peaceits domestic manufacturing 20, according to R.K. Singh, the 2018. is not in power the medium leaders of the party andraids Whileborder the recent episode led to here: of whether countries would dential Medal of Freedom, its Yet, India One ofa place, theon high-profile regularly areas for solar modules, as well Minister for Renewable Energy. its own, to fund massive projects Geopolitical tensions will also and how administraeven aided the party’s an admission by Facebook that it keeping operations byis as agree to this initiative based Mark Zuckerberg’s creation the highest civilian award, and in Tutsi survivors from Hotel ancillary products like lithiumof the DRC in hot pursuit of tions with technological 2019 election cam“needs to do more” to curb hate Additionally, this expansion such as the OSOWOG in other come into play, and potential on their own regional energy one inbatteries. the also eye ofThere the storm, buta ECOWAS as by the CRORE FB INVESTMENT IN JIO ion must be and financial resources paign. It is no secret speeches in India, there has been no wasOdette created mostlyHutu by private 2006, heWould published his memdes Mille Collines was countries. candidates will be forced to make a demands? countries be rebels and ischanges accused the core issue is the power that strong strategy on long-term can abuse it. it along with India? that Facebook, and the systemic or two actions taken UN, for their profescompanies, some of whom are choice between the rivals, India able to fund a private entity has. The foundaoirs ‘An Ordinary Man’, which Nyiramilimo, a Senator and of killings, rapes, and looting. company-owned mesinternally. Opposition leaders and development in lineexpands with to private equity-funded, rather than “It is a long political process. It and China. tion of this problem And what will be the supply chains sionalism. However, 300+mn saging service, Whatactivists haveisexplicitly demanded criticised Rwanda under Mr former Minister for Social the ISA’s goals that address FACEBOOK USERS all such platforms, and there is a Political power conby the government. involves countries ceding a bit of ALLEGATIONS involved? sApp, are a backbone the removal of Ms. Das from her pothe oppressive poliprice and need forcompetitiveness a systemic response. their sovereignty to a between supranational 2000 The success of the OSOWOG Paul Kagame. In 2007, he also Affairs and centrated the but hands ofunlikely. a for the ruling party’s social media in sition, that seems OF A ‘DEAL’ Campaigns demanding profitability. India is largely an 400+mn cies, largely ignored by has While tried to a domestic authority that will oversee the grid,” campaign. project will largely also depend the International President Solar Alliance (ISA) allfoster political parties The company hasonhuge reported Kagame 2003. USERS “There is no India denying greater accountability by these orWHATSAPP energy deficient nation, and small clique owing allegiance solar industry by imposing a twosays Aditya Valiathan Pillai, a senior relationship between India and WITH TRUMP is an India-based organisation that use these platforms, the BJP has business interests in India, and it has the powerful western ganisations can only have limited there is the added incentive tois pushing an international tribunal that Rusesabagina yearrisked levythe on imports, yet domestic researcher at theMr. Centre for Policy the countries question. A World Mr. Kagame. Elections, inside this project. It is the first mastered art ofto disseminating lobbied to be oninthe right of the success and, ironically, even their IN INDIA world, still guilt-ridden to generate jobs in the energy manufacturing has not taken offas on administration. messages infor social media as early Researchhis (CPR)life to The There are on nearly 300 Given that power, it is alarming when Bank-sponsored report power multilateral organisation oftreaty-led war crimes in Rwanda for toKen. provide refuge ability to create a mark on social which Mr. Kagame routinely sector the 2014 election campaign. It is only million users of Facebook and more there are allegations that Facebook that great a scale. nonchalance dursector integration summed up for its media will depend on algorithms to be headquartered in India and atrocities committed by the my family and me and many 99 per than cent votes, getting bettergets with time! million on are WhatsApp. Furactively with a ruling dispenof a Facebook! The ISA is also pushing for the the 400 reality in 2010. “If there is one planscolludes to mobilise US$ 1 trillion in ing the 1994 massacres, • The policy should Facebook has consisther, it has also a humungous sation allowing by hate speeches to be Given the approach global nature of RPF. others,” she World told The formation of a US$10 billion overriding requirement for regional VYINGEast FOR THE PIE investments 2030. India also has largely considered a made sham P R be to ensure domestic tently faced allegations of these organisations, it is imperaRs. 