India's "passive" multistakeholder cyber diplomacy

Abstract

Indian diplomacy has always accorded a central role to the state in its approach to global negotiations. Yet while formal mechanisms to contribute have not always existed, various stakeholder groups have impacted the negotiating stances and approaches adopted by the Indian government at several global negotiations. This approach continues as India engages with a range of technology regimes, including that of cybersecurity regime formation. Convergence of interests with that of the state and mediums through which interests can be asserted by each non-state actor has impacted the extent to which these interests were represented in global negotiations.1 India has been non-specific when it comes to controversial fissures in global cybersecurity negotiations. Further, there has been no “conscious structuring of mechanisms”2 from India to facilitate multistakeholder cyber diplomacy. Additionally, none of the actors in the Indian cybersecurity ecosystem (hereinafter “stakeholder groups”), including the government, private sector, media, and civil society (which includes experts and advocacy groups) have articulated or even recognised a clearly defined interest or “stake” that they want India to bring to global negotiating tables. Instead, much of the focus has been on shoring up domestic cybersecurity resilience and building capacity, which has also been the emphasis of India’s diplomatic contributions abroad. All stakeholders are thus relatively satisfied with the outcome, and there is a negligible clash of competing interests between stakeholders because they do not perceive yet a clearly defined cost or opportunity in shaping the global cybersecurity regime.

Studying India’s approach to cyber norms formulation offers an opportunity to unpack this unique case characterised by a relative lack of participation and “passive” engagement by all stakeholder groups, and offer recommendations. This chapter is in three parts. First, it evaluates the interests and actions of each stakeholder group in India with respect to cybersecurity regime formation, and how these actions (or lack thereof) are interdependent. In the second section, it highlights India’s contributions to global cyber norms processes and evaluates how this has been shaped by the stakeholder ecosystem. In the final section, the chapter offers recommendations for more optimal multistakeholder engagement going forward.