Modi's holistic plan for breaking China's Indo-Pacific hold
When Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi paid his first state visit to Mauritius in March 2015, he launched India's Security and Growth for All in the Region, or SAGAR, doctrine.
A decade later, in March 2025, during another visit to Mauritius, Modi announced the launch of the Mutual and Holistic Advancement for Security and Growth Across Regions, or MAHASAGAR, policy – an upgraded and more comprehensive version of SAGAR.
MAHASAGAR signals a multilayered, comprehensive, long-term and more ambitious Indian vision to the Indo-Pacific, one that extends beyond security concerns to include development, technology sharing and economic cooperation.
During Modi's visit to Mauritius, India upgraded its bilateral relationship with Mauritius to an Enhanced Strategic Partnership.
Modi's new vision of MAHASAGAR – which means 'sea' in Hindi – seeks to integrate trade-driven development, capacity-building for sustainable growth and a mutual security framework to ensure a stable future.
Concessional financing, technological cooperation and institutional support are expected to play key roles in this initiative. How the MAHASAGAR policy, as with SAGAR 2.0, will be implemented, however, remains to be seen.
Over the past decade, SAGAR has served as India's strategic framework for maritime engagement in the evolving Indo-Pacific dynamics, emphasizing India's contribution to ensuring a safe, secure and stable regional order.
Modi's keynote speech at the 2018 Shangri-La Dialogue further sharpened India's Indo-Pacific approach, situating it in a broader geopolitical context. At the 2023 Shangri-La Dialogue, Vikram Misri, then India's Deputy National Security Advisor (now Foreign Secretary), delineated five core pillars of SAGAR, namely: Security cooperation; Capacity-building; Collective action; Sustainable development; and, Maritime connectivity
These principles have guided India's engagement with regional partners. India's Indo-Pacific Oceans Initiative (IPOI) was introduced as a complementary mechanism to SAGAR, providing an open and non-treaty-based platform for collaboration. The IPOI promotes cooperation in maritime ecology, resource management, disaster response and security coordination.
Key Indo-Pacific stakeholders, including the US, Japan, Australia, ASEAN, France and New Zealand, have aligned with India on IPOI, underscoring its inclusive and cooperative approach to Indo-Pacific governance.
India has strategically embedded itself within regional security and economic frameworks to operationalize SAGAR. Initiatives such as the BIMSTEC, Colombo Security Conclave (established in 2020 with Mauritius, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and the Maldives) and India's observer status in the Indian Ocean Commission (comprising Mauritius, Seychelles, Madagascar, Mayotte and Réunion) underscore its commitment to institutionalized maritime cooperation.
Beyond multilateral engagements, India has undertaken significant capacity-building measures to reinforce maritime security and regional stability. These include sharing white shipping information, improving maritime domain awareness and strengthening humanitarian assistance and disaster relief (HADR) frameworks.
Mauritius exemplifies India's proactive role in capacity-building, benefiting from extensive Indian assistance in its Coast Guard modernization, infrastructural development and economic partnerships. India has undertaken various developmental projects in Mauritius, such as the metro project, the new Supreme Court building, the 956 housing project, a new ENT hospital and others
Despite India's efforts, China's growing influence in the Indian Ocean Region (IOR) necessitates a recalibrated approach. The geopolitical rivalry between India and China, exacerbated by the Galwan border clash in 2020, has reinforced strategic competition, particularly in the IOR.
China has systematically expanded its economic and military influence in the Maldives, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh, challenging India's traditional regional role.
China's economic leverage is a major concern for India as Mauritius' bilateral trade with China (US$1.1 billion) is nearly double that with India ($554 million), reflecting Beijing's stronger financial influence. India's challenge lies in bridging this economic gap while maintaining its strategic partnerships.
The shift from SAGAR to MAHASAGAR seemingly aims to counter this challenge by scaling up developmental and security cooperation with the littoral states of the Indian Ocean Region.
Against the backdrop of the return of a transactional US foreign policy under the Trump administration, fast-evolving US-China rivalry, the often predatory nature of China's Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) – and its growing footprints in the IOR and the Pacific Island Region – all necessitate the move from SAGAR to MAHASAGAR.
The gaps between persistent non-traditional security threats and the preparedness of littoral states positions India as a credible and reliable net security provider to the IOR and wider Indo-Pacific region.
However, India faces critical financial hurdles to scaling up its ambitions. A review of the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) annual report reveals a decline in the budget allocated to the ministry, undermining India's ability to provide aid and sustain large-scale support for the Technical and Economic Cooperation (TEC) programs of the MEA.
