Skip to main content

Is India run by "embattled, authoritarian, repressive regime" supported by vigilante groups? Asks Newsweek

Minorities protest in US visit
By A Representative
In a scathing commentary on Prime Minister Narendra Modi's governance ahead of his visit to the United Kingdom (UK), to take place in November second week, the powerful international journal "Newsweek" has wondered if "India is being run by an embattled, authoritarian and repressive regime, supported by vigilantes."
In an opinion article by John Elliott, titled "Narendra Modi’s Rule in India Threatened by Holy Cows" and a photograph showing the family of lynched Dadri victim Mohammad Akhlaque with a sub-title "Modi Islamaphobia India", the top weekly said, such a view "contrasts sharply with the friendly open “make in India” economic-growth face that Modi displays on his frequent visits abroad — and will do again in the UK next month."
The importance the weekly gives to the opinion article is proved by the fact that it chose to reproduce an article which first appeared on the "Riding the Elephant" blog. An India hand, Elliott is the author of "Implosion: India’s Tryst With Reality" (HarperCollins, India).
Newsweek said, "India has been hit by waves of growing religious and social intolerance since Narendra Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party was elected 18 months ago. This has flushed out some of the Hindu nationalist party’s most stridently anti-Muslim voices, and has also sharply increased liberal concern about where a Modi-led India is heading."
It commented, "For the most part, Modi and his fellow ministers have done little to restrain the extremists though; facing the possibility of failing to win the state of Bihar’s current assembly elections, they have been trying to defuse a row over eating beef that has escalated into a national issue."
"So serious has this issue and other examples of prejudice and intolerance become — and so silent was Modi and his fellow ministers — that Pranab Mukherjee, the country’s president, has broken tradition by speaking forcefully on a current topic. He has twice called for restraint in recent days, expressing 'apprehension about whether tolerance and acceptance of dissent are on the wane',” the weekly underlined.
"The events have confirmed the worst fears of those who opposed Modi’s election last year. They have also damaged India’s image abroad, which has already been hit in the past two or three years by evidence of widespread rapes, caste-based repression and violence and endemic corruption", the weekly pointed out.
Giving examples of lynching of Mohammad Akhlaque in Dadri in September on rumour of beaf eating, and the killing of MM Kalburgi, the 76-year old Kannada writer in August, the weekly said, "The lack of official condemnation of this and other similar killings, and the failure of the Sahitya Akademi to condemn the slaughter and commemorate the life of one of its awardees, led to a stream of protests from other authors."
"This became linked with protests against the government’s inaction over the beef row, and numerous writers have demonstrated by returning awards given by the Akademi, which has increased national publicity over the issue", the weekly said, adding, "Modi was slow to comment on the killings and the broader beef issue, and when he did speak on the Dadri death, he only said it was 'saddening and unfortunate'.”
The weekly believed, "A prime minister might be expected to be more outspoken about such a crime, but it fitted with his approach to all controversial anti-Muslim events and extreme Hindu nationalist remarks since a government minister soured the government’s image and undermined the apparent supremacy of its economic agenda last November when she implied that non-Hindu’s (i.e. Muslims) were illegitimate."

Comments

thanks for picking up my blog article, but a slight correction please:

I did not say that "India is being run by an embattled, authoritarian and repressive regime, supported by vigilantes". I said that this was the implication of what has been happening, and made that statement in order to point out how it "contrasts sharply with the friendly open “make in India” economic-growth face that Modi displays on his frequent visits abroad – and will do again in the UK next month".

John Elliott
Counterview said…
We have corrected the header.-- Counterview Representative
thanks, and for the headline
je

TRENDING

100,000 dead, 4 million displaced: Myanmar's post-coup war grinds on as the junta loses ground

By Nava Thakuria*  At least 100,000 people, including civilians, have been killed in Myanmar's conflicts since the military coup of 1 February 2021, according to the UN. Kelley Anne Eckels-Currie, UN Special Rapporteur on human rights in Myanmar, gave the figure to the UN General Assembly in New York on 27 October 2026. She called President Min Aung Hlaing a tyrant who still deliberately attacks civilians to force them into submission.

Delhi’s waste-to-energy plants emit 3.5 times more carbon than coal, new report reveals

Counterview News  Centre for Financial Accountability exposes the “plastic paradox” and calls for an end to climate finance for incineration, urging a shift to genuine zero-waste systems *** A damning new report by the Centre for Financial Accountability (CFA) and the National Alliance for Climate and Ecological Justice (NACEJ) has exposed the severe climate cost of waste-to-energy (WTE) incineration in India. Titled “The Climate Cost of Burning Waste,” the study reveals that Delhi’s WTE plants produce electricity that is significantly more carbon-intensive than coal, challenging the government’s classification of these facilities as "renewable" energy sources.

Stop selling the golden goose to foreigners: People's Commission on IDBI deal

Counterview News   The People's Commission on Public Sector and Public Services has demanded that the Centre immediately stop the sale of IDBI Bank to Fairfax, a Canadian company. In a detailed statement titled "Stop selling the golden goose to foreigners – Stop IDBI sale to Fairfax", the Commission said the deal is opaque, legally questionable and against the Constitution's Directive Principles.