‘India has in the past been accused of contradictions between what the global community has prescribed and what it itself adopts’ | Photo credit: Shiv Kumar Pushpkar
during his official visit to indiaOn April 10-12, 2023, Emin Dzhaparova, First Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine, clearly laid out the contradiction of pursuing India’s interests in global affairs – as it should always be – and at the same time, following the path appear to have happened. of morality, as the Vishwa Guru. he tweeted [Emine Dzheppar]: “Happy to be in India which gave birth to many saints, seers and gurus. Today #India wants to be Vishwaguru, global teacher and mediator. In our case, we have a very clear picture: attackers against innocent victims. Assistant [Ukraine] The only correct option is for the true Vishwaguru.
echoing a wide view
Naturally, Ms. Dzaparova was presenting her country’s case forcefully, but what she said cannot be ignored because what she said publicly was, according to some observers, prudent and expressed privately by foreign diplomats. being done. They are pointing to the wide gap between India’s desire to be a moral teacher and its cold pursuit of its interests in not condemning it. Russian invasion of Ukraine, All this to prompt India to openly criticize Russia for its invasion of Ukraine, even though India has already made clear its unhappiness with Russia’s actions against Ukraine, including Prime Minister Narendra Modi. including the oft-quoted remark of, “this is not the age of war,
India has been accused in the past of what it dictates to the global community and what it does. When India was strongly critical of American actions in Vietnam, and earlier against the Anglo-French invasion of Egypt in 1956 against President Gamal Abdel Nasser’s nationalization of the Suez Canal, US and Western diplomats often expressed their relative ‘concern’ on Soviet operations. Pointed to silence. Hungary, Czechoslovakia and later Afghanistan. However, there was a fundamental difference between the dichotomy of the Indian discourse on foreign affairs then and that which is now being projected as part of the Vishwa Guru project. The principles of India’s foreign policy, then, were rooted in the principles of the contemporary world order. Now, inspiration flows from the wisdom of ancient India, with claims that its worldwide application will contribute to the welfare of the planet.
west stand
India is not the only country that ruthlessly pursues its own interests while criticizing others for not following global principles. The serial culprit in this regard is the United States. While advocating democracy, it has sided with the worst of dictators. Its (and indeed Western Europe’s) decades of support for the apartheid regime in South Africa has a shameful and hypocritical record of breaking every norm of the world order. India’s opposition to apartheid and being at the forefront of the process of decolonization derives from the principles of its independence movement. However, the Indian approach did not then try to play into any national constituencies, and combative language was rarely used, especially at senior political levels. That has changed now. Foreign Minister S. Jaishankar has led the charge in forcefully pointing out contradictions in the Western prescription for the rest of the world in terms of the Ukraine war and the pursuit of his own interests. But his aggressive dismissal of Western liberal criticism of the Modi government’s policies goes back to 2019. A few months after becoming minister, Mr. Jaishankar famously said in the US that India’s reputation was not built by a newspaper in New York. Mr. Jaishankar has gained immense popularity in the country for his strong statements. It is this that has led to him being declared the third most powerful person in the country by a national newspaper, even ahead of Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh’s Sarsanghchalak Mohan Bhagwat.
Some Sangh Parivar intellectuals avoid the use of the term ‘Vishwa Guru’ in their writings, but claim that the ancient Indian heritage can show the world a way out of its present problems. They emphasize Indian traditions of spiritual democracy, celebration of diversity, harmony with nature, formulation of development policies keeping in mind the interests of the poorest and the idea of the world as one family. It can hardly be disputed that these threads of thought were present in the Indian intellectual traditions and are of great importance to avert the calamities facing the planet. However, there are two issues that cannot be avoided. A: These were not the only ways of imagining the world in Indian thought. For example, the idea of an anarchic world where the brave and strong prevailed was part of the political idea contained in the term ‘fish justice’; Two: how often were these Indian principles applied in reality, since even ancient Indian history was full of upheaval and violence? Furthermore, did spiritual democracy extend to the social sphere? Yes, what India can rightly be proud of is the continuity of spiritual traditions and the absence of dogma in them. It will be a matter of sadness if dogmatic statements are made about these traditions now.
It is impossible to sit between two horses of interest and morality in the diplomatic field. This is exactly what Ms. Dzhaparova has publicly pointed out.
Vivek Katju is a retired Indian Foreign Service officer