Subject: Bilateral Relations

India has been maintaining strategic autonomy in its foreign policy since Independence. But the end of Cold War and growing closeness towards the U.S. raises concerns. This article addresses this issue.

India’s foreign policy: characterised by autonomy

• India has historically prided itself as an independent developing country which does not take orders from or succumb to pressure from great powers.
• Indian maintained this stance in its foreign policy when the world order was bipolar from 1947 to 1991, dominated by the U.S. and Russia.
• Also, when the world was unipolar from 1991 to 2008, dominated by the U.S.
• Or when it is multipolar as at the present times.
• The need for autonomy in making foreign policy choices has remained constant.

Flexibility in foreign policy

• However, strategic autonomy has often been adjusted in India’s history as per the changing milieu.
• During the 1962 war with China, Prime Minister Nehru, had to appeal to the U.S. for emergency military aid.
• In the build-up to the 1971 war with Pakistan, Prime Minister Indira Gandhi had to enter a Treaty of Peace, Friendship and Cooperation with the Soviet Union to ward off both China and the U.S.
• And in Kargil in 1999, India welcomed a direct intervention by the U.S. to force Pakistan to back down.
• In all the above examples, India did not become any less autonomous when geopolitical circumstances compelled it to enter into de facto alliance-like cooperation with major powers.
• Rather, India secured its freedom, sovereignty and territorial integrity by manoeuvering the great power equations and playing the realpolitik game.

Concerns over India’s growing closeness to the U.S.

• As India is facing China’s growing aggression along the LAC, Non-alignment 2.0 with China and the U.S. makes little sense.
• Fears that proximity to the U.S. will lead to loss of India’s strategic autonomy are overblown.
• Because independent India has never been subordinated to a foreign hegemon.

What should be India’s strategy

• In the threat environment marked by a pushy China, India should aim to have both- American support and stay as an independent power centre by cooperation with middle powers in Asia and around the world.
• For India complete dependence on the U.S. to counter China would be an error.
• Such complete dependence would be detrimental to India’s national interest such as its ties with Iran and Russia and efforts to speed up indigenous defence modernisation.
• A wide and diverse range of strategic partners, including the U.S. is the only viable diplomatic way forward in the current emerging multipolar world order.

Consider the question “Does India’s close alignment with the U.S. harms its strategic autonomy? Suggest the strategy to balance India’s security concerns and maintaining strategic autonomy.”

Conclusion

We are free and self-reliant not through isolation or alliance with one great power, but only in variable combinations with several like-minded partners. India is familiar with the phrase ‘multi-vector’ foreign policy. It is time to maximise its potential.

This article analyses what the new shift in the India-U.S. ties will require for the mutual benefit.

Following 12 factors would influence the depth and longevity of the India-U.S. ties.

1) Outcome of the  U.S. Presidential elections

• The success of India’s new bonding with the U.S. will depend on the outcome of the U.S. Presidential elections.
• The Democratic party candidate with the Left wing and liberals in the U.S. has been highly critical of the Citizenship (Amendment) Act.

2) Need to build trust with the U.S.

• India purchased of the S-400 air defence missile system from Russia disregarding the U.S. concerns.
• India refused to send Indian troops to Afghanistan.
• We need to build trust with the U.S. that we will give to the U.S. as good as it gives us.
• For this structuring we must realise that India-U.S. relations require give and take on both sides.
• What India needs to take today is for dealing with the Ladakh confrontation with China.
• India needs U.S. hardware military equipment.

3)  Fighting the U.S. enemy in neighbourhood

• The U.S. needs India to fight her enemies in the neighbourhood such as in Afghanistan.
• India should send two divisions gradually to Afghanistan and relieve U.S. troops to go home

4) Intelligence sharing and cooperation

• India needs the support of the U.S. and its ally, Israel, in cyberwarfare, satellite mappings of China and Pakistan.
• There is a need for sharing intercepts of electronic communication, hard intelligence on terrorists, and controlling the military and the Inter-Services Intelligence in Pakistan.

