The steep 50% tariffs imposed by the United States from 27th August have forced India to find ‘Aapada mein avsar‘ (opportunity in crisis).
Several sectors that earlier depended heavily on the American market are now quickly redirecting their products to other regions. Items like shrimps, gems and jewellery, auto components, and electrical machinery have found many buyers in Asian and European countries.
A recent report from the Commerce and Industry Ministry shows that while exports to the US have fallen sharply across some categories, overall numbers have not collapsed because exporters are tapping new destinations.
Gems, Jewellery and Auto components find new buyers
One of the clearest examples of this shift can be seen in the gems and jewellery sector. Exports of these items to the US fell by a massive 76% in September compared to last year. Yet, overall gems and jewellery exports dropped only 1.5%. This was possible because shipments to the UAE increased 79%, to Hong Kong by 11%, and to Belgium by 8%.
A similar trend was visible in auto components. Exports to the US dipped 12% in September, but total auto component exports actually grew 8%. Germany, the UAE and Thailand picked up a large part of the redirected shipments, showing how Indian exporters are turning to multiple markets at once.
Marine products are seeing the strongest growth among all categories. Exports rose 25% in September and 11% in October. China, Japan, Thailand and the European Union accounted for most of this rise. Exporters say demand from these countries has helped them deal with the sudden slowdown from the US.
These trends strengthen the idea that India’s strong trade links with countries across Asia and Europe can reduce the immediate shock of losing access to the American market. However, this may not be true for all sectors.
Marine sector expands EU approvals
The government has been pushing for diversification, especially for products like marine items that already have good demand in many regions. Since the US tariffs were imposed, the number of Indian seafood units approved by the European Union has gone up by 25%. At least 102 additional units have now been allowed to supply to the EU, which is India’s second-largest seafood export market.
Image via The Indian Express
Before this, 502 Indian units were listed as eligible exporters to the EU. Many of the latest approvals had been pending for more than five years. Exporters say these new permissions will help increase shipments significantly.
Exporters asked not to slash prices
The government has also asked exporters to explore new markets like Russia. A senior official said around 25 fishery units in India may soon get approval to export to Russia as well. Authorities believe these diversification efforts are useful.
The Commerce Department has advised exporters not to reduce prices too sharply in the search for new buyers. Officials say that slashing prices may harm India’s long-term position in those markets.
Some US shipments are still taking place because buyers need temporary replacement stocks. But these orders are slowly being taken over by countries in East Asia and Central America. Indonesia and Ecuador, where US tariffs are lower at around 19% and 15%, have emerged as major gainers. Interestingly, both these countries have increased their prices too, which still keeps Indian goods competitive in some segments.
Tariffs in the EU may also come down from the current level of around 12% once the India–EU Free Trade Agreement (FTA) is finalised. This could boost India’s fishery exports to Europe by 20–25%. EU approval is considered an important quality benchmark, and once exporters crack that market, it often becomes easier to enter other regions too.
To support exporters, the government has announced assistance worth Rs 45,060 crore, including Rs 20,000 crore in credit guarantees for bank loans. A special support scheme announced in the Union Budget has also been put into operation.
Data shows diversification is helping
A recent report by SBI’s Ecowrap said India’s export diversification strategy is showing early signs of success. Between April and September this year, India’s total merchandise exports grew by 2.9%. Surprisingly, exports to the US also grew 13% during this period, although this may be because exporters rushed to ship goods before the tariffs took effect.
But by September, US-bound exports fell 12% year-on-year. At the same time, India’s exports to countries like the UAE, China, Vietnam, Japan, Hong Kong, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka and Nigeria increased sharply. This suggests that many goods that once went to the US are now being routed elsewhere.
The report pointed out that the US is now importing many items from Indonesia, Thailand and Vietnam, where shipments have risen as exports from India and China have dropped. Container shipments from India to the US fell 18.4% in October 2025 compared to the previous year, while China’s shipments declined 16.3%. Meanwhile, Indonesia’s shipments grew 10.1%, and Thailand and Vietnam grew around 3.6%.
Overall, India has managed to soften the blow of US tariffs by actively shipping goods to other countries. Many sectors, especially those with strong demand in Asia and Europe, have adjusted quickly.
Jamiat Ulema-e-Hind President Maulana Mahmood Madani triggered a national controversy on Saturday (29th November) after asserting that “if there is oppression, there will be jihad,” a statement he made while sharply criticising the judiciary and accusing it of failing to protect the constitutional rights of minorities.
Speaking at the Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind’s national governing body meeting held at Barkatullah Education Campus in Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh, Madani suggested that several recent court verdicts, including the Babri Masjid decision and the judgment that criminalised instant triple talaq, reflected a judiciary working “under government pressure.” His comments have set off a storm of political reactions, especially from the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), which accused him of inciting Muslims, spreading misinformation, and challenging constitutional institutions.
Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh: Islamic scholar Maulana Mahmood Madani says, "Law and order in a country, and the creation of a crime-free society are impossible without justice, absolutely impossible. Sadly, it must be said that over the past few years, especially after verdicts in… pic.twitter.com/DEHhkaFnpo
Madani, who leads one of India’s oldest Islamic organisations, founded in 1919, positioned his comments as a defence of minority rights. However, the phrase “if there is oppression, there will be jihad” became the centre of the controversy, as critics argued that it could be interpreted as a call for confrontation. Madani maintained that the word “jihad” was being misrepresented in public discourse, and insisted that he was referring to it in a spiritual and ethical sense rather than violence. But the backlash was swift and intense.
Madani’s critique of the Judiciary and the Constitution
During his speech, Madani argued that a series of recent judgments had weakened constitutional protections for minorities. He highlighted cases being heard in courts despite the Places of Worship Act, 1991, which mandates maintaining the religious character of places of worship as it existed in 1947. Citing this, he said, “The Supreme Court is entitled to be called ‘Supreme’ only as long as the Constitution is protected there. If this does not happen, then it does not deserve to be called supreme even in a non-remnant.”
The remark was interpreted by many as a direct challenge to the country’s highest court. Madani further said that the judiciary’s recent decisions “openly violated the rights of minorities guaranteed in the Constitution,” and said that these verdicts indicated constitutional deviations driven by political influence.
He also offered an assessment of the public mood, claiming that “10% of people are supportive of Muslims, 30% are against them, and 60% are silent.” Urging the Muslim community to engage with this silent majority, he warned that if these neutral individuals “turn against Muslims, then there will be a big danger in the country.”
‘Jihad was and will always remain holy’: Madani
A major part of Madani’s speech focused on the interpretation of jihad, a term he claimed had been repeatedly distorted by the government, media, and certain political groups.
Madani said, “By using phrases like ‘love jihad’, ‘land jihad’, ‘education jihad’, ‘spit jihad’, etc, the freedom of Muslims and their religion is being insulted… This is an old pattern: whenever any terrorist act occurs anywhere, it is labelled jihad, and Islam and Muslims are subjected to taunts, accusations and baseless allegations. It must be clarified that in Islam, jihad is a sacred religious obligation.”
He said that the “word jihad is used in the Quran in many meanings, but in whichever meaning it is used, it is for the welfare of the individual, society and humanity, for their elevation and for upholding their honour and dignity”.
“Wherever it is used in the sense of war and fighting, that too is for ending oppression and corruption and for the survival of humanity. Therefore, wherever there is oppression, there will be jihad. I repeat: wherever there is oppression, there will be jihad,” Madani said.
He further said, “In a democratic and secular country like India, where the concept of an Islamic state does not exist, any talk in the name of jihad is not even a subject of discussion.”
“Muslims are bound by constitutional loyalty, and the government is also responsible for protecting the rights of citizens. If the government fails in this, it will be the government’s responsibility, not ours,” he said.
Madani’s remarks on Vande Mataram trigger another debate
In the same address, Madani also commented on the ongoing debate surrounding the recitation of ‘Vande Mataram.’ His remark, “A dead community surrenders”,sparked fresh criticism, as he suggested that any community that unquestioningly complies with demands to recite the song is “a dead community.”
Madani said that if Muslims are pressured to recite Vande Mataram, they should not accept it passively. “If they say ‘say Vande Mataram,’ they will start reading it. This will be the identity of a dead community. If we are a living community, we will have to face the situation,” he said.
The comment was viewed as provocative at a time when debates around national symbols and religious freedom had already become politically charged.
He also spoke about halal, alleging that “the purely religious concept of halal is being systematically defamed”.
“Halal does not mean only ritual slaughter; it is the pure way of life of an entire Muslim life. Halal includes the basic principles of lawful earnings, honesty in employment and trade, and the correct use of wealth,” he said.
Madani’s statements invited an immediate and fierce backlash from the BJP, which accused him of deliberately provoking the Muslim community and attacking constitutional institutions.
Responding to Madani’s comments, BJP leader Narottam Mishra said, “…India will no longer tolerate such a mindset. They are questioning the courts; they are questioning Vande Mataram. What kind of mindset is this?”
BJP MLA Rameshwar Sharma led the charge, saying, “new Jinnahs are emerging in India who are trying to provoke the country’s Muslims.” He demanded that the Supreme Court take suo motu cognisance of Madani’s remarks and initiate action against him.
Sharma accused Madani of “violating the Constitution” and “challenging the Supreme Court,” warning him to “stay within limits.” His response escalated sharply as he claimed that individuals like Madani “produce terrorists, jihadists, rapists” and support movements such as “love jihad, land jihad, and thook jihad.” Sharma also questioned the morality of expecting the Supreme Court to “serve them biryani” after promoting activities he associated with terrorism.
Taking a hard line, Sharma said: “Will you spread terrorism, kill innocents in India, and expect the Supreme Court to reward you? The Supreme Court will hang you.” He added that the government “will not feed sweets to terrorists” and that Madani should “keep his misbehaviour in check.”
Sharma argued that anyone who “violates the Constitution or questions the judiciary” should face strict action, even under sedition-like laws. He warned that India is not a country that would tolerate anti-national activities. “If your children become doctors, the country will salute you,” he said. “But if they become doctors who throw bombs, they will also be blown up by bombs.”
The heated exchange further deepened existing tensions between the Jamiat Ulema-e-Hind and the BJP leadership, with both sides accusing the other of undermining national unity and constitutional principles.
Madani was selected as the ‘Person of the Year – 2023’
Maulana Mahmood Madani, the President of Jamiat Ulama-e-Hind (M), has been selected as the ‘person of the year – 2023’ by the Royal Islamic Strategic Studies Centre.
The independent research entity recently published the 14th annual issue [pdf] of ‘The Muslim 500: The World’s 500 Most Influential Muslims’ wherein Maulana Mahmood Madani is listed as the ‘Person of the Year- 2023.’
Madani’s latest remarks are part of a recurring pattern in which he has taken strong and often contentious positions on national issues. Over the past few years, he has been at the forefront of debates on the Uniform Civil Code, alleged Islamophobia, religious freedom, and the rights of Islamic institutions.
Opposition to Uttarakhand’s Uniform Civil Code
In January this year, when Uttarakhand became the first state in independent India to implement a Uniform Civil Code, Madani strongly opposed the law. Calling it a violation of the constitutional right to religious freedom, he compared it to an “assault on democracy.”
Madani argued that the law ignored the objections raised by Muslim minorities and failed to consider the guidance provided by the Law Commission of India, which had previously stated that a Uniform Civil Code was neither necessary nor desirable. According to him, the government imposed the UCC in a “dictatorial manner,” disregarding democratic processes and public consultation.
He insisted that Muslims would continue to adhere to their personal laws and Sharia, and that they would resist any attempt to dilute religious practices, though only “within the bounds of the law and Constitution.” Madani’s remarks sparked significant political debate, with critics accusing him of resisting reforms aimed at ensuring gender justice.
