Listen to this article:

In what was widely seen as an olive branch, Iran last week extended an invitation to Prime Minister Narendra Modi to attend the official burial ceremonies of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. The delegation India plans to send indicates that India does not seek overt reconciliation or realignment at this time. The situation offers an interesting example of how, despite growing internal calls for a strategic reset both with respect to the US and in West Asia, resetting Indian foreign policy is easier said than done.

From becoming uncomfortably entangled with the losing side in West Asia to surrendering strategic autonomy on issues like energy security, multiple questionable decisions made in the last year or so have been put down to either poor planning or incompetence. The assumption that these decisions can be reversed rests on a broader theoretical premise that the foreign policy goals of the Modi government are not substantially different from those of its predecessors. Hindutva, it is argued, merely relabels a foreign policy whose world view, understanding of the nation and strategic goals remain unchanged. But does this really hold true today? 

The current trajectory of India’s foreign policy, when viewed both in terms of its assertions and its silences suggests otherwise. The Hindutva imagination of a nation rooted in a global Hindu identity generates a series of foreign policy priorities that differ from and are increasingly in conflict with more traditional national interests. 

From territory to identity

The role played by Hindutva in foreign policy often becomes reduced to the single point of Islamophobia. And while this is certainly central to the repulsive glee with which the public discourse embraces atrocities committed by states like Israel, it is insufficient as a framework of analysis. For instance, India’s closeness to the United Arab Emirates has grown in parallel to its indifference to Palestine. Hindutva’s impact on foreign policy stems rather from the manner in which it defines the nation itself. 

Most modern nation states tend to root themselves, above all else, in the idea of a defined territory. Their primary or central foreign policy concerns therefore tend to revolve around issues that impact the territory in question. These include, for example, guarding territorial borders, sovereign control over resources, securing supply chains or transportation corridors, tariffs, currency exchange rates, the safety of its citizens and so forth. While identity linked grandstanding is common in politics across the world, it........

© The Wire