E-Paper
Rethinking India’s place in a changing world
This article is authored by Rajeev Ranjan Chaturvedy and Anushka Padmanabh Antrolikar.
When power shifts, thinking must follow. The world is changing faster than the ideas we use to explain it. Geopolitical realignments, climate stress, technological disruption, and social transformation are reshaping the global order in real time. Power is more diffuse, partnerships are increasingly interest-driven and flexible, and long-held assumptions about how international order functions are under strain. Institutions that once anchored stability are struggling to adapt to this altered landscape. For India, responding to this moment requires more than agility or ambition; it demands inner resilience—intellectual and institutional, as much as economic or military. Leadership in a multipolar, transactional, and climate-affected world rests on the ability to read change clearly and act with foresight. The central question, therefore, is: Are India’s frameworks for thinking about power and policy keeping pace with reality, or are they still shaped by a world that no longer exists? These concerns framed the discussions at the 8th India Think Tank Forum, recently held at Nalanda University and jointly organised by the Observer Research Foundation.
The international system created after World War II was designed for a time when power was concentrated. Today, influence comes from states as well as markets, technology, supply chains, and cross-border networks. Wars continue, terrorism persists, economies remain fragile, and climate pressures are rising faster than institutions can adapt. The distance between problems and responses has widened.
For decades, global order was shaped by the idea that one power, or a small group of powers, would act as an anchor. This belief assumed that stability required leadership by a few western countries. Over time, this idea has weakened. Institutions formed after 1945 have struggled to prevent conflicts or build lasting peace. Their authority is increasingly questioned, especially by countries that feel excluded from decision-making. The United Nations Security Council still reflects a balance of power from another era.
The strain within the transatlantic partnership reflects this shift. Differences over trade, domestic politics, and responsibilities have made collective action harder. At the same time, the expansion of BRICS shows that many countries want a greater role in shaping outcomes. This is not a rejection of cooperation. It is a demand for fairness, voice, and shared responsibility.
Cooperation today does not depend on one country acting as a referee. It depends on institutions that reflect the present distribution of power and allow space for different paths to participation. This is where the idea of a multiplex world order becomes useful. Power now exists in many centres, with overlapping rules and parallel systems of cooperation. Global order is no longer linear or hierarchical. It is layered, uneven, and often improvised. What is interesting is that this shift is visible not only in global politics, but also within India’s own policy landscape. Just as power is moving away from a few global capitals, ideas in India are also moving beyond Lutyens’ Delhi. Policy think tanks, research centres, and universities are emerging across regions. The geography of Indian foreign policy thinking is widening, and this decentralisation mirrors the larger global transition to a world without a single centre.
This shift places new importance on Baudhik Atmanirbharta - intellectual self-reliance. In a world of competing narratives and borrowed frameworks, countries need the confidence to think for themselves. Intellectual independence means the ability to set questions, define problems, and offer solutions from one's own history and experience. When scholarship comes from many regions, languages, and institutions, the national conversation becomes stronger and more balanced.
National interest has always shaped foreign policy. What has changed is the level of interdependence. Financial shocks, health crises, climate stress, and digital disruptions cross borders easily. No country can fully shield itself. Cooperation is harder to organise, but it is still necessary to manage shared risks. Shared agendas today are rarely uniform. They are broad in direction and flexible in practice. Countries agree on goals, while choosing different ways to reach them. Cooperation happens in parts, not as a single package. Issue-based coalitions are replacing rigid alignments, reflecting a more practical approach to engagement.
At the same time, the world is experiencing interdependence without trust. Partnerships are more transactional. Economic ties are used as leverage. This weakens multilateralism, but it also makes selective cooperation unavoidable. Countries work together where interests overlap, even when differences remain elsewhere.
India’s role in this world begins at home. Internal cohesion, economic capacity, and effective institutions shape credibility abroad. Foreign policy influence grows from domestic strength. This is why India’s external engagement has been pragmatic, flexible, and cautious of permanent camps. India has increasingly focused on leading by example rather than instruction. Its digital public infrastructure, development partnerships, and crisis support show how cooperation can be built through delivery and practice, through a human-centric approach. South-South cooperation remains central to this effort. When countries of the Global South work together, they gain collective weight in global negotiations. India’s engagement in these partnerships strengthens cooperation from the ground up.
Values must anchor this transition. Cooperation is not a strategic liability, and fairness is not optional. Global institutions are imperfect, but they remain essential to managing a fractured world. The real challenge is not to discard them in frustration, but to reform, recalibrate, and make them fit for the realities ahead.
This article is authored by Rajeev Ranjan Chaturvedy, associate professor, School of International Relations and Peace Studies, and founding coordinator, Centre for Bay of Bengal Studies and Anushka Padmanabh Antrolikar, postgraduate scholar, Nalanda University, Rajgir.
