THE PRESENT AND FUTURE OF NEW DELHI'S FOREIGN POLICY GRAND NARRATIVE

The year 2023 had much to offer for New Delhi’s foreign policy ambitions. In both rhetoric and substance, New Delhi’s policies throughout the year attempted to safeguard its strategic interests as well as project its upcoming role for the next decade. In the process of mitigating through various global challenges, New Delhi’s rhetorical responses also exhibited the fundamental narratives that will drive its foreign policy for the time to come. From bringing the Global South to the centre-stage at the G20, to outrightly condemning terrorism through the Hamas-Isarel conflict, New Delhi’s responses and actions subtly canvased a noteworthy picture of its grand narrative. However, narratives in the international arena perform a complex function, sometimes even leading to contradictions in what a state says and what it actually does. Thus, deconstructing elements of foreign policy narratives becomes all the more important to understand the path New Delhi’s foreign policy is expected to take as well as assess the inconsistencies its grand narrative faces.

Elements of New Delhi’s Foreign Policy Grand Narrative

Narratives, in the realm of international politics, has found greater importance at a time when nations around the world are vesting for diverse interests. Examples of such competing interests are evident in the response global challenges have evoked; from the Russia-Ukraine crisis to the disagreements on reforming global forums, the fault lines in the international space are quite evident. This has nonetheless led to countries undertaking narrative strategies in communicating their stance; an approach that conveys their vision, ambition and values amidst competing interests.

The concept of narratives has also found greater ground as an essential communication strategy. The need to project a nation’s global ambitions coupled with mitigating, at times contradictory, internal and external interests has further prompted the importance of effectively communicating the state’s position to a set of diverse interests. A grand narrative in this sense, as expounded by the state itself, can be understood to be an articulation of a set of events that proposes a global vision all the while safeguarding the state’s strategic interests. Specifically in the domain of foreign policy, narratives perform a crucial function- to exhibit ambitions and project positions. A critical disjuncture in the understanding of a narrative however, is the ability to view narratives not only as a concept that constitutes as a meaning making process and conveys a specific vision, but also to view them as a means to achieve a desired end.

From New Delhi’s foreign policy standpoint, aspects such as the inclusion of the African Union to the G-20 grouping as well as the passing of the New Delhi Leader’s Declaration in 2023 resounded with the aspirational role it was hoping to play, signifying the desired goal New Delhi’s G20 narrative sought to achieve. By projecting itself as a facilitator between those seeking reforms, including itself, and those on the other side, New Delhi utilised the opportunity to brand itself, through the well-crafted narrative, as a bridge that can facilitate discussions on reducing structural gaps.

New Delhi’s foreign policy in the past few years has majorly rested on two crucial narratives, inclusivity in international forums and ensuring an equitable rules-based world order. In competing global interests and narratives, the narrative path a country undertakes in projecting its vision becomes all the more crucial in showcasing its priorities in terms of values and interests. For instance, both India and China have called for a greater role of the Global South in international decision making, yet the narrative path through which they articulate their position is a crucial differentiator that distinguishes their approaches.

Politically, New Delhi has always acknowledged the value systems and norms that form as the bedrock of a rules-based world order. The divergence however with those in the developed North as well as China for that matter, is in the implementation of these values and norms that drive these institutional settings. New Delhi has also consistently advocated for reforms rather than revision of the existing global governance model with a consensus-driven approach thereby signifying a key component of its global narrative- inclusivity in international decision making. Furthermore, a major part of this inclusivity narrative has been driven by its calls to integrate the Global South in the prevailing structure as opposed to China’s revision of such institutions altogether. By conducting important forums such as the Voice of the Global South Summit twice last year as well as holding critical discussions for global debt relief, New Delhi made it clear that differences can be mitigated by consensus-centric reforms and not necessarily through revisions.

Challenges facing New Delhi’s Grand Narrative

New Delhi’s overarching narrative, is however not without its own set of challenges. Firstly, the gap created by New Delhi’s rhetoric, in terms of its global ambitions and its actual fructification is a concern that challenges India’s legitimacy, especially within its own neighbourhood. Development remains one of South Asia’s primary concerns; New Delhi’s lack of material capacity to compete with Beijing has further posed challenges in a region that has traditionally relied on New Delhi as a prime-mover. However, even though it invariably competes with Beijing in this space, New Delhi must ensure that it is playing the long game, within the realm of its rhetoric, and not letting short-term political gains pre-empt its larger strategic interests. The narrative in South Asia regarding New Delhi’s role, which is currently being projected as the big-brotherly approach, must remain people-centric instead of increasingly becoming one that constantly counters Beijing’s inroads. Moreover, its rhetorical approach in these instances must also ensure that local sentiments as well as the socio-political aspirations of smaller states in the neighbourhood are taken into consideration while it crafts its regional as well as global foreign policy narratives, enabling it to play on its people-centric strength in the region.

Secondly, India’s China challenge is an ever-growing concern that will draw majority of its attention in the years to come. The narrative approach it takes to the structural differences it faces with its northern neighbour, will to some extent, determine the status of the relationship going forward. Matters such as New Delhi’s Indo-Pacific strategy as well as its ambiguous approach within the Quad will further be challenged by Beijing given Washington’s direct involvement in such matters. More so, Beijing will also continue to test New Delhi’s leadership of the Global South compelling it to invest materially for its grand narrative to stay relevant. In these cases, too, New Delhi must continue to prioritise a narrative that establishes its efforts of reducing structural gaps prevalent between the North and the South as well as continue to seek greater cooperation from the West in terms of collective material investments. Both in the Global South as well as in the Indo-Pacific, New Delhi’s efforts must reflect a collective approach with like-minded partners and ensure the material benefits are extended in a time bound manner. This way New Delhi’s rhetoric would both safeguard its strategic interests as well as project a vision that is all inclusive.

Furthermore, New Delhi will also increasingly continue to find itself in confrontation with many other global powers in the coming year. Its rhetoric must carefully tread its path in a manner that does not distort the larger objective it wishes to achieve in terms of its own global aspirations. For instance, short-term confrontations such as push and pull, on matters concerning climate finance and debt relief for developing and under-developing countries with the Global North will find greater space as New Delhi stretches its arms as a leader of the Global South. In these cases, its larger narratives must continue to emphasise on the importance of deliberation as well as the need to reach consensus in a time bound manner. Moreover, it must also ensure that short term distractions such as its diplomatic stand-off with Canada and the U.S do not take away attention from the specific position it seeks to project in terms of intolerance against anti-India entities. The instance of sending back diplomats from both Canada and India did very little in driving attention towards New Delhi’s primary concern in the whole matter- intolerance against terrorism. New Delhi’s larger narrative in such confrontations must continue to focus on the why’s instead of the what’s and ensure that the emphasis is directed towards the larger collective interest instead of short-term political retaliations. Its rhetoric in these cases must also continue to prioritise the need for cooperation on various matters but also draw red lines in terms of what it will not tolerate in the pursuit of greater cooperation.

In the process of mitigating rhetorically in these matters, contradictions in its position are bound to arise. Such is the nature of international politics. However, New Delhi’s narrative path must ensure that it is prioritising some crucial elements of its foreign policy narrative as well as maintain a rhetoric which can stand the test of counter-narratives and more importantly, its own layered national interests. Thus, a well-crafted narrative will not only elevate New Delhi’s global positioning, but will also assist in mitigating structural challenges that it faces given its ascension to power in the international stage.