Education Hindus Leadership Policy Technology

Bharat, An Evolving, Chaotic but Vibrant Democracy

From being ‘gana rajyas’ to going high-tech in campaigns & voting, Bharat has covered huge space and willing to experiment with spiritual democracy Dr Aniruddh Subhedar Like people, nations too have a distinct nature, character and history of their own. Bharat is no exception to this and has its own uniqueness in all these three aspects. Studying Bharat diligently and objectively, one will find that ideal of democracy and freedom to choose leaders has been ingrained in her ethos since times immemorial. No doubt the modern democratic institutions of Bharat took their form after British colonization but roots of democracy in Bharat are as old as it gets. When Greece was enjoying its city states, in Bharat there were Gana-Rajyas. Ganas means the people making up a state and Gana-Rajya translates to “rule of people”. Scholars tell us that even before Gana-Rajyas, during evolution of Bharatiya civilization, in Vedic period we find existence of assemblies like Sabha, Samiti and Vidath, which used to administer people and whose leaders were elected by the people only. The Ganas were basically units as cohesive as families or clans. Later when monarchy became the norm in Bharat, it was not too far away from this basic ideal. The word ‘praja‘, which means people / subjects, literally translates to ‘offspring’ or children. In essence, Raja (King) was supposed to take care of his people as his own children. And, even during that era of monarchy, at the village level panchayats or village assemblies, usually made up of community elders, were thriving in Bharat; respected and accepted by the State. Therefore, transition to modern democratic political setup was not too hard for Bharatiyas. As soon as Bharat freed itself from colonial clutches, it made universal adult franchise one of the defining characteristics of its political system. In Letter & Practice In modern times, democratic ethics are too well entrenched in Bharat’s polity in letter and practice. Preamble of Bharat’s Constitution pledges to constitute the country into “a democratic republic”. Free and fair elections are bedrock on which this democratic systems stands upon. The Constitution ensures that there is a permanent and independent body- ‘Election Commission of India’ (ECI) which has the power to control and regulate elections to parliament, state legislatures, office of president and vice-president. Measures relating to elections are so stringent that once ‘Model Code of Conduct’ is implemented by the Election Commission, the government is prohibited from making any announcements or policy decisions that could potentially influence people’s voting choices. This means government cannot start any populist scheme and even government bodies cannot start any recruiting process. Provisions of Constitution are not a dead letter. In fact, it’s followed quite strictly. General elections in Bharat are not some run-of-the-mill affair; it is of gigantic proportions. General elections in 2024 Bharat will be the largest exercise ever in the world surpassing even the one held in 2019. Total 90 million people are eligible to vote in this election. It will be the longest-held general election in Bharat (except for the first general election of Independent Bharat in 1951-52) spanning over 44 days. One of the reasons Bharat’s democracy has endured test of time is the seriousness about voting rights and fair elections. Otherwise in Bharat’s neighbourhood there’s hardly a country which can pride itself as a true democracy. In fact, in Bharat’s west, it is hard to find a truly functioning democracy till one crosses the Middle-Eastern countries. Being one of the most populous and diverse countries in the world, Bharat plays a major role in ensuring that democracy and human rights are secure in South East Asia. Bharatiyas take their right to vote seriously and don’t like anyone meddling with it. The closest Bharat came to dictatorship was during 1975-77 emergency imposed by then Prime Minister Indira Gandhi. But what preceded and followed this 21-month stint with dictatorship is worth mentioning here. Among the other reasons, the immediate cause of Indira Gandhi implementing emergency was that the courts concluded that malpractices were used in her election and declared it as null and void. Indira Gandhi paid the price for imposing the Emergency when she and her party Congress were wiped out in elections post-emergency. Interestingly enough, she was re-elected by the people again and later her son Rajiv Gandhi won highest number of seats in Bharat’s political history owing to sympathy wave caused by Indira Gandhi’s assassination by Khalistani terrorists. It shows that Indira Gandhi always had a political stature but even Prime Minister of her standing wasn’t spared by Bharatiya people when she tried to curb their freedom. Credibility of Election Process Given the vast geographical area and size of the electorate, ECI has modernized the process by using Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs) for polling and counting votes for more than two decades. Making the process more credible and faster, EVMs were first used in 1980s, and they are used in general elections since 2004. In 2017 many Opposition parties like Congress, Bahujan Samaj Party, Aam Admi Party harboured doubts on credibility of EVMs after they lost elections in some states. It was alleged that BJP is tempering with EVMs. The allegations went as bizarre as claiming that EVMs (a self-contained, stand-alone machine, lacking any networking capability) is being hacked via internet. A leader of AAP even brought a machine to the Delhi Assembly which looked like EVM and demonstrated how it could be hacked. All this hullabaloo was silenced when in May-June 2017 the ECI invited these parties and gave them the real EVM to prove that it could be hacked. Parties like AAP did not even participate in the challenge, while other two other parties, CPI (M) and NCP, who sent their representatives said that “they just came to understand how EVMs work”. Even without going into technical know-how the allegations against EVMs could be easily dismissed by looking at the fact that even in these 2017 elections, BJP lost in Punjab and Congress won. AAP won Punjab state

Disinformation Hindus Human Rights Insurgency Misinformation Policy Security

1.03K

Jinnah’s Fallacy Commemorated as Pakistan’s National Day!

