Bangladesh Bharat Hindus Human Rights Pakistan Policy Security

Hindu Pogrom Under a Nobel Laureate’s Watch in Bangladesh

Ethnic Cleansing of Bangladeshi Hindus A Nobel Peace Prize is not a shield against scrutiny. Bangladesh’s post-August 2024 reality demands a hard, evidence-led assessment: violence against Hindus has escalated into a pattern that aligns with internationally recognised elements of ethnic cleansing. This is not a claim made lightly, nor is it built on rhetoric. It is grounded in documented indicators that appear repeatedly across historical cases, from the Balkans to Rwanda and the forced flight of Kashmiri Hindus. Our report, “Hindu Pogrom Under a Nobel Laureate’s Watch in Bangladesh,” examines what changed after the extra-constitutional transition that installed Muhammad Yunus as head of the interim administration. In the immediate aftermath of Sheikh Hasina’s ouster, Hindu homes and temples were specifically targeted, and minority families attempted to flee toward India. This is the first stage seen in many ethnic cleansing trajectories: a sudden collapse of security, followed by identity-targeted attacks that signal “you are not safe here.” Reuters reporting captured these early markers, including vandalism of Hindu temples and homes and attempted flight by minorities. Ethnic cleansing is defined less by slogans and more by method. The method in Bangladesh is visible through six elements. Forced displacement is the predictable output when a minority is subjected to sustained terror and sees no credible protection from the state. When families attempt to flee, when communities retreat into guarded enclaves, when daily life becomes a risk calculation, the displacement is no longer voluntary. It is coerced Violence and terror form the second element. The pattern includes killings by shooting, hacking, abduction, lynching, and arson. The purpose is not only to kill, but to send a message to all remaining members of the community. Dipu Chandra Das’s lynching and burning is an emblematic example of violence designed to intimidate, not merely to harm. Deliberate attacks on civilians are the third element. The victims are not combatants. They are teachers, traders, community leaders, elderly couples, workers, and youth. They are targeted in homes, workplaces, and transit routes, consistent with identity-based selection rather than incidental crime. In the first post-ouster phase, minority groups documented attacks on Hindu homes and temples across multiple districts, underscoring organised targeting rather than isolated incidents. Destruction of property is the fourth element, and it is a strategic tool. Burning homes, looting businesses, and desecrating temples do more than punish. They make return difficult, erase cultural presence, and collapse economic survival. These are classic “remove the population by destroying the conditions of life” tactics. Reuters recorded that hundreds of Hindu homes and businesses were vandalised and multiple temples damaged during the initial post-ouster violence. Confinement is the fifth element. Even without formal camps, a minority can be confined by fear. When communities self-restrict movement, rely on volunteer night-guards, and avoid public visibility, they are being functionally contained. This is how pressure accumulates until exit becomes the only perceived option. Systematic policy is the sixth element. Ethnic cleansing does not require a written decree. In many cases, it proceeds through the combination of organised extremist violence and state failure: weak protection, delayed response, denial of communal targeting, and persistent impunity. Here, the core accountability question is state responsibility. Minority groups have accused the interim government of failing to protect Hindus, and the Yunus administration has denied those allegations. Denial, in the presence of repeated identity-targeted attacks, is not neutrality. It is an enabling posture. This is where the Yunus interim administration becomes central. The issue is not whether Yunus personally directs each assault. The issue is whether the state under his leadership has fulfilled its duty to prevent, protect, investigate, prosecute, and deter identity-based violence. When the outcome is repeated killings, recurring temple attacks, widespread property destruction, and the steady tightening of fear around a minority community, responsibility does not stop at the street-level perpetrator. It rises to the governing authority. The report also examines the role of Islamist forces operating in the current environment. Independent reporting notes that hardline Islamist actors have become more visible and influential since the fall of Hasina. This matters because ethnic cleansing campaigns typically require both ideological mobilisation and operational impunity: a narrative that dehumanises the target, and a system that fails to punish the perpetrators. Bangladesh is at a decision point. It can either reassert protection for all citizens and rebuild the rule of law, or drift toward a majoritarian model where minorities survive only as tolerated remnants. The world has seen this script before. The lesson from Rwanda and the Balkans is that early warning indicators are not “political noise.” They are the architecture of atrocity. What is required now is not performative condemnation. It is measurable action: robust protection for minority localities, transparent investigations, prosecutions that reach organisers and inciters, disruption of extremist mobilisation networks, and independent monitoring that makes denial impossible. Without these steps, the pattern described in our report will continue to harden. The Nobel label does not change the facts on the ground. The responsibility of the interim government is to stop the trajectory. If it cannot, it must be treated internationally as enabling an ethnic cleansing process by omission, denial, and impunity.

