Context: 

This editorial is based on the news “At the high table: On the Raisina Dialogue” which was published in the Hindu. The ninth edition of the annual Raisina Dialogue held in New Delhi.

• Greece’s Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis joined the inauguration session as the chief guest.

What is Raisina Dialogue?

• It is India’s flagship conference on geopolitics and geo-economics, committed to addressing the most challenging issues facing the international community.
• Host: Delhi-based think tank Observer Research Foundation (ORF), in partnership with the Ministry of External Affairs. (ORF is an independent global think tank based in Delhi)
• Theme of 2024 edition: “Chaturanga: Conflict, Contest, Cooperate, Create”. 

Key Developments in Raisina Dialogue 2024

• India as a bridging power: India is seeking common ground through a “multi-vector” policy, and playing the role of a “Vishwamitra” or friend of the world. Therefore, forums like Raisina dialogue aims to engage global leaders on the big issues and challenges in the world.
• India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor: The importance of connectivity projects such as the India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor were highlighted by the Greek Prime Minister.
• Global governance, UN Security Council and impending reform were also discussed: India’s rightful place to be a player, rather than a playing field, was referred to repeatedly, as was India’s success in hosting the G-20 last year.
• Absence of senior ministerial presence from P-5 or major G-7 or BRICS-10: Due to the G-20 Foreign Ministers Meeting in Brazil.
• Presence of Baltic-Nordic Forum: presence of large ministerial contingent from Central and Eastern Europe, which included all Ministers of the Baltic-Nordic forum, enabled a new diplomatic outreach for the government that is seeking trade agreements and investment ties with this part of Europe that is oft-overlooked but competitive, economically.
• Russian war in Ukraine and the need to handle an aggressive China: Unfortunately, these conversations did not strive for balance, as neither Russia nor China was invited.

Some Shortcomings Observed by the Writer:

• The Raisina dialogue lacked diversity in conversations on foreign policy Minimal presence from South East Asia, Latin America, and even South Asia (excepting Nepal and Bhutan)
• The Israeli war in Gaza was not discussed.
• Lack of non- governmental civil society organisations : Discourse produced a narrow view of challenges faced by democracy worldwide

Conclusion

The lack of diversity in conversations at the Raisina Dialogue hinders it from  becoming the “Made in India” version of the “Global Public Square”.