The Lahore Resolution, aka Pakistan Resolution, written by Sher-e-Bangla A.K. Fazlul Huq, said that Muslims in India were a separate country with their own social, religious, and cultural identities. It called for the creation of independent states in areas where Muslims predominated. Despite the resolution’s own lack of mention of the term “Pakistan,” it planted the seeds for its ultimate establishment. Millions of Muslims’ hopes for their political future were brought to life and given a tangible vision by the Lahore Resolution. Intellectuals like Allama Iqbal, who emphasised the political, social, and cultural distinctions between Muslims and Hindus, were instrumental in developing the idea of a distinct Muslim state. The concept gained more popularity after Choudhary Rahmat Ali’s 1933 pamphlet “Now or Never”, which suggested calling the hypothetical state “Pakistan”, was published. Pakistan is an odd outlier in the vast fabric of geopolitical history, a nation that appeared out of thin air and lacks a tangible locus. Its establishment in 1947, during the mayhem of British decolonization in the Indian subcontinent, was not a product of historical or cultural evolution, but rather of political expediency. Ever since its establishment, Pakistan has faced difficulties in defining its identity and navigating issues related to legitimacy, governance, and identity beyond its arbitrary borders. Pakistan was created by political plotting motivated by the demands of sectarian politics and colonial legacies, not by a natural process based on nationalism. Pakistan was created by the division of British India. Pakistan’s ideological foundation came from the Two-Nation Theory, which maintained that Muslims and Hindus were two distinct nations that could not cohabit in a single state. Nevertheless, this notion oversimplified the complex sociocultural context of the Indian subcontinent and ignored the diversity within Muslim communities. Pakistan’s identity gets more complex by its large geographical region. Divided by over a thousand miles of Indian territory, East and West Pakistan (now Bangladesh and Pakistan, respectively) had little in common except their shared religious beliefs. This physical separation further undermined the legitimacy of the Pakistani state, escalating racial tensions and ultimately leading to the bloody battle and Bangladesh’s secession in 1971. Two-Nation Theory of Muhammad Ali Jinnah was weak and unimpressive. It was hollow on an intellectual level and disconnected from reality. Muslims were everywhere throughout India and all of them would not have been able to have had their own homeland without a massive population swap. Although Ambedkar and Jinnah discussed it in passing but both must have understood how unrealistic it was. Yet, Jinnah was able to stir up fleeting feelings and sway Muslim sentiment in his favour. The day India was divided proved its falsehood. Just slightly more than half of the 100 million Muslims migrated to Pakistan. The remainder chose to remain in India.[1] Jinnah, leader of the All-India Muslim League, fiercely advocated Muslims’ rights in British India. He believed that the Muslims of the subcontinent were a distinct people and that they ought to have their own nation where they could openly practice their religion and have their rights to politics and culture protected. This idea served as the cornerstone of his political campaign to establish Pakistan. A fundamental element of Jinnah’s scheme and subsequent partition of the Indian subcontinent was the Two-Nation Theory. The argument that Muslims and Hindus in British India were two different nations with irreconcilable differences was used by Jinnah and his Muslim League to support the demand for a separate Muslim state.[2] With support from Muslim League, Jinnah formulated the Two-Nation Theory for the purpose of defending their political, cultural, and religious rights, contented that Muslims needed their own state. This increased tensions between communities and prepared the ground for the terrible violence and uprooting that precipitated division in 1947. In fact, the split itself continues to rank among the most horrific events in the history of the region, causing extensive killings, large-scale migrations, and lingering hostilities. There is no denying that Jinnah’s Two-Nation Theory still has an impact on South Asia’s political climate today. The contentious relations between India and Pakistan and the continuous discussions in the region about nationalism, identity, and religious plurality are all affected by the legacy of partition. Dismissing the Myth That Hindus and Muslims Cannot Coexist With a population of over a billion, India is home to both one of the biggest Muslim populations in the world and a majority Hindu population, dispelling the idea that the two religions cannot live in harmony. Most Muslims and Hindus in India live in harmony, sharing homes, workplaces, and cultural activities. This coexistence is a result of centuries of shared history and respect for one another, not just an oddity. Rhetoric that asserts Muslims and Hindus cannot live in harmony has reappeared in recent years. The long history of tranquilly and cohabitation between these two cultures in the Indian subcontinent is undermined by this dividing narrative, which is frequently supported by political agendas and sectarian interests. The belief that Muslims and Hindus cannot live together exaggerates complex social realities and ignores millennia of shared cultural history and respect. Many religious sects have historically called India home, contributing to the country’s rich cultural diversity. First of all, these claims are contradicted by India’s own history. For centuries, Muslims and Hindus have coexisted in the same social and cultural context, sometimes amicably and other times tensely. The blending of these two major religions is attested to by the nation’s syncretic traditions, which are seen in its literature, festivals, and architectural design. From ancient times India has been a melting pot of several religions, where mutual respect and understanding have often prevailed. During the Indian Independence movement, Muslims and Hindus fought side by side against British colonial rule. Visionaries like Mahatma Gandhi and Maulana Abul Kalam Azad, who highlighted that all Indians, regardless of their creed, share a common destiny, advocated religious harmony and cooperation. There are countless examples of Hindus and Muslims living side by side in harmony and peace throughout India. The reality on the ground belies the

Geopolitics Leadership Media Policy Security

854

China Spins Jingoistic Narrative

Bharat hits back on Chinese Communist Party’s false claims on Arunachal Pradesh. Global community including US recognize the dragon ploy. Rohan Giri There’s something innate in China that cannot change. It’s in its DNA to encroach on others. As part of its grand plan to usurp others land, properties and expand its hegemony, China and its ruling Communist Party of China (CPC) have tasted success in few areas while they eagerly look at grabbing neighbours’ territories. Tibet is one area where Chinese Communist Party has had large success in altering names of places, assert control on large swaps of land and change, culture, languages and life of ordinary citizens. Through coercion, China constructed certain structures to also advance on its border regions through coercive means. Similar attempts have been made with Bharat’s territories especially Arunachal Pradesh to assert its dominance in the region. Communist Party of China and its life time General Secretary Xi Jingping announced Chinese names to places in and around Arunachal Pradesh. Latest in the Chinese ploy of old and deceitful rhetoric is evidenced by statements made by People’s Liberation Army’s Senior Colonel Zhang Xiaogang, spokesperson for Chinese Defense Ministry. By intention, he claimed that southern region of Xizang, the Chinese nomenclature for Tibet, was integral component of China’s territory. This was obvious reference to Arunachal Pradesh which China thinks is its own territory. Chinese Defense Ministry raked up the bogey on Bharat’s north-eastern state of Arunachal Pradesh after Sela Tunnel was constructed to enhance civic and military connectivity and capabilities in the state. The latest overtures by China expose the Chinese Communist Party ploy to initially seize Tibet and subsequently move in on Arunachal Pradesh. Bharat along with 17 other countries, mostly neighbours, has experienced adverse consequences of persistently making unsubstantiated claims by Chinese Communist Party. Henry McMahon, then foreign secretary of Britain drew an 890-km border between Bharat and Tibet in 1914. Arunachal Pradesh was formerly referred to as North Eastern Frontier Agency before the establishment of the McMahon Line. On one side of McMahon, Tibet existed as an autonomous region while on the other Arunachal Pradesh was an Indian state. Chinese communist party falsely maintains that Tibet is one component of China and refuses to acknowledge this demarcation. China’s aspirations for territorial expansion had begun to gain momentum at this point. The act of manipulating maps to include some regions of Bharat has been observed since ancient times, hence its innate to its nature. Bogus claims of Chinese communists were undermined when Japanese forces launched an invasion of Arunachal Pradesh, north-eastern state of Bharat during Second World War. Additionally, emergence of Chinese expansionism posed an enormous threat to Bharat’s territorial integrity. During that period, the British-led Indian Army provided protection to Tawang of Arunachal Pradesh. Bharat has had consistently maintained a firm stance against China’s claims and Arunachal Pradesh residents have historically rejected China’s expansionist aspirations and unsubstantiated assertions. Latest PLA statements on Arunachal Pradesh have come after Chinese Communist Party misleading names of 11 locations in Arunachal Pradesh. In addition to expressing their outrage, local populace actively engaged in peace marches on the roads, demonstrating their opposition to China. The protesting people were holding placards that read, “We stand by India” and “Arunachal is not part of China.” The posters in their possession had the message, “Don’t we know… How China is oppressing the people of Tibet and is always engaged in looting it? At any cost, we would not like the condition of Arunachal Pradesh to become like that of Tibet…” Individuals hailing from Arunachal Pradesh, holding tricolor flags, asserted that similar demonstration were held when China changed the names of six locations in 2017 and 15 locations in 2021. The misleading names were in the Chinese and Tibetan languages. In 2023, the controversy over stapled visas gained attention as Indian Wushu players were granted such visas by China. New Delhi-based think tank Center for Integrated and Holistic Studies, at that time, had reported that the “Stapled visas incident is seen more as one step further in China’s grand expansionist plan and communist vision to occupy others’ land disregarding international treaties, pacts and ‘gentlemen’ agreements to not change on-the-ground goal posts. Only way to put an end to this psycho-warfare like stapled visas is to firmly retake ‘Aksai Chin’ under its ‘illegal’ occupation since 1950s and held after the 1962 war.” Bharat and its government always said that Arunachal Pradesh was, is, and will remain integral to the country. China’s illegal expansionist strategy extended much beyond Arunachal Pradesh, Tibet, or Nepal. Countries and international communities need to be alert to such machinations and not succumb to mechanisms like debt trap, infrastructure development or other forms of avarice. (Author: Rohan Giri is a journalism graduate from Indian Institute of Mass Communication (IIMC) New Delhi, and Manager Operations at CIHS.)

