India’s Foreign Policy: Evolution Through Phases

Introduction

Foreign policy is an extension of a nation’s domestic priorities, strategic interests, and global
worldview. Since independence in 1947, India's foreign policy has undergone three distinct phases
—Nehruvian idealism, strategic realism, and pragmatic global engagement. These shifts were
driven by changing global dynamics, internal challenges, and leadership visions.

In the early years, India, newly decolonized, sought a peaceful and independent voice on the global
stage. Over time, military con icts, economic crises, and the rise of new global powers led India to
adapt its approach. As scholar Sumit Ganguly notes, India's foreign policy has evolved through
"correction, consolidation, and recalibration."

Phase I: Nehruvian Idealism and Non-Alignment (1947–1962)

• Non-Alignment: India avoided joining either the U.S.-led or Soviet blocs during the Cold
War.

• Moral Diplomacy: Emphasized peace, disarmament, anti-colonialism, and support for

• Panchsheel Principles: Mutual respect, non-aggression, non-interference, equality, and

Key Developments

• India was among the rst to recognize the People’s Republic of China (1950).

• Played a leading role in the Bandung Conference (1955) and Non-Aligned Movement
(NAM).

• Advocated for global nuclear disarmament.

• The 1962 Sino-Indian War exposed strategic vulnerabilities and ended this idealist phase.

Achievements

• Enhanced India’s moral standing in the Global South.

• Laid the foundation of India’s diplomatic framework and independent foreign identity.

Criticism

• Over-reliance on idealism, particularly in trusting China.

• Neglected defense modernization, leading to a humiliating defeat in 1962.

• Sumit Ganguly: Nehru gave India a global voice but lacked realism.

• K. Subrahmanyam: Characterized this phase as “strategic restraint” at the cost of security.

• C. Raja Mohan: Criticized the absence of geopolitical foresight.

Phase II: Strategic Realism and Regional Assertion (1962–

• Shift to Realpolitik: Focused on security, defense, and regional dominance.

• Closer ties with the USSR: India aligned more with Moscow for military and diplomatic
support.

• Assertiveness in South Asia: India positioned itself as a regional power.

Key Developments

• 1965 and 1971 wars with Pakistan, with the latter leading to the creation of Bangladesh.

• 1971 Indo-Soviet Treaty ensured Soviet backing during the Bangladesh war.

• 1974 Pokhran-I nuclear test demonstrated India’s strategic aspirations.

• Interventions in Sri Lanka (IPKF) and Maldives (1988) to protect regional interests.

Achievements

• Emerged as South Asia’s dominant power.

• Gained military strength and nuclear capability.

• Maintained diplomatic balance in Cold War politics.

Criticism

• Economic stagnation and missed opportunities during the global liberalization wave.

• Over-reliance on the Soviet bloc limited India’s global outreach.

Scholars' Views

• Ganguly: This phase corrected Nehru’s idealism but remained inward-looking.

• Shashi Tharoor: Diplomacy became more rhetoric than substance.

Phase III: Economic Liberalization and Pragmatic

• Market Reforms: Liberalization post-1991 crisis reoriented foreign policy towards

• Strategic Autonomy: India engaged multiple global powers while preserving independence.

• Multi-Alignment: Balanced ties with the U.S., Russia, Iran, and others without forming
rigid alliances.

Key Developments

• 1991 economic reforms opened India to global trade and investment.

• 2005 Indo–U.S. Civil Nuclear Deal marked a major strategic breakthrough.

• Greater participation in forums like BRICS, SCO, G20, and Quad.

• Assertiveness in the Indo-Paci c and recalibration of China policy after Galwan (2020).

• Hosting the G20 Presidency (2023) showcased India’s global leadership ambitions.

Achievements

• India emerged as a globally engaged power with economic and strategic clout.

• Balanced competing interests with strategic partners.

• Built robust regional and global partnerships, especially in Asia-Paci c.

Criticism

• Lacks a consistent grand strategy—often reactive rather than proactive.

• Domestic political issues occasionally undercut its democratic image.

• Balancing Russia ties amid Western sanctions (e.g., Ukraine war) has tested diplomatic
exibility.

Scholars' Views

• Tanvi Madan: India’s foreign policy is shaped equally by China and internal constraints.
fl
fl
fi
fi
 • Shivshankar Menon: Advocates “pragmatic autonomy” through selective global
engagement.

• Ganguly: Applauds the realist turn but warns of internal factors affecting foreign policy
clarity.

Conclusion
India’s foreign policy re ects a continuous journey of adaptation—from Nehru’s moralistic
approach, to Indira Gandhi’s regional realism, and nally to 21st-century pragmatism driven
by economic and strategic goals. Each phase has contributed to India’s evolving global identity.

