Changing World Order: India’s Response

Before I begin to express my views on what India’s response has been/ should be to the changing world order, I would do well to define clearly, the perspective from which I view India’s position vis-à-vis other nations of the world.

The emerging world order and India’s response to it would have to be viewed through the prism of geopolitics as well as economics. In fact in today’s world the aforementioned paradigms have more or less merged into each other. Thus my approach would focus on a convergence of these spheres, which if viewed in isolation, are extremely wide ranging.

In 1991, with the collapse of the Soviet Union, a unipolar world emerged. The United States emerged as the only superpower. This led to a paradigm shift in the American foreign policy. For nearly half a century prior to 1991, the American foreign policy had been a ‘Cold War policy.’ But now America set about exerting its influence on those countries that were formally or informally a part of the Soviet block, while at the same time consolidating its hold on its traditional allies.

Thus the post cold war American foreign policy can briefly be said to have the following objectives:
a) Enhance its own status as the sole superpower.
b) Increase control over the energy resources of the Central and West Asian countries.

For India, the year 1991 signaled major changes in its economic policy. To tide over the balance of payments crisis, the Indian government started the process of liberalization and globalization. Also, with the collapse of the Soviet Union, India had to readjust its foreign policy, as it now just had one superpower to contend with. Readjustment was also necessitated as India had to shed its image of a socialist state and that it was ideologically closer to the Soviet block. (It is another matter however, that India had always championed the cause of non-alignment).

Today we exist in a unipolar world and unipolarity has its own perils. And these are evident. For one, the world is faced with an American policy that is not just hegemonic but also imperialist in nature. Another fall out of unilateralism is the strategy of pre-emption, a recent example of which was the American led invasion of Iraq.

So where do we go from here? India needs to adopt a more pro-active foreign policy and needs to stress upon the formation of a world order based on the superiority of the UN charter and international law. India must advance toward the establishment of a multi-polar environment and a fair and new international order.

Some analysts are of the view that India must forge alliances with countries having similar concerns in order to obtain the following objectives:
a) Democratization of international relations
b) Countering international terrorism, separatism and extremism
c) Opposing the hegemony of the sole super power

But let my reader not misconstrue me. Indeed, India must forge multilateral co-operation, but it should stay clear of forming blocks and such co-operation should not be diminutive of national sovereignty and identity.
Speaking specifically of Indo-US relations, the three main strategic issues, often referred to as the ‘trinity issues’, are:

a) Co-operation in civilian nuclear power
b) Co-operation in civilian space research
c) Export of dual use technology

I must state here that India is one of the most competitive producers of high end technology equipment. This is why Indian equipment in space and nuclear fields is associated with low cost.

India and the United States must resolve the trinity issues as this can open up a multi billion dollar business corridor between the two countries.

At quite another level, India has often had to bear the brunt of a policy of exceptionalism that is very often adopted by the US when dealing with Pakistan, China and Israel. On the other hand the US hectors India that it must operate within the confines of US laws and agreements. This is hardly a way to advance a relationship that is sometimes described as strategic.

Further, at the economic front, for the first time, at the WTO conference at Cancun, there was solidarity among the developing countries to force the pace of trade liberalization. India, along with Brazil, was at the forefront of negotiations with the so called ‘developed block’, and to say the least, India championed the cause of the developing world rather well.

In my view, India must focus on issues like energy, agriculture and communications and must capitalize on the solidarity achieved at Cancun.

When talking of India’s relations with the rest of the world, one needs to take into account the scenario prevailing in India’s neighborhood. The following may be termed as the positive aspects of India’s relations with its neighboring countries:
a) Sino-India relations have improved considerably over the years with significant progress having been made on the border dispute. Also, trade is on the up, and both countries are taking confidence building measures (CBMs)
b) India has adopted a policy of engaging the military regime in Myanmar and this might be instrumental in reversing Myanmar’s tilt toward China and away from India, which had occurred in the past few years.
c) India continues to enjoy friendly relations with all SAARC members except Pakistan
d) In the recent past India has come closer to ASEAN and is keen to engage Shanghai six, a group of China, Russia and some Central Asian republics.
e) Relations with Pakistan have minor improvement in the recent past but it remains to be seen if the initiatives taken by both sides would yield any tangible results.

And now for some negatives:
a) Nepal has in the recent past seen Maoist insurgency, thus making the political situation in the kingdom unstable.
b) Sri Lanka is facing civil strife, and a permanent truce with the LTTE does not seem viable in the foreseeable future.
c) Afghanistan, which is of strategic importance to India is still struggling to come out of the shadows of a two decade old civil war that has crippled the country.

Relations between India and the rest of the world need to be based on a sympathetic understanding of each other’s concerns and not against the backdrop of international rules of conduct which are breached whenever they are in conflict with the rational interests of an influential country or a group of countries.