M K Bhadrakumar is a distinguished retired Indian diplomat and an influential geopolitical commentator. With a 30-year career in the Indian Foreign Service, Bhadrakumar held strategic postings that shaped India’s foreign policy across pivotal regions—from Moscow to Kabul and Islamabad to Ankara.
Bhadrakumar brings a rare blend of diplomatic insight and sharp analytical commentary to his expressions. He shares with TNIE his thoughts on the US deep state, Operation Sindoor, Iran-Israel conflict, and why he thinks only PM Narendra Modi can settle the Indo-China issue.
Excerpts
India has taken a multi-alignment position as far as foreign strategy is concerned. Your assessment…
Multi-alignment goes beyond non-alignment. It is actually constructive engagement with even those you disagree with. External Affairs Minister Jaishankar ought to be complimented for this. He took it forward when everyone was talking about multipolarity which implies several power centres in the world order. The Modi government has succeeded in boosting our international prestige, where our voice is accorded due respect. BRICS is a telling example of multi-alignment for India.
How can India make use of the changing world order?
Good politics is about creating wealth. After the Cold War, there was a myth of a unipolar world, with American triumphalism over the destruction of the Soviet Union. Back then, American thinkers projected the 21st century as an American century. But Professor Kennedy termed it the last phase of American dominance. From the 90s,
China’s rise was apparent. In 1995, with Boris Yeltsin realising Russia wouldn’t be part of the western block, he decided to normalise relations with China, proposing the same to India. But we weren’t ready for it because of the old narrative inherited from 1962.
Is it just a narrative?
We don’t have a border dispute with China. The dispute is actually about creating a border where none existed. Such narratives are very much part of a country’s psyche. Americans, even today, find it extremely difficult to accept the reality that theirs is not the prescriptive approach to the world or that they cannot dictate terms to the world. That era is over and they don’t have the capacity to enforce it. The world-order is shifting with China’s rise. And India cannot be invaded as it’s a significant military power. It’s a nuclear power and its economy is galloping. How can India then be browbeaten? It is impossible. That’s the geo-political reality.
You mentioned the Indo-China border. Why is LAC (Line of Actual Control) such a difficult issue?
Look at the wording, LAC. It isn’t even Line of Control (LoC). The Line of Actual Control is a grade lower. You simply happen to be there, and so that’s the line. When it comes to Pakistan, it is LoC which means you are effectively in control of the land. There’s a huge difference between the two. I firmly believe it is possible to be resolved and the best person to resolve it is probably PM Narendra Modi.
There’s no one else who can tackle this. I fervently hope the meeting on the sidelines of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation in China will become a trigger. But then, it’s also a highly accident-prone process. The Dalai Lama issue can completely spoil the momentum.
Should India be in a similar position with regard to a restive, alienated region, and where your claims aren’t exactly supported by history or archaeology, it wouldn’t be tolerated. Sometimes, I think China is an extremely tolerant country, maybe because it views time differently. Having been in existence for 5,000 years, it isn’t in a rush to solve such issues (smiles).
Your remark that China is a tolerant country goes against the popular narrative…
China faces a situation that no country can tolerate. The interference in Tibet didn’t begin after 1962. There was a permanent CIA aircraft at Safdarjung Airport to handle the issue during Nehru’s time. The Dalai Lama arrived here in such a backdrop. The plan was to settle him in a sanctuary. But the 1962 war changed that, with India evincing an interest in him as an emerging counter-point. But from China’s viewpoint, its neighbouring country was harbouring and encouraging a person from a disputed land. The Nepal border was porous then.
My reading of it is that considering his (Dalai Lama’s) age, the issue will be resolved after his time. They don’t wish to blow the issue up. Tibetans who have come here aren’t keen on integration. They take our hospitality, but look for a chance to go to the USA or Europe. Realistically, Tibet coming in the way of our strategic relationship with a major country is not good for our interests. If roles were reversed, India wouldn’t have allowed a country to do so.
You said Modi could make a difference. But given the prevailing anti-China sentiment, is it possible for him to take the initiative even if he desires so?
The anti-China narratives were developed by the Congress government. As a nation, we were immature. France and Germany’s fierce enmity contributed to two World Wars, but today, there is a Franco-German Axis in the European Union. I was highly optimistic when Chinese President Xi Jinping visited India in 2014, as it crashed against the narrative. Modi has visited China several times. He is capable of seeing it through. It is common sense to have a good relationship with China. It will be a game changer if it materialises, making us unstoppable and possibly the second biggest world power after China.
