Home Blog Page 181

As Pakistan boasts about signing ‘defence agreement’ with Saudi Arabia, read how the bankrupt nation will end up as a ‘mercenary state’ of the Kingdom

Shraddha Pandey
-
0
As Pakistan boasts about signing ‘defence agreement’ with Saudi Arabia, read how the bankrupt nation will end up as a ‘mercenary state’ of the Kingdom

The core existence of Pakistan revolves around Islamic terrorism and India hate, however, there is another disgraceful defining feature of this country—functioning as paid mercenary for other countries. On 17th September 2025, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan signed a “Strategic Mutual Defence Agreement”.

This agreement is touted as Pakistan’s security guarantee against foreign attacks such as India’s Operation Sindoor, given the agreement’s clause that any aggression against either nations would be treated as an attack on both. In reality, however, it only solidifies Pakistan Army’s position as a mercenary force waiting for orders from Saudi Arabian administration for deployment.

The agreement was inked during a state visit by Pakistan Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif on Wednesday to Riyadh at the invitation of Crown Prince and Prime Minister of Saudi Arabia Mohammed bin Salman bin Abdulaziz Al Saud.

According to a joint statement issued following the visit, “building on the historic partnership extending for nearly eight decades between the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, and based on the bonds of brotherhood and Islamic solidarity, as well as shared strategic interests and close defence cooperation between the two countries, HRH the Crown Prince and the Pakistani prime minister signed a Strategic Mutual Defence Agreement.”

“This agreement, which reflects the shared commitment of both nations to enhance their security and to achieving security and peace in the region and the world, aims to develop aspects of defence cooperation between the two countries and strengthen joint deterrence against any aggression. The agreement states that any aggression against either country shall be considered an aggression against both,” the joint statement further read.

Pakistan Army: Saudi Arabia’s outsourced muscle

Interestingly, Pakistan has long been Riyadh’s outsourced muscle. Saudi Arabia has also earlier deployed Pakistan’s forces as its proxies in regional conflicts and internal uprising management. Since 2015, when the Saudi-led coalition launched airstrikes against a Shia Iran-backed Houthi, Riyadh sought ground support from allies, including Pakistan, after realising what blunder it committed. A subservient Pakistan obliged and sent thousands of troops to Saudi Arabia for invasion of Yemen.

In 2018, Pakistani government decided to send 1,000 more troops to Saudi Arabia for deployment. It’s not that Pakistani parliament did not oppose deployment of its troops as mercenaries for a foreign nation. In fact, there was a period of diplomatic chill between the two nations. However, Saudi Arabia’s pressure tactics and chequebook diplomacy—aid and oil deferrals—made Islamabad mend its ways. In 2018, Saudi Arabia

Pakistan had earlier maintained neutrality in the Saudi-Houthi conflict, however, it rushed to Saudi help not only with troops but with logistical support as well, when the latter decided to invade Yemen.

For optics, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia may call each other ‘brothers’ and Islamic allies, their relation in reality, is that of a patron and client.

Even in 1979, when Juhayman al-Otaybi’s militants seized the Grand Mosque in Mecca, Saudi turned to Pakistan and Islamabad deployed its elite SSP commandos to assist Saudi forces in reclaiming the mosque. The Saudi-Pakistani forces managed to crush down the militants with brutality, this episode exposed Pakistan’s willingness to act as a foreign nation’s crisis response team. Unsurprisingly, Riyadh paid back to Pakistan in form of financial aid and oil supplies and exported its Wahhabi jihadist ideology fuelling Islamist extremism which became precursor to the Taliban.

In the 1970s-1990s, during the oil boom, Gulf monarchies like UAE, Saudi Arabia and Oman hired Pakistani forces to strengthen their nascent militaries against regional threats. In Oman, Pakistani troops, mostly Balochies, served as mercenaries fighting in the Dhofar war (1965-1977), to protect Sultan Qaboos’s regime. Pakistan secured financial rewards for its role as a mercenary in the wars of Gulf countries it fought at that time.

Not to forget, how Pakistan funnelled in billions of dollars from the US on the pretext of fighting Taliban terrorists in Afganistan.

Pakistan goes back to its mercenary business, Saudi Arabia secures subservient force, and Trump looks to bolster petrodollar

The timing of this agreement is crucial. Saudi Arabia and Pakistan have inked the Strategic Mutual Defence Agreement amidst escalating tensions in the Middle East, particularly after Israel’s 9th September airstrike on leaders of the Palestinian Islamic terror group Hamas in Doha, Qatar.

For Saudi Arabia, this agreement seems to be its attempt at diversifying security alliances to reduce overdependence on the US, and the presence of Pakistan’s Field Marshal Asim Munir at the meeting highlights the military’s central role. KSA will have a dollar-hungry Pakistan ‘Aand’ Forces at its disposal if and when the need arrives. Moreover, Saudi Arabia is also said to be eyeing Pakistan’s nuclear program which it is known to have funded. This makes even more sense given Israel is the only nuclear-armed country in the Middle East and poses a threat to Gulf countries.

While Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and US President Donald Trump denied America’s approval or support to Israel’s airstrike in Qatar, the attack alarmed Arab nations, especially, Saudi Arabia, which grew wary about the US’s reliability as their security guarantor. Not to forget, Israel has undertaken military operations not only in Palestine, but Iran, Lebanon, Syria, Yemen and now Qatar.

For Pakistan, this agreement is less a genuine security guarantee and more a codification of its historical subservience to Saudi interests. While Pakistan Army is the de facto ruler of Pakistan, now it going transform Pakistan into a de facto mercenary state. Islamabad will project this agreement as an elevation of its reputation among the Islamic countries, considering it is a nuclear-armed nation. However, its grim economic and political realities as well as failure to garner support of Islamic nations against India be it over the May conflict or Kashmir tells a different story.

Also, mercenaries can earn dollars, and perhaps, a pat on the back from its client but not a respect and global standing in a multipolar world becoming increasingly assertive of the essentiality of their territorial integrity and sovereignty. In fact, the Pakistani military elites will profit from Gulf gigs while the common Pakistani populace will only get further radicalisation, debt traps and vulnerabilities, as has always been the case.

This Saudi-Pak agreement offers disproportionate benefits to Riyadh, entangling Pakistan into Gulf conflicts while offering vague assurances of mutual defence. A section of Pakistani geopolitical analysts sees this agreement as a security guarantee against India, given the this comes just months after India inflicted a humiliating defeat on Pakistan in May, it hardly holds any value in India’s eyes. New Delhi never attacked Pakistan for territorial gains, Islamabad did, four times, and always lost. India’s attacks on Pakistan have only been in response to Pakistan-sponsored Islamic terrorism against India.

