4 Making of India’s Foreign Policy

Dr. Suresh Dhanda

Structure of the Module

1. Introduction

2. Objectives

3. Agencies/Organisations Involved in Making of India’s Foreign Policy

3.1. Parliament

3.2. Prime Minister and Cabinet

3.3. National Security Council

3.4. Ministry of External Affairs

3.5. Intelligence Agencies

4. Criticism

5. Conclusion

6. Important Questions

7. Suggested Readings

1. Introduction

For the proper evaluation of India’s foreign policy, the study of its formulation process is essential. Policy formulation process is an important subject, and in modern context, it is a complex process. Hence, there are many hurdles in its proper evaluation—- (1) where so many researches and literature is available on estimation and analysis of foreign policy, the literature is scant on formulation process. (2) Numerous factors play role directly or indirectly in this process. (3) It is not possible to estimate exactly that which institution played how much role in this task? Hence, to properly understand this extremely complex system, there is a need of in-depth study.

Besides the above general problems, it has become more complex to understand the formulation process of foreign policy of a developing country, like India. India had to adjust its foreign policy in context of multidimensional issues after independence. These main issues were—-issues arising out of India’s partition, relations with small and big neighbours, communism, cold war, UN and freedom of numerous countries, relations with Superpowers, relations with England in changed situation, etc. Nature of bureaucracy in India, political institutions, multicultural social system and impact of personality cult has a role in foreign policy making. Hence, the study of formulation of foreign policy becomes essential.

2. Objectives

The making of foreign policy is a tough job. The extreme complex nature of collection, analysis, estimation and utilisation of data makes this task more complex due to the unexpected increase in the means of communication and dissemination. This module will acquaint the readers with various organs and agencies involved in making of India’s foreign policy. The present module will also analyse the comparative importance of these organisations in formulation process of India’s foreign policy. Why some of the institutions involved in this process have lost their importance with the passage of time while others are acquiring importance, is also a subject of discussion in this module. Finally, some important questions and suggested readings have also been listed in this module.

3. Agencies/Organisations Involved in Making of India’s Foreign Policy

The following agencies/organisations play the key role in formulation process of India’s foreign policy: – (1) Parliament (2) Prime Minister and Cabinet (3) National Security Council (4) Ministry of External Affairs (5) Intelligence Agencies.

3.1. Parliament

According to article 246, ‘All matters which bring the union into relations with any foreign country’ falls under the jurisdiction of Parliament. Hence, broadly the parliament has the right to take decisions on all the matters of foreign policy. Members of parliament can not only debate any matter of foreign policy in parliament but can also influence this process through various activities. Two important committees of parliament have comprehensive and direct influence on this subject. These committees are: – (1) Parliamentary Advisory Committee of External Affairs Ministry. (2) Standing Committee of External Affairs Ministry. The government takes the suggestions seriously given by these committees. Two other committees of parliament also influence the formulation of foreign policy individually and indirectly. These are—Estimate Committee and Public Accounts Committee. Hence, the parliament influences the functional aspects of making of foreign policy in an important way through its various activities.

But the power of parliament depends upon the following many factors: – (1) on the charismatic and expertise personality of executive. (2) On the level of interest and expertise of parliamentarians in foreign policy. (3) Emergency situation of country. (4) On the nature of representation of various forces in parliament.

After evaluation of influence of parliament on foreign policy during more than last six decades, it comes to know that interest of parliament in this context has widened continuously. In comparison to the regimes of Nehru and Indira, this factor appears more clearly from the activities of present parliament. There were four main reasons of decline of parliament’s influence during the regimes of Nehru and Indira— (1) there was no need of approval by the parliament on the treaties concluded in that era because Indian constitution was lacking this kind of provision; (2) role of parliament was negligible due to the charismatic leadership of both the leaders and strong knowledge of both on matters of foreign relations; (3) there was no change in this situation due to the domination of congress party in parliament; and (4) the role of advisory committees couldn’t go further from one sided dialogue.