The Fourth Report of the Committee on External Affairs (2024-25) of the 18th Lok Sabha of highlights the shortfall and recommends 'a phased increase of at least 20% annually in the MEA budget over the next five years to address resource deficits and alignment with long-term goals.'
Without adequate financial commitment, MAHASAGAR risks becoming an ambitious diplomatic acronym without the funds to back its transformational aims. The transition from SAGAR to MAHASAGAR reflects India's recognition of the need for a broader, more dynamic engagement strategy in the Indo-Pacific.
For this vision to materialize into action, India must address several key challenges, including but not confined to scaling up financial commitments, strengthening partnerships with ASEAN, the Quad members (US, Japan, Australia) and key IOR nations.
To establish the policy's credibility, it must shore up economic engagement by diversifying trade and investment partnerships to counterbalance China's economic dominance in the region. India's proactive role in regional groupings like the IPOI and the Colombo Security Conclave should be further institutionalized to ensure long-term stability.
Ultimately, India's success in realizing the MAHASAGAR's goals will depend on its ability to match strategic ambition with financial and diplomatic execution. If effectively implemented, MAHASAGAR could reinforce India's position as a preeminent power and net security provider in the Indo-Pacific, balancing regional security, economic growth and strategic influence in a rapidly evolving geopolitical landscape.
Rahul Mishra is associate professor at the Centre for Indo-Pacific Studies, School of International Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi, India, and a senior research fellow at the German-Southeast Asian Center of Excellence for Public Policy and Good Governance, Thammasat University, Thailand. He can be reached at rahul.seas@gmail.com and followed on X at @rahulmishr_
Harshit Prajapati is a doctoral candidate at the Centre for Indo-Pacific Studies, School of International Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University, India. He can be reached at harshi55_isn@jnu.ac.in and followed on X at @harshitp_47
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
South China Morning Post
3 days ago
- South China Morning Post
Canada's Sikhs, outraged by Modi G7 invitation, plan to protest
Members of Canada's Sikh community who were warned by police that the`ir lives were at risk and allege the Indian government is responsible for the threat are incensed by Ottawa's invitation to Prime Minister Narendra Modi to the G7 summit in Alberta. Advertisement Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney invited Modi, although India is not a member of the group of seven economies, to attend the summit that starts on Sunday as a guest. It will be Modi's first visit to Canada in a decade and a diplomatic test for Carney, a political neophyte. Canada's relationship with India has been tense since former Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau in 2023 accused India's government of involvement in the June 18, 2023, murder of Hardeep Singh Nijjar, a Sikh separatist leader in Canada. Modi's government has denied involvement in Nijjar's killing and has accused Canada of providing a safe haven for Sikh separatists. ''Outrage' is the kind of term that I've heard from people,' Sikh activist Moninder Singh, a friend of Nijjar, said of the invitation. He and other Sikh leaders plan to hold a protest in Ottawa on Saturday. Carney, locked in a trade war with the United States, is trying to shore up alliances elsewhere and diversify Canada's exports. Carney told reporters he invited India due to its importance in global supply chains. Mourners carry the casket of Sikh community leader and temple president Hardeep Singh Nijjar, in Surrey, British Columbia, June 25, 2023. Photo: AP India's Foreign Ministry spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal said in a Thursday press briefing that a meeting between Modi and Carney 'will offer an important opportunity for them to exchange views on bilateral and global issues and explore pathways to set or reset the relationship.' Sikhs face threats
Asia Times
3 days ago
- Asia Times
The silence of icons in hours of need
Two articles–one from The Caravan, the other from The Atlantic–circle around a deceptively simple yet thought-provoking question: Can a global icon, someone capable of shaping the public thought of hundreds of millions, if not billions, of people, afford to remain silent during times of political and moral crisis? Take Sachin Tendulkar, cricket's eternal deity and arguably one of India's most venerated public figures. In a searing 2021 piece titled 'Establishment Man: The Moral Timidity of Sachin Tendulkar,' journalist Vaibhav Vats conducted a quiet evisceration. Yes, Tendulkar is humble. Yes, he's famously self-effacing. But Vats doesn't let those qualities mask the deeper absence at the heart of Tendulkar's public life: a glaring moral void. At a time when India was being battered by the second wave of Covid-19 pandemic and its Prime Minister Narendra Modi was aggressively advancing an exclusionary Citizenship Amendment Act, Tendulkar–idol to a billion–offered no comment, no concern, no gesture of civic responsibility. Vats recounts a moment of almost surreal dissonance: as nationwide protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act gripped India, with mass demonstrations, police crackdowns, constitutional questions burning in the public square, Tendulkar took to X (formerly Twitter) to share his preferred chutney ratio for vada pav. 