I am excited to join the Foreign Policy Association blogging community. It feels great to be a part of one of the largest network of global affairs blogs. Here is a brief introduction about your new blogger Madhavi Bhasin.
Academic interests and personal yearnings inspired my journey from the banks of the Ganges in Kolkata to shores of the Pacific in San Francisco. From Chowringhee Lane (where every aspect of Bengali culture comes alive) to Castro Street, a variety experiences have shaped my outlook to life.
I received schooling in Kolkata and Delhi and kept moving between the two cities during the years of my doctoral dissertation. Inspired by Neoclassical realism, my thesis examined the impact of elite perceptions in ascribing India a hegemonic/leadership role in South Asia. Currently, I am a Visiting Scholar at the Center for South Asian Studies at UC Berkeley, working on the role of new social media in South Asia.
I completely admire the writings of K.Subrahmanyam, India’s strategic guru and a former civil servant. Reading and blogging continue to remain my passion even though these would now qualify less as hobbies and more as professional necessities.
My posts on this blog would primarily highlight India’s foreign and strategic policy and domestic politics while occasionally drawing attention to social and cultural issues in India. Hope you’ll enjoy the posts and join the conversation.

In what could potentially be a significant step towards women’s empowerment in India, the Rajya Sabha* yesterday passed the ‘Women’s Reservation Bill’ with 186 votes. Also known as the Constitution (108th) Amendment Bill 2008, it seeks to reserve 33% of the seats in the national and state legislatures for women. The Manmohan Singh government had hoped to have it passed on March 8, International Women’s Day. But intense opposition by the Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD), Samajwadi Party (SP) and Lok Jan Shakti Party (LJP), and their  disruptive unparliamentary behavior led to the House being adjourned for the day. Seven Members of Parliament (MPs) were suspended and House marshals brought in before the bill could be passed on Tuesday evening. Because it is a constitution amendment bill, it also needs to be passed by the Lok Sabha** and ratified by 50% of the State legislatures for implementation.

Though the bill has certain shortcomings and could end up providing only an illusion of empowerment, it is a positive step in the right direction. At present only 59 out of the 545 MPs in the Lok Sabha are women, whereas the number is 21 out of 233 MPs in the Rajya Sabha. Bringing more women into the political process at all levels of government would help reduce gender inequalities and give meaningful representation to a significant section of the population. Women participation at the panchyat (village) level has grown significantly since a similar bill requiring 33.3% reservation for women was implemented in the ’90s. It can also be argued that female representatives and leaders would be more sensitive to women’s issues. However, power corrupts, and political calculations might force such women to be no different about women’s empowerment than their male counterparts.

This reservation requirement could be interpreted as interference in the free and fair election process. The voters would potentially be given a restricted pool of candidates to decide who can serve them best. But as favoritism in rampant in Indian political parties, the voters do not have a fair choice of candidates at the moment either. If party tickets were merit based, and grass-root party workers could grow up within the party through their work on field, that would be a fair argument to make. The women’s reservation requirement would only change the set of options available; the quality would continue to be debatable.

One of the most prominent objections to the bill is that it would only create more ‘Rabri Devis’. In 1997 Lalu Prasad Yadav, then Chief Minister of Bihar, resigned on charges of massive corruption and ‘appointed’ his wife Rabri Devi as the Chief Minister. She had no prior political experience and was seen as being his puppet and surrogate. It is feared by critics of the Women’s Reservation Bill that instead of giving power to the real dis-empowered women, the 33% reserved seats would pass on to wives/daughters/relatives of the sitting MPs who would have to give up their seats. But this is largely because political parties in India do not have a democratic process for selection of candidates. Election/seat tickets are usually given to those who come recommended and are favored by the party leadership. It would be a real test for the political parties to ensure that such ‘Rabri Devi’ incidents are not repeated when filling the 33% seats. One way to do that would be to introduce internal party democracy and ensure that each time one third of their candidates are women. But that could be a big problem for smaller parties with only a handful of MPs, as a considerable number of their male members would have to give up their seats.  

Another problem with the bill is that it would diminish the accountability factor. As the 33% seats would be randomly selected by rotation, the serving MPs would have no incentive to work for their constituencies. They would not want to invest in and develop their constituencies as there is no guarantee of re-election. Even in case of potential ‘women-puppet-candidates’ the male candidates in the background would not be held accountable for not fulfilling election promises and neglecting their constituencies. It would give only those men indefinite power.