Khalistani-Jamaat Joint Operations amid Minority Killings in Bangladesh

Hindus Bangladesh Bharat Human Rights Khalistan

187

Situational Analysis: Khalistani-Jamaat Joint Operations amid Minority Killings in Bangladesh

Khalistani support for Islamist-linked violence and minority killings in Bangladesh, and the appearance of anti-Hindu and anti-India sloganeering outside the Bangladesh High Commission in London, reiterate that this is not simply a local Western “public order” problem. It is foreign territory being utilised as an outward-facing theatre for a Pakistan-rooted, anti-India orientation, where street spectacle and digital amplification do the work of deniable pressure.

Ideology Before Inquiry? A Rejoinder to New York Times RSS Narrative

Bharat Disinformation Geopolitics Hindus

331

Ideology Before Inquiry? A Rejoinder to New York Times RSS Narrative

Dr. Aniket Pingley I am not a journalist by profession. But like any reader who values intellectual honesty, I expect journalism to adhere to its own stated standards of ethics, verification, and fairness. In its article published by NYT titled “From the Shadows to Power: How the Hindu Right Reshaped India,” that expectation is repeatedly taken for a toss. If the NYT is willing to relax on standards when writing about the RSS, readers are entitled to ask whether what is being offered is reporting at all, or merely a predetermined story wearing the language of journalism. This essay examines where and how the article by Mashal and Kumar departs from those standards. My critique does not rest on disagreement with conclusions alone, but on demonstrable violations of widely accepted journalistic ethics, as codified in the IFJ Global Charter of Ethics for Journalists, the Munich Charter, and the Society of Professional Journalists’ Code of Ethics. In the sections that follow, I identify specific statements from the article, map them to the standards they violate, and offer rewritten versions showing how the same points could have been presented in a professional manner. 1. Failure: Fact–Opinion Separation Violated Statement Violated standard How should it have been written RSS’s stated position “The far-right group known as the R.S.S. has spent a century trying to make India a Hindu-first nation.” “The journalist shall make sure to clearly distinguish factual information from commentary and criticism.” – IFJ Global Charter, Article 2 Founded in 1925, the RSS has articulated a vision of national identity centered on Hindu cultural/civilizational unity. Critics interpret this vision as seeking a Hindu-first political order, an interpretation the organization has refuted consistently. India, that is Bharat, is a Hindu nation. The word Hindu transcends Hinduism (religion). Hindu is the collective identity of the people of this nation called Bharat. The nationhood of Hindus has evolved over thousands of years independently of the kingdoms in Bharat and their political boundaries. 2. Failure: Loaded Language Used as Factual Description Statement Violated standard How should it have been written Some common sense “The R.S.S. originated as a shadowy cabal for the revival of Hindu pride after a long history of Muslim invasions and colonial rule in India, its early leaders openly drawing inspiration from the nationalist formula of Fascist parties in Europe during the 1930s and 1940s.” “Avoid stereotyping. Journalists should examine the ways their values and experiences may shape their reporting.” – SPJ Code of Ethics The RSS began as a small, closely organized volunteer movement during the colonial period, operating primarily through local branches, called as shakhas, rather than public political platforms. An honest discussion with the RSS leadership reveals that the founder Dr. Hedgewar was inspired by the vision of Swami Vivekananda, Yogi Aurobindo, Bankim Chandra Chattopadhyay, Bal Gangadhar Tilak etc. The RSS was founded in 1925, about half a decade prior to the start fascism in Europe. Why would anyone in the RSS had to go to Europe to learn about martial discipline if they could simply observe the British exercise the same, first-hand and for free? Suggested reading for NYT: Bhawani Mandir pamphlet written by Yogi Aurobindo in 1905. 3. Failure: Suppression of Essential Context Statement Violated standard How should it have been written RSS’s stated position “It’s philosophy casts India’s Muslims and Christians as descendants of foreign invaders who need to be put in their place.” “The journalist shall not suppress essential information or falsify any document.” – IFJ Global Charter, Article 3 Some critics argue that certain Hindutva interpretations frame Indian history through a civilizational lens that emphasizes foreign invasions. RSS leaders, however, state that their definition of national belonging is cultural rather than religious and applies to all citizens. As a matter of fact, Sarasanghachalak Dr. Mohan Bhagwat has stated, on record, umpteen times that everyone in Bharat shares a “common DNA”, irrespective of their faith. https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/living-in-harmony-is-our-culture-mohan-bhagwat-says-dna-of-people-in-undivided-india-same-for-40000-years-as-rss-marks-100-years/articleshow/123528212.cms The article itself states: “Their definition is a cultural one, and they consider everyone living in India as Hindu, he (Dr. Mohan Bhagwat) said.” 4 & 5. Failure: Causal Claims Without Verification and Prediction Presented as Fact 2 Statements Violated standards How should it have been written “The R.S.S. has infiltrated and co-opted India’s institutions to such a degree …” “that its deep roots will ensure it remains a powerful force long after Mr. Modi is gone.” “Never confuse the work of a journalist with that of a publicist or a propagandist.” – Charter of Munich, Responsibility 9 “The notion of urgency or immediacy in the dissemination of information shall not take precedence over verification.” – IFJ Global Charter, Article 5 Individuals associated with organizations that describe ideological affinity with the RSS are present across political parties, civil society groups, and public institutions in India. Scholars and analysts disagree on whether this presence reflects coordinated organizational strategy, informal ideological influence, or the broader political mobilization of Hindu nationalist ideas. However, no judicial findings or investigative agency has proven that the R.S.S exercises institutional control over state bodies or established centralized direction of such influence. 6. Failure: Unfounded Accusations by Association Statement Violated standard Counter question for the NYT “And when you see Hindu vigilantes parading through Muslim neighbourhoods or ransacking churches, you are seeing the R.S.S. affiliates exercising their vision of supremacy.” “Slander, libel, defamation, unfounded accusations are serious professional misconduct.” – IFJ Global Charter, Article 10 The article itself states: “He (Dr. Mohan Bhagwat) discouraged engaging in hooliganism and incitement of violence”. The basis of this article is a study conducted by Felix Pal that attempts to establish RSS having a tight control over all its affiliates. So does the RSS’s discouragement to incitement of violence and its affiliates’ “exercising their vision of supremacy” through hooliganism logically add up? 7. Failure: Unverified causal theory presented as settled fact Statement Violated standard Counter statement with similar flavour “But the formula has remained central to its success ever since: uniting Hindus around grievances from the past and injecting

