The recent state visit of Prime Minister Narendra Modi to the United States has ignited debates surrounding democracy and India's position on the global stage. The joint statement issued by both countries highlighted their shared interests in partnerships based on democratic principles, freedom, and the rule of law. Notably, the statement emphasized the establishment of the US-India Global Digital Development Partnership to promote digital public infrastructures in developing nations.

However, concerns arise regarding the promotion of digital infrastructures and digital identities, given their historical implications for individual rights and democratic institutions. The Aadhaar project in India, for instance, has significantly impacted welfare systems and undermined the constitutional rights of its citizens. Despite promises to protect privacy, data security, intellectual property, and individual rights, the reality often falls short. The Indian government has consistently pledged to enact privacy legislation but has failed to uphold the fundamental rights of its people.

One aspect of concern is the creation of comprehensive 360° profile databases through Indian digital infrastructures, which the United States managed to avoid establishing in the 1970s. While super apps like the Diia app promote access to a digital government, they pose a threat to democratic institutions and individual rights by granting nation-states extensive knowledge about their populations without adequate privacy safeguards.

Moreover, granting governments unfettered access to citizens' information hinders their ability to resist or protest, as this very data is often used to monitor and control the population. These concerns, coupled with software deficiencies leading to errors and implementation failures, present primary oppositions to the expansion of digital infrastructures. Even with US support, it remains uncertain whether these issues can be fully addressed.

While India has been actively promoting digital infrastructures as part of its "software diplomacy," the lack of economic incentives limits their adoption in geopolitical terms. Developing countries still require substantial loans to establish institutions capable of implementing these digital infrastructures and providing internet connectivity. Consequently, large-scale lenders like the World Bank, through initiatives such as Identity for Development (ID4D), play a crucial role. Kenya, for example, has shown interest in India's digital infrastructures and expects a line of credit for their implementation. However, the local population has opposed the Kenyan government's plans for digitization with the Huduma Namba unique identity. The Kenyan Supreme Court has temporarily halted these plans until a data protection law is in place. Despite opposition, Kenya is likely to adopt digital infrastructures from India, mirroring how India imposed them on its own population. The demand for safeguards, as promised by the US and India, may not suffice when the market ecosystem behind these infrastructures seeks the proliferation of personal data.

The push for digital infrastructures is not exclusive to India but is championed by institutions such as the United Nations, USAID, World Bank, Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation, Republic of France, Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, Omidyar Network, and Nilekani Philanthropies. The formal interest of the United States in participating in this global setup aids in promoting these digital technologies worldwide. This development may mark the inception of a global digital identity, as advocated by the World Economic Forum. However, there is no guarantee that this model, centered around digital identity-based development, will enrich the citizens of these nations or effectively combat corruption as promised to the Indian population. Instead, these solutions risk becoming collateral damage in the pursuit of a wealthy individual's vision for the world, further jeopardizing privacy and other human rights.