Modi alone cannot move mountains

India’s foreign policy cannot be centred around personalities any more

If India’s foreign policy is confronted with a volatile moment in its neighbourhood and beyond, Narendra Modi’s inaugural speech at the 2017 Raisina Dialogue hardly reflected it. A few hours before him, China’s president Xi Jinping had held forth on the virtues of globalisation from the World Economic Forum’s perch at Davos. In contrast, Modi chose to highlight India’s “transformative” potential, selling as he has done since taking office, New Delhi’s arrival on the world stage. Xi’s lecture seemed incredulous, but pundits have already begun to sing paeans anointing China as the new steward of the Washington Consensus. The Indian prime minister mercifully delivered a more sober assessment of geopolitics – “globalisation gains are at risk”, said Modi, and rightly left it at that – but his rosy vision for India’s external relations seemed boilerplate. The Raisina Dialogue was an opportunity for him to acknowledge that the initial years of his personality-driven diplomacy were over, and that it was now time for New Delhi to roll up its sleeves and consolidate its relations with major powers. Rather than gird Indian foreign policy for the unpredictable times that lie ahead, however, Narendra Modi relied once again on his “can do” narrative – whose utility and indeed, necessity, has dimmed since 2014.

None of this is to say Modi should not cultivate the strongmen in power today, but it is time for the National Democratic Alliance to acknowledge that invisible diplomacy often produces the best results, away from microphones, cameras or summits. This is true not just of bilateral engagements but also multilateral initiatives. A cloud now hangs over the Paris climate accords, despite the personal capital that Francois Hollande, Modi and Obama invested in its negotiation. Were the Trump administration to abandon the new climate regime – he will not be the first US president to do so, as the history of the Kyoto Protocol suggests – India should have an exit strategy from Paris, without drawing down on the commitments it would in any case pursue nationally. Despite the prime minister’s whirlwind tour of the hold-out Nuclear Suppliers Group states last year, progress on India’s membership remains elusive. New Delhi must now take stock of the changed circumstances since 2008, and assess how India can silently ratchet up the costs for China’s opposing its candidature.
The same lessons should hold for India’s engagement with South Asia. At Raisina, the prime minister spoke of his “dream” for an integrated neighbourhood, which now seems more distant than it ever was. Save Bangladesh, with whom relations have been decidedly upbeat, India has struggled to find common ground with its smaller neighbours. In Nepal, Prachanda has returned a more seasoned politician, but the country’s governing institutions offer no semblance of stability or comfort for New Delhi. Under Abdulla Yameen, the Maldives has witnessed the state sponsorship of radical Islamist tendencies, in addition to a crackdown on civil society. The gains India made in Sri Lanka soon after the 2015 presidential election have been diluted by the lack of measurable progress in living standards of the country’s Tamils. To complicate matters, former president Mahinda Rajapaksa is eyeing a comeback to national politics, and New Delhi appears to have no strategy to engage him. Prime Minister Modi enjoys a great camaraderie with Afghan President Ashraf Ghani, but the ground beneath Kabul is shifting thanks to the prospects of a US withdrawal and an Iran-Russia alliance. Simply put, the South Asian neighbourhood is in turmoil, and New Delhi would be ill-advised to presume the Prime Minister’s political stock alone can resolve these problems.
All told, the Raisina Dialogue presented a missed chance for the NDA government to switch gears from individual to institutional diplomacy. It is still not late. In fairness, Modi’s decision to address the forum itself was a clever move, tempted as the prime minister may have been to join Xi Jinping at the World Economic Forum. 

The writer  works at the Observer Research Foundation, India

Modi alone cannot move mountains

Indias foreign policy cannot be centred around personalities any more

If Indias foreign policy is confronted with a volatile moment in its neighbourhood and beyond, Narendra Modis inaugural speech at the 2017 Raisina Dialogue hardly reflected it. A few hours before him, Chinas president Xi Jinping had held forth on the virtues of globalisation from the World Economic Forums perch at Davos. In contrast, Modi chose to highlight Indias transformative potential, selling as he has done since taking office, New Delhis arrival on the world stage. Xis lecture seemed incredulous, but pundits have already begun to sing paeans anointing China as the new steward of the Washington Consensus. The Indian prime minister mercifully delivered a more sober assessment of geopolitics globalisation gains are at risk, said Modi, and rightly left it at that but his rosy vision for Indias external relations seemed boilerplate. The Raisina Dialogue was an opportunity for him to acknowledge that the initial years of his personality-driven diplomacy were over, and that it was now time for New Delhi to roll up its sleeves and consolidate its relations with major powers. Rather than gird Indian foreign policy for the unpredictable times that lie ahead, however, Narendra Modi relied once again on his can do narrative whose utility and indeed, necessity, has dimmed since 2014. None of this is to say Modi should not cultivate the strongmen in power today, but it is time for the National Democratic Alliance to acknowledge that invisible diplomacy often produces the best results, away from microphones, cameras or summits. This is true not just of bilateral engagements but also multilateral initiatives. A cloud now hangs over the Paris climate accords, despite the personal capital that Francois Hollande, Modi and Obama invested in its negotiation. Were the Trump administration to abandon the new climate regime he will not be the first US president to do so, as the history of the Kyoto Protocol suggests India should have an exit strategy from Paris, without drawing down on the commitments it would in any case pursue nationally. Despite the prime ministers whirlwind tour of the hold-out Nuclear Suppliers Group states last year, progress on Indias membership remains elusive. New Delhi must now take stock of the changed circumstances since 2008, and assess how India can silently ratchet up the costs for Chinas opposing its candidature. The same lessons should hold for Indias engagement with South Asia. At Raisina, the prime minister spoke of his dream for an integrated neighbourhood, which now seems more distant than it ever was. Save Bangladesh, with whom relations have been decidedly upbeat, India has struggled to find common ground with its smaller neighbours. In Nepal, Prachanda has returned a more seasoned politician, but the countrys governing institutions offer no semblance of stability or comfort for New Delhi. Under Abdulla Yameen, the Maldives has witnessed the state sponsorship of radical Islamist tendencies, in addition to a crackdown on civil society. The gains India made in Sri Lanka soon after the 2015 presidential election have been diluted by the lack of measurable progress in living standards of the countrys Tamils. To complicate matters, former president Mahinda Rajapaksa is eyeing a comeback to national politics, and New Delhi appears to have no strategy to engage him. Prime Minister Modi enjoys a great camaraderie with Afghan President Ashraf Ghani, but the ground beneath Kabul is shifting thanks to the prospects of a US withdrawal and an Iran-Russia alliance. Simply put, the South Asian neighbourhood is in turmoil, and New Delhi would be ill-advised to presume the Prime Ministers political stock alone can resolve these problems. All told, the Raisina Dialogue presented a missed chance for the NDA government to switch gears from individual to institutional diplomacy. It is still not late. In fairness, Modis decision to address the forum itself was a clever move, tempted as the prime minister may have been to join Xi Jinping at the World Economic Forum. The writer works at the Observer Research Foundation, India