Fresh off the heels after receiving the Distinguished Scholar Award from the International Studies Association, Professor T.V. Paul has published his latest book, “The Unfinished Quest: India’s Search for Major Power Status from Nehru to Modi” with Oxford University Press.
In “The Unfinished Quest” Paul offers a comprehensive understanding of India’s rising power and the country's continued influence in the Indo-Pacific region and its relationships with Western powers.
We spoke to Professor Paul about his latest book.
Q: What led you to write this book?
A: The rise of India has evoked many policy analyses, but not a rigorous academic treatment as of yet. Now that we have advanced literatures on status in international politics and the rising power phenomenon, I wanted to develop a book that systemically examines India’s search for major power status, the constraints, and opportunities it is facing, the future prospects, and the implications of this for larger international order in the 21st century.
Q: Your book begins with a description of a confrontation between the Chinese People’s Liberation Army and the Indian Army in the “Line of Actual Control” in the Himalayan mountains of Eastern Ladakh in May 2020. Why did you choose this event to mark the introduction?
A: China has emerged as a leading challenger to India’s major power aspirations, partly because Beijing does not want a peer-competitor in Asia in its pursuit for global dominance. India’s strategic partnerships and soft balancing coalitions with the US, Japan, and Australia through the QUAD could upend China’s goal of establishing its dominance in the Indo-Pacific in the coming decades.
Increasingly, there has been border tensions and military activities in the contested 3,488 kilometer long India-China border. These limited skirmishes portend a dangerous possibility of China and India rivalry escalating to a large-scale war in the Indo-Pacific as their capabilities increase in the coming decades. New Delhi’s unwillingness to join the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI, as well as various multilateral trade pacts with China, suggests an uneasiness in India of China’s economic and strategic dominance. India’s increasing willingness to challenge China militarily on the border is also an interesting dimension. Hence, I took the decision to start with the most consequential relationship for India’s rise in the Indo-Pacific.
Q: Why is India considered a significant “swing power” and what role does it play in a US-China rivalry?
A: India’s geostrategic location with its 7,500 kilometer long coastline in the Arabian Sea, Indian Ocean and the Bay of Bengal gives it many strategic advantages. It also has naval facilities in the Andaman and Nicobar Islands that can choke the narrow Malacca Strait through which China’s and other East Asian states’ trade passes, if a significant conflict develops between the US and China in the Pacific.
More importantly, India’s economic growth, now around 7 percent annually (while China’s has declined to 3-4 percent), could make it a leading economy in the coming years. India is also militarily growing in importance, as it is now the fourth largest military spender after the US, China, and Russia. Yet, it has maintained strategic autonomy or a policy of multi-alignment keeping limited ententes and collaborations with all leading powers. If it decides to join a military alliance with the US against China, the balance of power equation will tilt sharply in favor of Washington as happened during the Cold War in the 1970s when US and China formed an alliance against the Soviet Union.
Q: How did the COVID-19 pandemic affect India’s continued status quest as a global major power?
A: The impact was largely negative, at least in the short run. The Indian government’s initial struggle to cope with the Covid crisis produced many unnecessary deaths. Mass migration of workers from urban centers to their rural homes with minimal support system also produced misery to millions and the world media covered the events with alacrity. In the second round, India managed to handle it better as vaccines were starting to make a big difference in preventing mass deaths. India also supplied vaccines to many developing and developed countries as the largest vaccine producer in the world. India’s economy declined substantially for the short term, but now it is returning to almost pre-pandemic era level of growth.
Q: How has the domestic rise of nationalist movements impacted India’s global perception?
The rise of majoritarianism and Hindu nationalism has generated different responses from the world. The liberal-minded Western media has been in general critical, while governments have been somewhat silent for geopolitical reasons. A segment of the Indian diaspora supports this movement. Social media platforms have been used by this movement strategically to generate support for Prime Minister Modi who has been successful domestically to garner more support for him and his party which is expected to win the third term in the elections that are taking place now. The 200 million strong Muslim population is some 14 percent of India’s total population which has borne the brunt of the majoritarian policies. Overall, the movement has few takers internationally, as it does not offer a modern-era vision that is inclusive and democratic either for domestic order or world order. It is unlikely to garner international support as Liberalism and Communism did in the past, but it could be a domestic mobilizer for greater national assertiveness in the international arena.
Q: What are some of the main themes, similarities, and dissimilarities among Indian political regimes from Nehru to Modi? How has India’s domestic policy impacted its global recognition?
A: Both leaders wanted India to have a larger role in the international arena than what is accorded to it. Nehru approached this by emphasizing soft power more than hard power as India was just emerging from colonialism and faced immense poverty and depravation. His vision was based on a pluralist, secular and inclusive India, and he pioneered the establishment of democracy, federalism, and secularism in the Constitution. His successors in general followed these principles barring occasional aberrations such as the 1975 emergency promulgated by the Indira Gandhi government which suspended constitutional rights for some 18 months.
All governments since 1991 including the Modi government have been focusing on economic growth to a larger level than previous periods. Modi is more determined to acquire hard power, as well as emphasizing the Hindu-ness of the Indian civilization. To his credit, he has offered greater infrastructure developments and delivery of welfare schemes to the poor through direct transfers using digital technology, while emphasizing cleanliness among the masses. Previous government also showed willingness to have periodic negotiations with Pakistan on Kashmir, but the Modi government has taken a tougher line by removing the special status of Jammu and Kashmir, which is a popular move internally.
Q: What are some examples of the human development indices that are challenging India from obtaining a sustained global status?
A: UNDP’s 2023 Human Development Index placed India at 134, below neighbors such as Bangladesh (129) and Sri Lanka (91). This is largely due to the large North Indian states remaining low in human development despite major advances by a few especially in the South and the Western side of the country. The paradox is that human development is not improving appreciably despite the sustained economic growth of the country during the past three decades. This has to do with low emphasis on mass education, skill development and health care by both central and state governments and the growing inequality in the economic fortunes of the population. India is producing large numbers of billionaires every year and the wealth is concentrating in the top layer. The demographic dividend of greater concentration of working age population is under utilized as of it.
Q: In your book, you note that India is viewed as a “significant autonomous center of power, covered for partnership by the United States and its Western allies, such as Japan” and that its ongoing strategic relationship with Russia gives the country an important “bridge-builder role.” What are some of the opportunities and challenges India will face as it continues its rise as a global power?
A: India is a central player in the Indo-Pacific’s strategic trajectory. The possible growth of Indian economy and ongoing naval buildup could offer it a major strategic role in the region as the 21st century advances. However, India’s multi-alignment policy has made its possible partnership with the US more of a limited balancing coalition. But it could transform into a key alliance if the Chinese policies become more threatening. India wants to be a pole of its own and not an appendage of any other power.
The growing Hindu nationalism and majoritarianism have undermined some of India’s soft power markers making it a challenging partner for Western liberal states which themselves are also facing democratic backsliding. Canada, in particular, is having difficulties with India over the Sikh nationalist movement Khalistan, which has a strong support base here even when it is no longer a factor within India. The potential for this relationship is yet to be utilized by both governments.
T.V. Paul is the James McGill Professor of International Relations in the Department of Political Science at McGill University and a Fellow of the Royal Society of Canada. He is also the Founding Director of the Global Research Network on Peaceful Change (GRENPEC). Paul is the author or editor of 23 books, coeditor of 4 special journal issues, and author of over 80 scholarly articles and book chapters in the fields of international relations, international security, and South Asia. Paul currently serves as the editor of the Georgetown University Press book series South Asia in World Affairs.