Economy Geopolitics Insurgency Judiciary Leadership Media

977

Do we have a Robust Alternative to Electoral Bonds?

If bonds scheme was struck down to end opacity in political funding, will SC, HC judges declare assets annually to ring in transparency? K.A.Badarinath Electoral bonds have been demonised. Bond purchasers, donors to political parties and all elected representatives have been thrashed in the process. After Supreme Court struck down electoral bonds scheme what followed was ‘headline hogging’ competition from every possible analyst, writer or commentator. Given that the five-member Supreme Court judgement on electoral bonds was unanimous, there has been enough mud-slinging on political parties, leaders and every individual associated with the political spectrum. Each write up made valiant attempt to ‘get to the truth’ claims and gave out figures of ‘who paid whom’ kind of screaming headlines. At stake was Rs 16, 518 crore worth bonds purchased and donated to over two dozen parties in seven years at least. What’s unacceptable though is to depict every corporate, high net-worth individual, small or big donor, social foundation as ‘dirty’. Attributing motives to every donation made irrespective of their standing in the society smacks of cynicism at its best. Over 300 petitions have reportedly been filed by individuals, businesses and industry bodies drawing them into slugfest between parties that have benefited from political funding through bonds. Let’s not forget that barring a few swindlers, not all businesses and individuals that contributed to political parties were ‘fraudsters’. For decades political parties were run on cash donations that were hardly accounted for. Today, at least a big chunk of political funding through electoral bonds has been accounted for and donations have been made through banking transactions. These transactions need to reflect in returns filed by political parties. Companies and individuals have to show source of these funds utilized to buy electoral bonds. After the ‘Lordships’ insisted, we even know as to ‘who’s who’ made donations and the parties that en-cashed these bonds. When late Arun Jaitley piloted electoral bonds scheme in 2017-18 through Bharat’s budget, it was hailed as first step towards bringing in transparency to otherwise unaccounted ‘cash donations’. Ringing in transparency and accountability to electoral funding is what Arun Jaitley had declared as the avowed objective. Honourable judges that declared electoral bonds as ‘opaque tools’ may have either been blissfully unaware of the past ‘black money market’ in politics or chose to ignore the illicit cash that made way into elections in Bharat. They may have conveniently forgotten or chose to ignore government’s bid to end cash flows into political parties. But, the fact is that electoral bonds were a baby step towards making political donations more transparent. Otherwise, restricting cash donations to Rs 2000 would not have been announced by then finance minister Arun Jaitley. There was a need to cleanse political funding in India, Jailey had stated in his budget speech. By amending Reserve Bank of India (RBI) act, the bonds scheme became operative on January 2, 2018. State Bank of India was designated as issuer of the electoral bonds. “If you ask people to disclose that (identity of the donor), I’m afraid the cash system will be back”, Arun Jaitley had stated. Well that may be come true given that SBI has been forced by Supreme Court to divulge unique identification number of each electoral bond, along with value, date of purchase and donors names. This will enable mapping political parties as beneficiaries and each donor would be identified. It’s akin to disclosing publicly from election booth as who a voter was voting for? If ‘secret ballot’ was sacrosanct in electoral process, then keeping political donations discreet was an imperative at least for now. There are valid reasons for keeping identity of donors – individuals and firms, domestic and abroad – under wraps till an effective alternative system was in place. Apprehension otherwise is that witch hunt would begin once a political regime changes in states or centre. As long as central and state agencies are convinced that there was no malaise in political donations, then keeping political funding under wraps is an option. Secondly, disclosures on political funding by businesses or individuals, big and small, should be voluntary rather than by statute. Thirdly, a roadmap to achieve full transparency in political funding can be put together through a wider national debate. Fourthly, given that electoral bonds are not available for 2024 general elections and four state legislative assemblies, a comprehensive study on possible role of unaccounted cash or black money may have to be instituted. Fifthly, preference to a political ideology, party or policies of a particular formation need not necessarily be due to business considerations or ‘revdies’ that some parties are good at distributing to purchase votes. It’s not that every donor has a clear ‘business motive’ attached to his contribution. One tends to agree with Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman when she says that it’s a ‘huge assumption’ to say that top 30 corporate companies made political donations through bonds to ‘save themselves’ from investigative agencies. Or, construing these donations to be ‘protection money’ is again a false narrative being peddled by a few groups or individuals. Trust and credibility of electoral bonds was an issue that was flagged by Supreme Court’s five-judge constitution bench when it struck down the scheme last week. Trust and credibility was also the issue pointed to while asking all elected members of Parliament, state legislatures and councils to declare their assets annually. If transparency, credibility and trust are the factors that govern political parties and elected representatives, then should judges of Supreme Court and 25-state high courts not declare their assets every year? Why are the honourable Lordships or the Supreme Court registry sitting on a recommendation of the 30-members Parliamentary Standing Committee led by BJP member Sushil Kumar Modi? Opacity, corruption and power peddling will have to be tackled in all arms of governance including judiciary. Will the Lordships usher in transparency? Should electoral bonds not continue in absence of a more robust, alternative to fund elections? Is belittling or trivializing every political formation or elected representative

