The formulation of India’s foreign policy is a complex and protracted process, involving a wide range of individuals, institutions, experts with domain knowledge, and technical support staff. Suggestions for adopting specific policy alternatives may come from various sources, but the final policy decision is made by the Ministry of External Affairs only after extensive discussions, careful deliberation, and a thorough evaluation of the potential benefits and drawbacks of each option. Broadly, the framework for India’s foreign policy is shaped by the country’s parliamentary system of government. While the executive initiates policy measures, the legislature’s approval is required for the adoption and execution of these policies. This process ensures a degree of accountability for those responsible for managing the country’s external relations.
Table of Contents
Complexities in the Making of India’s Foreign Policy
For the average person, India’s foreign policy is often perceived as being shaped solely by officials from the Indian Foreign Service (IFS), working within the grand setting of South Block on Raisina Hill in New Delhi. However, this view presents only a partial picture of the intricate process involved in crafting India’s foreign policy. In reality, the formulation of foreign policy, both in India and in other countries, is a laborious process that demands considerable time, effort, and coordination. Additionally, the creation of foreign policy is typically more about making incremental changes—fine-tuning existing policies—rather than implementing radical transformations. While there are occasions that require creative policy responses to novel situations, such moments are rare. For example, India’s long-standing relationship with the Soviet Union required significant recalibration when the USSR collapsed and the United States emerged as the sole global superpower, presenting India’s foreign policy with a new set of challenges.
However, such drastic shifts are exceptional, and foreign policy in most cases evolves through gradual adjustments to meet the demands of a changing global landscape.
Foreign policy formulation in India occurs at multiple levels, involving various institutions and individuals with different roles and responsibilities. It takes place primarily at two levels: the macro and the micro. Moreover, the involvement of various stakeholders is not equal in terms of degree or scope. Some institutions and individuals contribute their specialized expertise to refine the nuances of policy, while others may only provide formal endorsement to meet statutory requirements or lend legitimacy to the policy.
At the macro level, foreign policy is shaped by higher bodies and individuals responsible for steering the country’s government and overarching policy framework. The key players here are generalists, not necessarily experts in foreign policy, but individuals who assess policy decisions based on the broader national interests they serve. The most important institution at this level is the Parliament, which reviews and approves all policy measures to ensure they align with the country’s national priorities. While parliamentary committees with specialized knowledge may engage in some scrutiny, foreign policy deliberations at this level tend to be more formal than analytical.
The true action in foreign policy making occurs at the micro level, where the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) plays a central role. The MEA collaborates closely with various scientific and technical institutions, as well as experts in strategic and foreign affairs, to shape policy. Inputs for policy development may come from many sources, but they are funneled through the relevant divisions within the MEA. Another significant institution in this process is the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO), which often works alongside the MEA to guide India’s foreign relations. Under Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s leadership, the PMO has at times functioned almost as a parallel body to the MEA in managing the country’s foreign affairs. Nevertheless, the PMO has always played a critical role in foreign policy making, regardless of the prime minister. From crafting the initial blueprint of foreign policy to finalizing and executing it, the institutions and individuals at the micro level are integral to shaping India’s foreign policy.
Institutions of Foreign Policy Making in India
The process of formulating foreign policy in India is complex and involves various institutions that play both direct and indirect roles. The Ministry of External Affairs (MEA), as the institution statutorily responsible for managing the country’s foreign affairs, serves as the central hub for foreign policy making. However, since the MEA cannot encompass all the knowledge, expertise, and insights needed to address the diverse issues and challenges India faces on the global stage, other institutions and actors are also involved in the formulation of foreign policy. These additional actors are assigned specific responsibilities to contribute to the process, ensuring a comprehensive and well-rounded approach to India’s external relations.
Ministry of External Affairs
Foreign policy making in India begins and ends with the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA). Primarily staffed by members of the Indian Foreign Service (IFS), the MEA is led by the Minister of External Affairs on the political side and the Foreign Secretary on the administrative side. The Foreign Secretary is supported by various Secretaries, including the Secretary (East), Secretary (West), Secretary (Economic Affairs), and Secretary (CPV and Overseas Indian Affairs). Each of these Secretaries oversees and coordinates multiple divisions and agencies within the ministry.
