After Tiff, A Thaw: How India, Maldives Buried Differences To Make Ties Stronger
However, just about 18 months ago, the same could not have been imagined. In January 2024, Prime Minister Narendra Modi's visit to Lakshadweep to promote domestic tourism did not go well with some Maldivian ministers, who not only mocked India but also disrespected Modi. This led to a huge uproar as the ties between the two nations plummeted further. Though the Maldivian government distanced itself from the statement and expelled the ministers, the hate for India stemmed from its President Mohamed Muizzu's poll campaign.
Muizzu, who is considered close to China, led 'India Out' campaign in the run-up to the presidential polls. When he took reign of the Island nation, he forced around dozens of Indian personnel, who used to train Maldivian soldiers, out of the country, taking the bilateral ties and defence cooperation to a historic low. India's influence in the Indian Ocean island chain appeared to be at risk due to the increasing presence of China.
A memorable welcome in Maldives. Strong ties between our nations will greatly benefit our people. pic.twitter.com/qQVoB51FJw — Narendra Modi (@narendramodi) July 25, 2025
After wrapping up a five-day trip to China in January 2024, President Muizzu emphasized in a media interaction that although the Maldives is a small island nation, that doesn't give anyone the right to dominate or pressure it. He firmly stated that the Maldives is 'not in anyone's backyard.' A couple of months later, in March, he made it clear that no Indian military personnel — not even those in civilian attire — would remain in the Maldives beyond May 10, 2024. By early May, India complied with the deadline, withdrawing its troops entirely and replacing them with technical staff as part of a mutual understanding.
Relations between India and the Maldives took a positive turn when President Muizzu visited India on a state trip in October 2024. His visit came at a time when the Maldives was grappling with a mounting debt crisis and a growing fiscal deficit, raising concerns about a potential default. During his meeting with Indian leaders in New Delhi, a significant breakthrough came in the form of a $750 million currency swap agreement, valid until 2027, aimed at easing the Maldives' foreign exchange challenges. The two nations also issued a joint 'vision statement' outlining plans for a broad-based partnership covering economic cooperation and maritime security. Further strengthening the support, India extended a $50 million treasury bill in May 2025 to help the Maldives boost its foreign reserves and stabilize its economy.
India and the Maldives have long shared a strong relationship shaped by their close geographical proximity, cultural ties, and mutual support during times of crisis. With only about 70 nautical miles separating India's southernmost islands from the northern Maldives, the island nation plays a key role in India's maritime security in the southern Indian Ocean. Over the years, India has supported the Maldives through medical aid, training programs, infrastructure projects, and emergency assistance.
To maintain momentum in their development agenda, the two countries established High-Level Core Group Meetings (HLCGMs). These regular meetings have helped resolve diplomatic challenges and ensure smooth implementation of agreements—starting with the troop replacement deal and now focusing on pushing forward the joint Vision statement.
India has also remained a steady partner in enhancing the Maldives' maritime capabilities by assisting with coastal radar systems, naval training, and surveillance — all in line with its broader Indian Ocean security strategy. In May 2025, the two nations held joint disaster response exercises, reflecting their shared commitment under the MAHASAGAR regional cooperation framework.
Given the Maldives' strategic position along vital international shipping routes, its stability and collaboration are essential to India's maritime interests. For President Muizzu, the advantages of working closely with India have become more evident after a year of exploring alternative partnerships.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hindu
22 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Letters to The Editor — July 29, 2025
Honouring Chola legacy India should formally honour the Chola legacy for launching successful naval expeditions beyond India shores and establishing the Tamil influence across Southeast Asia. Getting the Indian Navy to celebrate 'Rajendra Chola' day would be a fitting tribute to these unmatched maritime achievements. Prime Minister Narendra Modi's references to Chola military and democratic legacy rightly spotlights their enduring contributions. Their practice of Kudavolai Murai — selecting local representatives by lot — was a democratic model that was centuries ahead of its time. The Chola overseas campaigns were not just conquests but also acts of cultural diplomacy and naval vision. Honouring the Cholas would not be symbolic alone. It would reclaim India's proud naval heritage and inspire a forward-looking maritime spirit rooted in our own history. Avinashiappan Myilsami, Coimbatore It is a matter of pride that Tamil Nadu is now home to a number of World Heritage sites. One can think of Gingee Fort along with the great Chola temples and the Mahabalipuram monuments. The only drawback at these sites is the lack of proper infrastructure. Connectivity is an issue. Pollution control too is another problem. A.S. Thirumalai, Chennai Crowd management Stampedes have become a frequent occurrence, leading to a tragic loss of lives (Front page, July 28). There needs to be comprehensive crowd control and management measures in place at all places of public gathering. There needs to be a posse of well-trained volunteers (with a specific dress code) to guide people and ensure their orderly movement. Kosaraju Chandramouli, Hyderabad
