MEA admits India lacks a stand-alone tech diplomacy document

Access a copy of the parliamentary report here: [pdf]

The Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) has admitted to a parliamentary committee that India does not have a single, stand-alone policy document that consolidates India’s strategy on:

• digital governance, 
• artificial intelligence (AI), 
• cyber issues, and 
• space diplomacy. 

This was revealed through the 17th report of the Committee on External Affairs, titled “India’s Role in Global Tech Diplomacy, Digital Governance, Outer Space Diplomacy, AI and Emerging Innovations,” tabled in September 2026. Member of Parliament Shashi Tharoor had chaired the Committee. 

Instead, the Ministry stated that India’s strategic direction in these critical domains is currently spread wide and “reflected across sectoral missions, inter-ministerial coordination mechanisms and India’s positions in key bilateral, plurilateral and multilateral engagements.”

 In reply to a direct query on whether India has a clearly articulated strategy linking digital governance, AI, cyber issues and space diplomacy within its foreign policy, the Ministry submitted that

‘there is no single, stand-alone policy document that consolidates all these strands’, and that strategic direction is instead ‘reflected across sectoral missions, inter-ministerial coordination mechanisms and India’s positions in key bilateral, plurilateral and multilateral engagements’.” – Parliamentary Report.

‘Fragmentary, piecemeal and ad hoc’: The parliamentary committee strongly criticised that isolated individual approaches can’t make up for the lack of national strategy. 

“The Committee are of the considered view that this approach is fragmentary, piecemeal and ad hoc, and falls short of what an arena as significant and fast evolving as technology diplomacy demands. A collection of well-conceived individual initiatives, however successful in isolation, cannot substitute for an articulated national vision, nor can tactical adaptability substitute for strategy.” 

It indicates that rather than operating under a centralized, whole-of-government tech diplomacy guidence/rules, various ministries are essentially running parallel policies. 

The Committee’s Recommendations: The parliamentary panel has specified these recommendations for the MEA and government:

1. A technology vision and strategy document: The Committee recommended that the MEA, in consultation with MeitY and other concerned ministries, must “initiate consultations on a Technology Vision and Strategy Document that brings together India’s objectives, priorities, sequencing and institutional responsibilities across digital governance, artificial intelligence, cyber issues, space and emerging technologies within a coherent framework.”
   
2. Formalise Inter-Ministerial Coordination: The Committee recommended the establishment of a “formally constituted Inter-Ministerial Coordination Mechanism on Technology Diplomacy, chaired by MEA,” with defined participation from MeitY, the Department of Space, and the Ministry of Commerce and Industry, meeting at a specified periodicity.
   
3. Public scrutiny and a periodic review of the policy: The Committee further recommended that both the Technology Vision Document and the complementary Technology Diplomacy Strategy “should also be placed in the public domain and reviewed periodically to keep pace with technological change.”

The tech partnerships and diplomatic dialogues “carries a risk of announcements outpacing implementation,” noted the report. It could be referring to recent tech-partnership announcements, like: 

• At SEMICON India 2026, the India Semiconductor Mission formalized partnerships with Japan’s NIPPON Express for secure semiconductor logistics, Lam Research and Singapore Polytechnic International for workforce skilling, Siemens EDA for design education with NIELIT, and Microchip Technology for testing and smart meter SoC manufacturing.
• On the bilateral side, India and Israel signed “deep strategic partnership” covering a Cyber Centre of Excellence and co-developed ethical AI frameworks, 
• Meanwhile, Japan’s METI and Indian MeitY set up policy-dialogue pacts that have drawn investment from Renesas, Tokyo Electron, Fujifilm, and ROHM into chip fabrication tools and Open RAN infrastructure.
• India has also signed agreements with 23 countries to replicate its Digital Public Infrastructure,

For some reference, here is a brief list of each individual country’s policy documents that could be guidling their legislations and national strategies: 

• United States: America’s AI Action Plan & National Security Science & Technology Strategy. 
• European Union: Digital Decade Policy Programme 2030
• United Kingdom: UK Digital Strategy  
• Singapore: National AI Strategy 2.0 (NAIS 2.0) 
• Denmark: The Ministry Of Foreign Affairs Of Denmark’s Strategy For Tech Diplomacy   
• Netherlands: National Technology Strategy (NTS) 

Also Read:

• India’s AI Impact Summit 2026: Key takeaways and the Global South agenda
• How India’s Digital Public Infrastructure is becoming a tool of foreign policy