External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar recently asserted a fundamental truth: India’s destiny will be forged by its own intrinsic strength, not by the grace or grievances of others.

In a world shifting toward multipolarity, he emphasised a self-reliant India, one that views the Indian Ocean not just as a transit route, but as a recovering ecosystem vital to global stability. Even the recent docking of an Iranian vessel in Kochi was framed by the Ministry as a principled humanitarian gesture, adhering to maritime law amid regional volatility.

Read in Hindi: कोई 'सियासी खिलौना' नहीं है विदेश नीति...!

However, the domestic reception of such diplomacy tells a different story. Opposition leader Rahul Gandhi sharply criticised the government’s ‘silence’ regarding the US sinking of the Iranian warship IRIS Dena. Labelling the event a fire in India’s ‘backyard’, he questioned whether New Delhi has surrendered its strategic sovereignty, warned of risks to energy security via the Strait of Hormuz, and accused the administration of weakening an independent foreign policy.

In matters of defence and global standing, wisdom demands restraint. These are the rare arenas where political parties must rise above daily skirmishes to speak with a unified voice. A nation is judged abroad not merely by the calibre of its tanks or the growth of its GDP, but by the maturity and consistency of its political discourse.

Unfortunately, this discipline is increasingly absent from India’s domestic theatre. Foreign policy is not a television shouting match; it is a meticulous craft where every syllable carries diplomatic weight. When international issues are treated casually, the result is avoidable confusion that echoes far beyond our borders.

Since Independence, India has maintained a remarkably resilient tradition of strategic autonomy. From Jawaharlal Nehru and Indira Gandhi to Atal Bihari Vajpayee and Narendra Modi, the guiding star has remained fixed: India engages with every power bloc but subordinates itself to none. In today’s turbulent landscape, defined by great-power rivalry and energy insecurity, New Delhi performs a high-stakes balancing act. It deepens ties with Washington, sustains a legacy partnership with Moscow, champions the Global South, and builds economic bridges from Brussels to Riyadh.

While democratic debate is healthy, recent interventions suggest that internal friction is beginning to fray our national messaging. The ongoing dispute over the 2020 China border crisis is a prime example. Constant allegations of ‘lost territory’ in Ladakh, met by government rebuttals, create a cacophony that China can exploit to suggest a lack of internal resolve during sensitive military negotiations.

Similarly, the aftermath of Operation Sindoor in 2025, a counter-terror response against Pakistan, became a partisan flashpoint. Criticisms that India’s foreign policy had ‘collapsed’ because global powers supposedly ‘hyphenated’ India with Pakistan once more were dismissed by the ruling party as demoralising to the armed forces. Whether the critique is valid or not, the optics of a house divided during a security crisis are rarely in the national interest.

We see this tension again in ‘optics diplomacy’. Rahul Gandhi’s 2024 meeting with US Congresswoman Ilhan Omar, a vocal critic of India’s Kashmir policy, drew fire for sending mixed signals. Even energy diplomacy is not immune; when US officials discussed waivers for Indian refiners to purchase Russian oil, the opposition characterised it as a compromise of sovereignty. The government, conversely, maintained it was a pragmatic move dictated solely by national economic concerns.

India’s historical successes on the world stage were built on a foundation of bipartisan consensus. Even during the height of the Cold War or the upheaval of economic liberalisation, leaders generally avoided sabotaging the nation’s external posture for internal gain.

Today, the stakes are exponentially higher. The global order is fragmenting. Supply chains are weaponised, and alliances are in constant flux. In such a volatile climate, consistency and clarity are a nation’s most valuable assets.

The bottom line: Criticism of the government is a sacred democratic right, but on the global stage, that criticism must be constructive, informed, and mindful of consequences.

Our diplomats and soldiers operate in gruelling environments, from the frozen heights of the Himalayas to the high-pressure boardrooms of the UN. Their task is made infinitely more difficult when domestic politics sends conflicting signals to our allies and adversaries alike.

Foreign policy is a marathon, not a sprint. Governments are temporary; the national interest is permanent. India’s political class, both treasury and opposition, must remember that when the lion speaks to the world, it must speak with a single, coherent roar.