top of page

By:

Naresh Kamath

5 November 2024 at 5:30:38 am

Indian Tourists Need a Reputation Reset

India has long taken pride in the philosophy of ‘Atithi Devo Bhava’ - the belief that guests deserve warmth, respect and dignity. It is an idea deeply woven into the country’s cultural imagination, often been projected as a defining Indian value. As millions of Indians travel overseas every year, the conduct of a small but highly visible section of Indian tourists is increasingly shaping how India itself is perceived abroad. The issue is not about a single incident or a handful of viral...

Indian Tourists Need a Reputation Reset

India has long taken pride in the philosophy of ‘Atithi Devo Bhava’ - the belief that guests deserve warmth, respect and dignity. It is an idea deeply woven into the country’s cultural imagination, often been projected as a defining Indian value. As millions of Indians travel overseas every year, the conduct of a small but highly visible section of Indian tourists is increasingly shaping how India itself is perceived abroad. The issue is not about a single incident or a handful of viral videos but a pattern that is drawing notice from hotels, tourism operators and local authorities across the world. The debate gained fresh momentum after reports emerged of a Swiss hotel issuing a notice specifically addressed to Indian guests. The advisory reportedly requested guests not to pack food from breakfast buffets for later consumption and reminded them to maintain silence in corridors and balconies. Hotels routinely issue guidelines. But when a particular nationality becomes the subject of a specific advisory, it inevitably raises larger questions about perception. “It is a sorry state of affairs. Indians, especially in groups, are displaying atrocious behaviour. This was anyway bound to happen,” says Subhash Motwani, founder of Namaste Tourism. Embarrassing Incidents Whether the notice was justified is another separate matter. The question is why such perceptions are emerging in the first place. Recent months have seen several incidents involving Indian tourists gain traction on social media. One widely circulated video showed travellers performing garba on an airport tarmac in Vietnam. Garba is among India’s most vibrant cultural traditions and a source of immense pride for millions. Yet airports are highly regulated spaces where safety protocols and discipline take precedence over celebration. The incident became symbolic of a larger problem. The rise of social media has encouraged some travellers to treat foreign destinations as stages for content creation. Public dancing, loud celebrations, disruptive behaviour and attention-seeking stunts may generate views and engagement online, but they can also leave lasting impressions on locals and fellow tourists. India is hardly the first country to confront such a challenge. During the 1950s and 1960s, American tourists acquired a reputation for arrogance abroad, giving rise to the phrase “Ugly American.” Britain spent decades dealing with the international embarrassment caused by football hooliganism. China faced similar concerns as outbound tourism surged during the early years of the twenty-first century. A nation’s image is shaped not just by its economic achievements and diplomatic influence but also by the behaviour of its citizens overseas. India today finds itself in a similar situation. Indian tourists are now among the most visible traveller groups across Europe, Southeast Asia and the Middle East. This is, in many ways, a remarkable success story. However, with visibility comes responsibility. Hospitality professionals across destinations frequently point to recurring concerns. Excessive noise, queue-jumping, disregard for local regulations, overcrowding hotel rooms and attempts to bypass established rules through jugaad are among the complaints often cited. Collectively, repeated experiences can create lasting perceptions. The most revealing aspect of the debate is that Indian travellers often display exemplary discipline in countries known for strict law enforcement. In destinations such as Singapore, the UAE, Qatar and Saudi Arabia, compliance with rules is generally high. Complaints tend to emerge more frequently in places perceived as relaxed or lenient. That suggests the challenge is not one of awareness. Most travellers understand the rules perfectly well. The problem is often a mindset that rules can be negotiated when consequences appear unlikely. Changing that mindset is far more important than introducing additional regulations or issuing fresh advisories. Every interaction at an airport, hotel, restaurant, tourist attraction or public transport system contributes to how a country is viewed. These everyday encounters often shape perceptions more powerfully than government campaigns or tourism advertisements. As India stakes its claim to a larger role in the world, its citizens must recognise that national prestige is shaped not only by economic achievements and diplomatic successes, but also by everyday behaviour abroad. The overwhelming majority of Indian tourists travel responsibly and leave behind positive impressions. Their conduct rarely becomes news because courtesy seldom goes viral. Yet a handful of highly visible incidents can overshadow thousands of positive experiences. The challenge is to encourage responsible travel and a greater awareness that behaviour abroad carries consequences beyond the individual. The conduct of Indian citizens overseas should reflect the confidence and values of a nation seeking not merely recognition but enduring respect. (The writer is a senior journalist based in Mumbai. Views personal.)