The Hindu
22 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Lessons from the past: on the Chola legacy
The visit of Prime Minister Narendra Modi to Tamil Nadu had a subtle political message. In his address at the valediction of the annual Aadi Thiruvathirai festival at Gangaikonda Cholapuram to mark the birth anniversary of Rajendra Chola I, he focused on the legacy of the Chola emperor and his father Rajaraja Chola I to underline that contemporary India would be as enterprising as ancient India under the imperial Cholas, in expanding trade, and in guarding India's sovereignty. The festival was also organised to commemorate 1,000 years of the maritime expedition of Rajendra Chola to south-east Asia as well as the construction of the iconic temple, a World Heritage Site. The grandeur of the Chola dynasty is fascinating to recall, but there are other mundane facets of the Chola rule which are of modern relevance — its water management, tax and land revenue collection, and democratic processes. In creating infrastructure, especially, the Cholas hold many lessons. In recent months, there have been fatal accidents involving civic structures. The resilience of the Brihadisvara temples, which have stood tall for over 1,000 years, could provide learnings. Studies show that the southern peninsula was the epicentre of several earthquakes in the last 200-odd years. Archaeologists are of the view that the superstructure of the temples holds the key to modern building techniques when it comes to seismic resilience. A close study of the temples for structural stability can be of immense value in the contemporary context. Apart from focusing on the heritage and culture of the Cholas, India could try and replicate their success in administration. Management of water resources, especially, could be an important learning. The Cauvery delta, where Gangaikonda Cholapuram is located, may experience floods, with a large volume of water draining into the sea without being harnessed for periods of scarcity. More than 30 years have passed since the adoption of the 73rd and 74th Amendments to the Constitution, but a large number of local bodies, even in the major cities, are functioning without elected representatives. The celebration is an opportunity for an analysis of the functioning of grassroots-level democratic bodies. Mr. Modi announced that the Centre would install the statues of Rajaraja Chola and Rajendra Chola to remind the country of its historical consciousness. But this exercise would have greater purpose if it reminds the country of the administrative acumen of the Cholas, and nudges those in governance to address many of the chronic flaws and problems.
The Hindu
22 minutes ago
- The Hindu
The medical boundaries for AYUSH practitioners
The recent controversy on X between a hepatologist and an Indian chess Grand Master, on whether practitioners of traditional medicine can claim to be doctors, has sparked much commentary on the role and the status of practitioners of traditional Indian medicine systems such as Ayurveda and Unani, in India. Committees, governments, perspectives The burning issue here is not merely whether practitioners of Ayurveda can refer to themselves as doctors, but rather the scope of medical activities permitted under Indian law. This is an issue which has consequences for public health. A starting point for this discussion is to understand the framing of the debate over the last 80 years, beginning 1946, when the Health Survey and Development Committee, better known as Bhore Committee, batted in favour of modern scientific medicine based on evidence. The committee had pointed out that other countries were in the process of phasing out their traditional medicine systems and recommended that states take a call on the extent to which traditional medicine played a role in their public health systems. The Bhore committee's lack of enthusiasm for the traditional medicinal system did not go unnoticed by practitioners of traditional Indian medicine who mounted a vocal protest. They managed to convince the Government of India to set up the Committee on Indigenous Systems of Medicine, which submitted its report in 1948. This committee unabashedly wrapped up its conclusions in communal language, framing the issue in terms of Hindu nationalism by linking Ayurveda to the Vedas and its decline to 'foreign domination'. While the Nehru government took no action to formally recognise these practitioners of traditional medicine, the Indira Gandhi government in 1970 enacted a legislation called The Indian Medicine Central Council Act recognising and regulating the practitioners of Ayurveda, Siddha and Unani. This law was replaced in 2020 with a new law called The National Commission for Indian System of Medicine Act. The syllabus for aspiring practitioners of Ayurveda is an absolute mish-mash of concepts that span everything from doshas, prakriti, atmas (which includes learning the difference between paramatma and jivatma) with a sprinkling of modern medical concepts such as cell physiology and anatomy. These are irreconcilable concepts — the theory of tridosha attributes all ills to an imbalance of doshas, while modern medicine