The Union government’s jurisdiction over matters listed under the Union List in the Indian constitution has never been contested. However, the involvement of states, especially border and coastal states, and those with significant stakes abroad, such as a large diaspora, is crucial in foreign policy due to the sensitivity of these issues. The disagreement, between the Union Government and the state of Kerala, over an administrative position created to facilitate external cooperation has spiralled into an unwarranted controversy, fuelled by widespread misunderstanding.
The situation escalated with Kerala’s appointment of a secretary in charge of ‘External Cooperation,’ sparking a debate about the role of Indian states in foreign policy. This move by a non-BJP-ruled state has been met with criticism from the Union government, which insists that foreign affairs fall exclusively within its domain. Other instances, such as the chief minister of West Bengal’s remarks on Bangladesh, which prompted a diplomatic note, highlight the practical implications and potential overreach of state involvement.
These events have called for a critical examination of whether the Union government’s approach to state engagement in external matters undermines its own stance and raises questions about the balance of power in India’s federal structure.
It was on July 15 that the Kerala government appointed senior IAS officer K. Vasuki as a secretary in charge of “matters concerning external cooperation.” The order indicated that Vasuki, who is also the secretary of labour and skills, would handle this additional role. The Resident Commissioner at Kerala House in New Delhi will support Vasuki and liaise with the Ministry of External Affairs, Missions, and Embassies on related matters.
Kerala chief secretary V. Venu clarified the rationale behind the decision. Venu explained that the appointment was part of an initiative to establish new relationships for the state’s development. He emphasised that the Kerala government is well aware that foreign affairs fall under the Union government’s jurisdiction. He elaborated that many foreign and multilateral agencies, institutions based in foreign embassies, and delegations regularly interact with the Kerala state government, as well as other state governments. These interactions foster cooperative relations in commercial, industrial, and cultural fields. He noted that visits by the chief minister or other state ministers abroad often result in foreign representatives visiting Kerala to seek new partnerships.
Venu clarified that the intention behind the move was not to engage in diplomatic relations, which is the purview of the Union government. Previously, such interactions were managed by separate departments, but as these discussions increased, the need for better coordination became apparent. Thus, the division called ‘external cooperation’ was created to streamline these efforts.
Responding to the decision by the Kerala government, the official spokesperson of MEA, Randhir Jaiswal, provided a clarification during the weekly media briefing. He emphasised that, according to the constitution of India, foreign affairs and all matters relating to the Union’s relationship with any foreign country fall exclusively under the jurisdiction of the Union government.
Ministry of External Affairs. Photo: Wikimedia Commons
Jaiswal referred to the specific provisions of the constitution, citing the Seventh Schedule, List-I (Union List), Item Number 10, which clearly delineates that foreign affairs is not a Concurrent subject and certainly not a State subject. He said that state governments should refrain from intervening in matters that are beyond their constitutional jurisdiction. In his statement, Jaiswal noted the necessity of respecting constitutional boundaries, reiterating that the role of state governments does not include engaging in foreign affairs.
Jaiswal also addressed a related issue involving a diplomatic note from Bangladesh, protesting comments made by the chief minister of West Bengal. He pointed out that this incident underscores the importance of maintaining clear lines of responsibility and authority in foreign affairs, as outlined in the constitution.
Earlier, BJP Kerala State President K. Surendran criticised the Kerala government, calling the appointment a ‘blatant overreach’ and a violation of the Union List of the constitution. Surendran expressed his concerns on social media, suggesting that the move was unconstitutional and set a dangerous precedent, questioning whether CM Pinarayi Vijayan was attempting to position Kerala as a separate nation.
Indian National Congress MP Shashi Tharoor responded to the appointment of Vasuki stating that it was a typical focal point of responsibility within the government. Tharoor explained that the Kerala government routinely designates someone for this role, which is necessary due to the significant Kerala diaspora and related welfare issues that arise abroad. He clarified that this does not imply the state government is attempting to take over the Central government’s authority in foreign affairs. He viewed the appointment of the young officer as a standard point of responsibility within the state government.
Controversy erupted when media and social media amplified news that the Kerala government had appointed a ‘foreign secretary,’ without providing context. This issue gained media attention against the backdrop of the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) recently denying permission for a Kerala minister to coordinate the repatriation of expatriates killed in a fire in Kuwait.
Also read: ‘Against Federalism’: Kerala CM Writes to PM Modi Over Denial of Permit to Minister’s Kuwait Travel
This is not an isolated incident. A few years ago, the Centre’s decision to deny a diplomatic passport to a Kerala minister sparked another Centre-state debate. The minister intended to travel to Saudi Arabia to aid Keralites in crisis after losing their jobs. In 2018, during the massive floods in Kerala, the Centre announced that India should not accept aid from foreign governments for flood relief. This declaration came just hours after Kerala chief minister Pinarayi Vijayan stated that his government would work to remove any ‘impediments’ to receiving the Rs 700-crore financial assistance offered by the United Arab Emirates (UAE) for flood relief.
