​Influencing interlocutors: On Operation Sindoor, India’s delegations 

The seven Indian delegations of mostly Members of Parliament and some former diplomats, tasked by the government to carry diplomatic messages after Operation Sindoor, have completed their travels. The 59 members visited 32 countries to convey the country’s position on the outrage felt over the Pahalgam terror attack and its links to Pakistan, the restrained and precise nature of Indian strikes on Pakistan’s terrorist infrastructure, and the “new normal” the government has adopted for terrorist strikes. The message was meant not just for foreign governments but also for lawmakers, the foreign media and the general public, especially in countries where New Delhi has felt it has not found the expected support. Many of the countries visited are members of the UN Security Council (UNSC), and include those which are elected non-permanent members or will join next year. This is important as India faced a diplomatic setback when Pakistan, an elected UNSC member for 2025-26, was able to amend the UNSC statement to omit references to The Resistance Front (TRF) that had claimed responsibility for the Pahalgam attack. That Pakistan managed to be chosen Chair of the Taliban Sanctions committee and Vice-Chair of the UN Counter-terrorism Committee will make India’s task of holding the terrorists responsible for the attack accountable through UN designations and at the Financial Action Task Force more difficult. Another area of focus was the membership of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation that has been particularly critical of India. Finally, the focus on the U.S. was pointed, where the delegation visited New York and Washington. This may have stemmed from the appearance that ties with Washington are strained over President Donald Trump’s persistent claim that he had mediated the ceasefire between India and Pakistan, using trade ties as a leverage to avert a “nuclear conflict”.

It remains to be seen just how successful these tours of political diplomacy have been, given criticism in India that more time was spent speaking to the Indian diaspora, and giving interviews to the accompanying Indian media rather than in influencing interlocutors abroad. The delegations also had to contend with a copy-cat move from Pakistan to counter the Indian narrative. However, the overarching message of the delegations, comprising representatives from a number of Indian States, faiths and political parties, is a powerful one — of Indian unity and consensus on the issue of national security. At a time when the Modi government is under criticism internationally for “democratic decline” and increasing majoritarianism, New Delhi chose its messengers wisely, with a view to projecting abroad a positive and pluralistic image of a country that was resolute against terrorism.