Bharat Business Economy Geopolitics International Policy Politics Trade United States USA

Trump, Tariffs & Tumult

Uncertainty in global trade got new lease of life with US President Trump insisting on weaponising tariffs with no signs of easing down. K.A.Badarinath President Donald Trump is going bonkers. Tariffs or weapons of mass destruction, it makes no difference to him or the Republican White House that he runs. It’s with the same vigour that deadly arms to different parts of the world are supplied or sold, tariffs slapped or reviewed. In one of my earlier write ups, I did say that Donald Trump would be one of the ‘biggest disruptor’ of global order, be it geo-political, economic and trade relations. This has been proved beyond doubt in recent days. US Supreme Court order of last week may have been just a few hours of pause on weaponised tariffs that’s central to Donald Trump’s economic policy formulation. In those few hours, he switched statutes, juggled acts, related provisions and then slapped 15 per cent import tariffs on each and every country that America trades with, be it an ally or a foe. Well, reciprocal tariff regime of President Trump under his emergency economic powers may have ended. But then, he opened another line to slap tariffs for 150 days pending approval from US Congress. Even as new tariff regime comes into operation beginning Tuesday that are over and above most favoured nations (MFN) duties, uncertainty in global trade continues to reign supreme with nations’ capital across seven seas trying to make sense of the new tariffs, their future and what’s in store for each one of them. By weaponizing tariffs to force both allies and enemies alike into submission, Donald Trump opened a new untested model of building relationships. In the process, President Trump has addressed his domestic white core political constituency who perceive him as a ‘decisive leader’ who’s just going about his job of governing America. From provisions relating to balance of payments, discrimination against American interests to several substantive clauses of Trade Acts in US may be invoked by President Trump to carry forward what he describes as part of his campaign to Make America Great Again (MAGA). President Trump is going gaga to leave his imprint on America’s governance come what may. He shows no signs of backing off any time now. But, what essentially happens is that period of uncertainty would extend, most countries will use this timeframe to recalibrate to redefine their negotiation strategy. While China is better off as it secured one-year negotiation time to sign upon a new trade deal, Bharat has kept its options open and may need more fresh air in the room before a pact is clinched with Washington DC. Now, the proposed18 per cent reciprocal duty to be part of free trade agreement with US becomes infructuous as use of International Economic Emergency powers have been struck down by US Supreme Court. Fresh negotiations for a deal between Bharat and US seem inevitable at much below 18 per cent impost though President Trump continues to insist that nothing has changed for Bharat. Postponing current round of negotiations on FTA for a later date would work well for both India and US as Washington DC. Secondly, keeping all options open would work in best interest of Bharat and its 1.4 billion citizens. Reworking the entire deal with US in totem over next six months is not a bad idea with ‘strategic autonomy’ being central to engagement. In this context, taking a common approach on US tariffs with like-minded partners as suggested by Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva may be explored. Building blocks or unions against America may not be an option for Bharat though the visiting President Lula has postulated such a strategy. Similarly, putting a full stop to purchase of oil and gas from Russia cannot be an option as Bharat continues to diversify its energy basket, sources and undertakes rework of energy matrix. Diversifying its markets for selling its goods and services beyond European Union should be seriously considered by Bharat’s negotiators. Speciality minerals deal with Brazil is a fine example like the ‘strategic relations’ entered into France is unique and specific to Bharat. Similarly, arriving at a working understanding with China be seriously considered notwithstanding the aggressions, transgressions made by the people’s liberation army on the borders. Containing border conflicts, China giving up its falsified claims in Indo-Pacific should be integral to the working arrangement with Beijing. Thirdly, Bharat should aggressively play the role of a peacenik in conflict between Russia and Ukraine, Israel & Iran apart from taking an aggressive ‘zero tolerance’ posture against radicalism, religious terror and overseas interferences on the sly. Fourthly, achieving a fine balance in our global engagement in the medium to long term to safeguard Bharat’s security interests that are non-negotiable should be the objective. Republican or Democratic White House is no patronizing friend of Bharat. Bharat must safeguard her own interests. (Author is a veteran journalist, writer & blogger, director & chief executive at non-partisan New Delhi based think-tank, Centre for Integrated & Holistic Studies)

Bangladesh Election Geopolitics Hindus Human Rights Politics

Client State or Regional Player?

