Paradiplomacy is another name for the role of states (provinces) or constituent units in the foreign policy. This may seem unusual as the poqwer to conduct foreign affairs is vested in the Union government in India under the Union list of the Constitution. However, in the post-globalized world, paradiplomacy has assumed a special significance in every federal system including India. Paradiplomacy facilitates the participation of states or constituent units of a nation in the formulation and implementation of foreign affairs. This underlines the changing nature of foreign policy process as well its environment. The Foreign Policy of nation is neither conceived nor functions in a vacuum. It functions in a given environment consisting of both domestic and external factors. Though it may seem farfetched, but among the domestic factors, the form of government has deep bearing on the formulation and implementation of Foreign policy. In India this fact has become more pronounced in recent years, in spite of the contrary legal and constitution. India is federal polity with heavy unitary tilt. Under the Indian Constitution, all powers related to foreign affairs are assigned to the Union Government. The Seventh Schedule of the Indian Constitution (Entry10-21of the Union List) places all matters related to foreign affairs including diplomatic relations, UN, war and peace, treaties etc under the jurisdiction of the Union Government. Not only that, Article 253 of the Constitution further empowers the Union Legislature to frame a law in a subject included in the State List to give effect to any international treaty and agreement. Thus, legally, the states of the Indian Union have no scope to play any role in the formulation and implementation of the India foreign policy.
Yet India’s cooperative federalism has cast its deep shadow on the formulation and implementation of Indian policy. The role of states (Constituent Units) and even local bodies like Municipal corporations have gradually become more pronounced in the conduct of foreign affairs of the nation. Two recent examples are cited to highlight this point in the Indian context. Since 2011, the Union government of India has been trying to sign Teesta River water sharing agreement with Bangladesh, but this was repeatedly opposed by the Chief Minister of West Bengal Mamata Banerjee on the ground that this agreement would deprive states farmers of water for irrigation. Consequently, for last one decade this agreement could not be signed between the two countries, which has become a bilateral irritant also. The Union Government is legally competent to sign this agreement but it could not afford to do so. More recently, man y people from Myanmar have fled to border areas of Indian state of Mizoram, due to military crackdown in Myanmar. The Union government of India adopted the policy of treating all such person as illegal migrants and turning them back to Myanmar. The people of Mizoram share ethnic ties with the Chin refugees of Myanmar. Nearly 1000 such Chin refugees have crossed over to Indian state of Mizoram since February, 2021 to escape military crackdown. In spite of Union government’s contrary direction, the state government provided them with food shelter and medicines. Later on the request of state government, the Union government relented to provide them medicine and shelter. This example shows how state government prevailed over the Union government over policy matter of foreign affairs. These examples are not exhaustive.
The debate on the role of states or constituent units of a nation in the conduct of foreign affairs involves two fundamental questions.
First why the role of constituent in foreign affairs has been increasing? Second what forms the role of states take into foreign fairs in India?
How States have stakes in the formulation and implementation of Foreign policy?
If we analyze the nature of formulation and conduct of foreign relations, the role of constituent units cannot be discounted. However, the increasing role of states or constituent units has been a global trend in last few decades. Some of the factors which create scope for states role in foreign relations are:
First, the formulation of foreign policy of a nation cannot be dissociated from its domestic concerns: security of the nation including coastal and border areas, development of the economy including trade and investment, protection and welfare of the Indian citizens living abroad etc. Though nation’s policy may be decided by the central department, the states and constituent units have vital stakes in these issues, because any policy measures with respect to these issues affects them at the ground level. After all coastal regions, border areas or people are based in some state. In a way foreign policy is nothing but just the continuation of domestic policy in external sphere.
Second, the implementation of foreign policy decisions including treaties investment proposal, joint defence ventures will take place in some state territories. Without the active cooperation of the states, implementation of such foreign policy decisions would not succeed. May aspects of such implementation, like law and order, infrastructure facilities and lands use and control falls within the states’ jurisdiction.
Third, in the South Asian context, the Indian states have special interests in India’s policy towards her neighbours due to certain special factors like cross border social, ethnic, cultural, social and economic ties running for centuries. For example, the people of Tamil Nadu will have concerns for the welfare of Tamils settled in Sri Lanka, or people of Mizoram would have special interests in the welfare of Chin community in Myanmar as they share ethnic ties with them. Similarly, the Sikhs, and Hindus settled in Pakistan and Bangladesh, or Madhesis of Terai in Nepal share close ethnic, religious and cultural ties with people in the Indian States.
