Modi, Narendra

Subterms

    More stories

    • 113 Shares139 Views

      in Elections

      G20 Declaration Omits Criticism of Russia’s Invasion of Ukraine

      by

      A painstakingly negotiated declaration Saturday evening at the Group of 20 summit in New Delhi omitted any condemnation of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine or its brutal conduct of the war, instead lamenting the “suffering” of the Ukrainian people.It was an eye opening departure from a similar document agreed to less than a year ago in Bali, when leaders acknowledged different views over the invasion but still issued a strong condemnation of the Russian invasion and called on Moscow to withdraw its troops.This year, amid low expectations that the divided group would reach any sort of consensus with Ukraine, the declaration pointed to past United Nations resolutions condemning the war and noted the “adverse impact of wars and conflicts around the world.” The statement also called on Russia to allow the export of grain and fertilizer from Ukraine and “to support a comprehensive, just and durable peace.”American officials defended the agreement, saying it built on the statement released last year and that the United States was still pressing for peace in Ukraine.“From our perspective, it does a very good job of standing up for the principle that states cannot use force to seek territorial acquisition or to violate the territorial integrity and sovereignty or political independence of other states,” Jake Sullivan, the president’s national security adviser, told reporters.But Oleg Nikolenko, a spokesman for Ukraine’s Foreign Ministry, said on Facebook that the omission of Russian aggression was “nothing to be proud of.”Mr. Biden and his advisers focused on what the new declaration had achieved: It included new language on the issue of global debt and on overhauling institutions like the World Bank to address the growing strains on poorer countries; an invitation to the African Union to join the G20; and a push for more financing to help vulnerable nations deal with the costs of dealing with climate change. The declaration also underscored the potential of digital technologies to increase inclusion in global economies.The president joined other leaders in announcing a project to create a rail and shipping corridor linking India to the Middle East and, eventually, Europe. It was a promise of new technological and trade pathways, they said, in a part of the world where deeper economic cooperation was overdue.The project lacked key details, including a time frame or budget. Even so, it represented much softer than usual rhetoric about Russia from Mr. Biden and other Western leaders, who have spent the better part of two years spending billions on arming Ukraine and burning untold domestic political capital building support for the war. Facing a summit rife with deep divisions, Mr. Biden did not speak publicly about the war or almost anything else, except to say “it would be nice” if President Xi Jinping of China, who skipped the summit along with the Russian leader, Vladimir V. Putin, had attended.Mr. Biden spent most of his time at the summit quietly nurturing his relationship with Narendra Modi, the Indian prime minister, who has continued his country’s traditional practice of abstaining from superpower skirmishes, but who has his own tensions with China. He is also keenly interested in presenting himself — and his country — as an ascendant global player.“Biden, like previous presidents, is trying to bring India closer,” Richard N. Haass, a foreign policy veteran and former president of the Council on Foreign Relations. “He’s having limited success, but that’s the nature of the relationship. That’s baked into the cake here.”Mr. Haass said that joint declarations often take on the characteristics of the host country. In this case, he said, it seemed that “the host determined not to antagonize either China or Russia.” He called the statement — and the economic summit — an example of “incremental diplomacy” and not a forum where the conflict could be resolved.White House officials did not publicly say why the United States would sign onto a joint agreement that did so little to keep pressure on Russia, though the Russians had loudly complained about the focus on them. (Maria Zakharova, the spokeswoman for Russia’s Foreign Ministry, cited the “Ukrainization” of the summit to explain Mr. Putin’s absence.)Besides Ukraine, there were other points of contention over the declaration. Mr. Sullivan was asked about reports that the Chinese had objected to language in a draft that confirmed that the United States would host the G20 meeting in 2026. “On the issue of China, all I can say is the communiqué is done,” he said.The absence of two of the group’s most influential leaders, coupled with the ongoing war in Ukraine, had raised questions about whether the summit meeting could achieve much of anything given the current geopolitical divisions. Biden administration officials spent much of their time with reporters assuring them that the summit was still effective.Mr. Biden’s advisers pointed to to the announcement of plans to build a rail and shipping corridor from India through the Middle East to Europe as evidence that the group could build connections even in fraught territory.At the event presenting the initiative, Mr. Biden shook hands with Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman of Saudi Arabia, which has agreed to participate, something he had pointedly avoided doing when visiting the kingdom last year.The announcement comes as the Biden administration has worked, so far unsuccessfully, to broker an ambitious diplomatic agreement that would help the Saudis normalize diplomatic relations with Israel. The United States and the European Union also announced on Saturday a project that would explore the creation of a rail line between Zimbabwe and Angola.Unlike in years past, where he held high-stakes meetings with individual allies and competitors, Mr. Biden stayed in the background for most of his time in India, content to let Mr. Modi take the lead. On Sunday, Mr. Biden will travel to Vietnam, where he is expected to celebrate a new upgrade in relations with Vietnam, despite concerns about the country’s recent authoritarian crackdown and repression.Unlike his predecessor and possible 2024 competitor, former president Donald J. Trump, Mr. Biden’s brand of personalized statesmanship has long been centered around the belief that the best relationships — and even some of the worst ones — are best handled through one-on-one interactions and private negotiations. At forums like the G20, Mr. Biden has often presented his version of leadership as a steadier alternative to Mr. Trump’s bombastic and unpredictable style.Mr. Modi, for his part, was so intent on showcasing the promise and potential of India to the rest of the world that his government effectively shut down a city of 20 million people for the occasion. Leading up to the event, Mr. Modi’s likeness was plastered on thousands of posters throughout New Delhi.On Saturday, speaking in Hindi, Mr. Modi began his inaugural address to the group of leaders by paying respects to the people of Morocco, where an earthquake killed hundreds. He ended his remarks by announcing the invitation to the African Union and hugging Azali Assoumani, the chairman of the bloc and the president of Comoros. Officials offered Mr. Assoumani a flag, a country nameplate and a seat at the table.India’s G20 presidency comes at a moment of contradiction for the country: Its rise to a bigger role on the world stage coincides with increasing divisions at home. While Mr. Modi is tapping into India’s strengths — a rapidly growing economy, a young work force and a strong tradition of technological and scientific innovation — to transform it into a developed nation, he is making sure that nation is reshaped along Hindu-first lines.The increasing aggression of his right-wing support base has created a combustible reality, with religious tensions between Hindus and Muslims frequently erupting in clashes.Mr. Biden notably stayed away from the democracy-versus-autocracy themes that shape much of his messaging overseas and at home. (At one point, Mr. Biden did pose for a photo with the leaders of several other democracies, including India, Brazil and South Africa.) And, his advisers stressed that the G20 was not competing with forums like the group of nations known as BRICS — Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa.They pointed out that reaching a consensus on the declaration, even if it was a softer one, was a labor of effective diplomacy.“The G20 is just a more diverse body with a wider range of views,” Jon Finer, the president’s deputy national security adviser, said. “It gives us a chance to interact with and work with and take constructive steps with a wider range of countries, including some we don’t see eye-to-eye with on every issue.”Mujib Mashal, Peter Baker, Alex Travelli and Damien Cave contributed reporting from New Delhi. More

