Top 10 Insights Into Why India Ignored the Zohran Mamdani Story: A Deep Dive into Media and Power Structures

Top 10 Insights Into Why India Ignored the Zohran Mamdani Story: A Deep Dive into Media and Power Structures

The Overlooked Victory: Zohran Mamdani and the Indian Media Blind Spot

• Brief overview of Zohran Mamdani’s significant Democratic primary victory for Mayor of New York City.
• Highlight the initial delayed and understated coverage in Indian media.
• Thesis: This delayed coverage is not merely an oversight but indicative of deeper trends in Indian media, its relationship with power, and a narrowing of its global vision, particularly concerning the diaspora and South Asian identity.

• Zohran Mamdani: A Profile in Significance:
  • His identity as a 33-year-old American of Indian origin, son of celebrated filmmaker Mira Nair and academic Mahmood Mamdani.
  • The scale of New York City (population, budget) and the significance of the mayoral position.
  • Mamdani’s campaign strategy: extensive outreach to South Asians, use of Urdu/Hindi, Bollywood themes.
  • His progressive platform and endorsements (e.g., Bernie Sanders, AOC).
  • Historical context: Potential to be NYC’s first American of Indian origin and first Muslim mayor.
• The Indian Media’s “Deathly Silence” – An Analysis of Delay and Omission:
  • Comparison with rapid celebration of other Indian-origin figures (Priti Patel, Rishi Sunak) despite more attenuated ties to South Asian identity/campaigning.
  • Exploration of why Mamdani’s story “should have written itself” for Indian media (serious political implications, entertainment value).
  • The “Depressing Answer”: The Hindutva Lens:
    • Mamdani’s Muslim identity (Shia of Twelver belief) as a primary factor.
    • How the rise of Hindutva in India has shaped media narratives, leading to a selective celebration of diaspora figures based on alignment with the dominant ideology.
    • Ignoring or demonizing Muslim and Sikh diaspora figures.
    • The media’s perceived need to “crawl before power,” resulting in a narrowed worldview.
• Beyond Religion: The Erosion of a “Capacious Sense of Self”:
  • The historical ease with which “desis” abroad have found common ground (food, music, movies) despite internal South Asian divisions.
  • The role of figures like Mira Nair and Mahmood Mamdani in fostering this broader diasporic identity.
  • Mamdani’s ability to connect across ethnicities (e.g., the “Bangladeshi auntie”).
  • The argument that this “capacious sense of self has evaporated” under the current Indian political climate.

India’s Diminished Influence: Foreign Policy and Diasporic Alienation

• Introduction:
  • Recap of the argument from Part 1: India’s internal political shifts impact its external relations, including its diaspora and neighborhood policy.
  • Thesis: The current Indian government’s transactional foreign policy, driven by a focus on self-proclaimed power and a narrow ideological lens, has led to a significant decline in India’s goodwill, influence, and soft power in its immediate neighborhood and among sections of its global diaspora.
• The Shifting Sands of Neighborhood Relations (2014 vs. Present):
  • Afghanistan: From being a major donor in 2014 to “sidling up to the Taliban.”
  • Myanmar: From aiding democracy restoration to fencing borders due to Manipur violence and engaging solely with the military junta.
  • Bangladesh: From pre-eminent foreign supporter to pushing people across borders, violating humanitarian principles.
  • Pakistan: From Nawaz Sharif attending inauguration to closed airspace and strained ties.
  • Analysis of factors: “Many of these changes are ones in which India could do little, but not all.” The role of India’s choices.
• The Transactional Turn in Indian Foreign Policy:
  • Focus on touting India’s “very large economy cumulatively” while ignoring per capita well-being compared to neighbors.
  • Prioritization of relations with US, Europe, and global powers.
  • The “cost” borne by neighborhood relations.
• Erosion of India’s Soft Power and Legislative Inspiration:
  • Contrast with the past:
    • Right to Information Act (2005) as a model for other countries.
    • Export of police reform experience to Commonwealth countries.
  • Present-day reality: “hardly any form of legislation in India that inspires South Asia and the world”; cited as a “caution of what could go wrong.”
  • The “Akhand Bharat” irony: A political party advocating for a unified South Asia (“Akhand Bharat”) has presided over its greatest withering of appeal.
• Impact on the Global Desi Diaspora:
  • Internal divisions within the Indian-American diaspora:
    • Support for Mamdani by organizations like the India Impact Fund (promoting Indian/South Asian American political participation).
    • Opposition from groups like “Indian Americans for Cuomo” and the “American Hindu Coalition.”
  • Reason for opposition: Mamdani’s criticism of Modi (and Netanyahu).
  • The implication: Mamdani’s victory, significantly aided by South Asians, will likely have “limited influence from anybody who approves of the current Indian government.”
  • Conclusion: India’s policies are “isolating us in the South Asia abroad as an increasingly diminished India chooses to march alone.”

