China Cyber Security Defence Geopolitics Pakistan Policy Security Terrorism

Beyond “Iron Brothers”: The Cracks in the China-Pakistan Defence Partnership

N. C. Bipindra Pakistan’s engagement with both Washington and Beijing raises concerns about its relationship with China. Despite claims of trust and shared interests, Pakistan’s foreign policy history reveals a consistent pattern of duplicity. This poses risks for China, affecting its security and technological dominance. Let us analyse Pakistan’s dual alignments, urging caution from Beijing regarding military technology transfers to Islamabad. Pakistan’s foreign policy traits, transactionalism, opportunism, and dependence on external allies, suggest a potential shift in technology flow from the U.S. to China in a new geopolitical landscape. Historical Patterns of Technology Transfers Pakistan has long capitalised on its geostrategic location to obtain military and economic concessions from major powers. During the Cold War, it accommodated CIA operations against the Soviets in Afghanistan and received sophisticated U.S. armaments; however, not all of it remained in Pakistani possession. Two instances are particularly noteworthy. In the 1990s, U.S. intelligence asserted that Pakistan transferred American-supplied Stinger missiles to China, a claim that Islamabad refuted. After the 2011 Abbottabad raid, The New York Times disclosed that Chinese engineers were permitted to examine the remnants of a downed U.S. stealth-modified Black Hawk helicopter. Although definitive evidence was lacking, U.S. officials referenced intercepted communications to substantiate the allegation. These occurrences, notwithstanding Pakistani refutations, solidified perceptions of duplicity. For Beijing, the implication is unequivocal: if Pakistan was unable to protect U.S. technologies, it cannot be entirely relied upon to safeguard Chinese ones. Pakistan’s Contemporary Balancing Act Today, Pakistan faces a transformed strategic environment. Following Operation Bunyaan-un-Marsoos and subsequent outreach efforts, Islamabad has sought to re-engage Washington, particularly to secure tariff concessions and financial relief amid severe economic strain. Simultaneously, it remains dependent on Beijing for military hardware, ranging from advanced weapons and sensors to drones. The private lunch hosted for Asim Munir at the White House on June 18, 2025, is not merely a ceremonial bonhomie. It is a fact that such courtesies are rarely extended without an eye on strategic dividends. It appears that, in an era where China has surged ahead of the U.S. in technologies like AI, 5G, and advanced manufacturing, Washington views Pakistan not merely as an old battlefield ally but as a potential conduit for intelligence, leverage, and Chinese tech transfer. Perhaps, for Washington, cultivating ties with Pakistan’s generals is about far more than courtesy. It offers a discreet channel for access, legitimacy, and potentially even Chinese technology. However, this balancing act carries profound risks for China. Sensitive Chinese systems, long assumed to be secure within the framework of an “all-weather” partnership, may become vulnerable to American scrutiny as Pakistan attempts to cultivate favor in Washington. What was once an unshakable partnership is beginning to look increasingly fragile, as Pakistan’s loyalties are often dictated not by long-term commitments but by immediate strategic and financial incentives. As former CIA officer Bruce Riedel has long observed, “Pakistani generals can be bought any time,” a reminder of how transactional and compromised the country’s military elite remain. Compounding this vulnerability is the conduct of Pakistan’s civil–military elite. Many former army chiefs, including Pervez Musharraf, Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, and Qamar Javed Bajwa, have relocated abroad or maintained significant overseas assets after retirement. Such behavior underscores an entrenched pattern of ethical and moral corruption: leaders prioritise personal enrichment and external safe havens over national development, leaving the public to suffer under chronic instability and economic decline. Case of the J-35 Stealth Fighter Pakistan’s reported withdrawal from a planned deal for 40 J-35 stealth fighters highlights these dynamics. Once poised to be the jet’s first foreign buyer, Islamabad later dismissed the reports, despite earlier claims of pilot training in China. Battlefield lessons from Operation Sindoor — where Chinese systems underperformed against India’s BrahMos and S-400 — fueled doubts about the untested J-35. Economic pressures, including IMF austerity and a stretched defence budget, further undermined the $5 billion deal. For Beijing, Pakistan’s reversal exposed the fragility of trust: a flagship transfer was abandoned in favor of renewed U.S. outreach, underscoring China’s vulnerability to Islamabad’s hedging. Hypersonic Missiles: China Draws a Line Another case highlighting Beijing’s caution is its reported rejection of Pakistan’s request for hypersonic missiles and related technology. Media reports suggest China refused both sales and tech transfers, fearing Islamabad’s growing outreach to the U.S. could expose sensitive systems. Unlike fighter jets or conventional missiles, hypersonic platforms like the DF-17 are central to China’s strategic deterrence and lack downgraded export versions, reflecting their sensitivity and immaturity. The denial underscores a key reality: even in an “all-weather” partnership, Beijing does not fully trust Pakistan with its most advanced technologies. Strategic Implications for China The implications of this dynamic for China are far-reaching. First, Pakistan represents both an asset and a liability for Beijing. It provides strategic depth in South Asia, a reliable arms market, and political support in international forums. Yet these benefits come at the cost of significant vulnerability: advanced Chinese systems risk exposure through Pakistani networks, intentionally or inadvertently, to Western intelligence. Second, the problem is structural rather than episodic. Pakistan’s foreign policy has long been characterised by transactionalism, with loyalty subordinated to immediate material gains. As Islamabad draws closer to Washington, Beijing must anticipate that Pakistan’s defence partnership could once again become a conduit for technological leakage, this time at China’s expense. Third, the nature of emerging technologies magnifies the risk. Whereas conventional hardware could be downgraded for export, dual-use and software-driven systems cannot be so easily restricted. For Beijing, the possibility of losing control over AI, cyber, or hypersonic technologies through Pakistan would represent a strategic disaster, undermining years of investment and eroding its position vis-à-vis the United States. In this sense, Pakistan’s growing closeness with Washington is about far more than counterterrorism cooperation or financial bailouts. It is “more than what meets the eye”: for the West, Pakistan provides a potential backdoor to scrutinize and even reverse-engineer Chinese technologies in domains like AI, quantum, and stealth areas where Beijing has made significant advances over the United States. Washington now views Beijing not merely as a rising

