A comparative factsheet on constitutional guarantees, statutory protections and welfare provisioning for religious minorities in India, the United States, the United Kingdom and Europe, assessed on four measures: constitutional entitlement enforceable as a fundamental right, institutional autonomy in education, preservation of community personal law, and dedicated state machinery for affirmative action and welfare.
Fact-Checking claims behind a letter for banning RSS and bar Dr. Mohan Bhagwat from Canada. Rohan Giri Read the McPherson-Kwan letter once, quickly, and it sounds urgent. Read it twice, slowly, and a different question starts to form. Two sitting Members of Parliament are asking three cabinet ministers to ban an 89,000-branch (Shakha) civic organization and personally exclude its 76-year-old spiritual head Dr. Mohan Bhagwat from Canadian soil. What did they attach to justify that? Four hyperlinks and the word “fascist,” used as though repetition were an argument. That gap, between the size of the demand and the size of the proof offered for it, is the actual story here. Walk through it claim by claim and the gap doesn’t close. It widens. An Adjective Standing in for an Argument The letter’s opening sentence calls the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) a “fascist paramilitary organization.” It never returns to prove that claim. It doesn’t need to, because the sentence is doing the job a paragraph of evidence should be doing. Here is what the RSS actually is, as a matter of public record. Founded in Bharat’s western state Maharashtra’s Nagpur in 1925 as a voluntary community service organization. Structured today as a cultural movement with elected office bearers, answering upward through district and provincial layers to a national council of roughly 1,400 representatives who review its functioning. It runs daily neighbourhood gatherings called Shakha, disaster relief programs, and education initiatives. That is the architecture of a civic cultural movement. Calling it a paramilitary force doesn’t make it one, any more than calling Canada’s elected government a “regime” turns Parliament into a junta. Both moves borrow the vocabulary of atrocity and hope nobody asks for the receipts. The Terrorist List That Already Exists, and Doesn’t Include the RSS The letter accuses Dr. Mohan Bhagwat’s association with “listed terrorist organizations,” plural, unnamed. Canada actually publishes this list. It names Hamas, Hezbollah, ISIS, al-Qaida. It also names Babbar Khalsa International and the International Sikh Youth Federation, two terrorist groups whose Canadian file is not a matter of dispute. Public Safety Canada’s own description of the ISYF states it was responsible for a number of bombings, assassinations and kidnappings targeting Hindus, moderate Sikhs, and Indian government officials, working in coordination with BKI. BKI is the organization tied to the 1985 Air India Flight 182 bombing, which killed 329 people, 268 of them Canadian citizens. The RSS appears on this list zero times. Not once, in any form, under any name. So when a letter demanding a fresh terrorist listing invokes “listed terrorist organizations” as though the target already qualifies, it is worth asking a plain question. Which organizations actually sit on that list. And why does a letter about protecting Canadians from terrorism manage to avoid naming either group Canada has formally designated as one. The vocabulary and terminology used are conventional progressive-Islamist talking points i.e., “fascist paramilitary,” “Hindutva extremism,” “genocidal rhetoric,” and “transnational repression.” There is no comparable urgency applied to actual Khalistani terrorist networks that have murdered Canadians, or to Islamist terrorism pipelines working within Canada. One Word Carrying an Entire Accusation The letter’s most severe assertion is also the most cautiously worded. Which is Nijjar’s killing. Before I get into their claims, let me tell you that Hardip Singh Nijjar was proscribed as a terrorist by Indian intelligence officials in 2020. As per official report he was top operative of the Khalistan Tiger Force (KTF) and was the mastermind behind a separate 2007 cinema bombing in Punjab, Bharat. Now, returning to their allegations, it says, in Nijjar’s killing, “reportedly” involved senior BJP leadership connected to the RSS. Read that sentence again. The whole accusation rests on a single adverb. Canada’s own Foreign Interference Commission ran a formal public inquiry with subpoena power into exactly this territory. Its final conclusion on a state link to the killing was that no definitive link to a foreign state could be proven. The men actually charged in the killing are alleged to belong to a criminal network. Not the RSS. Taking “reportedly,” running it through a finding that falls well short of the accusation, and landing on a demand to ban an organization and its members nationwide isn’t caution. It’s laundering. A Citation That Doesn’t Say What It’s Cited For The letter invokes “United Nations Human Rights experts” who supposedly called on Canada to protect Sikh Canadians from RSS threats. The actual conversation concerned threats received by a specific individual Bhai Moninder Singh, a Khalistan supporter and national spokesperson for ‘Sikh Federation Canada,’ who is also an associate of Nijjar. This was issued weeks before the letter, and on the public record does not name the RSS as the source of those threats. If the primary text says otherwise, publish it. Citing a document nobody has quoted the relevant