India on the World Stage
A candid conversation with Syed Akbaruddin — former Official Spokesperson of India's Ministry of External Affairs and India's Permanent Representative to the United Nations — on diplomacy, power, Pakistan, China, and what it truly means for India to rise as a global force in the 21st century.
30+ Years of Diplomacy
Postings across Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, the UN, and more — a career spanning India's transformation from a quiet observer to an assertive power.
Architect of Key Wins
Led India's historic ICJ election victory over the UK and the decade-long campaign to designate Masood Azhar a global terrorist.
Strategic Clarity
His core thesis: India is wealthier and more guarded — silence is not weakness, it is strategy calibrated to a world where 50% of India's economy is now globally linked.
Sourced from Raj Shamani's Podcast | Indian Diplomat Explains: India vs US vs China & Trump | Syed Akbaruddin | FO491Raj Shamani | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5suNXiI1vjQ&t=1s
What Does a Diplomat Actually Do?
The popular image of a diplomat — cocktail parties, protocol, and elegant deception — is a relic of a simpler era. Today's Indian diplomat is, as Akbaruddin puts it, "a jack of all trades" representing India in every aspect imaginable. When he began his career in 1986, posted to Egypt with barely 500 Indians in the country, his working day ended at 2 pm. Today, that same posting involves millions of Indian nationals, billions in trade, and round-the-clock engagement.
Consular Welfare
Acting as district collector, lawyer, and emergency services coordinator for millions of Indian diaspora members — from labor disputes in Saudi Arabia to evacuations during armed conflict. In Saudi Arabia alone, the Indian community grew from 200,000 to over 2 million in a generation.
Trade & Investment Promotion
Attracting foreign capital, facilitating Indian exports, and opening doors for Indian manufacturers in host countries. India was a closed economy in the 1980s; today even 10% external investment materially moves the GDP needle.
Security Intelligence
Exchanging sensitive security information with partner governments, tracking threats, and maintaining back-channel communications that never appear in the press. A growing part of every posting as India's threat environment has expanded globally.
Remittance Architecture
India is the world's largest remittance recipient — $125–130 billion annually. Diplomats work to reduce transmission costs, streamline transfer mechanisms, and ensure smooth money flows back home.
Soft Power & Cultural Representation
Representing India as a civilization state — from celebrating Diwali at the UN to using Bollywood's Amitabh Bachchan as India's most powerful calling card in 1980s Egypt, where his magazine ran out instantly and got diplomats off the hook with traffic police.
Crisis Management
Evacuating tens of thousands of Indian nationals from war zones, coordinating with host governments, chartering aircraft, arranging overland convoys — all funded through a welfare fund built from embassy service fees, at zero cost to the evacuees.
Sourced from Raj Shamani's Podcast | Indian Diplomat Explains: India vs US vs China & Trump | Syed Akbaruddin | FO491Raj Shamani | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5suNXiI1vjQ&t=1s
Soft Power: India's Unwritten Stories
Long before "soft power" entered the foreign policy lexicon, Indian diplomats were deploying it instinctively — and Amitabh Bachchan was their most potent weapon. Akbaruddin's posting in Egypt in the late 1980s offers a revealing window into how culture can accomplish what formal diplomacy cannot.
The Bachchan Effect
In 1986 Egypt, the most important "product" India had was not a trade good or a policy position — it was Amitabh Bachchan. Indian diplomats published an Arabic-language magazine called The Voice of India and ensured every issue carried Bachchan's photograph. It sold out immediately. When a traffic policeman stopped the diplomats' car, a single mention of "Hindi, Amitabh Bachchan" was enough to send him on his way with a smile.
Soft Power Meets Commerce
Egyptian law restricted A-class theaters from showing Indian films for more than six months, as Bollywood was outcompeting the local film industry. One theater owner found a creative workaround: he reclassified his venue as a B-class theater, exempting it from the rule. The film Mudda ran for the entire three years of Akbaruddin's posting. When Bachchan visited Egypt in the 2000s, the road from the airport to his hotel was blocked by crowds — he had to be airlifted by helicopter. "These are the unwritten stories of India's soft power," Akbaruddin reflected, "and we all played small roles in expanding that."
The lesson endures: soft power — festivals, food, film, and cultural familiarity — reduces threat perception, builds goodwill, and over time opens doors for hard commerce. When people understand your civilization, they may eventually want to buy your weapons too.
