India has warned the international community that global peace and prosperity are at risk, negotiations are difficult and agreements are even tougher, countries have withdrawn more from the international system, the world is disillusioned and polarised. And reiterated that this is the only way out. It is urgently reforming multilateral institutions, especially the United Nations (UN).

Delivering India’s national statement at the high-level session of the 79th UN General Assembly in New York on Saturday, External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar not only criticized the Western-led global order but also indirectly criticized China for He outlined the prices. Dependence on a single geography for global production, unenforceable debt, sovereignty-violating connectivity projects, and the use of technology as a means of dominance rather than empowerment.

Instead, the minister presented a stark contrast to these models, the Indian experience which he proposed was based on five pillars – inclusive development of the vulnerable, expansion of employment and entrepreneurship opportunities for all, especially women, digital public infrastructure. (DPI) and being a “people’s pharmacy” that can serve the world, call and articulate the voice of the Global South, and contribute to global goods.

The minister began his speech to the United Nations by painting the darkness that is engulfing the world today. “The world is yet to recover from the ravages of the Covid pandemic. The war in Ukraine has entered its third year. The conflict in Gaza is having wider ramifications. Across the Global South, development projects have stalled and SDG targets are shrinking… Technology development, which has long been a source of hope, is now an equally worrying factor.Climatic events occur with greater intensity and frequency Worryingly, the world has become more polarized and desperate to negotiate.”

Jaishankar then turned it over to the United Nations, asking the international body to take stock of its role as it pursued a vision of global peace and prosperity that led to nearly eight Decades ago, the United Nations was established. “Today we find both peace and prosperity equally threatened. And that’s because trust has eroded and processes have broken down. Countries have taken more out of the international system than they put into it. has put it, in the process, disabled it, so reformation of multilateralism is inevitable.

He said UNGA’s vision of leaving nothing behind could not be realized by the United Nations in the face of “division, conflict, terrorism, and violence”, or food, fuel , “paralyzed” when access to fertilizers is threatened, or when markets are captured without regard to livelihoods, or when developed countries shirk their climate responsibilities, or when resources are scarce. It hinders the achievement of development goals.

“If the world is in such a state, the body must ask itself: How did it happen? The problems stem from a combination of structural deficiencies, political calculations, vested interests and, yes, neglect of those left behind,” J. Shankar said. And while acknowledging the scale of the challenges, he suggested that change must start somewhere, and nowhere better than the United Nations itself. “Not because it’s a struggle for influence or a jockeying for position. But because the world is going to get worse if we keep going like this.”

He then outlined the government’s welfare initiatives, employment promotion, digital and accessible healthcare initiatives, and India’s efforts to bring the voices of the most marginalized into the mainstream. of Notably, Jaishankar focused on DPI at a time when the Indian government is making a conscious effort to portray it as a model that offers real benefits. “This is seen when public benefits, from food aid and housing to energy and health, are delivered efficiently and widely. Or when small business loans and support to farmers are extended without using middlemen. Goes… Fewer people will be left behind when street vendors and overseas workforces confidently use fintech in their regular transactions. This is India’s experience and India’s relevance.

But Jaishankar’s speech also had a strong geopolitical subtext, while criticizing the current Western leadership order, and presenting India’s own model. At the very beginning of his speech, portraying the global context, the minister referred to “unviable projects” that increase debt levels and connectivity projects that violate “sovereignty and territorial integrity” that acquire strategic connotations, especially when it is not a “joint effort”. Both claims were aimed at China, which has come under fire globally for debt trap diplomacy and has pushed forward with projects such as the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor, which India views as a violation of its sovereignty. What is the strong objection?

Later in the speech, Jaishankar spoke about the dangers of the current model of globalization where he chose to highlight the dangers of dependence on one geography. “The high concentration of manufacturing has hollowed out many economies, affecting their employment and social stability. Democratizing global production, building flexible supply chains, ensuring trusted digital services, and open source Supporting culture, all of these are economic responses, as are social responses.

Discussions at the United Nations have been overshadowed by the intense conflict in West Asia, with a strong mood critical of Israel at the United Nations, as well as the war in Ukraine, which has split the international body into a distinctly Western bloc. which opposes the Russian invasion. A small group of countries that support Moscow, and a large group of countries that want peace and diplomacy and don’t want to be embroiled in a great power conflict. India was among the pioneers of this third path when the war broke out in February 2022, and over the past three months, has adopted unusually active diplomatic outreach with both Moscow and Kiev.

Jaishankar did not elaborate on the diplomatic effort but stressed the need not to be fatalistic about the conflict. “We must also recognize that conflicts must be resolved themselves. The world cannot be fatalistic about the continuation of mass violence, indifferent to its wider consequences. Be it the war in Ukraine or Gaza. conflict, the international community must recognize and act upon these sentiments.