The Indian diaspora, scattered across the globe, plays a significant role in contributing to India’s development through various avenues such as investment, remittances, and entrepreneurship. This contribution not only bolsters India’s economy but also enhances its global connections and influence.

Economic Contributions of the Indian Diaspora:
Remittances:

Financial Inflows: Remittances from the Indian diaspora constitute a substantial portion of India’s foreign exchange earnings. These funds are often directed towards supporting families back home, contributing to household income, and financing education and healthcare expenses.
Economic Stability: Remittances provide stability to India’s balance of payments and help mitigate external economic shocks by providing a steady inflow of foreign currency.
Investment:

Foreign Direct Investment (FDI): The Indian diaspora invests in various sectors of the Indian economy, including real estate, infrastructure, manufacturing, and services. Their investments contribute to economic growth, job creation, and infrastructure development.
Venture Capital and Start-ups: Diaspora members are increasingly involved in funding start-ups and innovative ventures in India, fostering entrepreneurship and technological innovation.
Entrepreneurship:

Business Initiatives: Many members of the Indian diaspora are successful entrepreneurs abroad, leveraging their skills, networks, and capital to establish businesses in India. These ventures create employment opportunities, transfer knowledge and technology, and stimulate economic growth in their respective regions.
Challenges Faced by the Diaspora:
Regulatory and Administrative Hurdles:

Investment Regulations: Complex regulatory frameworks and bureaucratic procedures can deter diaspora members from investing in India. Streamlining regulations and improving transparency can encourage more investments.
Taxation and Legal Framework: Taxation policies, including the lack of clarity on tax liabilities, can pose challenges for diaspora investments and remittances.
Financial Infrastructure:

Remittance Costs: High transaction costs associated with remittances reduce the amount of money reaching recipients in India. Efforts to reduce these costs through technological innovations and improved financial infrastructure are essential.
Access to Financial Services: Limited access to banking and financial services in rural areas can hinder the effective utilization of remittances for development purposes.
Government Policy Measures:
Pravasi Bharatiya Divas (PBD):

The Government of India organizes PBD to engage with the Indian diaspora, understand their concerns, and explore opportunities for collaboration in various sectors.
Diaspora Bonds and Schemes:

Initiatives like the Resurgent India Bonds and Bharat Bond ETFs have been launched to mobilize diaspora investments in India’s infrastructure and development projects.
Ease of Doing Business:

The government has implemented reforms to improve the ease of doing business, simplify regulatory procedures, and enhance transparency, thereby facilitating diaspora investments and entrepreneurship.
Financial Inclusion:

Efforts are underway to promote financial inclusion and digital payments, which can reduce remittance costs and improve access to financial services for recipients in India.
Conclusion:
The Indian diaspora’s economic contributions through remittances, investments, and entrepreneurship play a crucial role in India’s development trajectory. Despite facing challenges related to regulatory frameworks and financial infrastructure, the diaspora continues to leverage its resources and networks to support India’s economic growth and social development. Government policies aimed at addressing these challenges and harnessing the potential of the diaspora are essential for maximizing their impact on India’s economic prosperity in the coming years.

Answer: India’s energy diplomacy for ensuring energy security in the South-Asian region ranges from cross- border electricity trade to supplying petroleum products and setting up liquefied natural gas terminals. Cross-border energy trade is a key aspect of India’s ‘neighbourhood first’ policy, with plans to build energy links to check China’s growing influence. Need for energy cooperation in South Asia:

• To match the energy demand and resource endowments among the South Asian countries:
  • For instance, India, Pakistan and Bangladesh account for the major share of natural gas and coal resources in the region. However, these countries also have huge resource demand due to large populations.
  • Bhutan and Nepal, on the other hand, have hydropower potential in excess of their demand for electricity over the foreseeable future and offer the best prospects for intra-regional electricity export.
• Enable access to clean energy: A large section of the population, particularly in rural areas, lacks access to electricity and relies on the traditional use of biomass for cooking.
• Leverage economies of scale in energy procurement: Regional energy transfer will increase countries’ access to energy resources (from outside the region) and leverage economies of scale thereby.

