Conservatives, by definition, are proud of their heritage and strive to conserve their values, practices, and ethos. From the very definition, conservatives have a conspicuous limitation. On the other side of the political spectrum, liberal internationalists or globalists, by definition, engage with their allies and partners globally. These global alliances make liberal internationalists a formidable force and conservatives limited by their numbers, nation-states, or ideologies. 

Thought leaders such as Yoram Hazony of the Edmund Burke Foundation and Ram Madhav of the India Foundation have sought to bridge this gap with international conferences and increased exchanges between conservatives around the world. Most recently, at the National Conservatism Conference in Washington, DC, the two, among other esteemed guests, laid out their vision of conservatism to foster healthy exchanges. The result is not entirely what they have envisioned, at least so far. 

While some comments were neutral and/or positive, there were a number of negative comments on X in response to Ram Madhav’s speech, in particular, which were deeply racist and Hinduphobic. Adding to this, X users trotted out the usual antisemitic tropes against Hazony as well. Not long after the National Conservatism conference, the Republican nominee for vice president, JD Vance, and his wife—who is a second-generation Hindu American—were widely trolled with similar racist vitriol. 

Over the years, conservatism in the Western world has transformed into ethno-nationalism, limiting membership and making global alliances difficult. The conservative movement, from the likes of Charles Krauthammer, has dwindled down to social media influencers, such as Nick Fuentes and Candace Owens, who seek fame and notoriety.

With no barriers to entry, not just the average Joe but the average David Duke finds a platform to share his vitriol and frustrations. These opinions, largely ill-informed, should not be setting the narrative for American foreign policy. A recent example is one section of the American civil society’s ardent position on Israel. Over the last year or so, Hamas’ acts of extreme violence have been whitewashed or minimized, while the Israeli Defense Forces’ retaliatory actions have been highlighted and vilified with antisemitic tropes.

Increasingly, this is a horseshoe problem with the far-left and far-right joining hands to engage in virulent antisemitic and racist activity. Notably, far-left activists such as the former Bernie Sanders staffer Briahna Joy Gray and the former columnist at the Daily Wire, Candace Owens, have engaged in blatant antisemitism under the guise of anti-Zionism. While both were fired or asked to resign from their respective roles at The Hill and the Daily Wire, they quickly found their own podcast mediums with little censors. 

Several studies have raised the alarm on the surge in hate incidents against both Jews and Hindus across America. This includes a new report by the California Civil Rights Department, which found that Jews and Hindus faced the highest number of all religiously motivated hate incidents in the state at 36.6 percent and 23.3 percent, respectively. That amounts to nearly 60 percent of all religiously motivated hate incidents in the state recorded under this new study. What would have been fringe, hiding in the woodwork, is now out in the open thanks to platforms such as X lowering the bar on censorship. Conspiracy theorists and the dregs of society are finding a platform for their drivel.

For example, in his address, Madhav drew parallels between the similarities of national conservatism in the West and cultural nationalism in India rooted in an ancient Hindu culture, identity, and civilization. Though he highlighted some points of divergence between national conservatives in the West, such as over issues of proselytization, climate change, and pluralism, the greater emphasis was on a common struggle to oppose a left-liberal globalist Marxist ideology. The internet world did not see it that way. Ideology or even common enemies are not uniting swathes of civil society but ethnic and racial affinity instead. This is a dangerous development for American foreign policy.

In the current environment in Washington, where restraint and realism are resurging, it is more necessary than ever to establish international relations and foreign policy discussions on stable and intellectual grounds rather than conspiracy theories to avoid short-sighted and misinformed opinions becoming policy. 

Particularly, if former President Trump returns to the Oval Office in November, alliances and partnerships will increasingly become transactional. At the outset, neither New Delhi nor Tel Aviv had much to worry about in the defense and security realm, given that they were largely independent of Washington, unlike Brussels, Seoul, or Tokyo. New Delhi certainly has reasons to worry about the trade and immigration spheres, and Tel Aviv has an ongoing war. The Biden administration snubbed Netanyahu by not welcoming the leader of Israel at the airport with the honors of a high-level delegation. The Trump administration behind the Abraham Accords may not be as dismissive of Israel as the Biden administration. Nonetheless, short-sighted transactional foreign affairs with limited opportunity for long-term strategic convergence will cost time-tested partnerships such as the one with Israel if antisemites, in the name of anti-establishment thinking, find a place in the administration. 

Indian advocacy groups in Washington have lobbied for removing discriminatory caps on Indian work visa recipients waiting on their green cards. In an interview with venture capitalists and technology leaders, Trump advocated for easing the process and even increasing legal high-skilled immigration. However, if the high-skilled immigrants were from just India or, for that matter, any non-European nation, once again, there runs a risk of a backlash.

If this backlash from civil society seeps into policymaking in Washington, America will not have strong partnerships or alliances around the world. Subsequently, it will lose foresight, and its enemies will thrive without formidable challenges. It is vital to engage experts from around the world with shared challenges, regardless of the color of their skin or any perceived attributes, to prevent restraint and realism in foreign policy from turning into ethno-nationalist isolationism. 

Conservatives, scholars of realism, and grand strategists have to unite under the common challenge of defeating global terrorism, Marxist ideologies, and the pacing threat of the People’s Republic of China’s hegemony in the Indo-Pacific and not over racial or ethnic solidarities.

Akhil Ramesh is the Director of the India Program and Economic Statecraft Initiative at the Pacific Forum.

Samir Kalra is the Managing Director for Policy and Programs at the Hindu American Foundation.

Image: Johnny Silvercloud / Shutterstock.com.