:: OP-ED

Superpower India should match karma with dharma

Patralekha Chatterjee

Oct.30 : Most analyses of India’s rising stature in the world in recent years rest on the all-too-familiar indices — dazzling economic growth, military might, globally-acknowledged IT prowess and so on. But India has another trump card — its natural soft power advantage — which it could leverage better.

The latest to remind us of how we can convert our soft power into a valuable instrument of our global strategy was Kenneth Roth, executive director of Human Rights Watch (HRW). Mr Roth, who was in Delhi last fortnight for HRW’s international board meeting, the first such in the capital, argued that the world needed India to raise its voice for human rights around the globe.

His case, in brief: Traditionally, India has had a foreign policy with a pro-rights strain. However, of late, a certain ambivalence has crept into India’s public position on regimes with dubious records on human rights, especially those in the country’s backyard. Burma is a case in point. India does not want to strengthen China’s hand in that country and hence is on a mute mode on the military junta’s treatment of political prisoners. In Mr Roth’s view, by addressing human rights violations within the country and having a more rights-oriented foreign policy, India would actually be strengthening its claim for leadership within the region and in international affairs.

Is India’s global leadership on human rights increasingly becoming necessary to counteract the negative role played by other powerful states? What about the more prickly human rights issues related to our internal affairs? Should India end laws such as the Armed Forces Special Powers Act, be more mindful of rights violations against dalits, religious minorities, adivasis etc?

There are two ways you can take Mr Roth’s message.

You can either dismiss everything he said by citing the standard critiques against human rights activists and their sympathisers: they are bleeding heart liberals, out of touch with realpolitik, a bunch of busybodies whose advice one takes at one’s own peril. Those wired to reject everything that emanates from the United States of America would also point out that Mr Roth is an American, HRW is headquartered in the US, and ergo, there has to be a deep, dark conspiracy underlining his statements.

Alternatively, you can read what a reputed international organisation like HRW is saying in the context of questions pivotal to our emerging role in world affairs: What kind of global power is India going to be? What role can India’s democratic credentials play in Asia’s emerging security environment?

Significantly, some of what Mr Roth said has also been articulated by many eminent Indians in academia and in public life who prescribe hard power along with a nuanced soft power strategy.

Respect for human rights within and beyond the country’s borders is part of this critical mix to make the idea of India more attractive.

Soft power, a term coined by Harvard professor Joseph Nye, is usually considered to be the ability to attract friends and allies and mitigate adversarial situations by way of the attraction of your nation, society or group. Soft power is increasingly viewed today as an alternative to hard power as well as a necessary complement to it.

The US provides the best example of a nuanced mix of soft and hard power. The appeal of its films, TV, music, books etc and the allure of the American lifestyle which they represent traditionally gave the US the ability to attract and persuade others to adopt the US agenda in many instances. Use of just coercive "hard power" of military force would not quite have had the same outcomes. No doubt, a lot of the sheen of the US’ attraction has worn off in the wake of the economic downturn.

Within Asia, the hard power-soft power discourse has been fuelled by the meteoric rise of India and China. Almost all discussions about international affairs today focus on the two countries as future agents of change. And not surprisingly, there is heated debate about the merits and demerits of the two sharply divergent models.

US-based political scientist Maya Chadda, for instance, has argued that while security has trumped democracy in India’s foreign policy perspective, democracy has become increasingly important as an underpinning for an Asian security architecture that could be in India’s interest. India’s liberal democracy is its soft power asset, and its democratic identity can be a stepping stone to international alliances and collective diplomatic engagement.

In an article written for the Global Brief — a top-tier international affairs magazine published in Canada — some days before he became the minister of state for foreign affairs, Shashi Tharoor outlined his vision of India’s strategic, soft power. A country’s soft power emerges from the world’s perceptions of what that country is all about. "The world of the 21st century will increasingly be a world in which the use of hard power carries with it the odium of mass global public disapproval, whereas the blossoming of soft power, which lends itself more easily to the information era, will constitute a country’s principal asset", Mr Tharoor wrote.

As far as India is concerned, it is not just its economic progress that will enhance its soft power. The values and principles for which India stands would be equally important. Mr Tharoor’s article makes clear that the author does not advocate reliance on just soft power. That will be foolish as New Delhi knows all too well. "Soft power cannot solve its security challenges. To counter the terrorist threat, there is no substitute for hard power. Where soft power works is in attracting enough goodwill from ordinary people to reduce the sources of support and succour that the terrorists enjoy, and without which they cannot function", he said.

Distilled to its essence, this is a recipe for better public diplomacy as well as better governance. India needs to solve its internal problems before it can play any leadership role in the world.

This entails ensuring that the country’s population is healthy, well-fed, and secure. It also means preserving our precious pluralism.

"It adds to India’s soft power when its non-governmental organisations actively defend human rights, promote environmentalism, fight injustice", Mr Tharoor argued.

To liberals in India and elsewhere, this may seem plain common sense, But it is good to remember that in today’s fractious climate, such common sense is becoming less common.

Patralekha Chatterjee writes on contemporary development issues, and can be contacted at patralekha.chatterjee@gmail.com