Call for legislation against ‘Islamophobia’
In June 2024, Madani and the Jamiat Ulama-e-Hind demanded comprehensive legislation to address what they called rising Islamophobia in India. However, this appeal triggered controversy due to the organisation’s track record of legally defending individuals accused of terrorism.
OpIndia earlier published a report in 2022, which explain that since 2007, the Jamiat’s legal cell has provided legal support to nearly 700 terror-accused individuals, resulting in over 190 acquittals, many due to procedural lapses rather than confirmation of innocence. The organisation’s involvement in high-profile cases, such as the 7/11 Mumbai train blasts, the 2006 Malegaon blasts, and the 26/11 Mumbai attacks, raised questions about its intentions in proposing such a law.
Madani’s statement also accused the government and child rights bodies of targeting madrasas under the guise of regulation. He said that directives such as mandatory Surya Namaskar, Saraswati Puja, or recitation of Hindu prayers were unconstitutional and infringed upon Muslim religious freedom. Critics dismissed these allegations as exaggerated and argued that such claims were intended to create a false narrative of victimisation.
Jamiat also voiced objections to the UCC, demanded protection for Islamic institutions, and even raised questions on reservation policies, further intensifying debates around identity politics and religious autonomy.
Threat-like statements during UCC debate
Madani’s contentious statements on the UCC date back to May 2022, when the Jamiat Ulama-e-Hind passed a resolution against the proposed national Uniform Civil Code during a two-day convention attended by thousands of Muslim organisations.
*?#जमीअत* *उलमा-ए-हिंद की मजलिस-ए-मुंतजिमा का अधिवेशन #लाइव टेलीकास्ट उस्मान नगर (ईदगाह मैदान) देवबंद से।*
— Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind (@JamiatUlama_in) May 29, 2022
The resolution warned that Muslims would “take all measures” against the UCC, though it insisted that these measures would remain “within constitutional limits.” The phrasing led to criticism that the organisation was indirectly issuing threats.
Madani added another layer of controversy by saying, “We had a chance to go to Pakistan, but we did not go. Those who harp on about Pakistan should go there themselves.” He said that Muslims had become “strangers in their own country,” adding that they would compromise on everything except their faith.
During the same event, a Jamiat official, Maulana Niaz Ahmed Farooqui, warned that disputes like the Gyanvapi mosque issue could lead to “the creation of another Pakistan.” The statement was widely condemned for invoking a divisive and sensitive historical reference.
Demand for a new blasphemy law
Another controversy arose in August 2022, when Madani demanded exemplary punishment for former BJP MLA T Raja Singh over alleged derogatory comments about the Prophet Muhammad. He described the party’s internal action against Singh as inadequate and called for a new law to protect the dignity of religious figures.
Critics argued that creating such a law would endanger freedom of expression and could be misused. The demand also triggered concerns about the rise of blasphemy-related restrictions at a time when many countries were moving away from such legislation.
Support for the Waqf Act and opposition to reforms
In September 2022, Madani and the Jamiat Ulama-e-Hind opposed a petition challenging the Waqf Act’s sweeping provisions. The organisation moved the Delhi High Court, defending the existing structure of Waqf administration and suggesting that any attempt to amend the law was part of a campaign to target Muslim community practices.
Maulana Mahmood Madani’s recent remarks on “jihad,” judicial decisions, and Vande Mataram have reignited long-standing debates around religious identity, constitutional rights, and political polarisation in India. While he insists that his comments stem from concern for minority rights and constitutional protections.
The intense reactions to his latest statements are not occurring in isolation. Over the past several years, Madani has repeatedly taken strong and controversial positions on issues ranging from the Uniform Civil Code to alleged Islamophobia, blasphemy laws, and Waqf regulations. Each of these episodes has contributed to wider political and societal divisions.
The Ministry of Home Affairs recently denied visa to Christian evangelist Franklin Graham from the United States, who was scheduled to visit Kohima in Nagaland on 30th November for a Christian event. While his visit has been cancelled, the event would continue as stated by the organisation behind it. The Centre has not publicly stated the reason behind rejecting visa to Franklin, however, his long-standing activities in India, including conversion-linked outreach through his organisation Samaritan’s Purse, might be at the core of the decision.
Franklin Graham’s long history in India
Over the past few decades, Franklin has visited India multiple times. His organisation, Samaritan’s Purse, has been involved in conversion-oriented activities in the country, using aid, food distribution, and other material assistance as a tool for evangelism. In the 1980s, the organisation had announced plans to establish one thousand churches in India and has worked towards that goal through various mission programmes.
His father, the late Billy Graham, first visited India in the 1950s and had met then Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru. He also had links to the Gandhi family. These historical associations must be recalled as the Nagaland Pradesh Congress Committee has openly criticised the central government for denying visa to him.
Organisations criticised Government for denying visa
The Nagaland Joint Christian Forum (NJCF), National People’s Party (NPP), Chakhesang Public Organisation (CPO), Nagaland Pradesh Congress Committee (NPCC) and others have expressed disappointment over the cancellation of Graham’s visit due to visa restrictions.
NJCF is the organisation that had arranged the event which Franklin was scheduled to attend. Despite the setback, NJCF said the scheduled programme, organised with the Kohima Baptist Pastors’ Fellowship, would proceed as planned. The event took place on 30th November at the Indira Gandhi Stadium. NJCF called the event an opportunity for unity and worship.
On the other hand, NPP said it was disappointed and troubled by the Centre’s decision. The party noted that local churches had prepared extensively and that thousands of Christians were anticipating Graham’s visit.
NPP argued that Christianity in Nagaland is not a ceremonial identity but the moral and social backbone of the State. It said the cancellation had hurt sentiments and raised concerns about how the Christian minority is being treated. While acknowledging India’s sovereign authority in visa matters, NPP warned that repeated restrictions could erode minority confidence in democratic institutions.
The CPO issued a statement calling the visa denial a “direct affront” to the Christian community of Nagaland. CPO leaders Veuzhu Keyho and Chepetso Koza said the decision hurt the sentiments of people who had been preparing in prayer for months.
The group described the event as an anticipated moment of renewal and revival. It linked the decision to what it termed a historical pattern of “stepmotherly treatment” by the Centre, recalling even the 1929 Naga Club memorandum to the Simon Commission. CPO said the refusal widened the existing trust deficit and reopened old wounds, asserting that the Nagas’ right to self-determine their future must be respected. It urged the Centre to act with transparency and sensitivity in matters concerning the State’s distinct identity.
The NPCC condemned the visa denial and called it discriminatory and an “insult” to the Christian community. Congress claimed the decision reflects what it described as the BJP-RSS establishment’s intolerance towards religious minorities. It criticised the Naga People’s Front (NPF), a partner in the ruling alliance, accusing it of remaining silent and failing to defend the concerns of its own people.
Franklin Graham mocked Hinduism
In 2010, during an interview with USA Today, Franklin Graham had mocked Hinduism for its many manifestations of God and said “No elephant with 100 arms can do anything for me. None of their 9,000 gods is going to lead me to salvation.”
“We are fooling ourselves if we think we can have some big kumbaya service and all hold hands and it’s all going to get better in this world. It’s not going to get better,” Graham added.
His remarks were a direct dismissal of Hindu beliefs. He reduced the rich and ancient Hindu tradition to caricatures. By saying “No elephant with 100 arms can do anything for me” and referring to “9,000 gods”, he was not merely expressing theological disagreement, he was ridiculing Hindu Gods and asserting that they hold no value or power.
His argument rested on an exclusivist evangelical claim that salvation is possible only through Christianity, rejecting the legitimacy of all other religious paths. When he criticised the idea of a “big kumbaya service”, he mocked the very concept of interfaith harmony, implying that coexistence or mutual respect between religions is meaningless.
His mocking of Hinduism reflected the same missionary mindset that has historically targeted India, dismissing its civilisational heritage while aggressively promoting conversion under the guise of spiritual concern.
Mission to build 1,000 churches in India
In 1984, Franklin came to India to lay the foundation stone of a church. In a report from January 2020 on Samaritan’s Purse’s website, the organisation flaunted the fact that over the years, it has established 1,012 churches and 12 Bible schools across India.
The organisation used the standard modus operandi to attract Hindus towards Christianity, by providing basic amenities, education and health care. The report noted that most of the churches established by the organisation included a well where Hindus could come and get clean water.
“This gave Christians the opportunity to share the same Good News that Jesus once revealed to a Samaritan woman drawing water: “Everyone who drinks of this water will be thirsty again, but whoever drinks of the water that I will give him will never be thirsty again. The water that I will give him will become in him a spring of water welling up to eternal life” (John 4:13-14, ESV),” the report noted.
Using COVID pandemic as tool to convert people
As most of the evangelists do, Franklin also used the pandemic to claim that only “Christian God” can save people from the disease. In May 2020, targeting India, Billy Graham Evangelistic Association published a video from 2010 when Franklin was in India to attend a conversion event. In the post, the organisation wrote, “As COVID claims thousands of lives in India, join us in praying the people of India come to know the living Saviour. This clip is from Franklin Graham’s 2010 visit to the country.”
In April 2021, when the second wave of COVID-19 hit India, Franklin’s organisation Samaritan’s Purse claimed that it distributed food to 1,000 families, helped a local clinic for COVID-19 care and more. It is, though, unclear which channel the organisation used to provide relief material during the pandemic in India.
Billy Graham’s visit to India and his links to Congress
In early 2025, after US President Donald Trump decided to shut down USAID, several organisations that were running conversion rackets in India were hit. OpIndia, at that time, had published an investigation into World Vision International, one of the top recipients of USAID funds. The organisation sent hundreds of crores every year to its Indian chapter pretending it was for humanitarian work.
In reality, World Vision is a Christian fundamentalist organisation that allies with other Christian fundamentalists to convert unsuspecting Hindus, especially children and women. World Vision has been indulging in conversion activity in India for many years. It was first established in India in 1951. For over 70 years, World Vision received crores to convert Hindus and subvert Hinduism. It was only in 2024 that the Modi government revoked its FCRA licence, denting its conversion activity in India.
World Vision was founded by Bob Pierce. In the early 1950s, the organisation started operations in India and by 1960, the organisation had started six childcare projects. In the background, it was establishing its foot in the country to run conversion rackets. In this letter by Bob Pierce in February 1953, he talked about how he was in Calcutta and was converting Hindus and Sikhs. In 1956-1957 too, Pierce travelled to India to preach to Indian students, again children.
Another crucial point came in 1956-57 when Pierce had an interesting meeting with then Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru. Here is a picture of him meeting Nehru. In the picture, Billy Graham, father of Franklin Graham, was also there.
To understand the implications of this picture, we must, along with Billy Graham, also understand who evangelist Billy Graham was.
William Franklin Graham Jr (Billy Graham) was an American evangelist and ordained Southern Baptist minister. In his years of preaching the gospel and converting people, Graham met several state heads and personalities. He was extremely close to several US Presidents. He famously said, “Everywhere I go I find that people … both leaders and individuals … are asking one basic question,” Billy Graham has said. “‘Is there any hope for the future?’ My answer is the same, ‘Yes, through Jesus Christ.’”
According to the Billy Graham website, After being encouraged by a key figure in the Evangelical Alliance in London, Rev. Graham scheduled Crusades in Bombay (now Mumbai), Madras (Chennai), Kottayam, Palamcottah, New Delhi and Calcutta (Kolkata).
His first visit to India has been documented on the website as 1956. “His 1956 visit was timely, as India was beginning to strengthen its ties with the Communist bloc, raising questions about the role of Western influence and faith in the area. Billy Graham, however, was well prepared, taking the initiative to meet with the current secretary of state for a briefing on relations between the U.S. and India”.
