Ramesh Jaura
Since the 1960s, India has prioritised strategic autonomy in its foreign policy, consistently avoiding alliances that could compromise its sovereignty. Western partners often overestimate their influence, overlooking India’s strong commitment to independence. For India, autonomy is not a tactic but a core principle.
In September 2025, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen unveiled an ambitious India Strategic Roadmap, which includes the world’s largest free trade agreement, a startup corridor, deeper ties to Horizon Europe, and broad security and defence cooperation.
However, the agreement included caveats. The EU warned that India’s continued purchases of discounted Russian oil and joint military exercises with Moscow would impede closer ties.
Indian leaders anticipated this response and maintained their position. The legacy of the 1960s remains relevant, when the United States used the PL-480 “Food for Peace” program to influence India during the Cold War.
The core challenge remains: India consistently defends its autonomy, while Western partners often seek alignment as a condition for partnership.
PL-480: Food as Foreign Policy
The 1954 Agricultural Trade Development and Assistance Act, commonly referred to as PL-480, was designed to dispose of surplus U.S. grain and foster goodwill. For India, this aid was essential.
By the late 1950s, India faced recurring droughts, rapid population growth, and stagnant farm output. U.S. wheat imports through PL-480 soared, reaching nearly 10 million tonnes annually by 1965.
Though touted as humanitarian, PL-480 quickly became a foreign policy tool.Under President Lyndon Johnson, the U.S. enforced a “short-tether” policy, authorising aid in small, conditional tranches.
Continued aid depended on India’s support for U.S.-Vietnam actions and alignment with Washington.
When Prime Minister Lal Bahadur Shastri condemned the bombing of Hanoi in 1965, U.S. shipments slowed mid-drought.
The message was clear: food aid was contingent on political alignment.
India’s Response: Tightening Belts, Guarding Sovereignty
The PL-480 experience exposed the risks of dependence and reinforced India’s commitment to the non-aligned path envisioned by Nehru.
Non-alignment was an active assertion of independence. India engaged with major powers but consistently set its own terms.
Prime Minister Shastri made it plain: “We have to tighten our belts, but we will never sacrifice our freedom.”
No comments:
Post a Comment