Education Hindus

1.31K

Dr Hedgewar: Rare Gem, True Leader & Visionary

Dr. Aniket Pingley Every time I visit Reshim Bagh Karyalaya of Rashtriya Swayasevak Sangh in Nagpur, I pay my tributes at the Smriti Mandir. Firmly nestled, there is a statue of Dr. Keshav Baliram Hedgewar, carved in black stone, depicting a sentinel of this great nation of Hindus. In his chiselled form, ‘Doctor ji’ as he’s popular, appears calm and resolute, watching over the swayamsevaks who are expanding the work of RSS in every realm possible. To say that the statue stands as a symbol of inspiration is an understatement, as is saying that the man was an institution. When man first landed on the moon, the whole world believed that it was a giant leap for mankind. Dr. Hedgewar also took one such giant leap for mankind, albeit a few decades earlier, when he founded the RSS. But unlike many visionaries, he put everything into action through ‘Shakhas’, basic units of Sangh and created a universal roadmap for ‘Vyakti-Nirmaan’ (personality development) that would diligently serve not only Bharat but humanity transcending borders. More than a dozen biographies of Dr. Hedgewar have been written thus far; perhaps the most remarkable one is in Marathi by Shri Nana Palkar, titled ‘Dr. Hedgewar Charitra‘. Shri Palkar, writer and poet himself was also a lifelong pracharak of RSS. Dr. Anil Nene recently translated his book into English under the title ‘Man of the Millennia: Dr. Hedgewar.’ It was released on March 2, 2024. Almost a century since RSS inception, its key figures remain the most under-researched and bordering on enigmatic, but amply vilified, mostly due to a lack of due diligence that often stems from malicious intent. For the English-dominated intellectual space in metropolitan regions of India and the global audience, ‘Man of the Millennia: Dr. Hedgewar’ is a ‘go to’ book as it was originally authored by a Pracharak who not only had opportunities to meet Dr. Hedgewar personally but also internalized the vision-in-action laid down by the fountainhead of the RSS. The book takes us through many notable incidents in Dr. Hedgewar’s life. Since his childhood, the signs of a freedom fighter, a revolutionary and a leader have been evident. From refusing to celebrate Queen Victoria’s birthday in school to raising slogans of Vande Mataram which eventually led to his rustication from school, Dr. Hedgewar’s moral compass was palpable. He went to Kolkata for higher studies. With revolutionary moorings, he played an active role in movement of fellow revolutionaries in Bengal and assisted with supplying them ammunition. To readers, it may come as a shock that before founding the RSS in 1925, Dr. Hedgewar was an active member of Indian National Congress! His speeches against colonial rule as a grassroots’ organizer of Congress led to British charging him with sedition and imprisoning him for almost a year in 1921. When he was released from jail, he was not only met with a rousing welcome from the Congress cadre, but senior leaders like Motilal Nehru felicitated him in a public gathering. Dr. Hedgewar was imprisoned second time for leading ‘Jungle Satyagraha’ during Civil Disobedience Movement in 1930. Dr Hedgewar truly believed in collaboration without any consideration for recognition. Not just with Congress and Anushilan Samiti, he aworked closely with a spectrum of leaders like Dr B.S. Moonje, Shri Babarao Savarkar, followers of Shri Lokmanya Tilak, who also had revolutionary tendencies but deep rootedness in the cultural and civilizational position of Bharat. There must be no doubt that Dr. Hedgewar not only believed in an independent and self-reliant Bharat but made solid contributions to freedom struggle. Through all learning of working at grassroots with people holding divergent view points and methodologies, Dr. Hedgewar also experienced that sporadic passion among people and a sentimental up-tick in emotions for the freedom struggle would fade away quickly. He also saw that Hindus were divided due to narrow considerations of language, caste, region, etc. He realized that being disciplined and organized is fundamental to having lasting conviction for a unified nation. This led him to change gears and steadfastly focus organizing Hindus via the instrument of a ‘Shakha’. Now, in its 100th year since inception, the RSS has expanded to sphere of national life. Dr. Hedgewar’s genius lies in selflessness. He did not create anything for himself. Instead, through genuine affection and razor sharp focus on the goal, the world’s largest brotherhood of volunteers stands before humanity ever ready to do the needful without personal considerations. Dr. Hedgewar is a legend in his own league who continues to live on through the generations of swayamsevaks he inspires. A lot of people talk, some walk the talk, very few walk more than they talk and the rarest of the rare create a roadmap for others to walk. Dr. Hedgewar is that rare gem—a true pathfinder who once walked alone, leaving footprints in Bharat’s history. (Author is an accomplished computer scientist, educator, and holds expertise in media content strategy)

Disinformation Hindus Human Rights Insurgency Misinformation Pakistan Policy Security

