National interest taking priority in foreign policy

In 2018, PM Modi, in his keynote address at the Shangri La dialogue in Singapore, spoke about India’s growing engagement through economic and strategic cooperation with different parts of the world. He spoke about India’s strategic autonomy and maturity to develop ties with all. India’s global strategic partnership with Russia was important; with the United States, India had overcome the hesitations of history; the mature relationship with China had so far managed issues, ensuring a peaceful border. So much has changed since then that the call for strategic autonomy now is challenged by new situations.

The pandemic was a natural disaster which affected countries across continents. The ability to deal with it buttressed New Delhi’s strategic autonomy since India developed its own Covid vaccine, was willing to share it with others and ran the globe’s largest vaccination programme.

Since then, the Ukraine crisis has compounded global problems. Two of India’s strategic partners, the USA and Russia are at loggerheads. Europe, a third pole which India was wishfully working with is challenged by the Ukraine crisis. The India-China equation is marred by China overturning two decades of calm on the border through provocative and aggressive behaviour which it also continues in the East and South China Seas.

Thus, India’s relationship with China has undergone a change due to Chinese behaviour. The relationship with Russia is under pressure due to our other friends exercising sanctions against it for Ukraine’s sake. Compounding this is tension around Taiwan.

India and other emerging powers that prefer a multi-polar world are caught amid these cleavages. Indian strategic autonomy seeks to make the UN agencies work better and have partners around the world who would cooperate for more functional partnerships. India has moved centre stage on issues like climate change and trade, becoming more amenable over the last few years.

India shows willingness to play by the rules of the international order. The permanent members of the Security Council including the United States, Russia and China wilfully violate these rules for their own benefits when it suits them.

The security aspect of the global order is increasing in importance. Globalisation agenda of trade, climate, public health and the like are often pushed out allowing the bigger powers to settle scores. Increasing bipolarisation by the United States through Quad, AUKUS and NATO is pulling its friends into becoming allies. Europe is stronger behind NATO. Asian allies Japan and Korea attended a NATO summit in Madrid. China and Russia are closer. Russia invaded Ukraine and China is more aggressive on Taiwan. This competitive aggressive intent is of concern to the rest of the world. Most summits now focus on dividing the world rather than uniting it, though, on the face of it, their agendas are well-intentioned towards a better world.

The new buzzword is resilient supply chains. The developed countries’ adherence to China by concentrating their production there is challenged and needs alteration. China Plus One policies are emerging. Resilient value chains make more sense. After the pandemic, and the China Plus One syndrome, it also now includes a Russia Plus syndrome though the equation there is largely on energy and foodgrains, which are both critical as well.

It is not only the labour arbitrage and lower cost of production that now attracts international business chains. How dependable a country is and how it is backed by trade agreements is considered for new investments. India and the ASEAN with whom it has trade, investment and services agreements and Africa under the Africa Continental Trade Free Area (AfCFTA) must raise ambitions and increase regional digital and supply chains.

Japanese companies seek new manufacturing facilities, which will participate in value chains with the ASEAN and export to Africa. German companies also seek to expand manufacturing in India and export back to Europe. They could also think of utilising the FTA with ASEAN to build new supply chains as part of their Indo-Pacific policy. The dependence on China and Russia may not disappear. It is diminishing indicating opportunities and alternatives for exploration. Seven ASEAN members are part of the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework (IPEF) of which India is also a part.

India’s preference for a multi-polar world is to exercise its strategic autonomy better. If the world is pushed towards bipolarity, being a dependable partner will indeed be a major contribution to achieving economic diversity and supply chains.

For vaccines, agricultural products, foodgrains and pharmaceuticals, besides services, India is an important partner for ASEAN, Africa and beyond. Similar assured supply chains for energy, fertilisers, solar panel components, rare earths etc. are required for India to rise to the next level of manufacturing. India needs to find partners to contribute to these sectors. India has both the manufacturing heft and market size to provide the basis for a China+1 systemic shift.

In this multi-polarity, India, ASEAN, Japan, Germany, Australia, the African countries, Central Asia and the Latin American countries could play a role by pooling their energies and resources. Alternative security and economic trust can emerge. For its own development and for its strategic autonomy, India needs an international order that is conducive to its place in the world. If some powers are hesitant to grant that, India must reach out to others to create new opportunities.

The G-20 summit will be held in November in Bali, Indonesia. A year later, India will be hosting the summit. Brazil will be the host in 2024. This is a unique opportunity for three important countries of the global south to guide the G-20, insulate it from great power politics and save the institution and its agenda to ensure wider consultations and cooperation.

In his ‘Tryst with Destiny’ speech, PM Nehru said: ‘Peace has been said to be indivisible; so is freedom, so is prosperity now, and so also is disaster in this one world that can no longer be split into isolated fragments.’ Now at 75, we are setting out in a changed world to pursue these ideals autonomously and with empathy.