India’s Shrinking Global Standing Amid Gaza, Trump adn China‘s Rise
Recent geopolitical shifts – the conflict in gaza, the potential return of Donald Trump to the US presidency, and China’s assertive rise – are collectively challengingโค India’sโฃ position on the world stage, demanding a recalibration of its foreign policy. โWhile India has traditionally navigated a non-aligned path, maintaining strategic autonomy, the current landscape necessitates a โmore proactive and nuanced approach.
Former External Affairs Minister Yashwant Sinha, inโ a recent interview with Frontline, highlighted a critical internal constraint impacting India’s foreign policy: โits โคrelationship with Pakistan.While โคthe โdiscussion centered on India-China relations, Sinha underscored how a frozenโฃ dialog with pakistan hinders broader regional stabilityโ and, by extension, India’s ability to focus on larger globalโ challenges.He pointedโค to two distinct approaches India has taken towards Pakistan.
The first,โฃ exemplified by the Vajpayee and Manmohan Singhโข administrations, prioritized โคengagement despite historical tensions. “As Vajpayee said, you โฃcan change your friends, youโข can’tโ change your neighbor. So you have to have amiable relations with Pakistan,” Sinha stated.He emphasized the economic benefits of a stable relationship, arguing that โฃprogress and improved living standards for both nations are contingent on peaceful coexistence. โ Vajpayee, โฃas the first BJP Prime Minister, demonstrated this willingnessโฃ to engage.
Though, theโข current Modiโฃ government has adopted a markedly different strategy – one of distance and โขnon-engagement. Sinha argues this approach is failing as โคit hasn’t addressed the core issue of cross-border terrorism. “This model willโ succeed or will have any relevance โif โฃwe wereโข able to โคstop cross-border terrorismโฆ But we have not achieved that. We are vulnerable. Maybeโ we are even careless,” he observed. He directly linked the need โfor peace with Pakistan to effectively combating terrorism, stating, “If we wont, therefore, to stop terrorism, we have to make peace with Pakistan. That’s as clear as daylight.”
sinha acknowledged his views are currently isolated within India’s political discourse.โฃ He noted the complete cessation of “track two” diplomacy and other informal channels of interaction with Pakistan, attributing this to a government policy of discouraging engagement. He emphasized the increased obligation of the Indian government to prevent Pakistan-sponsored terrorism.
This internal โขchallenge – the inability to โforge a constructive relationship with a key neighbor – is occurring at a time when india’s broader global influence is being tested. The ongoing conflict in Gaza โpresents a complex dilemma for โindia, requiring it to balance its โคhistorical support for the Palestinian cause with its growing strategic partnershipโข with โIsrael. โ The potential return of Donald Trump to the US presidency introduces further uncertainty, given his transactional foreign policy approach and potential for โขdisruptive actions.
Perhaps most significantly, China’s continuedโ economic and military rise is reshaping the globalโ order. As Sinha’s initial commentsโข in the Frontline interview suggest,โ navigating this complex โrelationship with China โis paramount. However, a distracted India, burdened by unresolved regional conflicts and internal policy constraints, is less โequippedโ to effectivelyโ manage these challenges and assert itsโ interests on โฃthe world stage.
The interview โขconcluded with journalistโค Amit Baruah noting the “topsy-turvy” nature โคof currentโค global โaffairs,citing examples like the Taliban’s engagement with Delhi and the exiled Bangladeshi Prime Minister’s situation,underscoring the volatile and โคunpredictable international environment India must navigate.