Prime Minister Modi’s statement, during his recent visit to Poland, that “for decades, India’s policy was to maintain distance from all countries” is preposterous, to say the least. Worse, he arrogated to himself the credit of reversing this situation and asserting, “Today India’s policy is to maintain close ties with all countries. Today’s India wants to connect with everyone.”
Such twisted statements negate the history, perspective and diplomatic orientation of India’s foreign policy, which, right from the days of the freedom struggle, celebrates active engagement with the rest of the world and avoids alignment with the military blocs of big powers. There was a national consensus on this foreign policy and successive political regimes, including the one headed by Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee, followed it.
During Modi’s visit to Austria in July 2024, Chancellor Karl Nehammer, in Modi’s presence, recalled the crucial role played by Nehru in the restoration of Austria’s freedom, independence and sovereignty in 1955. Nehru did so on the request of Austria by prevailing upon the erstwhile Soviet Union, which was holding up a crucial treaty.
Had Nehru “maintained a distance from all countries” – as Modi would have us believe – Austria, annexed by Germany in 1938, would have continued under the subjugation of the erstwhile occupation forces of the Soviet Union, Britain, France and the US, following the defeat of Germany in World War II. The re-emergence of Austria as an independent nation with an avowed commitment to remain neutral could be traced to Nehru’s non-aligned foreign policy, one aspect of which was neutrality towards military alliances and active engagement with all countries with a spirit of friendship, equality and reciprocity.
Nehru’s 1927 foreign policy
Modern India’s foreign policy was enunciated for the first time by Jawaharlal Nehru in 1927 in an article, A Foreign Policy for India, written around the time he attended the International Congress of Oppressed Nationalities Against Colonialism and Imperialism held in Brussels.
There, he wrote, “…Our main strength will lie in our peaceful and friendly policy towards all countries and in the spirit of our people.” Nehru’s vision remained at the core of India’s external relations and successive governments carried it forward.
It is instructive that Nehru, in his article, blamed the British colonial rulers for the isolation of India in global affairs. In the pre-colonial era, he wrote, “India was intimately connected … with the countries of the East and even with some Western countries”. “Gradually,” Nehru stated, “these connections dwindled and with the coming of the British they almost ceased”. Then he observed, “Political reasons and the development of the sea routes to Europe brought us into greater touch with England but isolated us from the rest of the world”.
However, as the freedom struggle under Gandhi’s leadership gained momentum and he became a household name across Europe, it helped to mould public opinion, in favour of India’s aspirations, both in England and the rest of the world
So while British rule kept India in isolation from the rest of the world, the Indian freedom struggle forged wider contacts with other nations. Nor was this trend limited to the Congress. The Ghadar movement and later the Communists forged links with revolutionaries and their struggles around the world. Shaheed Udham Singh was in regular contact with Irish rebels fighting British colonialism. The list is a long and glorious one.
So Modi’s statement, that India kept itself away from the rest of the world before 2014, is completely false.
Nehru’s prescient observations
What Modi said is also contrary to the progressive vision of Nehru, who wrote, “Whether we wish it or not, India cannot remain, now or hereafter, cut off from the rest of the world. No country can do so”. He added, “The modern world is too closely knit together to permit such isolation”.
With a clear-headed understanding of the powerful forces shaping international affairs and the foreign policy of great powers, he wrote, “…the greatest and most powerful international organisations today are those of capital and finance which control the governments of even so-called democratic countries and bring about war and peace”.
“India,” therefore, “cannot keep apart from this tangled web, and her refusing to take heed of it may indeed lead her to disaster.”
Nehru underlined that India should understand world movements and politics and fashion her own movement accordingly. That could be done by getting educated about the problems of world affairs so as to serve our country better.
His approach guided successive governments to study developments in the international field and shape our foreign policy by factoring our national interest. That was how India succeeded at the global level in the face of formidable challenges. It was best exemplified in 1971 when, under the leadership of former Prime Minister Indira Gandhi, our active engagement with other countries was combined with a decisive military response to counter Pakistan’s genocide against its own Bengali population and this resulted in the emergence of Bangladesh as a sovereign country.
If Modi is serious about navigating the rough and tumble of global politics, he should be mindful of this invaluable legacy rather than running it down for domestic political purposes.
SN Sahu served as officer on special duty to former President KR Narayanan.
