|
Blame Not the Messenger in India’s Diplomacy
Context:
- After Operation Sindoor (May 7–10, 2025), Indian diplomats faced criticism—not for their messages, but for perceived diplomatic shortcomings.
- This calls for an assessment of India’s diplomatic posture amid changing global geopolitics and perceptions.
Criticism of India’s Diplomatic Messaging:
- Eroding International Support:
- Unlike past incidents (2008 Mumbai, 2016 Uri, 2019 Pulwama), global responses to India’s recent strikes were muted.
- South Asian neighbors largely withheld clear support.
- Pakistan gained backing from China, Türkiye, Malaysia, and the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC).
- This lack of consensus is seen as a diplomatic setback for India.
- Pakistan’s Diplomatic Gains:
- Pakistan has effectively used multilateral platforms despite its association with terrorism.
- It succeeded in diluting a UNSC resolution on the Pahalgam attack by removing references to The Resistance Front (TRF).
- Pakistan secured leadership roles in UNSC counter-terrorism bodies, accessed international loans, and maintained strong U.S. engagement, exemplified by White House meetings with General Asim Munir.
- These developments highlight India’s difficulty in advancing its global narrative.
- U.S. “Hyphenated” Narrative:
- U.S. President Donald Trump repeatedly equated India and Pakistan’s positions, suggesting moral parity.
- Trump offered mediation on Kashmir but avoided strong condemnations of terrorism.
- This reveals a strategic disconnect between New Delhi and Washington.
Message vs. Messenger:
- Indian diplomats merely convey government policy; criticism should also address the content and tone of that policy.
Modi’s “New Normal” Military Doctrine:
- Key elements:
- Treating terrorism as war, lowering thresholds for military retaliation.
- Rejecting nuclear blackmail, introducing nuclear brinkmanship rhetoric.
- No distinction between state and non-state actors, risking disproportionate responses.
- While domestically projecting strength, these stances raise international concerns about regional stability.
Changing Global Attitudes Post-2020:
- Conflicts like Russia-Ukraine and Israel-Gaza wars have increased scrutiny of military actions justified as counter-terrorism or self-defense.
- India’s neutrality on Russia and silence on Gaza, alongside increased oil trade with Moscow, have hurt its credibility, especially in Europe and the Global South.
- This selective stance weakens India’s calls for international support against Pakistan.
India’s Image, Democracy, and Credibility Gap:
- Concerns about democratic backsliding under Modi’s government have grown internationally.
- Issues include: Citizenship (Amendment) Act, abrogation of Article 370, internet shutdowns, suppression of dissent, and alleged extraterritorial killings.
- During diplomatic outreach post-Operation Sindoor, India’s diplomats had to address human rights concerns alongside terrorism.
- These factors erode India’s moral advantage over Pakistan as the world’s largest democracy.
The Way Forward:
- India must rethink the content and tone of its diplomatic messaging.
- It should emphasize its democratic credentials, political stability, and constructive global role.
- Balancing strategic autonomy with principled diplomacy is essential.
- Ultimately, diplomatic power depends not just on strength but on how that power is perceived internationally.
|
Latest News
General Studies