ArticlePDF Available

THE GLIMPSES OF INDIA'S FOREIGN POLICY IN THE WAKE OF THE COVID-19

Authors:
Aadil Ahmed Shairgojri at Annamalai University
Aadil Ahmed Shairgojri
Download full-text PDF
Read full-text
Download citation

Abstract

The Covid 19 pandemic affected people worldwide, and its effects continue to be felt today. The pandemic's impact and consequences vary depending on one's personal and social status. COVID- 19 in India was a flop. An outbreak of coronavirus illnesses and deaths in 2021 plunged India into a humanitarian crisis. In order to reduce global vaccine inequity, India needs to use its world�renowned pharmaceutical manufacturing capabilities to provide COVID-19 vaccines to low�income countries. It should force India to rethink its domestic and foreign policies. With China's rise and India's national interests in a more dangerous world, the COVID-19 disaster forced India to rebuild its humanitarian reputation. This article contains in-depth information on the changes that have been implemented in India's foreign policy as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic
Content uploaded by Aadil Ahmed Shairgojri
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Aadil Ahmed Shairgojri on Jul 09, 2022
Content may be subject to copyright.
International Journal of Educational Review, Law And Social Sciences |IJERLAS
E-ISSN: 2808-487X | https://radjapublika.com/index.php/IJERLAS
455
THE GLIMPSES OF INDIA'S FOREIGN POLICY IN THE WAKE OF THE
COVID-19
Aadil Ahmad Shairgojri
Department of Political science and Public Administration
Research Scholar of Annamalai University Tamil Nadu, India
E-mail: aadilhassan1995@gmail.com
Abstract
The Covid 19 pandemic affected people worldwide, and its effects continue to be felt today. The
pandemic's impact and consequences vary depending on one's personal and social status. COVID-
19 in India was a flop. An outbreak of coronavirus illnesses and deaths in 2021 plunged India into a
humanitarian crisis. In order to reduce global vaccine inequity, India needs to use its world-
renowned pharmaceutical manufacturing capabilities to provide COVID-19 vaccines to low-
income countries. It should force India to rethink its domestic and foreign policies. With China's
rise and India's national interests in a more dangerous world, the COVID-19 disaster forced India
to rebuild its humanitarian reputation. This article contains in-depth information on the changes
that have been implemented in India's foreign policy as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Keywords: Foreign Policy, Covid, Vaccine, Ban and Relations etc
1. INTRODUCTION
A state's foreign policies are broad goals that help it decide what to do and how to act when
it meets other states. People, policies, and the actions of other countries all play a role in the
development of foreign policy. In India, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs is in charge of this job. For
example, it has the 4th largest army in the world, the 5th largest GDP in real terms, and the 3rd
largest GDP in PPP. Apart from its nuclear capabilities, it is a global power and a potential
superpower. It is a Commonwealth of Nations member as well as a member of BRICS, an acronym
for Brazil, Russia, China, South Africa, and India. India founded the Non-Aligned Movement and
is a supporter of SAARC's "Neighbourhood First" and "Look East" policies, which seek to
strengthen economic and strategic ties with other East Asian countries. India had already exported
vaccines to 92 countries and received foreign aid from 27 countries prior to Vaccine Maitri. India's
regional hegemony was also based on historical ties, material assistance, and political strength.
2. RESEARCH OBJECTIVES
✓ To analyse and explain the role of India’s foreign policy during Covid 19 pandemic.
3. METHODOLOGY
When it comes to supporting its claims, the article is both descriptive and analytical in
nature. It makes extensive use of secondary sources to do so, including newspaper articles,
magazine articles, and investigation reports, among other things.
4. DISCUSSION
The Covid-19 pandemic presented new challenges to the international system in 2021-22,
which was still grappling with them in 2021-22. The increase in COVID-19 cases in India has
resulted in economic turmoil in both the domestic and international income markets. The death toll
had risen dramatically since the outbreak of the third wave and the Omicron virus. As a result of
this surge, the country was forced to accept foreign assistance for strategic economic initiatives.
The second wave of Covid-19 and the agonising consequences that followed have prompted India
Volume 2 No. 3 (2022)
THE GLIMPSES OF INDIA'S FOREIGN POLICY IN THE WAKE OF THE COVID-19
Aadil Ahmad Shairgojri | DOI: https://doi.org/10.54443/ijerlas.v2i3.276
456
International Journal of Educational Review, Law And Social Sciences |IJERLAS
E-ISSN: 2808-487X | https://radjapublika.com/index.php/IJERLAS
to accept foreign aid for the first time in 17 years. As a result, the country of India will almost
certainly face far-reaching strategic repercussions from this decision.
Experts say that if the pandemic doesn't stop, India's claim to be the most important
country in the region could be damaged. It will be because of this that India's foreign policy in the
next few years will be affected by these things. India has long been the most powerful country in
the region, but it was built on a foundation of material help, political power, and strong historical
ties. Because of the Covid-19 agreement, India will not be able to help its neighbours, so it will not
have as much power. History alone may not be enough to keep India's regional power in the long
run. Using chequebook diplomacy, China already wants to get into India's strategic space, the
Indian subcontinent, which is a big part of the country.
It has been accelerated by the second wave of Covid-19, as India's ability to stand up to
China in recent years has been significantly weakened, both in terms of material power and balance
of power considerations, as well as political will. Covid-19 will be implemented to halt military
spending and modernization, as well as to divert the country's attention away from global
diplomacy and regional geopolitics. Due to decreased military spending and decreased diplomatic
attention given to regional geopolitics, India's role in the development of the Quad is in question. In
spite of the importance of India to the Indo-Pacific project, India's inability to lead and China's
success in courting smaller states in the region will lead to a shift in power in China's favour in the
long run. Economic distress, a drop in FDI and industrial production, and an increase in
unemployment have all contributed to Covid-19's negative impact on India's long-term strategic
ambitions.... India's foreign policy after Covid-19 will likely be described as a holding operation.
The United States and China's relationship: To normalise relations with China, it may be
necessary to deal with India's Covid-19-related issues. As a result of the events of September 11,
India may be forced to be more accommodative toward China in addition to the devastating return
of COVID-19 and the damage it has caused. Relationship between India and the U.S.: In the wake
of COVID-19, India may find it more difficult to resist calls for a closer military ties with the
United States
There was some progress in the first wave of the pandemic. Covid-19, on the other hand,
will open up new opportunities for regional cooperation, especially through the South Asian
Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC). People in India should use the term "regional
health multilateralism," which means working together with other countries when there is a health
emergency like this one. Traditional geopolitics in South Asia should be put on the same level as
health diplomacy, environmental issues, and regional connectivity, just like they are now.