India’s Diminished Influence: Foreign Policy and Diasporic Alienation

The Intertwined Destinies of Domestic Ideology and Global Standing

The preceding analysis of Zohran Mamdani’s overlooked electoral victory in the Indian media served as a poignant illustration of a deepening chasm between India’s internal ideological landscape and its external engagement. The reluctance to celebrate a figure of Indian origin, whose success resonated deeply within the South Asian diaspora, points to a selective embrace of “Indian-ness” dictated by a narrow ethno-religious lens. This section posits that this internal ideological shift, characterized by the ascendancy of Hindutva, is not merely a domestic phenomenon but has profound, often detrimental, implications for India’s foreign policy, its relationships with immediate neighbors, and the cohesion within its vast global diaspora. India’s proclaimed “Neighbourhood First” policy, while conceptually sound, has frequently been overshadowed by a transactional approach and a prioritization of nationalistic narratives that have inadvertently alienated traditional allies and fractured diasporic unity. This analysis will demonstrate how India’s pursuit of perceived power, often at the expense of its historical soft power and pluralistic values, has led to an increasingly diminished standing in its neighborhood and fostered significant divisions among its overseas communities.

The Shifting Sands of Neighborhood Relations: A Comparative Analysis (2014 vs. Present)

India’s “Neighbourhood First” policy, inaugurated with the symbolic gesture of inviting all SAARC leaders to Prime Minister Modi’s first swearing-in ceremony in 2014, ostensibly aimed to recalibrate and strengthen ties with its immediate regional partners. However, a decade on, the reality on the ground presents a stark contrast to this initial promise. While some engagements have continued, the goodwill and strategic standing India once enjoyed across much of South Asia appear to have significantly eroded, replaced by a climate of suspicion, transactionalism, and, in some cases, outright alienation.

• Afghanistan: In 2014, India was a significant donor and developmental partner to the then-democratic government of Afghanistan, investing heavily in infrastructure, education, and capacity building. Its engagement was rooted in a long-standing commitment to a stable and democratic Afghanistan. Today, with the Taliban in power, India’s approach has shifted to a cautious and pragmatic, albeit controversial, engagement, effectively “sidling up to the Taliban” to protect its security interests and ensure minimal recognition of the regime while monitoring evolving risks. This reflects a departure from its earlier principled stance on democratic governance.
• Myanmar: Similarly, in 2014, India was actively involved in assisting Myanmar’s transition towards democracy, playing a crucial role in international efforts to foster political reforms. It was seen as a key partner in the restoration of democratic processes. Presently, amidst the ongoing civil war and humanitarian crisis following the military coup, India’s primary concern appears to be fencing its borders due to the violence in Manipur, a domestic security imperative. Its only significant interlocutor in Myanmar is now the military junta, signaling a shift from promoting democratic values to prioritizing border stability and strategic pragmatism, even at the cost of democratic principles.
• Bangladesh: India’s relationship with Bangladesh, particularly under the Sheikh Hasina government, had been a bedrock of stability and cooperation, with India often seen as a pre-eminent foreign supporter. Bilateral ties flourished across security, economic, and cultural domains. However, recent actions, particularly concerning the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) and perceived pushes of people across the border in violation of fundamental rule of law and humanitarian principles, have strained this relationship. While economic initiatives and connectivity projects continue, these actions have generated significant resentment and distrust, challenging the historical goodwill. The recent change in government in Bangladesh and the resurgence of anti-India sentiment highlight the fragility of these ties, despite India’s substantial credit lines and developmental aid.
• Pakistan: The nadir of India-Pakistan relations is perhaps the most glaring example of a southward trajectory. The initial promise of Nawaz Sharif attending Prime Minister Modi’s first inauguration, a rare gesture of goodwill, has given way to a near-complete breakdown of dialogue and trust. Today, not only is high-level political engagement virtually non-existent, but even basic connectivity, such as airspace, remains largely closed to each other. The relationship is overwhelmingly defined by mutual suspicion, cross-border terrorism concerns, and a hardened stance from New Delhi, often prioritizing “terrorism first” in any potential talks, thereby precluding broader engagement.

