India’s Strategic Culture: From Modern and Medieval

India, also known as Bharatvarsh, was the land that once stretched all the way from Kandahar and Ghazni in the northwest (present-day Afghanistan) to present-day Southeast Asia. A land that had flourished as a hub of knowledge, science, and culture turned into a region marred by nearly 800 years of continuous conflict.

Illustration by The Geostrata

Geography placed India at the crossroads of continents, commerce, faiths, and empires, from the bone-chilling mountain passes of the northwest to the flat plains in the east to the vast open seas that lie in the south of the subcontinent. 

India’s approach to power, security, and survival has been shaped by its geography, demography, civilisational memory, and being a land that has experienced invasions for almost a millennium. Today, as India finds itself surrounded by an assertive China, hostile Pakistan, unstable Bangladesh and a volatile Indian Ocean region. With such a neighbourhood, the inheritance of deeper strategic planning becomes not just relevant but also essential.

MODERN INDIA'S STRATEGIC DILEMMAS

India today faces a mix of dilemmas from managing land and maritime frontiers to navigating internal fault lines and balancing diplomacy in today’s multi-polar world, all while sustaining long-term resilience and a vision for Viksit Bharat.

In order to understand India’s security today, one must look beyond its post-independence doctrines.

Modern-day India operates in a very strategic environment that is unforgiving, crowded, and increasingly contested across multiple domains. From being surrounded by hostile neighbours on all sides, India faces challenges not just externally, but internally as well. The internal challenge of managing diversity, political competition, and social cohesion in an age where internal fractures are routinely exploited by external actors.

In summary India’s primary strategic challenges, it can be summarised in a single phrase, which is called “2.5 Front War.” Coined by former CDS General Bipin Rawat, this term describes the Indian context in the last few years with intricate detail.

To the north and northeast stands a militarily superior and increasingly assertive China, which challenges the territorial status quo along the Himalayan frontier while expanding its footprint across the Indian Ocean Region. To the west lies Pakistan, which continues to pursue a doctrine of sub-conventional warfare of cross-border terrorism and proxy warfare. These two fronts of war are in the conventional or subconventional domain, while the 0.5 front lies in the internal security challenges. The “half front” lies within. This includes social fault lines and information warfare, and religious fundamentalism that external adversaries actively seek to inflame. This reality explains India’s preference for strategic restraint, calibrated military responses, and strategic autonomy.

ANCIENT-MEDIEVAL INDIAN DIPLOMACY

Ancient Indian strategy did not emerge from a desire to conquer the world, but to maintain its strategic autonomy, which was uncertain and unforgiving. The subcontinent was never an empty space, but a home to competing kingdoms, shifting alliances, and constant movement of people and ideas. 

Various texts like the Arthashastra spoke plainly about deception, alliances, and the hard choices rulers must make to protect their people, while the Mahabharata reminded them of the cost of those choices.

The Vedas and Upanishads asked rulers to look inward even as they defended outward borders. Thus, strategy was not written for generals alone, it was written for human beings who should know how to live with the consequences of their decisions.

While, in the medieval period India was politically fragmented, geographically vast, and culturally diverse. Yet across regions, from the Deccan and the northwest to the Brahmaputra valley, Indian rulers were confronted with recurring challenges of hostile imperial powers, difficult terrain, limited resources, internal dissent, and the constant need for political legitimacy.  However, three inspiring figures that stood out through their ability to navigate these constraints are Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj, Maharaja Ranjit Singh, and Lachit Borphukan. 

Each of them operated in a distinct geographical region that covered the length and breadth of Bharat. Even with a distinct regional context, they went on to shape the core elements of India’s strategic culture that blends a mix of adaptability, political-military integration, and immense strategic patience.

CHHATRAPATI SHIVAJI MAHARAJ: THE STRIVE TO SWARAJ

Born in a context of imperial forces ruling all over Bharat, Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj laid the foundations of the Maratha empire at the height of Mughal expansion. With northern India under the control of the Mughals, while the Deccan was dominated by the imperial armies of the Sultanates,

Shivaji laid the foundation of his empire with just the dream to achieve Swaraj, which meant complete freedom. He did not possess the advantage of big armies and immense wealth, but he did possess a clear understanding of time, terrain, and limits. 

Shivaji Maharaj did not attempt to defeat the Mughal Empire and the Deccan Sultanate outright. He focused on building a formidable resistance over the course of three decades, which focused on survival, consolidation, and legitimacy. The Sahyadri ranges, which were known for their inhospitable terrain, became his strategic shield, enabling mobility and concealment while denying the enemy decisive engagement. His extensive fort network was designed not for symbolism but for endurance and strategic advantage, where each fort acted as a logistical and intelligence node rather than a luxurious bastion.

