The transformation of India’s defence infrastructure to a non-contact war model, undertaken by Prime Minister Narendra Modi, was the foundation for the spectacular Operation Sindoor. This new model marked a significant departure from earlier efforts like the Uri surgical strike and the Balakot aerial attack, which were based on traditional war models. Modi realized that the old model would no longer suffice for the future. Without deep strikes into Pakistan’s territory, India could not destroy terror outfits at their source. This realization impelled Modi to shift to non-contact warfare, the result of which was Operation Sindoor and its breathtaking success.

Despite all the military infrastructure and preparations, Operation Sindoor could not have been undertaken with such relative ease without a cluster of supportive factors. These factors dramatically transformed the geopolitical, economic, and strategic ecosystem in India’s favor under Modi’s ten-year rule. It was also aided by the relative decline of Pakistan during the same period.

Non-contact warfare

What is non-contact warfare and how Modi put India on its ladder?

This is what the Pakistan Defence website had to say [8.7.2020] about how India was climbing on to non-contact warfare. It described the induction of long range missiles, high precision smart weapons, unmanned systems, robots and satellites primarily driven by technology and aimed at achieving a quick, decisive victory by remote delivery of destructive kinetic energy as “non-Contact Warfare”.

The Pakistani site went on to say, “The concept has recently gained currency with the Indian strategic community.” It added, “The Balakot strikes and earlier fake surgical strike claims (by India) point to its strong desire for gaining psychological ascendancy without suffering casualties, simultaneously avoiding escalation of violence.

As recently as January 2015, the Indian army Chief reiterated that non-Contact Warfare is “important” and is a “major consideration” in the planned restructuring of the Indian army.” In its post in 2020, the Pakistan website cited the Indian army chief’s reference to non-contact warfare in 2015 as “recently”!

Op Sindoor – non-contact war mode

The core strength of Operation Sindoor lay in five cutting-edge, non-contact warfare technologies that eliminated the need for ground troops or traditional air assaults.

First, the Rafale fighter jets, second, the SCALP cruise missiles, third, the HAMMER precision missiles, fourth, the Kamikaze loitering drones developed with Israeli collaboration, and fifth, the lethal BrahMos missiles.

All these systems are non-contact and autonomous—once launched, they independently track and engage their targets.

The Indian Air Force used Rafale jets to carry out Operation Sindoor. India equipped these jets with advanced weaponry, including SCALP and HAMMER missiles, enabling deep penetration and highly accurate strikes.

• The SCALP missile is capable of stealthily reaching and destroying distant fortified structures like bunkers and command posts up to 500 kilometers away.
• The HAMMER missile is designed for air-to-ground attacks, effective even against moving targets. During the operation, HAMMER missiles complemented SCALP’s assault.
• The Kamikaze drones are ‘one-way’ drones controlled remotely by humans for targeted destruction.
• Lastly, the BrahMos missile, equipped with an indigenous guidance system, was pivotal in demolishing terrorist hideouts during the mission.

A key asset in defending against Pakistani drone and missile counterattacks from May 7 to 9—following the major Indian strike on the night of May 6-7—was the Russian S-400 missile defense system.

In what seemed like a conspiracy against the nation, the Congress party strongly opposed the purchase of Rafale jets, accusing the deal of corruption and attempting to block it. Fortunately, the Supreme Court intervened and cleared the way, allowing the Rafale deal

Non-contact infra – Modi plan

Modi acquired Rafale and HaMMER missiles from France, SCaLP missiles from England, Heron Mk2 UAVs and technology for HaROP drones from Israel, S-400 missile interceptors from Russia, AH-64 Apache attack helicopters, and AGM-114 Hellfire missiles from the US.

The Modi government also secretly purchased various other technologies and equipment.

The two key acquisitions made against all odds and opposition were the Rafale fighter jets and the Russian S-400 missile defence system.

Without the Rafale fighters, non-contact warfare under Operation Sindoor would have been unthinkable.

Without the Russian S-400s, India could not have thwarted the waves of Pakistani drones and missiles targeting Indian defence and air installations on May 7, 8, and 9.

Pakistani missiles were shot down like birds in the sky.

Modi defied the US, took on Rahul’s Congress

Modi faced heavy opposition for buying the two major defence assets — Rafale and S-400 — which ultimately made Operation Sindoor and its aftermath a spectacular success.

In what appeared to be a conspiracy against the nation, the Congress vigorously opposed the purchase of the Rafale jets and, alleging corruption, tried to stop it. Fortunately, the Supreme Court intervened, allowing the Rafale deal.

As the 2019 polls were approaching, Modi took the highest political risk to buy the Rafales, which today have saved India. Without Rafales, our defence forces would not have been able to fire autonomous drones and missiles to target and destroy terrorist camps 250 km away, without crossing the border — the very essence of non-contact warfare.

If Rahul Gandhi was bent upon stopping the Rafale, the US was hell-bent on stopping India from buying the S-400 from Russia. It had threatened to impose technological sanctions on India if it went ahead with the S-400 deal.

But Modi did not buckle under the threat of his friend Trump and went ahead to buy the S-400s in 2018.

It is the S-400s that stopped and destroyed hundreds of Pakistani missiles and drones fired into our territory after the tri-force attacked nine terror camps.

Had Modi buckled under Congress pressure before the elections and not gone ahead with buying Rafale fighter jets, and had he succumbed to Trump’s threat and cancelled the order to buy S-400 anti-missile systems, India could never have thought of Operation Sindoor.

Modi’s Atmanirbharta yielded Kamikaze drones

The story is not complete without complimenting Modi for his efforts to indigenise defence manufacturing under his ambitious Atmanirbhar Bharat agenda.

Modi did not stop at importing the best equipment. He also encouraged the development of technologies within the country.

Our country, which produced only 32% of our defence needs in 2014, now produces 88% of them.

A word about the Kamikaze drones: the Israeli technology was indigenised as Swadeshi Kamikaze drones and inducted into the defence forces in April last year, ahead of India’s 78th Independence Day.

The National Aerospace Laboratories (NAL) manufactured the indigenous Kamikaze drone, marking a significant milestone in India’s defence technology.

These “do-and-die” unmanned aerial vehicles, designed with home-built engines, can fly up to 1,000 km and loiter over target areas for up to nine hours.

The Swadeshi Kamikaze drones made their debut in Operation Sindoor.

Geopolitical rise of Modi, India

Mere military preparation would not have enabled India to cross the borders and strike Pakistan. When Modi took over as Prime Minister, he faced a wave of negative perceptions spread venomously by his detractors in India, with active support from their liberal woke associates abroad. He vowed to confront this liberal world that virtually hated him.

Anyone facing such widespread adversity might have hired an expensive global PR agency to soften the blow. But Modi chose a different path — he decided to correct the false impressions about him through his own efforts, in the most unconventional way.

He undertook the most extensive travel by any leader anywhere in the world — visiting 73 countries in 10 years. He went to Israel, a country India had neglected for seven decades and which no previous Indian Prime Minister had visited. Today, Israel is one of India’s closest allies.

He was the first PM to visit Australia after Indira Gandhi, and that country has now become a strong partner for India in dealing with the West.

As of May 2025, Modi has visited 41 countries once, 14 countries twice, eight countries thrice (including the UK and Saudi Arabia), Sri Lanka four times, three countries including China five times, Germany six times, Japan, Russia, and UAE seven times, France eight times, and the US ten times.

These were not mere diplomatic picnics. Modi built powerful, personal relationships with leaders worldwide. His strenuous, personal outreach made him familiar with most nations, and endeared him to influential leaders and even distant countries.

Many world leaders became his admirers. For instance, former Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett said Modi was the most popular person in Israel. US President Donald Trump called Modi “a fantastic person, magnificent and a total killer.” Trump’s predecessor Joe Biden said he “felt like taking Modi’s autograph.” Russian President Vladimir Putin called Modi “a wise man” and admired his toughness in defending India’s national interests.

Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni described Modi as “the most loved leader in the world.” Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese called him “boss.” The then British Prime Minister Boris Johnson wrote in his book Unleashed that Modi is a “change-maker,” recalling a sense of “curious astral energy” during their first meeting.

Modi has been conferred the highest civilian awards by 21 countries, including Muslim-majority nations like Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, UAE, Bahrain, Egypt, and Kuwait, as well as the USA, France, Russia, and Greece. No other world leader has received such a broad range of honors.

Since 2019, Modi has been the most admired leader worldwide, quarter after quarter, according to the US Morning Consult survey, with an approval rating above 70%.

While Modi was straining every nerve to build India’s global image through extensive foreign travels, the Congress party mocked him as a “non-resident Prime Minister.” In contrast, Rahul Gandhi secretly traveled abroad 247 times in four years, often unknown even to his own party.

Modi’s rise and India’s rise were complementary. His visits and the global stature he earned brought technology, trade, investment, and military equipment that would have been difficult to secure without his unprecedented outreach.

His geopolitical ascent as a global leader enabled India to tower over Pakistan, which was dwarfed by Modi and India’s growing influence. When the stealthy Balakot aerial strike was launched under Modi’s watch, there was muted support and open opposition.

This time, with Operation Sindoor, Modi openly declared the mission and launched a brutal attack on Pakistan after crossing the border.

Remarkably, no Muslim country except Turkey supported Pakistan. Even Qatar, which had previously aligned with Pakistan, backed India this time.

India could not have undertaken Operation Sindoor without this crucial global support.

Israeli technology was indigenized into swadeshi Kamikaze drones—“do-or-die” unmanned aerial vehicles capable of flying up to 1,000 km and loitering over target areas for up to nine hours. These Swadeshi Kamikaze drones made their debut during Operation Sindoor.

India’s rise from Fragile 5 to Super 4. Pak 10 steps bel

India’s rise under Modi’s leadership has dwarfed Pakistan and shifted the global ecosystem decisively in India’s favor. When Modi assumed office, India was listed among the world’s Fragile 5 economies. Today, it ranks among the top four fastest-growing economies, with a GDP of $3.88 trillion in 2024. Pakistan, by contrast, lags far behind with a GDP of just $0.37 trillion — nearly ten times smaller.

During Modi’s tenure, India doubled its GDP, while Pakistan, mired in prolonged macroeconomic crisis, has struggled to keep pace. In 2024, India recorded an impressive 8.2% growth rate, three times Pakistan’s 2.4%. Over the past decade, India’s per capita GDP surged by 74%, whereas Pakistan’s growth remained stagnant.

