Home Blog Page 125

‘Declaring Munambam land as a Waqf property was a land-grabbing tactic of the Waqf Board’, says Kerala HC. Read how the Waqf Board tried to displace 600 families

Aditi
-
0
‘Declaring Munambam land as a Waqf property was a land-grabbing tactic of the Waqf Board’, says Kerala HC. Read how the Waqf Board tried to displace 600 families

In a significant decision, a division bench of the Kerala High Court on Friday (10th October) held that the Kerala Waqf Board’s decision to declare the disputed land in Munambam a waqf property was “bad in law” and was a “land-grabbing tactic”.

A Division Bench of Justices SA Dharmadhikari and Justice Syam Kumar VM also set aside the order of a Single Bench passed in March this year, quashing the Kerala government’s decision ordering the formation of an inquiry commission to examine the rights of about 600 families facing eviction from the disputed land. The decision was passed by a Single Bench of Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas after members of the Waqf Samrakshana Samithi challenged the state government’ order before the High Court.

The Single Bench had held that the commission, appointed in November 2024, led by retired Justice CN Ramachandran Nair to recommend solutions, lacked the authority to intervene in the matter already decided or pending before the Kerala Waqf Board under the Waqf Act, 1995. Overturning the Single Bench’s decision, the Division Bench said that the petitioners had no locus standi to challenge the state government’s order before the Single Bench. “The original writ petitioners do not possess the locus standi to have instituted the writ petition before the Single Bench, which clearly ought not to have been entertained at their instance,” the Division Bench noted.

The dispute relates to around 404 acres of land located in the coastal region of Munambam in the Ernakulam district of Kerala. It houses around 600 families, primarily of Christians from the Latin Catholic community and Hindus from backward sections, who have been residing there for decades. In 2019, the disputed land was declared as the waqf property by the Kerala Waqf Board based on a 1950 waqf deed executed by one Mohammed Siddeeq Sait, which dedicated the land to the management of the Farook College of Kozhikode. The resident families, however, opposed the Waqf Board’s claim, saying that they own the legal rights to the land as they bought it decades ago from Farook College, which was once entrusted with its management.

The declaration of the disputed land as a waqf by the Waqf Board was a sham: HC

The Division Bench called out the Kerala Waqf Board for wrongly declaring the disputed land as waqf property. “…we would hold that the declaration by the KWB in May 2019 of the property as a waqf is a complete sham,” the High Court remarked. Besides, the Division Bench observed that the orders of the Waqf Board were issued with unreasonable delay, and were unenforceable because they violated the law. However, the Bench did not quash the Waqf Board orders, as in the present case, it was only concerned with the state government’s appeal against the single bench’s order of quashing its decision to form an inquiry commission.

“The action of the KWB of declaring/ registering the subject property as a waqf property through its declarations and orders issued in September and October 2019 is bad in law on the grounds of being unreasonably delayed and having been issued in palpable violation of the provisions of the Waqf Acts 1954, 1984, and 1995 and resultantly non-enforceable. However, we restrain ourselves from issuing a formal order of quashing them, since the purpose of returning all the above findings is just to hold that the State Government is not bound by such a highly belatedly issued declaration by the KWB after 7 decades (69 years),” the Court remarked.

Waqf Board’s decision was a land-grabbing tactic: HC

The High Court described the Kerala Waqf Board’s actions as “land-grabbing tactics”, which resulted in the livelihoods of the resident families being affected. “We shall be holding that the notification dated 25.09.2019 notifying the subject property as waqf is ultra vires the provisions of The Waqf Act, 1954, as also The Central Waqf Act, 1995 and nothing less than a land grabbing tactics of KWB which has affected the bread and butter, livelihood of hundreds of families and bonafide occupants who had purchased tranches of land decades prior to the notification of the waqf property,” the High Court noted in its judgment.

“The manner in which the KWB has acted is nothing more than land-grabbing tactics after almost 7 decades, affecting fundamental rights, and the livelihood of hundreds of helpless citizens, who have been left with no choice, but to come down on the roads to launch protests, stage dharnas and agitations, which is what compelled the State Government to take the drastic step of setting up an IC. The brazen manner in which the KWB has acted in the case at hand shows reckless disregard of not only the provisions of the Waqf Act, but also the fundamental rights of a large number of citizens whose livelihood is dependent as bona fide purchasers and occupants on land under dispute”, the Court added.

The 1950 deed that dedicated the land to Farook College was not a waqf deed: HC

Examining the 1950 waqf deed, the Division Bench said that the deed was not a waqf deed but a simple gift deed, which never intended to create a permanent dedication of property “in the favour of the Almighty God”. “The endowment deed of 1950 never intended to create any ‘permanent dedication in favour of the Almighty God’, but was simpliciter a gift deed in favour of the Farooq Management and therefore could have never qualified as a ‘waqf deed’ under any of the enactments of the Waqf Act 1954, 1984, or 1995,” the High Court stated in the judgment.

The High Court noted that a property transferred with the intent of being treated as a waqf ceased to have the waqf character if it is transferred or alienated to a third party. In that case, the property possesses the character of a public charitable entity. “In all the enactments, the common feature about the definition of ‘waqf’ has been that there must be ‘permanent dedication’ by a person professing Islam of the property to be treated as waqf. ‘Permanent dedication’ implies creation of an absolute inalienable interest which is non-reversionary in nature, in the property by the donor in favour of the donee, so that the property may be utilised exclusively for the purposes religious, pious or charitable in nature,” the court explained.

The High Court further explained that it is essential for a document to constitute a waqf deed that it creates a permanent dedication of the property for the waqf. “It is an essential facet of any document to constitute a waqf deed that a waqf must be created having the facets of ‘permanent dedication’ of the property for the purposes of creation of waqf, in the absence of which it doesn’t achieve the attributes of waqf,” the court said.

The court added that since the 1950 deed permitted the donee, Farook College management, to sell, lease or otherwise transfer the property for educational or charitable purposes, it proved that the property was meant for charitable use and not as a waqf. “… the element of ‘permanent dedication’ was never reflected in the said endowment deed, wherein the beneficiary was not only entitled to sell the property, but also utilise the sale proceeds for themselves and there was a specific provision of reversion of the property to the donor or his successor in case any portion of the property still remains,” added the court and held, “Thus in view of the law as discussed above, it can be inferred that there was a clear absence of permanent dedication or any inalienable feature in the endowment deed. Therefore, we deem to attribute it to the character of a gift deed and not a waqf deed”.

Background of the dispute

The dispute dates back to 1902, when the Travancore royal family leased the land to Abdul Sathar Moosa Sait, who was a prominent trader in the region. In 1950, Sait’s son-in-law, Mohammed Siddeeq Sait, registered a deed dedicating the land to the President of the management committee of Farook College of Kozhikode. The deed specifically mentioned that the land would be used for charitable and educational purposes as per Islamic law.

The land got embroiled in a legal battle in the 1960s after the Farook College began the process of eviction of families residing on the land, who had been living there for generations but did not have the official documentation to prove their ownership. The management of the Farook College eventually decided to sell land parcels to the residents at the market price. However, this led to further dispute as the college management did not disclose that the land they were selling was waqf property. The management cited the 1950 gift deed as the basis of their ownership. Subsequently, the Kerala Waqf Board challenged the sale, claiming that the property was a Waqf land, its sale without the Waqf Board’s consent was illegal.

The issue did not hit the headlines until 2009, when the Nissar Commission, appointed by the CPI(M)-led government, announced that Munambam land was indeed waqf property. The commission declared that the sale of the land initiated by Farook College was unauthorised and recommended that the land sold by the college should be recovered. In 2019, a decade after the findings were reported by the Nissar Commission, the Kerala Waqf Board decided to act on it and suo motu declared the land as waqf property under Sections 40 and 41 of the Waqf Act, 1995. The Board then instructed the Revenue Department to cease accepting land taxes from the occupants of the land, effectively undermining the residents’ claims of ownership of the land. In 2022, the Kerala state government overruled the Waqf Board’s directive. However, the Board challenged the decision in the Kerala High Court. The court issued a stay on the state government’s action, leaving the residents in a legal limbo.

Politics around the dispute

The Munambam waqf land dispute also led to protests and political debates in Kerala. The controversy gained a lot of traction when the Centre proposed the Waqf Amendment Bill of 2025, as the Bill had the potential to nullify the illegal claim made by the Kerala Waqf Board on the lands of 600 Christian families in Munambam. While the Bill was being debated in the Parliament, the sole BJP MP from Kerala, Suresh Gopi, said that the legislation would help the Christian residents of Munamabam.

This left the Congress party in a fix, which had been opposing the Waqf Amendment Bill of 2025 to appease the Muslims in Kerala, as well as its ally, the Indian Union Muslim League (IUML), while also trying to hold on to its Christian votes in the state. Christians constitute 18.4% of Kerala’s population. They have traditionally voted for the Congress party. Trying to monkey balance, the Congress party declared that the Munambam was not a waqf land. However, the Congress party failed to retain the support of its Christian voters, who drifted towards the BJP, helping the party secure its first Lok Sabha seat in the state.

Uttar Pradesh: Tauqeer Raza, infamous for inflammatory speeches and terrorising Hindus in Bareilly, finally faces the heat of law after 43 years

Rukma Rathore
-
0
Uttar Pradesh: Tauqeer Raza, infamous for inflammatory speeches and terrorising Hindus in Bareilly, finally faces the heat of law after 43 years

The Uttar Pradesh administration is in action after 26th September riots in Bareilly over the “I Love Mohammad” controversy. Police has jailed 88 people, including Maulana Tauqeer Raza Khan (65) and seven of his close associates. The Bareilly Development Authority and Municipal Corporation has sealed or demolished properties valued at more than ₹220 crore, reported Dainik Bhaskar.

The Power Corporation is also actively involved in the action. Multiple connections have been severed due to continuous inspections. A similar action is underway in Bareilly to the one taken after the Sambhal violence.

A massive crowd assembled outside a mosque in the Kotwali district of Bareilly following Friday prayers after the cancellation of a protest organized by Tauqeer Raza regarding the “I Love Muhammad” row which lead to an assault on the police. Many shoes and slippers were discovered strewn across the road as 22 police personnel sustained injuries due to the stone-pelting by the Muslim mob.

This marks the first significant action against Tauqeer Raza, the president of the Ittehad-e-Millat Council (IMC) along with his aides, in a span of 43 years of criminal history. No administration ever dared to execute such measures against him due to his political clout and links to the Aala Hazrat Dargah.

Illegal shops sealed, fines slapped, bulldozer action

The Power Corporation discovered electricity theft at the residences of eight individuals, including Mohsin Raza who is a relative of Tauqeer Raza and Samajwadi Party councilor Mohammad Nadeem, in October. Cases were initiated against all involved which resulted in an aggregate fine of ₹1.12 crore.

An illegal charging station owned by Mohsin was also dismantled and a notice demanding payment of a bill amounting to ₹1 crore 26 lakh was slapped. Moreover, recovery certificates were issued for ₹15.39 lakh against Wasim Khan, ₹22.29 lakh against Monish Khan, ₹37.32 lakh against Barkan Raza Khan, ₹26.92 lakh against Aman Raja and ₹26.57 lakh against Ghulam Nabi.

