Apart from the fact that no country is self-sufficient, it is obvious, and requires no argument to prove, that if a country shuts itself in and hermetically seals itself against foreign influence and ideas, if such a course were possible, it will only ensure its own retrogression and ultimate loss of independence. Careful cultivation of international relations is, consequently, one of the prime duties of every nation which it can neglect only at dire peril to its independence.
The study of international relations is fundamentally a study of power relationships. This, of course, has to be interpreted in terms not only of military power but also of political stability and leadership, industrial strength, and all the factors which contribute to the power of nations. The power relationships between nations are constantly changing, and unless a country understands and adjusts itself to the changes that are taking place around it, its own security will be seriously endangered. In our own time we have witnessed such changes, cataclysmic in character and revolutionary in effect, that the picture of international relations may be said to have been completely transformed in the course of two decades.
It is only by a continuous and vigilant study of power relationships in the world that even the mightiest nations can maintain their position. Without a knowledge of the changes and dynamics of social life taking place elsewhere
in the world no country can build up its own life. This is the primary object of international relations. Diplomatic relationships which every country now establishes with the the independent nations of the world has this knowledge as its primary object. Earlier, since political interests were limited to one’s own neighborhood, diplomatic relations never extended beyond countries which were closely connected with one another either by geography or by interests. As everyone knows, modern diplomacy developed in Italy and spread from there to the rest of Europe. Till the second half of the nineteenth century, even the independent countries of Asia did not consider it necessary to set up permanent diplomatic missions in other countries or to study the dynamics of power so far as other countries were
Neither the Moghuls nor the Marathas had any notion of the sources of strength of the European nations with whom they had to deal. The Chinese Admiral who challenged the might of Britain during the First Anglo-Chinese War knew nothing about the naval strength of Britain and firmly believed that he could defeat the British Navy with his fleet of junks. The result of this ignorance of the sources of power of other nations was that India had, for a long time,
to remain subject to a foreign power while China was, for over a hundred years, the whipping-boy of European nations.
From the earliest times, India lacked interest in the balance of power outside its own national frontiers. While China was continuously watchful of developments across its land frontiers and had developed a very efficient system of diplomatic relationship on a continental basis, the Indian idea of diplomacy was confined to states
within the geographical limits of India. Within this area, at different times, India developed a system of
international relations and diplomatic usage. But so far as areas outside the physical boundaries of India were
concerned, we were content to live with the attitude of complacent ignorance. It is a well-known fact of history
that the changes in the dynamics of power in the Hindu Kush Valley profoundly influence the politics of the
Indo-Gangetic Valley. From the time of the first Aryan invasions this has been one of the determining factors of
Indian political evolution. The emergence of a powerful state in the Kabul area, whether in the time of Kanishka,
Mahmud of Ghazni or Ahmed Shah Durrani, profoundly influenced events within India; and yet, so far as the great
states of the India-Gangetic Valley were concerned, they continued to remain ignorant of these developments
and, therefore, were unable to take the necessary steps to safeguard their independence. In the time of Mahmud
of Ghazni, every effort was made by that king to collect and evaluate information about the political situation
in India and to estimate the sources of strength of the various Indian states. We know with what thoroughness
this was done from Alberuni’s great work. In contrast, we may note that the great monarchies—rich, powerful,
and well organized according to the standards of the time—of King Bhoja of Dhar and the Gurjara Pratiharas
of Gujarat knew little or nothing of the revolutionary transformation which had taken place in the Kabul Valley
and of the strength of the great state which Sabaktajin had established and Mahmud had inherited and enlarged.
This may be compared with the policy which the policy which the British pursued from the beginning of the last century, when they established themselves as one of the imperial powers in India. The invasion of Egypt by Bonaparte was viewed as an event affecting the security of India. When Napoleon and Tsar Alexander reached an agreement at Tilsit, the British authorities in India immediately took steps to send a mission to Persia, the object of which was
to find out the extent of that country’s defensive strength and to explore possibilities of entering into an alliance with its government. Sir John Malcolm’s report on Persia is still a classic. Similarly, the advance of Tsarist Russia towards Central Asia led to the British neutralization of Afghanistan. The British did not wait for enemies to penetrate as far as Panipat before taking countermeasures as the Indian rulers of the Gangetic Valley had been accustomed to do. They carefully studied the conditions across the borders, developed a large body of experts who studied the geography,
language, political conditions, and economic structure of the areas which bordered on India or which were
considered to be of vital importance to the defense of India. No area was left uncovered. The British Government in India had at its disposal men who had devoted most of their active life to the study of sensitive areas: the North-Western Frontier and adjacent areas, the Persian Gulf and the Trucial Coast, Tibet and the Himalayan regions, Sinkiang, Alma Ata, and other areas of Central Asia. It was sufficient for them to cover the areas of special interest to India because the British Empire, as world power whose interests were spread over five continents, was able to take care of the rest.
Our case today is different. We have to keep ourselves informed of developments in all parts of the world, not because we have vital interests everywhere, but because conditions in the world have so changed that events in the most distant parts may affect us in a manner which few of use realize. Undoubtedly for us the vital areas continue to be those immediately bordering India; and consequently the study of conditions in these areas is of permanent importance
to us. But with changed economic, political and military conditions, other areas also emerge as vital and sensitive. At no time in India’s long history had Tibet and the North-Eastern Frontier become areas of vital concern to India’s defense. The geographical, political and social conditions of Tibet were sufficient guarantees for our safety from that quarter: while the North-Easter Frontier covered by dense forests and high mountains was also a dead frontier. Besides the Himalayas provided us with an almost impenetrable wall across which no invading force had ever approached India. Today, the emergence of a great military power on the other side of the Himalayas, which stretches from the Karakoram to the borders of Burma, has totally transformed the situation.This is only one example of the frequent changes in areas of international sensitivity, without a knowledge of which it is not possible at any time to formulate
national policies. This has been the weakness of India in the past, this sense of isolation and refusal to see itself
in relation to the states outside the geographical limits of the subcontinent.
In the days of aristocratic rule by monarchs the study of external relations was a mystery entrusted to a small group of people closely connected with the court. The decisions relating to foreign affairs were the last, in most European states, to come under the control of democratic forces. It was carefully kept outside the influence of public opinion. Today,
an informed public opinion is as much a necessity for a wise determination of international policy as a competent and highly trained Foreign Service. To create such public opinion is, however, not an easy task; for, as we have seen, international relationship today is not merely a question of political issues but covers a whole range of national interests which could not be understood or appreciated without careful study.