ABSTRACT India’s government under Narendra Modi represents a return to single party rule. This paper investigates whether and why single party governments in India differ in their extremity of foreign policies from coalition governments. It particularly focuses on how different forms of government influence the saliency, contestation, and enactment of national conceptions about India’s global role. First, I situate India within the academic debate regarding coalitional governments and foreign policy. I suggest that one reason why India challenges scholars‘ assumption is the missing link between partisan conceptions of India’s global role and their institutional representation. Second, I propose a role theoretical approach and argue that the process of self-identification, consisting of ego and anticipated alter expectations, conditions a state’s role set and extreme foreign policy. It is hypothesized that the nature of contestation of national role conceptions varies between factions and fractions because of the nature of India’s party system, as well as the relative significance of external others for India’s identity. Third, I examine instances of role-taking in the field of nuclearization and Sino-Indian relations. Findings suggest that contested role conceptions during single-party rule caused more extreme variances in international role-taking, while coalition governments proved to induce more complementary role-taking processes.

中文翻译：

---

从派系到派系：印度在不同政党体系中的外交政策角色

摘要 纳伦德拉·莫迪 (Narendra Modi) 领导下的印度政府代表着回归一党统治。本文调查了印度的单党政府在外交政策方面是否以及为何与联合政府不同。它特别关注不同形式的政府如何影响有关印度全球角色的国家概念的显着性、争论和制定。首先，我将印度置于关于联合政府和外交政策的学术辩论中。我认为，印度挑战学者假设的一个原因是，关于印度全球角色的党派观念与其制度代表性之间缺少联系。其次，我提出了一种角色理论方法，并认为自我认同的过程，包括自我和预期的改变期望，一个国家的角色设定和极端的外交政策的条件。假设由于印度政党制度的性质以及外部他者对印度身份的相对重要性，国家角色概念的争论性质因派系和派别而异。第三，我研究了在核化和中印关系领域扮演角色的例子。研究结果表明，单党统治期间有争议的角色概念导致了国际角色扮演的更多极端差异，而联合政府则证明会引发更多互补的角色扮演过程。以及外部他人对印度身份的相对重要性。第三，我研究了在核化和中印关系领域扮演角色的例子。研究结果表明，单党统治期间有争议的角色概念导致了国际角色扮演的更多极端差异，而联合政府则证明会引发更多互补的角色扮演过程。以及外部他人对印度身份的相对重要性。第三，我研究了在核化和中印关系领域扮演角色的例子。研究结果表明，单党统治期间有争议的角色概念导致了国际角色扮演的更多极端差异，而联合政府则证明会引发更多互补的角色扮演过程。