Disinformation Hindus Human Rights Policy Security

Bangladeshi Hindus Face Religious Persecution

The book brings to fore sexual assault, rapes, extreme inhuman discrimination perpetuated by Muslim vandals on minority Hindus. Prakhar Sharma “Being Hindu In Bangladesh” is documentation of a narrative often sidelined in mainstream discourse. Authored by Deep Halder, an esteemed editor and Avishek Biswas, a seasoned professor, this publication offers first-hand account of the lives of Hindus in Bangladesh, transcending mere secondary research to provide a grassroots perspective. The book cover serves as a powerful prelude to the content within. Adorned with stark red blood sign, it commands attention and sets tone for the narrative. This imagery resonates deeply evoking visceral responses and hinting at harsh realities faced by Hindus in Bangladesh. It captures author’s experiences in Dhaka. Within the pages of this tome lie two prevailing sentiments that encapsulate plight of Hindus in Bangladesh. Firstly, there is the pervasive fear that under the rule of opposition Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP), the already precarious situation of Hindus would deteriorate further with murderous mobs threatening their very existence. Secondly, even under governance of the Awami League, Hindus continue to harbour concerns about their future, uncertain about what awaits them beyond the tenure of Sheikh Hasina. Halder and Biswas meticulously unravel these beliefs, presenting a harrowing portrait of challenges faced by Hindus in a predominantly Muslim nation. They delve into grim reality of unprovoked violence, where Hindus routinely lose not only their land and livelihoods but their homes and daughters to marauding mobs. These incidents, occurring year-round and predominantly in rural areas, remain obscured from journalistic scrutiny, compelling the authors to undertake a journalistic odyssey akin to war reporting. In “Being Hindu In Bangladesh,” Halder and Biswas have not only shed light on a marginalized narrative but have provided a platform for voices that often go unheard. Their work stands as a testament to resilience of a community grappling with adversity, urging readers to confront uncomfortable truths and advocate for change. “Dalit – Muslim Unity is a false Narrative” Yes, you have read it correctly. Deep Halder, the book’s author, ventured to Mandal’s house in Bangladesh, gathering evidence and first-hand information for his narrative. The book meticulously unravels the story behind “Jai Bhim – Jai Mem,” a narrative that has been romanticized over decades. Halder skilfully captures life of Jogendranath Mandal, Pakistan’s first Law Minister and a towering figure in pre-partition dalit leadership. Mandal, who opted for Pakistan over India, envisioned harmonious coexistence between dalits and muslims in newly-formed nation. However, as communal tensions escalated, Hindus began fleeing East Pakistan for India in large numbers with Mandal eventually following suit. Few in Mandal’s lower-middle-class neighbourhood now recall that this very house was host to the eminent leader during his twilight years. Mandal, disillusioned and broken, spent his final years here, perhaps reflecting on his shattered dream of Hindu-Muslim unity in East Pakistan. He passed away in obscurity in Bongaon, North 24 Parganas, West Bengal, in 1968. The house, adorned with blue windows and nondescript outer walls, is owned by Bharat Chandra Adhikary. Adhikary extended refuge to Mandal upon his return to India in 1950, offering solace to a man who had resigned from the Pakistani cabinet in despair. In his resignation letter to Pakistan’s Prime Minister Liaquat Ali Khan, dated October 8, 1950, Mandal expressed his belief that economic interests of Muslims and Scheduled Castes in Bengal were aligned. However, disillusionment with Muslim League and scepticism towards Indian National Congress and Hindu Mahasabha eventually led him to accept unpopularity of his decision to support Pakistan. Halder’s exploration of Mandal’s life and choices offers readers a nuanced understanding of complexities surrounding identity, politics, and communalism in tumultuous era of partition. Through meticulous research and poignant storytelling, Halder brings to light the untold story of a man whose ideals and aspirations were ultimately overshadowed by harsh realities of history. “Noakhali Horror” In a poignant interview reminiscent of haunting tales depicted in “Pather Panchali,” Deep Halder met with Smritikana Biswas, a 90-year-old witness to horrors of Hindu – Muslim riots in Noakhali in 1946 and subsequent atrocities in 2021 which included attacks on Hindu temples and homes. Biswas recounted a chilling memory of her father’s desperate attempt to save her sister during the 1946 pogrom, where violence threatened their village located hours away from Dhaka. It was a haunting decision but the only means to safeguard the girl. Even now, the trauma of witnessing mutilated bodies and stench of blood still lingers, as Biswas confessed to Halder, reflecting on tragic events that have left an indelible mark on her life. Each time I revisited this chapter, I found myself recoiling in horror. Through first-hand account of Purnima Rani Shil, detailed in “Horror In The Countryside,” the grim reality of plight faced by Bangladesh’s Hindu population came into stark focus. Shil’s harrowing experience on the night of October 8, 2001 where she was brutally assaulted and violated until losing consciousness, serves as a reminder of unfathomable brutality endured by countless individuals. Even worse, the perpetrators and their associates continue to torment her with incessant harassment. Why This Book is ‘Different’? What sets “Being Hindu In Bangladesh” apart from other contemporary literature is its distinctive focus on a narrative often overlooked in discussions of war and history. While numerous books delve into broader themes of conflict and violence, this publication stands out by addressing a significant gap in partition literature which has predominantly been shaped by a selective narrative favoured by left historians. Moreover, Partition of Bengal and its aftermath remain underexplored topics, lacking the attention it rightfully deserves. Authors Deep Halder and Abhishek Biswas seize the opportunity to rectify this oversight. They embark on a unique journey into lives of Hindus in Bangladesh, traversing the country to document their experiences, challenges, and broader socio-political landscape. By shining a spotlight on this overlooked aspect of history, the authors offer readers a more comprehensive understanding of complexities inherent in post-partition societies. Hindu American Foundation’s report revealing that 11.3 million Hindus have fled Bangladesh due to religious persecution