Parliament started to pass more discussions, debates, question-answers, opposition, dissent, memorandums, resolution on the matters of foreign policy since the decade of 1980. Even after all these, the position of parliament could not become more important. This situation definitely improved up to some extent, in post cold war period. Three factors were responsible for increase in powers of parliament in this era—- (1) end of one party government and the beginning of the era of coalitional governments; (2) expression of public opinion by general masses regarding foreign policy due to the open economy in India; and (3) getting achievements by a person in the field of foreign policy to be helpful in having an highest post (like the image of Gujral as an expert of foreign policy). Hence, parliament helps the executive indirectly in formulation of foreign policy. But this role of parliament depends on its nature, party position, nature of government, leadership, etc.

3.2. Prime Minister and Cabinet

Cabinet works as a real executive in parliamentary democracy. Hence, only Prime Minister and his/her cabinet perform the function of foreign policy formulation. But in reality, the responsibility and authorization of taking initiatives on matters of foreign policy lies with the external affairs minister in the cabinet. After that, external affairs ministry execute them after the approval of cabinet. Prime Minister and other members of cabinet interfere in it only in special circumstances. These circumstances are— (1) if suddenly new circumstances emerge or (2) if there is a need to make basic changes in the current structure of foreign policy. Important factor in this context depends upon influence of Prime Minister on foreign policy making process, his/her knowledge in this field, personality cult and political prestige.

Theoretical position of Prime Minister and cabinet seems to be very important, but it is not true in practice. Many matters of foreign policy slip from their control. Four reasons are responsible for this position of cabinet—- (1) lack of interest regarding matters of foreign policy among maximum leaders of cabinet; (2) lack of influential role of big institutions in the form of institutional role (though this is not applicable completely on cabinet, yet many matters are limited to the political affairs committee); (3) lack of political influence in the members of cabinet; and (4) culture of coalitional governments and balance of political power. Hence, external affairs minister or political affairs committee takes the important decisions instead of taking direct decisions on foreign policy by Prime Minister and cabinet. Consequently, powers of cabinet seem to be declined in this context.

3.3. National Security Council

National Security Council (NSC) was formed on 19 November 1998. NSC is divided into three stages– apex group, national security advisor and three tier organisation. Prime Minister is the main person in its top decision makers, for the help and advice of whom there are five other members—home minister, defence minister, foreign minister, finance minister and vice chairman of Planning Commission. This high powered group has the right to take final decision on the matters of foreign policy and defence of India. This group can also invite other ministers for meeting, if necessary. Basically, this group has to be dependent up to some extent, on national security advisor because he will act as a link between three tier organisation of the council and top level group. Three-tier group will submit its report to national security advisor, and he/she further will convey this to the top level group. Five people have taken this responsibility of advisor from the beginning till date. These are Brijesh Mishra (from 27 May 1998 to 27 May 2004); J.N. Dixit (from 27 May 2004 to 25 January 2005); M.K. Narayan (from 25 January 2005 to 24 January 2010); Shiv Shankar Menon (from 24 January 2010 to 28 May 2014); Ajit Kumar Doval (from 30 May 2014 onwards).

There are 17 members in the ‘Strategic Policy Group’ of three-tier organisation. Besides the secretary of cabinet, chiefs of all three armed forces, secretaries of Home, Defence, Finance, foreign secretary, secretary (Defence production), secretary (Revenue), secretary (RAW), secretary (Nuclear Energy Department), scientific advisor of defence minister, governor of reserve bank, secretary (Space), chairman (joint intelligence committee), director (Intelligence Bureau), etc are included in this Strategic Policy Group. Beside this, any other official can be invited, if necessary. The main function of this group is to review the strategic defence. Along this, it will present the outline of near future and long term challenges of India’s security, and will provide suggestions for alternative policies to tackle them. The most important thing is that in present context the same group is asked to develop a detailed system for nuclear direction and control under the review of India’s defence. Hence, this coordinated group of inter-ministries will work as an important organ of National Security Council.