And since India and Saudi Arabia too have committed to cooperate in acting against terrorism, Riyadh will not jump to Islamabad’s defence in case India pounds Pakistan again in the aftermath of any misadventure by the latter. Reacting to the Saudi-Pakistan strategic defence agreement, Indian Ministry of External Affairs has said that it was aware of the possible formalisation of the long-standing agreement, and that New Delhi will study its implications.

“We have seen reports of the signing of a strategic mutual defence pact between Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. The Government was aware that this development, which formalizes a long-standing arrangement between the two countries, had been under consideration. We will study the implications of this development for our national security as well as for regional and global stability. The Government remains committed to protecting India’s national interests and ensuring comprehensive national security in all domains,” the MEA said.

Moreover, India and Saudi Arabia have lucrative trade ties and Riyadh would not want to ruin its relations with a thriving economic and nuclear power like India to defend a nuclear but economically dying Pakistan.

Despite this, it seems that Pakistan’s economic dependency on loans, bailout packages and foreign financial aid, coupled with desire to counter a Shia Iran by aligning with a Sunni Gulf to counter Iran and balance India, and Pakistan Army’s dollar greed have driven Islamabad to ink the agreement with Riyadh. It will not be surprising if in the coming months, Saudi Arabia asks Pakistan to deploy its troops, military supplies or to even strike Houthis in Yemen and defend Saudi in case Iran strikes them in the future.

There, however, is another aspect to the Saudi-Pakistan agreement. The United States appears to be subtly orchestrating a new energy chessboard drawing Saudi Arabia and Pakistan into closer alignment, extending the lifeline of the petrodollar through innovative channels like stablecoin linkages, while simultaneously turning the screws on India’s refining of discounted Russian crude. Not to forget, India has been diversifying its crude oil purchases in the recent years even though Russia became New Delhi’s key supplier since the Ukraine-Russia war started.

Apparently, the strategy is to reconfigure trade flows to claw back lost market share for Aramco in Asia and for American LNG across Europe.

However, it remains to be seen how Pakistan’s so-called ‘iron brother’ China reacts to this, considering Beijing sees Saudi Arabia as a US proxy and is also entangled in a trade war with Washington. In addition, Iran would also be displeased with Pakistan over the latter’s cozying up to its two adversaries, Saudi and the US.

Truth about ‘hydrogen bomb’ of Rahul Gandhi, and what it shows about his mindset

Rahul Roushan
-
0
Truth about ‘hydrogen bomb’ of Rahul Gandhi, and what it shows about his mindset

Latest accusation by Rahul Gandhi is that names of Congress voters are being deleted, as a targeted campaign, from electoral rolls using some software to fill up online application forms. He further says the ECI is not giving relevant information that can track down people who are using this software. He used a silhouette of Amit Shah in the PPT to hint at a ‘suspect’, making those memes real where Shah is looking at some PC and hacking things from Instagram to EVM.

First, let us look at Form 7. It can be filled in by any voter registered in that constituency, who can request the Election Commission to delete someone else’s name by providing relevant information such as that the person has shifted house, or the death of the person, or by claiming that the person is registered on some other roll already. If someone submits wrong information to get another’s name deleted, he or she is liable to be prosecuted.

Rahul Gandhi paraded a man who said that he never applied to delete someone else’s name from the electoral list, but somehow the data shows that he had made such an application. Not just that, the mobile number used in that application did not belong to the person who submitted the application.

This indeed is a flaw in the system, if not fraud, and needs investigation. Rahul Gandhi claimed as if this anomaly was exposed by the Congress party, which filed an FIR and is currently seeking more details using CID under their state government of Karnataka. However, the Election Commission has made it clear that the FIR was actually filed by an authority of the ECI itself, that is, the EC itself is investigating the issue rather than trying to hide it, which is how Rahul Gandhi tried to portray it.

So let us assume some ‘hacker’ indeed is using some software and dummy mobile numbers to apply for deletion of some voters. The fact is that such a hacker can at best create and submit multiple such applications (Form 7) successfully, but that does not mean that names get deleted ‘successfully’.

A successful application only triggers a process where Election Commission authorities have to check in person if the information given on Form 7 is genuine, and if such a person’s name should indeed be deleted from the electoral rolls.

In short, it is a manual system at the end of the day. It is not like you submit an OTP after using a fake phone number and, poof, the other person’s name is gone from the electoral list.

Rahul Gandhi gave no proof of why someone’s name was wrongly deleted from the list. The ECI actually says that no names were deleted as a result of suspicious but successful submission of Form 7. But there can be a case where, even if triggered by any software while impersonating someone (which is a crime and should be punished), maybe the information submitted was genuine and the person’s case qualified for deletion.

Maybe the BJP IT Cell (bigger and stronger than the CIA and Mossad combined) is just more alert and makes sure that if a Congress voter has shifted house, they try to get his or her name deleted. Panna Pramukh type folks have such responsibility, basically. I had explained that earlier in this video:

But in all probability, there is no BJP IT Cell or Panna Pramukh involved in this particular instance he cited. Because the constituency where these names of Congress voters were supposed to have been deleted (Aland in Karnataka) was won by Congress in the subsequent assembly election. Not just that, in the previous election, the BJP had won that seat. Absolutely pathetic job by the BJP IT Cell to end up deleting their own supporters’ names from the voter list if the ‘hacker’ belonged to the BJP.

Jokes aside, this hydrogen bomb had no fire but the same colour of smoke that we saw earlier – basically Rahul Gandhi using known loopholes and shortcomings in the voting system to paint some kind of grand conspiracy to cheat elections. No wonder he simply didn’t respond when a journalist asked if he would go to courts if he was so convinced about wrongdoings. His agenda is simple – trust Gen Z to be a bunch of absolute morons who would believe his conspiracy theories and take to the roads to indulge in violence. He has seen that around 100 such young people dead can help defeat parties in power. Possibly he finds that an easier route than trying to win 100 more parliamentary seats by 2029.

CM Yogi Adityanath launches fifth phase of Mission Shakti in UP, campaign to focus on women’s safety, police deployment and awareness drives during Navratri

OpIndia Staff
-
0
CM Yogi Adityanath launches fifth phase of Mission Shakti in UP, campaign to focus on women’s safety, police deployment and awareness drives during Navratri

On Wednesday, 17th September, Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath announced the launch of the fifth phase of Mission Shakti. This mission is the state’s flagship campaign for women’s safety, dignity, and empowerment. The new phase will begin on 22nd September, during the Sharadiya Navratri festival, and will continue for 30 days.

