What's New

INDIA AND A CASE FOR STRATEGIC AUTONOMY

Relevance: GS 2 – Bilateral, regional and global groupings and agreements involving India and/or affecting India’s interests.

Why in the News?

• On July 11, 2024, two days after Prime Minister’s visit to Moscow, Eric Garcetti, the U.S. Ambassador to India, stated:
  • “In times of conflict, there is no such thing as strategic autonomy; we will, in crisis moments, need to know each other.”
• Modi’s visit to Russia occurred just before a NATO summit in Washington.
• The Biden administration publicly expressed its “concerns” about Modi’s visit.
• A U.S. State Department spokesperson mentioned:
  • “We have expressed those [concerns] privately, directly to the Indian government and continue to do so.”

More about the News

• On July 13, 2024, President Joe Biden’s National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan commented on the situation:
  • “A bet on Russia as a long-term, reliable partner is not a good bet… Russia would side with China over India any day of the week.”
• Reports in the U.S. media indicated that:
  • S. officials had requested New Delhi to postpone Modi’s Moscow visit due to the NATO summit starting on July 9.
  • India chose to proceed with the visit, which “disturbed” the Biden administration.

India-U.S. Strategic Partnership

• The strategic partnership between India and the U.S. has generally been steady.
• Recent years have seen stress points, most notably India’s stance on Russia during the Ukraine war.
  • The U.S. and allies imposed economic sanctions on Russia and supplied weapons to Ukraine.
  • India maintained its strategic partnership with Moscow, expanded energy cooperation, and refrained from condemning the invasion.
  • India called for ending the war and respecting territorial sovereignty, adopting a neutral position.
    • The West perceived this as economic support for “Putin’s war.”
  • This divergence caused friction in the India-U.S. partnership, intensifying over the past two and a half years.
    • Public comments by top U.S. officials earlier this month highlighted these persisting stress points.

Strategic Autonomy

• Strategic autonomy implies that countries should make decisions serving their national interests, regardless of external pressures.
• Two key elements:
  • The first element is the inherent conviction that a nation is capable of making decisions that serve its own interests.
  • The second element is that the nation should have the will and the resources to make those decisions even under high pressure.
• If India cannot make autonomous foreign policy decisions during crises, it undermines its strategic autonomy.
• Importance of Strategic Autonomy
  • If India were part of an alliance system, like Germany with NATO, it would lose the strategic flexibility to maintain its partnership with Russia while being a close partner of the West.
    • For example, Germany had to accept the destruction of the Nord Stream pipeline, partly owned by it, due to alliance commitments.
  • Strategic autonomy allows India the necessary space to pursue independent foreign policy decisions and partnerships.

Historical Overview of India’s Strategic Autonomy

• All Indian governments since Independence have followed strategic autonomy, through non-alignment, multi-alignment, multi-directional foreign policy, or strategic autonomy.
  • This approach was not dogmatic but aimed at serving India’s interests in a turbulent international system.
• Initially, India’s foreign policy was seen as idealistic, focusing on non-alignment and Asian solidarity.
  • Prime Minister Nehru’s vision helped mobilize Third World voices and maintain independence from both power blocs.
  • This provided moral grounding and pragmatic leverage for India’s foreign policy.
• India stayed equidistant from both capitalist and communist blocs
  • The U.S. formed new treaty alliances in Asia: Pakistan joined the Southeast Asia Treaty Organization (SEATO) and the Central Treaty Organization (CENTO).
  • China moved closer to the U.S. after its split with the Soviet Union.
• In response, India strengthened its ties with Moscow while maintaining strategic autonomy.
• After the collapse of the Soviet Union and the communist bloc in 1991:
  • India pursued greater integration with the global economy.
  • India developed a closer strategic partnership with the West.
• India’s Strategic Approach
  • In an anarchic international order, India aims to balance relationships with great powers without joining any alliance system.
  • Maintaining strategic autonomy is crucial for India to navigate this complex landscape.

