Global Leader or Opportunistic Grifter? On India

Got caught up on the 'unprovoked, full-scale invasion' of Iran, then got sparked into this topic, but Part 2 of that previous piece will come...

While the U.S. presents one extreme of the “Per what’s in our best interest” slogan, India presents a separate, increasingly perplexing interpretation of that dictum.

And while India’s version still remains the only respectable form of the two, however, from Nehru to today, India’s perspective on "non-alignement" certainly appears to have changed significantly, the ultimate proof lying in PM Narendra Modi’s meeting with Israel’s Benjamin Netanyahu—who’s wanted by the International Criminal Court for war crimes and crimes against humanity—in order to seal a, chiefly, weapons and tech deal just two days before the war on Iran was launched, this visit having a very souring effect on much of the world and throughout India, especially within its Muslim communities.

If the photos and videos of two besties paling around in between warm embraces weren’t enough to convince you that Modi had no qualms about being chums, and partnering, with a genocidal and criminal regime, then his Knesset address, in which he openly declared strong support for Israel, stating, “India stands with Israel, firmly, with full conviction, in this moment, and beyond," should remove all doubts.

Are we to believe that, two days before launching this major attack, Netanyahu kept Modi totally in the dark re what Israel and the U.S. had in store for Iran?

The fatherland/motherland claim reinforced that notion and devotion even if the scandal around it got twisted into being out of a viral false interpretation; Modi was clearly referring to the Indian diaspora in Israel, and not to Israel as a whole.
Nonetheless, Canada’s Indian community, at approximately 2 million, eclipses Israel’s of around 105,000, and you’ll never hear Modi refer to Canada as their “fatherland”. There’s a deeper bond in play, one that extends past the 'national self-interest' that New Delhi claims to be its guiding principle.

As Hindutva sees many parallels with Zionism's brand of ethnonationalism, and their foe, this aspect is sure to have played some role in the shift that distanced New Delhi away from the overt bond once expressed in relation to Palestinians and their cause, but, though relevant, this aspect can only be marginally causal, couched within a greater change.

But, how so? If India's relationship with Israel is what's in the country's best interest, what validates the claim that, with Modi, the principled non-alignment doctrine that allowed India to avoid rigid bloc alliances and to flow between worlds in service of its interests has morphed into an unprincipled form of opportunism whereby New Delhi is, per Indian media, always caught “in a delicate diplomatic tightrope walk.”

That type of acrobatics is only warranted if the wrong perspective is being applied to "interest", for, through its acquiescence, abstentions, inactions, and silences, the Modi government has communicated that it now prefers to align itself with the neo-colonial West. These days, New Delhi only expresses solidarity with the Global South so long as doing so is sure to not offend any great Western power.

Why am I discussing any of this? Because the view I held then hasn’t changed: I still believe that, geopolitically, India is currently the most important country. And, I also still believe that, if seen through the full scope of “interest”, at the global level, India is consistently making the wrong choices, "non-alignment" now including a selfish, pro-imperialism clause.

Modi and his BJP came into office with a clear plan and he's now had over a decade to put it into motion. Past the five-year point, despite all the moments that contradicted this, it became clear that India would eventually have to side with the West, unless it were to deviate in a crucial way from the trajectory it had set for itself. Why was I so certain? That, I couldn't, then, quite put my finger on.

I haven’t given up hope yet. As long as India still has a Palki, how can I?
Yeah, I know… Don’t ask.

•       •       •

Recall that New Delhi unequivocally condemned Hamas for the October 7th 'terrorist attacks' while simply calling for restraint and negotiations for Israel and Palestinians (MEA.gov) as the godi media instantly flooded the landscape with pro-Israel and anti-terrorist takes, pushing the “Israel has a right to defend itself” talking point and blaming Hamas for Palestinian suffering and Israeli missiles.

Like too many in the Western world, it was as if all had started on 7-Oct. Given India’s longstanding, strongly sympathetic relationship with Palestine, this turn marked a clear positional change.