Mission Shakti was first launched in 2020 and has since become a major initiative in Uttar Pradesh. With four successful phases already completed, the Yogi government now aims to take the program to every village and town. According to the CM Yogi Adityanath, the mission is not just a government scheme but a social movement to ensure that every woman in the state feels safe and respected.

The people must feel fully protected: CM Yogi

The upcoming campaign should include an extensive programme carried out through close interdepartmental coordination, the chief minister directed while chairing a high-level meeting with senior officials.

Top police officials, ranging from Zonal ADGs, IGs, to DIGs, have been ordered to visit the field frequently, interact with the people, and be personally involved in patrols. 

“The people must feel fully protected, while criminals must live under constant fear of the law,” the chief minister said.

Women police at the centre of the campaign

One of the biggest strengths of Mission Shakti is the state’s large women police force, which now has more than 44,000 personnel. The Chief Minister said women police officers must be given a more active role during the campaign.

For the next 30 days, women beat officers will visit all 57,000 gram panchayats and 14,000 urban wards. They will be accompanied by the village heads, councillors, ASHAs, Anganwadi workers, and health personnel. They will interact with women and girls directly, hear their issues, and raise awareness about safety, rights, and government welfare programs.

Navratri and other festivals will also see special arrangements, with women police being deployed in temples, places of religion, fairs, and crowded events. Yogi Adityanath also sought to strengthen the Anti-Romeo Squad, which deals with women harassment.

Awareness in schools, colleges, and public places

The campaign will also emphasize awareness programs at district levels. Seminars, discussions, and interactive sessions will be conducted in schools, colleges, universities, hospitals, and industries. Gender equality and the safety of women will be taught to students, and short movies will be screened for further spreading the message. 

The Chief Minister also stressed the need to provide legal aid to women prisoners, make help faster for victims, and ensure that crimes against women are resolved quickly. Every call made to the women’s helpline 1090 must be handled with seriousness and solved properly.

As part of the new phase, Pink Booths will be set up across municipal corporations. These booths, manned by trained women police, will work round-the-clock. At the same time, Mission Shakti Centres will be strengthened to act as a one-stop solution where women can register complaints, receive counselling, get legal aid, and follow up on cases.

The staff at these centres will be given training in gender sensitisation, digital evidence collection, and handling of financial assistance schemes.

Achievements of earlier phases

Mission Shakti has already delivered strong results in the past four phases. During the last phase alone, more than 3.44 lakh programs were organised, reaching over 2.03 crore women and girls. Nearly 18,344 women police personnel and 9,172 women beat officers were deployed for these efforts.

Several targeted drives were also carried out, including Operation Garuda against cybercriminals, Operation Bachpan, which rescued over 2,800 children, Operation Majnu that acted against more than 74,000 youths harassing women, Operation Nasha Mukti against drug abuse, Operation Raksha to monitor hotels and pubs, and Operation Eagle that arrested more than 7,000 offenders.

As per official data, Uttar Pradesh now ranks first in the country in resolving sexual offence cases, with a 98.80% disposal rate. The women’s helpline 1090 and other initiatives like Pink Scooty patrols, Pink SUVs, CCTV monitoring, and Asha Jyoti Kendras have also played a big role in this success.

Election Commission debunks Rahul Gandhi’s latest lies on ‘vote chori’, clarifies nobody can delete any vote online

OpIndia Staff
-
0
Election Commission debunks Rahul Gandhi’s latest lies on ‘vote chori’, clarifies nobody can delete any vote online

Hours after Rahul Gandhi accused the Election Commission of ‘software driven voter deletion’ and ‘vote chori’ to benefit BJP, the poll panel has rejected his claims. The ECI clarified that contrary to the claims by the Congress leader, nobody can delete any vote online.

The ECI stated, “No Deletion of any vote can be done online by any member of the public, as misconceived by Shri Rahul Gandhi.”

Referring to Rahul Gandhi’s claim that some persons deleted votes online, the Election Commission said that in 2023, certain unsuccessful attempts were made for deletion of electors in Aland Assembly Constituency and an FIR was filed by the authority of ECI itself to investigate the matter.

The ECI also said that Congress candidate BR Patil won the Aland Assembly Constituency in 2023, the year when the alleged ‘vote deletion’ took place. BJP candidate Subhadh Guttedar had won the seat in 2018.

Addressing a press conference in Congress Headquarters in Delhi, Rahul Gandhi claimed that a targeted attempt was made to delete 6,018 votes in the Aland constituency in Karnataka. He claimed that 6,018 applications were filed impersonating voters and these applications were filed automatically using mobile numbers from outside Karnataka. “This deletion of votes was not done by individuals, but in a centralised manner using software,” Gandhi claimed.

“This I am saying with solid proof,” Rahul Gandhi claimed. He claimed, “I am saving my country and democracy,” while stressing that he had “100% proof” of what he described as an orchestrated operation to manipulate electoral rolls.

Rahul Gandhi accused the Election Commission of “protecting the people who have destroyed Indian democracy” by not providing details of deletions sought by the Karnataka CID. “The EC is defending the murderers of democracy,” he said, demanding that the CEC immediately publish all details of voter deletions within a week.

The leader of opposition also claimed that there are moles in CEC who is giving him inside information. Gandhi claimed that he is “getting help” from people who are working at the ECI in uncovering alleged “vote fraud” in the country.

Tejashwi Yadav is the face of the RJD on all 243 seats in the Bihar Vidhan Sabha election: Here is why this ‘political strategy’ may backfire

अजीत झा
-
0
Tejashwi Yadav is the face of the RJD on all 243 seats in the Bihar Vidhan Sabha election: Here is why this ‘political strategy’ may backfire

Bihar will go to the polls by the end of the year. It’s the season of political rallies and meetings. There’s a deluge of statements, and from this deluge has emerged a statement of Tejashwi Yadav. He claims that his face will be contesting on all 243 seats in Bihar.

Addressing a public meeting, Tejashwi Yadav said, “This time, Tejashwi will contest 243 seats. Whether it’s Bochahan or Muzaffarpur, he will contest. I appeal to all of you to vote for me.“

Lalu Prasad Yadav’s dynastic party, the Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD), wants the INDI alliance to field Tejashwi Yadav as its chief ministerial candidate in the upcoming assembly elections in Bihar. The Congress, the Left and other RJD allies are shying away from this.

Why is the INDI alliance afraid of Tejashwi Yadav’s name?