4.1. India’s Response to COVID-19
It is fair to say that the Vaccine Maitri initiative helped to strengthen India's position as the
"pharmacy of the world." India's efforts to rapidly expand vaccine production and supplies at
critical junctures in the pandemic have been publicly commended by world leaders. As of the end
of the year 2021, India had provided more than 110 million vaccine doses to 97 countries around
the world. To combat the catastrophic resurgence of the COVID-19 second wave, more than 25
countries have pledged financial assistance to the Indian government.
The United States' inability to approve raw materials for vaccine production in India
resulted in the concept of Hobbesian realism being coined. This factor was superfluous in the
context of Indian foreign policy. In his opinion, India had beaten the pandemic and had the
potential to distribute vaccines throughout the world, according to Prime Minister Modi. He made a
similar promise at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, in January 2021. PM Modi
made a commitment to deliver 5 billion vaccine doses by the end of 2022 at the Group of 20
summit in October, which took place in Argentina. Covid-19 vaccines, which were manufactured
in India and distributed to 18 countries in the region, assisted India in assisting friendly African
countries in overcoming the pandemic in the region. To assist Bangladesh in its on-going efforts to
combat the pandemic, India donated 3.3 million Covishield vaccines to the country in December.
International Journal of Educational Review, Law And Social Sciences |IJERLAS
E-ISSN: 2808-487X | https://radjapublika.com/index.php/IJERLAS
457
This was the largest shipment of Covid-19 vaccines made in India that India has ever given
to a foreign country. Assistance related to Covid-19 was also provided in 2021, with 400,000 doses
of Covishield vaccine being sent as grant assistance to Bhutan in March of that year, according to
the United Nations Development Programme. On May 11, 2021, the Prime Minister spoke with
Bhutanese Prime Minister Lotay Tshering, in which he expressed solidarity in the countries' joint
efforts to combat the Covid-19 pandemic, according to the Prime Minister.
The total amount of bilateral medical assistance provided by India to Myanmar in the fight
against Covid-19 is approximately USD 2.3 million. Additionally, India has provided medical
assistance to Myanmar in the amount of USD 200,000 through the ASEAN Centre for
Humanitarian Assistance. Myanmar will receive a donation of 10,000 tonnes of rice and wheat
from India, according to the government..
4.2. Support to India during COVID-19
The second wave of the pandemic, which occurred between April and June of 2021, placed
enormous strain on our health-care systems. Medical supplies such as oxygen cylinders and
concentrators were in short supply, causing widespread panic. In the Ministry, a Special Control
Room that is open 24 hours a day, seven days a week has been established. Crucial supplies, such
as Liquid Medical Oxygen (LMO), oxygen generation plants, concentrators, ECMO machines,
vaccines, and essential medicines, were procured from a variety of sources throughout the world.
A total of more than 50 countries have shown their support for India during this difficult
time by donating critical medical supplies. The Ministry worked with counterparts in the United
States and Europe to make it easier to import pharmaceutical ingredients. The Ministry also
collaborated with foreign regulatory agencies in order to expedite the approval of vaccines that
were "Made in India." Covishield was approved by the World Health Organization in February
2021, and Covaxin was approved by the World Health Organization in November 2021.
5. CONCLUSION
Post-COVID-19 pandemic scenarios would limit Indian foreign policy in some ways.
China's strategic autonomy could be challenged by India, which would make it more important in
the future. India stood firm and set an example for recovery after the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunamis
devastated Tamil Nadu and the Andaman Nicobar Islands, but India also offered assistance to
neighbouring countries.
India's ability to maintain its position as the world's largest economy and a potential ally
for its allies is a bright spot in the gloomy scenario of a pandemic. As part of a global effort to
combat infectious diseases, Indian vaccine manufacturing capabilities should be utilised. As soon
as the US-China standoff is over, we'll have to choose a side. Relations with Pakistan are expected
to remain unchanged in the Covid scenario, and China's manufacturing model of going for the
cheapest is expected to remain unchanged, as the global supply chain before the pandemic changes.
Committees are expected to vet China's investments.
When it comes to taking sides in the US-China strategic competition, Evin Feigenbaum
says that India should wait for the best opportunities to do so. Today, Nepal is embroiled in a
border dispute with India at the behest of another country, China, five years ago, when China's rise
was still a distant possibility Until it can make use of the enormous pool of skilled workers it
already has because of China's dominance, India will face an uphill battle.
Acknowledgement
I would like to express my heartfelt appreciation to each and every one of you for allowing
me to complete this paper. I am especially appreciative of the numerous researchers and inspectors
who worked tirelessly to prepare papers on subjects related to my article and work throughout the
process.
Volume 2 No. 3 (2022)
THE GLIMPSES OF INDIA'S FOREIGN POLICY IN THE WAKE OF THE COVID-19
Aadil Ahmad Shairgojri | DOI: https://doi.org/10.54443/ijerlas.v2i3.276
458
International Journal of Educational Review, Law And Social Sciences |IJERLAS
E-ISSN: 2808-487X | https://radjapublika.com/index.php/IJERLAS
REFERENCES
Allen, J., Burns, N., Garrett, L., Haass, R. N., Ikenberry, G. J., Mahbubani, K., ... & Walt, S. M.
(2020). How the world will look after the coronavirus pandemic. Foreign Policy, 20(2020),
97-103.
Bag, R., Ghosh, M., Biswas, B., & Chatterjee, M. (2020). Understanding the spatio‐temporal
pattern of COVID‐19 outbreak in India using GIS and India's response in managing the
pandemic. Regional Science Policy & Practice, 12(6), 1063-1103.
Balajee, A., Tomar, S., & Udupa, G. (2020). Fiscal Situation of India in the Time of COVID-
19. Indian School of Business.
Chadha, A. (2021). India’s COVID-19 Strategy and implications for its relations in the Indian
Ocean. Ritsumeikan Journal of Asia Pacific Studies, 39(01), 82.
Chattu, V. K., Singh, B., Kaur, J., & Jakovljevic, M. (2021). COVID-19 vaccine, TRIPS, and
global health diplomacy: India’s role at the WTO platform. BioMed Research
International, 2021.
Chaudhary, M., Sodani, P. R., & Das, S. (2020). Effect of COVID-19 on economy in India: Some
reflections for policy and programme. Journal of Health Management, 22(2), 169-180.
Ghosh, A., Nundy, S., & Mallick, T. K. (2020). How India is dealing with COVID-19
pandemic. Sensors International, 1, 100021.
