Siddhi Shinde
In a world where likes, hashtags, and headlines increasingly replace treaties, diplomacy has become an act—a perfectly choreographed performance. Once the quiet terrain of ambassadors in closed rooms, diplomacy now unfolds in vibrant colours, glowing LED screens, and Instagram reels. And nowhere is this transformation more spectacular and even deeply contested, than in contemporary India. A country of staggering contradictions, India has embraced the aesthetics of power with zeal, turning foreign policy into a stage and itself into a brand. This is diplomacy not just in action, but in costume. Full of curated awe. And beneath it all, a quiet rage simmers. A rage at the chasm between what is seen and what is lived.
India’s modern diplomacy is a timely example of nation branding. Borrowing from marketing theory, this approach repackages the state as a product; and its identity compressed into logos, slogans, colours, and photo ops. In this rebranding of the republic, the state performs for the world, not as a humble negotiator, but as a confident protagonist in the global marketplace of images. “Make In India” and “Digital India” are not just policy programs; they are spectacles designed to evoke power, modernity, and techno-optism. Theri success lies in the image they project, as opposed to just the outcomes.
Take the lion of Make in India, unveiled in 2014—a mechanical beast striding across yellow backdrops, its gears meshing to signal industrial might. The symbolism was unmistakable: this was not the old India of bureaucracy and sluggish growth, but a retooled engine of global ambition. International roadshows followed, dazzling investors and diaspora alike. India, it seemed, had finally arrived—not with a whisper, but with a roar. Yet behind this roar lay quieter realities: delays in land acquisition, fragile environmental safeguards, and questions about whether jobs promised were ever jobs delivered. The lion moved swiftly through the world’s gaze, but back home, the gears often jammed.
Similarly, the Digital India campaign launched in 2015 carried the scent of a techno-future. It promised universal digital access, seamless e-governance, and a transformation of everyday life. Celebrity endorsements and glitzy infographics painted a picture of a nation plugged into the 21st century. The internet was to be the new railway: uniting citizens, leveling inequality, catalyzing change. But like so many dreams branded from above, it glitched on contact with the ground. Rural India lagged behind; millions remained disconnected, unskilled, or excluded. While Delhi dazzled, entire regions remained dim. And still, the state posted, tweeted, and tagged its progress for the world to applaud.
The 2023 G20 Summit in New Delhi was perhaps the most audacious performance of all—a Gatsbyesque gala of aesthetic diplomacy. The city was transformed into a stage: roads repaved, murals painted, slums veiled behind green curtains. Diplomacy here was not just about agreements but ambiance. The goal was as much to impress as to negotiate. The summit’s visual grammar—lotus motifs, backdrops of prosperity, digitally enhanced cleanliness—presented India as both ancient and futuristic, spiritual and hypermodern. But beneath this grandeur lay an unsettling truth: the spectacle required erasure. Street vendors were evicted. Informal settlements disappeared overnight. Poverty was not solved—it was hidden.
There is power in this kind of storytelling. It asserts control over narrative and space. It aligns with Joseph Nye’s soft power—attracting rather than coercing. A well-branded nation can invite investment, curry favor, and shape geopolitical imagination. The problem is not the branding itself. It is the cost of the performance. It is what gets left out of the frame.
Because diplomacy as branding is not just a mirror—it is a mirror that distorts. What happens when a nation’s identity becomes a campaign, a logo, a carefully curated grid of visuals and slogans? Melissa Aronczyk warns of the risks: branding, she argues, renders nations legible for global consumption but risks flattening their complexity. The more spectacular the performance, the more glaring the disconnect when lived reality intrudes. Every mural concealing a slum is a promise deferred. Every tweet of progress rings hollow to those who remain voiceless in the nation’s story.
This is not to say the image lacks value. A country must project strength, coherence, and vision. But when diplomacy becomes a masquerade—when the performance replaces the policy—rage grows. Rage at the marginalization of the poor to stage a summit. Rage at digital policies that privilege urban elites. Rage at a lion that roars abroad while stalling at home.
And yet, there is also wonder. Wonder at the ambition to reimagine a nation. Wonder at the creative power of narrative. India’s branding is not merely cynical—it is also aspirational. It reveals what the state wishes to become. In that wish lies potential. But only if the performance is eventually matched by substance.
For now, the gap remains. Diplomats tweet victories. Cities are beautified for a day. The world watches a glittering India—carefully styled, masterfully edited. But those left behind still see the curtain, the paint, the emptiness behind the set. If India is to lead not only in image but in truth, then diplomacy must stop hiding what it fears and start addressing what it avoids.
In the end, the future of diplomacy is not in hashtags or lions. It is in what remains when the cameras stop rolling. Branding can make the state legible—but only authenticity can make it just. Without that, all the performance in the world is just a mask—and every mask, eventually, slips.
About the contributor: Siddhi Shinde is Communication and Journalism Graduate, Student at Government Law College, Mumbai. She is a fellow of DFPGYF Diplomacy, Foreign Policy & Geopolitics Youth Fellowship- Cohort 2.0.
Disclaimer: All views expressed in the article belong solely to the author and not necessarily to the organisation.
Read more at IMPRI:
Sovereign Firms vs. Sovereign State: India’s Blueprint for Digital Diplomacy
Asia’s Rising Soft Power: Influence, Identity & International Impact
Acknowledgement: This article was posted by Shivashish Narayan, a visiting researcher at IMPRI.