One of the reasons for the Congress’s reluctance to make Tejashwi Yadav the chief ministerial candidate is the party’s apprehension that it might lose the meagre upper-caste votes it receives in Bihar. Another possible reason might be that by not endorsing Tejashwi Yadav, the RJD allies want to increase pressure on the party to give him a greater share of seats.

Failing to receive approval from his allies, Tejashwi Yadav went on to boast, “Tejashwi will contest all 243 seats in Bihar”. However, in chasing his political ambitions, he forgot that a name or a face is not just a few words or a picture. Names and faces can form an inseparable part of history and public memory.

The name and face that gave Tejashwi Yadav the reins of the RJD have a history so deeply etched in the minds of the people of Bihar that the same may become a burden for him. His statement not only highlights the ongoing conflict within the INDI Alliance but also revives the fear in the people of Bihar, which took them years to overcome.

Tejashwi Yadav’s name and face haunt Bihar

In his book ‘How India became Modimay’, Senior journalist Santosh Kumar, who is from Bihar, cited a presentation from the period before the 2019 general elections, and writes, “The question in this presentation was: If you mention the names of two big industrialists (one is a fugitive and the other has been in jail for a long time, it would not be appropriate to disclose their names), what image comes to your mind? The answer was: fraud. But what is the response when Narendra Modi’s name is mentioned? A leader who can take any major decision, whether on the development agenda or related to national security.”

Similarly, if you were asked what image comes to mind when you hear the name Tejashwi Yadav or see his photo, you would undoubtedly recall the Jungle Raj of the Lalu-Rabri regime. Despite RJD being out of power for years, and Tejashwi being projected as a ‘young leader of a new era’, the fear of Jungle Raj is so fresh in the minds of people that they believe if Tejashwi Yadav comes to power, the Jungle Raj will return.

  • Tejashwi Yadav’s face reminds the people of Bihar of a time when crimes like kidnapping became the norm, when people were forced to migrate to different parts of the country, and when other states were joining the race for development, Bihar was grappling with casteism and corruption.
  • Tejashwi Yadav’s politics hinge on the “MY equation.” This not only limits his political base but also creates a sense of insecurity among the majority of the population.
  • Tejashwi Yadav hasn’t reached his current political stature through hard work. He is a product of dynasty politics. He was imposed on the people of Bihar by the RJD. In his journey from cricketer to politician, he has nothing concrete to show that could change the image conjured by his name and face.

In contrast, Nitish Kumar, though he has changed political allies from time to time, has broadly established his image as a leader who has freed the people of Bihar from crime and fear, and has provided basic amenities like electricity, roads, and education. People cannot separate Tejashwi Yadav’s name and face, the legacy and family he is associated with, from crime and corruption. This is why, even though Tejashwi Yadav occasionally addresses issues like employment and development in his speeches, the public considers him a successor to the same old political system.

The partnership of Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Chief Minister Nitish Kumar has created new aspirations for development in Bihar. The presence of Tejashwi Yadav’s name and face instils fears that these aspirations may be stifled.

There’s a saying in Bihar: “एक बेर साँप काटलक, दोसर बेर रस्सी देखिते कँपलौं।” (Once bitten, twice shy), which means people who have endured horrific experiences tremble at the mere mention of a similar situation. In reality, Tejashwi Yadav is that “rope,” which reminds the public of the “snake.” His boastful statement about having his name and face on all 243 seats is reminiscent of that horrific past, the mere thought of which makes Bihar shudder.

No ‘Hydrogen Bomb’ as of now: Rahul Gandhi accused CEC of protecting ‘vote chors’, claims ‘someone’ using software to add-delete voters

OpIndia Staff
-
0
No ‘Hydrogen Bomb’ as of now: Rahul Gandhi accused CEC of protecting ‘vote chors’, claims ‘someone’ using software to add-delete voters

On 18th September, Congress leader Rahul Gandhi launched a fresh attack on the Election Commission of India (ECI) and accused Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Gyanesh Kumar of shielding “vote chors” (vote thieves). Addressing a press conference, Gandhi claimed that voters from Dalit, OBC and minority communities were being systematically targeted for deletion through a “centralised software-based mechanism”.

‘I have 100% proof’, claimed Rahul Gandhi

Calling the revelations “solid proof” of large-scale voter fraud, Gandhi said he was exposing the matter out of his “love for the Constitution and democratic process”. He claimed, “I am saving my country and democracy,” while stressing that he had “100% proof” of what he described as an orchestrated operation to manipulate electoral rolls.

Karnataka’s Aland case

Gandhi cited the example of Aland constituency in Karnataka where during the 2023 elections, 6,018 deletion applications were filed in the names of voters who never submitted them. According to him, these applications were “fraudulently” made through impersonation, using mobile numbers from different states, and aimed specifically at Congress supporters.

He claimed that the incident came to light by coincidence when a Booth Level Officer (BLO) noticed her own uncle’s name missing from the rolls. When she questioned a neighbour, whose credentials had been used to file the deletion, he flatly denied having done so. Gandhi claimed the entire exercise was a “part of a planned action and not isolated mistakes”.

‘Centralised operation using software’

“This deletion of votes was not done by individuals, but in a centralised manner using software,” Gandhi claimed. He insisted that it was not just about Karnataka but also Maharashtra, Haryana and Uttar Pradesh, where “mass deletions” of Congress-leaning voters had been carried out.

In Maharashtra’s Rajura, he said, at least 6,850 voters were targeted, with both deletions and additions being manipulated.

EC shielding those ‘destroying democracy’

Gandhi accused the Election Commission of “protecting the people who have destroyed Indian democracy” by not providing details of deletions sought by the Karnataka CID. “The EC is defending the murderers of democracy,” he said, demanding that the CEC immediately publish all details of voter deletions within a week.

“This is another example of vote chori through deletion of votes,” Rahul Gandhi asserted, warning that unless corrective measures were taken, the credibility of India’s democratic process itself would remain under question.

While answering questions from the media, Rahul Gandhi claimed that people from inside the Election Commission are “secretly” helping Congress to uncover these discrepancies in the electoral roll. He further claimed that this system has been followed for over 10-15 years, which could put the target on Congress itself as the party had won the general elections under the banner of UPA in 2009.

This is a developing story. Reply from Election Commission of India is awaited.

Executive arm of EU targets India for purchasing Russian oil, conveniently forgets about its own $70 billion trade with Moscow: Details

OpIndia Staff
-
0
Executive arm of EU targets India for purchasing Russian oil, conveniently forgets about its own $70 billion trade with Moscow: Details

At a press conference in Brussels on Wednesday (17th September), European Commission’s High Representative for Foreign Affairs, Kaja Kallas, made a sharp comment about India’s growing relationship with Russia. 