984

Bharat Championing Global Humanitarian Leadership

Citizenship Amendment Act unequivocally embodies Bharat’s commitment to provide sanctuary to persecuted minorities from Afghanistan, Bangladesh and Pakistan Rahul Pawa In a historic move that ignited a firestorm of debate both within and internationally, Bharat’s Parliament took a decisive step on December 11, 2019 by passing Citizenship (Amendment) Act (CAA). This landmark legislation marked a momentous shift in the nation’s approach to citizenship, amending the Citizenship Act of 1955 to offer an expedited pathway to Bharat’s nationality for certain persecuted religious minorities originating from Afghanistan, Bangladesh, and Pakistan who had arrived in Bharat by the end of 2014. The Act specifically extends olive branch to Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Jains, Parsis, and Christians delineating a clear classification based on religious affiliation. In alignment with Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s administration’s pledge to enact CAA prior to 2024 national elections, Ministry of Home Affairs delivered a crucial update on March 11, 2024 by notifying related rules. This announcement, which detailed regulatory framework supporting CAA represents a significant move towards making the Act operative. It also echos the government’s commitment in sync the manifesto and reflect the mandate given by people of Bharat. Critically, CAA represents first instance in current day Bharat’s legal history where religion has been explicitly utilised as a criterion for citizenship. This aspect of the law has spurred a plethora of opinions and interpretations sparking an intense discussion about its implications and underlying motivations. While critics argue it undermines Bharat’s constitution by excluding Muslims sparking accusations of discrimination, proponents view the CAA as a humanitarian gesture extended to protect and provide citizenship to persecuted religious minorities. In the heart of this historic decision to enact CAA, lies a complex mosaic of historical events, demographic and ideological shifts that shaped its creation. The genesis of CAA can be traced to tumultuous Partition of imperialist British-occupied Bharat in 1947. An era was marked by fallacious stance of Muslim League led by Muhammad Ali Jinnah that propagated the notion that Hindus and Muslims could not coexist. This was put to rest as millions of Muslims chose to remain in what became Bharat despite formation of East and West Pakistan exclusively for Muslims. The violent emergence of Bangladesh from Pakistan obliterated Jinnah’s claim that a singular Muslim state was the panacea for communal harmony and coexistence. Their path to a harmonious or rights respecting states has been fraught with challenges. The aspiration to uphold and foster Islamic tenets often translated into systemic and legislatively endorsed persecution of minorities—Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Jains, Parsis, and Christians—who found their historical roots in the erstwhile cultural landscape of Bharat. These communities have faced and continue to confront relentless religious persecution and systematic violence. Their ordeals have been marked by forced conversions, marriages, massacres, extreme violence against women and desecration and destruction of sacred sites and educational institutions. Despite1950 Liaquat–Nehru Pact and Bangladesh Constitution of 1972 espousing minority rights and secularism, the reality remains fraught with contradictions, particularly as these nations declared Islam as their state religion. This was also echoed in Afghanistan’s constitutional journey, from the 1931 endorsement of Hanafi Shariah to the 2004 Constitution that sought to balance Shia and Sunni Islam yet declared that no law could contradict Islamic tenets, laying the groundwork for state-endorsed discrimination against minorities. The Taliban years starkly exemplified this, as their strict interpretation of Sharia law further marginalised religious and ethnic minorities evidenced by the tragic destruction of the giant Buddha statues of Bamiyan, and extreme persecution leading to almost no Christians, Hindus, Jains, Buddhists or Skilhs in Afghanistan , underscoring a history of entrenched discrimination, intolerance and violence against minorities in Afghanistan. These historical nuances highlight the backdrop against which Bharat’s CAA was conceived and implemented, setting the stage for a law aimed at providing refuge to persecuted minorities from these countries, whose cultural footprints emanate from Bharat, positioning it as a beacon of human rights and humanitarian leadership in the region and beyond. The CAA, thus, is not merely a legislative act but a response to a historical legacy of division, persecution, violence and discrimination, offering a new path towards inclusivity and protection for those fleeing persecution. In the intricate mosaic of global legislation addressing the plight of persecuted minorities, Bharat’s CAA emerges with a distinct humanitarian ethos, paralleled yet contrasted by international counterparts. Notably, the United States’ Lautenberg Amendment, introduced in 1990, similarly targets religiously persecuted minorities, facilitating their resettlement from the Soviet Union and, following a 2004 extension, from Iran. Like the CAA, it identifies specific religious communities as historically persecuted, excluding Muslims from the Soviet Union and Iran, thereby hastening the path to citizenship for these selected groups. In stark contrast, the United Kingdom’s Nationality and Borders Act of 2022 embodies a markedly different approach, empowering the government to revoke citizenship without notification under Clause 9—a provision that has sparked controversy for its potential to disproportionately affect British Muslims, highlighting ethnic and religious divides. The case of Shamima Begum, often cited in debates, underscores the law’s focus on revocation rather than protection, raising ethical and human rights concerns. While the Lautenberg and Specter Amendments in the United States echo the CAA’s intent to shelter historically persecuted groups, the UK’s Nationality and Borders Act diverges, prioritising national security over humanitarian considerations. This juxtaposition illuminates the CAA’s unique position in the international legal landscape as a beacon of refuge, distinguishing Bharat’s legislative approach to addressing religious persecution without resorting to the revocation of citizenship To conclude, the CAA unequivocally embodies Bharat’s commitment to providing sanctuary to persecuted minorities, standing out as a beacon of humanitarian leadership on the global stage. It is crucial to reiterate that the CAA is not an act designed to revoke citizenship nor is it anti-Muslim or discriminatory in nature. Instead, it represents a unique and targeted legislative effort aimed at extending a hand of protection to those with historical and cultural ties to Bharat who have and continue to suffer from injustices in Afghanistan, Pakistan and Bangladesh. By enacting this legislation, Bharat

Disinformation Hindus Human Rights Insurgency Leadership Misinformation Policy Security World

966

Why’s Global Media Silent on Sandeshkhali Women’s Rapes?