But China is a communist country…
China’s national character is basically about wealth, not communism. Many Chinese have told me they wanted to live like Americans. They don’t promote socialism. China isn’t a representative of communism. Claims by both countries about borders can be questioned. What I’ve heard, as mentioned by V K Krishna Menon (former defence minister), is that as far as China is concerned, Aksai Chin is one of the most important areas... it is the only land route connecting Xinjiang. It is a place with a lot of mineral deposits as well as an alienated Muslim area. I believe if there is a candid discussion between Narendra Modi and Xi Jinping, a compromise can be reached.
China supplied weapons to Pakistan, which were reportedly used during Operation Sindoor…
Pakistan buys from China largely because its weapons are inexpensive. India buys arms from Russia. Islamabad juggles relations with both Washington and Beijing, currently leaning towards the US. For India, a reset of the relationship with China could alter Islamabad’s stance as well. Strategically, India stands to gain by balancing strong ties with both China and Russia—precisely the constellation Washington worries might dilute its own influence in Asia.
Whenever India engages in talks with China, tensions arise at the border, like the Galwan Valley clash. What steps can be taken to genuinely improve our relationship with China?
Such incidents flare up whenever India opens dialogue with Beijing. Yet PM Modi has never fuelled anti-China sentiment. As Gujarat CM, he welcomed Chinese investment. In his third term as PM, he will be keen to craft a lasting legacy.
The China issue lacks a communal dimension, so the RSS is unlikely to resist rapprochement, though the Opposition may criticise any concession. Successive Congress governments shaped the narrative of a rigid border, but in reality, vast stretches remain undefined... what Nehru once called “areas where not even grass grows”. Reaching a settlement is ultimately a question of political will.
What role does a political leader’s personality play in diplomacy?
After the Babri Masjid demolition and the Bombay riots, Narasimha Rao decided to visit Iran after a long protest from the Muslim world. He was the first Indian Prime Minister to go there. His erudition came into play and stabilised the situation. Two years later, when we needed Iranian help, they pitched in. Similarly, the way (Lal Krishna) Advani responded to the same incident shows the breadth of his vision. He (Advani) is a very tolerant man, and a humanist.
As a diplomat, how do you view PM Modi’s personality traits?
Modi’s is a complex personality… he isn’t a one-dimensional man. He’s very versatile. I haven’t met him but I think he’s a very lonely man. That’s my intuitive cognition. I don’t think he can relate to anybody in the political class. The kind of personality he has projected since childhood is introspective. What we see externally, his oratory et al, is one side of it. He has intuitive cognition of men and matters. He can see through things. He can look at it objectively. What I said about Modi resolving India’s tension with China is based on all these. He is a very ambitious man, extremely hardworking.
How is Modi different from Vajpayee and Advani?
I don’t think he has much in common with either of them. Except perhaps in the larger sense of a devotion to India’s interest. They were very profound personalities. Their lives weren’t just about winning elections. Vajpayee was always interested in Pakistan matters. He was a very emotional man. So is Advani, frankly. I was told by some people that Advani would cry watching certain Hindi movies. I can’t associate Modi with such stuff. In that sense, Modi is very different.
Talking about the Middle East, Saudi Arabia is surprising everyone with its pace of modernisation….
The ruling elite in Saudi Arabia, the royal family, dare not disappoint the Wahabi establishment. There were many restrictions like not allowing women to drive. Now, the crown prince is removing these restrictions... there has been a big departure from the past. What’s happening there is a thing of profound significance to the Islamic world.
How did Saudi come into the picture in the Iran-Israel conflict?
Russia was ready to mediate but Iran kept them at a distance. Instead, they sought the Saudis. Iran’s president and foreign minister requested the Saudi crown prince to mediate. The crown prince’s brother, Prince Khalid, who looks after the defence ministry, was sent to Tehran as a personal envoy to discuss and evolve a strategy. The Saudis thus became Iran’s partner. The reason for the Saudi crown prince’s intervention was Israel’s actions in Gaza. Prince Khalid held a secret meeting with Trump. What Iran needs is America’s promise not to play such games anymore. America’s last attack wasn’t really an attack. They just dropped a few bombs and left. Look at how Trump handled the issue. He knows that Iran is not a country that makes bombs. They have a fatwa against it.
It tells a lot about Trump’s personality…
We shouldn’t underestimate personalities. We picturise Trump as a buffoon and an inconsistent person. In 1980, when Ronald Reagan became president, a businessman booked a full-page advertisement in The New York Times. It was a message for President Reagan: “There is no need to see Russia as an enemy. They are interested in relations with us. Then why is there such a Cold War?” Do you know who wrote it? Donald Trump. USD 98,000 was the price of that advertisement. That was 45 years ago, when Trump was 35-40 years old. The bizarre theories he talks about now are all crystallised thoughts. He is working on it now.