While the MEA’s organizational structure mirrors that of other ministries in the Government of India, it maintains a degree of flexibility in its operations and procedures. All initiatives related to foreign policy are processed through the MEA, which, despite having its own research and development wing, also receives input from various governmental and non-governmental sources. The ministry’s officials are highly trained, experienced, and analytically adept, with a deep understanding of the intricacies of diplomacy and international relations.
The MEA’s actions and decisions are guided by the broader vision of serving India’s national interests. Additionally, the country’s external intelligence agency, the Research and Analysis Wing (RAW), provides crucial inputs into foreign policy. While RAW is under the Cabinet Secretariat’s control, its functions are closely aligned with the MEA’s core activities. Therefore, it is accurate to consider the MEA as the central hub around which India’s foreign policy making revolves.
Prime Minister’s Office
In India’s parliamentary system, the Prime Minister serves as the executive head of the government and is expected to stay informed about the policy initiatives originating at various levels. Given that foreign policy is a crucial aspect of governmental affairs, Prime Ministers have traditionally been highly engaged and proactive in shaping the country’s foreign relations. Therefore, after the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA), the next key institution in the foreign policy-making process is the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO).
The PMO functions as the secretariat providing technical and administrative support to the Prime Minister, enabling them to monitor government activities and offer strategic guidance to various agencies. The PMO plays a more prominent role in foreign policy-making, particularly under the leadership of active Prime Ministers like Narendra Modi. Even in routine matters, foreign policy decisions made by the MEA are submitted to the PMO for review and, if necessary, modification before they receive the Prime Minister’s approval. The final shape of foreign policy initiatives is only achieved once they are endorsed by the Prime Minister.
Thus, the PMO acts as a critical body that provides final approval and direction to India’s foreign policy decisions.
National Security Advisor
The Prime Minister’s stance on foreign policy is often shaped by the insights provided by the National Security Advisor (NSA). The NSA heads the National Security Council (NSC), established during Atal Bihari Vajpayee’s tenure in 1998. Although the need for an NSC had been recognized since the time of Jawaharlal Nehru, it was not created earlier for various reasons. Prior to the establishment of the NSC, the Cabinet Committee on Political Affairs (CCPA) acted as the political body responsible for decisions related to foreign policy and national security. In the absence of an NSA, earlier Prime Ministers relied on close confidants to advise them on critical national interests.
Today, the NSC is chaired by the Prime Minister and includes several political and administrative appointees who formulate recommendations on national security and foreign policy issues. However, the primary responsibility for national security matters lies with the NSA, who works closely with the Prime Minister to provide updates on internal and external developments. In contemporary India, the NSA plays a significant role, often serving as the extended representative of the Prime Minister due to their active involvement in shaping both security and foreign policy. Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s foreign policy initiatives are likely informed by the inputs provided by NSA Ajit Doval, reflecting the critical influence of the position in today’s policy-making process.
Cabinet Committee on Security
In India’s parliamentary system, the principle of collective responsibility is paramount, meaning that the cabinet is expected to make decisions together on all issues. The Cabinet Committee on Security (CCS) is the designated body responsible for making collective decisions on matters related to national security and foreign policy. Headed by the Prime Minister, the committee includes key ministers responsible for ministries critical to national security.
Typically, once decisions on India’s foreign policy are finalized at the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) and Prime Minister’s Office (PMO), they are presented to the CCS for consideration and final approval. Although the CCS rarely overturns foreign policy decisions made by the MEA and PMO, it still retains the right to discuss these issues and offer suggestions if its members feel strongly about them. In general, the role of the CCS in foreign policy decision-making is more formal and customary, rather than substantive. Nevertheless, it remains an essential part of the broader parliamentary framework, ensuring that foreign policy decisions are vetted within the collective decision-making structure of the government.
Parliament
In India, Parliament serves as the custodian of public conscience, shaping the government and ensuring its accountability. Every decision made by the government requires Parliament’s approval, making it a central institution in the policy-making process. Foreign policy decisions, like all government actions, must be presented to both Houses of Parliament for consideration and approval.
