Comment: Mandal theory. (2003, 20 Marks)
The mandala or rajamandala (circle of kings) is the theory of inter-state relations in the Arthashastra of Kautilya (Chanakya/Vishnugupta), set out mainly in Book 6, chapter 2. It maps the world from the standpoint of the vijigishu, the would-be conqueror. Book 7 then derives the whole of foreign policy from it, opening with the principle that the circle of states is the source of the six-fold policy.
The Structure of the Circle
| Position | King | Relation to the vijigishu |
|---|---|---|
| In front | Ari, then mitra, then the enemy’s ally, the ally’s ally, and so on | Alternating enemy and friend |
| Behind | Parshnigraha (rear enemy) and akranda (rear ally), each with an ally | A campaign ahead exposes the rear |
| Beside | Madhyama, the middle king bordering both conqueror and enemy | Can help or resist either |
| Beyond | Udasina, the neutral, stronger than any of them | The system’s balancer |
- The count is twelve kings. Each has five material constituents (ministers, territory, fort, treasury, army), so the circle has seventy-two elements in all.
- The logic is positional, not moral. A contiguous king is the natural enemy because both want the same land. The king beyond him is the natural ally because he shares that enemy.
How the Theory Works
- From structure to choice. The shadgunya, the six measures (peace, war, staying quiet, marching, seeking shelter and the dual policy), are chosen by comparing one’s own seven elements with those of every king in the circle.
- Fluid alignments. When the conqueror absorbs his neighbour, his old ally becomes the new neighbour, and so the new enemy. No friendship is permanent.
- Instruments. The four upayas (conciliation, gifts, dissension, force) work through the circle: the rear ally pins down the rear enemy.
- Bounded expansion. The vijigishu aims at the chakravartin ideal, yet Kautilya prefers peace when peace and war promise equal gain. He also recommends dharmavijaya, the restrained conquest.
Significance
The mandala is one of the earliest theories of the balance of power. It derives alignment from geography, as later realism derived it from capabilities. George Modelski (1964) read it as a model of an international system. Roger Boesche (2002) called Kautilya the first great political realist.
It still illuminates India’s neighbourhood (as analogy, not doctrine):
- Pakistan, the hostile neighbour, draws its principal support from China. SIPRI found that China supplied 81% of Pakistan’s arms imports in 2020–24, which fits the circle’s enemy’s ally.
- Afghanistan lies beyond Pakistan. In October 2025, as Pakistan–Afghan border fighting flared, India hosted the Taliban foreign minister, Amir Khan Muttaqi, and upgraded its Kabul mission to an embassy. It follows the logic of the ally beyond the enemy.
- Operation Sindoor (7 May 2025), after the Pahalgam attack, applied calibrated force against one adversary without widening the front.
Limits
- Geographic determinism. Bhutan and Nepal are neighbours without being enemies. Non-alignment and strategic autonomy have often run against what a pure mandala reading predicts.
- Missing variables. It has no place for ideology, economic interdependence, international law, nuclear deterrence or non-state actors.
- Advice, not a system. It guides one ruler; it does not explain how the circle behaves as a whole.
- Ethical rejection. The Buddhist ideal of conquest by righteousness, and later Nehruvian Panchsheel (1954), refuse to treat the neighbour as a standing enemy.
Conclusion
The mandala turns foreign policy from sentiment into calculation. It links position, relative power and a graded menu of action as no other ancient text does. Its value today is as an analytical lens that warns against permanent friendships and encirclement, not as a script for an order far thicker than a ring of land-hungry kingdoms.