India must return to traditional diplomacy

Description

Context: The target audiences of Indian diplomacy’s public articulation and responses are changing radically as shown by the statement of the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA).

The direction of Indian diplomacy’s external publicity is no longer confined to other governments, international organisations.
It now extends to international “celebrities.
It also seeks to take into account apparent and latent sentiment on the Indian streets not only to clarify India’s diplomatic positions or refute allegations and misperceptions but also to whip up sentiment on issues important to the government.
Finally, it aims to forcefully convey to foreign audiences, India’s unwillingness to accept perceived or real interference in the country’s domestic affairs.

New, assertive norms:

This development is part of the government’s impatience with the norms of old-fashioned diplomacy.
It is in keeping with the emphasis on establishing a personal rapport with global leaders and what has been often stressed by the External Affairs Minister, S. Jaishankar — the need to take risks to advance Indian positions and interests.
It is beyond dispute that new directions for Indian diplomacy, in form as well as in substance, should be constantly sought.

It is on this basis that the MEA statement and the widespread social media activity that followed need to be judged.
While the statement’s origin will not be authoritatively known, it can be legitimately surmised that it was/could not have been through the normal processes of the MEA.
Hence, it would have been on the basis of a political decision.
The hash tags attached to the statements lend credence to this view as also the intensely orchestrated social media response from Indian personalities to tweets by Ms. Rihanna and others.
There is nothing intrinsically wrong in building public opinion; all governments as well as groups do so.
It is part of the global political and diplomatic processes but must be part of a careful strategy to achieve objectives. Otherwise, it can be counter-productive.

Ponder over direction:

It is difficult to imagine that foreign critics like Ms. Rihanna, or for that matter of the Greta Thunberg kind, would be deterred by a concerted Indian pushback of the nature that has been undertaken.
In the days of conventional diplomacy, the Rihanna tweet would have perhaps been just ignored, at least officially. But now ‘the times they are a-changin’.
So, is what the MEA doing headed in the right direction?

India should of course press the governments concerned, especially of Canada, to take action against Khalistani elements.
The fact though is that these countries, Canada in particular, have shown scant regard for Indian concerns on this account and it is unlikely that they will change course now.
Through all this the question that still remains is whether the social storm unleashed in India after the Rihanna tweet would deter other foreign celebrities from pursuing the now amended ‘toolkit’.

The rise of liberal opinion:

Finally, it is not the Rihanna-like celebrities who will pose the real challenge in the coming months to the Narendra Modi government, but liberal opinion in democratic western societies.
And, it will have far more traction with the advent of the Joe Biden administration in the United States.
A pointer is the interaction of top U.S. Congress members in the India Caucus had, recently; asking India to ensure that “norms of democracy are maintained and peaceful protests and demonstrations be allowed”, with this being conveyed to India’s Ambassador to the U.S., Taranjit Singh Sandhu.
The government would be now conscious of engaging international liberal opinion rather than merely dismissing it.
This does not imply coming under pressure on matters of critical importance to Indian interests. But it does mean taking recourse to traditional diplomacy even if it is stodgy and unappealing to sections of nationalist Indian opinion.