Parliament contributes to the formation of India’s foreign policy in three primary ways. First, through debates, Members of Parliament (MPs) offer diverse perspectives on the government’s decisions, providing both support and critical evaluations that help the government consider alternative viewpoints. These debates reflect a broader public opinion on policy matters. Second, Parliament occasionally suggests modifications to foreign policy decisions. While such suggestions rarely pass, they alert the government to the concerns and sentiments of MPs. Lastly, when Parliament formally approves a foreign policy decision, it gains greater legitimacy, becoming a consensual stance that carries more weight than a policy adopted without Parliament’s endorsement.
Though Parliament’s role in foreign policy-making is indirect, it remains a crucial and influential component of India’s democratic framework.
Parliamentary Committees
Parliamentary committees play a more substantive role in shaping India’s foreign policy than Parliament itself. This is primarily due to two factors. First, as a large deliberative body, Parliament cannot effectively contribute to the detailed formulation of policies. Second, many Members of Parliament (MPs) may lack the technical expertise required to understand the complexities of foreign affairs and make informed contributions. As a result, parliamentary procedures have long included provisions for committees to address such matters in detail.
Parliamentary committees are advisory bodies consisting of members from both Houses of Parliament. Initially, consultative committees provided input on foreign policy issues. However, with the establishment of standing committees, the Parliamentary Committee on Foreign Affairs has become the most prominent body overseeing foreign policy matters. This committee, comprising members from both Houses, continually monitors the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) and reviews its policies and decisions regarding India’s external affairs.
In this way, parliamentary committees play a significant, though indirect, role in shaping India’s foreign policy.
Policy Think Tanks
Policy think tanks play a significant role in shaping India’s foreign policy. These non-governmental, non-profit organizations focus on research and analysis of various aspects of India’s strategic and foreign affairs. Notable among them are the Observer Research Foundation (ORF) and the Vivekananda International Foundation (VIF). These think tanks conduct in-depth research and surveys on key foreign policy issues, publishing research papers and policy briefs to influence the country’s foreign policy formulation.
Staffed by professional researchers, former diplomats, and practitioners with deep expertise in foreign affairs, these think tanks offer a blend of theoretical knowledge and practical experience. Their contributions are so valued that many individuals affiliated with these organizations have been appointed to prominent roles in the current government. Additionally, the government often collaborates with these think tanks to co-host major policy dialogues, such as the Raisina Dialogue, focused on India’s strategic and foreign policies.
The role of think tanks in the foreign policy process is primarily consultative and advisory. Through their research, these organizations accumulate valuable insights and knowledge, which can become a crucial resource for the government, especially in novel or unprecedented situations where there are no established precedents. In some cases, their innovative analyses can capture the attention of policymakers.
Although think tanks have long been a part of the policymaking process in countries like the United States, they are relatively new in India. However, given their significant contributions to the development of foreign policy, they have proven to be an asset to the process. While their involvement requires some caution, it is clear that think tanks can no longer be overlooked in the decision-making landscape of contemporary India.
Paradiplomacy
Paradiplomacy refers to the international diplomacy undertaken by sub-national governments, such as states, provinces, or cities, to promote their own interests. This includes activities like “town twinning” or the establishment of “sister cities,” which have gained popularity as part of this growing trend. In India, the practice has accelerated significantly since 2014, when Prime Minister Narendra Modi took office.
From an academic standpoint, paradiplomacy is a relatively recent phenomenon. It is often described using terms like “substate diplomacy,” “decentralized cooperation,” “people-to-people diplomacy,” and “intermestic affairs.” The study of paradiplomacy began as part of research on federalism, particularly in countries like Canada and Australia.
Federal countries, with their emphasis on the autonomy of regional governments, naturally lead in the practice of paradiplomacy. For example, both Canada and Australia have made significant strides in this area. However, paradiplomacy is not exclusive to federal or democratic countries. Even in quasi-federal systems, such as China, paradiplomacy plays a crucial role, especially in its foreign direct investment (FDI) strategies, where central coordination is combined with municipal diplomacy.
Canadian scholar Panayotis Soldatos describes paradiplomacy as a response to the crisis in the traditional foreign policy mechanisms of nation-states. He argues that decentralization can enhance national unity and efficiency by preventing the fragmentation of foreign policy responsibilities. In his view, subnational paradiplomacy helps streamline the entire foreign policy process.