The second important organ of this organisation is ‘National Security Advisory Board’, which has a multidimensional nature. There is one chairman and some other members in this board. Former foreign secretaries, strategic experts, economists, international relations experts, educationists, scientists, domestic security experts and retired chiefs of armed forces are included in this board as members. The special importance about these members is that all experts are nongovernmental. This board presents the methods and different alternatives to fight the challenges. Beside this, it provides assistance and advice time to time to the National Security Council on the issues directed by NSC.

Other important organisation is secretariat, which has been assigned with the work of ‘Joint Intelligence Committee’ (JIC). An experienced and senior officer of Indian Foreign Service, Satish Chandra was appointed as its first chairman. It collects the secret information in coordination of all the three organs, and then sends it to the advisor of Security Council after the evaluative study of information. Through this organisation, the efforts have been made to re-establish the ‘Joint Intelligence Committee’ in its amended form.

In this way, the establishment of top National Security Council, Security Advisor and three-tier organisation has been very useful. Now a detailed and comprehensive analysis of foreign policy will be possible by this organisation. Through this, it will be possible to have a systematic and deep study of influence of both the elements–military and non military–on foreign policy. Through this way, the organisation could be a stable body, and the possibilities of its suspension could be minimised. And the accountability of ministers and bureaucrats will increase along with the availability of a formal structure to execute the important decisions. The ‘Joint Intelligence Committee’, which was going meaningless, has also taken rebirth through this organisation. It will increase the influence of chiefs of all the three armed forces in taking the final decisions on foreign and defence matters.

3.4. Ministry of External Affairs (MEA)

Ministry of external affairs has the most important place in making of India’s foreign policy. Its role is not limited up to the secretariat only but all the embassies and consulates in foreign countries are also the part of it. It is directly related with foreign policy formulation, and its diplomatic officials are selected accordingly. The activities of this department can be evaluated under the following three headings: – (1) Historical Background; (2) Structure; and (3) Process Analysis.

India’s Foreign Department has been a part of East India Company and the Intelligence Department of British up to 1914. After 1914, this department came under the control of two separate Secretaries with the names ‘Political Department’ and ‘Foreign Department. During the Interim Government of 1946, there were two departments ‘Foreign Relations’ and Commonwealth Relations’. That’s why it started working in 1947 after the independence as two departments–Foreign relations and Commonwealth Relations. High Commission situated at London was also accessed in the same. It was designated as ‘Foreign Department’ in 1949 by removing the words ‘Commonwealth Relations’ from its name. And after that it is known by the same name.

Foreign minister is the Chief Executive of ministry of external affairs. There is a provision of Foreign State Minister and Foreign Deputy Minister to assist the Foreign Minister. There is no important role of Foreign State Minister and Foreign Deputy Minister in decision making, but is just the provision to give a respect to the medium level politicians. Hence, the Foreign Secretary is the most important person after the Foreign Minister. The post of Secretary General was abolished during the regime of Nehru because there was no Foreign Minister at that time. But today there is the provision of two other Secretaries parallel to the Foreign Secretary. These are Secretary (East) and Secretary (Economic Relations). After Secretaries, there is the provision of additional Secretaries also. In the same way, there is a place for assistant secretaries, directors, deputy secretaries, under secretaries, cooperatives, research officers, assistants and clerks according to seniority respectively.

The basic structure of foreign ministry is divided into various branches. These branches are mainly of two types— (1) special and associate branches and (2) regional branches. The classification of these is not permanent and limited; but changeable according to time. There are 18 special and associated branches and 23 regional branches in the foreign ministry these days.

