top of page

By:

Bhalchandra Chorghade

11 August 2025 at 1:54:18 pm

Applause for Cricket, Silence for Badminton

Mumbai: When Lakshya Sen walked off the court after the final of the All England Badminton Championships, he carried with him the disappointment of another near miss. The Indian shuttler went down in straight games to Lin Chun-Yi, who created history by becoming the first player from Chinese Taipei to lift the prestigious title. But the story of Lakshya Sen’s defeat is not merely about badminton final. It is also about the contrasting way India celebrates its sporting heroes. Had the same...

Applause for Cricket, Silence for Badminton

Mumbai: When Lakshya Sen walked off the court after the final of the All England Badminton Championships, he carried with him the disappointment of another near miss. The Indian shuttler went down in straight games to Lin Chun-Yi, who created history by becoming the first player from Chinese Taipei to lift the prestigious title. But the story of Lakshya Sen’s defeat is not merely about badminton final. It is also about the contrasting way India celebrates its sporting heroes. Had the same narrative unfolded on a cricket field, the reaction would have been dramatically different. In cricket, even defeat often becomes a story of heroism. A hard-fought loss by the Indian team can dominate television debates, fill newspaper columns and trend across social media for days. A player who narrowly misses a milestone is still hailed for his fighting spirit. The nation rallies around its cricketers not only in victory but also in defeat. The narrative quickly shifts from the result to the effort -- the resilience shown, the fight put up, the promise of future triumph. This emotional investment is one of the reasons cricket enjoys unparalleled popularity in India. It has built a culture where players become household names and their performances, good or bad, become part of the national conversation. Badminton Fights Contrast that with what happens in sports like badminton. Reaching the final of the All England Championships is a monumental achievement. The tournament is widely considered badminton’s equivalent of Wimbledon in prestige and tradition. Only the very best players manage to reach its final stages, and doing it twice speaks volumes about Lakshya Sen’s ability and consistency. Yet the reaction in India remained largely subdued. There were congratulatory posts, some headlines acknowledging the effort and brief discussions among badminton enthusiasts. But the level of national engagement never quite matched the magnitude of the achievement. In a cricketing context, reaching such a stage would have triggered days of celebration and analysis. In badminton, it often becomes just another sports update. Long Wait India’s wait for an All England champion continues. The last Indian to win the title was Pullela Gopichand in 2001. Before him, Prakash Padukone had scripted history in 1980. These victories remain among the most significant milestones in Indian badminton. And yet, unlike cricketing triumphs that are frequently revisited and celebrated, such achievements rarely stay in the mainstream sporting conversation for long. Lakshya Sen’s journey to the final should ideally have been viewed as a continuation of that legacy, a reminder that India still possesses the talent to challenge the world’s best in badminton. Instead, it risks fading quickly from public memory. Visibility Gap The difference ultimately comes down to visibility and cultural investment. Cricket in India is not merely a sport; it is an ecosystem built over decades through media attention, sponsorship, and mass emotional attachment. Individual sports, on the other hand, often rely on momentary bursts of recognition, usually during Olympic years or when a medal is won. But consistent performers like Lakshya Sen rarely receive the sustained spotlight that their achievements deserve. This disparity can also influence the next generation. Young athletes are naturally drawn to sports where success brings recognition, financial stability and national fame. When one sport monopolises the spotlight, others struggle to build similar appeal. Beyond Result Lakshya Sen may have finished runner-up again, but his performance at the All England Championship is a reminder that India continues to produce world-class athletes in disciplines beyond cricket. The real issue is not that cricket receives immense attention -- it deserves the admiration it gets. The concern is that athletes from other sports often do not receive comparable appreciation for achievements that are equally significant in their own arenas. If India aspires to become a truly global sporting nation, its applause must grow broader. Sporting pride cannot remain confined to one field. Because somewhere on a badminton court, an athlete like Lakshya Sen is fighting just as hard for the country’s colours as any cricketer on a packed stadium pitch. The only difference is how loudly the nation chooses to cheer.

A Desert Bridge

India’s courtship of Jordan blends history, hard interests and quiet diplomacy.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s recent visit to Jordan, the first full bilateral visit by an Indian prime minister in nearly four decades, was stripped of ceremony and sentimentality and marked a careful recalibration of India’s engagement with a pivotal, if understated, West Asian partner at a moment of regional flux.