States’ role in foreign affairs
India’s states have traditionally not played a significant role in foreign policy formulation, but this was expected to change. Happymon Jacob had written in a Carnegie paper that economic liberalisation and coalition governments in New Delhi created an environment where states could more actively engage with the central government on foreign policy issues affecting their interests.
During the first term, Prime Minister Narendra Modi had recognised the necessity of involving regional governments in foreign policy, although his efforts had limited success. In October 2014, the Union government announced the creation of a States Division within the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA), headed by a senior officer with the rank of joint secretary. This division was to coordinate efforts between Indian missions abroad and State/Union Territories governments, as well as foreign diplomatic and trade missions in India.
There was some expectation that the establishment of this division reflected New Delhi’s growing recognition of the significant role states play in foreign policy. The States Division was created to help states and Union territories promote exports and tourism and attract foreign investment and expertise. It aimed to assist these regions by sharing the ministry’s experience and expertise through training and capacity building, particularly in areas related to trade, investment, and cultural linkages. This approach sought to enhance coordination and facilitation of states’ efforts to establish external linkages.
Even before becoming prime minister, Narendra Modi and the National Democratic Alliance (NDA) advocated for greater state involvement in foreign policy. The 2014 election manifesto of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) emphasised the importance of fostering cooperation between New Delhi and the states, envisioning a ‘Team India’ that included chief ministers and other regional leaders as equal partners alongside the Prime Minister. This new approach represented a significant shift in India’s foreign policy landscape, recognising the valuable contributions that states can make in promoting the country’s international relations and economic interests. The 2019 election manifesto of the BJP also emphasised states’ role in external affairs.
Prime Minister Narendra Modi chairs the first Union Cabinet meeting after being sworn in. Photo: X (Twitter)/@BJP4India
Happymon Jacob noted that in October 2013, in his first major foreign policy speech, Modi criticised the Congress Party’s Delhi-centric approach and emphasised that foreign policy should be decided by the people, not just politicians in Delhi. After becoming Prime Minister, Modi continued to advocate for involving states in foreign policy making, promoting the concept of “cooperative federalism.”
In November 2015, Modi highlighted the involvement of states in foreign policy, noting initiatives like state-to-state summits and export promotion councils. While the Congress-led regime viewed state involvement in foreign policy as a constraint, Modi, having been a state chief minister, saw it as beneficial. Despite the central government’s enthusiasm, fundamental policy changes have been limited, with Modi’s approach being more functionalist than holistic. Effective implementation required consensus-building among state governments and political parties, which has been lacking.
Article 246 of the Indian constitution grants the central government exclusive jurisdiction over foreign policy, but economic liberalisation and coalition governments empowered states to influence foreign policy. States’ geopolitical contexts, such as shared cultures and economic ecosystems, prompt their participation in foreign policy.
Key areas of state engagement include foreign economic activities, resource management, and environmental and security concerns. Examples include state-organised investor summits and opposition to international treaties, like West Bengal’s resistance to the Teesta River treaty with Bangladesh. This evolving scenario showed the significant role states can play in shaping India’s foreign policy.
According to Venu Rajamony, former Indian Ambassador to the Netherlands and Consul General in Dubai, MEA’s statement contradicts the Modi government’s own policy. He said that foreign service officers were “encouraged to adopt particular States and maintain continuous contacts with the States concerned throughout their career.” Moreover, Indian Ambassadors abroad were encouraged to visit States and discuss with state governments how external cooperation could be strengthened, he said.
Former Ambassador Debnath Shaw observed that although foreign affairs are constitutionally a central subject, state governments do play a role in policymaking. States that border neighbouring countries are especially influential in cross-border issues.
For example, the Ganges Water Sharing Treaty with Bangladesh required the support of the West Bengal Government. Similarly, the longstanding enclave issues with Bangladesh were resolved with the cooperation of states like Meghalaya. Water and land boundary issues with Pakistan require the perspectives of Jammu and Kashmir, Punjab, and Gujarat.
In relations with Nepal, Uttar Pradesh and Bihar are key participants. Tamil Nadu’s influence on India’s policies toward Sri Lanka is significant due to the Tamil population. Other states have become more involved in foreign affairs, particularly on issues that directly impact their residents, such as Kerala’s focus on NRI and PIO issues. States also contribute to discussions on trade, investments, and national and international security matters. Shaw also noted to involve states as partners in foreign relations, the MEA had created a States Division to facilitate communication with all states. Heads of Missions and Commercial Officers from our Embassies and High Commissions were encouraged to visit their respective states regularly.
According to T.P. Sreenivasan, a former Ambassador, the outcome of the Sharjah ruler’s visit to Kerala, a few years back, showed the need for greater involvement of states in foreign policy. Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s concept of competitive federalism, especially in foreign affairs, was evident during the five-day visit of Sultan bin Mohammed Al-Qasimi.
Chief minister Pinarayi Vijayan engaged in discussions with the Sultan on trade and commercial cooperation, presenting a road map for joint projects between Kerala and Sharjah. At a Calicut University convocation ceremony, CM announced that the ruler had agreed to release 149 Indian prisoners from Sharjah jails. The Sultan’s response was remarkable, as he not only agreed to their release but also offered them jobs, allowing them to continue living in Sharjah.
