Is NAM relevant in today's Multipolar World?

In the present context when we attended the NAM virtual meeting, skipping the last two, it actually becomes a concern whether adhering to NAM will reap us any good and how much of relevance does it hold today.

India’s non-aligned foreign policy raised its head in certain historical environment. The cold war began the year when we became independent and so because of varied reasons we wanted to stay away from it. We remained an inward looking economy during the time of cold war, but by the end of it, we opened our economy to other nation states. Trade and investment ties brought growth at our ends. So, to boost our geopolitical and economic interest, India’s foreign policy needed to adjust likewise for example having ties with all major powers, new strategic partnerships etc. The prevalent idealist mindset of those times too was playing a role.

Today, we have strategic partnerships with numerous countries be that USA, France, Russia etc. USA designated India as a major defense partner. However, USA’s move to withdraw itself from WHO, it’s present VISA issues and students’ concerns back the fact that it can turn out to be quite unpredictable at times. Russia has remained our strongest defense partner. Our biggest strategic adversary, China, with which we try maintaining highest level dialogue to keep tensions under control which seem tough and complicated now. Our strong US-Japan -India partnership that now extends to trilateral naval exercises and have had three rounds of quadrilateral dialogue with Australia’s inclusion. We have joined the SCO as a full member and are a member of BRICS, which is seen as a counter to the West.

So, clearly, NAM was articulated as a strategy which had significance in a different time and context. It was never intended to be an ideology, or was it?

In all these years we have been trying to resist the western hegemony and the sanctions that west posed on us.

Today it has become a big strategic challenge for us to counter China’s hegemonic ambitions in Asia and beyond. And who doubts the fact that China will continue to be a security threat in terms of territorial issues and more?

Inspite growing resentment towards China, with its expansionist policies of string of pearls, salami-slicing tactics etc., we cannot deny the fact that we cannot isolate China being dependent on it in so many ways as of now (even great powers like USA is dependent on it to a great extent). Maybe one day, but that day ain’t any close amidst these health crisis, economy crisis and security crisis. All we can do is engage with it at a diplomatic level and let it not get on our nerves by keeping ourselves strategically well involved with other world powers like Russia, Israel, USA etc. Again, we cannot deny that we are incapable of countering China if a war breaks out as it can easily outspend us and then recover itself post war.

Not just that, Delhi remained so tight lipped about Beijing even after the Wuhan virus, that it seemed neutralized. But why? Were we again trying to appease China as we did n number of times before, continuing quid without a quo? What did we get? Another face off in Galwan valley, only this time with bloodshed?

Keeping in view the above points, can we align with a power? That seems risky in all the ways. Also it’s clear that our interests do not fully converge either with the west or those who are challenging west. 

At the same time, NAM seems too idealist in the complex international relation plot of today. If it is, we may try 'issue based alignment' in interest with the nation and it's citizens keeping intact our national integrity and sovereignty.

We need a realist approach now keeping in view our ambitions and needs. We need to engage with individual nations in individual ways. Not only bilateral but multilateral ties, like that of ISA and CDRI, can bring abundance of prosperity in different areas.

India must ramp up its game by several notches NOW. We need to preserve our strategic autonomy.

Therefore, Pragmatism, with clear focus on our interests, should determine our foreign policy. Also, our foreign policy should not be based on public opinion, as sometimes, if not always it is motivated by hyper nationalism, which can turn out to be inapt in terms of international relations.

The thing is, a historical ideology or tradition in Indian policy or let’s say a “tag” must never compromise with the underlying objective to be achieved, either by an individual or by a nation. The problem arises when we hold on to a tag so sternly that we start compromising with our goals and stay too rigid.

In today’s globalizing world where India is increasingly and maybe compellingly integrating, can India really practice non alignment? If it can, I hope that wouldn’t imply isolationism. Need is to find a middle path.

Let us remind ourselves that our underlying objective was to maximize the strategic autonomy.

Therefore the need of the hour in the current foreign policy context is to try 'issue based Alignment' in interest of our goals, to realize the India of our Dreams. 

Jai Hind!