The marriage hall belonging to Dr Nafees who is a close to Tauqeer Raza was demolished as it was constructed on government property. His establishment “Khan Optical” was also sealed which he operated without possessing a valid degree.

Over 200 unauthorized shops in Sailani Market were destroyed because they had encroached upon the land by building tin sheds.

A dargah is located near Novelty Square in Bareilly where a market has been established with 37 shops. It is reported that this property is owned by the Waqf, yet Tauqeer Raza exercises control over it. The Municipal Corporation sealed off the entire market.

As a result, shopkeepers have taken their merchandise out of their shops and are compelled to operate as hawkers on the street, selling their goods at reduced prices. A banner is displayed in this market which read, “The tomb of Pehalwan Sahib and its associated property are managed by the Waqf Board, Uttar Pradesh, Lucknow.”

It further conveyed, “This property is not owned by any private person or political entity. Any legal disputes concerning this matter are currently pending in the Allahabad High Court and the Lucknow Bench. All courts have granted stay orders in favor of the Waqf Board.”

This was installed outside the shops by the secretary of the Intezamia Committee, directly contesting the actions of the Municipal Corporation. Meanwhile, the government sealed several key properties, including the Flora Garden: 60 crores, the Skylark Hotel: 40 crores, Fahm Lawn: 50 crores and Mazar Market: 25 crores.

Moreover, Tauqeer Raza also received a recovery notice from the Badaun District Cooperative Bank for failing to repay an agricultural loan of ₹5,055 that he took out more than 35 years ago.

Strict action on the accused

Bareilly Range Deputy Inspector General of Police (DIG) Ajay Sahni informed that there had been 84 arrests in connection with the violence. However, the number reached 88 on 8th October. “The bank accounts of all perpetrators are under investigation to identify if they were receiving funds from external sources. The assistance of several departments is being sought for this inquiry,” he outlined.

Meanwhile, the police and the district administration are planning to impose the National Security Act (NSA) on Tauqeer Raza who is currently in Fatehgarh Central Jail. “There are sufficient grounds to detain Maulana Tauqeer Raza under the NSA. Given his record and the city’s fragile situation, his presence in Bareilly is not appropriate,” Sahni asserted.

Officials have also asked that all of his court hearings be held via video conference in order to prevent law and order concerns. He mentioned that the police had strengthened their hold on Tauqeer Raza’s companions and added more names following the examination of social media videos and CCTV evidence pertaining to the violent events.

Additionally, the Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP) announced a reward of ₹15,000 for each of the seven perpetrators who are evading capture. According to him, a warrant had also been requested against Tauqeer Raza in a 2019 case involving agitations against the CAA and NRC (Citizenship Amendment Act and National Register of Citizens).

12 FIRs (First Information Reports) have been lodged in this case with at least 125 identified individuals and over 3,000 unidentified persons. A Special Investigation Team (SIT) has been formed to look into all these matters.

Tauqeer Raza has been implicated in ten cases. He urged the public to assemble at Islamia Ground following Friday prayers on 26th September and proceed to the collectorate. The police had previously placed Tauqeer Raza and his associates under house arrest. The Muslim crowd attempted to make their way to Islamia Ground.

The authorities intervened and clashes erupted in four locations. There was stone throwing and gunfire directed at the cops after which they employed batons and discharged tear gas canisters to control the escalating situation.

Tauqeer Raza’s political ties

Tauqeer Raza emerged as a popular religious figure among Muslims from Bareilly. The founder of the Barelvi movement, Ahmed Raza Khan is his great-grandfather. He is affiliated with the Bareilly sect of Sunni Muslims and is a member of the prominent Ala Hazrat family. He is the first member of this family to enter politics. He founded the political party Ittehad-e-Millat Council in 2001.

His party achieved victory in 10 municipal seats in its debut election. He became a member of the Congress party in 2009 and the party’s candidate triumphed over Bharatiya Janata Party leader Santosh Gangwar with the backing.

Tauqeer Raza was apprehended and charged in connection with the major anti-Hindu riots that occurred in Bareilly in 2010 but the action proved to be futile because of his political connections.

During the assembly elections of 2012, he endorsed the Samajwadi Party, which subsequently secured victory in the Bhojipura constituency. He was appointed as the vice-president of the Handloom Corporation by the SP government, a role he relinquished following the Muzaffarnagar riots.

Tauqeer Raza expressed his support for Mayawati’s Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) in 2014. He established the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (Jadeed), next year.

Tauqeer Raza fuelled 2010 Bareilly unrest

A large-scale riot broke out in Bareilly on 2nd March 2010 in relation to a procession on Prophet Muhammad’s birthday. Tauqeer Raza’s incendiary statement was the catalyst for this outburst of violence. The first target was Guddarbagh. Many of the main marketplaces and homes, including Koharapeer and Bada Bazaar were then destroyed by fire.

The violence became so widespread that it was difficult to determine how many cars and houses were ultimately damaged. The offenders broke into multiple homes and attacked innocent people.

Maulana Tauqeer was arrested after four days as the authorities concluded that he was the main instigator. The development triggered more violence and BSP government started receiving threats from Muslim organisations that they would boycott Mayawati’s rallies, endangering her support base.

Hence, he was given bail within two days after the government promptly dropped the legal charges against him. Nevertheless, he persisted in making offensive statements that incited more violence afterward.

The 150-year-old custom of the Ram Barat procession, that is held annually around Holi was also disrupted by the disturbances. It took a long time for the city to return to normal after the unrest which lasted for many days. He was named the mastermind of riots by the Uttar Pradesh Additional Session’s Judge Court in March of last year.

“I will shed rivers of blood of Hindus. I will set their (Hindu) homes and shops on fire,” he reportedly warned as Hindu properties were attacked by armed throngs in a series of deadly assaults.

According to the court, evidence demonstrated that he was the architect of the since riots were started throughout Bareilly following his inciting speech. The court also conveyed its surprise that the chargesheet did not include his name.

Tauqeer Raza’s contentious past

Tauqeer Raza declared a “Fill the Jails” campaign after the Supreme Court permitted Hindus to pray at the contested Gyanvapi structure in 2024. Violence broke out in Bareilly after Friday prayers when an extensive Muslim crowd rushed to the streets on his appeal. They threw stones at police during the demonstration, and some individuals were beaten.

He made similar provocative remarks after the riots in Haldwani over the removal of encroachment. He claimed that Muslims had the right to self-defence and even the right to murder those who persecuted them, accusing the court of failing to protect the community.

The radical preacher asked Muslims to assemble at Ramlila Maidan in opposition to Yati Narsinghanand in October 2024. He declared that arrangements were being made to publicly convert five Hindu women to Islam and perform their nikkah in July of the same year. According to him, he acquired 23 such applications for conversion to Islam, from 15 women and 5 Hindu men.

Tauqeer Raza, displeased by the construction of the Ram Mandir, criticized the central government’s decision to confer the Bharat Ratna upon veteran politician Lal Krishna Advani. “If our youth go out of control, then no one can save India from a civil war,” he brazenly challenged, in February of that year.

The Supreme Court’s verdict on temple was termed dishonest by Tauqeer Raza in December of 2023. He emphasised that Muslims were not prepared to lose any mosques at this time, regarding the Mathura and Kashi issues irrespective of how many surveys are carried out.

“After Babri mosque, it is enough. We showed patience with Babri. We will not show any patience with Gyanvapi. Inshallah, this battle will be fought on the streets,” he declared.

Tauqeer Raza threatened that Muslims would seek an Islamic nation if no action was taken against those calling for India to be declared a Hindu Rashtra, in May 2023. He conveniently overlooked that Bangladesh and Pakistan have already been separated from India as Islamist havens.

“If this government continues to do such injustice, the countrywide Jail Bharo Andolan will become so big that it will be unable to contain it. The day Muslims come to the streets, one must understand that they will be uncontrollable. Therefore, I warn the government and Narendra Modi in particular that if he fails to correct this way of taking action with immediate effect,” he threatened in April 2022 amid bulldozer action against criminals in Uttar Pradesh.

Conclusion

The aforementioned incidents are merely the tip of the iceberg illustrating how audaciously he used to threaten the government and the authorities as well as unleash terror in the streets with impunity. He was emboldened by the belief that no government would penalize him for his actions, given his political affiliations and street power.

However, no criminal is spared under the leadership of Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath, regardless of their political ties or authority as is evident in the case of Tauqeer Raza. Therefore, he will be held accountable for his crime even though it took 43 years and this has been made possible only by the BJP-led government of the state.

Semiconductors Vs rare earths: China retaliates against US sanctions, imposes strict export control for elements it has 90% global monopoly in. Read what it means

Shraddha Pandey
-
0
Semiconductors Vs rare earths: China retaliates against US sanctions, imposes strict export control for elements it has 90% global monopoly in. Read what it means

In the modern era, war is not confined to military superiority, geopolitical manoeuvres, rhetoric and narrative management but also about having a monopoly in the arena of technology, especially semiconductors and rare earth elements (REEs). Donald Trump’s return to power in the US has stirred a geopolitical upheaval, driven by the motives of establishing dollar dominance and unipolarity, the US is tariffing, threatening and arm-twisting countries into bowing down. However, countries like China and India, which firmly advocate multipolarity, are not only resisting US pressure but also playing the game in Trump’s style.

China’s Ministry of Commerce has announced sweeping new export controls on rare earth elements on 9th October 2025. This marks a massive escalation in its trade arsenal, and a move that would rattle the US. The CCP government’s measures expanded restrictions to cover 12 rare earth elements–adding five critical ones, including, Holmium, Europium, and Ytterbium, along with related materials–bringing these under tight scrutiny to include crucial materials used in semiconductors, defence technologies and permanent magnets.

The Chinese MOFCOM’s announcement number 61 goes beyond REE export restrictions and says, “Overseas organizations and individuals (hereinafter referred to as “overseas designated export operators”) must obtain a dual-use item export license issued by the Ministry of Commerce of China before exporting the following (listed) items to countries and regions outside of China.”

The statement attached a list of REEs divided into two parts. Part one includes: Samarium Metal, Dysprosium Metal, Gadolinium Metal, Terbium Metal, Lutetium Metal, Scandium Metal, Yttrium Metal, Samarium-Cobalt Alloy, Terbium-Fe Alloy, Dysprosium-Fe Alloy, Terbium-Dysprosium-Fe Alloy, Dysprosium Oxide, Terbium Oxide.

Part two contains two sub-categories: first, rare earth permanent magnet materials, which include Samarium-Cobalt Permanent Magnet Materials; Terbium-Containing Neodymium-Fe-Boron Permanent Magnet Materials; Dysprosium-Containing Neodymium-Fe-Boron Permanent Magnet Materials; Parts, Components, and Assemblies Containing the Above Materials.

Second are Earth Target Materials, including target materials containing Samarium: a. Samarium Target; b. Samarium-Cobalt Alloy Target; c. Samarium-Fe Alloy Target. 2. Gadolinium-containing targets: a. Gadolinium target; b. Gadolinium-iron alloy target; c. Gadolinium-cobalt alloy target. 3. Terbium-containing targets: a. Terbium target; b. Terbium-cobalt alloy target; c. Terbium-dysprosium-iron alloy target. 4. Dysprosium-containing targets: a. Dysprosium target; b. Terbium-dysprosium-iron alloy target. 5. Lutetium target. 6. Scandium target. 7. Yttrium-containing targets: a. Yttrium target; b. Yttrium-aluminium alloy target; c. Yttrium-zirconium alloy target.