5) Developing naval bases

• India needs the U.S. to completely develop the Andaman & Nicobar, and also the Lakshadweep Islands as a naval and air force base.
• These naval bases can be used by the U.S  and shared along with its allies such as Indonesia and Japan.

6) Economic relations and India’s concerns

• The economic relations must be based on macroeconomic commercial principles.
• Free, indiscriminate flow of U.S. foreign direct investment (FDI) is not in India’s national interest.

7) Technology sharing

• India needs technologies such as thorium utilisation, desalination of sea water, and hydrogen fuel cells.

8) U.S. should allow import of agricultural product

• The U.S. must allow India’s exports of agricultural products including Bos indicus milk, which are of highly competitive prices in the world.

9) FDI in India

• FDI should be allowed into India selectively from abroad, including from the U.S.
• FDI in India should be based on the economic theory of comparative advantage and not on subsidies and gratis.

10) Tariffs

• Tariffs of both India and the U.S. should be lowered, and the Indian rupee should be gradually revalued to ₹35 to a dollar.
• Later, with the economy picking up, the rupee rate should go below 10 to the dollar.

11) Stay away from certain issues

•  India should not provide the U.S. with our troops to enter Tibet, or be involved in the Hong Kong and Taiwan issue.
• There is always a possibility of a leadership change in China.
• Thus, China’s policy changed very favourably towards India.
• In the cases of Tibet, Taiwan, and Hong Kong, we have made explicit agreements.
• In the case of Tibet, two formal treaties were signed by Nehru (1954) and A.B. Vajpayee (2003).

12) Trilateral commitment to world peace

• In the long run, India, the U.S., and China should form a trilateral commitment for world peace provided Chinese current international policies undergo a healthy change.

Consider the question “What are the factors influencing the India-U.S. ties? Suggest the pathway to address the issues that hamper the deepening of India-U.S. ties.”

Conclusion

Both countries need to recognise each other’s concern and work towards the deepening of the ties for the mutual benefit and with a view to dealing with the challenges confronting both the countries.

The economic grip China exerts on the world protects it from the threat of isolation. This article examines this issue and its implications for India.

Worsening U.S.-China ties and implications for other countries

• After years of cooperating with one another, the U.S. and China are currently at the stage of confrontation.
• Both are seeking allies to join their camps.
• This places several countries in Asia, in a difficult position as most of them, loathe to take sides.
• The U.S. may not necessarily be the first choice for many countries of Asia and the Asia-Pacific region.
• In the case of China, it is clearly more feared than loved.

China’s aggression

•  Beijing’s virtual takeover of Hong Kong has only confirmed what had long been known about China’s intentions.
• In March-April this year, China further stepped up its aggressive actions, renaming almost 80 geographical features in the region as an index of Chinese sovereignty.
•  Taiwan, Japan, Vietnam, Indonesia and South Korea have all complained about China’s menacing postures in their vicinity.

How countries are resisting China

• Hardly any country in Asia is willing to openly confront China, and side with the U.S.
• East Asian countries explain that China was always known to be over-protective of the South China Sea.
• And China consider South China Sea a natural shield against possible hostile intervention by outside forces inimical to it.
• No U.S. assurance and Chinese aggression has been enough to make countries in the region openly side with the U.S. and against China.

China’s economic grip and lessons for India

• Despite a series of diktats from Washington to restrict economic and other relations, China remains unfazed.
• China seems confident that its stranglehold on the global economy ensures that it does not face any real challenge.
• It would be wise for India to recognise this.
• It is equally necessary to realise how fickle some of these countries can be when it comes to economic issues.
•  At a recent meeting in Washington Australia (a member of the Quad) made it clear that China is important for Australia.
• Likewise, the U.K.’s Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, recently stated in its Parliament, that the U.K. wants a positive relationship with China.
• It is evident that few nations across the world are willing to risk China’s ire because of strong economic ties.