India’s foreign exchange reserves stand at a robust $676 billion, compared to Pakistan’s mere $9 billion. India is the world’s fastest-growing major economy, while Pakistan has been at the IMF’s doorstep over 20 times since 1980 seeking bailouts. The recent $7 billion IMF rescue package for Pakistan is one of the largest in its history. Unfortunately, many such bailouts have been diverted to fund Pakistan’s military, which remains closely linked to terrorist activities.

These stark economic contrasts played a significant role in the global community’s positive reception of India during Operation Sindoor.

Op Sindoor – the key takeaways

Operation Sindoor is a dramatic turn that transformed India into a rule-setter in the Indo-Pakistan interface. There are several key takeaways:

One, India avenged the Pahalgam carnage with massive missile strikes on nine terror camps, which Pakistan could neither block nor deny—unlike in the past when it was always in denial.
Two, Pakistan, which started the war after India’s attack on terror, failed to penetrate the country’s air defence system with its missiles.
Three, Indian forces destroyed Pakistan’s air defence systems while attacking and damaging its air bases with impunity.
Four, when thoroughly beaten, Pakistan’s nuclear threat was laughed away by India, forcing Pakistan’s Director General of Military Operations to beg for a ceasefire.
Five, India openly declared that any future terror strike will be regarded as a declaration of war and will be met with pursuit of terror outfits inside Pakistan.
Six, Pakistan’s military commanders attending funerals of globally wanted terrorists and paying homage has provided vital evidence of the link between its army and terror.
Seven, the Prime Minister told Pakistan and the world that ‘terror and talk,’ and ‘trade and talk,’ cannot go together.
Eight, he stated that any talk with Pakistan will be only about PoK (Pakistan-occupied Kashmir).
Nine, he also declared that blood and water cannot flow together, clearly linking Indus water flow to Pakistan giving up terror.
Ten, Modi warned Pakistan that unless it gives up terror, it will be destroyed by terror.
And lastly, Modi said India will not tolerate nuclear blackmail, indicating that its no first use nuclear policy may be reviewed.

To conclude, Operation Sindoor resets the India-Pakistan engagement—whether in war or peace.

Nine days later, at a blood donation camp held on her slain husband's birthday, Himanshi demanded that the perpetrators of the Pahalgam massacre be brought to justice. The sindoor that was cruelly wiped from her forehead—and from the foreheads of 25 other women—became the spilled symbol of Operation Sindoor and a powerful, emotional representation of the national mission to avenge the heinous crime against Indian women.

Pakistan as terrorist state

Op Sindoor, which will figure in military history as the most spectacular anti-terror operation anywhere in the world, daring a nuclear power which threatens to press its nuclear button at will, cannot be rivalled even by Israel, the master terror-buster. The reason is simple: Israel faces no nuclear threat.

Op Sindoor is also the high vantage point of rising India’s war on the terror state of Pakistan, from where the Modi-led India binned and buried the most dangerous and anti-Indian, anti-human narrative of the Sonia-Manmohan-led India — that “Pakistan is not a purveyor of terror but a victim of it.”

The shameful endorsement of the terror state of Pakistan as a victim of terror needs to be recalled and its authors shamed, as Op Sindoor finally proved it is a terror state. Pakistani generals stood in reverence and paid homage to the most wanted terrorists killed in the operation.

In 2011, Pakistan stood naked before the world as a global terror merchant, as the US commandos chasing the 9/11 mastermind Osama Bin Laden — who massacred over 4,000 men and women — found him in Abbottabad in Pakistan, well protected by the Pakistan military.

Op Sindoor is also the high vantage point of rising India’s war on the terror state of Pakistan, from where Modi-led India binned and buried the most dangerous and anti-Indian narrative of the Sonia-Manmohan-led India — that “Pakistan is not a purveyor of terror but a victim of it.”

And yet, India under the Congress-led coalition government was busy probing and proving Hindu terror! Until Modi arrived on the scene in 2014 and began to unravel that Pakistan itself is a terrorist state, two generations of Indians were fed on the narrative that friendship with Pakistan was the best way for both to fight terror — when it really meant shaking hands with the terrorist!

Pakistan is not run by government or law. It is driven by a huge terror architecture.

State, army, intelligence, $30 billion—backed terror

Before Op Sindoor is unravelled, the story of how Pakistan’s terror infrastructure was built — beginning from the time of General Zia-ul-Haq, when the country adopted jihad as state policy — needs to be told. The Pakistani state, army, and intelligence agencies converged to create and sustain a massive global-level terror infrastructure: first backed by the West against Russia in the 1980s, and later used for a covert war against India.

A well-known quip in diplomatic circles goes: “Every nation has an army, but Pakistan’s army has a nation.” This aptly describes the deep-rooted control of the Pakistan army over the country. Seen as a national icon by its people, the Pakistan army dominates not just the polity but also controls the economy and stock market. The Fauji Foundation (often referred to as the "Soldiers Foundation"), managed and owned by the Pakistan army, is a vast conglomerate covering industries like fertilizer, cement, food, retail, power generation, gas exploration, LPG distribution, and financial services. It provides "womb-to-tomb" benefits to retired servicemen and their families (Balfour, Frederik. “Pakistan: Armed Forces Inc”. Bloomberg, 11 Nov 2001).

According to Professor R. Vaidyanathan of IIM Bangalore (Pakistan: Army with a Country, 2011), the Soldiers Foundation holds a staggering 70% share of Pakistan’s stock market capitalisation. With Pakistan’s current market cap at around $43 billion, this implies that the army controls nearly $30 billion in liquid assets.

It is with these massive resources that the Pakistan army — which has not won any of the four wars it has fought with India — and its intelligence wing, the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), built thousands of madrasas to radicalize millions of youth. From this radicalized base, the state, army, and intelligence agencies created and supported terror outfits like Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM), Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT), and Hizbul Mujahideen (HM). Later, groups like The Resistance Front (TRF) and many other jihadist organizations were formed to recruit unemployed youth to wage a covert war on India, all under the army’s doctrine of “bleeding India with a thousand cuts.”

These terror outfits operate out of luxurious mansions protected by the army. From there, jihadists infiltrate India with army cover, carry out attacks, and escape with impunity. Even though the state that protects them behaves like a sovereign nation, it is effectively a fraudulent legal sovereign. India, the victim of this cross-border terrorism, cannot strike back directly without being accused of violating Pakistan’s so-called sovereignty — even though it is clearly a jihadi state.

From candle lights ….

Since the 1990s, India has been suffering silently or crying loudly about terror attacks by jihadi outfits operating from inside Pakistan, killing tens of thousands of people. With the Indian state ruled by fragile and weak coalitions from 1989 to 2014, Pakistani terrorists not only operated freely, but Pakistan also had the sympathy of the Indian state.

When, in 2008, Islamist terrorists—including Ajmal Kasab—sent by Pakistan slaughtered and maimed hundreds of innocents in Mumbai, an attack witnessed by the whole world on television, the Sonia-Manmohan-led Indian state fervently appealed for peace and harmony. They sponsored and led candlelight processions, even expressing empathy that poor Pakistan was also a victim of terror, effectively certifying the greatest terror merchant against India as innocent. They repeatedly claimed that terror has no religion and is secular. Yet paradoxically, they insisted that Hindu terror existed, with Rahul Gandhi warning the US that Hindu terror was more dangerous!

This was the narrative about terror in India when Narendra Modi led the BJP to win a majority on its own in 2014. With his image dented worldwide as a Hindu nationalist and anti-Muslim, and with many countries denying him visas, Modi had to overcome this negative perception, especially regarding Pakistan.

He chose to attend Nawaz Sharif’s family wedding on December 25, 2015, following the example of Atal Bihari Vajpayee, who traveled by bus in February 1999 to Lahore to befriend Pakistan. However, within three months of Vajpayee’s bus journey, in May 1999, Pakistan launched the Kargil war to stab him in the back.

Similarly, within seven days of Modi attending Sharif’s family wedding, on January 2, 2016, Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM) struck the Pathankot military base, killing seven army personnel and injuring 25 others. Modi realized that in Pakistan, neither the prime minister nor the government mattered; what mattered were the terror outfits as the extended arm of the army and the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI).

To gun shots, aerial strikes

When the JeM terror group struck Uri and killed 19 Indian soldiers in September 2016, Modi ordered a surgical strike by the army. The forces crossed the Line of Control (LoC), entered Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK), and killed around 70 terrorists. Modi reversed India’s response to terror from candlelight vigils to gunfire.

In 2019, he took this further. When JeM attacked Pulwama on February 14, killing 46 CRPF jawans, Modi ordered the Indian Air Force to cross the LoC and strike the JeM camp at Balakot, killing an estimated 250-300 jihadis. Modi upgraded India’s response from gunfights in 2016 to aerial bombing in 2019.

Pakistan called a meeting of its nuclear command group to threaten India in 2019, but Modi brushed it aside. India firmly declared that cross-border attacks were now part of its anti-terror strategy. Save for wailing and complaining, Pakistan could do nothing.

By the end of 2019, Article 370 was abrogated and thrown into the dustbin. Once again, Pakistan could only lament and shout. With surgical strikes and airstrikes hitting terror launchpads, coupled with stricter policing to clamp down on terror, Kashmir became peaceful and prosperous. Terror killings in Kashmir dropped dramatically from 86 in 2018 to just 12 in 2023. Elections were held in 2024, and despite opposing the repeal of Article 370, the Abdullah family became rulers in Kashmir without Article 370.

And finally brahMos

A humiliated Pakistan lost all its senses and struck through LeT’s proxy, The Resistance Front (TRF), at the unguarded tourist spot in Pahalgam. Worse, it killed tourists after checking their religion and confirming that, as mandated by Islamic theology—which governs Pakistan—they killed only Kafirs, that is, Hindus.

Modi knew that attacking terror bases in Pakistan would invite a war with a reckless Pakistan armed with nuclear weapons. Yet, he chose to initiate that conflict by openly directing the strikes on those terror bases — essentially declaring war and notifying Pakistan, “We are going to hit you.”

Their theology did not forbid them from killing in front of the victims’ wives and children. Yet they did that too. Modi vowed that India would chase these beastly terrorists, their backers, and funders to the ends of the earth and bury them in the soil — an open political directive to the Indian defence, intelligence, and diplomatic community. It needed no political pundit to deduce that the Prime Minister’s direction was to strike terrorist camps in Pakistan.

