Model Answer
0 min readIntroduction
The adage, "There is no permanent friend or permanent enemy, only permanent interests," is a cornerstone of Realpolitik in international relations. This pragmatic understanding of state interactions finds a profound echo in the ancient Indian treatise, the *Arthashastra*, attributed to Kautilya (also known as Chanakya or Vishnugupta). Penned around the 4th century BCE, the *Arthashastra* is a comprehensive manual on statecraft, economic policy, and military strategy. Kautilya's views on sovereignty are deeply rooted in a realist philosophy, where the paramount goal of the state, embodied by the *Vijigishu* (the aspiring conqueror), is self-preservation, security, and expansion. This overarching interest dictates all alliances and antagonisms, rendering sentiments of permanent friendship or enmity obsolete in the cold calculations of power.
Kautilya's Conception of Sovereignty and State Interest
For Kautilya, the sovereignty of the state, represented by the King (Swami), is absolute and indivisible. Its primary objective is the material well-being (*artha*) and security of its people and territory. This pursuit of *artha* is not merely economic but encompasses the holistic strength and prosperity of the state. All state actions, especially in foreign policy, must be guided by this supreme national interest. Kautilya's statecraft is characterized by a pragmatic and amoral approach, where means are justified by the end of securing the state's welfare.
- Saptanga Theory: Kautilya conceptualized the state as having seven interdependent elements: the Swami (King), Amatya (Ministers), Janapada (Territory and People), Durga (Fortifications), Kosha (Treasury), Danda (Army), and Mitra (Allies). The strength and proper functioning of each element are crucial for the state's sovereignty and survival.
- Prioritization of State Security: Kautilya emphasized that a strong treasury and army are fundamental for good governance and strong defense capabilities. The welfare of the people is directly linked to the stability and security of the state, which the sovereign must constantly strive to achieve.
Fluidity of Relations: No Permanent Friends or Enemies
Kautilya's foreign policy doctrines explicitly articulate the idea that relationships between states are not based on sentiment but on constantly shifting power dynamics and mutual interests. A friend today can become an enemy tomorrow, and vice versa, if interests diverge or power balances shift. This fluidity is best understood through his:
1. Mandala Theory (Circle of States)
The Mandala theory is Kautilya's geopolitical framework for inter-state relations, which hypothesizes that a state's allies or adversaries depend on their geographical position relative to the central state (the *Vijigishu*). It posits a system of concentric circles:
- Immediate Neighbor as Natural Enemy: Kautilya asserted that the immediate neighbor of a king is a natural enemy (*Prakritik Ari*) due to geographical proximity and inherent expansionist tendencies, as securing land is vital for material well-being.
- Neighbor of the Enemy as Natural Friend: Consequently, the state located beyond the immediate enemy's territory is considered a natural friend (*Prakritik Mitra*) because their interests align in counterbalancing the common enemy. This reflects the principle, "the enemy of my enemy is my friend."
- Other Classifications: The theory also includes *Madhyama* (intermediary king, capable of helping or hindering both the *Vijigishu* and the enemy) and *Udasina* (neutral king, powerful and outside the immediate conflict zone).
This dynamic system demonstrates that alliances are strategic and transactional, formed to achieve specific objectives, typically the weakening of an adversary or the enhancement of one's own power.
2. Shadguna Siddhanta (Six-Fold Policy)
To navigate the complex Mandala, Kautilya prescribed a six-fold foreign policy framework (*Shadguna Siddhanta*) that a *Vijigishu* should adopt depending on their strength relative to other states:
| Policy (Sanskrit Term) | Description | Rationale/Application |
|---|---|---|
| Sandhi (Peace/Treaty) | Entering into agreements or alliances. | Adopted when weaker or when needing to consolidate power, strengthen economy, or prepare for future conflicts. |
| Vigraha (War/Hostility) | Engaging in open conflict. | Chosen when the king is confident in superior power and military strength. |
| Asana (Neutrality/Indifference) | Remaining passive or non-aligned. | When taking sides is not advantageous or when a state is of equal strength to the enemy. |
| Yana (Marching/Preparation) | Making military preparations or a show of strength. | To demonstrate intent or readiness for action without immediate engagement. |
| Samsraya (Seeking Shelter/Alliance) | Seeking protection or joining a stronger power. | When significantly weaker and unable to defend itself; to build strength. |
| Dvaidhibhava (Dual Policy) | Simultaneous peace with one and war with another. | A strategy to exploit divisions among enemies, making peace with one while engaging in hostilities with another. |
These policies are not rigid but flexible tools to be employed pragmatically based on the assessment of power, timing, and specific state interests. A king should not hesitate to break any friendship or alliances found to be disadvantageous. This underscores the transactional nature of relationships.
Relevance in Modern International Relations
Kautilya's philosophy, despite being ancient, remains remarkably relevant in contemporary international relations. The core tenets of his statecraft align closely with modern realist thought, emphasizing national interest, power projection, and strategic maneuvering:
- Realpolitik: Modern foreign policy, particularly among major powers, often prioritizes national interest over ideological alignment or historical ties. The shifting alliances and rivalries in regions like the Indo-Pacific, with countries balancing relations with the US and China, exemplify Kautilyan pragmatism.
- Balance of Power: The Mandala theory's emphasis on geographic positioning and forming alliances against immediate threats is a classic balance of power strategy. India's strategic partnerships with countries beyond its immediate neighborhood (e.g., Quad with US, Japan, Australia) can be seen through a Kautilyan lens, aimed at balancing regional powers.
- Economic Diplomacy and Strategic Autonomy: Kautilya's focus on *artha* translates to modern economic diplomacy. Nations pursue trade agreements, investments, and economic partnerships based on their perceived national benefit, even with countries with whom they have political differences. The pursuit of strategic autonomy by many nations reflects Kautilya's emphasis on maximizing state power and reducing dependence.
- Dual Policy (Dvaidhibhava): Nations often employ dual policies, maintaining diplomatic channels while also strengthening military capabilities or engaging in covert operations. India's approach to its neighbors, engaging in dialogue while maintaining strong defense postures, is an example.
Conclusion
Kautilya's view on sovereignty unequivocally champions the state's security, prosperity, and expansion as the ultimate goals, overriding sentimental notions of enduring friendships or enmities. His *Arthashastra* provides a profound realist framework, where inter-state relations are dynamic and determined solely by strategic self-interest, power calculations, and geopolitical imperatives, as vividly illustrated by the Mandala theory and Shadguna Siddhanta. This ancient Indian wisdom offers timeless insights into statecraft, reminding us that in the intricate dance of international politics, adaptability, pragmatism, and a clear-eyed focus on national interest are the enduring virtues of a sovereign state, mirroring the often-cited maxim: there are no permanent friends or enemies, only permanent interests.
Answer Length
This is a comprehensive model answer for learning purposes and may exceed the word limit. In the exam, always adhere to the prescribed word count.