Key messages
- The bilateral relationship between the EU and India would require a practical method, anchored in strategic convergences, whereas mitigating tensions from normative divergences.
- For the EU-India strategic partnership to evolve, Brussels should acknowledge India’s method to partnerships and adapt by adopting a modular, pragmatic and resilient diplomatic framework.
- Nonetheless, in the medium to long run, the partnership must deal with normative and worth discrepancies, which, regardless of being ceaselessly emphasised as widespread in official declarations, stay a supply of friction.
- These divergences stem from basically totally different worldviews that inevitably mirror either side’s interpretation of the modern international situation.
Evaluation
Introduction
In July 2025 a gaggle of early-career European students was convened to articulate their visions of the relationship between the EU and India. This initiative has resulted in two analyses, every reflecting totally different visions of the evolving partnership. Wanting forward, as the bilateral EU-India relationship deepens, Europe will more and more require specialists on India to offer nuanced evaluation, whereas India might want to domesticate its personal experience to foster mutual understanding.
This initiative aligns with the Elcano Royal Institute’s Proyecto Generación Europa (Era Europe Challenge), which seeks to amplify the voices of younger Europeans at a pivotal second. Likewise, these students have been drawn from Southern Europe, the place tutorial engagement with Indian research is much less developed in contrast with the UK, France or Germany. Establishing a basis for additional analysis and debate on India is important to boost understanding and combine totally different views from throughout Southern Europe.
Whereas most analyses of the EU-India relationship performed to date deal with financial and technical dimensions, normative points appear trickier to deal with. These divergencies represent one of the predominant irritants between the two companions. Though there’s a broad consensus on the must deepen ties, it’s equally essential to confront the difficulties posed by normative misalignments and misunderstandings arising from differing worldviews at the negotiating desk.
The next contributions will deal with these challenges and provide suggestions. A key level of convergence between the EU and India lies in the agency perception that, amid present international tensions, each actors should lead efforts to advertise diplomatic dialogue and cooperation. The 2 agree that the world’s economic system shouldn’t be weaponised and that neither the US nor China ought to dictate the guidelines of the worldwide order.
Partaking Bharat: how home politics shapes India’s overseas coverage, and what this implies for the EU
India’s overseas coverage has change into extra assertive and interest-driven beneath Prime Minister Narendra Modi, reflecting deep home transformations reminiscent of centralised management, Hindu nationalist narratives and a shrinking democratic area. These shifts notably have an effect on how India engages with its exterior companions, together with the EU. Brussels faces each alternatives for nearer cooperation and challenges stemming from India’s resistance to exterior normative frameworks. For the EU, the process is thus to craft a practical and selective engagement technique, balancing strategic ambitions with its normative identification. The next points have to be taken into consideration:
- Home drivers matter: India’s assertive worldwide posture displays inside political tendencies, reminiscent of centralised management, nationalism and a rebooted civilisational framing of identification.
- Normative divergence: India more and more resists exterior prescriptions on democracy and rights, complicating its engagement with the EU’s values-based overseas coverage.
- Strategic weight: regardless of divergences, India stays indispensable to the EU’s targets n commerce, digital governance, safety, and multipolar stability.
- Coverage alternative for the EU: conditionality dangers alienation, whereas a purely transactional engagement would possibly weaken the EU’s identification. A selective, interest-based method provides the most viable path.
Home politics and overseas coverage
India’s overseas coverage is deeply influenced by its home political dynamics. Since Prime Minister Narendra Modi got here to energy in 2014, India has projected a extra assertive and autonomous posture, invoking a nationwide resurgence and Hindutva-inspired identity politics. Whereas this may occasionally haven’t basically and radically altered Indian overseas coverage as such, some implications are evident: a larger reliance on multi-alignment, resistance to exterior criticism and a sharper rejection of universalist norms. These exterior shifts are underpinned by deeper home tendencies, together with challenges to the rule of law, shrinking civic space, elevated market concentration and a redefinition of nationwide identification by way of the lens of Hindutva. The growing invocation of Bharat, a civilisational conception of the nation, symbolises this redefinition. It frames India as the political expression of an historical civilisation and reinforces the projection of its uniqueness overseas.
