There is not only an absence of big ideas backed by political conviction, but there is also an intellectual vacuity.
India’s growing heft in global politics was the story of 2011 year when even as India continued to grapple with myriad challenges at home, its rise in the global landscape became a reality that few could deny any longer. The US wants India to do more, the regional states in the Indo-Pacific also want India to assert its growing economic power and to do more in balancing China’s growing preponderance.
India’s burgeoning ties with Japan are a case in point as was underscored by the visit of the Japanese prime minister, Yoshihiko Noda, to India last week when the two nations renewed a bilateral currency swap agreement whereby Japan agreed to make $15 billion available to India to help it in stabilising the rupee which has witnessed a more than 16 per cent decline in its value this past year. Japan has also decided to make huge investments in India’s infrastructure projects.
Despite the budgetary tightening in Japan post Fukushima disaster, India remains the largest recipient of Japan’s overseas development aid and Japan remains critical if India is to meet its infrastructural development targets in the coming years. And yet despite this growing recognition of India’s global importance by the world, India has had trouble articulating what role it sees for itself in global politics. Part of the problem is domestic where the UPA government beset with domestic challenges has had limited time and will to articulate a national vision. But the real problem is a much bigger one.
For all the talk of India’s rise in recent years, it is yet to define clearly what it stands for as a power rapidly rising in the global firmament. For the claims of a great power to be legitimate in the eyes of the world, it is essential that the ideational moorings of that power be in place. Indian policymakers are still coming to terms with the nation’s rise but there is not only an absence of big ideas backed by political conviction but there is also an intellectual vacuity in the debate on what being a great power means for India. When India was on the margins of world politics, it mattered little what India stood for. But now when India is rapidly acquiring global centrestage, it needs to address the issue of the larger purpose behind its growing ambitions. India wants to rise, but what for?
This lack of strategic vision is exacerbated by certain aspects of India’s political culture. Indian elites have a growing sense of their country as an emerging great power and an important player on the global stage. Yet the State seems unable to fully leverage the opportunities presented by its economic rise.
Messy process
Policymaking in democracies — especially a multi-ethnic one like India’s —is a complex, messy process, with inherent tensions often exacerbated by the demands of pursuing a great-power foreign policy. But India’s polity displays an almost-paralytic fragmentation of authority, to the point where a sense of drift prevails on a range of crucial issues. Policy initiatives continue to be hampered by an unstable political environment with the result that larger issues confronting Indian foreign policy often end up becoming a casualty of this drift.
India’s credentials as the world’s largest democracy, its open, tolerant and inclusive culture, its unique geopolitical and cultural position as a bridge between East and West gives it a unique opportunity to provide the leadership for forging new forms of global governance. Certainly, India’s democratic political system will go a long way in allaying the apprehensions of the established powers, thus smoothing its rise to global prominence. But the real challenge lies in the domestic sphere, where the State will have to succeed in overcoming the constraints that continue to inhibit the country’s potential.
India has always wanted to be taken seriously. Now it would do well to remember the old adage, “Be careful what you wish for; it may come true.” For if India succeeds in achieving its great-power ambitions, the transition is not going to be easy, and will take place in full view of a global audience. That means that everyone will be listening when New Delhi speaks, and watching when it acts. They will also care about what Indian policymakers decide to do, and even more so if India does become a permanent member of the Security Council, where it would have to bite the bullet and take positions on a range of critical issues. Given the fragility of its domestic politics, India might find that harder to accomplish than many anticipate.
India will be forced to jettison its old foreign-policy assumptions and strike a delicate balance between the pursuit of its narrow national interest and its responsibility as a rising power to help maintain global peace and stability. It won’t be able to please everyone, as solving the world’s problems often involves making difficult choices -- and at times picking winners and losers. Merely suggesting, as Indian policy makers are prone to do that India ‘will be the voice of moderation and constructive engagement’ won’t help.
India is on the cusp of achieving the status of a major global power but it is a pity that at this crucial juncture it lacks a political leadership that can help the nation make that crucial transition.