“The arrow shot by an archer may or may not kill a single person; but skilful intrigue devised by wise men, may kill even those who are in the womb.”
- Kautilya
INTRODUCTION
1. Strategic culture is defined as the “ability of the people and society to generate power; and to have the social will and ability for a full and effective use of that power.” A nation's strategic culture flows from its history and experience, geography and resources, society and political structure. India’s enormous strategic depth, billion plus populations of diverse ethnicity vis-à-vis national unity have produced a strategic culture that emphasizes strategic preemption, offensive operations and aspiration to become hegemony - one of the super powers.
2. Being geographically encircled and beset with number of security related issues, it is of critical importance for Bangladesh that she be prepared to know the Indian strategic culture to deal with effectively the dangers emanating from India. Traditionally, strategy has had something to do with the preparations for and execution of war. This paper thus intends to discuss briefly Indian core strategic culture and persistence legacy to identify the Indian definition of her enemy. Finally our strategic weaknesses are highlighted to transform them into strength by formulation and application of right national strategy for Bangladesh.

CORE OF INDIA’S STRATEGIC CULTURE

3. Thucydides - an Athenian Admiral in exile, in his history of the Peloponnesian War, records that the Spartan king Archidamus and the Athenian strategos Pericles each linked the core of their strategic culture to the constitution of their respective states. Likewise, academics argue that the Indian strategic culture - Indian-ness (or Bharatvarsha and Hindutva), an outlook that transcends the Republic of India, originate from Vedic, Kautilyan and Ashokan traditions that date back several millennia. Embedded in the hearts of educated social elites and illiterate common mass alike, the consciousness of “Hindu values” has been prominent in the sacred belief called “Mother India”. This continuity of values was battered and overlaid but never severed or completely submerged; whether by Muslim invasions and Mughal rule, the seaborne arrival of French and Portuguese adventurers and missionaries, or the encroachment of the British Empire.
4. Indian strategic culture is thus inherited from Chanakya’s (Kautilya’s) secular treatise, the Arthashastra, which closely parallels Niccolo Machiavelli’s The Prince, as an exposition of monarchical statecraft, realpolitik in inter-state balances of power, and the practices of war and peace. Indian strategic decision makers and diplomats reject contemporary principles of international law that subscribe to equality among sovereign nations – the SAARC countries for instance and that give weaker countries leverage against the more powerful. On the contrary, whenever they work in India’s favour, international legal norms are exploited to the fullest.

THE PERSISTENCE LEGACY

5. Since Independence, India has been a strong promoter of the United Nations and active participant in the elaboration of international law; but yet to abide by the UN resolution regarding plebiscite over the status of Kashmir. Jawaharlal Nehru, India’s first prime minister adhered to some principles and policies that arguably were idealistic in their inspiration but India’s strategic culture – omniscient and patrician – remained uncompromising.

6. On the surface, India’s strategic culture today operates through, and affirms, a Parliamentary-style republic, a secular constitution, popularly elected national and state governments, and modern diplomatic channels that are cognizant of international law and globalizing trade practices. Most of India’s top political leaders, military top brasses and civil servants are well educated and are sophisticated in the ways of the modern world. Internally, Indian society is highly diverse. But there are common threads of attachment to India as India, even among the educated layers of India’s religious minorities. There are core traits of Indian strategic culture that have persisted since independence despite shifts in India’s strategic foreign and security policies during and after the Cold War, and notwithstanding the gathering momentum of the forces of nuclear India and globalization.

DEFINING THE ENEMY

7. How Indian strategic culture does interpret “the enemy”? The enemy is a force whose aims or actions would deprive India of its sacred territory or subvert its society by undermining its Vedic values. The Muslim invader is a particularly potent example of an enemy in India’s concept. British leaders probably had an advantage in gaining Indian allegiance for the British Empire in India because the British unseated the Moghul Emperors and contained other less powerful Muslim kingdoms (e.g., the state of Hyderabad) that had established themselves in the subcontinent.
HOLD YOUR OWN

8. Despite being predominantly Muslim with aesthetic heritage and culture and of similar ethnicity, there is too much of political infighting and too less political consensus. We are a politically divided house in vital policies of security and economic development. Longstanding weaknesses in the attitude and approach to national security and interests are finding their reverberation in the lack of decision-making or wrong decision-making. Our governance is weak. We remain fixing each other rather than fixing the outsiders. However still there is light at the end of the tunnel.
CONCLUSION
9. India’s strategic culture discussed above rooted in India’s ancient cultural and religious heritage, as they were manifested after independence. These traits may be considered the core of India’s strategic culture. On the other hand our weakness in the strategic culture stems from our inability to learn from our history and heritage as Muslim. Hence careful study of strategic culture of India will undoubtedly help policy makers, strategists, scholars and citizens in authority to extract lessons as part of our all out effort to be united as a nation as well as understanding the potential adversary’s intention to formulate our ‘National Strategy’ for the future.