Harsh V. Pant

India in the Asia-Pacific: Rising Ambitions with an Eye on China

It is almost a conventional wisdom now that the centre of gravity of global politics has shifted from Europe to the Asia–Pacific in recent years with the rise of China and India, gradual assertion by Japan of its military profile, and a significant shift in the US global force posture in favour of Asia–Pacific. The debate now is whether Asia–Pacific will witness rising tensions and conflicts in the coming years with various powers jockeying for influence in the region or whether the forces of economic globalization and multilateralism will lead to peace and stability. Some have asked the question more directly: Will Asias future resemble Europes past?1 It is, of course, difficult to answer this question as of now when major powers in Asia–Pacific such as China, India and Japan are still rising and grappling with a plethora of issues that confront any rising power in the international system. But what is clear is that all major powers are now re-evaluating their policy options vis-à-vis the Pacific. This paper examines Indias foreign policy in the Pacific as it has emerged on the last few years. First, the emerging balance of power in Asia–Pacific will be examined in light of the theoretical debate on the issue followed by a broad assessment of the role that India envisages for itself in the region. Subsequently, Indias relationship with the three major powers in Asia–Pacific—China, Japan, and the US is analysed. Finally, some observations will be made about the future trajectory of Indian foreign policy in the region.

The BRICS Fallacy

The term BRICS /referring to the association of emerging economies of Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa /dominated the headlines in March 2013 as Durban hosted the annual group summit. South African President Jacob Zuma suggested that the nascent organization’s leadership has ‘‘firmly established BRICS as a credible and constructive grouping in our quest to forge a new paradigm of global relations and cooperation.’’ The meeting resulted in a much-/hyped proposal to create a joint BRICS development bank that would finance investments in developing nations. Notwithstanding the pomp and ceremony in South Africa, the BRICS grouping has begun to lose much of its sheen. Reports have even emerged detailing its impending demise. For example, the U.S. Conference Board released a global economic outlook in November 2012 that called into question the BRICS miracle, arguing that the ‘‘low hanging fruit’’ from cheap labor and imported technology has already been picked. The report said that China’s double-/digit expansion rates will soon be ‘‘romantic memory’’ as growth will fall dramatically over the next few years, with investment returns going into ‘‘rapid decline’’ and an aging crisis hitting the country hard. India will also see a fall in its growth rate by 2018, from 5.5 percent to around 4.7 percent. The report underlined that ‘‘as China, India, Brazil and others mature from rapid, investment-/intensive ‘catch-/up’ growth, the structural ‘speed limits’ of their economies are likely to decline.’’ Prominent economic analysts such as Ruchir Sharma have also suggested that growth rates in Brazil, Russia, India, and China

Coping with challenges to sovereignty: Sino‐Indian rivalry and Nepal's foreign policy

This paper analyzes the different strategies pursued by China and India in their ongoing security competition in Nepal, and the latters foreign policy responses to this competition. It examines whether both China and India have accepted the status quo in Nepal, or are incessantly looking for opportunities to expand their influence in the country. First, a theoretical framework of great power politics is provided to examine the Sino‐Indian power competition vis‐à‐vis Nepal. This is followed by an examination of Chinese and Indian foreign policy strategies in Nepal. Finally, Nepals foreign policy response to preserve its sovereignty and security is examined. This paper has broader implications for small states seeking to preserve their sovereignty in the context of the great power competition for exercising hegemony over them.

India in Afghanistan: a test case for a rising power

Indias role is seen as crucial for the long-term stability of Afghanistan, and India realizes that a stable, prosperous and democratic Afghanistan is also in its strategic interests. This article examines the trends in Indias ties with Afghanistan in the past few years and argues that, driven by its growing regional and global ambitions, India is following a multi-pronged strategy in Afghanistan. A range of factors are propelling India towards an unusually proactive policy towards Afghanistan, and the success of Indias Afghanistan policy will go a long way in determining whether India will be able to emerge as a provider of regional security in South Asia. First, a very brief historical overview of India–Afghanistan relations is followed by the delineation of trends in this bilateral relationship. Subsequently, an analysis of Indian strategic interests in Afghanistan is presented and placed in the broader regional strategic context.

India's Nuclear Doctrine and Command Structure: Implications for India and the World

In January 2003, nearly five years after openly declaring itself as a nuclear weapon state, India finalized its nuclear command structure and formalized its nuclear doctrine. This work argues that while a clear enunciation of its nuclear doctrine and command structure will enhance regional stability and assure the international community, it is at the operational level that India continues to, and will have to work harder to, achieve its nuclear policy goals. Nations base their nuclear doctrines and command structures on the assumptions of traditional nuclear deterrence theory. However, as this paper demonstrates, at the operational level, the simple coherence and elegance of nuclear deterrence theory begins to break down. This is the challenge that India faces as it tries to evolve into a “nuclear weapon state.”