    • 88 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      Indian Court Dismisses Rahul Gandhi’s Defamation Appeal

      by

      The defamation case, stemming from a comment Rahul Gandhi made about Prime Minister Narendra Modi, could go to the Supreme Court. It may hurt his ability to run in upcoming elections.Rahul Gandhi, India’s top opposition leader, faced another setback on Friday when a court in the state of Gujarat denied his request to stay his conviction in a defamation case, a move that leaves him at risk of imprisonment and possibly unable to run in national elections next year.Mr. Gandhi, the most prominent leader of the Indian National Congress party, was sentenced to two years in prison in March in connection with a 2019 campaign speech in which he likened Prime Minister Narendra Modi to two Indians accused of swindling money who shared the same last name.A member of Mr. Modi’s party, who also shared the Modi name, argued that the remark was offensive and filed a lawsuit. The sentence, the maximum for defamation cases, automatically disqualified Mr. Gandhi from his seat in Parliament. Members of the opposition have called the case politically motivated.The Gujarat High Court, where Mr. Gandhi had filed a petition seeking a stay on his conviction, said there was no reasonable ground to suspend it. “The conviction is just, proper and legal,” said Justice Hemant Prachchhak, who heard the review plea at the high court.Mr. Gandhi, 53, is out on bail, and his last option is to advance the case to India’s Supreme Court for final review. His party has said he will do so.His case is the latest example of what opposition parties have long accused Mr. Modi of: using branches of the government, including the police and the courts, to quash dissent and bog down political opponents and critics of his government.One of India’s premier law enforcement agencies that answer indirectly to Mr. Modi, the Enforcement Directorate, is being increasingly accused of conducting raids on places connected to political opponents of Mr. Modi’s governing Bharatiya Janata Party, or B.J.P.Mr. Gandhi is among the most vocal of the national opposition leaders, and his legal woes are stymieing him at a time when he was trying to build momentum and to unite various political opposition groups around his party. He had rallied the public with a grass-roots march across India — some 2,000 miles over five months — during which he railed against Mr. Modi’s power.In actively seeking the public’s support, Mr. Gandhi, the scion of a once-mighty political dynasty, positioned himself as a main challenger to Mr. Modi, who remains popular with Indian voters.After his conviction in March in a lower court, Mr. Gandhi approached the high court in Gujarat seeking a stay of the conviction. As long as that conviction stands, Indian law bars him from competing in elections and from Parliament. “The use of defamation law is being utilized to crush a voice,” Abhishek Manu Singhvi, a member of the Indian National Congress, said after the high court verdict. “But that doesn’t mean Rahul Gandhi is afraid. He will continue to walk on the path of truth.”Lawmakers from the B.J.P. praised Friday’s ruling.One of them, Ravi Shankar Prasad, said Mr. Gandhi’s remarks were a direct attack on members of lower-caste groups, including the one with which Mr. Modi is often associated, who have faced discrimination in India for centuries.“It has become a chronic habit of Mr. Rahul Gandhi to abuse, to defame and shower the worst kind of abuses against eminent leaders and organizations,” he said. More