Prejudiced, preconceived and pre-determined narrative-based news coverage on Bharat’s happenings is neither ethical nor objective. Dr Aniruddh Subhedar Renowned Belgian Indologist Koenraad Elst had said, “Western correspondents in Delhi just don’t know very much and also don’t feel the need to find out more.” In 1990s, Elst did extensive research on India especially Ayodhya Ram Temple Movement. In his book “Ayodhya and After: Issues Before Hindu Society”, Elst observed that Western media views India as a backward society which needs to learn the “European civilized ways”. As a natural consequence their view of any movement / political party that asserts indigenous cultural moorings of India was not their best bet. Overly and overtly critical view of Western media towards organizations like Rastriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) and Bhartiya Janata Party (BJP) reflects in their reportage due to this very mind set. This prognosis may sound a wee bit sweeping allegation but a simple analysis of recent events and their coverage in international media does reveal a pattern. For past two months, the shocking and gruesome cases of financial scams, land grabbing, forced labour, sexual harassments and rapes have emerged from Sandeshkhali, a village in West Bengal in Bharat. But western media raises more questions than answering any on the issue. Our analysis examines coverage of the issue by about a dozen international media organizations like The New York Times, The Guardian, The Washington Post, The Wall Street Journal, Financial Times, Le Monde (France) The Times, Reuters, CNN International, Al Jazeera English and BBC What happened in Sandeshkhali? Sandeshkhali is a village in Indian state of West Bengal in proximity to Bangladesh border. West Bengal is currently ruled by Trinamool Congress Party (TMC) whose leader Mamta Banerjee has been an outspoken opponent of Prime Minister Narendra Modi and his political party, Bhartiya Janata Party (BJP). Being one of the very few political leaders who found some traction in resisting BJP spread in Bengal, Banerjee holds significance for anti-BJP political formations. For last few months, news reports of financial irregularities in West Bengal being investigated by the government agencies have been frequently filed by newspersons. On January 5, 2024, officials of Enforcement Directorate (ED) went to investigate TMC leader in Sandeshkhali, Sheikh Shahjahan in a financial scam. ED officials were attacked by his men following which Sheikh Shahjahan went into hiding. It was during his absence that the local women could gather courage to speak up and depth of the issue came to light. Sheikh Shahjahan and his men were de facto rulers of the area. They grabbed land of locals, made them work like slaves, facilitated illegal immigration from neighbouring Bangladesh in large numbers to numerically enlarge their supporter-base. But most horrific reality of Sandeshkhali was that women were being raped by Sheikh Shahjahan and TMC bigwigs regularly at their will and pleasure. At midnight, women were summoned from their homes, assaulted and returned: “Trinamool people will come and check out which house has a young and pretty wife”, revealed women of Sandeshkhali. As they all belonged to ruling party Trinamool Congress, this went on unabashedly and in complete know of the state police brass. After women of Sandeshkhali spoke of their ordeal in public, it turned out to be a big story in national media. Severity of Sandeshkhali incident could only be matched by what followed after it came to public knowledge. State government put its weight behind the accused and blocked investigation of the incident. Opposition leaders were being blocked by the TMC government from entering Sandeshkhali. A journalist of a leading national news channel, who was reporting on issue, was arrested by State police while on camera. Sandeshkhali in Western Media It goes without saying that what was happening in Sandeshkhali deserved media outrage and its coverage in the international media was expected. But a simple Google search tells that there was not a single article or write-up on Sandeshkhali in any of the above-mentioned international media outlets, except in BBC. British Broadcasting Corporation reported the plight of Sandeshkhali women as it has regional language offices in India that have some traction. Sandeshkhali women’s problems and misrule of TMC got some coverage in national media as Union Minister of Women and Child Development Smriti Irani flagged the issue. TMC strongman Sheikh Shahjahan absconded for 50 days, arrested later owing to court directives and Sandeshkhali could not be avoided any further. While there’s no plausible explanation to remain silent on Sandeshkhali story, western media may take umbrage in defence that the story may not warrant global attention or comment, Some even went to the extent to say that Sandeshkhali was India’s internal issue and we respect the country’s sovereignty. But as further analysis will show that it is not true either. Farmers’ Protest coverage In contrast, Punjab farmers protest hogged headlines in news portals of global media houses. This clearly debunks their stated claims of honouring sovereignty cited in Sandeshkhali story. About 16 news stories were done on farmers’ protest, not counting the multiple stories done by BBC and Al-Jazeera in first ten days of Punjab farmers hitting the streets at Sindhu border. One each by New York Times, The Guardian, Financial Times, Reuters, two stories by The Wall Street Journal, Le Monde, and CNN International and six in The Washington Post. Both BBC and Al-Jazeera did multiple stories on farmers’ protest issue. Apart from coverage of farmers’ protests, these media outlets also found space, time and invested on other stories as well. On March 1, 2024, a foreign tourist was gang-raped in the Indian state of Jharkhand. This became a prominent story followed by several global media outfits including The Washington Post, Reuters, CNN, Al-Jazeera and BBC and others. Severity of Sandeshkhali rapes is much bigger in magnitude. If the horrific crime that happened with the foreign tourist deserved media coverage, then by the same measure, Sandeshkhali story should have become a global headline given that leaders and cadres of ruling TMC were involved and it happened with

Disinformation Hindus Human Rights Misinformation

925

Smear And Non-Stop Campaign Against Sanatan Dharma!

