Why are neighboring countries getting angry against India one by one?

Last Updated on August 13, 2024 10:11 am

Exactly 10 years and three months ago, when Narendra Modi was sworn in as the Prime Minister of India for the first time, he gave a big surprise by inviting the heads of state or government of all the neighboring countries to come to Delhi.

The then Prime Minister of Pakistan Nawaz Sharif also received such an ‘invitation’. The Modi government has always said from day one that its neighbors will be given the most importance in its foreign policy.

This policy is aptly named ‘neighbourhood first’ – and government ministers or policy makers in Delhi have repeatedly said over the last decade that this is the main pillar of Narendra Modi’s foreign policy!

In other words, India will prioritize relations and interests with its immediate neighbors in South Asia (Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Myanmar, Nepal etc.) rather than those geographically further away (be it America or Nigeria) – this is ‘neighbourhood first’. The essence of

But word of mouth is one thing, but not in reality, which has always been reflected in the work of the Modi government. Just as Western friends have often been of apparent importance to Delhi, Delhi has had to worry a lot about China.

Again, Narendra Modi himself received a huge reception and great response from people in Nepal (August 2014), Sri Lanka (March 2015) or even Bangladesh (June 2015) during his first visit as Prime Minister, but later the image was not so friendly in all those countries. There were no signs of improvement in relations with Pakistan either.

And now, a decade after ‘Neighbourhood First’, it appears that the government of the country that helped Sri Lanka so much during its severe financial crisis is also allowing Chinese spy ships to enter their ports, ignoring Delhi’s frowns.

The common people of Nepal have erupted in anti-India protests against the program of ‘economic blockade’ which was carried out with the tacit support of India during the framing of the new constitution. Also in power in Nepal is KP Sharma Oli, who is known to be staunchly anti-India.

The Maldives also overthrew a pro-Indian government last year, elected to power by Mohamed Muijju, who demanded the withdrawal of all Indian military personnel from the country immediately after becoming president. With his party’s ‘India Out’ campaign well received in the Maldives, President Mooijju is leaning towards China without hesitation.

What’s more, Bhutan, which is dependent on India in almost all aspects – military, foreign or economic, has also initiated border talks with China separately, not even outright rejecting China’s offer to establish diplomatic relations.

It cannot be said that India has good relations with the two governments in power in Afghanistan and Myanmar.

As India has not yet established full diplomatic relations with the Taliban, and India’s investment of hundreds of crores of rupees in various sectors in both these countries is now facing great uncertainty.

The latest addition to the list is Bangladesh – where a government close to India’s friend has been in power for the past decade and a half, almost overnight. Then some powers came into the circle of power who are not exactly known as India’s allies.

Apart from that, the protests and violence against Narendra Modi peaked during his visit to Bangladesh three and a half years ago. Almost all observers agree that the recent quota reform movement in that country also had a strong anti-India slant.

So are there any serious flaws in India’s foreign policy, so that India-hating sentiments are rearing their head in one neighboring country after another? Or is the geopolitical structure of greater South Asia such that this fate for India was a foregone conclusion?

To find answers to these questions, the BBC spoke in detail to international relations analysts, professors, former ambassadors or experts in the field of diplomacy in India and outside India.

Dr. Irfan Nooruddin is a professor of “Indian politics” at the “School of Foreign Service” at Georgetown University in Washington DC, America. Researches on economic development, globalization, democracy and democratization and civil conflict.

He said, first of all, South Asia is the least integrated and integrated region in the world. There is no other region in the world where movement from one country to another or cross-border communication is as difficult and complicated.

If we dissect India’s foreign policy, we will see that they have never pursued a multi-dimensional policy aimed at establishing long-term relations with any of their neighbours, be it Maldives, Sri Lanka or Nepal. Priority has always been given to short-term interests, and for that a narrow, dubious one-dimensional policy has been pursued.

As the current government of India has sought to establish its ‘Hindu identity’ as a major pillar of foreign policy – and this has backfired as usual in several Muslim-majority countries such as Bangladesh.

It is understood that India wants to establish itself as a regional superpower, but to do so it will also have to fulfill some responsibilities towards these countries and develop a ‘multidimensional’ relationship – which is almost absent now.

Dr. was a professor of international relations in many educational institutions of the world including JNU of Delhi and National University of Singapore. Muni. Served as India’s Ambassador to Laos, also served as India’s Special Envoy to South East Asia. Thinktank Delhi is also associated with IDSA as a Distinguished Fellow.

He said that Narendra Modi government announced ‘neighborhood first’ when it came to power, there was a problem at the beginning. I would say that there was no pressure behind this announcement, rather it was a ‘knee-jerk reaction’ or a spur-of-the-moment decision.

I think India has made two more serious mistakes in its foreign policy under Narendra Modi.

First, over-reliance on the intelligence apparatus. It is true that intelligence is needed, but what happens if we try to judge a neighboring country through the eyes of intelligence and decide based on that what our policy or strategy should be.

Second, we have never seen India’s ruling party actively engaged in foreign policy implementation before this Modi era.

Modi 1.0 or Modi 2.0 is not the foreign minister of the country, but RSS leader Ram Madhav would have decided what policy India would take in Nepal, Bangladesh, Myanmar or even Pakistan to some extent.

It was in the hands of that influential leader of the BJP and the RSS that India’s strategy in so many countries in the neighborhood was left. It is now being seen that the result was not good for India.

If we come to the context of present Bangladesh, many reasons can be blamed for the failure of India’s foreign policy there.

For example, India has never made it clear to Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina that she is not moving on the right path in that country and public anger is accumulating against her.

If he is a good friend of India, then he should have been seriously ‘nudged’, which was never done! There was an extreme intelligence failure on him.

Even before the assassination of Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujib, Indira Gandhi’s political secretary PN Haksar had offered to evacuate him by helicopter for security reasons. Whether Bangabandhu did not agree to it is another matter, but India was aware of the threat to his life.

In this case, there could be any possibility of removing Sheikh Hasina, India could not even imagine it.

I would say, by politically supporting Sheikh Hasina, India practically wrote a ‘blank cheque’ – it has now boomeranged back to India!