    • 125 Shares109 Views

      in Elections

      Modi’s Visits Abroad Help to Build His Image in India

      by

      For an audience in India, the prime minister is linking his diplomatic reception abroad, and himself, to the country’s growing importance on the world stage.His grip on the levers of national power secure, his hold on India’s domestic imagination cemented, Prime Minister Narendra Modi has increasingly turned to advancing himself on a new horizon: the global stage.With a packed diplomatic calendar that includes India’s hosting of the Group of 20 summit later this year, Mr. Modi is building an image going into his re-election campaign as a leader who can win respect and investment for his vast nation. The state visit accorded to Mr. Modi in Washington, which ends on Friday, is perhaps the biggest prize yet in that quest.“It’s not just about a fairer bargain abroad,” said Ashok Malik, a former government adviser who is the India chair at the Asia Group, a consulting firm. “It’s also that ‘my investments in key foreign policy relations are actually helping to build the Indian economy and therefore create opportunities for Indians at home and strengthen India overall.’”At home, Mr. Modi’s Hindu nationalist party has continued to sideline institutions that were once important checks on the government. It has persisted in its vilification of the country’s 200 million Muslims, even as Mr. Modi used an exceedingly rare news conference in Washington to claim that there was no discrimination against anyone in India.But abroad, world leaders eager to court an ascendant India have offered little pushback. And often, they have given Mr. Modi invaluable fodder for an information campaign that shapes perceptions of him among many Indian voters who are ecstatic to see their country’s importance affirmed.Eid-al Fitr prayers in Chennai, India, in April. Mr. Modi used a news conference in Washington to claim that there was no discrimination against anyone in India, including the country’s huge Muslim minority.Idrees Mohammed/EPA, via ShutterstockWhen Mr. Modi traveled to Australia last month, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese referred to him as “the boss” in front of an arena in Sydney packed with about 20,000 people. Mr. Modi then returned to New Delhi to a large crowd gathered for his welcome at 6 in the morning, telling supporters that the grand welcome for him abroad was about India, not him.On Friday, as Mr. Modi was wrapping up his meetings in the United States before arriving in Egypt for another grand greeting, his political party and the large sections of the broadcast media friendly to him reveled in the reception he had gotten from President Biden and other American leaders.The red carpet in Washington played perfectly into one of Mr. Modi’s talents: He can build a media campaign out of virtually anything, projecting himself as the only leader who can expand India’s economy and usher a nation coming into its own to new heights.While opposition leaders back home were holding their largest gathering yet, hoping to find a formula for uniting to challenge the prime minister in elections early next year, Mr. Modi was reaching for the world.Social media was flooded with montage videos, set to regal background music, of Mr. Modi making a grand entrance into the House of Representatives for his address to a joint session of Congress. The speech, after which several lawmakers sought Mr. Modi’s autograph, made him one of only a very small number of world leaders to have addressed that body twice.Another video online kept count of the number of times Mr. Modi received applause or standing ovations during his speech. A third cut to dramatic images of Mr. Modi contrasting him with the dynastic leaders who came before him, advancing a constant narrative that he represents a subversion of the old elite that long ruled India.“History tells us that powerful people come from powerful places. History was wrong,” a deep voice intones in the video. “Powerful people make places powerful.”Congress offers a standing ovation for Mr. Modi’s speech on Capitol Hill on Thursday.T.J. Kirkpatrick for The New York TimesMr. Modi’s next major opportunity to appear as a global statesman will come in September when India welcomes the Group of 20 leaders, a summit meeting he has framed to his support base as his bringing the world to India.His government has turned promotion for the meeting into a roadshow, hosting hundreds of G20 events, so many that foreign diplomats in New Delhi quietly complain about travel fatigue. Cities and towns across India are decked out with billboards bearing the G20 logo — which cleverly incorporates the lotus, a symbol both of India and his Bharatiya Janata Party — and pictures of Mr. Modi.In promoting the G20 presidency, Mr. Modi has taken to frequently describing India, the world’s most populous nation, as the “mother of democracy.” Abroad, however, he has pursued a transactional brand of diplomacy built not on practicing democratic values, but on what best serves Indian economic and security interests, and what elevates India in the world.The image of “a rising India, a new India being seen more seriously abroad” helps Mr. Modi politically, Mr. Malik said. But Mr. Modi is also investing heavily in U.S. relations with an eye toward how they could help an Indian economy that is struggling to create enough jobs for its huge young population and that must put up a fight against an aggressive China next door.“Addressing China is not just about soldiers and weapons at the border, it’s also about building economic alternatives to what China offers,” Mr. Malik said.Supporters of Mr. Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party cheer during a rally in Bengaluru, India, last month.Manjunath Kiran/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesThe list of agreements between the United States and India, announced at the end of a bilateral meeting at the White House, was long, covering defense, space and a wide range of technological cooperation.Defense cooperation, in particular — including deals on Indian manufacturing of General Electric jet engines and purchasing Predator military drones — received a major boost after what had been a history of reluctance and bureaucratic hurdles on both sides. Dr. Tara Kartha, a former senior official in India’s security council who dealt with U.S. on defense, said the agreement on aircraft engines was “an affirmation of trust” that would help the military partnership beyond the smaller steps of the past two decades.“Each country is trying to get past its bureaucratic constrains,” she said. “Until the bureaucracy can catch up, there will be frustrations.”Among ordinary Indians on the streets of New Delhi, opinions of Mr. Modi’s diplomatic efforts were divided.Vijay Yadav, a 26-year-old taxi driver, said Mr. Modi’s outreach abroad could not cover for how India’s economy was struggling to create enough jobs.“I saw on Instagram a news feed which was constantly touting Mr. Modi’s trip to America as if no other Indian leader had been there before,” he said. “Firstly, he must get down to solving the problems of his own countrymen before he goes abroad to project himself as a hero.”Nidhi Garg, 41, who has inherited a vegetable and fruit shop from her father, said her heart swelled each time she saw Mr. Modi representing India abroad.“Today, wherever you see, the name of our nation is being taken,” she said. “The first thing that comes to anyone’s mind when they mention the word India, they immediately connect it to Prime Minister Modi.”Suhasini Raj More