Paradiplomacy serves several purposes that make it increasingly desirable. While regional governments typically rely on the central government’s resources, these resources are limited. Through paradiplomacy, regional governments can attract FDI and develop localized growth models tailored to their unique needs. This process, often referred to as the “globalization of local issues,” enables states to engage more directly in global affairs.
The rise of paradiplomacy can be attributed to two key phenomena: globalization and liberalization. As the world economy becomes more integrated, state governments are more directly affected by global events and trends. To safeguard their interests, state governments have become more proactive in engaging in foreign diplomacy.
Globally, many countries are benefiting from paradiplomacy. For example, Sao Paolo, Brazil’s wealthiest city, has seen significant economic growth through municipal paradiplomacy.
In India, the practice of paradiplomacy began in earnest after 1967, when regional coalition governments increased states’ autonomy. However, it remained underdeveloped until the 1990s, when liberalization opened up new opportunities. A notable early example of paradiplomacy was in 1992 when Maharashtra signed an agreement with Enron and General Electric to fund the Dabhol Power Project, which only succeeded after support from the central government.
Today, many Indian states are actively using paradiplomacy to pursue economic reforms and outreach. Campaigns like Gujarat’s “Vibrant Gujarat,” Maharashtra’s “Magnetic Maharashtra,” and Odisha’s “Invest Odisha” reflect a growing trend of regional governments engaging with international markets. Border states such as Punjab have also focused on promoting trade with neighboring countries, with Tripura excelling in organizing border haats.
However, paradiplomacy in India is not limited to economic affairs. States also play vital roles in security, environmental protection, and resource management, making paradiplomacy a multifaceted tool.
Despite its benefits, paradiplomacy can lead to conflicts between state and central governments, especially when their foreign policy positions differ. For example, West Bengal’s Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee blocked a proposed Teesta River water-sharing agreement with Bangladesh, while Tamil Nadu pushed for India to oppose a U.S. resolution against Sri Lanka at the UNHRC. Similarly, Kerala’s insistence on prosecuting Italian marines involved in the deaths of two fishermen led to tensions with the EU.
While such incidents highlight potential challenges, they do not negate the advantages of paradiplomacy. These issues can be addressed through the creation of formal institutions and clear guidelines. Currently, paradiplomacy in India is still in its nascent stages. The Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) has established State Divisions, but further institutional development is necessary to fully realize the potential of paradiplomacy.
For paradiplomacy to succeed in India, a framework is needed to ensure coordination between state and central foreign policy objectives, particularly in non-economic matters. With the right policies and infrastructure in place, paradiplomacy has the potential to significantly accelerate India’s growth and enhance its global influence.
Informal Institutions in Indian’s Foreign Policy Making
Media
In recent years, India’s established media—particularly newspapers, journals, and television—has shown a growing interest in foreign affairs, a trend that marks a positive shift in the country’s public discourse. This increased engagement compels the government to consider public opinion and media perspectives before making decisions that could impact citizens’ lives. The media’s expanding role is also linked to its transformation into a significant business sector, attracting substantial investments. This financial growth has enhanced the autonomy of the media, allowing it to become a more influential player in shaping the foreign policy debates in India.
The media possesses the power to draw sustained attention to specific policy issues and can shape the public discourse by framing those issues in particular ways. It plays a vital role in informing the domestic audience about the foreign policies and actions of other countries, thereby contributing to the broader understanding of global events. However, it is important to note that much of the Indian media still relies heavily on foreign news agencies, as Indian news agencies have relatively few correspondents based abroad.
Undoubtedly, the media has a significant impact on the foreign policy debate by informing, shaping, or sometimes skewing public opinion. However, it remains uncertain whether the media can directly influence a government to adopt, change, or abandon a foreign policy stance. Given that the public often depends on the media to report and interpret developments in foreign policy, there exists a complex, reciprocal relationship between media practitioners and policymakers. This relationship involves the government guiding (and at times manipulating) the flow of information concerning national interests, while the media, through its reporting and commentary, may subtly nudge policy in certain directions.
