From global stage to strategic silence: India’s bold diplomacy faces new test in Trump era

One of the major reasons for India’s success in the last decade has been its deft and often bold foreign policy choices. Whether it was the decision to stand up and defy the West despite the threat of sanctions by continuing to buy Russian crude oil after the breakout of the Russia-Ukraine war in February 2022, or Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s call that “this is not the era of war” at the SCO Summit in Samarkand in September 2022, India has made many crucial foreign policy choices. These decisions have propelled the country to the global centre stage.

The Vaccine Maitri during the Covid-19 pandemic, when India supplied Covid vaccines to more than 100 countries, won India global goodwill, especially within the Global South. The G20 Summit in Delhi in September 2023 was a crowning glory where, despite huge contradictions in the text of the joint statement due to the Russia-Ukraine war, the Delhi Declaration was signed unanimously, without a single footnote of disagreement.

The launch of transcontinental connectivity projects like the India Middle East Europe Economic Corridor (Imec) has projected India as the hub of global connectivity. Plus, the decision of India to become the voice of the Global South, first by having the African Union included in the G20 and thereafter, hosting Global South Summits, too, has been hugely successful for India.

In the era of Donald Trump, where his authoritarian and personalised style of leadership has demanded obedience and compliance, it is perhaps only India which is still standing, holding its ground.

In the Gaza war, India was among the few countries which were seen to balance things right, supporting Israel in its fight against terror while supporting and endorsing the right to a statehood for the Palestinian people. Even in the Russia-Ukraine war, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, acknowledging India’s closeness with Russia, has often called upon PM Modi to help end the war.

India’s decision to engage the Taliban leadership of Afghanistan by hosting their Foreign Minister, Amir Khan Muttaqi, in October and upgrading their diplomatic presence in Kabul to an embassy was a big diplomatic push, as it came against the backdrop of Trump asking the Taliban to return Bagram Air Base to the US and the recurring Pakistan-Afghanistan clashes.

However, in recent months, some of the choices or decisions taken by India have definitely raised eyebrows, if not questions. Most of them can be attributed to US President Trump’s approach towards India and its consequences for India’s economic and security interests. The start to this was the recent India-Pakistan conflict, Operation Sindoor, which was called off when Pakistan, hit hard by Indian strikes deep into Pakistan, pleaded for a ceasefire, which India agreed to.

However, the twist in the tale came about when Trump started claiming that it was he who pressured India to accept a ceasefire with Pakistan under the threat of trade and sanctions. Despite repeated clarifications and denials by India, Trump continues to do so.

India had two choices in such a situation: either to accept Trump’s version or to have a direct rebuttal coming from PM Modi. India chose a third option, of staying quiet and avoiding direct engagements between Modi and Trump. So, while President Trump has been globe-trotting, often with Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif and Army Chief Asim Munir in close tow, the Indian PM stayed away from the photo ops. Such absences may well achieve the aim of avoiding Trump but are unintentionally leading to the dilution of Indian influence and outreach across the world. Let us examine some of these.

The first of those was soon after Operation Sindoor when PM Modi was invited by Trump to visit Washington after the G7 Summit in Canada in July, which Modi declined. Additional tariffs had not yet been imposed on India by the US then. The primary reason was the possibility that Trump would have used the opportunity once again to claim that he had got the ceasefire between India and Pakistan. No major damage was done due to this missed invite, although it can be said that it did lead to some frustration in Washington.

In September, Modi missed two opportunities because of Trump. The first was the virtual summit of Brics called by Brazilian President Lula da Silva to discuss the Trump tariffs on September 8. Following public threats by the US Commerce Secretary of imposing 100 per cent tariffs on India and Brics nations, Modi nominated External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar to represent India.