The US has a legacy of dominance and aggression, with Trump’s attitude to boot. In that context, will the US be ready to abdicate the throne of the unipolar world it held?
I’m not at all optimistic. Trump has got only three-and-half years more. What if a person like Joe Biden succeeds him! Dwight D Eisenhower during his farewell speech had predicted that the military-industrial complex will pose the biggest threat to US democracy. The US deep state is a reality with permanent bureaucrats, establishment, arms dealers, intelligence establishment, and political components on board. Their election is expensive and fuelled by the big guns of Wall Street, with the Jewish lobby a part of it. Classical-mode politicians can’t survive by violating them.
Trump is right wing. But look at the coalition he has built up… very contradictory. Working class, middle class are all components… a rainbow coalition. And to make it work, you need Trump. In 2008, he had a debt of 900 million dollars. All his companies and casinos were declared bankrupt. In 2015, he became a billionaire in New York, a place full of sharks. He’s gutsy and has incredible stamina... sleeps just four hours.
Operation Sindoor resulted in internationalisation of the Kashmir issue and cancellation of the Shimla Agreement. Was that a blow for India?
Operation Sindoor could have been handled better. The terrorism rubric itself has become irrelevant. Trump has shaken hands with Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa, aka al-Julani, the most notorious killer in the Islamic State and Al Qaeda. Look at the BRICS statement. The Pahalgam attack was condemned but there was no reference to Pakistan. Our international diplomacy is going well. But when the Pakistan angle comes up, Indian domestic politics comes into play.
Has India been isolated in the international community after Operation Sindoor?
If handled any other way, it wouldn’t have political acceptability. The Pahalgam killers are yet to be caught. This means some deficiencies on the part of the intelligence and the establishment. My assessment is that Op Sindoor wasn’t a fantastic operational success. Pakistan has a formidable military force. During the Bangladesh Liberation War, they had a geographical disadvantage and had their back towards the wall. In all other wars, going by football parlance, it was all a draw.
Where did we falter in our relations with Pakistan? During Vajypee’s time, there was bus diplomacy, then Kargil happened…
The elements within Pakistan sabotaged it. Pakistan knows India is rapidly progressing and there’s no point in clinging on to old ideas. It’s a failing state but there’s a huge body of opinion that if they have good relations with India they can live better. The Manmohan-Musharaff talks had made some headway on Kashmir but changes there caused the talks to freeze. If we pick up those threads, even the military will reconcile with it.
How do you look at the Shashi Tharoor-led delegation after Op Sindoor?
There’s no point sending delegations one fine morning. It is best addressed in a systematic way. This was done to silence some political parties by including their representatives.
Diplomatically, which was India’s golden era?
The best period was during Manmohan Singh’s two terms as PM. He was a highly respected man. He didn’t have ‘hug diplomacy’, but was a profound thinker. Peer groups abroad accepted it and respected him. He cemented the relations with the US, tactfully handled a difficult period in the relationship with Pakistan, and almost brought it to a kind of a solution. Economy-wise, we did fairly well. UPA-I was very good.
How would you term your association with the Left?
I was part of a cell in the politburo and my task was to give intellectual inputs during UPA- 1. When the Left proposed NREGA, Manmohan Singh and P Chidambaram (then finance minister) opposed, but Sonia Gandhi showed interest. Sonia is one of the best Leftists we have (smiles). She took our suggestions seriously. On a few occasions, she even overruled Manmohan.
Do you think the CPM opposing the nuclear deal was a foolish decision?
Of course. UPA-1 where the Congress and the Left joined hands together was the best model for the country. Sonia tried her best to harmonise the positions of CPM and Congress on the nuclear deal, but Manmohan, Chidambaram... none of them liked this alliance. She viewed the Left’s presence as a larger-than-life factor. She also knew the party (Congress) was full of bandicoots (chuckles). So, the link with the communists was like a breath of fresh air.
You used the term ‘civilisation state’ several times. What role does a country’s history play in shaping its future?
We became a political entity fairly recently. But what was binding us together? In my opinion, it was not Hindu religion. Going beyond that, there’s a fabric, a corpus of values, a certain way of life, collective identity... a stream of consciousness in the minds of a continuing entity. That’s the trait of a nation state. Indianness is reflected in all of us, in one way or another. We Indians think differently. We are not a violent society like Russia.
TNIE team: Kiran Prakash, Cithara Paul, Jayanth Jacob, Anil S, Sreejith K S B P Deepu (photos) Pranav V P (video)