Sourced from Raj Shamani's Podcast | Indian Diplomat Explains: India vs US vs China & Trump | Syed Akbaruddin | FO491Raj Shamani | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5suNXiI1vjQ&t=1s
Diplomacy as Interest, Not Emotion
One of Akbaruddin's most consistent themes is that diplomacy is fundamentally transactional. The old notion of the diplomat as a trained liar — "going out to lie for his country" — has given way to something more nuanced: frenemies. Countries are friends in some areas, competitors in others, and outright opponents in a third. What determines trust is not truth but aligned interest.
"Whether you say truth or don't say truth, if interests match, things will work out. If interests don't match, you can do what you want — it will not work. Trust but verify is the norm that all diplomats follow."
The Russia Question
Asked which country has most consistently supported India's interests, Akbaruddin's answer was Russia — not out of sentiment, but because the two nations have historically had no major clash of interests. Young Indian diplomats were taught to look to Russia in a crisis. Yet even this is calibrated: when Russia began charging India more for oil than the economic benefit justified, India quietly reduced purchases. "This has nothing to do with friendship," Akbaruddin noted. "It's a trade transaction. If the economic circumstances change, I recalibrate."
Young India's Demand
Akbaruddin observes a generational shift in how Indians view foreign policy. Earlier generations argued from doctrine — non-alignment, principle, ideology. Young India asks a blunter question: "What does foreign policy do for me? Does it bring me jobs? Open opportunities to study? Make visas easier?" He sees this not as narrowness but as a more demanding accountability — one that foreign policy establishments must respond to. The shift mirrors India's own economic opening: in the 1980s, India's economy was 15% linked to the global system; today it is 50%.
Sourced from Raj Shamani's Podcast | Indian Diplomat Explains: India vs US vs China & Trump | Syed Akbaruddin | FO491Raj Shamani | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5suNXiI1vjQ&t=1s
Serving in Pakistan: The Most Challenging Posting
For an Indian diplomat, no posting is more psychologically demanding than Pakistan. Akbaruddin served there during some of the most turbulent years in the bilateral relationship — witnessing both the warmth of Prime Minister Vajpayee's historic Lahore Yatra and the betrayal of Kargil, nearly within the same breath.
Surveillance as Daily Life
Indian diplomats in Islamabad are permanently marked. The Indian number plate — "27" — was known to every local. ISI surveillance followed families everywhere: Akbaruddin's wife was trailed to shops, with the shopkeeper whispering warnings to her. The mental toll on families, who form the diplomat's only island of support in a hostile environment, is immense and sustained.
A State Built on India's Failure
Pakistan's fundamental challenge, Akbaruddin argues, is ideological: "Their state thinks — their society cannot flourish if they see a flourishing India." This isn't simply enmity. It is a foundational national identity built on rivalry with India. As long as that premise holds, no amount of dialogue will produce durable peace. Every agreement will be undermined by the army or elements with vested interests in conflict.
Pakistan in India's Rear-View Mirror
Despite the security concern, Akbaruddin is clear-eyed about the asymmetry: India has moved decisively ahead — economically, technologically, institutionally. Pakistan's domestic dysfunction is its own undoing. The cricket analogy is apt: when Akbaruddin first watched cricket, Pakistan routinely beat India. Today the record tells a different story. "We need to look forward, not keep looking at the rear-view mirror."
Why Maintain a Presence at All?
If Pakistan offers India so little — no trade, no trust, no meaningful dialogue — why maintain a diplomatic presence? Because, Akbaruddin explains, geography cannot be changed. Pakistan's capacity to create "asymmetrical threats" to Indian society is immense. A small, professional presence focused purely on observation and reporting is worth the investment. "Observation was the only thing I was gaining in some places — and in Pakistan, the relationship is so primordial that observation and reporting is all there is."
Sourced from Raj Shamani's Podcast | Indian Diplomat Explains: India vs US vs China & Trump | Syed Akbaruddin | FO491Raj Shamani | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5suNXiI1vjQ&t=1s
The Ceasefire & Back Channels
India's firm doctrinal position is that the India-Pakistan relationship is bilateral — no third party mediates, no external facilitator is recognized. Yet the mechanics of de-escalation are inevitably more complex. During the ceasefire following Operation Sindoor, multiple countries were engaged: Saudi Arabia, UAE, Qatar, and the United States all communicated with both sides. India's position remained consistent throughout: if Pakistan stops, we are ready to talk.