Bharat Disinformation Media Misinformation News Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS)

242

Hit Job Guised as Study

Caravan’s purported study on Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh and like-minded organisations smack of framing agenda for future Dr Aniket Pingley “A plausible explanation is not necessarily a true one.” Dr. Richard Feynman, American Physicist & Nobel Laureate Synopsis: The Caravan published a study on December 17, 2025 titled “Unveiling the RSS – Exposing the largest far-right network in history”. Its central hypothesis can be summarized as follows: The RSS is not a loose family of ideologically inspired but autonomous organizations, as claimed. Rather, it functions as a single, centrally coordinated political organism that strategically uses thousands of legally distinct civil-society entities as proxies to expand power, evade accountability, and manufacture the illusion of an organic grassroots movement. The study repeatedly asserts that what appears as decentralization has in fact concealed bureaucratic control and that RSS maintains a dual narrative: public denial of control and internal acknowledgment of centralized authority. The central hypothesis smuggles in multiple unstated claims that radically escalate its meaning. Here is what the study actually posits: The study advances several interlocking claims: This is not the first, nor the last, “study” that “attempts” to “demystify” RSS and a large bouquet of organizations with shared ideals. Keeping my subjective opinion about the intention behind this study aside, let us put it to an objective, rational and fundamental test. The test has three questions: “Suspicion, however strong, cannot take the place of proof.” Supreme Court of India, February 2021 Mapping Caravan’s Claims Against Four Postulations The afore-stated verification framework which includes first-hand verification, evidentiary validity and inferential necessity, will be applied to all postulations. P1: “Claims of autonomy are intentionally deceptive; RSS is consciously lying.” This is an accusation of intentional deception and not mis-description. Here are Caravan’s claims. Failure on Verification Test: Caravan’s Proof #1: Caravan states that RSS public material states that it “runs” other organizations as well. The books by Rakesh Sinha and Ratan Sharda are used as a proof of RSS own public material. It also hand wavingly states, “It is, however, common knowledge that the RSS’s influence extends far beyond this limited circle.” Counter-questions for Caravan: What is the basis to qualify a certain literary work as RSS own public material? Does RSS own a publication or on the contrary publicly denies owning a publication? Are even the authors cited holding any official position in RSS? Did Caravan meet an RSS top-level functionary to ascertain if the authors in-fact officially represent RSS? How does Caravan define and measure extent of RSS’s circle of influence? Failure: By asserting and concluding, before offering any evidence, that any literary work by an RSS sympathizer, well-wisher or volunteer is automatically RSS public material, Caravan demonstrates that it treats its own conclusions as proof, rather than seeking actual substantiation. Caravan has accused RSS of obfuscation while it being blurry about the mechanism to measure RSS influence by making use of hand waving statements. Caravan’s Proof #2: Caravan states, “the RSS, as has been repeatedly noted, is —not registered—not as an NGO, not as a religious trust, nor as any other legal entity.” And, that “ … lack of traceability on paper allowed it to set up a headquarters in the heart of the national capital without having to disclose its sources of funding, or even who its members are.” Failure: Legalese, clearly, is not of Caravan’s botheration. RSS is legally recognized in India as a “body of individuals” under the Income Tax Act, 1961, Section 