Therefore, whereas strategic traditions in India’s overseas coverage might endure, their expression has developed: non-alignment has become multi-alignment, whereas Delhi more and more insists on pursuing its rise by itself phrases. Again in the 1955 Bandung Conference, universalism was not a supply of contestation for India, however quite a typical reference level. As we speak, the rejection of universalist claims marks a departure from that earlier posture, reflecting a brand new flip. On this respect, India presents itself as a civilisation-state, selling a multipolar, sovereignty-first order that resists Western claims to common norms. This shift has moved India in direction of a extra particularist worldview, deepening its suspicion of liberal norms, reinforcing its choice for multipolarity and making it extra assertive in rejecting exterior criticism.
The EU-India paradox
For the EU, India is each a strategic companion and a normative conundrum. Bilateral ties have deepened significantly lately. Since 2018 the EU has invested in strengthening ties with India throughout essential areas reminiscent of commerce, digital governance, inexperienced transition and safety. But India more and more pushes again in opposition to exterior normative frameworks. As the Exterior Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar noted in Brussels in the summer season of 2025, ‘the concept that one half of the world will set requirements for everyone else is one thing we’re in opposition to’. This alerts India’s need to behave as a rule-shaper, not a rule-taker, which carries implications for the EU’s exterior actions, particularly given Brussels’ normative anchoring in human rights, pluralism and democratic governance.
The current 2025 Joint Communication on a New Strategic EU-India Agenda underscores this duality. It broadens cooperation into 5 pillars: (a) prosperity and sustainability; (b) expertise and innovation; (c) safety and defence; (d) connectivity and international points; and (e) enabling elements reminiscent of expertise and mutual understanding. The breadth of this agenda displays the EU’s strategic guess on India as an indispensable companion, however its success will hinge on navigating some of the divergences that New Delhi more and more asserts.Inside the EU, the European Exterior Motion Service and the European Parliament are the actors which are most delicate to a normative drift, constantly emphasising democratic requirements and human rights in exterior relations. Their stance contrasts with the extra pragmatic focus of the Fee and the Council, creating inside tensions in how Brussels approaches India. On the different hand, India’s civilisationally framed conception of order, sovereignty-first orientation and suspicion of universalist norms widen the hole with the EU’s values-based method, at the same time as interdependence grows.
Towards a backdrop of international uncertainties, together with the imposition of tariffs by the Trump Administration, India-EU relations thus demand a slight recalibration. Engagement have to be grounded on clear targets and mutual respect. Normative conditionality, if too rigidly utilized, dangers alienating an more and more confident India. At the identical time, a purely transactional method might dilute the EU’s strategic identification.
Coverage implications for the EU
India isn’t aligning absolutely with the West, neither is it disengaging with it. It’s charting its personal path, balancing multipolar ambition with home imperatives. For the EU, 4 potential trajectories loom: (a) strategic convergence, the place shared pursuits outweigh divergences, enabling a deeper cooperation; (b) normative divergence, with democratic backsliding in India straining relations and limiting belief; (c) transactional drift, the place cooperation turns into pragmatic however shallow, with little resilience; and (d) democratic renewal (much less possible), with a situation the place inside reforms in India reopen area for convergence with EU values, restoring some normative alignment.
India is charting its personal course, formed by its international ambition and its imaginative and prescient of multipolarity. More and more articulated by way of the lens of Bharat, this course displays a civilisationally framed and ideologically grounded projection of India’s rise inside and overseas. The EU ought to thus deal with areas of shared curiosity and have interaction India as it’s: a fancy, extra assertive and but indispensable companion, navigating its rise by itself phrases. The choice is a partnership formed extra by phantasm than technique.
