NonAlignment 2.0: A Foreign and Strategic Policy for India in the 21st Century by Sunil Khilnani
Authors: Sunil Khilnani
Ads: Link
downsides, both of which need careful evaluation. Above all, India should recognize that Africa is itself looking to leverage its relation with other major powers, and this gives India opportunities to enlarge its strategic space.
International Law and Norms
India must recognize and take advantage of its own extraordinary history in the evolution of international law and norms. It was an active participant in the creation of modern human rights norms. It has stood for a world order that was more equitable, just and non-discriminatory. It has been a major advocate of more rational security structures.
Norms do matter in international society. Nation states will, for the foreseeable future, remain the principal units of international society. But nation states—even those with the ability to enforce their will—operate within a context of international public opinion and norms. For all the emphasis on national power, the fact remains that, over the long duration of history, norms have come to be institutionalized in the international system, and have come to regulate wide areas of interstate behaviour.
Norms in the international system often mask the exercise of raw power. They are also hostage to the fact that enforcement of these norms is selective. It is often a pretext for the application of power. And even when the intentions are benign, judgements about what precise action is required in order to enforce a norm remain disputable. Any discourse on norms not allied with prudence can be self-defeating.
But equally there is no denying that the evolution of norms has largely been governed by a progressive agreement over certain moral imperatives: from the prohibition of slavery, the institutionalization of human rights, to the end of apartheid. It is therefore essential when thinking about international norms to have a clear diagnosis of the demand for these norms.
This is of particular importance for us, since the worldwill be increasingly looking to India to shape global norms. Rather than being a passive observer, it is in India’s interests to proactively shape the evolution of these norms and the contexts of their application. This will require considerable investment in diplomatic and intellectual capacity. For example, India’s ability to engage with and shape international law is still relatively limited by the fact that there are few Indians with expertise or training in international law.
We must also recognize that norm-setting at the international level is now happening at many different levels. Norm-setting is increasingly being determined not just by formal institutions like the UN, but also by informal associations and networks, particularly in fast-changing economic and technology sectors. NGOs are also increasingly important in norm creation at an international level and in mobilizing public opinion. It is also the case that the creation of international regulatory norms in one area can have profound implications for our strategic choices in other areas. This overall picture has to be kept in mind.
India is often accused of not participating in the creation of international norms and of free riding on the current system. This is a debatable subject. We have to recognize that often it can amount to a tactic to pressure India todo the Western powers’ bidding. India must not be shy of projecting its own track record on norm creation. Part of this may be an issue of diplomatic projection. It is often more effective and accurate to say ‘yes, but …’ than an outright ‘no’.
This is not merely a rhetorical point. Take the example of new norms on the international agenda like Responsibility to Protect or Democracy Promotion. Our commitment to important values like human rights, democracy and prevention of genocide must be very clear. And we should not be shy of projecting the fact that when we judged the circumstances to be right, and the instruments clearly defined, we have acted with full
International Law and Norms
India must recognize and take advantage of its own extraordinary history in the evolution of international law and norms. It was an active participant in the creation of modern human rights norms. It has stood for a world order that was more equitable, just and non-discriminatory. It has been a major advocate of more rational security structures.
Norms do matter in international society. Nation states will, for the foreseeable future, remain the principal units of international society. But nation states—even those with the ability to enforce their will—operate within a context of international public opinion and norms. For all the emphasis on national power, the fact remains that, over the long duration of history, norms have come to be institutionalized in the international system, and have come to regulate wide areas of interstate behaviour.
Norms in the international system often mask the exercise of raw power. They are also hostage to the fact that enforcement of these norms is selective. It is often a pretext for the application of power. And even when the intentions are benign, judgements about what precise action is required in order to enforce a norm remain disputable. Any discourse on norms not allied with prudence can be self-defeating.
But equally there is no denying that the evolution of norms has largely been governed by a progressive agreement over certain moral imperatives: from the prohibition of slavery, the institutionalization of human rights, to the end of apartheid. It is therefore essential when thinking about international norms to have a clear diagnosis of the demand for these norms.
This is of particular importance for us, since the worldwill be increasingly looking to India to shape global norms. Rather than being a passive observer, it is in India’s interests to proactively shape the evolution of these norms and the contexts of their application. This will require considerable investment in diplomatic and intellectual capacity. For example, India’s ability to engage with and shape international law is still relatively limited by the fact that there are few Indians with expertise or training in international law.
We must also recognize that norm-setting at the international level is now happening at many different levels. Norm-setting is increasingly being determined not just by formal institutions like the UN, but also by informal associations and networks, particularly in fast-changing economic and technology sectors. NGOs are also increasingly important in norm creation at an international level and in mobilizing public opinion. It is also the case that the creation of international regulatory norms in one area can have profound implications for our strategic choices in other areas. This overall picture has to be kept in mind.
India is often accused of not participating in the creation of international norms and of free riding on the current system. This is a debatable subject. We have to recognize that often it can amount to a tactic to pressure India todo the Western powers’ bidding. India must not be shy of projecting its own track record on norm creation. Part of this may be an issue of diplomatic projection. It is often more effective and accurate to say ‘yes, but …’ than an outright ‘no’.
This is not merely a rhetorical point. Take the example of new norms on the international agenda like Responsibility to Protect or Democracy Promotion. Our commitment to important values like human rights, democracy and prevention of genocide must be very clear. And we should not be shy of projecting the fact that when we judged the circumstances to be right, and the instruments clearly defined, we have acted with full
Similar Books
