A Humbled Narendra Modi, a Diminished Global Stature

China will remain the elephant in the room when it comes to foreign policy during Modi’s third term too. Modi, who boasts of his closeness to many world leaders, has failed to charm President Xi Jinping, who snubbed him by not attending the G20 meeting last year.

“When India speaks at global forums now, the whole world pays rapt attention,” Prime Minister Narendra Modi exulted during an election rally in Uttar Pradesh this May. Amidst raucous applause from the audience, the bravado continued: “When India takes decisions, the world tries to match its steps.”  

In the 2014 and 2019 elections, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) focused on corruption, Hindu nationalism, and domestic and Pakistan-origin terrorism. This is the first time in India’s history that foreign policy has figured prominently in the campaign discourse. In speech after speech, Modi crowed about India’s status as the fastest-growing major developing economy in the world, how the nation overtook Britain to become the fifth-largest global economy, and how successfully India hosted the G20 summit last year, all of these under his leadership, of course! He even raked up the long-settled issue of the Sri Lankan island of Katchatheevu just for narrow political gain in Tamil Nadu. 

When the results were announced on 4 June, Modi’s feet of clay were exposed as voters handed down the BJP a stunningly reduced parliamentary majority. A new era of coalition politics was ushered in — an uncharted territory for a leader who has often bragged of his ability to beat the Opposition single-handedly. The diminished mandate and dependence on coalition partners introduce new dynamics that could influence India’s foreign policy direction in the next five years. 

Modi is believed to have made most of the crucial foreign policy decisions on his own without consulting his cabinet. Prominent among them was proclaiming solidarity with Israel within a few hours of the October 7 attack by Hamas. It took several days for an embarrassed Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) to come up with a more balanced statement.

Also read: What Israel’s Eroding Impunity Means for India

To cement India’s status as a global leader, Modi will likely prioritise securing a permanent membership on the United Nations Security Council (UNSC). It will be interesting to see how the new government will leverage the UN’s upcoming ‘Summit of the Future’— dubbed as a historic opportunity to reform the global body —scheduled to take place in New York in September this year. However, given the geopolitical realities, including P-5 member China’s resistance to India’s rise, the UNSC permanent membership looks like a farfetched goal and will most likely remain beyond Modi’s reach.

China will remain the elephant in the room when it comes to foreign policy during Modi’s third term too. Modi, who boasts of his closeness to many world leaders, has failed to charm President Xi Jinping, who snubbed him by not attending the G20 meeting last year. Xi has also not personally congratulated Modi on his third-term victory so far. 

China, meanwhile, is involved in extensive development of military infrastructure along the Himalayan border. Recent reports of China deploying advanced J-20 stealth fighter jets at Shigatse, only 150 kilometres from Sikkim, underscore the ongoing volatility. Opposition leaders have accused Modi of failing to deal with China seizing Indian territory through “salami slicing,” or incremental occupation of the border areas. 

Diplomatic engagements will be crucial in managing the complex relationship with China. Underlying tensions and territorial disputes will require careful navigation to avoid escalation. Observers will be keenly watching whether there will be a meeting between Modi and Xi on the sidelines of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation summit in Kazakhstan’s capital Astana next month.

New Delhi will likely continue to promote “minilateral” arrangements with like-minded countries to advance its foreign policy and regional security objectives. The I2U2 (India, Israel, United States and United Arab Emirates), the Colombo Security Conclave (India, Sri Lanka, the Maldives and Mauritius), and the Quad (India, Japan, Australia and the U.S.) will most likely play significant roles in tackling regional challenges.  

However, the Quad has come under a cloud lately with the U.S. forming the ‘Squad,’ replacing India with the Philippines. An additional “deterrence” angle has been added to the ‘Squad’ group given the rising tensions in the South-China Sea. It has been over a year since the Quad leaders met for a summit. With U.S. President Joe Biden snubbing Modi’s invitation to be the chief guest at India’s Republic Day in January, a planned Quad summit along the sidelines of the celebration had to be deferred. Another attempt to hold a summit before the beginning of the national elections on April 19 also fell apart for various reasons. Now no summit is likely before the U.S. elections are over in November.

Meanwhile, the plot to assassinate, Gurpatwant Singh Pannun, a U.S.-Canadian citizen and alleged Khalistani separatist, in New York, reportedly involving Indian intelligence agents, has strained India-U.S. ties. Additionally, India’s perceived alignment with Russia amid the Ukraine conflict and its long-term agreement with Iran regarding the Chabahar port have further complicated relations with the U.S. 

Also read: Biden’s ‘Xenophobic’ Comment Shows the Steep Decline of the Indian Soft Power Under Modi

India’s relations with Canada too have nosedived under Modi’s watch with the murder of Hardeep Singh Nijjar, a Canadian citizen and an alleged Khalistani separatist, in British Columbia, in June last year. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau accused the Indian government of being complicit in the assassination, which subsequently led to a serious diplomatic spat, inflicting considerable damage to ties between the two major democracies.  

Relations with Pakistan also remain strained, and New Delhi will likely continue the current policy of limited engagement with Islamabad. 