2(31). This means that RSS, as a BOI, can be assessed for income tax purposes as a separate entity. Headquarters of RSS are built and operated under Dr. Hedgewar Smarak Samiti, an independent society registered under the Societies Act. Both these facts are (purposefully?) left-out from the study. A cursory reading on Internet shows several legal notices, defamation suits, sedition charges etc. levied against Caravan by a variety of individuals and entities. Perhaps, it is due to lack of rigour for the legalese. Counter questions for Caravan: Which legal obligation is actually being evaded by RSS? Provided its disregard for legal facts, should anything that Caravan states related to legality be taken seriously? Closing remarks: The “evidence” by Caravan supports an alternative explanation: a culturally networked movement with loose (or strong) coordination but no unitary legal control, since RSS is presented to be “not” a legal entity. If not legally backed, how is control defined or measured? P2: Decision-making authority flows from a central node; affiliates lack discretion Here are the claims made by Caravan: Failure on the Verification Test: Caravan’s Proof #3: I will take one example among a few similar ones. Caravan states “the Maharaja Pratap Singh Ved Vidyalaya was established by a Pune-based organisation, Maharshi Ved Vyas Pratishthan, whose founder, Govindadev Giri, is an RSS member, the treasurer of VHP-controlled trust Ramjanmabhoomi Tirth Kshetra and also sits on the advisory board of the Nagpur hospital Madhav Netralaya, named after former RSS chief Madhav Sadashiv Golwalkar. According to RSS mouthpiece, Organiser, Govindadev Giri’s “initial samskars as RSS swayamsevak are manifested in” the Pratishthan.” Counter-questions for Caravan: Is it being posited that Govinddev Giri (Maharaj) takes orders from RSS on how to conduct his activities? Even if Maharaj is advisor to Madhav Netralaya, does the eye hospital run on whims of RSS through him? If so, can the chain of command be established and proven to be enforced? Counter-example for Caravan: The creative director at Caravan happens to be alumni of the same University as many members of UK-based Conservative Party, so Caravan must be peddling Conservative views. Is there any apparatus to measure degree of ridiculousness of this “proof”? Failure: The establishment and operational excellence of Maharishi Ved Vyas Pratishthan is not being considered as a meritorious position of Govinddev Giri’s national influence; but his early association with RSS is posited as his de facto qualification. Caravan’s Proof #4: “Pracharaks are trained in central RSS mission and, upon qualifying, sent out to Sangh appendages to maintain and consolidate control over the network,

International Pakistan Terrorism Uncategorized

139

2001 INDIAN PARLIAMENT ATTACK

Pummy Mattoo Pandita 13 December 2001 is remembered as a turning point in Bharat’s democratic history, when democracy was not merely challenged but violently attacked by Jaish-e-Mohammed, targeting not just lives, but the very sovereignty, constitutional stability and civic trust on which the nation stands.

China Economy Hindus International Misinformation Policy World

170

Reject Hindu Label to Slow Growth

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

Bharat Defence Human Rights Kashmir Pakistan Security Terrorism

212

Analysis: From Siege to Staccato Strikes: 26/11 Mumbai Attack to 10/11 Red Fort Blast

From foreign-directed, 26/11-style mega-operations to low-signature, micro-cell, digitally inspired strikes like 10/11 and the foiled ricin plot, India’s terror landscape has changed. Through community monitoring, hardened cities, quick forensics and sharper intelligence India has reduced incidences significantly. In order to combat terror ecosystems at their root, world must now embrace India’s zero-tolerance policy and modernise international counter-terrorism frameworks.

