Navigating the Cold War: India’s Foreign Policy from Shastri to Rajiv Gandhi

When Jawaharlal Nehru died in 1964, India inherited a foreign policy built on non-alignment, moral diplomacy, and faith in international cooperation. But the world was changing fast. Wars on the border, a hostile neighbourhood, and the intense rivalry of the Cold War forced his successors to rethink the rulebook. Over the next two decades, Prime Ministers Lal Bahadur Shastri, Indira Gandhi, and Rajiv Gandhi steered the country through war, nuclear ambition, and military intervention abroad. The story of this period is essentially the story of how idealism gradually gave way to pragmatism, and how a young nation learned to put its own security and interests first.

The Nehruvian inheritance and a changing world 🔗

Nehru’s foreign policy rested on the idea that a newly independent country could stay out of the superpower contest between the United States and the Soviet Union. The Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) was the cornerstone of this vision, along with the principles of Panchsheel and a belief in peaceful coexistence. This approach gave the country moral authority on the global stage.

However, the 1962 war with China had already exposed the limits of pure idealism. Military weakness had real consequences. By the time Shastri took office, the leadership understood that diplomacy needed to be backed by hard power. The shift was not sudden, but the direction was clear: national interest would increasingly shape decisions that were once guided by principle alone.

Lal Bahadur Shastri and the test of 1965 🔗

Shastri became Prime Minister in 1964 at a difficult moment. He was a soft-spoken leader, often underestimated, but his short tenure produced one of the most defining episodes in the country’s military and diplomatic history.

The 1965 war with Pakistan 🔗

The most defining moment of Shastri’s time in office was the second war with Pakistan in 1965. The conflict grew out of long-standing tension over Kashmir. Pakistan launched Operation Gibraltar, sending infiltrators into Jammu and Kashmir in an attempt to spark a local uprising. When this failed, the conflict escalated into a full-scale war.

Shastri’s most consequential decision was to open a front across the international border towards Lahore, rather than confining the fighting to Kashmir. This shifted India’s posture from a defensive, Kashmir-centric stance to an offensive one that threatened Pakistan’s heartland. The move forced Pakistan to disperse its forces and is widely seen as a turning point in the war. His slogan, “Jai Jawan, Jai Kisan,” captured the spirit of self-reliance in both defence and food production.

The Tashkent Declaration of 1966 🔗

The war ended in a stalemate, followed by a United Nations ceasefire. What came next was a significant diplomatic development. The Soviet Union stepped in as a mediator, with Premier Alexei Kosygin inviting Shastri and Pakistani President Ayub Khan to Tashkent in the then Soviet Union. The Tashkent Declaration was signed in January 1966.

Under the agreement, both countries agreed to withdraw their forces to positions held before August 1965, restore diplomatic and economic ties, and commit to non-interference in each other’s affairs. The declaration had two lasting effects. First, it was criticised at home because it did not include a no-war pact or any firm guarantee on Kashmir. Second, and more importantly for the long term, it marked the entry of the Soviet Union as an active power broker in South Asian affairs. Tragically, Shastri died in Tashkent the day after signing the agreement, making him the first Prime Minister to die abroad.

Indira Gandhi: from idealism to realism 🔗

Indira Gandhi served as Prime Minister from 1966 to 1977 and again from 1980 to 1984. Under her leadership, foreign policy moved decisively away from the idealistic Nehruvian framework towards a more assertive and pragmatic one. She was willing to use both diplomacy and military force to secure the country’s strategic goals, and her decisions reshaped the regional balance of power.

Tilting towards the Soviet Union 🔗

The most significant change under Indira Gandhi was the visible tilt towards the Soviet Union. By 1971, a Washington-Beijing-Islamabad axis was taking shape, with the United States moving closer to both China and Pakistan. This left the country diplomatically exposed at a critical moment, especially as a refugee crisis from East Pakistan was building up.

In response, India signed the Indo-Soviet Treaty of Peace, Friendship and Cooperation in August 1971. The treaty included provisions for mutual consultation and assistance in the event of an external threat. For a country that had long championed non-alignment, signing such a treaty was a remarkable departure. It was driven not by ideology but by hard calculation about national security.

The 1971 war and the birth of Bangladesh 🔗

The 1971 war was the high point of Indira Gandhi’s foreign policy. The crisis began with the political and humanitarian disaster in East Pakistan, where the military crackdown by West Pakistan pushed millions of refugees across the border. India intervened in support of the Bengali liberation movement, the Mukti Bahini.

The Soviet treaty proved its worth during the conflict. When the United States dispatched its Seventh Fleet towards the Bay of Bengal in a show of pressure, the Soviet Union backed India diplomatically, helping to keep the conflict contained. The war ended swiftly with the surrender of Pakistani forces and the creation of Bangladesh. This victory transformed the country into the dominant power in South Asia and demonstrated a new confidence in using military strength to achieve clear objectives.

The 1974 nuclear test 🔗

In May 1974, India conducted its first nuclear test at Pokhran in Rajasthan, codenamed “Smiling Buddha.” The government described it as a peaceful nuclear explosion, but the strategic message was unmistakable. The test signalled the country’s entry into a small group of nations with demonstrated nuclear capability.