This trip appears to be a significant one not just from the point of view of Christian conversions, but also geo-politically. It was in this period that Graham and Bob Pierce met Jawaharlal Nehru as well.
In the book, “Billy Graham – His Life and Influence” written by David Aikman (former TIME magazine senior correspondent), there are details of the meeting which prove that Graham was furthering USA’ foreign policy goals.
The book states clearly that the US Government was using Billy Graham’s Christian crusades to further foreign policy goals and the first time they tried this was when Graham was visiting India.
President Dwight D. Eisenhower sent greetings to Graham before his trip to India and Secretary of State Dulles met Graham to impress upon him that he must not make any political mistakes during his trip to India and focus on furthering American interests.
The book says, “This was but the first of many occasions US administrations found it useful to capitalize or piggyback on Graham’s evangelistic activities and indeed his prominence as a worldwide evangelist. In decades to come, not only did his crusades have the indirect effect of helping to bring down totalitarian regimes, but, on occasion, Graham served as an unofficial emissary for American presidents to world leaders with whom the US government was unable otherwise to have direct contact”.
The book reveals that the US Ambassador to India John Sherman Cooper had “strongly” pushed Nehru to meet Graham. When they met, Nehru looked bored until Graham started talking about Christianity.
In the meeting, it is said that when Billy Graham was talking to Nehru about how much he liked India, he displayed boredom and fiddled with a paper opener.
However, the situation evolved when Graham changed his strategy. Realising that Nehru was not particularly interested in talking about how much Billy Graham had learnt about India on his trip, he switched the conversation to Christianity.
“Nehru immediately became alert and, according to Graham, began to ask questions”, the book says. The book further makes a shocking revelation. Jawaharlal Nehru told Billy Graham that he had nothing against Christian missionaries so long as they avoided politics.
It is pertinent to note here that the image of Nehru, Billy Graham and Bob Pierce was ‘created on’ the George Fox University website in 1957. But, according to the records we can find, the actual meeting possibly took place in 1956. The account of the meeting finds its place in several books – one of them being the Autobiography of Billy Graham called “Just As I Am”. The book by Billy Graham does not mention Bob Pierce being present during this meeting, however, the book makes it amply clear that Graham and Pierce knew each other very well.
Interestingly, in the biographical book on Bob Pierce, “This One Thing I Do”, the introduction was written by Billy Graham. In that book, with a foreword by the Chaplain of the United States Senate, there is a picture of the same meeting with Jawaharlal Nehru.
India revisited – Indira Gandhi continues the legacy of Jawaharlal Nehru
In 1972, Billy Graham returned to India. The Hindu on 24th November 1972 published a report that read as follows:
The noted American evangelist, Dr. Billy Graham, to-night expressed the hope that his visit to this country would help improve relations between India and the United States. Dr. Graham, who was talking to newsmen at the airport here on his arrival from Kohima, was asked if he was carrying any message from President Nixon for Mrs. Indira Gandhi. “I am sorry, I can’t answer that,” he replied. Dr. Graham, a close friend of Mr. Nixon, is scheduled to meet Mrs. Gandhi on Monday. Dr Graham said the Indian Government had gone out of the way in permitting him to visit Nagaland. “I am grateful for this,” he added. During his stay in the capital, he will also call on the President, Mr. V.V. Giri. Earlier, talking to newsmen at Calcutta airport, Dr Graham said he had talks with Mr Nixon twice before he left for India. “I love India and I want the United States and India to become very close friends. This is necessary because we need each other for our mutual interests,” he said.
There were certain operative parts of this short report that we must bear in mind:
He said he could not tell the press the message he was carrying for Indira Gandhi from President Nixon.
The Indian govt had gone “out of its way” to permit him to visit Nagaland.
He wants a great relationship between the US and India.
The report by The Hindu would make it appear as though Graham was merely a Christian pastor, close to the President of the US, who was in India to improve ties and visit Nagaland. However, there was far more to the story – which The Hindu, of course, didn’t report.
Billy Graham details his 1972 trip to India and his meeting with Indira Gandhi during that trip in his autobiography.
About his mandate to meet Indira Gandhi, Graham writes:
President Nixon, at the request of the American consul in New Delhi, had personally asked me to seek an interview with Prime Minister Indira Gandhi, in part to find out from her what kind of ambassador she wanted from America. He asked me to notice every single thing about her—the movement of her hands, the expression on her face, how her eyes looked. “When you’ve finished the interview,” he said to me, “go to the American embassy and dictate your report to me.” And so, when I visited with Mrs. Gandhi in the Indian capital, I put the question to her. She told me she wanted someone who understood economics, who had the ear of the President, and who had influence in Congress. This I reported to the President. He later appointed Daniel Patrick Moynihan. Whether my report influenced the President’s decision, I never learned.
According to what Billy Graham wrote in his autobiography, it is evident that while Billy Graham was in India for a completely different reason, his mandate from the US government was to meet Indira Gandhi, observe her mannerisms and report back to the US. It is also evident that Billy Graham was close enough to the US dispensation to affect their decisions.
However, this mandate by the US government was essentially a pile-on. It was what the government wanted Graham to do, while he was visiting India for his real motive.
In his book, Graham makes it clear that he was visiting Nagaland for the purpose of evangelism.
“Our purpose in going to India was to preach in Nagaland, an isolated area tucked in the mountainous, jungle-covered northeast corner of India near the Burmese border. The area was home to a dozen separate tribes, each with its own dialect and often with a history of headhunting“, Graham writes.
Graham writes that in late November 1972, it was almost miraculous that the Indira Gandhi government granted him a permit to visit Nagaland, since at that time, due to instability, foreigners were not getting the permission to visit the Indian state.
What becomes interesting is how Graham got the permit. He writes (emphases added):
This permission was in response to an appeal from a delegation headed by the Reverend Longri Ao and other church leaders from Nagaland. (Assisting them was a gifted young Indian clergyman named Robert Cunville, who was head of the North East India Christian Council and had been invited to be director of youth evangelism for the World Council of Churches; he later joined our Team as an evangelist and has had a wide ministry not only in India but in many other parts of the world as well.)
It becomes important here to remember what “World Council of Churches” is. In our previous report where we wrote about the USAID-funded World Vision, we investigated how World Council of Churches was a trusted partner of World Vision – the evangelical organisation which was founded by Bob Pierce.
In their own words, “The World Council of Churches is a fellowship of churches which confess the Lord Jesus Christ as God and Saviour according to the scriptures, and therefore seek to fulfil together their common calling to the glory of the one God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit. It is a community of churches on the way to visible unity in one faith and one eucharistic fellowship, expressed in worship and in common life in Christ. It seeks to advance towards this unity, as Jesus prayed for his followers, “so that the world may believe.” (John 17:21). The World Council of Churches (WCC) is the broadest and most inclusive among the many organized expressions of the modern ecumenical movement, a movement whose goal is Christian unity”.
World Council of Churches is funded by several governments across the world and also gets substantial funding from a German NGO called “Bread For The World”. Bread For The World funds and has connection to several anti-India NGO, Urban Naxals, Jihadis and nefarious elements like Harsh Mandar.
Coming back to Billy Graham’s Nagaland trip, Graham writes that when he landed in Nagaland, he was received by American consul who was a good friend of Mother Teresa.
Interestingly, in another book about Bob Pierce – the founder of World Vision – the NGO was also paying money to Mother Teresa.
Billy Graham in his book writes that when he reached Nagaland, he started shaking hands with people when the police pulled him and made him sit in the car because they felt he was in danger. He says that he then arrived at the place to deliver the sermon to over 90,000 people. Thereafter, he was taken to the government house to stay.
“After that, we were taken to a government house to spend the night. The chief minister of the cabinet of Nagaland had arranged a dinner for us. At that dinner, the schedule for the next day was discussed”, Graham writes.
The website of Billy Graham says, “500,000 people attended Billy Graham’s Crusade from November 20-22, 1972. The crowd included many different tribes, each having their own interpreter. Mr. Graham took note of the attendees’ tribal dress, painted faces, and spears in hand as he preached from the platform, declaring God’s love for them”.
Other than the fact that the Indira Gandhi government had provided him police protection, a stay in the government house and his evangelism was entertained by the CM of Nagaland, Indira Gandhi had also arranged for helicopters for Graham and said that she would be following his trip with great interest.
“Mrs. Gandhi had told me that she would be following the trip with great personal interest and warned me of some particular dangers. She ordered two helicopters to pick us up at the conclusion of our meetings”, Graham writes.
This portion of Billy Graham’s writing reveals a few things:
Indira Gandhi was keenly following Billy Graham’s tour of Nagaland.
She gave him a permit to visit Nagaland when foreigners were not being granted permit due to the instability.
She gave him the permission to visit Nagaland on the insistence of a priest associated with World Council of Churches.
She gave Billy Graham police protection, government accommodation and private helicopters to travel.
She went out of her way to ensure the evangelist Billy Graham – who was converting hundreds of thousands of non-Christians (predominantly Hindus) could visit Nagaland during instability to convert people.
Billy Graham was extremely close to the US government and was carrying out their foreign policy goals when he met heads of state like Indira Gandhi – and reporting back to the US Government.
As it is established that Billy Graham played a significant role in shaping Nagaland into a Christian-majority state, Franklin’s visit would have further enabled the ongoing conversion networks in the Northeast, particularly targeting tribal communities already vulnerable to such influence.
Ditwah, a powerful cyclonic storm that formed in the Bay of Bengal, struck neighbouring Sri Lanka, causing unprecedented devastation. More than 120 people died in the country due to the cyclone, which caused extensive damage. The cyclone is now reportedly moving toward India’s coastal areas, including Tamil Nadu, Puducherry, and southern Andhra Pradesh. The Indian Meteorological Department (IMD) has issued a red alert for heavy rain and gusty winds in these states, and residents have been advised to stay indoors.
#WATCH | Rameswaram, Tamil Nadu | Strong winds, rain and rough sea conditions in Pamban as a result of cyclonic storm 'Ditwah' moving north-northwest across Sri Lanka and the southwest Bay of Bengal.
A cyclone is a large and powerful storm that forms over an ocean, caused by a strong low-pressure centre and inward-spiralling winds. It is like a wind machine, bringing with it strong winds, torrential rain, and high waves. These storms typically form over warm waters like the Indian Ocean and cause massive destruction upon reaching land.
Here is how a cyclone typically forms over an ocean. For a cyclone to form, the ocean surface water must be very warm (about 26.5°C or higher). This heat is what powers the storm. When the water has reached the ideal temperature, the air above it also heats up, becomes lighter, and begins to rise rapidly. The rising air creates a void near the ocean’s surface, reducing the pressure in this area. This is the “centre” where a storm brews up.
To fill this void created near an ocean’s surface, cold air from the surrounding area rushes in at a fast rate. Gushing winds approach this ‘centre’, and the Coriolis force (resulting from the Earth’s rotation) causes them to spin in a circular motion. This swirling air continues to rise, transforming into steam and forming large clouds. When the speed of these winds exceeds 119 kilometres per hour, it becomes a full-blown cyclone. Cyclone Ditawah formed similarly over the Bay of Bengal, which first hit Sri Lanka and is now approaching the coast of India.
Why are cyclones so dangerous?
A cyclone isn’t just wind and rain; it is a formidable combination of wind and rain moving at reckless speed. The winds in a cyclone are so powerful that they can uproot trees, destroy houses and buildings. They can even topple electricity poles, plunging cities into darkness.
Cyclones bring heavy rainfall, so much so that flooding occurs within hours. Floodwaters inundate homes and farmland, causing significant damage. Strong winds raise ocean waters to great heights, and these high waves (like a moving wall) rapidly approach land. This can submerge coastal areas in an instant, causing significant loss of life and property. Cyclones can wreak havoc on agriculture, livestock, and the entire region’s economy. Therefore, as soon as the weather department issues a “red alert,” people in affected areas should immediately move to safety.
