To make sense of why states are dramatically shifting their agendas to focus on their diasporic population abroad, this project builds a theoretical model which makes sense of decisive shifts in political behavior between states and their external populations. A two-fold argument is presented to explain these shifts. First, analyses of diaspora should treat diaspora not as a bounded entity but as a process or social practice. This allows for a multi-level analysis which neither negates the role individuals play in the formation of diasporic identity nor denies the agency of states which actively engage in their own unique approach to identify, label or shape what constitutes their diaspora. Second, state-diasporic engagement practices can be better understood as an institutional practice, which in turn allow us to explain state behavioral change in terms of their diasporic populations and what factors elucidate diaspora to respond. It also allows us to ask two-fold questions - a) who the sending state targets, why they are targeted and when states increase their engagement with their diasporic populations abroad; and b) what policy tools states develop to encourage dependable contributions of the diaspora to its political agenda. These theoretical arguments are then applied to address the modern Indian state's approach and its shifting agenda to its diaspora. The intent is to provide a historical foundation from which to make sense of why the Indian diaspora evolved from a political liability under Jawaharlal Nehru to an instrument of strength in the early 1990s. This thesis concludes with an exploration of the current Prime Minister Narendra Modi's discourse and state practices and suggests that India's accelerated engagement of the Indian diaspora to be representative of a muscular Hindu nationalist agenda. In short, Modi's engagement of the Indian diaspora should be understood as part of a nation-building project which seeks to communicate to both domestic and international audiences alike that India and Indians are first and foremost Hindu. / Graduate

The Swedish independent research institute V-Dem, which measures democracy around the world, declared in their most recent report on the issue that India was no longer classified as a democracy, but an electoral autocracy. Amongst other things, V-Dem draws the conclusion that the election of the Hindu nationalist leader Narendra Modi in 2014 has been a strong contributor to the decline in democracy in India. At the same time, The U.S. Department of State declares that the U.S.-India partnership is founded on a shared commitment to freedom and democratic principles. With India as a close ally, friction could arise. This thesis aims to explore how India is portrayed in American media, to get a broader understanding of how Americans view India and Narendra Modi. Many scholars believe policy is based on people’s opinions, and people’s opinions are largely based on how the media portrays certain issues. The author also draws a comparison between American right-leaning media outlets and left-leaning media outlets to examine if there are any differences regarding the depiction of India between them. By performing a quantitative content analysis, the author aims to examine how American media portrays India, its leaders, and democracy. The layout of the study is based on exanimating 175 published articles about India and coding them via a codebook designed to measure democratic values and the depiction of Narendra Modi, his government, and party BJP. The findings suggest that when democratic values are depicted in articles about India, it is mostly in negative terms. On the other hand, the portrayal of Narendra Modi, his government, and his party are more balanced. The findings also suggest that right-leaning and left-leaning media have a very similar way of portraying India, its democracy, and Narendra Modi.