    • 63 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      Assessing Modi’s Leadership of India

      by

      More from our inbox:Trying to Make Sense of Donald Trump: ‘An Exercise in Futility’Depoliticize Helping the HomelessThose Annoying Noise Machines Doug Mills/The New York TimesTo the Editor: As an Indian American living in the United States for a long time, I have been a strong supporter of the media for their active stance against people like Donald Trump who engaged in egregious behavior while in office. But I’m totally aghast at the tirade against Prime Minister Narendra Modi in “During Modi’s Visit, Biden Plans to Focus on Common Interests” (news analysis, June 22).For the past year or so, you have published articles critical of Mr. Modi, accusing him of being authoritarian and anti-democratic. You seem to lump him in the same group as Vladimir Putin, Recep Tayyip Erdogan and Viktor Orban.This article talks about a crackdown on dissent under Mr. Modi and India backsliding in democracy. Similar articles have pointed out large-scale incarceration of political opponents ever since Mr. Modi’s party has been voted to power.Are we living in an alternate world? I’ve not seen any mass jailing or subversion of democracy in India as is happening in other countries like Turkey.I can understand that the West is upset about India’s neutral stance in the Ukraine-Russia war and India’s continuing to buy oil from Russia despite Western sanctions. As S. Jaishankar, India’s foreign minister, has said, India will do what is good for India.Every country has an obligation to take care of itself first.Mudi RameshKensington, Md.To the Editor:Re “Modi’s India Isn’t What It Seems,” by Maya Jasanoff (Opinion guest essay, June 22):Like Professor Jasanoff, I am Indian American. For many years after Indian independence in 1947, except for a brief period when J.F.K. was president, Indo-U.S. relations were marked by misunderstanding and acrimony.Perhaps the lowest point was reached in 1971 when the U.S. Seventh Fleet sailed into the Bay of Bengal, threatening India during its war with Pakistan.For Indian Americans, the joint Indo-U.S. effort to finally acknowledge shared interests in a global order based on the rule of law is a welcome relief, and we are grateful to Prime Minister Narendra Modi for encouraging this initiative. However, all this has to be set against the erosion of civil rights that is ongoing in India today.The resilience shown by U.S. career officials against the authoritarian dictates of former President Donald Trump has been absent in India. The U.S. has to exert greater pressure to strengthen civil governance in India or all our mutual interests in good governance will come to nothing.Bharat S. SarathEast Brunswick, N.J.To the Editor:Prof. Maya Jasanoff makes some valid points about harassment of minorities, journalists, media, etc., and the sliding of democratic norms in India. But Narendra Modi becoming an autocratic ruler is far-fetched. The Indian public will not stand for it. Case in point: His party recently lost an election in the Indian state of Karnataka.In the mid-1970s Prime Minister Indira Gandhi imposed an emergency rule to subdue opposition. At the time I believed that the Indian populace would not stand for it. Sure enough, Gandhi’s party lost in 1977 when she called for an election. Having learned her lesson, she was back in power three years later.Mr. Modi is popular because he has provided a stable government and made substantial progress during the last 10 years. The general public cares about that and will ignore faults of his and his party’s rule. Opposition parties are splintered.With a country as large as India, there are bound to be some imperfections from our Western point of view. But I am confident that India will handle it as best as it can and prosper.Eswar G. PhadiaWayne, N.J.Trying to Make Sense of Donald Trump: ‘An Exercise in Futility’ Justice DepartmentTo the Editor: Re “To Jail or Not to Jail,” by Maureen Dowd (column, June 18):Everyone seems to be trying to make sense of Donald Trump’s disordered mind and unpredictable behavior. As if he did this because of this, and then this happened and he did/said this other thing.Trying to make sense of Mr. Trump is an exercise in futility. He is impulsive, irrational and thoughtless, lacks introspection and has no conscience. He acts on a whim, makes up things as he goes along, and everything is done in his own interest without concern or consideration for anyone else in the world. That’s it.If I were explaining him to a child, I’d say, “He’s a bad man.” And he is. Now, what are we going to do about it?Kathryn JanusChicagoTo the Editor:Maureen Dowd compares Donald Trump to Hamlet. But he’s more Macbeth or Richard III, men who violate higher moral laws to grasp power. And in many ways Mr. Trump ticks the boxes of the tragic protagonist: a man of high estate whose reversal of fortune flows from fatal flaws, usually overweening pride and blindness to his own weaknesses.What remains to be seen is if Mr. Trump’s downfall will bring about an anagnorisis, the tragic hero’s recognition that he brought it all upon himself. Will a playwright or opera composer or movie director portray him tragically? Or will he only inspire satire. “Springtime for Trump”?Arnold WengrowAsheville, N.C.The writer is professor emeritus of drama at the University of North Carolina at Asheville.Depoliticize Helping the Homeless Adriana Zehbrauskas for The New York TimesTo the Editor: Re “Policy to Fight Homelessness Becomes a Target of the Right” (front page, June 21):Everyone loses when we politicize our response to homelessness, especially those we say we are trying to help. It is shameful that in America nearly 600,000 people experience homelessness on any given night.I have worked as a shelter director and service provider for 25 years. To suggest that our policies are enough and our efforts are meeting the need is irresponsible, yet to throw them out is misguided too. We need to build upon what we have, open our minds, expand our options and listen to people with lived experience, rather than fighting about which solution is right.There simply is no one-size-fits-all solution to address homelessness. People experiencing homelessness are diverse, and our solutions need to match that diversity. Communities need more tools including shelter, treatment, employment and housing.I have worked with the right and the left, and common ground is possible if we move beyond labels toward an integrated response.Isabel McDevittPhiladelphiaThe writer is the former C.E.O. of Bridge House, a homeless services agency in Colorado, and co-founder of Work Works America, which helps communities address homelessness.Those Annoying Noise MachinesNoise Could Take Years Off Your Life. Here’s How.We used a professional sound meter to measure the din of daily life and talked to scientists about the health risks it can pose.To the Editor: Re “Chronic Noise Proves Deadly” (Science Times, June 20):The bane of suburbia is the gas-powered, two-stroke leaf blower. Not only do those infernal things emit an ear-piercing sound, but they also generate an incredible amount of exhaust. Ban them!!Mark MaddaloniCloster, N.J.To the Editor:Your analysis is much appreciated. In Brooklyn, the noise from helicopters heading to and from the Hamptons has gone from an occasional annoyance to a constant. To ferry, what, two or four people at a time, tens of thousands are subject to noise so loud that it sets off car alarms on the ground and scares children.On Friday and Sunday evenings their low-altitude flyovers happen dozens of times in the space of a few hours. Flying at such low altitude may save fuel and time for the carriers, but doing so over densely populated areas is the height of selfishness.John WilkensBrooklyn More

