It has been a rather long learning curve for New Delhi to separate presumed transcendental religious solidarity and the logic of national self-interest in engaging the Middle East.
The problem is not the lack of big ideas within Indian political class. There are a host of other reasons that limit public engagement on foreign policy. Few parties believe foreign policy is of any importance in winning elections.
Carnegie India, in partnership with the Vedica Scholars Programme for Women, hosted the inaugural talk of the Anahita Speaker Series on “The Architecture of Diplomacy.”
Prospects for a sensible neighborhood policy can’t rest solely on having single-party governments at the center and ‘responsible’ chief ministers in the border states. India needs a measure of political consensus on regional policies.
The Bangladesh crisis makes clear that no subcontinental crisis is ever just a subcontinental affair. There will invariably be wider geopolitical forces which will impinge on the way that the subcontinent acts.
As countries debate an emerging security architecture in the Indo-Pacific, a key area is missing from the discussion: the role of islands. Much as they did in the past, islands will come to play a critical role in shaping the new order in the Indian Ocean region.
New Delhi’s efforts should be geared toward getting China to yet again calibrate its approach to India and Pakistan.
While New Delhi and Tokyo have identified regional cooperation across the Indo-Pacific as a major objective of their bilateral partnership, cooperation with ASEAN remains at the heart of their Indo-Pacific approach.
The election is a good opportunity for the BJP and the Congress to debate the changing international situation, potential Indian responses, and the much needed reform in India’s defense and national security system.
Terrorism is an important problem, but it is not a problem that is amenable to being “solved” in any straightforward sense of the word.