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 Nuclear Pivot

Updated: Feb 18, 2025

India’s pivot to small modular reactors marks a quiet revolution in its nuclear policy, with deep geopolitical and strategic implications.

Nuclear Pivot

For decades, India’s nuclear energy policy has been defined by caution, self-reliance and stringent regulatory frameworks. That may be about to change following Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s recent visit to France, when the two countries announced a new collaboration to develop small modular nuclear reactors (SMRs). This marks a striking departure from the country’s historically ambivalent approach to international nuclear cooperation. This initiative, coupled with India’s decision to amend its strict nuclear liability law, suggests that Modi’s government is prepared to shake up the sector.


The timing was significant as it came before Modi was due to discuss nuclear investments with American firms during his ongoing Washington trip. This suggests a deliberate recalibration of India’s energy strategy that could potentially redefine its role in the global nuclear order.


For decades, India’s nuclear ambitions have been tempered by its rigid liability laws, a legacy of the tragic 1984 Bhopal gas leak, which left thousands dead and exposed the dangers of weak corporate accountability. Unlike other major nuclear nations, India has insisted on holding operators financially responsible for accidents, a stipulation that has deterred private investment and stalled projects like the massive, long-planned nuclear plant in Maharashtra. The recent push for small modular reactors (SMRs) represents a way to expand nuclear capacity without wading into the logistical and legal quagmire of traditional plants.


SMRs, unlike their full-scale counterparts, are compact, scalable and far easier to install. Built in factories and transported to their final destinations, they bypass the need for vast tracts of land and heavy infrastructure that has plagued India’s previous nuclear projects. By emphasizing modular reactors, India is not only accelerating its nuclear expansion but also signalling a willingness to integrate private sector players and foreign expertise into a domain long dominated by the state-run Nuclear Power Corporation of India Limited (NPCIL).


Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman recently set an ambitious target of 100 gigawatts of nuclear power by 2047. Given that India’s current capacity is a fraction of that, meeting such a goal requires a drastic policy rethink. The government has pledged over $2 billion for nuclear research and development, with a particular focus on building five indigenous reactors by 2033. The India-France agreement, which envisions joint design, development and production of SMRs, dovetails with this broader strategy.


For France, the deal is equally significant. The country has long been a champion of nuclear power, relying on it for nearly 70 percent of its electricity. Yet, its nuclear sector has faced setbacks in recent years, including cost overruns and safety concerns. By partnering with India, France is positioning itself as a leader in the next generation of nuclear technology. The collaboration also offers the diplomatic advantage at a time when Paris seeks to establish itself as a key player in Indo-Pacific geopolitics, countering both American and Chinese influence in the region.


Of course, this shift does not come without challenges. India’s nuclear liability law remains a sticking point, and while Modi’s government has hinted at reforms, it remains unclear how far these will go in assuaging foreign concerns. The memories of Fukushima linger in global nuclear discourse, raising questions about the safety of even smaller reactors. Then there is the question of public perception. Nuclear power remains politically sensitive in India, with environmental activists and local communities often resisting new projects.


Yet, if successful, this pivot to SMRs could be transformative. At a time when India is desperate to curb its reliance on coal and meet its carbon neutrality targets, nuclear energy offers a rare combination of reliability and low emissions. The geopolitical ramifications are equally profound: deeper cooperation with France strengthens India’s position as a global nuclear player, while the Washington talks could cement its role as a strategic energy partner to the West.


In many ways, India’s nuclear story is coming full circle. Decades ago, its nuclear program was shaped by suspicion. Ostracized from the global nuclear order after its 1974 test, it had to rely on self-sufficiency and tight regulation. Now, in a world increasingly defined by energy security and technological partnerships, India is emerging not as an isolated player, but as a collaborative force.

Comments


bottom of page