Anyone who refers to Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Houthis as loathsome “terrorist organizations” has taken a firm pro-Western-imperialism stance, period. 
This betrays either a complete disregard for, or a willing embrace of, the many decades of meddling and violent oppression inflicted by the U.S. and Israel on the region that justify these groups' existence under the label of “resistance movements.” And when you don't have the U.S.'s military budget, you do what you can.
Outside of the Islamophobic framing that's pushed by Western right-wing and liberal outlets, it's absolutely ridiculous to think that these militant organizations came to be in a void and that their actions are totally unprovoked, yet, per the acceptable narrative, these groups just naturally formed into an angry death network because they're run by "religious lunatics" obsessed with ballistic missiles and drones who've always been on the verge of having nuclear bombs so they can destroy the world simply because Islam teaches them to hate Jews and Freedom. The Pentagon swears: Iraq, Sudan, Libya, Yemen, Lebanon, and, of course, Palestine, all of it, all the fault of Iran-led Islamic terrorists. The U.S. has always been just trying to fight evil, perhaps a tad too eagerly, ditto Israel; they both just want peace and democracy in the Middle East so damn much!

Ironically, when "terrorists" serve Western imperialist needs and receive U.S. funds, the same types of groups using the same types of tactics are raised to the level of “freedom fighters” or anti-Dictator “rebel groups”.

Is it a coinkidink that all the Gulf countries happen to be rich in oil and are smack-dab in the middle of key trade routes? Ponder that then add God to the mix, sprinkle racism in there, and realize that the good-old 19th-century colonial ideals of “supremacy” have only changed in terms of the methods employed.

Modi and his BJP would do well to remember that all the revolutionary groups that helped free the country from British colonial oppression, earning it its independence in 1947, are still referred to by the West as “terrorist organizations.”

Things may change under its new anti-terrorist policy, but, in the past decade, despite the very real terrorism problems that occasionally plague the country, Modi’s BJP has certainly exploited and abused the “terrorist” label in service of its nationalistic political aims.
And the initial reaction and statements that emphasized a one-sided blame and a strong disdain of Hamas expressed the same hate-driven lack of empathy and nuance that shines through the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh’s (RSS) aggressively oppressive and discriminatory attitude toward anti-nationalist elements that the BJP has adopted. The Jammu & Kashmir area, as well as the Khalistan issue, amongst others, provide potent case studies showcasing New Delhi's supremacy-driven hypocrisy.

What's that? No, get real! Calling Washington and Tel Aviv "terrorists" makes no sense; they have huge armies with official and expensive weapons.

Notice that Washington, while already severely abusing the label since the 80s, has also intensified its misuse in service of its ethno-nationalist goals.

•       •       •

A 29-Sep-2014 Jerusalem Post piece titled, “Why is Adolf Hitler popular in India?” wants readers to conclude that, only in India, it’s ‘ignorance and curiosity with no trace of antisemitism that drives Indians toward Mein Kampf. India’s fascination with Hitler may be jarring but it's normal and healthy.’

Its Toronto-based Jewish author, then temporarily living near New Delhi, tells us:

“This ignorance, according to Jael Silliman, a member of Calcutta’s once-sizeable and prominent Jewish community, is what allows Indians to limit their opinion of Hitler to what they see as his positive attributes and discuss them without any of the stigma that surrounds Hitler in the West.”

He also interviewed Philipp Franz, a German exchange law student from Munich, who says that, due to his nationality, ‘Hitler’ is an unavoidable topic while he’s in India, and “one he certainly wasn’t expecting to have come up in the way it has.”

Franz states:

“They say ‘I like his kind of leadership.’ And the older people who say this, they know what happened. The 17-year-old in my hostel in his first year of university, okay, he might not know. [...] They are fascinated by the pomp and circumstances – the celebrity image of Hitler. ... In a country where many Indians want to believe a strong leader can transform a society for the better, images of tens of thousands of Germans standing at attention before their Fuhrer seems to speak to them, despite the evil that those rallies gave birth to.”

The article goes on to assure us that Indians love all Jews, and the problem is that, due to the lack of deeply-felt significance that WWII had on India and the gap created by the country's approach to history, “there is a willingness to overlook Hitler’s most heinous acts, and be impressed by his ‘strength’ as a leader.”

The aforementioned Silliman concurs, agreeing with all those cited that: “Anti-Semitism, she says, isn’t a factor at all in Hitler’s Indian popularity. She has never seen or experienced any form of it in India.”

Given what now passes for antisemitism throughout the West, you gotta admire, and envy, the Jews’ tolerant attitude toward India.

However, what comes across is a patronizing Western attitude that paints Indians as just too naive and so very accepting of Jews, that the issue, if their Hitler hobby presents any, lies in the very briefly mentioned fact that, “...the book’s message can be abused by India’s rising Hindu nationalist movement. “[Mein Kampf] can be used to support a purist Hindu India where Muslims are persecuted.”

