General

________________________________________________________________________________

This Blog is written by Ridhima Mehrotra from Symbiosis Law School, Noida. Edited by Anumeha Jain.

________________________________________________________________________________

INTRODUCTION

“Neighborhood First” is a foreign policy that India has been following ever since 2014. It means that the Indian government will focus more on its ties with its immediate neighbors as compared to its other strategic partners. Modi Government has time and again coined the phrase “Neighborhood First” reiterating its stance on foreign policies.

The roots of the policy ‘Neighbour’s First’ began from Look East policy which was initiated by the former Indian Prime Minister P V Narsimha Rao. The purpose was simple and clear, to maintain friendly relations with neighboring countries and to cultivate extensive economic and strategic relations with the nations of Southeast Asia to bolster its standing as a regional power and a counterweight to the strategic influence of the People’s Republic of China. The major dispute between India and China began when India gave asylum to Dalai Lama before the Indo-Sino war. Despite signing the Panchsheel Agreement, in 1962, China attacked India in the North-East and occupied a part of the Indian Territory. The war ended soon but relations between India and China remained strained for a long time to come. The visits of the former Indian Prime Ministers Rajiv Gandhi (in 1988) and Narsimha Rao (in 1993) to China have improved the situation to some extent. Several trade agreements have also been signed. But it is not an easy task to restore peace and mutual trust between the two countries.

South Asia comprises the countries lying to the south of the Himalayas and the Hindukush mountains. India, Pakistan, Nepal, Bhutan, Bangladesh, Maldives, and Sri Lanka are the countries belonging to the region. Most of these countries were previously ruled by the British. They have similar cultures, social habits, and economic problems. All these countries face problems arising out of overpopulation, poverty, malnutrition, illiteracy, etc. It is believed that these countries of South Asia could progress fast only through cooperation with each other and by devising common plans for development. This concept led to the formation of the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) with the objective of mutual economic and social development. SAARC and ASEAN are two main pillars of Neighbor’s First Policy.

Even before being elected as the 14th Prime Minister of India, Mr. Narendra Modi roundabout that his foreign policy will keenly focus on improving ties with India’s immediate neighbors and he initiated well by welcoming all heads of state/heads of government of South Asian countries in his inauguration and on the second day on the office he held bilateral talks with all of them in person which was known as a mini SAARC summit. while several claimed ahead of his election that Modi would be a nationalist hardliner, a foreign affairs novice, or simply more of the same on external affairs, the Prime Minister in its place proved more active and more pragmatic than a lot of had expected. The main purpose of the Indian Prime Minister to work on this policy is to strengthen the regional cooperation and developmental activities and role in building and nourishing institutions like SAARC because SAARC and BLOC have failed to serve its purpose and hold summits at regular interval as compared to ASEAN. Modi’s diplomatic activities offer a comprehensible picture of India’s priorities and planned objectives. The policy aims for willingness to give political and diplomatic priority to its immediate neighbors and the Indian Ocean island states, to support neighbors, as needed, in the form of resources, equipment, and training, is greater connectivity and integration, to improve the free flow of goods, people, energy, capital, and information, to promote a model of India-led regionalism with which its neighbors are comfortable, to leverage international partnerships to advance India’s domestic development.

ADVANTAGES OF NEIGHBOUR’S FIRST POLICY

1) Prioritizing an integrated neighborhood; “Neighbourhood First.”

2) Leveraging international partnerships to promote India’s domestic development.

3) Ensuring a stable and multipolar balance of power in the Indo-Pacific; “Act East.”

4) Dissuading Pakistan from supporting terrorism.

5) Advancing Indian representation and leadership on matters of global governance

6) Strengthening economic cooperation to improve the quality of life of the people of South Asia;

7) Increasing the pace of economic growth;

8) Giving mutual assistance and cooperation in areas like agriculture, scientific development, etc.; and

9) Promoting social progress and cultural development.

STAYING THE COURSE ON NEIGHBORHOOD FIRST

Looking ahead, Modi will need to further refine aspects of his foreign policy. Despite efforts, he has failed to make a breakthrough in Pakistan. The relationship seems stuck in the same vicious circle, as a terrorist attack in an Indian airbase days after Modi’s seemingly spontaneous visit to Pakistan has once again raised questions about the prospects of meaningful dialogue. India’s approach to Nepal floundered when a constitution that India finds inadequately representative was promulgated. India was accused of enforcing an unofficial economic blockade, and its image in Nepal has deteriorated rapidly.

