Monday, August 10, 2020

The determinants of India’s foreign policy

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.



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.