Sixty years ago, to the date, leaders from 29 Asian and African nations concluded a seven-day long assembly in the city of Bandung in Indonesia. India was among the five organisers of this extraordinary event — the four others being the host, Indonesia, Burma (now Myanmar), Pakistan and Ceylon (as Sri Lanka was then called). Jawaharlal Nehru and Sukarno, first President of Indonesia, were under the spotlight because they not only conceived the idea of the first Asian-African Conference but also for showcasing China and its leader, Zhou Enlai.
The 10-point Bandung declaration expanded on the vision of the five-point Panchsheel, or five principles of peaceful co-existence, enunciated a year earlier between India and China. The spirit of Bandung heralded a transition in world politics after the Second World War. It was the first intercontinental conference of coloured people in history and sentiment of the conclave thereafter found articulation at various international fora, most importantly at the United Nations.
Leaders from a large number of countries have assembled in Bandung to attend the commemorative 60th anniversary session. Among heads of states and chief executives, China’s President Xi Jinping and Japan’s Prime Minister Shinzo Abe feature prominently and turned out with a large delegation in tow though Japan was not part of the original Bandung Conference. Founder-nation India is not represented at the highest level and external affairs minister Sushma Swaraj is marking attendance.
Prime Minister Narendra Modi previously committed to attend the multilateral summit but in a letter to Indonesian President Joko Widodo expressed inability to attend because of the ongoing Parliament session.
Mr Modi has travelled abroad twice in the short span of 11 months that he has been in office when Parliament has been in session — the first time in November last when he visited Nepal for the Saarc summit, and second during the first half of the Budget Session when he toured Seychelles, Mauritius and Sri Lanka. Evidently, in his vision of the world,
Mr Modi does not pay similar importance to an assembly of Asian and African nations where South-South convergence, expanding trade relations and providing assistance to lesser developed nations are the basic themes.
By marking an absent at Bandung, Mr Modi provided Mr Xi with an opportunity to steer leaders of assembled nations into the Chinese embrace. From a time when India was a natural leader of the non-aligned world, New Delhi has now vacated the space for Beijing to step in. In the contest for influence among nations, the Chinese have stolen a march over India not by stealth but because India vacated its position. Mr Xi talked about Chinese wish to provide assistance and help develop African and Asian economies.
He reiterated the relevance and thrust being given by his leadership to the Silk Road initiative. The Chinese Premier also gave indications of his resolve to expand the role of China in the region and aim for the leadership of Asia. The initiative comes at a time when there is unanimity that the idea of decolonisation as an adhesive has run its course and a new framework for unity is required. In the absence of any alternative from India, China has fortified its position. Mr Modi has engaged in rhetoric by saying that India’s “Look East” policy will henceforth be termed “Act East”. But as his absence has demonstrated, India has been found to be neither looking nor acting eastwards!
In the past 11 months, the primary emphasis of the government’s foreign policy has been the personal redemption of Mr Modi’s image. While the United States and the United Kingdom may have hogged headlines over denial of visa to Mr Modi in the aftermath of the 2002 riots, he was not a particularly appreciated leader in the major part of the liberal democratic world. The objective has been achieved and the American President penned a 166-word profile of Mr Modi for Time magazine which named him in its “100 Most Influential People” list. Mr Modi has been met with bear hugs in almost every Western nation that he has visited. But, more importantly for Mr Modi, at each of these places — New York, Sydney, Berlin or Toronto — his rockstar-like performances were cherished by his supporters, giving credence to the argument that Mr Modi’s foreign policy was aimed at gratifying his domestic constituency.
This is where we come to the troublesome part: because character certificates are what are being primarily sought, it makes perfect sense that these are being secured from the First World first. Mr Modi’s supporters — their reaction can be considered pointer to his assessment — get exuberant at the reception Mr Modi receives in their lands of dreams because they ail from an inverted colonial mentality and it is important to be treated as special by those who colonised us. Mr Modi’s foreign policy stems out from his worldview and value system. He may have personally emerged from the Indian hinterland and the margins of Indian economy, but his aspirations, initially middle-class in character, now look further upwards. It figures then that the poor act as hurdles in the path of development as visualised by him.
South-South solidarity not being a thrust area of the government is indicative of its leaders having a poor sense of history. Bandung may have been a flawed Nehruvian initiative and the decision to propel China into the international arena boomeranged on him in 1962. But there is a world outside the embrace of the super-powers and the developed world, and it is there that India needs to emerge as a leader of a block of nations. One can browbeat dissenters and minorities within the country into submission, but internationally there is need to reach out amiably to where the majority live. It is time Mr Modi looked at foreign policy beyond his tenure and truly believed that the world is his family.
The writer is the author of Narendra Modi: The Man, the Times