While some of these shifts in the neighborhood are undeniably influenced by complex internal dynamics within these nations or broader geopolitical currents where India’s agency might be limited, it is also clear that a significant portion of this decline stems from India’s own policy choices. The consistent prioritization of a nationalistic agenda, often interpreted as majoritarian, has led to an erosion of trust that pragmatic economic or strategic engagements alone cannot easily mend.

The Transactional Turn in Indian Foreign Policy

Under the current dispensation, Indian foreign policy has increasingly adopted a transactional posture, prioritizing immediate national interests, particularly economic and security concerns, often over broader ideological alignment or long-term regional stability. This shift is characterized by:

• Emphasis on Cumulative Economic Power: India frequently touts its status as a “very large economy cumulatively” on the global stage. While this indeed reflects its growing economic might, this narrative often overlooks the stark reality that, at per capita levels, its citizens are “hardly better off, and in some case worse off, than its neighbors’.” This disparity undermines the narrative of shared prosperity and makes it challenging to lead by example within the region.
• Prioritization of Major Global Powers: There has been a discernible pivot towards strengthening strategic partnerships with global powers such as the United States, Europe, and other Western nations, along with key players like Japan and Australia (e.g., through mechanisms like the Quad). While these alignments are crucial for India’s geopolitical aspirations and economic growth, they often come “at the cost” of diligent and nuanced management of its relations in the immediate neighborhood. The focus on multi-alignment and strategic autonomy, while beneficial on a global scale, has not always translated into effective neighborhood diplomacy.
• Diminished Soft Power Diplomacy: India’s historical soft power, rooted in its democratic ethos, cultural diversity, and non-aligned stance, has arguably been sidelined in favor of a more assertive, hard-power projection. This is evident in the declining appeal of its domestic legislative frameworks. In 2005, India’s Right to Information Act served as a model, with “countries lined up to learn from our experience.” Similarly, India “exported its experience with police reform to other Commonwealth countries.” Today, however, there is “hardly any form of legislation in India that inspires South Asia and the world.” Instead, India is increasingly “cited as a caution of what could go wrong,” reflecting a significant erosion of its democratic and institutional soft power.

The irony is profound: the political party that fervently advocates for “Akhand Bharat”—a unified Greater India, often depicted on maps that strain ties with neighbors—has simultaneously presided over “the greatest withering of Indian appeal across the subcontinent.” This disconnect between an aspirational, yet often perceived as expansionist, vision and the practical realities of strained regional relationships highlights a critical fault line in India’s current foreign policy approach.

Impact on the Global Desi Diaspora: Fractured Unity

The internal ideological shifts and the resultant foreign policy trajectory have not only impacted state-to-state relations but have also created significant schisms within the global Indian (or broader South Asian) diaspora, previously united by a shared cultural heritage and common experiences abroad. Zohran Mamdani’s campaign vividly illustrated this fragmentation.

• Internal Divisions: While organizations like the “India Impact Fund,” dedicated to promoting the participation of Indian and South Asian Americans in politics, backed Mamdani, other groups actively opposed him. Notably, “Indian Americans for Cuomo” and the “American Hindu Coalition” attacked Mamdani. This opposition, as the original text suggests, stemmed “principally because Mamdani has criticised Modi in a similar vein as he has criticised the Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu.” This indicates a growing political polarization within the diaspora, where support for figures of Indian origin is increasingly contingent on their alignment with, or criticism of, the current Indian government’s policies and ideological leanings.
• Ideological Alignment as a Litmus Test: The Mamdani case underscores how critical solidarity within the diaspora is now being challenged by ideological purity tests. The celebration of “Indian-ness” among overseas communities is becoming less about shared heritage or achievement and more about political allegiance to the ruling ideology in India. This dynamic limits the potential for broad, unified diasporic political action, as demonstrated by the assertion that Mamdani’s “comprehensive victory, in which South Asians have had a strong contribution, will likely have limited influence from anybody who approves of the current Indian government.”
• Isolation in the “South Asia Abroad”: The cumulative effect of these policies is that as India increasingly finds itself “alone in our own neighborhood,” its policies are also “isolating us in the South Asia abroad.” The previously robust and inclusive “desi” identity, which allowed for cross-ethnic mingling and collaboration among South Asians overseas, is being challenged. An “increasingly diminished India chooses to march alone,” not only in its immediate vicinity but also by inadvertently fracturing the very communities that once served as powerful cultural and economic bridges globally. This ideological imposition on the diaspora undermines the organic strength of these communities and their potential to be effective advocates for a truly pluralistic and globally engaged India.

