Building Regional Bonds, India’s Diplomatic Challenge and the Power of People-to-People Ties in South Asia

Building Regional Bonds, India’s Diplomatic Challenge and the Power of People-to-People Ties in South Asia

Why in the News?

India’s neighbourhood policy has come under scrutiny as its bilateral relations with several South Asian countries have either stagnated or soured in recent years. The government’s apparent tilt toward a security-heavy, hyper-nationalist narrative—often treating all neighbouring states with suspicion—has led to erosion in regional goodwill, especially among the common people in countries like Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, and Nepal. As South Asia continues to grapple with instability, poverty, and regional mistrust, New Delhi’s diplomatic posture and domestic narratives about its neighbours are being questioned more than ever.

This article offers a deeper examination of India’s engagement with its neighbours—particularly the disconnect between people-level aspirations and state-led antagonism—and suggests why India must prioritise public diplomacy, cultural exchange, and regional empathy to strengthen its leadership and influence in South Asia.

Introduction: The Case for Empathetic Neighbourhood Policy

India, as the largest and most influential country in South Asia, has long aspired to be a regional leader. However, its contemporary foreign policy has largely reflected a strategic, security-oriented, and sometimes isolationist approach—especially towards countries perceived as adversarial. While such posturing may offer short-term political capital domestically, it risks alienating common citizens in neighbouring nations who may not align with their respective governments’ hostility towards India.

The editorial argues that people in neighbouring countries should not be treated as enemies just because their governments are hostile. A shift toward empathy-driven diplomacy and people-centric engagement could revive India’s sagging regional influence.

Historical Backdrop: The Rise of Nationalism and Indo-Pak Hostility

The seeds of India’s current diplomatic disposition toward South Asia lie in the summer of 1996, when the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) emerged as the single largest party in the Lok Sabha. Shortly after assuming power, the BJP’s ideological stance on cultural nationalism and security threats from neighbours started to shape both domestic and foreign policy.

In this context, an incident involving Pakistani poet Fahmida Riaz, who warned that Indian society was beginning to mirror Pakistan in terms of communalisation, became symbolic. Riaz’s critique, although poetic and spontaneous, highlighted the trend of India slipping into religious majoritarianism, something that many progressive voices had cautioned against.

The Two-Nation Theory and Cultural Anxiety

The editorial discusses the psychological baggage of Partition, which still influences Indian attitudes toward Pakistan and, by extension, other Muslim-majority countries in the region. This residual mindset has led to a reluctance to differentiate between the governments and the people of those countries. For example:

• Artists and intellectuals from Pakistan or Bangladesh are frequently targeted for criticism if they are seen as being sympathetic to India.

• Popular Pakistani singers like Abida Parveen or Nusrat Fateh Ali Khan, who once enjoyed mass appeal in India, are now seen through the lens of nationalism.

• Joint cinematic projects often face backlash from nationalist groups.

This trend has severely restricted cultural and artistic bridges, which historically played an essential role in fostering cross-border understanding.

Media and Cinema as Bridges or Barriers

Ironically, even when art attempts to bridge diplomatic gaps, it often becomes the first casualty in politically charged environments. The editorial cites two relevant examples:

1. “Dunki”, a Bollywood film starring Shah Rukh Khan, included a character of Pakistani descent but did not spark any backlash—possibly because it aligned with a narrative that avoids glorifying Pakistan.

2. Conversely, singer Diljit Dosanjh’s international collaboration with Pakistani singer Abrar ul Haq, in a cross-border Punjabi song, was released without delay despite the growing tensions.

These examples show that while some artistic collaborations still survive, they are increasingly subjected to political scrutiny, and their approval often depends on the prevailing electoral or diplomatic mood.

Impact of the BJP’s Electoral Strategy

Since 2014, India’s foreign policy has increasingly become an extension of the BJP’s domestic electoral narrative. The ruling party has used foreign policy—and the portrayal of Pakistan and China in particular—as instruments of nationalist mobilisation. This has led to:

• A conflation of diplomacy with party politics, where peace gestures are deemed politically weak.

