FOREIGN POLICY OF SMALL STATES: A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF BHUTAN AND MALDIVES

This article provides a comparative study of the foreign policies of Bhutan and the Maldives, two small states navigating the complex geopolitical landscape of South Asia. It examines how each country has sought to preserve its sovereignty and advance its national interests while managing relationships with larger and more powerful neighbors, particularly India. The study analyzes the distinct geopolitical contexts of the two nations: Bhutan as a landlocked Himalayan kingdom with a special treaty relationship with India, and the Maldives as a strategically located archipelago in the Indian Ocean. The research compares their approaches to foreign policy, highlighting Bhutan's traditionally cautious and India-centric policy versus the Maldives' more globally-oriented engagement through forums like the Non-Aligned Movement and the Commonwealth. The paper argues that despite their differences, both states have skillfully employed diplomacy and multilateralism to maximize their autonomy and create space for themselves on the international stage. The analysis concludes by drawing broader lessons about the conduct of foreign policy by small states in asymmetric regional systems.

Small states face a unique set of constraints and opportunities in the conduct of their foreign policy. This paper offers a comparative analysis of two South Asian small states, Bhutan and the Maldives, to illustrate different strategies for navigating an international system dominated by larger powers. The first part of the study focuses on Bhutan. It examines the historical evolution of Bhutan's foreign policy, which has been overwhelmingly shaped by its "special relationship" with India, codified in the 1949 treaty. The analysis explores how Bhutan has gradually sought to diversify its foreign relations and assert a more independent international identity, while still operating within the broad parameters of its relationship with New Delhi. The second part of the paper turns to the Maldives. It highlights how the Maldives, in contrast to Bhutan, has pursued a more extroverted foreign policy, leveraging its strategic maritime location and its identity as a small island developing state to play an active role in multilateral forums. The study examines the Maldives' advocacy on issues like climate change and its engagement with a wider range of international partners. The comparative analysis reveals that while both countries must carefully manage their relationship with the regional hegemon, India, they have adopted different but equally rational strategies to maximize their room for maneuver. Bhutan has prioritized security and stability through a close, managed relationship, while the Maldives has sought influence and security through broader international engagement. The findings offer valuable insights into the diverse diplomatic toolkits available to small states seeking to preserve their sovereignty.