Hindus Human Rights Insurgency Misinformation Security

852

Pakistan, China Rob Balochs Freedom to Live

Protests in Amsterdam, Berlin on ‘black day’ against forced occupation and annexation of Balochi land marks 76 years struggle for liberation Rahul Pawa Seventy-six years ago, on March 27, 1948, Pakistan’s occupation and forceful annexation of Balochistan ignited a bloody conflict that has simmered since decades and claimed innumerable lives. This annexation, far from being a justifiable integration, signalled start of a prolonged struggle for Baloch people, who have since endured relentless torment and despair. Despite passage of time, the spirit of resistance within Balochistan remains undiminished, as its people continue to assert their rejection of Pakistani illegal occupation. This struggle is not just a tale of contested territory but a profound testament to resilience of Baloch peoples’ steadfast in their pursuit of self-determination. Baloch account for roughly 15 million of Pakistan’s 240 million people, however, their province, largest in current day Pakistan, stands as the country’s most backward region despite its immense wealth in natural resources. This stark contrast is highlighted by its vast reserves of oil, coal, gold, copper, and gas which significantly contribute to Pakistan’s revenue. Result of, Balochistan has experienced a prolonged period of neglect and exploitation by the Pakistani state, which has primarily focused on exploiting its rich mineral resources without consideration for the people of Balochistan. This exploitation came to a head following Pakistan’s nuclear tests on May 28, 1998, at the Ras Koh mountains in Balochistan, which had devastating environmental and health impacts on the local population. The tests resulted in significant livestock losses and led to increased cancer rates among the Baloch people due to nuclear radiation exposure. These actions have fueled discontent and resistance against the state authorities. In addition to environmental degradation and a public health crisis, the region has been subjected to severe human rights abuses, including enforced disappearances and a notorious “kill and dump” policy of the Pakistan Army. This inhumane treatment has further exacerbated tensions in the occupied territory and fueled discontent leading to resistance against the Pakistani state and highlighted the urgent need for addressing severe human rights concerns in Balochistan. The dire situation in Balochistan, as unveiled in a 2016 United Nations Working Group’s assessment and corroborated by activist accounts, illustrates a severe human rights crisis that has not been adequately reported or acknowledged by the Pakistani state. The discrepancy between the provincial government’s admission of fewer than 100 missing persons and data from local sources of over 14,000 individuals missing underscores a profound transparency and accountability issue. Furthermore, while the Pakistan Commission of Inquiry on Enforced Disappearances documented 2,708 missing persons since 2011, activists report a staggering 504 extrajudicial killings within the province in just the previous year alone. These numbers, vastly divergent from official state reports, highlight a critical gap in the state’s acknowledgment and documentation of human rights abuses pointing to state complicity in the violations against the people of Balochistan. In addition, banking on occupied territories, the province hosts Pakistan’s only deep-sea port at Gwadar. This port, pivotal to the US $65 billion China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), a project designed to connect southwestern China with the Arabian Sea via Pakistan, has added another layer of occupation of Baloch lands by the Communist Party of China (CPC) and its People’s Liberation Army (PLA). The strategic significance of Gwadar Port extends beyond economic interests, serving as a key maritime node in China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). This development aims to expand China’s influence through a vast network of trade routes and infrastructure projects across Asia, Africa, and Europe. However, the expansion of Gwadar Port and the broader CPEC initiative have raised concerns among the Baloch population regarding sovereignty and the fair distribution of resources. These massive infrastructure projects serve the interests of CPC and Pakistani federal stakeholders, compounding environmental impacts, the displacement of local populations, and the alteration of traditional livelihoods. The influx of foreign workers, particularly from China, and the prioritisation of their needs and security have created an environment where the rights and welfare of the local population are sidelined. Reports of forced marriages have sparked outrage, highlighting the exploitation and vulnerability of local communities amidst the sweeping changes brought by these Chinese projects. This scenario is further complicated by extreme instances of human rights violations, including the suppression of dissent, censorship, and the curtailing of freedoms. The Baloch population’s grievances are not limited to economic marginalisation but extend to a profound sense of cultural and societal invasion. The presence of PLA and Pakistani security forces, under the guise of protecting investments, has led to a militarisation of the region, contributing to a climate of occupation, fear and repression. In the face of persistent human rights abuses and the forceful occupation of their homeland, the Baloch community worldwide observes March 27th as a ‘black day’, symbolising resistance against their land’s forced annexation. Spearheaded by the Baloch National Movement (BNM), significant protests across cities like Amsterdam and Berlin highlight Baloch struggle for freedom, denouncing Pakistan’s oppressive control, amplified by the complicating presence of China’s CPC and PLA through projects like the CPEC. This international outcry, marked by rallies and informative campaigns, not only exposes the dire situation in Balochistan but also calls for global intervention. The Baloch people’s defiance is a plea for recognition of their sovereignty and an end to external exploitations—a clear demand for justice and respect for human rights in the shadow of occupation and exploitation. (Author is Director – Research at Centre for Integrated and Holistic Studies, a non-partisan think tank based in New Delhi)

Disinformation Hindus Human Rights Insurgency Misinformation Policy Security

790

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

Disinformation Hindus Human Rights Insurgency Misinformation Pakistan Policy Security

792

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

Uncategorized

739

Explainer: Jammu and Kashmir Sankalp Diwas

In aftermath of India’s independence and subsequent Partition of earstwhile British occupied India, Princely States were vested with the prerogative to decide their accession to either the dominion of India or Pakistan, contingent upon geographical coherence as per Indian Independence Act of 1947. This foundational principle was disrupted on the night of October 22/23, 1947, when Pakistani army along with its rallied tribal raiders initiated a forceful assault on the Princely State of Jammu & Kashmir. Subsequently, Maharaja Hari Singh formally acceded to the dominion of India on October 26, 1947, prompting deployment of the Indian army. Read More….