Selective Outrage

India’s left-liberal media has long prided itself on being the torchbearer of secularism, dissent and moral rectitude. In the aftermath of ‘Operation Sindoor,’ the precision military strike launched by the Modi government against Pakistan-based terror camps, it has revealed its not a principled commitment to peace or truth, but a disturbing penchant for ideological prejudice, performative sanctimony and selective outrage.


The operation itself was a textbook display of calibrated force and geopolitical prudence. Prime Minister Narendra Modi, often caricatured as ‘authoritarian’ by the ‘liberal’ English-language commentariat, chose patience over provocation. He consulted opposition leaders, held detailed discussions with defence chiefs and took key international stakeholders, notably the United States and Russia, into confidence before authorising limited military action. The symbolism of ‘Operation Sindoor’ was also carefully crafted: a pointed reminder that the attack’s real victims were Hindu women widowed by Pakistan-sponsored militants in Kashmir. The government’s briefings were also strategic and symbolic as two ranking female officers, one of them Muslim, were made the public face of the mission, underlining a new Indian confidence that blends military muscle with democratic pluralism.


But this was unacceptable for India’s entrenched ‘left-liberal’ press, steeped in academic jargon, Western validation and a knee-jerk hostility to anything remotely ‘Hindutva.’ That a Muslim officer briefed the nation on ‘Operation Sindoor’ was branded ‘tokenism’ by such commentators. Others crudely alleged that the April 22 Pahalgam massacre was the logical culmination of reported atrocities against Muslims since Modi came to power in 2014.


The semantic nitpicking over ‘Operation Sindoor’ was maddening. An editor of a prominent magazine dubbed the operation’s name as ‘patriarchal’ and coded in Hindutva tropes. In a bizarre case of moral inversion, sindoor was likened to symbols of ‘honour killings’ and gender oppression, ignoring both its cultural resonance and the cruel reality that these women had lost their husbands in cold blood. For years, India’s ‘secular’ commentariat nurtured a preordained binary: the Congress may be flawed but was at least ‘secular’ while the BJP was an inveterate ‘fascist.’ Thus, the 2002 Gujarat riots are always focused upon but the Congress-backed pogrom of the Sikhs in 1984 is either downplayed or rationalised. Terrorism in Kashmir is tragic, but state retaliation is ‘jingoism.’ A strong Muslim voice in government is ‘tokenism’ but its absence is ‘exclusion.’ Even journalistic rigour is selectively applied. When Pakistan claimed to have downed Indian jets, some Indian outlets rushed to amplify the story before verification, inadvertently echoing enemy propaganda.


Dissent is vital in any democracy. But when its becomes indistinguishable from disdain, when editorial choices are dictated by ideological conformity, then the press becomes a caricature of itself. Ironically, many of these journalists enjoy robust free speech and loudly lament India’s supposed slide into ‘fascism’ from the safety of their X handles. Yet they turn a blind eye to Putin’s repression, Erdogan’s purges or Xi Jinping’s camps. In their eyes, Modi remains the greatest threat to democracy even as they broadcast their outrage freely, without fear of censorship or reprisal. ‘Operation Sindoor’ was a statement of cultural self-confidence. That confidence has rattled those who have spent their careers gatekeeping Indian discourse. Today, their monopoly is over. The people are watching and they no longer believe that the emperor has clothes.

Comments

bottom of page