The Back Channel Doctrine
Akbaruddin is frank about India's preferred tool: back channels. They can be denied, they don't exist in media light, and they allow both sides to communicate without the political cost of public engagement. The ceasefire itself was concluded through a direct military-to-military contact — Pakistan's army leadership called India to confirm terms, and India said yes. "Nobody else. Yes, everybody will say don't fight. But the final agreement is between us."
Back channels were operational even during Kargil and the Lahore Yatra — passing information, testing positions, and telling Nawaz Sharif that his own army had launched operations without his knowledge.
The Press Conference Moment
One of Akbaruddin's most celebrated diplomatic moments came when, as MEA spokesperson, the Pakistani and Chinese ambassadors refused to take press questions. Akbaruddin stepped forward, announced he would take five questions — and then walked up to Pakistani journalists, shook their hands, and delivered India's message directly: "Stop terror. Then start dialogue." It was a masterclass in messaging: turning a routine press briefing into a public declaration of India's red line, with the global media as witness.
His view on whether India should halt all engagement until Pakistan stops terrorism is nuanced: "We not only have to win the battle against terrorism — we have to win the battle of narrative against terrorism. And that's as important." PM Modi's visit to Lahore was not naïve — it was an attempt to win the narrative, knowing it might not succeed on substance.
Sourced from Raj Shamani's Podcast | Indian Diplomat Explains: India vs US vs China & Trump | Syed Akbaruddin | FO491Raj Shamani | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5suNXiI1vjQ&t=1s
The ICJ Victory: Beating the Permanent Five
In the annals of Indian multilateral diplomacy, few achievements stand out as starkly as India's 2017 election to the International Court of Justice — defeating the United Kingdom in a contest at the UN General Assembly and Security Council. It was the first time in ICJ history that a non-permanent member had beaten a P5 country. Akbaruddin was the man who pulled it off.
The Kulbhushan Jadhav case catalyzed India's decision to contest. India took Pakistan to the ICJ arguing violation of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations — and won, stopping Jadhav's execution. The realization that an Indian judge at the ICJ could provide both intelligence and influence made the candidacy essential. The campaign was extraordinary: the Prime Minister secured the first pledge before India had even formally announced its candidate, and Akbaruddin personally contacted over 60 delegations — "called, pushed, texted, and did a lot of things." The US, bound by its UK alliance, agreed not to lobby against India — a deal negotiated with then-Ambassador Nikki Haley. "It was a reflection of India's coming of age at a diplomatic level."
Sourced from Raj Shamani's Podcast | Indian Diplomat Explains: India vs US vs China & Trump | Syed Akbaruddin | FO491Raj Shamani | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5suNXiI1vjQ&t=1s
Masood Azhar: Ten Years to a Global Terrorist Tag
After the 2008 Mumbai attacks, India began a sustained campaign to have Jaish-e-Mohammed founder Masood Azhar designated a global terrorist by the UN Security Council's 1267 Committee. China blocked it — repeatedly. For nearly a decade, every attempt was vetoed by Beijing, quietly and without public justification. Then in 2019, after the Pulwama attack, Akbaruddin changed the game.
The Procedural Masterstroke
Previous attempts had been made within the committee — a closed, quiet process that allowed China to block without accountability. In 2019, Akbaruddin threatened to take the vote to an open Security Council meeting, forcing China to veto publicly and defend its position before the world. "The Chinese like to do these things quietly, under the table." The threat of public exposure was more costly to Beijing than conceding the designation. China began negotiating — first claiming the timing coincided with India's elections, then haggling over dates (15th April, 22nd April, finally 1st May). They eventually agreed.
Does It Actually Matter?
The honest answer: partially. Travel bans mean little to a man who moves in shadows. Asset freezes are symbolic when financing flows through untraceable channels. Azhar remains active; Pakistan's foreign minister periodically claims not to know his whereabouts. Yet Akbaruddin resists dismissing the gain entirely. Pakistan cannot openly claim him as a state asset. Hafiz Saeed periodically appeals for removal from the list — a tacit acknowledgment that the designation carries real cost. "In diplomacy, small gains add to a big kill." The designation is one piece of a longer narrative war — one India is gradually winning, even if the terrorist himself remains at large.