    • 100 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      Indian TV Praises Modi During His U.S. Trip

      by

      “Super King of Diplomacy,” read the ticker placed in bold on top of one news channel. “Long live our friendship,” said another. A third declared, “The Boss in America.”Mainstream Indian news channels — in Hindi, English and some regional languages — covered Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s reception in Washington with adulation, praising his diplomatic skills for millions of viewers before a crucial election year for him.The visuals from Washington played into what Mr. Modi has already set as one of his main campaign themes: tying India’s rise as a major economic power with his rise as a global statesman.“The scale, the splendor, the warmth,” one headline enthused. Others, such as “Modi’s breakthrough diplomacy” and “Watch history being made,” flooded Indians’ homes Thursday evening as Mr. Modi walked the red carpet to meet President Biden and the first lady, Jill Biden.“Their body language reflected that they were incomplete without one another,” one news anchor said as visuals of the two leaders shaking hands played on the screen.Mr. Modi has carefully crafted his relationship with traditional news outlets, using a mix of incentives and pressure tactics to get most of them on his side.When uncomfortable issues arise — a state election loss, an ethnic war resulting in weeks of unrest and bloodshed in a northeastern state, a deadly three-way train crash — they are quick to deflect blame away from Mr. Modi.And when a major moment like the state visit to Washington comes, they are happy to join in the cheerleading — a factor that, combined with how Mr. Modi’s party has mastered social media to take his messages viral, helps explain Mr. Modi’s talent for shaping politics to his benefit.The coverage of Mr. Modi’s visit to the United States is a political boon, setting the agenda in his favor before he launches himself full-time into campaign mode for parliamentary elections next year.While many channels showed the White House dinner menu ad nauseam, calling it “dinner for friendship,” some others waxed eloquent about the importance of the gifts Mr. Modi had carried for the Bidens. One anchor declared of a military deal between the two countries: “The biggest defense deal. The hearts of enemies will burn!”And when, at his news conference with Mr. Biden, Mr. Modi skirted a question on India’s grim human rights record and suppression of free speech, one Hindi-language news anchor came to his rescue on her show, saying he had “very bravely” faced the question. More

    • 113 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      The United States and India Can Be Better Partners

