Chanakya, his theory on geo-politics & its relevance in today’s world
Kautilya(Chanakya) was a 3rd-century bc economist, strategist, advisor & philosopher, who authored ‘Arthasastra’, a treatise on statecraft, political economy, military strategy & foreign policy. The contemporaries were Plato & Aristotle, who gave their versions of king, state, constitutions, justice, etc. Kautilya too had given his versions & also, what distinguished Kautilya from them is his ability to explain politics in a realistic way. This realism in the west came into picture with the advent of Machieavelli during the end of medieval age. By a comparision of time & space, we can say that Kautilya was ahead of his contemporaries, in explaining realistic politics. He gave few theories to explain them & one among his theories was Mandal theory, which is something unique & showcases his intellect & empirical power. So what is this theory about?
Mandal theory(mandala means circle) -theory on geo-politics & balance of power & also he applies principles of psychology to geography & foreign policy. Principles are -
- A king needs to acquire power
- Greater the distance, lesser is the enmity
- A neighbor is a natural enemy
- Enemy of an enemy is a friend
who are all these?
- Vijigishu is the potential conquerer-King. Kautilya would call a king only if he has the will & potential to go on a conquest
- Ari is the enemy in the south
- Mitra is king’s enemy’s enemy & so a natural friend & this pattern goes on in the south.
- Parashanigraha is the enemy on back & the above-mentioned pattern continues on the north
- Udasina is a neutral king out of proximity but is powerful & important for King. Ex from India’s perspective, USA
- Madhyama is a Buffer state between King & the enemy. It is important for the king & plays a strategic role. Ex from India’s perspective, Nepal
Why was all this needed from the viewpoint of Kautilya?
- Arthasastra stresses on Economic policy & back then, land was the main source of wealth. Hence expansionist foreign policy was essential
This theory is a unique piece of work & can still be used for analyzing current geo-politics. But nothing is static in International Relations, so just like every other theory in Geo-politics, this too is dependent upon the time & space in which it was made.
Mandala theory’s limitations -
- In Kautilya’s time, land was the primary source of wealth & if a king wants to acquire more wealth, territorial expansion was the primary method. But today, the world is filled with nuclear powers & waging war for territorial expansion is not a smart move
- Today, collective security & collective defense are relevant & an attack against one country will draw the others to take necessary action
- Also, the world is globalized & due to low logistic costs for trading, neighbours are the biggest assets. Ex Though India & China are in a territorial conflict, the trade between them is nearly $90 billion, also India imports 70% of API(active pharmaceutical ingredients) from China & is highly dependent on China for its pharmaceutical industry(also smartphones domination)
- Today, countries also need to consider their energy needs & security needs. And as there is a common threat of terrorism, countries have already joined hands to fight against it. There is no scope in Mandala theory for all these national interests.
- Also, Kautilya wants the king to go on a conquest & conquer territories. There were incidences when a portion of this theory was relevant, such as Annexation of Kuwait by Iraq, Annexation of Crimea by Russia, Tibet occupation by China etc. But altogether, today, the world is more dynamic & also nations are joining hands to fight against terrorism, leaving little room for conducting expansionist policies against each other.
