Dr Nicolas Blarel, in Provincializing India’s Foreign Policy: Unpacking the Local and Regional Origins of India’s External Policies (Indian Politics & Policy, Vol. 5, No. 3, Winter 2025), examines how India’s foreign policy, traditionally centralized in New Delhi, has increasingly been shaped by regional actors and state-level governments. Rather than viewing Indian diplomacy solely as the domain of national elites and the Ministry of External Affairs, Blarel argues that subnational political dynamics, federal structures, and regional economic interests have gradually expanded the range of actors involved in shaping India’s external engagement.
The article situates this development within broader changes in India’s political economy since the 1990s. Economic liberalization, greater global integration, and the intensification of inter-state competition for investment have pushed Indian states to cultivate direct links with foreign governments, multinational firms, and diaspora networks. Through initiatives such as global investor summits, trade delegations, and diplomatic outreach by chief ministers, states have sought to attract foreign capital, technology, and tourism. These activities reflect the emergence of what the literature describes as “subnational diplomacy” or paradiplomacy, in which regional governments pursue international engagement to advance local economic development.
Blarel illustrates these dynamics through examples such as Tamil Nadu, whose political leadership has long linked regional identity politics with foreign policy concerns regarding Sri Lanka’s Tamil population. Over time, however, the state’s external engagement has expanded well beyond ethnic politics to include economic diplomacy aimed at investors and governments in countries such as Japan, Singapore, Spain, and the United States. Similar patterns can be observed across other Indian states that organize investment summits, maintain diaspora connections, and participate in global networks related to trade, science, and climate cooperation. These developments indicate that international engagement is no longer confined to the national capital but increasingly occurs across multiple levels of India’s federal system.
At the same time, the article emphasizes that the growing role of regional actors has not produced a fully decentralized foreign policy system. Instead, India’s central government has developed mechanisms to coordinate and manage these activities. The establishment of the “States Division” within the Ministry of External Affairs in 2014 reflects an attempt to facilitate international cooperation by Indian states while maintaining strategic oversight. Through such institutional arrangements, New Delhi can incorporate subnational initiatives into broader diplomatic priorities and ensure that state-level engagements do not conflict with national foreign policy objectives.
The article also explores the conditions under which regional interests are most likely to influence national foreign policy decisions. Blarel argues that three factors are particularly important: the degree to which international issues resonate with local political constituencies, the bargaining power of regional parties within India’s federal system, and the extent to which the central government politicizes or prioritizes specific foreign policy issues. Where international developments directly affect regional identities, economic interests, or electoral politics, state governments may exert pressure on New Delhi to adjust diplomatic positions. Conversely, where such factors are absent, foreign policy remains largely insulated from regional intervention.
Importantly, the article situates these trends within the broader political context of the past decade, marked by increasing centralization of power under the Bharatiya Janata Party. Despite the BJP’s strong parliamentary position and the concentration of authority in the executive, Blarel finds that regional actors continue to shape aspects of India’s external relations, particularly on issues with direct regional implications. However, this influence remains selective and mediated through central institutions rather than representing a structural shift toward decentralized diplomacy.
From this analysis, the article advances three main conclusions. First, India’s foreign policy should be understood as the product of interactions between national and subnational actors rather than as an exclusively centralized process. Second, state governments have become important participants in India’s international economic engagement, expanding the country’s global presence through localized initiatives. Third, the central government retains decisive authority and strategically integrates subnational diplomacy into national foreign policy frameworks rather than relinquishing control.
The article concludes that India’s foreign policy is becoming increasingly “provincialized” in the sense that regional actors contribute to its formation and implementation. Yet this process does not fundamentally weaken central authority. Instead, it produces a hybrid system in which subnational diplomacy expands India’s global engagement while remaining embedded within a centrally coordinated foreign policy structure.