The ministry of foreign affairs has established embassies in various countries to analyse the events occurred in foreign countries and to collect the information at international level. Finally, these embassies are responsible to execute the India’s foreign policy effectively. Delhi based ministry controls, supervises and administers these missions and keeps bilateral communications with them. The number of these missions increased with the increase of India’s diplomatic activities. Whereas the number of these missions was 104 in 1970-71, it became 129 in 1976-77, 140 in 1990-91 and 157 in 1997-98. The same trend of increase is visible in number of employees at headquarters and missions. Whereas this number was 3089 in 1976-77, it became 3582 in 1997-98.

These changes are not limited to numbers only but qualitative aspect has also strengthened. Qualitative change is clear from the selection of the members working in this body because this selection is made, these days, through competitive exams. After joining the service, they are made experts of different aspects of execution of foreign policy through various syllabi by Foreign Service Institute. Beside this, many foreign languages are taught to them in this institute.

In India, ministry has very important role and responsibility in relation to foreign policy. In fact, this is the only central point responsible for making the foreign policy. Foreign ministry has to take decisions related to mainly three kinds of matters. These are: (1) Routine work, in which there is nothing new to do; (2) Extremely disputed political matters; and (3) Macro decisions on world affairs.

First kinds of functions are mostly the routine works related to internal functioning of the ministry in which Executive has a rare interference. Most of them are related to internal administration which are hardly communicated to External Affairs Minister.

Second kinds of functions are associated with the regional environment of India and are related to the events happened in neighbouring countries which have direct or indirect bearing on the foreign policy of India. These matters are not limited to the jurisdiction of foreign ministry only. These issues have important place in foreign policy. Here, the Political Executive prepares a structure on foreign policy, and issues basic directions. Though, officers of foreign ministry play an important role in this process because they provide necessary facts and data in this regard. Beside this, these officers make the foreign policy more clear, and execute it. But important policy related decisions are taken only at the level of Political Executive. Ministry only helps them.

Third kinds of functions are of technical nature rather than political. In these, the functions related to outer world like disarmament, non-alignment, matters related to UN, etc are included. Though these issues have no special importance for general masses but these are very important for foreign policy. Hence, like the matters of second kind, Political Executive plays an important role in these matters also. Ministry is related only to provide the helpful material and to follow the directions. But this work is also sensitive and important in itself. Hence, the role of foreign ministry is very important. Even if the Political Executive is too much strong, we cannot deny the importance of ministry because no decision can be independent of its vigilance and observation. Finally, any decision taken will have a sound impact of foreign ministry, because this ministry plays an important role even in making the approach of Political Executive about foreign policy.

Even after the above important role, Harish Kapur thinks that the role of foreign ministry in making of foreign policy has declined in the recent years. Three main reasons are responsible for this decline. These are as follows:-

I The emergence and participation of other important institutions in the making of foreign policy is a reason of decline in the powers of foreign ministry. Indirect international information, globalisation of Indian economy and participation of India in many world conflicts has definitely increased. Besides, the establishment of Prime Ministerial Secretariat has also declined the importance of foreign ministry.

Ii The personality of Prime Minister is the second important factor responsible for decline in the powers of foreign ministry. When Prime Minister is very powerful and takes interest in foreign affairs also, the position of ministry becomes weak.

Iii The last reason of decline in the powers of foreign ministry is its lack of general interest in the matters of foreign policy. Today the interest in other fields is increasing rather than the political nature of foreign relations. As a result of this, the importance of other ministries like—health, labour etc is directly increasing in foreign relations.

The decline in above powers never means that foreign ministry has lost its importance in foreign policy process. Contrary to this, the position of this ministry is still very respectful and graceful. Its most important reason is that anybody or any institution howsoever becomes powerful but cannot reduce its importance beyond a certain level.

Hence in the new world system, it seems on surface level that importance of India’s foreign ministry is getting declined and the role and importance of other ministries and nongovernmental organisations is increasing. But in reality, it is not the situation. Perhaps there is a decline in powers of ministry in traditional fields. But it has to face new challenges, and consequently, its role is widening. So keeping in view the current scenario, the Indian government has to take more steps to develop and extend the role of foreign ministry. It has to establish new research wings so that foreign ministry can work with full vigilance and alertness to face the dynamic challenges.