The heart-rending terror left no option for the political system and leadership but to declare an open war against terror. However, this was unlike the US-led war on terror, which targeted a state — the invasion of Afghanistan. India’s war on terror was not, and could not be, an open war against the state of Pakistan. Yet, technically, any attack on terror camps in Pakistan, which are extensions of the state and army, was in effect an attack on Pakistan itself.

Modi knew that attacking these terror bases would invite war with a mad Pakistan armed with nuclear weapons. Yet he chose to initiate that war by openly directing strikes on terror bases — essentially declaring war and notifying Pakistan, “We are going to hit you.” Executing such an openly declared mission, which deprived the Indian army of the surprise element crucial for success, was indeed a daunting challenge, as the enemy would be fully prepared to thwart it. Moreover, since it was a declared cross-border attack, it required not only military preparation but also extremely skillful diplomatic maneuvering to secure support from major world powers and minimize opposition.

Within 15 days of the Pahalgam slaughter, Team Modi — comprising the tri-forces, intelligence, and diplomacy — spectacularly accomplished the explicitly declared mission by hitting nine terror bases in Pakistan and killing over 100 jihadis. This time, it was no mere gunshot as in PoK, no aerial bombing as in Balakot. Modi upgraded the Indian response to barbaric Pakistani terror to another level — BrahMos missiles.

How could Modi transform an anti-terror mission, previously kept secret to maintain surprise attacks on terror camps in PoK in 2016 and Balakot in 2019, into an open and notified mission in 2025 and still succeed? His preparations for 2025 began right after Balakot in 2019, when he realized that a completely new non-contact war model was needed — one targeting not just terror but its sponsor, Pakistan.

The next part is about how the Indian army, air force, and navy masterfully and professionally executed that openly declared mission against terror and how they even excelled Israel in an Israel-model attack.

I. The Critical Question

The single most critical question which has tormented the Indian establishment consisting of most thinkers, intellectuals, academics, political leaders, policy makers, economists, sociologists of India since Independence is whether the Indian religions, culture, traditions, lifestyle and values are compatible with the contemporary time, particularly for economic development. This question has also acutely tested the faith and conviction of the people in Hindu culture which constituted, according to the Supreme Court, the way of life, ethos and traditions of the Indian nation itself. ^[1] It has also challenged the capacity of the religious and spiritual leaders to help sustain the faith of the people in their religion and philosophy. While the Indian establishment had virtually concluded that India's traditions and culture are incompatible with contemporary economic thinking, the people of India did not agree with the establishment and the religious and spiritual leadership of India had kept the faith of the people alive in both. But, with India now perceived as a rising world super power by think tanks like the Indian Council for Research on International Economic Relation [ICRIER] in India ^[2] and many outside, it is time to make a value judgement on Indian culture – its past, present and future – to know to whether it is compatible with contemporary demands and what is it contributory role for India and for the world as India emerges as a global force. This calls for a look back and look ahead from our current position

II. Indian mind under western influence

In free India's discourse, the proponents of our sense of this ancient nation, Hindu philosophy, culture and lifestyle had always been on the defensive for the last several decades because the colonists had made us believe that the West was always advanced in economics and technology and we were always backward in both. Since the soft India was militarily conquered and colonised, the colonial and the other Western thinkers, consistently labelled India as barbaric [Wm. Archer ^[3]/ Winston Churchil ^[4]], or as semi-barbaric [Karl Marx ^[5]], or as disqualified for development in modern capitalism because of Hindu and Buddhist beliefs [Max Weber ^[6]] or as functioning anarchy [JK Galbraith ^[7]] and exerted great negative influence on the Indian mind and on Indians' opinion about India. Of them, according to studies, Karl Marx and Max Weber, neither of whom visited India nor otherwise deeply familiar with Hindu culture and traditions, have exerted the greatest influence on Indian academic and intellectual establishment. ^[8] The continuing tsunami of such negative academic and intellectual vibrations devalued the Hindu philosophy, culture, society, traditions and values in the mind of the Indian scholars and rated them as backward and unsuitable for the contemporary world. A well-known Indian economist Dr Raj Krishna even described, as late as in 1978, the moderate GDP growth rate of India as 'Hindu Growth Rate'. ^[9] This term was later popularised by the then World Bank chief McNamara ^[10] to say that India would always survive on aid from West and deride India. Undeniably the Indian mind was dominantly influenced by the Western scholars and philosophers.

III. The U-turn – western scholars now disprove the detractors

But in the last decade or thereabouts, this whole impression has undergone a change with the rise of India. With the rise of Japan in the 1970s, of the East Asian nations in the 1980s, of China in the 1990s and of India at the dawn of the 21st century, a huge geo-political and cultural power shift has been taking place in the world from the Euro-American West to Asia. The assumption in, and of, the West till Asia rose was that West was the First [rate] World and the rest belonged to the Second and Third [rate] Worlds. The rise of Asia, Japan first, prompted the Western scholars to study whether such rise was founded on any potential inherent in them. On such study, Paul Bairoch, a Belgian economist, came out with his stunning finding that as late as in 1750, India, with 24.5% and China with 33% had a combined share of 57.5% of global GDP, when the share of Britain was 1.8% and that of US just 0.1%. ^[11] This led to two huge debates in the West. One, whether the West had a lesser standard of living compared to Asia as late as in the 18th century; two, whether the rise of the West was due to any superior qualities or capabilities inherent in it, or, it was just exploitation of its colonies. Based on Bairoch's study some historians like Ferdinand Braudel said that the standard of living of the West was not higher than that of Asia before industrialisation. Some felt that the West exploited the Rest and particularly Asia and grew and others differed.

As if to resolve the debate, the Organisation for Economic Development and Cooperation [OECD] , a forum of developed nations of the world, constituted a study – the Development Studies Institute – under Angus Maddison, a great economic historian, to study, in substance, whether Paul Bairoch was right. Angus Maddison, who felt at the start that Bairoch was unlikely to be correct, ended up endorsing him completely. In his study 'World Economic History – A Millennial Perspective' ^[12], Maddison not only confirmed Bairoch, but went on to say that India was the world economic leader for 17 centuries from the beginning of the Common Era, with China, which overtook India later, as No 2. And after CE 1800, both of them lost out – with India crashing to 1.8% and China 6.2% in 1900. As the British Historian William Dalrymple wrote, the current rise of India is not a rags to riches story, but that of an empire, which had lost out temporarily, striking back to acquire its due position in the world. These studies have completely disproved the views of Marx and Weber, Galbraith and Raj Krishna and also established that the Indian culture and way of life could and did build a successful globally powerful economic model for India. So, India, rich in cultural heritage, was also economically prosperous. It was therefore canard spread by the colonial scholars that the Indian culture and traditions were incompatible with economic prosperity.

IV. Traditional culture and modernity, economy and society

It is necessary at this point to know what, in the Hindu understanding, is tradition, culture and modernity and what is their role in the economy and society. Our culture, according to the Kanchi Mahaswami who lived for a century among us, is founded on the twin principle of “aparigraha” [contentment] and “nirahambhavana” [humility]. Both these virtues are the products of the larger consciousness of relation among humans and within all elements of creation; they recognise and imply a higher duty to fellow humans and to nature. The virtue of contentment recognises and balances economic differences. Humility comprehends and addresses all differences. These two virtues help to unify the diversities. This twin virtues are therefore in tune with the very principle of creation, namely, unity in diversity. The diverse appearances of high and small, high and low, and weak and strong are harmonised by these virtues of higher relations. This is supplemented by worldly relations, family, community, society and nation. Our culture honours relations. It rests on relations and it promotes and sustains relations in turn, as Sri Krishna says in Bhagavad Gita, on the basis of “parasparam bhavayantah”, namely mutually cooperative relations. Our tradition and culture mutually cooperatively relate individuals to families, families to communities and communities to larger society and the larger society to the country and finally the country to the world on the principle of “Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam”. No other ancient civilisation even thought of the world or the world as 'family”; the modern civilisation looks at the world as 'market'.

The expanding relationship of these collectives is well-described in Mahabharata capturing the integral relation between individual, family, village, the country and God, thus: “Tyajet ekam Kulasyarthe, Gramasyarthe Kulam tyajet; Gramam Janapadasyarthe, Atmarthe prithivim tyajet”^[13]. It means that [rights of] individuals are to be sacrificed for the family; [rights of] families are to be sacrificed for a village; [rights of] villages are to be sacrificed for the country; and when it comes to realising God, the entire everything can be sacrificed.” The meaning is that the individual owes duties to families, families to village [neighbourhood] village to the country. So the relation between the individual to the nation is interlinked and integrated by a sense of duty to one another. The traditional society is relation-oriented which binds everyone to duties to families, near and dear, community and society, even to nature and animals. This sense of duty is comprehended in the concept of Dharma. Now let us see how the decline of culture or collective behavioural norm leads to economic decline.

V. Cultural decline leads to economic decline

In contrast, in the Western civilization there is no integrality, only compartmentality. The individual and his rights are supreme, subject only to the law. If there is a conflict between the individual and the family or between the individual and the village or society, the individual rights prevail. In the Western view, the family itself is a contract, a terminable one. There is nothing called society, said Margaret Thatcher. ^[14] Driven by individualism, modernity rests on law and contracts to regulate individual human beings. The principal drive of modernity is rights and rights-consciousness – the individual rights, human rights, gender rights, animal rights and so on. In fact the core of modernity consists in releasing humans from tradition, traditional relations and bonds and atomising them and granting rights to them.

While India, China and generally Asia are on the rise, the Euro-American economies are declining or slowing. The world which has witnessed almost a breakdown of the global financial system in the year 2008 saw two distinct responses. The Asian countries which are largely family-community based recovered fast. The Economist Magazine wrote a cover-page article on Asia's “Astonishing Rebound” ^[15]. But the West, which has over several decades weakened family and communities has not recovered from the downtrend. Actually, the bankruptcy of households in America triggered the financial crisis in America that exploded as the financial crisis in the US, which was later exported by America as a global economic meltdown. The recent economic downturn of the West, particularly America, is a standing example of how this sequence of decline in culture and values to decline in national economy is a cause and effect sequence. This led to the decline of families. This necessitated the state with a social security programme to intervene to take care of people – the elders, infirm, and the unemployed, who were left unprotected because of the decline of culture and therefore families. In the year 1980, the National Bureau of Economic Research [NABER] in the US had warned against this kind of State-provided social security which makes families functionless and purposeless adding that it would inevitably cause “serious erosion in family values”. The NABER said that while business firms have taken over much of the family functions production of food, the State taking over the vital functions would render the family meaningless.^[16] This amounted to virtual nationalisation of families. With the nationalisation of families, the propensity of the families to save also was eroded. This also further accentuated decline in savings. The current value of the future social security burden of the US is estimated at $104 trillions ^[17], which is 6.5 times the GDP of America! This is the cost of the decline in culture and families. Experts say that this is a dynamite waiting to blow up the US economy.

