India's Foreign Policy

Imagine you’re sitting in a classroom in 1991, watching the Berlin Wall fall on TV, while your parents whisper about India’s empty foreign exchange coffers and soaring wheat prices. That same year, a quiet revolution began in Delhi—not with tanks or treaties, but with a budget speech that opened India’s doors to the world. Today, that moment still shapes how India navigates friendships with superpowers, tiny island nations, and everyone in between. This note isn’t just about dates and names; it’s about the choices India makes when the world feels both dangerous and full of promise.

What is foreign policy—and why does India need one?

Imagine you’re the manager of a sprawling family business that runs everything from street-food stalls in Mumbai to software start-ups in Bengaluru. Every day you juggle suppliers in Dubai, customers in New York, loans from Tokyo, and a workforce of 1.4 billion people with wildly different needs. Foreign policy is simply India’s playbook for protecting and growing the interests of this giant enterprise on the world stage—securing fuel and fertilizer, attracting investment, defending borders, and shaping rules so your next generation can thrive.

Without a clear strategy, even small shocks ricochet dangerously. Picture April 2020: the sudden global rush for medical oxygen amid COVID-19 threatened to strangle Indian hospitals. In two weeks, India’s diplomats redirected tankers from Germany, chartered flights from Singapore, and fast-tracked imports of key parts. That coordinated response didn’t happen by accident; it was the product of years of cultivating relationships, diversifying suppliers, and keeping a nimble crisis playbook—exactly the kind of global playbook a vast, diverse country with a young population must have.

How did India’s colonial past shape its first foreign policy moves?

India’s first foreign policy moves after 1947 were not born in a vacuum—they were shaped by the heavy shadow of centuries under British rule. For nearly 200 years, India was treated as a colony: its resources drained, its people governed from London, and its voice ignored in global affairs. This experience left a deep imprint on how independent India viewed the world. The trauma of exploitation made India wary of alliances that could tie it to powerful nations, suspicious of great-power politics where smaller countries often get sidelined, and determined to walk its own path. Non-Alignment—India’s choice to stay out of Cold War military blocs—was not just a strategy; it was a direct response to the colonial era’s lessons about sovereignty and dignity.

Consider the 1955 Bandung Conference in Indonesia, where leaders from Asia and Africa gathered to chart a course away from Cold War divisions. India’s Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru played a leading role, emphasizing peaceful coexistence and mutual respect. This wasn’t just idealism—it was a conscious break from the colonial past, where India had been forced into alliances it had no say in. By rejecting military pacts like NATO or the Warsaw Pact, India signaled to the world (and itself) that it would not be a pawn in great-power games. The lesson was clear: independence meant control over its own destiny, even if it meant standing alone at times.

Why did Nehru bet big on the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM)?

As India gained independence, **Nehru's foreign policy** was shaped by the country's unique position in the world. One of the key components of this policy was the **Non-Aligned Movement (NAM)**, which originated in Bandung, Indonesia in 1955. The movement was a response to the Cold War, where countries were forced to choose between the US and USSR. Nehru saw an opportunity for India to take a leadership role in promoting peace and cooperation among newly independent nations. The moral appeal of NAM was strong, as it allowed countries to maintain their independence and sovereignty while still engaging with the global community.

The **Bandung Conference** was a pivotal moment in the formation of NAM. It brought together 29 countries from Africa and Asia, including India, Indonesia, and China. The conference aimed to promote economic and cultural cooperation, as well as to oppose colonialism and imperialism. Nehru's participation in the conference marked the beginning of India's involvement in NAM, which would become a flagship foreign policy project for the country. For example, India's relationship with the **Tata Group**, a leading Indian conglomerate, demonstrates how NAM's principles were applied in practice. The Tata Group has been involved in various international collaborations, including joint ventures with companies from NAM member countries, promoting economic cooperation and mutual benefit.

India's commitment to NAM was not without its challenges. The country had to navigate a delicate balance between the US and USSR, two superpowers with competing interests. However, Nehru believed that NAM offered a unique opportunity for India to promote its own interests while also contributing to global peace and stability. The movement's emphasis on **south-south cooperation** and **economic development** resonated with India's own priorities, making it an attractive platform for the country to engage with the world. As a result, India played a key role in shaping NAM's agenda and promoting its principles, which continue to influence the country's foreign policy to this day.