Hindus Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS)

229

RSS at a Glance

Introducing “RSS at a Glance” a crisp infographic-ready snapshot of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh’s scale and momentum. It captures headline metrics you can cite at a glance: volunteers (swayamsevaks), daily shakhas, annual seva projects, educational initiatives and schools, disaster-relief deployments. A numerical backbone behind a century of volunteerism and nation-building.

Hindus Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS)

279

An introduction to Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS)

As the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) enters its centennial year, we present “An introduction to Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS)” a primer on RSS’s origins, ethos, and impact. From daily shakhas and disciplined selfless volunteerism to nationwide seva initiatives in education, social harmony, environment, and disaster relief, this primer shows how character-building and community leadership translate into nation-building. Explore the milestones, the organisational cadence, and the living culture that has impacted social life across Bharat for a hundred years and continues to do so with purpose.

Hindus Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS)

242

Sangh@100 with People’s Support

Dattatreya Hosabale The work of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh has now completed one hundred years. In this long journey, countless people have been companions, contributors, and well-wishers. This journey was full of hard work and challenges, but the unwavering support of ordinary citizens turned it into a fulfilling one. As we pause in the centenary year and look back, memories of many such moments and people come alive—those who devoted their everything to ensure the success of this mission. In the early years, young karyakartas set forth across the country like dedicated warriors, driven entirely by their love for the nation. Family man like Appaji Joshi or full-time pracharaks such as Dadarav Parmarth, Balasaheb and Bhaurao Deoras brothers, Yadavrao Joshi, Eknath Ranade—all of them, under the guidance of Dr. Hedgewar, took Sangh work as a sacred vow of lifelong service to the nation. The progress of the Sangh has always rested on society’s constant support. Because its work remained in tune with the spirit of the people, acceptance grew steadily over time. Once, Swami Vivekananda was asked during his foreign travels: “Most of your countrymen are uneducated, they don’t even know English, so how will they understand these profound things you talk about?” Swamiji had replied, “Just as ants do not need to learn English to find sugar, my people do not need foreign tongues to recognise a noble and spiritual cause. Their inner wisdom will guide them.” This statement turned out to be remarkably true. Similarly, despite the slow pace, society at large has continuously recognised and supported the Sangh’s sincere efforts. From the very beginning, Sangh Karyakartas received blessings, shelter, and encouragement from ordinary families. In fact, the households of swayamsevaks themselves became the foundational centres of the work. The contribution of mothers and sisters has been critical in giving completeness to this journey. Inspired figures like Dattopant Thengadi, Yashwantrao Kelkar, Balasaheb Deshpande, Eknath Ranade, Deendayal Upadhyaya, and Dadasaheb Apte drew strength from the Sangh and went on to build several organisations in different walks of social life. Today these organisations, with immense growth, have brought about constructive changes across many fields. Among women too, towering personalities like Mausiji Kelkar and Pramila Tai Medhe, through the Rashtriya Sevika Samiti, have offered a motherly strength that has been central to this mission. Over the decades, the Sangh has raised several issues of national importance, always with society standing in support. At times even those publicly opposed have lent their voices for the larger Hindu cause. The Sangh consistently sought consensus and cooperation on matters of Hindu unity, national security, social harmony, democracy, and preservation of culture. Thousands of Swayamsevaks endured unimaginable hardships, and many laid down their lives. Through all this, society’s hand of support was always there. In 1981, when a few Hindus in Meenakshipuram, Tamil Nadu, were converted under misleading circumstances, a massive Hindu awakening movement followed. A conference attended by nearly half a million people was presided over by Dr. Karan Singh, then a senior Congress leader. In 1964, the Vishwa Hindu Parishad was founded with the active participation of renowned spiritual leaders like Swami Chinmayananda, Master Tara Singh, Jain muni Sushil Kumar, Buddhist bhikshu Kushok Bakula, and Namdhari Sikh Guru Jagjit Singh. The initiative was inspired by Shri Guruji Golwalkar, with the purpose of reaffirming that untouchability had no place in Hindu scriptures. To uphold this principle a grand World Hindu Conference was conveyed in Udupi where revered spiritual leaders, saints and mahants came together extending their blessings and support. The spirit voiced earlier at the Prayagraj conference—that Na Hindu patito bhavet (No Hindu can ever fall from grace) was echoed at this conference as Hindavah Sodara Sarve (All Hindus are brothers, children of Bharat Mata.) From the campaign for cow protection, to the Ram Janmabhoomi movement, Sant-samaj (saintly fraternity) has always given blessings to the Sangh swayamsevaks. After Independence, when political reasons led to a ban on the Sangh’s activities, it was not only ordinary people but also highly respected figures who openly stood by it, giving courage in those difficult times. The same was experienced during the Emergency. That is why, despite so many obstacles, Sangh work has continued seamlessly and steadily. Through crises, it has often been the mothers and sisters who shouldered the responsibility of keeping Swayamsevaks and their work intact, becoming a constant source of inspiration. Looking ahead, in this centenary year, Sangh Swayamsevaks will make a special effort to reach every household—across big cities, remote villages, and among all sections of society—to invite wider cooperation and participation in the mission of national service. With the coordinated effort of all well-meaning forces of society, the next stage of our nation’s journey—towards holistic development—will certainly be smoother and more successful. (The writer is the Sarkaryavah of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh)Sangh@100 with People’s Support

