Debunking myths about India’s multilateralism: 

Debunking myths about India’s multilateralism: 

Context

• The article discusses the issues that prevent India from understanding what considerations influence India’s diplomacy.

Annual UN General Assembly and India’s diplomacy

• The international community’s attention focuses on New York for the annual UN General Assembly.
• The Indian delegation is sizeable, not least in its agenda.
• Besides meeting with leaders from 20 states, Indian officials are participating in discussions on UN reform, counter-terrorism, climate change, human rights and peacekeeping.
• The annual event also gives us an opportunity to audit and clear up some longstanding myths that cloud our thinking and judgment on India’s multilateral diplomacy.
• These myths propagate perceptions that have outlived their utility.
• Such views prevent us from better understanding what considerations influence India’s multilateral diplomacy, how her behaviour, influenced by strategic considerations, has changed over the years, and why it is important to view India’s multilateral positions in the context of the country’s economic trajectory.

India as a multilateral naysayer

• India is regarded as a “naysayer” while negotiating international rules and while interacting on multilateral issues like climate change, nuclear proliferation, trade, etc.
• By identifying India as a multilateral naysayer, India has either blocked multilateral efforts from going forward, refused to accede to rules that others have agreed to or has blocked multilateral negotiations.
• Defensiveness has restrained India’s potential and multilateral ambitions.
• Almost all states enter multilateral settings with a set of concerns they hope to secure without conceding much in return.
• Negotiations are characterized by attrition where compromises and breakthroughs are made on the margins.

Ideas shape India’s multilateral postures

• A myth is that ideas and ideologies shape India’s multilateral postures. Interests are lost in the picture.
• India’s multilateral interventions at the UN were shaped by the political currents of the time, particularly decolonization and the desire for autonomy in foreign policy and development.
• Growth has generated convergence in some areas, like trade, public health, intellectual property rights, and increasingly on issues like climate change.
• India has pushed the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade/World Trade Organization to liberalize tariffs in industries like services and agriculture where Indian firms have a competitive advantage.
• At the World Health Organization, India endorsed a strong set of rules to curb rising tobacco use worldwide, having seen the raging effects of tobacco consumption at home.

Multilateralism and power politics

• We focus more on big-ticket multilateral issues, like nuclear proliferation and arms control, international trade, climate change, and the UN Security Council.
• These issues matter and India’s ability to deftly manage them redounds to her position in the international system.
• Multilateralism is more prosaic and defined by incremental advances made within international organizations.
• India has negotiated international rules covering issues like tobacco control, desertification, food security and agriculture, labour, disability rights, and refugee rights.
• India’s positions on such issues are also influenced by other ministries (health, agriculture, environment, commerce, etc) which have different interests and priorities from diplomats from the ministry of external affairs (MEA).
• Institutions affect India’s multilateral postures.

Need for pragmatism in India’s multilateral diplomacy

• Pragmatism imply being more amenable to cooperating with other states and international organizations, adopting progressive and collectively minded stances on issues like climate change and nuclear proliferation.
• Cooperation becomes Trojan horse to nudge India to accept commitments that may not be in the national interest.
• Evidence suggests that India has been pragmatic in its multilateral interventions since the 1980s to advance and defend its core interests through multilateral engagement, resist or abstain from international rules when necessary.
• India needs to be open and willing to proactively shape and ratify the rules where national and global interests converge.