At global leaders’ assembly in Egypt, junior minister leads India

As world leaders gathered in Egypt’s Sharm El-Sheikh for the Gaza Peace Summit on Monday, India was represented by Minister of State (MoS) for External Affairs Kirti Vardhan Singh, who met Egyptian President Abdel Fattah El-Sisi on the sidelines of the high-profile meeting.

“It was a privilege to meet with President Abdel Fattah El-Sisi of Egypt during the Gaza Peace Summit in Sharm El-Sheikh. Egypt and India share a significant and vibrant strategic partnership. The summit underscored the global commitment to peace and dialogue. India reaffirms its unwavering dedication to peace, stability and enduring security within the Middle East,” Singh posted on X after the meeting.

The summit — co-chaired by President Donald Trump and President El-Sisi — brought together over 20 world leaders, including Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Pakistan Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif, to deliberate on consolidating a Gaza ceasefire, humanitarian relief and long-term regional stability.

While Prime Minister Narendra Modi had been invited to the summit, he did not attend. The government offered no official explanation for the decision, though diplomatic observers believe New Delhi might have opted to avoid sharing stage with the Pakistani premier.

The Congress, however, criticised the government for sending a junior minister to what it called “a defining moment in West Asian diplomacy”.

Congress MP Shashi Tharoor, a former Minister of State for External Affairs and the current chairperson of the Parliamentary Standing Committee on External Affairs, said India’s limited representation contrasted sharply with the stature of global attendees. "India’s presence at the Sharm El-Sheikh summit, at the level of a Minister of State, stands in stark contrast to the heads of state gathered there. Strategic restraint or missed opportunity?" he remarked on X.

Clarifying that his criticism was not directed at Singh personally, Tharoor added, “Given the galaxy of grandees present, India’s choice could be seen as signalling a preference for strategic distance, which our statements don’t convey. And for reasons of protocol access alone, our voice at the summit on issues of reconstruction and regional stability may carry less weight than it could have. In a region reshaping itself, our relative absence is puzzling.”