The decision reflected a security environment shaped by China’s nuclear test of 1964 and persistent tensions with Pakistan. The international reaction was sharply critical. The United States and other powers tightened export controls on nuclear technology, and the test contributed to the creation of new global non-proliferation regimes. Yet it firmly established strategic autonomy and self-reliance as central goals, a theme that would define the country’s security policy for decades.

Rajiv Gandhi: technology, vision, and intervention 🔗

Rajiv Gandhi came to power in 1984 after his mother’s assassination. A younger leader with a modern outlook, he combined a vision of technological progress and global disarmament with a willingness to use military power in the immediate neighbourhood. His foreign policy was a study in contrasts, idealistic on the world stage but interventionist closer to home.

The Indo-Sri Lanka Accord and the IPKF 🔗

The most controversial chapter of Rajiv Gandhi’s foreign policy was the intervention in Sri Lanka. The island nation was gripped by a civil war between the Sinhalese-majority government and Tamil militant groups, chiefly the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE). The conflict sent refugees into Tamil Nadu and raised fears that the demand for a separate Tamil homeland could spill across the strait.

In July 1987, Rajiv Gandhi and Sri Lankan President J.R. Jayewardene signed the Indo-Sri Lanka Accord. The agreement aimed to end the war by devolving powers to Tamil-majority provinces and disarming the militant groups. As part of this arrangement, India sent the Indian Peace Keeping Force (IPKF) to Sri Lanka at the request of the Sri Lankan government.

What began as a peacekeeping mission quickly turned into a bloody counter-insurgency campaign. The IPKF became embroiled in direct combat with the LTTE, suffering heavy casualties in operations such as the fight for Jaffna. The mission did not achieve its goals, and the force was withdrawn in 1990. This was the only time the military was deployed overseas on a long-term basis, and the experience left deep scars. The intervention damaged relations with Sri Lanka, and in 1991 the LTTE assassinated Rajiv Gandhi in revenge for the IPKF operations.

The push for disarmament and regional cooperation 🔗

On the global stage, Rajiv Gandhi presented a very different face. In June 1988, he placed before the UN General Assembly his Action Plan for a Nuclear-Weapon-Free and Non-Violent World Order. The plan called for time-bound, universal, and verifiable nuclear disarmament. It echoed the older idealism of the Nehru era while giving it a fresh, structured form.

He also gave momentum to regional cooperation. He was an active supporter of the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC), formally launched in Dhaka in 1985, which aimed to promote collective self-reliance among the countries of the region. At the same time, his government significantly expanded defence capability, with a major push on missile development through programmes like Agni and Prithvi. This combination of disarmament advocacy and military modernisation captured the dual nature of his approach.

Mending fences with China 🔗

Rajiv Gandhi also made a notable diplomatic move towards China. His visit to Beijing in 1988 was the first by an Indian Prime Minister in over three decades. The visit helped reopen dialogue after years of frozen relations following the 1962 war, and it set the stage for a gradual normalisation of ties. It showed his willingness to engage even with difficult neighbours through patient diplomacy.

The thread that connects the three eras 🔗

Looking across these two decades, a clear pattern emerges. Shastri showed that diplomacy had to be backed by the readiness to fight. Indira Gandhi demonstrated that strategic partnerships and military power could decisively reshape the region. Rajiv Gandhi blended a vision of global peace with hard-edged intervention in the neighbourhood.

Through all these shifts, the underlying movement was from idealism to pragmatism. Non-alignment was never fully abandoned, but it was increasingly interpreted through the lens of national interest rather than abstract principle. Each leader responded to the pressures of the Cold War in their own way, but together they transformed a young nation’s foreign policy from one rooted in moral aspiration into one anchored in realistic calculation of security and power.

What do you think? Was the gradual move away from Nehruvian idealism a necessary adaptation to a hostile world, or did it cost the country some of its unique moral standing on the global stage? And looking at the IPKF experience, should a regional power intervene militarily in a neighbour’s internal conflict, even with the best of intentions?

References

1. https://www.mea.gov.in/non-aligned-movement.htm
2. https://www.legacyias.com/lal-bahadur-shastri-his-era/
3. https://www.britannica.com/event/Tashkent-Agreement
4. https://theprint.in/opinion/little-lenin-shastri-worked-his-magic-to-keep-kashmir-issue-out-of-tashkent-declaration/799484/
5. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indo-Soviet_Treaty_of_Friendship_and_Cooperation
6. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_policy_of_the_Indira_Gandhi_government
7. https://www.ebsco.com/research-starters/history/india-conducts-nuclear-tests
8. https://www.outlookindia.com/national/why-rajiv-gandhi-sent-military-to-sri-lanka-and-how-ltte-played-both-sides-news-240574
9. https://military-history.fandom.com/wiki/Indian_Peace_Keeping_Force
10. https://www.thequint.com/opinion/rajiv-gandhi-birth-anniversary-foreign-policy-legacy