Beyond Territoriality: India's Geostrategic Expansion in the 21st Century

    

                                                                                                                                          Introduction: 

Remember history class? The 19th-century “Great Game” was a thrilling, high-stakes spy novel playing out in real life. It was a secret battle for influence and control, mostly between the British and Russian empires, with the mountains and deserts of Central Asia as their chessboard. The goal was simple: dominate the region.

Today, a new Great Game is underway. The players have changed, the chessboard is much bigger, and the goals are far more complex. This time, one of the central players is India. But India isn't playing for an empire. It's playing for its future—for security, the economy, 21st-century strength, and a definitive seat at the world's top table.

This isn't a game of shadows and secrets anymore. It's happening in plain sight, through billion-dollar deals, strategic handshakes, and a foreign policy that is as bold as it is clever. For decades, India was often seen as a "non-aligned" nation, hesitant to pick sides. But the new India is confidently writing its own rulebook. Let's pull back the curtain and understand the moves in this new Great Game, where every decision reshapes the world map.

  First Move: America and the Grand Plan of 'Indo-Pacific'

If we look at a world map, we’ll see the term "Asia-Pacific"—a region covering East Asia and the Pacific Ocean. But about a decade ago, a new term started popping up in global strategy papers and diplomatic meetings:  The Indo-Pacific

This wasn't just a change in geography; it was a change in strategy. Who pushed this idea? Primarily, the United States, Japan, and Australia. Why? Due to the rise and increasingly aggressive nature of China.

The "Indo-Pacific" deliberately places the Indian Ocean at its centre. And who is the natural, dominant power in the Indian Ocean? India.

This was America's grand strategic move. By renaming the region, the US was effectively handing India a central role in a new alliance system designed to counter Chinese expansion. This led to the formation of the Quad (the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue), often called an "Asian NATO," comprising the US, India, Japan, and Australia.

For India, this was a golden opportunity. For years, it faced a two-front challenge: a hostile Pakistan to the west and an increasingly assertive China to the north. Aligning with the US and its allies provided a powerful counterbalance to China. It meant access to better military technology, joint naval exercises to secure sea lanes, and a political partnership that gave India more global heft.

So, the first big move in India's new game was saying "yes" to the Indo-Pacific. It was a signal that India was ready to step out of its non-aligned past and become a net security provider in a vast region. But this was just the public, diplomatic move. The second, more tactical move was happening elsewhere.

 Second and Real The 'Game Changing' Israel Deal with Move:

While the Indo-Pacific strategy made headlines, a quieter, more profound relationship was deepening in the background: the partnership between India and Israel.

For a long time, this relationship was kept under wraps. India had a large Muslim population and traditionally supported the Palestinian cause, so open friendship with Israel was politically tricky. However, over the past decade, it has undergone a significant transformation. The relationship has moved from secret handshakes to a public, strategic embrace.

Why is this a "game-changing" deal? Because it’s about India’s immediate, life-and-death security concerns.

 Counter-Terrorism:  Israel is a forerunner in world intelligence and fighting terrorism. India, which has suffered countless terrorist attacks from Pakistan-based groups, has found an unmatched partner in Israel. The sharing of techniques, technology, and real-time intelligence has been a massive boost for India's security agencies.

 Defence Technology: This is the most significant aspect. When Indian troops were vulnerable in the high mountains of Kashmir, they needed better rifles. They bought Israeli Tavor rifles. When they needed precision-guided missiles and drones, they turned to Israel. The Spike anti-tank missiles and Heron drones are now a core part of India's defence. Perhaps the most dramatic example was in 2019. After a terrorist attack in Pulwama, India needed to strike back deep inside Pakistan. The Indian Air Force used Israeli-made SPICE-2000 guided bombs to destroy terrorist training camps with pinpoint accuracy. This was technology that delivered a direct, strategic message.

 Agriculture and Water: Beyond guns and missiles, Israel helps India with "drip irrigation" technology that allows farmers to grow more food with less water. In a country where millions depend on farming, this is just as strategic as any weapon.

The deal with Israel isn't just a purchase; it's a partnership. It gives India the cutting-edge tools it needs to manage its volatile neighbourhood, especially Pakistan, with confidence.

 Language Similarity: One 'Script', Two 'Actors'

What do India and Israel have in common? On the surface, they seem very different—one a huge, diverse democracy of 1.4 billion people, the other a small, compact nation of only 9 million. But they are acting on the same "script."

That script is a story of survival in a tough neighbourhood.

 Both are Democracies: they are the only two robust democracies in a region dominated by autocracies, monarchies, and unstable regimes.

 Both Face Existential Threats: Both nations were born around the same time (1947-48), amidst violence and have faced wars and threats to their existence ever since. Israel faces hostile neighbours and non-state actors like Hezbollah and Hamas. India faces a similar threat from Pakistan and terrorist groups like Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Mohammed.

 Both have "Bone of Contention" Territories:  Israel has Palestine. India has Kashmir. Both are incredibly complex, emotionally charged disputes that their adversaries use against them on the global stage.

