The RSS should have a foreign policy
The RSS should have a foreign policy
By Radha Rajan
Fears about being labeled ‘Hindu nationalists’ and fears about being abused for ‘militarist and territorial nationalism’ restrained the BJP from formulating and fine-tuning their core belief. A well-defined foreign policy is crucial in governance if Hindus have the vision and are determined to maintain their sphere of control and influence in the region. India’s foreign policy in that case, must necessarily have two components—ideology and pragmatism. While ideology defines the character and intent of the objectives of foreign policy, pragmatism is a tactical instrument to attain the objectives. For Hindu nationalists ideology in foreign policy can only derive from the Hindu worldview which will view statecraft driven by Islam, Christianity, capitalism and Marxism as being inherently predatory by nature and therefore a serious threat to the Hindu way of life. But this is placing the cart before the horse. Hindus need state power to implement a foreign policy consistent with Hindu worldview and Hindu interests.
I personally find the idea behind performing the ashvamedha yajna absolutely breathtaking. The ashvamedha yajna can teach our think-tank foreign policy experts, PMO aspirants and wannabe Track II players a thing or two about defining national interests and how to go about securing them. The ashvamedha yajna was performed by a powerful king, only upon instructions from his Rajaguru or dharmic preceptor to establish dharma or rule of righteousness as far away and as widely around his kingdom as his capability to enforce it. It was also intended to send a strong signal to the kings of other big and small kingdoms that he intended to keep the entire region traversed by the horse firmly under his influence and control. A king who exercised such far reaching control and influence on the strength of his moral authority and military might was acknowledged as chakravarti. In modern parlance such a state would be considered a regional or global power.
The king performing the ashvamedha yajna had to wait until such time as the Rajaguru was convinced that the king had achieved the stature accruing from high moral authority and demonstrable military strength. In short a king could not undertake this high yajna without one or the other. Moral authority alone without the matching military might to enforce dharma could not achieve the objectives of the ashvamedha. Similarly military might without the matching high moral authority would only have reduced the king to an asuravijayi or a maniac super power. The ashvamedha yajna was therefore a yajna and not a lustful march for conquest of territories or plundered wealth.
Sri Rama and Yudhishtra undertook the asvamedha yajna to establish dharma, demonstrate their military might and to reinforce their authority both within the kingdom and in the region. The ashvamedha yajna also has this lesson for the de-Hinduised Indian polity—that the King must not only demonstrate his military might but must also signal his readiness to use force to attain the objectives of the yajna. In the Jain tradition, king Bharata of Ayodhya belonged to the Ikshvaku dynasty and was the son of Rishabdev the first tirthankara. When he performed the ashvamedha yajna, one of the kings who incurred Bharata’s displeasure was the king of a neighboring kingdom who had to face Bharata in war for taxing his subjects unfairly.
A well-defined foreign policy is crucial in governance if Hindus have the vision and are determined to maintain their sphere of control and influence in the region. India’s foreign policy, in that case, must necessarily have two components—ideology and pragmatism.
Against this civilisational understanding of what constitutes the basis for international relations and what it means to be a regional power, ideology in contemporary foreign policy must mirror nothing but national interest and national interest derives from national identity. In today’s context India must attempt to perform the ashvamedha yajna through its foreign policy with the singular objective that India is a Hindu nation and will seek to control its immediate neighborhood and influence the Asian continent to defend Hindu territory and protect Hindu interests. Serious threats to Hindus and their territory is posed by jehadi Islam, evangelising Christianity, Marxism/Maoism/Naxalism, Chinese and American expansionist intentions and failed, failing and unstable states. All countries in the immediate vicinity of the Indian nation have been overrun by one or more of these threats.
The Arthashastra of Kautilya states that neighboring countries pose the biggest threat to national security and must therefore be considered to be potential enemies always. Chanakya also counseled subjugating them and keeping them under our control. Today there is no such thing as the near or distant enemy. The distant enemy is present in the immediate vicinity of our nation and Hindu nationalists must wake up to the menacing and encircling presence of China and the US in the region which we must seek to control.
The time has come for the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) to devise a foreign policy which will achieve for us the twin objectives of keeping not only our own territory under the control of the Hindus of this country but also the region in our vicinity. This has become an urgent need.
The NDA government had neither the world view nor the political will to use force to perform a contemporary ashvamedha yajna. The UPA government too does not have them because unlike the BJP, it does not even pretend to want to undertake the yajna. The RSS must therefore apply itself to devising a foreign policy consistent with our world view and our interests. The BJP for its turn must cultivate a Hindu understanding of the use of force not only to establish righteousness but also to subjugate the enemy. The post-Godhra Gujarat riots were an exemplary lesson of society’s initiative and response to jehadi Islam, a lesson that some of the BJP’s leaders failed to learn or understand. The Americans however understood only too well and denying Narendra Modi visa to travel to the US was intended to humiliate Hindu nationalists who presumed to teach the world how to deal with Islamic terrorism.