3.5. Intelligence Agencies

In modern period, the intelligence department also plays an important role in foreign policy determination and process. The main function of a spy deputed for this purpose is to collect relevant political, military, social and economic data from various countries. These data may be helpful in making the foreign policy. This function of collecting the data is done by special agencies on the basis of direct and indirect information. India doesn’t have the intelligence agencies like CIA of America and KGB of former Soviet Union. But some intelligence agencies are working in this field.

The role of RAW (Research and Analysis Wing) is very important in Indian intelligence system. Whereas the role of Intelligence Bureau (IB) is related to the internal matters, the sole responsibility of external affairs is on RAW. After independence, the Indian leaders were not interested to make the intelligence system important. Even the opinion of Nehru in some early years about intelligence system was not so good. But the experience of some years has changed his opinion and he started taking interest in intelligence activities. The Chinese attack on India in 1962 opened the eyes of policy makers and underlined the importance of foreign intelligence system. This incident proved that neither bureaucracy nor military can provide the approach which an intelligence system can provide.

In this way, the pressure on political leadership increased and it started to think in that way. Finally, the RAW was established on 1st October 1968 to conduct the intelligence activities in foreign countries. In the beginning, the office of RAW was opened in the south block of central secretariat. Early recruitments were made from the officers of Home ministry. Later on, many officers were selected from other ministries, military, intelligence bureau, etc. But gradually, the dependence on other ministries was left and its own executive, policies and rules were framed. In this way, giving the foreign intelligence department a designation is a proof that political leadership now accepted the importance of intelligence system in foreign policy formulation.

Though RAW became an important institution but expenditure on it is very limited and less as compared to the expenditure in the developed countries. This institution collects the direct information on the basis of research and its links but it collects indirect information through its outside network. After that, this institution evaluates the information and sends to the special persons who are decision makers. In this context, the centre of its activities is the whole world but it is more active in the areas where the special interests of India are concerned. For example, it plays an important role to influence the decisions related to South Asia. Beside this, RAW also plays an important role in executing the decisions. In this context, it has wide programmes and keeps the special people involved in this function which proves to be helpful in executing the particular aspects of India’s foreign policy. For example, it played an important role in Indo-Pak war of 1971 and birth of Bangladesh.

As far as powers of RAW are concerned, these are very influential but the new government in 1977 tried to check these powers as a result of misuse of these powers by RAW during emergency (1975-77). But Harish Kapur thinks that even after this episode its powers are increasing gradually rather than decline due to three reasons. First, the organisational development of RAW has reached to the point that its officers not only have the information of the country where they are posted but also have the details of various important international events. Beside this, it has experts of various subjects who draw conclusions after evaluation of different data and provide important help in policy making. Second, Raw is directed by the Prime Minister Secretariat. Third, the director of RAW has a direct link with Prime Minister and provides the details to Prime Minister on daily basis which helps the government in decision making. Hence, the role of RAW, these days, has become an important part of India’s foreign policy making process.

Beside RAW, two other important institutions are also the part of this process. These are– (1) Military Intelligence Department; and (2) Joint Intelligence Committee. Indian Army has also a separate intelligence wing through which it has a vigil on the military activities of the foreign powers and other countries. This military intelligence department works through the headquarters of all the three armed forces—Military, Air Force and Navy. The size of Military Intelligence Department is limited as compared to RAW. Besides, RAW has overall responsibility of all kinds of intelligence activities. Hence, the military intelligence wing has to perform its role in context and collaboration of RAW.

Joint Intelligence committee also plays its role in making of foreign policy. But role of this organisation never acquired a practical shape. Though this organisation is in existence since 1948 and was restructured in 1965 but it was never equipped with means of intelligence execution and capable for long-term evaluations and estimations. After the formation of National Security Council, it is associated with NSC as an organ. In this new context, it will coordinate between ‘Strategic Policy Group’ and ‘National Security Advisory Board’ for execution of intelligence activities along with secretariat. But as mentioned above, the meaningful role of this committee is still questionable. Hence, after the existence of various agencies and sub-agencies, RAW is the only organisation for intelligence which plays an important role in formulation of India’s foreign policy.