      by

      Idealism and pragmatism have long made rival claims on American foreign policy, forcing hard choices and sometimes leading to disappointment. There was a moment in the 1990s when the collapse of the Soviet Union looked to clear the way for a universal political and economic order, but that chimera soon gave way to the more complex world we inhabit today, in which the ideals of liberal democracy — often in otherwise well-functioning democracies — sometimes seem to be in conflict with the popularity of strongmen leaders, the desire for security or the forces of xenophobia or grievance.For American presidents and policymakers, this poses a challenge; it is no longer enough to champion the ideals of liberal democracy and count on the rest of the world to follow. Lecturing any country, be it global powers like Russia or China or regional powers like Turkey and Saudi Arabia, can embolden autocratic tendencies; engagement can, at least sometimes, lead to further dialogue and space for diplomacy. Advancing American ideals requires being pragmatic and even accommodating when our democratic partners fall short of the mark — and humility about where the United States falls short, too.Take India, and the quandary it poses for Washington, which is on display as Prime Minister Narendra Modi makes a state visit this week.India is a democracy in which the world’s biggest electorate openly and freely exercises the fundamental right to choose its leader. Its population is the largest in the world, and its economy is now the fifth largest in the world; its vast diaspora wields huge influence, especially in American business. With its history of close relations with Moscow, long and sometimes contested border with China and strategic location in a highly volatile neighborhood, India is destined to be a critical player in geopolitics for decades to come. Mr. Modi, the prime minister since 2014, commands sky-high popularity ratings and a secure majority in his Parliament, and is in the enviable position of leading a country with a relatively young, growing population.While India has a long history of wariness toward America — most of its military equipment comes from the Soviet Union and Russia, and it would prefer to steer clear of direct involvement in the U.S.-China rivalry — senior American officials believe that India’s views of the United States have fundamentally improved in recent years.This is partly through the work of the dynamic Indian diaspora, partly through greater strategic partnership, and partly because of the growing interest by American companies in India as an alternative to China for expansion in Asia. India has joined the United States, Japan and Australia in the “Quad,” an informal grouping that seeks to counter China’s increasingly assertive behavior in the Indo-Pacific region. And hundreds of American business and industry leaders will gather to meet with Mr. Modi this week. The visit is expected to include major deals to build American jet engines in India and to sell American drones.So it is not hard to fathom why India’s leader is getting rock-star treatment in Washington, from a state dinner at the White House to an address on Capitol Hill. President Biden is right to acknowledge the potential of America’s partnership with India using all the symbolism and diplomatic tools at his disposal.But Mr. Biden cannot ignore the other, equally significant, changes in India during the last nine years: Under Mr. Modi and his right-wing, Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party, India has witnessed a serious erosion of the civil and political rights and democratic freedoms guaranteed by the Indian Constitution. Mr. Modi and his allies have been accused of policies that target and discriminate against religious minorities, especially India’s 200 million Muslims, and of using the power of the state to punish rivals and silence critics. Raids on political opponents and dissenting voices have become frequent; the mainstream news media has been diminished; the independence of courts and other democratic institutions has been eroded — all to a chorus of avowals from the B.J.P. that it is acting strictly within the law.In March, a court in Mr. Modi’s home state sentenced the opposition leader, Rahul Gandhi, to a two-year prison term for defaming the prime minister; though Mr. Gandhi has not been jailed, the sentence led to his expulsion from Parliament, and will most likely prevent him from running again. Before that, in January, the Modi government used emergency laws to limit access to a BBC documentary that reexamined damning allegations that Mr. Modi played a role in murderous sectarian violence in Gujarat State 20 years ago, when he was chief minister there. As this editorial board warned, “When populist leaders invoke emergency laws to block dissent, democracy is in peril.”This remains true, and it behooves Mr. Biden and every other elected official and business leader who meet with the Indian delegation this week to make sure that a discussion of shared democratic values is on the agenda.That may be a tall order. Mr. Modi has demonstrated a prickly intolerance for criticism and may still harbor resentment from the nearly 10 years he was effectively barred from traveling to the United States for allegations of “severe violations of religious freedom” over the Gujarat violence. (He has repeatedly denied involvement, and the visa ban was lifted by the Obama administration when Mr. Modi became prime minister.) A public scolding from the White House, especially when the United States is wrestling with its own threats to democracy, would serve little purpose except to anger the Indian public.Nevertheless, Mr. Biden and other American officials should be willing to have a forthright, if sometimes uncomfortable, discussion with their Indian counterparts. America’s own struggles are humbling proof that even the most established democracies are not immune to problems. As Human Rights Watch notes in a letter to Mr. Biden: “U.S. officials can point to how the U.S. political system has itself struggled with toxic rhetoric, while working to maintain an open and free media. These topics can be discussed openly and diplomatically in both directions.”The quandary is not limited to India. How the United States manages its relationships with “elected autocracies,” from Poland’s Law and Justice government to Benjamin Netanyahu’s far-right coalition in Israel to Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s government in Turkey, is one of the most important strategic questions of American foreign policy. The leaders of these countries and others will be watching closely to see how the Biden administration deals with this indispensable but increasingly autocratic Asian democracy.The administration also faces the problem that the United States’ democratic credentials have been tarnished by Donald Trump and the possibility that he may be back in the White House before long. Mr. Trump’s politics have been openly hailed as inspiration by many an elected autocrat — including Mr. Modi, whose magnetism Mr. Trump likened to Elvis Presley’s at a rally in Houston on an official visit in 2019.President Biden knows, from his many years in public service, that there will always be points of friction even in the closest partnerships between nations, let alone in relationships with leaders who have a very different view of the world. And senior U.S. government officials say that the administration is keenly aware of the flaws of the Modi government. Yet they believe that India’s vital role on the global stage supersedes concerns about one leader. Far better, they say, to raise concerns in private; and they insist they have raised them in many difficult conversations, and said they would raise them in this week’s meetings with Mr. Modi.It is essential that they are raised. India has shaped a great and complex democracy out of a rich panoply of people, languages and religious traditions, and it is reaching for a more prominent role in global affairs.But it is also critical to make clear that intolerance and repression run counter to everything that Americans admire in India, and threaten the partnership with the United States that its prime minister is actively seeking to strengthen and deepen. America wants and needs to embrace India; but Mr. Modi should be left with no illusion about how dangerous his autocratic leanings are, to the people of India and for the health of democracy in the world.The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: letters@nytimes.com.Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram. More