Despite Moscow’s close ties with Beijing, the historical and strategic partnership with Russia remains vital. Navigating this complex triad of relationships will require a delicate balance, ensuring that India’s interests are safeguarded while maintaining its strategic autonomy.

Meanwhile, Modi’s decade-long rule saw Indian democracy coming under severe strain. Illiberalism and religious bigotry have been on the rise, and the country’s global standing has taken a beating. According to the Opposition Congress party, the nation’s image has been damaged by the BJP government’s “intolerance of dissent and suppression of human rights.” Freedom House has downgraded India from “free” to “partly free” while Sweden’s V-Dem Institute has classified the country as an “electoral autocracy.”  On the World Press Freedom Index, the “largest democracy in the world” now ranks 159 out of 180 countries.

Though the BJP has cornered most of the crucial ministries in the new government, including the MEA, the party’s dependence on coalition partners may lead to compromises. A humbled Modi at home will likely be more susceptible to international pressure during his third term. The made-up swagger with which he was walking on the world stage is gone forever.

E.D. Mathew is a former U.N. spokesperson. He posts @edmathew on X.

After Pakistan Army Chief’s Visit to the US, India Says It Hoped Others Will Treat Counter-Terrorism Seriously

Last week, Pakistan Army Chief Asim Munir embarked on his first-ever official visit to the US, engaging in discussions with senior officials, including Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Secretary of Defence General Lloyd Austin.

New Delhi: After Pakistan Army Chief Asim Munir’s first official visit to Washington and meeting with a series of senior officials, India on Thursday (December 21) remarked pointedly that New Delhi hoped that other countries would treat counter-terrorism with due seriousness.

Last week, the Pakistan Army Chief embarked on his first-ever official visit to the United States, engaging in discussions with Secretary of State Antony Blinken, Secretary of Defence General Lloyd Austin, Deputy Secretary of State Victoria Nuland, Deputy National Security Advisor Jonathan Finer, and Chairman of Joint Chiefs of Staff General Charles Q Brown.

“Yes, we did see some reports in this regard about these meetings,” Ministry of External Affairs spokesperson Arindam Bagchi said at weekly media briefing.

“Our concerns for Pakistan’s support to terrorism, its support to cross-border attacks is well-known. We would hope that other countries would also take counter-terrorism seriously,” he said.

As per the Pakistan Army, discussions with US officials highlighted counter-terrorism cooperation and defense collaboration as central areas of mutual interest. Both parties emphasised their commitment to strengthening interaction and expanding the scope of mutually beneficial engagements during these meetings.

‘US Bombed 6 Muslim Countries’: BJP Leaders on Obama, After US Ex-Prez’s Remarks on Minorities

Obama’s remark that ‘protection of Muslim minority in a majority Hindu India is something worth mentioning’ has led to pointed attacks against him by Nirmala Sitharaman and other BJP leaders.

New Delhi: Days after former US President Barack Obama commented on the rights of ethnic minorities in India during Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s state visit to the US, several Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leaders targeted him in scathing attacks.

“Part of my argument would be that if you do not protect the rights of ethnic minorities in India, then there is a strong possibility India at some point starts pulling apart. And we’ve seen what happens when you start getting [into] those kinds of large internal conflicts,” Obama said in an interview to CNN’s Christiane Amanpour.

When asked on how Biden should engage with leaders such as Chinese President Xi Jinping and Prime Minister Modi, who is considered “autocratic… illiberal democrat”, Obama said, “If President (Joe Biden) meets with Prime Minister (Narendra) Modi, the protection of Muslim minority in a majority Hindu India is something worth mentioning.”

Reacting to the former US president’s statement, finance minister Nirmala Sitharaman on Sunday (June 25) questioned the timing of the comments given that Prime Minister Narendra Modi was on a State visit to the US during that time.

She told reporters at the BJP headquarters in New Delhi that the US bombed six Muslim countries when Obama was president.

“Perhaps six Muslim-dominated countries were bombed due to him (Obama). More than 26,000 bombs were dropped – from Syria and Yemen to Saudi (Arabia) and Iraq,” she said.

“It was surprising that when the PM was visiting the US, a former US President was making a statement on Indian Muslims… I am speaking with caution, we want a good friendship with the US. But comments keep coming from there on India’s religious tolerance,” she said.

Sitharaman also implied that the Congress party was behind campaigns to target the prime minister and his government, the Indian Express reported.

“Politically speaking, since they can’t see any possibility to win an election against the BJP-NDA government, against the prime minister, that is why such campaigns are being run by people from within the country.”

She said the “role” of the Congress in such campaigns is becoming quite clear, more than during the last two (Lok Sabha) elections, the report added.

“They go to Pakistan and seek their help in changing the government in India saying ‘ek haath jodo’… and these kinds of toolkits that are run abroad, the Congress seems to have activated them all,” she said.

She further said that it seems Congress leaders are “not confident that people will listen to them”, so they are using these “tricks of inciting such baseless allegations” against the prime minister. But who will believe these people, she said.