Cyclone Ditawah has a devastating impact on Sri Lanka
Cyclone Ditawah struck Sri Lanka, causing a major disaster. The government described it as “destruction like never before.” More than 120 people have died, and 130 are still missing. Heavy rainfall caused flooding in many areas and landslides in hilly areas and mudslides.
The situation was so alarming that the government had to evacuate around 44,000 people from their homes and send them into camps set up in schools and other safe places. Water level rose significantly in Sri Lanka’s capital, Colombo, and surrounding areas, prompting immediate evacuation there as well. Schools were closed, trains were halted, and even the stock market was forced to close early due to the storm.
‘Operation Sagar Bandhu’ linked to PM Modi’s vision ‘SAGAR’
At a time when Sri Lanka is dealing with such a massive disaster, India launched “Operation Sagar Bandhu” to assist in relief and rescue work. The operation demonstrates how India is a trustworthy friend to its neighbours. With Operation Sagar Bandhu, India has proved that it is always willing and prepared to help its neighbours during difficult times.
India’s benevolent gesture has further strengthened its relationship with Sri Lanka. This demonstrates India’s strong capabilities in providing Humanitarian Assistance and Disaster Relief (HADR). In this relief operation, India deployed its large and modern warships, such as INS Vikrant, showcasing India’s maritime prowess and alertness.
#OperationSagarBandhu unfolds. @IAF_MCC C-130 J plane carrying approx 12 tons of humanitarian aid including tents, tarpaulins, blankets, hygiene kits, and ready-to-eat food items lands in Colombo.
Whenever a neighbouring country faces a crisis, China also attempts to utilise the opportunity to establish its influence there. However, China’s expansionist ambitions were foiled by India’s swift action of sending aid to Sri Lanka in time. Operation Sagar Bandhu is linked to Prime Minister Modi’s larger vision of “SAGAR” (Security and Growth for All in the Region). The vision signifies that India is always ready to ensure the security and progress of the entire Indian Ocean region.
What will be the impact of Cyclone ‘Ditwah’ on India?
After wreaking havoc in Sri Lanka, Cyclone Ditvaah is now moving toward India. The Indian Meteorological Department (IMD) predicts it could reach coastal areas in northern Tamil Nadu, Puducherry, and southern Andhra Pradesh by the morning of November 30, 2025. The Meteorological Department has issued a red alert in several Tamil Nadu districts, including Cuddalore. Heavy downpour is expected in these regions, which could cause flooding and submerge low-lying areas over the next couple of days. Wind speeds could reach 70 to 90 kilometres per hour, which could cause downed trees, power poles, and damage to homes.
Additionally, Chennai and the surrounding districts will experience heavy rains, disrupting flight services and daily activities. An orange alert has been issued, and the local administration has geared up to deal with this threat. In Cuddalore district alone, 233 relief camps have been set up to accommodate 150,000 people. Motors and teams are also ready to pump out water, and doctors are working 24 hours a day in all government hospitals.
#WATCH कुड्डालोर, तमिलनाडु: चक्रवात 'दितवाह' पर जिला कलेक्टर सिबी अधित्या सेंथिल कुमार ने कहा, "चक्रवात दितवाह को देखते हुए IMD ने कुड्डालोर जिले के लिए बहुत भारी बारिश की चेतावनी जारी की है। जिला प्रशासन ने तैयारी के लिए कई कदम उठाए हैं…हमने 233 राहत सेंटर भी पहचाने हैं जहां… pic.twitter.com/YOMBX4DZ0S
People have been advised to remain indoors for the next few days. Fishermen who venture out into the sea have been strictly advised to avoid going near the sea til December 1, 2025. Flights between Chennai and Sri Lanka have also been affected. Anyone experiencing any concerns can call the government helpline number 1077.
(This is a translation of the original article published on OpIndia Hindi.)
Prime Minister Narendra Modi unveiled the tallest bronze statue of Lord Rama on Friday, 28th November. This 77-foot-tall statue stands at Shree Sansthan Gokarna Partgali Jivottam Math in Partgali village, Canacona, South Goa. The statue was crafted by the famous sculptor Ram Sutar, who also created the Statue of Unity in Gujarat. Lord Rama is depicted holding a bow and arrow to show his divine and gentle nature.
VIDEO | Canacona, Goa: PM Modi (@narendramodi) unveils 77-feet-tall bronze statue of Lord Ram at Shree Samsthan Gokarn Jeevottam Mutt in South Goa.
Goa Governor Ashok Gajapathi Raju, Chief Minister Pramod Sawant, Union Minister Shripad Naik, and other ministers attended. PM Modi first prayed at an ancient temple inside the monastery complex.
PM Modi’s words on the Math and Statue
Addressing the gathering, PM Modi highlighted the rich 550-year history of the monastery. He said, “Shri Sansthan Gokarna Partgali Jivottam Math has endured the test of time for over five centuries. Despite all changes and challenges faced by society and the country, this monastery has remained a guiding light for the people.”
A memorable programme in Canacona, marking the 550th-year celebration of the Shree Samsthan Gokarn Partagali Jeevottam Math. Here are some glimpses. pic.twitter.com/WVGnE0xTRr
He praised India’s cultural revival, mentioning the restoration of the Ram Temple in Ayodhya, the grand restoration at Kashi Vishwanath Dham, and the expansion of Mahakal Mahalok in Ujjain. These developments, he said, show how India is waking up to its spiritual heritage with renewed energy and confidence.
Referring to Goa’s past hardships, PM Modi said the state’s temples and traditions once faced challenges, and language and culture were under pressure. However, these difficulties only made the cultural spirit stronger. Goa’s uniqueness lies in how its culture stayed true and even revived over time, with institutions like the Partgali Monastery playing a vital role.
Highlighting current developments, PM Modi spoke about the newly unveiled Lord Rama statue and a Ramayana theme park inaugurated alongside it. He said these additions will be permanent centres for meditation, inspiration, and spiritual learning for generations. The monastery is also developing a museum and a 3D theatre with modern technology to connect youth to their traditions.
During the event, PM Modi urged the people to commit to nine important resolutions, including conserving water, planting trees, helping the poor, adopting Swadeshi, promoting natural farming, leading a healthy lifestyle, practising yoga regularly, preserving ancient manuscripts, and visiting heritage sites across India.
Shree Sansthan Gokarna Partgali Jivottam Math
The Shri Samsthan Gokarna Partgali Jivottam Math is the oldest Vaishnava monastery of the Gaud Saraswat Brahmin community. It was founded in the 13th century by Jagadguru Madhvacharya, following the Dvaita Vedanta tradition. The monastery’s headquarters are in Partgali, a peaceful town on the banks of the Kushavati River in South Goa, where the current complex was built around 370 years ago.
This math is one of India’s oldest spiritual institutions, known not only for its religious importance but also for promoting social and cultural values.
The monastery historically provided strength and hope to Hindu families during difficult periods like the Portuguese colonial era, when Hindu temples were often under threat. It became a symbol of unity and resilience for the community, rallying Saraswats and preserving their identity.
Math actively supports education, too. It runs schools and a Vedic pathshala, a traditional learning centre, drawing students from all over India to study Sanskrit and old religious texts. This keeps Hindu educational traditions alive.
Over centuries, it expanded its reach with centres across India, including Varanasi, Mangalore, and Belgaum, and supported education, Sanskrit studies, and Vedic traditions.
Recent developments and celebrations
To mark its 550th anniversary, the monastery is creating a Ramayana theme park and a Ram museum, designed to bring devotees closer to Lord Rama’s story and encourage cultural tourism. The anniversary celebrations from 27th November to 7th December are drawing thousands daily, with 7,000 to 10,000 visitors attending bhajans, spiritual talks, and cultural programs that showcase the rich heritage of the math.
The Goa Public Works Department recently renovated the complex, adding modern amenities to serve visitors better. Goa Minister Digambar Kamat remarked, “This centuries-old spiritual centre has now received a modern facelift that will carry its legacy forward to the new generation.”
How the Math had powered India’s cultural renaissance
At a time when India is reclaiming its civilizational confidence, the Partagali Math stands as a living example of how ancient institutions can drive a modern cultural renaissance. The Math is not merely preserving heritage; it is actively revitalizing it. By installing a monumental 77-foot bronze statue of Lord Rama, launching a Ramayana theme park, and building a state-of-the-art museum and 3D theatre, the Math is ensuring that timeless dharmic values are communicated through contemporary forms. This blend of tradition and technology reflects the very ethos of New India, where cultural identity is not a relic of the past but a foundation for the future.
The Math’s cultural impact also lies in its centuries-long commitment to education, Sanskrit learning, and Vedic scholarship. In an age where rootlessness and civilizational amnesia pose real challenges, institutions like Partagali Math offer continuity, clarity, and grounding.
Its Vedic pathshalas, heritage programmes, and spiritual camps ensure that the younger generation reconnects with their linguistic, philosophical and spiritual inheritance. By nurturing both knowledge and character, the Math helps cultivate the very consciousness that fuels India’s ongoing cultural resurgence, from Ayodhya to Kashi to Ujjain.
Above all, the Partagali Math embodies the civilizational resilience that PM Modi often highlights. For centuries it protected Hindu faith in Goa during adversity, kept traditions alive through colonial suppression, and provided refuge, unity, and leadership.
Today, that same spirit of service is being channelled into building a culturally confident India, a Bharat that is modern yet rooted, progressive yet anchored in dharma. As India experiences a nationwide spiritual revival, the Math stands as both a symbol and a catalyst, proving that when ancient institutions rise with renewed purpose, an entire civilization rises with them.
Bangladesh is passing through one of the toughest periods in recent history. Energy shortages, a weak financial sector, high interest rates, and stubbornly high inflation join forces to bring the country’s economic activity down. Ordinary people work under the pressure of low wage growth, coupled with falling purchasing power, and businesses struggle hard to survive in an atmosphere that can be described as uncertain. However, the situation worsened after the interim took charge last year on 8th August.
The highest inflation in South Asia
One of the most visible problems for people in Bangladesh is inflation. Even after months of monetary tightening by the new central bank governor, inflation is still above 8%, making it the highest in South Asia. In October, inflation stood at 8.17%, according to the Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics. That is well above India’s 0.25%, Sri Lanka’s 2.1%, Nepal’s 1.47%, and even Pakistan’s 6.2%. Only Bhutan and the Maldives show slightly higher figures than Pakistan, but all remain far below Bangladesh.
That means the cost of food, fuel, rent, and essential services keeps rising for ordinary households. People in this country have been saying that their lives have not become easier, even though the political situation has changed. The long economic pain, starting with the COVID-19 pandemic, never went away. For five straight years, Bangladesh has lived with high inflation and very slow wage growth. As a result, real incomes have fallen sharply, and poverty has gone up again.
Private surveys estimate the current poverty rate at around 28%, although government data places it at 18.7% in 2022. Many families who were earlier considered “just above” the poverty line are now slipping back into poverty because their earnings can no longer keep up with rising prices. This growing gap between income and expenses has created widespread frustration.
A steep drop in investment
Another major concern is the steep drop in investment. Bangladesh has not seen such a low level of investment activity in many years. Even though inflation is high and interest rates have increased, experts say that investment in Bangladesh has never been extremely sensitive to interest rates alone. Instead, businesses point to issues such as frequent power cuts, corruption, extortion, bureaucratic delays, poor law and order, and constant changes in the exchange rate.
But the biggest reason entrepreneurs give for not investing is instability. After months of violent protests, political uncertainty still hangs over the country. Many businesses do not feel confident enough to inject fresh capital or start new projects. Without restoring trust between the government and the private sector, economists warn that the investment slump will continue, keeping the economy stagnant.
