.png)
Reassessing the Gujral Doctrine: Normative Ideals vs Strategic Realities
- THE GEOSTRATA
- 43 minutes ago
- 5 min read
South Asia is characterized by a geopolitically volatile environment within contemporary global power dynamics. Once viewed as an arena where India’s influence was unquestionable, it is now marked by political uncertainty, regime shifts, never-ending hostilities, security tensions, and competitiveness, along with external influence, particularly China. Collectively, these developments have changed the landscape of South Asia into a contested domain rather than a collaborative neighbourhood.
Illustration by The Geostrata
India itself is in a conflicting situation. Despite being the largest country of the region, in terms of area, economy, and military, it has not fully translated its material primacy into durable regional leadership and stabilising force due to its fragile relations with immediate neighbours, like Bangladesh, Bhutan, the Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka. Even though there exists infrastructure development support, emergency aid, and cross-border connectivity projects, suspicion, political distrust, and narratives portraying it as a regional bully continue.
This gap raises a fundamental question: should India lead South Asia with goodwill and non-reciprocity, or should it prioritise its strategic goal in these hardcore geopolitical surroundings marked by competition and uncertainties?
Against this background, the Gujral Doctrine needs to be revised. Formulated during the optimistic settings of the post-Cold War era, the doctrine advocated for India to be a benevolent and selfless regional leader, rather than a regional dictator. However, this goodwill is being challenged by current strategic environments.
THE GUJRAL DOCTRINE
Gujral Doctrine is one of the landmarks in India’s Foreign Policy. Inaugurated in 1996 by then Foreign Minister Inder Kumar Gujral, during the Deve Gowda Government, the doctrine championed that India should exercise leadership through restraint and accommodation by extending unilateral concessions to the neighbouring countries.
The Doctrine is a five-point roadmap, a guide for India’s conduct towards its adjacent neighbours. It also outlines what India expects from its neighbours while conducting relations with India, particularly with other South Asian countries. The five principles are:
With neighbours such as Bangladesh, Bhutan, the Maldives, Nepal, and Sri Lanka, India does not seek reciprocity but offers and accommodates what it can in good faith and trust.
No South Asian country should permit its territory to be used against the interests of another South Asian nation.
Countries should not interfere in the internal affairs of one another.
All South Asian countries should respect each other’s territorial integrity and sovereignty.
They should settle all their disputes via peaceful bilateral negotiations. The essence of the Gujral Doctrine has been that, being the largest country in South Asia, India can extend unilateral concessions to neighbours in the sub-continent.
Gujral himself spelled out the strategic rationale behind the doctrine. He argued that since we had to face hostilities from Pakistan in the west and China in the north, it is utmost important to have ‘total peace’ with other immediate neighbours, so that their influence can be contained in the region. Additionally, it challenges the narrative of India as a regional hegemon by highlighting its role as a stabilizing force.
GUJRAL DOCTRINE ACROSS TIME
The significance of the Gujral Doctrine cannot be detached from the regional context of the 1980s and 1990s, in which it was formulated. At that time, India’s relations with its neighbour were recovering from a period of prolonged strain. The early 1990s marked political transitions in Nepal and Bangladesh, the withdrawal of the Indian Peace Keeping Force (IPKF) from Sri Lanka, and the relatively warm post-Cold War strategic environment became a fertile ground for reworking diplomatic ties.
In this context, the doctrine’s emphasis on restraint and asymmetry helped ease fears of Indian dominance and encouraged cooperation through economic and institutional channels.
During I.K. Gujral’s tenure, first as external affairs minister and later as prime minister, the policy was actively translated into practice. India pursued trade and transit arrangements, expanded dialogue mechanisms, and prioritized confidence-building over coercive leverage. This approach did not end with Gujral’s departure. Successor governments followed the doctrine. Vajpayee's Government undertook Measures such as trade concessions within SAARC, the Indo-Sri Lanka Free Trade Agreement, and the Lahore bus initiative, indicating a willingness to preserve engagement-based diplomacy even while navigating heightened security pressures, particularly with Pakistan.
By contrast, the Modi government has pursued neighbourhood engagement under far more constrained conditions. While policies such as “Neighbourhood First”, which guides its approach towards the management of relations with countries in its immediate neighbourhood, and “SAGAR” (Security and Growth for All in the Region), which envisages a free, open, inclusive, peaceful, and prosperous Indo-Pacific region, retain echoes of earlier thinking.
However, the Gujral Doctrine today survives less as a fixed policy model and more as a normative reference point, adapted selectively to the demands of a more competitive geopolitical landscape.
INDIA'S CONTEMPORARY RELATIONS WITH SOUTH ASIAN NATIONS
The contemporary relations of India with its immediate neighbours, marked by suspicion, competition, politics, and strategic interests, erode the very principles envisioned by the Gujral Doctrine.
India-Bangladesh, though cooperating on many fronts like water management, trade, connectivity, and defence, has several areas that obscure the development of full-fledged diplomatic relations. Migration, from the beginning, has been a permanent site of tension. The recent political transition in Bangladesh has strained the relationship further.
The relations between India and the Maldives were friendly until the current Prime Minister, in 2021, started the India-Out Campaigns, and anti-India social media comments surfaced. However, the relations are again setting in motion, focusing on economic ties, tourism, and defence.
India-Nepal relations are quite cordial in terms of connectivity, trade, humanitarian aid, and defence. However, Nepal’s new currency note showing disputed territories of Kalapani, Lipu Lekh, and Limpiyadhura has caused tensions between the two nations.
These circumstances constrain India’s ability to abide by the non-reciprocal principles set by the Gujral Doctrine, which points out that the doctrine is more aspirational in approach rather than pragmatic.
Despite seismic changes in the region’s geopolitical environment, India has not entirely forsaken the core principle, that is, prioritizing neighbour first, of the Gujral Doctrine. This shows India’s maturity in approaching the ever-changing geopolitical environment.
CHINA-PAKISTAN AXIS: A MAJOR CONSTRAINT TO STABILITY
The reassessment of the Gujral Doctrine is incomplete without understanding the growing strategic influence of China in South Asia. By leveraging its infrastructural and economic prowess, China is asserting itself as a viable partner for India’s South Asian neighbours.
The major case is Pakistan, where China, under its Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), is building the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC). India boycotts BRI as it passes through Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK), infringing upon its sovereignty.
Apart from CPEC, Beijing backs Islamabad through infrastructural investment, political endorsement, and economic support, which strengthens its ability to withstand India’s pressure.
Similar patterns are visible in Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, the Maldives, and Nepal, where China has strategically invested in infrastructure and developmental projects like ports, roads, and energy projects. Such developments have undermined India’s historical influence and ties in the region, weakening the premises of trust and asymmetry as highlighted in the Gujral Doctrine.
A WAY FORWARD
The Gujral Doctrine was instrumental at the time it was formulated. However, in contemporary times, it seems ineffective due to the principle of non-reciprocity and the inability to adapt to the shifting geopolitical realities of contemporary times.
However, the Gujral Doctrine need not be rejected but should be revised. While its core principle of non-coercion for regional stability is still relevant, its operational framework needs to be reimagined.
The revised doctrine should move from non-reciprocity for all to selective non-reciprocity tied to strategically thought-out objectives. Building deeper economic ties, investing in regional institutions, and aligning neighbourhood diplomacy with Indo-Pacific priorities are essential.
BY TANU VIJAYVARGIYA
TEAM GEOSTRATA