India’s relations with neighbouring countries: concerns

• India’s relations with Nepal, meanwhile, have hit a roadblock over the Kalapani area.
• In Sri Lanka, the return of the Rajapaksas to power after the recent elections does not augur too well for India-Sri Lanka relations.
• The strain in India-Bangladesh relations is a real cause for concern since it can provide a beachhead against Chinese activities in the region.

Growing Chinese presence in India’s sphere of influence

•  In July, the Chinese Foreign Minister organised a virtual meeting of the Foreign Ministers of Nepal, Afghanistan and Pakistan.
• In this meeting, China proposed economic corridor plan with Nepal, styled as the Trans-Himalayan Multi-Dimensional Connectivity Network.
• China has also made headway in Iran to an extent, again at India’s expense.

Conclusion

Geo-balancing is not happening to China’s disadvantage. This lesson must be well understood when India plan its future strategy.

The article examines the issue of declining political capital in India’s neighbourhood and the factors responsible for this. 

India’s standing in neighbourhood: Past

• Not long ago, India was seen as a natural rising power in South Asia and the Indian Ocean Region.
• It was the de facto leader of the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC).
• It has historical and cultural ties with Nepal.
• It enjoyed traditional goodwill and influence in Sri Lanka and Bangladesh.
• It had made investments worth billions of dollars in Afghanistan and cultivated vibrant ties with the post-Taliban stakeholders in Kabul.
• It had committed itself to multilateralism and the Central Asian connectivity project, with Iran being its gateway.
• It was competing and cooperating with China at the same time.

India’s relations in with the neighbourhood: Present

• India is perhaps facing its gravest national security crisis in 20 years, with China along the Line of Actual Control (LAC).
• SAARC is defunct.
• Nepal has turned hostile having adopted a new map and revived border disputes with India.
• Sri Lanka has tilted towards China.
• Bangladesh is clearly miffed at the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019.
• When Afghanistan is undergoing a major transition, India is out of the multi-party talks.
• Iran has inaugurated a railway link project connecting the Chabahar port, on the Gulf of Oman, to Zahedan.

What are the factors responsible for this?

When we dig deep, three problems can be found which are more or less linked to this decline.

1) Alignment with US

• As India started moving away from non-alignment, there has been a steady erosion in India’s strategic autonomy.
• India’s official policy is that it is committed to multilateralism.
•  When India started deepening its partnership with the United States, New Delhi began steadily aligning its policies with U.S. interests.
• The case of Iran is the best example.
• India’s deepening defence and military ties with the U.S.  probably altered Beijing’s assessment of India.
• One of the reasons for the shift could be Beijing’s assessment that India has already become a de facto ally of the U.S.
• The forceful altering of the status quo on the border is a risky message as much to New Delhi as it is to Washington.

2) Domestic politics

• The passing of the CAA is regionalisation of the domestic problems of the countries in India’s neighbourhood.
• Bangladesh took offence at the CAA and the National Register of Citizens, there were anti-India protests even in Afghanistan.
• CAA also drove new wedges between India and the countries that had a Muslim majority and were friendly to India in the neighbourhood.
• The abrogation of the special status of Jammu and Kashmir was another such move.
• But it damaged India’s reputation as a responsible democratic power and gave propaganda weapons to Pakistan.
• The change of status quo in Jammu and Kashmir, could be another factor that prompted the Chinese to move aggressively towards the border in Ladakh.

3) Misplaced confidence

• Great powers wait to establish their standing before declaring that they have arrived.
• China bided its time for four decades before it started taking on the mighty U.S.
• India should learn from at least these modern examples.
• If it did, it would not have used high-handedness in Nepal during the country’s constitutional crisis and caused a traditional and civilisational ally to turn hostile.
• The updated political map which India released in November rubbed salt into the wound on the Nepal border.

Consider the question “India’s standing in its neighbourhood has been on the decline for some time now. Examine the factors responsible for this.”

Conclusion

To address the current crises, India has to reconsider its foreign policy trajectory. It does not lack resources to claim what is its due in global politics. What it lacks is strategic depth.

Original article:

https://www.thehindu.com/opinion/lead/needed-a-map-for-indias-foreign-policy/article32206877.ece