But such arguments assume that women are completely dependent upon men to enter politics and take up leadership positions. Instead of giving more power to the men, the bill could actually be a chance to bring good women leaders from the grass-root levels into the larger picture. Such constitutional guarantee could motivate more women to enter politics and make a difference in society. It might not happen during the first couple of elections, but as the reservation process falls in place and garners public confidence it might actually achieve the empowerment that it intends.

Nonetheless, it would be foolish to expect a sudden momentous change in the Indian political environment. The Bill is no guarantee that Indian women will soon be free of all the social inequalities and discrimination. It would require cultural and social changes at a much deeper level. The Women’s Reservation Bill’s passage in the Rajya Sabha is only one baby step forward. It should not make women’s rights activities and the truly concerned complacent. Now more than ever they would have to work hard to ensure that women are properly represented at all levels of government. The women candidates have a greater responsibility of proving the necessity of the bill and bringing in a breath of fresh air into the Indian political system. The Women’s Reservation Bill is a great opportunity that cannot be missed.              

______________

(*Upper House of Parliament; **Lower House of Parliament)

In a first for the city, Pune was struck by a terrorist attack that killed nine and injured 45 peoplelast night. A few foreigners are among those killed. An explosive left behind in a backpack at the German Bakery in Pune’s Koregaon Park area exploded at around 7.15 pm. The Home Minister P Chidambaram said in a press conference that the city was known to be on the radar of terrorists groups and the city police had been sensitized about it in advance. David Headley, prime accused in plotting the Mumbai attacks in November 2008, had visited the Koregaon Park area known as being a hotspot for foreign tourists to the city. The Lashkar e-Taiba’s involvement is therefore being suspected in the first attack after 26/11. It also casts a shadow on the secretary level talks between India and Pakistan scheduled for Feb 25.      

Having born and brought up in Pune, the terror attack was truly a case of terror striking home for me. Incidentally it is only last morning that I returned back to Pune from the US. I have visited and known places and people in the Koregaon Park area. I have enjoyed many delicacies at the German Bakery. Pune - my home, the place I always felt the safest in, the city that thousands throng to for its opportunities and sense of security. To know that terrorists struck here makes things more real than even the attacks in Mumbai did!

Amnesty International appoints its first Indian Secretary General: Salil Shetty will take over as the new Secretary General of Amnesty International in June 2010. Shetty has served as the Director of the UN’s Millenium Campaign for the past six years. According to Peter Pack, the chair of Amnesty International’s Executive Committee, “As we approach our 50th anniversary, we have ambitious plans to expand our work, especially in the global south, and Salil has a solid track record in mobilising people, civil society, governments and international organizations in the fight for people’s rights and dignity. He’s absolutely the right person to take Amnesty International into the next stage of our work.”

German President on a week-long visit to India: German President Horst Koehler is visiting India with a high-level business delegation, and will discuss economic and security cooperation. During his meeting with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, the two leaders discussed a framework agreement on trade and economic cooperation to the tune of $500 million. A proposed security pact would potentially include legal framework for German specialists to train Indian anti-terrorism personnel. President Koehler also called upon India to help fight protectionism by some countries that adversely affects development of international trade.

RBI Governor talks to 400 economist and analysts in an effort to improve transparency: The Governor of the Reserve bank of India, D Subbarao, held a teleconference with around 400 economists and analysts from across the globe on Monday. This was part of the Governor’s efforts to bring in greater transparency into the working of the RBI by communicating at the technical and non-technical levels. According to Niranjan Rajadhyaksha, “The Monday teleconference seems to be one attempt to bridge the information gap between the central bank, on the one hand, and the financial markets and society at large, on the other.” The RBI has previously come under criticism for lack of transparency by the IMF and some eminent economists.

Britain suspends visa operations in three north Indian centers: Three UK visa application centers ( Chandighar, Jalandar and New Delhi) have suspended student visa applications due to a sudden increase in visa application for the period of October to December 2009. A ten fold increase in student visa applications had raised red flags and the authorities have suspended visa processing until the situation is satisfactorily scrutinized. In December 2009, Britain had also tightened visa rules for Indian IT professionals seeking inter-company transfers.