Britain's Palestine Recognition Hands China the Mediterranean

China Geopolitics International Policy Security United Kingdom

286

Britain’s Palestine Recognition Hands China the Mediterranean

CCP spent six decades cultivating Palestinian movements, embedding influence in Western activism and positioning itself as the indispensable power in a post-American WestAsia. Britain just made that job easier. Rahul Pawa On 21 September 2025, Prime Minister Keir Starmer broke with decades of U.K. policy formally recognising the state of Palestine. It was Britain’s most consequential West East move since the 1917 Balfour Declaration, made over explicit U.S. objections and Israeli fury. In London’s rush to show moral leadership, one reality was ignored: Beijing had spent six decades preparing for this moment. The CCP’s Palestinian project began in the 1960s. Between 1965 and 1970, Beijing sent small arms, mortars and anti-tank weapons to the Palestine Liberation Army and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine. It trained cadres at the Whampoa Military Academy in Nanning and dispatched instructors to Syria and Algeria. In May 1966 Palestine Liberation Organization Chairman Ahmad al-Shuqairy thanked “Peking” for constant arms and training shipments. After the Six Day War in 1967, Israeli commanders displayed captured Chinese-made AK-47s, 81mm mortars and chemical decontamination gear seized in Gaza and Sinai. Alongside, Beijing also built a diplomatic bridge. In December 1995 it opened a foreign office in Gaza; a de facto embassy to the Palestinian Authority, decades before most Western states considered recognition. Its message to Palestinians was consistent: you can count on us when the West won’t. By Xi Jinping’s era the posture turned strategic. In 2017 the PLA opened its first overseas military base in Djibouti, a Red Sea hub housing thousands of Chinese troops. Beijing secured port stakes from Gwadar in Pakistan to Haifa in Israel, embedding itself along the arteries that supply Europe and the Gulf. A 25-year strategic agreement with Iran in 2021 locked in $400 billion in Chinese investments across oil, gas and transport corridors. CCP’s pattern is clear: first ports, then troops. Djibouti proved it, Hambantota confirmed it, Gaza may be next. Beijing has already demonstrated how commercial access becomes military power, and a recognised Palestine gives it the opening to repeat the same playbook on the Mediterranean. While Beijing built bricks abroad it built narratives at home. State-aligned Arabic media channels and TikTok streams pump out Gaza content at scale. A July 2025 Program on Extremism report mapped how the CCP’s influence runs through Western activism itself. That report details how Shanghai-based tech investor Neville Roy Singham, a onetime Huawei adviser, poured millions into U.S. and U.K. activist groups after Hamas’s October 7, 2023 attack. Groups like the People’s Forum, ANSWER Coalition and “Shut It Down for Palestine” became organising hubs for anti-Israel protests. BreakThrough News, their media arm, live-streamed marches while praising Xi Jinping Thought and Maoist revolution. Investigators concluded the effect was “to project the CCP as a defender of justice while undermining U.S. influence.” In December 2023 the People’s Forum hosted a “China75” event lauding Beijing’s governance model; by early 2024 its funding spiked from under $500,000 to $4.4 million as it expanded pro-Palestinian actions. The same network underwrote protests at Columbia University and in Whitehall, echoing CCP state rhetoric about “imperialist Zionism.” When Starmer spoke to recognise Palestine, Beijing didn’t improvise. Chinese State media instantly framed Britain’s recognition as vindication of the CCP’s “historic” support for Palestinian independence. Chinese diplomats in Ramallah pointed out they had welcomed Mahmoud Abbas to Beijing two years earlier and had pushed a ceasefire plan in 2023. They reminded Palestinian officials who had invested in them when no one else would. With London’s imprimatur, a Palestinian government now has every incentive to turn to CCP for reconstruction finance and infrastructure contracts. Beijing can bolt these onto its Belt and Road Initiative, locking in leverage over a new state at the heart of the Levant. U.S. influence, already eroded by drift and divided Congresses, will shrink further. China’s record speaks for itself. In Djibouti, commercial port access became a PLA base within three years. In Sri Lanka, Chinese loans turned into a 99-year lease at Hambantota. CCP has cultivated a pattern: ports, logistics, security co-operation and then military presence. If Palestine’s future leadership wants investment and security guarantees, CCP will deliver both. Even a small PLA signals unit or intelligence station would tilt the Eastern Mediterranean’s security balance. By presenting any facility as humanitarian or anti-piracy, Beijing can minimise Western backlash while gaining a front-row vantage on Israel, Egypt and NATO operations. Britain’s recognition may have been meant as a rebuke to Israel. However, in practice it is a strategic gift to Beijing. It signals to the Arab world that the West’s will is fractured and that China, not America, not Europe is the constant patron. It creates a diplomatic vacuum China is already moving to fill, from Gaza reconstruction bids to Palestinian security training. This is not hypothetical. Chinese firms dominated Iraq’s post-2003 oil fields; they built most of Africa’s new ports in the last decade. Palestine is a likely next. And unlike the United States or the U.K., the CCP fuses infrastructure with intelligence collection and military access as policy. Starmer’s Downing Street statement marks not the dawn of West Asia peace but a milestone in Beijing’s global ascent. The CCP spent six decades cultivating Palestinian movements, embedding influence in Western activism and positioning itself as the indispensable power in a post-American West Asia. Britain just made that job easier. (Rahul Pawa is director, research at New Delhi based think tank Centre for Integrated and Holistic Studies)