Government borrowing adds to the pressure. When the interim government took charge, government borrowing was rising at 11.61% year-on-year. Today it has more than doubled to 27.22%. At the same time, private sector credit growth has fallen to just 6.29%, the lowest in more than two decades. This means banks are lending more to the government and far less to businesses.
A large share of government funds is spent on salaries, subsidies, and administrative costs, while development spending has sharply declined. In the first four months of the current fiscal year, only 8.33% of the Annual Development Programme was implemented. Rural areas are suffering because development work is slow, and new job opportunities are not being created.
Non-Performing Loans: A financial sector under strain
On top of these problems, Bangladesh’s banking system is facing its own crisis. The country now has the highest non-performing loan (NPL) rate in all of Asia. The Asian Development Bank reported last year that Bangladesh’s NPL rate in 2023 was 9%. But after the interim government exposed previously hidden NPLs, the figure has shot up drastically to more than 28%.
Globally, Bangladesh is now among the worst performers in banking health, surpassed only by a few troubled economies such as Equatorial Guinea, San Marino, Ukraine, and Chad. This makes borrowing more difficult and expensive for businesses and weakens public confidence in banks.
The Awami League government left behind a banking sector weighed down by bad loans, weak governance, political interference, and large-scale loan defaults. The interim government has tried to fix the situation. A special committee was formed to restructure the NPLs of 280 institutions, and the central bank issued new circulars based on these recommendations. But several state-owned banks are reportedly ignoring the guidelines. There are also allegations that some groups are still profiting from the crisis instead of helping resolve it.
Merging weak banks with stronger ones has been suggested, but this is easier said than done. Governance reforms require political will, transparency, and strong legal enforcement, things that will be challenging once the next elected government takes office.
The Asian Development Outlook (ADO) April 2025 report by the Asian Development Bank paints a cautious picture of Bangladesh’s future. Bangladesh, the report said, is expected to witness a GDP growth of only 3.9% in FY2025 against the 4.2% growth it recorded in FY2024. Growth could improve to 5.1% in FY2026, but political stability and structural reforms will become decisive in that.
According to ADB, garment exports have continued to rise, but domestic demand is weak due to political transition, high inflation, industrial unrest, and natural disasters. Remittances may somewhat boost consumption and investment, yet overall demand will stay under pressure as fiscal and monetary policies are tightened.
Inflation, on the other hand, is expected to rise further, from 9.7% in FY2024 to 10.2% in FY2025. The reasons include limited competition in wholesale markets, poor market information, supply chain issues, and the weakening taka. High global tariffs, especially the new U.S. trade measures announced in April, could slow Bangladesh’s export growth in the coming years.
Graph via The Business Standard
Asian Development Bank (ADB) also notes that service growth will stay slow due to reduced purchasing power and political uncertainty, while agriculture may suffer because of repeated floods. Manufacturing could improve slightly because of garment exports, but only if the global market remains stable.
Rising poverty in the post-crisis period
The World Bank released a report on Tuesday, 25th November, which has also raised red flags for the Nation’s poverty rate. Their latest projections show that Bangladesh’s poverty rate is climbing again after decades of improvement. According to the World Bank’s micro-simulation model, the poverty rate may cross 21% in 2025. The number of poor people is estimated at around 36 million.
Image via Prothomalo English
Even more worrying is the large number of people living just above the poverty line, 62 million in 2022. These households are at high risk of slipping back into poverty because of inflation and reduced income. The period between 2022 and 2025 has been described by experts as a phase of “reversal,” meaning Bangladesh is undoing years of progress in poverty reduction.
Several analysts say this reversal is tied to a change in political priorities. Between 2016 and 2022, poverty reduction slowed as the government focused more on debt-driven mega-infrastructure projects while ignoring governance reforms and social investment. Corruption increased, political accountability weakened, and economic inequality widened.
The PPRC’s own poverty survey in 2025 estimated an even higher poverty rate, 27.93%. Taken together, these reports suggest the interim government has inherited a country where poverty is becoming more widespread and harder to manage.
Trump tariffs and their impact on Bangladeshi economy
Adding to the challenges is the new tariff regime announced by U.S. President Donald Trump. Bangladesh managed to negotiate the tariff on its garment exports down to 20%, a significant relief compared to the initially proposed 37%. This is crucial because Bangladesh is the world’s second-largest garment exporter, and the sector contributes more than 80% of total export earnings while employing about 4 million workers.
The reduced tariff brought Bangladesh in line with other major exporters such as Vietnam, Sri Lanka, and Indonesia. India, meanwhile, faces a higher 25% tariff after failing to reach a broader deal with Washington.
Bangladesh’s negotiators emphasised that they safeguarded the garment sector while also agreeing to purchase more U.S. agricultural products, an exchange designed to help their food security plans and build goodwill with American farming states.
Although the 20% tariff will still raise costs and reduce competitiveness slightly, industry leaders believe Bangladesh is better positioned than many of its rivals. But they also admit the sector is nervous, as long-term impacts could affect export earnings if global demand weakens or if other countries negotiate even better deals with the U.S.
Unrest, violence, and uncertainty after the Awami League’s fall
The economic crisis cannot be separated from Bangladesh’s political turmoil. The fall of the Awami League government in August 2024 created a long period of unrest. The country had already gone through waves of protests, strikes, and clashes, but things got drastically worse in July 2024.
Violent clashes between protesters and security forces paralysed the cities of Bangladesh for weeks on end. The roads were blocked, transport services were disrupted, and many factories remained closed. There was unrest in the countryside, too, with broken supply chains aggravating inflation and slowing down economic activity even further.
In these months, the collapse of governance hurt business confidence. Many investors pulled out or postponed projects. Foreign investors, too, put their plans on hold, waiting to see whether Bangladesh could stabilise politically. The interim government tried to calm the situation, but rebuilding confidence takes time, especially after such widespread violence.
How Sheikh Hasina was removed from power
The protests against government actions that eventually forced Hasina out of office started in July 2024, when people launched large-scale demonstrations against government actions. The situation quickly escalated into widespread violence. On 5th August 2024, after weeks of clashes that left hundreds dead, the military forced Hasina to leave the country.
The interim government took over and declared parliamentary elections for February 2025. But the Awami League says elections under the ban will not be free and fair. It claims thousands of its workers have been arrested across Bangladesh in the past year.
There is still no agreement on how many people were killed during last year’s uprising. A United Nations report released in February estimated that up to 1,400 people might have died. The interim government’s health adviser put the toll at more than 800, with nearly 14,000 injured. Hasina rejected both figures, calling for an independent international investigation into the deaths and injuries.
A nation struggling to find stability
There was a time when Bangladesh used to be recognized as a country that showed phenomenal economic growth, steady poverty reduction, and impressive human development. Today, violent unrest, political instability, and the rising influence of hardline Islamic groups have created deep uncertainty. The collapse of an elected government, along with widespread protests and military intervention shook the very foundations of democracy.
Simultaneously, the economy is fighting high inflation, weak investment, a failing banking sector, and increased poverty. New U.S. tariffs and global uncertainty add to the pressure.
Bangladesh now stands at a crucial crossroads. Whether it can overcome these economic and political crises will depend on restoring trust, strengthening governance, and ensuring a peaceful transition to an elected government. Only then can the country return to the path of stability and growth it once enjoyed.
In a landmark move to modernize India’s financial regulatory framework, the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) on Friday announced the issuance of 244 Consolidated Master Directions, effectively scrapping 9,345 outdated and redundant circulars that had accumulated over seven decades. This sweeping overhaul, described by RBI officials as a “paradigm shift in its regulatory communication”, aims to consolidate fragmented guidelines into a single, accessible reference for banks and financial institutions, ensuring greater clarity and efficiency in compliance.
The initiative, finalized after extensive public consultation, repeals instructions dating back to as early as 1944, including British government era regulations, while preserving the core regulatory regime. Of the scrapped circulars, approximately 5,673 were deemed obsolete and fully withdrawn, with the remaining integrated into the new master documents.
The oldest obsolete circular was from 1944, dealing with loans against bonds issued by the British govt during the second World War. Another pre-independence circular is from 1946, dealing with Profits on Sale of Securities & Shares.
Apart from consolidating the existing regulations across baking and financial sectors under RBI’s regulation, new directions also have been issued pertaining to digital banking.
The directions issued by Reserve Bank of India span 11 categories of regulated entities, which are Commercial Banks, Small Finance Banks, Payments Banks, Local Area Banks, Regional Rural Banks, Urban Cooperative Banks, Rural Cooperative Banks, All-India Financial Institutions, Non-Banking Financial Companies (NBFCS), Asset Reconstruction Companies, And Credit Information Companies.
The process involved consolidation of over around 9000 existing circulars, directions, and guidelines into 238 function-specific Master Directions, plus seven new ones focused on digital banking channels, such as requirements for explicit customer consent for digital services and mandatory transaction alerts. The RBI has also consolidated instructions issued by the National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development (NABARD) to Regional Rural Banks, State Co-operative Banks and Central Cooperative Banks.
During this consolidation process, only around 3,500 directions, circulars, and guidelines, were consolidated into 238 Master Directions across 11 types of regulated entities. The rest of the over 9000 circulars were found to be completely obsolete, and therefore they were scrapped altogether.
The drafts were released for public feedback on October 10, 2025, garnering over 770 comments, many of which were incorporated into the final versions issued on November 28. The RBI also published list of all circulars proposed to be repealed. The most recent circulars to be withdrawn are from 29 September this year, dealing with Basel III Capital Regulations and other issues.
As a result of his reform, the RBI today issued the final documents for the 244 maser directions. With this, The existing set of Master Circulars issued on various subjects will stand withdrawn. These Master Directions will serve as the sole library of regulations administered by the Department of Regulation. The full list of the consolidated directions have been made available on RBI website.
One Master Direction have been issued for each subject matter covering all instructions on a type of entity regulated by the RBI. The Master Directions are organized by entity type, covering critical areas such as licensing, governance, capital adequacy, risk management, customer protection, and emerging priorities like climate finance.
Any change in the rules, regulation or policy will be communicated during the year by way of circulars/press releases. And then the Master Directions will be updated suitably and simultaneously, whenever there is a change in the rules/regulations or there is a change in the policy. All the changes will get reflected in the Master Directions available on the RBI website, ensuring that only the updated and relevant guidelines are available.
RBI also stated that explanations of rules and regulations will be issued by way of Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) after issue of the Master Directions in easy to understand language, wherever necessary.
This reform builds on RBI’s earlier efforts since 2016 to replace “master circulars” with directions. This initiative marks the most comprehensive cleanup to date, targeting legacy clutter that often leave banks sifting through thousands of documents for routine compliance.
How this reform eases banking for everyone
Beyond streamlining operations for financial institutions, the RBI’s overhaul promises tangible benefits for everyday customers by creating a more efficient, transparent, and customer-centric banking ecosystem. With clearer, consolidated rules, banks will spend less manpower and resources for bureaucratic compliance, enabling them to improve service delivery, which will lead to faster processing times for loans, account openings, dispute resolutions etc.
The new guidelines for new-era banking are also crucial improvement. For instance, the new digital banking directions mandate explicit opt-in consent and real-time alerts, empowering users with greater control and reducing fraud risks, making online and mobile banking safer and more intuitive.
With thousands of different circulars and orders issued over the decades, the RBI rules had become a complex web with overlapping and sometimes even conflicting regulations. There were legacy regulations which are no longer relevant, but entities need to comply with them. In case of disputes, this led to lengthy debates with even top lawyers struggling to clarify things. Entities and users often faced the risk of violating rules due to such unclear regulatory framework.
