top of page

By:

Correspondent

23 August 2024 at 9:59:04 pm

Liberal Hypocrisy

A revealing test of liberalism is whether it can condemn an idea when it comes from someone it considers politically useful. A recent interview given by controversial former student activist Sharjeel Imam to a supposedly progressive portal has put sections of India’s self-proclaimed liberal establishment in a right quandary. In his interview, Imam outrageously questioned the democratic framework as a means of securing Muslim political rights, portrayed secularism as a majoritarian stratagem...

Liberal Hypocrisy

A revealing test of liberalism is whether it can condemn an idea when it comes from someone it considers politically useful. A recent interview given by controversial former student activist Sharjeel Imam to a supposedly progressive portal has put sections of India’s self-proclaimed liberal establishment in a right quandary. In his interview, Imam outrageously questioned the democratic framework as a means of securing Muslim political rights, portrayed secularism as a majoritarian stratagem and challenged the idea of a unified Indian nation while going so far as to label the Constitution a trap and denouncing parliamentary democracy itself The point is not what Imam believes; radical fundamentalism has always worn its extremism on its sleeve. The real issue is why his pronouncements have not provoked the kind of hysterical moral outrage routinely directed at Hindu nationalism. Imam, who became a prominent face of the anti-Citizenship Amendment Act protests of 2019–20, faces serious charges under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) in connection with the Delhi riots conspiracy case and remains in judicial custody without conviction. The point is why are the voices, that routinely lecture the country on secularism, pluralism and constitutional morality, so conspicuously silent after Imam’s brazen statements. Figures like Imam have never existed in an ideological vacuum. Sections of the activist, academic and media elite gave the anti-CAA movement considerable moral and political support, and some commentators treated its more radical voices primarily through the prism of resistance to the Modi government, while wilfully sanitizing bigotry as 'dissent' and dressing up open sedition as mere political grievance When Hindu nationalist figures speak, their statements are meticulously dissected, parsed, and condemned for their threat to minority rights and secularism. Yet, when comparable or worse challenges to national cohesion, territorial integrity, and democratic principles emanate from minority or Islamist quarters, the same commentators suddenly discover the virtues of nuance, context and restraint. They retreat into a cowardly fence-sitting, desperate to avoid alienating a vocal constituency in their anti-regime coalition. Anything less than equal scrutiny turns universal principles into mere instruments of partisan convenience. This reveals a deeper, more embarrassing pathology among sections of the liberal establishment to conflate opposition to the government with absolute moral virtue. It exposes an unseemly willingness to forge Faustian bargains with extremist elements, operating on the crude and dangerous logic that the enemy of my enemy must be my ideological ally. An individual does not become a defender of democracy merely by opposing Narendra Modi, just as criticism of Islamist politics does not automatically make someone a Hindu nationalist. Ideological arguments must be judged by consistent standards rather than convenient labels. Liberalism that cannot confront illiberalism among its own ideological fellow-travellers is not principled liberalism. It then devolves into mere partisan hypocrisy and a hollow exercise in selective outrage that ultimately destroys the very democratic values it claims to defend.

A War Without Sirens

Apr 27
4 min read

India’s security battle is no longer confined to contested borders but spans supply chains, trade routes and political narratives.

When Indians think of national security, the mind still conjures the familiar tableau of a jawan on vigil on n a wind-swept ridge, guarding a distant frontier. But for a country of India’s scale and ambition, its security today far outgrown the trench and the checkpoint. The country’s security now sprawls across markets and media, rivers and routers, trade routes and political narratives. It is no longer confined to a direct clash of armies across contested borders.


India’s geography is both a blessing and a burden. Its land borders stretch across some of the world’s most volatile terrain. The armed forces, ably supported by paramilitary formations, have long managed this burden. Yet the challenge has sharpened as an ever-aggressive China presses its claims along the Line of Actual Control with a strategy often described as “salami slicing” - incremental advances without triggering outright war. At sea, Beijing’s growing naval presence in the Indian Ocean, coupled with investments in ports across the region, has complicated India’s maritime calculus. The port of Hambantota in Sri Lanka, leased to Chinese interests, is emblematic of infrastructure that can serve both commercial and strategic purposes.


Eternal Threat

To the west, Pakistan remains a persistent irritant, its military posture intertwined with that of China. Periodic ceasefire violations and the shadow of proxy conflict keep the frontier tense. The narrow Siliguri Corridor, the so-called “Chicken’s Neck” linking India’s northeast to the mainland is a strategic vulnerability that demands constant vigilance. Meanwhile, new technologies in form of swarm drones, armed unmanned systems, pervasive surveillance are lowering the threshold for disruption whereby an adversary can wreak havoc without even formally declaring war.