Is Islamic Alliance in offing, With Ambiguities

Defence Geopolitics International Pakistan Policy Security Trade

271

Is Islamic Alliance in Offing, With Ambiguities

Only a true test, a moment of crisis, will reveal whether this new alliance is as ironclad as advertised, or more of a strategic signal than a binding shield. Rahul Pawa When Saudi Arabia and Pakistan signed a sweeping mutual defense agreement in Riyadh this month, it marked a strategic pivot. The agreement, termed a “Strategic Mutual Defence” agreement declares that an attack on one is an attack on both, echoing NATO’s famous Article 5 commitment. It’s an unprecedented pledge between the guardian of Islam’s holiest sites and the only Muslim nation armed with nuclear weapons. Yet behind the celebratory rhetoric, the agreement’s true scope and weight remain uncertain. A NATO-Style on paper, the agreement’s collective defense vow is explicit: “any aggression against either country shall be considered an aggression against both” Pakistan’s government said. In practice, much is left vague. Notably, the agreement is silent on whether Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal, the Islamic world’s only nukes is now at Saudi Arabia’s disposal. Pressed about a potential Pakistani “nuclear umbrella” for Riyadh, a senior Saudi official would only say the agreement “encompasses all military means”. This careful ambiguity hints at a broad commitment while stopping short of any explicit nuclear guarantee. Another grey area is the agreement’s status. Riyadh and Islamabad pointedly call it an “agreement” and not a treaty. By definition, though, any written inter-state accord intended to bind is a treaty under international law, regardless of its label. The absence of a published text and the flexible wording suggest the parties prefer some wiggle room. Saudi Arabia has pursued grand defense coalitions before like a 2015 pan-Islamic military alliance against terrorism that proved “more symbolic than operational”. This time, the language of collective defense is tied to plans for concrete cooperation (joint exercises, intelligence-sharing, arms training). Whether it matures into a robust alliance or remains largely aspirational will only be clear with time. The agreement’s timing is telling. It came days after a surprise Israeli airstrike in Doha, Qatar that killed Hamas figures and stunned the Gulf States. Qatar hosts a major US airbase, yet Washington did not prevent the strike, a jolt to regional confidence in American protection. Saudi Arabia, already uneasy about U.S. reliability, seized the moment to bolster its own security. Officially, Riyadh says the deal “institutionalises” long-standing cooperation rather than targeting any specific incident. Still, it unmistakably signals that the kingdom can seek safeguards beyond the U.S. umbrella. The agreement even revived talk of an “Islamic NATO.” Saudi Arabia binding itself to Pakistan, Islam’s spiritual heart partnering with its only nuclear-armed state is a powerful image. Observers speculate that other Muslim countries might one day align under a similar framework. Yet longstanding sectarian and political rifts (Sunni vs Shia, Arab vs non-Arab) have doomed past unity efforts. For now, the Riyadh-Islamabad agreement is as much a message to big powers as a foundation for any broader alliance. Perhaps the toughest diplomatic test for Riyadh is managing the agreement’s fallout in New Delhi. India has spent years cultivating Saudi Arabia as a partner, a top source of oil, investment and Islamic-world backing on contentious issues. A formal Saudi-Pakistani security link is exactly what India hoped to avoid. New Delhi “would not welcome an explicit security tether between its principal energy supplier and its strategic rival,” one analysis noted. In effect, the agreement edges Saudi Arabia closer to Pakistan, risking awkward strain in Saudi-India ties. Indian government reacted in measured tones, acknowledging the agreement and saying it would “study the implications” for her security. The real worry in New Delhi is not that Saudi forces would fight on Pakistan’s side which remains far-fetched but that Pakistan will feel politically bolstered by Riyadh’s backing. Pakistani hardliners may adopt a tougher posture in future confrontations, believing a wealthy Arab power has their back. There’s also concern that Saudi aid or arms could flow to Pakistan over time, indirectly strengthening India’s longtime foe. Aware of these optics, Saudi officials have been quick to reassure India. One senior official stressed that Saudi’s relationship with India “is more robust than it has ever been” and vowed to keep deepening it. Riyadh clearly wants to show it can defend its interests with Pakistan without abandoning its friendship with India. Even so, the balancing act is delicate. New Delhi will likely respond by tightening its own strategic bonds, for instance, with Israel, a close defense partner – and by quietly urging Riyadh to stay neutral in South Asian issues. Much progress in India-Saudi relations has come in recent years, and both sides have incentives to prevent this new alignment from derailing that momentum. As the dust settles, the Saudi–Pakistan agreement stands as a bold statement, but one not yet tested by crisis. Its ripple effects are already evident. Israel, which had been inching toward a historic normalisation with Riyadh, now sees that prospect put on hold Washington, too, must grapple with a Gulf ally hedging its bets on security. Ultimately, the agreement’s significance will hinge on how seriously Riyadh and Islamabad implement it. Regular joint drills coordinated planning or clear mutual defense protocols could turn the promise into genuine deterrence. Absent that, skeptics may view it as more posturing than substance. History offers caution: Pakistan’s past defense agreement s (such as Cold War alliances with the U.S.) often fell short when real wars loomed, and Gulf unity schemes have tended to fragment under pressure. For now, Saudi Arabia has made a dramatic bid to diversify its security options, a gamble on Pakistan’s reliability and on charting a more independent course without alienating old partners. If the gamble succeeds, it could redraw the strategic map of the Middle East and South Asia. If it falters, it will remind everyone that even grand agreements can carry unspoken caveats. Only a true test, a moment of crisis will reveal whether this new alliance is as ironclad as advertised, or more of a strategic signal than a binding shield. (Rahul Pawa is director, research at New Delhi