VI. Indian thinker Bahuka's economics rejected in India thousands of years ago, is now followed by America

The economic policy which makes the people government-dependent on the government was originally expounded by an ancient Indian thinker Bahuka in Srimad Bhagavatam. Kamsa, who became a hate figure because he repeatedly killed the children Vasudeva, asked his adviser Bahuka how to make the people, who hate him, accept him. To which Bahuka replied: 'open your treasury to the people; give them free money to enjoy life; breakup families; teach women that chastity is not worth having at the cost of pleasure; bring up children to look upon parents as old and useless; once people begin to believe in unrestrained pleasures of life as the goal of life, self-restraint will disappear; and men will be like well-fed cattle at the mercy of their cowherds and like uncomplaining beasts, obey your lash as if it were a favour from you.'^[18]

This is precisely what the US economic system has done to its people. It has freed the people from families and relations and enslaved them to the government. These individuals are individually free, but collectively slaves! Each one of Bahuka's advice has been implemented in the US. Women have lost chastity for pleasure and that is why a fifth of the pregnancies are teenage girls; 41% of the pregnants are unwed women ^[19]; and half of the households are government dependent . ^[20] The Americans have discarded their relations, turned families into contracts, to be finally at the mercy of the government. The individuals, women, and elders got freedom from their families only to become slaves of the governments. So the advice of Bahuka, rejected by Indians thousands of years ago, has now been adopted by the US with disastrous consequences which India has avoided. The US today bears testimony to the fact that the decline in culture leads to decline in economic performance and strength of a nation.

VII. Dharma and modernity

The sense of duty in the traditional model and the sense of right in modernity are a total contrast. The duty of one transforms into the right of another. So dharma transcends both duty and right because it comprehends both. Dharma consists of self-enforcing norms by the voluntary submission of the people. Culture is the collective behaviour according to the norms of Dharma which protects Dharma; and Dharma which is the behavioural norm of the individual and then collective protects culture. The relation between Dharma and Culture is mutually beneficial cooperation. Enforced law which creates enforceable rights cannot create families; but it can destroy them. It cannot create relations; but it can destroy them. It cannot create communities; but it can destroy them. This is self-evident from a comparison of law and contract dominated West and culture and relation dominated – read dharma driven – Indian society.

VIII. Indian culture has protected Indian society, economy

The principles of Dharma embedded in our cultural values which have protected our society and economy are: respect for parents and elders, respect for women; respect for teachers; respect for animals; respect for nature. These principles are embodied in the concept of Pancha Maha Yagna. The upanishad proclaims “matru devo bhava”, pithru devo bhava” “acharya devo bhava” and “athithi devo” bhava. Our Vedas proclaim reverence for mother earth. Our religious literature calls upon all to worship girls and women through kanya puja and suvasini puja. Mahabharata insists on protection of forests and tigers saying that tigers protect forests and forests protect tigers ^[21] Our spiritual literature implores us to worship rivers, mountains and other forms of nature. It is these principles of dharma embodied in our culture which have saved the Indian economy; environment and ecology in India. It has preserved the respect for parents, elders, teachers, women, and nature. No other major religion of the world today makes it part of the religious practices to respect parents, teachers, elders and nature. In fact the Bible says that all forms of nature worship is not only idolatry, but also stupid and to worship nature in any manifestation is to exchange the creator for the created ^[22] Islam is even more opposed to reverence for anything other than Allah. It calls upon the children to disobey the parents to obey the religion. ^[23] Neither in Christianity nor in Islam are teachers other than those who teach of Bible or Quran recognised, much less celebrated.

How the cultural value of society and family influence over the individual is not just a theoretical idea but an effective functioning value is brought out in a commercial research to sell products. It says: “In India, social acceptability is more important than individual achievement and is given priority in an individual's life. Group affiliations are given precedence with family traditions and values. For most Indians, family is the prime concern and an individual's duties lie with the family. “In India people's search for security and prestige lies within the confines of the near and dear”. ^[24] It is a traditional cultural value which has sustained the Indian family, society and economy, even when the Indian state had remained hostile to our dharma for almost a millennia, and continues to sustain even today. These values constitute the social, cultural, and civilisational capital of India.

This cultural orientation is self-evident in the Indian economy. The family savings in India which is the direct product of family culture is now 25% of the GDP ^[25] and according to Goldman Sachs, a top global banker, this has ensured that India does not need foreign investment for its infrastructure development. Since 1991 to 2011 the amount of foreign investment that has funded Indian development was only 2% of the total; while the rest 98% has been funded by local savings ^[26] in which the family tops with 70% of the national savings. ^[27]

It is the culture of protection of the elders, care of young and the responsibilities which the family undertakes as a cultural institution, and the disciplining of the relations between humans and between humans and nature through the concept of dharma and sustained by culture that has protected our economy and society. In contrast, in the West, the care of the parents, unemployed, infirm, ill-healthy are all the concern of the state. All family obligations are nationalised in the West, while it is dharma and culture founded on dharma which takes care of all family obligations.

IX. Indian culture protects environment

In respect of protection of the environment by inculcating cultural values there is no parallel to the Hindu ethos which look upon and train the people to look at nature as divine. On the contrary in monotheistic faiths nature is considered to be secular intended for the enjoyment of humans. In his famous essay published in the popular Science magazine in 1967 Lynn White held the biblical view of dominance of earth and nature by man as the primary cause of environmental crises. ^[28]This view is directly in contrast to the Hindu view which considers nature as sacred and human beings as part of nature. The world in the tip of the environmental crisis needs the Hindu perspective of nature as sacred.

X. World needs India and Indian culture and spirituality for its survival, say historians and economists

The world, particularly the West, needs India. That is why two most famous historians, Arnold Toynbee from UK and Will Durant from US, who lived through the turbulent 20th century had this to say:

“It is already becoming clear that a chapter which had a Western beginning will have to have an Indian ending if it is not to end in self-destruction of the human race. At this supremely dangerous moment in human history, the only way of salvation is the ancient Hindu way. Here we have the attitude that can make it possible for the human race to grow together into a single family”: Arnold Toynbee ^[29]

“It is true that even across the Himalayan barrier India has sent to us such questionable gifts as grammar and logic, philosophy and fables, hypnotism and chess, and above all numerals and decimal system. But these are not the essence of her spirit: they are trifles compared to what we may learn from her in the future. Perhaps in return for the conquest, arrogance and spoliation, India will teach us tolerance and gentleness of the mature mind, the quiet content of unacquisitive soul, the calm of the understanding spirit, and a unifying, a pacifying love for all living things”: Will Durant ^[30]

If this were what Arnold Toynbee and Will Durant said in the last century, one of the most well-known economists and thinkers of the world, Jean Pierre Lehmann, who was also the Adviser to the World Trade Organisation and is presently Professor in IMD, the famous management institute in Switzerland wrote, in 2006 that what is needed is a global ethical and spiritual role model for which the best candidate to fill the spot is India with non-conflicting Hinduism, adding that globalisation cannot work without Hindu way of life. ^[31]

XI. What values the West needs from Hindu India today are what is precisely at risk in India

The West needs to learn from Hindu India's cultural values (i) to rebuild and protect the family and social foundations of its economy, (ii) to reinstate the reverence for nature and (iii) to revive the respect for women. Individual rights, gender rights, children's rights, elders' rights, and other rights consciousness have undermined the respect for women and brought down the sustaining structures of the family and caused the lack of reverence for nature in the Judeo-Christian Western civilisation and led to the current environmental crisis. Though, fortunately in India, these sustaining values – family and society, respect for women and reverence for nature – are still functioning form, they are at great risk because of the continuation of colonial mindset through the intensification of the process of westernisation of the Indian intellectual, educational and media and generally the secular establishment, in the name of modernisation which is just alibi for westernisation. The Indian intellectual establishment is unable to draw the line between the individual belief system and the country's ethos and way of life, it tends to throw the baby with the bathtub – namely discard the national culture as conflicting with secularism, which according to the Supreme court it does not. This is precisely what the Supreme Court has said in its judgement in Prabhoo's case ^[32] and Farooqi's case ^[33] where it has distinguished between Hindu cultural values as the way of life of the people of India and the Hindu religion as such, saying that the Hindu cultural values is the foundation for secularism itself.

XII. Conclusion

Because of the Indian establishment's lack of intellectual and political courage and because of the concept of political correctness, the very values which sustain the Indian family, society, economy and environment and which the West desperately needs to import from India for its own good and even survival, are at risk in India. The public discourse promoted by the politically correct establishment is making it fashionable to follow the very western model which has brought down the families, societies and economy; undermined the respect for women and made them carbon-copy the West and fight for their rights at the cost of respect; and destroyed the reverence for nature which has invited the global environmental crisis. QED: Indian people need to reinforce their conviction in those values which most of them practise even today and the young India must be made to imbibe these values first in the interest of the Indian economy, society, and environment, before India can teach these values to the West.

The world – particularly the Western world – is keen to follow our values and is already following it. Lisa Miller, the religious affairs editor of the Newsweek magazine wrote a stunning article on August 14, 2009 titled “We are All Hindus now” ^[34] referring to the changing American beliefs. She said that data shows 'we are becoming more like Hindus and less like Christians in the ways we think about God, our selves, each other, and eternity; 65 percent of us believe – like Hindus – that "many religions can lead to eternal life”; they include 37 percent of white evangelicals, the group most likely to believe that salvation is theirs alone; a third of the Americans burn, not bury the dead; a quarter of the American believe in rebirth. The West needs from us, and imports, our spiritual and cultural assets. Isn't Dhrshta Swami Vivekananda proving right? Is not America now opening the gift from Swami Vivekananda it had kept unopened for over a century? But ironically when the West is looking at us, many of our intellectuals, academics and thinkers are looking to the West! QED: to make young Indians consciously imbibe Hindu cultural values which contemporary India largely follows is the biggest challenge to India.