line from is not evidence. It’s a hyperlink doing cosplay as a finding. The same problem sits under the letter’s claim about “considerable evidence of the RSS’s sphere of influence in Canada,” footnoted to a single advocacy report, not a CSIS assessment, not an RCMP finding, not a threat bulletin. Advocacy groups are entitled to publish advocacy. What two MPs are not entitled to do is attach the phrase “Canadian security officials know” to someone else’s campaign document. The Visits Where Nothing Happened The letter warns that Bhagwat’s presence “could lead to social disorder.” This is a testable claim, because Bhagwat has already made this exact trip, repeatedly, to countries with no shortage of scrutiny or free press to report what happened. He addressed a gathering in the United Kingdom in 2016. He addressed the World Hindu Congress in Chicago in 2018, in front of roughly 2,500 delegates. He delivered the inaugural address at the 2023 World Hindu Congress in Bangkok. None of these produced the disorder the letter predicts for Canada. His most reported domestic engagement with a minority community, a 2022 visit to a New Delhi mosque and madrasa, involved him meeting the chief
US Congressman Riley Moore says India’s FCRA Amendment Bill, 2026 is a takeover of churches and a clear attack on Christians. It is neither. The Bill seizes no church and touches no place of worship; it manages foreign-funded assets only after an organization has already lost its license for misuse, and it names no faith at all. This explainer walks through that record of misuse, and the far harsher foreign-funding laws of the United States, the United Kingdom, and the European Union, where senators go to prison and mosques are closed outright. Read together, they show a simple truth: India is regulating foreign money, not faith, and doing it more liberally than the very countries now lecturing it.
Were Jantar Mantar protests peaceful to trigger dialogue in spirit of ‘reasoned debate’ to forge consensus on education reforms? K.A. Badarinath Bharat’s youth who fall under 35-years age bracket total to over 800 million. Only a few thousands of these youngsters joined Cockroach Janata Party (CJP) led Jantar Mantar protests on NEET paper leak last month. Genuine students, irrespective of their ideological moorings, that sought educational reforms, corrective measures against paper leaks may not be treated as ‘anti-national’. And, they have the right to protest, take to streets in a peaceful formation or even get loud. Protests are one way of leading to consensus on core education issues in a large diverse democracy like India that’s on path to constant reform. In a democratic polity like India’s, protests are perfectly fine. Even this instrument of protests has to be used with lots of wisdom and responsibility in forging consensus on reforming education system that may have fallen short of student’s expectations and aspirations of youth. This seems to be tone and tenor with which Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) chief Dr Mohan Bhagwat for the first time articulated the organization’s position on recent protests in New Delhi while interacting with thousands of Gen Z and Gen Alpha at an event in Mumbai on Thursday. The 49-days protests were however not entirely peaceful as envisioned by Bharat’s Constitutional visionary Dr Bhimrao Ramji Ambedkar in several of his writings. RSS chief made a specific reference to Dr Ambedkar’s line on peaceful protests in his public interaction with youth. Ambedkar held peaceful protests on several occasions unlike violence, hooliganism and stone pelting witnessed in recent Jantar Mantar protests infiltrated by rowdy sheeters, drug peddlers, rapists and criminals. Dr Ambedkar had led thousands of people in 1927 against caste-based discrimination in accessing drinking water from wells. This protest is easily seen as one of the most unique and popular as ‘Mahad Satyagraha.” Kalaram Temple entry satyagraha in 1930 was yet another peaceful movement that was held under leadership of Dr B.R. Ambedkar seeking end to untouchability of low caste Hindus. Ambedkar sought equal rights to temple entry in Nashik as an issue of ‘fundamental human dignity’. In a speech on November 25,1949, Dr Ambedkar had argued stringently against unconstitutional methods and disruptions terming them as ‘grammar of anarchy’. In fact, Dr Ambedkar wanted communities, citizens groups and stakeholders to take recourse to constitutional means like Parliament and elections for seeking redress to their issues. When Dr Bhagwat referred to Ambedkar’s line on peaceful protests, not many would have gauged the context and its significance. RSS chief’s messaging seems to be crystal clear. There’s no place for violence unlike what happened during the CJP protests. Culture of reasoned debate in Bharat was highlighted by the RSS chief in the context of protests held by students. Well, did the protestors trigger a reasonable debate on their issues? It’s a big question. Second big rider pointed to by Dr Mohan Bhagwat was that protests should not lead to divisions in the society or bring about divisiveness. But, did the Jantar Mantar protests pass this test? Well no. Only some genuinely concerned students and their families were there seeking changes in education system. But then, anti-social elements took control of narratives as well as the dais at Jantar Mantar. Stone pelting was resorted to by anti-social elements akin to what we had witnessed in Kashmir valley terrorists backed street incidents. Students’ issues took a back