• A shift from traditional statecraft and multilateralism to aggressive posturing aimed at consolidating electoral support at home.

• Suppression or avoidance of people-to-people initiatives that may contradict the narrative of India being “under threat.”

Such approaches may succeed electorally but undermine India’s long-term credibility as a regional stabiliser and leader.

Consequences of People-as-Enemy Narratives

When India views the entire citizenry of another nation—say Pakistan, China, or Bangladesh—as hostile, it plays into the hands of hardliners and anti-India elements in those countries. It also:

• Undermines moderate voices who support cooperation and peace.

• Reinforces authoritarian regimes that thrive on portraying India as an enemy.

• Alienates youth populations in South Asia who look up to India for education, employment, and cultural inspiration.

The editorial makes a poignant case: when Indians cheer a Pakistani singer or when Nepali or Bangladeshi youth admire Indian cinema, these are not threats—they are opportunities for soft diplomacy and regional integration.

Learning from Success Stories

There are successful precedents for India’s soft power in the region:

• Bollywood continues to dominate screens in Nepal, Sri Lanka, and Bangladesh.

• Indian television serials and music enjoy immense popularity, particularly among younger demographics.

• Educational ties have flourished, with thousands of students from neighbouring countries studying in Indian universities.

By empowering these people-to-people bonds, India can bypass antagonistic regimes and foster goodwill directly with populations.

The Path Forward: Reimagining Diplomacy

To reclaim its position as a South Asian leader and stabiliser, India must adopt a fourfold strategy:

1. Recalibrate Public Diplomacy: Engage directly with citizens of neighbouring countries through cultural festivals, exchange programs, and educational initiatives.

2. Separate Electoral Rhetoric from Foreign Policy: Avoid using foreign policy as a political tool for domestic mobilisation.

3. Promote Artistic and Academic Freedom: Allow musicians, actors, and academics from across borders to collaborate without fear of backlash.

4. Rebuild Multilateral Engagements: Return to SAARC, revive regional water-sharing agreements, and champion climate resilience efforts in the region.

Conclusion

India’s success in South Asia will not be determined solely by its military might or economic clout. It will depend on how well it can inspire, respect, and connect with the people of the region. By casting entire populations as enemies, India risks isolating itself in its own neighbourhood. Instead, by wooing the hearts and minds of the people, especially the youth, it can create a buffer against hostile regimes and become a truly regional leader with moral, cultural, and democratic legitimacy.

This is a time not for enmity, but for empathy. In diplomacy, as in life, friendship yields far more than fear.

5 Key Questions and Answers

Q1: Why is India’s current foreign policy in South Asia under criticism?

Answer: India’s foreign policy is criticised for being overly security-focused and nationalistic, treating entire populations of neighbouring countries as adversaries, rather than distinguishing between governments and people. This has damaged people-to-people ties and reduced India’s regional goodwill.

Q2: How has India’s electoral politics influenced its diplomacy with neighbours?

Answer: The ruling party has used foreign policy—especially hostility towards countries like Pakistan and China—as a tool to mobilise domestic electoral support. This has led to aggressive posturing, reduced diplomatic flexibility, and erosion of India’s traditional multilateral engagement.

Q3: What role can cultural diplomacy play in improving India’s regional relations?

Answer: Cultural diplomacy, including film, music, and academic exchanges, can bypass government-level tensions and directly foster goodwill among the people. Popularity of Indian entertainment and education in neighbouring countries offers India a unique soft power advantage.

Q4: What are the risks of treating entire populations as enemies?

Answer: It strengthens hardliner narratives in those countries, alienates pro-India voices, reduces bilateral trust, and undermines India’s image as a regional stabiliser. It can also trigger retaliatory sentiments among neighbouring populations, deepening regional divides.

Q5: What steps should India take to strengthen its neighbourhood diplomacy?

Answer: India should:

• Separate diplomacy from electoral agendas

• Promote cultural and educational exchanges

• Rebuild regional forums like SAARC

• Encourage moderate voices across borders

• Embrace empathy-driven people-to-people diplomacy