Like socio-cultural ties, the natural resources of India like rives, mountains, forests, sea waters, Islands etc also have cross-border dimensions. The concerned states have vital stakes in the conservation and use of natural resources. This is how the Indian state of West Bengal is involved in the water sharing agreement over Teesta River between India and Bangladesh. The cross border trade between India and neighbouring countries passes through India’s Border States and hence they have interests in the trade and economic interaction. The tradition cross-border trade between India and her neighbouring countries like Pakistan, Bangladesh Nepal and China contributes to the development of Border States. Hence they would have stakes in the orderly transaction of such economic exchanges. In short, India’s Border States face both challenges and opportunities in the context of the country’s relations with their neighbors. This is what prompts them to play a role in India’s foreign policy toward their neighbors, and most of the time, legitimately so (Jacob: 2016).
Fourth, In the Indian context, political factors also facilitate states role in the conduct of foreign relations. India has adopted a federal and democratic form of government. Federal system grants certain powers to states and impart them a separate political identity, which enables them to influence the foreign affairs also. The states, as a distinct political identity are expected to safeguard the interests of the people of the state. For example, a large number of people from Kerala work in the gulf countries. If they face any problem in those countries, the government of Kerala may raise the issue with the Union government. The democratic polity at both the Union and State level also makes the Union government sensitive to the demands and concerns of the people of a state, because ultimately any ruling party at the Centre also needs the support of the people of states. The growth and powerful position of regional parties in India and their increasing say in the national government in recent decades have also encouraged states larger role in the foreign affairs.
Fifth, the process of globalization and the new seam less means of information and communication technology have also created conducive environment for the greater role so states, constituent units, and local governments in the foreign affairs. Globalization involves increasing exchange of goods, services, technology, capital, ideas and people across the national boundaries. The modern means of communication have facilitated this exchange and blurred the jurisdictional boundaries not only among nations but also among the constituent units of a nation. Nations go for greater cross border investment, trade, technology transfer and other joint projects. The constituent units and states automatically get involved in such joint projects. Many of the state governments of India have made efforts to at6tract foreign capital in their states. The government of Uttar Pradesh sent a high-level delegation led by the Chief Minister to Russia to finalize the project for the participation of state in the skill development and economic development programs in the Eastern parts of Russia. Now Countries are not confined in their interaction at the national and state level, but have moved down to the level of local government. India has signed MoU with many countries including China to launch sister city projects, where the Municipal bodies of the two cities of the two countries share their experience but also cooperate in the development programmes. The modern ICT facilitates continuous coordination at different levels of government (national state and local) for better management of foreign oriented programmes and projects.
Constituent Diplomacy: A Global Trend
Because of globalization process, the increasing involvement of constituent units, states, and local bodies in the conduct of foreign affairs has become a global trend. The states’ role in foreign affairs has come to assume various nomenclatures such as ‘state diplomacy’, ‘Constituent diplomacy’, ‘regional diplomacy’, and ‘sub-national diplomacy’ or paradiplomacy. The trend has invited the attention of international scholars like John Kincaid who, in 1990, coined the term ‘constituent diplomacy’, which means the ‘international activities of a foreign-policy character undertaken by the constituent governments…and local governments (mostly municipalities) of federal countries and decentralized unitary states, as well as by citizen organizations and non-governmental organizations. As opposed to conventional diplomatic relations that fall under the exclusive domain of sovereign nation states exercised by central governments, par diplomacy makes space for external relations of sub-national or federal units that might indulge themselves in international activism in order to promote their own interests. Stefan Wolff describes paradiplomacy as the “foreign policy capacity of sub-state entities, their participation, independent of their metropolitan state, in the international arena in pursuit of their own specific international interests.” In Wolff’s writings, paradiplomacy as an emerging policy capacity of sub-state entities can be enjoyed by both the states (or provinces and regions) of federations and the autonomous entities of otherwise unitary states (Tewari: 2017).