Considering that the neighborhood focus comes after years of neglect and ambivalence, the policy will need time to yield results. Many of the issues affecting India’s immediate neighborhood have domestic motivations and offer little scope for India to intervene. Modi has engagements planned for much of 2016, and three objectives will guide his foreign policy—maximizing security, expanding India’s sphere of influence, and securing economic growth.

In recent months, domestic developments have taken up much of the prime minister’s attention. Political opponents have accused him of spending too much time abroad at the cost of priorities at homes such as pending economic development, domestic security, and heightened social tension. Additionally, recent electoral defeats at the state level and elections in the Rajya Sabha (upper house of the parliament) in 2016 will require Modi’s attention.

Given Modi’s hands-on foreign policy decision-making, if he becomes unavailable, it will be all too visible. While there are no signs yet, analysts will look for signals like deferred measures on promised reform to aid foreign investment, canceled foreign trips, failure to reach out to neighbors, and inertia on agreements and consultations with major partners. If this happens, India will lose the international gains made in the first years of the present administration and slide back to the days of foreign policy stasis during the previous government. In his 2014 election manifesto, Modi promised to take India to “its rightful place in the comity of nations and international institutions.” If he takes his foot off the foreign policy pedal, that goal is likely to stay out of reach.

CHALLENGES IN INDIA’S FOREIGN POLICY

The size of India is an important factor in the way our neighbors view India and its policies. We account for over 75% of the land area, population, economic activity, resources, etc., of South Asia. We need to be conscious of our neighbor’s discomfort of having to deal with a big neighbor. Most of our neighbors are highly sensitive and we have to bear this in view while dealing with them. It is a continuous process. One small thoughtless act could undo years of hard work and careful nurturing.

The demarcation of our external boundaries is yet to be completed, partly due to historical reasons. In respect of land boundaries, apart from political problems, there is difficulty in transcribing what is there on maps to the ground. All of you are aware of the reasons for the external boundary around Jammu and Kashmir not having been demarcated. It has also not been possible to agree on the border with China since China is laying unreasonable claims on territories that have historically been India. The unsettled boundaries pose major problems.

Demarcation of two short segments of our boundary with Nepal – Kala Pani and Susta – is yet to be completed. Of these, Kala Pani is strategically important, since it will determine the tri-junction between India, Nepal, and China. Eastern and Western extremities of our boundary with Bhutan have not been agreed upon since the location of the tri-junction with China is yet to be fixed. We, however, don’t have any major problem with either Nepal or Bhutan on account of the non-completion of boundary demarcation. Demarcation of our land and maritime boundary with Bangladesh was completed about 2 years back, after many years of delay. The maritime boundary with Sri Lanka was agreed upon several decades back, though questions have been raised in Tamil Nadu on the same.

Though foreign policy comes under the domain of the central government, on many matters concerning neighboring countries, there is a need to consult and take on board the views of the state governments on our side of the border. This is because of contacts between the people on both sides of the border for centuries and their mutual concerns, the effect of policy on the states concerned, the presence of people of Indian origin in the neighboring country, etc. For example, in the 1980es when Tamils of Sri Lanka were facing serious problems, the Tamil Nadu Government was constantly consulted by the Government of India and kept informed of the developments. Similarly, the Government of West Bengal was consulted on sharing of waters of Ganges and Teesta with Bangladesh as also on border-related issues. Our policy towards Nepal is of keen interest to UP and Bihar. It is necessary to get the state governments on board; this will facilitate the smooth implementation of the policy.

A serious practical problem faced by the foreign policy establishment concerning neighbors is the existence of multiple channels of communication between the two countries. Contacts are there between political parties and their leaders, community and religious leaders, relatives, etc., on both sides of the border, apart from people to people contacts. Often contrary signals emanate from these sources, making policy formulation difficult. Also, it is often seen that neighbor’s policy towards India is more the policy of the party in power or sometimes even of the leader, than a well laid out national policy. This leads to drastic changes in policy when there is a change of Government, making it difficult for us to plan our long term approach.