This reform fixes that scenario by providing clear regulations categories by types of entities and functions. Regulatory clarity also minimizes errors in areas like KYC (Know Your Customer) norms and credit reporting, potentially shortening onboarding processes and improving access to credit for underserved segments, such as small businesses and rural borrowers.
By scrapping obsolete requirements, banks will face lower operational costs, which could translate to competitive interest rates on deposits and loans, benefiting depositors and borrowers.
The comprehensive regulations on digital banking are also crucial reform, as it consolidates various directions issued by RBI in the last few years to combat online financial frauds and improving consumer protection.
Ultimately, this positions India’s banking sector for quicker adoption of fintech solutions, from UPI enhancements to AI-driven advisory services, ensuring customers enjoy seamless, affordable, and inclusive financial experiences in a digital-first economy. RBI’s reforms will play a crucial role in making India’s financial regulatory landscape clearer and more predictable with fewer ambiguities.
On 27th November, in a crucial development for public safety, particularly for children, patients, commuters and citizens, the Animal Welfare Board of India (AWBI) finally issued a comprehensive Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) in compliance with the Supreme Court’s 7th November order in the suo motu case titled “City Hounded by Strays, Kids Pay Price”.
It has to be noted that since 2001, when the ABC Rules came into effect for the first time, the country has been facing an increasing stray dog menace on a year-on-year basis. Replies to OpIndia’s RTIs showed how grim the situation has become. In July 2025, the Supreme Court of India took suo motu cognisance of the matter and since then, a lot has happened. Initially, the apex court ordered the removal of all stray dogs from Delhi on 11th August. However, the resistance from the self-styled dog lovers worked and within a few days, the case was forwarded to a larger bench and the order got modified.
Though it looked like a win for stray dog lovers, the Supreme Court extended the scope of the case countrywide and ordered the transfer of all such cases from High Courts to itself. In the following months, State Secretaries were ordered to be physically present in the court as they failed to submit affidavits about the compliance of ABC Rules and the situation in their respective states.
Finally, on 7th November, the court passed an interim order and directed the authorities to remove all dogs from schools, colleges, hospitals, sports complexes, railway stations and bus stands. While the order faced criticism from self-styled dog lovers for unknown reasons, as it is unclear why they want to leave the dogs on streets where they are not only a danger to the vulnerable but remain in constant fear and danger themselves, AWBI, for a change, issued an SOP that is in favour of humans more than dogs.
With the SOP in place, the country now has a legally enforceable operational framework that mandates the removal of stray dogs from a wide range of institutional premises. These include schools, colleges, hospitals, bus depots, railway stations, religious places, tourist sites and other spaces where vulnerable groups are present.
Source: AWBI
The SOP was circulated to all Chief Secretaries on 27th November. It marks the first time that AWBI has formally accepted and operationalised the Supreme Court’s recognition that dog bite incidents inside institutions have reached alarming levels and it requires immediate action from the authorities. With specific responsibilities placed on municipal bodies, managements of institutions and State governments, the document leaves no room for misinterpretation. Human safety has finally been restored as the central priority of the law.
What led to the SOP
In the 7th November order, the court specifically expressed concerns about dog bite incidents inside institutional areas, which house children, patients, travellers and the elderly. The Court observed that the rising number of attacks inside school campuses, hospital compounds, bus stands and transport hubs represented a failure of governance and waste management, and deserved urgent action.
Section 25(j) of the apex court’s order directed the AWBI to formulate and circulate the SOP for the prevention of dog bites and for the management of stray dogs in institutional premises. In its order, the court gave AWBI a four-week timeline to issue the SOP for all the States and UTs.
This background is important because for years, debates on stray dogs were clouded by activist narratives and misleading claims about what the law permits. The Supreme Court order, and the AWBI SOP that now enforces it, settle the matter clearly. Institutional premises cannot be shared spaces between humans and free roaming dogs. Public safety takes precedence.
Scope of institutional premises covered under the Court’s directions
One of the strongest features of the SOP is the clarity with which it defines the term institutional premises. According to the document, these include:
Government and private educational institutions including schools and colleges
Hospitals, health centres, medical colleges and district hospitals
Railway stations and platforms
Airports and helipads
Bus stands, bus depots and inter-state bus stations
Religious sites and places of worship
Tourist sites and public complexes
Children’s parks and recreational spaces
This clarity removes the scope for local administrators to claim confusion or rely on outdated interpretations influenced by activist pressure.
Identification of all institutions and responsibility of local authorities
The SOP has assigned the first tier of responsibility to local and municipal authorities, district administrations and urban local bodies. These authorities must identify every institution within their territorial limits. This is not limited to government institutions but includes private establishments as well.
The identification exercise is foundational because each institution will be required to comply with entry prevention, waste management and dog removal guidelines. Mapping the institutions is the first step in ensuring that responsibility cannot be shifted from one department to another. The SOP treats every municipal body as accountable for everything that happens within its jurisdiction.
The document also obligates local authorities to identify other public places such as religious sites, parks and tourist spots where members of the public congregate in large numbers. This exercise changes the framework from passive stray dog management to proactive prevention of dog presence in sensitive spaces.
Mandatory prevention of dog entry into institutional areas
Once an institution is identified, the SOP requires its management to ensure that stray dogs do not enter the premises. This is a major shift from earlier years when animal rights NGOs frequently argued that institutions could only remove dogs temporarily and must allow them back after sterilisation.
The SOP rejects that position, as it cannot co-exist with public safety. Measures that institutions must take include:
Boundary walls or fencing where absent
Functional gates
Regular checking of entry and exit points
Physical barriers that prevent dog ingress
The purpose is straightforward. If dogs cannot enter, there will be no chance of children facing them in corridors or playgrounds, no chance of patients encountering them near emergency entrances and no chance of travellers seeing them lying inside waiting rooms or platforms.
Appointment of Nodal Officers for monitoring and removal
In a significant governance reform, the SOP mandates that each institution must appoint a Nodal Officer. This person is responsible for ensuring that no dog is present inside or around the institution. Monitoring must be regular and recorded.
This is crucial because without a designated officer, responsibility gets diluted. The presence of a named officer means accountability is immediate. If a dog is found in a school campus or a hospital’s emergency bay, there is no confusion about who must respond.
For large institutions such as hospitals, universities and transport hubs, the Nodal Officer ensures communication with the local municipal body for swift dog removal. This establishes a chain of accountability that was previously missing.
Process for removal and relocation of stray dogs from institutional premises
The SOP states clearly that all stray dogs found within institutional premises must be identified and removed by local or municipal authorities. These dogs must then be shifted to designated shelters. The language of the SOP leaves no ambiguity. The authority responsible for removal cannot outsource this responsibility to activists or NGOs except for technical assistance.
The removal process must be carried out in a humane manner, but it must be carried out. The Supreme Court’s concern that institutional premises have become unsafe zones is reflected in the clarity of this instruction. Removal is not discretionary. It is mandatory.
Furthermore, the SOP clarifies that once removed and shifted to shelters, dogs are not to be returned to these institutional spaces. This is a direct contradiction of activist claims that sterilised dogs must be returned to their original locations. The SOP recognises that institutions are not public streets or neighbourhoods, but controlled premises where the presence of stray animals puts human lives at risk.
Rules on sterilisation, vaccination and medical handling after removal
The SOP also prescribes how dogs must be handled after removal. Municipal Corporations must ensure that all dogs removed are sterilised before being placed in shelters. If sterilisation centres are not available, veterinary hospitals under the Animal Husbandry Department must carry out the procedures.
Vaccination is also mandatory, particularly the anti-rabies vaccine. Pregnant dogs, injured dogs or diseased animals must be handled according to veterinary guidelines until they recover. These medical requirements ensure that dogs housed in shelters do not create health risks for shelter staff or for each other.
Waste management directives to curb stray dog presence and attacks
The SOP recognises that poor waste disposal is one of the root causes of the dog menace. Dogs gather around food waste, and even if removed from institutions, they will return if leftover food and garbage are available nearby.
Therefore, municipal authorities must:
Install waste bins within 100 metres of institutions
Ensure daily waste clearance
Take action against vendors or individuals who dump food waste
Prevent the creation of feeding points near institutions
Source: AWBI
This is an overdue admission of an uncomfortable truth. Many dog bite incidents happen not because citizens provoke dogs but because waste attracts packs which become territorial. Removing waste removes the incentive for dogs to gather.
Feeding related rules and prohibition on feeding around institutions
The SOP places feeding related restrictions that activists have long resisted. Food must not be provided to dogs near or inside institutional premises. This is a major step because feeding points often become aggressive territorial zones.
Food may be provided only within shelters. If volunteers wish to feed dogs in shelters, they must do so under supervision and within the rules laid down in the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Rules on feeding costs and care.
This provision protects both citizens and volunteers. There is no scope to argue that institutions are feeding zones. Public safety cannot depend on the whims of private feeders.
Public awareness measures for schools, hospitals and public spaces
The SOP requires that institutions and municipal authorities generate public awareness about responsible behaviour in the presence of dogs, responsible waste disposal and safe interaction practices. Video clips must be displayed in multiplexes, shopping complexes and recreational areas. Mass awareness is necessary because dog bite prevention is partly behavioural.
The SOP includes guidance on reading body language, approaching unfamiliar dogs, avoiding direct eye contact with aggressive dogs, and what to do if a dog attacks. These guidelines are important, but they cannot substitute administrative responsibility. The core responsibility remains with authorities to prevent dog presence in sensitive spaces.
Guidelines for preventing dog bites, especially concerning children
The document includes specific instructions on child safety. Children must be taught:
Not to pull ears or tails
Not to hug or ride dogs
Not to make direct eye contact with aggressive dogs
How to move away slowly if confronted
This section is significant because children are disproportionately victims of dog attacks. However, no amount of behavioural caution can justify the presence of dogs in school campuses. The SOP ensures both behavioural awareness and administrative safeguards.
Monitoring, compliance reporting and enforcement expectations
The SOP instructs that implementation must be monitored by authorities concerned. States must report compliance to the AWBI. This reporting requirement is essential because it converts the SOP from a recommendation to a monitored policy. States that delay action will be accountable directly to the AWBI, and indirectly to the Supreme Court.
Compliance is expected in every district and for every category of institution. Given the Supreme Court’s concern over rising attacks, non-compliance could result in further judicial action.
Brief overview of shelter requirements
The SOP prescribes three shelter types that are 100 dog capacity, 500 dog capacity and 1000 dog capacity. Each shelter must follow minimum infrastructure norms such as six-foot fencing, kennels with demarcated open and dry areas, night shelters and veterinary access. Staffing requirements include watchmen, cleaners and record keepers. Feeding schedules and medical care must also be maintained.
Source: AWBI
These shelters represent the long-term solution for managing dog populations without allowing them to occupy institutional premises. The designs provided in the annexures give States a ready model that can be scaled as required.
AWBI has added a clause that puts responsibility of creating shelters and kennels on NGOs and self-styled dog lovers as well, which will now help in differentiating those who wants to dogs to be in safe place and those who want the dogs to suffer on the streets. AWBI noted “The animal welfare organizations and NGOs may volunteer for technical support, capacity building and other resources towards the construction, and maintenance of animal shelters and community kennels, in partnership with local bodies and institutions.”
Source: AWBI
Furthermore, the board said, “The local/municipal bodies shall facilitate the establishment of community kennels for which financial contribution can be jointly mobilised from interested Institutions, NGOs and other stakeholders willing to support the creation and development of community kennels and shelters.”
Conclusion
The AWBI’s SOP marks a major shift in India’s stray dog management framework. After years of ambiguity and activist pressure, the law now unequivocally recognises that public spaces like schools, hospitals, transport hubs and parks cannot be shared zones with free roaming dogs. Human safety, particularly the safety of children, has been restored as the central consideration.