Disinformation Hindus Human Rights Judiciary Media Misinformation Security

772

Sabarmati Express Carnage Brushed Under Rug by Fanatics

It has been 22 years since Islamic fanatics attacked Sabarmati Express train and burnt down 58 Hindu pilgrims within the train’s S-6 and S-7 coach. After recent pran pratishtha of Ram Lalla recently, it’s imperative to debunk misleading narratives surrounding the attack on Ram devotees. Rohan Giri On the morning of February 27, 2002, Sabarmati Express, on its way to Ahmedabad, came to an abrupt halt at the Phalia signal that is located within a Muslim slum covering both sides of the railway track. A person on board the train applied the emergency brake, bringing the train to a halt. Upon the train’s stoppage, shouts of “Maro, Kapo (kato), Badhane Jalavi Do (Burn them all)” resonated sounded from all sides. While the passengers were in deep sleep, they were abruptly awakened upon hearing uproar. To their horror, they discovered that a multitude of thousands had encircled the train with explicit intention of causing harm to them. Who comprised the individuals in this assemblage? What was the motivation behind these individuals’ determination to commit murder? What discourse did the foreign media attempt to generate? These questions should arise in minds of every individual, as this incident was not merely a train fire. It resulted in tragic death of 58 innocent Hindus leading to an unforgettable event in the history of western Indian state, Gujarat. (Rohan is a journalism graduate from Indian Institute of Mass Communication (IIMC) New Delhi, and Manager Operations at CIHS.)

Disinformation Fact Sheet Hindus Insurgency Misinformation Security

730

‘Familial Story of Violence Perpetrators Masquerading as Victims’

Over the years, Banbhoolpura in Haldwani has shot to fame as a centre for Islamist extremism. Recent history of extremist activities came to fore with violence unleashed on a police station and public transport in 2019, attacks on COVID19 healthcare personnel in 2020 and assaults on Hindus in 2022. The islamist gangs’ ties with drugs and crime apart from violence is a heady mix remenescent of Hollywood thrillers.

Geopolitics World

719

Trudeau’s Lost Plot with India

Trudeau’s political gambits with Canada-based extremists threaten to undermine the fabric of Canada’s national interests, casting a long shadow over its democratic values and international relations, especially with India. Rahul PAWA In a development that could further complicate the already strained ties between Ottawa and New Delhi, a commission established by the Trudeau administration to probe foreign interference allegations has officially called on the government to release information about India’s possible role in meddling with Canada’s electoral processes. This request unfolds against a backdrop of concerns raised by the Canadian Security Intelligence Service, which has pointed to covert efforts by China to influence the outcomes of Canada’s recent federal elections. A top-secret briefing report, later obtained by various news organizations, highlights the urgent need for Canada to strengthen its defences against such covert activities. The document sheds light on the sophisticated and wide-ranging campaign led by the People’s Republic of China, leveraging everything from diplomatic channels to grassroots community organizations to influence every stratum of society and governance. Adding a new layer to the narrative, the agency has expanded its scrutiny to include India, expressing its apprehensions in a detailed three-page memo that categorises India alongside China as a formidable threat to the democratic integrity of Canada. The report expressly singles out India, anticipating an uptick in interference efforts and strongly advising on the critical importance of bolstering Canada’s democratic systems and institutions to guard against external meddling. In an unfolding scenario that seems straight out of the saying ‘the pot calling the kettle black’, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, recently labeled as the worst Canadian Prime Minister in the last fifty years, is fervently aiming for a fourth term in office—a milestone last reached in 1908. Despite facing significant hurdles, including trailing behind the opposition Conservatives in polls throughout 2023, Trudeau is unwavering in his quest for re-election, seeking to surpass the achievements of his father, Pierre Trudeau, who narrowly missed winning a fourth electoral term in 1979. Yet, Trudeau’s relentless pursuit of power