Going Out Clubbing’s Good for New Delhi, Why India’s Observer Status in Trump’s ‘Board of Peace’ Makes Strategic Sense
Lyndon Johnson, a man who had a way with words, memorably said, ‘Better to have your enemies inside the tent pissing out, than outside the tent pissing in.’ It works both ways. India’s decision to attend the inaugural meeting of the latest Trump club, ‘Board of Peace’, as an observer country is a smart move.
BoP is something of a vanity project for a man whose utility is of Uriah Heep proportions—Trump is its life-time chair. Not only does India’s presence not put it in the holdouts column, but it also gives it a chance to read the room with some characters it usually doesn’t have the opportunity—or inclination—to be in with.
The Johnson Principle
Lyndon Johnson’s aphorism captures a fundamental truth of politics and diplomacy. It is better to have potential adversaries inside your coalition, where their actions are visible and somewhat constrained, than outside, where they can operate freely and unpredictably.
India’s observer status in the Board of Peace applies this principle in reverse. By being inside the tent—even as an observer—India gains visibility into the dynamics of a group that includes countries and leaders it might not otherwise engage with. It can read the room, understand the players, and assess the direction of the conversation.
This is not endorsement. It is not alignment. It is strategic awareness.
The Board of Peace: What We Know
For now, BoP is ostensibly ‘focused’ on the reconstruction of Gaza. The devastation in Gaza is real, and the need for reconstruction will be immense. Any initiative that genuinely contributes to rebuilding lives and livelihoods deserves attention.
India has an interest in the region—especially the India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor (IMEC). IMEC is a strategic project that would connect India to Europe via the Middle East, bypassing traditional routes and creating new economic opportunities. Stability in the region is essential for IMEC’s success.
So, India can take notes. It can observe how the BoP approaches reconstruction, what resources are committed, what mechanisms are used, and what political dynamics shape the effort. This information is valuable, whether or not India ultimately participates more actively.
The Logic of Clubs
As a low middle-income country with considerable developmental deficits but high aspirations and much going for it, India’s path to a bigger global role, commensurate with its population size and growing economy, will require adopting non-traditional options.
That means participating in smaller plurilateral arrangements, coalitions and regional groups as members or observers. The old model of waiting for consensus in large multilateral forums is increasingly inadequate. The action is shifting to smaller, more agile groupings.
It pays for New Delhi to keep friends close, and not-so-dear friends within one’s Venn diagram. Joining some groups and not joining others is an expression of its strategic autonomy that seems to be coalescing well.
India has historically been cautious about joining clubs that might be seen as aligning it too closely with any particular power or agenda. But the world has changed. The old certainties are gone. Strategic autonomy now means having the flexibility to engage where engagement serves India’s interests, without being bound by rigid ideological positions.
The Game Plan
What New Delhi needs is a game plan of the role it seeks to play on the global stage, particularly as a bridge between the developed and developing world. ‘Visions’ won’t help. Strategic manoeuvrability will determine India’s engagement, as more plurilateral coalitions—clubs, if you will—emerge in a new ‘two-party’ global system.
The emerging global order is not bipolar in the Cold War sense, but it is increasingly characterised by competition between two major poles—the US-led West and a China-led alternative. In such a system, middle powers like India have options, but they also face pressure to choose sides.
India’s strategy of engaging with multiple groupings—the Quad, BRICS, SCO, I2U2, and now the Board of Peace as an observer—demonstrates that it is not choosing sides. It is choosing issues. It is choosing interests. It is choosing influence.
The Observer Advantage
Observer status is a particularly useful tool. It allows India to be present without being committed. It allows engagement without entanglement. It allows information-gathering without obligation.
In the Board of Peace, observer status gives India a seat at the table—or at least a chair in the anteroom—without making it party to any decisions or actions that might prove controversial. It can watch, learn, and decide later whether deeper engagement is warranted.
This is not fence-sitting; it is strategic patience. It is the wisdom to know that not every invitation requires a full commitment, and that sometimes the best way to influence a conversation is to listen before speaking.
Conclusion: The Art of Strategic Manoeuvrability
India’s decision to attend the Board of Peace as an observer is a textbook example of strategic manoeuvrability. It keeps India in the game without overcommitting. It provides intelligence without entanglement. It opens options without closing doors.
In a world of increasing uncertainty and rapid change, such manoeuvrability is invaluable. India cannot afford to be rigid in its alignments or ideological in its engagements. It must be pragmatic, flexible, and opportunistic—in the best sense of that word.
Going out clubbing is good for New Delhi. Not as a permanent member of every club, but as a discerning participant who knows when to join, when to observe, and when to stay home. The Board of Peace observer status is a smart move. It should be followed by many more such moves.
Q&A: Unpacking India’s Board of Peace Observer Status
Q1: What is the ‘Board of Peace’ and what is its stated purpose?
The Board of Peace is a new initiative launched by Donald Trump, described as something of a vanity project with Trump as its life-time chair. It is ostensibly focused on the reconstruction of Gaza. The devastation in Gaza requires massive rebuilding efforts, and the BoP aims to contribute to this process, though its actual operations and effectiveness remain to be seen.
Q2: Why did India choose to attend as an observer rather than as a full member?
Observer status allows India to be present without being committed. It provides visibility into the group’s dynamics and access to information about its activities, without making India party to any decisions or actions that might prove controversial. It’s a classic example of strategic manoeuvrability—keeping options open while avoiding overcommitment.
Q3: What is the Lyndon Johnson principle mentioned in the article?
Johnson famously said, ‘Better to have your enemies inside the tent pissing out, than outside the tent pissing in.’ The principle is that it’s better to have potential adversaries inside your coalition where their actions are visible and somewhat constrained, than outside where they can operate freely. India’s observer status applies this in reverse—being inside gives visibility into the group’s dynamics.
Q4: How does this fit into India’s broader strategic approach?
India’s path to a larger global role requires adopting non-traditional options—participating in smaller plurilateral arrangements, coalitions, and regional groups as members or observers. This reflects strategic autonomy: the ability to engage where engagement serves India’s interests without being bound by rigid ideological positions. It’s about keeping friends close and not-so-dear friends within one’s Venn diagram.
Q5: What interest does India have in Gaza reconstruction?
India has an interest in regional stability, particularly because of the India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor (IMEC), a strategic project that would connect India to Europe via the Middle East. Stability in the region is essential for IMEC’s success. By observing BoP’s reconstruction efforts, India can gather information about resources, mechanisms, and political dynamics that might affect its interests.
