Historically India had been a non-aligned country. It had been convenient for India. For instance, India managed to purchase weapons from major weapons suppliers while distancing itself from American or Soviet proxy-wars.

In recent years, India decided to shed its non-aligned posture and decided to move toward the American pole. From 2002 to 2018, India signed GSOMIA, LEMOA, COMCASA. BECA is under process as of March-2020. So, as we can see even though moving to the American pole started in 2002, it was expedited during the present BJP rule.

Why has India suddenly decided to change its non-aligned posture?

  • 2
    At its present and past forms as well, this question didn't show any evidence of India moving toward American pole. India remains non-aligned, last decade saw India's relations with US improved a LOT, India's relations with Russia remaining strong, an official head of state visit to Israel, India opposing Trump’s decision to recognise Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, India asking US not to interfere in Chabahar port, etc etc, etc. Some examples.
    – user32657
    Jul 27, 2020 at 13:42
  • 2
    Some opinion here: Question that could make sense are: Has India suddenly decided to change its non-aligned posture? No, and if that was the question I would have answered with proper citations. The original version of this question was poorly researched, had irrelevant details, and was misleading.
    – user32657
    Jul 27, 2020 at 13:50
  • 2
    Regarding the new details added to this question: There has been talks with the Russian sides too regarding defence logistics sharing pact. Regarding it was expedited during the present BJP rule Yes, maybe. Many other things, like rate of village road construction, village electrification, sanitation facilities, etc have been seen to have accelerated. That could mean good governance, increase in efficiency. Not endorsing BJP, just saying it could mean that.
    – user32657
    Jul 27, 2020 at 14:39

2 Answers 2


The term "non-aligned" (as opposed to simply "neutral") is an historical product of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM), which in turn was a response to the Cold War. Although the NAM still exists formally and India is still a major member, it is considered much less relevant now that the Cold War has ended. More generally, the end of the Cold War has radically changed the geopolitical landscape and so it is not surprising that India has been gradually (I would not say "suddenly") been closer to the United States. India's increasing conflicts with China further reinforces this.

Domestically of course there is also the fact that BJP is in power. Modi and Trump in particular have a strong and close relationship. To the extent that the change actually is "sudden", this is the key reason for it.

  • 16
    @user366312: Kashmir was not annexed, it has been part of India since the partition of India and Pakistan. If the Sino-Indian conflict had been dormant, it aeems more likely to have been a matter of China building up its military, and recently deciding to flex its muscles. See recent actions WRT Hong Kong and South China Sea islands.
    – jamesqf
    Jul 24, 2020 at 3:25
  • 2
    @user366312 That's a separate question and one that could be asked as such (if it hasn't already been asked) - the comments here are not the place for it.
    – gormadoc
    Jul 24, 2020 at 13:03
  • 4
    @user366312 In short, article 370 gave 'special' status to the state of Jammu and Kashmir (exemption from some federal laws, not allowing Indians from other states to settle in J&K permanently etc). It's abrogation removed this special status and brought it in line with other states that make up India. Jul 24, 2020 at 17:23
  • 4
    @user366312 "Article 3 in part 2 of the Jammu and Kashmir constitution stated "Relationship of the State with the Union of India:-The State of Jammu and Kashmir is and shall be an integral part of the Union of India." It is not annexed, just was given special status. And as the situation demanded, i.e the infiltration of terrorists which promoted national integrity disrupting activities article 370 was abrogated all by constitutional means which was not objectionable
    – Sikander
    Jul 24, 2020 at 19:05
  • 2
    @user366312 No, you are wrong/mistaken. Maharaja Hari Singh acceded to India on the basis of the Instrument of Accession, not article 370. The accession to the Indian dominion happened on 26th October 1947. Article 370 was formalized as a presidential order only in 1950 and was a goodwill article of the Indian constitution to assure the well-being of the citizens of the erstwhile princely state. Further, the monarchy itself was abolished in 1952, so the article was just a dead-weight to the Indian constitution. So, abrogation of 370 was just a matter of time. Thus, your argument is invalid.
    – varun
    Jul 25, 2020 at 13:38

In the past, India had its Soviet ally to help protect it from China. Now that the Soviet Union is no more (and its rump state Russia is diminished), the US is the only power opposing China; thus they are trying to get closer ties with the US.

  • 2
    as the economy strengthens, India is a much favorable player for the businesses and ties as the world was too dependent on china, which is not a good idea for the whole world, but that is only realised by powerful countries lately and Covid-19 is the perfect time to snatch away the Chinese superiority in manufacturing sector
    – Yadu
    Jul 24, 2020 at 5:15
  • 1
    Then they weren't non-aligned (were aligned) in the past, in contrast to what is claimed in the question? Jul 25, 2020 at 14:13
  • 2
    In the past, India had its Soviet ally to help protect it from China Was it China or US&pak?
    – user32657
    Jul 27, 2020 at 13:25
  • 1
    @Andrew Thanks for replying. I thought the Soviets (now Russians) were/are friendly with China as well. To the best of my knowledge, during any escalation of situation between India and China, Russia has remained neutral and has always urged de-escalation and resolving issues via peaceful talks.
    – user32657
    Jul 27, 2020 at 16:23
  • 4
    The Soviets were not friendly with China in the 60s, they even fought a border war en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Soviet_split Both the USSR and the US supported India in 1962. Current day Russia is much friendlier with China.
    – Andrew
    Jul 27, 2020 at 17:09

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .