By Abhay Pratap Singh
In a world fractured into competing blocs, India stands not as an outlier, but as a civilizational anchor. The global order is increasingly defined by a binary choice: the rules-based liberal system championed by the West, and the authoritarian civilizational states like China and Russia, which frame Western norms as morally weak and chaotic. Both sides present the other as an existential threat to their identity.
Amid this geopolitical tug-of-war, India’s position is unique. As the world’s largest democracy, it respects the tenets of a rules-based order. Yet, with its deep cultural and philosophical roots, it operates with a distinct civilizational identity that resists easy categorization. India is not a mimic of the West, nor is it a mirror of authoritarianism. Instead, it is forging a third path—positioning itself as a sovereign axis that integrates ancient wisdom with modern global engagement.
From Non-Alignment to Strategic Autonomy
India’s independent foreign policy is not a recent phenomenon. Its seeds were sown in the aftermath of World War II, as newly independent nations sought to escape the gravitational pull of the U.S. and the Soviet Union. The 1955 Bandung Conference laid the groundwork for the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM), formally established in Belgrade in 1961. NAM was an assertion of the right to an independent foreign policy, a principle India champions to this day.
Over time, this principle evolved from passive non-alignment to proactive strategic autonomy. The 1971 Indo-Soviet Friendship Treaty, for instance, was not an abandonment of this ideal but a pragmatic masterstroke to secure national interests during the Bangladesh Liberation War. Following the economic liberalization of 1991, India’s diplomatic horizons expanded. Leaders from Atal Bihari Vajpayee to Manmohan Singh deepened ties with the U.S., Israel, and ASEAN, all while preserving India’s independent posture. The 1998 nuclear tests were the ultimate declaration of this strategic sovereignty — a bold announcement that India’s security decisions would be made in New Delhi, and nowhere else.
The Modi Era: An Independent Axis in Action
Under Prime Minister Narendra Modi, India’s foreign policy has fully matured into that of an independent axis of power—a civilizational state that balances, engages, and leads without being absorbed into any single camp.
This strategic fluidity is visible across the diplomatic spectrum. During the Russia-Ukraine conflict, India has maintained open channels with both Moscow and Kyiv, balancing its energy security needs and historical ties with Russia while providing humanitarian aid to Ukraine. On the Israel-Palestine issue, it consistently supports Palestinian rights at the UN while simultaneously building a deep, strategic partnership with Israel.
India’s ability to transcend rigid alliances is best exemplified by its concurrent and active membership in both the Quad, a strategic grouping to counterbalance China, and forums like BRICS and the SCO, where it partners with both Russia and China. Initiatives like the India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor (IMEEC) further position it as a geoeconomic bridge, creating alternatives to China’s Belt and Road Initiative. Through forums like the Voice of Global South Summit, India has become the chief advocate for developing nations, championing equity in climate action and global trade. It is not choosing sides; it is redefining the very axis of global discourse.
Civilizational Memory as a Strategic Compass
In a world of failing institutions and rising polarization, India’s geopolitical posture feels less like a reaction and more like a return—a return to a deeply ingrained civilizational ethos. The theme of the 2024 Voice of Global South Summit, “An Empowered Global South for a Sustainable Future,” was a modern articulation of the ancient ideal of “Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam”—One Earth, One Family, One Future.
This is not mere symbolism; it is strategy rooted in memory. India’s global offerings—from its Digital Public Infrastructure (DPI) to its development compacts—are framed not just as policy tools but as a form of dharmic responsibility, a sense of civilizational duty toward collective upliftment. In this context, the Global South becomes both a mirror and a medium: it reflects India’s deeper self and provides the stage upon which that self can act.
Navigating the Poles: Relations with the U.S. and China
The U.S. Contradiction:
The India-U.S. relationship has always been a study in contradiction. Since 1947, Washington’s tilt toward Pakistan, its arming of a regional rival, and its intimidation tactics—such as sending the USS Enterprise into the Bay of Bengal during the 1971 war—left deep scars. When India asserted its strategic autonomy with nuclear tests, the U.S. responded with sanctions, punishing India for its refusal to remain vulnerable.
While ties have warmed in recent decades, the underlying friction remains. The current landscape, marked by punitive U.S. tariffs on Indian exports over issues like Russian oil imports, has been described by Prime Minister Modi as a moment to stand like a wall protecting India’s core economic interests. Foreign Minister S. Jaishankar has condemned these measures as unjustified, highlighting a trust fracture. This dynamic serves as a stark reminder that strategic cooperation with the West has always been conditional, and U.S. anxiety is growing that its intended counterweight to China may itself become a new pole in the global order.
The China Equation:
India’s relationship with China is layered with millennia of cultural exchange and decades of conflict. The civilizational influence of Buddhism flowing from Nalanda shaped China’s spiritual landscape. But the 1962 war shattered the illusion of brotherhood, leaving a legacy of lost territory and broken trust. In 2020, the clashes in Galwan, where twenty Indian soldiers made the ultimate sacrifice (Veergati), became a point of national mourning and resolve, leading to economic retaliation and a freeze in relations.
The recent easing of tensions in 2025—marked by high-level visits, the resumption of border talks, and the lifting of Chinese export restrictions—is not, as some analysts suggest, a reactive pivot driven by U.S. pressure. As Dr. Jaishankar noted, it is a mistaken analysis to see this as reactive choreography. India’s choices, he asserted, follow their own rhythm. For the U.S., this independent rapprochement quietly complicates its grand Indo-Pacific strategy, which relies on an intractable India-China rivalry.
The Rhythm of Memory
India’s foreign policy has been shaped by memory, not mood. In the Mahabharata, Shri Krishna did not initially fight for either side; he offered a choice—his army to one, and his counsel to the other. This principle of deliberate choice, rooted in a deeper wisdom, defines India’s actions today. When empires demand allegiance, India does not pivot. It pauses, listens, and then moves—not because it was pushed, but because it has decided.
It remembers. It remembers the USS Enterprise, the post-nuclear sanctions, and the persistent hyphenation with Pakistan. It also remembers 1962 and Galwan. It remembers who stood by it and who did not. Yet, this memory does not breed bitterness; it breeds clarity.
Conclusion: The Original Sound
India is not echoing the West or the East. It is speaking in its own voice—a voice not of assertion, but of remembrance. In a world that demands allegiance and punishes autonomy, India chooses sovereignty. It chooses itself.
The unpredictability of the U.S. and the aggression of China are geopolitical weather patterns—they may frustrate India’s pace, but they cannot alter its trajectory.
The rise of India isn’t a trend; it’s a return.
This is not a nation with a 200-year history. It is a civilization with millennia of wisdom, scars, and resilience. It has weathered invasions, colonization, partition, and isolation. And it is still here. This is not arrogance; it is memory. India’s growth is not merely economic; it is existential—the unfolding of something that was never lost, only paused. The world can attempt to contain it or delay it, but it cannot rewrite it.
In a world of echoes, India remains the original sound.