India’s internal security matrix is shaped by a mix of old and new pressures: illicit trafficking of drugs, arms and people; illegal migration and the persistence of terror networks in the region which corrode institutions and strain social cohesion. Espionage, too, has evolved. Where once it relied on cloak-and-dagger tradecraft, it now often exploits the vulnerabilities of an interconnected, aspirational society.


Yet the most consequential internal risks may be the least visible. Social fragmentation, if left unattended, can be as destabilising as any insurgency. Information ecosystems, turbocharged by social media, can and does amplify grievance. In such an environment, the boundary between dissent and disinformation blurs, and the state’s task becomes not merely to enforce order but to sustain legitimacy.


Vulnerable Points

Economic security sits at the heart of this expanded definition. India’s growth story has been impressive, but it remains exposed to external shocks. Global finance still runs on the plumbing of the dollar. Supply chains, once celebrated for efficiency, have revealed their fragility in wake of the ongoing Iran crisis. The weaponisation of commodities has now become a dominant feature of geopolitics.


China’s dominance in rare earths is a case in point. For India, reducing such dependencies without retreating into protectionism is a delicate balancing act.


Closely allied is cyber security, a domain where borders are porous and attribution elusive. With power grids, transport networks, financial platforms, communications getting increasingly digitised, the vulnerability factor has increased as well. A well-aimed cyberattack can disrupt a city as effectively as a physical strike, and often with less risk to the attacker. Building resilience requires coordination across government and industry, and a workforce attuned to a threat that is constantly mutating.


Trade security, too, has acquired sharper edges. India’s prosperity depends on the steady flow of goods through sea lanes that pass chokepoints such as the Strait of Hormuz, as the ongoing crisis has shown. Any disruptions in such places quickly ripple through the world economy. Meanwhile, the resurgence of tariffs and industrial policy among major powers complicates the trading environment.


Then there is water, an element so fundamental that it is often overlooked until it becomes scarce. Upstream interventions can alter downstream flows, with consequences for agriculture, energy and livelihoods. Managing these risks demands diplomacy as much as engineering, and a domestic culture that treats conservation as a collective responsibility rather than an episodic concern.


Finally, the media can no longer be considered as a mere mirror to events but a battlefield in its own right. As fierce media wars during Operation Sindoor and other incidents show, narratives today are curated, manipulated or manufactured at scale, influencing the perceptions of institutions, corporations and even national indices of well-being. The danger is an erosion of a shared baseline of facts. A society that cannot agree on what is true will struggle to agree on what to do.


What is to be done? The varied nature of challenges resist any neat compartmentalisation. A cyber breach can trigger economic loss; a trade disruption can inflame domestic politics; a media campaign can undermine both.


For the state, this means efficient coordination across ministries, between the centre and the states, and with the private sector. It requires investment not only in hardware but in human capital. For citizens, the role is no less important. Awareness is the first line of defence. They need to understand that security is not a distant abstraction but a set of everyday practices, they must understand how information is consumed, and how resources are used.


Today, India’s front line runs through data centres and drought-prone districts, shipping lanes and social feeds. The country’s security will be secured not only by guarding its borders, but by strengthening the many, less visible lines that hold the republic together.


(The author is a retired naval aviation officer and a defence and geopolitical analyst. Views personal.)

3 Comments


Namaskar Sir,

Reading your piece, one is immediately struck by how decisively you shift the frame of national security. You do not merely expand its boundaries; you redefine its very grammar. The image of the lone sentry at the frontier gives way, under your lens, to a far more complex architecture where security flows through supply chains, data networks, trade corridors, and even the fragile terrain of public perception.

What stands out most is how you weave together domains that are often treated in isolation. Your analysis does not stop at the military dimension, though you handle that with clarity and authority. It extends into economic systems, technological vulnerabilities, geopolitical strategy, internal cohesion, and the evolving power of media narratives.…

Like

Nicely analysed. But unfortunately China is in dominating position not only in rare earths but host of many areas. Solar panels, speciality chemicals, EV cars and battery manufacturing... the list is almost endless.

Indian government has perhaps now woken up and started pushing into chip making, ship building etc. Though it will take a long time, first steps are being taken in many spheres. Perhaps a little more push is required to speed things up.

Future definitely looks great.

Like

Sir,you have covered all aspects of external and internal security of the country in a lucid language.The article is thought provoking.Thanks for sending it to me.

Like
bottom of page