The practice of constituent diplomacy has been observed in all parts of the including Europe and North America, Asia. Even China, which is highly centralized polity and has no democratic accountability, also displays the involvement of constituent provinces in the conduct of foreign affairs. During the contemporary globalized world, the constituent units of China are playing active role in foreign affairs, particularly in economic diplomacy. Many Chinese provinces have their own foreign affairs offices (FAOs) and foreign trade and economic cooperation commissions (FTECCs) to deal with international partners. Many Chinese cities have opened overseas offices to attract investments and promote trade. Provincial governments play a big part in setting the agenda of the sub-regional initiatives undertaken by China. The role played by the border province of Yunnan, for instance, has been highly instrumental in the success of the Greater Mekong Sub-region (GMS), which includes Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar, Thailand and Vietnam. Even China’s other sub-regional initiatives like the GMS, Tumen River Area Development Programme, Central Asia Regional Economic Cooperation, and Pan-Beibu Gulf Economic Cooperation have not been successful without the active participation of the concerned provincial government (Livemint: 2017). It offers a lesion for India as she has taken many sub-regional integration and connectivity initiatives like Mekong Ganga Cooperation (2000), BIMSTEC, BBIN, BCIM and Kaladan Multimodal Transport Project. While analyzing the evolution of Constituent diplomacy in India, Jenkins Robs (2003) finds that India’s economic policy stance (liberalization), and in the (diluted) nature of economic sovereignty in the contemporary world, are combining to enhance the role of state governments in the making of India’s foreign economic policy. Because of states’ high-profile investment-promotion activities, it is tempting to classify India as a case of what has been called ‘constituent diplomacy,’ the increasingly direct engagement of sub-national units in international affairs.
The forms of State’s participation in Foreign Affairs in India
In India, legally, the formulation and implementation of foreign policy is the exclusive power of the Union. But in actual practice, the states have been playing important role in the conduct of foreign affairs as they have vital stakes in the conduct of these affairs. Apart from traditional concerns like protection of interests of people of state arising from ethnic ties (Tamil Issue in Sri Lanka) or economic interests (Teesta River Water sharing with Bangladesh), the economic liberalization policy of India, close integration with global economy, and focus on new programme like sub-regional integration and connectivity etc have given avenues for new role of states and local governments in the implementation of foreign policy. Economic liberalization and the emergence of coalition governments in New Delhi have created an environment conducive for states to proactively engage the central government on foreign policy issues that affect their interests (Jacob:2016).
Some the forms of state’s role in foreign policy may be identified as below:
A. Protection of the interests of people of the state
The states in India have been playing important role both in formulation of foreign policy choices of India and its implementation. The interests may be ethnic ties or economic concerns of the people of the state. Sometimes, this role of the state becomes problematic for the Union government as it has to take decision in the larger national interest. India’s policy towards Sri Lanka has been largely affected by the concerns of people and parties of Tamil Nadu. The Tamil problem of Sri Lanka has been a bone of contention between the two countries. India wants that discrimination against Sri Lankan Tamil should end and they should be given larger autonomy in the northern region within the framework of united Sri Lanka. Tamil issue has affected the relations between India and Sri Lanka in other areas. India does not have any refugee policy, but Tamils who fled Sri Lanka were refugee status in India. India’s grant to Sri Lanka is largely directed to the development of Tamil region in Sri Lanka. For the people and political parties of Tamil Nadu the Tamil problem of Sri Lanka is very emotive issue. They persuaded the Manmohan Singh government at the Centre to adopt hard policies towards Sri Lanka at a time when China was courting Sri Lanka with many investment projects. Consequently, India voted against Sri Lanka at the UN Human Rights Council on the issue of violation of human rights of Tamil during the last phase of LTTE war in 2009. Not only that, the Indian Prime Minister did not go to Colombo participate in the Commonwealth Summit in 2013. Even now, the Central government has to be careful to the concerns of Tamil parties on this issue.
Another notable example of state governments’ larger role in foreign policy against the wishes of Central government is the issue of sharing of Teesta water with Bangladesh. This river originates in India, flows in West Bengal and enters north Bangladesh. Teesta is crucial for irrigation in north Bangladesh region, which is considered granary of Bangladesh. In 2011 when the Indian Prime Minister visited Manmohan Singh visited Bangladesh, the agreement was to be signed between the two countries. The Indian Prime Minister invited as part of delegation all the Chief Ministers of Indian States which have boundary with Bangladesh. But West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee not only opposed the Teesta water sharing agreement, but refused to go to Dhaka as part of the Prime Minister’s delegation. She argues that the Teesta agreement would compromise with the irrigation needs of the farmers of West Bengal. Till now she has maintained this opposition to the agreement. Consequently, this agreement has not been signed. As a result, Bangladesh, which was willing to give maximum access to India to North-Eastern States through Bangladesh, has now become reluctant to India’s connectivity projects through her territory. To offset the loss of water through this agreement, Bangladesh has invited China to fund a huge reservoir on the Teesta in North Bangladesh which would cater the irrigation needs of farmers during lean season. China has agreed to finance this project. The delay in signing Teesta water sharing agreement has become a major irritant in bilateral relations between India and Bangladesh. If we recall the issue of sharing of Farakka dam water was resolved in 1996 when the then Chief Minister of West Bengal Jyoti Basu visited Bangladesh in 1996. This episode also highlights the confrontational role of the states in foreign policy implementation.