His much-discussed ganimi kava warcraft was not an improvisation but a doctrine which believed in an approach that avoided decisive battles, targeted logistics, and exhausted the enemy psychologically and materially.

Thus, Shivaji Maharaj was a visionary who anticipated future threats from European powers and built a formidable naval fleet to counter them along the Konkan coast, an extraordinary act of foresight for a land-based power.

Shivaji’s achievement was not empire-building but something that is far more enduring. He proved that imperial domination can be brought to a grinding halt even by a formidable regional resistance. His ideas were further used as inspiration by freedom fighters like Veer Savarkar, Bal Gangadhar Tilak and many others during India’s freedom struggle against the British.

MAHARAJ RANJIT SINGH: THE WALL OF THE NORTHWEST

If Shivaji mastered survival under imperial pressure, Maharaja Ranjit Singh mastered balance in a dangerous neighbourhood. The Northwestern frontier has always been a gateway to the Indian subcontinent, which faced repeated incursions. Maharaja Ranjit Singh governed this region, historically exposed to repeated invasions. His strategic environment was defined by Afghan incursions, internal factionalism, and the growing presence of the British East India Company. Unlike rulers who relied solely on martial tradition, Ranjit Singh embraced military modernisation as a survival imperative.

One of the things Maharaj Ranjit Singh believed in was the philosophy of unity, which led him to unite all the Sikh Misls, while projecting a coherent political entity. He created a stable power base by reducing the chances of internal rebellion, which was ensured by co-opting rivals and respecting religious diversity. Under his tenure, he included Persian as an official language and recruited European officers to modernise his military. Unlike many rulers who believed in a sectarian identity, Maharaja Ranjit Singh pursued a broader civilisational goal. 

His most famous act of cultural patronage includes the repatriation and gilding of the Harmandir Sahib, now known as the Golden Temple, but his vision extended well beyond Punjab. Maharaja Ranjit Singh contributed significantly to the renovation and gilding of Hindu temples across India, including the famous Kashi Vishwanath temple in Varanasi, Jwala Ji Temple in Himachal Pradesh, recognising that sacred geography and civilisational identity transcended beyond political borders. Despite possessing a formidable army, he avoided direct conflict with the British, as he understood the asymmetry of power and the dangers of premature confrontation. His restraint bought time, stability, and autonomy in the region, which a very few rulers enjoyed in that era. The Sikh Empire’s experience reinforces one of the core elements of India’s strategic culture, which meant balancing strength with strategic restraint, all while never compromising on sovereignty.

LACHIT BORPHUKAN AND THE AHOMS: THE NORTHEASTERN FORTRESS

Away from the imperial centres of Delhi and Agra, the Ahom Kingdom in the east built one of the most formidable defence strategies. The Ahoms faced repeated Mughal invasions into the Brahmaputra valley, which were foiled each time, under the visionary leadership of their general, Lachit Borphukan. The Brahmaputra valley’s terrain is termed to be one of the harshest and most unforgiving, which meant an obvious disadvantage to the outsiders. 

Lachit’s strategy was rooted in his intimate knowledge of the terrain and society. Rivers became weapons, supply lines became vulnerabilities, and climate became an ally. This was showcased skillfully in the Battle of Saraighat in 1671, when naval warfare, deception, and morale management halted a vastly superior force and forced it to retreat.

These tactics of warfare and the experiences learned along the eastern frontier hold much relevance for India in the modern-day. He demonstrated that peripheral regions were never liabilities, but rather an asset. When politically integrated and empowered, every region can be converted into a growth engine of the future. 

WHY INDIA'S STRATEGIC CULTURE STILL MATTERS

In today’s context of a multi-polar world, as new power centres arise, India needs to navigate challenges in a much more nuanced and comprehensive way. Further, an imminent 2.5 front war and continuous attempts at internal destabilisation by external forces, these lessons remain deeply relevant. The tough and challenging time-period from our medieval history reminds us that strategy is much more than just winning battles and adopting doctrines, it is about choosing which battles to fight and which to navigate through diplomacy. These lessons from our past help us understand our limits and capabilities, which help in sustaining power over time.

India’s strategic culture was forged under duress. It learned to adapt without breaking, to absorb without succumbing, and to wait when waiting was a wiser decision than fighting. Across centuries, India’s strategic culture has been one that favours endurance over indulgence, legitimacy rather than coercive force, and flexibility rather than rigidity. In all these cases, we find a constant pattern that India’s greatest visionaries understood that civilisation itself was a strategic asset. Military victories could be reversed, borders could shift, but culture once revived and protected could sustain resistance across generations.

---

BY JYOTIRADITYA SHETTY

TEAM GEOSTRATA

info@thegeostrata.com