Decolonising the Global Economic Order: India’s Case for Self-Sufficiency and Justice

The ninth session of Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam Ki Oar 4.0: Sankraman Kaal brought the spotlight on a question that has increasingly occupied global discourse: whether the existing economic order is fundamentally colonised and skewed in favour of a few powerful nations. Titled “Decolonising the Economic Order”, the session witnessed a wide-ranging discussion on capitalism, socialism and communism, the relevance of the New International Economic Order, and the uneasy relationship between law and economic injustice.

Opening the debate, the panel acknowledged that the present economic framework was neither neutral nor organic, but historically shaped by a handful of nations to serve their interests.

Dr. Soumya Kanti Ghosh, Group Chief Economic Advisor at the State Bank of India, observed that while India follows a mixed economic model, the focus must remain on infrastructure and wealth creation. He highlighted tangible progress in the MSME sector and stressed that development demands large-scale capital, making pragmatic engagement with global systems unavoidable, even as their inequities are recognised.

Former RBI Deputy Governor M. K. Jain underlined the importance of economic self-sufficiency as a prerequisite for global influence. Recalling India’s insistence on data localisation norms despite resistance from global payment companies, Jain said the episode demonstrated how sovereign policy choices, backed by political will, could successfully challenge entrenched economic power.

He pointed to history to argue that economic dominance was not innate to the West, noting that China and India once accounted for over 60 per cent of global economic activity, a share that has since shrunk dramatically. According to him, reclaiming that space requires sustained self-reliance and strategic policy-making.

The session also examined whether the principles of the New International Economic Order, articulated in a 1974 UN General Assembly resolution, remain relevant today. Jain cautioned that unless nations, particularly in the Global South, become internally strong, global resolutions alone would not translate into meaningful power or equity. Echoing this sentiment, several speakers emphasised that sovereign equality in theory rarely translates into equality in decision-making within international institutions.

A sharper critique came on the use of law to legitimise injustice within the global economic system. Spiritual leader Yugbhushan Suriji Maharaj argued that the rule of law could be used to legalise exploitation, calling it a historical blunder that must be corrected by first re-establishing justice. He spoke of “timeless principles” such as fairness in trade, the dignity of labour, and the ethical use of natural resources, arguing that these had been eroded by colonising economic models. His remarks on returning to ancient and natural systems of trade sparked reflection on whether modern artificial systems had severed the balance between humanity and nature.

Moderating the discussion, Shaurya Doval, Director of India Foundation, pushed the panel to identify concrete instances where unjust economic practices are defended through legal structures. Responding to this, Dr. Ghosh cited the persistent deadlock in the Doha Round at the World Trade Organization as a glaring example of how global trade rules disproportionately disadvantage developing economies.

He added that currency manipulation and unfair trade practices continue to undermine countries like India, despite their significant share in global trade.

Vice Chancellor of Nalanda University, Sachin Chaturvedi situated the debate in a broader civilisational context, noting recent policy signals aimed at undoing colonial intellectual legacies. The discussion ultimately converged on a shared conclusion: decolonising the economic order is not merely about rejecting global systems, but about reasserting indigenous principles, strengthening domestic capacity, and ensuring that law serves justice rather than disguising inequity.

The exhibition accompanying the conclave is principled on the idea of Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam and presents twelve timeless principles that underscore the foundations of strong families, ethical governance and social harmony, while situating today’s geopolitical and legal challenges within a broader civilizational framework rooted in responsibility, compassion and coexistence.

In the opening ceremony, Former Supreme Court Judge Justice B.N. Srikrishna emphasised the importance of understanding the culture and ethos of the country while engaging with constitutional principles. He underlined that faith, awareness and sensitivity to social realities are essential to ensure that constitutional values are meaningfully sustained during periods of change. Drawing from ancient scriptures, he invoked the timeless maxim;

आत्मनः प्रतिकूलानि परेषां न समाचरेत्।

Do not do to others what is adverse or hurtful to yourself

Resonating with the idea of Vasudhaiva Kutumbhkam, he quoted:

अयं निजः परो वेति गणना लघुचेतसाम्। उदारचरितानां तु वसुधैव कुटुम्बकम्॥

“This is mine, that is yours” is the thinking of the small-minded. For the large-hearted, the whole world is one family.

Earlier, the forum revisited critical constitutional questions, focusing on the nature of citizens rights, the limits of the State, and the Basic Structure Doctrine. Speaking on the insertion of Article 31B in the Constitution by the then unelected Parliament, His Holiness Yugbhushansuriji Maharaj stated, “Article 31B has never been tested on the touchstone of the Basic Structure Doctrine. Astonishingly, Article 31B is causing the gravest injustice, which has never been faced by any community in the world. In regard to the Jains, this draconian Article stands upright, protecting the acquisition of their topmost place of worship, Parasnath Hills.”