Sourced from Raj Shamani's Podcast | Indian Diplomat Explains: India vs US vs China & Trump | Syed Akbaruddin | FO491Raj Shamani | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5suNXiI1vjQ&t=1s
India's Strategic Balancing Act: Friends With Everyone
India maintains active, productive relationships with countries that are deeply hostile to each other: Iran and Israel, the United States and Russia, the Gulf states and China. Critics call this moral inconsistency. Akbaruddin calls it strategic necessity — and explains why each relationship serves a distinct and irreplaceable purpose.
Iran
Iran is India's gateway to Central Asia and West Asia — the only viable route given that Pakistan blocks overland access to the west. The Chabahar port and North-South Transport Corridor are critical infrastructure plays. India also has deep civilizational ties with Iran, and Shia Muslims in India share cultural bonds with Tehran. India is "engaged but not entangled" — more vigorous when the Gulf was attacked than when Iran was struck, but maintaining humanitarian and commercial ties regardless.
Israel
Defense technology, precision systems, agricultural innovation, and a long-term strategic friendship built over decades of quiet engagement. PM Modi has visited Israel twice; the Gulf 15 times — a deliberate calibration. Israel is described as extraordinarily long-term in its strategic thinking: "every citizen, every government officer, every business person — you can define their thinking in one line: long-term strategy for growing influence, because they want to survive."
United States
The world's largest economy and critical technology partner, especially in semiconductors, digital infrastructure, and defense. India has not followed the US on Ukraine sanctions, did not join the "Board of Peace," resisted pressure to join naval minesweeping operations in the Red Sea, and had PM Modi refuse to make the personal call Trump reportedly expected during the tariff standoff. "I don't think there is anybody in the world who thinks that India will be following the US — even the US doesn't think that."
Russia
India's most historically reliable partner — no major clash of interests, and a consistent willingness to support India in crises. Russia's default diplomatic style is "Nyet" — saying no first, then negotiating. India increased Russian oil imports from under 1% to over 33% when the economics were favorable; when Moscow began extracting higher prices in other domains, India recalibrated. The friendship endures; the transactions are reviewed constantly.
The Gulf
India's single most important external economic theater: $200 billion in trade, 10 million Indians resident, and $125–130 billion in annual remittances. PM Modi has visited Gulf states 15 times. When the Gulf was attacked by Iranian proxies, India spoke out. When Israel struck Iran directly, India calibrated its response — because condemning the strike risked its equities in the region where the most Indian lives and livelihoods are concentrated.
Sourced from Raj Shamani's Podcast | Indian Diplomat Explains: India vs US vs China & Trump | Syed Akbaruddin | FO491Raj Shamani | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5suNXiI1vjQ&t=1s
"Wealthier and More Guarded": The New India Doctrine
"In the 1980s we were the most vociferous — we were more noisy, more upfront. If somebody hit Libya, we'd be the first to condemn. Today we have to be more guarded and cautious. India matters to the world — and the world matters to India."
— Syed Akbaruddin
From Poorer but Louder to Wealthier but Guarded
In the 1980s, India's economy was approximately 15–17% integrated with the global system. Today it is 50%. This single fact explains an enormous amount about how India conducts foreign policy. When India had little to lose by condemning anyone, it condemned freely — and the world largely ignored it. Today, a family in Telangana has a cousin in Dubai sending remittances; a factory in Gujarat depends on Chinese raw materials for pharmaceuticals; a startup in Bangalore depends on American semiconductor architecture. Every foreign policy statement carries economic consequence.
This is not weakness or timidity. It is the natural behavior of a rising state protecting expanding interests. As Akbaruddin frames it: "India's foreign policy should be judged not by ideological purity but by whether Delhi can reduce exposure without surrendering agency." The key word is agency — India still makes its own choices, it simply makes them with greater awareness of the costs.
50%
Global Integration
India's economy is now 50% linked to the global system, up from ~15% in the 1980s — demanding far more diplomatic caution.
$130B
Remittances
India is the world's largest remittance recipient — $125–130 billion annually — creating a massive diplomatic stake in the diaspora's welfare.
10M
Indians in the Gulf
Over 10 million Indian nationals in Gulf countries, making regional stability a direct domestic economic concern.