Ghosh, N., Saha, I., Sarkar, J. P., & Maulik, U. (2021). Strategies for COVID-19 Epidemiological
Surveillance in India: Overall Policies Till June 2021. Frontiers in Public Health, 9.
Greg, S. (2020). The Corona Virus pandemic and global transformations: Making or breaking
international orders?. Контуры глобальных трансформаций: политика, экономика,
право, 13(5), 20-37.
GUPTA, M. DEFINING THE ROLE OF PUBLIC RELATIONS IN INDIA’S FOREIGN
POLICY.
Hoekman, B., Fiorini, M., & Yildirim, A. (2020). COVID-19: Export controls and international
cooperation. COVID-19 and trade policy: Why turning inward won’t work, 77.
KUMAR, R. (2021). Introduction: India–East Asia Relations in the Post-COVID-19 Era. The
Journal of Indian and Asian Studies, 2(02), 2103001.
Kuppalli, K., Gala, P., Cherabuddi, K., Kalantri, S. P., Mohanan, M., Mukherjee, B., ... & Pair, M.
(2021). India's COVID-19 crisis: a call for international action. The Lancet, 397(10290),
2132-2135.
Lancet, T. (2020). India under COVID-19 lockdown. Lancet (London, England), 395(10233),
1315.
Purushothaman, U., & Moolakkattu, J. S. (2021). The Politics of the COVID-19 Pandemic in
India. Social Sciences, 10(10), 381.
Rana, V., Patel, P., Mohyuddin, S., & Deb, P. (2021). Vaccine Maitri: India faces a balancing act
with its COVID-19 diplomacy. LSE Business Review.
Shingal, A. (2020). Responding to the COVID-19 crisis: policy priorities for India. COVID-19,
101.
Sikri, R. (2009). Challenge and strategy: rethinking India's foreign policy. SAGE Publications
India.
Taneja, P., & Bali, A. S. (2021). India’s domestic and foreign policy responses to COVID-19. The
Round Table, 110(1), 46-61.
Xiong, Y., Gao, M., van Duijn, B., Choi, H., van Horssen, F., & Wang, M. (2021). International
policies and challenges on the legalization of traditional medicine/herbal medicines in the
fight against COVID-19. Pharmacological research, 166, 105472.
INDO-RUSSIA RELATIONS WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO UKRAINIAN IMBROGLIO: AN ANALYTICAL STUDY
Article
Full-text available
  • Feb 2023
Russia has been a longstanding and time-tested partner for India. Development of India-Russia relations has been a key pillar of India’s Foreign policy. India and Russia have enjoyed good relations since 1947 wherein Russia helped India in attaining its goal of economic self-sufficiency through investment in areas of heavy machine-building , mining, energy production and steel plants. Later India and Soviet Union signed the Treaty of Peace and Friendship in august 1971 which was the manifestation of shared goals of the two nations as well as blueprint for the strengthening of regional and global peace and security. After the dissolution of Soviet Union, India and Russia entered into a new Treaty of Friendship and cooperation in January 1993 and a bilateral Military-Technical Cooperation agreement in 1994. As the Indian government’s response to the Russian-Ukrainian crisis received a mixed reaction, it puts a serious introspective question to Indian lawmakers: is Indian foreign policy still dependent upon the big superpowers or are we moving towards Atmanirbhar Bharat (self-reliant India)? After abstaining in UN Security Council, New Delhi again abstained from voting in United Nations General Assembly on a resolution condemning “in the strongest terms” Russia’s belligerence against Ukraine and calling on Moscow to “immediately, completely, and unconditionally withdraw all of its military forces from Ukraine’s territory within its internationally recognised borders.” In the current crisis, India has strived to maintain a non-aligned collinear, avoiding pointing a finger or naming names. This has proven to be challenging in the present predicament. It has done so by reiterating fundamental principles enshrined in the UN Charter and international law, but also appeals for a halt to violence and to return for dialogue as “the only response to addressing disagreements and conflicts, however daunting that may sound at this time.”
View
Introduction: India–East Asia Relations in the Post-COVID-19 Era
Article
Full-text available
  • Oct 2021
This article argues that India-East Asia relations are likely to enter a new phase in the post-COVID-19 era. The COVID-19 pandemic has hastened the decline of the post-Cold War liberal order that has so far promoted mutual trust and cooperation and underpinned peace and prosperity. This development has enormous implications for East Asia’s international relations. Indeed, significant changes appear to have occurred in the region during the pandemic. On the one hand, the pandemic has accelerated China's growing supremacy, but on the other hand, it has also enhanced its rivalry with all major liberal powers, including the US, India, Japan and Australia. Moreover, the geo-economic front has also witnessed drastic changes as pandemic-induced economic nationalism, economic retaliation, and supply chain restructuring have swept across the region. Hence, it is not premature to proclaim the post-pandemic East Asia will differ from the post-Cold War liberal era. That, in turn, raises important questions: How has the COVID-19 influenced India–East Asia relations? Will the post-COVID-19 era transform India's ties with East Asia? If so, how will this relationship change, and to what extent? This article, and this special issue more broadly, seek to answer these questions. In doing so, we first examine the major geopolitical and geo-economic issues between India and East Asia. Thereafter, we analyze India's relations with South Korea, China, Japan and ASEAN.
View
The Politics of the COVID-19 Pandemic in India
Article
Full-text available
  • Oct 2021
India responded to the COVID-19 measures abruptly and in a tough manner during the early stages of the pandemic. Its response did not take into consideration the socio-economic life of the majority of people in India who work in the informal sector and the sheer diversity of the country. The imposition of a nationwide lockdown using the Disaster Management Act 2005 enabled the Union Government to impose its will on the whole country. India has a federal system, and health is a state subject. Such an overbearing role on the part of the Central Government did not, however, lead to coordinated action. Some states expressed their differences, but eventually all complied with the central guidelines. The COVID-19 pandemic struck at a time when an agitation was going on in the country, especially in New Delhi, against the Citizen Amendment Act. The lockdown was imposed all of a sudden and was extended until 31 May. This led to a humanitarian crisis involving a large number of domestic migrant workers, who were left stranded with no income for survival and no means of transport to go home. Indians abroad who were intending to return also found themselves trapped. Dissenting voices were silenced through arrests and detentions during this period, and the victims included rights activists, students, lawyers, and even some academics. Power tussles and elections continued as usual and the social distancing norms were often compromised. Since COVID-19 containment measures were carried out primarily at the state level, this paper will also selectively draw on their experiences. India also used the opportunity to burnish its credentials as the ‘pharmacy of the world’ by sending medical supplies to over a hundred countries. In the second wave, there were many deaths, but the government was accused of undercounting them and of not doing enough to deliver vaccines to Indians. This paper will deal with the conflicts, contestations and the foreign policy fallout following the onset of the pandemic and the measures adopted by the union government to cope with them, with less focus on the economic and epidemiological aspects of pandemic management. This paper looks at previous studies, press reports, and press releases by government agencies to collect the needed data. A descriptive and analytical approach is followed in the paper.