A notable example of states role in foreign affairs is the land transfer agreement with Bangladesh. The state governments played a major role in negotiating and signing the agreement Land Boundary Agreement with Bangladesh in 2015 as it involved the exchange of enclaves and “adverse possessions” from the Indian states of Assam, Meghalaya, Tripura, and West Bengal. Though land transfer was approved through the constitutional amendment, it became law only after the consent of at least half of the state legislatures.
Yet another example of State fighting for the interests of its residents is the case of killing two fishermen (residents of Kerala) off the Kerala coast in 2012 by the two Italian marines. The government of Kerala strongly argued for an India-hosted trial of two Italian marines. The State government did not agree to Italy’s move not to send back one of the accused persons to India to face trial. The state government demanded from the Union government of India to take bold action to bring back Italian accused to face trial in India. Italy did not like India bold posture and in retaliation exercised its veto power to block India’s entry into the Missile Technology Control Regime (Kington: 2015). Though India paid heavy diplomatic price, but relented to the demand of Kerala government in foreign affairs.
B. Economic Cooperation and Development
The role of states is not always confrontational with the Union government. During the age of globalization, the states have been playing very constructive role in the success of India’s economic diplomacy. Many of the state governments have made successful efforts to create conducive environment for investment and trade and attracted foreign investments and promote external tourism. In the era of globalization, states have been important players in improving India’s economic ties with other countries in the implementing India’s economic diplomacy; the states of the western and south India have played a key role. States like Gujarat and Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu, Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka have shown great promise in trade contributing as much as 70 percent of India’s total exports. These states have utilized global economic opportunities for rapid economic growth. These states have struck deals with major players in the international market, like Maharashtra’s deal with Enron in 1996, or Andhra Pradesh’s efforts to get state-level World Bank development loan in 2002 (Srivatstava: 2017). These initiatives and other similar efforts have proved instrumental in the success of India’s economic diplomacy. In post liberalization era, a paradigm shift in the Central government’s policy became clearly visible when the Centre encouraged border-states to establish border haats to market local produce to accessible markets across the borders. The aim was to encourage transborder trade along the traditional trade routes and such haats went a long way in encouraging local prosperity and cultural exchange. The Central government facilitated such trade interactions both on the western and eastern borders. From 1990 onwards, the World Bank started extending loans to select states of India like Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu and Karnataka for the promotion of trade. The Government of India played the role of a facilitator by extending sovereign guarantees in those loans (Tewari: 2017).
Many development schemes of the UN and its agencies are being successfully implemented by the Indian states in the field of education, health and skill development. Of late the local government institutions have also been involvement in the bilateral cooperation programmes of the foreign countries. The NDA government has taken special steps in last five years to promote the role of state governments in foreign affairs at least in field of economic cooperation and development. During Prime Minister Modi’s visit to China in 2015, four agreements were signed on sister-state and sister city relations between Karnataka and Sichuan province; Chennai and Chongqing; Hyderabad and Qingdao; and Aurangabad and Dunhuang (Economic Times: 2015). This trend continues further. Now the role of states in foreign trade, investment and external tourism has been institutionalized by the Union government by setting up the States Division for this purpose under the Ministry of external Affairs.
C. States as Connectivity Nodes
For last one decade or so the Indian government has been focusing on the development of regional and sub-regional connectivity as it has been found as the crucial element in economic growth and cooperation and integration. All regional organizations like SAARC, BIMSTEC (Bay of Bengal Initiative for Multi-sectoral Technological and Economic Cooperation) have declared development of connectivity as one of their priority areas. Besides, the Union government has also initiated some specific programmes of regional or sub-regional connectivity like BBIN (Bhutan, Bangladesh India and Nepal Highway), Kaladan Multi-modal Highway Project to improve connectivity to India’s North-Eastern States through Myanmar, BCIM (Bangladesh, China, India and Myanmar highway project; India-Thailand, Myanmar trilateral highway Project, Sagar Mala project (2015) for promoting port-led development of the country through exploiting the potential of India inland and international waterways. These all projects pass through different states located at the border areas. No project of connectivity can succeed if the concerned state government actively cooperates in the connectivity projects. The land and other infrastructure facilities for these projects are to be facilitated by the state government. The concerned states also have direct developmental interest in the success of these programmes.
