If there’s one thing common to the last three prime ministers that India has had, it’s the accent and thrust they have given to their foreign policy initiatives—even if the policy direction comes with variations. Some reasons for this are easily decipherable. In a globalised world, foreign policy is not a hermetically sealed-off realm—it has a kind of bidirectional value. What you do abroad bleeds backwards to colour discourse in the domestic constituency—and how you comport yourself at home makes your image abroad. Whether in terms of policy (security, energy, etc.) or the audience it’s addressed to (including NRIs), it’s a continuum.
There’s another reason, an enabling factor. Foreign policy is the only realm that the political executive has a free hand on. Free from the encumbrance of having to go through Parliament and win its endorsement. Little wonder foreign policy is where most prime ministers have tried to secure their legacy or shown an appetite for risk-taking. Take Atal Bihari Vajpayee.
He staked his whole statesman’s reputation on the possibility of mending fences with the most destructive, difficult and slippery customer in the neighbourhood. When his turn came, Manmohan Singh staked even the survival of his government to clinch the civil nuclear deal with the US, turning on its head his party’s traditional foreign policy moorings. And now, Narendra Modi could be attempting something of the same nature and scale.
As 2019 approaches, Modi appears to be going back to where he began in 2014—gift-wrapping himself in big foreign policy statements—full of drama and surprise to throw critics off-track as also careful calculation along pre-destined paths.
His July 2017 Israel visit, without that mandatory trip to the other side, was a clear break from the past. The red carpet he rolled out for Benjamin Netanhayu here was an even bigger statement. And no sooner had we readjusted to this bold India-Israel axis comes news of another West Asia visit. Yes, with Palestine on the itinerary. There’s little scope left for anyone—social segment or political opponent—to offer any complaint.
And in between, throw in a pro-globalisation keynote address at Davos where his oblique criticism of the US even drew praise from China—even if his strong pitch for India in a leadership role contrasted its benign nature against China’s.
And this January 26, India’s determined wooing of ASEAN will be consecrated with a line-up of leaders from the whole bloc at Rajpath. Successive governments have chosen the chief guest for the R-Day parade carefully, and always to make a point. But no one ever thought it was possible to extend the honour to a group of nations. Just as no one had ever thought an Indian PM’s swearing-in could be graced by a full subcontinental star cast.
But the big picture emerges only when the ASEAN invite is seen in tandem with the Davos speech. More than the catchphrases and slogans on offer (‘red carpet instead of red tape’), what made Modi’s speech stand out was the cautionary note he sounded. Not the fairly hackneyed one on terrorism, nor even his not-so-subtle critique of the Trump administration’s tariff regime undoing the gains of globalisation. It was the striking fact that he seemed to be voicing concern about unbridled capitalism—greed for profit without responsibility towards Mother Earth (an imagery his core constituency would appreciate)—and how India engages with the world in a non-exploitative, non-predatory way, for the benefit of all.
The full import of these words—in the context of the ASEAN initiative—became explicit in another session of Davos that neither got reported nor got too much audience. This was one by MoS M J Akbar who, without beating about the bush, made it known that Modi sees India as a centre of Asia. Not just because of its geographical position but because India is where the two sides—a violence-ridden West Asia and the ‘Tiger economies’ of the East—are conjoined. And the Modi government is trying to take India decisively towards the East so as to overcome the impact of strife in West Asia and the declining economies of the further West.
On the latter point, whatever green shoots can presently be seen in certain parts of the global economy obviously did not merit comment the way a newly articulated concern for climate change did—in a surprisingly trenchant anti-Trump line.
Those back home still trying to look at the economy through the prism of DeMo and snags in GST are perhaps missing the big-picture messaging Modi is attempting. Whether he gets investors to buy into his story or not, critics will have to come up with a more sophisticated alternative theoretically. Something more than a Yechury line versus Karat line on aligning with the Congress.
One would have expected a Left party to debate the issues Modi is raising. The leader of India’s premier right-wing party is talking of qualified capitalism or responsible use of natural resources. And the Left is caught in an unseemly fratricidal duel about whether to go shopping for an ally or not.
Maybe it’s not surprising that the Left, already reduced in the national arena, chooses to persist in its momentum of self-destruction. What then of the Congress? It too will need to up the game and reinvent itself, beyond the daily tweets, to develop a doctrine that responds to the changing world scenario. Broader understanding and alliances can have meaning only once an alternative text to Modi’s line is defined. Otherwise, whatever one says about ground realities, in terms of the big picture, no one can blame the voter for thinking the latter is showing signs of higher evolution at this point.
Santwana Bhattacharya
Political Editor, The New Indian Express
Email: santwana@newindianexpress.com