Indian foreign policy

The election in 2014 of Narendra Modi as prime minister of India ushered in a single-party government with a unique opportunity to define the country's global role. Debate on India's foreign policy has been dominated by two broad positions. The first relates to the ‘Nehruvian’ vision of its founding fathers which is suspicious of global capitalism, alliances and Great Power politics, advocating reform of institutions and solidarity with the global South. The other reflects the more orthodox ‘realist’ ambition towards ‘Great Power status’, pursued in line with traditional International Relations (IR) interests and priorities. This debate is ongoing precisely because the tension remains. Three new publications make different, but nonetheless complementary, contributions to this field. In turn they provide overview, external assessment and global economic context for discussions of India's emerging role in the increasingly multipolar international order. In Indian foreign policy, Harsh Pant assesses the country's approach to foreign policy by looking first at its decision-making mechanisms, then at a series of key bilateral and regional relationships, before examining thematic areas. The book is ideal as a reference text for researchers, especially those dealing with policy. Pant's view is that developmental limitations and moralistic ambitions have institutionalized in India an aversion to power, especially hard power and the role of the military. This inhibits the adoption of strategy, planning and institutional structure for a foreign policy commensurate with the reality of India's increased influence. Civilian control of foreign and defence policy has concentrated decision-making around the Prime Minister's Office. This leaves the Ministry of External Affairs and Ministry of Defence as ‘implementers’ with limited advisory roles. This arrangement supports India's democracy, but foreign policy is therefore highly personalized, centred on the ‘interest and political will’ of incumbent prime ministers. This remains the case despite the establishment of the National Security Council, and for Pant demonstrates an approach lacking in long-term grand strategic ambition and capacity. He sums up his assessment succinctly: ‘The assertions, therefore, that India does not have a China policy or an Iran policy or a Pakistan policy are plain irrelevant. India does not have a foreign policy, period’ (p. 13)

Context (archaeology · Foreign policy · Political economy · Political science · Politics · Power (physics · Sociology · Soft power · Solidarity · Vision · Indian Economic and Social Development · Law · Politics and Conflicts in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Middle East · South Asian Studies and Conflicts