Between phantasm and curiosity: rethinking the EU’s strategic engagement with India
The EU sees India as a doubtlessly key strategic companion. Nonetheless, escalating international tensions –from the struggle in Ukraine to Center Jap instability and the lingering results of the Trump period– are forcing a crucial reassessment of the partnership. As well as, the nation’s home panorama and its calculated ambiguity in overseas coverage are a critical concern for the EU. This ambiguity needs to be handled as a structural factor of India’s strategic behaviour, not as a short lived or tactical deviation. On this regard, the EU ought to rethink the concept of democratic affinity or a superbly symmetrical partnership, acknowledging as a substitute the structural variations in institutional logic and strategic company between the EU and India. A extra pragmatic technique is required, specializing in sectoral cooperation in areas of shared curiosity –reminiscent of maritime safety or digital governance– primarily by way of bilateral relations of Member States, coordinated inside a typical European framework.
Indian strategic ambiguity: evasive balancing
India’s technique of evasive balancing clearly exhibits the rigidity between its sensible strategic strikes and the manner it presents them. Whereas India builds up its capabilities and competes with different powers, it rigorously reassures nations like China that it doesn’t intend to impress a safety dilemma. This calibrated ambiguity permits India to behave as a versatile energy, avoiding formal alliances in favour of adaptable partnerships that enable it extra flexibility and maintain a strategic identification rooted in the MNA and its ongoing dedication to autonomy. This implies that India could also be intentionally positioning itself as a counterweight to China, doubtlessly pursuing an actual technique of geopolitical seduction geared toward being courted by all main powers.
EU-India relations: the civilisational issue and ideological divergences with Europe
In its relations with India, the EU should take into account the nation’s civilisational identification and the notion amongst its elites of Western nations as declining paradigms –ethically, culturally and strategically– unworthy of replication. This outlook, tied to the Hindutva ideology, fuels India’s view of a delegitimised liberal order represented by the EU. In observe, the distinction is stark: the EU is sluggish, collective and normative. India, against this, is agile, ambiguous and extremely selective. Trying to align India with EU beliefs can be futile and dangers strategic embarrassment.
Nonetheless, India is clearly desirous about nearer entry to the European market and superior dual-use applied sciences. For New Delhi, the EU is beneficial: not as a strategic ally, however as a sensible companion that may provide tangible advantages. The September 2025 Joint Communication on a New Strategic EU-India Agenda, whereas updating sectoral cooperation mechanisms, implicitly assumes a broader symmetry –not solely in capabilities but additionally in institutional logic and strategic outlook– whereas underplaying civilisational and normative divergences, reinforcing the want for a versatile, modular and sector-focused engagement.
India’s inside constraints and vulnerabilities as a strategic companion
India faces many inside hurdles, reminiscent of political divisions, inequality, restricted technological improvement, and vitality dependence, hindering its potential for growth. These inside constraints transcend the financial or political realm; they mirror a deeper reconfiguration of India’s democratic structure. On this regard, one of the dangers of extreme rapprochement on the half of the EU can be falling right into a misguided notion of convergence and trying to impose an ideologically incompatible mannequin, given India’s authoritarian tendencies and illiberal-nationalist elements. Moderately than a basic energy, India is a key systemic actor, which can not change into dominant in the coming years however will nonetheless be strategically consequential.
Strategic suggestions for the EU
The next strategic suggestions needs to be thought of:
- Settle for India’s structural ambiguity as a companion; abandon the phantasm of excellent symmetry or deep ideological convergence. Query the binary logic of ‘ally vs rival’ –India doesn’t match inside that dichotomy–.
- Re-formulate political engagement; perceive India’s selective multilateralism as everlasting and take into account each its goals and anxieties when defining European strategic pursuits.
- Undertake modular, pragmatic and resilient diplomacy; promote sectoral agreements with clear moral strains and use European range as a tactical asset. Permit differentiated relationships between Member States and India inside a coordinated widespread framework, managing intra-EU divergences to keep up cohesion.
- Acknowledge actual competitors with India in third areas reminiscent of Africa and Latin America, the place the EU ought to act as a facilitator, not a paternalistic actor –embracing complexity quite than imposing alignment–.
- Europe should study to bop to India’s rhythm, not insist on a ‘waltz’ –flexibility is the final strategic benefit–.
Parliamentary diplomacy in EU-India relations: a potential joint method to deepening political dialogue and strategic cooperation?
