India is frustrated, that’s all. Just frustrated and confused. Its diplomatic maneuvers speak volumes of the fact that it is riddled with a troubling ambiguity – a confusion not born from principled beliefs, but rather from political expediency, selective outrage, and a pressing need to divert attention from its internal shortcomings.
India has adamantly asserted that issues like Kashmir are strictly bilateral, a claim it staunchly defends at international forums in an effort to evade outside scrutiny. Ironically, India has embarked on a widespread diplomatic campaign across the globe, engaging with foreign governments and multilateral organizations under the pretext of combating “cross-border terrorism.”
If these matters are truly bilateral, then why is India dispatching delegations to Egypt, Ethiopia, and the Gulf, while also courting alliances like the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO)?
This contradiction lays bare the shaky foundation of India’s diplomatic posture. Even more revealing is the composition of these delegations.
In a surprising twist, opposition figures such as Shashi Tharoor are at the forefront of these diplomatic efforts. This is no happy accident; it represents a calculated strategy by the Modi administration to blur the lines of accountability.
Ironically, India has embarked on a widespread diplomatic campaign across the globe, engaging with foreign governments and multilateral organizations under the pretext of combating “cross-border terrorism.”
By including opposition leaders, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) creates a convenient escape route: if these outreach initiatives falter, blame can be seamlessly shifted to the opposition, whitewashing the government’s responsibilities.
Perhaps the clearest indication of India’s diplomatic confusion is its attempt to involve the SCO – a platform where both India and Pakistan sit as equals – in what it insists are “bilateral” issues. India utilizes this forum to promote narratives it fails to effectively sell elsewhere, undermining the organization’s core principles and threatening its spirit of regional cooperation. Despite extensive and sometimes desperate efforts, India has repeatedly fallen short in its goal to diplomatically isolate Pakistan. The recent crisis highlighted this stark truth: countries like China, Turkey, Azerbaijan, and even Russia stood firmly alongside Pakistan, advocating for dialogue and opposing unilateral actions. This display of solidarity, particularly from influential nations, not only challenges India’s narrative but also reinforces Pakistan’s principled stance on regional peace and legality.
Moreover, India has notably overlooked the overtures from former U.S. President Donald Trump, who at various points expressed a willingness to mediate on the Kashmir issue – an offer that acknowledged the international dimensions of the conflict. Ignoring such meaningful engagement, while simultaneously seeking support overseas exposes India’s inconsistent and hypocritical approach to diplomacy. This duplicity extends beyond foreign relations. India’s management of the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) – a crucial agreement with Pakistan forged in 1960 under World Bank mediation – highlights a troubling pattern of hypocrisy. As the upper riparian state, India is obligated to ensure an uninterrupted flow of water to Pakistan from the western rivers. Yet, it has weaponized this vital resource as a tool for pressure, threatening to restrict flows and delaying data sharing, which violates both the letter and spirit of the treaty. Such actions not only breach international norms but also erode trust in long-standing agreements intended to foster peace rather than serve as instruments of leverage. India’s diplomatic actions today are shaped more by optics than by a coherent doctrine. Governed by the insecurity of a leadership that seeks to manipulate perceptions rather than confront underlying realities, the muddled narrative – whether reflecting nationalism, multilateralism, or opportunism – transcends mere semantics.
It symbolizes a state apparatus struggling to reconcile its internal contradictions with the expectations of a watchful world. In stark contrast, Pakistan remains unwavering in its commitment to peaceful dialogue, anchored in international law and buoyed by global partners who recognize that stability is far more valuable than mere political theater.
The writer is a freelance columnist.