OpIndia is doing a series on the stray dog menace in India which can be checked here.
The National capital of India witnessed the coming together of Urban Naxals on 23rd November to vent out their frustration over the gradual but decisive end of Naxalism in the country, under the protest against air pollution. These pro-Naxal protests were spearheaded by left-leaning student organisations Bhagat Singh Chhatra Ekta Manch (bsCEM) and The Himkhand.
Recently, OpIndia reported that bsCEM is one of the 40+ organisations that formed a collective called “Campaign Against State Repression” or CASR. One of the participants of the anti-pollution protests, where ‘Kitne Hidma Maaroge, Har Ghar Se Hidma Niklega’ slogans were raised, was a student group named Fraternity Movement.
Fraternity Movement is the student wing of the Welfare Party of India and operates with the slogan “Democracy, Social Justice and Fraternity”. Just as it is the case with most leftist outfits, Fraternity Movement also packages itself as a defender of democratic principles, secularism, the constitution, social justice and whatnot; however, beyond the shiny packaging lies the dark and disturbing pro-Islamist and divisive activism. During the anti-CAA protests in December 2019, its members even blocked Calicut International Airport.
Fraternity Movement against Ayodhya Ram Mandir
Islamists and the left liberals harbour deep resentment over the construction of the Ram Mandir in Ayodhya, even as it came only after the Supreme Court of India’s verdict. Fraternity Movement shares this resentment of its ‘fraternity’.
In an X post crying over the consecration of Ram Lalla in his rightful abode last year, Fraternity Movement presented Babri Masjid, erected by Mughal barbarian Babur as a symbol of justice and democracy, while Ram Mandir and the consecration ceremony were a symbol of “violent, criminal, and immoral “victory” of Hindutva extremism.”
“The inauguration of the Ram Mandir has turned into a spectacle with the RSS-BJP government, its various machineries, and allies promoting and celebrating the violent, criminal, and immoral ‘victory” of Hindutva extremism over justice and democracy, with absolute impunity,” it wrote.
The inauguration of the Ram Mandir has turned into a spectacle with the RSS-BJP government, its various machineries, and allies promoting and celebrating the violent, criminal, and immoral "victory" of Hindutva extremism over justice and democracy, with absolute impunity. pic.twitter.com/Yd1Jybvvrg
Fraternity Movement called the judiciary ‘RSS’s tool of communal agenda’ after the court acquitted Malegaon blast accused
While the same Islamo-leftist cabal cries Islamophobia when Hindus simply call terrorist attacks like those in Pahalgam, where Hindus were singled out and shot dead for not being Muslims, as acts of Islamic Jihadist terrorism, the likes of Fraternity Movement have no qualms about labelling incidents like the Malegaon Blast (2008) as ‘Hindu Nationalist Terrorism’ and ‘Hindutva terrorism’.
In August this year, the Fraternity Movement resorted to casting aspersions on the integrity of the Indian judiciary and labelled it a “tool of Sangh Parivar’s communal agenda”. This came after the NIA court acquitted all the accused in the Malegaon blast case, including Sadhvi Pragya and Lieutenant Colonel Purohit.
“…Fraternity Movement strongly condemns the shocking acquittal of all accused in the 2008 Malegaon bomb blast case, including Sadhvi Pragya Thakur, Lt. Col. Prasad Purohit, and others linked to the Sangh Parivar ecosystem. This verdict is a grave miscarriage of justice and an open assault on the democratic and moral fabric of the Indian Republic. The 2008 Malegaon blast was a targeted act of terror that killed 6 innocent civilians and injured over 100. It was not just a crime, but a communal hate act, a clear example of Hindutva terrorism…” it wrote.
It must be recalled that on 29th September 2008, six people were killed and several others were injured when a bomb strapped to a motorcycle detonated near a mosque in Malegaon City, Nashik. Sadhvi Pragya and Lt Col. Purohit spent several years in jail without charges in the case.
Fraternity Movement cries for Bhima Koregaon case accused Professor Hany Babu
Unsurprisingly, the Fraternity Movement supports those accused of involvement in stirring unrest in the country. In July this year, the Welfare Party’s student wing came out in support of Delhi University professor Hany Babu, a defendant in the 2018 Bhima Koregaon violence case.
Fraternity Movement claimed that Hany Babu, booked under ‘repressive’ UAPA, is under wrongful incarceration and denied proper medical care. They called Babu’s arrest and incarceration a reflection of “a broader attack on academic freedom, dissent, and democratic rights.”
Notably, the NIA chargesheet accuses Hany Babu of instigating violence and disturbing peace, among other charges. According to the NIA’s chargesheet, a letter discovered on Babu’s computer outlined a conspiracy against Prime Minister Modi. Babu refuted this, asserting that the letter was neither authored nor addressed to him. He contended that it made no mention of his involvement in the conspiracy.
Babu is accused of having links with the Revolutionary Democratic Front and the banned CPI (Maoist). Allegedly, Hany Babu was also a part of the committee supporting Naxal ideologue G.N. Saibaba.
While in 2023, Babu’s bail plea was denied by the Bombay High Court, in 2024, the petitioner moved to the Supreme Court only to withdraw it, citing ‘change in circumstances’. Babu’s lawyer had informed the apex court panel comprising Justice Bela M Trivedi and Justice Pankaj Mithal of their decision to pursue bail anew in the High Court. The change in circumstances essentially means an absence of a favourable judge.
OpIndia has reported earlier how even the 2020 anti-Hindu Delhi Riots accused mastermind Umar Khalid’s case too, such ‘change of circumstances’ resulted in multiple voluntary bail plea withdrawals and yet his supporters outside continuously cried ‘travesty of justice’ and whatnot.
Fraternity Movement fearmongered about SIR in Bihar, calling it ‘NRC with a new name’
Months back, the Election Commission of India announced that a Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of the electoral roll in Bihar ahead of elections. The opposition parties labelled it a ‘conspiracy’ by the BJP and ECI to remove the names of Muslims and other voters who generally opposed to the BJP. The Fraternity Movement went a step ahead and linked the SIR exercise meant to weed out illegal voters from the electoral roll to Hindutva and NRC.
“Stop the ploy to implement the NRC under a new name—withdraw the decision to re-examine the voter list in Bihar!” The Fraternity Movement strongly opposes the Election Commission of India’s (ECI) decision to conduct a Special Intensive Revision of the voter list in Bihar. This is demanding documents proving their citizenship and that of their parents, including those whose names were added to the voter list after 2003. This is not a simple investigation—it is a conspiracy to implement the NRC secretly and covertly. This is all part of the Hindutva ideology—to link citizenship to religion and caste. Just as the NRC and CAA were introduced in Assam to scare people, the Election Commission of India is now being used for the same purpose,” it wrote in an Instagram post.
The SIR was conducted; lakhs of fake voters were found and removed, yet no valid citizens, including Muslims, lost their citizenship or their voting right.
Fraternity Movement’s pro-Palestine activism
Much like the other ‘student’ organisations linked to the CASR, Fraternity Movement has also been regularly organising pro-Palestine protests across the country.
In one of the social media posts published this June, Fraternity Movement accused India of betraying Palestine after India. The Fraternity Movement claimed that India decided to “vote against” the resolution demanding a ceasefire in Gaza in the UN General Assembly. The Islamist student group accused the Indian government of handing a “silent endorsement of the genocidal violence unleashed by the fascist Israeli regime.”
However, India did not vote against the resolution; rather, it abstained from voting. The Fraternity Movement went on to invoke Hindutva even where neither Hindus nor Hindutva have anything remotely to do.
“This is not an aberration; it is the consequence of a growing ideological alliance between Zionist Israel and Hindutva‑driven India. Both are governed by ethno‑nationalist regimes, united by an imperialist mindset, an obsession with military surveillance, and a contempt for Muslim life,” the Fraternity Movement wrote.
However, neither the Indian government has taken any U-turn from its historical support for a two-state solution to the Israel-Palestine dispute, but has also been providing aid to Palestine. While the Fraternity Movement very conveniently invoked Hindutva and painted the ‘Hindu nationalist’ government as inherently anti-Muslim, it is a fact that the only reason Indian Islamists and their leftist cheerleaders cry for Palestine is because of their shared religious identity, not simply because of ‘humanity’. Be it in India or anywhere in the world, Islamists rejoiced when the Palestinian Islamic terror group Hamas massacred Israeli civilians on 7th October 2023 for being Jews.
Fraternity Movement supports Rejaz Sydeek, who condemned Operation Sindoor against Pakistani terror establishments
In May this year, the Indian Armed Forces successfully carried out Operation Sindoor against Pakistani terror establishments and later Pakistani military targets in the aftermath of the Pahalgam Attack, wherein 26 Hindus were shot dead by Pakistani jihadis for being Hindus. At the time of supporting the forces, some pro-Pakistan voices were raised in India.
One such was Rejaz Sydeek, a 26-year-old pro-Maoist student ‘activist’ from Kerala. Rejaz M Sheeba Sydeek was arrested in Nagpur on 7th May, following his post against Operation Sindoor on Instagram. Sydeek was booked under the UAPA.
Sydeek, on his Instagram account, had condemned Operation Sindoor carried out by the Indian Armed Forces against terror camps in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Jammu & Kashmir. Along with that, he was criticising operations against Naxalites, the First Information Report registered at Lakadganj police station in the city read. He was also reportedly brandishing firearms as well in the video.
Even as Sydeek was booked for his anti-national remarks during the Indo-Pak conflict, Fraternity Movement painted the arrest as an act of suppressing Sydeek’s voice as he was exposing ‘human rights violations’ by the Modi government in Naxal-affected Chhattisgarh. The Islamist student body was upset with the Central government eliminating the menace of Naxalism from the Dandakaranya region.
Fraternity Movement condemned the arrest of a leader belonging to the banned Islamist outfit PFI’s political arm, SDPI
In March this year, the Enforcement Directorate arrested SDPI President Moideen Kutty K, alias MK Faizy, from Delhi’s Indira Gandhi International (IGI) Airport under the provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), 2002. “Investigation revealed that the office bearers, members and cadres of Popular Front of India (PFI), were conspiring and raising/collecting funds from within India and abroad through banking channels, Hawala, donations for committing and financing terrorist acts across India,” said the ED.
During the earlier conducted searches, ED recovered documents that provided insight into the true objectives of the PFI, describing it as an organisation committed to advancing an Islamic movement in India by “endorsing the principles of Jihad in all forms.” The investigators said that SDPI is PFI’s political arm and was dependent on PFI for its day-to-day functions, policy making, selecting candidates for election campaign, public programs, cadre mobilisation and other related activities.”
Fraternity Movement, however, deemed Faizy’s arrest a “blatant misuse of power is an attack on democratic values and an attempt to silence dissent.”
The Movement’s support for SDPI leader is not entirely unexpected, given Welfare Party of India itself is led by figures such as Syed Qasim Rasool Ilyas, a former member of SIMI and father of Umar Khalid, and has long been associated with Islamist-leaning activism.
Fraternity Movement’s support for Sharjeel Imam, who wanted to cut off India’s ‘chicken neck’ and 2020 anti-Hindu Delhi Riots accused mastermind Umar Khalid
Given the Fraternity Movement’s support for Islamists and anti-India elements, it is not surprising that the Welfare Party’s student wing also backs Sharjeel Imam. It must be recalled that during the anti-CAA-NRC protests in 2019-20, Sharjeel Imam faced serious charges, including inciting Muslims, instigating riots, and sedition. He was arrested on January 28, 2020, and has been undergoing trial since.