The Imperative for Re-evaluation

The insights from Zohran Mamdani’s electoral success, juxtaposed with the Indian media’s muted response and the broader erosion of India’s regional standing, highlight a critical juncture for New Delhi. The preceding analysis demonstrated how an increasingly inward-looking, ideologically driven domestic narrative has constrained India’s foreign policy options and fostered division within its once more unified diaspora. This part argues that for India to truly assert its envisioned role as a Vishwaguru (world leader) or a responsible global stakeholder, a fundamental recalibration of its engagement strategy is imperative. This involves not only addressing the visible diplomatic and economic ruptures but also confronting the underlying ideological currents that are alienating key constituencies, both at home and abroad. A forward-looking strategy must prioritize genuine regional cooperation, a revitalization of soft power rooted in pluralism, and a more inclusive approach to its diverse diaspora.

The Geopolitical Consequence of Ideological Contradictions

India’s foreign policy under the current administration, while projecting an image of strength and “India First,” often reveals inherent contradictions when viewed through the lens of its domestic ideological commitments. The pursuit of “strategic autonomy” and “multi-alignment” on the global stage, while commendable in theory, struggles for coherence when juxtaposed with actions that are perceived as undermining democratic values, human rights, or religious pluralism at home.

• Soft Power Paradox: India’s traditional soft power assets – its vibrant democracy, diverse culture, spiritual heritage, and non-aligned principles – are increasingly challenged by narratives that promote a singular, majoritarian identity. While efforts are made to project India’s cultural heritage globally (e.g., International Yoga Day, promotion of Ayurveda), the credibility of this projection is often undermined by domestic policies that are seen as discriminatory or illiberal. The “culture of trolling and doxing” against critics, even within the diaspora, as highlighted by recent reports, further erodes the goodwill that cultural initiatives aim to build. The world watches not just what India projects, but how it treats its own citizens and internal dissent, impacting its global perception as a “caution of what could go wrong” in areas where it once offered leadership (e.g., rule of law, RTI).
• Neighborhood Instability and Missed Opportunities: The “Akhand Bharat” rhetoric, while aimed at invoking a historical, unified South Asian identity, paradoxically contributes to instability by creating anxiety among neighbors about Indian hegemony and irredentism. This undermines efforts at practical cooperation and pushes smaller states further into the strategic orbits of rivals like China. The transactional nature of engagement, focused on specific projects or security concerns, often fails to build the deeper trust required for sustainable regional leadership. Instances like the “India-Out” campaigns in the Maldives, the increasing Chinese influence in Nepal and Sri Lanka through infrastructure projects and loans, and the strained ties with Bangladesh over border issues and alleged political interference, underscore this failure. India’s past leadership in fostering regional initiatives (e.g., SAARC’s early promise) has waned, replaced by a preference for more pliable, smaller groupings like BIMSTEC, which, while useful, do not fully address the broader South Asian imperative.
• The Quad and the Neighborhood Disconnect: While India actively participates in multilateral forums like the Quad (with the US, Japan, and Australia) to counter China’s influence in the Indo-Pacific, its inability to secure its immediate neighborhood effectively creates a strategic vulnerability. A strong regional base is often a prerequisite for projecting power globally. If India’s neighbors perceive it as an unreliable or overbearing partner, its ability to influence regional dynamics, let alone global ones, becomes compromised.

Rebuilding Bridges: Towards a More Inclusive Diasporic Engagement

The polarization within the Indian diaspora, as exemplified by the reactions to Zohran Mamdani’s victory, demands a strategic rethink of how India engages with its overseas communities. The current approach, which often prioritizes diaspora segments that align with the ruling political ideology, risks alienating a significant and influential portion of the diaspora that holds diverse political views and affiliations.