locates the concepts of some diseases such as infections in 'germ theory', among others. There is no middle ground between both systems of medicine which is why concepts such as integrative medicine make no sense. Point of friction Nevertheless, the legal recognition of this new class of practitioners led to questions on the exact boundaries between the practice of traditional and modern medicine. The major point of friction has been the prescription of modern medicines by the practitioners of traditional medicine. Ayurvedic practitioners, in particular, while claiming the superiority of their art over modern medicine, have consistently demanded the right to prescribe modern medicines developed by evidence-based modern science. Pertinently, this dispute revolved around the interpretation of Rule 2(ee) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Rules, 1945 which defined the class of 'registered medical practitioners' who can prescribe modern medicine. This definition is complicated since it is not limited to doctors with a MBBS degree. It delegates a certain amount of power to State governments to pass orders declaring medical practitioners on their State medical registers as persons 'practising the modern scientific system of medicine for the purposes of ….' the Drugs & Cosmetics Act, 1940. Many State governments have used this power under Rule 2(ee) to allow registered practitioners of Ayurveda and Unani to prescribe modern medicine such as antibiotics. The constitutionality of these orders was challenged before the courts and the first round of litigation concluded in 1998 with the judgment of the Supreme Court of India in Dr. Mukhtiar Chand & Ors vs The State Of Punjab & Ors. The Court concluded that 'the right to prescribe drugs of a system of medicine would be synonymous with the right to practise that system of medicine. In that sense, the right to prescribe allopathic drug cannot be wholly divorced from the claim to practice allopathic medicine'. Simply put, Ayurvedic practitioners had no right to prescribe modern medicine. That judgment never stopped the lobbying by Ayurvedic and Unani practitioners with State governments for the promulgation of orders under Rule 2(ee) allowing them to prescribe modern medicine. Several State governments have continued passing these orders in defiance of the Court's judgment. This inevitably leads to litigation before the High Courts, usually by the Indian Medical Association, which often wins these cases. Unsuspecting patients too have often sued practitioners of Ayurveda before consumer courts on the grounds that they were deceived into believing that they were being treated by a doctor with a MBBS degree who can prescribe modern medicine. While much of the litigation has revolved around the right to dispense modern medicine, there is also the issue regarding the medical procedures that can be conducted legally by practitioners of Ayurveda and Unani. For example, can a registered Ayurvedic practitioner 'intubate' a patient? This is an important question to ask since it is an open secret that many hospitals purporting to practise modern medicine are hiring Ayurvedic practitioners with Bachelor of Ayurvedic Medicine and Surgery (BAMS) degree at lower pay in place of graduates with a MBBS degree. Further, a notification by the Indian government in 2020 has allowed Ayurvedic practitioners (post graduates) to perform 58 minor surgeries, including the removal of the gall bladder, appendix and benign tumours. The constitutionality of this notification is pending before the courts. If the notification is upheld, the question that arises is whether these Ayurvedic practitioners can now use anaesthetic agents and antibiotics required to conduct surgeries. The stakes are high for public health in India since the likely strategy of Ayurvedic practitioners will be to argue that these surgeries were known in traditional Indian medicine. In these times of heady Hindutva, it will be difficult to find a judge who will ignore these claims. The political factor The larger political backdrop to this entire debate regarding Ayurvedic practitioners is 'Hindu pride', which has fuelled claims of fantastical achievements by ancient Indian civilisation, be it the pushpaka vimana or the claims of the Kauravas being test tube babies. When a policy issue such as Ayurveda is cynically draped in the language of 'Hindu pride', it is not just the Bharatiya Janata Party but also the Indian National Congress which feels compelled to support an obviously dangerous approach to public health. The last election manifesto of the Indian National Congress, in 2024, promised that the party would 'support' all systems of medicines instead of a promise to support only rational, evidence-based medicine. This blind faith in traditional medicine is going to cost every citizen in the future since the government is actively considering the inclusion of AYUSH (Ayurveda, Yoga and Naturopathy, Unani, Siddha and Homeopathy) treatments under the Ayushman Bharat insurance scheme funded by tax-payers. This is in addition to approximately ₹20,000 crore of tax-payer money spent on research councils functioning under the Ministry of AYUSH with a mandate to research AYUSH. They have very little to show for in terms of scientific breakthroughs. Twitter outrage notwithstanding, the joke at the end of the day is on the tax-payer. Dinesh S. Thakur is the author of 'The Truth Pill: The Myth of Drug Regulation in India'. Prashant Reddy T. is the coauthor of 'The Truth Pill: The Myth of Drug Regulation in India'