BNP’s huge victory puts a big responsibility on Tarique Rahman to reshape Bangladesh’s politics, re-balance power equations globally and rejig economic policy formulation. N. C. Bipindra The outcome of February 12, 2026, general elections marked a watershed moment in Bangladesh’s political history. It has dramatically altered balance of power and set the stage for a new era in governance. Bangladesh Nationalist Party’s (BNP) resounding victory signals not merely a change in government but reflect a deeper shift in Bangladesh’s domestic political order. With a commanding parliamentary majority in 13th Jatiya Sangsad, BNP has tromped home to power after nearly two decades in opposition. The political space once dominated by Awami League has undergone an unprecedented shift. The election is widely regarded as most competitive and consequential since political upheaval of 2024 which saw fall of long-serving Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina, following mass protests and civil unrest. The absence of Awami League from electoral fray reshaped competitive landscape, effectively ending entrenched two-party rivalry that had defined Bangladeshi politics for decades. In its place, a new alignment has emerged, with BNP consolidating power while Bangladesh Jamaat-e-Islami got mainstreamed, strengthened its parliamentary footprint as principal opposition formation. At the centre of this political transformation stands Tarique Rahman, BNP leader, who is poised to assume the office of prime minister. His return to frontline politics after years in exile represents a dramatic personal and institutional comeback. For BNP, the electoral mandate is both a vindication of its long campaign against what it described as authoritarian rule and heavy responsibility to deliver institutional reform, economic recovery and political reconciliation. One of the most significant developments accompanying the election was approval of constitutional reforms through a parallel referendum. The amendments introduce term limits for prime minister, strengthen judicial independence and expand safeguards aimed at preventing executive overreach. These reforms are designed to address concerns about excessive concentration of power that had accumulated over past decade and a half. The referendum’s success indicates broad public appetite for systemic recalibration and democratic consolidation, reflecting a desire to prevent re-emergence of dominant-party rule. Domestically, BNP’s victory reshapes political calculus in several critical ways. First, it dismantles old Awami League–BNP binary that had structured electoral competition since the 1990s. The sidelining of the Awami League leaves a significant vacuum in secular-nationalist political space. Whether that space is eventually reoccupied by reconstituted Awami League, a new centrist force or remains fragmented will determine durability of the new political order. For now, BNP’s dominance gives it legislative freedom to pursue policy reforms without the constraints of a fragmented parliament. Second, the rise of Bangladesh Jamaat-e-Islami as a strong opposition block introduces new ideological dynamics into parliamentary politics. Jamaat’s improved electoral performance underscores continued resonance of conservative and religiously oriented political narratives in certain regions. While BNP and Jamaat have historically cooperated tactically, the evolving relationship between them will shape legislative debates on social policy, education, socio-religious equations and governance norms. The presence of a robust Islamist opposition also complicates BNP’s balancing act between appealing to its traditional base and projecting a reformist, moderate image to urban and business constituencies. The collapse or marginalisation of smaller parties, including the once-influential Jatiyo Party highlights another structural shift. The electorate appears to have consolidated around clearer poles of power, reducing role of kingmakers and coalition brokers. This concentration of power can enhance decision-making efficiency but also raises concerns about reduced pluralism if institutional checks are not effectively maintained. The newly introduced constitutional safeguards will therefore face an early stress test under BNP stewardship. Youth participation and civic mobilisation have emerged as defining undercurrents of this electoral cycle. The protests of 2024 were largely driven by younger Bangladeshis demanding accountability, employment opportunities and an end to entrenched patronage networks. Although youth-led political platforms did not translate that energy into sweeping parliamentary gains, their influence on public discourse has been unmistakable. All major parties, including BNP were compelled to address issues such as job creation, digital governance, anti-corruption measures and institutional transparency. The durability of youth engagement will determine whether Bangladesh’s political evolution moves toward participatory reform or reverts to personality-driven politics. Economically, the new government inherits a fragile macroeconomic environment marked by inflationary pressures, currency volatility and strains in the export sector. The garment industry considered backbone of Bangladesh’s economy, experienced disruptions amid political instability. BNP has pledged to restore investor confidence, stimulate private-sector growth and reform regulatory institutions. Achieving these objectives will require careful fiscal management and sustained political stability. A decisive parliamentary majority gives the government room to legislate, but it also removes excuses for policy paralysis. Governance credibility remains a crucial question. The BNP’s previous tenure in government was marred by allegations of corruption and administrative inefficiency. To differentiate itself from the era it replaces, the party must demonstrate a tangible commitment to institutional strengthening rather than patronage redistribution. Early actions on judicial independence, anti-corruption enforcement and civil service reform will serve as signals of intent. Failure to meet heightened public expectations could rapidly erode the legitimacy conferred by the electoral mandate. The broader significance of the 12 February 12 2026 election lies in its redefinition of political legitimacy in Bangladesh. For years, electoral contests were overshadowed by boycotts, disputes and questions about inclusivity. The competitive nature of this poll and comparatively strong voter participation suggest renewed engagement with democratic processes. However, the absence of a historically dominant party complicates narratives of full inclusiveness. Long-term stability will depend on whether political competition remains open and institutionalised rather than episodic and crisis-driven. Ultimately, the 2026 election represents both an end and a beginning. It ends an era defined by prolonged single-party dominance and inaugurates a phase of recalibration in Bangladesh’s domestic politics. When Tarique Rahman assumes office as prime minister, Bangladesh’s external alignments are likely to undergo calibrated adjustments rather than abrupt reversals. Relations with India may enter a more negotiated and transactional phase. Historically, BNP has taken a more sovereignty-centric approach compared to Awami League, particularly on issues such as water sharing,