If Donald Trump’s narrow win shook the United States in 2016, the scale of his victory now has amazed the country into silence. Equally amazing is how the US market reacted to his win now as compared to 2016. And how did the economists trash him in his first term and how silent are they now.

Unravelling these conundrums will bring out that the explosive pro- and anti-Trump campaigns are not just a battle between two economic or political ideas but a larger war. A war between two Americas – the America of its founding fathers and the America that breaks their statues. It calls for a deeper and at the same time a high helicopter view to demystify the forces at work in the US.

Villain becomes hero

In 2016, Trump was universally seen by liberal media and economists as a villain. No surprise therefore that when the news of his victory trickled in on 7th November night, US stock futures plummeted, Dow Jones dropped 800 points, markets went into a tailspin. But shockingly in the next 24 hours they rebounded to higher than 48 hours before. From November 9, the stocks began the famous “The Trump Rally” that lasted till early 2017.

Once a villain, Trump became a hero. The rally, said economists, was because the market was positive to Trump’s declared policies of tax cuts, infrastructure plans, and deregulation to spur economic growth. But Trump had declared all this ad nauseam during his long campaign. Why then did the stocks collapse on the 7th night? That was the blinding impact of the vicious political campaign of the entire US and Western media against Trump as one who had come to destroy America in the name of making it great again!

Market economics was fooled by ideological politics for 24 hours. But Trump’s victory this time saw the US stocks rise on the day he emerged winner and post “their best weekly performance all year”. Learning from its experience on 7th November, 2016, and refusing to be fooled by the anti-Trump poison, this time the market immediately celebrated his policies like they did after 24 hours in 2016.

Trump’s policies in 2024 are the same as they were in 2016. The whole world is in debate now on where the US economy is headed under Trump 2.0. Before answering this question, a look at the US economy shows that it performed as well or as badly under Trump 1.0 as it did under Obama earlier and under Biden later. Trump or no Trump, the US economy seems to do what it will anyway. Why? Look at the fundamental strengths of the US as a nation.

Strength – Geography and resources

The US economic power does not seem to depend on any President. States in the US are stronger than the elected President. Its economy is stronger than the state. It is stronger because the US is a unique phenomenon in human history. Why? Just a look at its geography, history, demography and politics will provide the answer.

The US land mass is three-and-half times India’s with a fourth of the latter’s demography. It has expansive 95,000-km long coastlines, fertile land, fresh water, oil and coal. Its natural resources are matchless. It has 45% of the world’s water, over 22% of the world’s coal reserves, over 6% of the world’s land mass, over 10% of the world’s farmland with just a little over 4% of world’s population. It has 256 billion barrels of untapped oil — 20% more than Saudi Arabia.

The US, which was a net importer of oil till 2018, is now its net exporter. No nation has this kind and scale of strategic and economic resources. That is the greatest advantage of the US. And most importantly it has no enemies on the border who can take an inch of its territory or a gram of its resources. Its adversaries are far away — Iran 11,500 km away, China 5,900 km away. Russia is nearer in geography yet, as a physical threat, very far away. Surrounded by seas and bordered only by its surrogate Canada, the physical security of the US is its matchless strategic asset. No other country has this geopolitical luxury.

A US with a border with China or Pakistan like India has or with Russia like Europe, can’t afford the liberal politics and economics it is so proud of and preaches to all. But this advantage could be turned into economic power only by demographic expansion of America through immigration. It added to its economic power in the past; it is now dynamiting its polity. The increasing economic returns of the US from immigration are now equally increasing the political risk with its borrowed demographic strength tearing it apart. Unless that history is traced, the rise of Trump cannot be understood.

Weakness – Demography and polity

Now come to the US political history and demography. It is the only large country in the world which has no baggage of history. Contemporary America had wiped out all natives in its geography — over a 100 million — by the dawn of the 17th century. They are now just 0.8% - mere curios in their own land. In 1610, the non-native, colonist US population as recorded by the US Census Bureau was just 500. It rose to 2.78 million in 1780. Eight years later, a new nation, the United States of America was born in a clean state populated by only the white race from Europe with black slaves.

Within that, the homogenous Anglo Saxons constituted 80%. In 100 years, by 1900, the numbers rose to 76 million. Clearly intending to be White dominant, the US limited naturalised citizenship to only “free white persons” with property, not to women, non-whites. With white population hovering a couple of points below 90% from 1870 to 1950, the US rose as an integrated and powerful White nation.

Only after the civil rights movement (1960s), US immigration laws became multiracial. American economy prospered because of multiracial immigration. But that gradually first and expeditiously recently, began impacting on the White —the Anglo-Saxon — identity of the US. The share of the Non Hispanic White (NHW) population in the US crashed by almost 32% to 58% by 2020. Asian Hispanics and mixed races rose to 34% with Blacks down at 13%.

The sharp drop in the NHWs from 72% in 2000 to 58% in 2020 — 14% in 20 years — shook the US. Samuel Huntington foresaw this and warned the US of the loss of its core identity — White Anglo-Saxon-Protestant (WASP). With the projection that by 2030 NHWs will be down to 56% and by 2060 to 44%, the US risks becoming a non-White nation. The Hispanic White population will be 27% by 2060 — three-fold rise in six decades — blacks 15% and the Asians 9.1%. Demographic expansion by immigration that strengthened the US, thus eroded the US polity and turned it into a divided nation.

Added to that was the rise of anarchic Woke liberalism which is destroying the remains of the disintegrating US families and communities. In the background of the depressing domestic polity, the euphoric globalisation that wore off with the US financial meltdown in 2008. China’s rise as a challenger undermined the hegemonic economic and geopolitical status of the US. That set the compelling stage for the advent of the Trump phenomenon in the US with his slogan, Make America Great Again (MAGA).

Made a fool of detractors

As Trump unveiled his policies in the 2016 Presidential race, Obama’s chief economic adviser Larry Summers said, “Under Trump, I would expect a protracted recession to begin within 18 months. The damage would be felt far beyond the United States.” Citigroup warned that “A Trump victory could cause a global recession.” The Washington Post wrote, “President Trump could destroy the world economy.” Steve Rattner, an economics guru, said: “If Trump wins you will see a market crash of historic proportions.

The markets are terrified of him.” Simon Johnson, an MIT economics professor, wrote, “Trump would likely cause the stock market to crash and plunge the world into recession.” When Trump was seemingly winning and the markets were plunging the day after the poll, Nobel Laureate in economics Paul Krugman said, “We are very probably looking at a global recession, with no end in sight.”

Even after he won, a headline in the UK’s Independent in January 2017, read: “Donald Trump’s first gift to the world will be another financial crisis.” In the face of these catastrophic predictions, Trump, who had promised 3.5 per cent growth, delivered it along with the lowest unemployment rate few presidents after Ronald Reagan could achieve. Trump made his detractors look like fools as he rewrote the domestic rules of the US.

Rewrote US-Rest relations

Many haven’t noticed that Trump has also once and for all rewritten the relations of the US with the rest of the world. When the Berlin Wall collapsed, along with it the Soviet Union, the US became so euphoric that it concluded that the Western liberal democracy and market capitalism had finally won against the Rest. It clamped on the One-Size-Fits-All world order — globalisation — symbolised by WTO and its siblings that rested on the assumption of its financial, technological, systemic and military superiority over the Rest.

But the US did itself in by declaring and admitting the autocratic China as a market economy into its and global markets. In less than two decades, autocratic China exploited the transparent US and global markets and emerged to challenge the US itself. Even before Trump filed his nomination papers for the 2016 elections, the US and the EU had to file applications in the WTO, believe it, to declare China as not a market economy!

When Trump came, he launched an assault on China, levied tariffs on the EU and even India. If China were declared as a market economy, it would not be easy to levy the punitive anti-dumping duty on it. He threatened the WTO that if it did not declare China as a non-market economy, the US would leave the WTO.

He refused to appoint judges for the dispute settlement mechanism of WTO; so questionable US levies on China, EU and others could not be disputed. Trump declared that globalism was no more on the US agenda. It was America first. Result, after the pandemic and the Ukraine war, even the chief protagonist of globalisation and anti-Trump crusader, The Economist magazine, has declared globalisation as dead.

Biden followed Trump

Joe Biden who came to power after Trump, declaring him as the destroyer of the US and the global economy, did not change a line of core Trumpism but followed it. Trump invoked national security provisions to impose a 25% tariff on steel and 10% on aluminium from India and the EU, breaking the policy of not targeting friendly nations. Biden kept talking with India and the EU but would not lift the tariffs.

Trump disabled the WTO’s dispute settlement mechanism and castrated the WTO. Biden promised to revive it but did not during his entire tenure of four years. Trump’s protectionism grew, not eroded, under him. Trump waged his famous tariff war on China citing unfair trade practices. Biden followed him, increased the tariffs on Chinese electric vehicles (EVs) from 25% to 100% this year, and on certain steel and aluminium products from 0-7.5% to 25% citing the very theory enunciated by Trump. Why couldn’t Biden undo what Trump did? Why did he follow him instead? Trump or no Trump, Trumpism will last. That is the message of the US for the world.

What Trump symbolises is not just an electoral change but a paradigmatic shift that was brooding in the US for over a decade and has exploded as the Trump phenomenon. What is the consequence of it to the US and the world? Only the future can tell.

S Gurumurthy
Editor, Thuglak Tamil Magazine. Chairman, Vivekananda International Foundation Strategic Think Tank.

As a Brahmin by birth, TMK gained fame in Tamil Nadu, the land of Brahmin hate, by his virulent anti-Brahmin tirades, which automatically made him a progressive in today’s discourse. Since he is a leftist and a liberal, no one can dare call him a misogynist for his dirty and sexy remarks about MS.

Imagine Bhagwan Mahaveer Award for promoting vegetarianism is given to a butcher—a Jain by accident of birth who says the Bhagwan is a hoax. By a jury that has no reverence for the Bhagwan. And the apostate butcher proudly accepts the award in the name of the apostle. How humiliated his Jain devotees will be? Apologies to Jains for taking the Bhagwan’s name for a fictional analogy. Similarly, devotees of Carnatic music to whom it is not just an art but divine and sacred, have been hurt and humiliated in Tamil Nadu. Here unfolds the sordid story.

