Some things to Reconsider

 Modi brand rests on two pillars. First, every public figure of consequence is expected to praise him with near-religious devotion, as though he were a deity rather than a political leader. Second, there is never any acknowledgment of failure. If something goes wrong, it is explained away as natural, inevitable, or simply beyond anyone’s control. To justify this supposed inevitability, billionaires and power-brokers step forward to present “facts” that are often as distant from reality as the Earth is from the Moon. The delightful spectacle of Niranjan Hiranandani, the venerable real estate magnate—and chief competitor to the Adani empire, no less—showering the Prime Minister with the kind of beatific praise. This, coming not long after the entire nation watched a political drama unfold, where an opposition MP, Mahua Moitra, faced the judicial axe over allegations of taking favours from this very same gentleman. The man survives the scandal, thrives, and then publicly kisses the ...

During his recent visit to Gaza, Jared Kushner — Donald Trump’s ever-serene son-in-law and self-appointed statesman — was asked on television what he had seen there. His reply: “It looks like a nuclear bomb was dropped.” When pressed further — “Was this genocide?” — Kushner, a man more comfortable dealing in property than in pity, said “No.” Buildings turned to ash, hospitals to craters, hunger to strategy. But unlike Afghanistan in 1979, the “Muslim world” did not erupt. No calls for jihad, no volunteers crossing borders, no princes emptying treasuries. Where, one might ask, are the new Mujahedeen? To find them, we must go back to that bitter winter of 1979, when the Soviet Union marched into Afghanistan. The Soviets said they came reluctantly, to rescue a collapsing ally. But once Soviet boots touched Afghan soil, a guerrilla army sprouted almost overnight — the Mujahedeen , “fighters of Islam.” They were not Afghans alone. They came from the deserts of Arabia, the plains of Egy...

 When the history of Indian diplomacy under Narendra Modi is eventually written, it may be remembered not for its strategic breakthroughs, but for its theatrical excesses, its silences in moments of crisis, and its worrying penchant for personalisation over institutional prudence. Modi’s foreign policy, by design, was never meant to be quiet or cautious. From the grand gestures of “Namaste Trump” to his surprise visits to Pakistan, it has been high on drama and low on deliverables. It has sought headlines, not long-term relationships. Unfortunately, in foreign affairs, style without substance often invites consequences. Let us begin closer home. In 2015, when a devastating earthquake struck Nepal, India was the first responder. This was an admirable and expected act by a regional power. However, what could have been a reaffirmation of India’s neighbourhood leadership quickly descended into a public relations disaster. Kathmandu’s citizens and civil society accused India of using ...

https://theprint.in/national-interest/zohran-mamdani-new-york-mayor-indian-socialism/2673153/  https://www.business-standard.com/opinion/columns/zohran-mamdani-socialist-agenda-could-actually-spur-faster-growth-in-nyc-125062701427_1.html Shekhar Gupta’s recent column on Zohran Mamdani reads like a man trying to play neutral referee in a rigged match—raising one eyebrow at the Sanghi mob baying for blood, while slyly tossing them a whistle and pretending not to notice. With the other, it slips the ideological brass knuckles to the crowd already frothing at the mouth. Mamdani, Gupta suggests, is a well-meaning radical caught in a swirl of impractical dreams. But scratch past the polish of editorial polite prose and one finds the familiar discomfort of India’s populists and the extended coterie It’s not that Mamdani’s ideas are too radical—it’s that they are delivered from a platform that can’t be easily dismissed. A brown man, Muslim by heritage, representing a diverse district in ...