Bangladesh Bharat China Economy Geopolitics Human Rights Policy Security

182

Myanmar’s Strategic Crossroads China’s Influence, Western Interests and a Turbulent Election

Arun Anand Myanmar (formerly Burma) sits at a critical crossroads in Asia, both geographically and geopolitically. The country’s location – bordering China, India, Bangladesh, Thailand, and Laos, with a long coastline on the Bay of Bengal and Andaman Sea – makes it a bridge between South Asia and Southeast Asia. In fact, Myanmar is often described as the “main connecting hub” linking East, South, and Southeast Asia. Its shores provide access to the Indian Ocean’s major shipping lanes, which has long attracted great power interest. In short, Myanmar’s geostrategic location grants it outsized importance: it is the only Southeast Asian nation sharing borders with both India and China, and it offers a land gateway from the Bay of Bengal into the heart of Asia.

1971 Genocide and the Unhealed Scars of Bangladesh

Bangladesh Bharat Hindus Human Rights Pakistan Policy Security Terrorism

179

1971 Genocide and the Unhealed Scars of Bangladesh

Bangladesh may paper over its wounds one by one, but the scars of systematic genocide during 1971 Bangladesh Liberation War will remain permanent. Pummy M. Pandita The 1971 Bangladesh Liberation War was marked by a systematic campaign of genocide carried out by the Pakistan Army and its supporting forces, Razakars, against the Bengali population, pro-independence activists, intellectuals and civilians. The Razakar Force, officially established by the Pakistan Army under the command of General Tikka Khan and acknowledged as a proxy paramilitary entity, was pivotal in the perpetration of these offenses at the direct command from Pakistan. More than fifty years post-independence, Bangladesh persistently pursued international acknowledgment and a formal apology from Pakistan; however, these requests remain unmet. The enduring impact of violence and denial has resulted in lasting sociopolitical wounds that continue to manifest in both domestic and diplomatic contexts. Established pursuant to the East Pakistan Razakars Ordinance issued in August 1971, this militia group was intentionally created to serve as a local support mechanism for Pakistan’s counter-insurgency efforts against the Bengalis of erstwhile East Pakistan. The establishment and functioning of this militia group were crucial to the genocidal tactics employed by the military leadership of Pakistan in order to stifle the aspirations for independence from Pakistan. The contingent comprised roughly 50,000 volunteers, primarily sourced from Islamist groupings in Pakistan political groups including Jamaat-e-Islami, Al Badr, Al Shams and others that resisted Bengali autonomy. In stark contrast to purported accounts, the Razakars were not merely engaged in “internal security” operations; they were complicit in heinous acts of mass murder, sexual violence, torture and terror directed at civilians, with a particular focus on Hindu communities, political dissidents, scholars and advocates for independence from Pakistan. After the Bangladesh Liberation War of 1971, approximately 200,000 women and girls, predominantly Hindus, were raped by the Pakistani Army and its allied proxies (Razakars). These heinous acts were part of an effort to create a “pure” Muslim race in Bangladesh. The targeting of Hindu women has continued, with sexual violence being used to intimidate and displace Hindu families. Multiple thoroughly recorded massacres during 1971 by Razakars alongside the Pakistan Army, encompassing extensive killings in Jathibhanga (approximately 3,000–3,500 victims), Gabha Narerkathi (95–100 Hindu victims), Akhira and Char Bhadrasan, among others, each exemplifying methodical assaults on defenseless populations. In December 2019, almost fifty years post Bangladeshi independence, the Government of Bangladesh released an official enumeration of 10,789 individuals recognized as Razakars, a clear initiative to identify and document those who supported the Pakistan Army’s operations against the Bengali population. The aim was to guarantee that future generations retain awareness of the genuine perpetrators of violence and treason, opposing any efforts to obscure or sanitise this historical narrative. Notwithstanding these actions, the pursuit of justice remains unfulfilled and the scars of history endure. The lack of an official apology transcends mere diplomatic obstruction; it signifies a refusal to acknowledge historical responsibility, thereby exacerbating the anguish of survivors, the families of victims and the broader communities deeply affected by the events of 1971. For a significant segment of Bangladeshi society, especially among Hindu communities that were disproportionately targeted, the ongoing lack of recognition constitutes not merely an omission but a deliberate erasure. It denies victims and survivors both justice and historical recognition, making their suffering invisible and original crimes even worse. This silence reinforces impunity, invalidates experienced trauma and indicates a systemic reluctance to address the violence perpetrated by Razakars and Pakistan Army against these communities. The Razakar legacy stands as a profound and enduring mark in the collective consciousness of Bangladesh, serving as a proof to the genocidal tactics employed by the Pakistan Army and its accomplices. It highlights the necessity for healing from mass atrocities, which hinges on the pursuit of truth and formal accountability, elements that cannot be fully achieved without clear recognition and apology from those who hold historical responsibility. The plight of Hindu communities in present-day Bangladesh finds its roots in the tragic events of the 1971 Liberation War and this suffering has persisted in a sporadic manner throughout the subsequent decades. In the year 1971, the Pakistan Army, in conjunction with the Razakars, engaged in state-sanctioned violence that resulted in widespread atrocities, including mass killings, sexual violence and the deliberate persecution of the Hindu community as a distinct religious group. The immediate consequences resulted in significant refugee movements and a sustained demographic reduction of Hindus in Bangladesh. Since the attainment of independence from Pakistan, there has been a recurring pattern of communal violence, biased governance practices, assaults on property and places of worship and a prevailing sense of impunity for those who commit such acts. This troubling trend has notably escalated during periods of political instability in 2024–25, resulting in cycles characterised by fear, displacement and the erosion of rights. Historical context: targeted violence in 1971 “Operation Searchlight” on March 25, 1971, started the Bangladesh Liberation War, which lasted from March to December 1971. The campaign conducted by the Pakistan military specifically aimed at Bengali freedom fighters, scholars, students and, with notable intensity, Hindu civilians. Recent and ongoing research show that there were coordinated mass executions, gang rapes used as weapons against women (especially Hindu women) and communal cleansing in towns and rural areas where Hindus lived. Independent scholarly reviews, government compilations of incident reports and survivor testimonies delineate massacres nationwide, enumerating particular incidents with substantial civilian casualties. Scholars and post-war accounts emphasise that although Bengalis were the primary targets, Hindus were subjected to extreme brutality due to their perceived political and cultural alignment with India and the Bengali freedom struggle. The ongoing vulnerability of Hindu communities in Bangladesh from 1972 to 2024 has been perpetuated by a combination of systemic impunity, inadequate legal accountability and politicised justice. Post 1971 period promised justice, but convictions for war crimes were few and far between, allowing many criminals and their networks to become part of local power structures again. Even when accountability mechanisms like the International Crimes Tribunal were used, the idea and practice of

