What is in India's strategic interest in foreign economic policy?

"The world is multipolar economically, still unipolar in military terms, but confused politically. The world is in between orders, and adrift."

A strategy document paper on what India's foreign policy strategy should be by Shivshankar Menon was definitely an interesting read. Ranging from India's history, geographical reality and aspirations to be a prosperous and modern nation, it espoused India to work in its strategic interest in a multipolar and chaotic world.

I tried to elicit some clues on what could be an economic policy for India in this multipolar world. I found these:

On regional trade agreements:

A new economic order is forming around us with the globalised economy breaking up into sub-regional trading blocs like NAFTA, TPP and RCEP and with new standards being imposed by the United States and others. The U.S. had devised and managed the global free trade and open investment system of which India and China were the greatest beneficiaries in the two decades before the 2008 global economic and financial crisis. Today, however, the liberal economic and free trade consensus is broken in that same United States and the West. The Brexit vote, the U.S. withdrawal from TPP, and Trump’s positions reflect that fear and lack of confidence.

On strategic autonomy:

In practice it has meant keeping decision-making power with itself, avoiding alliances, and building India’s capabilities while working with others when it was in India’s interest to do so.

On India and China, the inevitable conflict: 

Both India and China have developed and changed since the strategic framework was put in place in the eighties and the situation around them has changed as well. As a result The more India rises, the more it must expect Chinese opposition, and it will have to also work with other powers to ensure that its interests are protected in the neighbourhood, the region and the world. 17 India’s Foreign Affairs Strategy of their development, their interests have grown and expanded, and they now rub up against one another in the periphery they share. One example is the South China Sea. 

On alignment of foreign policy and trade policy:

India must work with other powers to ensure that its region stays multi-polar and that China behaves responsibly. Some of this began as part of the Look East, now Act East, a policy begun by Prime Minister P.V. Narasimha Rao in 1992, and India is working more closely in defence, intelligence and security with Japan, Vietnam, Singapore, Indonesia, Australia and others. But it is hard to sustain a political-military relationship with partners if there are constant differences with them in India’s economic relations, in bilateral and multilateral negotiations on trade, climate change, and other issues. India cannot have an activist political and defence outreach if its economic and trade policy is inward-looking, and both are totally disconnected from each other.

A great read but many questions:

1. What should India's foreign economic policy strategy be?
2. How do foreign policy strategy and economic policy strategy coalesce?
3. Can one have different alliances in foreign policy and economic policy?
4. What impact does a "strategic autonomy" policy in foreign economic policy have on south-south co-operation?
5. Can new alliances in multilateral trade negotiations be based on foreign policy interests?
6. Does an interconnected world mean that India should aim for high standards in rules on international trade?

The strategy paper also states that "India’s history makes it clear that it has been most prosperous and successful when most connected to the world."

In today's world, what would "most connected mean" - liberalise trade or ensure strategic interest?