* Biden-Trump Presidential Debate * Putin’s Ukraine War: Stalemate * How Western Leaders Stumbled * How Modi Lost His Foreign Policy Mojo By Shashi P.B.B. Malla ‘The Mother of All US Presidential Debates’ This week’s US presidential debate, to be hosted by CNN on Thursday, could be one of the most important presidential-election history, writes Financial Times columnist Edward Luce. The debate is to be moderated by CNN’s celebrated anchors Danna Bash and Jake Tapper of CNN’s “State of the Union” fame. Another celebrated CNN presenter Fareed Zakaria characterized the Biden-Trump encounter as the ‘The Mother of all US Presidential Debates’ (CNN/Global Briefing, June 21). Elements of the dabate format, like muting the candidate who’s not talking and the lack of an in-person audience, may favour Biden, Luce writes. But slip-ups happen, and strong performances can tip races. “In 1980 Ronald Reagan’s genial presence quelled doubts that he was a fanatic on trigger alert with the USSR,” Luce writes. “Until that moment – a week before the election – [Jimmy] Carter and Reagan’s numbers were neck and neck. All Reagan needed to do was to come across as sane. He won by a landslide.” In the end, the whole of the debate may weigh less on the November election than will the short video clips that emerge from it, Luce writes. Luce points to “Tik Tok, or Instagram Reels, on which many Americans will get their exposure. “In March, Biden gave an energetic State of the Union speech [to both houses of Congress]. Millions only saw the 15-second clip where he mangled the name of a murder victim. “The perception gap between Americans who watched the speech and those who saw tiny snippets was vast. “Biden is certain to produce a few clippable Bidenisms next week. Are these the impressions on which the future of US democracy hinges? “The dispiriting answer is maybe.” At CNN Opinion, Julian Zelizer (professor of history and public affairs at Princeton University) agrees, writing: “Like it or not, quips and gaffes have tended to be the most impactful elements of televised presidential debates since they started in 1960, when Senator John F. Kennedy squared off against Vice President Richard Nixon. “While appearances certainly matter, the candidate who delivers the most clever remark, or utters the worst line, stands to move the needle the most.” Thus the debate between Biden and Trump “will be the highest-stakes moment of their rematch, plunging two presidents into an extraordinary early confrontation before a divided and angry nation” (The New York Times, International Edition, June 25). Russia’s War on Ukraine: Stalemate & New Dangers In Russia’s war on Ukraine, there is a new phase, more of a holding pattern. The Russian advance in the east finally slowed following the long-awaited resumption of US military assistance. However, no diplomatic progress can be expected until after the November elections in America, as Putin has no incentive to compromise if he believes he can accomplish his nefarious goals thanks to a change in US policy that could well result from a Trump victory, according to Richard Haass, president emeritus of the Council on Foreign Relations (in his newsletter: “Home & Away: More War than Peace”, June 21). But there has been some significant movement in the diplomatic arena. Above all, Vladimir Putin has been especially busy. First, he put out some thoughts on “peace’ in Ukraine that in reality amount to a demand for Kyiv to capitulate. Second, he flew to North Korea and then to Vietnam. The visit to Pyongyang, Putin’s first in a quarter of a century, demonstrated that he is increasingly a disruptive actor, one devoted to choices and policies designed to bring down the existing international order. While Putin once cooperated with international efforts to constrain North Korea’s nuclear programme, he has now become a full-fledged enabler of North Korea’s missile and nuclear programme, apparently pledging to provide ‘military-technical’ assistance that will help North Korea become a global nuclear threat, including to the continental U.S. In return, Putin gets much needed arms and ammunition to fuel his aggression in Ukraine. He also complicates defence planning for the United States and its allies (Japan, South Korea), who now have to deal with a North Korea more difficult to deter on the Korean Peninsula. There is also the potential that Russia and North Korea will act in coordination. Indeed the new “Treaty on Comprehensive Strategic Partnership” inked during Putin’s visit and in effect a revival of their mutual defence pact from the 1960s, states, “In case any one of the two sides is put in a state of war by an armed invasion from an individual state or several states, the other side shall provide military and other assistance with all the means in its possession without delay.” At the same time, Putin signals to Chinese leaders that Russia can still be an effective independent player lest they think of him only as a junior partner (Haass). This is the worst possible scenario. It is bad news for those seeking to bring the war in Ukraine to an end and prevent one from erupting on the Korean Peninsula. It also bodes poorly for the future of nuclear arms control, as current US agreements with Russia are nearing their expiration. As if this were not enough, a growing North Korean nuclear arsenal paired with closer Russia-North Korea alignment, will add fuel to growing calls in South Korea for it to acquire an independent nuclear capability. We are definitely in a world of mounting disarray. Ending the Ukraine War Last week, Putin also proposed an agreement in which Russia would agree to a ceasefire in exchange for territorial surrender of the four eastern Ukrainian provinces it annexed in October 2022 (even the parts it does not control!) as well as Crimea (it annexed in 2014) and a pledge from Ukraine not to seek NATO membership. This is, of course, totally unacceptable to Ukraine. There is only one way for this war to end on acceptable terms for Ukraine, which is the abused party. It will require long-term U.S. and Western military aid to Ukraine in order to persuade Putin that time is not on his side [US help will not be forthcoming with a Trump/Republican victory!]