The Aryavarth Express
Agency (New Delhi): As India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi gears up for the upcoming parliamentary elections to seek his third term, he will base his electoral campaign on highlighting the various ways in which he has brought about significant changes and development in India over the past ten years. India’s electoral debate rarely includes discussions on foreign policy, but Narendra Modi has been a unique exception to this trend.
Ahead of the campaign trail, BJP, has emphasized Modi’s vision of positioning India as a global leader with the slogan “vishwaguru” or world leader. The term “vishwaguru” gained significant visibility on the global stage when India hosted the G-20 summit last year. Posters featuring Modi and various meetings of the G-20 were displayed across the country.
Modi’s emphasis on discussing foreign policy openly in India marks a significant shift from previous practices, where such matters were largely unknown to the public and confined to the official circles of New Delhi. If this openness leads to informed debates, greater transparency, and a public feeling of ownership over the results of foreign policy decisions, it could be seen as a positive change. However, in the context of increasing communal division and reduced freedom of the press, public conversations have further complicated India’s relationships with various countries, especially those in its immediate neighbourhood.
Consider the current dispute between India and the Maldives. At the beginning of this year, the Maldives requested that New Delhi remove its military forces from islands of strategic importance. This situation escalated after political figures, celebrities, and journalists in India responded furiously to offensive remarks made about Modi by three ministers from the Maldives. The government of the Maldives suspended the involved ministers, yet this action did little to halt the widespread demands within India for an economic boycott of the country. Consequently, the number of Indian tourists visiting the Maldives has significantly decreased in the past few months.
Following the trend of making foreign policy more public, Modi has shifted India’s global identity from that of a secular democracy to that of a state rooted in Hindu civilization.
For many years, India had positioned itself as a leading example of liberal democracy among developing nations. Earlier governments in New Delhi had emphasized India’s diverse, multi-religious society and its special knack or talent for promoting and welcoming differences, while neighbouring nations experienced civil conflicts and religious discords.
However, Modi has almost solely focused on promoting Hindu nationalist objectives through foreign policy: spreading ancient Hindu traditions, removing traces of Islamic art and history, and establishing Hindu temples in other countries.
This shift has also transformed the character of India’s overseas community, with significant consequences. The overseas Indian community, the largest of any nation, has historically played a key role in supporting policies that benefit New Delhi. Particularly in the 2000s, after India was sanctioned for conducting nuclear tests, groups from its overseas community worked to establish worldwide acceptance of India as a nuclear power. This led to the significant nuclear agreement between India and the United States and prompted nations such as Australia to rethink their bans on nuclear exports.
However, whether the overseas community remains a unified force supporting New Delhi’s interests is now uncertain. A 2020 study by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, based in Washington, found that while a substantial 69 percent of Hindu Indian Americans approved of Modi’s tenure as prime minister, only 20 percent of Muslim and 34 percent of Christian Indian Americans shared this approval.
This division along religious lines has led to outbreaks of violence among South Asians in Western countries, including street clashes, political demonstrations, and assaults on places of worship. Sometimes, New Delhi has even welcomed this division instead of attempting to reduce it. Following clashes between Hindus and Muslims in Leicester, England, in 2022, the Indian High Commission in London released a statement that was clearly biased. It only condemned the “destruction of Hindu religious sites and symbols” without acknowledging any harm done to Muslim individuals.
Even with these big changes in overall strategy and global politics, Modi’s methods haven’t really changed much. Similar to those before him, Modi has seen India as a self-reliant force in a world with many powerful nations. To achieve this aim, Modi has also maintained India’s historical stance of staying neutral, not aligning with any major power blocs, and avoiding taking sides.
Regarding various matters, including the conflict in Ukraine, the Gaza war, and situations involving Iran and Taiwan, India has consistently avoided declaring a definitive stance on policy. When New Delhi has chosen to speak out, it has been to justify its decision to remain silent and neutral.
As a result, Modi has also carried on and broadened the initiatives of previous administrations by pursuing alliances with nations that are openly hostile or opposed towards one another. India has thus found it quite manageable to be a member of both the Quad (alongside the United States and its allies) and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (with China, Russia, and their allies).India has also succeeded in acquiring sophisticated weaponry from the U.S. while at the same time exploring possibilities for collaborative defense projects with Russia.
In this specific area, Modi has arguably achieved his most significant and prominent success. In a world marked by geopolitical tensions, few leading nations have succeeded in fostering collaboration with the U.S. while openly engaging with its greatest rivals. India stands out as a notable exception. By skillfully leveraging Washington’s concerns about China, Modi has been able to secure remarkable backing from the White House without offering anything in exchange.
For example, India declines to commit support to the U.S. on any of its key geopolitical objectives, whether they are in Europe or the Middle East. Additionally, it keeps turning down requests for military base access in the Indo-Pacific region, in contrast to the Philippines, which grants such access. Moreover, it will not agree to join U.S. forces in battle in case of a conflict with China, unlike other U.S. allies in Asia. However, the question facing Modi — especially if he is to remain in power this year — is how long this uneven deal with Washington can last.
While Modi has made minimal adjustments to India’s traditional approach of neutrality and independence, his administration is confronted with a unique set of motivations and interests compared to past governments. In his 2021 book “Flying Blind: India’s Quest for Global Leadership,” Zeeshan, who writes about international relations for The Diplomat, notes that India’s approach to governance and economic growth as a liberal, secular democracy had previously aligned New Delhi’s interests and values closely with those of Western countries. However, in recent times, domestic political developments in India have led to Modi finding more commonality with nations such as China and Russia. This alignment is seen in areas like the management of human and business rights, the broadening of government authority across various policy areas, and efforts to limit the influence of Western ideals in international governance.
Modi’s remarkably effective handling of these underlying conflicts in his interactions with the United States to date might be considered his greatest achievement in foreign policy. (IPA Service)
By Girish Linganna