Existing gaps in South Asia’s energy cooperation:

• Resources constraints: While coal is abundant in India, Bangladesh and Pakistan, it is not considered a fuel of the future due to its pollutant effects and negative impacts on society through mining-induced displacement of vulnerable communities. On the other hand, while gas is comparatively a cleaner hydrocarbon, supplies are depleting in Pakistan and Bangladesh.
• Issues with mobilization of financial resources: Financial resources are needed to develop the necessary energy infrastructure. One of the major reasons for this is the state-centred approach towards energy security that is primarily based on government-to-government interactions and the use of public sector enterprises.
• Lack of diversification of fuel basket: There is an overarching dominance of a single fuel in the energy mix across all SAARC nations. India, for instance, is heavily dependent on coal, Bangladesh and Pakistan on gas, and Bhutan and Nepal are predominantly hydro-based energy generators, which leaves countries vulnerable to disruptions caused by market and technological failure.
• Limited focus on renewable energy: Despite abundant renewable sources available across the region, they have not been efficiently tapped. Afghanistan, for instance, has large renewable resources, which, if exploited fully, could help reduce supply gaps.
• Slow progress on regional and multilateral projects: Despite recent progress in negotiations, no construction has yet taken place and doubts have been raised about the completion of the projects in this regard.
  • Overarching political differences: At present SAARC, SASEC AND BIMSTEC are the three established institutional mechanisms dealing with regional energy cooperation in all or some of the South Asian countries. However, cooperation among member countries has not been as successful as expected due to political differences.

South Asian nations need to see the comparative advantages they hold in various energy sectors, and must come together to benefit each other via trade links. India must take a lead by facilitating financing, developing harmonized technical regulations, deepening professional networks, and enhancing regional business opportunities. In this direction, a high-level group, namely the South Asia Group for Energy (SAGE), has been set up for promoting, initiating and facilitating effective policy dialogue and capacity building on bilateral, sub-regional and regional basis for energy and related issues among South Asian countries.

Answer: India and France enjoy a traditionally close and friendly relationship. In 1998, they entered into a “Strategic Partnership” based on the convergence of views on various international issues. For India, France could act as a doorway to the European Union (EU). The bilateral relationship could help India in deepening its engagement with the EU in the following ways:

• As the President of the Council of EU: Recently, France has taken over the Presidency of the Council. As the President, France will be instrumental in steering the economic, strategic, and security decisions of the EU. This could result in greater convergence between India and the EU in these areas, as India and France share common values and visions.
• The impact of Brexit: The United Kingdom’s departure has left enormous political and financial gaps in the EU thereby shifting the centre of gravity towards other Eurozone members especially Germany and France. With France looking at Brexit as an opportunity for a “European Renaissance and a change in dispensation in Germany, the case for EU balance shifting in favour of France gets strengthened. Thus, a strong bilateral relationship with France will be in India’s interest to take the India-EU relationship to the next level.
• Convergence over the Indo-Pacific: The EU’s strategy for cooperation in the Indo-Pacific will be formally adopted during the French presidency. This is expected to result in greater convergence between India and the EU on the question of the Indo-Pacific, as both India and France firmly share the vision of freedom and rules-based order in the region.
• Facilitate greater trade engagement: India and the EU are presently negotiating a Free Trade Agreement (FTA). India’s successful trade relationship with France (despite the pandemic, bilateral trade stood at US $8.85 billion in 2021) could help in generating greater synergies between India and the EU and could help arrive at a consensus regarding the FTA.