This even includes items made outside China with Chinese mining, refining, magnet or recycling technology and products with trace amounts, as little as 0.1% of their value coming from China.

It is essential to note that over 90% of the world’s processed rare earths and rare earth magnets are produced in China. The 17 rare earth elements are essential components of everything from military radars to electric cars and aircraft engines. It is not that rare earth elements are scarce in other countries. But they are difficult to process. China dominates this sector since it has mastered the difficult process of extracting rare earth elements. Technological advancements, availability of cheap labour and lenient environmental regulations provide China with an edge over others.

Image courtesy: Visual Capitalist

Is China weaponising rare earth elements to gain a trade and geopolitical edge?

The new rule will effectively expand Chinese export control jurisdiction outside of its borders, generating additional uncertainty for multinational manufacturers who operate in Southeast Asian countries like Malaysia, Vietnam, or Thailand and depend on Chinese-designed separation or magnet fabrication equipment.

Beijing has now officially linked REEs with the semiconductor and Artificial intelligence sectors. China has sent out an unambiguous message to the West that any exports linked to logic chips that are 14 nanometres or smaller, memory chips that are 256 layers or more, or AI research that may have military uses will essentially be subject to a case-by-case evaluation. The delicate worldwide balance of supply chains for chipmaking, where rare earths are essential for lithography, wafer polishing, and magnetic components, is likely to be unsettled by this.

This, however, is not the dragon’s first dance with REE restrictions. China has for quite some time been adopted the approach of strategic tightening and loosening. In August 2025, China announced the removal of restrictions on the export of fertilisers, rare earth magnets/minerals and tunnel boring machines to India amid a tariff war with Trump and mounting global supply pressures. That reprieve, however, proved to be short-lived as the latest controls reverted to, rather, surpass previous aggressions, including the 2010 Japan-China dispute over REEs supply in the World Trade Organisation.

China today wields a monopoly controlling about 90% of the global REE processing and refining as a potent weapon, turning obscure minerals into crucial geopolitical leverage. Now, by choking off even trace amounts in finished goods, Beijing is not only targeting raw exports but entire downstream industries, compelling adversaries and rivals, particularly the US, to scramble for alternatives that may not exist in scale.

In such a case, even friendshoring efforts don’t help since processing remains a Chinese choke point. It remains to be seen how the US tackles potential defence project delays. US sources a significant chunk of its rare earths, as much as 70%, from China, as per latest data.

Image via Visual Capitalist

US and China playing a tit-for-tat game

The timing of China’s REE clampdown is significant as Chinese President Xi Jinping is set to meet Trump later this month. Currently, the US charges tariffs of 57.6 per cent on Chinese goods. Trump, however, has threatened to halt Chinese imports. Tensions between the US and China are mounting as the 90-day tariff truce, which began on 11th August, ends around 9th November.

On 8th October, the US Department of Commerce’s Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) announced the addition of 16 mainland Chinese companies to the Unreliable Entity List. These companies included the mainland China and Hong Kong subsidiaries of Arrow, which is a major global electronic components distributor, in addition to a range of small and medium-sized tech and trading companies. The move came over allegations that the Chinese companies in question facilitated the purchase of components for drones used by Hamas and Houthi terrorists.

In response, China not only expanded restrictions over rare earth elements, but also announced on 9th October that it will add 14 US companies, including the anti-drone technology company TechInsights and its affiliates, to the Unreliable Entity List. Beijing said that these companies indulged in military and technological cooperation with Taiwan, or “made malicious remarks about China, and assisted foreign governments in suppressing Chinese companies.”

Meanwhile, the Trump administration proposed banning Chinese airlines from flying over Russia on US routes since it saves China fuel and time. Separately, the US imposed sanctions on Chinese refineries and oil terminals, Shandong Jincheng Petrochemical Group and Rizhao Shihua Crude Oil Terminal Co., for buying Iranian oil.

However, when the measures and countermeasures taken by both the US and China are juxtaposed, it is evident that Washington’s move reeks of desperation while Beijing’s retaliation has been swift, measured and comfortable.

While it is an era of global interdependence, the US needs China more than China needs the US. China has responded to the Trump administration’s geopolitical tantrums with solid measures harming the American technology sector.

Trump’s high-handedness and intransigence are costing Americans more than inflicting significant damage to China. In June this year, Ford Motor Company temporarily shuttered factories due to magnet shortages from China. American farmers, particularly soybean farmers, are devastated due to Trump’s policies. Amusingly, while the US is rolling out measures against China one after the other, Washington is also expecting China to purchase American soybeans.

The fresh China-US trade war began in February this year after Trump imposed an additional 10 per cent tariff on Chinese imports, demanding that Beijing act on fentanyl precursors in to the US. In response, China imposed levies on US commodities, farm equipment and automobiles, and launched a probe into several American businesses.

In March this year, the Trump administration expanded US export controls on advanced semiconductors, including a licensing requirement for high-end AI chips like Nvidia’s H20. This move, built on prior Biden-era rules, aimed explicitly at denying China access to the computing power needed for training large AI models and advancing military applications. In short, Trump intended to slow Beijing’s AI self-reliance to ensure that the US maintains a technological edge.

In April, President Trump singled out China over tariffs exceeding 100 per cent of his ‘Liberation Day’ levies. China also retaliated to Trump’s high-handedness, and both countries increased duties on each other until agreeing on a 90-day pause in May. While the TikTok deal has been a positive indicator, China’s REEs control expansion move hints that Beijing will not hold back from playing on the front foot if the US intensifies the trade war.

Even during a cabinet meeting on 9th October, Trump said, “We import from China massive amounts, and maybe we’ll have to stop doing that.”

Interestingly, the US-China containment policy, particularly in the context of semiconductors, is not new. While Trump, in his first tenure, openly expressed his discontent with China over trade, the Biden administration introduced a new rule in July last year expanding US powers to stop exports of semiconductor manufacturing equipment from some foreign countries to Chinese chipmakers. Now, Trump is taking the trade war forward, but only this time, China is retaliating more fiercely than ever.

Trump’s trade war with China began in 2018, with tariffs on steel, aluminium, and tech goods. Back then, Donald Trump promised to bring manufacturing home and weaken China’s hand. However, even by 2025, it has boomeranged spectacularly, luring the US into a cycle of retaliation that Trump himself helped architect. With China playing the REE ‘trump card’, it seems that Trump’s semiconductor curbs, meant to hobble China’s tech ambitions, will end up harming American tech dreams.

Impact of China’s REE restrictions expansion and the way forward

China’s REE squeeze will have ripple effects on India, given New Delhi’s heavy reliance on Beijing for its REE imports. The expanded restrictions will impact electric vehicles and renewables, where REE-dependent magnets power motors and batteries, hampering automobile production for major automakers like Tata and Mahindra, causing price hikes and even stalling the Modi government’s 30 per cent EV adoption target by 2030. Besides, defence modernisation reliant on REEs for radars and missiles could also falter. The August relaxation boosted India’s access to Chinese REEs, but the fresh restriction expansion requires New Delhi to chalk out a plan.

However, the recent improvement in Indo-China relations makes things slightly easier for New Delhi. China has reportedly sought India’s assurance that the heavy rare-earth magnets exported by it will not be re-exported to the US and will be used only for domestic needs. Indian companies have submitted end-user certificates stating that Chinese magnets will not be used for the manufacturing of weapons of mass destruction. It must be noted that China resumed supplies of light rare earth magnets to India after Prime Minister Narendra Modi and President Xi Jinping met at the Shanghai Cooperation Summit in August. Beijing and New Delhi are in talks to resolve issues and ensure REE supplies to India based on mutually agreeable terms.

Meanwhile, the Modi government is also working on a Rs 7,350 crore incentive scheme spanning seven years to promote the domestic production of sintered rare-earth permanent magnets (REPMs). The plan is meant to create a fully indigenous supply chain from the conversion of neodymium-praseodymium oxide (NdPr oxide) to the final fabrication of magnets. The scheme will back the establishment of five integrated REPM manufacturing units, each with an annual capacity of 600 to 1,200 tonnes. An effective implementation of this plan could provide India with a combined annual capacity of around 6,000 tonnes, helping curb reliance on China significantly.

Mamata Banerjee’s outrageous ‘Mir Jafar’ attack on Amit Shah and outburst over voter list purification drive reveals TMC’s fear of losing illegitimate voters

Rukma Rathore
-
0
Mamata Banerjee’s outrageous ‘Mir Jafar’ attack on Amit Shah and outburst over voter list purification drive reveals TMC’s fear of losing illegitimate voters

The Election Commission’s initiative to purify voter lists of fraudulent voters to strengthen the democratic process of elections has been facing relentless resistance from the opposition parties. After the successful execution of the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) drive in Bihar, which aimed to eradicate bogus voters despite loud protests and baseless accusations of “vote theft” and “disenfranchisement” from the I.N.D.I. Alliance, the electoral authority is set to replicate this significant exercise in West Bengal.

Predictably, the move has angered the ruling All India Trinamool Congress (AITC/TMC) which mirroring the rest of the opposition has turned to making outrageous statements and violent threats despite the clear lack of evidence to support their allegations. Nevertheless, the attack from Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee provoked a scathing response from Bharatiya Janata Party leaders.

BJP leaders launch stinging counter-attack

On 9th October Amit Malviya, member of party’s national executive and co-incharge of West Bengal lashed out at the TMC leader for “crossing all limits of political and constitutional propriety.” He highlighted that she publicly threatened riots and other troubles if the SIR was carried out in the state, while she was in the state secretariat in Nabanna. He wrote that she even went so far as to ask for the death of a purported “Mir Jafar” who was seated in Delhi.

“She did not hesitate to malign the institutions of the Government of India,” Malviya pointed out. He maintained that the only hope and support that TMC retains currently is provided by Rohingyas and illegal infiltrators from Bangladesh. He charged that the party is in power due to their votes. “Mamata Banerjee knows very well that if the voter list becomes transparent, no genuine Indian will vote for the Trinamool,” he asserted.

West Bengal BJP chief Samik Bhattacharya accused that Mamata “wants to incite riots in West Bengal and provoke conflicts between Hindus and Muslims. The minority community in the state has also realised that 90% of the political killings over the past three years involve people from the minority community.”

“If those who had fled the country have returned today, then this is not a brothel or a Dharamshala where anyone can enter the country. This cannot happen. Our stance is clear – detect and deport,” he declared.

“Mamata Banerjee is afraid of the deletion of names of fake voters after the SIR. The highest number of fake voters are in West Bengal. She has no hope of winning the election this time. She is talking about the National Register of Citizens (NRC) to mislead the public. The names of Indian citizens will not be removed. Fake cards are made, and people are sent to vote,” BJP leader Locket Chatterjee expressed adding to the criticism.

“Ram Mandir, which is linked to our nation’s identity was built during his time. Triple Talaq was also abolished during his time, which helped Muslim women gain freedom. She has a speech disorder. She says anything. She never does what she says and who actually does what he says is Amit Shah,” BJP Lok Sabha MP pointed out while slamming Mamata’s diatribe.

