Impact of Nationalist Populism in India's Strategic Culture

• In Event: Poster Session: New Avenues in Human Rights Research & South Asian Politics
  In Poster Session: Poster Session: South Asian Politics

Abstract

The debate over India's strategic culture, particularly in the context of its emergence as a great power, underscores the complex and evolving nature of the nation's approach to security, foreign policy, and global engagement. As India ascends to the world stage, assumptions and expectations regarding its strategic behavior are subject to rigorous scrutiny and diverse perspectives. The contours of these debates and perspectives are shaped by historical legacies, geopolitical imperatives, and the intricate interplay of national values and interests. The struggle for independence, led by visionary leaders such as Mahatma Gandhi and Jawaharlal Nehru, significantly shaped the foundational principles of India's strategic outlook. The non-violent resistance during the independence movement left a permanent mark, influencing India's preference for diplomatic solutions and non-aggressive postures in international relations. However, the global surge in populism has reverberated across political landscapes, influencing the foreign policy decisions of nations worldwide. India, a democratic and diverse country, has not been immune to this phenomenon. This essay explores the ways in which the rise of populism has affected India's strategic autonomy and foreign policy dynamics. Populist policies under Prime Minister Modi emphasize nationalism and identity politics, framing foreign policy decisions in the context of protecting national interests and asserting sovereignty. This has led to a more assertive stance on issues related to borders, security, and territorial integrity. A shift in India's strategy vis-à-vis China has been observed in the last few years, as evidenced by the Doklam crisis of 2017 or the Galwan valley standoffs of 2020. India's strategy in both events was more assertive in nature than its past strategic history of defensive culture in case of similar confrontations. However, while using force against Pakistan has become much easier in punishing its inimical actions, India still uses restraint in its use of force to counter similar, or even harsher, actions from China. With the United States, India has been performing an act of friendship as their interest matches in countering China from spreading its sphere of influence across Asia and the Pacific. This friendship did not stop India from being rational in its foreign policy and maintaining its relationship with Russia. Over the last few decades, India has been practicing a lot of strategic autonomy in its foreign and security policy and thus has been on good terms with Russia. In the wake of the Russia-Ukraine war, now it is time to analyze how India can continue to practice that autonomy. Since India has remained neutral in this war, it makes the US, already upset due to increased defense ties between Russia and India, more skeptical. The U.S. is now trying to use the stick against India by shifting its policy of 'favoring India' to 'balancing between' India and Pakistan. Although in its very initial stage and it is too early to conclude that the US will make India confined in its foreign policy choices, still it affects Delhi's autonomy in policy making. As India needs the US in backing its strategy to counter China in South Asia and the Indian Ocean, a defect in the tie with the US could make India weaker against China. India will continue to react against China's aggression in the future with an iron fist within a velvet glove. That will help China utilize more of its nibbling tactics and violate India's sovereignty at the border. How growing Russia-China relations will impact India's security also remains to be seen. Thus, US actions are putting India in a considerably pressurized situation in its choice of strategy. This paper investigates the direction or possible tone shift in India's foreign policy in the coming years and decades. It answers two questions – First, How, in the face of democratic recession internally, can India satisfy its global interests and uphold its position as a leader in the rule-based international order?; Second, how the nationalist populism under Narendra Modi will impact its foreign policy towards the smaller neighbors. For the case study Bangladesh, Nepal and Maldives are analyzed. Understanding this is imperative since it is going to affect the regional balance of power to a large extent and affect the liberal order in the region. The paper uses the lens of strategic culture and elements of populist foreign policy in evaluating India’s approach to foreign and security policies. Drawing on the evidence and examples from existing literature and official documents or official statements collected from different secondary sources it argues that India’s pragmatic approach to foreign and security policy is driven by its strategic culture of practicing strategic autonomy combined with the nationalist populist policies.

Authors

• Umme Salma Tarin, University of Delaware

• Muhammad Mustahsin Adnan, BRAC