Q # 4: Define foreign policy and discuss its objectives

Foreign policy
“Foreign Policy is the use of political influence in order to induce other states to exercise

their law-making power in a manner desired by the states concerned: it is an interaction

between forces originating outside the country’s borders and those working within them”.

Prof. F. S. Northedge

Foreign policy of a state is concerned with the behavior of a state towards other states. It

refers to the ways in which the central governments of sovereign states relate to each

other and to the global system in order to achieve various goals or objectives. Through its

foreign policy it endeavors to persuade others in accordance with one’s own ends. It is

primarily in proportion to its national power that its persuasive power is effective in this

regard. However, even a powerful state cannot afford to enjoy a solo flight in this regard.

It has to take into account, not only its own objectives and interests, aspirations and

problems, but also those of other states. This process involves intricate processes of

diplomacy short of war. It is also based on the observations regarding the traditional

behavior of a given state. Moreover, a state while implementing its foreign policy cannot

afford to ignore the rules of International law and canons of international morality. The

whole essence of this prelude is that the term foreign policy cannot be studied in isolation

from the factors that determine it.

“Foreign policy is the key element in the process by which a state translates its broadly

conceived goals and interests into concrete course of action to attain these objectives and

preserve interests”

So foreign policy is the bundle of principles and practices that regulate the intercourse of

a state vis-à-vis other states. Through foreign policy a state seeks to achieve a variety of
objectives. The objectives sought to be attained by a state are of different types and

categories, yet there are certain objectives which are uniformly pursued by all states i.e.

Political independence and territorial integrity, economic well-being and, prestige and

status of a nation. They have been classified into short range, middle range and long-

range objectives.

Objectives:
 They are called Core Objectives as well, because these objectives are attained at

all costs. State cannot afford to show any laxity on this count. Among Core

Objectives, territorial integrity and political independence enjoys to be the

foremost priority of each and every nation-state. Without any physical unity the

state would cease to remain a state. So it needs to be and it has to be the foremost

objective of a state. The state has to girdle itself to realize these objectives

directly, quickly, forcefully and effectively; it has no luxury of time in case of

fulfilling these core objectives. It cannot afford the threat to magnify. Moreover, it

has to deal with the source of the threat directly i.e. the demand is made on the

single state or group of states who might pose threat to the geographical integrity

of the country.

 In order to maintain one’s geographical integrity, a state must have arms and

ammunitions. Whereas in case of conventional weapons, it has to carry out ‘finite’

deterrence in order to deter the enemy from attacking it, in case of nuclear

weapons, thanks to their expensive and destructive nature, only ‘minimum

deterrence’ is considered enough. The message is “If you undertake a particular

action, then the cost of that action would outweigh its gains”. However, some of

the strategists advocate the strategy of ‘finite deterrence’ even in case of nuclear

weapons as well. They believe in the accumulation of more and more weapons.
 They advocates of this kind of strategy argue that it is safer to ensure your

survival against a danger by developing more and more sophisticated weapons.

The strategy ultimately leads to unlimited arms race and arms building. The

strategy of minimum deterrence believes in just enough retaliatory capacity to

remove maximum danger. There must be enough material to inflict unacceptable

damages upon the aggressor, if an attack accrues. The advocates of this strategy

contend that by chalking out this strategy, the unnecessary costs of arms building

are minimized.

 As a matter of fact, question of Pakistan’s solidarity is given utmost priority by

Pakistani policy makers. Traditionally, Pakistan’s policy has been India-centric,

and its pattern of relations with the rest of the world has been subservient to that

factor. Pakistan has concentrated her full attention on her eastern borders, because

it perceives that its security stakes mainly rest there. Pakistan sees the situation

through its fear-psychosis originating of its distrust of India. It is highly skeptical

of increased Indian presence on Afghan soil, particularly the establishment of

Indian consulates so close to Pakistan-Afghanistan border.

 Political independence means that the state is able to play its prestigious role in

the international arena at its own will, and if a state is able to do this then it is

politically independent. States seek to safeguard the core objectives at all costs. It

has no time to delay or postpone the fulfilling of these objectives.