India celebrates its 60th Republic Day today. It is to this day in 1950 that the Indian Constitution came into force after its independence from Britain in August 1947. The Republic Day celebrations are an opportunity to display the nation’s cultural diversity, military might and other achievements to its people and the world through a grand parade along the Rajpath in New Delhi. On this day, the Indian government also invites a foreign head of state as a chief guest to the parade, a honor bestowed upon ’special friends’. By inviting the South Korean President Lee Myung-bak this year, India reiterated that the East Asian nation is one of its foreign policy priorities.

Manmohan Singh greets Lee Myung-bak

The Manmohan Singh government had taken bold steps towards expanding relations with South Korea, when it signed the Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement (CEPA) with it last August. In effect a free trade agreement, the CEPA came into force this month. To further facilitate growth in bilateral trade the two countries also signed agreements related to cooperation in peaceful uses of outer space, IT, science and technology for the year 2010-12. They seek to boost bilateral trade from the current $16 billion to $30 billion by 2014. During an interview with the Times of India, President Lee Myung-bak said that South Korean expertise in IT hardware manufacturing and Indian excellence in IT services could produce a “synergy in the IT area between the two countries”. Businesses on both sides should take advantage of the significant tariff cuts brought about by the CEPA.

Another crucial outcome of this visit was that India and South Korea agreed to explore possibilities of bilateral civil nuclear cooperation. A press statement after the talks said, “The two leaders shared the view that nuclear energy can play an important role as a safe, sustainable and non-polluting source of energy. They agreed to facilitate development of a framework for bilateral civil nuclear cooperation.” The foundations for the possibility of such a cooperation were laid in September 2008, when South Korea supported a NSG waiver to India allowing countries to reopen nuclear trade with it. South Korea has considerable expertise in production and safety of civil nuclear projects. After his meeting with External Affairs Minister S.M. Krishna, President Lee Myung-bak said, “This is (civil nuclear) an area which will be very productive for both of us.” In December 2009, South Korea beat US-Japanese bids to win a $20 billion contract to build four nuclear power plants in the United Arab Emirates.

At its present stage of economic growth, India has a lot to learn from its new friend. South Korea, the ‘Miracle on the Han River’, is a good role model for economic development for developing countries. Not only did South Korea grow money-wise, but its literacy levels, education standards and innovativeness grew with it. This has helped create a sustainable development model for the country. The CEPA and other bilateral science and technology research cooperation agreements between India and South Korea are steps in the right direction. But the relationship needs more work.

India and South Korea have only recently began to understand the vast potential of their cooperation not only in terms of trade, but also security in the Indian Ocean and South China Sea region. As a major exporter of manufactured goods and importer of natural resources, South Korea has significant interest in protecting the sea lines of communication and trade in the region. India should take special efforts to ensure cooperation in combating piracy and protecting these sea routes if it wants to have a well-rounded ‘look-east policy’. (Since the 1990s India has tried to build upon its historical and cultural ties with South East Asian countries to expand markets, counter Chinese influence in the region and improve India’s standing as a regional power.) Without a well-developed security dimension this policy would only have been partially successful.

India launches anti-Maoist operation: India has launched a large offensive against the rebel Maoist groups in five states - West Bengal, Jharakhand, Orissa, Chhattisgarh and Maharashtra. The new operation, according to Home Minister P Chidambaram, is aimed at reasserting “the authority of the civil administration” in the affected areas, and arresting top leaders. The Indian government had in the past repeatedly called upon the Naxalite-Maoists rebels to end the violence, and enter into talks to resolve grievances. However, the groups have failed to do so. The operation is so far being termed as satisfactory by the Home Minister.

Naxalite-Maoists groups rebelling against underdevelopment and neglect of tribal areas have been involved in violent attacks on police and other representatives of the state machinery. Their attacks kill hundreds of policemen and innocents each year. The movement that began in the 1960s has spread across many states of India and threatens to destabilize the country.

Indian airlines and airports put on high security alert: Following intelligence reports of the possibility of a hijacking, Indian airlines and airports have been put on high security alert. The Times of India reports, “terrorist groups having allegiance with al-Qaida, Lashker-e-Taiba and Jamat-ul-Dawa were planning to hijack an Air India plane especially operating in or from SAARC countries — Nepal, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Bhutan, Maldives, Afghanistan, Pakistan and India as well.” Airports in these countries have also been requested to tighten security measures, and sky marshals are to be deployed on flights between these countries.