Kallas, who is also a vice president of the Commission, argued that “Ultimately, our partnership is not only about trade, but also about defending the rules-based international order.” 

She made it clear that while the EU is keen on building closer ties with New Delhi, India’s continued engagement with Russia is something that “stands in the way of closer ties.” The remarks came at the launch of a new EU strategy that talks about strengthening relations with India, particularly in areas like defence and security.

Speaking alongside EU trade chief Maros Sefcovic, she said “the EU is India’s largest trading partner, after a growth of over 90% over the past decade.”

For the unversed, European Commission is the executive arm of the European Union

Kallas also pointed out India’s purchases of oil and military exercises

Kallas specifically pointed to India’s participation in the Zapad joint military drills with Russia and Belarus this month, and its decision to keep buying Russian oil despite the ongoing war in Ukraine.” Participating in military exercises, purchases of oil, all these are obstacles to our cooperation when it comes to deepening the ties,” she said. 

The contradiction in her statement, however, lay in the fact that at the very same event, EU leaders were speaking about taking the EU-India partnership “to the next level” and finalising a free trade agreement by the end of 2025. On the one hand, the EU wants stronger relations with India, but on the other, it continues to pressure India over its energy policy with Russia.

India pushes back against Western hegemony

This is not the first time India has faced such attacks. Western countries, including the US, have been urging India to cut down its Russian oil imports since the Ukraine war began. 

India has defended itself repeatedly, saying that it has a sovereign right to make decisions in its national interest, and that its energy needs are too large to be compromised by political demands from other countries. 

Indian officials have pointed out that even the US encouraged India to buy Russian oil in the early months of the war, to help stabilise global prices. Despite this, US President Donald Trump raised tariffs on most Indian exports to 50% in August over the continued purchases of Russian oil. 

EU’s own trade with Russia runs deep

While all this pressure continues, the trade numbers reveal a different picture. Europe speaks of isolating Russia and even pressurising India to do the same. But in reality, its own trade with Moscow remains almost as large as India’s, and in some areas, even bigger. 

In 2024, the EU’s total trade with Russia was valued at $70.3 billion, nearly equal to India’s $72 billion. This is despite the EU being at the forefront of global calls to cut off Moscow from world markets.

The EU in 2022 paid over $120 billion to Russia for fossil fuels. India’s total payment in the same period was around $50 billion. And yet, India is the one being attacked with sanctions and criticism.

Europe buys chemicals, metals, food and machinery from Russia 

The difference lies in what each side is trading. Out of the $72 billion, about $59.5 billion came from crude oil and other fuels, which made up more than 80% of the total. Europe, on the other hand, has reduced its direct imports of Russian oil, which stood at $24.2 billion in 2024. But it continues to import other goods from Russia in large volumes. 

For example, Europe’s chemical imports from Russia reached $17.6 billion in 2024, which was more than six times India’s $3.1 billion. The EU also imported $6.7 billion worth of metals, compared to just $0.9 billion by India. 

On top of that, the EU bought nearly $5 billion worth of food and $4.4 billion worth of machinery and electronics from Russia. These numbers clearly show that while Europe criticises India for its oil purchases, it is keeping many of its own trade doors with Russia wide open.

Europe exports more to Russia than India ever did

The imbalance is even more obvious when we look at exports. In 2024, the EU exported around $34 billion worth of goods to Russia, while India exported only $4.9 billion. Europe’s exports included $14.6 billion in chemicals, $5 billion in food, and $3.7 billion in machinery and electronics. 

That is more than seven times India’s total exports to Russia. These figures suggest that Europe is not only buying heavily from Russia but also earning significantly by selling to it. India, meanwhile, is mostly buying energy and not exporting nearly as much.

Double standards weaken EU’s criticism

This pattern underlines the hypocrisy in Europe’s position. Its leaders publicly scold India for continuing energy imports from Moscow, but quietly maintain their own trade flows across multiple sectors. 

Europe’s chemical and metal trade with Russia is not only larger than India’s, it dwarfs it. If the goal is to punish Russia economically, Europe’s numbers show that it is far from cutting ties.

Divine or ‘bovine’: Justice Nariman makes another anti-Hindu comment while talking about ex-CJI Chandrachud’s ‘prayed for guidance for Ram Mandir verdict’ remark. Read details

OpIndia Staff
-
0
Divine or ‘bovine’: Justice Nariman makes another anti-Hindu comment while talking about ex-CJI Chandrachud’s ‘prayed for guidance for Ram Mandir verdict’ remark. Read details

In yet another incident that seem to solidify judiciary’s anti-Hindu bent, former Supreme Court judge Rohinton Nariman courted controversy with his recent comments where he needlessly referenced bovine, animals that are considered sacred by Hindus, while criticising former CJI Chandrachud for turning to faith during the momentous Ram Mandir verdict. Nariman stated that allowing divine or any other form of intervention to influence judgments would amount to a violation of a judge’s oath to the Constitution.

He made the remark while responding to a question during the KM Bashir Memorial Lecture organised by the Press Club of Thiruvananthapuram on September 1. An audience member had asked his views on former Chief Justices of India speaking about divine intervention in delivering judgments, in reference to ex-CJI DY Chandrachud’s statement that he had prayed for guidance during the Ram Mandir-Babri Masjid verdict in 2019.

“Whether with divine or bovine intervention or any other kind of intervention, if a judge delivers a judgment, he is violating his oath to the Constitution. You (judges) have to live only by your oath to the Constitution and the laws. And when you live by your oath to the Constitution and the laws, you certainly bring in your own morality. That’s about as far as it goes,” Justice Nariman said.

His comments, both his disapproval of former CJI Chandrachud for leaning on faith to arrive at an important verdict and his reference to bovine, considered sacred by Hindus, underscore the deep-seated anti-Hindu bias that appears to have taken root in the higher judiciary. The timing further accentuates this perception, coming just a day after another controversial episode: Chief Justice of India BR Gavai, while dismissing a plea for the restoration of a mutilated idol of Lord Krishna in Khajuraho desecrated by Mughal invaders, mocked the petitioner with a sarcastic remark, saying, “Go and pray to God instead.”

Delivering his lecture on the theme Fraternity in a Secular State: The Protection of Cultural Rights and Duties, Justice Nariman underlined that secularism is essential to achieving fraternity, a fundamental value of the Constitution.