“I believe that people from the Opposition parties, when they travel abroad, don’t talk in India’s national interest, because they know they cannot defeat Prime Minister Modi. They prop up such people to jump into this argument without knowing the ground reality,” she said.

Assam chief minister and senior BJP leader Himanta Biswa Sarma had by then already tweeted an Islamophobic line, saying: “There are many Hussain Obama in India itself. We should prioritize taking care of them before considering going to Washington.”

BJP national vice-president Baijayant Jay Panda said: “First, President Joe Biden finally went out on a limb to call a spade a spade – calling Xi (Jinping) a dictator; next, he had the audacity to treat PM Modi to rare honours and boost US-India ties to the next level. What a ‘coincidence’ that Barry (an apparent reference to Obama) waited till that very moment before raining on the parade, by bizarrely trying to equate India’s record on minorities to China’s.”

India, US Agree on ‘Ambitious New Roadmap’ for Defence Industrial Cooperation

US defence secretary Lloyd Austin, who met defence minister Rajnath Singh in New Delhi, said the US-India cooperation is necessary to protect the world against China’s ‘bullying’ and Russian ‘aggression’.

New Delhi: India and the United States on Monday, June 5, agreed upon an “ambitious new roadmap” for defence industrial cooperation, which will accord high priority to various projects for the co-development of military platforms and hardware, according to news agency PTI.

India’s defence minister Rajnath Singh and his American counterpart Lloyd Austin finalised the roadmap in New Delhi, two weeks ahead of Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s visit to the US on a state visit.

Austin explained the importance of the US-India cooperation, saying “because we all face a rapidly changing world. We see bullying and coercion from the People’s Republic of China and Russian aggression against Ukraine that seeks to redraw borders and threatens national sovereignty”.

Calling the US-India partnership a “cornerstone” for a free and open Indo-Pacific, he added that the deepening ties came to show how technological innovation and growing military cooperation between the two “great powers” can be a force for global good.

“We established an ambitious new roadmap for defence industrial cooperation with a fast-track (and) high-priority for co-development and co-production projects and to build closer ties between our defence industries,” Austin said during a press briefing.

“Democracies must now rally together in common interests and shared values. Preserving and protecting freedom are essential to peace and prosperity and require vigorous leadership from the US and India,” he added.

The PTI report also said that both sides discussed General Electric’s proposal to share technology with India for fighter jet engines and New Delhi’s plan to procure 30 MQ-9B armed drones for over USD 3 billion from US defence major General Atomics Aeronautical Systems Inc.

A statement issued by India’s defence ministry said both sides will identify opportunities for the co-development of new technologies and the co-production of existing and new systems besides facilitating increasing collaboration between defence start-up ecosystems of the two countries.

“Towards these objectives, they concluded a roadmap for US-India defence industrial cooperation which shall guide the policy direction for the next few years,” the statement added.

“India-US partnership is critical for ensuring a free, open and rules-bound Indo-Pacific region. We look forward to closely work with the US across the domains for capacity building and further consolidating our strategic partnership,” Singh said on Twitter about the meeting.

The US defence secretary arrived in New Delhi on Sunday, June 4, for a two-day tour. It is Austin’s second visit to India; he had visited India before in March 2021. Besides Singh, Austin also held talks with national security adviser, Ajit Doval, which he described as “productive”.

Washington Keen for India To Diversify From ‘Reliance’ on Russian Military Supplies: US Official

Two US officials – Kurt Campbell and Donald Lu – commented on issues that impact India the most: Ukraine and China.

New Delhi: A US official says that Washington is keen that India diversifies away “from its reliance” on Russian military supplies. The Indian army chief, meanwhile, said in an interview that “the need of the hour for us to become self-reliant.”

And, over the weekend, India’s foreign minister S. Jaishankar said India’s “counter-response” to China, was “strong and firm.”

Kurt Campbell, the White House coordinator for Indo-Pacific affairs, said, “We have stated clearly our interests to help India diversify away from its reliance, largely on Russian military supplies. We work closely with a number of other nations, like-minded nations, that also seek that goal.” He was speaking at Indo-Pacific forecast 2023, an annual preview of security developments held by the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies.

Indian Army chief General Manoj Pande, in an interview with StratNewsGlobal, said, “What we realised in the last couple of years is based on what we saw and may be direct fallout of the Russia-Ukraine conflict and the pandemic situation, we realise that we need to become self-reliant. We also need to have robust and more secure supply chains then only will be able to better handle the security challenges as we move forward… as we go forward this is something that is in fact the need of the hour for us to become self-reliant.”

One of the major lessons from the Russia-Ukraine war was “we realised that there were sustenance issues which we have now overcome. So I think [this] lesson was loud and clear and that is how we have made good beginning,” Gen Pande added.

At the annual press conference on January 12, Gen Pande had said that the Army has carried out an assessment on the reliance on some of the Soviet and Russian-origin equipment in its inventory in the backdrop of the continuing war in Ukraine and is trying to identify alternative sources for spares and ammunition that has been impacted. In terms of supplies from these countries, he said, “Yes, there has been an impact. We have put out a plan to overcome this and as we move forward, we will be able to overcome this challenge successfully.”

