Q6(a) · UPSC Civil Services Mains 2024 · PSIR GS 2 · 20 marks · 2 min read

← Q5(e) Q5(a) →

Would you concur with the view that of late, India's foreign policy has been in a transition mode from Nehruvianism to Neoliberalism? Support your answer with the help of suitable examples.

Topic: Recent developments in Indian Foreign policy. Syllabus: Recent developments in Indian Foreign policy: India’s position on the recent crisis in Afghanistan, Iraq and West Asia, growing relations with US and Israel; vision of a new world order. Same official PYQ from year-wise 2024 and Recent developments in Indian Foreign policy.

Revision summary

Nehruvianism meant NAM, UN moralism and refusal of blocs; neoliberalism in this debate means markets, U.S. partnership and globalisation. 1991, Act East, the U.S. nuclear bargain and the Quad are the visible transition. India still refuses formal alliance, keeps Russia, defends WTO policy space and talks Global South — Nehruvian residues. Concur partly: instruments have shifted; doctrine of autonomy has not been abolished. Multi-alignment is the mix, not a clean replacement of one school by the other.

Model answer

Introduction

Nehruvianism in foreign policy meant non-alignment, Afro-Asian solidarity, UN moral language, and suspicion of military blocs, with a weak material base. Neoliberalism here does not mean only domestic market reform. In the foreign-policy debate it means engagement with global capital, closer ties to the United States, and comfort with economic globalisation. The view that India has been in transition from Nehruvianism to neoliberalism is partly right. It is wrong as a completed story.

Body

Where the transition is visible

1991 opened the economy and forced diplomacy to seek capital, oil and technology. Look East / Act East replaced a purely continental NAM map with ASEAN and later the Indo-Pacific. The civil nuclear path with the United States, the 2+2s, LEMOA, COMCASA and BECA, and revival of the Quad are not Nehru’s instruments. India signs trade talks, courts supply chains, and speaks the language of ease of capital. C. Raja Mohan and others have described this as a turn from idealism to a more interest-based, market-compatible diplomacy. Examples are concrete: India as a lower-cost manufacturing hedge in China-plus-one; ITEC plus digital public infrastructure as exports; a G20 presidency that sold investment as much as NAM memory.

Where Nehruvianism has not died

India still refuses a NATO-like alliance, which is the point of 7(c). It still buys oil and platforms with Russia. It still uses strategic autonomy and Global South voice — a Nehruvian habit in a new accent. It did not join a condemnation camp on Ukraine in the way neoliberal Atlanticism demanded. At the WTO, India defends food stocks and policy space rather than a pure open-market catechism. Neighbourhood policy still uses civilisational and security language that is not reducible to FDI.

So the transition is in the economic and U.S.-facing layers. It is not a conversion of the whole doctrine. NonAlignment 2.0 already tried to name autonomy after NAM’s bipolar script died. Multi-alignment, treated in 8(c), is the current mix: Nehruvian refusal of a camp, neoliberal use of markets and minilaterals.

Comment

Concur in part. Late Indian foreign policy has moved toward markets, the United States and issue-based coalitions. Do not concur that Nehruvianism has been replaced. The state still wants autonomy in a hierarchical world-economy that Wallerstein would recognise. Neoliberal tools serve that autonomy. They have not abolished it.

Flow diagram

flowchart TD
  N[Nehruvian NAM UN] --> T[1991 Act East US nuclear]
  T --> Q[Quad markets]
  N --> A[Autonomy Russia WTO food]
  T --> MIX[Partial transition]

Conclusion

India has used neoliberal economic diplomacy and U.S. minilaterals that Nehru would not have signed. It has not become a camp follower or a free-trade fundamentalist. The transition is real in instruments. The end remains autonomy. That is a partial, not a total, shift.

Quick related

Students also ask

  • Explain the major features of India's Foreign Policy in the 21st century.

    Next question on this syllabus topic (2023 · Q5(a)). View answer →

  • Is neoliberalism the same as being pro-American?