Intellectual Laziness or Toolkit Operation!

Disinformation Media Misinformation Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS)

306

Intellectual Laziness or Toolkit Operation!

The Economist’ stands exposed in its agenda driven write up on RSS, world’s largest voluntaristic Hindu centric movement. Dr Aniket Pingley The Economist, in its edition dated September 11, 2025, has published a leader write up on Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), also known as Sangh. It postures as serious analysis. In reality, it is a flimsy collage of clichés, innuendo and context-stripped assertions. The author has not studied RSS; he or she has merely parroted decades-old propaganda, hoping that repetition will substitute for rigour. This is not journalism; it is intellectual laziness with an agenda. I have been trained in rigorous research within scientific disciplines which means I test every claim against data, logic, intention and approach. Unlike the author, I will not shoot and scoot with unverified slogans. I will hold up each statement, examine it under evidence and reasoning and expose whether it stands or collapses. Let’s begin. The overarching theme of this article is this – a mere lazy recycling of tropes. The author serves up familiar accusations as though they were fresh insight. In truth, it is the same stale dish of “paramilitary,” “fascist,” “second-class citizens,” and “paranoia” — merely reheated and presented as new. These labels have been thrown at the Sangh for past several decades, none have stood the test of law or fact and yet they are recycled here again. Instead of examining how RSS sustains 83,000 shakhas or runs 150,000 service projects (as stated by the author), the author prefers easier route of re-serving leftovers from decades past. Before we move ahead, let me unmask toolkit used by the author, like most other authors who are critical of the Sangh. The author uses eleven manipulative devices: This toolkit is not one of scholarship but one of manipulation. Let us now examine how this blunted toolkit is used to criticize the Sangh. For ease of reading, I have used a table for presentation. The list is not exhaustive; however, it should serve the purpose. Criticism in Article Toolkit Trick Used Facts Queries RSS wants Hindu-first India, minorities as second-class Stereotype recycling + loaded language Minorities hold top constitutional offices; Muslims vote, run businesses, thrive in arts and sport. Socio-economic progression of Muslims is an undeniable fact If minorities are “second-class,” by what metric? Where is the data? RSS ideology violates secular constitution One-dimensional framing RSS never sought a theocracy; it speaks of cultural nationalism. BJP once endorsed “positive secularism.” If RSS violated the Constitution, why has no court ever said so in 100 years? RSS has paramilitary/fascist roots Guilt by association + stereotype recycling No armed wing, no dictator, no fascist-style state control. Built around shakhas, service, volunteerism. If early rhetoric mattered, why is there no continuity of fascist traits today? RSS was banned thrice Cherry-picking 1948 ban lifted after courts did not find RSS’s role in Mahatma Gandhi’s assassination; 1975 was outright Emergency suppression; 1992 ban struck down by court. If truly dangerous, why revoke every ban? Why not ban permanently? Muslims as second-class Shoot-and-scoot Muslims enjoy constitutional equality, socio-economic welfare schemes, political representation at every level. What does “second-class” mean? Denied vote? Barred from office? Where is evidence? Babri demolition / Ayodhya Innuendo CBI court acquitted all accused; temple built via Supreme Court judgment after a long, patient waiting by the entire nation. Why omit the court verdict? Why keep innuendo alive after acquittal? Why omit that the nation celebrated the construction of the temple on a grand scale. RSS paranoia/obsession Loaded language 150,000+ service projects in education, health, relief; 83,000+ daily shakhas build discipline. Is this paranoia? Is community service equal to obsession? Where’s the proof? Authoritarian discipline = fascism Trope recycling RSS decisions by consensus; organizations inspired have disagreed on issues publicly. If authoritarian, why do these organisations openly disagree with BJP policies? Hindutva dominates all politics Fear projection + alarmism Opposition still governs major states; BJP loses elections; multiple visions compete. If Hindutva dominates, why do opposition parties win a significant chunk of votes across all states? I would like to highlight the author’s intellectual laziness furthermore by unmasking baselessness of his statements. Here are a few: Quote 1: “Senior members have distanced themselves from some of their predecessors’ rhetoric (not least the stuff about fascists).” Quote 2: “Earlier this year, Mr Bhagwat backed a popular call for India to carry out a caste census, even though the RSS… had long opposed this.” Quote 3: “The RSS is fuelled both by confidence and paranoia.” Each of these quotes, when stripped of their toolkit tricks, collapses into hollow rhetoric. Let me now educate the author about the Sangh. Unlike caricature offered, RSS is a cultural, civilizational project of institution-building and service. Here are some of its pillars that enabled 100-year long, thriving journey: This is the picture any serious analyst must confront. The Economist’s author chose instead to erase it entirely. One wonders as to why The Economist allows such a piece under its banner. Where was the editorial rigour? Why publish an article that recycles tropes, omits essential context and reduces complex realities to slogans? If these are the standards set for its writers by ‘The Economist’, the world’s largest volunteer organisation, then, RSS does not diminish. It is The Economist’s credibility. RSS has survived hostilities, slander and decades of unwarranted criticism done with an agenda. It continues to grow as it is rooted in Bharatiya society and not on borrowed clichés. The Economist’s article does not analyse the RSS. It exposes the intellectual bankruptcy of its editorial board and brings to closer scrutiny its rigour for writing. (Author is an accomplished computer scientist, educator, and holds expertise in media content strategy)