The sustenance of these weapon systems and equipment, in terms of spares and ammunition, is one issue that we have addressed, the Army chief said, stating, “We got a waiver and sanction to procure, even if it is ex-imports, for the next two to three years. We have 40 such cases, including spares and ammunition, largely pertaining to air defence and tank fleet. We are looking at how the sustenance requirement is met.”

A larger role for India 

Kurt Campbell also said, “We want to see an India that increasingly operates in the Indo-Pacific in a responsible way and you see that reflected in a number of engagements with Indian partners… we can hope for and expect in the US-Indian relationship is better and bigger things in the future and I think that includes working more together as partners on the security side as well.”

“Our interests are to see India playing an ever larger, responsible role in almost everything that we are doing,” added the senior US official.

Another top US official – Donald Lu, the US Assistant Secretary of State for South and Central Asian Affairs – criticised China’s “aggressive” moves along the Indian border.

“We have not seen that the PRC [People’s Republic of China] has taken good faith steps to resolve the border conflict. Quite the opposite, we have seen aggressive Chinese moves along India’s border, most recently in India’s North Eastern States,” Lu, said.

“In 2020, when the Chinese military attacked an Indian border post in the Galwan valley, the US was the first to criticise Chinese aggression and to offer support to India,” he added. He said it was the US assessment that China has not made positive moves in that direction, referring specifically to the recent incident between Indian and PLA soldiers in Arunachal Pradesh’s Tawang region in December.

Donald Lu. Photo: US Department of State, Public Domain

Meanwhile, speaking at the 53rd Anniversary Day of Thuglak magazine in Chennai, external affairs minister S. Jaishankar continued with his line that “on the Northern borders, China is seeking to change the status quo by bringing large forces, violating our agreements. Despite Covid, remember, this happened in May 2020. Our counter-response was strong and firm.”

At Bengaluru, addressing the Army Day parade earlier on Sunday, General Pande said that “in the northern border areas, the situation has been normal and through established protocols and existing mechanisms, necessary steps have been taken to maintain peace. Maintaining a strong defensive posture at the LAC, we are ready to tackle any contingency.”

‘Not Relevant, Necessary or Contextual’: MEA on Reference to PM Modi by US Official

A US official had cited the example of Prime Minister Modi while defending the Biden administration’s decision to grant immunity from a lawsuit to the Saudi Crown Prince over the murder of Jamal Khashoggi.

New Delhi: India is upset at a reference to Prime Minister Narendra Modi by a US state department official while defending the immunity it had extended to Saudi Arabian ruler Mohammad bin Salman, who is facing allegations of killing journalist Jamal Khashoggi.

“Frankly, I fail to understand how the comment on Prime Minister Modi was either relevant, necessary or contextual,” external affairs ministry spokesperson Arindam Bagchi said responding to questions about a US official referring to Modi while explaining the reasons for granting immunity to the Saudi ruler.

“Our two countries enjoy a very special relationship which is growing from strength to strength and we look forward to working with the US to further deepen it,” he said, referring to the bilateral ties between India and the US.

A US state department official had on November 18 cited the example of Prime Minister Modi while defending the Joe Biden administration’s decision to grant immunity from a lawsuit to the Saudi Crown Prince over the murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi.

“Some examples: President Aristide in Haiti in 1993; President Mugabe in Zimbabwe in 2001; Prime Minister Modi in India in 2014; and President Kabila in the DRC in 2018. This is a consistent practice that we have afforded to heads of state, heads of government, and foreign ministers,” US state department’s principal deputy spokesperson Vedant Patel had said.

In 2005, US officials had denied Modi a visa just as he was preparing to travel to New York to address Indian-Americans at a rally scheduled in Madison Square Garden. This decision was taken based on the allegations that as chief minister of Gujarat he had failed to stop riots in the state in 2002.

Then, after he became the prime minister in 2014, Modi secured an immunity from the ban.

Also read: US State Department Cites Immunity Given to Modi While Justifying the Same for MBS

According to the Hindu, Bagchi also spoke about the US Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) issuing a “country update” that accused the government of “engaging in or tolerating systematic, ongoing, and egregious religious freedom violations”.

“We have seen the biased and inaccurate observations about India by the USCIRF. Their tendency to consistently misrepresent facets shows a lack of understanding of India, its constitutional framework, plurality and robust democratic system,” he said.

The newspaper reported that the “country update”, released on November 22, had included recent incidents and government actions that it called a “crackdown on civil society and dissent”, pointing to the imprisonment and harassment of “journalists, lawyers, rights activists, academics, political leaders, religious minorities, and others critical of its policies”.

It also said that the government’s actions have “eroded the secular principles of the Indian Constitution and India’s pluralistic democracy by promoting and implementing its Hindutva ideology through government policy”, and recommended that the US state department, which periodically releases a list of countries being watched for religious freedom issues, to designate India as a Country of Particular Concern.

Separately, Bagchi also said that reports about the prime minister’s visit to the US in December were “incorrect”.