EU-India relations gained new vigour following the ‘New Strategic EU-India Agenda’ endorsed by the EU International Affairs Council on 20 October 2025. The strategic doc elevates the relationship in areas of shared pursuits, prioritising financial and safety cooperation in an unsure geopolitical context. With commerce belongings and vitality provide chains more and more used as instruments of worldwide politics, each the EU and India discover themselves compelled to diversify their relations and discover widespread floor in a strategic partnership that has remained largely stagnant since its formation in 2004. An extended-term funding in political dialogue is crucial to this effort. This evaluation foregrounds parliamentary diplomacy as a channel to assist EU-India political engagement and bridge the normative variations underlying the bold cooperation framework.
Parliamentary diplomacy in EU-India relations
Whereas typically ignored, parliamentary diplomacy has lengthy been recognised as an essential dimension of EU-India relations. Since 2004 key policy documents have constantly recognized interparliamentary exchanges as each an essential space of cooperation and an integral part of the institutional structure supporting the strategic partnership. Nonetheless, the new agenda notably deprioritises this side. As the EU and India goal to maneuver previous a stagnating relationship by way of an bold partnership requiring sustained diplomatic communication, de-emphasising a shared dedication to parliamentary diplomacy at agenda-setting suggests a major shift in the path of mutual cooperation established in 2004.
Amongst various platforms fostering EU-India dialogue, parliamentary diplomacy never evolved into a structured mechanism, regardless of its relevance in the exterior motion method of either side. The European Parliament (EP) established the Delegation for relations with India (D-IN) in 2007. But, on the different facet, this step in direction of formalising EU-India parliamentary relations was by no means met with the identical impetus. The Indian Parliament fashioned an equal physique, the India-EU Friendship Parliamentary Group, solely intermittently, in 2008 and 2014-19. Consequently, EU-India interparliamentary exchanges stay unstructured and asymmetrical, going down largely by way of interparliamentary meetings and advert hoc diplomatic visits of the EP’s standing committees related to ongoing bilateral initiatives.
Towards this backdrop, the determination to deprioritise EU-India parliamentary relations in the new agenda –coupled with the use of a extra diluted values-based discourse throughout the doc– factors to 2 predominant elements. First, it signifies a practical deal with pressing financial, and safety points. Secondly, it communicates {that a} deeper political dialogue is now seen as an engagement that will hinder progress on the strategic partnership.
The strategic and normative context of a renewed EU-India partnership
The brand new EU-India agenda outlines an bold plan, projecting the EU and India as ‘mutually enabling partners’ in 5 areas of strategic cooperation, together with commerce, expertise, safety, connectivity and frameworks of structured engagement. Years of bilateral relations primarily in the economic and defence sectors present the basis for converging on shared benefits. Nonetheless, constructing a stronger EU-India partnership additionally entails discovering constructive avenues for addressing persisting normative divergences on global governance rules and issues that –amongst different political and structural elements– have to date prevented Brussels and New Delhi from changing into sturdy companions.
If unaddressed, normative distance on points like sustainable development, vitality transition, information safety, human rights and international governance reforms danger complicating EU-India negotiations throughout all strategic sectors. Furthermore, the ongoing transformation of India’s domestic politics and foreign policy approach beneath the BJP-led authorities straight challenges the EU’s commitment to partnerships based on the founding values of the Union, eg, democracy, the rule of regulation, pluralism and human rights. How the EU and India got down to navigate these variations is a crucial side of their present rapprochement that deserves nuanced consideration.
Balancing pragmatic cooperation and political dialogue
At the moment concerned in a number of pragmatic partnerships which are pushed by nationwide pursuits quite than value-based positions, India has emerged as a extra assertive international actor and a tougher companion for the EU to interact with. These shifts are unfolding in a extra fragmented worldwide context, the place the declining significance of multilateralism and worldwide regulation in international politics, mixed with a perceived fall of the liberal order, reduces the relevance of a values-based diplomacy.