Do political upstarts understand sanatan dharma and idea of Bharat? Or, their smear campaign is designed to push for linguistic subversion? Vinod Kumar Shukla Diversity, dialogue, disagreement and harmonious co-existence have been eternal values of Bharat and its Sanatan way of life. But, disrespect, threats and abuses is what they have been getting all long. Sanatan have always been subjected to onslaught in the past by those active with anti-Sanatan and anti-India narrative ecosystem in the contemporary times. Apparently, those resorting to abuses against Sanatan, Hindutva and Bharat have actually run out of arguments to put forth their views with logic, reasoning and rationale. Hence, they seem to have unleashed a smear and non-stop campaign against Sanatan, Hindutva and Bharat. This eco-system of anti-sanatan include constituents of the political alliance that they bracket themselves to be I.N.D.I.A. Also, attempts have been made to cause artificial divide between north and south. These elements however appear to be puppets in the hands of dismantling Bharat brigade active within and outside the country. Balkanisation of Bharat is a global project that some organisations within the country are also part of. Stirring regional and linguistic sentiments, Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) leader and former Union minister A Raja claimed that India is not a nation but a subcontinent where states like Kerala, Tamil Nadu and Odisha have their unique identity. He has threatened that these states will secede. His party colleague Udayanidhi Stalin, son of Tamil Nadu chief minister M K Stalin forcefully argues to eradicate Sanatan dharma and likens it to Dengue, Malaria and AIDS. Udayanidhi Stalin seems to have enlisted support of yet another disrupter in Priyank Kharge, Karnataka minister and son of Congress President Mallikarjuna Kharge. Even senior Kharge spoke against Sanatan on an earlier occasion A Raja likened the ‘Sanatana Dharma’ to HIV and leprosy. DMK Member of Parliament DNV Senthilkumar S contemptuously said in Parliament, “The power of this BJP is only winning elections mainly in the heartland states of Hindi, what we generally call the ‘Gaumutra’ states.” Rahul Gandhi too spoke the same language when he described Bharat as a Union of States which means it is not a nation. He made valiant efforts to differentiate Hindutva and Hinduism. This is contrary to Justice J S Verma’s ruling that described Hindutva as a way of life. Communists that have largely become irrelevant in Bharat and elsewhere seem to be seeking to re-establish their relevance by peddling India as a state with multiple nationalities. Interestingly, parties with Sanatan abusers found some traction in Karnataka, Tamil Nadu or West Bengal having 84.00 per cent, 87.58 per cent and 71 per cent Hindu population by inciting regional and linguistic subversion. When Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi talked of decolonising Indian minds, he’s well aware of the narrative fed for ages that replaced ‘Varna’ with ‘Caste’ introduced by Portuguese. English education system that drove Indians from their Sanatani ethos to certainly an alien knowledge system if one hesitates to call it superficial as India respect every knowledge system. Fortunately, people of Bharat have begun to reclaim their civilisational and cultural glory. Though India that came into being on January 26, 1950 as a political entity, its civilisational predecessor, Bharat existed for millennia. Bharat intrinsically celebrates diversity since ages in the geographical entity and has been identified as Sanatan from civilizational point of view. Vishnu Puran aptly described Bharat as: उत्तरं यत् समुद्रस्य हिमाद्रेश्चैव दक्षिणम् । वर्षं तद् भारतं नाम भारती यत्र सन्ततिः ।। It means, “The country that lies north of the Ocean & south of the Himalaya is called Bhārat and there dwell the descendants of Bharat.” Apart from trashing Bharat periodically, Lord Ram is targeted by a few leaders to hog headlines or seek relevance. DMK leader Raja said that his party was not concerned if they were dubbed as “enemies of Ram”. C Rajgopalachari (Rajaji) in preface to his book ‘Ramayana Retold’ wrote, “In presenting this English version (of Ramayana) to a wider circle of readers spread all over the world, I think I am presenting to them the people of Bharat just as they are, with all their virtues and their faults. Our classics really embody our national character in all its aspects and it is well the world sees us as we really are, apart from what we wish to become.” And, most Sanatan scriptures in East, West, South and North India are written in Sanskrit which for them is a language of the divine. Languages evolve over a period and henceTamil, Kannadiga, Malyalam and Telugu etc evolved in southern states while Hindi or Hindavi became prevalent in northern states with more Arabic and Persian effect due to Islamic invasion. Trinamool Congress leaders in West Bengal brand themselves as Shakti worshipers that have nothing to with Lord Ram. Why do political minions forget that Ram Krishna Paramhans in West Bengal was initially named Gadadhar Chattopadhyay. Gadadhar was in reverence to Lord Hanuman. So, nothing could be more ignorant than to say that Ram only belongs to North India. ‘Dravid’ in Sanskrit obliquely means ‘the land with water on three sides’ – a peninsula referring to peninsular Indians as Dravidians and not a race by any stretch of imagination or definition. Adi Shankaracharya was called Dravida Sishu who travelled length and breadth of Bharat to set up ‘Maths’ in four corners of the country in Sringeri of Karnataka, Jyotir Math in Garhwal, Kalika Math in Dwarka and Govardhan Math in Puri. But, political lightweights of today fail to appreciate Bharat’s essence. While addressing a public gathering at Thiruvananthapuram in February 2021, Wayanad Member of Parliament, Rahul Gandhi said, “For the first 15 years, I was an MP in the North. I had got used to a different type of politics. For me, coming to Kerala was very refreshing as suddenly I found that people are interested in issues and not just superficially but going into detail in issues.” Minister in Karnataka government Priyank Kharge was quoted as saying

Economy Education Hindus Leadership Policy

908

Wins Hearts, Pitches for Prosperity in Kashmir

Kashmir people resoundingly dismissed notions of a divided stance; unequivocal support for Modi’s vision of a ‘Naya Kashmir’. Rahul Pawa During his maiden visit to Srinagar after having ended an era of discrimination by landmark amendment of Article 370, Prime Minister Narendra Modi encountered a reception that left critics and skeptics astounded. Anticipation for his visit had been building for several days with throngs of Kashmiris flocking to Srinagar, the summer capital of Jammu and Kashmir. Driven by a desire to glimpse Modi, a leader whose popularity has surged across what was once known as a turbulent state. This fervent public display signifies a pivotal shift in socio-political landscape of Jammu and Kashmir. It marks beginning of a period that could redefine its history ushering in significant changes and reimagining Jammu and Kashmir’s future. This visit not only punctuates Modi’s magnetic appeal with people of Jammu and Kashmir but also signals potential evolution of a territory poised to embark on path to peace and prosperity. At today’s ‘Viksit Bharat Viksit Jammu Kashmir’ programme in Srinagar, people of Kashmir resoundingly dismissed any notion of a divided stance on Jammu and Kashmir sending a clear message to global community their unequivocal support for Modi’s vision of a ‘Naya Kashmir.’ In the event at Srinagar’s Bakshi Stadium, Lieutenant Governor Manoj Sinha extended warm welcome to Prime Minister Narendra Modi who was cheered by thousands of followers and supporters joining online from all districts of Union Territory and around the world. Modi, engaging in dialogue with Viksit Bharat beneficiaries from several J&K districts including Shopian, Jammu, Kupwara, Srinagar, Ganderbal, Bandipura, Kathua, and Kishtwar, showcased inclusive reach of the initiative. Amid scenic backdrop of Bakshi Stadium, Modi then unveiled an ambitious slate of 53 projects, cumulatively valued at Rs 64 billion. These ventures go beyond just infrastructure projects; they are beacons of hope and engines of progress for Jammu and Kashmir. PM emphasised the transformative impact these projects are poised to have on the UT’s development trajectory. Modi’s visit was not only about projects, it was genuine urge to outreach to Kashmiris whom he addressed as his parivar or larger family. Echoing sentiments of Syama Prasad Mukherjee whose sacrifices laid the groundwork for this new vision of Jammu and Kashmir, Modi reiterated the symbiotic relationship between development in the valley and broader pillar of India’s progress. Modi also empathized on evolving travel trade making Srinagar, as a focal point in India’s burgeoning tourism industry pivotal to Bharat’s development story by launching ‘Dekho Apna Desh People’s Choice Tourist Destination Poll’ and ‘Chalo India Global Diaspora’ campaign. Reflecting on his visits post-2014, Modi shared, “Whenever I came here after 2014, I have always said that I am making all these efforts to win your hearts and I am seeing that I have been able to win your hearts. I will keep trying hard. This is Modi’s guarantee…” It was a moment of reassurance, emphasise his commitment to winning over people of Jammu and Kashmir through sincere efforts and dedication. Prime Minister Narendra Modi didn’t shy away from addressing the political landscape taking aim at Congress party and its allies, along with regional opposition parties for misleading people regarding Article 370. Striking a stern note, Modi highlighted how Article 370 had disproportionately benefited certain families in the Valley challenging the earlier prevailing narratives surrounding its amendment. Furthermore, PM announced the Valmiki community now qualifies for Scheduled Caste (SC) benefits with the Vidhan Sabha reserving seats specifically for SCs. Additionally, the Pattari tribes, Pahadi groups, Gadda Brahmin and Koli communities have been newly included in the ST list. Modi turned the spotlight on tangible progress emphasizing historic milestone of railways reaching the Kashmir Valley. This infrastructure development is not just about laying tracks; it symbolizes connectivity, economic growth and prosperity for the region. In a moment of optimism, Modi expressed his unwavering faith in the youth of Jammu and Kashmir. Their potential, he asserted, is the bedrock upon which the future prosperity and vitality of the region will be built. In a striking demonstration of political acumen and visionary leadership, PM Modi’s first visit to Srinagar has marked a turning point for J&K, signaling radical departure from its tumultuous past. The overwhelming reception that he got reflects a watershed moment in the region’s history, illuminating a collective desire among the people of J&K to embark on a journey of peace, prosperity and closer integration with the country’s developmental story. Modi’s initiatives, skillfully intertwining development agenda with efforts to connect on a personal level, have laid the foundation for a comprehensive socio-economic revival. Modi’s ability to draw unprecedented crowds in a region once beset by strife speaks volumes about his popularity and the shifting sentiments among its people. By directly addressing longstanding grievances and proposing a vision of progress and inclusivity, Modi has not only reinforced his political dominance but charted a bold path towards the realisation of a ‘Naya Kashmir’. This journey, underpinned by aspirations for stability and growth, could redefine the future of Jammu and Kashmir, setting a precedent for inclusive and development-driven governance. (Author is Research Director at New Delhi based non-partisan think tank, Centre for Integrated and Holistic Sudies)