Did NAM really keep India safe during the Cold War—or did it leave us isolated?

The question of whether the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) truly kept India safe during the Cold War or left it isolated is a complex one. On one hand, NAM provided India with a platform to maintain its independence and sovereignty in the face of superpower rivalry. By not aligning itself with either the United States or the Soviet Union, India was able to avoid being drawn into the conflict and maintain its own unique foreign policy trajectory. This was particularly important during the Cold War, when the threat of nuclear war and superpower intervention was ever-present. For example, during the 1971 Bangladesh Liberation War, India's non-aligned status allowed it to receive support from both the Soviet Union and the United States, while also maintaining its own independence and sovereignty.

On the other hand, NAM sometimes muted India's voice in global crises. For instance, during the 1962 Sino-Indian War, India's non-aligned status made it difficult for the country to receive support from other nations. The war highlighted the limitations of NAM in providing concrete security benefits to its member states. Despite this, India continued to play an active role in NAM, recognizing the importance of maintaining good relations with other developing countries and promoting South-South cooperation. Today, India's foreign policy continues to be shaped by its experience in NAM, with a focus on maintaining its independence and sovereignty while also engaging with other nations to promote peace and stability in the region.

How did 1991 change everything? The liberalisation pivot in foreign policy

The 1991 balance-of-payments crisis hit India like a sudden power-cut in the middle of a cricket match—everything ground to a halt. Foreign exchange reserves had fallen so low that India could barely pay for two weeks of imports, and the IMF’s bailout came with a tough condition: open the economy. The government, led by Prime Minister Narasimha Rao and Finance Minister Manmohan Singh, responded by junking the old “self-reliance” mantra and embracing strategic engagement with the world. Suddenly, Coca-Cola returned after a 16-year exit, Suzuki’s Maruti partnership rolled out new car models every few months, and foreign investors who once saw India as a closed bazaar now queued up to set up factories in Manesar or Pune.

• Trade doors swung open: Average tariffs plunged from over 150% in 1991 to around 40% by 1997, letting in toys from China, electronics from Singapore, and auto-components from Japan.
• Capital chased efficiency: Foreign direct investment (FDI) jumped from a trickle of $162 million in 1991-92 to $5.3 billion by 1996-97, funding everything from Pepsi’s bottling plants to IBM’s return after leaving in 1978.
• Foreign policy turned pragmatic: India stopped lecturing the world about “exploitation” and started negotiating trade deals, courting Gulf remittances, and even courting the U.S. for civilian nuclear cooperation a decade later.

The 1991 pivot didn’t just change how India made cars or phones; it rewired how Indian diplomats talked to the world—from ideology to interest.

What’s the deal with ‘Look East’ and ‘Act East’? India’s love affair with ASEAN

India's relationship with Southeast Asia has undergone significant transformations over the years, with two notable policies being Look East and Act East. The Look East policy, introduced in the 1990s, marked a shift in India's focus towards Southeast Asia, with an emphasis on strengthening economic ties and cooperation with the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). This policy was driven by the need to expand India's trade and investment opportunities, as well as to counterbalance the growing influence of other major powers in the region.

A key aspect of the Look East policy was the development of India's northeastern region, which shares borders with several Southeast Asian countries. The government invested heavily in infrastructure development, including roads, ports, and airports, to facilitate trade and connectivity with ASEAN nations. For instance, the construction of the India-Myanmar-Thailand Trilateral Highway has improved trade and people-to-people connectivity between India and Southeast Asia.

In 2014, the Act East policy was launched, which built upon the foundations laid by the Look East policy. The Act East policy aims to further strengthen India's ties with Southeast Asia, with a focus on enhancing trade, investment, and cultural exchanges. Vietnam, Singapore, and Indonesia have emerged as key partners for India in the region, with cooperation in areas such as defense, tourism, and education. For example, Indian companies like Tata Motors and Mahindra & Mahindra have established significant presence in Southeast Asia, with manufacturing facilities and partnerships in countries like Vietnam and Indonesia.