The brand new EU-India technique displays these advanced (geo)political realities. On the one hand, recalibrating the normative dimension of its exterior motion in direction of India might assist the EU negotiate on short-term goals like finalising the stalled Free Commerce Settlement (FTA) by 2025. On the different hand, although, anchoring the EU-India partnership in a shared dedication to interact in areas of divergence stays essential for guaranteeing its long-term feasibility. It is a advanced problem that requires a rethinking of obtainable diplomatic mechanisms that may facilitate a sustained political dialogue over time. Parliamentary diplomacy, involving diverse functions, actors and levels, can each complement executive-driven EU-India exchanges on particular points (eg, commerce, safety and local weather) and allow a long-term effort to boost understanding of one another’s positions, significantly on divisive and delicate issues (eg, human rights, democratic freedoms and home affairs).
EU-India parliamentary cooperation isn’t premised on binding institutional agreements; therefore it relies upon totally on political will. Each contextual and structural dynamics affect the position that parliamentary diplomacy would possibly play in a renewed EU-India partnership. Most notably, parliamentary actions reminiscent of the EP’s interventions in occasions affecting human rights and democratic freedoms in India have triggered friction in EU-India relations in the previous. Furthermore, rising executive dominance and reduced legislative contestation have made India’s parliamentary diplomacy a strategic software utilized by the authorities to support its foreign policy and manage international perceptions, doubtlessly leaving little room for unbiased initiatives. Towards this backdrop, reworking EU-India parliamentary diplomacy from an underutilised channel right into a extra dynamic platform of dialogue stays advanced. But de-emphasising its position in a strategic agenda that tasks a shared normative foundation, with a powerful smooth energy dimension, reinforces present limitations quite than overcoming them.
The brand new EU-India strategic agenda marks a practical shift in direction of an issues-based partnership formed by the present geopolitical panorama. Its feasibility relies upon not solely on converging pursuits, however crucially on mediating normative variations. Though to date underutilised, parliamentary diplomacy is an obtainable avenue that might complement govt diplomacy in translating complementarities into tangible outcomes. Its diminished position in the new strategic agenda weakens the institutional structure of the partnership amid advanced political realities. At a symbolic degree, it alerts a extra cautious engagement that restricts political dialogue to govt channels. At a sensible degree, it dangers additional decreasing parliamentary diplomacy to an advert hoc and unstructured observe. This will likely undermine the potential to systematically deal with rising variations, leading to potential diplomatic setbacks and restricted alternatives to construct long-term political belief.
Conclusions
Any options?
These contributions present helpful insights into how divergent normative approaches would possibly form the long-term trajectory of the EU-India relationship. A key query emerges: might this partnership evolve right into a larger ideological alignment? In a quickly altering international situation, and as the two improve cooperation in a number of domains, friction is more likely to persist. However, the authors emphasise what’s not doubtful: India and the EU stand to profit from a more in-depth engagement, and the second to behave is now.
On 26 January the Presidents of the Fee, Ursula von der Leyen, and the Parliament, Antonio Costa, attended India’s Republic Day in New Delhi as friends of honour, when the bilateral FTA was signed. Throughout her earlier go to to Delhi in February, when von der Leyen travelled with the total Faculty of Commissioners, she remarked: ‘Europe and India are like-minded partners, certain by the shared conviction that democracy greatest serves the folks’.
But, whereas strategic convergence of pursuits underpins the relationship, setbacks would possibly come up from differing worldviews. Phrases like ‘like-minded’, ‘multilateralism’ and ‘strategic autonomy’ are ambiguous and open to interpretation. Though the emphasis is on shared pursuits in the present international (dis)order, these nuances reveal underlying divergences.
The texts not solely spotlight key challenges from an EU perspective but additionally suggest the right way to deal with them. These younger students have famous that core political values permeate the strategic dialogue between the two companions. The normative dimension shouldn’t be sidelined in the EU-India partnership. Furthermore, this relationship compels Brussels to confront its own internal challenges, points that mirror some of these mentioned right here. Intolerant actions are gaining affect inside EU establishments and Member States, contributing to a worldwide pattern that threatens democracy and its core liberal principles. Polarisation, disinformation and radicalisation threaten political freedoms, the rule of regulation and the separation of powers.
What is especially compelling is observing how this partnership evolves at a time when each actors search to outline their roles as international gamers in an more and more adversarial worldwide surroundings.
