Some things to Reconsider

Couple of years ago, was have a discussion with Andhbhakt, who firmly believed that Prime Minister Modi was correcting the ills of the past, my position was vehemently opposite. During the argument, my question to this friend was, “what’s the difference between planning commission and NITI aayog.” This was rhetorical question because none of us had a clue, but the response was interesting. “This kind of hair splitting is for JNU kind of debates, not for working mortals like us.” In other words which is the standard belief among the community “Modi ji ne kiya hoga to soch samajh ke he keya hoga.” But I came to see, thanks largely to Eram Agha’s Caravan article and other public sources, that the differences are deep, structural, and troubling. The Planning Commission was born in 1950, just after the Constitution came into effect. It was the product of a consensus among leaders across party lines. President Rajendra Prasad spoke of raising living standards through structured planning...

For years, Indian economists droned the same refrain — too much revenue expenditure, not enough capital expenditure. The government, they said, must stop spending on salaries and start building roads. It’s the fiscal equivalent of being told to eat more protein and less dessert. Under Narendra Modi, the state has gone on a construction binge worthy of the Mughal emperors — ₹54 trillion poured into capital expenditure in just eleven years. In the last three alone, we’ve spent over ₹11 trillion annually. Roads, railways, defence, water projects — you name it. The bulldozers haven’t rested since. So, naturally, one would expect an economic dawn — faster movement of goods, lower logistics costs, more jobs, happier people. A Keynesian dream, in other words: the government spends, demand rises, and the private sector jumps in, inspired and eager. Only, it hasn’t. The animal spirit is not just asleep; it seems comatose. Private capital expenditure — the ultimate litmus test of investo...

 Donald Trump is back doing what he does best — throwing tantrums in prime time and calling it policy. His latest target? India. From parading deported Indian immigrants in chains — yes, actual chains, mid-flight — to snatching credit for ending Operation Sindoor, Trump’s message is simple: “I’m the boss of Vishwaguru.” He’s slapped tariffs on Indian goods, frowned upon Russian oil imports, and hiked H1B visa fees — a direct jab at the Indian tech class. And New Delhi’s response? Silence . The kind that pretends to be strength but smells suspiciously like fear. Spin doctors call it strategic restraint . The rest of us call it waiting for Trump’s next mood swing. When Trump wished Modi on his 75th birthday or extended his velvet glove , BJP’s online cheerleaders pounced on it like a Bollywood twist — “See! Friendship restored!” — until, of course, Trump’s next tweet arrived with his usual thunder. As the American columnist Ashley Tellis politely put it, India’s “extreme discipl...

The job of a Prime Minister is never an easy one. Some inherit a storm; others inherit calm seas with a steady wind. Jawaharlal Nehru got the raw end of the deal: a traumatised, partitioned land, millions uprooted, and the Cold War beginning to freeze the world in two hostile blocs. Lal Bahadur Shastri died a war time Prime Minister, and Indira Gandhi presided over a war-ravaged economy, staring across hostile borders at Pakistan and China while the superpowers treated India as a pawn. Morarji Desai stumbled into South Block after the Emergency, the West reeling from stagflation and his own coalition too weak to command authority. Rajiv Gandhi, with a brute majority in Parliament, was besieged by multiple insurgencies at home and a belligerent Zia-ul-Haq across the border. P.V. Narasimha Rao had to deal with the mother of all crises—the 1991 balance of payments collapse —just as the Soviet Union, India’s security blanket, disintegrated into history. Even Atal Bihari Vajpayee, who loo...

  The transformation of the Indian state under Narendra Modi has often been narrated in terms of strong leadership, decisive governance, and an unrelenting emphasis on development. Development being a synonym for civil engineering projects, showcased in glossy WhatsApp forwards and jarring emotional endorsements by nobodies. Yet what has emerged over the past decade is less a model of sustainable development than what can be described as the “Contractor State”: a polity where monumental construction projects, executed with little public scrutiny, have replaced democratic debate as the primary mode of statecraft. In Modi’s vision, the nation’s destiny is equated with the building of imposing physical structures, even as institutional and ecological foundations are steadily weakened. The Central Vista redevelopment project and the construction of a new Parliament epitomize this logic. The official justification—that the old Parliament was structurally inadequate and technologica...

  https://theprint.in/national-interest/indian-pakistan-air-force-doctrines-1965-1971-kargil-op-sindoor/2722096/ Among the well-worn tales of the 1965 Indo-Pak war, one stands tall: Lal Bahadur Shastry’s fearless call to cross the International Border in Punjab, defying both diplomatic and military counsel (especially diplomatic), to relieve pressure in Kashmir or then LoAC. It was a rare moment in history when Delhi’s political leadership took a risk for the soldier in the trench. But during the recent monsoon session of Parliament, Narendra Modi, in what can only be described as his “Blames, Boasts & Bullshit — Volume Whatever,” introduced a new villain into his perpetual “blame-the-past” series. Nehru the usual punching bag, Manmohan Singh gets a usual swipe, Rajiv Gandhi a mention sometimes, and even Indira in a rare moment. But Shastry? Yes, Shastry. Accused, by insinuation, of “squandering” the chance to reclaim Haji Pir Pass and Kartarpur Sahib. Why? Because Op Sind...