Digital outreach has become an essential instrument of geopolitics. But the same platforms that amplify a country’s image can also distort the context of major international events with misinformation and fake news
Diplomacy has always been a carefully choreographed affair. More so today, when geopolitics is marked by deeply divergent interests and often belligerent postures. However, the diplomatic architecture of succinctly written speeches, curated photographs and television footage, and controlled press briefings, can be disrupted in seconds by something as simple and ubiquitous as a smartphone.
Traditional diplomacy operates through context. Social media operates through attention. In public diplomacy (PD), communication increasingly happens on Instagram, YouTube, X, Facebook, and WhatsApp. A photograph, a gesture, an informal exchange or even what an official happens to be eating can travel across borders within minutes, often stripped of the context in which it originally occurred.
The 18th BRICS Summit hosted at Bharat Mandapam in New Delhi offered a revealing case study about ‘digital diplomacy’. India hosted the summit, quite successfully, involving some of the world’s most consequential leaders, and came out with a substantial New Delhi Declaration (NDD) putting issues of immediate concern – ranging from global governance and development to digital cooperation and the Global South – on the diplomatic agenda.
The summit emerged as an impressive international forum with several substantive outcomes. Yet some of the most widely circulated digital content surrounding the summit had little connection with these discussions.
Soft power and digital diplomacy
Digital platforms have dramatically expanded the reach of soft power, and has significant influence in the way a country is perceived, understood and trusted beyond its hard economic or military capabilities. A high-profile diplomatic visit is now followed by millions of people online. A photograph can communicate warmth between leaders more effectively than a formal statement. A reel of a foreign student speaking about India can travel further than a government advertisement. A cultural performance, a sporting moment, a meal or even a book gifted to a foreign leader can become a powerful piece of storytelling.
This was quite visible in the recently concluded summit, in varying colours, offering a timely reminder that soft power in the digital age can be both a boon and a bane.
Perils of ‘digital diplomacy’
The summit generated substantial digital attention around India’s hosting, the presence of global leaders and several symbolic moments. However, some of the most widely circulated content had little to do with the summit’s substantive agenda. Some went viral simply out of curiosity. A photograph featuring Prime Minister Narendra Modi with Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chinese President Xi Jinping, for instance, went viral partly because users became interested in the Indian Foreign Service officer visible in the background.
However, not everything was innocuous. Videos of Indian officials eating snacks during proceedings, informal visuals of officials and visiting dignitaries, and other uncurated visuals quickly became social-media content.
There was also a more serious side to the problem. Fact-checkers documented old videos, manipulated material and AI-generated content being falsely presented as events from the BRICS Summit. One viral video falsely claimed that Prime Minister Modi had touched Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian’s feet. The Ministry of External Affairs also had to reject false claims that visiting leaders had fallen ill after the summit.
This is considerably more serious than an official being mocked for eating snacks. A funny video may distract from diplomacy. A fabricated video can alter perceptions of diplomacy. The paradox was quite apparent – the same digital ecosystem that allows a country to project itself to the world can also take the narrative away from it.
Cyber threat and diplomacy are now inseparable
The key shift is that cyber risks are no longer confined to military systems or critical infrastructure; they increasingly affect the credibility, security and perception of diplomacy itself.
Delhi Police’s cyber-security advisory ahead of the BRICS Summit itself reflected this broader concern, warning officials and contractual staff about cyber risks, phishing, unauthorised software, external cloud services and misinformation.
But the challenge went beyond protecting devices and networks. The information environment surrounding the summit itself became a space of contestation.
Fact-checkers identified several Pakistan-linked accounts amplifying misleading narratives related to the BRICS Summit hosted by India. Some of these narratives used recycled footage, manipulated visuals or AI-generated content to present events out of context, presumably to damage India’s image.
The consequence is not merely the spread of false information. Such content can create confusion about what actually happened, distort the public understanding of diplomatic engagements and, in some cases, seek to undermine the credibility of the country hosting a major international event.
This is where cybersecurity, digital diplomacy and information warfare begin to converge. Protecting a diplomatic event today is no longer simply about securing the venue, the networks and the officials. It is also about protecting the information environment and context in which the event is perceived.
(Author is a geo-political commentator and Director – African centre of India. Views are personal)