This shared experience means they understand each other's security paranoia perfectly. They don't need to explain why a certain weapon or piece of intelligence is crucial. They just get it. They are two different actors, but they are performing in a play with a very similar plot. This deep understanding makes Israel India's most reliable "tactical" partner.

  Neighbour’s 'Itch': Where is Pakistan's Real Fear?

For decades, Pakistan's entire foreign and military policy was built around one central idea: countering India. It balanced its smaller size and economy by aligning with superpowers—first the US during the Cold War, and then China.

But India's new moves have given Pakistan a real and growing "itch"—a deep-seated fear that the old game is no longer working.

Pakistan's core strategy was to use terrorism as a “proxy war” or "low-cost" tool to keep India tied down in Kashmir. But with Israel's advanced surveillance and precision-strike technology, India can now detect and respond to these threats more effectively than ever before. The 2019 Balakot airstrike was a stark demonstration of this new reality. India proved it could and would strike inside Pakistan, a red line that was previously uncrossed.

This nullifies Pakistan's primary strategy. Furthermore, Pakistan sees the India-Israel-US triangle as a terrifying encirclement. Its traditional ally, China, is helpful, but even China has to think twice before directly confronting a combined front like the Quad.

Pakistan's real fear is not that India will invade. It fears that India is becoming so powerful, economically and militarily, that Pakistan will simply become irrelevant. The gap between the two nations is widening into a chasm, and Pakistan's old playbook has no answers.

 Pakistan's 'Duplicity' and the Gaza Game:

The war in Gaza presented a difficult test for many countries, but for India and Pakistan, it was a moment that revealed their starkly different priorities. Pakistan, as an Islamic state, loudly and consistently condemned Israel and supported the Palestinian cause. This was expected.

India's position was more nuanced, and this is where its mature, self-interested foreign policy shone through. While India has a long history of supporting Palestine and was one of the first countries to recognise the Palestinian state, its statement on the Gaza war was balanced. It also condemned the terrorist attacks on Israeli civilians by Hamas on October 7th, while also expressing concern for the humanitarian crisis in Gaza and supporting a two-state solution.

This balanced approach frustrated Pakistan, which accused India of hypocrisy. But from India's perspective, it was not duplicity; it was pragmatism. India separated its core strategic partnership with Israel (which is vital for its security) from the political issue of Palestine.

Pakistan, on the other hand, tried to use the Gaza issue to rally the Muslim world against India, especially on Kashmir. This is Pakistan's "duplicity"—using the Palestinian cause not just out of solidarity, but as a tool to diplomatically attack India. For India, foreign policy is about national interest. For Pakistan, it often seems to be about countering India, even on global issues far from its borders.

The ongoing conflict in Gaza posed a significant challenge for many nations, particularly highlighting the contrasting priorities of India and Pakistan. Pakistan, being an Islamic state, vocally condemned Israel and supported the Palestinian cause as expected. In contrast, India's response was more measured, reflecting a mature, self-interested foreign policy. While India has historically backed Palestine, its stance during the Gaza war was balanced; it condemned Hamas's terrorist actions on October 7 while also addressing the humanitarian crisis in Gaza and advocating for a two-state solution.

This pragmatic approach displeased Pakistan, which accused India of hypocrisy. However, India maintained that it was acting in its national security interests, separating its strong partnership with Israel from the Palestinian political issue. In contrast, Pakistan attempted to leverage the Gaza situation to galvanise Muslim support against India, particularly regarding Kashmir, demonstrating its own "duplicity." Thus, while India's foreign policy is grounded in national interest, Pakistan often appears focused on countering India, even on issues unrelated to its immediate borders.

 

History Witness: Why is Israel India's 'All-Weather Friend'?

We often hear the term "all-weather friend" used for the relationship between China and Pakistan. It means a friend who sticks with you in good times and bad. Surprisingly, Israel and Russia have become that for India, more than any other nation.

Why? Because the relationship is based on unshakeable mutual need, not just fleeting convenience.

The foundations were laid in secret. In 1962, during the India-China war, Israel supplied India with weapons and ammunition, even though India officially did not recognise Israel. Again, during the 1965 and 1971 wars with Pakistan, Israel was a key supplier. This support in India's darkest hours created a bond of trust.

When full diplomatic relations were finally established in 1992, the partnership exploded. It moved beyond government-to-government deals. Israeli companies set up shop in India. Indian farmers trained in Israel. Indian students went to Israeli universities for technology courses.

Unlike relationships with the US or Russia, which can be affected by changing presidents or global politics, the India-Israel relationship has no such baggage. There are no historical conflicts, no border disputes, and no competition for influence. It is a clean, focused partnership where both sides get exactly what they need: Israel gets a huge market and a strategic ally in a key region, and India gets cutting-edge technology and a reliable partner that doesn't judge its domestic affairs. This is the definition of an all-weather friend.

The Billion Dollar Question: What Will Happen to Russia? India's 'Multi-Alignment 2.0'

This is the burning question. For decades, Russia (and the Soviet Union before it) was India's oldest and most trusted partner. Russia supplied over 60% of India's military equipment, used its UN Security Council veto power to protect India, and helped build India's core industries.