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

402

Mayor Mamdani: Socialist agenda in Capitalist New York

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

Disinformation Fact Sheet Hindus Misinformation

634

Understanding Savera, 31 co-signatories that petitioned Mayor Eric Adams

Open-source intelligence (OSINT) reveals that the Savera coalition and the groups that countersigned its 10 July 2025 letter are not a loose assortment of concerned New Yorkers; they constitute a disciplined advocacy network that fuses three streams of ideologies: These entities repeatedly collaborate under banners such as Reclaiming India and the Alliance for Justice & Accountability, run coordinated social-media campaigns, and target three policy nodes in Washington: Congress, USCIRF and the State Department. Their operational goal is to brand Indian government positions, and increasingly mainstream Hindu events in America, as “supremacist”, thereby normalising an equivalence between Hindutva and violent extremism. While most are registered 501(c) organisations, multiple red-flag indicators emerge: historic Hamas-related designations (CAIR), documented Jamaat-e-Islami overlaps (IAMC), Soros-funded BDS-style campaigning now redirected from Israel to India (HfHR), opaque fiscal disclosures, and revolving-door leadership across the network. The pattern warrants Treasury, DOJ and IRS scrutiny for potential FARA non-compliance, foreign in-kind support and grant-making that masquerades as purely humanitarian work.

Disinformation Media Misinformation News

468

Washington Post Does It Again!

Agenda based biased reportage from Bharat seems to never end. Latest story is with regards to illegal infiltrators from Bangladesh. CIHS Several global media representatives operating out of India or those descending in New Delhi on behalf of organizations like Washington Post seem to have been adequately briefed on their agenda. And, these uncouth operators who carry press cards may have in reality been sold out to ‘anti-Bharat’ lobbies globally. Otherwise, there’s no reason why Washington Post does time and again only seek to debunk the India story through its editorial and news columns. Latest in a series of ‘anti-India’ despatches appeared in July 11, 2025 edition of Washington Post under the headline, “In India’s deportation drive, Muslim men recount being tossed into sea” put together by Pranshu Verma, Tanbirul Miraj Ripon and Sahal Qureshi. Their claim through the write up is simple from the word ‘go’. They claimed with obviously little or no-evidence that Indian Muslims with valid documents were either thrown into the sea or pushed across Bangladesh borders. Detentions, demolitions and torture purportedly perpetuated by Indian security personnel have been written about. Even a cursory online search puts the number of illegal migrants and Bangladeshi infiltrators as more than 20 million turning India into being the country with largest number of illegal migrants in the world. As per Ministry of Home Affairs, Bharat, Delhi and Mumbai, apart from coastal states like Gujarat and Goa have become centres of illegal migrants especially from Bangladesh and Pakistan. These numbers in no way bother Washington Post reporters with an ‘agenda’ to paint Bharat black and dirty as it expands its growth story, spreads prosperity and remains open, largest and a bustling democracy. Washington Post management decision to run an anti-India tirade through its editorial and news pages may not surprise many. In recent past, WP published two anti-India stories that turned out to be blatantly false if one were to go by Indian government. One WP report made a sensational claim that India made serious attempts to impeach Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu. Second big claim made by WP was that Indian agents attempted to eliminate certain terror elements in Pakistan. Well, both reports were denied by Indian government and bracketed them as ‘compulsively hostile’ in nature, spirit and content. In fact, Washington Post had to publicly apologise for mocking at Bharat’s mars mission with ‘frugal budgets’ and turning it blatantly racist. Well, WP management, under owner Jeff Bezos of Amazon who purchased the media house through Nash Holdings in 2013 for reported US $ 250 million, may have overstepped in its editorial and news policy towards India. Otherwise, there’s no reason why Washington Post goes hammer and tongs against Bharat, her interests and her ethos. Leave alone the factthat Bangladeshis form largest chunk of illegal immigrants, WP does not consider significant enough that India is home to over 205 million Muslims as per Pew Research. And, this number would only grow in multiples to become largest Muslim population in the world by 2050. Now, these projections are in contradiction to WP claims of Muslims being targeted or framed by India. Deportation of infiltrators or illegal immigrants from India may not be an outright crime. But then, for Washington Post, it’s a human rights issue. Will Washington Post come up with screaming headline when illegal migrants to America are sent back to their countries of origin? In the deportation of infiltrators, where do Hindu groups figure? What’s their crime? Why portray Hindus as the aggressors? In the process, Washington Post has lost the plot and pursuit to objective reporting of events, developments and ‘news worthy’ issues. If India were to demonize her own Muslim citizens as claimed by Washington Post, how does one explain their socio-economic progression in last two decades in particular? In a campaign against illegal occupation of public spaces also, Washington Post sees a sinister design to dismember Muslims in India.

Blog Post