View
COVID-19 Vaccine, TRIPS, and Global Health Diplomacy: India’s Role at the WTO Platform
Article
Full-text available
In light of the devastation caused by COVID-19, the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) and vaccine research and development (R&D) have been occupying a prominent position in the field of global health diplomacy (GHD). Most countries, international organizations, and charitable organizations have been engaged in the R&D of COVID-19 vaccines to ensure timely affordability and accessibility to all countries. Concomitantly, the World Trade Organization (WTO) provides some provisions and enforcements regarding copyrights, patents, trademarks, geographical indications, and industrial designs. Given these safeguards, it is considered that intellectual property rights (IPRs) have become major barriers to the affordability and accessibility of vaccines/medicines/technology, particularly to the developing/least developed countries. Realizing the gravity of the pandemic impact, as well as its huge population and size, India has elevated this issue in its global health diplomacy by submitting a joint proposal with South Africa to the World Trade Organization (WTO) for a temporary waiver of IPRs to ensure timely affordability and accessibility of COVID-19 medical products to all countries. However, the issue of the temporary waive off had become a geopolitical issue. Countries that used to claim per se as strong advocates of human rights, egalitarianism, and healthy democracy have opposed this proposal. In this contrasting milieu, this paper is aimed at examining how the TRIPS has become a barrier for developing countries’ development and distribution of vaccines/technology; secondly, how India strategizes its role in the WTO in pursuant of its global health diplomacy? We conclude that the IPRs regime should not become a barrier to the accessibility/affordability of essential drugs and vaccines. To ensure access, India needs to get more engaged in GHD with all the involved global stakeholders to get strong support for their joint proposal. The developed countries that rejected/resisted the proposal can rethink their full support. 1. Introduction In the context of COVID-19, the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) has been identified as one of the most significant barriers to vaccine and medicine affordability, particularly for developing and least developed countries. TRIPS is a hard law instrument that is enforceable and binding; it mandates patent protection for pharmaceutical products for up to 20 years, and any violations result in trade sanctions [1]. Apart from the lack of pharmaceutical research and development (R&D), patents on pharmaceutical products and processes and poverty used to become double whammies for third world countries. Given the monopolies over vaccine production, marketing and fixing the higher prices maximize profits by the multinational pharmaceutical and drug companies/developed countries. Global health diplomacy is an integral part of Indian foreign policy. Recognizing the urgency of the situation, India and South Africa have jointly submitted a draught request to the World Trade Organization (WTO) for a temporary waiver of intellectual property (IP) rights to make COVID-19 medications affordable and accessible to all. [2]. In this scenario, the main focus of this paper is to examine how the pharmaceutical TRIPS have become a barrier to the development and distribution of vaccines/technology to the poor countries. The paper also argues why the developed countries (advocates of health, democracy, egalitarianism, and protection of human rights) are refusing to support the temporary IP waiver proposal for the humanitarian cause. Even though international trade cooperation has suffered from geopolitical shifts and competition in the midst of the pandemic crisis, governments can align their trade and health policies to serve the global community by engaging in GHD [3]. Because of this COVID-19 pandemic and the consequent lack of vaccines/medicines, many developed countries are actively engaged in vaccine R&D. According to recent findings from a country pandemic risk exposure measurement model, the national risk management strategies in Italy and Spain have anticipated these needs [4]. On the contrary, public criticism in many developing nations has grown exponentially, as issues about the legitimacy of patents on life-saving vaccines have been raised. This has contributed to the call for modifications or amendments to the TRIPS, which many claims are too strongly favoring private and commercial rights and interest, and against public interests. However, developing countries such as India and South Africa, which are seen as the emerging leaders of third world countries, are concerned that TRIPS may prevent the patients from these countries’ from accessing essential COVID-19 vaccines/medicines/technologies. Given this context, we conducted a review to examine how TRIPS has become a barrier to the development and distribution of vaccines/and technology in developing countries. Second, we looked at how India strategizes its involvement in the WTO through its global health diplomacy. 2. Methodology A literature search was done in all the major databases, namely, PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and Google search engine for the terms “COVID-19” OR “COVID-19 Vaccine” OR “Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS)” OR “World Trade Organization” OR “Global Health Diplomacy” AND “India.” All relevant titles were screened, and essential information was extracted in preparation for this review. A total of 40 full-text articles and eight other reports were reviewed, and the findings are discussed in three main sections, namely, (1) COVID-19 medical products and TRIPS, (2) COVID-19 Vaccine and TRIPS, and (3) Global Health Diplomacy: India’s Role at the WTO Platform. 3. Results 3.1. COVID-19 Medical Products and TRIPS The economic and social disruptions caused by the COVID-19 pandemic are devastating. Millions of people are at the risk of falling into extreme poverty. Globally, there have been 115,653,459 cases, including 2,571,823 deaths reported to WHO as of March 6, 2021 [5]. It had become a critical challenge for the developing and least developed countries where healthcare systems are not adequate to care for the affected people. With its great toll of lives and strain on the healthcare systems, COVID-19 has been a great challenge for such countries and even the developed countries. On December 2, 2020, WHO has published its official release of “Draft Landscape of COVID-19 Candidate vaccines 2020,” which contained a total of 51 Candidate Vaccines in Clinical Evaluation with more additions coming in [6]. Treatments available for patients suffering from an active clinical form of the disease also remain scattered and without firm consensus on efficiency ranging from old antimalarial drug chloroquine [7] over convalescent plasma [8] up to novel targeted monoclonal antibodies [9]. Secondly, it had left indelible imprints on unemployment, poverty, hunger, undernourishment, etc. Thirdly, whatever the efforts are being made for vaccines R&D [10] that would likely remain beyond common people’s reach, given the high prices of the same due to TRIPS. A number of studies have already proven that the most developed non-OECD South Asian countries confront significant impediments to the financial affordability of pharmaceuticals for the general public, even in the richest coastal and metropolitan districts of their major cities [11]. Now, how TRIPS is one of the major concerns for the availability of the medicines is the moot question in this context? The intellectual property rights (IPRs) started taking place during the late 19th century, formally concretized in 1995. The IPRs are meant for protecting the creators/agencies’ exclusive rights over the creation/s for a certain period. While the agreement establishes minimum standards for intellectual property right (IPRs) protection in the form of patents, trademarks, geographical indications, industrial designs, and the enforcement of those rights in all WTO member countries, it is primarily concerned with reducing distortions and impediments to international trade. The TRIPS has been conceived very beneficial for society, particularly given the imposition of temporary monopolies and other limitations resulting from