The bilateral relationship between India and France is not only crucial for unlocking the synergies between India and the EU but it is also crucial for sustainable and stable world order, because of the following reasons:

• International forums: In the UN Security Council and other international forums, where competing and complex sets of interests affect choices of members, France has been a reliable, strong and consistent partner of India.
• Development cooperation in other regions: Indo-French partnership is critical for India to safeguard its interests, including the security of the sea lanes, freedom of navigation and the protection of the marine commons. It also works jointly to uphold international law and support the organic evolution of a rules-based regional architecture and for development in other regions, for instance, Indo-French cooperation for development in Africa.
• Cooperation for environment protection and sustainability: The Indo-French cooperation for sustainable development is crucial. Together, they have taken various steps such as declaring the year 2021-22 as the Indo-French Year of the Environment, formation of the International Solar Alliance, etc.
• Space cooperation: India and France have a rich history of cooperation in the field of space. They have issued a “Joint Vision for Space Cooperation” and both advocate peaceful and constructive development of the space sector. The two countries have also cooperated for various space programmes such as Gaganyaan, GSAT-11, etc.
• Cooperation for strategic autonomy and multilateralism: India sees France as a resident power in the Indo-Pacific and considers France to be indispensable for ensuring peace and stability in the region. Both countries not only share the vision of free and rules-based conduct in the Indo-Pacific region but also the vision of strategic autonomy and a multi-polar world.

Thus, India’s strong bilateral relations with France will not only be a fundamental anchor in shoring up the Brussels-India dynamic during its presidency but it is also crucial for protecting the commons and upholding international law and multilateralism.

Answer: China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) is an ambitious infrastructure project that aims to build land and sea routes to link Asia, Africa, and Europe. Many policy analysts believe that the BRI is a state- backed campaign for global Chinese dominance and presents the following apprehensions:

• Chinese investments in strategic sectors in developing and struggling economies have led to severe degree of economic dependence of these countries on China.
• Due to the unsustainable debt-for-infrastructure deals, the host countries find themselves handing over substantial tracts of territory and natural resources to the Chinese, for example, the Hambantota port in Sri Lanka.
• Several BRI projects violate the global principle of sovereignty and territorial integrity, for instance, the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor in Pakistan Occupied Kashmir.
• Many analysts believe that China is pursuing a ‘String of Pearls’ geo-economic strategy in the Indian Ocean, through which it may seize control of the regional choke points.
• The host countries do not find opportunities to create skill and employment through these projects as almost 90% of all BRI contracts are executed by Chinese construction companies using Chinese labour.

In this context, the Build Back Better World (B3W) of G7 and the EU’s ‘Global Gateway’ are deemed as alternatives that can fund the global infrastructure gap. BRI vs B3W:

• The focus of both BRI and B3W differs. BRI is primarily focused on traditional hard infrastructure’ i.e., ports, roads, dams, railways, electric power plants, and telecommunication facilities. In comparison, the B3W focuses on “softer” outcomes, namely improvements in climate, health and health security, modernized digital technology, and gender equity and equality.
• However, the G-7 and their partners have deep experience with bilateral and multilateral development finance, which could help address the $40+ trillion global infrastructure gaps identified by it.

BRI vs Global Gateway:

• The Global Gateway, similar to the BRI, aims at upgrading transport, digital and energy networks and making them smarter, greener and more sustainable. However, its target is broader as it also includes strengthening health, education, and research systems across the world.
• The Global Gateway aims to mobilize 300 billion Euro until 2027 from public and private sources. It is in no match to the financial assistance provided through BRI. Besides, it is not fresh money and the majority of the capital consists of existing funds and loans guaranteed under different agreements. It is also questionable whether private sectors would participate or not as long-term investment in developing countries are risky.
• The Global Gateway has started later in comparison to the BRI. By the end of 2021, 145 countries, including 18 EU members such as Greece, Greek Cyprus, Italy, Portugal, and Austria, have already signed on to the BRI, and China has already invested about $2.5 trillion.
• The Global Gateway’s value-based approach conditions i.e. release of funds and investments on transparency and good governance will provide challenges as many countries in Africa and South-East Asia have undemocratic regimes.
• Global Gateway’s present focus is its periphery, mainly Africa and eastern Europe, while the BRI encompasses the 6 major economic corridors across the world. However, the Central European and East European nations are still reliant on EU structural funds and cannot take a stand against Western Europe.

The two initiatives are timely interventions. However, loans might give the lending countries power and influence over the domestic and foreign policy of the countries accepting the loans. To counter the neo-colonialist policy of any nation, it is essential that the rest of the world provides an integrated alternative approach rather than individual commitments. The developing countries also need to be aware and resist falling trap to the hidden agenda.