MAHARASHTRA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY MUMBAI

SEMESTER – III ( FINAL DRAFT )

TOPIC :

A Theoretical and Conceptual Correlation to External Factors in India's

Internal Security

SUBMITTED BY: NISHIT GOKHRU, 2020 149 (SECTION- A)

ANURAG KALE, 2020 150 (SECTION- A)

UNDER THE GUIDANCE OF: SHRIYA MOKTA MAM

As no nation's security is self-contained, national security concerns are fundamentally justified.
The intricate interaction of geographical locations, historical, cultural, and political legacies, and
tactical, political, and socioeconomic objectives, all have a crucial role in a nation state's
security. A state's security issues can also be considered to be intertwined with its strategic,
governmental, economic, social, cultural, and ecological interests. As global powers' objectives
change over time, so do the state's and its neighbouring states' self-interests, and thus a state's
security worries.

1. India's security challenges through the prism of IR theory of Realism

Over time, realism has come to be regarded as one of the most important theories of international
relations.

The realist school has served a crucial role in the development and survival of International
Relations as an unique academic field, where, above all else, a state's quest of security through
the accumulation and projection of power has been of essential significance. The state is the
primary player, and it is the job of its political establishment and institutions to pursue the best
possible path to protect the factors that make its national security feasible. The pursuit of national
interest, according to realism, is the driving force underlying all governmental acts. Despite
differing perspectives and understandings of the elements that make up the presumption and idea
of national security, there is a near-unanimity in realism regarding the importance of national
interest and how nation states accumulate and project their Comprehensive National Power just
for their interest of the country.

Realism include the study of governance in relation to domestic and global security, as well as a
knowledge of the world as it is, rather than how it should be. Morgenthau and other realists
focused on understanding the character of people in general, which is mostly governed by their
desire to gain power via various ways in order to enhance the maintenance and advancement of
their own objectives. This awareness is transferred to a state's greater levels, where the methods
and means by which it uses means to fight challenge and preserve security must be grasped.
Power, according to realism, is both relational and relative.
Most evaluations and analysis in realism are made via the lens of the state, and the three S's of
realism are mirrored in the terms 'statism’, ‘survival,' and' self-help.'As 'statism' is the core of
realism because it views the state as the principal actor, 'survival' is the major or ultimate goal of
the state, and 'self-help' is the basis since no other state can ensure a state's continuation. A state's
principal concern is to ensure its existence, which entails maintaining its geographical integrity,
population, and, in certain cases, the political order in place.

Rebel and terrorist organisations operating within a nation's territory provide a variety of security
concerns and problems, including attacks on the state's sovereignty, territorial integrity,
harmony, and stability, as well as a sense of uneasiness among its citizens. Considering its
location and the types of security threats it has faced over the years, state like India must invest
heavily in its national capabilities. Realism asserts that a country's security strategy should be
influenced only by national interest.

2. India's security challenges through the prism of IR theory of Neo-Realism

The idea of neoliberalism is mostly ascribed to American professor Kenneth Waltz, who
published it in his major work ‘Theory of International Politics’. As a version of the realist
school, Neo-realism fully embraces the premise that the state is perhaps the most essential
element in the world relations, and the aspect of self-help may be linked to Neo-realism's. The
neo-realist variety, on the other hand, focuses on the nature of the international system, which is
referred to as a 'anarchy,' which refers to the lack of a centralized power to implement order in
the international system. That's why neo-realism is known as 'structural realism,' because it
stresses the international system's structure as the deciding element in a state's pattern of
behaviour. It asserts that a country's security and existence should not be reliant on other
countries or perhaps even international organizations.