• Embracing Pluralism in the Diaspora: India needs to recognize and embrace the inherent political and social diversity within its diaspora. Treating criticism of the Indian government or its policies as “anti-national” serves only to push away valuable voices and resources. A mature engagement strategy would allow for open dialogue, even dissent, fostering a sense of ownership and connection based on shared heritage rather than ideological conformity. This includes acknowledging and engaging with Muslim, Sikh, and other minority communities within the diaspora, whose concerns often feel marginalized by the current administration.
• Beyond Remittances and Rallies: While the economic contributions (remittances, investments) and political lobbying (rallies, endorsements) of the diaspora are significant, a holistic relationship requires more. It necessitates fostering genuine cultural exchange, intellectual engagement, and a recognition of the diaspora’s evolving identities in their adopted homelands. Figures like Zohran Mamdani, who seamlessly blend South Asian heritage with local political realities, represent a powerful bridge that India should be keen to cultivate, not alienate.
• Safeguarding Rights and Freedoms: Reports of punitive actions against OCI cardholders and blacklisting of individuals for expressing critical views on social media create an environment of fear and mistrust. Such measures, while perhaps intended to control narratives, ultimately damage India’s reputation as a democratic nation and erode the fundamental freedoms that many in the diaspora value in their resident countries. Reinstating due process and ensuring transparency in such cases would go a long way in rebuilding confidence.

Pathways for Recalibration: A Forward-Looking Agenda

For India to move beyond its current challenges and truly realize its potential as a responsible global power, several recalibrations are necessary:

• Prioritizing Neighborhood Diplomacy: This requires a shift from a transactional to a more trust-based and empathetic approach. It means consistent high-level engagement, timely completion of projects, sensitive handling of contentious issues (like water sharing, border management), and a willingness to address grievances. True leadership involves listening and facilitating, not just dictating terms. Re-energizing regional bodies like SAARC, or fostering new inclusive regional platforms, could signal a renewed commitment.
• Revitalizing Soft Power through Pluralism: India’s greatest strength lies in its diversity. Re-emphasizing its constitutional values of secularism, democracy, and inclusive growth would resonate globally and domestically. Promoting its rich cultural tapestry, which includes contributions from all communities, without ideological filtering, would enhance its attraction. This also means robust protection of human rights and civil liberties at home, which lend authenticity to its global pronouncements.
• Engaging the Diaspora Inclusively: Foster dialogue with all segments of the diaspora, irrespective of their political leanings. Create platforms for constructive criticism and intellectual exchange. Leverage their networks and expertise for India’s development, but respect their independent political choices in their resident countries. The success of figures like Zohran Mamdani demonstrates the potential influence of a politically active and engaged diaspora, which, if not alienated, can be a powerful force for India’s global standing.
• Strategic Communication: India needs a more sophisticated and nuanced communication strategy that goes beyond nationalistic rhetoric. It should aim to explain its policies transparently, address international concerns maturely, and counter disinformation effectively without resorting to aggressive or dismissive tactics, especially on social media.

The Choice for India’s Future

Zohran Mamdani’s victory in New York City serves as a powerful metaphor for the choices facing India on the global stage. It highlights the vast, untapped potential of a diverse and globally integrated Indian diaspora, but also exposes the self-imposed limitations of a narrative that prioritizes ideological conformity over broader inclusion. India’s current trajectory, characterized by a diminished regional standing and fractured diasporic unity, risks isolating it from crucial partnerships and undermining its aspiration for global leadership. The path forward demands a strategic re-evaluation: one that embraces its constitutional values of pluralism, invests genuinely in its neighborhood, and fosters an inclusive relationship with its diaspora. Only by demonstrating a commitment to these principles can India truly harness its demographic dividends and historical strengths to secure a prosperous, influential, and respected position in the 21st century global order. The opportunity for recalibration exists; the question remains whether India will seize it to shape a more capacious and globally confident future.

From Aspirations to Realities – Gauging Global India

India’s ambition to be a leading global power, often articulated through terms like “Vishwaguru” or a voice for the Global South, rests not just on economic might or military strength, but critically, on its soft power and international standing. The preceding parts have highlighted how internal ideological shifts and a transactional foreign policy have complicated India’s relationships in its neighborhood and within its diaspora. This section will delve into how these dynamics have cumulatively impacted the global perception of India. By examining trends in international indices, expert opinions, and public sentiment, we will assess the divergence between India’s self-perception and how it is increasingly viewed by the international community, and the tangible implications of this evolving image on its strategic objectives.

