Prime Minister Narendra Modi has secured power at home and his Hindu-first vision has taken hold, and in recent years he has aimed to become a global politician, riding on India’s economic and diplomatic rise. In doing so, he distances himself from the party’s main job, which is to polarize India’s diverse population along religious lines for his own electoral gain.
His silence provides tacit support as vigilante groups continue to target non-Hindu minorities and members of his party often use hateful and racist language, even in Parliament, against the largest of these groups, India’s 200 million Muslims. As the situation continues to boil over, Modi’s subtle dog whistles – involving Muslim attire or burial sites – could go a long way at home while providing enough deniability to ensure the man who leads the world’s largest democracy continues abroad Roll out the red carpet.
What prompted the Prime Minister to break this carefully planned pattern? Fierce campaign speeches on Sunday — when he calls Muslims “infiltrators” “More kids” The question of who will get India’s wealth if his rivals come to power has been hotly debated. Analysts said that could be a sign that his standing with voters is not as solid as one might think and it could be a sign of anxiety on his part. Or it could simply be a reflexive expression of the divisive religious ideology that fueled his politics from the beginning.
But Modi’s brazenness makes it clear that his immense power has few checks. At home, regulators have largely bowed to the wishes of Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP Abroad), with partners increasingly turning a blind eye to what Modi is doing in India because they see the country as Democratic counterweights to China.
“Modi is one of the most skilled and experienced politicians in the world,” said Daniel Markey, senior adviser for the South Asia Program at the U.S. Institute of Peace. “He would not have made these comments unless he believed he could get away with it.”
Markey said Modi may have been trying to demonstrate this impunity “to intimidate the BJP’s political opponents and show them and their supporters that there is nothing they can do about it.”
The Prime Minister considers himself Builders of modern new India Towards development and international respect. But he also wants to leave a distinct legacy from the leaders who established the country as a secular republic after British colonial rule.
He served for more than a decade as a cultural foot soldier in the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), an organization founded in 1925 with the mission of making India a Hindu nation, before joining the organization’s political wing. The group considered it an act of treason when independent India agreed to partition Pakistan as an independent state for Muslims, embrace secularism and grant equal rights to all citizens. One former member even assassinated Mohandas K. Gandhi in anger.
Mr Modi has been effective in advancing some of the core items of the Hindu right’s agenda during his decade in power.he Abolition of semi-autonomy The Muslim-majority state of Jammu and Kashmir.he promulgated citizenship law There is widespread belief that there is prejudice against Muslims.He helped complete a Magnificent temple of Hindu god Ram Conspiracy about the long-standing dispute between Hindus and Muslims.
The violent razing of a mosque on the property in 1992 – which Hindu groups say was built on the site of a former temple – was at the heart of a national movement for Hindu assertiveness that would eventually bring the country to its knees. Dee was thrust into power more than two decades later.
More profoundly, Mr. Modi has shown that the broader goals of a Hindu state can largely be achieved within the confines of India’s constitution — by co-opting institutions designed to protect equality.
Officials in his own party stand ready to rebut any such complaints. If all Indian citizens, they say, benefit equally from the robust government benefits — toilets, roofs, monthly rations — how can Mr. Modi discriminate against anyone?
Analysts say the argument is telling, showing how Modi is redefining democratic power as the broad generosity of strongmen rather than leadership within checks and balances, even as he redefines citizenship in practice to make clear that there is also a third Two rights. class.
His critics say secularism – the idea that no religion is favored over any other – has largely been used to mean that no religion can deny the dominance of Hindus as the country’s majority. Officials under Modi have made religious beliefs public and openly conflated prayer with politics, and they have cracked down on public expressions of other religions as violating India’s secularism.
While right-wing officials promote conversion to Hinduism, which they describe as “coming home,” they have introduced laws criminalizing conversion to Hinduism in many of the states they govern. Instigated by these leaders, Hindu extremists lynched Muslim men accused of transporting cattle or beef and hunted them down for “love jihad” or seducing Hindu women. Vigilantes often break into churches and accost priests they believe are engaged in proselytizing or converting activities.
“What they do is create a tolerant environment that encourages and valorizes hatred,” said Harsh Mander, a former civil servant who is now a social harmony activist.
Referring to Modi’s speech on Sunday, he added: “Such public recourse to such hate speech will only embolden the hardline Hindu right wing of society.”
Bharatiya Janata Party spokesperson Tom Vadakkan said Prime Minister’s comments The point about Muslims is misunderstood. Vadakan said Modi was referring to “invaders” or “illegal immigrants” who the party claims are being used by the political opposition to “redefine the demographics”.
Privately, Western diplomats in New Delhi have done little to hide their displeasure with some of Modi’s actions as a democratic ally, from targeting minorities to cracking down on opposition and dissent. But they acknowledge that he is taking advantage of a particularly open season in the global order, with many of their own capitals offering less positive examples than before and an overly focused focus on China and trade deals.
Washington analyst Markey said there are several reasons why the U.S. government has not publicly expressed concerns, in addition to its interest in making India an economic and geopolitical counterweight to China.
He said the United States is aware of the growing limitations of its public criticism in changing the behavior of partner countries. This was demonstrated recently when Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu repeatedly ignored President Biden’s demands that the Israeli military change its behavior in the Gaza war.
Markey added that criticism of Modi could also be counterproductive for U.S. politicians who “don’t want to conflict with the Indian diaspora.”
But Modi may not be immune as he seeks a closer partnership with the United States in areas such as joint arms manufacturing, high-tech transfers and intelligence sharing.
“My sense is that Washington’s growing dissatisfaction with Modi’s domestic politics is gradually lowering the ceiling for potential U.S. cooperation with India,” Mr. Markey said. “The question is how much Washington is willing to trust India. Will India be seen as an ally in all but name, or more like a partner to Vietnam or Saudi Arabia?”
Hari Kumar Contributed reporting.