The RSS must therefore apply itself to devising a foreign policy consistent with our world view and our interests. The BJP for its turn must cultivate a Hindu understanding of use of force not only to establish righteousness but also to subjugate the enemy.
The Americans realised that if they let the message of the Gujarat riots prevail unchallenged then they would be triggering the beginning of the end to their presence in Asia and the Middle-East. And that is why the US wants to retain all rights to deal with Islam or communism with itself. The rest of the world, India in particular, if they refuse to transform themselves into American client states, have the right only to attempt peace with their enemies.
The Chinese have realised that American presence in the regions close to their borders poses the biggest threat to their authority and are not only forging strategic alliances with Russia to ward off the threat but as in Nepal, they are seeking to increase their sphere of influence. American think-tanks and foreign policy experts do not shy away from stating bluntly that American foreign policy is only about furthering and promoting not just American self-interest but also American values. Samuel Huntington must be thanked for stating the obvious openly. “The American Creed as initially formulated by Thomas Jefferson is the crucial defining element of American identity. The Creed however was the product of the distinct Anglo-Protestant culture of the founding settlers of America in the 17th and 18th centuries. If American identity is defined by a set of universal principles of liberty and democracy then presumably the promotion of these principles in other countries should be the primary goal of American foreign policy”. The US is seeking to conquer the world for the sake of the American Creed. This is the core of all American foreign policy. It is a predatory lust for power that is devoid of moral authority and powered only by military might. The American state’s ruthless ambition to subjugate the rest of the world makes it the classic asuravijayi.
China however is determined not to let the US overrun the region. India on the other hand is aspiring to become a Made-by-the-US super power. Sections of the de-nationalised Hindu elite within the Congress and the BJP would like the US to make us king so that we can become its servant. Resisting or challenging US expansionism is not on their agenda and so we find ourselves in a situation where we have a failed state to the West, a failing state on the East, an unstable state on our forehead and one at our feet, the growing menace of international jehadi and Maoist terrorism and the menacing presence of America and China all around us. We have acquired neither the moral authority nor the military strength or the political will to perform the ashvamedha yajna. This must top the RSS agenda now.
By Radha Rajan
Fears about being labeled ‘Hindu nationalists’ and fears about being abused for ‘militarist and territorial nationalism’ restrained the BJP from formulating and fine-tuning their core belief. A well-defined foreign policy is crucial in governance if Hindus have the vision and are determined to maintain their sphere of control and influence in the region. India’s foreign policy in that case, must necessarily have two components—ideology and pragmatism. While ideology defines the character and intent of the objectives of foreign policy, pragmatism is a tactical instrument to attain the objectives. For Hindu nationalists ideology in foreign policy can only derive from the Hindu worldview which will view statecraft driven by Islam, Christianity, capitalism and Marxism as being inherently predatory by nature and therefore a serious threat to the Hindu way of life. But this is placing the cart before the horse. Hindus need state power to implement a foreign policy consistent with Hindu worldview and Hindu interests.
I personally find the idea behind performing the ashvamedha yajna absolutely breathtaking. The ashvamedha yajna can teach our think-tank foreign policy experts, PMO aspirants and wannabe Track II players a thing or two about defining national interests and how to go about securing them. The ashvamedha yajna was performed by a powerful king, only upon instructions from his Rajaguru or dharmic preceptor to establish dharma or rule of righteousness as far away and as widely around his kingdom as his capability to enforce it. It was also intended to send a strong signal to the kings of other big and small kingdoms that he intended to keep the entire region traversed by the horse firmly under his influence and control. A king who exercised such far reaching control and influence on the strength of his moral authority and military might was acknowledged as chakravarti. In modern parlance such a state would be considered a regional or global power.
The king performing the ashvamedha yajna had to wait until such time as the Rajaguru was convinced that the king had achieved the stature accruing from high moral authority and demonstrable military strength. In short a king could not undertake this high yajna without one or the other. Moral authority alone without the matching military might to enforce dharma could not achieve the objectives of the ashvamedha. Similarly military might without the matching high moral authority would only have reduced the king to an asuravijayi or a maniac super power. The ashvamedha yajna was therefore a yajna and not a lustful march for conquest of territories or plundered wealth.