Defence Geopolitics Hindus International Leadership Policy Security

255

Nepal Stares at Uncertainty!

A stable, open, vibrant Himalayan nation retaining its Hindu core with cultural, civilizational and spiritual underpinning is most sustainable. K.A.Badarinath Peace and tranquillity, political stability and nursing the tiny Himalayan nation, Nepal to normalcy is pivotal to enduring growth and sustained development in South Asia. Bharat’s nearest and one of the most trusted partners, Nepal went through a lot in last couple of weeks. Disturbing and painful scenes of complete anarchy, loss of 19 young lives, scores injured, iconic Parliament, Supreme Court and other top-end buildings burning to ashes in part or completely painted a distressing picture of this picturesque country. There’s no place for corrupt, authoritarian or anti-people regimes that let down their own people. Be it Bangladesh, Nepal or Sri Lanka, zero tolerance to corruption is something that each will have to prioritize as basic tenant of a democratic polity. And, Nepali political leadership of all hues and shades have got thoroughly exposed after they failed to provide corrupt-free governance. Social media related policies were incidental and served as trigger for youngsters to hit the road. Eight major political formations with diverse ideologies and linkages like Nepali Congress, CPN-UML, Moist Centre, Jan Samajwadi Party, CPN – United Socialist, Loktantrik Samajbadi Party, Rashtriya Janmorcha that dominated the political arena today find themselves out of the system after K.P.Oli led coalition was forced out by the youngsters. Kathmandu Mayor Balen Shah and Sudan Gurung that apparently played a key role during the protests seem to have shifted behind the screen in their activities. While uncertainty stares in Nepal, an interim government headed by Prime Minister Sushila Karki and her three ministers do not fit into any of these political parties. And, they would find it difficult to find their in moving forward. Given that the young protesters did not have centralized leadership or entity that led the violent protests, the interim government will have to carve out its own socio-political space. Home Minister Om Prakash Aryal, Power Minister Kulman Ghising and finance Minister Rameshwar Khanal appointed by the first lady Prime Minister reportedly enjoy clean image and do not come with political baggage of any kind. Their work in respective areas stands out. All the four including Prime Minister Karki seem to have western orientation either due to their profession or outlook. Hence, their work in the government would be subjected to closer scrutiny by all stakeholders in Nepal. For the first time, overtly professional Nepal army had to play a semi-political role leading to dissolution of Parliament, formation of interim government that will lead the country into general elections in March 2026. To its credit, Nepal Army displayed exemplary professionalism by not taking reins of governance and backed the Karki regime to see through difficult transition next few months. Also, it is immensely possible that political parties that lost people’s confidence may realign to bounce back to centre stage seeking a second chance. After adoption of the new constitution ringing in democracy in 2008, fourteen governments were formed, dislodged with political alignments happening all through. None of these political formations were able to complete the mandated five-year term after an election. In these 18-years of political turbulence marked by twists, turns and realignments, India stood as beacon of strength to lend a helping hand in the Himalayan nation’s transition to democracy. Notwithstanding political ideologies of a government that ruled Kathmandu, India stood firmly with Nepal in its socio-economic development journey as a steadfast partner with no strings attached. If Prime Minister Narendra Modi and external affairs minister S.Jaishankar’s statements are any indication, India continues to be firmly behind Nepal. One also needs to watch out for cold play from Communist China and Republican US while Nepal struggles to end uncertainty and get back its rhythm. Hard part for Nepal would be to retain its basic Hindu character while diverse ideological formations and external forces come into play. There were wild guesses that the former monarchs were behind protests which were proved wrong. An open, vibrant and bustling Nepal retaining its Hindu core in terms of its cultural, civilizational and spiritual orientation is what would sustain itself as a sovereign nation. (Author is Director and Chief Executive of non-partisan New Delhi based think-tank, Centre for Integrated and Holistic Studies)

