Editorial #1 Genocide and the world’s averted gaze

Introduction

On January 27, 1945, Soviet soldiers liberated Auschwitz-Birkenau, uncovering the remnants of Nazi atrocities—8,000 survivors, piles of personal belongings, and the horrific evidence of the industrialized extermination of 1.1 million people, primarily European Jews. As the world commemorates the 80th anniversary of this liberation, it is imperative to reflect on why the global pledge of “never again” continues to fail in preventing genocides.

A Permanent Stain on Human History

The 1948 Genocide Convention defines genocide as acts committed with intent to destroy, wholly or partly, a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group. Despite this legal framework, genocide has marred history repeatedly. On December 9, 2020, UN Secretary-General António Guterres reminded the world that genocide is often preceded by clear warning signs, yet these are frequently ignored.

Nazi Persecution of Jews

After assuming power in 1933, the Nazis institutionalized the persecution of Jews through hundreds of laws, culminating in the Nuremberg Laws of 1935, which stripped Jews of German citizenship. Attempts by Jews to emigrate faced bureaucratic hurdles, xenophobia, and tightening immigration quotas in countries like the U.S. and the U.K., which worsened after the 1929 Stock Market Crash. Even after 1938, when Germany forbade Jewish emigration, neighboring European countries failed to provide refuge. The tragic culmination of these failures was the Holocaust, claiming the lives of six million Jews.

The Broken Promise of “Never Again”

In 1945, the world vowed to prevent another Holocaust. Yet, genocides have occurred repeatedly:

• Cambodia (1975-1979): The Khmer Rouge’s communist vision led to the deaths of over two million people, with Cold War politics shaping inadequate international responses.
• Rwanda (1994): In just 100 days, nearly 1 million Tutsi and moderate Hutu were massacred, as UN peacekeepers stood by helplessly.
• Srebrenica (1995): Despite being declared a UN “safe zone,” 8,000 Bosnian Muslims were executed due to international inaction.
• Darfur (2003-2005): The International Criminal Court (ICC) recognized the deaths of 200,000 people as genocide, yet violence persists in Sudan.

Gaza: A Contemporary Reality

As leaders commemorate Auschwitz’s liberation, Gaza remains a haunting reminder of the fragility of global commitments to human rights. Over 47,000 people, predominantly women and children, have perished in recent conflicts. The International Court of Justice (ICJ) is examining allegations of genocide against Israel, while the ICC has issued arrest warrants for both Israeli and Hamas leaders. However, Western nations have criticized these legal actions, reflecting a selective approach to justice and human suffering.

Conclusion

Genocide is not a relic of history; it is an ongoing reality enabled by global indifference. While every nation has the right to self-defense, the boundary between defense and genocide must not be blurred. The international community must ensure that the pledge of “never again” is upheld through proactive measures, unbiased accountability, and unyielding moral responsibility. Ignoring these duties is tantamount to complicity.

Editorial #2 An enduring commitment to the Indo-Pacific

Context

The return of Donald Trump as the 47th President of the United States marks a significant moment in global geopolitics, particularly for the Indo-Pacific region. Under his renewed leadership, the Indo-Pacific is expected to gain even greater prominence, with a sharper focus on hard power dynamics and strategic alliances. The presence of foreign ministers from India, Japan, and Australia—the key members of the Quad—at his inauguration underscores the importance of this grouping in the evolving U.S. foreign policy vision.

As the U.S. doubles down on deepening defence, economic, and technological partnerships with like-minded nations, Trump 2.0 is poised to address both emerging challenges and enduring threats in the Indo-Pacific while reinforcing regional stability.

Importance of the Indo-Pacific

Strategic Recalibration

During his first term, President Trump initiated a pivotal shift in Washington’s approach to the region:

1. Rebranding to ‘Indo-Pacific’: The term ‘Indo-Pacific’ replaced the traditional ‘Asia-Pacific,’ reflecting a broader geopolitical lens that encompassed the Indian Ocean alongside East Asia and the Pacific Rim. This emphasized the significance of securing sea lines of communication (SLOCs), tackling maritime challenges, and countering China’s growing regional influence.
2. Multifaceted Engagement: The Indo-Pacific narrative expanded beyond traditional economic cooperation to integrate defence, security, and political considerations, signalling the region’s importance for global trade, stability, and strategic balance.

Structural Changes in U.S. Security Policy

Trump’s administration brought structural shifts in U.S. defence frameworks to align with Indo-Pacific priorities:

• The U.S. Pacific Command was renamed the U.S. Indo-Pacific Command in 2018, highlighting the operational focus on the region.
• The Office of the Secretary of Defence established specialized units to strengthen ties with Indo-Pacific allies and partners.

Revival of the Quad

The Trump administration reinvigorated the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (Quad), recognizing its strategic potential in 21st-century geopolitics:

• Institutional Strengthening: The Quad was elevated to the ministerial level, paving the way for enhanced collaboration in areas like maritime security, supply chain resilience, and technological standardization.
• Shared Vision: The grouping emerged as a platform for like-minded democracies—India, Japan, Australia, and the U.S.—to collectively address regional challenges.

Continuity Under the Biden Administration

President Biden inherited the Indo-Pacific framework and expanded its scope:

• Convened the first-ever Quad Leaders’ Summit in 2021, reflecting a commitment to multilateralism.
• Broadened the Quad’s agenda to include vaccine distribution, climate change, critical technologies, and infrastructure development.
• Introduced the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework (IPEF) in 2022, complementing strategic focus with economic engagement.

Biden’s emphasis on a rules-based order and inclusive development in the Indo-Pacific aligned the Quad’s mission with global governance goals, ensuring continuity in U.S. policy.

Prospects for Trump 2.0

A More Assertive Indo-Pacific Strategy

With bipartisan consensus on the region’s importance, Trump’s renewed term is likely to:

1. Adopt a Hard Power Approach: A sharper focus on countering China’s influence through increased defence cooperation and robust security postures.
2. Strengthen Quad Partnerships: Rely on India, Japan, and Australia to share the burden of regional security while deepening strategic collaboration in maritime, technological, and economic domains.

Early Foreign Policy Moves

The Trump administration’s first major foreign policy initiative was a Quad foreign ministers’ meeting on January 21. U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio underscored China as the most formidable adversary, reaffirming Washington’s commitment to the Indo-Pacific. Key outcomes included:

• A joint statement emphasizing international law, peace, stability, and maritime security.
• Opposition to unilateral actions that alter the status quo through force or coercion.
• Agreement to enhance maritime, economic, and technological security, and promote resilient supply chains.

Preparing for the Quad Summit

The Quad members also pledged regular ministerial engagements, with India preparing to host a leaders’ summit. The grouping’s role in ensuring a free, open, and rules-based Indo-Pacific will remain central to Trump’s foreign policy agenda.

Conclusion

Under Trump 2.0, the Indo-Pacific is set to retain its strategic centrality, but with a sharper focus on hard power dynamics. While the region’s geopolitical landscape has evolved since Trump’s last term, his renewed leadership will likely prioritize strengthening security frameworks alongside fostering broader agendas in economic and technological cooperation.

For India, as a key player in the Quad and the Indo-Pacific, this offers opportunities to bolster its strategic and economic influence, ensuring regional stability while advancing its national interests. The enduring commitment to the Indo-Pacific underscores its significance as the fulcrum of 21st-century geopolitics, demanding collective action and unwavering resolve.