.png)
International Relations as a separate discipline was developed to bring inclusivity to the emerging neo-world order. However, this model was structured from the lens of a Eurocentric viewpoint where most scholars separated the object and subject creating a more duality of understanding, splitting the outside and inside spheres of mind and creating a wall, may it be the idea of Realism, Marxism or to an extent Secularism which discards human consciousness and depend totally on scientific approach or may it be the ideas of Feminism, Modernism or Radical Constructivism which lacks much objectivity.
Illustration by The Geostrata
The satirical reality is that post-colonial and de-colonial scholars tried to develop nothing better than just binaries to these predominant theories out of historical repression. The primary need is to construct an alternative or search for one which eradicates this separation, “the debate is not so much about whether these biases exist, but about how to discover appropriate pathways to address these biases”.
The challenge is to search for resources and textual traditions which can provide a more virtuous guide for strategic understanding and better governance.
The Indian knowledge toolkit offers much relevance to the existing challenge of the Westernized perspective, however “Re-imagining IR in India is not about creating an Indian school of IR but redefining IR itself”.
India boasted a fertile intellectual climate, bequeathed from the remotest antiquity. During the times when scholars like Panini were active, numerous other schools of thought developed as well, contributing to grammar, philosophy, and intellectual activity. One of the most influential schools was the Nyaya, whose major emphasis placed upon were logic, epistemology, and the means of valid knowledge.
The Vaisheshika school went into studies on nature, atoms, and principles of existence. The Samkhya and Yoga schools involved theories of reality, consciousness, and the way of liberation.
These different schools of thought led to a lot of discussions and debates, all resulting in the growth of Indian philosophy, linguistics, and intellectual traditions that continue to affect modern thought.
The account of Advaita, one of the three Vedantic schools promoted by Adi Shankaracharya focuses on the problem of dualism. It poses a non-dualistic and monistic viewpoint where the foundation is self with others, not self and others.
The Indian text was initially considered very Kantian, which was less scientific and more ontological. However, with the existing order not catering to many problems of global politics, these knowledge traditions can return to accommodate separated identities of states, people, and reality.
The idea of Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam or Vishwamitra which current India arbitrated in their outlook encompasses the non-dual feature of Advaita philosophy to bring more inclusivity.
India’s considerable involvement and inclusion of many multilateral and bilateral institutions have been evident in its strategy for global peace and conflict resolution. Forums like UN, BRICS, G20, QUAD, etc show India’s bringing together approach for a more equitable order.
India adopted this non-dual strategy throughout many foreign policy decisions historically, like Non-Alignment during the bipolar order of the Cold War or with the mission of Vaccine Maitri on offering free COVID vaccines to many third world (LDCs) countries to tackle a global issue (Self+Others) or the Neighbourhood First Policy to bring together the global south for south-south cooperation and lastly most recently gaining 100% consensus at the G20 Summit, especially with the inclusion of the African Union as a member of the multilateral forum.
However, it is crucial to consider the debate of the theory-practice gap where India has revisited some of its foreign policies to face the ground reality and strengthen national interest.
For instance, India adopted the “No first use” policy after their nuclear revolution to balance nuclear powers and for peaceful use only but with ever-changing geopolitical scenarios the state is re-examining to be more pragmatic.
Yet theoretically Advaita as a strategic thinking needs to be revisited, the world is a politically connected entity, where diverse elements such as individuals, nation-states and society are fundamentally interconnected, representing different facets of the same global reality.
Understanding these connections required a flexible approach that transcends rigid levels of analysis, calling for intellectual advancement to reveal the hidden connectedness across diversities.
Interconnectedness, reaching beyond borders, and including unity in diversity could give the impetus for creating a more multilateral international system, which would be more commensurate with the rich and complex global reality in which we exist. Such a system would encourage cooperation, coordination, and a holistic approach to solving global problems, considering the different actors' various contexts and perspectives.
BY HARSHVARDHAN SINGH RATHORE
TEAM GEOSTRATA
Well written
What a fresh take on IR!
Interesting
well written!