India & Its Need for a Monroe Doctrine

“An op-ed by Harsh Singh Dahiya on India’s regional strategy and the need for a clearly defined sphere of influence. And how Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modi ji is reclaiming India’s regional dominance once lost by former Prime Minister Nehru.”

For nearly two centuries, the Monroe Doctrine served as the strategic foundation of American power. In 1823, United States President James Monroe articulated a principle that would later be named after him. It declared that the Western Hemisphere would no longer be open to European interference and that any attempt by external powers to control the Americas would be viewed as a threat to American security. That statement, made when the United States itself was still emerging, created a protected strategic space that allowed it to grow without being constrained by rival powers.

The United States has continued to apply this logic in modern times, often with force. Its recent intervention in Venezuela is a stark example. By capturing the country’s President and taking effective control of its political and energy infrastructure, Washington has demonstrated that it will not tolerate adversary power or foreign influence in its immediate neighbourhood. Venezuela’s vast oil resources have now been placed under American oversight, showing how strategic dominance in one’s own region is exercised not just through diplomacy but through hard power and economic control. This is the Monroe Doctrine in its contemporary form.

Every great power in history has followed this logic, whether openly or quietly. India alone, after Independence, chose to deny it.

India today stands at an inflection point. It is a rising economic and military power, yet it remains strategically constrained in its own backyard. Chinese influence had penetrated countries that should naturally look to New Delhi for leadership. Pakistan’s military and it’s state sponsored terrorism against India has destabilised the region for long. Bangladesh has witnessed growing external influence over its political and economic choices, Nepal has drifted away from its natural strategic alignment with India, Sri Lanka’s financial vulnerabilities have allowed outside powers to gain leverage, and the Maldives has repeatedly seen governments attempt to dilute India’s traditional security role in the Indian Ocean. This is not accidental. It is the direct result of India’s long refusal to define and defend its legitimate sphere of influence.

In 1823, the United States was not a global superpower, yet it drew a clear red line that Europe could not cross. Over time, this gave Washington the space to grow, stabilise its neighbourhood, and eventually dominate global affairs. Even today, the logic remains intact. When the Soviet Union attempted to place missiles in Cuba, America was willing to risk nuclear war rather than allow a rival to militarise its backyard. No major power behaves differently.

China has adopted the same principle with ruthless clarity. Beijing treats East Asia, the South China Sea and its land borders as its strategic perimeter. Taiwan is declared non-negotiable. Foreign navies in nearby waters are harassed. Through the Belt and Road Initiative, China has extended this logic far beyond its borders, acquiring ports, leverage and military access from the Pacific to the Arabian Sea. Gwadar in Pakistan, Hambantota in Sri Lanka and Kyaukpyu in Myanmar are not commercial accidents. They are pillars of a Chinese sphere of influence being built around India.

India’s tragedy is that it once had the chance to prevent all this and chose not to. When the British left in 1947, India was the dominant power in South Asia by every measure. It had the largest military, the strongest economy and immense civilisational authority. Yet Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru deliberately dismantled this advantage. By internationalising Kashmir at the United Nations, and not allowing the Indian Army to fully drive out the Pakistani invaders, he invited great power intervention into what should have remained a regional issue. By allowing China to annex Tibet without resistance, he removed the single most important buffer between India and China. By embracing moralistic non-alignment instead of strategic realism, he surrendered India’s natural leadership of its neighbourhood.

The result was predictable. Pakistan became a permanent proxy for external powers. China marched to the Himalayas. India found itself boxed in, forced to fight on its own borders rather than shaping events beyond them. This was not the outcome of weakness but of self-imposed restraint.

That era is now ending. Under Prime Minister Narendra Modi, India has begun, quietly but firmly, to reclaim its strategic space. The Neighbourhood First policy is not a slogan; it is a framework of influence backed by political engagement, economic assistance, and credible security commitments. For the first time since Independence, India is shaping outcomes in its immediate periphery rather than reacting to them. Through sustained diplomatic outreach and leadership, Prime Minister Modi has restored India as the central strategic reference point for South Asia.

India stepped in to rescue Sri Lanka from economic collapse when Chinese debt traps had pushed it to the brink, providing financial support, fuel, food and diplomatic backing that stabilised a critical neighbour. It has reasserted its security role in the Maldives and deepened economic, infrastructure, energy and security integration with Bangladesh to levels unseen since 1947. These outcomes are the result of deliberate statecraft under Prime Minister Modi, who has replaced passive diplomacy with active regional stewardship, ensuring that India once again anchors stability in its neighbourhood.

In the Indian Ocean, the strengthening of naval power and the Andaman and Nicobar Command has given India the ability to monitor and deter hostile movements through key maritime chokepoints. India’s participation in the Quad and its expanding Indo Pacific partnerships under Prime Minister Modi have provided strategic depth without surrendering autonomy, while the firm rejection of third party mediation in regional disputes sends another message: South Asia is not a playground for global power politics. India today is no longer absent from its backyard. It is increasingly decisive within it.

Critics will call this assertiveness. In reality, it is overdue normalcy. A power that does not dominate its neighbourhood will be dominated by outsiders. India’s historical reluctance to be expansionist, even in the benign sense of shaping its environment, has cost it strategic depth, influence and security. Expansion today does not mean annexation. It means economic integration, military presence, political alignment and the ability to say no when a rival power seeks to intrude.

India does not need to announce a Monroe Doctrine. It only needs to practise one. The more confidently it does so, the more stable and respected it will become. Under Prime Minister Modi, India has finally begun to align its foreign policy with its geography and its destiny. The task now is to carry this logic forward without hesitation, because history does not reward nations that apologise for protecting their own neighbourhood.

---

About the Author

Harsh Singh Dahiya is an Advocate at the Supreme Court of India and an award-winning former entrepreneur. With a distinguished background in law, business, and public policy, he has worked towards the empowerment of citizens, farmers, and youth while contributing meaningfully to policymaking and governance. A regular face on national television debates, he offers a sharp and reasoned India First perspective on law, politics, and public affairs.