China Economy Hindus International Misinformation Policy World

175

Reject Hindu Label to Slow Growth

Hinduphobia, colonial enslavement led certain intellectuals, socialists to frame Hinduness for tardy progress. Real culprits are socialists and their handlers! K.A.Badarinath It’s a colonial era slur. None has the right to deride about two billion Hindus living in 100 countries on some pretext or the other. Debunking Hindutva as being somehow responsible for Bharat’s tardy progress or sub-optimal GDP growth of 3.5 per cent in 1950s and 1980s era reeks of hatred. At last week’s Hindustan Times annual leadership summit, Prime Minister Narendra Modi rightly pointed to colonial mind-set for framing Hindu faith with tardy economic growth. Big question is why does one attribute slow economic progress and development to Hindutva? Why do some scholars make derogatory remarks and prejudiced framework to point fingers at Hindu people? Why do self-proclaimed intellectuals and economists ignore Bharat’s seven to eight per cent growth in last two decades was precisely due to these very Hindus? Colonial overhang and socialist underpinning of some intellectuals may have led to bracket low growth with Hindutva. As per The Oxford Companion to Economics in India, economist Raj Krishna made an attempt in 1982 to link the then 3.5 per cent economic growth to an inherent cultural phenomenon. Raj Krishna, a faculty member with Delhi School of Economics, blamed Hindus for not thinking big, staying reticent sans ambition etc. Well, Raj Krishna or his disciples’ arguments are not tenable. He may have grossly erred on intent and by design. Economic progress and development models hitherto adopted during Smt Indira Gandhi or Pandit Jawahar Lal Nehru were largely socialist in orientation and governance. Till, economic reforms were unveiled in 1991, state controls were overbearing and stifled growth. In pre-liberation era, strangulating free enterprise, spirit of Bharat’s businesses and individuals was the norm. Even the governance model was socialist in nature with most power concentrated in Prime Minister like the communist oligarchy. Most annoying was accusing Hindus of strangulating socio-economic development in Bharat and slowing down fight against poverty. It’s rather well documented that economist Raghuram Rajan had revived the debate on linking Hindutva to slow growth rates in 2023. In last quarter ending September 2025, Bharat’s economy reported an expansion of 8.2 per cent with about 65 crore people going to work. Similarly, Bharat was the top major economy to report growth of 7.3 per cent globally, highest amongst G-20 nations with China and Indonesia at second and third position with 5.3 per cent and 5.1 per cent respectively in 2024-25. Countries like Italy and Canada reported contractions in their economies during some quarters. Germany reportedly was at bottom of the pyramid with a feeble 0.2 per cent growth. Stellar economic performance by Bharat was not given a cultural, civilizational or Dharmic label? If it’s not Hinduphobic mind-set, why did self-proclaimed intellectuals bring in Hindu angle to lack of or slow economic progress? Consequence of this Hinduphobic mind-set was that ‘Hindu rate of growth’ gained credence internationally amongst academics and audience thereby driving wrong notion and reinforcing that Bharat and Hindus was incapable of development. Attaching a civilizational label or wrongly portraying Hindus as lethargic or not being innovative may be rejected lock stock barrel. In fact, socialist policies adopted in first four decades put Bharat’s economy on a slumber. Unleashing the potential in a free, flexible and predictable policy paradigm would allow Bharat to realize its potential and emerge the ace. Getting out of colonial mind-set and rejecting out-dated socialist doctrines is pre-requisite to further hastening growth the Bharatiya way. (author is Director & Chief Executive at New Delhi based non-partisan think tank, Centre for Integrated and Holistic Studies)