Defence Hindus Kashmir Pakistan Policy Politics Security

552

Heritage, Ethos, Not Saffronisation

Selective amnesia and deliberate attempt to communalise the army on naming of operation Sindoor is gross and unacceptable. Brig Brijesh Pandey Frontline column “Hindu Names for Military Operations: Treading a Dangerous Line” by Mani Shankar Aiyar published on 09, September 2025 argues that naming of military operations by the present government – most recently Operation Sindoor reflects a deliberate “saffronisation of Indian Army.” The argument is provocative, selective and highly misleading. Having served for 35 years in Indian Army, I never felt that I’m a Hindu or so to say only a Hindu. Being from a pure Sikh Regiment, felt more like a SIKH, behaved like a Sikh and whenever there was a chance to name an institution, exercise or force, the first name that would come to the mind was one that related to Sikh traditions of valour. Yet no one, including my parents, questioned my secular or Hindu credentials. This is so, because anyone who understands armed forces – the history, military tradition and institutional structure – knows that operation or force names are cultural symbols, not ideological manifestos. The culture of naming operations and exercises is older than modern warfare and militaries across the globe use evocative names for operations and exercises – sometimes as a code for secrecy, motivation and more often for messaging deterrence to the adversary as much as public consumption. From earliest days of independent India, armed forces have drawn names from mythology, Sanskrit, geography and abstract concepts. This practice cuts across political regimes led by Congress, BJP or coalitions. In 1984, almost four decades prior to the debate, Indian Army launched Operation Meghdoot to secure Siachen Glacier. The name comes from Kalidasa’s Sanskrit classic Meghaduta (Cloud Messenger from Hindu Cosmology) where an exiled Yaksha asks a cloud to carry a message to his beloved in the Himalayas. Name was chosen, as it was apt reflection of the nature of operation wherein Indian troops were airlifted like clouds into Himalayan heights. It was nothing but a cultural resonance. The name of recently concluded operation Sindoor has been used as evidence to create a discourse that Army is getting communalized or saffronised. Rationale for the name is very clear. Terrorists in Pahalgam targeted married Hindu men, widowing women overnight. Sindoor (vermilion) symbolizes marital bond in Indian culture. Naming the operation which was primarily a retaliatory action against such a heinous crime selectively inflicted on the majority community of the country was meant to be a tribute to victims and their families, not as a religious decree. Branding it as ideologically motivated reflects ignorance as well as crafty effort to question secular credentials of the armed forces. The act of symbolism and resolve when questioned post-operation Sindoor, a defense ministry official had said, “There is no single written policy on naming. Choices are pragmatic, contextual and meant to evoke resolve.” More often than not, the ideas get generated at very junior level and accepted as such to keep the initiative alive. The writer of “Hindu Names for Military Operations: Treading a Dangerous Line” has been selective about names in recent times, without considering full spectrum since evolution of Indian Armed Forces. When names like Operation Trident (1971), Operation Shakti (1998) or Exercise Ashvamedha (2007) were chosen, no one accused the government of the day – the Congress-led in each case – of religious indoctrination. In the name “Operation Trident”, famous naval strike on Karachi in 1971, “trident” is nothing else than “Trishul”, the weapon of Lord Shiva. Operation Shakti, India’s nuclear test in 1998 drew the name from Goddess power in the Hindu philosophy. But then, these names were accepted as civilizational, not sectarian. When no questions were Congress raised then, why do it now? To illustrate that there is neither any disruption in naming the operations nor is any correlation with appointment of CDS, it is important to analyze few names that relate to the pre and post-2014 era. Era Operation/Exercise Name Year Origin/Meaning Mythological/ Cultural link Pre-2014 Operation Meghdoot 1984 Kalidasa’s Meghadoota Yaksha sends clouds to Himalayas Operation Trident 1971 Trident (Trishul) Weapon of Lord Shiva Operation Pawan 1987 Pawan = Wind Vedic Deity Operation Shakti 1998 Shakti = Power Goddess Power Exercise Ashvamedha 2007 Royal Horse sacrifice Ancient Hindu Ritual Exercise Sudarshan Shakti 2011 Sudarshan Chakra Vishnu’s discus Missiles Prithvi, Agni, Akash, Nag Ongoing Fire, Earth, Sky, Serpent Vedic / Hindu roots Exercise Indra Ongoing Indra = God of rain Vedic deity Post 2014 Operation Maitri 2015 Maitree = Friendship Sanskrit, Budhist ethos Exercise Shatrujeet 2016 Shatrujeet = Enemy Conqueror Sanskrit motivational If Armed Forces were being transformed to suit a particular religion, their names and demography would also have started changing. Instead, the regimental system remains plural – Sikh Regiment, Rajputana Rifles, Maratha Light Infantry, Punjab Regiment, Assam Regiment, Madras regiment, Gorkha Regiment, Brigade of Guards, and so on – each maintaining regional, caste or faith-based traditions. The very regimentation of Indian Armed Forces is proof of pluralism. If the army was being saffronised as claimed by Aiyar, there would be a written directive mandating Hindu names. Whether it is regiments, exercises or operations, they would all start assuming names relating to Hindu religion only. Unlike compulsory recruitment of persons of religions based on which regiments exist only Hindus will get recruited. Likewise, promotion criteria will change. There would be no non-Hindu tenanting critical appointments such as Chief of Army / Navy / Air Force. Contrary to this, what we see is continuity: a mixture of neutral, mythological and cultural names chosen for operational and symbolic value. Seen through Cognitive Warfare lens, such narratives follow a familiar toolkit: disinformation (casting doubts on facts by portraying cultural symbolism as ideological capture), amplification (mainstreaming selective examples while ignoring historical continuity) and de-legitimization (eroding trust in one of the most patriotic institutions). We saw a similar pattern when opposition leaders questioned authenticity of 2016 Surgical Strikes and 2019 Balakot airstrike. In each case, rumour and