seat. Instead, protests got politicised with several opposition parties jumping in lending an anti-Modi twist to the protests. Left extremists who joined the protests claiming to be heirs of Dr Ambedkar were in fact seeking relevance as their guerilla war waged against democratic institutions got wiped out. In fact, the RSS chief brought the conversation back on issues that mean a lot to students and youth. Dr Mohan Bhagwat pushed for setting aside six per cent of GDP for education making it affordable and accessible to all. RSS has also argued against commercialization of educational institutions as avenues for profiteering at the cost of students and youth. At the same time, RSS chief has pin pointed to ‘collective responsibility’ of entire Indian society for taking education to all and not leaving it in exclusive domain of government. So, bringing meaningful debate on education engaging students and youth as big stakeholders may be the way forward. (Author is Director & Chief Executive of Centre for Integrated and Holistic Studies and a veteran newsman)
Pakistan resorted to raids, violence, terror against Balochs while US, Europe stand as mute spectators. Rohan Giri Pazeer Baloch, son of Muhammad Amin, was picked up from his home in Panjgur in November 2025. His family looked for him for months, hoping he would come back. Alas! he did not, but his lifeless body surfaced in Kech three months later. A few districts away, Zareef Baloch who ran a small medical store, was taken by individuals his neighbours described as a state-backed death squad. Not long after, a twenty-year-old named Muhammad Fareed, the sole earner for his family after his father mysteriously disappeared, was abducted as well. One could continue listing these names until the write-up runs out of space, yet Balochistan would still be overflowing with names of those who have disappeared, murdered by Pakistan’s hoodlooms. Paank, human rights wing of the Baloch National Movement, counted 225 extrajudicial killings and 1,355 enforced disappearances in the province in 2025 and pinned the responsibility squarely on Pakistan Army, its intelligence agencies and the Frontier Corps. Baloch Yakjehti Committee put the count at 1,223, the number of people forcibly disappeared that year, among them women, teenagers and two elderly men. Paank called its own report A Year of Repression. There was not much need to dress it up further. Islamabad would prefer that you overlook these human violations and acts of terrorism. In first week of July 2026, Baloch fighters did hit back hard. Coordinated assaults across several districts during July 4 – 8 left 42 dead. Out of these, 38 were security personnel after a strike on a police post guarding the Mangi Dam project in Ziarat. Islamabad claimed this to be an unprovoked atrocity and violent. However, Pakistan has stonewalled public questioning on what a province should do with decades of grief, especially when the perpetrators openly acknowledge their actions. Military raids never really stopped for long enough to call them an aberration. Eighty-two enforced disappearances were logged in January 2026 alone, described by monitors as part of a pattern that is both widespread and systematic. By June 2026, families in Jiwani near Gwadar were crossing into Iran after night raids and home demolitions, their children now out of school in a displacement that has become in the flattest possible sense, routine. None of this began last week or even last decade. Balochistan’s insurgency has its roots back in late 1940s when the region was folded into a country it had not quite agreed to join and locals began accusing Islamabad of extracting the province’s wealth while leaving its children without schools. Every uprising since has been met with a crackdown and every crackdown has quietly triggered next uprising, the way burning a field down to the soil somehow never stops it from growing back. Then there is Gwadar where the whole thing acquires a price tag. Sixty-two billion dollars of Chinese investment sits on edge of this coastline, meant to give Beijing a shortcut past the Malacca Strait. The port, marketed as crown jewel of CPEC has pushed out local fishermen and wrapped the area in security restrictions that have hollowed out whatever economy was left, while the state treats requests for compensation as either terrorism or foreign funded subversion. Ask to be paid for your own coastline and you risk disappearing. China has bought the port. It has not bought the people who used to fish beside it and every few months it gets billed for that difference in the form of an ambush on its own workers. Widen the frame and neighbourhood looks nervous rather than helpful. As per reports, Pakistan’s army is already tied down along the Line of Control, Durand Line and its own fight with the Pakistani Taliban. So Balochistan becomes the front it cannot properly staff and a death squad unleashed instead of a school or a hospital. Iran now hosts some of the families fleeing the area while keeping a wary eye on its own Baloch population. Afghanistan’s Taliban government stands accused of sheltering fighters who slip across a border that exists mostly on paper, a charge Kabul denies. And, Bharat mostly shows up here as an excuse. Pakistani officials always have a ‘foreign hand’ to point fingers at almost by reflex whenever Balochistan burns. Pakistan has never ever produced any verifiable evidence on this mysterious ‘foreign hand’ argument. This obviously is seen as an easy while lie for not reading its own human rights reports. Those