Pakistan Politics

240

Pakistan at Crossroads: 27th Amendment and Vanishing Republic

Arun Anand When a state alters the rules that govern it, the transformation can arrive with force—or with formality. Pakistan’s 27th Amendment represents the latter: a political restructuring that wields the authority of a coup but cloaks it in legality. Rather than suspending the constitution or dissolving parliament, it reshapes the constitution from within, erasing previous checks on military power. That distinction is crucial—one disrupts the system; the other remakes it. At the heart of this recalibration stands Asim Munir. His promotion to Field Marshal and the proposed establishment of a Chief of Defence Forces position do more than elevate his career—they institutionalize what was long an informal dominance. Unlike Ayub, Zia, or Musharraf, who ruled by toppling constitutions, today’s strategy seeks to embed military supremacy within the constitutional framework itself—ensuring that, in the future, the army can govern without the need to overthrow. The change is deceptively small in language and vast in consequence. Replace one title with another; place all services under a single command; harden immunities around senior officers; tweak judicial mechanisms so the courts have less room to operate free of executive pressure. Each clause reads like technocratic housekeeping. Taken together, they create a new architecture: an army whose institutional primacy is not merely tolerated but constitutionally protected. That is legal militarism rather than extra-legal rule. This is not an academic quarrel over drafting. It is a political settlement about who counts as the ultimate arbiter of public affairs. Under the old ambiguity, civilian leaders could plausibly claim the last word, even while the military shaped the range of choices behind the scenes. The amendment seeks to collapse that ambiguity in one direction. Why would civilian parties, visibly weakened and electorally vulnerable at times, agree to such a reconfiguration? The motives are painfully direct. Pakistan’s political class operates in a narrow corridor: economic collapse, fragmented coalitions, a restive opposition, and a media space that oscillates between sensationalism and censorship. Under these pressures, cohabitation with the military promises immediate stability. It keeps riots at bay, opens channels to patronage, and provides a shield against judicial harassment or street mobilisation. Short-term survival, in other words, is a powerful incentive. Yet political survival bought by reliance on the barracks is a pyrrhic achievement. Civilian parties have historically gained legitimacy by standing up to military overreach. Opposition to the establishment, even when risky, has often been the most reliable source of political capital. When a leader defies the generals and survives, that defiance becomes a badge of authenticity. By contrast, parties that appear to defend or normalise the military’s dominance surrender the claim to be an alternative. They transform from contesting forces into managers within a narrower, military-shaped consensus. This is the arithmetic of erosion. Short-term gains for the party in power can lead to long-term erosion of its moral and political standing. Consent, in this context, is not neutrality; it is a transfer of legitimacy. A constitution stamped by the military’s imprimatur becomes less a shield of pluralism than a vehicle for managed politics. Democracies do not die in dramatic moments alone; they wither when the forms of democracy remain but their essence, the capacity of political actors to challenge and to be challenged on equal footing, is hollowed out. Those who enable this constitutional realignment may imagine that they will keep the benefits: stability, access to resources, and the ability to govern without constant confrontation. But history is unsparing about such bargains. Iskander Mirza appointed Ayub and found himself dispossessed within days. Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto, who navigated the generals’ world, was later tried and executed under military rule. Nawaz Sharif’s flirtation with the military ended in exile. Power that is lent by a stronger institution is rarely returned intact. The amendment also alters the foundation upon which other institutions stand. The judiciary, already a site of contestation, risks becoming a subsidiary player if a new constitutional forum strips the Supreme Court of powers or if transfer mechanisms for judges are altered to reduce their independence. Provinces that won space under the 18th Amendment see their gains threatened if federal competencies are recentralised or if finances are reconstituted in ways that favour central control. The fragmentation of federal bargains bolsters local grievances, and these grievances become fuel for instability, precisely the outcome the army claims to preempt. There is a particular irony to the present moment that is worth stressing. Civilian politicians once drew their energy from popular resistance to an overbearing establishment. That very act of resistance could convert electoral weakness into credible leadership. Today, however, many politicians choose acquiescence because the immediate costs of resistance, jail, economic disruption, and the threat of engineered crises look intolerable. They trade a precarious moral authority for a steady foothold in the office. The problem is that this lease rarely extends beyond the lifetime of a political cycle, and its renewal depends on the goodwill of the institution whose favour they bought. And yet the public mood complicates any neat diagnosis of decline. Ordinary Pakistanis are weary; years of economic pain and political turbulence have dulled their appetite for dramatic confrontation. Some will welcome the promise of order; others will shrug their shoulders. That fatigue provides the ideal conditions for legalised domination: the population tolerates constraint for the promise of relief. But tolerance is not acquiescence; it is the brittle glue that holds an unstable settlement together until it snaps. When Munir leaves the scene, and he will, as all men do, the institution he helped constitutionalise will remain. The following chief benefits from a script rewritten to favour the uniform, drawing authority from not just force but law. Undoing that script will require more than an election or a public outcry; it will demand a sustained political project that reconstructs constitutional checks, reenergises provincial autonomy, and restores judicial independence. That project is possible but arduous; it requires actors willing to risk more than a short-term office. History’s lesson is stark: military dominance dressed as legality is harder to overthrow