Hey, if Hitler strengthens India’s love for the Jews and helps shape their hatred of Muslims, why should any Zionist complain or care about India’s Hitler obsession?

No matter the motivation that’s spun, the fact that Mein Kampf constantly shows up on India’s Best Seller list means that many are absorbing its essence, all while the RSS and its Hindutva philosophy experience a strong rise, which should lead one to conclude that what strikes a chord with many are the parallels they see between the Israelis’ plight against the fanatically evil Muslim terrorists that constantly threaten their properly-stable way of life, and all the Pakistani-funded fanatically evil Muslim and tribal terrorists that continually harm civilized Hindu life and disrupt the Hindu Rashtra project.

Disturbingly, that ‘gap in historical knowledge’ appears to be responsible for a generalized inability to fully connect Hitler’s concentration-camp Jews with those now in Israel; the former are abstracted, turned into symbolic representations of the nationalistically-geared hatred toward Muslims and minority groups that the media encourage them to feel, linking these with the problems that a great leader like Hitler can surely resolve. Modi, he's also a strong leader...

It shouldn’t come as any surprise that the Hindutva extremist literature treats Muslims in ways that resemble how the Jews were treated across Nazi propaganda. Nor that the RSS is, at its core, a fascist movement that was greatly inspired by Nazism.

Interestingly, within the Hindutva crowd, a significant portion has its sights set on a ‘Greater India’ project that would return India’s borders to the pre-British divisions.

That said, the proliferation of Hindutva adherents helps explain the emergence of a popular and vehemently pro-Israel/anti-Palestine attitude within India that's willing to cheer on this change, but it falls real short in terms of explaining the change that justifies growing criticisms against India's non-alignment principle and intensifying accusations of "betrayal". In fact, Modi's "pro-industrialist" decisions have, at times, put him at odds with the RSS' leaders.

•       •       •

While I see much good in Hindutva’s underlying principles, when ethno-cultural or religious “beliefs” lie at the centre of any identity-based ideology, between the theory, dissemination, and practice, the message always gets distorted through fundamentalist lenses that, in due course, give reason to hate-fueled extremist mindsets and the types of groups they join.
Since, in this case, both establish the type of nationalist state that’s the goal of this guiding philosophy, no matter how broad a definition of “Hindu” is set—over an inclusionary focus on “Indian”—it’s sure to take on very narrow ones once it hits the streets, eventually justifying an exclusionary, racialized, and incrementally-discriminatory reading of the movement’s manifesto that’s bound to creep into policy through manipulative campaign slogans.

Given that it's not a popular fringe group pushing this nationalist agenda and that the government in power since 2014 functions as one arm of the RSS’ far-reaching Sangh Parivar collective, that narrowing process seems to have skipped a few steps, rapidly leading to supremacist-based swells and increases in state-sanctioned acts of violence and in in-humane modes of authoritarianism aimed at sets of non-Hindu ‘others’. The deeply secular India of ten years ago, despite BJP and godi claims, is no more.

Since Hindus represent the country’s vast majority, it doesn’t seem right to refer to the RSS as a separatist group, yet…

If it's only the numbers that give pragmatic credence to ideological fanaticism, legitimizing such a group's actions, how is the Hindutva ideal not being implemented under the belief that "might makes right"?

•       •       •

Under Modi, New Delhi has continually and boldly proclaimed India the nation that’s to lead the rise of the Global South. The Dr. Syama Prasad Mookerjee Research Foundation (SPMRF), a nationalist think tank, perfectly echoes the BJP’s repeated grand-saviour-of-the-colonially-oppressed vision in a piece called, “India and the Global South: Leading the Rise of a New Economic Powerhouse.”

However, that visit In Tel Aviv, in combination with New Delhi’s complete silence vis-à-vis the U.S.-Israel war on Iran, is now seen by anti-colonialists throughout the world as a last straw that undeniably confirms India’s betrayal.

Encouragingly so, a rising number of Indian intellectuals and public voices are also seeing the deepening contradiction that’s widely expressed across the Global South and beyond: Between words and actions, India doesn’t “walk the talk.”

Vishal R Choradiya, an assistant professor with the Department of Professional Studies, Christ University, Bengaluru, in a 19-Jul-2025 Scroll article titled, “India Claims to be a Leader of the Global South but its Strategic Silences Subvert that Assertion,” wrote:

“India’s foreign policy under the Modi regime has demonstrated a troubling dissonance between word and deed, particularly when it comes to supporting contemporary anti-colonial, anti-imperial struggles – the very foundation upon which Global South solidarity has been built historically.

