top of page

By:

Akhilesh Sinha

25 June 2025 at 2:53:54 pm

Nadda's strategic meet signals urgency for chemical sector

New Delhi: As war simmers across the volatile landscape of West Asia, whether in the form of a direct confrontation between Israel, United States and Iran, or through Iran's hybrid warfare involving groups like Hezbollah and the Houthis, the tremors are no longer confined to the region's borders. They are coursing through the arteries of the global economy. India's chemicals and petrochemicals sector, heavily dependent on this region for critical raw materials, finds itself among the earliest...

Nadda's strategic meet signals urgency for chemical sector

New Delhi: As war simmers across the volatile landscape of West Asia, whether in the form of a direct confrontation between Israel, United States and Iran, or through Iran's hybrid warfare involving groups like Hezbollah and the Houthis, the tremors are no longer confined to the region's borders. They are coursing through the arteries of the global economy. India's chemicals and petrochemicals sector, heavily dependent on this region for critical raw materials, finds itself among the earliest and hardest hit by this geopolitical turbulence. It is in this backdrop that the recent meeting convened by Union Minister for Chemicals and Fertilisers J. P. Nadda at Kartavya Bhavan must be seen not as a routine consultation, but as a signal of strategic urgency. India's ambition to scale this sector from its current valuation of $220 billion to $1 trillion by 2040, and further to $1.5 trillion by 2047, will remain aspirational unless the country confronts its structural vulnerabilities with clarity and resolve. India today ranks as the world's sixth-largest producer of chemicals and the third-largest in Asia. The sector contributes 6-7 percent to GDP and underpins a wide spectrum of industries, from agriculture and pharmaceuticals to automobiles, construction, and electronics. It would be no exaggeration to call it the backbone of modern industrial India. Yet, embedded within this strength is a paradox. India's share in the global chemical value chain (GVC) stands at a modest 3.5 percent. A trade deficit of $31 billion in 2023 underscores a deeper issue: while India produces at scale, it remains marginal in high-value segments. This imbalance becomes starkly visible when disruptions in West Asia choke the supply of key feedstocks, shaking the very foundations of domestic industry. Supply Disruption The current crisis has laid this fragility bare. Disruptions in the supply of LNG, LPG, and sulfur have led to production cuts of 30-50 percent in several segments. With nearly 65 percent of sulfur imports sourced from the Middle East, the ripple effects have extended beyond chemicals to fertilisers, plastics, textiles, and other downstream industries. Strategic chokepoints such as the Strait of Hormuz have witnessed disruptions, pushing shipping costs up by 20-30 percent and adding further strain to cost structures. This is precisely where Nadda's emphasis on supply chain diversification and resilience appears prescient. In today's world, self-reliance cannot mean isolation; it must translate into strategic flexibility. While India imports crude oil from as many as 41 countries, several critical inputs for the chemical industry remain concentrated in a handful of sources, arguably the sector's most significant vulnerability. Opportunity Ahead A recent report by NITI Aayog outlines a pathway to convert this vulnerability into opportunity. It envisions raising India's GVC share to 5-6 percent by 2030 and to 12 percent by 2040. If achieved, the sector could not only reach the $1 trillion mark but also generate over 700,000 jobs. However, this transformation will demand more than policy intent, it will require sustained investment and disciplined execution. The most pressing challenge lies in research and innovation. India currently spends just 0.7 percent of industry revenue on R&D, compared to a global average of 2.3 percent. This gap explains why the country remains largely confined to basic chemicals, even as the world moves toward specialty and high-value products. Bridging this divide is essential if India is to climb the value chain. Equally constraining is the fragmented nature of the industry. Dominated by MSMEs with limited access to capital and technology, the sector struggles to compete globally. Cluster-based development models offer a pragmatic way forward, such as PCPIRs and the proposed chemical parks.

Unholy Alliances: How Pakistan’s Friends Undermine India’s Security

As Turkey arms Pakistan, China shields it and Azerbaijan cheers, India must chart its own course to counter this new crescent of hostility.

Throughout Operation Sindoor, which India launched as retaliation against Pakistan for the April 22 massacre of tourists at Pahalgam, there loomed the shadow of an unsettling axis: Turkey, Azerbaijan and China.


These three allies of Pakistan, though disparate in geography and ideology, are united by a shared hostility towards India cloaked in the garb of strategic cooperation.


Despite the fact that India continues to pour billions of rupees into their economies via tourism and trade, Turkey and Azerbaijan especially continue to underwrite Pakistan.


In the last fiscal year, Indian tourists spent more than Rs.4,000 crore in Turkey and Azerbaijan combined, enriching their airlines, hotels and wedding planners. In return, Ankara has loudly announced its support for Pakistan after Operation Sindoor.