private IPRs [12, 13]. By putting legal protections in place and tackling piracy and counterfeiting through the IPs, the creation of new knowledge, innovation, and creativity is being encouraged. Therefore, the costs associated with the R&D can be retrieved, and remuneration would be earned. Matthews [14] argues that the IP regime not only stimulates domestic innovation but also promotes knowledge diffusion, technology transfer and licencing, and Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) to developing and least developed countries, thereby promoting trade and economic development in those countries. On the contrary, Sell and Prakash [1] have argued that the TRIPS has also been subjected to severe criticism since their inception. Recently, on October 16, 2020, during the WTO TRIPS Council meeting, nine WTO members, including the European Union, did not support the proposal though 100 countries showed support for the proposal. Though Canada became the first country worldwide to reform its domestic law to enhance developing countries’ access to patented medicines [15], it did not support the IP waiver proposed by India and South Africa recently in October 2020. It was proposed that Canada should assist developing countries in their calls for greater access to existing pharmaceuticals and technologies, as well as access to new treatments and equipment. Furthermore, it is an excellent time for global solidarity, and Canada should take advantage of this chance to reassess its position on IP acquisition in relation to other domestic and international policy levers [16]. 3.2. COVID-19 Vaccines and TRIPS Since the introduction of research and development in the biological sciences, vaccines have been given a vital place and role in saving millions of lives each year. Vaccines are used to prepare the body’s natural immune system to combat viruses and bacteria. On December 2, 2020, WHO published its official release of “Draft landscape of COVID-19 candidate vaccines 2020,” which contains a list of 51 candidate vaccines in clinical evaluation [6]. Yet, we mentioned ongoing efforts to foster early marketing approvals by shortening phase III development duration, with the first global official launch in Russia [17] for emergency use authorization. However, it has not received fully marketing approval in Russia. Similar accelerated development pathways currently occur in the US, China, India, Germany, UK, and possibly Israel [18]. Against this backdrop, the COVID-19 vaccine R&D program has been ongoing at an unprecedented pace to make a preventable disease vaccine [19]. Even assuming this ends up with several agents of acceptable efficiency–toxicity profile, it remains an open-ended question of public acceptance of massive vaccination. Public opposition to such an epidemiological strategy to achieve herd immunity is notable globally, with a huge population of Pakistan being a convenient example [20]. Many scholars such as Thanh et al. [21] and Fau et al. [22] argued that soon after coronavirus detection in December 2019, the genetic sequencing of COVID-19 was published on January 11, 2020 which has necessitated an urgent international reciprocation to develop a preventive vaccine immediately. Schmidt [23] has reported in one of his opinions that about 80 companies, and institutes in 19 countries have been engaged in COVID-19 vaccine R&D. According to Thanh et al. in their report in the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI), in terms of R&D of COVID-19 vaccine from a geographical standpoint, North America covers 40%; Europe covers approximately 26%; and South America, Africa, Asia, and Australia collectively cover only 30%. These figures indicate that the developed countries monopolize the R&D of the vaccine. International organizations have taken the lead in this direction and formed international alliances to expedite the R&D of vaccines. International organizations such as the World Bank, WHO, along with the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and other International NGOs, have raised a fund of US8.1billionandintroducedtheWHOCOVAXplanforthefairandequitabledistributionofaneventuallylicensedvaccine.CEPIhasalsocreatedanotherfundofUS 8.1 billion and introduced the WHO COVAX plan for the fair and equitable distribution of an eventually licensed vaccine. CEPI has also created another fund of US2 billion from the global partner for the fast-tracked research and clinical testing. Several countries like Belgium, Canada, Germany, Norway, the Netherlands, Switzerland, the UK, and charitable organizations like The Bill and Melinda Gates had contributed about US915andUS 915 and US250 million, respectively, in support of CEPI research and public education support for COVID-19 vaccines [24]. In these times, where vaccine nationalism is on the drive due to the scarcity of vaccines, initially, the COVAX initiative is an instrument for a fairer global distribution [25]. Concomitantly, the Global Research Collaboration for Infectious Disease Preparedness (GLoPID-R) and the International Severe Acute Respiratory and Emerging Infection Consortium have been working toward COVID-19 research and eventual vaccine distribution. A virtual summit was organized with private and government representatives of 52 countries, including 35 heads of state from G7 and G20 nations, who supported the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunization (GAVI). For example, the European Commission had invested about €80 million in CureVac. Here, we must emphasize a crucial role in global health funding by a set of huge non-OECD actors nicknamed Emerging Markets. Notably, the five nations have been known under the acronym BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa) or Emerging Markets Seven (EM7-Brazil, Russia, India, China, Mexico, Indonesia, Turkey) [26]. Real GDP growth rates among the EM7 remained substantially higher than G7 during the entire decade of the last global macroeconomic crisis, 2007-2016. Worldwide economic growth accelerating again in 2017 had roughly half of this growth being attributable to the EM7 and only one quarter to the G7 nations. Thus, the health sector’s investment and their huge impact on the demand and supply of medical goods and services during the COVID-19 pandemic period shall play an inevitably colossal role. Furthermore, these long-term health expenditure trends are likely to become even more prominent as we approach the mid-2020s as per some prominent forecasts [27]. Some countries have been working in the direction of developing COVID-19 vaccines. The Canadian government pooled about CA275millionfor96vaccineresearchprojectsatCanadiancompaniesanduniversities,alongwithacommitmentforCA 275 million for 96 vaccine research projects at Canadian companies and universities, along with a commitment for CA 850 million to the WHO for COVID-19 vaccines and preparedness [28]. The Chinese government has been providing low-rate loans to vaccine companies and research institutes. It had also pledged on May 18 to provide about US2billiontotheWHOforthelatter’sCOVID−19vaccineplans,aswellasaUS 2 billion to the WHO for the latter’s COVID-19 vaccine plans, as well as a US 1 billion loan to Latin America and the Caribbean countries to make its vaccine accessible [29]. France had committed a US4.9millioninvestmentinCOVID−19vaccineresearchundertakenbytheCEPI.Germanycommittedtoinvestingabout€300millioninvestmentinCureVac.SeveralcountrieslikeBelgium,Canada,Germany,Norway,theNetherlands,Switzerland,andtheUKhadcontributedaboutUS 4.9 million investment in COVID-19 vaccine research undertaken by the CEPI. Germany committed to investing about €300 million investment in CureVac. Several countries like Belgium, Canada, Germany, Norway, the Netherlands, Switzerland, and the UK had contributed about US 915 for the COVID-19 vaccines. The other vaccines rolled out with more support from the EU, US, and the UK that are from the Pfizer/BioNTech, AstraZeneca, Moderna, and Johnson & Johnson in early 2021. The US’s federal agencies like Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA) had announced that about US1billionwouldbeinvestedinvaccines.AnadditionalamountofUS 1 billion would be invested in vaccines. An additional amount of US 4 billion would be spent on vaccine development with companies like Sanofi Pasteur and Regeneron. The “Operation Warp Speed” fast-track program announced that it would collaborate with seven