India stands at a pivotal crossroads, where its quest for global leadership confronts the stark reality of its internal and regional challenges. The nation’s geopolitical ambitions are unmistakable: it projects its influence by hosting prestigious summits like the G20, champions the cause of the Global South, and celebrates technological triumphs in space. However, a fundamental paradox lies beneath this veneer of success. These grand aspirations are critically undermined by a diplomatic infrastructure stretched too thin for its global footprint, deepening sectarian fault lines at home, strengthened by the current government, that tarnish India’s international image and create an increasingly polarized society, alongside a volatile neighborhood where India has territorial or geopolitical disputes with almost all of its neighbors.
Diplomatic Limitations
Yet, despite occasional displays of diplomatic muscle on the international stage, India’s diplomatic infrastructure remains surprisingly limited. According to the Lowy Institute’s 2024 Global Diplomacy Index, India ranks 11th worldwide with just 194 diplomatic posts, trailing not only major powers like the United States and China but also smaller countries such as Turkey, Brazil, and Italy. India employs approximately 4,888 foreign service personnel, a figure considerably lower than China’s 8,000 and the United States’ 30,000. Meanwhile, the Indian diaspora continues to expand rapidly, with over 18 million expatriates and more than 500,000 overseas students. This mismatch between India’s global ambitions and its diplomatic capacity hampers its ability to protect its citizens abroad, cultivate strategic alliances, and exert influence over global policymaking. A key factor behind this shortfall is underinvestment in diplomacy. The Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) receives only about 0.4% of India’s total budget, approximately $2.5 billion for 2024–25. In contrast, the Parliamentary Committee on External Affairs has recommended doubling this allocation to 1% to better meet India’s expanding international responsibilities.
Domestic Sectarian Divisions
Beyond the strategic limitations of its diplomatic apparatus, the greatest challenge to India’s global ambitions lies in the openly anti-Muslim and anti-minority policies of its current government. No country in today’s world can credibly aspire to global leadership while nearly 20% of its population, around 250 million people in India’s case, feels systematically marginalized and suppressed. Government initiatives such as the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA), anti-conversion laws, and the push for a Uniform Civil Code, particularly those curbing Muslim women’s right to wear the hijab are widely seen as part of a broader campaign of exclusion. These measures are rooted in the long-standing ideology of Hindu nationalism, historically championed by organizations like the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) and Vishva Hindu Parishad (VHP), and politically institutionalized by the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). The demolition of the Babri Masjid in 1992 and the 2002 Gujarat riots, during which Narendra Modi was Chief Minister and nearly 2,000 Muslims were reportedly killed, remain stark markers of this trajectory. More recently, similar sectarian targeting has expanded to include India’s Christian population: in April 2025, members of the Bajrang Dal stormed an Easter service in Gujarat, and in June of the same year, a violent mob attacked a prayer gathering in Odisha’s Rayagada district, injuring 30 Christians with sticks and axes.
Despite constitutional guarantees of religious freedom, India has witnessed a sharp rise in intolerance and sectarian violence. In 2017 alone, 822 incidents of communal violence were reported, resulting in 111 deaths. The rise of cow vigilantism in 2019, often targeting Muslims involved in cattle trade or beef consumption, further exposed the deepening communal fault lines. These patterns raise serious questions about the internal stability and moral credibility of a country seeking to lead on the world stage.
This contradiction between India’s domestic realities and its global ambitions became even more apparent on March 15, 2024, during the International Day to Combat Islamophobia, when India abstained from voting on a United Nations resolution led by Pakistan and co-sponsored by China. The resolution condemned global anti-Muslim violence and proposed the appointment of a UN special envoy on Islamophobia. India’s Permanent Representative to the UN, Ruchira Kamboj, justified the abstention by calling for a broader focus on “religiophobia” rather than singling out Islamophobia. However, India’s decision was driven less by a commitment to inclusivity and more by geopolitical hostility toward Pakistan, as well as an unwillingness to support a resolution that spotlighted anti-Muslim discrimination, something India itself has increasingly been accused of. Indeed, India has instrumentalized Islamophobia as a political tool. While the country projects a secular image, especially in its relations with Muslim-majority partners in the Gulf, the domestic reality paints a starkly different picture. Muslims in India continue to face systemic discrimination, targeted violence, and political exclusion. In Kashmir, the government tightened its grip further in 2022 and 2023, curbing press freedoms, redrawing electoral boundaries to benefit Hindu-majority areas, and controversially hosting a G20 tourism summit in Srinagar to showcase a false sense of normalcy.
Regional Strains
At the regional level, India’s foreign policy faces increasing criticism as well, being undermined by unilateral actions and controversial decisions. Examples such as the 2015–16 blockade of Nepal, the publication of disputed political maps, and domestic policies like the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) and the National Register of Citizens (NRC) have strained India’s relations with its neighbors. India’s 2019 revocation of Article 370 in Jammu and Kashmir, along with symbolic gestures such as the Akhand Bharat mural in Parliament, have further exacerbated regional tensions. Relations with Nepal remain fragile due to unresolved border disputes and the growing influence of China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) in Kathmandu. Similarly, India’s ties with Sri Lanka have been complicated by Beijing’s deepening economic footprint through BRI projects, undermining New Delhi’s traditional influence in Colombo.
India’s relationship with Bangladesh, once seen as a diplomatic success has deteriorated notably since the change of government in Dhaka in 2024. The new Bangladeshi leadership has adopted a more assertive and independent posture, criticizing India’s internal policies such as the NRC and CAA. Additionally, disputes over river water sharing, border security incidents including killings of Bangladeshi civilians by Indian border forces and trade imbalances have led to growing mistrust. In 2025, Bangladesh’s decision to reject participation in a joint India-led regional infrastructure initiative signaled a marked cooling of bilateral ties.
India continues to face serious challenges from Pakistan and China. Military tensions persist along the Line of Actual Control in Ladakh amid China’s expanding influence in the region through economic projects. Meanwhile, India-Pakistan relations have worsened sharply, highlighted by the recent armed conflict in May 2025, suspending the Indus Waters Treaty, and intensifying military activity along the Line of Control. This was followed by a harsh crackdown in Kashmir, involving over 1,500 arrests and the demolition of homes linked to suspects. These developments have not only escalated Indo-Pakistani tensions but also revealed the fragile state of peace in South Asia, where India’s belligerent domestic and foreign policies continue to generate regional anxiety and international concern.
Overall, India’s global ambitions remain at odds with significant internal and regional challenges that undermine its credibility on the world stage. Deepening sectarian divisions at home, a strained and sometimes confrontational neighborhood, and an under-resourced diplomatic apparatus all limit India’s ability to act as a responsible global actor. Unless these issues are meaningfully addressed, India’s pursuit of global leadership risks being more rhetorical than real, leaving the country vulnerable to both domestic instability and regional isolation.
The views expressed in this article are the author’s own. They do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of the South Asia Times.