Declining Scores on Global Indices: A Bellwether of Eroding Soft Power

Despite significant strides in economic development and technological innovation (e.g., digital payments, space sector), India has witnessed a noticeable decline in various global opinion-based indices, particularly those pertaining to subjective yet crucial areas like democracy, press freedom, and civil liberties. This erosion in scores on reputable global indices, as noted by various analyses, cannot be simply dismissed as “mere opinions” as they often feed into critical assessments, including sovereign ratings and investment decisions.

• Democracy and Press Freedom: Several reports from organizations like Freedom House, Reporters Without Borders, and the Economist Intelligence Unit’s Democracy Index have consistently downgraded India’s status or score. These assessments often cite concerns over the narrowing of civil space, restrictions on freedom of expression, suppression of dissent, and increased government control or influence over the media. The “culture of trolling and doxing” against critics, even extending to the diaspora, further reinforces perceptions of a shrinking democratic space. This directly contradicts India’s long-standing projection of itself as the world’s largest democracy and a beacon of liberal values.
• Rule of Law and Human Rights: There are growing concerns globally regarding the selective application of laws, instances of religious discrimination (especially against minorities), and perceived human rights violations. Policies like the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA), which explicitly excludes Muslims, have drawn international criticism and raised alarms about India’s commitment to its secular constitutional principles. The revocation of Article 370 in Jammu and Kashmir and subsequent restrictions have also been points of international scrutiny. These issues directly impact the credibility of India’s “political values” and “foreign policies” which, according to Joseph Nye, are key components of a nation’s soft power.
• Governance and Corruption: While government initiatives aim to improve governance and ease of doing business, persistent challenges related to corruption, judicial independence, and transparency in certain sectors continue to affect India’s standing in governance-related indices. These perceptions contribute to a cautious approach from some international investors and partners.

The Hindutva Factor in Global Perception

The ascendance of Hindutva ideology in India has emerged as a significant factor shaping global perceptions, moving beyond the traditional geopolitical or economic lenses. While Indian officials might view it as a domestic matter or a source of national pride, the international community increasingly scrutinizes its implications for human rights, religious freedom, and India’s secular fabric.

• Religious Nationalism vs. Pluralism: The narrative of “Hindu identity synonymous with Indian identity” (as stated by some analysts) is viewed by many international observers as exclusionary, particularly for India’s significant Muslim and Christian minorities. This challenges India’s image as a diverse, pluralistic society and creates a perception of rising religious majoritarianism. This ideological slant is seen to influence not just domestic policy but also subtly permeate foreign policy engagements, as evidenced by India’s increasingly visible pro-Israel stance, and actions such as facilitating citizenship only for certain non-Muslim foreign refugees.
• Impact on Bilateral Relations: While India’s relations with Gulf countries have largely remained robust due to economic dependencies (oil, remittances), concerns about India’s domestic treatment of minorities have occasionally surfaced, though often tempered by shared perceived threats like terrorism. However, for countries and international organizations with strong human rights advocacy, these domestic shifts create friction and complicate diplomatic engagements. The criticism directed at Mamdani for his views on Modi and Netanyahu underscores how deeply intertwined domestic ideology and international political alignment have become, even for diaspora figures.
• Social Media Aggression and Doxing: The rise of aggressive online behavior by pro-government elements, including “trolling and doxing” against critics (both Indian and foreign), has been observed to contribute to negative perceptions. This online belligerence creates an impression of intolerance for dissent and can deter open engagement with India’s vibrant public sphere.

Implications for India’s Global Aspirations

The evolving global perception has tangible implications for India’s strategic goals:

• Challenges to Global Leadership: For India to assume a more significant role on the global stage (e.g., a permanent seat in the UNSC, leadership in the Global South), its soft power and normative appeal are as crucial as its economic or military might. A perceived decline in democratic values, human rights, or press freedom can undermine its credibility as a reliable and principled leader, making it harder to garner broad international support for its initiatives.
• Economic Consequences: While India’s economic growth remains attractive, concerns about instability, potential social unrest, and policy predictability stemming from ideological shifts can deter foreign direct investment (FDI) or limit deeper economic integration with certain blocs. The “red tape cut but global clues drag” sentiment observed in some surveys suggests that while internal reforms are appreciated, broader global perceptions can still influence investment decisions.
• Limited Influence in Multilateral Fora: A diminished perception of its democratic credentials can reduce India’s ability to effectively leverage multilateral platforms like the UN, WTO, and various human rights councils. Its voice on issues of global governance, climate change, or development might carry less weight if its own domestic practices are seen to diverge from universal norms.
• Fractured Diaspora as a Weakness: As discussed in Part 2, the internal divisions within the diaspora, fueled by ideological alignment with the home government, transform what could be a unified and powerful lobbying force into a fragmented one. When a significant portion of the diaspora feels alienated, India loses a critical asset in projecting a positive image and influencing policy in host countries. The example of “Indian Americans for Cuomo” attacking Mamdani highlights how this fragmentation plays out on the ground, potentially undermining collective diasporic influence.

The Path Forward – Bridging the Perception Gap

The global perception of India is a complex tapestry, woven with threads of economic progress, technological prowess, but also concerns about its democratic health and social cohesion. Zohran Mamdani’s journey, and the differing reactions it elicited, serve as a microcosm of this larger global narrative. For India to truly bridge the gap between its aspirations and its reality, and to effectively wield its considerable potential on the world stage, it must undertake a comprehensive effort to address the root causes of its declining soft power. This necessitates not only astute diplomacy but also a genuine recommitment to the pluralistic and democratic values enshrined in its constitution. Rebuilding trust in its neighborhood and fostering an inclusive relationship with its global diaspora are not merely acts of goodwill, but strategic imperatives for India to navigate the complexities of the 21st-century global order as a respected and influential power. The choice lies in whether India continues to march alone on an ideologically narrow path or embraces the inherent diversity and democratic spirit that once defined its global appeal.

From Diagnosis to Action – Charting a Course for India’s Global Future

The examination of Zohran Mamdani’s victory and its muted reception in India, alongside the declining trajectory of India’s regional influence and global perception, paints a clear picture of a nation at a crossroads. The preceding parts have highlighted how a narrowing ideological lens at home has directly impacted India’s external relations, weakening its traditional soft power advantages and fracturing its diverse diaspora. This final section moves from diagnosis to prescription, asserting that for India to effectively navigate the complexities of the 21st century and fulfill its aspirations as a responsible global power, a fundamental re-orientation of its foreign policy and domestic priorities is imperative. This requires a commitment to inclusive governance, revitalized regional diplomacy, and a truly global, rather than ideologically selective, engagement with its diaspora.

Reaffirming Democratic Values and Institutional Integrity

The erosion of India’s democratic image on global indices is not merely a public relations problem; it reflects fundamental challenges to its core institutions and values. Reversing this trend is paramount for India’s credibility and its ability to inspire on the world stage.

• Strengthening Rule of Law and Judicial Independence: Reasserting the primacy of the rule of law and safeguarding judicial independence are critical. This involves ensuring due process, transparent legal proceedings, and upholding constitutional principles, particularly concerning minority rights and freedom of expression. Concerns about selective application of laws and long detentions without trial need to be addressed proactively.
• Protecting Civil Liberties and Press Freedom: A vibrant democracy thrives on dissent and a free press. India must ensure a truly open civil space, protecting activists, journalists, and civil society organizations from intimidation or undue state pressure. This includes fostering an environment where criticism of government policies is seen as a democratic right, not an act of disloyalty.
• Promoting Inclusivity and Minority Rights: Actively demonstrating a commitment to its secular ethos and protecting the rights of all religious and ethnic minorities is crucial. Policies that are perceived as discriminatory (e.g., CAA) need re-evaluation. Promoting inter-faith dialogue and fostering social harmony are essential for a credible global image that champions diversity.
• Investing in Education and Human Development: Addressing issues like poverty, unemployment, and social exclusion, as highlighted in challenges to Indian democracy, is fundamental. Long-term investment in quality education and equitable development for all citizens would strengthen the democratic fabric from within, reducing the socio-economic grievances that can be exploited by divisive narratives.

Reinvigorating “Neighborhood First” with Empathy and Reciprocity

India’s neighborhood remains its most crucial strategic arena. A successful “Neighbourhood First” policy must move beyond transactionalism to a more empathetic and reciprocal approach, acknowledging the legitimate concerns and aspirations of smaller states.