businesses to produce COVID19 vaccines, including Johnson & Johnson, Moderna, Merck, Pfizer, and the University of Oxford in partnership with AstraZeneca [30]. From the above discussion, it is clear that most of the countries, international organizations, and charitable organizations engaged in the R&D of COVID vaccines are from the Western world. Currently, the TRIPS has been providing many IPs related to vaccines. TRIPS Article 7 explains the objectives in terms of protection and enforcement of the IPs as “the promotion of technological innovation,” “the transfer and dissemination of technology” to the mutual advantage of both “producers and users of technological knowledge,” and “social and economic welfare.” Article 8 obligates the member countries to protect public health and nutrition and promote the public interests congruent to the TRIPS Agreement provisions [31]. Moreover, it is the fundamental responsibility of sovereign governments to protect their citizens’ health and safety. The Article 73 of the TRIPS Agreement may justifiably be invoked to override IP protections because the pandemic constitutes an emergency in international relations within the meaning of Article 73 (b) [32]. Brooke and Sherris [33] had argued that the availability of vaccines, particularly in the low and middle-income countries, depends mainly on the prior evaluation by the developed countries/regions like the US or European drug regulatory agencies. Moreover, the pharmaceutical manufacturers used to receive a large chunk of revenues from the developed countries. Therefore, there are scanty financial incentives available if the same is not sold in the same markets. Additionally, poorer countries’ health agencies used to take green signals from the developed countries before approving/not approving the new products in the market. Though this is an independent regulatory approval guaranteeing the safety and effectiveness before the use, under such paradigms, the TRIPS can still become a hurdle for the availability of vaccine technology. Guimon et al. [34] stated that the pandemic will not recede until the COVID-19 vaccine is viewed as a global public good. Even the UNAIDS Executive Director Winnie Byanyima, in an open letter to the global pharmaceutical industry leaders, also called on the global pharma industry “to unlock the secrets to their COVID-19 vaccine technologies” to produce a cheap and accessible “People’s Vaccine” and not a profit vaccine [35]. Even a working paper by WTO staff highlighted that the evidence-based debate on the scope and effect of the TRIPS policy options is a task more important today than ever [36]. 4. Discussion 4.1. Global Health Diplomacy: India’s Role at the WTO Platform The outbreak of COVID-19 had taken place in December 2019 in Wuhan, China. Consequently, the same was declared a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC) and “Pandemic” by the WHO on January 30 and March 11 in 2020, respectively [37]. Concomitantly, the WTO has also cautioned that the “Pandemic represents an unprecedented disruption to the global economy and world trade, as production and consumption are scaled back across the globe.” The absence of vaccines/medicines for the ongoing pandemic became a more critical challenge for the entire globe. In this scenario, there was an overwhelming consensus for international collaboration to expedite vaccine development, manufacturing, a supply of effective medical technologies to ensure the protection of all patients across the globe. Even heads of several states urged the world leadership to treat the COVID-19 medical products as global public goods. India has been known as the world’s pharmacy, given its role in producing generic medicines [38]. Global health diplomacy has remained an important part of India’s foreign policy. India has pursued the same at the peak of the pandemic. It had provided more than 150 countries with a wide range of medical and healthcare services, including medicines (hydroxychloroquine and paracetamol) and vaccines (Covishield and Covaxin). It has also collaborated with international organizations for vaccine R&D. It has contributed to the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunization (GAVI) [39]. In this backdrop, once again realizing the gravity of the situation, India and South Africa proposed a temporary waiver (IP/C/W/669) before the WTO’s TRIPS Council as part of its global health diplomacy to expedite the development of medicines, vaccines, and diagnostics for prevention, containment, and treatment of COVID-19 [2]. Furthermore, the proposal casts a wide net, as practically any medical device required to diagnose, treat, or prevent COVID-19 could be eligible for such a waiver [40]. More than 350 civil society organizations and activists worldwide asked WTO member countries to support the Indian and South African joint proposal. Under the proposal’s provisions, countries need to “waive off” the patents, copyrights, and other IPs not only for the products themselves but also for their underlying technologies—without facing WTO charges or penalties for violation of international trade rules. To take the lead further, India and South Africa had argued before the Council for TRIPS that “Given the current global emergency, WTO Members must work together to ensure that intellectual property rights such as patents, industrial designs, copyright, and the protection of undisclosed information do not obstruct timely access to affordable medical products such as vaccines and medicines, or the scaling-up of research, development, manufacturing, and distribution of medical products essential to combat COVID-19” [2]. Many access-to-medicines movements were organized by patient activists, civil society, and health-right groups who stood up to governments’ passivity in the past to resist the pharmaceutical industry’s monopolies for HIV medicines and eventually succeeded in gaining patent relief. These movements have resulted in a significant decrease in the prices of HIV medicines (over 10,000/person/year) dropped by 99% over a decade by allowing generic drugs in developing countries. Currently, the COVID-19 pandemic situation also presents a similar situation as the pandemic has affected every nation. Though in the case of HIV epidemic, it affected the global south more than the north and thus the support came in from the rich nations in Western Europe and North America. However, in the current COVID-19 pandemic, the rich nations have been affected more, with more cases and deaths resulting in global competition, lack of solidarity, and nationalist movements in addressing the domestic economic and health crises. There is a lack of global leadership and international cooperation in the current scenario, with geopolitical shifts leaving behind the interests of the developing nations. Hence, in this current scenario, vaccine nationalism has taken precedence over global cooperation and solidarity. Therefore, if the TRIPS waiver proposal is approved, the access to essential COVID-19 medicines, technologies, and diagnostics will improve drastically [41]. The proposal was also supported by UNAIDS, UNITAID, MSF (Medecins Sans Frontieres), academics, researchers, and numerous civil society organizations [42]. The WHO wholeheartedly lent its support to the Indian and South African proposal. WHO chief had welcomed India and South Africa’s proposal and said “To ease international & intellectual property agreements on #COVID19 vaccines, treatments & tests to make the tools available to all who need them at an affordable cost.” The Indian leadership/health authorities realized that IPs are becoming barriers in the way of “scaling up production of test kit reagents, ventilator valves, N95 respirators, therapeutics, fluorescent proteins and other technologies used in the development of vaccines, etc.” Moreover, the waive-off argument has been advanced, realizing that the existing flexibilities in the TRIPS Agreement are “not adequate to address the fast-changing landscape of COVID19.” The fact that provisions under “compulsory licenses” are limited only to pharmaceutical products rather than the crucial medical devices required for combating the ongoing pandemic. The existing system became extremely onerous and time-consuming and of no practical use when exporters and importers have to comply with the existing provisions. In this backdrop, the joint proposal argued that the IP