He added that secularism was already present in the Constitution before the word was explicitly added to the Preamble through the 42nd Amendment. “It’s a misnomer to say that secularism was introduced only by the 42nd amendment. Some part of it was always already there… Now secularism according to me is an absolute must as a stepping stone towards achieving fraternity. You cannot have fraternity in a theocratic state,” he said.

Justice Nariman also spoke about his latest book An Ode to Fraternity, which explores world religions, and noted that he had studied various religious texts while working on it.

Retired Supreme Court judge Rohinton Nariman labelled Hindus demanding temple as ‘dictators-tyrants’

In December 2024, former Supreme Court judge Justice Rohinton Nariman criticized the 5-judge bench that delivered the Ayodhya Ram Janmabhoomi verdict in 2019 and said that the verdict was nothing but a ‘mockery of justice’ that violated the basic principle of secularism.

Addressing an Ahmadi Foundation event, Nariman said, “We find today, like hydra heads popping up all over the country, there is suit after suit filed all over the place. Now not only concerning mosques but also dargahs. All this can lead to communal tension and disharmony, contrary to what is envisaged in both our Constitution and the Places of Worship Act. This very Constitution Bench spends five pages on it and says that in secularism, which is a part of the Basic Structure, you cannot look backwards, you have to look forward… Every religious place of worship is frozen until 15th August 1947. Now, anybody who tries to change this, those suits will stand dismissed.”

The former judge declared Hindus seeking legal remedy to reclaim their encroached and destroyed temples, as “hydra heads”. Law abiding Hindus seeking legal recourse were villainised by a former judge, the court delivering verdict in favour of the Hindu side based on evidence and merit was deemed ‘travesty of justice’ to Muslims, by the same judge.  Nariman advocated stringent implementation of the controversial Places of Worship Act, so that no more lawsuits seeking reclamation of their temples could be filed. His rhetoric suggested that to uphold ‘secularism’ Hindus should have abandoned their claim and remained silent.

CJI Gavai makes a sarcastic jibe while denying restoration of Lord Vishnu’s idol in Khajuraho: Read 5 stark instances that exposes judiciary’s entrenched anti-Hindu bias

Shraddha Pandey
-
0
CJI Gavai makes a sarcastic jibe while denying restoration of Lord Vishnu’s idol in Khajuraho: Read 5 stark instances that exposes judiciary’s entrenched anti-Hindu bias

Judiciary is tasked with dispensing justice without bias; however, in India, the judiciary feels entitled to, at times, mock the faith of the Hindu majority. When petitioners from other religious communities approach courts with their grievances, they get justice. However, when Hindus move court in hopes of justice, they receive judicial activism, blame and outright mockery.

In a latest display of the blatant anti-Hindu prejudice of the judiciary, the Supreme Court of India mocked Lord Vishnu while dismissing a petition seeking restoration of a seven-foot mutilated idol of Lord Vishnu at the Javari temple in Khajuraho, Madhya Pradesh. The idol, part of the UNESCO-protected Khajuraho group of monuments, had been beheaded centuries ago during the Mughal invasions, left desecrated and dishonoured ever since.

On 16th September 2025, a Supreme Court bench headed by Chief Justice of India (CJI) B.R. Gavai and Justice Augustine George Masih heard the matter.

The petitioner, a devotee named Rakesh Dalal, argued that restoring the idol was not merely about archaeology but about faith, dignity, and the fundamental right of Hindus to worship their deities in wholeness.

The devout Hindu petitioner must have believed that the apex court would either rule in his favour and direct the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) and relevant authorities to repair the idol and revive the sanctity of the temple, or reject his plea citing relevant reasons. However, instead of simply telling the petitioner that the matter falls under the purview of the ASI as an archaeological conservation issue and not judicial intervention, CJI Gavai made unnecessary oral remarks against the Hindu faith by blending sarcasm and mockery.

“This is purely publicity interest litigation. Go and ask the deity itself to do something now. You say you are a staunch devotee of Lord Vishnu. So go and pray now,” the CJI told the petitioner.

Such is the state of affairs in a Hindu-majority secular India that a sitting judge, that too, the Chief Justice finds it right to throw sarcastic jibes at a devout Hindu and his faith in his God. CJI Gavai, who very casually said that “Go ask your God to do something about it”, would never have asked a Muslim petitioner who sought restoration of a mosque or Dargah, to go and ask Allah to rebuild it. Perhaps, CJI Gavai should answer that if he was on the five-judge bench that heard the Ayodhya Ram Janmabhoomi land dispute case, would he have told the Muslim side that if you are such staunch devotees of Allah, go and ask Allah to rebuild Babri Masjid?

This episode of the judiciary resorting to dismissing a Hindu petitioner’s faith, trivialises centuries of historical desecration and the emotional wound of the ‘beheaded’ idol, came across as a shocker for Hindus. However, this incident is not isolated rather emblematic of a sinister pattern where Hindu religious sentiments are treated as expendable in judicial discourse.

While the judiciary is assigned the role of the protector of the constitutional right of freedom of religion, it has increasingly been demonstrating a subtle yet pervasive anti-Hindu bias. In the recent years, this percolation of anti-Hindu bias in the judicial system has become evident.

The judicial activism and interference in practice of Hindu religion began in 1954 with the Shirur Mutt case by paving way for state intervention in Hindu institutions, and it goes on even now, as seen in the Sabarimala verdict of 2018, invalidating the Hindu traditions. The courts have had a penchant for reformulating Hinduism and imposing a ‘rational’ form of it by distinguishing “sacred” from “secular”.

From deciding the height of Dahi-Handi to volume of DJ music systems in Hindu religious processions, Hindu traditions and beliefs have been subjected to persistent judicial scrutiny. After scrutinising, modernising and rationalising Hinduism, the courts laid bare their anti-Hindu bias open in recent years.

When the Supreme Court blamed Nupur Sharma for Muslim mob violence and vindicated ‘Sar tan se Juda’ brigade

Nothing exemplifies the judiciary’s anti-Hindu bias and tendency to pander to those empowered with street veto and political patronage, better than the Supreme Court’s oral observations on the Nupur Sharma case, where it held her singularly responsible for “setting the country on fire.”

In May 2022, then BJP spokesperson, Nupur Sharma was appearing as one of the panellists on the Time Now show along with Taslim Ahmed Rehmani on the Shivlinga found at the Gyanvapi disputed structure site. During the debate, Rehmani used derogatory language against Bhagwan Shiv that irked then-BJP spokesperson Nupur Sharma. Sharma countered her and questioned how would he react if she used the same language for Islam and the Prophet.