“While India continues to posture as a champion of decolonial justice, its abstentions, evasions and silences on key issues indicate a growing complicity with forces driven by the impulses New Delhi claims to be standing against.”

This view was expressed in the context of the 2025 Israel-Iran 12-day war. Many more share a similar opinion since the start of the 2026 edition.

•       •       •

To much of the world, India’s tricky ambiguity dance is now seen as an attempt to have its cake and eat it too, and to boast the first but deny the second. New Delhi wants to have a foot in each camp in order to maximize its self-serving interests and reach its global economic goals, and it's gladly ditching its end of collective moral responsibility to do so.

However, whether or not India has changed drastically under Modi is only indirectly relevant; though I tried, it’s hard to identify a significant change in the “non-alignment” ideals or the foreign policy approaches that have guided India, from Nehru to now.

Therefore, the far more important change to consider is the one that’s happening everywhere outside of India, shifting the World’s Order and rewriting the Rules-Based rules.

Within that world, what’s changed is India’s status, and the U.S.’s desperation-driven determination to forge an unquestioned global hegemony and the level of lunacy that's behind that grand goal.

New Delhi’s ability to have good and distinct ties with both the Soviet and U.S. blocs worked out well for India then, because, in the Cold War years, the world was solidly divided between those two camps, and, so long as New Delhi was willing to offer certain accommodations and never took a firm anti-Western stance, India was an untrustworthy annoyance but worth tolerating as it presented no considerable threat to Western Freedom & Democracy.

In other words: Within the Cold War’s firm bipolar politics, India wasn’t going to help either side win the world. Plus, to add irritation to frustration, India’s protectionist policies, corruption, and sluggish bureaucratic overkill meant that the U.S. couldn’t easily and cheaply convert the country into a Western-serving ‘liberalized’ economy like they were doing with China…

CIA sidenote: If China became a U.S.-challenging and respected great economic force, it’s not because it refuses to play under the rules set by exploitative Western-centric institutions and, as such, it’s certainly not because China is better and more humanitarian than the West at their own Capitalism game. It’s because China is a Freedom-hating evil place, led by cheating authoritarian monsters.

Since its rise as a top global economic power within the China-USA split that came to pit Washington and Wall Street against yet another global villain, India’s significance, within this world, is now drastically different. Simultaneously, its markets have considerably opened up.

Today, seen through Washington's eyes, China’s non-approved, non-compliant success poses a veritable existential threat to U.S. primacy, forcing Beijing to deal with a one-sided war, yet, Washington’s focus isn’t on taking down an established system, it’s on making sure that the neoliberal one it set and controls continues to dominate. Even more. They didn't take down the Soviet Union just so another Red Evil could pop up and ruin Freedom for all!

The U.S.'s main oppositional foe isn't a clear axis, it's "transition", and breaking an emerging bloc before it can impose a firm economic division on the globe with the potential to destroy the USD’s absolute power is what Venezuela and Iran are all about, along with all the other military and meddling interventions currently happening in ‘key’ parts of the world. Therefore, the real fight is between the possibility of a more equitable multipolarity and a hardened continuation of U.S. unipolarity.
For the Global South, this fight lies between hope versus exploitation. People versus billionaires?

Hence, the Good vs. Bad vision of the world that’s pushed by the U.S. to justify its aggressions and human-rights violations and to give reason to its eschatological crusades and Free Market liberations is no longer actually crafted out of an unwittingly-accepted and justified bipolar reality, especially not one wherein a clear consensus still exists regarding who the “Bad” refers to; Trump’s tariffs, statements, and savagery amplified the spread of that sentiment.

What’s also changed is just how passionately, petulantly, and callously the White House embraces the “You’re either with us or against us” mindset that was popularized by Bush Jr. but goes far back.

•       •       •

On the economic front, despite the differences between the U.S.-led West’s understanding of “self-interest” and India’s, today, all of New Delhi’s metrics are satisfied, and its motivations driven, by the framing that’s globally imposed by the West’s interpretation. In this way, India has subjugated itself to an exploitative and violent framework of economic domination, focusing its efforts on competing for, and within, the Free Market and financial trappings that strengthen the U.S. empire’s grip on the world.

After all, Modi did make it amply clear early on that India, under his leadership, was willingly embracing a neoliberalism mindset, along with its modes and methods. Per what's in India's best interest.