Mamata Banerjee’s shocking tirade against Amit Shah

Mamata Banerjee asked Prime Minister Narendra Modi not to “trust him always” after charging Union Home Minister Amit Shah of functioning as a “acting prime minister” on 8th October. He was even referred to as Mir Jafar in a startling attempt to draw a comparison with the military leader of the 18th century who betrayed Nawab Siraj ud-Daulah during the Battle of Plassey.

“This is all Amit Shah’s game. He behaves like he is the acting prime minister of the country. PM Modi knows everything. We can request him not to trust Shah always. One day he will become your Mir Jafar,” she voiced.

Mamata added, “The Election Commission says SIR (Special Intensive Revision of the voters list) has to be done within 15 days. Are they going as per the BJP’s instruction? Everything is being done under the direction of Amit Shah.” The top BJP officials were accused by her of pressing the Election Commission into conducting the SIR program in the state.

“Their leader holds a meeting and comes here to say that he will delete several lakh names from the voters list of Bengal. Tell me, we are currently reeling under natural calamities, heavy rains, celebrating festivals and so on. Can the SIR exercise be completed within a fortnight and can fresh names be uploaded in that period under the current circumstances,” the chief minsiter questioned.

“I warned the BJP, don’t play with fire. Be prepared for public outrage. People of Bengal never believe you. I heard that the union home minister said in a party meeting that we will drop many names. Who is he to drop them? Today, his government is there, but tomorrow it will not be there,” she claimed and labeled the central government as “arrogant and dictatorial regime.”

The development transpired after Deputy Election Commissioner Gyanesh Bharti met with officials from several district administrations to examine West Bengal’s preparations for the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral records.

West Bengal’s mounting “fake voters” problem

The West Bengal Election Commission discovered that a sizable number of forged voter application forms had been accepted by Electoral Registration Offices (EROs) in certain districts during the sample checking of voter application forms (Form 6) for regular updates to the electoral roll. The Chief Election Officer mentioned that two EROs acknowledged a substantial number of phoney voter application forms.

An urgent investigation into the incident was ordered by the CEO, who also instructed the DEO to assemble a group of senior officials and perform a sample check of all voter application forms that were disposed of in the previous year.

On 13th August, the West Bengal government was given a seven-day deadline by the Election Commission to take action against state election officials who added fraudulent voters to the list. On 20th August, the government then suspended four officers.

Furthermore, according to the results of a study titled “Electoral Roll Inflation in West Bengal: A Demographic Reconstruction of Legitimate Voter Counts (2024)” the 2024 electoral roll of West Bengal could show an astounding 13.69% inflation amounting to 1 crore additional voters.

The crucial research was conducted by Dr. Milan Kumar, Assistant Professor at the Indian Institute of Management Visakhapatnam and Dr. Vidhu Shekhar, Assistant Professor at SP Jain Institute of Management & Research, an alumnus of IIT Kharagpur and IIM Calcutta.

It was published on 7th August and estimated the number of surviving voters from the 2004 base roll, additions through new cohorts (1986-2006 births) and adjustments for net permanent migration using official data from electoral rolls, censuses and civil registration systems. A similar paper was published in relation to Bihar as well.

Meanwhile, the West Bengal Chief Election Officer (CEO) was asked by the state government to provide a “clarification” on 8th August over a reported letter to the Election Commission of India stating that the state was “ready” to participate in the SIR exercise.

It took place following the release of the 2002 SIR voter lists by the body for all but one of the 293 assembly constituencies . Notably, West Bengal’s last SIR took place in the aforementioned year which served as the basis for the 2004 election roster.

SIR is clearly not related to the political agenda of the BJP and instead addresses the grave problem of counterfeit voters, a matter that the Election Commission and even the government are responsible for resolving. However, rather than aiding in the essential processes, Mamata took to threatening Booth Level Officers (BLOs).

She “reminded” them that they are employed by the state government and not the Election Commission of India (ECI) as they attend training for summary revision. “Voter names should not be arbitrarily excluded from the electoral process,” she stated authoritatively. “The ECI takes over only after the poll dates are announced. Until then, and even after that, the administration lies with the state government. You are employees of the state government. Do not harass any individual needlessly,” the chief minister added.

The opposition in Bihar created a massive uproar over the SIR while their own Booth Level Agents (BLAs) who were engaged in the detailed process at every level, conveyed their complete faith in the same. Additionally, no party filed any grievances regarding it within the specified timeframe, despite making ludicrous claims in the media and social media.

Their anger stemmed solely from the reduction of their voter base and parallel scenes are happening in West Bengal where the TMC has also emulated their approach. The challenge posed by the fake voters is just as serious, if not more so, in the state. However, since they benefit the TMC, Mamata and her party support them with no concern for the Constitution or democracy which they seem to propagate and advocate for only when it serves their agenda.

Conclusion

Mamata and her TMC are evidently alarmed by the potential loss of their electoral support following the SIR in West Bengal which will eliminate non-Indians and other bogus names from the list of voters.

Just as many names were eliminated in Bihar, which were supporters of the Mahagathbandhan and incited backlash from the bloc, a similar situation is poised to unfold in West Bengal, a region plagued by illegal immigrants from Bangladesh and blatant Muslim appeasement at the cost of national interest and integrity, by the chief minsiter and her administration.

Moreover, the TMC and its leaders have openly endorsed these elements in the past for votes and thus the potential removal of their voting power, which should never have been granted in the first place, has driven her to descend to the lowest levels of political rhetoric.

Nevertheless, considering the strong stance of the center and the Election Commission, it seems that no amount of low-level political attacks will deter them from executing the much needed exercise in the state.

“No valid voter’s name will be excluded. Whatever is stated in the law will be followed,” CEO Manoj Kumar Agarwal assured after a high-level meeting on 9th October, amid verbal attacks including corruption charges from Mamata.

Game of power: Why Donald Trump wants to take over Bagram air base in Afghanistan despite Taliban’s refusal and opposition from regional powers including Russia, China, India

Rukma Rathore
-
0
Game of power: Why Donald Trump wants to take over Bagram air base in Afghanistan despite Taliban’s refusal and opposition from regional powers including Russia, China, India

The world has been in disarray since President Donald Trump was re-elected for a second term. He has repeatedly encountered backlash from the international community because of his outrageous ambitions. From setting his sights on Greenland, trying to annex Canada as 51st state of the USA, renaming the “Gulf of Mexico” to “Gulf of America” and trying to exert control over the Panama Canal, his diplomatic manoeuvres have sparked intense opposition.

Now, a similar scenario has transpired as ten nations, including India, Russia, China, Pakistan, Iran, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan and Afghanistan have banded together to resist the United States. It happened during the 7th “Moscow Format Consultations on Afghanistan” which was hosted by Russia. The development took place after the Trump administration attempted to seize control of the Bagram air base near Kabul.

“They (the participants) called unacceptable the attempts by countries to deploy their military infrastructure in Afghanistan and neighboring states, since this does not serve the interests of regional peace and stability,” read a joint statement from the pivotal event. Amir Khan Muttaqi, the foreign minister of the Taliban who led the Afghan delegation, reaffirmed the same at a press conference following the meeting.

He aserted, “Afghanistan is a free and independent country, and throughout history, it has never accepted the military presence of foreigners. Our decision and policy will remain the same to keep Afghanistan free and independent.”

Trump asked the Taliban to turn over the Bagram air base to Washington, five years after an agreement with them that allowed the United States to withdraw from Kabul. The Taliban, however, refused the proposal.

Brief history of Bagram air base

Afghanistan’s largest military facility, Bagram air base, is situated in the pivotal Parwan region which is approximately 60 kilometres north of Kabul. Parwan’s connections with key cities like Kabul, Kandahar and Bamiyan provide it the capability to govern a large portion of the country

The Soviet Union built the installation in the 1950s and it gained prominence during the Cold War and the Soviet-Afghan War (1979-1989). However, the base was under the jurisdiction of the Afghan government at the time which changed when the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan in 1979.

Image via Kyber Mail

Moscow left the nation after 10 years of its authority on the air base. The Northern Alliance, one of the most powerful opposition parties vying for power, secured its from the Soviet-backed government of Muhammad Najibullah in 1991. However, it came to the hands of the Taliban later.

The air base became the primary operating base for American forces after the US-led invasion of Afghanistan in 2001 and served as a command, information and logistics centre during the “War on Terror.” The base could carry around 10,000 people in 2009.

Thousands of US and North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) forces comprising of units from the United Kindgom’s Royal Marines.were stationed there. They remained in the mountainous South Asian country after the 11th September 2001 attacks and withdrew under former President Joe Biden when the Taliban stormed to power in 2021.

The air base operates as a bastion

The air base is approximately 5,000 acres in size. It has two concrete runways, one measuring 3.6 kilometre in length and the other spanning 3 kilometre. It can accommodate large cargo planes and aircrafts like the C-130 Hercules and C-17 Globemaster as well as B-52 bombers due to its spacious area.

Its 11,800 feet runway is long enough to handle takeoffs from several fighter aircrafts. The expansive runways enhances its utility for rapid deployment and logistics operations. Additionally, the air base has three sizable hangars that can hold Apache and Chinook assault and supply helicopters.

It also features a control tower, multiple support buildings and a variety of housing sections. Moreover, there are five aircraft dispersal areas, more than 110 revetments and over 13 hectares of ramp space. It is a fortress owing to the vast space which can fit about 40,000 soldiers.

Image via @VivekSi85847001/X

The air base had expanded to the size of a small town by 2010 when the US control was at its strongest and featured a fully operational hospital, dormitories for thousands of soldiers, stores and supermarkets that had many US franchise restaurants such as Pizza Hut, Subway, Dairy Queen and Burger King. Over 100,000 US personnel used to pass through the airfield in 2012.

A new and upgraded runway, healthcare services and other amenities for the foreign troops were built while the base extended to cover more than 77 square kilometres. Its perimeter displayed thousands of housing units, fuel depots, intelligence centres, a 50-bed hospital with advanced trauma care, more than 110 aircraft shelters and fortified bunkers.

The Parwan Detention Facility which held valuable Taliban and al-Qaeda inmates was also located there. Special missions, drone operations, and intelligence gathering were coordinated from the facility. Several American presidents visited the place like Trump in 2019 and Barack Obama in 2012.

The air base is near the Central Asian, Iranian, Pakistani and Chinese borders. Beijing maintains military and nuclear structures in the Xinjiang region which is also nearby. The Taliban-led Afghan defence ministry currently controls it.

On the other hand, the 2.6 kilometer Salang tunnel which links Kabul to Mazar-e-Sharif and other northern cities makes the province a vital entry point. Kabul is also critical to Afghanistan’s connectivity and control as it hosts the highways that connect it to Bamiyan in the west and Ghazni and Kandahar in the south.

Why is the air base strategically signficiant

The capacity of Bagram air base is a notable aspect, however, its unique advantage is in the geographical location. Its strategic importance remained considerable even after the US withdrew the troops from Afghanistan. Its position provides insight into regional dynamics and bears even greater significance as China and the Taliban develop closer connections.

Its proximity to sensitive Chinese locations, the Koko Nur nuclear weapons plant located farther east in Qinghai province and the Lop Nur nuclear test site in Xinjiang which is about 2,000 kilometres away, increases the relevance. It offers dependable surveillance because it is located just 800 kilometres from some these nuclear plants.

