At a recent conclave in New Delhi on the India-US defence partnership organised by the United Service Institution of India, US ambassador Eric Garcetti appreciated the upward trajectory of bilateral ties between the two countries, but struck a discordant chord when he said that “in times of conflict, there is no such thing as strategic autonomy”.
He was clearly alluding to Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s visit to Russia, which has drawn harsh comments from Ukraine and some European countries. Garcetti, who compared the Russia-Ukraine war with the situation at the Line of Actual Control (LAC), said “we all know that we are interconnected in the world”, adding “no war is distant anymore.”
This brings to the fore two very important aspects, namely ‘strategic autonomy’ and ‘conflict/wars’.
Strategic autonomy
The concept of strategic autonomy refers to a nation’s ability to make decisions independently of external influences, particularly in matters of national security and foreign policy. In the context of India-US relations, strategic autonomy becomes crucial, especially during times of conflict or heightened geopolitical tensions. Strategic autonomy is fundamentally in India’s interest for several reasons, and while it can occasionally pose challenges where the India-US relationship is concerned, it generally does not hamper ties significantly. Here’s a nuanced look at why strategic autonomy is beneficial for India in the overall context of geopolitics.
India’s historical perspective: India has historically pursued a policy of non-alignment and strategic autonomy, particularly during the Cold War era. This approach was rooted in maintaining independence from bloc politics and avoiding entanglements in superpower conflicts. The war in Ukraine is just that, with the combined might of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) arrayed against Russia.
Current geostrategic realities: In today’s geopolitical landscape, India continues to value its strategic autonomy while engaging in partnerships and alliances with various countries, including the US. This balance allows India to pursue its national interests while cooperating on shared objectives with international partners.
US-India relations: The relationship between India and the US has grown significantly over the past few decades, driven by shared democratic values, economic interests, and concerns over regional stability. However, India has maintained its autonomy in decision-making, especially on issues like defence procurements, regional security strategies, and diplomatic engagements.
Implications during conflict: During times of conflict or heightened tensions, India’s stance on strategic autonomy becomes particularly relevant. While it values its partnership with the US and other nations, it also prioritises its sovereign right to make independent decisions based on its national interests and strategic calculations.
Managing differences: Despite close ties, India and the US may have differing perspectives on certain global issues or regional conflicts; for instance, India’s historical defence ties with Russia. India’s commitment to strategic autonomy allows it to navigate these differences while maintaining cooperative relations with multiple partners.
Outlook: The concept of strategic autonomy will likely continue to shape India-US relations in the future. Both countries recognise the importance of mutual respect for sovereignty and independence in their strategic calculus, even as they deepen cooperation across defence, economic, and technological domains. There will be occasional hiccups, which are to be tolerated in a spirit of mutual respect.
Areas of cooperation: India and the US collaborate extensively in defence and security, counterterrorism, trade and investment, technology, and climate change. Strategic autonomy allows India to engage deeply with the US while maintaining its own strategic priorities.
Challenges and differences: There are occasional challenges and differences in India-US relations, such as divergent views on certain global issues or India’s defence ties with Russia. However, strategic autonomy provides India with the flexibility to manage these differences without compromising its core interests.
Bilateral agreements: Both countries have signed key agreements that acknowledge India’s strategic autonomy while promoting deeper cooperation. These agreements, while strengthening interoperability, recognise India’s role as a significant regional player with its own strategic imperatives.
Also read: Modi’s Russia trip shows India is no longer afraid of US sanctions like exclusion from SWIFT
Conflicts vs wars
Conflict broadly refers to a state of disagreement, opposition, or tension between individuals, groups, or nations. It can encompass various forms of disputes, including political, economic, social, or territorial disagreements. They can range in intensity from minor disputes and skirmishes to more serious confrontations that may involve violence or armed clashes. Conflicts can be localised, involving specific issues or regions, or they can be widespread and involve multiple parties or nations and can be resolved through negotiation, mediation, diplomacy, or, in some cases, may escalate into more serious forms of violence or war.
War, on the contrary, is a specific type of conflict characterised by organised and sustained armed fighting between states or other large-scale armed groups. Wars often involve a formal declaration of hostilities by one or more parties, marking the beginning of a state of war. They typically involve higher levels of violence, casualties, and destruction compared to other forms of conflict. Wars can be prolonged, lasting for months or years, and may involve multiple phases of military operations and strategies. International laws and conventions govern the conduct of war, including rules regarding the treatment of prisoners and civilians and the use of certain weapons.
In this perspective, there is an ongoing conflict between Israel and Hamas, whereas the operations in Ukraine are more akin to a warlike situation. In an interconnected world, anything happening anywhere on the globe has second and third-order effects on all countries as first propounded by Edward Lorenz in what he called the ‘Butterfly Effect’. However, what needs to be seen is whether these events affect India’s core values and interests. If the ongoing wars/conflicts impinge on our core interests, then we must certainly get involved. If not, no one should try to force us into joining a battle that is not ours. This is what External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar meant when he said, “Europe [ the West] has to grow out of the mindset that its problems are the world’s problems, but [that] the world’s problems are not Europe’s problems.”
India has been facing a Pakistan-sponsored proxy war for decades. Just this month, the security forces have suffered almost a dozen casualties, killed and wounded in anti-terrorist operations. Yet, the US continues to support and provide military aid to Pakistan. Perhaps it is time for the US to address India’s concerns and come down heavily on Pakistan to show its commitment to the global war on terrorism, instead of hedging its bets. Rather than pointing fingers at India, the US should practise what it preaches.
General Manoj Mukund Naravane PVSM AVSM SM VSM is a retired Indian Army General who served as the 28th Chief of the Army Staff. Views are personal.
(Edited by Humra Laeeq)
Well stated sir