Kautilya’s Arthashastra is both an ancient and a modern text. Although composed nearly two millennia ago, it was lost for centuries. It came to modern light in or about 1905, when a manuscript was procured by R. Shamasastry, Sanskrit scholar and librarian of the Mysore Oriental Library.
Since its rediscovery, Arthashastra has spurred questions about its utility and relevance for modern domestic governance and foreign policy. These are legitimate questions but they have had to contend with the fact that the text has become a symbol of national pride and assertion of India’s identity on the world stage. Furthermore, enthusiasm for Arthashastra amongst analysts and practitioners of India’s foreign policy often rests more on the legend surrounding its authorship—and that author’s role in building the subcontinent’s first empire—than on the substance of the text itself.
These features have prevented a deeper, more meaningful engagement with this Indian classic of universal significance. Can we do better?
Enthusiasm for Kautilya’s Arthashastra
One reason for the current enthusiasm for the text is its unalloyed realism. In popular discourse, India’s Cold War era foreign policy has come to be characterised—simplistically and misleadingly—as idealist. Against this backdrop, Kautilya’s clear-eyed depiction of the international environment and foreign policy as based on calculation of power becomes attractive, especially as naked power play is on display everywhere in global politics.
Another reason for the enthusiasm is the trend of cultural and intellectual ‘decolonisation.’ It involves turning to indigenous Indian political science tradition for theoretical frameworks that can guide contemporary Indian foreign policy. This ‘decolonisation’ is a response to the supposed dominance of western ideas in the realms of modern Indian culture and knowledge.
Turning to one’s own tradition is an entirely legitimate exercise, except that here it is accompanied—and partly motivated—by two related perceptions.
The first is that Arthashastra has not received its due respect and recognition in International Relations (IR), a field hitherto dominated by Western academia. And the second is that even Indian scholars and practitioners have neglected it. There is an impression that Indians themselves have favoured western figures and texts, such as Machiavelli’s The Prince, Henry Kissinger’s Diplomacy, and Clausewitz’s On War.
