Strategic autonomy in the shadow of hegemony: India's post-RCEP trade paradigm

Question (10 marks, ~150 words):

'India's decision to stay out of RCEP was a calculated assertion of strategic autonomy rather than mere protectionism.' Critically examine, with reference to India's post-RCEP trade strategy and its relevance in the geo-economic turbulence of 2026.

Introduction:

• RCEP is the world's largest bloc (15 nations, ~30% of global GDP); India withdrew in 2019 and has refused to re-join — a decision back in focus amid 2026's US-China tariff wars and West Asian instability.

Why it was strategic, not merely protectionist:

• A pre-existing $105 bn+ deficit (China $50 bn) plus 90% tariff elimination threatened an import surge and MSME 'China shock'.
• Exports are price-inelastic, imports elastic — membership would widen, not narrow, the gap.
• The response was constructive: Atmanirbhar Bharat and PLI in 14 sectors to build manufacturing muscle.

The post-RCEP paradigm:

• 'RCEP-minus-China' hub-and-spoke bilaterals — deals with 14 of 15 members — captured market access while preserving policy space.
• IMEC as a strategic alternative to Belt and Road; proactive maritime security; excise/LPG measures in 2026.

The counterview:

• Risk of exclusion from regional value chains and complacency from protection — a genuine autonomy-vs-efficiency trade-off.

Conclusion:

• A bet on sequencing — strength first, integration on own terms later; a mature strategic autonomy that guards industrial sovereignty as the basis of future bargaining power.