$200B
Gulf Trade
India's trade with Gulf nations exceeds $200 billion annually — its most critical external economic relationship by volume.
Sourced from Raj Shamani's Podcast | Indian Diplomat Explains: India vs US vs China & Trump | Syed Akbaruddin | FO491Raj Shamani | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5suNXiI1vjQ&t=1s
China: The Long-Term Challenge
Akbaruddin is unequivocal: China is India's most consequential long-term strategic challenge — surpassing Pakistan, outpacing the complexity of the US relationship, and requiring a sustained, patient, multi-decade response. The challenge is structural: China does not want anyone else to dominate Asia, and India's rise — economic, demographic, civilizational — is precisely the kind of ascent Beijing fears most.
Yet Akbaruddin sees a path. India cannot match China's financial firepower in the neighborhood — China has deeper pockets and has invested massively in Sri Lanka, Nepal, Bangladesh, and Pakistan under the Belt and Road Initiative. But China has no cultural advantage. India's civilizational presence — its food, festivals, Bollywood, philosophy, and diaspora — is something China cannot replicate. "If we win the soft power game, economic power will be much easier to win." The strategy for now: via media — enough engagement to prevent open confrontation, sustained domestic strengthening to eventually compete as equals, and patient accumulation of leverage in every domain.
Sourced from Raj Shamani's Podcast | Indian Diplomat Explains: India vs US vs China & Trump | Syed Akbaruddin | FO491Raj Shamani | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5suNXiI1vjQ&t=1s
India's Diplomatic Strengths & Vulnerabilities
India's Greatest Diplomatic Strength
Access. India can pick up the phone and call any capital in the world. This was not always true — in the 1980s, India was predictably moralistic, and other countries knew exactly what it would say. Today, India's strategic ambiguity and its relationships across opposing camps mean it is genuinely useful to everyone as a communicator. During the Iran-Israel escalation, India was able to engage all sides. During Operation Sindoor, outreach to the Gulf, US, and Russia was not to seek support — it was to deliver a message: this is our new doctrine; if Pakistan acts again, this is what will happen.
That access, Akbaruddin argues, can be converted into leverage — not always, not immediately, but over time, as India's economic and military weight grows to match its diplomatic presence.
India's Greatest Diplomatic Weakness
Vulnerability from dependence. India's economic needs — in energy (33% from Russia), technology (US semiconductors), and manufacturing inputs (Chinese pharma raw materials, solar modules) — create leverage points for other countries. This dependence constrains India's ability to take bold public positions, because the economic costs of antagonizing a supplier or market are real and immediate.
The solution, Akbaruddin argues, is domestic: build nuclear energy capacity, scale solar to reduce hydrocarbon imports, develop indigenous semiconductor capability, and diversify supply chains. "If we reduce the vulnerabilities, we have greater space to do our deals." The access is already there — the task now is to reduce the constraints on using it.
Energy: The Clearest Weakness (2 out of 10)
A fast-growing country needs enormous energy, and India currently imports the majority of its hydrocarbons — from one choke point that can be disrupted. Diversification through solar, nuclear, and geographic distribution of sources is underway but incomplete.
Capital: A Growing Complexity (5 out of 10)
India is growing at a moment when global capital flows are more restricted than when China grew 25 years ago. Attracting foreign investment while managing dependence requires constant calibration.
Exports: The Next Frontier (6 out of 10)
Most countries that grew rapidly — China foremost among them — did so through export-led growth. Today, every major economy is erecting tariff barriers. India must build export competitiveness in an era of deglobalization, a harder challenge than China faced in the 1990s.
Access & Engagement: India's Strongest Card (9 out of 10)
No major power in the world lacks a productive relationship with India. This universal access — unprecedented in India's history — is the foundation on which every other diplomatic objective is built.
Sourced from Raj Shamani's Podcast | Indian Diplomat Explains: India vs US vs China & Trump | Syed Akbaruddin | FO491Raj Shamani | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5suNXiI1vjQ&t=1s
International Bodies: Flawed but Necessary
Are the UN, WTO, IMF, and the broader architecture of multilateralism fundamentally broken? The UN was created to prevent wars — yet Korea, Iraq, Afghanistan, Gaza, and Ukraine all happened. The WTO was built for free trade — yet the world is in its largest trade war in decades. The IMF was designed to stabilize failing economies — yet it has bailed out Pakistan 24 times without producing lasting stability. Akbaruddin's response to this litany is both honest and instructive.