Pressure Groups and NGOs
Non-political groups, associations, and organizations play a crucial role in shaping government policies, including those related to foreign affairs and security. Some of these groups, such as formal friendship associations, are officially registered with relevant authorities, giving them greater access to policymakers. Others are informal but still exert influence by voicing their opinions through various media channels, including influential journals, magazines, and, more recently, social media platforms.
Non-governmental organizations (NGOs) are increasingly influential, not only for their grassroots work within India but also for their ability to impact policy decisions, some of which affect India’s foreign relations. NGOs focused on issues such as the environment, human rights, and migration are particularly active in the country. Recognizing the importance of domestic support for foreign policy, the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) has established the Public Diplomacy Division and External Publicity Division to manage India’s “media diplomacy,” “soundbite diplomacy,” “instant diplomacy,” and “real-time diplomacy.” These initiatives underscore the significance of engaging the public in shaping India’s external relations.
Diaspora
According to the UN International Migration Report 2019, India is the leading country of origin for international migrants, with 17.5 million Indians living abroad. This is followed by Mexico (11.8 million) and China (10.7 million).
In the early years after independence, India’s government distanced itself from the Indian diaspora, fearing that such support might be perceived as interference by the host countries. However, since the early 1990s, India has adopted various initiatives to engage with its diaspora, including events like Pravasi Bharatiya Divas, the Bharatiya Pravasi Samman Award, corporate internships for diaspora youth, and programs like Know India, Study India, and scholarships for diaspora students.
The Indian diaspora has contributed significantly to the country’s development. They send regular remittances (amounting to $89 billion in 2021-22), make investments, lobby for India on important issues, promote Indian culture, and enhance India’s global image through their intelligence, hard work, and entrepreneurial spirit. India has also actively supported its diaspora in cases of discrimination or crisis, including evacuations from conflict zones.
Under Prime Minister Modi, diaspora diplomacy has become a key focus of India’s foreign policy. On his international visits, the Prime Minister consistently addresses the diaspora, emphasizing India’s priorities and encouraging investment in the country.
India’s connection with its diaspora is a powerful and enduring one, making “diaspora diplomacy” an essential component of India’s foreign policy.
Private Sector
Prominent business conglomerates, particularly the Tatas and Birlas, played a significant role in shaping the newly independent nation’s outlook, both domestically and globally. In the post-reform era, organizations such as FICCI, CII, ASSOCHAM, and NASSCOM can be compared to lobbyist groups in the US. These business associations work closely with the government to create a favorable environment that aligns with the interests of their members.
Since the 1990s, foreign trade and investment have become increasingly integral to India’s GDP. Much of this engagement aims to influence government policies in favor of Indian exporters, importers, recipients of foreign direct investment (FDI), and Indian investments abroad. In turn, the government leverages the expertise and resources of these business groups to conduct economic diplomacy.
It has become a common practice for senior political leaders, including Presidents, Vice Presidents, Prime Ministers, and key ministers, to be accompanied by business delegations during official visits abroad. Similarly, when foreign leaders visit India, their embassies, along with the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) or Ministry of Commerce (MoC), collaborate with business groups to organize events that strengthen business ties. These efforts not only enable Indian businesses to influence domestic policy but also enhance their ability to shape policies abroad. A prime example of this is NASSCOM’s successful lobbying efforts that created a favorable environment for Indian IT companies in the United States.
Processes of Foreign Policy Making in India
India has a well-established and comprehensive mechanism for formulating foreign policy, operating in a seamless manner to ensure continuity and stability. This process is dynamic, constantly evolving in response to unfolding circumstances and global developments. The country’s foreign policy is largely consensual, with incremental changes often made rather than radical shifts. In general, foreign policy decisions are rarely challenged by the public, and when they are, it is typically on a smaller scale. However, the system remains agile and responsive to changing international situations, ensuring quick action when necessary.
At the core of India’s foreign policy making is the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA), the primary institution responsible for shaping the country’s foreign policy. The MEA operates within the framework of India’s existing foreign policy, which provides the foundation for new decisions. Inputs for policy decisions can come from both official sources, such as government departments, and non-official channels. These inputs could address a range of issues, from defense and economic interests to global political developments, the challenges faced by the Indian diaspora, and more.
