Ideas of India Summit 2026: At the 'Ideas of India' summit, ABP Network's Chief Editor Atideb Sarkar expressed his views on the current situation.
Ideas of India Summit 2026: ABP Group's Chief Editor Atideb Sarkar inaugurated the 'Ideas of India 2026' summit on Friday. Referring to the rapid changes taking place in world politics and economy, he said that India's role in the new world order is very important. Beginning his address, he said, "Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to Ideas of India 2026. Last year we saw a glimpse of a new era of humanity, but since then the world has been embroiled in conflict."
The Chief Editor stated that the war has reached our region. The White House imposed tariffs, disrupting global trade, although the US Supreme Court later overturned this decision. India has negotiated a free trade agreement with the European Union. Farmers' organizations in India are protesting a potential agreement with the US. The situation in Gaza remains dire. There has been a regime change in Venezuela. Tensions persist in Iran. Numerous attempts to end the war in Ukraine have yet to bring peace. He stated clearly that peace does not come automatically in global politics.
Kissinger's View of the World Order
Atiddeb Sarkar cited the views of Henry Kissinger, who spoke in 2014. Kissinger stated that the world needs a system with fixed rules and limits on what each country can and cannot do. This system must operate based on national recognition and a balance of power, otherwise the world will slide into chaos.
The Chief Editor explained that the international order that emerged in Europe after the Peace of Westphalia in 1648 was based on national sovereignty, non-interference in each other's affairs, and a balance of power. This system was later implemented in many parts of the world, but technological changes, increased global connectivity, and the emergence of countries with different mindsets challenged this system. In Europe, the situation became such that a common system began to control its currency and borders.
Said this on the role of Russia, America and China
Atiddeb Sarkar said that Russia remains a mystery to Europe even today. It fought the most wars in the region, but also prevented any single country from dominating all of Europe. Regarding the United States, he said that there have been two streams there. One is an idealistic approach that seeks to spread democratic values worldwide. The other is a realistic approach that prioritizes national interests and the balance of power. China's approach differs. According to their system, there should be a kind of hierarchy in the world, in which other countries respect the central state, i.e., China. Kissinger believed that the world must create a new and stable order that is in keeping with today's realities and acceptable to all countries.
Experts' Opinion on the New World Order
Chief Editor Atideb Sarkar also presented experts' opinions on the current situation. Citing expert Monica Duffy Toft's opinion, he said, "If the situation becomes like that of the post-World War II era, the world could be divided into spheres of influence. This means that a few major countries will exert influence over different regions, even if they don't directly rule. The US, Russia, and China could divide the world into their respective spheres of influence. John Mearsheimer believes that China's rise will not be peaceful. He says that the US will never accept China's dominance in Asia. In such a situation, competition and conflict are inevitable."
He added, "Yan Xuetong predicts that the US and China will become the two major powers in the world because China is rapidly advancing in the fields of economy, military, and culture. Michael Beckley argues that the world order is currently stagnant. The pace of population, production, and territorial expansion has been limited, so no country is growing fast enough to completely alter the global balance. The US still leads in terms of productivity."
India's responsibility in an uncertain environment
Atiddeb Sarkar said that in these uncertain times, India's policymakers face a significant challenge. A key partner like the United States appears preoccupied with internal affairs. Neighboring countries are unstable. Relations with China appear to be thriving, but trust is lacking. Trade agreements with the United States and the European Union will require domestic reforms.
He said that India must focus firmly on its national interest. The Prime Minister has set a goal of making India a developed nation by 2047. This is not easy. The global economy is slowing. People are saving less after the pandemic. With the exception of Adani and Reliance, other Indian companies are not investing much. Employment remains a challenge for youth, and there is also a skills shortage. In these circumstances, development, not prestige, is the true national interest.
What should India do?
The Chief Editor stated that India must achieve substantial economic progress in the next two decades while also protecting its sovereignty. War is not in India's interest. We should increase trade with countries that buy our goods and services. Investors willing to create jobs here should be welcomed. However, it would be unfair to ignore national security in an unstable region, so investments by strategic rival countries in sensitive sectors should be scrutinized. In other sectors, the government should ask, "How can we help you establish yourself here?" The trade agreement with the European Union is an opportunity to bring in capital and technology, which will increase employment. We should wait for the situation in the United States to become clearer before deciding on a deal with the United States.
He further stated that India should deal with its neighbors in a fair, firm, and calm manner. Even with major powers, it should maintain balance and not threaten anyone. As Chinese leaders once told their diplomats, "Keep calm and get the job done."
Is it necessary for India to become a superpower?
Finally, Atidheb Sarkar said that as the world order is changing, India must achieve solid economic progress while protecting its sovereignty. The question is whether this requires India to become a superpower, or should development be its true goal?