India's Foreign Policy Capacity. Issue 2 (3rd April 2019)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Bajpai, Kanti; Chong, Byron
• Is Part Of: Policy design and practice. Volume 2:Issue 2(2019)
• Page Start: 137
• Page End: 162
• Publication Date: 2019-04-03
• Subjects: Policy capacity -- Indian foreign policy -- organizational reforms -- Indian Foreign Service -- Ministry of External Affairs; Policy sciences -- Periodicals; Policy sciences; Electronic journals; Periodicals; 320.6
• DOI: 10.1080/25741292.2019.1615164
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2574-1292

Abstract

Abstract: This paper attempts a qualitative assessment of the policy capacity of India's foreign policy system via an assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of the Indian Foreign Service (IFS) and the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA). India is a rising power and seeks to protect its widening interests and advance its influence in international affairs. Is India's foreign policy capacity up to delivering on its greater ambitions? The answer to that question first of all depends on an assessment of present strengths and weaknesses. Using the policy capacity conceptualization and framework developed by Xun Wu, M. Ramesh, and Michael Howlett, the paper examines the analytical, operational, and political competences of India's Foreign Service at three levels – the individual, organizational, and systemic. The resulting nine elements of policy capacity are then assessed for the Indian foreign policy system in terms of a number of key variables. The analysis reveals that despite being staffed by skillful and highly talented individuals, the institution suffers from considerable weaknesses at the organizational level above all. These weaknesses include: the critical mass of capable IFS officers; the infrastructure for collecting and processing information; the international organization of MEA; and the extent of communication with governance partners and the public. It is vital that India pursues reforms at the organizational level if it wishes to play a bigger and more influential role internationally. Reforms here are challenging but they are more tractable than at the systemic level which requires much larger political and more difficult changes.