“No proposal for a visit by the prime minister to the US in December has been made by our side. Media reports in this regard are incorrect,” he said.

He also dismissed social media posts about “false comments” attributed to external affairs minister S. Jaishankar and White House spokesperson with regard to the brief bilateral meeting between Modi and Biden on the sidelines of the recent G20 summit in Bali.

“We have seen some incorrect social media posts which attribute false statements to the external affairs minister, who has not made any comment on this to the press or on social media. It also attributes false statements to the White House press secretary. So, I would request you all not to lend credence to such incorrect information,” he said.

He said the prime minister met Biden on a number of occasions in the course of the Bali Summit, including a brief bilateral meeting and a trilateral meeting that involved Indonesian President Joko Widodo.

“During these interactions, they exchanged views on a number of issues. Our press releases and tweets as well as the foreign secretary’s briefing in Bali encapsulates all these conversations,” he said.

“The US side has also issued its readout of the trilateral meeting and also separately indicated that a brief bilateral meeting did take place between the two leaders,” he said.

(With inputs from PTI)

India Will Not Countenance Unilateral Change of Status-Quo at Border, Jaishankar Reiterates

The external affairs minister’s remarks were aimed at China, as the two Asian giants are in the midst of a military stand-off in eastern Ladakh for over two years.

New Delhi: External affairs minister S. Jaishankar reiterated on Tuesday that New Delhi will not accept any attempt to unilateral charge the status quo at the border, even as he praised “trusted partners” for helping to keep India “safe and secure every day”.

Speaking at an event organised by Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) to mark eight years of the Narendra Modi government, Jaishankar said, “Our borders also need safeguarding and we’ll never accept any attempt to unilaterally change the status quo. A posture that departs from established understandings will evoke its own responses.”

His remarks were aimed at China, as the two Asian giants are in the midst of a military stand-off in eastern Ladakh for over two years. The opposition to any unilateral changes has been a constant reiteration by India throughout the current border dispute with India.

The Indian minister also alluded to India’s security partnership with the West. “When it comes to security, we’ll do what it takes to ensure national well-being. I acknowledge the role of trusted partners who work to help keep India safe and secure every day. We’ve overcome the hesitations of history and won’t allow anyone a veto on our choices,” he said.

The phrase “overcoming the hesitations of history was first used by Prime Minister Modi in relation to India-US ties in his speech at Capitol Hill during his 2016 state visit.

He said India looks forward to taking initiatives on global concerns that are truly consequential. “We look forward to joining Nuclear Suppliers Group overcoming political impediments that are against global interest; taking initiatives on global concerns that are truly consequential. International Solar Alliance that we’ve collated now has 106 members,” said Jaishankar.

India has attempted to join the Nuclear Suppliers Group but has been stymied by opposition from China and a couple of other countries.

“We want to make in India, but make with the world. India has a deep belief in the world being a family and expresses it through greater development. The last eight years have seen a tripling of our lines of credit commitments,” Jaishankar said.

Stating that “India is proof that democracies can deliver”, Jaishankar said the country’s neighbourhood first policy is “clearly associated with a generous and non-reciprocal approach to our immediate proximities”.

He asserted Indian foreign policy has been displaying greater conceptual and operational clarity. 

(With agency inputs)

As India Hurtles Towards a Terrifying Endgame, Foreign Policy Community Cannot Remain Silent

Foreign policy is a sum total of many things, one of which is the character of the domestic polity – even for a supposedly “non-aligned” and non-interventionist Asian middle power like India.

It is an unsaid norm amongst large sections of India’s foreign policy community to stay away from commenting on domestic politics and society.

In reality, however, India’s relationship with the world has a lot to do with its internal character and more specifically, the health of its democratic order. 

India might not have used ‘democracy’ as a foreign policy precondition in the initial decades after independence. But, implicitly, it has always deployed its own democratic credentials as a key pitch to the world. This was backed up by independent India’s core worldview of resisting discrimination and domination – by the strong, of the weak.

After the end of the Cold War, India doubled down on this as it began to base its relationship with the West (especially the US) on shared values of democracy. In fact, it was A.B. Vajpayee who, while discussing India-US relations in 1998, had said: “We are the two largest democracies in the world, and have similar political cultures, a free press and the rule of law.”

The liberal West, too, has viewed the resilience of the Indian multi-party system, social pluralism, and respect for the rule of law with great admiration. Geopolitically, it has seen a liberal India as a compelling counter to ascendant illiberal Asian regimes, such as communist China. 

The entirety of this theoretical premise is under unprecedented stress today. But, India’s foreign policy community couldn’t care less.

Even as India continues to rapidly and visibly regress into a violent majoritarian state, the community continues to look away. The dominant thinking is that foreign policy is far above the “petty politics” of the homeland or that domestic affairs have no bearing on global diplomacy. At best, foreign policy voices contend themselves with paying lip service to the values of democracy and pluralism only for geostrategic ends.

