Nehru and Panchsheel: Guiding Principles of India's Foreign Policy

The term 'Panchsheel' originally referred to the 'five taboos' followed by Indian monks in their personal conduct, as outlined in ancient Buddhist scriptures. Under Nehru's leadership, this concept was elevated to a central theme governing international relations, particularly between India and China. The Panchsheel agreement, formalized in a trade pact between the two nations concerning Tibet, encapsulated the following five principles:

1. Mutual Respect for Territorial Integrity and Sovereignty:
• Both nations agreed to recognize and uphold each other's territorial boundaries and sovereignty.
2. Mutual Non-Aggression:
• India and China pledged to refrain from any form of military aggression against each other.
3. Mutual Non-Interference:
• They committed to not interfere in each other's internal affairs, respecting the principle of national self-determination.
4. Equality and Mutual Benefit:
• The nations aimed for balanced, mutually beneficial relations without one party exploiting the other.
5. Peaceful Co-Existence:
• India and China sought to maintain harmonious relations, resolving any disputes through peaceful means rather than resorting to force.

These principles, initially intended to govern Sino-Indian relations, later came to guide their interactions with other countries as well. The Panchsheel agreement was viewed as a foundation for global peace and security, offering a voice to newly independent nations and reducing the likelihood of conflict worldwide.

The principles of Panchsheel gained further international recognition during the 1955 Bandung Conference, where they were incorporated into the Ten Principles of International Peace and Cooperation. The United Nations General Assembly unanimously accepted these tenets in 1957, and they also formed the core principles of the Non-Aligned Movement.

In essence, Panchsheel advocates for non-violence, tolerance, and peaceful coexistence, allowing nations to collaborate towards peace and prosperity while preserving their distinct identities. These principles remain influential in shaping India's foreign policy to this day.

Non-Alignment Movement: India's Stand on Global Affairs

Non-alignment, a pivotal aspect of India's foreign policy, aimed at safeguarding national independence in international affairs. It involved refraining from aligning with any of the military alliances formed by the superpowers, the USA and the Soviet Union, post the Second World War. Non-alignment did not imply neutrality, non-involvement, or isolationism; rather, it was a dynamic approach that advocated independent stances on global issues based on their individual merits.

Jawaharlal Nehru viewed non-alignment as a safeguard for India's autonomy in foreign policy matters. He believed that joining any of the global blocs would mean sacrificing one's own perspective on a given issue to please and gain favor from another party.

India played a significant role in spearheading the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM), an initiative conceptualized by five leaders: Jawaharlal Nehru, Gamal Abdel Nasser (Egypt), Sukarno (Indonesia), Kwame Nkrumah (Ghana), and Yugoslavia's Josip Broz Tito. The inaugural summit of the NAM took place in Belgrade in 1961. The Non-Aligned Movement was a coalition of newly independent states that refused to adhere to the directives of their former colonial rulers. Instead, they chose to act according to their own judgements on matters of global significance. This marked a clear assertion of their independence and sovereignty on the world stage.

Significance of Non-Alignment Movement for India

The Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) held significant importance for India for several reasons:

1. Independent Decision-Making: NAM allowed India to make international decisions independently, based on the merit of each case. This ensured that India's interests were prioritized in its foreign policy.
2. Balancing Superpowers: It provided India with the ability to balance relations with the two superpowers, the USA and the USSR. This meant that neither could exert undue pressure on India or take it for granted.
3. Assertion of Sovereignty: NAM reflected the ideology that any sovereign state, regardless of its size or global standing, has the right to pursue an independent foreign policy based on its own assessment and requirements.
4. Call for Democratization of International Institutions: It highlighted the need to democratize global institutions. This demand is still relevant today, especially as emerging countries seek a greater share in international bodies like the United Nations, World Trade Organization, and World Bank.

Jawaharlal Nehru's adherence to the non-alignment policy continued even in the face of conflicts with China and Pakistan, as well as significant shifts in regional dynamics. Whether during the formation and dissolution of the United States-Pakistan alliance, the strengthening of relations between India and the USSR, or the complexities of Sino-Indian relations, India maintained its commitment to non-alignment and its pursuit of global peace.

The Kashmir Issue in India's External Relations

Kashmir has been a critical factor in India's external relations since independence. It brought the Cold War dynamics to the Indian subcontinent, leading to substantial spending on military armaments.

Jawaharlal Nehru's approach to the Kashmir question was evident when the issue was brought to the United Nations. At that time, the UN was still an emerging and experimental organization, predominantly influenced by Western powers. Nehru, addressing the Constituent Assembly in March 1948, expressed that India's referral of the issue to the UN Security Council was an act of faith, driven by their belief in the progressive realization of a world order and a world government.

The United Nations Security Council passed a resolution suggesting that the Kashmir dispute should be settled through mutual negotiations between India and Pakistan, and it also mentioned the possibility of a plebiscite. However, India rejected the options of conducting a plebiscite as proposed by the UN Security Council, as well as accepting any external intervention, which Pakistan desired, in resolving the Kashmir issue.

As no breakthrough occurred in resolving the complicated matter and dissatisfaction grew over the Security Council's resolution, Pakistan decided to pursue Kashmir through an undeclared war against India, opting for non-peaceful means to achieve its objectives.