Regardless of the fact that what Sharma said about the Prophet’s marriage to the 9-year-old Ayesha, which is mentioned in multiple Islamic hadiths, Nupur Sharma was branded as a ‘blasphemer’, with Islamic organisations openly declaring that she should be murdered. ‘Sar tan se juda’ calls were given by Islamists across the country. Islamists ran riots in several states; FIRs were filed not only against Sharma but also against those who supported her. In fact, Kanhaiya Lal, a Hindu tailor from Udaipur, Rajasthan, and Umesh Kolhe, a businessman from Maharashtra’s Amravati, were brutally murdered by Islamists for simply supporting Sharma.

In July 2022, when Nupur Sharma approached the Supreme Court for clubbing of the multiple FIRs filed against her, the two-judge bench that heard the matter seemed to have already formed an opinion against her based on the disinformation and misleading propaganda running in media and on social media. Justice Surya Kant, in his oral observations, blamed Nupur Sharma for what was happening in the country.

Blaming Nupur Sharma for the Islamist mob violence across the country as well as killing of Kanhaiyalal and Umesh Kolhe, for stating something even Muslim scholars and scriptures state, the Supreme Court judge had said, “You have ignited the whole country. You possess a loose tongue. Power has gone to your head. You should apologise to the nation.”

Who blatantly mocked Hindu religious sentiments? Tasleem Rehmani. Who quoted facts about Islamic prophet’s marriage as mentioned in the Islamic scriptures and often cited by Islamic scholars? Nupur Sharma. While genuine Hindu sentiments were hurt given Rehmani’s comments were deranged and devoid of scriptural accuracy, the Islamists were offended simply because a Hindu woman stated the facts mentioned in the Islamic text. Who unleashed mob violence and sar tan se juda calls? Islamists. Who killed Kanhaiyalal and Umesh Kolhe? Islamic Jihadis.

But for the apex court, somehow Nupur Sharma ignited the country. Forget rebuking rioting Muslims with similar aggression and intensity, the court did not even deem Tasleem Rehmani as the root cause of the matter, let alone reprimanding him. The court ignored the context and blamed Nupur Sharma, effectively vindicating Sar Tan Se Juda brigade running amok and calling for her beheading. The court’s approach in this case, not only validated Muslim mob violence but also ended up shifting culpability to the speaker rather than the perpetrators.

Compare this to the case of ‘comedian’ Munawar Faruqui, who during his stand-up performance in 2021, made outrageous remarks about Lord Ram and Goddess Sita. He was arrested after Hindus protested, however, Faruqui was eventually granted bail and was not subject to even half of what criticism Sharma received from the court. However, it seems that even if had Hindus also issued beheading threats and rioted across the country like Islamists did in Sharma’s case, the courts would have defended Faruqui and blamed Hindus for not tolerating a ‘joke’.

Haryana judge Fakhruddin incited Muslims to shoot Hindu adversaries

Back in 2019, a Haryana court judge, Fakhruddin while hearing a case which came up in his court, instigated Muslim petitioners against their Hindu adversaries by making hateful and violent comments against Hindus. During the hearing, the judge chided the witnesses by saying that they were a blot on the Muslim community for getting beaten up by members of the other (Hindu) community. Angered to see them been beaten up the judge questioned them as to why didn’t they shoot their adversaries (which in this case were Hindus).

Spewing acrimony at Hindus, the presiding judge, Fakhruddin asked the witnesses to bring a pistol when they come to the court next time.

Regarding Hindus, the judge said that they didn’t have any power in front of the Muslims. “You come with a pistol. I am here. I will take care of everything,” the judge said, sparking outrage.

This was not even a case of anti-Hindu bias but outright hatred for Hindus. A letter by the District Bar Association to the Punjab and Haryana High Court demanded his transfer. However, no significant action followed. Perhaps there is judicial impunity even when violence against Hindus is encouraged by a sitting judge.

Retired Supreme Court judge Rohinton Nariman labelled Hindus demanding temple as ‘dictators-tyrants’

In December 2024, former Supreme Court judge Justice Rohinton Nariman criticized the 5-judge bench that delivered the Ayodhya Ram Janmabhoomi verdict in 2019 and said that the verdict was nothing but a ‘mockery of justice’ that violated the basic principle of secularism.

Addressing an Ahmadi Foundation event, Nariman said, “We find today, like hydra heads popping up all over the country, there is suit after suit filed all over the place. Now not only concerning mosques but also dargahs. All this can lead to communal tension and disharmony, contrary to what is envisaged in both our Constitution and the Places of Worship Act. This very Constitution Bench spends five pages on it and says that in secularism, which is a part of the Basic Structure, you cannot look backwards, you have to look forward… Every religious place of worship is frozen until 15th August 1947. Now, anybody who tries to change this, those suits will stand dismissed.”

The former judge declared Hindus seeking legal remedy to reclaim their encroached and destroyed temples, as “hydra heads”. Law abiding Hindus seeking legal recourse were villainised by a former judge, the court delivering verdict in favour of the Hindu side based on evidence and merit was deemed ‘travesty of justice’ to Muslims, by the same judge.  Nariman advocated stringent implementation of the controversial Places of Worship Act, so that no more lawsuits seeking reclamation of their temples could be filed. His rhetoric suggested that to uphold ‘secularism’ Hindus should have abandoned their claim and remained silent.

Udhayanidhi Stalin called for eradicating Sanatan Dharma, Supreme Court stayed proceedings

Back in 2023, DMK leader and state minister in Tamil Nadu, Udhayanidhi Stalin, publicly gave calls for ‘eradication’ of Sanatan Dharma or Hinduism and equated it to “dengue and malaria”. Despite FIRs and nationwide outrage for slandering the religion of the Hindu community, the Supreme Court stayed fresh FIRs against him. While the Madras High Court deem Stalin’s anti-Hindu remarks against constitutional values, it dismissed petitions seeking quo warranto writs against him.

The Supreme Court also pulled up Stalin, saying that he is holding constitutional office and should not have made such remarks. However, Stalin was not subjected harsh critique was seen in the case of Nupur Sharma. Apparently, the reaction and extent to which the offended community goes to ensure punishment for the alleged offender decides the extent of anger and disapproval courts would express. The bias is evident.

Hindu practice of animal sacrifice (Bali) is dogmatic and non-essential, Islamic ‘Qurbani’ is not: Tripura HC one-sided quest to rid Hinduism of cruelty and superstition

Animal sacrifice in Shakti temples in Tripura is prohibited by the Tripura High Court, citing ‘cruelty’ and non-essentiality to devotion, but no such ban is imposed on animal sacrifice on Bakrid.  “Which religion or community mandates infliction of unnecessary pain or suffering on an animal? Which religion prescribes that physical or mental pain or suffering should not be eliminated in the pre-slaughter stage? Which religion would want its followers not to treat animal with compassion, care or a humane approach?” the court asked back in 2019.