"The UN was not created to take mankind to heaven. It was created with the hope that it doesn't descend into hell. That's the low bar international bodies are trying to fulfill — and by that measure, they have not entirely failed."
The Design Flaw: Deliberate, Not Accidental
The UN Security Council's veto architecture means that any conflict involving a P5 member or their close ally is structurally beyond the UN's reach. This was not a mistake — it was a calculated choice in 1945 by the victors of World War II who wanted to ensure they could never be overruled. The result: the UN is effectively entrusted with second- and third-degree peace and security issues only. For everything involving the big five, it becomes a theater for messaging, not a mechanism for resolution.
What the UN Actually Does Well
The UN's less visible work is often its most consequential: 80 countries decolonized under the UN's normative framework — an unprecedented transformation of the international system. The UNHCR manages 25 million refugees that no single nation could absorb. The World Food Programme channeled Indian wheat biscuits to Afghan schoolchildren when Pakistan refused direct passage. The IAEA monitors Iranian nuclear activity. These are not glamorous — but they prevent a descent into chaos that would cost far more than the institutions themselves.
On India's aspiration for UNSC permanent membership: "If you're not on the table, you're on the menu — and we are too big now for anybody to digest." Akbaruddin believes India's admission, in some form, is inevitable. Either the UN accommodates India, or it becomes redundant to the country that will be one of the world's two or three largest economies. India's position is not revolt but reform — and that framing is itself a form of leverage.
Sourced from Raj Shamani's Podcast | Indian Diplomat Explains: India vs US vs China & Trump | Syed Akbaruddin | FO491Raj Shamani | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5suNXiI1vjQ&t=1s
India's Trajectory: Bide Your Time, Build Your Strength
Akbaruddin closes with a reference to China's long-standing strategic doctrine: Tāo guāng yǎng huì — "bide your time, hide your strength." He believes India is in precisely that moment. The trajectory of India's rise is not linear but inevitable; the task is to protect it from disruption while building the domestic foundations that will eventually make external pressure irrelevant.
Build the Foundations
Financial inclusion — UPI, Aadhaar, digital identity — is Akbaruddin's pick as India's single greatest policy achievement of the last decade. It demonstrates technological adaptability, drives economic inclusion, and is now India's most credible export to the developing world. Other nations still cluster India with Pakistan and Bangladesh as a "cash economy." They are wrong — and making that case globally is itself a diplomatic task.
Harness the Full Labor Force
Akbaruddin's choice for India's biggest missed opportunity: the underutilization of women in the formal labor force, and the political delays around women's reservation legislation. "When India can harness its women, we become a superpower." The men will contribute regardless — tradition ensures it. If women join them at scale, no force on earth stops India's growth curve.
Win the Narrative War
India's performance has outpaced the global perception of India. The world still sometimes puts India in the same bracket as far less developed neighbors. Changing this requires government, media, and citizens working in concert — not uniformly, but around a "common minimum" of national messaging abroad. The BBC is funded by the British foreign office; Al Jazeera was seeded by Qatar. India needs creative equivalents. "Perception is as important as reality — and it's time to work at that."
Become the Third Pole
The end state Akbaruddin envisions is India as a genuine pole in a multipolar world — neither a US camp follower nor a Chinese antagonist, but a civilization-state with the economic weight, military capability, diplomatic access, and cultural influence to say yes or no to anyone on its own terms. The curve is set. The question is only whether it arrives in 20 years or 30. "India will rise irrespective of whether the US says so or China likes it. The curve is not going to change."
A rising tide lifts all boats. Akbaruddin's final observation is personal: in his 30+ years of diplomatic service, the way the world treated India changed visibly and dramatically. In the late 1980s, other countries knew what India would say before India said it — and largely ignored it. By the end of his career, no major decision in any multilateral forum was made without asking: where does India stand? That shift is irreversible. The question now is only how fast India moves to claim the seat it has already earned.
Sourced from Raj Shamani's Podcast | Indian Diplomat Explains: India vs US vs China & Trump | Syed Akbaruddin | FO491Raj Shamani | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5suNXiI1vjQ&t=1s