reports, for what it’s worth, are not being written by Balochistan’s enemies. European Union’s own GSP Plus monitoring mission flagged concerns in 2025 over enforced disappearances and the misuse of anti-terrorism law in a province that gets European trade preferences specifically because Pakistan promised, on paper, to behave better. So no, this isn’t really an insurgency story at its core. It’s a story about the state that gave up on winning Baloch consent a long time ago and settled instead for manufacturing Baloch absence, one raid, one dumped body, one displaced family at a time. Every operation with a grand name, Al Azm, Shaban and those before got Islamabad a week of headlines and left behind one more generation raised on funerals. Paank called it repression. Baloch Yakjehti Committee called the raids collective punishment. None of the reports were written or belonged to Bharat. Baloch rights defenders spent years cataloguing their own dead because nobody else would and who are, even now, still waiting for anyone outside their own funerals to take cognizance. (Author is a research scholar at Amity University, Gwalior, working at the intersection of socio-political research and media analysis. His writing engages with contemporary public narratives through a research-driven and analytical lens)
Youth be engaged in education reforms & setting up our own information technology ecosystem that’s youthful, open, competitive, cost effective. K.A. Badarinath When Prime Minister Narendra Modi offered to forgive youngsters who abused him and his late mother, large number of sneers and jeers were let out by anti-social elements that infiltrated the students protests held by Cockroach Janata Party (CJP). Prime Minister Modi striking a ‘conciliatory’ note in his insta videos to begin a substantial conversation with Gen Z and Alpha Z was unexpected for his political rivals and hooligans that were seeking relevance in the face of students and youth unrest. But then, spread of CJP protests in some states that hitherto did not see any movement reflected that restlessness within the youth was being utilized as a trigger to spread unrest and lawlessness. Such protests against paper leaks and exams related malpractices also spread in states like Jharkhand and Punjab where the opposition parties were in the saddle. Protests and largescale violence in opposition ruled states did not get the kind of attention from certain media outs that chose deliberately to play down the incidents. One big lesson for those in administration and governance across political spectrum is that youth seek ‘meaningful and serious engagement’ on their issues. Hooligans, rowdy sheeters, drug peddlers, rape accused apart from Islamist radicals and church-led proselytisers, youth and students have thrown up a serious challenge for reworking in the way Bharatiya society is run. Many analysts dashed off the 49-days protests as spontaneous outburst coupled with some deft backroom management by confirmed anti-national characters. Given that Bharat has the largest youth and student force with over 800 million aged under 35-years, their voice be heard, engaged, taken on board and a scientific understanding of the issues undertaken. Reforming education in a large diverse country and aligning it with aspirational youth is non-negotiable and needs to be comprehensively done to restore its credibility and emerge as global educational hub for innovation, research as well. Finding solutions to multiplicity of problems faced by Bharatiya people and communities internationally through this huge trained workforce should be the idea. Secondly, given the aspirational nature of upwardly progressive Bharat, setting up our own information ecosystem that’s more youthful and competitive on quality and price parameters as against world wide web and technology giants like Google is something that this movement has taught us. Given that a good number of young IT professionals joined the Jantar Mantar protests, repurposing their energies to evolve a new model for IT governance may work. Instead of false narratives being pushed by influencers and agenda-based handlers holding the sway, developing our own internet-based information highway with last mile delivery and servers based out of India is what needs to be prioritized. A parallel IT ecosystem, internet-based information highway that’s competitive both in terms of quality and pricing needs to be put in place while global technology players reform the way they seek to engage with Bharat. In this context, Parliamentary Standing Committee on Communications & Information Technology headed by Nishikant Dubey is significant. The all party panel has demanded a personal apology from Meta chief executive officer Mark Zuckerberg for having taken down a video of Prime Minister Narendra Modi. In effect, the policymakers in India are questioning the role of these technology companies during the CJP protests, comments on 2024 elections etc. Since protests and founding of CJP were an offshoot of an IT based campaign, reforming our technology policy and hastening it up is an imperative. In our case, Chinese model of IT system and governance may not work. China may have taken an extreme position with complete ban on access to Google or other western search engines with Baidu having a virtual monopoly in sync with Communist Party of China’s agenda to deny free speech, limit access to information and conversations. Sensing the uneasiness in its own youth, in May 2026, China launched a massive campaign to cajole its youngsters and pull