In a summit where the Russian and Chinese presidents were present, it was a missed opportunity for India and Modi. Shortly thereafter again, Modi skipped the UN General Assembly, once again asking S Jaishankar to deliver the annual address. It was a miss going by the impact Modi’s speech could have had, especially on trade and tariff wars, global conflicts and the need for effective multilateral forums.

Similarly, Modi chose to travel to Tianjin, China, in August, where the newfound bonhomie with Putin and Xi grabbed global headlines, but he once again chose to skip the Asean Summit in Malaysia in October despite Malaysia initially announcing Modi’s participation. The excuse was Diwali celebrations, which were, in fact, long over by the time of the Asean Summit. The real reason once again – to avoid Trump and any loose statement that he might make during any such meeting on a potential trade deal with India.

Any such half-truth or outright lie from President Trump could have hurt PM Modi and the central government back home, especially with the crucial elections in the state of Bihar round the corner. Result – Modi spoke via virtual link but missed out on many more meetings on the sidelines, whereas Trump, with the Pakistani PM in tow, made the most of the opportunity.

Another missed opportunity was the Gaza peace summit convened in Sharm el-Sheikh on October 13, where Trump, taking the lead, announced a ‘new rebuilding’ in Gaza while signing an agreement on the future of the Gaza peace process with Egypt, Turkey and Qatar. India was represented by Minister of State for External Affairs Kirti Vardhan Singh. Again, no clear reason was given for PM Modi skipping the summit. Surrounded by many global leaders, while Trump exerted leadership and power, India chose to stay on the sidelines – which is justified from a perspective, particularly when optics suggested Trump asserting his supremacy over others.

Another hindrance in India’s outreach in the extended neighbourhood was the recent vacation of the Ayni airbase in Tajikistan. The base – also known as the Gissar Military Aerodrome – was India’s part of India’s strategic outreach in Central Asia, planned and executed in the early 2000s. It was the only active overseas military outpost for India and provided options for power projection as well as ‘eyes and ears’, both into Afghanistan and Pakistan. The refusal of the Tajik government to extend the lease, evidently under pressure from China, is a major setback, especially in the context of the emerging dynamics in the region and India’s outreach to the Taliban government in Afghanistan.

In terms of the neighbourhood, the developments in Bangladesh over the past two years, especially the renewed bonhomie and increased interaction between the Pakistani and Bangladeshi armed forces, cannot be good news for India. Pakistan, beaten and hurt during Operation Sindoor, has found a willing ally in Yunus-led Bangladesh and is doing its utmost to exploit the opportunity. Plus, the surprising and sudden closeness between the US and Pakistan, coincidentally, after Operation Sindoor, must be causing anxiety in India’s policy circles.

Conclusion

There is no doubt that President Trump is defying the established norms of global geopolitics and setting demands and conditions which most countries are finding it difficult to accept and comply with.

The fact that India has stood its ground reflects how strongly India believes in its ‘India Story’ and the march towards realisation of its vision of Viksit Bharat by 2047. However, the practice of strategic autonomy and defiance always comes at a cost. Speaking at an international conference in Delhi on August 7, PM Modi had admitted in the context of trade tensions with the US that, “For us, the interest of our farmers is our top priority. India will never compromise on the interests of farmers, fishermen and dairy farmers,” further adding that, “I know we will have to pay a heavy price for it, and I am ready for it. India is ready for it.”

Within this, however, the choice of avoiding contact and letting go of important opportunities for projecting India’s stand directly is something that India will have to weigh in on.

In an age of social media and instant news, not putting out the Indian perspective directly and avoiding meetings/travel can be viewed as a sign of weakness or lack of clarity. India, which is the fastest-growing big economy in the world, with a stable and strong political leadership over the past decade and a proven military strength, cannot be seen in either of the prisms. It is time to shed the reluctance and play on the front foot.

(Col Rajeev Agarwal is a West Asia expert and a Senior Research Consultant at Chintan Research Foundation, New Delhi. His X Handle is @rajeev1421. Views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect Firstpost’s views.)