Introduction

Even over half a century after its founder's passing, Nehruvian non-alignment continues to cast a lasting influence over the practice and study of Indian foreign policy. The precise extent of its influence, however, has been a widely debated topic in India's foreign policy scholarship. For some, non-alignment has constituted the core feature of India's foreign policy consensus from independence to the present day, irrespective of differences in ‘leadership styles’ between India's largest political parties. On the other extreme, others have dismissed the notion of a foreign policy consensus among the Indian elite as a mere myth that was sustained by the Indian National Congress (INC) party's ‘dominance over the Indian political landscape’ for over four decades. Finally, straddling the two sides is the view that whereas Indian foreign policy was in fact guided by elite consensus on non-alignment during the Cold War, the Soviet Union's collapse and the end of bipolarity brought down India's foreign policy consensus along with it, allowing more realist tendencies to take hold. Despite their differences, these scholarly views share the assumption that Indian elites serve as the primary locus of consensus or contestation in Indian foreign policy. Citing a host of factors, including high levels of poverty and illiteracy, a lack of information, and a preoccupation with living conditions, some scholars argue that Indian voters tend to exhibit apathy towards most foreign policy issues. Despite the few attempts at challenging this view, the idea that foreign policy has been a strictly elitist affair remains foundational to the study of Indian foreign policy.

Building on Cantir and Kaarbo's domestic role contestation framework, this chapter seeks to break the scholarly impasse on non-alignment and challenge the conventional wisdom on the marginal role of public opinion in the making of Indian foreign policy. It begins from the premise that non-alignment serves as a core constitutive feature of India's national identity that informs the views held by Indian elites and public opinion as to whatroles India should play on the world stage. Indian elites and public opinion can shape or constrain what roles the government chooses to play through horizontal and vertical contestation, respectively. Their success in doing so, however, is mediated by the political or institutional conditions that characterize the domestic sphere.