Human Rights Policy Security

906

‘Army Out’ Mandate By The Pakistani People

The adage, ‘Pakistan Army is the only army in the world that has never won a war but has never lost an election’ seems poised to manifest yet again. Yet the people’s mandate is unequivocally clear: Army Out. Rahul Pawa Pakistan stands at a critical juncture in its political history, marked by rapid developments and significant electoral ambivalence. On February 8, the country held elections for its 16th National Assembly amidst large-scale allegations of pre-poll rigging and widespread electoral fraud. Despite these challenges, independent candidates backed by the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI), founded by Imran Khan, emerged as the leading force, securing nearly 33 million votes despite its jailed founder facing corruption convictions and an ten year ban on holding public office. As the elections unfolded in Pakistan, PTI-backed candidates faced severe repression of political activities, criminalisation of affiliations with PTI, systemic hindrances, and efforts to sideline the party. Nonetheless, it secured 101 seats in the 266-member national legislature and more than 85 percent of the seats in the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province, signalling a clear, long held mandate against the Pakistan Army’s involvement in politics. However, the adage “The Pakistan Army is the only army in the world that has never won a war but has never lost an election” seems poised to manifest yet again. Despite trailing in the electoral polls, the Pakistan Army-backed Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N), founded by Nawaz Sharif, and the Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP), founded by Zulfikar Ali Bhutto and currently led by his grandson Bilawal Bhutto Zardari, are well on their way to forming the governing coalition, deepening the challenges for Pakistan’s 241 million people more than ever before. Recent elections in Pakistan have created a stir shaping broader discussion on democracy, governance, and the role of the military in the political sphere. The PML-N—PPP coalition being formulated in the wake of a hung Parliament, highlights the overbearing influence of the Pakistan Army in in political affairs. The revelation by Rawalpindi Commissioner Liaquat Ali Chattha, asserting the manipulation of election results to favour certain candidates, is not merely an indictment of the electoral process but a clarion call for introspection and reform within Pakistan’s political and judicial systems. The resignation of Commissioner Chattha, coupled with his allegations implicating high-ranking officials in the electoral fraud, paints a grim picture of the challenges facing Pakistani democracy. This apprehension furthered by Pakistan’s Supreme Court’s, as it deliberates on a petition for the annulment of the elections and the court’s decision to proceed with the case, even after the withdrawal of the petition, underscores the gravity of the situation and the imperative for judicial independence and political transparency. Internationally, the response to Pakistan’s electoral controversy has been significant, with lawmakers from the United States expressing concern over the allegations of interference and fraud. The bipartisan calls for investigation into these allegations, along with statements from the US State Department, reflect global implications of Pakistan’s political crisis. Pre-election remarks made by Ajay Bisaria, the Former High Commissioner of India to Pakistan, inject an additional layer of regional concern and scrutiny over the electoral process in Pakistan. His assertion that elections were more akin to a “selection than an election,” with pre-election engineering by Pakistan army to install a preferred government, underscores the apprehension regarding the integrity of Pakistan’s democracy and the pervasive influence of its military in political matters. This critique from a senators and a seasoned diplomat not only reinforces the global and regional voices of dissent and calls for reform but also amplifies the international call for a transparent, free, and fair electoral process in Pakistan is in benefit of the global peace and stability. This recent electoral turmoil in Pakistan transcends mere domestic concerns. It highlights a growing opposition to the long-standing and deep-seated interference of the military in politics, reflecting a worldwide demand for governance that genuinely aligns with the aspirations of the Pakistani people. The establishment of a coalition government, despite PTI’s substantial seat victories, along with global concerns about electoral integrity, marks a significant shift in the consciousness of the Pakistani populace. This shift is towards a mindset that values the nation’s true needs—transparency, accountability, and democratic governance—above the traditional dominance of military power. This movement represents the most forceful ‘Army Out’ sentiment witnessed since the creation of Pakistan following the partition of Earstwhile British India. At this pivotal moment, Pakistan’s choice will not only carve its democratic path but also shape its international persona and influence. The nation is caught between a fervent call for democracy, unencumbered by military influence, and the entrenched power of the Army within its political sphere. This clash presents a formidable obstacle to progress in democracy, diplomacy, and development, spotlighting the military’s indisputable impact on governance. Pakistan’s journey ahead is fraught with complexity, demanding a steadfast commitment to forging a genuinely democratic governance structure. The imperative for Pakistan is clear: to bridge the chasm between current realities and the democratic ideals of its citizens, paving the way for a future where governance reflects the true will of the people. (Author is Research Director at Centre for Integrated and Holistic Studies, a New Delhi based non-partisan think tank)

Blog Post