Skip to main content

Panchsheel to partisanship: ​Nehru’s legacy vs. Modi’s multi-alignment

By Bhabani Shankar Nayak* 
​The Indian freedom struggle was built upon a bedrock of anti-colonial, anti-imperialist, and anti-racist principles. These were not merely slogans but the foundational architecture of post-colonial India’s engagement with the world. Just fifteen months after independence, the Draft Constitution of 1948 established that the State must promote international peace and "just and honorable relations between nations." By 1950, this was enshrined as Article 51 of the Directive Principles. These constitutional mandates provided the moral compass for a nation emerging from the shadows of empire.
Unlike the Westphalian nation-states of Europe or the United States—driven by racialized capitalism and a self-centered, often fictitious definition of "national interest"—India’s early foreign policy was governed by the pursuit of global justice. Under its first Prime Minister, Jawaharlal Nehru, India provided moral leadership through the Panchsheel: five principles of peaceful coexistence including mutual non-aggression and non-interference. These values became the heart of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM), influencing over 120 countries across Asia, Africa, and Latin America. NAM was never about passive neutrality; it was an internationalist force that sided with equality and freedom against the warmongering bipolarity of the Cold War.
​India’s stature was earned through principled clarity. In 1956, Nehru did not hesitate to condemn the USSR’s invasion of Hungary, despite India’s friendly ties with Moscow. India stood firmly with Africa against apartheid and with Latin America against American imperialism. Even as it provided refuge to Jewish communities fleeing Nazi persecution, India remained a steadfast advocate for Palestinian statehood, recognizing the State of Israel while opposing the Zionist occupation of Palestinian land. This was a policy of conscience, not convenience.
​However, these historical legacies began to erode when the Congress Party adopted neoliberal reforms, trading internationalist solidarity for market-driven alliances with the West. The Global War on Terror and the Indo-US nuclear deal gradually pulled India into Washington’s strategic orbit, softening India’s voice on Palestinian independence. Yet, what began as a dilution under Congress has become a systematic dismantling under the BJP governments of Atal Bihari Vajpayee and, more drastically, Narendra Modi.
​The current administration is stripping away the moral foundations of Indian diplomacy brick by brick. There is a visible ideological convergence between Hindutva, Zionism, and imperialist ethno-nationalism. Leaders like Narendra Modi, Donald Trump, and Benjamin Netanyahu find common ground not in the service of their people, but in a project of supremacist domination and crony capitalism. Under this "Hindutva" framework, India’s political and economic independence has been compromised, and its reputation as a moral force for peace has withered.
​Prime Minister Modi has shown little resolve in opposing the devastating wars that have leveled Palestinian life or undermined stability in the Middle East. His silence regarding attacks on civilian targets and the erosion of international law risks isolating India from its historic allies. The rhetoric of "national interest" now serves as a shield for a reactionary alliance that prioritizes the profits of a few over the lives of many.
​The strategy of "multi-alignment" is, in reality, a directionless drift that threatens India’s long-standing friendships across Russia, Africa, and the Arab world. The hollowness of Hindutva foreign policy is now laid bare: it has abandoned the internationalist ethos that once made India a beacon for the Global South. To restore India’s standing, the nation must reset its foreign relations, moving away from racial capitalism and back toward a constitutional pursuit of global peace and solidarity.
---
*Academic based in UK

Comments

Post a Comment

NOTE: Hateful, abusive comments won't be published. -- Editor

TRENDING

Neville Cardus: The man who turned cricket writing into poetry

By Harsh Thakor*  Neville Cardus was one of the most remarkable literary figures of the twentieth century. A prolific English writer and critic, he achieved distinction in two vastly different fields: cricket and classical music. Entirely self-taught, Cardus rose from humble beginnings to become both the cricket correspondent and chief music critic of The Manchester Guardian . His achievements in these contrasting disciplines earned him widespread acclaim and established him as one of the foremost critics of his generation. In February 2025, the cricketing and literary world marked the fiftieth anniversary of his death, which occurred in February 1975.
Post a Comment
»

​Ideological shifts and structural realities within India's left-wing insurgency

​By Harsh Thakor*  The Maoist insurgency in India is arguably at its weakest point since the formation of the Communist Party of India (Maoist) in 2004. Years of sustained counterinsurgency operations, leadership losses, shrinking territorial influence, declining recruitment, and growing technological advantages enjoyed by the state have significantly eroded the movement's operational capabilities. 
Post a Comment
»

The Dalit body on screen: Stereotypes, sacrifice, and subjugation in Hindi films

By Dr. Prem Singh*  Despite centuries of reformist efforts, from Gandhi and Ambedkar to contemporary activists, the caste system remains deeply embedded in the Indian psyche. One of the primary reasons for this persistence is the religious sanction provided by Brahminical scriptures, which have shaped not only social structures but also cultural and artistic expressions.
1 comment
»