them out of ‘extreme pessimism’ or mollify them from posing serious questions on the country’s economic future. Cyber Administration of China’s drive may not be workable for open debate and conversation with youngsters having fresh ideas, ideological proclivities and idiosyncrasies. In a free and open democratic polity like India that still runs on civilizational ethos and strength of its cultural diversity, controls and regulations may not be an option. Latest protests and mobilization done by Cockroach Janata Party should serve as a trigger not only to reform the education system but rejig the content for our youngsters, decolonize their mindset from European imposition of Macauly’s model and hold conversations and engagement with students. For instance, can we engage with them on all educational and societal issues via technology platforms? Institutionalizing this engagement is something that the central government and states can consider seriously. For instance, skills, work opportunities, history and evolution of Bharat should form core of educational reforms even as processes are being redone. All sectors of economy, development and community life having direct linkages with technology should also be conversed widely to evolve a consensus. For instance, what works for our villages, towns, cities and the society should be decided in conjunction with youngsters. A wider and deeper debate on education coupled with revamping our IT ecosystem is the only way forward. (Author is Director & Chief Executive of non-partisan think tank, Centre for Integrated and Holistic Studies based in New Delhi. He’s a veteran newsman also)
Jantar Mantar protests were never just about students. Foreign-funded NGOs, radical Islamists, Maoists, criminals and church, gave a lethal twist to the campaign. K.A. Badarinath A scientific deconstruction of what Cockroach Janata Party (CJP) and its 49-days violence ridden protests at Jantar Mantar in New Delhi warrants looking beyond the ordinary. Neither the protests were simply about leak of papers relating to national examinations for admitting students to top medical colleges nor were they instant outpour of students anger against the system alone. Possibly there were a couple of thousands of students and their parents that were genuinely agitated about leak of entrance exams papers. A big chunk of the protestors was with questionable background or their intent needs closer scrutiny. Resignation of Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan was demanded and achieved. What next is the lingering question that haunts a lot number of gentry. Will Pradhan’s exit from the council of ministers solve the issues relating to education sector? If one were to go by media reports there were over 46 such leaks in states and centre pre-2014 before this government took charge of Bharat’s affairs. Has resignation of education ministers of these states or at centre been demanded? Was the ‘education mafia’ tackled then is the moot question? Some reports suggest that cleanup of education system undertaken by this government was to be side-stepped and hence the cockroaches demanded his resignation. One report suggested that even change of portfolio was not acceptable to agitators who held the capital to ransom as hooligans took over the streets. Gridlock aside, who are these cockroaches that ratcheted up big time following on the insta and other social media handles that pushed the envelope? A big section of bureaucracy and political leadership is so much overwhelmed that they are not even willing to look at facts and begin the pushback. A Delhi Police analysis based on its Crime Kundli database and face recognition technology, over 2873 individuals with criminal background ‘infiltrated’ or took over the students protest that swelled to about 20,000 at its peak. Murder, robbery, dacoity, crime against women, drug peddling those with heinous criminal background were zeroed upon in their first set analysis. Illegal arms peddlers, chain snatchers and kidnappers also made their way into the protests that were marked by huge attacks on the Delhi Police force. Antagonists of Delhi Police did not waste time to question the database and its findings. They were out to claim that Delhi Police was attempting to paint the cockroaches protest black. As Delhi’s veteran crime reporters would vouch, this database is one of the most scientifically built assets to tackle crime in the national capital. It has not been created to denigrate two months old cockroaches born out of a satirical statement made by Honourable Chief Justice of India, founded and allegedly funded by foreign powers that be. How did so many crime-sheeters make it to the protest? Who mobilized them? There’s no plausible answer as of now. And now, they have the gumption to question the very authority of Supreme Court of India on proceeding against criminals linked to protests. Social media is awash with reports that Malayali businessman Mohammed Shaji of Dubai based Abreco Freight flew 23 of his employees to participate in the Cockroaches protest spending thousands of dollars. Big question is what’s the link between the two sides. Shaji reportedly facing issues with the United Arab Emirates (UAE) government covered all expenses for these employees and even provided some extra incentives to motivate their participation in this protest. Has anyone cared to find out the international linkages of these cockroaches? Has deep dive analysis been made into lethal twist given to cockroaches’ protest at Jantar Mantar by Bhim Army and its chief