India and Jordan have enjoyed cordial relations since 1950, but for much of that period the relationship remained polite rather than purposeful. The two countries occupied different strategic orbits during the Cold War, and New Delhi’s diplomatic energies in West Asia were traditionally focused on the Gulf monarchies, Israel and Iran. Jordan, a resource-poor kingdom with an outsized diplomatic footprint, was rarely at the centre of India’s regional calculations. That neglect is now being corrected.


Modi’s visit, that was timed to coincide with the 75th anniversary of diplomatic relations between the countries, was intended to signal continuity as much as change. India has increasingly cast itself as a ‘bridging power’ - a country able to talk to rival camps without becoming captive to any. Jordan, ruled by King Abdullah II, plays a similar role in a fractured West Asia: maintaining peace with Israel, hosting waves of refugees, and acting as a discreet interlocutor in regional crises, including the war in Gaza. Their convergence is not accidental.


Maturing Relationship

The substance of the visit lay in five memoranda of understanding covering renewable energy, water management, digital transformation, cultural exchange and tourism. Individually, none is revolutionary. Collectively, they point to a maturing partnership focused less on rhetoric and more on problem-solving. Water scarcity and energy transition are existential issues for Jordan; digital public infrastructure and low-cost renewables are areas where India has accumulated practical experience. For New Delhi, Jordan offers not only a stable partner but also a strategic waypoint in a wider regional vision.


That vision increasingly revolves around the India–Middle East–Europe Economic Corridor (IMEC), an ambitious plan to link South Asia with Europe through ports, railways and digital networks across West Asia. Jordan’s geographic position and political moderation make it a natural stakeholder. While IMEC remains aspirational, India’s courtship of Jordan suggests an effort to anchor the project in countries that value predictability over posturing.


Economic ties, though modest, are being nudged upwards. Bilateral trade stands at roughly $2.8bn; both sides now speak of doubling it to $5bn. More significant than the headline figure is the composition of trade. Jordan is a key supplier of phosphates, vital for India’s fertiliser security. Joint ventures such as the India–Jordan Fertiliser Company have helped insulate Indian farmers from volatile global prices. In an era of supply-chain anxiety, such arrangements carry weight disproportionate to their size.


Culture, too, was pressed into diplomatic service. An agreement to ‘twin’ Petra with the Ellora Caves may reflected a deeper logic rooted in civilisational diplomacy. Both sites are not merely tourist attractions but monumental expressions of how ancient societies blended faith, technology and landscape into enduring works of art. Petra, carved into Jordan’s rose-red sandstone, and Ellora, hewn from basalt cliffs in the Deccan, testify to an age when architecture travelled alongside trade, ideas and belief systems. Twinning them is less about symbolism for its own sake than about institutionalising cooperation in conservation, archaeology and heritage management.

India’s Archaeological Survey, now a century old, has developed a formidable reputation in conservation at home and abroad. Jordan, custodian of some of the world’s most fragile heritage sites, has reason to tap that expertise. Modi was keen to invoke ancient trade routes linking Gujarat to the Mediterranean - an allusion meant to place contemporary cooperation in a longue durée of exchange.


Regional security hovered in the background. India has consistently argued for dialogue over force, whether in Ukraine or Gaza, a position that resonates in Amman. Jordan’s own balancing act - condemning radical Islamic violence while maintaining channels to all sides - mirrors India’s instinctive caution. Counter-terrorism cooperation and food security were discussed without bombast, reflecting a shared preference for incrementalism.


There was, inevitably, some stage-setting. Jordan has expressed interest in joining the International Solar Alliance, an Indian-led initiative that blends climate diplomacy with geopolitical branding. India, for its part, hinted at a role in post-conflict reconstruction in Syria, aligning itself with Jordan’s hopes for regional stabilisation without overcommitting.


At a time when America is raising trade barriers and West Asia remains unsettled, India is diversifying its partnerships with care. Jordan, pragmatic and well-connected, fits neatly into that approach. For both countries, the relationship offers reassurance rather than adventure.


(The writer is a foreign affairs expert. Views personal.)

 


Comments


bottom of page