Revision summary
The 2004 strategic partnership was with the EU including the UK. Brexit split trade law, origin rules, and political access into two files. An India–UK FTA became a distinct opportunity. The EU bloc remains the larger market and climate partner. India’s interest is to run both tracks, not to pick a substitute Europe.
Model answer
Introduction
Brexit took the United Kingdom out of the European Union in 2020. India then faced two Western European partners instead of one legal market. Relations with Brussels and with London had to be re-specified without abandoning the older strategic partnership with the EU.
Body
Before Brexit
- The 2004 India–EU strategic partnership covered trade, climate, and multilateralism.
- A broad-based FTA stayed stuck on movement of professionals, automobiles, wines, and procurement.
- The UK inside the EU was a voice for openness to India in some dossiers and a complication in others.
What Brexit changed
- India must negotiate a Union of 27 and a separate UK. Rules of origin and financial passports split.
- Opportunity: a faster India–UK FTA track became thinkable once London could move without the 27.
- Risk: a weaker EU political union, or a preoccupied Brussels, could slow the India–EU FTA still further.
- Diaspora, education, and services links with Britain remain thick; they are now bilateral, not Union law.
Continuities
- Climate, data, maritime security, and a shared interest in a rules-based order still point to Brussels.
- The EU remains India’s large trading partner as a bloc. That arithmetic did not vanish with the UK’s exit.
- Values talk on human rights and Russian energy later sat beside trade. In 2021 the immediate file was still FTA architecture after Brexit.
Strategic reading
- Multi-alignment: India can use London as a gateway on some security and mobility issues and Brussels on climate and standards.
- Keohane-style complex interdependence with Europe is now two bargains, not one.
Flow diagram
flowchart TD B[Brexit] --> EU[India-EU 27 FTA climate] B --> UK[India-UK bilateral FTA mobility] EU --> R[Re-wired Europe policy] UK --> R
Conclusion
Brexit doubled India’s European negotiation without ending the EU partnership. The prize is two trade and political tracks. The cost is complexity and a possible further delay in the Brussels FTA. Context is re-wiring, not a rupture with Europe.
Quick related
Students also ask
-
Discuss the strategic implications of India's Look East Policy transforming into Act East Policy.
Next question in the 2021 paper (Q5). View answer →
-
Did Brexit make the EU less important to India?
No. The remaining Union is still a major trade and standard-setting partner. The UK is an added bilateral pole.
-
Is the India–UK FTA a replacement for the EU deal?
No. It is smaller in market size. It can still move faster on some services and mobility items.
PYQ trend
When UPSC asked this
Related PYQs from other years, newest first. Open a question to read it.
-
2023 · Q3(a) · PSIR GS 2 · 20 marks
"During the Cold War, the Non-Aligned Movement tried to become a Third force in World Politics, but failed because it was too large and unwieldy." Discuss -
2023 · Q3(b) · PSIR GS 2 · 15 marks
Account for the rise of European Union as a highly influential regional organisation -
2023 · Q4(c) · PSIR GS 2 · 15 marks
Discuss the various constraints on American hegemony today. Which of these are likely to become more prominent in the future? -
2023 · Q6(a) · PSIR GS 2 · 20 marks
Arms trade, economic ties and congruent geo-political interests are no longer the three pillars of India - Russia relationship in the emerging strategic context. Comment -
2022 · Q3(a) · PSIR GS 2 · 20 marks
Critically examine the rise of People's Republic of China (PRC) as a great power and its implications on Asian Political order -
2022 · Q5(d) · PSIR GS 2 · 10 marks
Explain the significance of Basic Exchange and Co-operation Agreement (BECA) for Indo-US strategic relations. -
2021 · Q3(c) · PSIR GS 2 · 15 marks
Critically examine the decline of the United States of America as a hegemon and its implications for the changing international political order -
2021 · Q7(c) · PSIR GS 2 · 15 marks
Examine the evolution of India's role in the global nuclear order
More from this paper
Q1(a) · UPSC Mains 2021 · PSIR GS 2 · 10 marks
Discuss the political economy approach to the comparative analysis of politics.
Comparative Politics
Political economy joins the study of power with the study of wealth. Marx and Wallerstein locate States in production and in a hierarchical world-economy. Almond’s functions describe roles; they do not explain ownership and dependence. Alavi’s overdeveloped State is a comparative PE thesis about post-colonial bureaucracy. The method compares markets, classes, and external ties, not only constitutions.
Q1(b) · UPSC Mains 2021 · PSIR GS 2 · 10 marks
"Political parties and pressure groups are sine qua non of democracy." Comment.
Politics of Representation and Participation
Schumpeterian democracy is a party contest for the vote. Almond split aggregation to parties and articulation to groups. Dahl’s polyarchy needs organised opposition, which parties supply. Groups carry specialised claims between elections. Mere organisation is not democracy; pluralism and contest are.
Q1(c) · UPSC Mains 2021 · PSIR GS 2 · 10 marks
"Marxist approach to the study of international relations has lost its relevance in the post-cold war era." Comment.
Approaches to the Study of International Relations
The USSR’s fall discredited State socialism, not every Marxist question. Waltzian polarity does not explain core–periphery production. Wallerstein and Cox remain usable after 1991. WTO, finance, and a capitalist China keep class and hierarchy on the agenda. Relevance is critique of order, not a second Soviet Union.
Toppers' copies
Toppers' copies for this question will be uploaded soon.