That the rest of the world, especially the democracy-crusading West, has so far given a pass to Narendra Modi’s India has only aided this culture of silence and deliberate ignorance. It seems to have lulled our foreign policy commentators into an illusion that no matter what, India can continue to recite its much-loved fable of liberal democracy over and over again, to the point that it becomes an irrefutable – almost hypnotising – fairy tale. 

On Monday, Prime Minister Modi and US President Joe Biden met virtually before the foreign and defence ministers of the two countries met for their much-awaited 2+2 meeting. There was lofty talk about “shared commitment to democracy and pluralism” and the two democracies – one oldest, the other largest – delivering “opportunity, security, freedom, and dignity” to their peoples. 

This came just two days after a Hindu group vandalised pushcarts of Muslim vendors in Karnataka’s Dharwad district. Earlier, the state’s chief minister had himself called for an economic boycott of Muslim vendors. Over this weekend, at least nine places across the country reported mass violence against Muslims (who are in the middle of the holy Ramzan month) as Indian Hindus celebrated the birth of Lord Ram.

A screengrab of a video from the site of the Dharwad temple. Photo: Twitter/@harishupadhya

But, save for a tepid and arguably broad comment on “some recent concerning developments in India, including a rise in human rights abuses by some government, police, and prison officials” by the US Secretary of State Anthony Blinken, the Biden administration refused to talk about the naked display of sectarian violence, majoritarianism and ensuing human rights abuses in Modi’s India. 

It also did not bring up the mounting legal intimidation and censure that vocal critics of the government, like Rana Ayyub and Aakar Patel (who was recently barred from travelling to the US), are facing in India today.

Also Read: The Government Can Stop People at Emigration Counters – But Truth Needs No Visas

The US today might be looking away from the alarming situation in India. But, that in itself should be a subject of critical scrutiny for India’s foreign policy scholars and observers – who are meant to offer unbiased analyses of India’s relationship with the world and how that can be secured for the long future, not write eulogies like court jesters or scribes. 

After all, if foreign policy is the projection of “national interests” on an international stage, then there is every reason for its students to concern themselves with the fundamental character of the “nation” that those interests flow from. They also ought to ask whose “national interests” are they batting for – those of every Indian or only the religious majority?

It was refreshing to see former diplomats speak out against anti-Muslim hate speech earlier this year. But, that was, positively speaking, a rare occurrence. Most foreign policy scholars or observers did not bother to speak out against Hindu monks calling for genocide against their fellow citizens or publicly threatening to rape Muslim women in the presence of policemen.

If empathy is so passé, then at the very least why India’s foreign policy commentariat should care about India’s democratic backslide because it could severely erode its diplomatic capital and by extension, affect its interests. 

Foreign policy is a sum total of many things, one of which is the character of the domestic polity – even for a supposedly “non-aligned” and non-interventionist Asian middle power like India. So, one administration in the White House or Number 10 might not bother too much about the situation in India today, but that doesn’t guarantee a smooth ride for an increasingly illiberal India forever.

It is notable that even Union defence minister, Rajnath Singh, during his visit to Washington DC for the 2+2, said that India has “critical roles to play in the Indian Ocean region and in the wider Indo-Pacific…as a democracy.” This might be a duplicitous stand for him to take, but it shows that even the Modi government, whose ministers and cheerleaders often deride the West for its preachings on democracy, knows full well what the West values India for.

In fact, just two days after his visit, the US Department of State released its annual Country Reports on Human Rights Practices, which offers a detailed and damning lowdown on various forms of human rights abuses underway in India. This includes attacks against Muslims, violent eviction of Bengal-origin (Miya) Muslims in Assam, and prolonged detention of political activists.

All of these become especially relevant today as Western governments and the intelligentsia drag India to the witness box over its neutrality on the Russia-Ukraine crisis.

As New Delhi defiantly refuses to call out Vladimir Putin’s cross-border aggression and buys Russian oil, some heads are turning. Modi is being equated to Putin – certainly on Twitter, and probably behind closed doors. Washington is sending emissaries to New Delhi with ominous warnings. The sanctity of its commitments as a Quad member is being scrutinised. Reportedly, Germany is contemplating dropping India from its list of invitees to the upcoming G7 meeting in Bavaria over the latter’s position on Russia-Ukraine.

None of this means the West will abandon India anytime soon. In fact, the depth of the recent India-US 2+2 shows that Washington still sees great value in empowering India, as also captured in its recently-recent Indo-Pacific strategy. But, India’s sharp turn towards a decidedly authoritarian and majoritarian future means that it has one less insurance against global censure, and a time-tested one at that.

US President Joe Biden, seated with US secretary of state Antony Blinken and India’s external affairs minister S. Jaishankar holds a videoconference with India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi, in Washington US, April 11, 2022.
 Photo: Reuters/Kevin Lamarque

With all its intellectual capital and access to global networks of knowledge and influence, if India’s foreign policy community remains silent as a stone today, it will be equally responsible for abetting the terrifying endgame that the ruling regime in New Delhi is pushing India towards.

And those who fully understand the gravity of the situation in India need to decide for good how they see the nation’s foreign policy – as a meaningful extension of Indian interests of which every citizen is an equal stakeholder or an ivory-tower public relations exercise that represents only the majority.