'Red chutney, very little green chutney & some imli chutney,' he wrote, as if utterly insulated from the country's moral convulsions. The Caravan did not mince words. It describes Tendulkar as a man curiously unaware of his own symbolic gravity. He occupies perhaps the highest pedestal in Indian public life, and yet appears incapable–or unwilling–to grasp the ethical responsibility that comes with such cultural elevation. His misreading of his own stature, the piece argues, is precisely why he retreats into the trivial when the moment demands conviction. Even more damning is the article's assertion that Tendulkar embodies the 'worst traits of the Indian middle class' – a trifecta of moral indifference, democratic apathy, and intellectual hollowness. He is a mirror, the piece suggests, not of who we aspire to be, but who we have become: more comfortable with consumer comfort than civic courage. Fast forward to this week's Atlantic piece, titled bluntly, 'Where Is Barack Obama?' writer Mark Leibovich asks a similar question, this time of the man who once embodied hope and change. Yes, Obama did his time–eight grueling years as the leader of the free world. Yes, he's earned the right to decompress, to cash in, to hover above the fray. But as Donald Trump barrels the whole world towards an unchartered territory during his second term–threatening to dismantle democratic institutions and global stability–Obama's detachment does feel a bit irresponsible. Leibovich, in The Atlantic, cuts through the nostalgia surrounding Obama with surgical precision: it would be one thing if Obama had slipped into quiet retirement–taken up oil painting, perhaps, like George W Bush. But that's not what's happened. Obama remains firmly in the public eye, only now his presence radiates curated ease–movies or book recommendations over X and beachside photoshoots–while much of the country and the whole world spirals into democratic anxiety. What makes Obama's absence more than a symbolic lapse, Leibovich argues, is the profound contradiction it exposes. His career was built on the rhetoric of engagement–grassroots activism, community organizing, civic renewal. In 2008, the entire ethos of his campaign was not 'I will save you' but 'We are the ones we've been waiting for.' That message, once electric, now rings hollow in the vacuum of his detachment. His conspicuous silence as Trump mounts a vengeful return and democratic norms buckle under pressure is a betrayal of the very premise on which Obama built his political identity. Leibovich calls it what it is: a dereliction. A man who once inspired millions to believe in the power of collective action now seems content to watch the civic unraveling from the comfort of a higher plane, buffered by wealth, acclaim and a curated brand of chill. The two articles have essentially pointed out that even though both Tendulkar and Obama represent vastly different cultures, different histories and different spheres of influence, the 'apparent moral failure' they share is unmistakable. When the world cries out for moral imagination, for voices that might still command trust and clarity, they evidently retreat. And in doing so, they remind us that silence is rarely neutral. In moments of crisis, it speaks volumes. Yet the underlying question posed by both articles is the same–and it grows more urgent by the day: What is the moral obligation that comes with influence? When someone holds the power to shape public opinion at scale, to steer collective attention and imagination, what does he owe the world in moments of crisis? Is there a duty to speak out? To take a stand? Must influence always be tethered to conscience? Or can the privileged few retreat into apolitical comfort, shrugging off the burden of moral clarity as someone else's job? Faisal Mahmud is the Minister (Press) of the Bangladesh High Commission in New Delhi .
South China Morning Post
3 days ago
- South China Morning Post
Winning narrative? How India, Pakistan's leaders seek cover under their flags after ceasefire
Pulled back from the brink by a ceasefire, nuclear-armed India and Pakistan avoided a potentially catastrophic collision, but the tides of nationalism unleashed by the four-day clash are still rising on either side of the border. Advertisement Now, leaders of the two nations are seeking to cement a political dividend from the May conflict, with competing claims of victory relayed to domestic audiences attuned to triumphalism whenever the two nations clash. 'The conflict has created a national fervour on both sides,' said Ajay Darshan Behera, professor at the Academy of International Studies at Delhi's Jamia Millia Islamia University. India's ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) is now hoping for a bounce in state polls later this year from Operation Sindoor – the military response to a militant attack in Indian Kashmir's Pahalgam that killed 26 civilians on April 22. India blamed Pakistan for backing the militants, a charge Islamabad has denied. People carry India's national flag as they take part in a rally on May 24 to express solidarity with the country's armed forces after India and Pakistan agreed to a ceasefire. Photo: AFP The BJP has already started campaigning on the basis that its government – helmed by Prime Minister Narendra Modi – dared to cross a red line, targeting what it says was 'terrorist infrastructure' on Pakistani soil.