India's Relations with Iran: Much Ado About Nothing

In the last few years, India’s policy toward the Middle East has often been viewed through the prism of Indian—Iranian relations. The international community, and the West in particular, has been obsessed with New Delhi’s ties to Tehran, which are actually largely underdeveloped, while missing India’s much more substantive simultaneous engagement with Arab Gulf states and Israel. India’s relationship with the Middle East as a region is dramatically different than a generation ago. From 1947—1986, as at least one academic has argued, India was too ideological toward the region, paying insufficient attention to Indian national interests, particularly in its subdued ties with Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Israel. Today, however, India is developing its new Middle Eastern strategy around these three states, with New Delhi recently taking special care to nurture all these relationships and pursue its substantial regional interests.

The US-India Nuclear Pact: Policy, Process, and Great Power Politics

Abstract This article examines the process through which India and the United States made their bilateral civilian nuclear energy cooperation pact a reality. Using the levels of analysis approach, this article examines the factors that were instrumental in shaping up the nuclear agreement as well as the negotiating process as it evolved in the United States and India with a special focus on how political leaderships in the two states managed domestic opposition to the pact. Subsequently, this article locates the US-India nuclear agreement in the context of the broader theoretical debate in international relations over the role of international institutions in global politics and argues that the successful conclusion of the agreement highlights the importance of strategic considerations in driving the nonproliferation priorities of great powers.

India and Nuclear Arms Control: A Study of the CTBT

The Bush Administrations decision to pursue the National Missile Defense reveals a lack of consideration for the significant role that the present arms control regime has played in maintaining global stability, both during and after the Cold War. This paper examines how the global nuclear arms control architecture interacted with India after its nuclear tests in 1998, in particular the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) and the role that it has played in this context. Indias evolving position with regard to the CTBT is examined, thereby revealing the crucial role that the nuclear arms control regime, of which the CTBT is an important part, has played in bringing about stability in South Asia in particular and international milieu in general. Discarding this arms control regime can have grave implications for global peace and stability.

India's ‘non-alignment’ conundrum: a twentieth-century policy in a changing world

The idea of non-alignment has remained a central component of Indian identity in global politics that is manifest in continuities: since independence in 1947 India has been in pursuit of strategic autonomy, a quest that in practice has led to semi-alliances fashioned under the cover of non-alignment and shaped by regional dynamics. In this setting, the rise of China now raises an interesting conundrum for Indian policy-makers as New Delhi seeks to balance the benefits and risks of an increasingly assertive neighbour and a network of alliances with like-minded countries. This article approaches this enigma by delineating continuities of non-alignment from the early roots of the policy, through the Cold War-era and into the modern-day international system. Though domestic factors have had a significant influence on the trajectory of Indian foreign policy, the continuities of non-alignment have prevailed through changes in leadership and domestic vicissitudes. By exploring the foundation of non-alignment and how India has operationalized the policy, this article maintains that to some extent continuity will persist: India will likely continue its rhetoric in favour of strategic autonomy while moving closer to the West and its allies in practice. Yet in order to effectively balance Chinas growing influence, India will need to be more assertive in building these alliances, as the success of its modern-day pursuit of strategic autonomy may well rest on a strong foundation of strategic partnerships. The coming to office in May 2014 of the National Democratic Alliance government led by Narendra Modi has signalled a move away from even the rhetoric of non-alignment, with significant implications for the future of Indian foreign policy

The US–India nuclear deal: the beginning of a beautiful relationship?

The United States (US)–India nuclear pact has virtually rewritten the rules of the global nuclear regime by underlining Indias credentials as a responsible nuclear state that should be integrated into the global nuclear order. The nuclear agreement creates a major exception to the US prohibition of nuclear assistance to any country that does not accept international monitoring of all its nuclear facilities. Given its far-reaching implications, the Indo-US nuclear agreement has sparked off a heated debate in India, the US and the larger international community. This article examines the debate surrounding the nuclear pact. It argues that the nuclear agreement is about much more than mere nuclear technicalities: it is about the emergence of a new configuration in the global balance of power and a broader need for a new international nuclear order in the face of a global nuclear non-proliferation regime that seems to have become ineffective in meeting the challenges confronting the international community today.