About the author

Col RN Ghosh Dastidar (Retired)

Col RN Ghosh Dastidar (Retd) is a keen follower geopolitics around the globe and an amateur freelance journalist.

Read More About: Col RN Ghosh Dastidar (Retired)



  1. Joy Dasgupta

    Interesting, well analysed article, on India’s compulsions on maintaining Strategic balancr with US,Russia & China..
    Keep it up Dusty.

  2. Colonel Vinod Kumar Sharma

    Nice article on a very important issue. It is really very difficult to tread a non aligned path in a present day world where our national needs and interests are controlled one way or other by the concerned powers. India needs to be militarily and economically strong to pursue this policy. Moreover, a stable government can really plan and execute this policy.

  3. Kapil Dev

    This Article by Col RN Ghosh Dastidar provides a very apt analysis of the complexities of India – US relationship. USA needs India as a counter to China and to contain latter’s increasing strategic influence in South Asia &Indo Pacific region. India too requires USA to counter China, with which it has unsettled borders and sporadic border clashes. This mutual need of India & USA to support each other explains US going lengths to accommodate India’s divergent views/ actions, be it over Ukraine or weapons and oil from Russia.
    However, on India remaining Non -aligned going forward, one may have to reconsider. Non Alignment, to whatever extent in spirit it was true, may have served the purpose earlier but with a hostile, belligerent China, an aspiring a Second Super power, knocking on it’s doors; India will probably look for US support. We may still be able to pursue our Independent Foreign policy and not become US camp followers. But to follow a true stand alone Non aligned policy, may not suit our interests.
    The author has covered these aspects very well, wherein he says that USA respects India’s strategic autonomy. At the same time, India too has shown clear intent in enhancing it’s economic, scientific and strategic relations with USA through various pacts, agreements and frequent engagements at the highest levels.

    1. Rabindra

      Candid. Thanks Kapil.

  4. Amit

    A very well written article. It covers almost all the aspects of Indo-US relations. India’s neutral stance towards joining either the US or Russia/China is the key to its foreign diplomacy. It is also imperative that India must leverage the platform of QUAD to downplay the Chinese assertion & growing influence in the Pacific. The way China is exerting pressure along our land borders by false claims & stand offs, similarly, international pressure must continue along China’s maritime border.

  5. Col RS Sidhu

    The term ‘non-aligned’, though coined in the early 1950s, had come to be discredited before the turn of the century, with the collapse of the erstwhile USSR. The geopolitical stage then was acknowledged to be bipolar, led by the then rival superpowers US and USSR. The Non-Aligned Movement (NAM), of which India was one of the pioneers, represented an irrelevant Third pole. China, after its breakup with USSR, had charted an independent geopolitical path for itself, despite lagging very far behind in all global development parameters. Its rapprochement with the USA in the early 1970s, slowly and steadily tilted the balance of power in favour of the US. A weak but adversarial China was enough to pose a two front threat to USSR.

    Fifty years down the line, India today stands at similar geopolitical crossroads, but with a difference. China has emerged as the second pole on the global stage to challenge the geopolitical supremacy of US. Russia is now aligned with China as the junior partner. India is being actively wooed by the US to overcome the challenge being posed by China. But that is where the similarity ends.

    India is no longer looking at revival of NAM, but is adopting a multi-lateral approach, as evidenced by its active participation in SCO, QUAD, and BRICS groupings. The collapse of USSR was more due to economic overreach, rather then induced by a strategic defeat. Currently, too, the battle for geopolitical supremacy is being fought by weaponising economic factors. Like China, in the 1990s, was in the process of restructuring its economy, so adopted a pragmatic hands-off approach, India too is currently involved in restructuring its economy, hence, can ill-afford to dissipate its meagre economic resources in geopolitical squabbles. An economically weak but adversarial India occupies the envious position of being the deciding factor in the ongoing geopolitical power play.

    1. Rabindra Nath

      RS, you describe what I state as NAM, as a multi lateral approach in our foreign policy, based more on needs driven by economics , with an aim to accelerate development.

      There’s a lot of merit in your assessment and possibly a more logical way to make sense of our foreign dealings.
      Thanks RS.

  6. Rabindra

    Your assessment of our Foreign policy, more driven by economic needs to accelerate our development and as also strategic needs is a more logical explanation, terming it as a multilateral approach.

    But yet , in yesteryears NAM did stand up to mainly US and Western domination without appearing to be aligned or supportive of USSR.

    Even now in UN , with nearly 40 nations abstaining to vote against Russia is an indication that countries can exist and develop without joining a power block.

    NAM may not revive but the thought, the idea will stay alive.

    Thanks RS, always a treat to read your writings.

  7. Colonel K Ramachandran

    The signals emanating from the foreign office in the recent past are often confused ones. The foreign policies of Nehruvian era was clear cut and kept both US and USSR blocks at equidistance. The NAM stalwarts in those days were Nehru, D’gaul Nasser and the like. They refused to join any of the two blocks and was relevant in the geo political stage of sixties. However, with the breakup of USSR, US became the only superpower. India started swinging closer towards US. Of late , during the Trump era, India started leaning still more towards the US. ( Remember How d Modi and ab ki bar Modi Sarkaar slogans by Trump) In the meantime, China’s geopolitical standings became stronger. Therefore, both India and US wanted to tackle the growth of China and coined various alliances like QUAD, BRICS, SCO etc. But during the recent Ukraine issue India refused to side with US and defied US sanctions on Russia purely due to economic reasons. India eyed the petroleum import at cheap rates from Russia and continued to do so even now. But to neutralise China’s proximity to Russia, Indian foreign minister sounded timid in saying that we cannot confront China in retaking our recently lost territories and China’s development of border villages near Arunachal and Bhutan. At the same time, India sounds quite determined to send out stern warnings to our estranged neighbour, Pakistan. It all, throw up a kind of confusion in the mind of Indian foreign office as to how to deal with different situations and different countries in the current geopolitical scene. India must take a firm stand on these issues rather than sending out confused signals.

    1. Rabindra

      Thanks Sir.

  8. Dr.Deepankar Mukherjee

    Thanks for your well studied and researched
    article.You rightfully focused on present issues, engaging the historical facts also.
    Definitely trade is one important angle to
    build a sustaining relationship among nations but this is also true every nation believes in ‘who will Bell the cat’.
    India is strong in democracy ,huge population and economic growth but perplexed in creating a balance between super powers and fox powers.
    India must secure it’s different ends then
    adopt philanthropic view for various groups.
    Finally I appreciate your efforts. In


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

©2024 Bharatshakti