Once the MEA receives concrete inputs on a specific matter, it conducts thorough research and consults relevant experts. This process culminates in the development of policy alternatives, which are then presented to the External Affairs Minister for evaluation. The minister tests the proposals against the political context, ideology, and philosophy of the ruling party. Once the minister approves a policy, it is forwarded to the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO) for consideration.
The Prime Minister, as the chief architect of India’s foreign relations, closely reviews the policy proposals. This process is supported by the National Security Advisor (NSA), who ensures that the policy aligns with both India’s foreign and security interests. The Prime Minister also assesses the financial, strategic, and political implications of the policy to ensure it is acceptable to the Cabinet. Once the Prime Minister gives his approval, the proposal proceeds to the Cabinet Committee on Security (CCS).
The CCS, composed of senior ministers, reviews the policy from various perspectives. The External Affairs Minister responds to questions, while other key ministers—such as those for finance, defense, and home affairs—examine the policy’s impact on their respective areas. Given that the policy has already been vetted by the Prime Minister and other stakeholders, it is unlikely to face rejection at this stage, though modifications are possible. The CCS provides a final, comprehensive review of the policy before it is approved for implementation.
In some cases, foreign policy proposals may be presented to the houses of Parliament for consideration and approval. This step is typically a strategic move by the government to gain public support or mitigate opposition. However, even without parliamentary presentation, once the CCS approves the policy, it becomes part of India’s foreign policy.
Once approved, the policy is implemented, with careful monitoring of its effects and potential consequences. Should valuable new inputs arise, the policy can be reconsidered or adjusted. This elaborate mechanism ensures that foreign policy decisions undergo thorough scrutiny at multiple levels, maintaining a robust system of checks and balances.
Conclusion
The effectiveness and credibility of the institutions and mechanisms involved in India’s foreign policy making have been demonstrated over the years. However, upon closer examination of these bodies, two significant trends emerge. First, foreign policy, in most countries, tends to be shaped by broad consensus across various sectors of society and academia. But due to India’s vast social, economic, linguistic, and territorial diversity, there are occasions when specific policy measures provoke dissent from certain sections of society. These groups may view issues from a narrow, parochial lens, questioning the national interest at stake. In such instances, the government must assertively pursue the policies it deems crucial, despite strong opposition. This necessitates a certain level of decisiveness and assertiveness within India’s foreign policy institutions and mechanisms, ensuring that policies designed to protect and promote the nation’s interests are effectively implemented, even if they face resistance from vested interests.
Second, for much of its history, India’s foreign policy has been more reactive than proactive, responding to unfolding global and domestic events. However, for a nation like India, with aspirations of becoming a global power, this reactive approach may not be the most effective. Major nations seeking to increase their influence on the global stage tend to adopt proactive foreign policies. While the unpredictable nature of international relations makes it difficult to predict outcomes with certainty, a proactive stance in foreign policy, even during stable periods, could better serve India’s interests.
In conclusion, while the institutions and mechanisms responsible for shaping India’s foreign policy have functioned well, there is a need to reassess their structural agility and functional dynamism to ensure they are not trapped in outdated practices. The global political landscape is evolving rapidly, with emerging leaders and significant advancements in science and technology transforming the way countries conduct diplomacy. In this fast-paced environment, India’s foreign policy institutions cannot afford to remain static within their comfort zones. They must be innovative and creative, not only responding effectively to immediate challenges but also anticipating future developments. By doing so, India can better prepare its foreign policy establishment to safeguard and advance the nation’s interests in an increasingly complex world.
References
- Shukla, Vatsala. India’s Foreign Policy in the New Millennium. Bombay: Atlantic Publishers, 2009.
- Srivastava, Dhiraj. India’s Foreign Policy. New Delhi: ABD Publishers, 2007.
- Jha, Nalini Kant, et al. (eds.). India’s Foreign Policy: Emerging Challenges. New Delhi: Neha Publishers, 2012.
- Dubey, Muchkund. India’s Foreign Policy. Hyderabad: Orient BlackSwan, 2007.
- Nautiyal, Annpurna. Challenges to India’s Foreign Policy in the New Era. New Delhi: Gyan Publishing House, 2006.