• Dialogue and Trust-Building: Regular, high-level political dialogue with all South Asian neighbors, including Pakistan, is essential. While security concerns are legitimate, an overly rigid stance that precludes any engagement beyond counter-terrorism risks ceding diplomatic space to rivals. Focus should be on building trust through consistent, predictable, and mutually beneficial interactions.
• Economic Integration and Connectivity: Accelerating infrastructure projects and connectivity initiatives (roads, railways, energy grids) that genuinely benefit all regional partners is vital. This should be accompanied by efforts to reduce trade barriers and foster greater economic integration within SAARC or alternative regional frameworks (like BIMSTEC, which needs to be significantly strengthened). India must address concerns about its economic asymmetry by offering more favorable trade terms and investment opportunities that are truly beneficial for smaller economies.
• Addressing Trans-boundary Issues Collaboratively: Issues like water sharing, disaster management, and climate change, which are intrinsically trans-boundary in nature, require collaborative solutions rather than unilateral approaches. Leading regional efforts on these fronts can rebuild trust and demonstrate India’s commitment to collective well-being.
• Cultural Diplomacy as a Bridge: While current efforts focus on promoting yoga and other specific aspects, India’s broader cultural heritage, encompassing the diversity of its languages, arts, and traditions (including those of its minorities), can be a powerful tool for building bridges. Supporting cultural exchanges, scholarships, and people-to-people contacts, without ideological filtering, can foster genuine understanding and appreciation.

Cultivating an Inclusive and Strategic Diaspora Engagement

The Indian diaspora is a formidable asset, but its potential can only be fully realized through an inclusive and politically sensitive engagement strategy.

• Beyond Remittances and Political Loyalty: India’s engagement with its diaspora must evolve beyond viewing them primarily as sources of remittances or political endorsements for the ruling party. It needs to acknowledge the diaspora’s evolving identities, diverse political views, and intellectual contributions.
• Fostering Open Dialogue and Addressing Grievances: Create formal and informal channels for genuine dialogue with all segments of the diaspora, including those critical of government policies. Address their concerns transparently and effectively, rather than dismissing them or resorting to punitive measures (e.g., OCI card issues). Establishing clear, accessible grievance redressal mechanisms, as recommended by parliamentary committees, is crucial.
• Leveraging Diaspora as Knowledge and Innovation Hubs: Encourage “brain gain” and “brain circulation” through attractive schemes that facilitate knowledge transfer, academic collaboration (like VAJRA Faculty Scheme), and entrepreneurial partnerships between India and its diaspora networks. Focus on creating win-win scenarios that benefit both India and the host countries.
• Political Engagement Respecting Host Country Norms: While encouraging the diaspora to engage in host country politics is beneficial, India’s engagement should respect the internal political dynamics of these countries. Directly or indirectly supporting specific political factions within the diaspora that align with the ruling party’s ideology, at the expense of broader diasporic unity, can be counterproductive and draw criticism from host governments. The case of Zohran Mamdani highlights the need for a nuanced approach that appreciates the diaspora’s independent political agency.
• Targeted Outreach to Younger Generations: Develop innovative programs to connect younger generations of the diaspora, many of whom are born and raised abroad, with their Indian heritage. This goes beyond cultural events to include educational exchanges, professional networking opportunities, and platforms for meaningful engagement that resonate with their contemporary global identities.

Conclusion: The Promise of a Pluralistic and Globally Engaged India

The journey from a nuanced understanding of Zohran Mamdani’s victory to a comprehensive assessment of India’s global standing reveals a critical truth: India’s domestic choices are inextricably linked to its international appeal and effectiveness. The current trajectory, marked by a perceived narrowing of its democratic space and a more assertive, yet less inclusive, foreign policy, risks undermining its long-term strategic objectives.

The future of India’s global influence hinges on its ability to embrace a more capacious and confident sense of self – one that celebrates its internal diversity, champions democratic values consistently, and engages with its neighbors and diaspora with empathy, reciprocity, and an inclusive spirit. This means moving beyond a reactive, ideologically driven foreign policy to a proactive, principled, and pluralistic approach. By doing so, India can not only regain its lost appeal in the neighborhood and among sections of its diaspora but also truly fulfill its potential as a leading, respected, and globally responsible power, a true Vishwaguru in every sense of the word. The choice for a greater, more influential India lies in its renewed commitment to the foundational values of its republic.

Also Read : Delhi Teen’s 5th-Floor Fall: Lover Enters in Disguise Using Burqa, Triggers Police Action