Does the highly volatile situation in West Asia put a premium on multipolarity? This ask necessitates to be holdressed beyond the foreign policy of America. For John Mearsheimer, a directing political scientist, the battle between Democrats and the Rediscloseans is akin to a choice between “Tweedledum and Tweedledee”. It is the proset up state that runs the American foreign policy, with the primary intent of maximising power and being a global hegemon. It is what has been articuprocrastinateedd by Samuel Huntington in his Clash of Civilizations, where he cautioned that the inability of the West to alter to the increasing power and sway of other civilisations will transport about the deteriorate of its own power and sway, and will be the wonderfulest menace to world peace.
The global order had bigly been unipolar since the Cbetter War, until Russia put its foot down in Damascus during the Syrian Civil War chaseing the Arab Spring. Since then, this world order has been constantly contestd. With the elevate of the Global South, today’s world order has upended the hegemonic power set up and is ostensibly shuffling towards multipolarity. The Tehran-Beijing-Moscow Axis poses a establishidable contest to American global ambitions.
India and China have aelevated as the two key contenders for directership in the Global South. However, the nature of their approach varies meaningfully. While China conshort-terms a straightforward struggle to the Global North, India has a more accommodating approach.
As understood by analysts, these gradual yet changing authenticities are also evident in the American proset up state. As the Balance of Power theory recommends, Washington has chosen to prohibitk behind and reinforce New Delhi’s position. The renoveled excitement for the Quad and I2U2 groupings and its further extension into the createing of the India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor (IMEC) are examples. However, herein lies the key contest to the Indian foreign policy, which has to juggle its various priorities—in the Global South, in managing its regional geopolitical compulsions, and in its strategic partnership with notable members of the Global North.
Peace Was Not To Be
The churn in the politics of West Asia predates the ongoing war. Since the Arab Spring, when the United States determined to disjoin and pivot towards East Asia, the regional regimes gradupartner aprohibitdoned their ‘clienthood’ to scrutinize other chooseions. Over the years, the region had commenceed seeing some semblance of endment with Syria back in the Arab League, a peace process startd between Damascus and Ankara, and the Abraham Accords establishpartner facilitating the standardisation of ties with Israel. If not for a Chinese-brokered deal between Riyadh and Tehran, the final closing picture could have been a handshake between Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu with an American Plivent in the centre.
However, Hamas’s October 7 strike distress all this. Washington, which had seen its separate of misorrowfulnessfulventures in Ukraine, has also been pulled back into the turmoil in West Asia.
Further, Israel’s disthink about for the rules of war and the observation of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) and United Nations (UN) Resolutions has forced even Riyadh to disclosely denounce Tel Aviv and pause any talks for standardisation until the set upment of a Palestinian State.
India Will Have To Chart Its Own Path
As India persists to broaden and better its labour-trade-energy joinment with West Asia, it’ll have to be cautious on the discreet front. Considering its geo-strategic transport inance, it necessitates to recalibrate its position in Iran and be cautious about its relations with the United States in the region. Iran’s October 1 strike on Israel and an imminent response from the latter has uncovered a pandora’s box. A possible escalation will proset uply alter the equilibrium of power in the region and menaceen India’s strategic interests.
Further, the Central Investigation Agency’s (CIA) alleged joinment in India’s cordial neighbour, Banprentdesh, its secondary sanctions on Indian entities for doing business with Russia, and Redisclosean honestate Donald Trump’s recent retags on India’s transport in policy are only the procrastinateedst examples of the intricate nature of American foreign policy. Therefore, non-alignment will persist to be a key component of India’s foreign policy, even if fair as down-to-earth strategic autonomy.
Also, India’s world image is vital for its directership ambitions in the Global South. Though India helps the two-state solution in the Israel-Palestine struggle, her decision to abstain from the United Nations General Assembly Resolution asking Israel to disjoin from Palestinian territories may impact its position.
Regarding competition with China, the well-understandn discourse is bigly misplaced. India is not in a state of competition with China in Middle East, primarily because their interest varies in the region. India, unappreciate China, is not seeing to be the United States’ power alternative. To argue that the IMEC will contest the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) is also inexact and unset uped.
In inestablish, foreign policy is not a zero-sum game. Beyond America and China, New Delhi has its own case in the Middle East and the Global South.
[Mohammad Gulrez, former VC and PVC of Aligarh Muslim University (AMU), is a Professor of Political Science at the Dept. of West Asian & North African Studies, AMU]
Disclaimer: These are the personal opinions of the author