Red flags were also raised by reports of significant para-gliding equipment procured by Lashkar e-Taiba (LeT). The LeT has previously masterminded numerous attacks on Indian territory, including the Mumbai attacks in 2008 that killed at least 160 people.

Shiv Shankar Menon

Former Foreign Secretary Shiv Shankar Menon will be Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s new National Security Advisor (NSA). The current NSA, M K Narayanan will step down after five years in office, and take over as the Governor of the state of West Bengal. The new appointment comes at a time when the Home Minister, P Chidambaram, has announced plans to restructure India’s security apparatus. As per the proposed changes he would assume charge of all internal security matters, and external security will be separated from the Home Ministry. It is therefore being speculated by analysts that the new NSA will have a smaller portfolio.

M K Narayanan, who headed the Intelligence Bureau in the late 1980s, was entrusted with all internal and external security issues and intelligence coordination. He had more than a ‘diplomatic’ and advisory role and was involved in policy formulation. Mr Narayanan was also the link between the Nuclear Command Authority and the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO), which means that he could advise the PM on the use of nuclear weapons. This could prove to be a murky area if the NSA’s profile is drastically altered. (“The NCA comprised a Political Council and an Executive Council. The Political Council was chaired by the Prime Minister and ‘is the sole body which can authorise the use of nuclear weapons’, the CCS said. The Executive Council, chaired by the National Security Adviser to the Prime Minister, ‘provides inputs for decision making by the NCA and executes the directives given to it by the Political Council’.”)

If Mr Chindambaram’s restructuring plans are implemented, intelligence coordination and internal security issues could be taken away from the NSA’s portfolio. For the Home Ministry to be fully accountable for internal security, intelligence agencies would have to report to it. But that could be contentious as it would mean delinking the PMO and intelligence agencies. Mr Chidambaram plans to pull all intelligence agencies under one roof and make the National Counter Terrorism Center (NCTC) their reporting agency.

According to some reports the new NSA is likely to perform a more ‘diplomatic’ role and concentrate on coordinating foreign and security policy. The proposed front-runner for the post, Shiv Shankar Menon, is one of India’s most prominent diplomat’s. He was previously India’s ambassador to China, Pakistan, Israel and Sri Lanka. He therefore has experience dealing with the two most important countries on Indian foreign policy agenda in the coming years. “A major milestone in his career was the India-US nuclear deal, for which he worked hard to convince the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) nations to get a clean waiver for nuclear supplies to India.” Mr Menon has served also as Alternate Governor on the IAEA Board of Governors. His experience with nuclear issues would be crucial as nuclear dealings could shape India’s relations with many countries in the near future. He enjoys good relations with the Prime Minister and the two are said to have similar views on many foreign policy issues. Mr Menon’s illustrious career indicates that he would be a great asset as the NSA if PM Singh intends to step up India’s foreign policy game to fulfill its aspirations for the future.

____________

Update: An excellent profile piece about the outgoing NSA, M K Narayanan, by retired Additional Secretary, B Raman.

David Headley and Tahawwur Rana have been indicted by a US grand jury for the terror attacks in Mumbai on November 26, 2008. The two men were arrested in Chicago on 3 October, 2009 and charges were filed against them on 7 December, 2009.

The indictment revels that Lashkar e-Taiba provided $28,000 to David Headley for his numerous reconnaissance  trips to India. The Times of India reports, “Gilani/Headley’s LeT handlers also showed him a styrofoam mockup of the Taj Mahal hotel and provided him with a global positioning system device and taught him how to use it to record the locations of possible landing sites and potential targets in Mumbai, which Headley then used during his surveillance trips in April and July 2008, the charges state.”

The grand jury also indicted Ilyas Kashmiri, a leader of Harakat-ul Jihad Islami and Abdur Rehman, a retired major in the Pakistani military, for their role in planning attacks on a Danish newspaper that published controversial cartoons of Prophet Mohammad. Ilyas Kashmiri was also allegedly involved in the recent suicide attack in Afghanistan that killed seven CIA operatives.

In India, Ajmal Kasab, the only surviving terrorist currently on trail in a Mumbai court, continued to deny his involvement in the terror attacks. He claims to have no knowledge of the 26/11 attacks. In December 2009 Ajmal Kasab retracted his guilty confession and instead alleged that the Mumbai police had conspired to frame him. Kasab was arrested on the scene, and also in action on surveillance cameras at the CST station. At present the special court is in the process of recording Kasab’s final statement before a verdict is issued.

