International politics is all about power. In the context of exercising power, an actor’s strategic culture matters a lot. Alastair Johnston, a renowned authority on the idea of strategic culture, defines it as a “system of symbols which acts to establish pervasive and long-lasting strategic preferences by formulating concepts of the role and efficacy of military force in interstate political affairs.” Ever since the United States of America and Israel launched their war against Iran on February 28, military strategists the world over are trying to deconstruct almost every single facet of the war to derive lessons both on the battlefield and off the battlefield. When it comes to the war, the exercise of force by all the actors is, interestingly, based on the lessons of one of India’s most celebrated statesmen — Kautilya.
Kautilya, popularly known as Chanakya, was an ancient Indian statesman who served as the Prime Minister of the first pan-Indian empire in its history — the Mauryan Empire. He is known for his treatise, the Arthashastra, or the ‘science of statecraft’. Divided into 15 books, the treatise serves as a foundational guide for a ruler on how to carve out an empire and enforce good governance. While the treatise addresses a multiplicity of subjects, such as taxation, maintenance of law and order, and agriculture, it primarily concerns war and statecraft.
In the context of the ongoing war in the Middle East and Iran’s resistance against the US-Israel duo, certain key ideas of Kautilya are applicable.
Mandala Theory
This theory represents a concentric circle of states where the core circle manifests itself through the Vijigishu, a Sanskrit word denoting an aspiring conqueror. In the context of the ongoing war, there are two ‘aspiring’ conquerors — Israel and the United States. The next circle is the Ari, a Sanskrit word for foe; in this context, the foe of the duo is Iran. The next circle, which supersedes the Ari is the Mitra, a Sanskrit word for ally. The Gulf Arab states in the region represent America and Israel’s direct and indirect allies.
The Arthashastra, or the ‘science of statecraft’, is divided into 15 parts, and the treatise serves as a foundational guide for a ruler on how to carve out an empire and enforce good governance
This clearly explains the geopolitical chessboard of the region, where Israel and the United States, who initiated the war, are not only trying to degrade the capabilities of the Ari, and the Ari in the process is trying to defend itself and raise the cost of escalation for the Vijigishus by targeting their allies.
Shadgunya Niti
As the conquerors of the Mandala theory are trying their level best to alter the status quo in the region against the primary foe, the nature of the policies the sides are applying broadly corresponds to the six-fold policy theory of Kautilya. These are Sandhi (peace), Vigraha (war), Yana (preparing for war), Samshraya (seeking alliance), Asana (remaining neutral) and Dvaidhibhava (dual policy — alliance with one power and hostility to others).
The Americans and the Israelis considered it essential to strike Iran to degrade Iran’s conventional as well as proxy capabilities. Hence, the duo resorted to the use of Danda
The conquerors gravitated towards the policy of Vigraha against Iran after trying the process of Sandhi. The actions of Sandhi can be understood in the context of the negotiations the actors were involved in before the commencement of the war concerning Iran’s nuclear programme. At present, Iran is pursuing Dvaidhibhava, under which, despite enforcing a de facto blockade of the Strait of Hormuz, Iran is allowing the shipping vessels of friendly countries to pass, even as it continues to block the maritime shipping assets of hostile countries, particularly the US and Israel. The US and Israel are trying to follow the policy of Samshraya, wherein Trump is desperately seeking the assistance of the transatlantic security alliance NATO to get the Strait of Hormuz reopened. However, NATO members have refused to assist America, incurring, in the process, President Trump’s verbal wrath, which he unleashes almost daily on social media.
Iran’s intention, on the other hand, is to wage economic warfare, whereby in blockading the Strait of Hormuz, Iran is attacking the Kosa of the global economy to blunt the Danda of the US and Israel.
Four Upayas
Linked to the Shadgunya Niti or six-fold policy of Kautilya is the four Upayas or expedients. Kautilya articulated these as steps that can enable a ruler to deal with other kingdoms in a pragmatic, calculated way. These four Upayas are: Sama, Dana, Bheda, Danda. Sama means a policy of conciliation, Dana means offering concessions to earn the goodwill of the negotiating parties, Bheda means sowing the seeds of dissension in another kingdom so that the concerned kingdom unravels from within, and Danda means exercising the use of force to fulfil one’s national interests.
Iran intends to wage economic warfare, whereby, in blockading the Strait of Hormuz, Iran is attacking the Kosa of the global economy to blunt the Danda of the US and Israel
In the context of the ongoing war, Iran sought conciliation with the US and Israel, due to the vast asymmetries in their respective force profiles. Iran tried negotiating in good faith; it even offered concessions or Dana in the form of its long-cherished nuclear programme, which was long perceived in global intellectual circles as the crown jewel of Iran’s scientific development. The Americans and the Israelis, however, considered it essential to strike Iran to degrade Iran’s conventional as well as proxy capabilities. Hence, the duo resorted to the use of Danda. The exercise of Danda by the United States and Israel is meant to serve a three-fold purpose — first, to enact regime change in Iran; second, to degrade Iran’s conventional warfighting abilities by destroying its ballistic missile programme in addition to its nuclear installations; third, to tilt the balance of power in Israel and America’s favour in the Middle East.
Interestingly, in order to make the cost of the war prohibitive for the aspiring conquerors and to protect the regime, Iran is engaging what Kautilya called the Gudha Yudh, it relies on the use of clandestine assets to erode the conventional military advantage of the enemy. This Iranian strategy is manifesting itself in the formidable network of allied non-state actors (known as the ‘Axis of Resistance’) that it has created in the region to harass the ‘vijigishus’. The strategy is paying off; Houthis in Yemen and Hezbollah in Lebanon have already opened new theatres of engagement against Israel, with the result that Lebanon is being bombed by Israel, and the entry of the Houthis is sparking conversations about the possibility of Bab-el-Mandab, another strategic waterway being blockaded by Iran.
Thus, Kautilya’s Arthashastra continues to remain remarkably applicable to the context of ongoing conflict, necessitating the need for global actors to internalise the lessons of this timeless treatise being put into force
–The writer is currently working as a Research Associate at Defence Research and Studies (dras.in) and is a columnist. The views expressed are personal and do not necessarily reflect the views of Raksha Anirveda
