Follow us on social

Modi’s surprise setback will mean little to India’s foreign policy

Modi’s surprise setback will mean little to India’s foreign policy

Ties with the US may however enter a period of some discord, especially if Biden is re-elected

Analysis | Asia-Pacific

India’s voters delivered a surprise setback to Prime Minister Modi and his Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) in the national elections, but will it change India’s foreign policy and U.S.-India relations? Unlikely.

Results show that the BJP lost a net of 63 seats in the 543 seat Lok Sabha (People’s Assembly), the lower and more powerful house in the Indian parliament, reducing the party’s tally from the previous election from 303 to 240. This is 32 seats short of a majority in the house and forces the BJP to rely on its coalition partners to make up the numbers.

Modi won his two previous national elections with a clear majority in parliament and did not need his coalition partners to pass sweeping legislation for his goal of economic and ideological transformation of India toward a more conservative and business-oriented polity.

After this election, the BJP will be significantly constrained in passing more such legislation and will have to negotiate with its more moderate allies to get things done.

However, though Modi’s decade-long primacy in Indian politics was upended this week, the Prime Minister remains the most popular leader in India, and in pole position in domestic politics. The impact, however, on foreign policy, will be minimal. For one, the BJP’s key coalition partners are led by wheeling-dealing regional bosses with little interest in foreign policy. Modi, his charismatic foreign minister S. Jaishankar, and National Security Advisor Ajit Doval will continue to drive India’s foreign policy with no real constraints from domestic allies.

Second, India’s foreign policy is largely determined by its structural position in the region and the world, and the sense of deep suspicion toward China is shared across its domestic political spectrum. India would ideally like to see a diminished global role for China and increased influence for itself among the leaders of the Global South. Its successful hosting of the G20 summit in 2023 was an attempt to achieve both objectives.

As a major Global South middle power living in a tough neighborhood, India has managed to pursue its interests reasonably skillfully over the past couple of decades, coupling its steady economic rise with achieving increased strategic space for maneuverability.

A lot of this space has been gained through a major rapprochement with the United States, which began in the late Clinton years and was sealed after the landmark 2005 nuclear deal under George W. Bush. The dominant structural factor for this major shift was the common American and Indian interest in countering China. India’s nuclear arsenal was essentially legitimized and New Delhi was partially included in key global conversations in return for cooperation on countering China and deeper economic relations.

Since the nuclear deal, the bargain has essentially held, and U.S.-India ties have only deepened. Arms sales, military-to-military interoperability, joint exercises, and a broadly common approach to the Indo-Pacific has been their hallmark. Even major differences on ties with Russia have been managed adroitly at the highest levels.

And India’s economy, while not growing in anything like the spectacular fashion of its anomalous neighbor and rival China, nevertheless represents a considerable market and a major alternative as “de-risking” from China gets underway. Unlike the case of most Asian states, India’s biggest economic partner is the United States, not China. Finally, closer India-Israel ties achieved under Modi only help New Delhi in the U.S. Congress and White House.

Nevertheless, there may be signs that the bilateral relationship has peaked. For one, Washington has realized that the convergence with India on China has its limits. While cooperation in the maritime domain and the Indian Ocean continues to deepen, India is constrained on going much beyond its immediate backyard due to its domestic limitations and the major militarization of the Sino-Indian land border since Chinese intrusions in 2020.

Second, the rise of Ferdinand "Bongbong" Marcos Jr.in the Philippines has furnished a more attractive partner for the United States in its China-countering strategy.

Third, the Quad has generally underperformed and is unlikely to be a linchpin of US strategy going forward. Fourth, the Russia factor, though managed well so far by both capitals, remains a sore spot for the Biden Administration. And fifth, the conservative, nationalist turn in Indian policies has sometimes run up against U.S. interests more directly.

The bonhomie between Washington and New Delhi is solidly bipartisan but tends to be a bit stronger with a Republican in the White House. All this implies that U.S.-India relations may enter a period of some discord, especially if Biden is re-elected as president.

Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh, India-April 6 2024: Prime Minister Narendra Modi greeted supporters from the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) during a roadshow ahead of the Indian General Elections in Ghaziabad(Shutterstock/PradeepGaurs)

Analysis | Asia-Pacific
3216117-scaled
A U.S. Special Forces Soldier demonstrates a kneeling firing position before a live fire range, March 6, 2017 at Camp Zagre, Burkina Faso. Burkina Faso Soldiers also practiced firing in seated position, standing position, and practiced turning and firing. (U.S. Army photo by Spc. Britany Slessman 3rd Special Forces Group (Airborne) Multimedia Illustrator/released)
A U.S. Special Forces Soldier demonstrates a kneeling firing position before a live fire range, March 6, 2017 at Camp Zagre, Burkina Faso. Burkina Faso Soldiers also practiced firing in seated position, standing position, and practiced turning and firing. (U.S. Army photo by Spc. Britany Slessman 3rd Special Forces Group (Airborne) Multimedia Illustrator/released)

Time to terminate US counter-terrorism programs in Africa

Africa

Every so often I am reminded of how counter-productive US engagement in the world has become. Of how, after miserable failure after failure, this country’s foreign policy makers keep trying to run the globe and fail again. From the strategic defeats in Iraq and Afghanistan to the feckless effort to sway the excessive Israeli military operation in Gaza, the US has squandered its power, exceeded its capabilities, and just plain failed.

My reminder was a recent New York Times piece lamenting the failure of US efforts to keep terrorists out of the Islamic areas of West Africa.

keep readingShow less
What South Africa's new unity gov't means for US relations

South African president Cyril Ramaphosa and deputy president Paul Mashatile attend a special African National Congress (ANC) National Executive Committee (NEC) meeting in Cape Town, South Africa June 13, 2024. REUTERS/Nic Bothma

What South Africa's new unity gov't means for US relations

Africa

On May 29, South Africans went to the polls in one of this year’s most anticipated elections. In an outcome that shook the country’s political system, the ruling African National Congress (ANC), which has governed South Africa since Nelson Mandela became the country’s president following the fall of apartheid, lost its parliamentary majority for the first time since taking power in 1994.

As a result, the ANC has been forced to form a coalition with rival parties. It has forged a political alliance with the center-right, pro-business Democratic Alliance (DA) party, the Inkatha Freedom Party (IFP), the right-wing Patriotic Alliance (PA), and a small party called GOOD, which holds a single seat in parliament. Collectively, this coalition, which could still grow as the ANC continues to negotiate with other parties to expand its unity government, accounts for 68% of the seats in the country’s national parliament, which convenes in Cape Town. Leaning on its newly formed coalition, the ANC successfully reelected Cyril Ramaphosa as the country’s president on June 14.

keep readingShow less
How the 'war on terror' made the US Institute for Peace a sideshow

U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken speaks at the launch of the U.S.-Afghan Consultative Mechanism with Special Envoy for Afghan Women, Girls, and Human Rights Rina Amiri, at the U.S. Institute of Peace, in Washington, U.S., July 28, 2022. Andrew Harnik/Pool via REUTERS

How the 'war on terror' made the US Institute for Peace a sideshow

Global Crises

This year the United States Institute of Peace is 40 years old, and most Americans and U.S. government officials have little to no awareness that Congress funds an institute of peace or understand what it does.

This lack of awareness about USIP and its anniversary this year reflects a larger problem in U.S. foreign policy: the U.S. government’s strained relationship with peacemaking.

keep readingShow less

Israel-Gaza Crisis

Latest