    • 125 Shares179 Views

      in Elections

      Defeat for Modi’s Party in South India Heartens His Rivals

      by

      An overturn in Karnataka is a morale boost for the beleaguered opposition Congress party. But defeating the B.J.P. nationally remains a long shot. Initial results from state elections in Karnataka, in India’s relatively prosperous south, were pointing to an overturn for the party of Prime Minister Narendra Modi — a boost to the otherwise struggling opposition ahead of general elections next year.The Indian National Congress, which governed India for much of its time since independence before being sidelined by the rise of Mr. Modi and his Bharatiya Janata Party, was winning a majority of the seats in the local assembly elections in Karnataka.Home to about 65 million people and India’s cash-rich tech hub, Karnataka is the only southern state where Mr. Modi’s Hindu nationalist party has managed to lead a government, its ideological push finding less acceptance in that part of the country than in Mr. Modi’s stronghold of northern India.With about half the votes counted, the Congress party was projected to win at least 135 of the assembly’s 224 seats, which would position it to easily form the government.In the final stretches of the campaign for the state, which saw a strong voter turnout of about 73 percent, Mr. Modi personally thrust himself into the race. He held about 20 rallies there, including several in which supporters showered him with flower petals as he drove past in an open car.Making the election about the popular Mr. Modi was a last-ditch effort, after the party’s usual efforts to polarize the electorate along religious lines — such as with a ban on Muslim girls wearing head coverings as part of their school uniforms — did not seem to be deflecting voter attention from allegations of local corruption among B.J.P. members.“We have not been able to make the mark in spite a lot of effort put in by everybody, right from our prime minister,” said Basavaraj Bommai, the B.J.P. chief minister of the state, conceding defeat on Saturday. Prime Minister Narendra Modi being strewn with flower petals during a car-parade rally known as a road show in Karnataka last Sunday.Associated PressWhile the win in Karnataka could be a shot in the arm for the national opposition, which has been trying to rebound after thrashings by Mr. Modi’s party in the 2019 and 2014 national elections, analysts warned that Congress would still face a formidable opponent in Mr. Modi when he seeks a third term early next year.The incumbent rarely wins in Karnataka, where control has largely alternated between Congress and B.J.P. in recent years. In local elections, caste rivalries and immediate issues of governance, such as corruption, loom large. Local preferences do not necessarily translate to votes for the National Assembly in India’s parliamentary system, which determines who the prime minister is.Mr. Modi’s popularity remains strong, with many voters in Karnataka — who voted against his local leaders because of rising prices, corruption and polarizing politics — still expressing fondness for him personally.At the national level, the Congress has struggled to match Mr. Modi’s appeal.Rahul Gandhi, the Congress’s most-recognized leader and often touted as the contender, built some momentum by taking a long walk across India, covering 2,200 miles over four months.But just as it appeared that he was shedding Mr. Modi’s tag on him of an entitled dynast, and presenting himself as a credible leader around whom a coalition of skeptical regional allies could unite to challenge Mr. Modi, the B.J.P. bogged him down in a legal challenge.An old and questionable case of defamation was revived in recent months, and the judge in Mr. Modi’s home state of Gujarat handed Mr. Gandhi the maximum sentence, which disqualified him from his parliamentary seat. Mr. Gandhi’s party has termed the case a political conspiracy akin to match-fixing, and has been fighting to keep him out of jail.Aarti Jerath, a political commentator in New Delhi, said while the voting patterns in the local elections do not immediately translate to support in national elections, the Congress party will take lessons from its Karnataka victory — of empowering local leaders, and focusing the campaign on bread-and-butter issues rather than making it a popularity contest against the formidable Mr. Modi.“This is a big morale booster for Congress — first win in a major state after a string of defeats,” she said. More

    • 100 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      In Karnataka Election, More Modi, Less Hindu Nationalism