Chandrashekhar Azad? The Nagina member of parliament not only extended his support to the Abhijit Dipke led CJP but actively fore-fronted the sit-in within and outside the Parliament premises. An elected Member of Parliament wedded to a certain ideology has full freedom to do what he did. He reportedly mobilized people on the ground, gave violent edge to the protesters who repeatedly claimed it was ‘peaceful and violence free’. There was nothing peaceful about the protests whatsoever. Bhim Party that was born out of divisive ideological moorings and sectarian agenda did its bit to lend numbers, logistical support and even partly funded the campaign that largely metamorphosed into one against Modi government, Bharat and RSS. Azad who dabbled with Congress, Left parties and Samajwadis in northern state of Uttar Pradesh has had his face off with law enforcement agencies in the past as well. While these Azad hooligans turned protests into an unruly affair, charges were made that Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) and its supporters were responsible for the protestors’ violence. Now comes the question of All India Students Association (AISA) that mobilized some youngsters from the Jawaharlal Nehru University and elsewhere. AISA is itself fighting for seeking relevance given that its parent Left extreme ideological assorted Naxalite groups have virtually folded up. AISA came into being as recruiting ground for all Marxist, Leninist armed groups including peoples war group whose Radical Students Union was merged into this outfit in a new avtar. AISA’s participation and some of its activists undertaking a fast along with Sonam Wangchuk is only a feeble attempt to revive the spirit of ‘naxalite revolution’, propagate the ideology of annihilation and wage an armed struggle against elected governments. Did splinter Naxalite groups on the run also become an active part of these protests? Has anyone examined this question? What was the role of Neha and her brand of CPI ML – Liberation activists? Did they see an opportunity in the Jantar Mantar protests to corner Modi government that was breathing down the neck of Maoist guerillas forcing their surrender or elimination? Now comes the radical Islamists link to the protests that were never spontaneous nor democratic, simple and plain. Bangladesh’s Jamaat e Islaami was abnormally active during the protests lending support
RSS strongly believes that distortions that have crept in need to be addressed as Hindu society goes about reclaiming its lost glory. Vinod Kumar Shukla Bharat that holds Vasudhaiv Kutumbakam (world is one family) as its philosophical foundation frequently faces accusations of being oppressive, unjust and regressive towards certain sections of its own people. But, how far does this charge hold true? To argue that Bhartiya society is innately regressive is historic mischaracterisation. Claims that its civilizational pathway inherently denies equal rights are unfounded. It is true, however, that Bharatiya society lately fractured along caste lines due to a rigid, hereditary system that crept in is a distortion that is neither correct nor intrinsically Indic. Throughout civilizational history spanning over 5,000 – 7,000 years, institutional aberrations were bound to occur across different eras and regions. Yet, Bhartiya society not only recognised these flaws at certain period of time but proactively corrected them from within. Emergence of Mahatma Gautam Buddha, Mahavir Swami, Adi Shankaracharya, Sant Kabir, Guru Nanak and innumerable other saints and social reformers demonstrate a robust internal tradition of reform and corrective processes operating under larger Sanatan umbrella. But it is foreign interventions that profoundly impacted both social fabric and collective psyche of Bharat. While Islamic invasions brought existential threats to life, faith and dignity, European colonizers deployed strategic narratives designed to divide and disintegrate Hindu society. Modern concept of ‘caste’ was one such foreign intervention manufactured by drawing a false parallel with ancient concept of Varna. English word “caste” is derived from Portuguese and Spanish word ‘casta’ which means race, lineage or breed. This European construct is being used to demonize Varna by Breaking Bharat brigade which was not hereditary. Most of ancient Bhartiya treatises explicitly state that Varna is determined by work profile, merit, conduct rather than birth. As Skanda Purana, the largest one, notes: जन्मना जायते शूद्रः संस्काराद् द्विज उच्यते। वेदपाठात् भवेत् विप्रः ब्रह्म जानाति ब्राह्मणः।। (Book VI, Nagara Kanda, Chapter 239, Verses 31-34) “By birth, everyone is a Shudra (an ordinary person). By undergoing purificatory rites and moral education, one becomes a Dwija (twice-born). By studying Vedas, one becomes a Vipra (learned), and one who realizes Brahman (the Ultimate Truth) is known as a Brahmana.” This clear distinction is reinforced in Srimad Bhagavad Gita, where Lord Krishna reveals to Arjuna: चातुर्वर्ण्यं मया सृष्टं गुणकर्मविभागश: । तस्य कर्तारमपि मां विद्ध्यकर्तारमव्ययम् ॥ 4.13॥ “Four categories of occupations were created by me according to people’s qualities and activities. Although I am the creator of this system, know Me to be the non-doer and eternal.” Srimad Bhagavad Gita further dwelves that varna system is not by birth but by action when it says: ब्राह्मणक्षत्रियविशां शूद्राणां च परन्तप । कर्माणि प्रविभक्तानि स्वभावप्रभवैर्गुणै: ॥ 18.41॥ Duties of Brahmins, Kshatriyas, Vaishyas, and Shudras—are distributed according to their qualities, their guṇas (and not by birth). But contemporary discourse around caste has been heavily shaped by colonial interventions, Western framing and specific ideological agendas by falsely equating it with Varna. Both external and internal forces working against interest of Bharat have weaponized the caste narrative to delegitimize Hindu tradition, value system and civilization, blaming it for systemic discrimination while ignoring historical distortions introduced by the British. Clearly birth-based caste system finds no support in Vedic traditions. All these distortions were done with a purpose. To disrupt the social harmony of a self-sustaining Bhartiya society, colonial administrators used censuses and codifications to institutionalize and freeze fluid social groups. Communities that once enjoyed social mobility were boxed into rigid hereditary categories. The first all-India census was conducted in 1871, followed by classifications under H H Risley in the 1901 census that formalized these divisions. Risley operationalized theory that varna, however ancient, could be rigidly applied to all modern occupations and groups in Bharat. Thrusted upon the society and repeated for generations, this artificial classification became a major impediment to social harmony. In present context, companies like Cisco and some state legislatures in United States continue to drive the narrative of caste as an impediment to social and economic progression in Bharat and hence identified caste as an issue of concern. Against this backdrop, Samajik Samrasta (Social Harmony) initiative of Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) gains significance aiming to counter these distortions and restore the original spirit of civilization. In modern digital age, where social media often exacerbates social fractures, targeted grassroots intervention becomes even more vital. Samajik Samrasta is intensified in centenary year of the RSS which ideated on five core social transformative ideas as ‘Panch Parivartan’ (Five Transformations). Samajik Samrasta is one of them. Anticipating threat posed by caste divisions, many of which were legacies of the colonial era and aberrations within the Bharatiya society, RSS initiated its anti-discrimination work decades ago. Dr Keshav Baliram Hedgewar, founder and first Sarsanghachalak (chief) of RSS included erasing internal divisions within Hindu society as one core vision of the organisation, believing that national strength could not be built on a divided Hindu society. Way back in 1925, he emphasized that every Swayamsevak (volunteer) must embrace shared civilizational identity as Hindu first, transcending caste lines. Second Sarsanghchalak M S Golwalkar while defending the functional philosophy of the varna system, strongly criticized its degeneration into a rigid, birth-based hierarchy renamed as Caste by the British. He also denounced untouchability as a historic deviation from true Hindu principles and called for its total elimination. Even M K Gandhi advocated for original concept of Varna while Dr B R Ambedkar, in his seminal work ‘Who Were the Shudras?’ posited that Shudras were originally part of the Kshatriyas (the second Varna). He quoted several scriptures to suggest that there were three Varnas at some places and four elsewhere. However, his quest remains that who were modern days Shudras? Subsequent RSS leadership accelerated these social integration efforts. The third Sarsanghchalak, Balasaheb Deoras, placed equality and social harmony at centre of organization’s outreach, famously declaring in 1974: “If untouchability is not wrong, then nothing is wrong in the world.” Current Sarsanghchalak, Mohan Bhagwat, continues to
Brig Brijesh Pandey The 1999 Kargil War is remembered as a war India won despite fighting under self-imposed restrictions of ground as well as Air Force not crossing the Line of Control (LoC). That framing, while accurate in terms of the triumph of the brute infantry courage and artillery firepower, screens the uncomfortable question as to what then, prompted the Kargil Review Committee (KRC) in the first place. The answer to this, lies in the fact that India was strategically surprised by the gravity of the intelligence failure along the front that the forces had occupied for decades. Pakistani forces had intruded at a massive scale, occupied the heights above Dras, Kargil, Batalik and Turtuk, and had remained there for weeks before they could be detected. The KRC was chaired by K. Subrahmanyam, and its findings were carried forward by the Group of Ministers (GoM) report of 2001, together constituting the most substantial defence-reform exercise in independent India’s history. More than a quarter-century later, three questions remain worth asking honestly: whether the KRC’s recommendations actually mattered in practice, whether India’s defence reforms have kept pace with a changing security environment, and whether the strategic, geopolitical and energy-security landscape has already outrun the assumptions of 1999-2001. Kargil as an Institutional Failure, Not Merely an Intelligence One The central insight of KRC not limited to Kargil simply being an intelligence failure, but the failure of systems. The report broadly identified: Six Pillars of Reform: Progress and Limitations Creation of the Integrated Defence Staff (2001), Defence Intelligence Agency (DIA), a reinforced National Security Council Secretariat (NSCS) and the post of Chief of Defence Staff (CDS) along with the Department of Military Affairs (DMA) reflect the most critical components of the success of the