The Davos Theatre: Indian Politicians Should Trade Performance For Partnership
As India finalises a landmark EU trade deal in Delhi, regional leaders in Davos prioritise domestic optics over global partnerships.
The Gist
India's regional leaders are overshadowed by a significant trade agreement with the EU, choosing to focus on domestic optics at the WEF in Davos.
- Prime Minister Modi prioritised the India-EU Free Trade Agreement over attending the summit.
- Regional leaders signed MoUs that could have been done domestically, drawing criticism.
- Davos should be a platform for global collaboration, not just a stage for local politics.
New Delhi has announced a historic trade deal with the European Union, but its regional leaders are still treating the Swiss Alps as a stage for domestic optics.
“All the world’s a stage,” William Shakespeare famously wrote in As You Like It, noting that men and women are merely players with their own exits and entrances.
At the World Economic Forum (WEF) in Davos last week, India’s political class appeared to take the bard’s observations quite literally.
While the global elite gathered in the snow, the truly significant news was happening elsewhere, at least from India’s vantage point.
The only agreement capable of shifting global sentiment — the long-awaited India-EU Free Trade Agreement — is not being signed in a Swiss chalet.
Instead, the final paperwork is being concluded in New Delhi, following European Union President Ursula von der Leyen's visit for Monday’s Republic Day festivities.
Prime Minister Narendra Modi skipped the Alpine trek, possibly recognising that the real exit and entrance of the capital is currently focused on the Indian capital.
Zero Global Breakthroughs
The Davos contingent this year was heavy on Indian Chief Ministers but light on global breakthroughs.
Leaders from states like Maharashtra, Madhya Pradesh, and Andhra Pradesh were in attendance, yet they primarily made headlines for signing Memorandums of Understanding (MoUs) with domestic Indian companies — deals that could have been executed just as easily in Mumbai or Bhopal.
Their presence would have likely gone unnoticed by the international community if not for the high-decibel coverage by Indian media outlets.
Politicians appeared to give interviews almost exclusively to Indian reporters. One of them claimed these deals involved a fair amount of foreign investment, necessitating a Davos backdrop.
But that is unconvincing. Using an international forum to announce domestic partnerships feels less like a hunt for global capital and more like a taxpayer-funded campaign stop.
Does this mean India’s regional leaders should stay home?
Quite the contrary. In a race for global capital, a state chief minister should be at Davos.
But they must distinguish between a platform and a stage.
Davos remains a networking engine without parallel. For a politician competing not just with other Indian states but with other nations, the time spent seeking out collaborations and "on-the-run" partnerships is invaluable.
This year's sessions — covering everything from longevity to electric vehicles — offered a chance to immerse oneself in the trends of tomorrow.
The lesson is not that ministers should avoid Davos, but that they should stop treating a global forum as a backdrop for a domestic audience.
A Summit Squandered
The last year has been among the most tumultuous in recent memory.
There were some 65 heads of state and Government in Davos this year, including US president Donald Trump and Canadian prime minister Mark Carney.
Carney famously signalled a rupture in the traditional world order.
Many attendees would have been there to enrich their understanding of a fragmenting global economy and see the world's most influential political leaders present their cases.
Unfortunately, by prioritising performance over partnership, India’s regional leaders reduced a potentially productive summit to a farce.
There are plenty of stages in India for political theatre. When on the global stage, however, the world expects a different kind of player — one interested in the business of the future, not just the headlines of the morning.