Since then, heavily influenced by the country’s two main billionaires, he and the BJP have been doing just that, adopting many neoliberalist programs and selling many national assets, allowing all sorts of foreign investments and Blackrock deals to go through.

Modi had managed to do so in a very Indian manner, imposing clear limits on what was to be expected from New Delhi and making it clear that it wasn’t going to be bullied by anyone, which, initially, gave weight to its desire to lead the Global South toward prosperity and equity, but the eloquent bravado and macho posturing has yet to translate into meaningful acts of actual leadership.

Quite the opposite.

•       •       •

India’s clear turn toward Israel is just one factor, albeit being the one that forces many to now see India’s foreign policy pomp as nothing more than a lame formulation to justify selfishly growing its GDP and defense posturing, morals be damned! 

But, but… It’s not India’s fault if the Palestinians aren’t currently producing anything that’s worth a trade deal; it’d just as happily do business with them, if they still had banks and stuff… But no weapons sales while Hamas is still in power!

Indian mainstream media tells us that the reason why the Modi government has yet to say or do anything in regards to the U.S. and Israel’s latest highly-criminal acts of gross aggressions on Iran is because, in this case, “[t]he aggressors are [India’s] partners, which makes it hard for New Delhi to criticise the U.S. or Israel,” and that “this is no different than how New Delhi treated Russia after it invaded Ukraine.”

I disagree with that last part. India may have infuriated the West by refusing to fully condemn Moscow—whilst providing aid to Ukraine—but the trepidation that now appears to dominate New Delhi’s ‘non-position’ was wholly absent then. Sure, through its historic ties and proven friendship, there’s a level of comfort that now exists between India and Russia that isn’t present with the U.S. and Israel, emboldening Modi to occasionally call for ceasefires, to attempt open dialogues, and to try to act as mediator between Ukraine and Russia, but that’s not it…

Through the string of events that New Delhi has had to react to, or avoided doing so, what one now senses is an ambivalent mix of acquiescence and complicity; Modi's silence on that trade deal with the U.S.—and the timing—certainly transmitted that. True, Trump's version of the details can't be trusted, but if the proposed deal was a clear win for India, Modi wouldn’t have allowed the Trump-created impressions of a serious loss to take hold, offering nothing more than empty, detail-free reassurances; he’d have given a 2-hour long Lok Sabha speech to both boast his victory and attack Congress party members.

Yet, with all those grandiloquent speeches and pledges to the Global South, not to mention India’s own experience with colonialism, the Middle East shouldn’t be a tough one, necessitating a demanding diplomatic tightrope act. As history attests, there are moments when—if that's what India is even getting—“a good deal” absolutely shouldn’t win over “justice” and “will to act”. This is one of them. 
Anything involving a genocide always is, which should establish a bright red line.
And India’s anti-colonialist stance in the face of blatant, savage imperialism is to avoid doing anything at all that could jeopardize its trade deals with the “aggressors”? (That an Indian mainstream anchor even used that term surprised me.)  

If one’s partner in a restaurant turns out to be a serial killer, should one remain quiet, stepping out of the way when they spot a victim because, well, for both of them, business is good? And knowing that they’re a serial killer beforehand and still partnering with them just makes it worse.  

By remaining silent, one automatically assumes a submissive position within such a partnership, doing so either willingly or through coercion, as this establishes that a dependence is in play, otherwise, why on earth would anyone tolerate such murderous behaviour?
Anywhichway, the one thing that doesn’t shine through is global-level “leadership”.

Leadership, the kind that Modi craves and ascribes to India, requires more than a “mind your own business” attitude and weak, protocolar calls for dialogue and cease fires. It requires the ability to make tough decisions and having the balls to take sides in order to lead others toward a greater understanding of “best interest” rather than the “self-serving” version embraced by India. Because the World Order is undergoing a shift… As the saying goes: If you decide to not make a choice, you still have made a choice.

Playing both sides to one’s benefit to guarantee one's place on the ‘winning’ side is one thing, but when you’re the piece that has the potential to shift the game either way, being a passive observer in order to maximize one’s trade deals isn’t only feeble and reprehensible, it puts one at a high risk of becoming irrelevant.

Much more to say. I still haven’t mentioned China, BRICS, cronyism, Epsteinism, or some of the related key moments at the latest Raisina Dialogues that I wanted to address, fleshing out my abstractions, and I do need to tie all of the above together, but I think I’ll stop here for now. I’ll offer a “part 2”, but I may finish the second part of the SocDem-tribal piece first.