Bharat Business Economy Policy

466

Tax Reforms Ahoy!

Modi government’s GST 2.0 reforms would make taxation more compliant, leave more money with people, take Bharat into a different league. K.A.Badarinath Goods and Services Tax was once sold as ‘one nation one tax’ by Narendra Modi led NDA government when it was first introduced on July 1, 2017 in Bharat. After 13-years of painful and protracted negotiation with states led by different political formations, multiple taxes at different levels were subsumed into this federal tax aimed at easing burden on businesses, taxpayers and reduce evasion. This single biggest tax reform brought in by Modi government was however seen with apprehension by a few stakeholders and several opposition parties that headed state governments. Today, most Indians are convinced that the reform path laid down by Narendra Modi government was firm, forward looking and easy to comply with. As on date, about 160 countries implement the GST or Value Added Tax (VAT) in some form or the other beginning with France in 1954. Though, India has been a late entrant into this taxation regime, it matured fast, compliance improved and held the tax mobilization campaign in last eight years on an even keel without disturbing the delicate applecart with 29 states and eight union territories. Revenue neutral rates for GST report put together by then Chief Economic Advisor, Arvind Subramanian, in December 2015 ahead the rollout studied Canada, European Union, China, Australia and Indonesia to make his recommendations. Subramanian had pointed to challenges in implementing a ‘dual rate structure’ in a federal system like ours. Similarly, Reserve Bank of India (RBI) report of 2017 had emphasised on big implementation risks faced by sovereign governments globally while implementing the GST. From evasion, under-reporting, cash deals, unregistered businesses, splitting invoices to making false claims, RBI flagged several issues in the implementation. World Bank that tracked initial years of GST implementation in India had underscored huge risks given the complexity of Bharat’s markets driven by states and local governments. But, the political leadership under Prime Minister Modi took a conscious call to implement GST, ease out the taxation burden on the system and get into the global league of ‘best compliant nations’. There were several naysayers across the spectrum. Prime Minister Modi and his economic ‘A’ team did not relent. It went ahead with roll out and implementing the dual GST with multiple rates akin to Canada which is the nearest in comparison. And, it’s for everyone to experience the impact and resultant taxation regime that delivered in eight years. Value Added Tax, State and Central Sales Tax apart from a multitude of imposts were replaced by the unified GST. This successful model served as a big trigger for Modi government to take up the next big reform measure and ring in the GST 2.0 regime beginning September 22 this year. On Wednesday, GST Council headed by Finance Minister, Nirmala Sitharaman, went into ten hour marathon huddle to thrash out two rate structure replacing the multiple slabs, provide massive relief to the hoi polloi. More than reworking the GST slabs to two at five per cent and 18 per cent, the biggest move was to do away with the12 per cent and 28 per cent slabs that were huge on revenue earnings for the government. One estimate suggests that by moving 99 per cent goods and services from 12 per cent to five per cent bracket or completely exempting daily use items from tax impost, Modi – Sitharaman played big by foregoing Rs 48,000 crore revenues in next two quarters of this fiscal. If one were to factor in the huge tax concessions of Rs 100,000 crore announced in Union Budget on February 1, 2025 and GST rate cuts as well as exemptions, middle-class and salaried classes gain substantially. Exempting both life and non-life insurance products from levy of GST is yet another big reform measure given the social security gaps prevalent across sections. Big gainers in this GST reform are farmers, women, youth and vulnerable sections that feel the pinch of high taxation. Most daily use items have been taken away from GST ambit with nil taxes. From bread, channa to paneer, all these come without taxes. Latest round of GST reforms have a serious socio, economic and political messaging as well. Leaving more money with the people that would widen and deepen the consumption basket would also push up economic growth from expected 6.5 per cent this fiscal. If one were to take exempted items, ‘sin’ and ultra-luxury goods rate of 40 per cent that include tobacco products, the two trick-ponies would partly offset the impact of US tariffs at 50 per cent and trigger economic growth. These tax reforms have not come in without adequate confabulation and computation by the economic managers. This was coming! Prime Minister Modi himself had hinted at GST reforms from ramparts of Red Fort in his Independence Day speech last month. It’s not fait accompli or desperation. It’s a well thought out reform measure that would lay an important brick in the foundation for developed Bharat. It’s early Deepawali for all! Companies, service providers – both domestic and foreign – are bound to rejoice and make merry like the consumers. Great festivities ahead! (Author is Director and Chief Executive of New Delhi based non-partisan think tank, Centre for Integrated and Holistic Studies)

Blog Post