 India’s Increasing Closeness to the US and Israel, Prodding the Russia relationship over?

Far from it. This is where we see the brilliance of India's new foreign policy:  Multi-Alignment 2.0.

The old non-alignment was about staying neutral, avoiding blocs. The new Multi-Alignment is about actively engaging with all blocs, even competing ones, to serve India's interests. It’s like a skilled CEO who does business with competing companies because each one offers something unique.

 From the US & Quad:  India gets strategic cover against China, access to advanced technology, and a place in global supply chains.

 From Israel:  India gets tactical military edge, counter-terrorism know-how, and agricultural technology.

 From Russia:  India gets its core, legacy military hardware (like the S-400 air defence system), cheap oil (which was crucial after the Ukraine war), and a historic partner that still holds veto power at the UN.

India has refused to condemn Russia for the war in Ukraine. While the West is frustrated, they understand India's position. For India, abandoning Russia would be strategically foolish. It would leave its military (which still mostly uses Russian equipment) vulnerable and push Russia completely into China's arms, which is a nightmare scenario for both India and the West.

Therefore, Russia is not going anywhere. It remains a crucial pillar of India's multi-aligned strategy. India is successfully managing a balancing act that few other countries could pull off.

India's foreign policy, termed Multi-Alignment 2.0, emphasises engaging with all global blocs, including those that compete with one another, to enhance its national interests. This strategy differs from the old non-alignment approach by actively involving itself with various powers. Through collaboration with the US and the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (Quad), India secures strategic defence against China, technological advancements, and integration into global supply chains.

Engagement with Israel provides tactical military advantages, counter-terrorism expertise, and agricultural innovations. Meanwhile, ties with Russia ensure access to critical military hardware, affordable oil—particularly vital post-Ukraine war—and maintain a long-standing partnership that retains Russia's UN veto power. India's ongoing refusal to condemn Russia over the Ukraine conflict reflects its strategic interests; severing ties with Russia would weaken its military reliance on Russian equipment and further align Russia with China, posing a significant risk to India's security and the interests of the West. Thus, Russia remains an essential component of India's multi-aligned foreign policy, showcasing India's capacity to navigate complex international relationships effectively.

 Real Goal: 'Self-Reliant India' and a $200 Billion Market

All these strategic moves—the Quad, the Israel partnership, the careful management of Russia—are not ends in themselves. They are a means to one ultimate, grand goal: making India a strong, self-reliant power.

This is the heart of the Prime Minister’s "Atmanirbhar Bharat” or “Self-Reliant India” mission.

The partnerships are designed to help India build its own capabilities. It's not just about buying Israeli drones; it's about learning to ‘make’ them in India. It's not just about buying Russian missiles; it's about joint manufacturing. The goal is to transform India from the world's largest arms importer into a major defence exporter.

This is where the numbers get staggering. India is one of the largest defence markets in the world. Its military budget is over $70 billion and growing. But the real opportunity is in the $200 billion that the Indian government has pledged for infrastructure and defence modernisation over the next 5-10 years.

The world is lining up to get a piece of this pie. But India is no longer just a customer. It's a partner. Every deal now has a clause for "Make in India." By partnering with global leaders, India is acquiring the technology, skills, and industrial base to stand on its own feet.

A self-reliant India does not need to depend on any foreign power during a crisis. It can produce its own weapons, feed its own people, and fuel its own growth. That is the ultimate prize in this new Great Game.

 Conclusion: New India's 'World Guru' Policy

This doesn't mean India wants to rule the world. In Indian tradition, a "Guru" is a teacher, a guide, a respected source of wisdom and stability. India aspires to be that on the world stage—a Vishwa Guru.

It wants to be a voice of reason for the Global South (developing nations of Asia, Africa, and Latin America). It wants to be the country that can talk to both Washington and Moscow, to both Tehran and Tel Aviv. It wants to be a nation that leads not by aggression, but by example—through its economic success, its democratic resilience, and its cultural strength.

The new Great Game is not about conquering territory. It is about building influence, securing prosperity, and crafting a destiny where India is not just a participant in world affairs, but a shape-shifter

 The chessboard is set. India is no longer a pawn; it is a key player, making bold and calculated moves. The alliance with America in the Indo-Pacific is the grand strategy. The deep partnership with Israel is the tactical masterstroke. The careful nurturing of the Russia relationship is the safety net. And the goal of a self-reliant India is the checkmate.

This is a complex, high-risk game. Balancing competing powers is never easy. But for a nation of India's size,  ambition and lucrative market, it is the only game in town. The world is watching as New India writes its own rules, plays its own game, and steps confidently into a future it intends to lead, not to dominate.

 

Disclaimer: This article on India's calculated and balanced rope walking in diplomacy is based solely on documented print sources and other media. While every effort has been made to present accurate perspectives, accounts may vary. As a septuagenarian blogger and non-expert and non-military strategist, I seek your understanding of any limitations. I offer this with utmost respect for the government’s excellent diplomacy, signalling India's emergence as a global power, keeping its eyes on national interest. Readers are encouraged to explore diverse sources for a comprehensive understanding.