In the aftermath of America’s “Operation Absolute Resolve” in Venezuela on 3 Jan 2026, countries across the world publicly articulated their respective positions. A majority of states protested the operation, describing it as an attempt to topple the executive head of a sovereign country elected by its people. Some nations, however, supported the US action, arguing that President Nicolás Maduro had undermined democracy and governed Venezuela in an authoritarian manner. China and Russia, often aligned on major international issues, strongly condemned the US intervention, portraying it as part of a broader pattern of hegemonic behavior by Washington.
Amid this global polarization, India adopted a distinct and carefully balanced position. Rather than aligning fully with any camp, India pursued a foreign policy course that reflects a third path in contemporary international relations, an alignment based on India's interest or a policy of multialignment with national interest at its core. As President Donald Trump continued to challenge multilateral institutions originally shaped by the United States and initiated multiple trade and tariff disputes even with close partners such as India, New Delhi refrained from rhetorical escalation and instead quietly recalibrated its diplomatic posture. India’s response to these developments illustrates a foreign policy approach that privileges strategic autonomy over ideological alignment. Rather than reacting impulsively to global pressures, India has consistently emphasized decision-making based on national priorities, domestic needs, and long-term strategic considerations.
Additional tariff on Indian exports
One of the most visible manifestations of US-India tensions was President Trump’s decision in Aug 2025 to impose an additional 25 percent tariff on Indian exports. The stated justification was India’s continued purchase of Russian crude oil despite US sanctions and pressure. Washington suggested that these tariffs could be reconsidered if India reduced or halted its energy imports from Russia.
India, however, did not change its policy. Instead of responding through public confrontation, New Delhi sent a quiet but firm diplomatic signal. Prime Minister Narendra Modi welcomed Russian President Vladimir Putin to New Delhi during his official visit last September. In a rare personal gesture, Prime Minister Modi received President Putin at Palam Airport, underscoring the importance India attaches to its relationship with Russia.
Beyond symbolism, substance followed. India and Russia concluded agreements aimed at ensuring uninterrupted oil supplies to India, reinforcing energy cooperation at a time of global volatility. These decisions were driven by India’s domestic energy needs and economic considerations rather than external pressure.
India’s position was straightforward: Indian leaders are accountable to Indian citizens and must protect Indian interests. India requires reliable and affordable energy supplies, and Russia remains a major and dependable source. While India and Russia have maintained cordial relations for decades, particularly in defense cooperation, recent developments have elevated this partnership to a strategic level. India continues to be one of the largest buyers of Russian defense equipment, further reinforcing mutual dependence. Despite sustained pressure from Washington, Prime Minister Modi chose to follow a course aligned with India’s own strategic roadmap. This episode clearly demonstrated that India’s foreign policy decisions are not dictated by alliance politics but by national necessity.
The Tianjin posture
India’s multialignment was also evident in its engagement with multilateral platforms. A key example was the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit held in Tianjin, China, in late August 2025. As an active SCO member, Prime Minister Modi participated in the high-level summit and held sideline meetings with major leaders, including Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chinese President Xi Jinping. India’s presence at the SCO summit reflected its willingness to engage with Eurasian powers even at a time when relations with the United States were experiencing strain.
However, India also demonstrated diplomatic sensitivity and balance. Prime Minister Modi chose not to attend a separate Chinese victory parade commemorating Japan’s defeat in the Second World War. While President Putin and several other SCO leaders participated in the event, Modi returned to India after the summit concluded.
This decision was deliberate. From India’s perspective, the commemorative event is related to a bilateral historical issue between China and Japan. India maintains strong and friendly relations with Japan and saw no strategic benefit in participating in an event that could complicate those ties. By separating multilateral engagement from bilateral historical narratives, India reinforced its issue-based diplomacy and avoided unnecessary diplomatic signaling.
Another example of India’s balanced approach was its response to the Venezuela crisis. Following the American intervention in Jan 2026, India’s Ministry of External Affairs issued a carefully-worded statement. India neither endorsed the US military action nor defended President Maduro. Instead, it expressed concern over developments in Venezuela and emphasized the safety and welfare of Indian citizens residing there.
For India, the protection of its citizens abroad remains a fundamental responsibility of the state. The MEA’s response reflected India’s long-standing principles of non-interference, respect for sovereignty, and preference for peaceful dialogue. At a time when many countries adopted sharply polarized positions, India chose restraint and balance.
Strategic autonomy
At the heart of these policy choices lies strategic autonomy, a concept deeply embedded in India’s foreign policy tradition. In today’s realist international system, national interest remains the primary driver of state behavior. In this context, Prime Minister Modi and External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar represent a realistic approach to diplomacy-one that places India and Indian citizens above all external considerations.
India maintains issue-based relations with all major powers. It is a strategic partner of the United States and a member of the QUAD, engaging actively in the Indo-Pacific framework. At the same time, India has preserved its deep strategic partnership with Russia, particularly in defense and energy cooperation. Simultaneously, India engages China through platforms such as BRICS and the SCO, even while managing complex bilateral challenges.
India and China also position themselves as prominent voices of the Global South, frequently questioning the dominance and hegemonic tendencies of the Global North. External Affairs Minister Jaishankar has emerged as a leading diplomatic voice articulating the concerns of developing countries on issues ranging from global inequality to institutional reform. Through BRICS, India and China, along with other emerging economies, seek to reduce over-dependence on the US dollar and challenge the weaponization of global financial systems.
Crucially, India does not pursue its relationship with one power at the cost of another. It neither sacrifices ties with China to please the United States nor undermines relations with Washington to accommodate Beijing. This balanced posture defines India’s multialignment policy. Far from compromising sovereignty, India has strengthened it by independently pursuing its foreign policy objectives.
Good neighbourly ties
This approach also shapes India’s neighborhood policy. India has clearly stated that it seeks cooperative relations with neighbors who reciprocate goodwill. If a neighbor adopts an unfriendly posture, India reserves the right to respond appropriately—a position reiterated by External Affairs Minister Jaishankar in recent statements.
In the context of Nepal-India relations, India’s multialignment and non-interference principles were evident. Despite significant political changes within Nepal, India refrained from intervening in domestic affairs. When Nepal experienced a political transition and an interim government was formed to conduct elections, India accepted the change and worked with the government in place. New Delhi supported Nepal’s general election scheduled for 5 March 2026, without showing preference for any political party or ideological orientation.
India’s multialignment foreign policy represents a pragmatic response to a fragmented and uncertain global order. By engaging all major powers while avoiding rigid alliances, India has positioned itself as an independent actor capable of navigating global crises without compromising national interests. Whether in trade disputes, energy security, multilateral diplomacy, or neighborhood relations, India’s actions consistently reflect strategic autonomy, realism, and national priority.
