Abstract
AbstractWhat kind of foreign policy do populists execute once in power? Based on the existing literature, we conceptualize populism as a set of ideas whose two core elements are anti-elitism and antipluralism. From this we develop a set of hypotheses regarding both substantive aspects of foreign policy as well as foreign policy–making processes of populist leaders in government. An analysis of Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi's foreign policy record serves as a first plausibility probe of our hypotheses. We find that our concept of populism carries most explanatory value in the procedural aspects of foreign policy making as well as in its communication, less so in those aspects relating to the goals or substance of foreign policy. Whereas foreign policy under Modi's populist leadership is highly centralized and personalized, the traditional foreign policy establishment, including most notably the Ministry of External Affairs, has lost some of its previous authority. Engaging the Indian diaspora abroad emerged as another characteristic of populist foreign policy making. By contrast, the case of India does not confirm our hypothesis regarding a preference of bilateralism over multilateralism, nor does populism necessarily preclude investing in global public goods.
Highlights
What kind of foreign policy will populists pursue once they come to power and form governments? This question is increasingly pressing against the backdrop of Johannes Plagemann is a research fellow at the GIGA German Institute of Global and Area Studies / Institute of Asian Studies in Hamburg, Germany
Sandra Destradi is a professor of International Relations and Regional Governance at the Helmut Schmidt University / University of the Federal Armed Forces Hamburg and the head of Research Programme 4 (“Power and Ideas”) at the GIGA German Institute of Global and Area Studies
Her work has been published in journals such as European Journal of International Relations, Review of International Studies, Democratization, and Asian Survey
Summary
The concept of populism is highly contested, thereby forcing us to ask if there is anything like a “populist” foreign policy and, if so, what its features might be To address this question, we proceed as follows: first, based on the extensive literature on the conceptualization and definition of populism, we outline what our understanding of populism is—a set of ideas whose two core elements are anti-elitism and antipluralism. As will be illustrated below, India’s previous coalition governments under the leadership of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh (2004–14) of the Indian National Congress (INC or Congress) do not count as populist according to our definition and can be used as a point of reference to assess potential shifts toward a populist foreign policy under Modi This clear-cut transition from a nonpopulist to a populist leader makes India a more useful case as compared to other cases in which the transition toward populism was more gradual—think of Turkey, where, according to our definition, Erdogan became populist over time by gradually adding ever stronger antipluralist elements to his anti-elitist rhetoric. New communication media allowing for direct channels between the leader and the people are endorsed enthusiastically by populists, while traditional media “are accused . . . of ‘mediating’ [and thereby] distorting political reality” (35)—think of Italian Beppe Grillo’s use of his blog to directly learn about the “people’s” wishes
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.