According to other reports, the air base’s location provides a critical vantage point for monitoring China’s nuclear arsenal, as it is nearly 92 kilometers from the sites. This allows for a close watch on their nuclear infrastructure and actions. Similarly, it is just 650 kilometres from the Iranian border which means the US can continue to exert pressure on the Islamic Republic, its long-time adversary.

Washington used the air base to support counterterrorism operations, conduct surveillance and keep an eye on nations in the region including China, Russia, Iran and Pakistan. Therefore, the strong rivalry between the United States and China, the two biggest economies of the world, elevates its appeal for the White House.

Likewise, gaining control of the air base can place the US in a position to influence broader Central Asia as Trump wants to include countries such as Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan in the Abraham Accords.

China has been using projects like the Belt and Road to grow and consolidate its power. The US could offset its expanding rise in the region by keeping a foothold at the air base. According to experts, China might be able to obtain a strategic foundation in Afghanistan in the absence of the US, possibly acquiring access to its mineral resources and forging a more formidable regional impact.

Key attractions of the air base

Trump’s efforts to retake the base from the Taliban are part of a larger strategic plan and a firm step to protect American national security interests and thwart China’s growing authority in the area.

He has made it clear that Bagram air base is more than just a remnant of the war in Afghanistan. It  provides an unrivalled logistical and strategic edge in the region with to its vast runways, state-of-the-art medical facilities and command centres.

America could have unmatched operational reach due to the air base where planes can fly to Pakistan to the east, Iran to the west and the Chinese and Central Asian borders to the north in a matter of hours.

The administration can project American strength in Central Asia and have leverage alongside rapid response capabilities by holding the air base. Hence, it has become a central subject in Washington on the subject of American regional strategy.

Largest American military base in Afghanistan: It could house tens of thousands of soldiers, had hardened shelters, clinics, fuel stores and runways longer than many international airports. It served as America’s regional nerve centre.

Launching pad in Central Asia: The air base is located north of Kabul at the intersection of Central Asia, Iran, Pakistan and the Chinese region of Xinjiang.

Nearby China’s sensitive locations: The air base is about “an hour away” from important Chinese nuclear and missile sites in Xinjiang. Its location puts it among the closest points of view the United States possibly have against China.

Treasure of intelligence and surveillance: Controlling the air base means having sophisticated aerial surveillance and signal intelligence over a wide area of Eurasia, from Chinese infrastructure projects under the Belt and Road initiative to Russian military operations.

Counterweight to Iran and Russia: The United States could keep an eye on Iranian operations to the west and Russian influence in Central Asia from Bagram. The base acted as a continual reminder to Tehran and Moscow that the United States was in their backyard.

Command of trade routes and supply chains: Afghanistan is situated on new trade routes and has a wealth of unexplored resources. Whoever is in charge of the air base has strategic control over the trade lines that Russia and China wish to protect.

Military foothold close to China: The closest American military installations are located thousands of miles distant from the border with Western China. The air base would improve the US preparedness and deterrence capabilities by restoring an essential forward operating base that is within striking distance of Chinese strategic assets.

Projecting power to combat insurgency and terrorism: The air base served as the starting point for operations against the Taliban, Al Qaeda and Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIS) throughout the war on terror. America’s ability to launch a swift attack in the area suffered after it was lost.

Symbol of American credibility and prestige: The abandonment of Bagram air base was seen as a shameful event and regaining it would send a strong message that the United States is not backing down from Central Asia and is back in the game.

China would love to use the infrastructure: China has long been rumoured to be interested in teh air base as a way to expand its Belt and Road footprint and establish a forward operating facility close to India. Washington is alarmed by the same.

Diplomatic chessboard: Trump’s fixation on the air base is a reflection of a broader strategy which is Central Asia. Its control can shift the balance between China, India and Russia, the three largest players and the competitors will fill the void.

Trump’s desperation for the air base

The stated objective of the Trump administration has generated worries about the reintroduction of US forces in the area. The Republican leader openly declared that his country should reclaim the air base due to its close placement to western China, noting that it is near Beijing’s nuclear weapons development facility.

Image via @VivekSi85847001/X

According to Trump, the US and NATO constructed the facility. “We’re trying to get it back. We want that base back,” he declared during a press conference with British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, on 18th September. “But one of the reasons we want the base is, as you know, it’s an hour away from where China makes its nuclear weapons,” he pointed out. “We gave it to the Taliban for nothing,” the president added.

He highlighted that it is “one of the most powerful bases in the world in terms of runway strength and length,” while addressing the journalists and added that “you could land anything there.” The base was, he repeated, “an hour away from where they make their missiles, China.”

On 20th September he reiterated, “If Afghanistan doesn’t give Bagram air base back to those that built it, the United States of America, bad things are going to happen,” on Truth Social.

Trump already demonstrated interest in retaking the former US military compound. He made a similar remark at a press conference in February 2025, which has since been removed from the White House website. “We were going to keep Bagram. We were going to keep a small force there,” he claimed.

“We’re talking now to Afghanistan, and we want it back, and we want it back soon. If they don’t do it, you’re going to find out what I’m going to do,” Trump threatened while talking to the media. He has often criticised the United States for leaving major weapons in Afghanistan after its hasty pullout in 2021, thereby giving them to the Taliban and other armed forces.

The Taliban’s repeated rebuffs

Meanwhile, any foreign military presence in Afghanistan has been categorically rejected by the Taliban. On 21st September, a defence official for the Afghan government emphasised that a deal over Bagram air base was “not possible.” Afghanistan’s Ministry of Defence chief of staff, Fasihuddin Fitrat outlined that “some people” wish to retake the base via a “political deal.”

“Recently, some people have said that they have entered negotiations with Afghanistan for taking back Bagram air base. A deal over even an inch of Afghanistan’s soil is not possible. We don’t need it,” he announced. Hamdullah Fitrat, the deputy spokesperson expressed that “a policy of realism and rationality should be adopted rather than repeating past failed approaches.”

Zakir Jalal, an Afghan Foreign Ministry official mentioned, “Afghanistan and the United States need to engage with one another without the United States maintaining any military presence in any part of Afghanistan,” on social media.

“The Afghans have not accepted a military presence in history and this possibility was completely rejected during the Doha talks and agreement (before the Taliban seized power in 2021) but the door is open for further interaction,” he stressed.

“Afghanistan’s independence and territorial integrity are of the utmost importance,” the government officially warned later. The Taliban earlier firmly denied Trump’s allusion to Beijing’s presence in the air base in March and stressed, “Bagram is controlled by the Islamic Emirate not China. Chinese troops are not present there nor do we have any such pact with any country.”

Notably, the first Trump administration (2017-21) had reached an agreement with the Taliban in 2020 that mandated the departure of all NATO forces from Afghanistan.

Opposition to Trump’s aspirations

India has given billions of dollars to Afghanistan. Pakistan has long fought to establish its presence in the country while China is also increasing its investments there. Any Pakistani involvemnet in Afghanistan has frequently been regarded with suspicion by Iran.

Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan and Kazakhstan have long feared that the bloodshed in Afghanistan will spread to their own countries. Additionally, Pakistan and the Taliban have had problematic relations in recent years. Islamabad had previously funded and protected the group for decades despite taking US dollars,

Nevertheless, this time the differences have been set aside as the matter of an outside power seeking to make its mark in the region through the country has emerged as the primary concern, reported Al Jazeera. Furthermore, majority of their neighbours are strengthening their ties with them, despite the fact that only Russia has officially acknowledged them as the Afghan government.

Russia and even China, America’s largest long-term adversaries, are not the only countries worried about this re-entry in Afghanistan. Iran is also against an American military deployment amid the heightened tensions with the US and Israel. It could aggravate tensions between the United States and China since the latter sees the military post near its borders as a direct security threat.

While New Delhi has been as a strategic ally to Washington, it has consistently opposed the existence of foreign powers in Afghanistan. Moreover, a considerable divide has emerged in the relationship between the two sides after the implementation of 50% tariffs on India, which encompasses a 25% tariff on acquiring Russian oil.

The six landlocked countries Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan along with Turkmenistan and Afghanistan have a distinct advantage in regional politics due to their geographic location, which also forces them to look for warmer waters for trade. Many of these countries would consider the US presence in the area to be “undesirable.”

“A US base would put host states on the front line of US-Russia-China rivalry. Moscow and Beijing have both signalled opposition to any renewed US presence, and aligning with that consensus reduces coercive pressure and economic or security retaliation on our much smaller economies,” stated Kuat Akizhanov. He is a Kazakh analyst and deputy director of the Central Asia Regional Economic Cooperation Institute (CAREC).

There are apprehensions that reintroduction of the US military in Afghanistan would revive its intelligence activities, exacerbate unrest and revert the country to a proxy battleground.

India sides with Afghanistan

The Indian embassy in Moscow informed that the team from India, headed by Ambassador Vinay Kumar, to the “Russia Format” supported the socioeconomic development and prosperity of the Afghan people as well as an autonomous, peaceful and stable Afghanistan. A safe, secure and stable Afghanistan will benefit the Afghan people and be “fundamental to regional resilience and global security,” Kumar underlined India’s stance.

The events surrounding the air base have crucial regional and security ramifications even for India. Hence, the central government has continuously opposed the establishment of foreign military bases in Afghanistan, citing reservations about regional security, sovereignty and the possibility of stronger outside interference in the nation’s immediate neighbourhood.

Interestingly, Muttaqi is going to be India from 9th to 16th October and will hold talks with with National Security Advisor Ajit Doval as well as External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar. Given the contentious relationship between the US and India after “Operation Sindoor” and the latest row around Bagram air base, this meeting is indeed crucial and will be observed by Washington.

Who is Bipin Joshi, the Nepali Hindu student who was abducted from Israel by Hamas and taken hostage in Gaza

Shriti Sagar
-
0
Who is Bipin Joshi, the Nepali Hindu student who was abducted from Israel by Hamas and taken hostage in Gaza

The family of Bipin Joshi, a Nepali Hindu student who was taken hostage by Hamas during the 7th October 2023 attack in Israel, has released a previously unseen video of him from Gaza. 

The video, which had been kept by Israeli intelligence for months, was released on Wednesday (8th October) after the government finally lifted restrictions on its publication.

According to Bipin’s family, this short clip is the only proof they have seen in two years that he might still be alive. “The sign of life found in Gaza, which we share with you today, is for us an anchor of firm faith that he is alive,” the Joshi family said in a statement.

Bipin Joshi: The only Hindu captured by Hamas in Gaza

Bipin Joshi, who was just 23 years old when he was taken hostage, had arrived in Israel only three weeks before the 7th October attack. He is the only Hindu captured by Hamas in Gaza. He was part of a group of Nepali students who went to Kibbutz Alumim under the ‘Learn and Earn’ agricultural training program. The students were learning farming techniques while working in a citrus and lemon farm.

That morning, when the Hamas terrorists attacked the kibbutz, Bipin and his friends were surrounded. Ten of his classmates were murdered, and Bipin was abducted. Before he was kidnapped, he texted some last messages to his cousin in English. One of them was, “If something happens to me, you have to take care of my family. Be strong and always look toward the future,” according to a report by the Times of Israel. 