However, a subsequent tweet by external affairs minister Sushma Swaraj, which announced the amnesty, did not mention the chief minister’s role, raising questions about the jurisdiction of states in such matters, according to Sreenivasan. CM had prudently informed Swaraj about the announcement and advised the Government of India to pursue similar actions in other Emirates for the release of more Indian prisoners.
The Indian Ambassador to the UAE, Navdeep Suri, was present in Thiruvananthapuram to keep New Delhi updated on the developments, Sreenivasan noted. This incident illustrated why more needs to be done to involve states in foreign policy. Recognising and institutionalising the role of states can lead to more effective and comprehensive foreign policy outcomes, he said.
V. Suryanarayan, a foreign affairs expert, pointed out that the formation of coalition governments at the centre with regional parties as alliance partners brought significant changes in centre-state relations, especially regarding neighbourhood policy. Alliance partners began influencing India’s neighbourhood policy, such as the DMK’s efforts that led to the inclusion of the Sethusamudram project in the Manmohan Singh government’s agenda.
The central government also moderated the hardline stances of regional allies, as seen during the Fourth Eelam War when the DMK supported India’s Sri Lanka policy while maintaining theatrics to champion overseas Tamils. However, harmony between central and state governments on neighbourhood policy remains challenging, exemplified by West Bengal’s opposition to the Teesta River water-sharing agreement and Tamil Nadu’s critical stance on India’s Sri Lanka policy. The competitive nature of Tamil Nadu politics, with Dravidian parties vying to support overseas Tamils, further complicates the situation, especially with state legislative assembly elections.
During his tenure as minister of external affairs, I.K. Gujral was keen on involving state governments in neighbourhood policy. Bangladeshi economist-turned-diplomat Rahman Sobhan recounted Gujral’s eagerness to engage the West Bengal Government on sharing the Ganges waters with Bangladesh.
Gujral suggested the Awami League government establish direct communication with West Bengal, leveraging shared geography and cultural heritage. This led to West Bengal’s formal invitation to negotiations, with finance minister Asim Das Gupta leading the Indian delegation. Professor Suryanarayan said that this contrasted sharply with chief minister Mamata Banerjee’s stance on sharing the Teesta waters. While federal units should not run the country’s foreign policy, they can and should make constructive inputs, he said.
The Kerala government has several reasons for establishing an external cooperation mechanism. The state has seen a surge of foreign dignitaries for various meetings and conferences, including the recent hosting of the 46th Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meeting (ATCM-46) and the 26th Committee for Environmental Protection (CEP-26) from May 20 to 30, 2024, in Kochi. Last year, Kerala hosted the Second G20 Sherpas Meeting in Kumarakom, and several similar gatherings are scheduled. In all such gatherings, Kerala is expected to facilitate the proceedings.
A significant aspect of Kerala’s proactive policy is managing its three million-strong diaspora. Kerala established the Non-Resident Keralites Affairs (NORKA) department on December 6, 1996, to address the grievances of the Malayali diaspora, the first of its kind in any Indian state.
NORKA Roots, set up in 2002, acts as an interface between NRKs and the state government, addressing their issues, safeguarding their rights, and aiding in the rehabilitation of returnees. NORKA has been instrumental in organising the Loka Kerala Sabha (LKS), with its Secretariat established in 2018. LKS meetings in 2018, 2020, 2022, and 2024 successfully engaged the Malayali diaspora, fostering cultural, socio-political, and economic cooperation between Keralites at home and abroad. Vasuki, who has been functioning as the Director of NORKA, has now taken on additional responsibilities.
In contemporary times, such mechanisms are not unusual. Universities in Kerala have long established centres for International Cooperation to coordinate foreign students’ admissions and exchange programmes, in collaboration with the Indian Council of Cultural Relations. These centres only have coordinating and supervising functions, without encroaching on the jurisdiction of the ministry of external affairs (MEA). Therefore, Kerala’s setup for external cooperation is clearly intended to support, not usurp, the Union’s powers or extend the state’s function beyond India’s borders.
The imperative of federal engagement in foreign affairs is increasingly evident as states like Kerala, Tamil Nadu and West Bengal have their stakes and interests in the international domain. This trend emphasises the importance of leveraging local expertise and fostering a democratic environment in external affairs.
While states’ involvement can enhance India’s foreign policy, it is essential to maintain a balance that complements the Union government’s constitutional mandate. Recognising and institutionalising the constructive roles states can play is indispensable for a cohesive and comprehensive diplomatic engagement, thereby strengthening India’s international presence and policy effectiveness.
K.M. Seethi is Director, Inter University Centre for Social Science Research and Extension (IUCSSRE), Mahatma Gandhi University, Kerala. He also served as Dean and Senior Professor of International Relations at the university.
Note: This article has been corrected to reflect that the massive floods in Kerala took place in 2018.
