Skip to main content

Have India's rulers favoured Gujarat by supplying only 'safer' Covishield to state?

By Rajiv Shah 
The controversy surrounding the two vaccines appears to be taking a scary turn. It so happened that I was talking to a senior healthcare expert of Gujarat on January 17. A very kind soul, this expert, whom I have known since 1990s, took the vaccine and posted the exercise on the Facebook so that others should know it's "safe". I contacted him on Facebook messenger, congratulated his gesture, and asked him which one was it. He said, "Covishield. This is the only one in Gujarat."
Covishield is the name the vaccine developed by Oxford, UK, and it is being produced in the Serum Institute in Pune. It has completed all the three phases of trials. The third and final phase, which took place after enrolling around 36,000 people, I presume, in Brazil and South Africa. In sharp contrast, the other vaccine, Covaxin, a Bharat Biotech product, hasn't yet completed its third trial, yet it has been "approved" by the Government of India.
The health expert telling me that Covishield -- the "safer" vaccine -- is the "only one in Gujarat" struck me. I phoned up several knowledgeable persons, and I was told that more than five lakh doses of this brand of vaccine has been supplied to Gujarat. "As for Covaxin (considered by doctors as 'unsafe' because it has not completed all the three phases of trial), it will be available, but at a later stage", I was told. I was left wondering: Why?
This made me contact some senior journalists in Delhi, who told me that in the national capital "only Covaxin has been supplied"! I was told, on Monday, out of 100 All-India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS) doctors, only 11 agreed to take the vaccine because it is "unsafe." They would take Covishield and not Covaxin, they added. I wondered: Is it because Delhi's overwhelming majority disapproves of BJP politics that there the "unsafe" Covaxin has been made available, while in Modi's home state the "safe" Covishield has been supplied?
Not without reason, this seems scary for those of us who are proud Gujaratis. India's politics is dominated by two persons who belong to Gujarat -- Narendra Modi and Amit Shah. And, this is not the only time when they have favoured Gujarat over other states. Media has repeatedly reported how Modi is surrounded by officials who have served in Gujarat. Favouring Gujarat like this might lead to people from other states feeling uneasy. If one looks at social media, I have found that derogatory comments on Gujaratis have become more frequent.
Not only those critical of Modi and Shah address Gujaratis scornfully "Gujjus", they often say Gujjus have "captured" India and are destroying the country! I do take exception to such comments, telling those posting such comments are sounding "parochial", as Gandhi and Sardar Patel were also Gujarati. Some of them readily accept my argument. However, isn't there reason to believe that Gujarat's own leaders, who are ruling India, are showing clear signs of parochialism?
Meanwhile, searching through Twitter, I found that already there are misgivings about Gujarat being supplied with the "safer" vaccine. One of them, Shahid Siddique, editor of the Urdu weekly "Nai Duniya", tweeted, "According to my information only Covishield vaccine is sent to Gujarat. No risks taken with the privileged state." Another, Vidya Bhushan Rawat, a human rights defender, added,  it is creating the "impression that Gujarat is now a VIP state treated differently." 
Gujarati daily quotes state officials saying they are very happy 
And, in a report, the Gujarati daily "Sandesh" has pointed out how Government officials are "very happy" over the state having been offered Covishield, which they consider as "more reliable" than Covaxin. The report states, Covishield has been given to Gujarat even though the state leadership didn't demand it. It quotes Gujarat health commissioner Mukesh Pandya, who is handling distribution of the vaccine, as stating that it is "good" this vaccine has been given both for the first and the second dose. Interesting!!! 

Comments

TRENDING

Swami Vivekananda's views on caste and sexuality were 'painfully' regressive

By Bhaskar Sur* Swami Vivekananda now belongs more to the modern Hindu mythology than reality. It makes a daunting job to discover the real human being who knew unemployment, humiliation of losing a teaching job for 'incompetence', longed in vain for the bliss of a happy conjugal life only to suffer the consequent frustration.

CFA flags ‘welfare retreat’ in Union Budget 2026–27, alleges corporate bias

By Jag Jivan  The advocacy group Centre for Financial Accountability (CFA) has sharply criticised the Union Budget 2026–27 , calling it a “budget sans kartavya” that weakens public welfare while favouring private corporations, even as inequality, climate risks and social distress deepen across the country.

From water scarcity to sustainable livelihoods: The turnaround of Salaiya Maaf

By Bharat Dogra   We were sitting at a central place in Salaiya Maaf village, located in Mahoba district of Uttar Pradesh, for a group discussion when an elderly woman said in an emotional voice, “It is so good that you people came. Land on which nothing grew can now produce good crops.”

When free trade meets unequal fields: The India–US agriculture question

By Vikas Meshram   The proposed trade agreement between India and the United States has triggered intense debate across the country. This agreement is not merely an attempt to expand bilateral trade; it is directly linked to Indian agriculture, the rural economy, democratic processes, and global geopolitics. Free trade agreements (FTAs) may appear attractive on the surface, but the political economy and social consequences behind them are often unequal and controversial. Once again, a fundamental question has surfaced: who will benefit from this agreement, and who will pay its price?

Why Russian oil has emerged as the flashpoint in India–US trade talks

By N.S. Venkataraman*  In recent years, India has entered into trade agreements with several countries, the latest being agreements with the European Union and the United States. While the India–EU trade agreement has been widely viewed in India as mutually beneficial and balanced, the trade agreement with the United States has generated comparatively greater debate and scrutiny.

Penpa Tsering’s leadership and record under scrutiny amidst Tibetan exile elections

By Tseten Lhundup*  Within the Tibetan exile community, Penpa Tsering is often described as having risen through grassroots engagement. Born in 1967, he comes from an ordinary Tibetan family, pursued higher education at Delhi University in India, and went on to serve as Speaker of the Tibetan Parliament-in-Exile from 2008 to 2016. In 2021, he was elected Sikyong of the Central Tibetan Administration (CTA), becoming the second democratically elected political leader of the administration after Lobsang Sangay. 

From Puri to the State: How Odisha turned the dream of drinkable tap water into policy

By Hans Harelimana Hirwa, Mansee Bal Bhargava   Drinking water directly from the tap is generally associated with developed countries where it is considered safe and potable. Only about 50 countries around the world offer drinkable tap water, with the majority located in Europe and North America, and a few in Asia and Oceania. Iceland, Switzerland, Finland, Germany, and Singapore have the highest-quality tap water, followed by Canada, New Zealand, Japan, the USA, Australia, the UK, Costa Rica, and Chile.

Mark Tully: The voice that humanised India, yet soft-pedalled Hindutva

By Harsh Thakor*  Sir Mark Tully, the British broadcaster whose voice pierced the fog of Indian history like a monsoon rain, died on January 25, 2026, at 90, leaving behind a legacy that reshaped investigative journalism. Born in the fading twilight of the Raj in 1935, in Tollygunge, Calcutta, Tully's life was a bridge between empires and republics, a testament to how one man's curiosity could humanize a nation's chaos. 

Territorial greed of Trump, Xi Jinping, and Putin could make 2026 toxic

By N.S. Venkataraman*  The year 2025 closed with bloody conflicts across nations and groups, while the United Nations continued to appear ineffective—reduced to a debate forum with little impact on global peace and harmony.