Explain the determinants of India’s foreign policy.
The determinants of India’s foreign policy, Indians secured their control over nation’s policy only after
their independence from British colonial rule out 1947. A newly independent
India was plunged into the planet affairs when the external environment was of
the conflict between the 2 super powers—the us (US) and therefore the Soviet
Union (USSR)—both were on the winning side within the the Second war . Even
before the independence in August 1947, an interim government under Nehru’s
leadership had been put in situ in September 1946.
The primary prime minister of India, Nehru was during a dilemma.
Though western educated, he was personally interested in the Marxist thought.
But any alignment with the one or the opposite bloc would have meant loss of
newly won independence. Loss of India’s independence within the decision-making
even slightly was an unacceptable proposition to him. The determinants of
India’s foreign policy,
Thus, he opted to
stay India faraway from both the facility blocs, and follow an independent
policy . This came to be referred to as the policy of non-alignment. He had
formulated the essential policy outlines during a broadcast from New Delhi on 7
September, 1946 during which he laid out certain policy goals. He was then only
an interim prime minister, as independence had not even been announced.
These goals included: end of colonialism and racism,
independence from power blocs and shut ties with China and Asian neighbours. In
his own words: “We shall take full part in international conferences as a free
nation with our own policy and not merely as a satellite of another nation…. We
are particularly curious about the emancipation of colonial and dependent
countries and peoples, and within the recognition in theory and practice of
equal opportunities for all races.” The determinants of India’s foreign policy, Thus, non-alignment with either of the military blocs was
Nehru’s answer to the dilemma he and therefore the nation faced. Non-alignment
was an intellectual coup on the a part of Nehru. it had been during a sense
learning from history. Soon after the independence the primary American
president Washington had asked his countrymen while laying down his office in
1796: “It is our true policy to steer beyond permanent alliances with any
portion of the foreign world….”. Instead, he advocated that the new Republic
should cultivate “just and amicable feelings toward all” nations.
Primarily by non-alignment Nehru meant not getting entangled
with any military alliances. Soon after the top of the Second war , there have
been military alliances floated by the us and therefore the Soviet Union . The
US promoted North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) and therefore the Soviet
Union had to counter it by Warsaw Pact. While these were the competing military
alliances at the worldwide level, these two super powers also promoted regional
alliances to draw in the newly independent nations in Asia and Africa. Second,
non-alignment didn't mean neutrality in world politics. Neutrality features a
meaning that's truly relevant during the days of war. But non-alignment may be
a positive thought; it meant that India retained the independence of deciding
on a problem that affected her interests. There was no a priori commitment to
support one or the opposite nation involved during a crisis. Thus, in India’s
neighbourhood the US promoted South East Asia Treaty Organisation (SEATO) and
Central Treaty Organisation (CENTO) within the 1950s. Both these organisations
were ostensibly meant to fight against communism exported by the Soviet Union .
But India’s neighbour, Pakistan joined the treaty organisations primarily to
urge military aid from the US to fight against India. The membership of Pakistan
of those treaties brought the conflict to the doors of India aggravating
tensions between India and Pakistan. The determinants of India’s foreign policy, The American weapons
and support generated due to their membership of military alliances also
complicated the India-US relations.
Nehru had maintained close ties with British Commonwealth of
countries by enabling the Indian Republic as a member. But Britain wasn't
curious about finding an answer to the Kashmir crisis. Another power that would
have helped India in resolving the conflict over J & K was the US. But
during his first visit thereto country in 1949, Nehru had disappointed Acheson
then Secretary of State. Acheson states in his memoirs: “When finally, I urged
Pandit Nehru to assist me by a frank discussion of a practicable solution of
the difficulty over Kashmir, I got a curious combination of a public speech and
flashes of anger and deep dislike of his opponents…. i used to be convinced
that Nehru and that i weren't destined to possess a pleasing personal relation
.” Acheson’s successor in office, John Foster Dulles didn't end up to be
friendly to India either. The determinants of India’s foreign policy, By then Dulles had come under the influence of pactomania in
promoting military pacts. He desired that India join the military alliances
promoted by the US.
Nehru’s non-alignment policy was obviously against it. Hence,
Dulles said that non-alignment is immoral because it did not take a firm stand
against godless communism. Under these circumstances the Soviet Union came to
India’s rescue. It saw a chance to befriend non-aligned nations within the
predicament faced by India within the UN SC. The US was guided by British
policy of divide and rule; the US, therein early period, went by with Britain
on the problems concerning the latter’s erstwhile colonies. Thus, when Western
powers just like the US and UK began to vote on the side of Pakistan on the
question of Kashmir, the Soviet Union exercised its veto power to save lots of
the Indian interests from conflict politics.
India-China
Border War
The strengths and weaknesses of the non-alignment were also
brought out during subsequent major crisis in Indian policy within the
background of the Chinese aggression of October 1962. Peace and friendship with
China was a cornerstone of the Indian policy as formulated and executed by
Nehru with assistance from his friend and Defence Minister, Krishna Menon. As a
matter of fact both of them never envisaged a threat from the China . They
mainly focussed on Pakistan’s threat to India’s security. Nehru thought of
resolving the territorial crisis by political negotiations instead of by the
utilization of force. He never realised that military capability enhanced the
power to barter political settlements amongst nations. The determinants of
India’s foreign policy,
This had led him to
approach the UN in response to Pakistan’s war in Jammu and Kashmir in 1947-48,
when, as a matter of fact, the Indian army was ready to throw out invading
Pakistani army from the Kashmir.
FOREIGN
POLICY AFTER NEHRU
In the 1960s one major question that was widely discussed was
‘After Nehru, Who?’ Nehru died in 1964. Lal Bahadur Shastri succeeded him. His
tenure was short as he died in Tashkent in January 1966 after signing the
Tashkent Agreement with Ayub Khan, military dictator of Pakistan. In India’s
policy , Shastri has got to be remembered for a serious change he caused within
the shifting of emphasis from international events more to the immediate
neighbourhood of India. it had been Nehru’s personality that made him to think
in terms of India playing a serious role in world affairs . Nehru perceived a
bigger role for India in world affairs , rather much bigger than then resources
permitted. He played a serious role in Bandung (Indonesia) Conference in 1955.
He was liable for introducing newly liberated communist China’s premier Chou en
lai. The Rann of Kutch may be a marshy land between Pakistan and Gujarat.
The determinants of India’s foreign policy, it had been Pakistan’s
case that Rann of Kutch was a lake and consistent with the law of nations , the
boundary should run within the middle of the lake. On the opposite hand, India
claimed that it's a marshy land and therefore the boundaries between Sindh and
India were well demarcated. But Pakistan was intruding into the world since
1956. In 1965 hostilities broke out between the 2 countries within the area. At
the intervention of then British PM Harold Wilson, an agreement was reached to
refer the dispute to arbitration if both the parties were unable to succeed in
an agreement. Eventually, because the two countries couldn't agree on an answer
, arbitrators awarded 900 square Km to Pakistan—one tenth of their original
claim.
0 comments:
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.