In several respects, waltz's neo-realism differs from classic realism. In realism, states' decisions
are addressed via inductive theory, which interprets the state's actions and reactions, however in
neo-realism, influence of structure, i.e. anarchy, which is the international system's organising
principle, is taken into consideration. Ex - a realist might attribute the action to test nuclear
weapons by India and Pakistan to the impact of politicians in both countries, their long-standing
animosity, and their geographical factors, a neo-realist would attribute any such action to the
global system's anarchy, or the total absence of a prevalent or central international power to
implement and maintain system into place.

Anarchy necessitates military strength for a state to exist and demonstrate its power, that's
because a state with more military power will typically have more impact. As per Waltz, nations
want to maximise security via power, and if security is attained, there is no incentive for them to
amass excessive authority. This safety demand for India may be critically analysed by asking
questions such as how much protection is sufficient for the country, what security is required for,
and how security will be delivered, among other things. All countries, as per neorealism, are
basically identical since they have comparable features such as sovereignty, territory, population,
and a centralized control authority, and can only be distinguished by the concept of varied
capacities.

It is necessary to comprehend how India protects its existence via its capabilities in the face of an
anarchic international system in order to apply neo-realism doctrine to India. India's strengths
must be viewed in light of its diverse resources, material resources in regards of military and
economic strength, and technical competence. India's regional and international ambitions are
linked to how well the country can establish a more suitable atmosphere for the advancement of
its interests both domestically and in its near vicinity, where the majority of the country's
security issues originate. In an environment of global anarchy, India must rely heavily on its own
capacities to protect its objectives.

3. India's security challenges through the prism of IR theory of Offensive and defensive
Realism.

There are two types of neo-realism, or structural realism: 'offensive realism' and 'defensive
realism.' Offensive realism seeks strength and influence by hegemony and predominance,
whereas defensive realism maintains that the international system's anarchic nature drives
governments to pursue security through cautious and restrained measures. According to
defensive realism, offensive realists' ambitious growth disrupts nations' inclination to validate the
power structure thesis.

Therefore, these 2 neo-realist variations contrast in how the anarchic international order is
viewed, and whether it promotes nations to maximise their security and safety or their wealth and
privilege.

Defensive realism, out of it's two forms of neo-realism, may be more suited to India's security
concerns, given the country's security threats originate from a variety of domestic and foreign
sources. Apart from focusing at merely the domestic imperatives of India's internal security
concerns, the realistic paradigm is required in India because of the danger links of external
groups. The realist paradigm gives clear idea as to how and why certain nations use various
methods, such as providing assistance to militants and other extreme forces operating within the
borders of other countries. It is self-evident that certain regimes' aid for terror and extremist
forces is motivated by a variety of goals and also proxy division of power.

4. India's security challenges through the prism of IR theory of Liberalism

In terms of methods for addressing internal security concerns, non-liberalism, another well-
known theory of international relations, may be linked to the study's issue. Scholars such as
Joseph Nye and Robert Keohane are significantly responsible for the tenets and conceptions of
neoliberalism. Neo-liberals, much like neo-realists, sought to objectively interpret liberalism's
beliefs in order to explain the evolving international environment and state actions that led to
conceptions of dependency.

Neoliberalism is often regarded as among the most serious challenges to the neorealist
worldview. Nonetheless, neo-realists and neoliberals share a bunch of concepts in common, one
being the anachic system's deciding influence on the state's cognitive element. The argument
between neo-realism and neo-liberalism has overshadowed international affairs discussions in
recent years. These two schools have been strongly represented in the environment of academia
and the tactical community throughout the world in terms of methodological approaches and
perspectives.

Although neoliberalism accords well with neorealist idea of anarchy, it does not rule out the
possibility of collaboration among nations. According to this thesis, nation-state cooperation may
be fostered through international structure and economic interdependence. Therefore, in order to
better evaluate the implications of neoliberalism on the potential outcome of India's collaboration
with other nation states, questions such as: to what degree can India rely on these partnership;
what are the disadvantages of combating terrorism or counterinsurgency collaboration with other
individual nations, etc. can be asked.