MS – “Greatest Hoax”, “Barbie doll”, “Sexy” to infatuated eyes?

“A young aspiring musician told me MS Subbulakshmi is the greatest hoax of the twentieth century”.

Who declared, on an anonymous testimony, M S Subbulakshmi as the greatest hoax?

“We have never thought of her music as being worthy of any serious investigation. What is there to say? We treat her [MS Subbulakshmi] like a saintly Barbie doll. Yet we duped the outside world into thinking we revere her.”

Who described MS as a saintly Barbie doll?

“Isn’t it astounding that we will all agree that MS has been one of the most beautiful musicians in the Indian classical musical scene, but the word sexual has never been used in the context of describing her….Let me make it clear I am not referring to her inner beauty. She was what my daughter’s generation would call sexy.”

Who saw MS as sexy, not her inner beauty?

“Let any honest man besotted with her beauty deny that his fascination had to do with her looks as with her music and that Cupid played with her darts wherever she went. The Smarta Brahmin kattu [a specific style of wearing sari] has never looked more fetching, been more alluring than on the daughter of Madurai Shanmugavadivu. She was a diva, yet we are unable to openly celebrate her physicality, even in 2016.”

Who spoke about men besotted — meaning “blindly, utterly infatuated” — with MS’ beauty? And said Cupid — Greek God of Erotic Love — played with MS wherever she went? Not so much her music. Who’s this misogynist — to use the modern term liberals quite often use to brand other men who they think demeaned women?

MS award – for abusing, demeaning, hating her?

It is no congenital Brahmin hater E V Ramaswami Naicker (EVR) or his disciples, nor the DK clones in the DMK, who continue to hate all the good work the Brahmins did and do, all their Gods, icons, literature, worship, traditions and devotion. It is T M Krishna (TMK), a self-proclaimed heretic among Carnatic musicians, and a Brahmin himself. Ironically, TMK who declared MS the greatest hoax, described her as a saintly Barbie doll, derided her as sexy, and spoke of men besotted more with her looks than her music, is the proud recipient of the Sangita Kalanidhi MS Subbulakshmi Award for 2024. TMK spoke so ‘honourably’ about MS not long back. Just eight years ago but long after MS left this world in 2004. The Award in MS’ name to TMK now is automatic after the Madras Music Academy conferred on him its ‘Sangita Kalanidhi’ Award for 2024.

TMK has unquestionable liberal and wokeist credentials to demean the gentle and humble MS – citing her birth, music and looks. As a Brahmin by birth, TMK gained fame in Tamil Nadu, the land of Brahmin hate, by his virulent anti-Brahmin tirades, which automatically made him a progressive in today’s discourse. Since he is a leftist and a liberal, no one can dare call him a misogynist for his dirty and sexy remarks about MS.

As a Carnatic musician who has turned an iconoclast to demolish all sacred and devotional foundations of Carnatic music that owes its body and soul to great saints like Tyagaraja, he has emerged a hero of atheist Dravidian liberals. Most importantly, like Kejriwal who, now neck-deep in scams, was promoted by the Ramon Magsaysay Award as a crusader against corruption, TMK too was adorned with the Magsaysay Award for unleashing “what music has to offer not just for some but for all”.

But, in the “for all” inclusiveness that the Magsaysay Award mentions, TMK reserves the choicest of dirty words for MS. His appetite to demean MS seems insatiable. He refers to MS’ ‘past’ as a single mother’s daughter and adds “what does MS’ metamorphosis [from that past] into a perfect Brahmin housewife say?… She sought respect and dignity and that she got only because she erased her past from her life and mind.” Without successfully erasing her past — as a woman of low birth, according to TMK — MS would not have got the dignity and respect she commanded.

More than all his credentials, what makes TMK more qualified to mock MS as a ‘Brahmanical’ pretender is that he is a proud fan of EVR. Not many, not even TMK, may know today that EVR, who not only wanted all Brahmins killed and burnt, also desired that Mahatma Gandhi be annihilated along with the Congress! Jawaharlal Nehru wrote to Kamaraj (on 5.11.1957) calling for action against EVR who, he said, was a “pervert, criminal and lunatic”. But speaking about MS, Nehru said: “Who am I, a mere Prime Minister before a Queen, Queen of Music”.

Diametrically opposite to Nehru, TMK character-assassinates the noble MS before whom Nehru felt humble, and eulogises EVR who, in the eyes of Nehru, was a criminal. TMK wrote and tweeted a song last year celebrating EVR as “the one who told us to think”. In the same tweet he glorified EVR, TMK also held aloft a perverted writer Perumal Murugan who wrote that women, who pray all night on a Holy Day in a temple in West Tamil Nadu for begetting children, actually slept with unemployed youth stealthily to get impregnated by them! The liberal TMK eulogised him for dirtying both women and their faith. The liberal in him is also liberal in dirtying not just MS but womankind as a whole.

Proud to humiliate? Or shameless to accept?

On the Sangita Kalanidhi Award given by the Music Academy to MS as far back as 1968, TMK says “there is a lot to discuss about the negative impacts of her musicality” with a snide comment on her “artistic journey on the Kalanidhi landscape”. What a shameful remark 50 years after MS was honoured by the Academy with Sangita Kalanidhi? And 18 years before TMK was born! He went on to characterise the award given to MS as beyond his reach.

To quote him, “Of course that is a space (Sangita Kalanidhi) we can never enter; how can we pollute the garbhagriha of her memory.” TMK, who spoke so disparagingly about the award to MS then, has gleefully accepted it now and finally entered the garbhagriha of “Sangita Kalanidhi MS Subbulakshmi Award”, that he never dreamt he would ever do. Is it his karma or his lust that made him accept the honour of the award that bears the name of MS he had wantonly dishonoured? Did he accept the MS Award proudly – to humiliate and damage her memory even more? Or was he so shameless to accept it because he was desperate to enter the Sanctum Santorum of the memorial of MS he had longed for? Either way it is petty and low.

Music Academy – negligent or conspirator?

Now come to the role of the owners of the Music Academy in conferring the Sangita Kalanidhi Award to TMK who had scorned MS, the Academy’s own Sangita Kalanidhi Awardee. TMK got two mutually interlinked awards. One is the Sangita Kalanidhi Award of the Music Academy 2024 – which is just a hall of fame award. The other is in the name of MS herself – ‘Sangita Kalanidhi MS Subbulakshmi Award 2024’ which carries a cash prize of `1 lakh. The eligibility for the second award in MS’ name is the first award of the Academy.

Not long ago, a jury of Carnartic musicians used to select the Academy’s awardees. But de-franchising the musicians, the non-musicians who own the Academy and know very little about the philosophy or even the contents of music, took over that task. In truth, the same set of non-musicians now control both awards. The owners of the Academy know that giving the Academy’s Sangita Kalanidhi Award to TMK automatically makes him eligible to the other award, the MS Award. What follows?

The responsibility of both the awards is on the Music Academy. If the Academy chose TMK without even Google-based due diligence that would have brought out TMK’s vilification of MS, it is guilty of willful negligence. But if it knew that he had maligned MS and still chose him, it is guilty as an active co-conspirator to vilify MS.

MS’ progeny challenges

A grandson of MS has filed a petition in the Madras High Court challenging the very idea of an award in her name itself. The petition says that, by her Will, MS had forbidden any award or statue or other symbols in her memory. The humble lady’s final wish clearly reflects the self-effacing humility that marked her entire life of unparalleled popularity.

That such a humble and noble icon is being trivialised long after her death by petty men who instituted the award in her name against her wish and gave it to TMK, the man who spewed venom on her is an inexcusably terrible story. Whether the case yields the result MS’ grandson is seeking or not, his petition has put the sordid facts in the public domain and shamed both the giver and receiver of particularly the MS Award.

The awards to TMK is a wake-up call for the Carnatic music fraternity, which increasingly sells the soul of divine music for such awards. Carnatic music will become Madonna’s Pop Music if it loses its soul of divinity and devotion. Musicians who revere music as divine must reject the awards given as favours by those who are illiterates in the devotional philosophy of Carnatic music.

By its single act of honouring the man who dishonoured MS, with the honour of the MS Award, the Music Academy has ended up irredeemably dishonouring itself. The Academy’s value today seems to be the worth of the price of its real estate at the prime place where music devotees live. Imagine it shifts to Velachery — just 12 km away — it will lose all its celebrity value.

There is still an honourable way out for TMK to atone for his shameless attempt to humiliate the iconic MS in the minds of the devotees of Carnatic music. If he introspects and turns humble like MS and apologises for his mad behaviour and blind hate for the greatest icon of the 20th century Carnatic music — whether he deserves the award or not — he would at least wash away his own shameful and sinful conduct. To end, the MS Award to TMK is like the Sankara Award for EVR. It will humiliate not only the givers but the receivers EVR and TMK too.

Sankara who would never have allowed an award in his name and MS who did not want an award in her name, would remain unaffected and stand tall any way.

Note to the Reader:  This article originally appeared in Thuglak Tamil Weekly Magazine. It was translated in English by Shri Venkateshwaran, who is the Chief of Thuglak Digital and personal secretary to Shri S Gurumurthy, exclusively for www.gurumurthy.net.

Balancing of Politics and Economics

In democratic countries worldwide, today there's a clear trend towards politically-driven economics that provides subsidies to the people. Studies show that even in the most liberal and open America, due to politically-driven economics, a majority of Americans are beneficiaries of government subsidies. What constitutes a politically-driven budget versus an economically-driven one? A politically-driven budget may prioritize current subsidies and freebies, potentially reducing future economic growth expenditures. An economically-driven budget, conversely, might limit subsidies and freebies to avoid hampering future economic growth investments. Since the 1950s, our budgets have taken three distinct forms. Until 1990, under the socialist and planned economy, our country's budgets focused on export-import production controls, taxes, and central bank financing. After the introduction of liberal economic policies in the 1990s, the focus shifted to stock markets, foreign investment, and liberalization of production and foreign trade. Particularly over the last 15 years, our economy has begun to transform into Alfred Marshalls’ political-economic hybrid. The second half of the UPA budgets were more politically driven with less economic and more political focus. The Modi government’s budgets have been more economically and less politically driven. The UPA's politically heavy, economically light budgets resulted in lower growth during their tenure. In contrast, the Modi government's more economically budgets have led to higher growth. This impact is tellingly  reflected in the following data.