Sri Rama and Yudhishtra undertook the asvamedha yajna to establish dharma, demonstrate their military might and to reinforce their authority both within the kingdom and in the region. The ashvamedha yajna also has this lesson for the de-Hinduised Indian polity—that the King must not only demonstrate his military might but must also signal his readiness to use force to attain the objectives of the yajna. In the Jain tradition, king Bharata of Ayodhya belonged to the Ikshvaku dynasty and was the son of Rishabdev the first tirthankara. When he performed the ashvamedha yajna, one of the kings who incurred Bharata’s displeasure was the king of a neighboring kingdom who had to face Bharata in war for taxing his subjects unfairly.
A well-defined foreign policy is crucial in governance if Hindus have the vision and are determined to maintain their sphere of control and influence in the region. India’s foreign policy, in that case, must necessarily have two components—ideology and pragmatism.
Against this civilisational understanding of what constitutes the basis for international relations and what it means to be a regional power, ideology in contemporary foreign policy must mirror nothing but national interest and national interest derives from national identity. In today’s context India must attempt to perform the ashvamedha yajna through its foreign policy with the singular objective that India is a Hindu nation and will seek to control its immediate neighborhood and influence the Asian continent to defend Hindu territory and protect Hindu interests. Serious threats to Hindus and their territory is posed by jehadi Islam, evangelising Christianity, Marxism/Maoism/Naxalism, Chinese and American expansionist intentions and failed, failing and unstable states. All countries in the immediate vicinity of the Indian nation have been overrun by one or more of these threats.
The Arthashastra of Kautilya states that neighboring countries pose the biggest threat to national security and must therefore be considered to be potential enemies always. Chanakya also counseled subjugating them and keeping them under our control. Today there is no such thing as the near or distant enemy. The distant enemy is present in the immediate vicinity of our nation and Hindu nationalists must wake up to the menacing and encircling presence of China and the US in the region which we must seek to control.
The time has come for the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) to devise a foreign policy which will achieve for us the twin objectives of keeping not only our own territory under the control of the Hindus of this country but also the region in our vicinity. This has become an urgent need.
The NDA government had neither the world view nor the political will to use force to perform a contemporary ashvamedha yajna. The UPA government too does not have them because unlike the BJP, it does not even pretend to want to undertake the yajna. The RSS must therefore apply itself to devising a foreign policy consistent with our world view and our interests. The BJP for its turn must cultivate a Hindu understanding of the use of force not only to establish righteousness but also to subjugate the enemy. The post-Godhra Gujarat riots were an exemplary lesson of society’s initiative and response to jehadi Islam, a lesson that some of the BJP’s leaders failed to learn or understand. The Americans however understood only too well and denying Narendra Modi visa to travel to the US was intended to humiliate Hindu nationalists who presumed to teach the world how to deal with Islamic terrorism.
The RSS must therefore apply itself to devising a foreign policy consistent with our world view and our interests. The BJP for its turn must cultivate a Hindu understanding of use of force not only to establish righteousness but also to subjugate the enemy.
The Americans realised that if they let the message of the Gujarat riots prevail unchallenged then they would be triggering the beginning of the end to their presence in Asia and the Middle-East. And that is why the US wants to retain all rights to deal with Islam or communism with itself. The rest of the world, India in particular, if they refuse to transform themselves into American client states, have the right only to attempt peace with their enemies.
The Chinese have realised that American presence in the regions close to their borders poses the biggest threat to their authority and are not only forging strategic alliances with Russia to ward off the threat but as in Nepal, they are seeking to increase their sphere of influence. American think-tanks and foreign policy experts do not shy away from stating bluntly that American foreign policy is only about furthering and promoting not just American self-interest but also American values. Samuel Huntington must be thanked for stating the obvious openly. “The American Creed as initially formulated by Thomas Jefferson is the crucial defining element of American identity. The Creed however was the product of the distinct Anglo-Protestant culture of the founding settlers of America in the 17th and 18th centuries. If American identity is defined by a set of universal principles of liberty and democracy then presumably the promotion of these principles in other countries should be the primary goal of American foreign policy”. The US is seeking to conquer the world for the sake of the American Creed. This is the core of all American foreign policy. It is a predatory lust for power that is devoid of moral authority and powered only by military might. The American state’s ruthless ambition to subjugate the rest of the world makes it the classic asuravijayi.
China however is determined not to let the US overrun the region. India on the other hand is aspiring to become a Made-by-the-US super power. Sections of the de-nationalised Hindu elite within the Congress and the BJP would like the US to make us king so that we can become its servant. Resisting or challenging US expansionism is not on their agenda and so we find ourselves in a situation where we have a failed state to the West, a failing state on the East, an unstable state on our forehead and one at our feet, the growing menace of international jehadi and Maoist terrorism and the menacing presence of America and China all around us. We have acquired neither the moral authority nor the military strength or the political will to perform the ashvamedha yajna. This must top the RSS agenda now.
posted by Inquiring Mind at 11:44 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home