      by

      A state election in Karnataka was being watched for what it might say about national elections next year.With how often and how fiercely Narendra Modi injects himself into elections, you would think every race — down to the vote for municipal bodies in what will soon be the world’s most populous nation — is a referendum on his standing as the leader of India.On Wednesday, a state election in Karnataka, home to 65 million people, was being closely watched for what it might foretell about national elections early next year in which Mr. Modi will seek to extend his transformational prime ministership into a second decade.In Karnataka, his Bharatiya Janata Party, or B.J.P., was trying to hold on to the only state it governs in the country’s more prosperous south, where its Hindu nationalist politics have found much slower reception.Initially, the B.J.P., in addition to boasting of social welfare programs, employed its usual campaign playbook of trying to polarize the state’s electorate along religious lines. This included, as a last-ditch effort, an attempt to take benefits away from Muslims and distribute them to two electorally important Hindu castes, before the judiciary stepped in to rebuke and pause the effort.A man dressed as a Hindu god waited for Mr. Modi to drive by on Saturday. Manjunath Kiran/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesHaving seemingly reached a saturation point in how many votes can be extracted through religious division in a place like Karnataka, where caste rivalries and divisions among Hindus remain a major electoral factor, the B.J.P. then made the race about trust in the popular Mr. Modi. He arrived in full force, holding 19 different rallies in the state.Among them were long “road shows” in which he rode through the streets of Bengaluru, the tech hub also known as Bangalore, in an open-top vehicle decked out in flowers and pictures of himself. News reports estimated that anywhere between 10 and 50 tons of flower petals were required for his longest road show, covering 16 miles, as supporters showered them on the prime minister.“I did not take much profit in that, because the flowers are offered to Mr. Modi — he is like God,” said V. Manjunath, who owns a flower store.In the final days of campaigning, even as Manipur, a state in India’s east, was engulfed in deadly ethnic violence, Mr. Modi remained focused on Karnataka. His lieutenants pushed the idea of a “double-engine government,” with the national B.J.P. government, vast resources at its disposal, helping the B.J.P. state government. The message was clear: It doesn’t matter who the state leaders are, because there is one driver, Mr. Modi.Mr. Modi kept his focus on the Karnataka election even as ethnic violence flared in eastern India.Arun Sankar/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesResults from the Karnataka vote are expected on Saturday. For the opposition Indian National Congress, crushed by Mr. Modi at the national level in the last two elections, in 2014 and 2019, a win there would be a much-needed morale booster.Congress has many things going for it in Karnataka that it does not at the national level. It has kept its ranks there largely united, and even lured important B.J.P. leaders to switch sides, while on the national level and in other states it has been mired in infighting.It also tried in Karnataka to keep the electorate focused on issues such as rising food and fuel prices, as well as repeated corruption allegations against local B.J.P. leaders.In one of the culminating rallies, Priyanka Gandhi, Congress’s general secretary, emphasized to those gathered that her party was focused on “your issues” — guaranteeing electricity subsidies, small payments to female-run families and to unemployed graduates, and rations to struggling families.She contrasted such practical assistance to the B.J.P. leader’s grievance-laden efforts to portray himself as a victim despite his vast power. “Not in one program have they told you how many jobs they have created, how many hospitals they have built,” Ms. Gandhi said, taking a dig at Mr. Modi. “He has just told you the list of how many times he has been abused.”The Congress party’s chances of forming a government in Karnataka, on its own or in a coalition, appeared high, according to opinion polls. The hard part, analysts said, would be to maintain momentum in other state elections, and to scale up its Karnataka performance in the national elections.Priyanka Gandhi, the general secretary of the opposition Indian National Congress, during a rally on Sunday.Jagadeesh Nv/EPA, via ShutterstockIf Congress is to put up a fight against Mr. Modi’s electoral juggernaut in the national race, it will have to cobble together a vast coalition of regional parties that have shown they can defeat the B.J.P., and do it so that its claim on leading that coalition does not derail it.The opposition must coalesce around key issues such as job creation and avoid a “leadership-driven unity,” said Sandeep Shastri, an academic and political analyst based in Bengaluru. “If it is a leadership-driven unity, then you have lost the battle even before it’s begun — because the B.J.P. wants it to be a leadership-driven battle, and against Modi they have no chance.”When the Congress party veered into an issue in Karnataka that sat squarely in the B.J.P.’s comfort zone, Mr. Modi’s lieutenants seized on it.In its campaign manifesto, Congress promised “decisive action” and even a ban on Bajrang Dal, a right-wing Hindu group that often engages in vigilante violence. The B.J.P., which has banned similar Muslim groups, quickly cast it as evidence of Congress’s disregard for Hindu values and its appeasement of the minority group.The Congress party proposed that the right-wing group Bajrang Dal be banned.Jagadeesh Nv/EPA, via ShutterstockOver the past couple of years, Mr. Modi’s party and its supporters had stirred several religiously charged issues in Karnataka, whose population is about 13 percent Muslim. B.J.P. leaders and supporters banned girls from wearing the head scarf as part of their school uniform, curbed halal food and even called for an economic boycott of Muslims by banning them from engaging in business near Hindu temples.The B.J.P.’s step away from those issues as the election neared, analysts said, was an admission that religious polarization was simply solidifying the support of a section of voters it would have captured anyway. In a sign of Mr. Modi’s sway with his supporters, even those who disagree with the country’s divisive politics often pin none of the blame on him.Evidence of the limited dividend of division was clear at the Shree Siddagangaa Mutt, a major temple institution of the Lingayat caste, a strong support base for the B.J.P., in the city of Tumkur.In India’s north, the B.J.P. has had success in using religious polarization to unite Hindus and minimize caste divides. But in a demonstration of how caste allegiance in Karnataka does not necessarily translate into support for exclusionary politics, a majority of the 10,000 students at the schools and colleges that the Lingayat institution runs are from other castes and religions.“There is no question of their caste and creed — they stay together, eat together,” said Siddalinga Mahaswami, the institution’s head.B.J.P. leaders said they had not given up on their Hindu nationalist agenda in the state, known as Hindutva, but had simply dialed it down a notch during elections.Polling officials collecting electronic voting machines on Tuesday.Manjunath Kiran/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images“Without Hindutva agenda, there is no B.J.P.,” said Chalavadi Swamy, a party member in the Karnataka Legislative Council. “But aggressively, we are not taking it now.”“In the north, Hindutva means Hindutva — everybody will follow,” Mr. Swamy said. “In South India, it’s very difficult to understand the game — the complexity is there.”As residents in Karnataka went out to vote, Mr. Modi was already in another state, Rajasthan, which will hold an election later this year, driving through throngs of supporters as he was showered with yet more flower petals. More