43,000 crore investment in Reliwidely distributed through O make it almost impossiT E S T Solar Bank (WSB), in collaboration integration to be successful, it is one of the largest interconnected The Rwandan shewith the HATE SPEECHAfrican. However, nowsiding and tive that they haveget uniform polirulingconstitutional party ance-ownedchanges telecom, Jio platform. its platform. In the 2016 government manufacturers the upper with the World Bank. India may that countries need to have the ble forcies India opting for the OSOWOG grids with five regional grids. It has the huge chasm worldwide and ensure that and even bolstering its 2019 All this only raises more conU.S. presidential elections, hand in producing goods, was quick to respond. The accuses him of having “sold have ensured he over will rule un- with become the lead member with a political will cooperate initiative is in a major play to moved the solar power capacity the same ethical standards are political campaign. Several cerns theto impartiality of their the there wereup questions raised between the Tutsis and with more waivers and easier local described Mr. his soul” to the “who 30% stake in WSB, amounting to French, neighbours.” strengthen its importance in the leaderboard from worldwide followed irrespective of the couninterrupted 2034. leading publications have till platform to political forces, be it in over the media spread of 10th ‘fake loans.from The focus has to be on the Hutus being try of operation. Ultimately, hate a US$ 3 billion commitment. Thisfinancial region,carried especially against China’s in 2014 5th position, reports, specifically Indiatolerance or the U.S. Butfor there is little news’ on toFacebook, and Rusesabagina asaccording “a man who promised him gain creating an end-to-end solar There is no speech, smear campaigns and comes in the backdrop of Beijing GEI. The GEIthe hasproximity the added India has of thecan fewhave to the Renewable over ofbenefit Ankhi control thatbeen civilone society then theInternational Cambridge Anabridged. PVnews manufacturing capacity to sold the soul of the Rwandan if he became a critic of the fake are a global threat. political dissent. Political riDas with the ruling party, and over such a massive corporate enlytica controversy brought of other components such as road creating the Asian Infrastructure countries that have been successful Energy Agency (IRENA). include solar PV modules, cells, it was even by parliatity. The issue isas alsoelectricity not limited to more focus on the and maritime traderaised to back its Investment Bank (AIIB) and the with international poolGenocide tocom-amass medRwandan government”. vals live in trepidation the wafers/ingots and polysilicon mentarians. Facebook. panies’ policies. While the
I
All stakeholders must come together to fight misinformation
T
Conclusion
43,000
VIOLENCE
The renewable energy sector in
New Development Bank (NDB),
case up, along with greater access
SYNERGIA FORUM/VIRTUAL FORUM
To access all editions of the Synergia Foundation Key Insights Newsletter, visit: www.synergiafoundation.org/insights Major General AJAY SAH (Retd.) Chief Information Officer, Synergia
Major General MONI CHANDI (Retd.) Chief Strategy Officer, Synergia
T.M. T. M. VEERARAGHAV VEERARAGHAV Consulting Consulting Editor Editor, Synergia
sharing ventures where it shares
The Synergia Forum is a by-invite only session where we invite eminent subject matter experts to discuss the challenges and disruptions that governments, academia and businesses may face today and in the future. SAMBRATHA SHETTY Chief Operating Officer Synergia
SYNERGIA FOUNDATION SYNERGIA FOUNDATION Synergia Foundationisisananindependent independent strategic whose purpose is to augment Synergia Foundation andand strategic thinkthink tank tank whose purpose is to augment decisionPpolicy making at a policy while enriching individualindividual discoursediscourse and public dialogue. With fact With based decision-making at alevel level while enriching and public dialogue. insights,the Synergia the Foundation provides impactful solutions that challenge thethat status quo,turning fact based insights, Synergia Foundation provides impactful solutions challenge therisks in to opportunities. status quo, turning risks into opportunities.
INSIGHTS
Synergia Insights is our weekly print and digital publication. Authored by functional and geostrategic experts, we provide unbiased analyses and assessments of both national and international affairs that affect our lives. Address 34, Vittal Mallya Road, Bengaluru, Karnataka 560001, India Tel : +91 80 4197 1000 Email : info@synergiagroup.in
@SynergiaFoundation @SynergiaImpact www.synergiafoundation.org www.synergiaconclave.org
SYNERGIA FOUNDATION
P