5. India's security challenges and comparitive applicability of 'Neo- Realism' and 'Neo-
Liberalism'

In the field of international relations, both neo-realism and neo-liberalism have been widely used
in investigation and policymaking. Although both theoretical frameworks emphasise the
dominance of states as the central concept in international affairs, neoliberalism also
acknowledges the existence of non actors and number of co institutions. Though neoliberalism
does not dismiss the use of armed power as a key part of politics and diplomacy, it contends that
it is not the sole component of statecraft, and that the economy must also be taken into account.
These models focus on deciding force of anarchy, while neoliberalism places a greater emphasis
on the potential of state collaboration.

The notion of absolute or relative rewards is among the concepts that distinguishes neo-realism
from neo-liberalism. Neoliberalism seems to be more concerned with finding solutions to
achieve a win-win situation rather than a zero-sum contest. Neoliberalism seeks to describe how
nations might build on a more positive notion of cooperation while working in their own self-
interest. Cooperation isn't assured, and it can't be taken lightly, but it encourages governments to
cooperate and collaborate.

For a variety of reasons, including tackling security issues, neoliberals trust global institutions to
offer coordinating mechanisms for country states to foster cooperative attitudes. Establishing a
feeling of connectivity among nation states is seen to be critical for receiving advance awareness
of dangers and being prepared to address them. Diverse states might have varied concepts of
country's interest that may not always coincide with each other, but the fact of economic
interdependence among nations has an impact on states' willingness to work together to address
and mitigate security threats. Neo-liberalism and neo-realism both are state-centric theories,
commonly known as system-maintainer concepts.

India has launched a variety of attempts to join forces with nations in its neighbourhood and
also beyond, mostly for economic and political reasons, with the goal of counter-terrorism and
counter-insurgency tactics. India has collaborated with a lot of nations to help address domestic
security threats, whether through sharing intelligence or joint military exercises. Most of
the infrastructure and economic interconnection projects currently being designed across South
Asia and Southeast Asia, within which India has now been aligning with most of South Asian
and Southeast Asian states, can also be seen as attempts to control a number of issues of national
security by enhancing economic cooperation.

India's Neighbourhood and Its Threat Perceptions

Each of India's South Asian neighbours, including Pakistan, Nepal, Bhutan, Bangladesh,
Myanmar, Sri Lanka, and the Maldives, have shared ages of historical, social, and linguistic links
with India. India is far larger geographically, economically, militarily, and in terms of population
than these neighbouring countries, and as a result, these countries are wary of India's hegemony.

India's neighbours look beyond the region for power balance, and China has taken full advantage
of this. China has acquired commercial and military objectives in all of India's bordering
countries. For India, the critical economic and military link between Pakistan and China is
already a major security threat. Pakistan unlawfully handed a section of Jammu and Kashmir
(Shaksgam Valley) to China in 1963, and the Chinese developed a key strategic roadway
connecting Pakistan and China through Karakoram Pass through Pakistan-occupied Kashmir
(POK). China is also constructing the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) with Pakistan,
which would offer China accessibility to the Arabian Sea.

Pakistan has been participating, supporting, and helping a variety of anti-India organisations and
non-state actors, as well as orchestrating atrocious terrorist operations inside Indian territory that
have resulted in terrible civilian losses, since the late 1980s, with a common objective of
destabilising India. A lot of academics have looked into the dynamics of tension between India
and Pakistan. In recent times, at retaliation to assaults on Indian military facilities and convoys
by non-state groups backed by Pakistan, India has called Pakistan's trick by conducting surgical
strikes on terror centers within Pakistan-occupied Kashmir, as was did in Balakot.

Hence, India's fragility and most of its security problems stem from its history's non-realistic
geographic borders, hostile power move by its South Asian neighbours, and China's strategic
confinement strategies, as well as its growing desire to become a global power. In the light of
each of India's neighbours, the security considerations and vulnerability of India may be
analysed in greater depth.