Economy Election Geopolitics Human Rights Leadership News Politics Uncategorized

314

Get Economic Governance Model right!

Taking off from Bihar debate, centre has to balance welfare pitch with sustainable development, reverse migration & make prosperity inclusive K.A. Badarinath Two simultaneous developments have had happened. Both these, though unconnected, have a linkage of sorts. Our most vibrant state, Bihar has gone to polls and a new government will be in place few days from now. On the other end, finance minister Nirmala Sitharaman has begun a mammoth exercise to present her next federal budget on February 1, 2026. One could be wondering as to what’s the linkage between the two albeit even indirectly. This budget will have to put together a new model for socio-economic development taking on board political freebies that are promised in state legislative assembly elections or Lok Sabha polls. Freebies, Revdies & Social welfare Not many socio-economic analysts or thinkers would support the idea of a welfare state in a globally inter-connected world of markets, investments and trade that’s fiercely competitive. Ahead of state elections, Nitish Kumar led BJP – JDU alliance with splinter parties in tow announced two big projects. Through Mukhya Mantri Mahila Rojgar Yojana (MMRY), Rs 10,000 was given to each of 1.5 crore women through direct benefits transfer (DBT). About 1.1 crore elderly women, widows and disabled were given enhanced pension of Rs 1100 from earlier Rs 400 per month. The two schemes alone added an extra outgo of Rs 14240 crore that constitute about six per cent of total revenue expenses of Rs 252,000 crore for 2025-26. Over and above, BJP – JDU led National Democratic Alliance has promised free power, water supply, one crore jobs, higher support to farmers etc in its bid to return with a thumping mandate. Some bracket these freebies as tools for socio-economic empowerment while others call them ‘Revdis’ or vote doles’, the sweet snack made out of sesame seeds and jiggery. Well, the debate is not about direct benefit transfers which have been refined by Narendra Modi government as surest way of reaching benefits to the needy, eliminate inefficiency and pilferage of funds. Larger question is what’s the sustainable model of economic governance that Bharat should adopt to expand, deepen her growth story and spread prosperity? Cash doles can at best act as booster dose for economic empowerment on temporary basis but unsustainable in the long run as experienced in several states including Karnataka, Himachal Pradesh and now Madhya Pradesh and Maharastra. Skilling and competencies, creating work opportunities for goods and services, low-cost credit support to making large chunk capital investments that create jobs may be sustainable. No two economists agree on either of the models for development. A blend of these two approaches may be workable in the medium to long term. Taking Bihar as latest to join the bandwagon of states on the cusp of economic development, Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman would do well in providing clarity on approach to economic development. For several years, NDA, BJP and Prime Minister Narendra Modi resisted temptation of going populist through their campaigns in states and centre. But, competitive populism practiced by its political rivals has pushed NDA to rethink on ‘freebies’ or cash doles as a ‘winning formula’ and ‘economic empowerment’ tool. Both, Karnataka and Himachal Pradesh states have been pushed into economic chaos or deep debt burden by respective Congress governments that promised the moon in their political campaigns drawing inspiration from Aam Admi Party’s manifestos in Punjab and Delhi. Therefore, big question to be addressed by finance minister Sitharaman was salience of freebies. Mirgration & Economic Empowerment Both NDA and opposition parties led Maha ghatbandan have made huge promises on jobs to win votes in Bihar. One crore jobs have been promised by NDA and one government job in each Bihar family is what Rashtriya Janata Dal has promised. Jobs creation, investments and migration have direct and intricate linkages in Bihar and elsewhere. As per New Delhi based Institute for Human Development, over 65 per cent households in Bihar cutting across caste lines have at least one migrant each. Their remittances constitute at least 50 per cent of a household’s income. Outward migration from Bihar tripled rural wages centred in construction and agriculture sectors. The data suggests manufacturing employs a measly five per cent people. It’s near impossible to provide jobs to growing youth population. As per the institute, in 2025, 12.8 lakh youngsters completed secondary school education and over 27 per cent of state’s population was aged below 15 years. For different states, these numbers may differ. But still, youngsters below 15-years age would constitute a whopping 15.6 per cent of total population in Bharat. Creating opportunities in manufacturing, services and agriculture apart from exports from rural India is relatively more sustainable to tackle migration. A comprehensive survey on opportunities, jobs, industry, agriculture and exports in each state should dictate our policy priorities. Sridhar Vembu of Zoho Corporation has demonstrated that he could lead a global corporation even while being in a remote Tamil Nadu village. Remote working by professionals across sectors has allowed them to move out of cities while they discharged job related tasks. Huge network of roads, rail, ports, airports infrastructure, data and telecom connectivity in semi-urban and rural areas should come handy in formulating a policy against migration. First step will be to stop this migration out of villages. Secondly, reversing the migration back to villages and finally reversing brain drain from the country should be an economic priority. Re-modelling our economic development paradigm with migration at centrality of policy making should be attempted. Ultimately, economic growth should be sustainable in long run, translate into prosperity for last man standing in the spirit of Antyodaya, make welfare and opportunities inclusive while expanding global linkages. Getting the economic governance model right is the challenge. (Author is Director & Chief Executive of New Delhi based non-partisan think tank, Centre for Integrated and Holistic Studies)