. It will also require increased freedom for Ukraine to use Western-supplied weapons systems against military and economic targets within western Russia so that Putin and the establishment feel the pain of the war he began. But Ukraine will also have to compromise, not on its ultimate goals but on how and when it seeks to realize them. Haass speculates that an interim cease-fire or armistice, one that ends the fighting without requiring either side to give up its goals or its ability to rearm is conceivable in 2025 if a favourable international atmosphere emerges. Rise & Fall of Western Leaders Both the Middle East and Ukraine figured prominently at the recently concluded G-7 summit in southern Italy  – a conclave of the world’s most advanced and most powerful economies [minus China & India, the world’s 2nd and 5th largest economies]. But the larger story of the conclave was arguably its dead man walking quality. Prime Minister Rishi Sunak of the UK will cease to be leader of the world’s 6th largest economy once the votes are counted on July 4. French President Emmanuel Macron will have to learn to live with a parliament dominated by the fir-right opposition [France is the world’s 7th largest economy]. Germany’s Chancellor Olaf Scholz leads a dispirited, battered coalition losing ground to the extremist right – Alternative fuer Deutschland. Germany is the world’s 3rd largest economy, but it is punching far below its weight and it must rejuvenate, not only economically, but also socially, politically, psychologically and yes, also militarily. It is predestined to be the leader of Europe and capture the high middle ground. Macron is passe’ and a leaderless Europe would face unnecessary and unwanted dangers from within and without. Japan’s prime minister Fumio Kishida, from the world’s 4th largest economy, will face internal challenges this autumn at a time when he has the support over one in five voters. Canada’s prime minister, Justin Trudeau has fallen some twenty points behind his conservative rivals in the polls. Canada is the 10th largest economy in the world. Only the extreme conservative host, Italy’s prime minister Giorgia Meloni, showed up in a position of strength. But considering her neo-fascist roots, she is an untested and charming chameleon. Meanwhile, European Commission head Ursula von der Leyen has come up on top with the European Conservatives but will have to deal with an European parliament that has lurched to the right. How long can the centre hold? The biggest question is the likely fate of the US representative at the G-7, Joe Biden. The presidential debate this week may show the way [see above]. The president continues to be dogged by claims that he is too old and unfit for the job. Most people forget that the challenger Trump is not much younger and most unworthy for the high office in every possible aspect. He is not only a psychological case, but would be a catastrophe for America and the world at large. Modi’s Diminished Role: Domestic & Foreign In the 2014 and 2019 elections, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) focused on corruption, Hindu nationalism, and domestic and Pakistan-origin terrorism. 2024 was the first time in modern India’s history that foreign policy has figured prominently in the campaign discourse. Speech after speech, Modi crowed about India’s status as the fastest growing major developing economy in the world, how the nation overtook Britain to become the fifth-largest global economy, and how successfully India hosted the G-20 summit last year, all of these under his leadership, of course! He even raked up the long-settled issue of the Sri Lankan island of Katchatheevu [ceded by India] just for narrow political gain in Tamil Nadu (Worldcrunch Today/E.D. Mathew). When the results were announced on June 4, Modi’s feet of clay were exposed as voters handed down the BJP a stunningly reduced parliamentary majority. A new era of coalition politics was ushered in – an uncharted territory for a leader who has often bragged of his ability to beat the Opposition single-handedly. The Opposition is now on the offensive and the Modi government in hot water over alleged irregularities in important entrance examinations to higher education, and persistent large-scale youth unemployment. Rahul Gandhi said PM Modi is “crippled, psychologically broken, (and) will struggle to run the government” (ANI/Asian News International, June 22). The diminished mandate and dependence on coalition partners introduce new dynamics that could influence India’s foreign policy direction in the next five years (Mathew). Modi’s decade-long rule saw Indian democracy coming under severe strain. Illiberalism and religious bigotry have been on the rise, and the country’s global standing has taken a beating. According to the opposition Congress party, the nation’s image has been damaged by the BJP government’s “intolerance of dissent and suppression of human rights.” Freedom House has downgraded India from “free” to “partly free” while Sweden’s V-Dem Institute has classified the country as an “electoral autocracy”. [Nepal can be considered an “electoral kleptocracy”]. Modi Under External Pressure Opposition leaders have accused Modi of failing to deal with China seizing Indian territory through “salami slicing” / tactic, or incremental occupation of the border areas in Ladakh [likewise in Bhutan, which India has undertaken to defend]. Relations with Pakistan also remain strained, and New Delhi will likely continue the policy of limited engagement with Islamabad. Relations with neighbouring countries are not especially close, although the heads of government were invited to Modi’s swearing-in ceremony, which many thought was like ‘a coronation’. SAARC remains in limbo and Modi’s India shows no interest whatsoever in resuscitating this vital regional organization. Instead, Modi promoted ‘mini-lateral’ arrangements with like-minded countries to advance its foreign policy and regional security objectives. However, the Quad (U.S., Japan, India, Australia) has come under a cloud lately, with the U.S. forming the “Squad”, replacing India with the Philippines, in order to confront rising tensions in the South China Sea. India’s role in the Western Pacific is, after all, minimal. It has been over a year since the Quad leaders met for a summit. Modi’s government continues to dabble with the BRICS organization and aspires to be a leader of the Global South, but with little headway. To cement India’s status as a global leader, Modi will likely prioritize securing a permanent membership on the United Nations Security Council. It all depends how the new government will leverage the UN’s upcoming “Summit of the Future” -- dubbed as an historic opportunity to reform the global body – scheduled to take place in New York in September of this year (Mathew). Other aspirants for the UNSC are: Germany, Japan, Indonesia, South Africa, Nigeria, Egypt and Brazil. Despite Moscow’s close ties with Beijing, the historical and strategic partnership with Russia remains vital. It is difficult to see how India will navigate the complex relationships with the U.S., China and Russia – maintaining a delicate balance while ensuring that India’s interests are safeguarded while keeping intact its strategic autonomy – akin to squaring the circle.  The writer can be reached at: shashipbmalla@hotmail.com The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect People’s Review’s editorial stance.