India’s limited partnership with the liberal international order (LIO) of the post-Second World War period had seen a substantial transformation after the end of the Cold War through its economic integration with the world economy. At this critical time of liberal internationalism triggered by the relative decline of American hegemony, rise of the non-Western powers and the tendency of populism in the West, India’s role in the emerging order has been a fundamental imperative. The rationale for its comprehensive partnership with liberal order rests on four main considerations: the looming threat on the liberal order and India’s role; consistency of India’s political principles with that of liberal order; the concern for national interest, identity and global role; and finally, the absence of any viable alternative order. In spite of these promising values and necessities, India’s deeper integration has been constrained by three major factors. The first reason relates to the very concept of the LIO, which is slightly Western-oriented. The second reason corresponds to India’s core identity and its governing view with regards to the world—of non-alignment, sovereign autonomy, non-interference and civilisational identity. Finally, its maximum assimilation within the liberal order continues to be hindered by ‘domestic setbacks’.

冷战结束后，通过与世界经济的经济一体化，印度与二战后自由国际秩序（LIO）的有限伙伴关系发生了实质性转变。在美国霸权相对衰落、非西方大国崛起和西方民粹主义倾向引发自由国际主义的关键时刻，印度在新兴秩序中的作用已成为根本当务之急。其与自由秩序建立全面伙伴关系的理由主要基于四个考虑：自由秩序面临的迫在眉睫的威胁和印度的角色；印度政治原则与自由秩序原则的一致性；对国家利益、身份和全球角色的关注；最后，没有任何可行的替代秩序。尽管有这些有希望的价值观和必要性，但印度更深层次的一体化受到三个主要因素的制约。第一个原因与 LIO 的概念有关，它有点西方化。第二个原因对应于印度的核心身份及其对世界的治理观——不结盟、主权自治、不干涉和文明身份。最后，它在自由秩序中的最大同化继续受到“国内挫折”的阻碍。互不干涉和文明认同。最后，它在自由秩序中的最大同化继续受到“国内挫折”的阻碍。互不干涉和文明认同。最后，它在自由秩序中的最大同化继续受到“国内挫折”的阻碍。