The video finally released after two years

The released video, believed to have been filmed in November 2023, shows Bipin sitting in front of the camera. He introduces himself calmly: “My name is Bipin Joshi. I’m from Nepal. I’m 23 years old. I came to Israel 25 days ago for the ‘Learn and Earn’ program. I’m a student and I work on a citrus and lemon farm.”

At the end of the clip, Bipin looks slightly off-camera, his eyes shifting to the side, as if glancing at someone nearby. The short recording does not reveal his surroundings, but it is clear that he was alive weeks after being captured.

For his family, that small detail means everything. “When I saw the video, my mother and father were next to me. First, I thanked God that I didn’t see any injuries on his face or body. Then, my body started shaking, and I couldn’t control my tears,” said his 17-year-old sister, Pushpa, while speaking to reporters in Israel.

She said that the family had been given the video nearly a year ago, but it was hidden behind Israeli government censorship. They opted to release it now, in the hopes that it would attract more pressure for Bipin’s release and force negotiators to sit down with him and discuss the other remaining hostages.

Family continues to fight for his release

Bipin’s family has refused to give up hope. His parents and sister, who live in Nepal, are currently staying with relatives in North Carolina, United States. They have been travelling between Washington, DC, and New York, meeting diplomats and officials to raise international awareness about their son’s situation.

“We decided to release the video to show that he is in Gaza and alive, and maybe it can create a little bit of pressure on the negotiating teams to understand our pain,” Pushpa said. “It’s been two years, it’s too much pain for us and the other hostages’ families.”

Pushpa has extended her stay in the US, saying she hopes to meet President Donald Trump in person to request his help. “We are here with hopeful hearts, and we want to meet President Trump and advocate for Bipin’s safe release,” she said. “President Trump gave an ultimatum to Hamas and Israel to negotiate, so we are very thankful for that. We are totally dependent on him and really hope his steps will give us our Bipin back.”

Video was earlier censored by Israeli govt

In their official statement, the Joshi family said they wanted to remind the world that Bipin was not a soldier but a student who had nothing to do with the war. “Bipin was brutally abducted from Kibbutz Alumim while ten of his friends were murdered that same day. Young students, beautiful and innocent souls,” they said.

“For two years, it has been difficult for the world to imagine Bipin as a hostage in the tunnels. Not anymore. This sign of life found in Gaza serves as confirmation of our steadfast belief that he is alive.”

The family added that releasing the video publicly was not an easy decision. “For many months, this footage was under strict censorship. Only recently were we granted permission to release it. It is not easy for us to share it publicly, but we are in critical and historic days that will determine the fate of the 48 hostages, whether the living will return to their families and the deceased to a proper burial, or whether we will remain in pain without closure.”

Pushpa described her brother as a cheerful and creative young man with simple dreams. “My parents are devastated, barely holding on. They miss their only son. I miss my best friend, the one who dreamed of growing bananas to make banana chips. The creative and funny guy,” she said in an interview with i24 News.

Gujarat HC refuses to quash FIR in Bharuch religious conversion case, rejects argument that converted Muslims can’t be accused of forcing others to convert: Read details

Aditi
-
0
Gujarat HC refuses to quash FIR in Bharuch religious conversion case, rejects argument that converted Muslims can’t be accused of forcing others to convert: Read details

The Gujarat High Court on October 1, 2025, dismissed a batch of applications filed by several accused in a case of religious conversion of Hindus to Islam, citing that prima facie offences were made out against the accused/applicants.

A Bench of Justice Nirzar S Desai was hearing the applications, which sought the quashing of the FIR filed against the accused in 2021 under Sections 120(B), 153(B)(1)(C), 153(A)(1), 295(A), 506(2), 466, 467, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 3(2)(5-A) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Section 84C of the Information Technology Act, 2000, and the relevant provisions of the Gujarat Freedom of Religion Act, 2003.

The court rejected the arguments that they could not be made the accused in such a case since they were themselves converts from another faith. The Court said that prima facie the accused did not appear to be victims since they had themselves influenced and pressurized others to change religions. Three of the accused were originally Hindus who later converted to Islam.

The former Hindus along with others named in the case are accused of alluring Hindu villagers in Bharuch’s Amod to change their religion by promising them new houses, food-grain, cash and jobs.

Background of the case

An FIR was filed on November 14, 2021, at the Aamod police station in Bharuch city against several people on the complaint of a person named Pravinbhai Vasantbhai Vasava. Initially, 9 individuals were accused in the FIR, but after the investigation was carried out, the number of accused reached 16.

In his complaint, Pravinbhai Vasantbhai Vasava said that he was converted to Islam in 2018 through allurement and his name was changed to Salman Vasant Patel. He said that one Abdul Aziz Patel used to teach him how to chant Kalma by taking him into an Ibadatgah made in a Government premises. He added that one day he was taken to Surat, where he was made to put his thumb impression on a paper by misrepresentation, and thereafter his name was changed to Salman Vasant Patel on his Aadhaar Card.

He accused Shabbirbhai Bakerywala and Samadbhai Bakerywala of converting another man named Ajitbhai Chhaganbhai Vasava (converted to Abdul Aziz Patel)to Islam by promising to provide him financial assistance and construct a house for him. After they provided him financial assistance, Ajitbhai Chhaganbhai Vasava converted two Hindu men, Mahendra Jivanbhai Vasava (name changed to Yusuf Jivan Patel) and Raman Barkat Vasava (name changed to Aiyub Barkat Patel). “Thereafter, all three persons together, along with Shabbir Bekriwala and Samajbhai Bekriwala, started alluring the other Hindu villagers of the village, and by giving them the temptation of constructing a new home, food-grain and cash, tempted them to convert to Islam,” said the complainant.

The complainant said that Abdul Aziz Patel received financial aid for religious conversion from one Hasan Tisli. He added that Hasan Tisli, Abdul Aziz Patel, and another person named Fefdawala Haji Abdullah, a foreign national, converted around 100 persons belonging to 37 Hindu families to Islam by offering them money. The complainant also said that Abdul Aziz Patel used to teach him Kalma in an Ibadatgah, which he had constructed by demolishing his house built using government aid. He further stated that the accused were part of a nationwide conspiracy to convert Hindus to Islam, and they were receiving huge financial aid for the same from abroad. When the complainant opposed the accused, they threatened to kill him, and therefore, he decided to approach the police.

The High Court refused to treat the accused as ‘victims’ of religious conversion

One of the grounds for challenge to the FIR was that the applicants were themselves victims of religious conversion and not the offenders. Describing their implication in the case as a misconception, the applicants claimed that the complainant and all other converts had converted to Islam of their own free will and not under any pressure or allurement, which is required to attract an offence.

Rejecting the contention the High Court noted, “…considering the fact that after their conversion to Islam, it is alleged that those persons also indulged into activity of pressurizing and alluring other persons as alleged in the FIR and as can be seen from the papers available on record, it is their further act of converting further people around 100 in numbers of 37 families to Islam would prima facie make out an offence against them and, therefore, I do not see any reason to interfere with the trial”.

Gujarat HC JudgmentDownload

“However, on account of their act of influencing and pressurizing and alluring other persons to convert to Islam, as can be seen from the FIR as well as statements of the witnesses, of course, those allegations are prima facie in nature for which today, upon examination of material produced, the Court is of the view that conversion of the victims indicates that a prima facie offence is made out. Therefore, it cannot be accepted that those persons who are arraigned as accused who are originally Hindus and subsequently were converted to Islam, can be said to be the victims on account of allegations made in the FIR as well as the material collected during the course of investigation by way of charge-sheet papers,” the court noted in the dismissal order.

Dismissing the petitions, the court said, “on account of their act of influencing and pressurizing and alluring other persons to convert to Islam, as can be seen from the FIR as well as statements of the witnesses, of course, those allegations are prima facie in nature for which today, upon examination of material produced, the Court is of the view that conversion of the victims indicates that a prima facie offence is made out. Therefore, it cannot be accepted that those persons who are arraigned as accused who are originally Hindus and subsequently were converted to Islam, can be said to be the victims on account of allegations made in the FIR as well as the material collected during the course of investigation by way of charge-sheet papers.”

Application of an accused dismissed on the ground of his non-cooperation in the investigation

The High Court dismissed the petition of accused Fefdawala, who lives in the United Kingdom, on the ground that he did Regarding the the application of accused the High Court noted that he did not cooperate with the authorities in the investigation and therefore, the court made it a ground for the dismissal of his application. The High Court pointed out that Fefdawala visited India 25 times before the registration of the case against him and has not visited even once thereafter. “…the applicant has visited India 25 times and, therefore, the Police Authority had insisted the aforesaid accused persons to come down to India and to participate in the investigation by extending his cooperation. However, the applicant has not come to India once thereafter and therefore, looking to his conduct, the petition filed by Mr. Fefdawala may be dismissed on the ground of his conduct itself without being considering the same on merits,” the court said.

“He did not prefer any anticipatory bail application and except the present petition for quashing, at no point of time, as per the records, he has shown any willingness to cooperate in the investigation. The applicant was served with a Summons under Section 41-A of CrPC which was though responded, but the applicant has chosen not to remain present and made himself available for extending cooperation in investigation,” the court added.

‘I Love Muhammad’ row, youth attacked over Lord Shiva post, and stone-pelting at Garba: Gujarat govt cracks down against rioters, demolishes 186 shanties

Divya Bharti
-
0
‘I Love Muhammad’ row, youth attacked over Lord Shiva post, and stone-pelting at Garba: Gujarat govt cracks down against rioters, demolishes 186 shanties

The government of Gujarat has launched a massive demolition drive in Gujarat’s Dahegam municipality-based Bahiyal village of the Gandhinagar district of Gujarat, following the recent communal riots during Navratri. The riots broke out on 24th September following a controversial social media post, prompting stone pelted between two groups. Police then registered riot cases against close to 200 and arrested close to 60.

Now, the administration is cracking down strictly on them. Close to 55 houses and stores owned by the accused are being demolished as part of the drive against illegal structures. Gandhinagar SP Ravi Teja Vasamsetty stated, “A total of 186 commercial establishments are being vacated. You must recall that some time back, riots had erupted here. Hence, the houses and establishments of the culprits were sealed.” Now, efforts are on to raze nearly 186 unauthorized encroachments.

In recent days, tensions have flared across several parts of the country over the “I Love Muhammad” poster campaign, which has repeatedly triggered violence. What was claimed to be a “social movement’, has instantly spiraled into widespread unrest, shattering peace in many regions. After incidents in Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand, Gujarat too has now witnessed clashes linked to the campaign.

Violence erupts during the garba night

As per eyewitness accounts, the situation turned tense late one evening when stone-pelting was witnessed during Garba celebrations held as a part of the Navratri festival. Residents claimed that stones were thrown from the rooftops as people danced Garba, causing panic among the spectators. Some of the participants, including women and children, were hurt as the festive ground was turned into chaos.

The clash rapidly spread into adjacent areas, where vandalism and destruction of vehicles were reported. The police authorities alleged that two police vehicles were also vandalized as officials moved into the scene to get the situation in order.

Witnesses described the attack as sudden and organized. Residents accused the lights in the area of being switched off before the stone-pelting, which made it difficult for the crowd to escape or identify the attackers. Several cars parked in the proximity of the celebratory site seemed to have their windows broken, while houses nearby were also targeted.

