India’s Left-Wing Safe Havens Need a Trump-Style Reckoning

While America is waking up to the dangers of ideological extremism in its universities, India remains hesitant to hold its varsities accountable.

In the United States, the Trump administration is cracking down on radicalism in higher education. Columbia University, long a bastion of leftist activism, faces a $400 million funding cut for failing to protect Jewish students from rising anti-Semitism. Meanwhile, individuals like Mahmoud Khalil, a Syrian national linked to pro-Hamas activism, are being deported, while student visas of extremists, like Indian PhD scholar Ranjani Srinivasan, are being revoked. America is making it clear: universities cannot be ideological outposts for radical movements.

And yet, in India, institutions like Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) continue to operate as hubs of left-wing activism, often shielding themselves under the guise of free speech. Despite its long history of insidious protests including pro-Naxal activism, open calls for sedition, and opposition to national security laws, an RTI query response from last year revealed that the Modi government had paradoxically increased funding for JNU even though the number of FIRs against troublemakers had increased.

JNU is not just an academic institution but an ideological fortress. Since its founding in 1969, it has served as a breeding ground for leftist activism. In the 1970s and 80s, the university was a stronghold of Naxalite sympathizers, many of whom later became intellectual apologists for the violent Maoist insurgency that continues to plague India’s tribal belt. While universities should be spaces for debate, JNU has often blurred the line between dissent and open advocacy for insurrection. The romanticization of violent revolution has never truly faded in the campuses of such varsities with professors and student leaders using ideological contortions to defend extremism, downplaying acts of violence as a form of ‘resistance’ against the state.

In 2016, JNU again found itself at the center of controversy when a group of students led by Kanhaiya Kumar and Umar Khalid had allegedly organized an event where anti-India slogans were raised with chants of Bharat tere tukde honge echoed on campus. Khalid, later accused of instigating the 2020 Delhi riots, had reportedly expressed admiration for terrorists like Afzal Guru. Yet, when the Modi government cracked down, the narrative quickly shifted to blame the government for engaging in ‘fascist suppression.’

In 2019, the passage of the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) provided another opportunity for JNU and similar institutions to mobilize against the state. Ostensibly about granting citizenship to persecuted minorities from Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan, the law was twisted into a ‘Muslim exclusion’ conspiracy by leftist academics and student groups. JNU, along with Jamia Millia Islamia (JMI), played a key role in the protests.

The anti-CAA protests quickly descended into violence, particularly in Delhi’s Shaheen Bagh, where roads were blocked for months. The violence reached its peak in February 2020, when riots broke out in northeast Delhi, leading to over 50 deaths. Investigations revealed that many student activists from JNU and JMI were deeply involved in orchestrating these riots. Umar Khalid and others were later arrested for their role in instigating the violence. But again, any attempt to hold these individuals accountable was met with cries of ‘fascism’ and ‘authoritarianism.’

Whenever left-wing radicals face consequences for their actions, their defence is not based on facts but on victimhood, while labelling Modi’s government as an ‘authoritarian Hindu nationalist regime’ for trying to enforce basic law and order.

The intellectual left in India, particularly in elite universities, operates under a unique privilege. It can openly sympathize with violent movements - be it Naxalism, radical Islamism or anti-national separatism - and yet claim persecution when confronted. The reality is that these institutions are not being targeted for their political beliefs but for their role in actively undermining the state.

Last year, the response to an RTI query had revealed that JNU received Rs. 3,030 crore in subsidies from 2015–2023 - 1.5 times more than what it received in the previous decade. The query had also revealed that no less than 35 FIRs had been lodged against protesting students by the varsity administration.

The point here is how long should taxpayers continue funding an institution that repeatedly harbours anti-India activism in one form or other under the cloak of ‘freedom of speech’? By contrast, Trump has proven unflinching in his response. Columbia University faces real financial consequences for its failure to address extremism on campus. If the U.S. can cut funding to an Ivy League institution, why does the Modi government hesitate to hold JNU, Jadavpur University or their ilk accountable whenever trouble brews in them?

Columbia’s predicament is a lesson in what happens when radical activism goes unchecked. While America is waking up to the dangers of ideological extremism in its universities, India remains hesitant. Institutions that engage in radical activism should see their grants cut. This is not about stifling dissent but ensuring that taxpayer money is not used to fuel anti-national narratives.

Individuals who foment trouble should have been permanently banned from academic spaces after their activities. The government should implement a zero-tolerance policy for students advocating violence. Many radical movements on Indian campuses are funded by foreign NGOs with vested interests. Greater scrutiny is needed to prevent external forces from destabilizing Indian academia. The Trump administration has shown that universities are not beyond accountability. The idea that academic institutions can serve as breeding grounds for extremism without consequences must end. If America can wake up to this reality, why can’t India?