waiver has been very important, particularly for the developing countries with insufficient or no manufacturing capacities/finance for producing the vaccines/medicines [43]. However, these two are correlated but ultimately different problems. However, the financial resources are currently being raised for ensuring sufficient doses, but not the manufacturing capacities. However, the proposal did not go through, given the rejection and lack of consensus among the developed countries. Rather, the WTO members have been divided into three groups. The first category including Chad, Tanzania, other African nations, Southeast Asia, and South American countries supported the proposal on behalf of the LDC countries and African Group. The second group of countries (China, Costa Rica, Chile, Columbia, Jamaica, El Salvador, Senegal, etc.) welcomed the proposal, but they did seek more clarifications. The third category comprises developed countries like Brazil, Canada, Norway, the UK, the US, Switzerland, and the EU, which outright rejected the proposal [42]. Chattu et al. have highlighted that though it is easy to talk of inequalities and inequities and include them in policies, and further added that, here is an opportunity for the world to show its solidarity for “Health For All” and nations should strive to find solutions to ensure equitable access to the COVID-19-related drugs, medical supplies, and vaccines [41]. From the above discussion, it becomes crystal clear that most vaccine R&D has been taking place in the developed countries’ private and public institutions as it requires huge investments. However, at this juncture, the question is moot: which is more important, making money or saving a human life? This is weighing heavily on the minds of the public, especially in light of the ongoing critical issues of health and human security. Surprisingly, the developed countries, which are viewed as the main advocates of egalitarianism, democracy, health, and human rights by the global community, have not supported this humanitarian cause in the larger context. These 35 developed countries Australia, Brazil, Canada, Japan, Norway, Switzerland, the UK, the US, and the EU (27-member block) have rejected India’s and South Africa’s proposal. However, the other 100 nations have welcomed or fully supported it. This disagreement has resulted in rich vs. poor in the race of getting access to the COVID-19 medical equipment, treatment, and vaccines [43]. Have the TRIPS become a tool for the expansion of capitalism? Are these countries concerned about the 20 illnesses that can be prevented or treated, including COVID-19? If this is the case, why not put the question of returns, remuneration, profits, and so on to the side for the time being and focus on considerations, sensitivities, and humanitarian cause when whole humanity is suffering due to lack of access to COVID-19 vaccines and medicines? To substantiate the above argument, it can be seen through the prism of deaths of millions of people due to infectious diseases every year. These diseases are perceived to be preventable or treatable. About 45% of deaths in Africa and Southeast Asia have occurred due to infectious diseases [44]. The death toll is unprecedentedly and unacceptably high in developing and the least countries. In the context of African nations, which depend on the development aid from rich nations, it would be prudent for the Africa Centers for Disease Control and regional bodies to embrace global health diplomacy to strengthen their capacity for disease preparedness and response [45]. During this crisis, the developing countries, especially in Asia and Africa, need to realign themselves and strengthen their health systems. A recent systematic review by Chattu et al. has emphasized that African Union needs to refocus and prioritize the continent’s health challenges by innovatively adapting the canons of GHD towards attracting more funding and developing collaborative partnerships with relevant actors in the global health domain [46]. Although, the health crisis is due to given interlinked factors such as lack of healthcare facilities, poverty, unemployment, lack of sanitation but the critical factor for the same is unaffordability [47], inaccessibility, monopolization of production, and distribution of vaccines/medicines in the backdrop of the agreement on TRIPS. On public health, trade, human rights, and the environment, governments seem to have lost faith in the value of working together. As highlighted by Jones Bruce, in the absence of credible great-power leadership from the US or China, the “middle powers” such as France and Germany have led to coordinating health and economic responses. Though the concept of “middle powers” is imprecise and inchoate, it refers to nations from the top 20 economies and lack large scale military power (or chose not to have a lead role) and is energetic in diplomatic and multilateral affairs such as France, Canada, Netherlands, Sweden, Germany, and the United Kingdom which were trying to fill the gaps in the international leadership [48]. They have shown their commitment and dedication by raising over 14 billion for providing free vaccines through the Vaccine Alliance to the countries that cannot afford them [49]. As Gostin et al. highlight the complexity of global health coordination and universal access to the COVID-19 vaccine, global health law’s role is very critical as it supports global solidarity and reaches agreements to secure equitable access [50]. Moreover, there is an immediate need for cooperation and collaboration, an understanding of shared responsibility, and critical aspects such as transparency, accountability, trust, and fairness to overcome this COVID-19 pandemic [51]. 5. Conclusions COVID-19 had left indelible imprints and taught us several lessons such as the importance of global solidarity, international cooperation, and focusing on inequities and inequalities exposed during the ongoing pandemic. Given the monopoly of private ownership over vaccines/medicines/medical technology, the aspects of access and affordability to essential health care services will be compromised, violating the universal right to health. During this COVID-19 pandemic, the numerous facets of many healthcare systems’ unpreparedness and fragile state were exposed. India, with its good infrastructure for pharmaceutical production and development, can become a hub for supplying generic medicines and essential medical equipment to the world, thereby improving access to the essential drugs, medicines, kits, and vaccines in many low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). There is a great need for cooperation and support from the developed nations to ensure the enjoyment of “right to health” by everyone. India must engage in global health diplomacy with a variety of global players to circumvent or obtain specific waivers for intellectual property rights (IP/IPRs) to safeguard the supply of life-saving and necessary pharmaceuticals and vaccines while maintaining equity and fairness. Every citizen has the right to health and human security. Therefore, the IP regime should not become a barrier to the availability and affordability of COVID-19 medical equipment and vaccinations. A large group of intellectuals, social activists, altruistic people, civil society organizations, nongovernmental organizations, international organizations, and other LMICs consider IPRs for COVID-19 essentials to be barriers during this pandemic. Hence, the countries that rejected the joint proposal of TRIPS waiver by India and South Africa should reconsider. Furthermore, those countries that claim to be strong supporters of human rights, egalitarianism, democracy, global health, and human security must rise to the occasion and lend their full support to India at the WTO for this great cause that prioritizes humanity over the business interests of the pharmaceutical industry. Data Availability The data presented in this study are available on request from the corresponding author. Conflicts of Interest The authors declare that they have no competing interests. Authors’ Contributions VKC conceived the study and prepared the initial draft. BS, KK, and VKC did the literature search and data analysis. MJ reviewed the manuscript, and edited and provided critical comments. VKC edited the final version of the manuscript. All the authors have approved the final version before submission.