Great Power Rivalry

• Changing Global Order
  • The global order is shifting from a unipolar world dominated by the U.S. to a more multipolar structure.
  • The U.S. remains the most powerful country, but China, the world’s second-largest economy, is emerging as a strong competitor to American global primacy.
  • Russia is challenging the western security architecture in Europe through military means.
  • In West Asia, a shadow war between Israel (an American ally) and Iran (a close Russian strategic partner) is intensifying.
• Russia Policy
  • Energy ties with Russia are largely opportunistic, driven by the attraction of cheap prices.
    • India’s crude imports from Russia jumped from $2.4 billion in 2021-22 to $46.5 billion in 2023-24.
  • The defence partnership with Russia is structural:
    • Over 40% of India’s defence imports come from Russia.
    • 86% of Indian military equipment is of Russian origin, making a quick shift unfeasible.
  • Russia is a key partner in continental Asia for economic progress, connectivity, and addressing security challenges.
• Adapting the India-Russia Partnership
  • Russia’s closer ties with China affect the nature of its historical partnership with India.
  • India sees this as an opportunity to reshape the partnership into a more balanced bilateral relationship, unlike the lopsided dynamics of the Cold War era.
  • Both India and Russia aim to consider each other’s sensitivities in their partnership.
    • India seeks to prevent Russia from becoming overly dependent on China.
    • Russia prefers to have multiple strategic options rather than relying solely on China.

Positive sum game of India’s Strategic Autonomy

• India’s Foreign Policy Stance
  • The U.S. should not view India’s foreign policy choices as unfriendly.
  • India is not a disruptive or revisionist power; it supports a multilateral global order.
  • India seeks a more representative international system that reflects current geopolitical realities.
• Economic vs. Power Dynamics
  • The world is economically multipolar, but this has not fully translated into the power dynamics.
  • India aims to enhance the system so that its voice, and that of the Global South, is heard more prominently.
• Strategic Autonomy and Engagement
  • Strategic autonomy for India does not imply isolationism.
  • It calls for greater engagement with various power centers based on informed national interests.
  • Theorists of strategic autonomy view foreign policy as a positive-sum game, where all parties can benefit.
• Western Misunderstanding
  • Western partners, agitated over India’s Russia ties and its strategic autonomy, fail to see the bigger picture.
  • This reflects a unipolar mentality: “you are either with us or against us.”
  • This approach was not very successful even during the unipolar era, as demonstrated by the two-decade-long war against terror.
  • It is unlikely to be effective in a post-unipolar world.
• Examples of Positive-Sum Game
  • India’s energy trade with Russia:
    • Ensures a steady flow of Russian crude into the market, helping stabilize global oil prices.
  • India’s cooperation with Russia can moderate Moscow’s quasi-alliance with China which the West sees as a revisionist power capable of altering the global order.

Way Forward for Strategic Autonomy

• Strengthen Multilateral Engagement
  • Deepen involvement in multilateral organizations to enhance India’s global influence and advocate for a more representative international system.
• Diversify Partnerships
  • Expand strategic partnerships beyond traditional allies, engaging with emerging powers and regional players to balance influence and opportunities.
• Advance Economic Diplomacy
  • Leverage economic ties to bolster diplomatic relations, ensuring that trade and investment policies align with broader strategic goals.
• Enhance Defence Capabilities
  • Modernize and diversify defence procurement to reduce reliance on any single supplier and strengthen self-reliance in security.
• Promote Regional Stability
  • Engage in regional diplomacy to address security challenges and foster cooperative security arrangements, ensuring stability in key areas of interest.
• Manage Great Power Relations
  • Navigate relations with major powers (U.S., China, Russia) with a focus on balancing interests and maintaining strategic flexibility.
• Pursue Technology and Innovation
  • Invest in cutting-edge technology and innovation to strengthen national capabilities and support strategic autonomy in a rapidly changing global environment.
• Address Global Challenges
  • Actively participate in addressing global issues such as climate change, terrorism, and pandemics, reinforcing India’s role as a responsible global player.
• Maintain Strategic Flexibility
  • Ensure policies and strategies remain adaptable to evolving global dynamics, avoiding rigid alliances and preserving autonomy in decision-making.
• Strengthen Domestic Resilience
  • Enhance domestic infrastructure, economic resilience, and social cohesion to support independent foreign policy and strategic autonomy.

Alternative articles

https://universalinstitutions.com/active-non-alignment/

https://universalinstitutions.com/discuss-the-continuity-and-change-in-indias-foreign-policy/

Source: ​​https://www.thehindu.com/opinion/lead/india-and-a-case-for-strategic-autonomy/article68418840.ece

Mains question

Discuss the implications of India’s strategic autonomy on its relations with the U.S. and Russia, considering recent global power shifts and the importance of maintaining a balanced foreign policy. (250 words)