Undeniably the growth during decade of Modi's rule has been manifold as compared to the UPA regime. The phenomenal growth is attributable to substantial increase in development spending by the Modi government In this context, it's crucial to examine whether the current budget in the coalition government continues Modi's 10-year economic growth pattern or if there are changes.

Continued Development Expenditure

There's a rule of thumb to assess whether a budget is economically driven – read growth oriented – or not. That is whether the government borrows for development spend or non-development spend like freebies and subsidies. In the current budget, the total development spend is Rs 15 lakh crore. Modi government plans to borrow a total of Rs 16 lakh crore this year. It means that 94% of the borrowing is for development. Clearly Modi government borrows for development. This marked a significant shift from the UPA rule which was the other way round. In the 2013-14 budget, the UPA government borrowed Rs 5.42 lakh crore, out of which only 3 lakh crore [55%] was for development spending – balance Rs 2.42 lakh crore was for non development  including freebies and subsidies. Undoubtedly UPA budgets were more politically and less economically driven, while Modi's budgets, the current one included, are more economically and less politically. There are elements of coalition politics in the allocations for Andhra Pradesh and Bihar. But those allocations are also fundamentally development spending. In Andhra Pradesh, the Telugu Desam Party government had invested thousands of crores of rupees in the Polavaram project and the New Capital Amaravati. However, Jagan Reddy who came to power effectively scrapped these projects, rendering those investments futile. The budget has allocated ₹15,000 crore to revitalize these investments. This is not merely a development project for Andhra Pradesh, but for the country as well. Similarly, the ₹12,500 crore allocation for flood control and irrigation projects in the Kosi-Mechi Link Project in Bihar is also a development-oriented allocation.

 Four Core Themes

The Finance Minister highlights four core themes of the budget: employment, skill development, MSME sector, and middle-class-oriented schemes. For generation employment in the formal sector, which is the first theme, a three-pronged approach is planned: The government will cover the first month's salary for new employees. For businesses creating new jobs, the government will pay two years of provident fund contributions. In the manufacturing sector, the government will cover four years of provident fund contributions for new employees and employers. These initiatives are projected to create employment for approximately 3 crore people, addressing the shortage of job opportunities for the educated. The second theme, skill development, includes upgrading 1000 industrial training institutes, aiming to train 20 lakh people over 5 years, and educational loans to 1.25 lakh students. The third theme focuses on MSME development, featuring government guarantees for uninterrupted bank loans, directives for banks to lend on inhouse appraisal and without rating agency opinion, a special government fund to prevent MSME failures during economic crises, and an increase in the MUDRA scheme's maximum loan amount from 10 to 20 lakh. The fourth theme targets the middle class with an annual income tax relief of ₹17,500, a ₹10 lakh crore housing scheme for one crore urban middle-class families, and loan facilities for overseas education. While the success of these measures are

Other Key Aspects

Beyond the four core themes, the budget contains several significant elements: A plan to create one million certified natural farmers with continuous marketing structures. Allocation of ₹11.11 lakh crore for infrastructure development, crucial for successful job creation and implementation of other schemes. Infrastructure has been the foundation of industrial growth since Modi's focus on it began in 2014, leading to significant economic growth.b While the Finance Minister has highlighted the four core themes due to current political considerations, some crucial long-term aspects of the budget have not been prominently featured. Let's examine a few of these:

Planting mango plant for grandson

India has signed the global pollution control agreement, committing to fulfill pollution control guarantees by 2070. This requires reducing thermal power usage and pollution. Clean electricity production through nuclear and solar power is a key alternative. We need to invest in these alternative energy sources with the next generation in mind. The budget has initiated research and construction for developing small nuclear power plants domestically. This is akin to planting a  mango tree for one's grandchild - a long-term vision that political parties focused on short-term electoral gains cannot undertake due to financial constraints.The budget has increased the allocation for the nuclear sector five-fold from ₹442 crore last year to ₹2,228 crore. Similarly, the solar power allocation has been doubled from ₹4,970 crore to ₹10,000 crore. The semiconductor industry, considered the future of global technology, has seen its allocation double from ₹3,000 crore to ₹6,000 crore. Research and development funding has increased from ₹840 crore to ₹1,200 crore.These allocations are investments for the next generation. However, the Finance Minister hasn't neglected current necessities. The rural employment scheme's allocation has increased by 60% from ₹60,000 crore to ₹86,000 crore. The free cooking gas scheme's allocation has seen a tenfold increase from ₹180 crore to ₹1,800 crore. The free food distribution program initiated during the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic continues, benefiting the underprivileged.

To end, this budget has not drawn any abnormal criticism even form a hostile opposition. Even former Finance Minister Chidambaram, has only claimed that the Modi government has "stolen" their schemes. Rahul Gandhi tweeted his usual political criticism, calling it a "budget to stay in power." Apart from routine political accusations, no major economic flaws have been pointed out by anyone, including the opposition parties. To restate this is indeed a budget with economics predominating politics.

Note to the Reader:  This article originally appeared in Thuglak Tamil Weekly Magazine. It was translated in English by Shri Venkateshwaran, who is the Chief of Thuglak Digital and personal secretary to Shri S Gurumurthy, exclusively for www.gurumurthy.net.

The onset to deterioration

Thuglak staunchly rejects BJP's self-serving slogan, "Bharat without Congress," emphasizing that even amidst Congress' decline over the past three decades, abandoning the party is not in the nation's interest. The magazine expresses deep concern over Congress' erosion of national identity, principles, and ethos since the fracture initiated by Indira Gandhi in 1969 for familial gains. Once synonymous with nationalism, Congress lost its essence when Indira wrested control through governmental machinations, sidelining stalwarts like Kamaraj, Morarji Desai, and Nijalingappa. By aligning with Communists in the 1971 elections, Congress forfeited its distinctiveness and veered from the national mainstream, a shift lamented by Cho, Thuglak Magazine's founder. The magazine traces its inception to Congress' decline and DMK's ascendance, spurred by the 1969 split. Thuglak's stance against today's Congress and support for Modi-led BJP stem from this historical context. Congress's policy shifts in the 1980s aligned it with the Muslim League, continuing its communist-like trajectory from the 1970s, adopting liberal policies temporarily before reverting to a communist-like stance in 2024, evident in its election manifesto.

Congress deformed into Muslim League

Prior to independence, the Muslim League advocated for Muslim political reservation, asserting a separate identity. In 1932, Mahatma Gandhi's hunger strike protested the British government's support for caste-based reservations. Subsequently, in 1937, the British introduced Sharia law, fostering division between Muslims and Indians. Emboldened, the Muslim League in 1940 demanded a separate nation for Muslims, rejecting coexistence with Hindus. In stark contrast, the Congress of that era championed unity, asserting Hindus and Muslims as part of one community. However, today's Congress echoes the divisive rhetoric of the past, aligning with the Muslim League's separatist ideology. While the Congress of yesteryears opposed Muslim reservations, even endorsed by the Ambedkar-led Constituent Assembly, today's Congress pledges such reservations, marking a departure from its earlier stance. The Karnataka government's inclusion of all Muslims in the OBC category, supported by today's Congress, marks a departure from the inclusive ethos of yesteryears. The Congress of the past advocated equality among Hindus, Muslims, Sikhs, and Buddhists, with priority only for Scheduled Castes. However, today's Congress prioritizes Muslims in resource allocation, a significant shift from its earlier stance. In 1938, the Muslim League's Birpur Committee accused Congress of Hindu favoritism, fostering anti-Muslim sentiments. In 1986, Congress repealed a Supreme Court ruling in the Shabano case, succumbing to Muslim demands against Sharia law. This marked Congress's transition towards the Muslim League's ideology. Subsequently, Congress opposed legitimate Hindu demands, even the construction of a Ram Temple, resembling the Muslim League more closely. This transformation is regrettable for both the country and the Congress.

Congress disfigured into Communist

The contemporary generation may be unaware that in 1969, Indira Gandhi fractured the Congress by labeling leaders like Kamaraj, Morarji, and Nijalingappa as anti-socialist and capitalist-influenced, opposing bank nationalization. Little known is Indira's reliance on Communist counsel, influenced by Soviet Russia, to govern. In 1971, she amended the constitution, empowering the government to expropriate property without fair compensation, advocating for widespread nationalization. This led to the government's control over banks, coal mines, and insurance companies, aligning with communist principles of state intervention. Thus, the Congress transformed into a mirror image of the Communist Party, embracing government intervention across all sectors. The Congress, once a staunch opponent of Communist ideology, underwent a dramatic transformation, evolving into the very entity it opposed. In the 1970s, the same Congress that had opposed Communism orchestrated brutal crackdowns on communist movements in Telangana and Kerala, mirroring the tactics it once condemned. Indira Gandhi, even vilified revered nationalists like Kamaraj as American agents for their opposition. The collapse of Soviet Russia in 1990 spurred Narasimha Rao and Manmohan Singh to abandon socialism, embracing Western capitalist ideals. Successive governments, from Vajpayee to Manmohan Singh and now the Modi administration, have endeavored to rectify socialist economic distortions through their unique approaches, transitioning from nationalization to privatization policies. The sudden inclusion of resource redistribution in the Congress manifesto for this election signifies yet another regrettable departure from its earlier principles.

Congress reduced into a caste-based party

Congress' transformation continued. In 1989, during the Mandal movement led by VP Singh, which demanded caste-based reservations, then Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi implored, "Don't divide the country on caste lines." Engulfed in the Bofors scandal, he failed to prevent the movement, leading to VP Singh's victory and the rise of OBC parties in northern states, contributing to Congress's decline. Simultaneously, the Ram Temple movement eroded Congress's Hindu support, weakening the party on both fronts. Losing Hindu support due to the Ram Temple issue and OBC support due to the Mandal movement, Congress adopted a Muslim League-like stance, seeking Muslim support at any cost. This strategy helped Congress win power in 2004, ruling for a decade. However, rampant corruption and appeasement politics led to BJP's resurgence, culminating in Modi's significant victory in 2014. Facing defeat again in the 2019 elections and losing traction with radical Muslim appeasement politics, Congress began advocating for a caste census to regain OBC votes. This shift marked an unfortunate departure from the principles of the earlier Congress, particularly under Rajiv Gandhi's leadership.