Senior police officials, including the District Superintendent of Police, also hastened to Bahiyal on being notified. Tear gas shells were also employed to disperse the masses and bring the situation under control from escalating further. The situation was brought under control by midnight with massive contingents of police officials deployed in the region and a few hours of mayhem.

So far, police have confirmed the deployment of two State Reserve Police (SRP) companies and over 200 officers around and within the village. Security has been stepped up, and patrolling is being carried out to avert any fresh violence.

Shops burned after social media row

The second violent episode was earlier in the night and was erupted over a post hailing Hindu God Shiva. According to eyewitnesses, a group of people gathered outside the shop of the youth who had made the “I Love Mahadev” post and attacked him. Within no time, violence escalated to surrounding commercial establishments.

It has been said that several shops, including an electronics store and a Xerox store, were set ablaze. Vehicles parked in the vicinity were also vandalized during the chaos. Fire engines responded to the venue but were allegedly met with aggression, with stones also being thrown at the fire and police trucks. The windows of a fire truck were shattered during the exercise.

Dahegam AASP Ayush Jain confirmed that at least four shops had been set on fire and some cars had been vandalized during the rampage. “The police initiated an immediate operation that continued late at night. At 4 a.m., around 60 were arrested through a combing operation,” Jain said.

Police officials further added that FIRs have also been lodged against 83 identified individuals and approximately 1,500 unidentified individuals on the basis of viral videos and CCTV footage. Everyone is being identified through investigations.

Residents complain of premeditated violence

The majority of residents are of the opinion that the attack was not spontaneous. Some of the victims told reporters that the glass bottles and stones were pre-primed, meaning that the attack could have been planned. A female resident in the area claimed that past festivals had also seen similar riots, but had never been handled seriously.

She said, “No way someone could gather so many bottles and stones at the eleventh hour. It looked like they had all been gathered beforehand to bombard the festival.” Another resident said that when there was the chaos, even his family goddess’s small temple near his house was knocked down, and its spire was broken.

Several residents alleged that the small processions with the ongoing campaign had been observed in the area a couple of days before the incident, when tensions had already begun running high. A shopkeeper claimed that his 25-year-old shop had been destroyed by the blaze. He said that almost ₹25 lakh worth of merchandise had been lost as the fire had engulfed the shop.

In the wake of the violent agitations in Bahiyal village, the Gujarat state government has moved tough by demolishing 186 illegal structures owned by individuals involved in the disturbances. The measure forms part of a larger move to re-establish law and order, scare off further agitations, and send a clear message that violence and encroachments will not be tolerated.

The collective action of the state government is also intended not only as a response to the current events but as a deterrent to discourage future intervention. With continued monitoring by the police and administrative machine, it is hoped that public celebrations like Navratri can continue without apprehension, and communal harmony returns to Bahiyal village.

From calling Hindus ‘H@r*mi’ to temple run: As Zohran Mamdani visits temples in New York ahead of mayoral elections, read about his Hinduphobic activities

Shraddha Pandey
-
0
From calling Hindus ‘H@r*mi’ to temple run: As Zohran Mamdani visits temples in New York ahead of mayoral elections, read about his Hinduphobic activities

New York City mayoral candidate for Democratic Party, Zohran Mamdani, has built a reputation for himself as a notorious Hinduphobe masquerading as a ‘modern-day progressive Muslim socialist’. Elections, however, necessitate politicians to either reveal their real raw self or to don a veneer to portray the exact opposite of what they truly are or believe in. Ahead of the November 4 mayoral race, Zohran Mamdani is on a Hindu temple visiting spree to garner support of Hindu New Yorkers.

On 5th October 2025, Mamdani visited two of the oldest Hindu temples in New York’s Flushing, the Sri Maha Vallabha Ganapathy Temple and the Hindu Temple Society of North America. Visuals of him receiving a warm welcome at the temple wearing garland and scarf surfaced online. The people around him were seen holding placards reading “Hindus for Zohran for New York City”.

Interacting with the media, Zohran Mamdani claimed that he is proud his mother, Mira Nair’s Hindu background and despite being a Muslim, he holds Hindu values dear and understands Hinduism. However, his understanding and respect for Hindu values could be understood from the fact that he was wearing shoes inside the Hindu temple while all others were barefoot in accordance with the tradition. If Mamdani had actually learnt about and respected Hindu values, he would not have violated the Hindu norms by wearing shoes inside the temple or perhaps the disrespect was deliberate. In either case, Mamdani’s temple visit was emblematic of tokenism.

Some temple-goers could be seen expressing support for Mamdani’s rent-freeze promises and lauded his temple visit as a bridge-building effort. However, Mamdani’s new-found ahead-of-the-elections-love for Hindus and the latter’s cosying up to the Democrat mayoral candidate glosses over a crucial detail. Mamdani’s track record of Hinduphobic statements.

All it takes a Muslim politician to pose for a picture at a Hindu temple while wearing shoes in utter disrespect, for American Hindus to forget the innate Hinduphobia this Democrat leader harbours and his persistent anti-Hindu activities. This whole “Hindus for Zohran for New York City” thing is like ‘Goats for Bakrid for slaughter’ or ‘Chickens for KFC’.

Zohran Mamdani and his inflammatory rhetoric against Hindus and India

Zohran Mamdani is notorious for a consistent pattern of inflammatory statements directed at Hindus and India. In fact, for a meteoric rise in Islamo-leftist ecosystem be it in the US or in India, slandering Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi is the most convenient and effective way. At a public forum hosted by New York Focus in May 2025, Mamdani compared PM Modi to Israeli PM Netanyahu, calling him a “war criminal.” The remarks sparked outrage among Indo-American leaders, who accused him of promoting hate and deepening divides.

Zohran Mamdani said in context of the 2002 Gujarat Riots which erupted after Islamists burnt a train bogey full of 59 Hindu pilgrims returning from Ayodhya who were burnt alive. Mamdani claimed that Modi, who was then the Chief Minister of Gujarat, helped the slaughter of Muslims and that hardly any Gujarati Muslims are there. This, however, was blatant lie as the Indian Supreme Court already has given clean chit to PM Modi. Moreover, the population of Muslims in Gujarat, forget decreasing, it has only increased over the years.

This was not an isolated incident. In 2020, Mamdani described Hindus aligned with Modi’s party as “fascists” and berated fellow New York politicians Jenifer Rajkumar and Kevin Thomas for not denouncing Modi. Rajkumar responded at the time by calling his comments “extreme and divisive.”

When Ram Mandir was being built in Ayodhya, he led a rally against it in 2020. At one such protest outside the Indian Consulate, Mamdani accused the Ram mandir temple inauguration of being a “celebration of the destruction of a mosque” and a “tool of oppression.”  While he was speaking at the rally, derogatory remarks against Hindus were being raised behind him. The rally was organised by Khalistani elements.

In 2023 as well, when PM Modi was scheduled to visit New York, he spewed venom against him accusing him for the 2002 Gujarat Riots.

Beyond democratic dissent, Mamdani has been slandering Hindus, especially the community’s legal battle to reclaim the birthplace of Lord Ram in Ayodhya.

In January 2024, Mamdani co-organized and endorsed protests in New York City that condemned the consecration of the Ram Mandir in Ayodhya, branding the event as “Hindutva extremism.” The temple—revered by Hindus as the birthplace of Lord Ram—was not just criticized as a political symbol but denounced as a project of “fascism,” equating Hindu religious aspirations with violent majoritarianism.

A video, shot in August 2022, surfaced on social media, showing Mamdani leading a hate mob against the Hindu community at Times Square. Citing “Who are the Hindus? Harami (Bastards),” the mob was heard yelling. It was evident that the dehumanization of the Hindu community by his supporters had Mamdani’s tacit support. He instead began spewing vitriol against the Ram Mandir.

Earlier, Mamdani defended the antisemitic “Globalise the Intifada” cry, which essentially calls for hatred and violence against Jews across the world. He also refused to acknowledge Israel’s right to exist, a common trait among Islamists and their liberal cheerleaders.

Beyond rhetoric, Zohran Mamdani had actively involved in undermining the Hindu American community. In March this year, assembly members Steven Raga, Zohran Mamdani, and Karine Reyes among other cosponsors, introduced bill AB 6920 to add caste as a protected category in New York. Back then, Coalition of Hindus of North America (CohNA) had raised objection to this bill and said that if passed into law, “This bill would unfairly target people of South Asian descent or origin, subject them to additional scrutiny, leave them vulnerable to bullying in schools, and deprive them of their fundamental civil rights in the workplace or elsewhere.”

Not to forget, the Islamist and anti-Hindu lobby in the US has for many years been peddling caste propaganda to malign Hindus.

Zohran Mamdani received funding from anti-India and anti-Hindu lobby

Unsurprisingly, Zohran Mamdani has the backing of anti-India and anti-Hindu lobby of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR). As OpIndia reported earlier, Islamist outfit CAIR has contributed $100,000 to New Yorkers for Lower Costs, the largest Parliamentary Action Committee (PAC) backing Zohran Mamdani. The campaign records show that CAIR, through its Unity & Justice Fund, gave ‘gift’ to Mamdani in two instalments. A $25,000 gift on 30th May and a $75,000 donation on 16th June 2025.

Other than CAIR, Anti-Semitic activist Linda Sarsour contributed $2,500 to the Unity & Justice Fund. End the Occupation, affiliated with the anti-Israel group IfNotNow, contributed $1,000 this week. The Truth Project, a New Jersey-based group that accuses Israel of “genocide,” gave $10,000 to New Yorkers for Lower Costs.

OpIndia has reported earlier about the anti-Hindu and anti-India activities of CAIR and IAMC. Interestingly, Zohran Mamdani has also received support, although not financial, from Sunita Vishwanath, the co-founder of Hindus for Human Rights (HfHR), a regime change specialist George Soros-funded anti-Hindu group.  HfHR was formed in the year 2019 by two Islamist advocacy groups named Indian American Muslim Council (IAMC) and the Organization for Minorities of India (OFMI).

In September 2025, several Hindu intellectuals, retired officers, professionals, and community leaders issued open letters raising concerns over the candidacy of Zohran Mamdani for his Hinduphobic tendencies. Two separate letters, one addressed to India’s External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar and another to filmmaker Mira Nair, Mamdani’s mother, have gained wide attention for their strong language and the list of signatories attached to them.

‘Hindus for Zohran’ is same as ‘chickens for KFC’

The Hindus of New York need to be cautious about supporting the likes of Zohran Mamdani who vilify Hindus as a hobby, call them ‘Harami’, glorify Islamic terrorists while villainising the democratically elected Prime Minister of India. While now the BAPS is welcoming Mamdani, confusing his pre-poll temple-run for a serious outreach visit to bridge the gap, he did not back BAPS when false caste discrimination case was brought against them. In fact, his sponsoring of the anti-Hindu AB6920 Bill demonstrates he will actively undermine Hindu interests. Hindus must stop this ‘Hindus for Zohran for New York’ self-sabotage.

From oral observations used for anti-Hindu propaganda to screeds about need for judges to be mindful: How liberals changed tunes in the face of public scrutiny

Anurag
-
0
From oral observations used for anti-Hindu propaganda to screeds about need for judges to be mindful: How liberals changed tunes in the face of public scrutiny

On 6th October, a shoe flew towards the Chief Justice of India, BR Gavai. It was not just an act of courtroom fury but a metaphor for how the age of social media has turned judicial speech into a public spectacle.

