The microcosm of contemporary global politics played out on the official Facebook page of Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi. His meticulously documented trip across saw him first touring Japanese factories, calling on the two countries to cooperate on semiconductor development. Then he found himself in Tianjin, China, openly handshaking and calling Xi Jinping and Vladimir Putin his friends and partners. All this despite the US publicly denouncing their summit as a congregation of anti-Americanism, while the Japanese government called on world leaders to avoid China ahead of its end-of-WWII celebrations.
The fact that Modi and those he met have been so open to playing both sides is a new development, even though the Global South's non-involvement in the Sino-American trade war and technological rivalry has been an ongoing theme for many years. Even though Modi himself has not said as much, the Trump administration's decision to levy tariffs on India, at a higher level than even China, for purchasing Russian oil, has galvanized this new development. Rather than coercing India to support the US's political position, Modi made the opposite point with plenty of photo opportunities with Putin in all smiles.
That term is ultimately a misnomer. As Xi Jinping made clear in his speech, the summit is ultimately about getting out of a Cold War mentality of choosing sides that pits the West against the rest, giving every nation credible choices when unexpected hostility arises. Modi knows this better than anyone else in the room, not only having to contend with tariffs but also with Trump's suddenly pro-Pakistani stance in still-simmering conflicts in Kashmir. Creating choices is a logical response. Collaborating with Japan on semiconductors and making nice with Putin can both advance national interests in not relying on the US.
Modi is not alone in his clear public statement of not picking sides. The Tianjin summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization was the largest in the organization's history, bringing together representatives of 25 states, including many that should have been more careful to toe the American line. But Pakistan bonding with Trump over anti-terrorism, Armenia thanking American support in conflicts with Turkey and Azerbaijan, Mongolia looking for a "third neighbor," and Egypt being reliant on American aid have not stopped them from contributing to a "non-Western world order."
How the supposed "non-Western alignment" works out will now depend on the American response. Cracks are appearing in Western sympathies toward Israel, as the brutality of the ongoing war no longer justifies the initial terrorist attacks by Hamas. European actions toward recognizing the Palestinian state will only further strain relations with a US too busy restricting visa issuance to Palestinian passport holders. The American First philosophy would surely lead more to examine the merits of Modi's multipronged diplomacy.
In this more flexible world, those who are unable and unwilling to cross over the imaginary lines to seek options will suffer. The Japanese public's continued conviction that their superiority comes from firmly belonging in the "liberal camp" will only come back to bite when the camp itself implodes, and they have little choice but to acquiesce to ever more unreasonable demands of a mercurial White House. As alternative financial structures and supply chains emerge in the "rest," how much can its sinking export-oriented manufacturing sector tolerate the uncertainties of more tariffs, nationalism, and new competition?
Perhaps all global leaders can learn a bit from Modi. He has a tough job: millions of youngsters grow up and graduate from schools, only to find a shortage of good jobs. He needs all the foreign friends he gets to boost economic competitiveness, even though many have worked against India by limiting migration, trade, or both. But rather than lashing out, he has maintained a gravitas, using smiles with what some would consider unsavory counterparts to quietly hit back at foreigners who insist on defining India with a single story, that of a democracy that is supposedly serving as a counterweight to China.
The world is entering an era that has vindicated just how right the Indian foreign policy of the past decades has been. The country's belief in using national self-interest as a guiding light, keeping in touch with everyone to seek maximum leverage, and coolly dismissing condescending lectures of its flip-flopping tendencies should be an effective reference, particularly for countries with limited resources and wobbly alliances. By observing not just any single behavior from Modi and Indian diplomacy as a whole, but seeing it as a holistic strategy, will do many favors for politicians around the world.
Comments
Post a Comment