Conclusion
The Indian Constitution assigns the power of foreign policy formulation and implementation to the Union government. But the Indian states have always some role in the conduct of foreign affairs. Gradually this role has become more pronounced and diversified due to various factors such rise of regional parties, federal structure, democratic process, economic liberalization and India’s integration with global economy, new focus on regional and sub-regional connectivity etc. Though in some case the regional voices have undermined Union government’s autonomy in foreign affairs, but in the present age of globalization and economic diplomacy, the Union government has also positively viewed the increasing role states in foreign affairs. While underlining this need, the Government of India has created in 2014 a separate States Division within the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to coordinate with States for further facilitation of their efforts to promote their exports and tourism and attract more overseas investments and expertise (MEA:2016). Some of the states have also appointed nodal officers to coordinate with the States Division and foreign entities. The State government should also institutionalize their role in foreign affairs. The mandate of the States Division has to be further enhanced to include other relevant areas of cooperation like climate change, development partnership and cyber security and other relevant areas. The institutional machinery at both levels should adopt a holistic, proactive and professional approach to promote States positive role in foreign affairs. Yet it is a matter of satisfaction that the Union government has positive approach towards the increasing role of state governments in foreign affairs. However, the road to constituent diplomacy is not smooth as it appears. Rob Jenkins notes that central government’s continued role in managing such important policy matters as external borrowing (from private and multilateral sources) and the regulation of core infrastructure sectors, including electricity, where despite states’ key roles, the central government maintains control over certain critical decisions. Thus, sincere efforts and holistic approach is required to make meaningful involvement of states in foreign policy. While the Union government may adopt a firmer stand on matters of core national interest, it also needs to give the state governments’ greater freedom to pursue cross-border economic partnerships. It also goes well with the spirit of cooperative federalism. As the trends in India and global are visible, the role of states and other local bodies in foreign affairs is likely to increase in coming decades.
REFERENCES
Jacob, Happymon (2016) Putting the Periphery at the Centre: Indian States Role in Foreign Policy. Carnegie India. Available At: https://carnegieindia.org/2016/10/10/putting-periphery-at-center-indian-states-role-in-foreign-policy-pub-64724
Jenkins, Rob (2003) India’s States and the Making of Foreign Economic Policy: The Limits of the Constituent Diplomacy Paradigm. Publius, Autumn, 2003, Oxford university Press, Pp-63-81.
Kington, Tom and Vivek Raghuvanshi (2015), Italy Blocks Indian Application to MTCR. Defense News, October 17, 2015. Available At: http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/policy-budget/warfare/2015/10/17/italy-blocks-indian-application-mtcr-uav-missile-technology-control-regime/74019832/.
Livemint (2017) Role of States in Foreign Policy. Available At: https://www.livemint.com/Opinion/pWTDtrHhs9TyrVQKHb29gJ/The-role-of-states-in-foreign-policy.html
MEA (2016) Question no 2970, New Division for the Centre-States Relations. Media Centre, MEA. Available At: https://www.mea.gov.in/lok-sabha.htm?dtl/26812/question+no2970+new+division+for+centrestate+relations
Srivastava, Ratish (2017) Why States need to be Involved in the Foreign Policy? Takshashila Institutions. Available At: https://takshashila.org.in/why-states-need-to-be-involved-in-indias-foreign-policy/
Tewari, Falguni (2017) Para diplomacy in India: Evolution and operationalisation. Occasional Papers, August, 2017, ORF. Available At: https://www.orfonline.org/research/paradiplomacy-india-evolution-operationalisation/
The Economic Times (2015) PM Modi’s China visit: India-China sign 24 key agreements, including one on railways. Economic Times, 15 may, 2015. Available At: https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics-and-nation/pm-modis-china-visit-india-china-sign-24-key-agreements-including-one-on-railways/articleshow/47292546.cms?utm_source=contentofinterest&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=cppst
Leave a Reply