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.

Old Friends, New Calculations

Forged in Cold War solidarity, India’s ties with Russia are built on trust and crises weathered together. But in 2025, pragmatism must temper nostalgia.


 

India’s foreign policy today is at an inflection point. While its partnership with the United States often garners headlines, its longstanding, deep-rooted ties with Russia form a quieter yet foundational pillar. As the global balance of power shifts in uncertain ways, a comprehensive evaluation of Indo-Russian relations becomes essential not just to understand historical trust but also to assess contemporary relevance, long-term risks and future opportunities.


The Indo-Russian partnership (previously Indo-Soviet) is built on decades of trust. During the Cold War era, the Soviet Union was India’s principal diplomatic and military supporter. The Treaty of Peace, Friendship, and Cooperation in 1971 and Moscow's support during the Bangladesh Liberation War remain emblematic of that legacy. For decades, Russian-supplied arms formed the backbone of India’s military. Unlike Western nations, Russia refrained from pressuring India on its nuclear ambitions and did not intervene in internal matters. Even today, approximately 60 to 70 percent of India’s military hardware is of Russian origin. Joint development projects such as BrahMos missiles, the leasing of nuclear submarines, and the production of Sukhoi and MiG fighter aircraft reflect deep technical cooperation. India’s purchase of the S-400 Triumf missile system, despite the threat of U.S. sanctions under CAATSA, signalled India’s resolve to preserve strategic autonomy. The reciprocal nature of these deals makes Russia a valuable defence partner.


Since 2022 Russia has become India’s biggest crude supplier, rising from less than one percent to over forty percent of imports by late 2024. Cheap oil steadied fuel prices and curbed inflation while Indian stakes in Sakhalin-I and Vankorneft and its role in the North-South Transport Corridor underscore a deepening energy interdependence.


While Russia is not a leader in digital technologies or semiconductors, its strengths in space, nuclear energy, and advanced defence systems complement India’s needs. The Kudankulam Nuclear Power Plant, built with Russian assistance, is India’s largest nuclear power facility. Russia has offered support for new reactors under an agreement that allows construction of more nuclear units while collaborations in Arctic research, quantum technology and rare earth mineral extraction are on the horizon.


Russia remains a vocal supporter of a multipolar world order - a principle central to India’s own foreign policy doctrine. Moscow supports India’s permanent membership in the UN Security Council and plays a balancing role in forums like BRICS, SCO, and the Russia-India-China trilateral. It seldom aligns with Western critiques on India’s internal policies. Russia has also facilitated India’s access to Central Asia, both for strategic presence and energy partnerships.


However, the Indo-Russian relationship is not without strain. Russia’s growing proximity to China, particularly in the aftermath of the Ukraine war and resultant sanctions, poses a dilemma for India. The Russia-China “no limits” partnership and joint military exercises in the Indo-Pacific have raised eyebrows in New Delhi. Additionally, India’s increasing engagement with the U.S., the QUAD, and I2U2 is viewed with concern in Moscow. Russia’s silence during the 2020 to 2022 India-China border tensions has further complicated perceptions. There is also a technological gap; Russia lacks depth in AI, green technologies, and digital infrastructure - areas where India seeks global partnerships.


The post-Ukraine Western sanctions regime has constrained India–Russia economic ties. Banking restrictions, SWIFT bans, and secondary sanction threats have disrupted payment mechanisms. The Rupee-Ruble trade mechanism has struggled with imbalance and convertibility. As a result, many Indian exporters have reported delays in payments and logistical hurdles. Long-term infrastructure cooperation such as the Chennai–Vladivostok corridor remains underutilized, largely due to geopolitical uncertainties.


In India, Russia continues to be seen as a time-tested friend. Opinion polls show consistent support for maintaining strong ties with Russia, especially among strategic communities and older generations. Indian political leadership across party lines has maintained continuity in Russia ties. This stands in contrast to the more transactional perception of Western partnerships.


Russia’s enduring popularity in Indian strategic and public imagination stems largely from its perceived reliability during moments of crisis. From the 1971 Bangladesh Liberation War, when the Soviet Union’s vetoes in the UN Security Council shielded India diplomatically, to its support for India’s defence modernization during the 1990s post-nuclear tests phase, Russia has often stood by India when others wavered. Even during the Kargil conflict, Russia took a firm position favouring India’s territorial integrity. In more recent years, it has refrained from criticizing India’s moves in Kashmir or its strategic autonomy in multilateral forums. This has created a reservoir of goodwill that continues to influence India’s elite and popular attitudes. However, the assumption that Russia’s support is unconditional must be re-evaluated in light of its growing dependence on China, its own strategic compulsions and the evolving global order.


In the wake of the U.S. imposing 50 percent tariffs on a wide range of Indian exports, India has quietly moved to deepen ties with alternative partners. External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar’s high-profile visit to Moscow in August 2025 underscored this recalibration. During the visit, both countries reaffirmed their strategic partnership, and Jaishankar dismissed U.S. criticism of India’s energy ties with Russia as hypocritical. The trip came amid fears of a broader decoupling with the West and domestic pressure to diversify trade routes and strategic alliances. Russia, sensing the moment, has offered India more favourable terms in oil and defence purchases, with faster payment channels and expanded rupee-rouble trade mechanisms now under discussion.


India–Russia ties are not defined by flashy headlines but are built quietly through continuity, crisis management and complementary interests. However, legacy trust should not cloud strategic calculation. The world of 2025 demands hard choices, especially when older alliances are tested by newer compulsions. India must navigate this equation not as a nostalgic partner but as a pragmatic power. As old friends evolve, the challenge lies in managing expectations while maximizing returns.


(The author is former Director, Agharkar Research Institute and Visiting Professor, IIT Bombay. Views personal.)

 

 

 

 

Comments

bottom of page