Bharat Disinformation Election Geopolitics Hindus International Kashmir Misinformation News Politics United States USA

411

Mayor Mamdani: Socialist agenda in Capitalist New York

India-Focused Rhetoric Risks Splitting New York’s Diaspora, Straining US-India Ties and Fueling Political Firestorms N. C. Bipindra Zohran Mamdani’s victory marks a striking moment in New York politics: a young, Muslim, democratic socialist, son of filmmaker Mira Nair and Mahmood Mamdani, will lead US largest city at a time of heightened identity politics and global polarization. His biography helps explain ferocity of the debate around him. It’s his stance on India-related issues, Kashmir, Palestine, criticism of Prime Minister Narendra Modi and pointed public comments about Gujarat that has transformed what might otherwise be a municipal governance story into a transnational political flashpoint. This is not just about ideology; it is about how rhetoric issued from City Hall can fracture diaspora coalitions, complicate diplomatic ties and provide political fodder for opponents at home and abroad. Mamdani’s critics, ranging from conservative commentators to influential diaspora organizations argue that some of his statements are one-sided, factually shaky and politically inflammatory. Misinformation on Gujarat Row over his remarks about Muslims in Gujarat is instructive. Opponents in India and beyond called out a claim he made suggesting a dramatic demographic or social shift in Gujarat’s Muslim population; fact-checkers and Indian commentators quickly disputed that account, saying it mis-states census data and on-ground socio-economic diversity of Muslims in the state. Whether these were careless rhetorical flourishes or substantive errors, they gave immediate ammunition to critics who charge Mamdani with repeating misleading narratives about India. No Sympathy for Israelis, Kashmiri Pandits On Palestine and Kashmir, Mamdani’s record reflects unmistakable activism. His vocal support for Palestinian rights, his positions on settlement funding and public statements criticising Modi government’s purported human rights record have resonated with some New Yorkers particularly youngsters and left leaning advocacy networks. But these positions have alarmed others. Jewish social groups and centrist constituencies have warned that his rhetoric can blur lines between legitimate criticism of Israeli policy and statements that some interpret as insufficiently condemnatory of extremist violence; that perception has hardened a political fault line in a city with world’s largest Jewish population outside Israel. Jewish Reactions to Mamdani Several mainstream Jewish organizations issued cautious, measured statements after the election, underscoring their vigilance about anti-semitism while also acknowledging internal divisions over Israel policy – a reflection of broader tension Mamdani now inherits. Importantly, most stinging critiques do not simply target Mamdani’s policy preferences; they attack his credibility. Opponents say his India-related assertions sometimes rely on sweeping narratives rather than granular, verifiable evidence. In public fora and on social media, detractors frame those statements as kind of moralising shorthand that, in a globalised information environment, can be magnified into misinformation or selective history-telling. Indian Americans Call Him Biased For New York’s diverse South Asian community that encompasses people with attachment to India, Pakistan, Bangladesh and beyond: such simplifications risk alienating those who do not see their lived realities reflected in Mamdani’s public claims. The result is a fractured coalition: socialist base that propelled him to victory and diaspora groups who feel caricatured or dismissed. Another dimension is geopolitical optics. Mayors generally have limited formal capacity to change US foreign policy, but New York’s Mayor remains a global figure whose words carry diplomatic weight. Misinformation as a Weapon Critics warn that incendiary or ill-substantiated claims about India could complicate US–India municipal and cultural ties, from sister-city arrangements to trade and philanthropy, and could be seized upon by political actors in New Delhi eager to paint American democrats as biased or hostile. That risk is magnified because India has a politically active and often transnational diaspora that reacts swiftly to public statements by prominent figures; controversy can therefore ripple back to New Delhi and become a bilateral talking point. Indian American community in New York has sharply criticised his comments on India, as “bigotry and bias” against Indian communities, and called him “divisive, discriminatory, and unbecoming.” Fanning Domestic Polarisation Domestically, Mamdani’s India-focused controversies also feed a very immediate vulnerability: nationalised political polarisation. President Donald Trump and conservative pundits have already shaped a narrative casting Mamdani as dangerously radical, a framing Trump used in the campaign to argue that federal funds should be withheld should Mamdani assume office. That nationalisation of a municipal election transforms local disputes over housing and transit into existential fights over patriotism, security and cultural loyalty. In a hyper-partisan media environment, claims about “misinformation” on issues like Gujarat riots or about Pakistan/India politics can be weaponised to de-legitimize policy initiatives, no matter how pragmatic their intent. Keeping Governance Promises Policy implications matter. If Mamdani wants to deliver on his agenda, rent stabilisation, transit relief, childcare expansion, he must secure broad administrative cooperation, funding and buy-in from constituencies that feel threatened by his rhetoric. That requires the kind of political translation that sanctified rhetoric rarely achieves: careful, evidence-based communication; clear sourcing for claims about international events; and consistent, unequivocal condemnations of violence and extremism coupled with nuanced critiques of state policies. Failing that, even feasible policies will be cast through the prism of identity and foreign-policy controversy, making compromise harder and governance costlier. Gujarati Muslim Father, Punjabi Hindu Mother There is, however, an opening: Mamdani’s background and family story provide him with a platform to reframe the debate. His parents’ Indian origins, public intellectualism, and filmmaking sensibility give him rhetorical gifts that could be used to de-escalate rather than inflame. By commissioning independent fact-finding on contested claims, clarifying past statements and engaging directly with South Asian and Jewish community leaders not as adversaries but as partners in city governance, he could shift the narrative from cultural combat to municipal competence. That won’t please hardliners on either side, but it could blunt attacks that center on his credibility rather than his policies. Fueling Identity Politics Finally, case of Zohran Mamdani is a cautionary tale about modern urban leadership: global identity politics are now inseparable from municipal governance. Mayors must navigate local service delivery while managing transnational reputations and diaspora sensibilities. For Mamdani, pragmatic path is clear even if politically costly: root his public statements