The Act East policy has also led to increased people-to-people exchanges, with India and Southeast Asian countries cooperating in areas like education, tourism, and cultural heritage. The Indian government has also launched initiatives like the India-ASEAN Youth Exchange Program, which aims to promote cultural understanding and exchange between Indian and Southeast Asian youth. Overall, India's Look East and Act East policies have played a crucial role in strengthening the country's relationships with Southeast Asia, with a focus on mutual benefit and cooperation.

Why is SAARC stuck in the slow lane—and is there hope for South Asia?

Imagine South Asia as a family dinner where everyone is invited, but two cousins refuse to sit at the same table. That’s SAARC in a nutshell. Founded in 1985, the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation was meant to turn neighbors into partners—trade, energy grids, even free movement—yet it has spent decades stuck in first gear. Why? The biggest roadblock is territorial disputes, especially the shadow of Kashmir between India and Pakistan. Every summit turns into a diplomatic tug-of-war, with Pakistan using SAARC summits as a stage to raise the Kashmir issue, freezing cooperation before the engine even starts. India’s 2016 refusal to attend the SAARC summit in Islamabad after the Uri attack wasn’t just politics; it was a signal that until the trust deficit shrinks, the car won’t move.

But Pakistan isn’t the only brake. Smaller countries often feel overshadowed by India’s size, fearing economic domination, while bureaucratic inertia and a culture of suspicion stall even small, doable projects. Remember the SAARC satellite? Launched in 2017, it was a rare win—yet years of delays proved how even shared skies need shared trust. So, is there hope? Enter BIMSTEC: a leaner, India-friendly club of seven nations from Bangladesh to Thailand that leaves out Pakistan and Afghanistan. Unlike SAARC’s consensus trap, BIMSTEC focuses on practical wins—like the 2018 motor vehicle agreement that lets trucks cross borders faster. It’s early days, but if BIMSTEC can deliver even one visible benefit (say, a cargo train from Nepal to Bangladesh without weeks of paperwork), it could prove that South Asia’s future doesn’t have to wait for Kashmir to be solved. The lesson? Sometimes, you don’t need to fix the whole dinner table—just build a smaller one where the food can still get served.

BRICS: From club of emerging markets to geopolitical heavyweights?

As the world's largest democracy, India has been actively engaged in shaping global governance through various multilateral platforms, including BRICS. Initially formed as an acronym representing the emerging markets of Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa, BRICS has evolved into a significant geopolitical bloc. The platform has provided India with an opportunity to push for reforms in global governance, addressing issues such as trade, security, and sustainable development. For instance, India has been a strong advocate for the reform of the United Nations Security Council, seeking greater representation and voice for emerging economies. The BRICS New Development Bank, established in 2014, is another example of India's efforts to promote South-South cooperation and provide alternative financing options for developing countries.

A concrete example of India's engagement with BRICS can be seen in the case of the Indian company, Tata Motors. As a leading manufacturer of commercial vehicles, Tata Motors has been expanding its operations in BRICS countries, particularly in China and South Africa. The company's success in these markets demonstrates the potential for Indian businesses to benefit from the economic cooperation and investment opportunities facilitated by BRICS. However, the recent India-China border clash has raised concerns about the future of BRICS and its ability to survive tensions between its member states. Despite these challenges, India remains committed to the BRICS platform, recognizing its potential to promote global governance reforms and address common developmental challenges.

How does India balance China and the US without falling off the tightrope?

Imagine India is walking a tightrope between two giants: China to its north, building ports and roads across Asia under the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), and the United States to its west, pushing the Indo-Pacific Strategy to keep sea lanes open and counterbalance Beijing. Falling off either side could mean losing trade, security, or sovereignty. So how does Delhi keep its balance? The answer lies in strategic autonomy—a phrase you’ll see in every foreign policy exam—meaning India refuses to pick a permanent side. Instead, it plays both powers when it suits national interests.

Why does this matter in daily life? Take Adani Ports, India’s largest private port operator. In 2021, despite tensions with China over the Ladakh border, Adani signed a deal to run a container terminal at Haifa Port in Israel—a project partly backed by the U.S. Indo-Pacific Strategy. At the same time, India still uses Chinese-made equipment in some of its own ports, showing how Delhi mixes caution with opportunity. This isn’t hypocrisy; it’s strategic autonomy in action. India buys cheap Chinese solar panels to meet green energy goals, joins U.S.-led naval exercises to protect shipping lanes, and invests in Iran’s Chabahar Port—all while avoiding a formal military alliance.

