India’s Foreign Policy

The recent strategic initiatives undertaken by the Union Cabinet, coupled with evolving regional dynamics, have reignited critical discourse on the foundational philosophy and geopolitical orientation of India’s foreign policy, particularly within the South Asian context and its broader global engagements.

Philosophical and Diplomatic Limitations

• Hyper-nationalism over Strategy: India’s foreign policy is increasingly driven by emotive hyper-nationalism, which impairs rational, objective analysis and undermines the ability to confront complex geopolitical realities.
• Refusal of Realism: The foreign policy establishment exhibits a refusal to acknowledge its own strategic predicament, instead preferring superficial triumphalism over candid engagement with difficult international situations.
• Moral Exceptionalism: India’s tendency to adopt moralistic postures—such as vague condemnations of terrorism or violence without naming aggressors—undermines its credibility and is seen as a deflection from substantive diplomacy.

Strategic Blind Spots and Regional Contradictions

• Nuclear Dialogue Vacuum: Despite growing nuclear anxieties in South Asia, especially between India and Pakistan, India's diplomatic efforts have failed to establish robust channels for escalation control or crisis management.
• Failure in Narrative Control: India’s inability to shape the regional narrative, especially post events like Operation Ganga or Balakot, results in both strategic isolation and a credibility gap vis-à-vis Pakistan and China.
• Pakistan and the Global Lens: Even when Pakistan is diplomatically isolated, India fails to translate this into global strategic advantage, largely due to inconsistent messaging and lack of cohesive follow-up action.

Global Standing and Structural Concerns

• Diplomatic Deficit at the MEA: Political control over diplomacy and weakening of professional diplomatic corps has resulted in poor strategic coherence, especially in crisis situations such as the Ukraine war or the Israel-Gaza conflict.
• Weak Global Strategy: India’s approach to multilateralism and global order is marked by a tension between ambition and capacity, with rhetorical assertions often unsupported by institutional or diplomatic strength.
• Soft Power without Substance: Grand slogans like “Vishwa Guru” are not backed by global leadership on pressing issues (climate, peace, regional integration), making India's foreign policy less persuasive to the world order.

Practice Question:

Critically examine the assertion that India’s foreign policy is marked by a refusal of strategic realism. In your view, how can India reconcile its aspirational global role with the challenges of regional and global diplomacy? (250 words)