In a goodwill gesture aimed at improving relations with its eastern neighbor, India will make available a line of credit of $1 billion to Bangladesh. This was announced during a three day visit by Bangladesh Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina to India. The two countries also signed agreements on mutual assistance in fighting terrorism, organized crime and drug trafficking. Ms Hasina assured the Indian Prime Minister that she would not allow Bangladesh to be used as a base for terrorist activities against India.

One of the highlights of the visit was the talks between Indian Railways Minister Mamata Banarjee and Ms Hasina about developing rail connectivity between the two countries. The Business Standard reports, “Among the proposals considered today includes a project to construct a railway link between Rohanpur and Singhabad to facilitate transit traffic from Bangladesh to Nepal through India. Railway ministry sources indicated that the ministry had no objections to opening the additional transit route to Bangladesh.” Another trans-Asian line connecting India-Bangladesh-Myanmar, and the strengthening of the revenue-generating Chittagong-Dhaka route were also among the projects discussed.

Increasing rail connectivity with Bangladesh could boost bilateral trade by making it cost efficient and lucrative. It would significantly reduce transportation costs, as containers between India and Bangladesh currently take a sea-route through Mumbai, located on India’s west coast. As one of the biggest powers in the region, it is in India’s interest to promote economic development in, and trade relations with Bangladesh. At present Bangladesh is one of the poorest countries in the world. China has been making advances towards both Bangladesh and Myanmar, and a strong Chinese influence to its east could undermine Indian security.

Though relations with Bangladesh have not been consistently cordial, the current Awami League government is seen to be in favor of developing better relations with India. This was clearly conveyed through the arrest, and transfer to India, of the chairman of the United Liberation Front of Assam (ULFA) by Bangladesh. Members of the separatist movement in the northeastern States of India are believed to frequently cross over into Bangladesh to plan and carry out their operations. India needs Bangladesh’s assistance in dealing with these separatist. It is particularly important now that China has being increasingly aggressive about its claims on the north-eastern state of Arunachal Pradesh. Good relations with Bangladesh are also important to deal with any Islamic fundamentalists/militants operating in the region.

Whether it is through economic assistance, or improving electricity supply and infrastructure in Bangladesh, India should take proactive steps to build beneficial long-term relations with Bangladesh. For them it might be a way of overcoming poverty and underdevelopment. For India, it is a matter of securing its eastern border.

In the latest issue of Foreign Policy Barbara Crossette writes about how India is the real “headache” in Asia. She refers to India as the “elephant in the room” that no one seems to be talking about. The piece is extremely critical of how India handles its international relations, and calls it “an international adolescent, a country of outsize ambition but anemic influence.” However, she fails to empirically explain how India’s actions are a bigger problem as compared to other Asian countries.

Crossette begins by blaming India of believing that international rules do not apply to it. She says, “Bucking an  international trend since the Cold War, successive Indian governments have refused to sign nuclear testing and nonproliferation agreements — accelerating a nuclear arms race in South Asia.” She seems to ignore Pakistan, North Korea and China whose nuclear proliferation records are anything but clean.

India refused to sign the NPT and CTBT since it considers them to be discriminatory. India believed that the NPT “discriminated against countries that did not have nuclear weapons, heightened difficulties for countries trying to develop nuclear energy and failed to force existing nuclear weapons states to engage in serious disarmament.” The NPT was finalized in 1968 by which time erstwhile USSR and China were already in possession of nuclear weapons. At the same time, India was a newly independent country and had already fought two wars with its neighbors- Pakistan in 1965, and China in 1962. It is not difficult to imagine that it had apprehensions about binding itself to an international treaty that forbade it nuclear technology without guaranteeing that its hostile neighbors would do the same. China signed the NPT as late as 1992 and only after it was recognized as a nuclear weapons state.

However, the Indian attitude appears to be changing, and last month Prime Minister Manmohan Singh expressed the possibility of reconsidering India’s position on the NPT and CTBT. He said that India would sign the CTBT after the US and China did so. In spite of its refusal to sign these treaties, India has maintained a no-first-use nuclear policy, and continues to be a responsible nuclear weapons country that cooperates with the IAEA. It has been under a self-imposed test moratorium since its last nuclear tests in 1998.