Angshuman Choudhury is senior research associate at the Centre for Policy Research, New Delhi. He is also a member of the Indo-Pacific Circle and works on Indian foreign policy, Myanmar, and Southeast Asia. 

‘Buying Russian Oil Is Not in India’s Interests,’ US President Tells PM Modi

The virtual meeting between two leaders was held hours before the ‘2 plus 2’ bilateral engagement between top foreign policy and defence officials in Washington on Monday.

New Delhi: US President Joe Biden on Monday told Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi that importing more Russian oil was not in New Delhi’s interest, even as he asserted that Washington would continue “close consultations” with India to manage the “destabilising effect” of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

The push from the highest level in the United States specifically endorsed the message conveyed by deputy National Security Advisor Daleep Singh, who said that there would be “consequences” if India attempted to actively circumvent the sanctions against Russia.

White House Press secretary Jen Psaki told reporters that Biden’s remarks in his call with the Indian leader were “consistent with what our deputy national security advisor, of course, did during his visit just a few weeks ago”.

She was referring to the visit of Daleep Singh, US deputy NSA for international economics, who is considered the chief architect of the sanctions against Russia.

Singh’s blunt message had annoyed New Delhi, which had led the White House to clarify earlier that the US had not warned India over buying Russian oil.

However, following the Modi-Biden call on Monday, the White House asserted that the US President had endorsed the missive delivered by Daleep Singh.

The US President made it “clear that it was in India’s interest to accelerate or increase imports of Russian energy and other commodities,” Psaki said.

She stated that while Russian crude accounts for just 1-2% of India’s energy imports, “we also made clear that we will be happy to help them diversify this as well”.

US President Biden had requested for the virtual interaction with Prime Minister Narendra Modi, their first one-on-one interaction since the Ukraine war began on February 24. They had previously taken part in the ‘Quad’ leaders summit in March.

The virtual meeting was held hours before the ‘2 plus 2’ bilateral engagement between top foreign policy and defence officials in Washington on Monday.

India’s external affairs minister S. Jaishankar and defence minister Rajnath Singh, who had travelled to Washington for the first ‘2 plus 2’ meeting under the Biden administration, sat at the round table with the US President as he began the talks.

Also read: ‘With Us or Against Us?’: What to Expect from the India-US ‘2+2’ Ministerial Talks

In a reflection of India’s stance, there had been no mention of Ukraine on the bilateral agenda in the Indian press release announcing the virtual meeting between the two leaders. However, the White House statement was categorical that President Biden would talk about the “ consequences of Russia’s brutal war against Ukraine and mitigating its destabilising impact on global food supply and commodity markets”.

The two leaders ‘ opening remarks clearly showed the differences between New Delhi and Washington over their public posturing on Ukraine.

“US and India are going to continue our close consultation on how to manage the destabilising effect of the Russian war. And I am looking forward to our discussion today,” he said.

India has been increasing its purchase of Russian crude to reduce the spiralling fuel import bill. But, this has met with disapproval in Western capitals, where economic sanctions have been the primary weapon in pressuring Russia to withdraw from Ukraine.

India had asserted that it has been open to talks with Russia to “stabilise” its “established” economic relationship with Russia. Both countries have been in the negotiations for setting up a payment mechanism that will allow India to keep on buying Russian commodities.

Russian foreign minister Sergei Lavrov praised India for not taking a “one-sided view” on the Ukraine war during his visit.

From Daleep Singh to Commerce secretary Gina Raimondo, senior US administration officials have increasingly made public noises about their discomfort with India attempting to thwart western sanctions. India responded by pointing out that Europe was still buying fuel from Russia and demanded “political colouring” should not be attributed to New Delhi’s actions.

At a background briefing on the Modi-Biden call, a senior US administration described the conversation as “very candid.”

“We know that not all countries will be able to do what we’ve done.  We know that India is not a major consumer of Russian oil.  Its current imports are about 1 to 2 per cent of its total energy imports. And, as of now, our energy payments — our energy payments are exempt from current sanctions.  And we’ve been very clear that we’ve been able to ban oil and LNG and coal imports from Russia, but other countries have to make their own choices,” he said.

In his opening remarks, Biden also acknowledged that India had sent humanitarian support to the war-ravaged country.

“On that note, I want to welcome India’s humanitarian support for people of Ukraine who are suffering a horrific assault, including a tragic attack on a train station,” said the US President. Biden’s reference to the Indian assistance came after his previous assertion that the “root” of the India-US partnership is a “deep connection between our people, ties of family, friendship and shared values”.

The Indian PM stated that India remains deeply concerned about the situation in Ukraine. He also repeated India’s condemnation of the killing of civilians in Bucha, which Ukrainian and Western governments had blamed on Russian soldiers.

In line with India’s stance, Modi did not, as usual, criticise Russia directly but restated India’s demand for an impartial probe.

“The news of the recent killings of innocent civilians in Bucha city was very worrying. We condemned it immediately and have also demanded an independent investigation”.

