What strategic, economic, and geopolitical imperatives have driven the evolution and articulation of India’s Look East Policy?

~ Polity Prober

Strategic, Economic, and Geopolitical Imperatives Behind India’s Look East Policy

Introduction

India’s Look East Policy (LEP), formally launched in the early 1990s under the Narasimha Rao government, marked a significant recalibration of Indian foreign policy towards East and Southeast Asia. Emerging in the wake of the Cold War, it was conceived both as a response to economic liberalization and as a strategic reorientation aimed at breaking out of the subcontinental straitjacket. Over the decades, LEP evolved into a multidimensional engagement framework encompassing economic integration, strategic partnerships, cultural connectivity, and regional institution-building. In 2014, this policy was rearticulated as the Act East Policy, reflecting a more assertive posture and broader Indo-Pacific outlook.

This essay critically evaluates the strategic, economic, and geopolitical imperatives that have driven the evolution and articulation of India’s Look East Policy, while situating the policy within the broader context of India’s global rise and regional rebalancing.

I. Economic Imperatives: Integration through Liberalization

1.1 Post-1991 Economic Liberalization and Search for Markets

The structural crisis of 1991 prompted India to abandon its inward-looking developmental model and embrace economic reforms. The Look East Policy became a natural extension of economic liberalization:

  • Southeast Asia, with its dynamic economies and deepened regional integration through ASEAN, offered India access to export markets, investment capital, and technology flows.
  • LEP sought to compensate for the decline of traditional trade partners like the Soviet Union and tap into the Asian Tiger economies as engines of growth.

India’s economic diplomacy focused on bilateral trade agreements, FDI promotion, and connectivity projects to align its eastern frontier with Asia’s growth corridor.

1.2 Regional Economic Architecture and India’s Inclusion

  • By the late 1990s, India actively pursued participation in ASEAN-led economic frameworks such as the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF), East Asia Summit (EAS), and Bay of Bengal Initiative for Multi-Sectoral Technical and Economic Cooperation (BIMSTEC).
  • The India–ASEAN Free Trade Agreement (FTA) (2009) and later India–ASEAN Services and Investment Agreement (2014) reflected India’s commitment to economic regionalism.

This economic imperative was underpinned by India’s aspiration to be part of the ‘Asian Economic Community’, envisioned as a pan-regional growth zone from the Indian Ocean to the Pacific.

II. Strategic Imperatives: Balancing, Security, and Connectivity

2.1 Strategic Rebalancing Beyond the Subcontinent

LEP marked India’s effort to escape the subcontinental mindset and assert its presence as a pan-Asian power:

  • With a historically limited engagement eastward during the Cold War, India needed to shed its continental inertia and develop its maritime identity.
  • LEP helped diversify strategic options beyond Pakistan and China, offering alternative partnerships and new geopolitical theatres.

This strategy aligned with India’s vision of strategic autonomy, allowing it to engage multiple power centres while resisting alignment within bloc politics.

2.2 Maritime Security and the Andaman–Southeast Asia Interface

India’s Andaman and Nicobar Islands place it at a strategic fulcrum between the Bay of Bengal and the Malacca Strait, which connects South Asia to East Asia:

  • LEP facilitated India’s entry into maritime security dialogues, naval diplomacy, and joint military exercises with ASEAN states and key regional actors such as Japan, South Korea, and Australia.
  • The growing threat of non-traditional security challenges—such as piracy, human trafficking, and maritime terrorism—also compelled India to forge strategic coalitions in the eastern maritime theatre.

By emphasising its Indian Ocean–Pacific interface, India was able to project itself as a net security provider in the region.

2.3 Counterbalancing China’s Influence

A fundamental strategic driver of LEP has been India’s need to balance China’s expanding footprint in Asia:

  • India sought to strengthen ties with Vietnam, Indonesia, Singapore, and Japan as part of a broader hedging strategy.
  • The South China Sea dispute and China’s growing assertiveness in the Indo-Pacific have pushed India to deepen defence cooperation with Vietnam (port calls, training), Japan (ACSA), and ASEAN at large.

LEP thus became an instrument of strategic diversification to counterbalance China’s unilateralism and prevent encirclement under initiatives like the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI).

III. Geopolitical Imperatives: Regionalism and Multilateralism

3.1 Engaging with ASEAN as a Pillar of Asian Regionalism

India’s LEP was predicated on the belief that ASEAN lies at the heart of Asia’s regional architecture:

  • As ASEAN expanded from five to ten members and began integrating political-security, economic, and socio-cultural communities, India viewed the grouping as a bridge between South and East Asia.
  • India’s inclusion in the ASEAN Defence Ministers Meeting Plus (ADMM+), ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF), and EAS represents strategic validation of its eastward engagement.

This multilateral orientation also allowed India to legitimize its regional role, while maintaining equidistance from major power rivalries.

3.2 Indo-Pacific Geostrategy and Act East Rearticulation

The transformation of LEP into the Act East Policy (2014) under Prime Minister Narendra Modi reflected the geopolitical shift towards the Indo-Pacific construct:

  • India repositioned itself within the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (QUAD) alongside the US, Japan, and Australia as part of a rules-based maritime order.
  • Initiatives such as Project Mausam, SAGAR (Security and Growth for All in the Region), and India–ASEAN connectivity corridors aim to institutionalize India’s presence across the Indo-Pacific’s strategic corridors.

India’s Act East Policy thus aligns with emerging geostrategic discourses and reflects greater diplomatic and security activism, especially in multilateral naval coalitions and infrastructure connectivity regimes.

IV. Civilizational Diplomacy and Soft Power

While less overtly strategic, India’s LEP also drew upon civilizational linkages to Southeast Asia’s Indic past:

  • Buddhist diplomacy, cultural exchanges, and historical trade networks were invoked to cultivate soft power linkages, especially with Myanmar, Thailand, Laos, and Cambodia.
  • Institutions like the Nalanda University revival and the International Conference on Buddhist Heritage serve as platforms for cultural diplomacy and shared regional identity-building.

This dimension of the LEP helped create non-contentious avenues of engagement, complementing hard power strategies with symbolic outreach.

Conclusion

India’s Look East Policy emerged from a confluence of economic compulsions, strategic rebalancing, and geopolitical aspirations, signifying a decisive shift in India’s external orientation. The policy has evolved from an economic outreach framework to a strategic geostrategic doctrine, culminating in the Act East Policy that seeks to align India’s eastern engagement with Indo-Pacific regional dynamics.

As India continues to navigate an increasingly multipolar and contested Asia, the future of its eastward policy will depend on its ability to reconcile strategic ambition with material capacity, deepen infrastructure and institutional connectivity, and maintain autonomous regional agency amid intensifying great power competition.

Discover more from Polity Prober

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.