bears a hefty price for the Canadian people, especially against the backdrop of deteriorating ties with India, the world’s fifth-largest economy, which is seemingly distancing itself from Trudeau’s politics. This growing estrangement is largely credited to Trudeau and his close confidant, Jagmeet Singh Dhaliwal of the New Democratic Party. Since ascending to office in 2015, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, in alliance with Jagmeet Singh, has navigated the complex waters of Canadian politics with a strategy that leans heavily on the support of Pakistan backed and homegrown Khalistani separatist factions in Canada. This reliance is not merely a reflection of contemporary political strategy but also echoes a longstanding tradition within Canadian politics of providing sanctuary to individuals and organizations known for their dissent against Indian sovereignty. Throughout his tenure, Canada’s political landscape has seen Trudeau’s open endorsement of factions with a history of terrorism and violence within the Khalistani context, a stance that became more marked in the face of competition for the same voter base from Jagmeet Singh. This tactical courtship of Khalistani supporters and sympathisers by Trudeau has significantly influenced his administration’s policies towards India and its substantial diaspora in Canada evidenced by stands taken during India’s farmers protests and during illegitimate referendum dramas in Canada. This demographic, consisting of individuals from both India and Pakistan represents a critical vote bank, ostensibly enabling Trudeau to maintain his grip on power. However, this approach has raised concerns over the compromise of the broader interests of the Canadian people, highlighting a scenario where Trudeau’s political gain is seemingly placed above national welfare. Further demonstrating how their own Prime Minister has placed political gain above all, disrupting the delicate balance between fulfilling national interests and chasing personal political ambitions, especially by jeopardising the economic, moral, and internationally friendly relations with India and her citizens. In a resolute and unified rebuttal to the latest misadventure to the accusations raised by the commission under the Trudeau government, the Indian Foreign Ministry vehemently dismissed the accusations as “baseless,” “absurd,” and “motivated.” The Ministry highlighted that similar claims had been brought up during Trudeau’s discussions with the Indian Prime Minister, only to be “completely rejected.” Furthermore, the statement from the Indian Foreign Ministry emphasised, “It is not the policy of the Government of India to meddle in the democratic processes of other countries. Contrary to these allegations, it is, in fact, Canada that has been found interfering in India’s internal matters.” The statement also reiterated India’s longstanding concern regarding Canada’s approach towards separatists, terrorists, and anti-India groups. This sharp rebuttal does more than just dismiss the claims; it redirects the focus onto the underlying diplomatic friction between the two nations, emphasizing India’s strongest objections to Canada’s treatment of elements opposed to Indian interests. The intensifying diplomatic standoff between Ottawa and New Delhi marks a pivotal moment, casting a spotlight on Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s approach of political appeasement toward Canada-based Khalistani extremist factions. This strategy, aimed at securing votes and maintaining power, appears to have jeopardised the broader interests of Canada in favour of Trudeau’s personal political ambitions. The engagement with Khalistani elements by the Trudeau administration has not only soured relations with India but also underscored the fragile interplay between domestic political tactics and the responsibilities of international diplomacy. The firm rejection by the Indian government of the allegations put forth by a commission established under Trudeau’s government deepens the diplomatic divide, signalling a dramatic shift away from a foundation of mutual respect and shared democratic ideals. This situation has led to a moment of reckoning, with India responding with decisive words that challenge the veracity of the Canadian Prime Minister’s stance, thereby reshaping the contours of an intricate bilateral relationship. (Rahul Pawa is director of research at the Centre for Integrated and Holistic Studies in Delhi, India, specialising in international law, crime, security, future-tech & futuristic warfare.)