In her article Crossette also blames India for the failure of the 2008 Doha trade talks, and the more recent climate change negotiations. (This contradicts her own claim that India has “anemic influence”.) The 2008 Doha talks failed because India, China and the US could not agree on agricultural trade, mainly the special safeguard mechanism. As a country where 60 percent of the workforce is involved in agriculture, it was the Indian minister’s primary responsibility to safeguard the interests of the people he was elected to serve. Foregoing their interests would have been a breach of trust that the Indian farmers put into their government, not to mention political suicide for Mr Kamal Nath. The Crossette article gives the impression that other countries had no role whatsoever to play in the failure of the talks. However, Peter Mandelson, the European Union trade commissioner, explained after the talks that “the agriculture talks had been harmed by the five-year programme of agricultural subsidies recently passed by the US Congress,” and that it had been a “collective failure.”

The most egregious claim in her article is regarding Indian intransigence during Copenhagen talks. The consensus amongst experts regarding Copenhagen relates to China’s stubbornness. Foreign Policy magazine itself had an article titled, ‘How China Stiffed the World in Copenhagen’. Neither has any high ranking international official made any statement claiming Indian negotiators stalled negotiations at the Copenhagen talks. In stark contrast last month India has announced 20-25 percent cut in carbon emissions irrespective of the outcome of the Copenhagen Summit.

India is one of the smaller emitters (India’s per capita emissions are approximately 1.2 tons as compared to the global average of around 4.2 tons) and its cuts will only make a small dent in the total. India’s current climate change position has been criticized by many Indian analysts. Arvind Panaragiya at the Economic Times is critical of how the country negotiated at Copenhagen, and says that “India ended up raising its commitments even further at Copenhagen by agreeing to ‘international consultations and analysis’ of biennial progress reports it must submit to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.” Crossette’s piece does not say anything about what other Asian countries in Central Asia, Sri Lanka, Japan, Indonesia, Malaysia etc are doing in this regard, but simply blames India of standing in the way of negotiations.

The article then criticizes India for not being a “liberal democratic paradise“. Exactly how this is related to the central thesis of the article regarding India being a ‘headache’  during international negotiations in unclear. While India might not be the perfect democracy, it has been the one of most well functioning democracies in the continent, and the world, with free and fair elections. The same cannot be said of more than half of the countries in Asia which do not have democratic governments. China, Myanmar, North Korea, Laos, Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, Iraq are only some of the glaring examples. India on the other hand has a multi-party parliamentary system that represents the cross-section of a multi-lingual, multi-cultural and multi-religious country. A written Constitution and independent judiciary protect the rights and freedoms of its people. It also has no record of military coups.

Freedom of press and speech is ensured as a fundamental right, and there are no restrictions on internet content (as are often heard in case of China). The Indian press and cyber-community freely criticizes the government, its policies and political leaders, without fear of punishment by the State. Though some authors/books/films may be banned by the government at various times, they are an exception and thousands of books -some very controversial- are published each year. ( Countries across the world, including the United States have banned books at one time or another.) While it is unfortunate that the government is wary of writings that could incite religious violence, it is also its primary responsibility to ensure peace within the country. But how far can the occasional ban on books be a measure of democratic robustness and ideals of a country?

As a multi-religious country with a history of partition of the country by the British on religious grounds, it is no surprise that religious riots happen in India. But, India has never hushed up its riots and human rights organizations within India and outside have been free to criticize government action. There is always room for improvement, and I think that more needs to be done to ensure speedy and fair trails in riot cases. But to imply that it has a poor record of ensuring minority rights as compared to other countries in Asia would be a gross misrepresentation.

India is a secular country with the third largest Muslim population in the world. Like the United States, it has also been affected by Islamic fundamentalism and resulting distrust towards minorities. Minorities including Muslims Christians, Buddhists, Jains, Sikhs, Jews live freely and are guaranteed the same rights as the majority Hindus. There is affirmative action for religious and cultural minorities. Crossette does not give any statistical references to compare India’s record with even those Asian countries that have some form of democracy. While the Indian government has a long way to go to eliminate religious riots, it has done considerably well considering the enormity of the challenge.

The lack of context and comparisons add up to a piece that comes across as biased rather than well-argued.