reforms. CDS as India’s first one-point military advisor duly supported by DMA and DIA closes the vital gap identified by KRC. The long-time of 21 years taken to appoint the CDS in 2020, illustrates the complexities involved in the institutional reforms against the entrenched service interests. Establishment of theatre commands, the operational payoff of having a CDS, remains unimplemented years after they were targeted for rollout. It is held up due to the disagreements between the three services over the allocation of command and order of battle of these commands. The capstone institution exists but its operational integration is not even half finished. The Multi Agency Centre (MAC) along with its state components, the DIA, substantial enhancement in satellite reconnaissance, long endurance UAVs as well as airborne early warning have measurably improved India’s technical intelligence base since 1999. However, the 2008 Mumbai attacks, the periodic border stand-offs and other terrorist initiated incidents suggest that fusion of multi-source intelligence into timely, actionable intelligence is harder to institutionalise. Buying sensors or raising infrastructure is easier to achieve than building the analytical culture and inter agency trust, the KRC actually called for. Defence procurement is the area that has seen tremendous change in form, though substance is little mixed. Acceptance of Necessity for equipment worth close to rupees 10 Lakh Crores in last two years under the road map of Atmanirbharta, Defence Acquisition Procedure, positive indigenization list, iDEX and defence industrial corridors are actively shifted the discourse from import led procurement to the domestic designs. Platforms such as Tejas, Brahmos, Aksah, Pinaka, Astra and Prachand demonstrate genuine domestic capability. The unresolved core problem, however, is one the KRC-era reforms did not anticipate. Dependence has changed forms; it has not disappeared. India remains import dependent for propulsion systems, semiconductors and rare earth magnets. India’s lack of sovereign design capacity in these areas dwarfs the achievements recounted previously. Another challenge that remains to be fully addressed is the procurement timelines. There have been instances when the time lag between “wanting to procure” to the “actually procured” was stretched to over two decades. This does not suit the era in which technology is changing so rapidly. Tri-service exercises, integrated ISR, space and cyber have advanced considerably. Operation Sindoor demonstrated that India can synchronise land, air, sea, information, space and cyber effectively in a live contingency. But jointness at the exercise or a single-operation level is not the same as jointness permanently embedded into the command structures. This is precisely why the creation of theatre commands matters most. Post Kargil and particularly post Galwan, investment in road, rail, tunnel and forward basing infrastructure along the northern borders has been substantial, addressing the KRC-era logistics deficiency directly. This remains one of the most unambiguous successes of the last decade, the stage of infrastructural parity with China is still some distance away. KRC was not left to operate in silence. Naresh Chandra Task Force (2012) revisited many of the same higher defence management questions eight years before the post of CDS was finally created in 1920. Likewise, Shekatkar Committee (2016) targeted force restructuring and cost rationalization. The very fact that in the period of 17 years, India needed three successive high-level committees to arrive at the reforms first envisioned by KRC, highlights the “resistance to change” which exists within India’s defence establishment. Geopolitical Ground has Shifted ever since the KRC In 1999, the KRC’s entire frame of reference was Pakistan. That frame is now inadequate. The People’s Liberation Army’s aggression of 2020 at Galwan, infrastructure built across Tibet, naval expansion into the Indian Ocean confirm that China, not Pakistan, is now India’s principal long-term military concern. This means that reforms designed around Pakistan’s intrusion centric scenario cannot be assumed to translate into readiness against much larger, better resourced adversary across much larger frontier. China-Pakistan Collusion and Two front Planning Pakistan’s growing reliance on Chinese missiles, aircraft, radar and electronic warfare systems raises the prospect of coordinated contingencies on two fronts simultaneously. India’s shift towards integrated theatre operations, multi-domain and network centric warfare is a response to this threat. However, as long as the theatre commands remains a “held in abeyance” dream, the two front problems will remain unaddressed. Energy Security: An Unacknowledged Dimension of KRC Energy security is
The Indian National Flag is far more than a national emblem; it is the living expression of India’s civilisational continuity, constitutional sovereignty, and democratic spirit. Born not from conquest but from one of history’s greatest mass movements for freedom, the Tricolour embodies the values of courage, peace, progress and moral responsibility. It reflects the collective will of over a billion citizens, symbolising a Republic rooted in an ancient civilisation yet confidently shaping the future through democracy, inclusivity and strategic autonomy. As India rises on the global stage, the Tricolour stands as a timeless witness to a nation whose greatest strength lies in the harmony of its heritage, its Constitution and its people.