Disinformation Fact Sheet Geopolitics Hindus Human Rights Misinformation Policy

831

Situational Analysis: Persecution of Bangladesh’s Hindus Intensifies

At the time of India’s independence from British colonialism in 1947, the predominantly Muslim eastern portion of Bengal province because East Pakistan, which declared independence as Bangladesh in 1971. The circumstances facing the Hindu population in Bangladesh are alarming. Being a minority in a largely Muslim nation, they are subjected to various forms of persecution, including theft, physical aggression, sexual violence, coerced conversions to Islam, desecration of religious sanctuaries, illegal confiscation of properties, and forced displacement. This analysis underscores the adversities encountered by Hindus in Bangladesh. The Hindu population has significantly dwindled over the last seventy years.

Disinformation Fact Sheet Hindus Human Rights Misinformation

749

Expose on glaring bias against Hindus: Georgetown University’s Bridge Initiative

In a report dated November 24, 2023, titled ‘Hindutva in Britain,’ a collaborative effort between US based Bridge Initiative at Georgetown University and UK’s Community Policy Forum – an entity claiming to protect Muslim interests in the UK – was published. The report aspired to falsely implicate Hindus and Hindu-centric organisations for anti-India, anti-Hindu unrest in Leicester, the UK. A narrative previously dismantled by several leading UK based independent think tanks including Henry Jackson Societ] and US based National Contagion Research Institute (NCRI), a prominent cyber threat intelligence organisation.

Blog Post