Kautilya’s Concept of Raja Mandala {Mandala Doctrine} and Shadguna in Foreign Policy

Kautilya in Arthashastra has detailed the notion of Raja Mandala or Circle of States and Shadguna or six-fold diplomatic policy, which can amazingly encompass every aspect of modern foreign policy.

Rajamandala {Circle of States}

The Rajamandala theory consists of four principal types of states viz. Vijigishu (desirous for or would be world conqueror), Ari (enemy, whose territory if contiguous to Vijigishu), Madhyama (Middle king with territory adjoining those of Vijigishu and Ari and stronger than both) and Udasina (kingdom lying outside or neutral and more powerful than that of Vijigishu, Ari, and Madhyama). Each of them has an ally and ally’s ally thus making 12 kings and 60 types of combinations called material constituents (for example, enemy’s enemy, mitra’s enemy, enemy’s mitra, mitra’s mitra and so on). This together combines into the total 72 elements of Raja Mandala.

This scheme is based on assumption that two neighbouring states which share their borders are hostile to each other; and the enemy of hostile neighbour is a natural ally. The Vijigishu is located at the centre of this circle.

Shadguna Sidhanta {Six-Fold Diplomatic Policy}

This doctrine is a six-fold foreign policy for attainment of one’s national interests and goals based on realpolitik. Kautilya had suggested this recipe for a Vijigishu to realise his dream to become world conqueror. The six principles are Sandhi, Vigraha, Asana, Yana, Sansraya and Dvaidhibhava. A very brief explanation of these is as follows:

Sandhi

Sandhi (making peace with strong enemy) has been advised for a weaker nation with strong enemy. When you enemy is stronger than you, don’t confront with him and rather make peace on terms and conditions of your enemy {i.e. surrender troops, treasury or territory}. Sandhi will thwart the strong enemy and will give enough time to get strong enough to overthrow the strong enemy. Thus, this policy is based on “opportunism” and seeks time to become strong and wait for enemy to get weaker.

Vigraha

Vigraha (policy of hostility) has been advised for stronger nation with relatively weaker enemy. There can be two dimensions of policy of hostility viz. Defensive and Offensive. Kautilya says that policy of Vigraha is advisable only when you are sure that you should be either repel attack of enemy or are strong enough to ruin enemy or seize his territories (in such case go ahead with Yana).

In this policy, Kautilya has hinted some kind of cost-benefit analysis and says that if cost appears more than benefit, then Sandhi is preferred over Vigraha.

Asana

The Asana is basically a stance of keeping quite. It is to wait for enemy to get weaker either by plunging itself in some difficulties or getting involved in war at some other front. Asana also includes secret efforts to weaken the enemy or some kind of proxy war in modern terms.

Yana

Yana {March or Expedition} is direct manifestation of a policy of Vigraha and is to be followed when you are sure that you shall ruin the enemy and win over him.

Sansraya

Sansraya means seeking shelter with another king. If a king is weak and threatened to be attacked by a powerful enemy, it’s better to seek protection from another King or another place / fort etc. This policy corresponds to status of Protégé in modern sense.

Dvaidhibhava

Dvaidhibhava refers to the double policy of Sandhi with one king and Vigraha with another at a time. It is suggested for a King who is strong enough to fight but may not win without getting additional strength of an ally.

Apart from the above Shadgunas, Kautilya has mentioned four tactics to overcome the opposition viz. Saman (Conciliation), Dama (Gifts), Bheda (Dissension) and Danda (Force).

Relevance of Rajamandala and Shadguna Siddhanta

In Arthashastra, Kautilya has made arguments about power, governance, statecraft etc. without any reference to any religion or divinity, which makes him eligible as true founder of what we call realpolitik. However, above description makes it very clear that Kautilya suggests a state to act in order to enhance its power and self-interest. There does not seem to be any moral / ethical or religious obligation in his policy. War and peace are solely on basis of profit. Many criticize this policy of Kautilya as ruthless realpolitik, intrigue, deceptive and immoral. Despite of criticism, the policy holds relevance because Kautilya said something which has always been actually practiced by states everywhere.

At the same time, when discussing about India’s foreign policy, many observers connect the ancient Indian strategic thought of Kautilya with contemporary Indian strategy, whereby foreign policy takes place within three widening concentrics, with the first circle encompassing India’s immediate neighbourhood region, the second its extended neighbourhood; and the third the entire global stage. Many observers consider such principles to be both applicable to, and evident in, the conduct of Indian foreign policy since 1947.