Not only Sharjeel Imam, Fraternity Movement’s heart also cries for Umar Khalid, who is accused of masterminding the 2020 anti-Hindu Delhi Riots. Fraternity Movement calls Khalid a ‘political prisoner’ and laments that he has been incarcerated for over a thousand days, suggesting that he has been jailed unfairly.
Contrary to the false narrative peddled by Islamo-leftists to garner support and sympathy for Umar Khalid, OpIndia has reported earlier that out of the 14 adjournments in 2023 and 2024, 7 delays and adjournments were sought by Umar Khalid himself. It therefore becomes evident that the withdrawal was certainly not because of the famed “delay” in hearing. While the Islamo-leftist ecosystem continues to cry ‘injustice’, it is the alleged failed forum shopping attempts of the accused’s lawyer that have Khalid rotting in jail for so long.
In fact, former Chief Justice of India, DY Chandrachud, had also said earlier this year that the real problem lies in the mindset of some lawyers and political groups who want their cases heard only by certain judges. Highlighting what OpIndia has reported multiple times, the former CJI said that court records showed that Khalid’s legal team, led by Sibal, had sought at least seven adjournments before finally withdrawing the bail plea in February 2024, citing “a change in circumstances.”
Fraternity Movement’s ‘revolutionary salutes’ to Naxal ideologue GN Saibaba
Besides Islamists, the Fraternity Movement also glorifies Naxalites like GN Saibaba. The Movement claims that Saibaba was booked under fabricated charges and was tortured while in jail, leading to his death.
Notably, G N Saibaba, a professor of English in Ram Lal Anand College of the Delhi University, was sentenced to life imprisonment by a Gadchiroli sessions court in 2017 for waging war against India for his Maoist links and involvement in anti-national activities. He was convicted under sections 13, 18, 20, 38 and 39 of the UAPA.
G N Saibaba was first arrested in May 2014 on charges of being a member of the banned CPI-Maoists, plus providing logistics and carrying out recruitment for them. He was then provided bail for three months on 30th June 2015 in view of his worsening health. He was given bail again in August 2016, this time by the Supreme Court against the wishes of the Maharashtra Government, which thought freeing Saibaba would render him free to propagate his views and brainwash students.
Afreen Fatima and Aysha Renna: The Fraternity Movement-linked ‘activists’ sympathise with Islamic terrorists and oppose the Ayodhya Ram Mandir
Several controversial activists are linked to the Fraternity Movement, including Afreen Fatima and Aysha Renna. Fatima has publicly defended Parliament attack convict Afzal Guru, repeatedly urging people to “revisit” his verdict.
Sharing an article published in terrorist-sympathising The Caravan magazine dated January 15, 2020, written by the far-left propagandist journalist Arundhati Roy, infamous for support towards Jihad in Kashmir and Naxals, Afreen Fatima took to Twitter to appeal to ‘revisit’ Afzal Guru’s verdict ‘again and again.’
Revisit, again and again. Read the verdict, again and again. Never forget.https://t.co/bsgz38CNwp
She has also questioned the Supreme Court over decisions like the Ram Mandir judgment. Renna, celebrated by sections of the media, openly backed Sharjeel Imam, calling police action against him a “witch hunt” and demanding that cases against him be dropped, despite his inflammatory secessionist speeches.
Aisha Renna had also condemned the action by Assam and Uttar Pradesh Police against “Anti-CAA Activist and PhD scholar of Jawaharlal Nehru University” under the UAPA. Renna, in her Facebook post, lies that the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) denies citizenship to Muslims in India. This came even as CAA merely fast-tracked Indian citizenship of persecuted religious minorities from three neighbouring Islamic countries: Bangladesh, Pakistan and Afghanistan. CAA had nothing to do with Indians, Muslims and non-Muslims, in any way.
Fraternity Movement against Irfan Mehraj’s arrest
Fraternity Movement has also extended support to Kashmiri journalist Irfan Mehraj. In one of its social media posts, the Movement claimed that “Kashmiri Muslim journalist” Irfan Mehraj’s arrest under the UAPA amounted to criminalising ‘journalism’.
However, contrary to the Islamo-leftist concocted narrative, Mehraj was not arrested for his journalistic work but for his alleged involvement in a terror funding case.
Mehraj was closely associated with ‘activist’ Khurram Parvez and a member of the Jammu and Kashmir Coalition of Civil Societies (JKCCS). The NIA had said that the JKCCS was funding terror activities in the valley and had also been in the propagation of the secessionist agenda in the Valley under the garb of protection of human rights. In a Facebook post from June 2020, Irfan Mehraj was seen in awe of controversial activist Khurram Parvez. “You keep inspiring us every day,” he wrote.
Conclusion
From opposing the Ram Mandir, glorifying Naxalites to hailing Islamists involved in terrorism, Fraternity Movement, contrary to its claim of spreading the message of “democracy, social justice and fraternity”, is actually disseminating the message of undermining democracy, mocking justice and weakening ‘fraternity’.
Pakistan always finds opportunities to claim victory over India even when none exists. Sometimes they steal the trophies of Cricket tournaments after losing the match, sometimes they use video game footages and morphed images to claim military victory. This time, the Pakistani government has claimed victory in debate at Oxford University, because the Indian side didn’t attend the debate after they were told that the Pakistani side has not arrived.
The Pakistani High Commission in London yesterday posted a lengthy post on X, claiming that the Indian delegation scheduled to participate in the ‘high profile’ debate at the Oxford Union on 27 November withdrew at the last minute, effectively handing a walkover to the Pakistani side.
The parliamentary style debate was to be held on the motion, “This House Believes That India’s Policy Towards Pakistan Is a Populist Strategy Sold as Security Policy”, the high commission stated. According to them, the participants from Pakistani side were General (Retd) Zubair Mahmood Hayat, former Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee, Hina Rabbani Khar, former Foreign Minister of Pakistan, and Mohammad Faisal, High Commissioner of Pakistan to the United Kingdom.
According to them, the participants from the Indian side were General M. M. Naravane, former Chief of Army Staff, Dr Subramanian Swamy and Sachin Pilot.
The Pakistani High Commission claimed that the Pakistani speakers had already arrived in London and were scheduled to proceed to Oxford today. The added, “Earlier this morning, however, the Oxford Union informed the organizers that all three Indian speakers had decided to pull out, offering no substantive explanation for their inability to attend a debate they had previously confirmed.”
Indian Delegation Backs Out Of Oxford Union Debate At Last Minute, Hands Walkover to Pakistani side
The Pakistan High Commission in London @PakistaninUK regrets to announce that the Indian delegation scheduled to participate in a high profile debate at the Oxford Union…
Pakistan claimed that this withdrawal has caused considerable embarrassment for the Oxford Union, adding that they believe that “this last minute decision reflects a lack of confidence on the part of the Indian delegation in defending India’s Pakistan policy in an open, rules based forum.” They further boasted that Pakistan’s delegation came prepared to argue its case on the strength of facts, international law and regional stability considerations.
The high commission also reportedly claimed that India later proposed “obscure and low-profile replacements,” adding that the replacements “did not match the level of the Pakistani delegation and undermined the credibility and balance of the debate.” “The collective retreat of the Indian delegation amounted to an unchallenged victory for Pakistan,” the High Commission stated.
The comments of the High Commission were widely reported by Pakistani media, claiming that India backed out of the debate against Pakistan.
However, today Supreme Court lawyer Sai Deepak J exposed the lies of Pakistan, as he revealed how the Indian side was misled to not attend the debate with false information, resulting in the walkover for Pakistan. According to him, the original participants from India were himself, Dr Subramaniyam Swami and General Naravane, which means Sachin Pilot was not scheduled to participate, as claimed by Pakistan.
Sai Deepak posted screenshots of mail sent to him by Moosa Harraj, the president of Oxford Union, confirming his participation at the debate. Notably, Moosa Harraj is the son of Muhammad Raza Hayat Harraj, the Minister of Defence Production in Pakistan’s federal government.
1. Trust the Pakistanis to make a pigsty even out of the @OxfordUnion. And as always, they are genetically incapable of being truthful. So here's the complete story of how this so-called debate played out. https://t.co/I74r18vZR6
However, 2 days before the debate, the Oxford Union informed Sai that Dr. Swamy and General Naravane would be unable to attend the debate, and asked him to propose alternative names. Before he could suggest names, they called him again to inform that Suhel Seth and Priyanka Chaturvedi will be joining the event, and they have confirmed their participation.
However, again on 26 November, a day before the debate, the Oxford Union called Sai Deepak saying that Seth and Chaturvedi also can’t attend at such a short notice. They asked him to propose alternatives from the UK so that there is no travel hassle. Accordingly, Pt Satish K. Sharma, author and MD of Global Hindu Federation, and writer-commentator Manu Khajuria, both based in London, were selected and they accepted to participate in the debate.
As a result, Sai Deepak travelled to London for the event on 27th November morning, and attended his hearings in the Supreme Court virtually. However, at 3:13 PM, just 3 hours before the debate, he got a call from the Union informing him that the Pakistani side hadn’t even landed in London. Unhappy hearing this, Sai conveyed his displeasure at the abysmal handling of the event.
As they were told that the Pakistani side hadn’t turned up, the Indian side didn’t see the point in going to Oxford. Therefore, they decided to stay back in London. Sai Deepak sent a mail to Union president Moosa expressing unhappiness over the development, the Moosa replied with an apology. Moosa claimed that he received a call at 10 am a day earlier that the Pakistani team wouldn’t be coming.
However, it turned out that Oxford Union led by Pakistani Moosa Harraj was lying all along. As it was later learnt that the Pakistani side had already arrived in UK and were put up at the George Street Hotel in Oxford. This same hotel was also booked by the union for Sai Deepak. The Pakistani debaters attended the event, and was declared winner without debate as the Indian side was not present.
Satish K Sharma, who was scheduled to debate on behalf of India, confirmed the development. He said that they were on the way when Oxford Union ‘pulled the plug’.
Aptly put @kk_OEG . We were on our way when the @OxfordUnion pulled the plug. The prospect of a legal mind such as @jsaideepak, a real J n K Hindu human rights expert in our @KhajuriaManu , and myself a Dharmic Scholar versed in the true Partition story, was clearly too daunting… https://t.co/6OLAzM2SME
— Pt Satish K Sharma MBCS FRSA FRAS (@thebritishhindu) November 28, 2025
He posted on X, “The prospect of a legal mind such as @jsaideepak, a real J n K Hindu human rights expert in our @KhajuriaManu, and myself a Dharmic Scholar versed in the true Partition story, was clearly too daunting a prospect. They came, they screamed, they fled, without even a verbal volley across the bows.”
In his thread, Sai Deepak said, “if the Pakistani team is still at Oxford, they should find the courage to debate us on the topic instead of doing an Operation Manhoos ki phati hui Baniyan where their Defense Minister couldn’t even produce evidence of their so-called success.” He asked why the Pakistani team hiding behind kids like their terrorists, instead of facing the Indians in a live debate for the world to see.
15. @UniofOxford, you have allowed the current President of the @OxfordUnion & his coterie of compatriots to drag your institution in muck. You have allowed the @OxfordUnion to become a concubinal mouthpiece of @PakistaninUK, perhaps reflecting the general state of affairs.
Addressing the Oxford University, he said that they have allowed the Union President and his coterie of compatriots to drag the institution in muck. “You have allowed the Oxford Union to become a concubinal mouthpiece of Pakistan, perhaps reflecting the general state of affairs,” he added.
Therefore, this makes it clear that the Oxford Union, and its Pakistani president, misled the Indian side to not attend the debate, by lying to them that the Pakistani side has not arrived. While in fact, the Pakistani representatives were already in Oxford, and were in the hotel arranged by the union for the event.
As a result of India’s absence, they were declared the winner. The claims of Pakistani High Commission that India decided to pull out is completely wrong.