The tightrope walk isn’t easy. When China blocked Indian goods at its borders or when the U.S. pressured India over Russian oil purchases, Delhi had to respond without breaking stride. Its solution? Deepen ties with like-minded democracies through the Quad (U.S., Japan, Australia, India) for technology and security, while keeping trade doors open with China where necessary. The goal isn’t to please everyone—it’s to ensure no single power dictates India’s choices. That’s why strategic autonomy remains the cornerstone of India’s foreign policy: flexibility without surrender.

What does India want from the UN, G20, and global climate talks?

India's foreign policy has been increasingly focused on multilateral forums, where it seeks to promote its national interests and champion the causes of the Global South. One of the key areas where India has been actively engaged is the United Nations, where it has been demanding a permanent seat on the UN Security Council. This demand is driven by India's growing global influence and its desire to play a more significant role in international affairs. For instance, India has been a key player in the UN Peacekeeping operations, with thousands of Indian troops deployed in various parts of the world. A concrete example of India's commitment to UN peacekeeping is the deployment of Indian troops in the Democratic Republic of Congo, where they have been helping to maintain peace and stability in the region.

Another important multilateral forum where India has been actively engaged is the G20. As a member of the G20, India has been working to promote its economic interests and to address global economic challenges. For example, India has been a key player in the G20's efforts to reform the international financial architecture, and has been working to promote the interests of emerging economies like itself. A real-world example of India's engagement with the G20 is the 2014 G20 Summit in Brisbane, where India played a key role in shaping the summit's agenda and outcomes.

India has also been actively engaged in global climate talks, where it has been pushing for climate justice and advocating for the interests of developing countries. For instance, India has been a key player in the Conference of the Parties (COP) negotiations, where it has been working to promote the interests of the Global South and to address the challenges of climate change. A concrete example of India's commitment to climate action is the National Action Plan on Climate Change, which outlines India's strategy for reducing its greenhouse gas emissions and promoting sustainable development.

Can soft power win hearts? Yoga, films, and food in India’s diplomacy

Imagine you’re in a small village in Nepal or a café in New York, and someone asks, “What does India stand for?” Often, the answer isn’t found in treaties or military alliances, but in something far more personal: the rhythm of a Bollywood song, the stretch of a surya namaskar on a sunrise rooftop, or the aroma of masala chai brewing in a clay cup. This is India’s soft power—the ability to shape preferences and win trust without firing a shot. In the 21st century, as global conflicts grow costlier and alliances shift, India has turned to its rich cultural tapestry—yoga, films, and cuisine—to build bridges of goodwill across continents.

Take Bollywood, for instance. With over 1,500 films produced annually and a global audience in the billions, Indian cinema doesn’t just entertain—it embeds Indian values, landscapes, and traditions into daily life from Lagos to London. When “3 Idiots” played in China, it didn’t just break box-office records; it sparked conversations about education reform among young viewers who had never visited India. Similarly, yoga—once a niche spiritual practice—has become a global phenomenon. The United Nations’ declaration of June 21 as International Yoga Day wasn’t just symbolic; it was a diplomatic milestone, uniting 177 countries in a shared act of wellness, proving that a 5,000-year-old tradition could serve modern diplomacy.

But can soft power truly replace hard power—military strength, economic leverage, or strategic alliances? Not entirely. While a Bollywood dance or a plate of biryani can melt hearts and open minds, it rarely deters a tank or secures a trade deal on its own. Real influence still demands hard power. Yet, in a world where trust is scarce and borders blur, India’s cultural exports do something priceless: they make friendship possible before negotiations begin. They turn strangers into allies, and distant lands into potential partners—long before diplomats even sit at the table.

What’s next? India’s foreign policy in a world of wars, AI, and climate disasters

As India continues to grow and assert its presence on the global stage, its foreign policy must adapt to the evolving landscape of international relations. In a world where protectionism is on the rise, India must navigate the challenges of trade wars and economic nationalism while protecting the interests of its 1.4 billion people. For instance, the recent tariffs imposed by the US on Indian goods have affected companies like Tata Motors, which exports vehicles to the US. To mitigate such risks, India has been actively engaging in free trade agreements with other countries, such as the ASEAN nations and the EU, to diversify its trade relationships and reduce dependence on any one market.

