Revision summary
NIEO sought fairer trade, finance, technology and voice for developing countries; it stalled in the late 1970s. India’s potential is to convene the South (G20, Voice of Global South), defend WTO food space, and offer generics and digital public infrastructure. Quad-plus-BRICS seating lets India translate between South and G7. China is the capital competitor; India is not a global paymaster; neighbourhood gaps weaken the claim. Realistic leadership is coalition and agenda-setting toward a less overcentralised order.
Model answer
Introduction
The New International Economic Order (NIEO) of 1974 asked for fairer commodity prices, technology transfer, more voice in the IMF and World Bank, and policy space for development. It stalled against Northern power. The question is what India could do as a leader of the Global South to revive that goal in this century. The potential is as a coalition builder, not as a substitute for Chinese capital or a new Bretton Woods by itself.
Body
What a twenty-first-century NIEO would mean
It would mean reformed IMF quotas, a usable WTO for food and industrial policy (India’s clout in 5(c)), climate finance that is not only a Northern sermon, digital public infrastructure that is not only Silicon Valley’s, and South–South value chains. It would still face Wallerstein’s hierarchy: core money and technology do not move by speech.
India’s potential role
India can convene. The Voice of Global South summits and the G20 presidency put African Union membership and development language on a high table. At the WTO India already speaks a food-and-livelihood dialect many poor members share. Vaccine manufacturing and generic medicines are a material NIEO fragment: health goods at Southern prices. Digital public infrastructure can be offered as a public good rather than as a Chinese smart-city bundle or a purely American platform. ITEC training and peacekeeping remain people-to-people leadership. On climate, India can insist on equity and still run a large renewable programme, which is more credible than a pure rejectionist line.
- India can also translate between the South and the G7: it sits in the Quad and in BRICS, which is the multi-alignment of 8(c) used for economic order, not only for security.
Limits
China claims South leadership with actual banks and BRI contracts. Many African states want Indian trust and Chinese speed. India’s own neighbourhood delivery is uneven, which weakens moral leadership. A new international economic order needs finance. India is not yet that paymaster. If leadership becomes anti-West theatre only, NIEO 2.0 will repeat 1974’s communiqués. If it becomes only a brand for Indian exports, the South will notice.
The potential role is therefore agenda-setting and coalition-making toward a more Southern-sensitive globalisation, the same problem named in other papers as overcentralised globalisation. That is achievable. A full NIEO is not a one-state project.
Flow diagram
flowchart TD NIEO[NIEO 1974 goals] --> V[Voice finance technology] IN[India] --> C[Convene G20 WTO climate] IN --> G[Generics DPI ITEC] CH[China capital] -.competes.-> IN C --> CO[Coalition not paymaster]
Conclusion
India can lead the Global South toward a twenty-first-century NIEO by convening, by defending food and digital policy space, and by offering affordable health and digital public goods. It cannot fund a new world-economy alone. Leadership here is a coalition, or it is a speech.
Quick related
Students also ask
-
Discuss the future of SAARC in the light of India's increased focus on other regional groupings like ASEAN and BIMSTEC.
Next question in the 2024 paper (Q7). View answer →
-
Is BRICS the new NIEO?
It is a partial hedge (New Development Bank, some de-dollar talk). It is China-heavy and not a full trade-and-IMF reform.
-
Did India betray NIEO by liberalising in 1991?
It changed domestic strategy. It still uses NIEO-type arguments at the WTO. The mix is the 6(a) transition, not a simple betrayal.
PYQ trend
When UPSC asked this
Related PYQs from other years, newest first. Open a question to read it.
-
2025 · Q2(b) · PSIR GS 2 · 15 marks
The withdrawal of the United States of America from the World Health Organization is set to have far-reaching impacts on global health. Reimagining the existing WHO is vital for the global health agenda. Discuss -
2025 · Q3(c) · PSIR GS 2 · 15 marks
Global South-sensitive model of globalization would prevent the danger emanating from overcentralized globalization. Discuss -
2025 · Q4(a) · PSIR GS 2 · 20 marks
Latin America has made moderate success in countering US-led global economic order by framing various organizations emphasizing regional sovereignty, economic integration and alternative development. Discuss
More from this paper
Q1(a) · UPSC Mains 2024 · PSIR GS 2 · 10 marks
Discuss the interpretive approach to the study of comparative politics.
Approaches to the Study of International Relations
The interpretive approach studies political action as meaning in context, following Weber’s verstehen and later cultural and linguistic turns. It replies to behaviouralism’s search for covering laws by asking how votes, nations and authority are understood locally. Thick description, ethnography and discourse analysis are typical tools. It explains legitimacy, nationalism and everyday state practice that a constitution or a class map alone cannot supply. Limits are relativism, weak generalisation, and neglect of material and institutional constraint if used alone.
Q1(b) · UPSC Mains 2024 · PSIR GS 2 · 10 marks
Explain the central tenets of the World-Systems Theory.
Approaches to the Study of International Relations
Wallerstein’s unit is the capitalist world-economy since the long sixteenth century, not the isolated nation-state. Core, semi-periphery and periphery form a durable three-tier division of labour. Unequal exchange and strong/weak states move surplus toward the core. The theory rejects modernisation’s national ladder and differs from Waltz’s interstate anarchy as first cause. Limits include economic determinism and underplaying state autonomy and culture; mobility exists but hierarchy persists.
Q1(c) · UPSC Mains 2024 · PSIR GS 2 · 10 marks
The expansionist tendencies of the current Russian regime indicate its intentions for the realization of a Greater Russia on the lines of the Soviet era. Comment.
Comparative Politics
Russia’s wars in Georgia and Ukraine, plus pressure on Belarus and nuclear signalling, show expansionist intent in the post-Soviet space. The Greater Russia story denies full independence of neighbours, especially Ukraine. The Soviet analogy fits geography of control more than ideology: today’s regime is nationalist and oligarchic, not a communist world-system. Morgenthau and Waltz explain power and structure; they do not make the war merely defensive. Comment: accept expansionism; reject a simple USSR restoration.
Toppers' copies
Toppers' copies for this question will be uploaded soon.