Decision Making and Execution Process: – Beside the above organs of foreign policy making, there are many other elements in present information age which play important role. From this point of view, the role of media persons, thinkers, analysts and journalists cannot be denied due to the pressures of international environment and domestic circumstances. But from many angles, the role of independent judiciary cannot also be denied. For example, human rights, environment, etc are the subjects where judiciary has played its role. Hence, the process of foreign policy making has become very complex.

Along with the formulation process, foreign policy has to pass through various stages and means for execution. The decisions/alternatives are presented by Prime Minister on his/her own or as per the directions of cabinet committee. Then these directions reach to the foreign ministry through defence, foreign or home minister to cabinet secretary or foreign secretary or through the meeting of both. Finally, the foreign ministry make them executed through various embassies, high commissions and other missions.

4. Criticisms The following weaknesses of foreign policy making process appear from its study:-

I. This process lacks the institutional development. In contemporary times, there are about 200 countries in the world and innumerable international organisations and authorities are working worldwide. In this situation, India has to interact with different nations and organisations on different issues at different levels. Any country makes its foreign policy through planned and institutional ways instead of emotional basis. The proper appointment, promotion and training of the people working in this process are also important because they perform the execution of the policies. The enough attention could not be paid towards this during Nehru regime because he was both Prime Minister as well as foreign minister and used to be extremely busy. Second, due to the inter service conflict, jealously, class discrimination etc of officers recruited in foreign services from various fields (ICS officers, teachers, elite class, journalists, etc) everything has become hotchpotch. These officers were far away from necessary capabilities and responsibilities to perform diplomatic functions. There was the domination of ICS officers in foreign services during Nehru era, which continued even in later years also. Though, the selection procedure through competition was established in 1949 and recruited persons were included in foreign services for the first time in 1951 but there remained the domination of ICS officers on top positions for a long time. Maharaja Rsasgotra of 1949 batch, recruited on the basis of competitive exams, could become foreign secretary only in 1982. In this way, the institutional development of foreign services has not been on proper basis.

II. Another important weakness of the foreign policy making process has been the ad-hoc policy of government in this regard. Its clear example is seen during Indira and Rajiv regimes. During their regimes, efforts were made to alter all those institutions which hindered their discretionary powers. Second, Indira Gandhi, due to her suspicious nature, tried to appoint the loyal persons on all top positions. That’s why the PPRC related to foreign department, established during Shastri regime, was amended in the style that first D.P. Dhar (1971) and then G. Parthsarthi (1985 and 1989) were appointed as the chairmen of this committee along with the status of Minister of State, so that they can be in direct reach of Prime Minister. The same process continued during Rajiv era which generated the nepotism and favouritism. As a result of this, PPRC died and Planning Division got separated. No improvements were seen in this even in later years. Its clear example is seen when Rajiv Gandhi asked to change foreign secretary during his press conference (Venkatraman resigned on this stance from his post). Even in Chandershekhar regime, foreign secretary S.K. Singh has to go from his post before the completion of his term because the newly appointed Prime Minister wanted any other person on this post. This policy of ad-hocism encouraged the ‘individual links, conflict among ministries, and lack of team spirit and violation of planned development in foreign policy making’.

III. There have been two other hurdles in smooth policy making process—– emergence of Prime Minister Office (PMO) and ambitions of officers of foreign services. Due to the continuous development in the powers of Prime Minister Office now they have started interfering, beside their legal rights, unnecessarily in the matters of foreign ministry. Officers of foreign ministry feel demoralised on many occasions and face the failures of predetermined foreign policy. These tendencies increased from Indira regime, as a result of which, foreign ministry has to face various problems. Second, presently the tendency of getting foreign postings among officers of administration and police is increasing. The officers of finance and trade are getting important positions in this regard. All these things have created deformities in the nature of this process.

