Parl panel calls for a more ambitious and better-funded approach to foreign policy

New Delhi: The Seventh Report of the Parliamentary Committee on External Affairs, tabled in both the Houses of Parliament on Thursday, has highlighted the difficulties confronting the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) in dealing with India’s increasing global responsibilities.

While acknowledging marginal increases in funding and institutional reform, the 81-page report—moved by Committee chairperson Shashi Tharoor—calls for a more ambitious, better-funded, and strategically integrated approach to India’s foreign policy framework.

The report, based on the MEA’s Demands for Grants for 2024–25, reiterates concerns about underfunding. Despite a 15.45% hike in the budget for 2025–26, the report points out that actual expenditure remains disproportionately low in relation to India’s growing global responsibilities. Historically, MEA’s share in total government expenditure has hovered below one per cent.

“India’s international ambitions demand more than just bigger embassies or more missions overseas. What is required is a redesign of the institutional underpinnings on which they rest,” the report cautions, urging a 20% annual increase in the MEA budget over the next five years.

The panel also flagged legislative delays, particularly the failure to replace the outdated Emigration Act of 1983 with the proposed Overseas Mobility (Facilitation and Welfare) Bill, 2024.

“This legislative inattention is particularly disturbing given the magnitude of India’s diaspora, which stands at over 32 million persons,” the report notes.

It further underscores the absence of a comprehensive diaspora engagement strategy, dismissing the MEA’s argument about diversity posing a challenge.

“Diversity must be looked at as an asset. There can be a disciplined policy approach to tapping the diaspora’s entire potential in sectors like economic diplomacy,

technology exchange, and cultural outreach,” the report stated.

Highlighting bureaucratic sluggishness, the report criticises delays at Nalanda University, where operational issues have persisted despite heavy investment and diplomatic backing. Similarly, it scrutinises the diminishing budget under “Aid to African Countries,” cautioning:

“A risk exists that delays and fiscal complacency undermine the goodwill and strategic footholds India has gained in the region.”

Another unaddressed recommendation is the call for a codified Strategic Foreign Policy Doctrine, which the MEA has resisted, citing long-established principles.

“Most nations, including the US, Germany, and Japan, have clearly articulated strategic frameworks. India cannot do without one if it aspires to set the tone in international forums,” the report states.

The Committee also raises concern over understaffed missions, delays in embassy openings, and gaps in

digital infrastructure. It advocates investment in mission readiness, foreign service training, cybersecurity, and expanding India’s diplomatic footprint.

“As India looks towards a greater role in world governance... it is up to the executive now to translate these into lasting policies and deliverable outcomes,” the report concludes.