As Sumit Ganguly observes, India has preserved its tradition of strategic autonomy, but with
increased global ambition. The challenge ahead is to craft a coherent, future-focused strategy that
balances national interests with global responsibilities in an increasingly multipolar world.
fl
fi
 Determinants of India’s Foreign Policy
Introduction

India’s foreign policy means how India deals with other countries to protect its interests and goals.
It is shaped by many factors like geography, history, leadership, economy, security, and the
world situation. Foreign policy is not xed—it changes based on challenges and opportunities. As
Shivshankar Menon says, “Foreign policy is not about big slogans, but about carefully protecting
the national interest.”

Let’s look at the main factors that shape India’s foreign policy.

1. Geographical Location and Strategic Position

India’s location plays a big role in its foreign policy. It shares borders with important and sometimes
dif cult neighbors like China and Pakistan, and is close to important sea routes in the Indian
Ocean.

• India focuses on its neighbors through the “Neighborhood First” policy.

• In the sea, India follows the SAGAR doctrine to keep the Indian Ocean safe and peaceful.

• Tensions with China (e.g., Galwan clash) and Pakistan affect India’s security policies.

Thinker’s View: C. Raja Mohan says geography forces India to act as both a regional power and a
global player.

2. Historical Legacy and Colonial Past

India’s experience with British colonial rule shaped its early foreign policy. After independence,
India did not want to join power blocs like the USA or USSR during the Cold War.

• India supported non-alignment, peace, and anti-colonial movements.

• It helped countries in Africa and Asia ght for freedom.

• But this focus on morality sometimes made India ignore practical threats—like China’s
intentions before the 1962 war.

Thinker’s View: Sumit Ganguly says this idealism gave India global respect, but lacked strategic
thinking.

3. Leadership and Ideology

The ideas and personality of leaders affect how India behaves internationally.

• Nehru promoted peace and non-alignment.

• Indira Gandhi focused on power and national security (e.g., 1971 Bangladesh War).
fi
fi
fi
 • Narasimha Rao started economic diplomacy and Look East policy.

• Vajpayee built nuclear strength and improved ties with the US.

• Modi focuses on strong diplomacy, the Indian diaspora, and India’s global image.

Thinker’s View: Shivshankar Menon says leadership decides how India achieves its goals, even if
the goals stay the same.

4. Economic Needs and Development

India needs foreign trade, investments, and energy to grow its economy. Since 1991 economic
reforms, India has made economic diplomacy a top priority.

• Ties with ASEAN, Gulf countries, and Africa are based on trade and energy.

• India actively joins forums like G20, BRICS, and WTO to protect its development
interests.

• However, India sometimes works with regimes that go against human rights to secure oil
and business.

Thinker’s View: Shashi Tharoor says India’s foreign policy today is led by trade, investment, and
technology goals.

5. Security and Strategic Concerns

India faces many security challenges—like cross-border terrorism, border disputes, and cyber
threats.

• India invests in defense and cooperates with other countries (e.g., Quad, S-400 deal with
Russia).

• Nuclear tests (e.g., Pokhran II) and military modernization help in deterrence.

• India also works on maritime security in the Indo-Paci c region.

Thinker’s View: K. Subrahmanyam believed that strong defense power is key to strategic
independence.

6. Domestic Politics and Public Opinion

Domestic issues also shape foreign policy.

• Political leaders sometimes use foreign policy for national pride (e.g., Balakot airstrikes).

• Relations with Bangladesh are affected by issues like migration and river sharing.

• Leaders connect with the Indian diaspora for both international support and votes.
fi
Thinker’s View: Tanvi Madan says Indian politics now often mix domestic and foreign interests.

7. International System and World Order

India’s role depends on how the world is structured.

• During the Cold War, India stayed non-aligned.

• After the Cold War, India moved to multi-alignment—working with the US, Russia, Japan,
and others.

• India now wants a bigger role in world affairs (e.g., UNSC seat, WTO reforms).

Thinker’s View: C. Raja Mohan says India must shape the global order, not just react to it.

8. Diaspora and Soft Power

India’s 30-million-strong diaspora, along with its culture (like yoga, Bollywood, democracy),
gives it soft power.

• Indian communities abroad help in lobbying and building good relations.

• Cultural events like International Yoga Day improve India’s image.

• Soft power helps build trust and goodwill, especially in Africa and Southeast Asia.

Thinker’s View: Joseph Nye (soft power theorist) says soft power is useful but must support, not
replace, hard power.

9. Institutions and Bureaucracy

Foreign policy is shaped by institutions like the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA), embassies,
and think tanks.

• India’s diplomatic service is small but important.

• Policy advice comes from think tanks like ORF and IDSA.

• Sometimes there is slow decision-making due to bureaucratic red tape.

Thinker’s View: Shivshankar Menon calls for more inter-agency coordination and modern
strategic planning.

Conclusion

India’s foreign policy is the result of many interlinked factors—geography, economy, leadership,
and security all play key roles. Over time, India has shifted from moral idealism to a more realistic
and strategic approach, aiming for strategic autonomy and global in uence. As India grows in
power, it must continue to balance domestic goals with its responsibilities in a changing world.
fl