Wisdom Of The Vedas

The Vedas, the oldest recorded texts in human history, delved into the interaction of our people with mankind and the environment. They recognised Earth as a concept within the cosmic creation and enquired into the harmony that bound all together. They discussed the ideas of vishwa sanskriti (global civilisation), vishwa grama (global village), vishwa putra (global progeny), vishwa mitra (global friend) and vishwa shanti (global peace) as fundamental for mankind. These five Vedic concepts underpin the philosophy framing India’s relations with the global community.

The Indus-Saraswati civilisation had contacts with contemporary civilisations in Mesopotamia and Egypt. The inscriptions found overseas point to a relationship that promoted harmony and mutual benefit based on exchange of people, ideas, and trade. Once the Indus script is deciphered, we shall learn more about these ancient ties. 

Arthashastra As Fountainhead Of Statecraft

Kautilya’s Arthashastra (early Mauryan period, 4th century BCE) provides an insight into the maturity and depth of our statecraft. The Arthashastra is a detailed treatise of governance and foreign policy of a time when kingdoms were relatively small, and the ideas of empire and use of power were evolving. The state was viewed as a saptanga (seven organs) system, of which one pertained to foreign relations. Kautilya’s mandala (circle of states) theory outlined an external environment that could be allies, friends, neutral or enemy. To deal with this external environment, he proposed the shadgunya (six paths) policy, which included sandhi (peace), vigraha (war), asana (neutrality), yana (military preparedness), samashraya (alliance) and dvaidhibhava (duality). These policies were implemented through four instruments, namely sama (conciliation), dana (gifts), bheda (division) and danda (punishment).  Kautilya niti was based on pragmatism and realism with state security focus.  His realpolitik was for the pursuit of dharma to promote and protect the welfare and prosperity of the state and its people. For him, justification for war or the use of other means needed a higher threshold. His thesis was elaborate and profound; it provided guidance and inspiration to succeeding generations. Its approach to diplomatic relations and strategy holds relevance even in modern times and current policies can be interpreted within this framework.

Kamandaka’s Nitisara (late Maurya/Gupta, 3rd-7th century CE) was inspired by the Arthashastra, but was written a few centuries later, at a time when the empire had expanded in territory and grown in prosperity. It is a verse-based interpretation of the ancient treatise. Nitisara discussed the political evolution of state organs and its interplay with neighbours to provide a geopolitical context.  It examined the nature of rulers and balance of power. Interestingly, while it relies on Kautilya’s mandala theory, its instruments of statecraft expand the four-fold approach of sama, dana, bheda and danda to add maya (illusion/fake narrative), indrajal (conjuring tactics) and upeksha (neutral/neglect), that reflects the dynamic nature of governance and diplomacy. It elaborated on the shadgunya system of governance and defined the roles of duta (envoy) and spy and placed them close to the king. It also clarified that foreign policy was framed by context, time, space and strength. In some ways Nitisara registered the evolution of nuances in diplomacy on account of diverse circumstances and sophistication in diplomatic options. 

In Shukra’s Niti (late Gupta, 5th-7th century CE), which was written after Nitisara, we see a more dynamic framework for public policy and diplomatic engagement. The neighbourhood of the empire was more integrated but complex and contested. Shukra sought to balance realpolitik with morality, laws and scriptures. In Niti, the engagement with foreign allies and enemies was more transactional but couched in morality. It prioritised dialogue and favoured incentive or tribute over divisive coercion or wars. Yet, it called for caution, even after a peace treaty was achieved. In this paradigm, the state could not exist in isolation, and since the power was more balanced, it called for a fuller involvement of the king in foreign affairs. He would directly select envoys, who would enjoy total immunity, for active diplomacy and building trust. The presence of competing states in the mandala led to a more accommodative foreign policy, with hard action often framed in the context of dharma and scriptures. 

The relevance and guidance of the Arthashastra prevailed over time.  Its realpolitik-dharma approach provided scope for adjustments in implementation to accommodate the changing mandala of power balance. It provided the rationale for application of hard and soft power, sometime for national security, sometime for dharma, and sometime couched in morality. 

Ashoka And Cholas - Great And Emerging Powers

Ashoka's reign is often divided into two segments, one of dig-vijaya or conquest for expansion and consolidation of the empire and the other of dharma-vijaya or renunciation of war and pursuit of Buddhist dharma to win the minds of people. Many say the first phase followed Kautilya’s thesis while the second phase deviated more towards dharma. Records portray the confidence of a great power that maintained a tight grip on governance and an effective army to deter misadventure from the avijita (unconquered) lands in the mandala. Rock edicts in border areas were uncompromising in stating that retribution would follow if his vijita (conquered) territory was attacked or peace disturbed. His religious missions to Lanka and marriage alliance with Nepal, who were lesser powers but immediate neighbours in the mandala showed his pragmatic yet firm approach, couched in soft power. He sent dutas to the Greeks in Macedonia, Babylon, Antioch and Alexandria as an expression of great power diplomacy and as an equal power seeking to preserve peace and prosperity. Interestingly his dutas were also commissioned to convert the Hellenic kings to the path of Ashokan dharma!

The Chola (11th-12th century CE) experience, especially the reigns of Rajaraja Chola and Rajendra Chola, who were somewhat further away from the lands where the Arthashastra held sway but not too far to be immune to its influence, provides another perspective of civilisational statecraft and the pursuit of foreign policy and diplomacy. Royal copper plates, temple inscriptions, guild records and Indonesian inscriptions bear testimony to their rule and dominance. The Cholas practiced hard power through maritime conquests for control of trade. 

When the Srivijaya rulers tried to exercise control over the Malaccas, the Cholas waged punishing naval attacks to open the Straits for free passage for Chola ships, bypassed Srivijaya tolls and agents, and secured advantage in trade with the Song dynasty in China. When the Chinese tried to exert pressure, Chola merchant-ambassadors demonstrated their dominant status in control over sea lanes and trade. Cholas maintained vassals & had strategic alliances in the littoral states of the region to ensure dominant power. 

Civilisational Statecraft In Modern Times

The extension of our civilisational statecraft in modern times deserves a fuller study, but a few examples can give a glimpse of its continuing relevance. The civilisational ethos was evident during the freedom struggle, when the Congress declared, in the 1921 and 1927 sessions, that India sought an independent foreign policy and the British did not represent the people of India and again in the statement of 1946 that India would maintain independence from power blocks. After independence, India’s solidarity with decolonisation and fight against racism echoed the pursuit of dharma. India’s role in the non-aligned movement and the recent expression of strategic autonomy followed the same realpolitik. 

Similarly, the recent policies of neighbourhood first, Act East, and Link West, strategic partnerships, and voice of the Global South reflect the dynamics of the mandala theory. As we encounter geopolitical flux and challenges to geoeconomics, India's aspirations for national development, national security, and global status must look at our civilisational statecraft as a foundation while negotiating options in a dynamic and rapidly transforming world.

(The writer is a former diplomat and currently Professor at Jindal Global University)