View
Strategies for COVID-19 Epidemiological Surveillance in India: Overall Policies Till June 2021
Article
Full-text available
  • Jul 2021
Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has gripped the entire world, almost paralysing the human race in its entirety. The virus rapidly transmits via human-to-human medium resulting in a massive increase of patients with COVID-19. In order to curb the spread of the disease, an immediate action of complete lockdown was implemented across the globe. India with a population of over 1.3 billion was not an exception and took the challenge to execute phase-wise lockdown, unlock and partial lockdown activities. In this study, we intend to summarise these different phases that the Government of India (GoI) imposed to fight against SARS-CoV-2 so that it can act as a reference guideline to help controlling future waves of COVID-19 and similar pandemic situations in India.
View
India's COVID-19 Strategy and implications for its relations in the Indian Ocean
Article
Full-text available
  • Mar 2021
The COVID-19 pandemic has swept the world with a state of medical emergency, economic slowdown and health infrastructures challenged by multiple wave sand strains of the mutating virus. Despite a good recovery rate from the COVID-19 infections, India is among the worst affected nations by the pandemic economically and from a security perspective. While New Delhi witnessed worsening relations with its neighbors like China, it introduced several policies to tackle the COVID-19, while handling its international relations with its neighbors in the Indian Ocean and beyond. The paper raises the question of how the COVID-19 pandemic affected the strategic environment for India. How did India respond to the regional challenges under this strategic environment through its COVID-19 strategy and/or diplomacy? The study uses the neoclassical realist concept of permissive/restrictive strategic environment and the role of foreign policy executive (FPE) in shaping foreign policy. The paper argues that COVID-19 proved to be a catalyst for shaping the strategic environment for India as that of imminent threat, leading to a more restrictive strategic environment for the nation, giving it narrower window of options to exercise its COVID-19 diplomacy and build security partnerships. It discusses how India's COVID-19 strategies were catalyst in shaping India's security policies and initiatives in the Indian Ocean region. The paper states that since India faced a restrictive strategic environment internationally, its foreign policy elite remained key actors that influenced India's foreign policy in the Indian Ocean to balance Chinese influence in the region through its COVID-19 diplomacy and strategy for regional engagement. Link: https://en.apu.ac.jp/rcaps/page/content0082/Vol39_4_CHADHA_Astha.pdf
View
International policies and challenges on the legalization of traditional medicine/herbal medicines in the fight against COVID-19
Article
Full-text available
  • Feb 2021
The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has now rapidly spread around the world, causing an outbreak of acute infectious pneumonia. To develop effective and safe therapies for the prevention and treatment of COVID-19 has become the major global public health concern. Traditional medicine (TM)/herbal medicines (HMs) have been used to treat multiple epidemics in human history, which brings hope for the fight against COVID-19 in some areas. For example, in China, India, and South Korea with traditional medication history and theory, the governments issued a series of guidelines to support TM/HMs in the medication of COVID-19. In contrast, other countries e.g. North American and European governments are typically silent on these practices, unless to warn of possible harm and overselling. Such difference is due to the discrepancy in culture, history and philosophical views of health care and medication, as well as unharmonized policies and standards in the regulation and legalization of TM/HMs among different areas. Herein, we reviewed the responses and scientific researches from seven selected countries on the policies and legalization of TM/HMs to treat COVID-19, and also analyzed the major challenges and concerns to utilize the traditional knowledge and resource.
View
The Corona Virus Pandemic and Global Transformations: Making or Breaking International Orders?
Article
Full-text available
  • Nov 2020
In the period of the 21 st century leading up to the Corona Virus pandemic, there was increasing consensus that the global order that had existed since the end of the Cold War and the collapse of the Soviet Union where the unipolar hegemony of the United States was in relative decline, weakening and transforming. It was transforming from a un-ipolar to multipolar order, of course, the US was not going to leave the transformation un-contested in order to retain its privileged global position. The Corona Virus outbreak was a black swan event, it is also being used by various international actors to leverage opportunities caused by the weaknesses exposed in this extraordinary time. The US has been acting in an aggressive manner during the pandemic in an effort to try and weaken opponents and coerce friends in order to 'cancel' the pre-Corona Virus global transformations and retain its global hegemony.
View
Understanding the spatio-temporal pattern of COVID-19 outbreak in India using GIS and India's response in managing the Pandemic
Article
Full-text available
  • Oct 2020
Due to the outbreak of Coronavirus, humans all over the world are facing several health problems. The present study has explored the Spatio-temporal pattern of Coronavirus spread in India including spatial clustering, identification of hotspot, spatial heterogeneity, and homogeneity, spatial trend, and direction of COVID-19 cases using spatial statistical analysis during the period of 30th January to 20 June 2020. Besides, the polynomial regression model has been used for predictions of COVID-19 affected population and related deaths. The study found positive spatial heterogeneity in COVID-19 cases in India. The study has also identified seventeen epicentres across the country with high incidence rates. The directional distribution of ellipse polygon shows that the spread of COVID-19 now trending towards the east but the concentration of cases is mainly in the western part of the country. The country's trend of COVID-19 follows a fourth-order polynomial growth and is characterized by an increasing trend. The prediction results show that as on 14 th October India will reach 14,660,400 COVID-19 cases and the death toll will cross 152,945. Therefore, a 'space-specific' policy strategy would be a more suitable strategy for reducing the spatial spread of the virus in India. Moreover, the study has broadly found out seven sectors, where Govt. of India lacks in terms of confronting the ongoing pandemic. The study has also recommended some appropriate policies which would be immensely useful for the administration to initiate strategic planning.
View
View
India’s domestic and foreign policy responses to COVID-19
Article
  • Jan 2021
A year after the first known case of COVID-19 was reported, India had the second-highest incidence of cases and accounted for about 13% of the global total. This article traces India’s local and foreign policy responses to the global pandemic. The article advances two arguments. First, while the government was swift and decisive in its response, the pandemic exposed weakness in policy coordination and inadequacies in India’s social protection system. Second, while the pandemic spread rapidly across the country, the government exploited diplomatic opportunities to demonstrate leadership both within South Asia and globally.
View