top of page

By:

Abhijit Mulye

21 August 2024 at 4:59:11 pm

Speculations of ‘Operation Tiger’

Mumbai: Recent disqualification of former Mumbai Mayor Vishakha Raut and senior corporator Deepak Sawant has sent shockwaves through the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC), sparking speculation of a targeted municipal sequel to the Shiv Sena split. With a surge of election petitions now threatening dozens of elected representatives, whispers of a new form of calculated “Operation Tiger” are growing louder. Many suspect this is a strategic move to dismantle the Uddhav Balasaheb Thackeray...

Speculations of ‘Operation Tiger’

Mumbai: Recent disqualification of former Mumbai Mayor Vishakha Raut and senior corporator Deepak Sawant has sent shockwaves through the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC), sparking speculation of a targeted municipal sequel to the Shiv Sena split. With a surge of election petitions now threatening dozens of elected representatives, whispers of a new form of calculated “Operation Tiger” are growing louder. Many suspect this is a strategic move to dismantle the Uddhav Balasaheb Thackeray (UBT) faction’s remaining stronghold in the civic body. Recent action against Raut and Sawant, whose Other Backward Classes (OBC) caste certificates were invalidated, reveals a broader vulnerability. According to BMC data, a staggering 79 election petitions are currently active against corporators across various parties. The charges primarily challenge the authenticity of caste verification certificates, but also include discrepancies in election affidavits concerning declared properties and income. While the sheer volume of petitions against the UBT camp is alarming, civic authorities note that filing a petition does not automatically result in disqualification. The process requires exhausting several legal and administrative steps. Even after a ruling by a caste scrutiny committee or judicial authority, the urban development department must formally issue a gazette notification before a seat is declared vacant. The timing of these petitions has fueled intense speculation. Against the backdrop of the ongoing Supreme Court hearings regarding the original Shiv Sena’s party name and election symbol, analysts suggest rival factions are leveraging these petitions. This municipal “Operation Tiger” appears designed to either legally disqualify embattled UBT members or pressure them into defection to avoid a public unseating. If these petitions lead to widespread disqualifications, the UBT faction risks losing its position as the largest opposition bloc, fundamentally altering the balance of power in Asia’s richest civic body. Election petitions against BMC corporators Political Party: Active Petitions Shiv Sena (UBT): 24 Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP): 18 Congress: 10 Shiv Sena (Shinde): 7 AIMIM: 7

New Alliances, New Pressures, New Fault Lines

To its west, old relationships in the Gulf are acquiring new strategic and military dimensions. Across the Atlantic, Washington is increasingly using tariffs as an instrument of foreign policy. At the same time, India holds the BRICS presidency in 2026 and prepares to host its summit when the grouping is being watched in the West as a potential challenge to the American-dominated global financial order.


Individually, these developments may appear unrelated. Put together, they reveal a larger geopolitical churn in which alliances, energy, trade, currencies and economic coercion are becoming interconnected. India finds itself almost at its centre.


The emerging Saudi Arabia–Türkiye–Pakistan security equation deserves particular attention.


Saudi Arabia brings enormous financial and energy influence; Türkiye possesses considerable military strength, NATO experience and an expanding defence industry; Pakistan brings a large military establishment and nuclear capability with the open support of Washington.


Any arrangement containing a collective-defence commitment naturally acquires significance beyond ordinary diplomatic cooperation.


Alongside it, another strategic convergence has gradually developed among India, Israel and the UAE. It would be incorrect to describe this as a formal military alliance. Yet geopolitics does not operate through defence treaties alone. India's extensive defence and technology relationship with Israel, its rapidly expanding economic and strategic partnership with the UAE, and the UAE-Israel relationship following the Abraham Accords have created considerable common ground. I2U2—bringing together India, Israel, the UAE and the United States—added another institutional dimension.


Thus, without necessarily becoming opposing military camps, two interesting strategic formations are visible across West Asia: Saudi Arabia–Türkiye–Pakistan and the looser India–UAE–Israel convergence.


Balancing Challenge

India faces a similar balancing challenge. The Gulf is not a distant geopolitical theatre for New Delhi. Nearly nine million Indians live and work there. India's energy security, investments, trade and remittance flows are closely connected with the region. The proposed India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor also requires relative stability across this geography. Polarisation in West Asia can therefore rapidly become an Indian economic and strategic problem.


There is another question Indian planners cannot ignore. If a future India-Pakistan confrontation escalates, how would any collective-defence commitment involving Pakistan be interpreted by Saudi Arabia and Türkiye? It would be alarmist to assume that either country would automatically enter a conflict against India. Saudi Arabia, in particular, has substantial economic and strategic interests in maintaining good relations with New Delhi.


Nevertheless, defence planners are paid to examine possibilities before they become crises.


While these equations develop in India's neighbourhood, economic pressure is emerging from Washington.


The US Senate has voted 86–11 for legislation intended to increase pressure on Russia by targeting major purchasers of Russian energy. The measure could authorise tariffs reaching 100 per cent against goods from countries continuing large-scale purchases of Russian oil and gas, with India among those potentially exposed. China is powerful enough to shrug off similar challenges from the West."


However this does not mean that America has already imposed a 100 per cent tariff on India. Further legislative steps remain necessary, and presidential waiver provisions are important. But the overwhelming Senate vote carries a political message that New Delhi cannot dismiss. Tariffs are no longer merely tools of trade protection; they have become instruments of geopolitical coercion.


Washington's argument is understandable: revenues from Russian petroleum help sustain Moscow's economy during the Ukraine war, and reducing those revenues increases pressure on Russia. But in that case what about European countries who too were/are customers of Russian oil?


India's question is equally legitimate: who should determine where India purchases the energy required by more than 1.4 billion people?


If Russian crude remains commercially advantageous and helps contain domestic energy costs, New Delhi cannot reasonably be expected to make every energy decision according to another country's geopolitical priorities. Strategic partnership cannot become strategic obedience.


This is where BRICS enters the larger picture.


India holds the BRICS presidency in 2026 and will host its leaders at an unusually sensitive moment. BRICS is no longer merely the original grouping of Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa. Its expansion has considerably increased its demographic, energy and geopolitical weight.


More importantly, discussions around BRICS increasingly touch a sensitive nerve in Washington: alternative payment mechanisms, local-currency trade, development finance and the possibility of gradually reducing dependence upon the dollar-dominated international financial system. The BRICS Summit this time is poised to take some decisive steps which may affect western interests especially US.


(The writer is an advocate, legal, geopolitical and public policy analyst. Views personal.)

Comments


bottom of page