Preliminary forensics suggest the drones that breached Indian airspace were Turkish-made AsisguardSongar models (over 300 Pakistani drones had targeted India’s military and civilian infrastructure at 36 locations). A Turkish anti-submarine corvette had even docked at Karachi earlier this month, days after a Turkish military aircraft landed at the same port city. Turkey claims these were routine stops.


But nothing about Turkey’s relationship with Pakistan is ‘routine.’ Turkey is not merely a rhetorical cheerleader for Pakistan on Kashmir but its enabler. Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has repeatedly voiced support for Islamabad’s claim on Kashmir in flagrant disregard of Indian sovereignty. His ties to Pakistan run deep, cemented by political Islamism and Cold War nostalgia. Since 2003, Erdogan has visited Pakistan at least ten times. A robust defence relationship has emerged, with Turkey becoming Pakistan’s second-largest arms supplier after China. The Ankara-Islamabad military nexus spans everything from Bayraktar drones to submarine upgrades.


But Erdogan’s ambitions do not end in South Asia. Turkey seeks influence in the Indian Ocean Region, competing with the Gulf monarchies. Its naval posturing, its base in Somalia and its drone deals with Maldives are part of a wider design.


If Turkey plays the ideological partner, Azerbaijan plays the opportunistic junior. A Turkic sibling and a staunch Pakistani ally, Baku has aligned itself closely with Ankara and Islamabad. Pakistan does not even recognise Armenia as a state, and in return, Azerbaijan openly supports Islamabad on Kashmir. This year, Pakistan agreed to sell Azerbaijan advanced JF-17 Thunder jets in a deal worth $1.6 billion. The three nations held their first trilateral summit in July 2024.


If Turkey is Pakistan’s ideological partner, China is its indispensable strategic benefactor. The roots of Sino-Pakistani cooperation stretch back to the early Cold War years. Their bond blossomed after Pakistan’s support to China during its 1962 war. As India leaned toward the Soviet Union, China, like the United States, found in Pakistan a useful counterweight and an intermediary to the West. It was Islamabad that facilitated the 1971 secret visit of U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger to Beijing, laying the groundwork for U.S.-China rapprochement and the historic meeting between Richard Nixon and Mao Tse Tung.


This strategic alignment grew deeper in the 1980s and 1990s, as China helped Pakistan build its nuclear and missile capabilities. The Kahuta Research Laboratories, the cornerstone of Pakistan’s uranium enrichment program, received critical Chinese assistance. In return, Pakistan became loyal diplomatically to China by supporting Beijing’s stance on Taiwan, Tibet, Xinjiang and the South China Sea.


In 2015, China launched the $62 billion China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), its flagship Belt and Road Initiative project, linking Xinjiang to the Arabian Sea. For Pakistan, it offers economic revival; for China, strategic access to the Indian Ocean. Despite frequent attacks on Chinese assets by Baloch and Islamist militants, the partnership remains strong, marked by joint military drills, arms deals, and regular diplomatic engagement.


At the UN, China has repeatedly shielded Pakistan-based terrorists from being designated under sanctions regimes most notably, blocking the listing of Jaish-e-Mohammed chief Masood Azhar as a global terrorist for years until it could no longer withstand international pressure in 2019.


During Pakistan’s escalations with India, like the Balakot airstrike in 2019 or the scrapping of Article 370 in Kashmir, China has amplified Pakistan’s line on Kashmir at international forums. For decades, Beijing has propped up Pakistan’s military machine, from nuclear assistance to advanced drone technologies.


To counter them, India’s foreign policy will have to be built on hard-nosed realism. The United States, for all its rhetoric of strategic convergence, is an unreliable partner. It coddled Pakistan for decades, armed it with F-16s and turned a blind eye to its nuclear adventurism.


The same applies to the Gulf. While Saudi Arabia and the UAE have recently shown more sensitivity to India’s position, their loyalties remain elastic. Their neutrality today is tactical, not principled.


India, therefore, must rely on no one but itself. To counter the threat of Pakistan and its allies, India must do three things. First, continually bolster its domestic defence manufacturing ecosystem. The pace and success of the Atmanirbhar Bharat initiative, especially in drone warfare, electronic intelligence and space-based surveillance must not be allowed to flag.


Second, it must tighten economic levers. Turkey and Azerbaijan do not deserve Indian tourism revenue or infrastructure contracts while they actively undermine Indian interests. A soft boycott must be imposed - not as a jingoistic gesture, but as a strategic signal.


Third, India must foster internal unity. A nation under attack cannot afford the luxury of domestic discord or imported delusions. While hostile drones breached Indian skies, some sections of the Indian media echoed Pakistan’s line, proof that not all threats wear a uniform.


Remember, unity, not ideology, must be India’s first line of defence.

Comments


bottom of page