If the court actually wanted to end cruelty against animals, it would have banned slaughter of animals for food. It would have banned the practice of Halal slaughter, a certified Islamic manner of killing that involves torturing an animal to death. The courts never question this torturous Islamic tradition, but take delight in declaring Hindu tradition as ‘dogmatic’, ‘superstitious’ and whatnot. Perhaps, Hindu practice of ‘Bali’ amounts to cruelty but Islamic ‘Qurbani’ stands for compassion.

Conclusion

There are numerous examples of the Indian judiciary’s anti-Hindu bias. CJI B.R. Gavai’s “Go and ask Lord Vishnu to do something”, Justice Suryakant’s “Loose tongue” and “Singlehandedly ignited the country” victim-blaming remarks, judge Fakhruddin’s incitement against Hindus, to Rohinton Nariman’s labelling of Hindus as “hydra heads” for approaching courts to reclaim their temples, and the persistent scrutiny of Hindu beliefs and traditions mirror the entrenchment of the bias against India’s Hindu majority, in the judicial system. The law-abiding and peaceful Hindu community gets mockery when demanded Nyay (justice), while the often violent and perennially offended Islamists get Ati-Nyay (over-accommodation and pandering in the name of justice).

EU announces new strategic agenda to raise bilateral relations to a higher level to boost trade, defence cooperation, and tackle global challenges together

OpIndia Staff
-
0
EU announces new strategic agenda to raise bilateral relations to a higher level to boost trade, defence cooperation, and tackle global challenges together

Despite U.S. President Donald Trump pressurising European Union to impose 100% tariff on India for buying Russian oil, the EU continues to strengthen its ties with India. While talks are going on for an India-EU Free Trade Agreement, the EU today proposed a new strategic agenda to raise bilateral relations with India to a higher level to boost shared prosperity, strengthen security, and tackle major global challenges together.

The initiative, titled EU-India Strategic Agenda for Prosperity and Security, seeks to elevate cooperation between the two democracies amid shifting global dynamics, placing trade, investment, security, and global challenges at the core of the relationship. A press release issued by the EU said, “Amid shifting geopolitical realities, closer EU–India relations are increasingly vital for strengthening economic growth and security, and diversifying supply chains in response to today’s uncertain global order. Beyond the bilateral dimension, the new strategic agenda highlights EU-India joint engagement on global issues and with third partners, reflecting India’s growing global influence.”

A joint communication on a new strategic EU-India agenda to the European Parliament and the European Council has also been published [PDF] by the union. It states that the both sides are committed to raising the Strategic Partnership to a higher level to boost shared prosperity, strengthen security, and tackle major global challenges together.

It proposes structuring the new strategic EU-India agenda around five pillars: Prosperity and Sustainability, Technology and Innovation, Security and Defence, Connectivity and Global Issues, and Enablers Across Pillars.

The agenda outlines commitments to accelerate progress on a free trade agreement, enhance investment flows, and expand joint projects in infrastructure, clean energy, and digital innovation. Brussels emphasized India’s role as a key partner in global supply chains and the need to build resilience against disruptions.

The new strategy proposes deepening tech cooperation, including a potential EU-India Startup partnership, and invites India to associate with Horizon Europe programme. Climate change and green technologies feature prominently, with both sides expected to step up cooperation on sustainable energy and emissions reduction.

Moreover, EU has highlighted opportunities to jointly strengthen food security, and health, climate and disaster resilience.

On security, the EU stressed closer coordination with New Delhi on crisis management, counter-terrorism, maritime security, cyber-security, and the fight against disinformation. This will also enhance defence industrial cooperation, focusing on boosting production and technological capabilities, securing supply chains, and driving innovation.

EU and India are also expected to join hands to exchange intelligence information, as the statement said that “Launching negotiations for a Security of Information Agreement to facilitate classified information exchange will support closer security and defence cooperation.”

Closer cooperation on the Indo-Pacific, addressing hybrid threats, space security, and intensifying engagement on Russia’s war against Ukraine, shadow fleets, and sanctions are other areas of focus.

The Joint Communication further emphasises strengthening regional connectivity initiatives, such as the India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor (IMEC) and advances Global Gateway and EU-India trilateral cooperation with and in third countries. It aims to enhance cooperation with India in multilateral forums and encourage India to advance international law, multilateral values and global governance.

It prioritises maximising interaction and strengthening EU-India coordination at all levels.

The statement added that EU is ready to work with India to develop a joint comprehensive strategic agenda that is driven by shared priorities and delivers mutual benefits. It seeks to complement the engagement of EU Member States, with adoption of Council Conclusions foreseen at the Foreign Affairs Council in October.

The Officials also highlighted the importance of safeguarding democratic values and a rules-based international order.

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said the move was a “natural step” in aligning Europe and India more closely at a time of geopolitical uncertainty. She underlined that the partnership is not just about economics but also about shared responsibility in tackling global crises.

She said, “Now is the time to focus on reliable partners and double down on partnerships rooted in shared interests and guided by common values.  With our new EU–India strategy, we are taking our relationship to the next level. Advancing trade, investment and talent mobility. Strengthening our joint economic security. Advancing the clean transition and driving innovation together. Deepening our industrial cooperation in defence. Europe is already India’s biggest trading partner and we are committed to finalising our Free Trade Agreement by the end of the year. Europe is open for business. And we are ready to invest in our shared future with India.”

Kaja Kallas, High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy/Vice-President of the European Commission, said, “India is one of the most important players in the world today and a natural partner for the European Union. There are many areas where our interests, strengths and political will align. Boosting our collaboration – which we are proposing today – will benefit the security and prosperity of citizens and businesses on both sides. There are areas where we disagree. Ultimately our partnership is about defending a rules-based international order. Our negotiations will address these challenges.”

The new strategy has been announced at a time when EU and India are close to finalise a Free Trade Agreement. The 13th round of talks for the FTA was recently held at New Delhi, and the 14th round is scheduled to be held in Brussels from October 6 to 10. Both sides have said that the FTA will be finalised by the end of this year, and is expected to be operational by early next year.

This development has shown that Donald Trump’s pressure tactics on other nations are not working after he angered the entire world with his trade and tariff policies. While he has been asking EU to impose 100% tariff on India, EU has made it clear that is not happening, and instead deepening its ties with India.

1...180181182...7,633Page 181 of 7,633