The vulnerability of global supply chains now extends far beyond major strategic straits, permeating a complex network of secondary nodes whose importance is often overlooked. Intermediate ports, rail corridors, transhipment hubs, and digital platforms have become critical points whose disruption can trigger cascading consequences worldwide. By foregrounding 'invisible bottlenecks', this Essay challenges conventional maritime security perspectives, traditionally focused on iconic chokepoints. Contemporary risks are systemic, hybrid, and interdependent, spanning physical, organisational, and cyber dimensions. India exemplifies a strategy rooted in logistical resilience, regional integration, and critical infrastructure protection, reshaping the levers of power within global trade networks.
This article examines India's drive towards national security self-reliance through defence innovation under Atmanirbhar Bharat and Make in India. The study situates this project within a historical continuum, interpreting India's orientation as a strategic reclamation of its 'Golden Bird' civilisational identity. It introduces the concept of a 'G2.5 world order'-an unstable environment defined by neo-mercantilism, weakened multilateral norms, and power-driven economic coercion. The central argument posits that economic sovereignty alone is insufficient to ensure strategic autonomy. Drawing cautionary lessons from Japan's post-Plaza Accord stagnation and Russia's strategic attrition, the article concludes that Atmanirbharta must function as a pragmatic hedging strategy.
The question of federalism is the structural core of the conflict between Ethnic Armed Organisations and Tatmadaw. This article uses Hobbes' concept of the state of nature to examine why internal strife persists despite decades of State building and democratisation efforts. The Hobbesian framework is specifically used to understand the paradox: the Tatmadaw invokes Hobbesian justification for centralised authority for prevention of chaos, yet simultaneously produces the conditions of ungoverned violence it claims to prevent. This contradiction, multiplied by the military's categorical rejection of federalism, explains both the durability of armed resistance and the failure of successive peace processes.