Another critical aspect of India's foreign policy is its response to AI-driven cyber conflicts. As AI technologies become more prevalent, the risk of cyber attacks and data breaches increases. India has already experienced several high-profile cyber attacks, including the breach of the Aadhaar database. To address this challenge, India has established the Indian Computer Emergency Response Team (CERT-In), which coordinates the country's response to cyber threats. Additionally, Indian companies like Infosys and Wipro are investing heavily in cybersecurity research and development to stay ahead of the threat curve.

Finally, India's foreign policy must also address the growing challenge of climate migration. As climate change leads to more frequent natural disasters and rising sea levels, India is likely to experience an influx of migrants from neighboring countries like Bangladesh and Nepal. To prepare for this scenario, India has been engaging in regional climate diplomacy, including the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) and the Bay of Bengal Initiative for Multi-Sectoral Technical and Economic Cooperation (BIMSTEC). These initiatives aim to promote cooperation on climate change mitigation and adaptation, as well as disaster risk reduction and management.

Key takeaways

• India’s foreign policy is guided by rational self-interest—not ideology—balancing sovereignty with global engagement since 1947.
• NAM was India’s moral compass during the Cold War, but today ‘strategic autonomy’ means choosing friends carefully, not avoiding them.
• The 1991 liberalisation turned India from a closed economy into a global player, reshaping trade, technology, and security ties.
• ‘Act East’ replaced ‘Look East’ to deepen ties with ASEAN, Japan, and Australia, making Southeast Asia India’s backyard for trade and security.
• SAARC is hobbled by Pakistan, but BIMSTEC offers a faster route to connect India with Bangladesh, Thailand, and beyond.
• India walks a tightrope between the US and China, betting on partnerships over alliances to safeguard its rise.

Test yourself

What was the core principle of India’s Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) during the Cold War?

NAM was built on the principle of not joining any military alliance, allowing India to stay independent and avoid becoming a pawn in the US-Soviet rivalry.

How did India’s 1991 economic crisis change its foreign policy approach?

The crisis forced India to open its economy, shifting from self-reliance to strategic engagement with global markets and investors.

What is the difference between ‘Look East’ and ‘Act East’ policies?

'Look East' (1990s) focused on economic and cultural ties with ASEAN, while 'Act East' (2014) added security and strategic partnerships, making it more proactive.

Why is SAARC often described as ‘stuck in the slow lane’?

SAARC is blocked by territorial disputes, especially between India and Pakistan, which derail summits and cooperation efforts.

What role does BRICS play in India’s foreign policy today?

BRICS gives India a platform to push for global governance reforms and counterbalance Western dominance, despite tensions like the India-China border clash.

How does India use soft power in its foreign policy?

India leverages cultural exports like yoga, Bollywood, and cuisine to build goodwill and influence, especially in the Global South.

Frequently asked questions

What is foreign policy, and why does India need one?

Foreign policy is India’s playbook for protecting and growing its global interests—securing resources like fuel and fertilizer, attracting investment, defending borders, and shaping international rules. Without a clear strategy, even small global shocks can ricochet dangerously, as seen during COVID-19 when India’s diplomats had to rapidly redirect medical supplies from multiple countries.

How did India’s colonial past influence its early foreign policy choices after 1947?

India’s colonial past left a deep imprint of exploitation and disregard for its voice in global affairs. This trauma made independent India wary of alliances that could tie it to powerful nations, suspicious of great-power politics, and determined to walk its own path, as reflected in its rejection of Cold War military blocs.

What was Nehru’s vision behind the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM)?

Nehru’s vision for NAM was rooted in a conscious break from colonial-era alliances, emphasizing peaceful coexistence and mutual respect. By rejecting military pacts like NATO or the Warsaw Pact, India signaled its commitment to controlling its own destiny and avoiding being a pawn in great-power games.

Did NAM keep India safe during the Cold War, or did it isolate the country?

NAM provided India with strategic autonomy during the Cold War, allowing it to avoid entanglement in great-power rivalries. While it sometimes left India isolated in military or security terms, it preserved India’s sovereignty and dignity by keeping it out of Cold War military blocs.