Defence Geopolitics Hindus International Leadership Policy Security

358

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)

Hindus Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS)

641

100 Years’ Journey of RSS: New Horizons

As the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh enters its Centenary Year, a special 3-day lecture and interaction series of “100 Years’ Journey of RSS: New Horizons” was organised at Vigyan Bhawan, New Delhi, from 26–28 August 2025. The event, marked by thoughtful deliberations and inspiring addresses, brought together swayamsevaks, intellectuals, foreign dignitaries from more than 20 countries viz., US, UK, Russia, China, Germany, Japan, Australia, Nepal, Sri Lanka, Argentina, Malaysia, Indonesia, New Zealand, Uzbekistan, ⁠Kazakistan, Denmark, ⁠ Isreal, (to name a few), foreign media viz., BBC, AFP, DW, Sputnik, Reuters, NYT, WSJ, Kyodo News and many others, to look back and see the future. Sarsanghchalak, Dr. Mohan Bhagwat Ji, in his keynote address presented a deep insight into the Sangh’s journey since 1925. He brought before the gathering the fact that the Sangh had not been born due to some passing cause, but due to a timeless civilisational requirement, to cultivate character, cohesion, and service in society. He noted that whereas Sangh’s first one hundred years have been committed to establishing a robust infrastructure and national consciousness, the coming century will require newer models of involvement in the areas of education, technology, nature, culture, and international discoursed. During the three days, there were thematic sessions discussing crucial aspects of the Sangh’s contribution: Nation First and Social Harmony, Civilisational Continuity in a Changing World, and Empowering Communities for Self-Reliant Bharat. Representatives from various walks of life deliberated on how the Sangh’s quiet and consistent efforts in villages, towns, and cities have brought up a generation with sanskars and with the confidence to tackle contemporary issues. The exchanges brought out one shared spirit: that the 100-year RSS pilgrimage is not so much a history of expansion, but a living witness to the dynamism of selfless service and cultural consciousness. As Sangh embarks on its second century, the challenge is to widen horizons, adopting inclusiveness, innovativeness, and greater social connect, yet staying rooted in the fundamental vision of ekatmata, sewa, aur rashtra-nirman (unity, service, and nation-building). Three day event at Vigyan Bhawan ended with a fresh commitment, that the Centenary of RSS will not only marks a glorious past but also plant the seeds of a brighter, harmonious, and self-assured Bharat for the future generations. “Sanghachhadhwam, Samvadadhwam, Sam Vo Manamsi Janatam” (Let us move together, let us speak together, let our minds be in harmony.) — Rig Veda

Blog Post