    In Indian FP debate the two overlap in the 2000s–2020s, but neoliberalism also means WTO and capital. India can be market-engaging and still fight Washington at Geneva.

  • Did Nehru ignore economics?

    No. He sought aid and mixed economy. He did not organise foreign policy around global production chains and a U.S. nuclear bargain.

PYQ trend

When UPSC asked this

Related PYQs from other years, newest first. Open a question to read it.

  1. 2025 · Q5(a) · PSIR GS 2 · 10 marks

    China's growing footprint and a tangible shift in power dynamics in Bangladesh has weakened India's leverage in Dhaka. Comment.

    View answer →

  2. 2025 · Q5(c) · PSIR GS 2 · 10 marks

    For India, a multipolar world order would also mean a multipolar Asia. Comment.

    View answer →

  3. 2024 · Q5(e) · PSIR GS 2 · 10 marks

    Despite deep ties, India's relations with Sri Lanka have seen strains due to China's growing influence in Sri Lanka through investments and economic dominance. Analyse.

    View answer →

  4. 2023 · Q5(a) · PSIR GS 2 · 10 marks

    Explain the major features of India's Foreign Policy in the 21st century.

    View answer →

  5. 2023 · Q7(a) · PSIR GS 2 · 20 marks

    "India's Nuclear policy is deeply influenced by its cultural beliefs and the pragmatic approach of its foreign policy." Discuss

    View answer →

  6. 2023 · Q7(b) · PSIR GS 2 · 15 marks

    What steps has India taken to regain its foothold in Afghanistan since the Taliban has taken over the country in August 2021?

    View answer →

  7. 2023 · Q8(b) · PSIR GS 2 · 15 marks

    Discuss the significance of "West Asia Quad" in the light of India's 'Look West' policy

    View answer →

  8. 2022 · Q5(a) · PSIR GS 2 · 10 marks

    Peaceful co-existence remains the cornerstone of India's foreign policy. Comment.

    View answer →

More from this topic

Q5(c) · UPSC Mains 2025 · PSIR GS 2 · 10 marks

For India, a multipolar world order would also mean a multipolar Asia. Comment.

Recent developments in Indian Foreign policy

A multipolar world is several great-power centres; it is hollow for India if Asia is Sino-centric. India’s threats, trade and waters are Asian, so Asian power-sharing is the real test of the slogan. Japan, ASEAN centrality, Korea, Australia and India beside China and the U.S. are the intended map. Quad and FOIP are instruments of pluralism, not a finished concert. The claim is right as strategy and still aspirational as fact.

Q5(a) · UPSC Mains 2025 · PSIR GS 2 · 10 marks

China's growing footprint and a tangible shift in power dynamics in Bangladesh has weakened India's leverage in Dhaka. Comment.

Recent developments in Indian Foreign policy

India’s Bangladesh leverage after 2009 was tied to Sheikh Hasina; her 2024 exit opened space for China. Beijing’s BRI projects, credit and defence courtship give Dhaka an omni-enmeshment option. Indian delays on Teesta, a trade surplus and political optics of patronage stored grievances. The shift weakens Delhi’s privileged access but does not erase geography, power trade or transit. A less personality-based Neighbourhood First is the repair, not a hyper-realist sulk.

Q5(e) · UPSC Mains 2024 · PSIR GS 2 · 10 marks

Despite deep ties, India's relations with Sri Lanka have seen strains due to China's growing influence in Sri Lanka through investments and economic dominance. Analyse.

Recent developments in Indian Foreign policy

India and Sri Lanka share people-to-people, security and neighbourhood-first ties, including the civil-war and 13th Amendment file. Chinese infrastructure credit, Colombo Port City and the Hambantota lease created economic presence with strategic meaning for Delhi. Colombo used China to hedge Indian political weight, especially on Tamil issues. The 2022 debt crisis restored India’s role as first financier and IMF-era partner. Strain is real omni-enmeshment, not a finished Chinese capture of the island.

Toppers' copies

Toppers' copies for this question will be uploaded soon.