In answer to repeated media queries on whether US pressure would finally lead India to condemn the Ukraine invasion, the White House spokesperson only observed that India had “condemned” the Bucha killing. However, she did not state that New Delhi had not pointed the finger at Russia for allegedly carrying out the civilian massacre.

India has, so far, abstained from voting on all the ten resolutions brought by western countries against Russia in UN bodies, including the latest one, which expelled the Russian delegation from the UN Human Rights Council.

Modi also hoped that ongoing dialogue between Russia and Ukraine would lead to peace.

“I spoke on the phone several times with the Presidents of both Ukraine and Russia. Not only did I appeal for peace, but I also suggested President Putin to have direct talks with the President of Ukraine. The subject of Ukraine has also been discussed in great detail in our Parliament,” said Modi.

He also referred to India’s evacuation of 20,000 medical students from Ukraine after the invasion began.

The US side also sought to wean India away from Russia by referring to Moscow’s tight embrace of Beijing. This had also been a refrain of visiting US officials in India.

“…we know that India has concerns about the links between Russia and China.  India, of course, is facing a very tense situation along the Line of Actual Control.  And when India sees the tight links between China and Russia, that’s obviously going to impact their thinking,” the senior US administration official told reporters.

In answer to another question during the briefing, Psaki added that no decision had been taken on providing India with a waiver against the CAATSA sanctions triggered by the purchase of the S-400 missile system.

Note: This story has been updated with new information since it was first published.

‘Would Prefer If India Moves Away from NAM, Russia’: Top US Diplomat

Wendy Sherman said India has made comments on Bucha killing which indicates that the US needs to keep working and helping to support India to understand what is in their national security interest.

Washington: The US would prefer India to “move away” from its long-term history of non-alignment G77 partnership with Russia, the Biden administration has told lawmakers, observing that there is a great opportunity to ramp up defence trade between the two countries that are moving forward on many achievements critical to the prosperity and security of the Indo-Pacific region.

Deputy Secretary of State Wendy Sherman told members of the powerful House Foreign Affairs Committee during a Congressional hearing early this week that America shares a very critical relationship with India.

“They are the largest democracy in the world. We have a strong defence relationship with them. They are part of the Quad, with Australia and Japan, and we are moving forward on many achievements that are critical to Indo-Pacific prosperity and security,” she said.

“We, obviously, would prefer that India move away from their long-term history of non-alignment G77 partnership with Russia,” Sherman said in response to a question from Congressman Tim Burchett.

The US has told Indian officials that it will be very hard for them now to get spare parts or to get them replaced from Russia because of the sanctions, she said.

“They have increased their defence relationship with us, and defence sales, and co-production efforts. And I think this is a great opportunity for that to surge in the years ahead,” she said.

US officials have expressed concern over India’s purchase of the S-400 missile systems by Russia.

In October 2018, India signed a USD 5 billion deal with Russia to buy five units of the S-400 Triumf air defence missile systems to ramp up its air defence, despite a warning from the then Trump administration that going ahead with the contract may invite US sanctions.

The US has already imposed sanctions on Turkey under the CAATSA for the purchase of a batch of S-400 missile defence systems from Russia.

“I’m wondering will India’s neutrality in Russia’s war on Ukraine and the country’s general friendship with Russia have any effect on our policy towards India? US policy towards India, I guess I should say,” Burchett asked.

Congressman Joe Wilson also asked about India’s position in Ukraine. He said the world’s largest democracy should be standing firm with the other democracies.

“We’re in a conflict that has been identified by President Biden as totalitarianism against democracies. And so, either we stand for democracy’s rule of law or we’ll be facing around the world destabilisation by governments that are the rule of the gun,” he said.

“And so, how can we make an effort to replace the oil that India depends on and the military equipment that they depend on from Putin? This is just so illogical for the extraordinary country of India, the wonderful people of India, to be overlooking abstaining. That’s incredible. That’s such an insult to the people of India,” Wilson said.

India has faced flak from US lawmakers, both Republicans and Democrats, for choosing to abstain from UN votes to rebuke Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

Unlike many other leading Western powers, India has not yet criticised Russia for its invasion of Ukraine and it abstained from the votes at the UN platforms in condemning the Russian aggression.

However, External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar has asserted that India is strongly against the Russia-Ukraine conflict as no solution can be arrived at by shedding blood. He told parliament this week that “if New Delhi has chosen a side, it is the side of peace and an immediate end to violence”.

During the hearing, Sherman said America’s relationship with India, the world’s largest democracy, is critical in so many areas.

“We have had very direct conversations with them about how we can address their very legitimate needs for their country,” she added.

“I think that there’s progress being made to see what we can do to be supportive to them, while, at the same time, urging them to be more forthright regarding what’s happening in Ukraine,” Sherman said.

“I did note that they made comments, not surprising, about the horrors that have taken place in Bucha. And so, I think we just have to keep working at this relationship and understanding the complexity of it, and helping India to really understand what is in their national security interests,” said the top American diplomat.

Talking about the civilian killings in the Ukrainian city of Bucha, Jaishankar has said that India was “deeply disturbed” by the reports of civilian killings in Ukraine.