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.

Wings of Deterrence

Manila’s billion-dollar fighter jet purchase signals a new chapter in US’ security strategy amid China’s maritime assertiveness.

The United States’ decision to approve the sale of 20 F-16 fighter jets to the Philippines, valued at $5.58 billion marks a defining moment in the evolving security architecture of the Indo-Pacific. Manila, long reliant on outdated hardware and a weak deterrence posture, is finally embracing a stronger air force capable of countering Chinese aggression in the South China Sea and preparing for contingencies in Taiwan’s defence.


The deal signals Washington’s determination to bolster its oldest ally in Asia against Beijing’s growing assertiveness. More tellingly, it coincides with urgent calls from the Filipino military leadership to prepare for a potential Chinese invasion of Taiwan.


Alongside these jets comes an arsenal of guided bombs, Sidewinder missiles, and radar systems that will modernize the Philippine Air Force (PAF). The State Department justified the sale on strategic grounds, citing Manila’s role in maintaining regional stability. The message seems to be that Washington wants a more capable Philippines to deter Chinese aggression - both in the South China Sea and, potentially, in Taiwan’s defence.


The U.S.-Philippines alliance, forged in the crucible of the Second World War and strengthened during the Cold War, has always been strategic. Throughout the 20th century, Washington viewed the Philippines as a crucial foothold in the Pacific, hosting major U.S. military bases at Clark and Subic Bay until nationalist sentiment forced their closure in the 1990s. Yet, even after their departure, security cooperation endured, driven first by counterterrorism efforts in the post-9/11 era and now by shared concerns over China’s regional ambitions.


This latest weapons deal is part of a broader realignment. Under President Ferdinand Marcos Jr., Manila has sought deeper security ties with Washington, reversing his predecessor Rodrigo Duterte’s flirtation with Beijing. Recent years have seen joint U.S.-Philippines military exercises expand, new defence pacts signed, and even discussions about granting U.S. forces rotational access to key Philippine bases. The return of F-16s to the archipelago after decades of reliance on aging South Korean FA-50 fighters suggests the Philippines is once again embracing its role as a frontline U.S. ally.


For Beijing, the F-16 sale represents a provocation. China has spent years tightening its grip over the South China Sea, transforming reefs into militarized islands and deploying coast guard and naval forces to intimidate rival claimants, including the Philippines.


Confrontations have escalated, from water cannon skirmishes near Second Thomas Shoal to shadowing of Philippine naval vessels. The acquisition of F-16s enhances Manila’s ability to contest these waters, particularly with improved maritime domain awareness and enemy air defence suppression capabilities.


Yet, the bigger geopolitical shift may lie beyond the South China Sea. General Romeo Brawner, the Filipino military chief, has urged his forces to prepare for a Chinese attack on Taiwan, a scenario that would almost certainly draw in the United States. The Philippines’ proximity to Taiwan makes it a critical player in any conflict, serving as a potential launching pad for U.S. military operations.


For all its strategic merit, the F-16 deal does not instantly transform the Philippines into a military heavyweight. The country still lacks the naval and air defence infrastructure to fully utilize such advanced fighters. Its fleet is small, its air force underfunded, and its military stretched thin by insurgencies in the south. The transition to F-16s will take time, and without sustained investment in training, logistics, and operational readiness, Manila risks acquiring high-tech weapons without the means to deploy them effectively.


Nonetheless, this sale sends a message that the era of American complacency in Southeast Asia is over. Washington has learned from the failures of the past decade, when China’s rapid militarization of the South China Sea was met with little resistance. By reinforcing Manila, the U.S. is redrawing the military balance of the Indo-Pacific. The next time Chinese ships test Philippine resolve, they may find a more formidable force staring back.

Comments

bottom of page