What happened was, the CJI gave an off-the-cuff advice to a petitioner who had approached the apex court to give directions for the restoration of a Bhagwan Vishnu idol. Instead of just asking the petitioner to approach the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) as it was under its domain to restore such ancient monuments or idols, the CJI went on to pass an unwarranted comment and sarcastically asked the petitioner to “Go and ask the deity himself to do something. Go and pray.”

His oral comments, which obviously did not make it to the judgment, sparked outrage beyond the courtroom. Within hours, social media was filled with criticism questioning the CJI, a Buddhist, about his intentions behind the comments. The outrage continued to grow to the point that the CJI himself tried to alleviate the situation by claiming that his comments were misunderstood. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta also commented on the social media outrage and, in a sense, called it an unnecessary attack on the judiciary. Retired judges, lawyers, so-called intellectuals, activists, everyone wanted to take a bite of the piece of cake the CJI served on a silver platter. Some favoured him, some went against him.

The situation became tense and moved away from the CJI’s comments when a 71-year-old lawyer, Rakesh Kishor, hurt by the top judge’s comments, hurled a shoe at him during open court. The CJI escaped narrowly from the attack. When Kishor was being taken away by the security personnel, he reportedly shouted, “India will not tolerate insult of Sanatan Dharma,” in Hindi.

The attack on the CJI was condemned by politicians, judges, former judges, lawyers, and others. In fact, Prime Minister Narendra Modi himself came forward to condemn the attack. Some voices, however, criticised Justice Gavai and pointed out that the outrage Kishor demonstrated was the result of the CJI’s own doing.

Among them was former Supreme Court Judge Markandey Katju, historically a liberal judge himself, who condemned the attack but categorically blamed the CJI for “inviting” the attack on himself. Katju’s remark captured an uncomfortable truth. Oral observations, once forgotten as courtroom chatter, now linger like viral hashtags. The comments made by judges, no matter whether of the Supreme Court, High Courts, or even the District Courts, are dissected, politicised, criticised, commented on, and immortalised online. What has changed is not merely judicial tone but public memory.

The missing serenity of the courtroom

In an op-ed, Justice Katju recalled the quiet atmosphere of the British High Court where, as he put it, judges “rarely spoke and allowed lawyers to make their case in low tones.” In contrast, even the Supreme Court has evolved into theatres of constant dialogues. Judges deliver lectures, rhetorical questions are raised, and, at times, sarcasm and satire find their place masquerading as “courtroom wit.” Katju quoted the Attorney General and Lord Chancellor of England, Francis Bacon’s warning, “A much-talking judge is like an ill-tuned cymbal.”

If we look at the history of courtrooms in India, any oral comments made by judges hardly made headlines before the era of live streaming and social media feeds. Courtroom exchanges often evaporated once the day ended. There used to be no instant amplification, no meme culture to replay a judge’s jest or jibe. Courtrooms used to be part of a closed universe which only a few had access to. They used to be a sanctum where judicial language could be lofty, personal, or even political without consequence. Not anymore.

When social media entered the courtroom

The privacy that judges enjoyed has vanished. Live reporting from courtrooms means that every pause, smile, or quip now lives online within seconds. Judges who once spoke freely without bothering about public scrutiny now find their words constantly under the microscope. Take the instance of the 2022 hearing of former Bharatiya Janata Party spokesperson Nupur Sharma, who had approached the apex court seeking the clubbing of multiple FIRs filed against her after a propagandist masquerading as a fact-checker, Alt News’ Mohammed Zubair, made an intentionally trimmed video of Sharma viral, making her the prime target of Islamists worldwide.

While hearing Sharma’s plea, Justice Surya Kant’s bench rebuked her and declared she was “single-handedly responsible for what is happening in the country” and that her “loose tongue has set the entire nation on fire.” Those comments were uncalled for and painted another direct target on her back. Within hours, the remarks dominated news cycles. Within days, the judges themselves became targets of criticism on social media. So much so, Justice JB Pardiwala, irked by the scrutiny judges were facing online, later warned that online commentary had evolved into “dangerous scenario” and urged regulation of judicial reporting.

It was an extraordinary moment, the judiciary lamenting the same transparency it had long demanded of others. The microphone that once amplified judges’ moral authority now amplifies their missteps.

Selective outrage and changing norms

Public reaction to oral observations cannot be expected to be ideologically neutral. When judges speak against those disliked by the liberal ecosystem, it is framed as moral courage. When they speak in ways that discomfort the ecosystem, it becomes “improper conduct.” However, there is another side that has developed over time, especially after the boom in social media platforms. Now, the comments are criticised or praised according to ideology. There is no single commentator but hundreds of thousands out there who are running their fingers on mobile screens or keyboards to express their views and be part of the larger ecosystem of their side.

Another such example is the Supreme Court’s oral observation during the farmers’ protest hearing. The bench made strong remarks criticising the Central Government’s handling of the agitation. While the left-leaning commentariat celebrated it as “speaking truth to power”, social media replayed those very statements and prompted questions about judicial overreach. The left-leaning “intellectuals” do not speak to the masses.

The masses, on the other hand, form their own views based on the available information. Since they have started questioning judges and criticising the overreach that comes with oral observations, the same left-leaning ecosystem started spewing a few voices that argued that oral remarks should not be taken seriously or criticised the media trial based on such observations. The principle had changed, not the practice.

Judicial speeches are now praised or condemned depending on the ideology of the commentator. While one person may like it and praise the judge, the other side may dislike it and call for the judge’s impeachment, or even hurl a shoe at him in the courtroom.

The anti-Hindu quips that went unchallenged

For years, oral observations that mocked or dismissed Hindu faith barely registered in mainstream discourse. For example, in 2008, Delhi High Court Judge Sanjay Kaul dismissed obscenity cases against painter MF Husain. He rebuked the outrage against nude depictions of Hindu goddesses. He said, “It is unfortunate that India’s new puritanism is being carried out in the name of culture,” and derided the Hindu protesters as “ignorant people vandalising art.”

In 2022, when Justice Surya Kant’s remarks against Nupur Sharma were met with protests, many of the same voices who had celebrated Kaul’s liberalism denounced public criticism of judges as an “attack on the judiciary.”

The double standard runs deeper. The Supreme Court, in 2003 and 2004, while hearing riot-related cases, delivered some of the harshest oral censures ever directed at an elected government. Chief Justice VN Khare infamously said, “I have no faith left in the prosecution and the Gujarat government to bring to book the guilty.” A year later, Justices Doraiswamy Raju and Arijit Pasayat compared the same administration to “modern-day Neros who were looking elsewhere while innocent women and children were burning.”

Back then, those comments were applauded by the liberal press as moral bravery. However, the other side found virtually no voice in the mainstream media. Today, the same liberal press decries even mild criticism of judicial behaviour as “dangerous rhetoric.” The yardstick changes with the politics of the moment.

The turnaround – how liberal circles went from praise to caution

For years, such oral remarks were not only ignored but often weaponised to build narratives that painted Hindus as intolerant and regressive. Each judicial aside that mocked Hindu belief was recycled across mainstream and social media to legitimise the “Hindu fundamentalist” trope. In those moments, oral observations were not just tolerated but celebrated, quoted, editorialised, and amplified by the same liberal intelligentsia that now pleads for restraint.

However, as the tide of digital opinion turned and social media began holding the judiciary accountable, the same ecosystem suddenly discovered the virtue of silence. What was once used to vilify the majority is now defended as “non-binding discourse.” The call for judges to “speak cautiously” arrived only when the scrutiny did not suit their narrative. The transformation from celebrating anti-Hindu judicial quips to demanding judicial mindfulness underlines not reflection, but fear of losing control over the story.

The age of ‘divine and bovine’ interventions

Even outside the Bench, retired judges have contributed to this moral theatre. Former Justice Rohinton F Nariman, while speaking at a public event, mocked the idea of divine guidance in the Ram Janmabhoomi judgment and said, “Whether divine or bovine intervention, such remarks violate the oath to the Constitution.” The choice of words, placing the cow, a sacred Hindu symbol, beside the divine, was not lost on his audience. Hindu groups called it a sneer; liberals hailed it as “rationalism.”

Nariman had earlier warned against Hindu petitions seeking the reclamation of temples under mosques and described them as “hydra-heads popping up all over the country.” Again, there were two ways to see the comments. While liberals hailed it and saw nothing wrong with a former judge likening Hindu plaintiffs to mythical monsters, the Hindu side outraged. But the fact is, judges, even the former ones, still escape without facing any legal action for such outrageous comments against Hindus, Sanatan Dharma and Hindu practices.

The smiling silence of Justice Joseph

Then came the episode of Justice KM Joseph, whose smile became a symbol of selective empathy. During the 2023 hearing on hate speech, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta cited instances of explicit hate against Hindus, including a DMK leader’s call to “butcher Brahmins.” Justice Joseph reportedly responded with a smile, quipping about Periyar’s historical crusade against caste.

The moment, captured by court reporters, enraged Hindu groups who saw it as a judicial smirk at calls for genocide. If such levity had greeted hate speech against any minority, there would have been editorials, candle marches, and televised indignation. Instead, there was silence, broken only by a few right-leaning outlets that dared to ask whether some judges had normalised prejudice when the victims were Hindus.

The new accountability, the new anxiety

The modern courtroom operates under the surveillance of millions. Judges, while keeping up with their habit of not pausing before speaking, are aware that a sentence uttered in jest may outlive their career. CJI Gavai himself admitted to warning a colleague to “speak cautiously” and keep it to themselves recently as the observation might cause social media unrest and criticism.

Transparency has, paradoxically, become both a shield and a sword. It forces accountability but breeds caution, sometimes bordering on fear. The judiciary that once commanded reverence through mystique now navigates the same public opinion it used to rise above. Judges do read social media and newspapers. They face the heat while hiding their identities on the internet, and it is affecting them, but not to the point that they at least start thinking of the consequences of their words. Old habits take time to fade away, someone has rightly said.

When hypocrisy meets hashtags

The liberal establishment’s discomfort is not with the scrutiny itself but with losing monopoly over it. For decades, their narratives framed judicial speech. Progressive judges were “voices of conscience,” conservative ones were “activists in robes.” The rise of platforms like OpIndia and others has shattered that monopoly. Every courtroom quip can now be replayed, reframed, and re-evaluated by audiences outside Lutyens’ drawing rooms.

When the shoe was thrown at the Chief Justice, outrage was universal, but so was introspection. Katju’s comment that “he invited this” was not cruelty; it was a mirror. Judges who once spoke without restraint now face the same unforgiving glare they once directed at others. The internet has no hierarchy, only memory.

Conclusion

In the end, the issue is not whether judges should speak at all, but whether they should mistake performance for persuasion. Oral observations were once theatre without spectators; now they are live broadcasts shaping public trust. The only remedy is restraint, applied uniformly, not selectively.

Those who once cheered the Supreme Court for “speaking truth to power” must also accept criticism when the power spoken to is their own ideology. The same transparency that once humbled governments is now humbling judges, and perhaps that is the balance democracy always needed.

If the courts are temples of justice, their sanctity lies not in silence but in discipline, the discipline to remember that in an era where every word trends, even the wisest tongue can set the court ablaze.

1...124125126...7,596Page 125 of 7,596