There is nothing unusual about one country engaging lobbying firms to strengthen its diplomatic relations with another. However, a clear distinction must be maintained between diplomatic efforts undertaken in the national interest and publicity campaigns designed to enhance the personal image of a leader in power. The recent revelation that American lobbying firms played a role behind a social media post by US President Donald Trump praising Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi has triggered a serious political debate in India. Investigative reports published by 'The Indian Express', 'The Wire' and 'Scroll' have raised several questions about the Union government's foreign policy, the use of public money and the promotion of Modi's personal image.

An investigative report published by 'The Indian Express' on November 7, 2026, brought several crucial details of this controversy to light. The information emerged from documents filed with the US Department of Justice under the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA). According to these documents, the Indian Embassy in Washington entered into a contract with Mercury Public Affairs, a lobbying firm with close connections to Trump's political circle, at a monthly fee of $75,000, approximately Rs. 70 lakh. Bryan Lanza, who served as communications director for Trump's transition team, is a key partner in the firm. Susie Wiles, who earlier served as Trump's White House Chief of Staff, had also worked as a lobbyist for the same organisation.

In its activity report, the firm referred to Trump's June social media post congratulating Modi on becoming India's longest-serving head of government. The firm's disclosure that activities relating to the promotion and circulation of this post formed part of its work has become the centre of the controversy. Although the firm itself has mentioned these activities in its report, the political and publicity objectives behind a foreign lobbying agency including praise of an Indian Prime Minister in its performance record deserve serious scrutiny.

The controversy does not end there. Another lobbying firm, SHW Partners, headed by Jason Miller, a former political adviser to Trump, entered into an agreement with the Indian government for a monthly payment of $150,000, approximately Rs. 1.4 crore. The contract, which began in April 2025, was extended for another year in April 2026. According to documents submitted by the firm to the US Department of Justice, it arranged eight telephone conversations between Indian government representatives and senior US government officials during May and June 2026. These included contacts with US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, Deputy National Security Adviser Michael Needham and US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer, among others. The contract ended on June 23, after Miller joined the Trump administration as a Special Government Employee.

The two firms together received more than $225,000 a month, amounting to over Rs. 2 crore of public money. This is certainly not a small expenditure. What exactly has India gained from this spending? Have trade disputes been resolved? Has the pressure arising from the steep tariffs imposed by the US on Indian exports eased? Have there been any changes in American policies in favour of India's interests? The government has so far failed to provide answers to these questions either to the Indian public or to Parliament.

A report published by the American news organisation 'Bloomberg' on August 25, 2025, provides another important dimension to this controversy. It revealed that the Indian government hired Mercury, a firm with close links to Trump's political circle, at a time when the US was preparing to impose 50 per cent tariffs on India. This was also a period when the Trump administration was expressing strong displeasure over India's continued purchases of oil from Russia. The fact that India had to seek the assistance of individuals close to Trump's political establishment to deal with American sanctions and tariff pressures raises serious questions about the direction and effectiveness of our foreign policy. 

Another investigation by 'The Indian Express' revealed that India had also relied on lobbying firms to reach American political and media circles during Operation Sindoor. After the military operation was halted on May 10, 2025, the Indian government approached senior American officials through Jason Miller. At the same time, Pakistan was also making extensive efforts to arrange meetings with US government officials, lawmakers and media organisations. This suggests that India, despite having its own diplomatic machinery, had to depend on expensive intermediaries to present its position on the international stage.

On November 7, 'The Wire' and 'Scroll' published more extensive accounts of these developments, raising questions about the Trump appreciation post, lobbying contracts, contacts arranged with American officials and the use of public funds. The central question emerging from these reports is simple: What tangible benefits has India secured through this expenditure of public money? Lobbying may be a legally recognised practice in a country like the United States. But legality alone does not make every expenditure beneficial to the public interest.

The real problem is not merely the appointment of lobbying firms. It is the blurring of the distinction between the country's diplomatic interests, the ruling party's political publicity and Prime Minister Modi's personal image-building. India once took pride in asserting its strategic autonomy in international affairs. Why has the country now reached a situation where it has to seek influence through individuals closely connected to the political establishment of the US President? The government owes the country an explanation.

In a democracy, a Prime Minister's personal praise from foreign leaders cannot be treated as a measure of the nation's achievements. Projecting US President Donald Trump's congratulatory message as an international achievement of Modi may serve as a political publicity strategy. But the real measure of success lies in how effectively the country addresses trade challenges, tariff threats and diplomatic pressures. The Ministry of External Affairs has a responsibility to account to the public for every rupee paid to lobbying firms. Every rupee spent by the Ministry must be accounted for before the Indian Parliament. Public money should not be spent on promoting the personal image and political prestige of Modi. The Ministry of External Affairs must work exclusively in the national interest. The Union government has a responsibility to establish transparency and remove any suspicion that public funds are being used to build the personal political image of an individual leader.