When social media outrage begins to influence sensitive foreign policy choices, then it enters a very dangerous terrain
So who is in charge of India’s foreign policy? On the face of it, that would seem a pretty obvious answer. Dr S Jaishankar as External Affairs Minister has been the highly visible public face of the Modi government, a peripatetic and seasoned diplomat, who has often made headlines for his sharp and pointed sound bites. And yet, there have been enough moments when even the media-savvy minister must wonder just who is calling the shots in the South Block. The latest instance of diplomatic confusion is exemplified by the handling of relations with Bangladesh.
Consider this. On December 31, Dr Jaishankar travelled to Dhaka to attend the funeral of the former Bangladesh prime minister Begum Khaleda Zia, handing over a personal letter of condolence from Prime Minister Narendra Modi to her son and heir apparent Tariq Rahman. The image of the minister shaking hands with the man most likely to be Bangladesh’s next prime minister suggested a thaw in ties after months of frosty relations. Yet, just two days later, the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) issued a directive to the Indian Premier League (IPL) franchise Kolkata Knight Riders (KKR) asking it to withdraw the Bangladesh star player, Mustafizur Rahman from its list of contracted players. The private franchise complied without demur, sparking off an angry reaction from the Bangladesh government and cricket board, which has now declared that it will not play the World T20 matches in India next month as a mark of protest.
So here is the question: what changed in 48 hours between a significant high-level diplomatic engagement and a sudden inexplicable decision to target an individual cricketer? The only apparent shift is the high-decibel campaign launched by so-called ‘fringe’ Hindutva elements calling on the Modi government to get tough with Dhaka against the backdrop of cases of attacks on Hindus in Bangladesh. BJP’s Uttar Pradesh MLA, Sangeet Som specifically targeted KKR owner Shahrukh Khan, accusing him of being a ‘gaddar’ (traitor) for having signed up Mustafizur. Som conveniently forgot to mention the other KKR owners including businessman Jai Mehta and his actor-wife Juhi Chawla.
In normal times, a rational, level-headed government would have ignored the rants of the ‘fringe’ but in ‘new’ India, the Hindutva fringe is now ‘mainstream’ and a government that is fuelled by toxic religious politics cannot ignore the social media army that propels it forward. When this social media outrage begins to influence sensitive foreign policy choices, then it enters a very dangerous terrain. It is almost as if the foreign minister’s reach-out to Dhaka does not really matter; what matters are the raw emotions of a domestic political constituency that treats every Bangladeshi as ‘anti-national’, including a cricketer who has little to do with coarsened politics.
This isn’t about making the usual trite argument about the need to separate sports and politics. Such distinctions are impossible to make at a time when sports, especially cricket in the sub-continent context, is a graphic demonstration of Indian ‘soft power’ to the wider world. The BCCI exercises hegemonic dominance over the cricket world with Union Home Minister Amit Shah’s son, Jay Shah as the president of the International Cricket Council and easily the most powerful man in the sport. Then be it refusing to shake hands with the Pakistani players at the Asia Cup or now ostracising a Bangladesh player, Indian cricket calls the shots. That ‘superpower’ status is now being used, rather misused, to play big bully on behalf of the government. Indeed, the decision to remove Mustafizur was not even taken after consulting the IPL Governing Council but instead seen as an urgent ‘firman’ from the political leadership.
Which brings one back to the original question: who is deciding Indian foreign policy? India’s practised diplomatic corps or the Home Minister and the BJP’s sangh parivar brotherhood in saffron? The former have to often walk a delicate tightrope, patiently balancing national interests within a larger framework of achieving credible strategic goals in the neighbourhood. By contrast, the ‘netas’ and their supporters have no such constraints. There is an election in Assam and West Bengal just months away and ratcheting up anti-Bangladesh sentiment is seen as a useful weapon to win votes.
Consequentially, rather than building bridges with Dhaka, we have only created a wall of mistrust and anger that could only exacerbate an already fraught situation, further emboldening the Islamic fanatics in that country. Imagine the embarrassment now if Bangladesh does not come to play in India or prefers neighbouring Sri Lanka as a ‘safer’ country.
Nor is Bangladesh an isolated example of ad-hoc foreign policy choices being driven by sentiment rather than common sense. In 2024, there was an entirely avoidable spat with tiny Maldives sparked off by incendiary tweets on both sides. It eventually required diplomatic finesse to slowly paper over the cracks. Last year, in the immediate aftermath of Operation Sindoor, the Modi government revoked the security clearances for Turkish airport ground handling firm, Celebi, citing national security concerns. It was again a sudden decision taken against the backdrop of Turkey being accused of siding with Islamabad in the war against India. Here again, a more refined foreign policy would have avoided an instant confrontation with Ankara but the impatient social media warriors have no time for any complex, well-considered messaging.
Perhaps the most obvious example of just how an inconsistent foreign policy matrix is influenced by rabble-rousers is provided by New Delhi’s initial response to Beijing in the aftermath of the Galwan clashes in 2020. From banning Tik-Tok to calls for boycotting Chinese goods, the right wing internet’s perpetually angry brigade determinedly sought to escalate the conflict by taking measures that were frankly no deterrent to an expansionist regime. Five years later, the BJP-RSS leadership is hosting a visiting Chinese Communist Party delegation, treating the engagement as routine politics.
(Rajdeep Sardesai is a senior journalist and author.)