IV. Policy of secrecy has also created a serious problem in foreign policy making process. The documents of foreign policy are not published for the masses in the name of secrecy. As a result, mistakes regarding foreign policy are not analysed properly, and this blocks the way of suggestions to improve the policies in future. Some experts believe that through this, India cannot properly evaluate the performance of its representatives on international fore. Because, sometimes, it has been observed that our representatives have acted on these fore contrary to the policies finalised and established by Indian government. Most of countries have an established procedure in this regard but India completely lacks this system. For example, in America the limitation period of having these kinds of documents secret is 20 years while in England it is 30 years. India has not fixed this kind of time limitation. This provision blocks the process of foreign policy making and causes the lack of a proper process.

V. There has been a huge debate on the formation of ‘National Security Council’. Formation of this Council is a welcome step because its absence caused many weaknesses in evaluation of security scenario and policies. But after its formation, it has been criticised on the basis of faults occurred in the appointment of National Advisor, Strategic Policy Group, Joint Intelligence Committee, Advisory Board, etc which have been discussed earlier in detail. But now it is not a matter of worry because if there is any fault in its working it can be amended. It is possible on the basis of experience. Only the time will decide. At this time, it is essential that its constitution should not be based on orders of Executive but should be passed by the parliament to strengthen it legally so that no government can abolish it in future at its discretion.

5. Conclusion

Finally, it can be said that foreign policy making is a multidimensional process in which various institutions and sources contribute. The influence and role of all these institutions is difficult to measure quantitatively. But one thing is true that foreign ministry plays an important role in this context. Basically, this ministry performs all the functions like formation of foreign policy, its execution, advice to political leadership, suggestions to change, etc. Beside this, ministry plays important role in collection of data and its study and analysis also. It has to take into mind the political direction, information provided by intelligence agencies, the debate in parliament, etc while performing its functions. In modern period, we can see the clear impact of expression of public opinion as national interests, role of means of communication, domestic and international environment, comments of thinkers and scholars, evaluation and estimations of defence organisations etc on the foreign policy making process. It is very difficult to have a proper estimation of the impact on making of foreign policy because of its multidimensional, multi institutional and complex process and in the absence of concrete available standards.

you can view video on Making of India’s Foreign Policy

Suggested Readings

a) Books/Articles

Amitabh Matto & Happymoon Jacob, Shaping India’s Foreign Policy, New Delhi, Har-Anand, 2010.
C.Raja Mohan, Crossing the Rubicon: The Shaping of India’s Foreign Policy, New Delhi, Penguin/Viking, 1993.
Kanti Bajpai & Harsh Pant, eds., India’s Foreign Policy: A Reader, New Delhi, Oxford, 2013.
Lalit Mansingh, et al, eds., Indian Foreign Policy: Agenda for the 21st Century, New Delhi, Konark, 1998. ( 2 Vols.).
Muchkund Dubey, India’s Foreign policy: Coping With The Changing World, New Delhi, Pearson, 2012.
R.S.Yadav & Suresh Dhanda, eds., India’s Foreign Policy: Contemporary Trends, New Delhi, Shipra, 2009.
R.S.Yadav, Bharat Ki Videsh Niti, New Delhi, Pearson, 2013.
Rajiv Sikri, Challenges and Strategy: Rethinking India’s Foreign policy, New Delhi, Sage, 2014.
Ramesh Thakur, Politics and Economics of India’s Foreign Policy, New Delhi, Oxford, 1994.
Stephan Cohen, India: Emerging Power, Washington, D.C., Brookings, 1993.
Summit Ganguly, ed., India’s Foreign Policy: Retrospect and Prospect, New Delhi, Oxford, 2010.
V.P.Dutt, India’s Foreign Policy in a Changing World, New Delhi, 1999.

b) Web Links:-