BJP became the then Congress

The BJP began to fill the void left by Congress, which had shifted towards the ideologies of the Muslim League, Communists, and Mandal parties, moving away from its nationalistic roots. In 1949, Raghava Das, a Congress MLA from Ayodhya, initiated the Ramjanma Bhoomi Rescue Movement. A Gandhian, he was affectionately called "Baba" Raghava Das by Mahatma Gandhi. When Congress, under Nehru's influence, abandoned the Ram temple cause, the BJP seized the opportunity, fully integrating the concept of Ram Rajya—celebrated by Gandhi—into the Ram Temple movement. The BJP revived symbols like Vande Mataram and Bharat Mata Ki Jai, which Congress had sidelined for vote-bank politics, embracing them as national icons. In this way, the BJP took on the mantle of the pre-independence Congress, championing the causes and symbols that Congress once celebrated but later rejected as religious. Today, Congress criticizes the BJP similarly to how the Muslim League once bashed Congress, labeling the BJP a Hindu party and itself anti-Muslim. How depraved is the transition?

Congress’ full toss & Modi’s sixers

That's why Modi easily likens today's Congress to the Muslim League. Modi hits Rahul, Sam Pitroda, and other Congress leaders for sixes on their stances regarding Muslim appeasement, caste, and communist politics. When they promise to share national resources, Modi counters by questioning if Muslims are the primary beneficiaries. He challenges their silence on Muslim sultans when they criticize Hindu kings for land usurpation and questions whether Muslim reservations mean OBC reservations. The list of full tosses and sixes is extensive.
In this heated election debate, both sides, including Prime Minister Modi and Rahul, have shown a lack of self-restraint. The Election Commission has issued notices to both parties following complaints of excessive rhetoric. We urge both sides to maintain self-control and conduct a respectful campaign until the election concludes.

Note to the Reader: This article originally appeared in Thuglak Tamil Weekly Magazine. It was translated in English by Shri Venkateshwaran, who is the Chief of Thuglak Digital and personal secretary to Shri S Gurumurthy, exclusively for www.gurumurthy.net.

1. Modi’s Strategic Diplomacy: He effectively challenged the belief held by developed countries that India’s democratic system was a barrier to its progress, offering a stark contrast to China’s authoritarian model. What strategies did he employ to accomplish this?
2. Majority Rule and Governance: With a commanding majority, Modi introduced a new era of bold policy-making, propelling India on an unparalleled growth path and dispelling the myth that democracy slows progress.
3. Corrective Measures: During his first term, Modi addressed the political and economic errors of the previous Congress-led decade, implementing practical solutions to deep-seated economic and societal issues.
4. Navigating Through Crisis: Amidst the global turmoil of the pandemic, Modi took decisive action to resolve age-old problems that had long divided the nation, using democratic processes.

These significant advancements were made possible by Modi’s overwhelming mandate, which established a strong majority government at the center for the first time in twenty-five years, setting the stage for these historic achievements. Let’s explore the details of this story.

Comparing Governance: China’s Autocracy and India’s Democratic Journey

“Why China flew, India just grew?” Forbes magazine (2019 highlighted the vast economic gap that emerged between India and China starting from the 1980s. By 2014, China’s economy had grown to be 3.5 times larger than India’s. The article credited China’s swift ascent to its authoritarian regime, in contrast to India’s democratic system, which is often seen as slow and cumbersome. This comparison was exemplified by the contrasting timelines of the Narmada river dam in India and the Yangtze river dam in China.

The Yangtze dam project, which resulted in the submersion of numerous cities and the displacement of over a million people, was completed in just 12 years. On the other hand, the Narmada dam project, impacting fewer people, took over six decades to complete, starting from Prime Minister Nehru’s initial groundwork. The delay was largely due to persistent opposition from groups like the Narmada Bachao Andolan (NBA), which sought legal avenues to halt progress.

The Narmada dam’s construction faced judicial roadblocks, with the Supreme Court granting incremental height clearances over the years, culminating in a height of 139 meters by 2019. Now, the Narmada dam stands as a symbol of significant development across several Indian states. Forbes’ analysis brought to light the perception that authoritarian regimes can expedite progress, while democratic systems like India’s are seen to hinder it.

This portrayal not only generated admiration for China but also contributed to a growing disdain for India internationally. Moreover, Modi’s rise to power in 2014 intensified the global skepticism towards India.

A New Dawn: Redefining Governance and Shattering Illusions - Modi’s Exemplary Leadership

The misguided belief that democracy was the root of India’s developmental challenges has been thoroughly discredited, thanks in large part to Prime Minister Modi’s insightful leadership. Reflecting on his successful governance in Gujarat, Modi recognized that India’s relative stagnation compared to China’s rapid advancement in the 1990s was not due to its democratic principles but rather the absence of a strong, decisive majority government at the national level. The political scene was chaotic, with an astonishing seven Prime Ministers in just ten years following 1989, each trying to steer the country through four general elections amidst the instability of minority or coalition governments.

Even during Prime Minister Vajpayee’s administration (1999-2004), which was noted for its effective governance, the need to appease a complex coalition of over 25 partners impeded swift decision-making. The years under Prime Minister Manmohan Singh were perceived as being hindered by an overbearing Congress leadership, which compromised governance effectiveness and diminished the government’s authority—casting a shadow over India’s political dynamism internationally.

In response to the call for significant change, the BJP elevated Modi to the national stage in 2014, driven by his proven leadership in Gujarat since 2001. Modi’s extensive campaign, which included over 700 rallies, struck a chord with the electorate, resulting in a historic single-party majority that signaled a new era of stability and robust leadership not seen in many years.

With Modi at the helm, India experienced a revival, overcoming global doubts with a series of bold reforms. Controversial yet impactful measures like demonetization and the introduction of the GST highlighted Modi’s determination to bring about fundamental changes. Notable achievements such as the creation of over 40 crore bank accounts, the construction of a similar number of toilets, the distribution of free cooking gas connections and housing to the needy, and the enrollment of 100 crore citizens for Aadhaar marked a significant shift in India’s development story, igniting national pride.

Former critics, now witnessing India’s dynamic progress under Modi’s guidance, reluctantly recognized his visionary approach. Modi’s remarkable accomplishments have challenged long-standing prejudices, prompting the international democratic community to reevaluate India’s capabilities. His unyielding spirit is emblematic of a revitalized India, proving the efficacy of decisive leadership and affirming the country’s democratic values on the world stage.

Pioneering Progress: Awakening from Dormancy

In his first term, Modi launched a campaign to correct the economic stagnation caused by the previous decade’s governance, marked by corruption. He decisively canceled the controversial 2G spectrum and coal block allocations, which were symptomatic of the crony capitalism of the time, thereby recovering substantial funds and improving India’s international reputation. He revitalized public sector banks that had been burdened by political interference and non-performing assets, enabling a surge in lending essential for economic revival.

Addressing security concerns, Modi took a firm stand against terrorism. He sanctioned surgical strikes across the border into Pakistan, sending a strong deterrent against years of cross-border terrorism. He also tackled Left-wing extremism, reaffirming his dedication to national security.

India’s strategic positioning in Doklam and Modi’s maneuvers in Kashmir, including the alliance with Mehbooba Mufti and the subsequent application of President’s Rule, set the stage for the revocation of Article 370, marking a significant step in national integration.

Modi expanded the BJP’s reach beyond its traditional bases, bringing attention and development to the long-neglected Northeast region through numerous ministerial visits and personal engagements. This effort integrated the region more fully into the national fabric, showcasing Modi’s forward-thinking leadership.

Charting New Paths: Overcoming Divides, Fostering Unity

Modi’s second term began with the formidable challenge of the Covid-19 pandemic. Under his leadership, India achieved the remarkable milestone of developing its own Covid vaccine, showcasing the country’s scientific capabilities.

While the United States faced significant losses, India’s proactive strategies limited the impact of the pandemic, earning global recognition for its effective management. Modi’s governance shone on the international stage with a vaccination campaign that set new records.

Navigating geopolitical complexities, Modi maintained India’s sovereignty and independence during the Ukraine conflict, securing essential resources despite international sanctions.

The abrogation of Kashmir’s special status was a bold move that ended years of proxy control by Pakistan, despite facing global criticism. Modi’s unwavering approach effectively isolated Pakistan, affirming India’s stance on the world stage.

Humanitarian Commitment: Modi’s Pledge to Inclusivity
Prime Minister Modi’s dedication to humanitarian principles is evident in his actions, such as granting citizenship to persecuted minorities, which reflects his adherence to constitutional values and marks the beginning of a more inclusive and equitable era.

The resolution of the Ram Janmabhoomi dispute, as per the Supreme Court’s decision, aligns with Modi’s vision for communal harmony and justice. The construction of the Ram Mandir, embraced by diverse societal groups, stands as a symbol of India’s cultural richness and commitment to pluralism.

In his second term, Modi’s leadership has broken through traditional limitations, setting a path of development and unity that challenges old conventions. His determination to rectify historical grievances and promote national solidarity is a testament to his steadfast dedication to India’s progress.

Deciphering Modi’s Legacy

The enduring question is how Modi managed to achieve what many thought impossible. While his personal qualities of resilience and commitment are significant, it is the Bharatiya Janata Party’s (BJP) achievement of a single-party majority that has been crucial in enabling Modi to overcome opposition and realize remarkable successes.

India’s impressive rise and expanding global presence under Modi’s guidance are rooted in the firm foundation of a strong majority government. As discussed previously, this stable governance is essential not only for India’s flourishing but also contributes positively to the international community. The upcoming elections present an opportunity for voters to renew their trust in the BJP, sustaining Modi’s forward-looking governance.

Looking ahead, we will explore the critical role of Tamil Nadu’s voters in the upcoming week, a decision that carries significant weight for the future direction of our nation.

The 2024 parliamentary elections, a pivotal event in India’s democratic journey, will commence in a multi-phased celebration of civic engagement starting April 19. This article presents a comprehensive analysis, structured in three sections, to examine the intricate tapestry of issues influencing voters’ choices. From international dynamics to national priorities and regional perspectives of Tamil Nadu, each facet will be explored to underscore the profound impact these elections hold on the global stage. The expansive scale of this electoral exercise surpasses previous precedents, highlighting its significance in shaping the future not just within national borders, but also in the broader international context.

The transformation from pariah to paragon

The 2024 Indian parliamentary elections are not merely a local affair but a global event, reflecting India’s burgeoning clout on the world stage. The catalyst for this ascendancy? Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s unparalleled influence, eclipsing even the President of the United States. The American think tank Morning Consult has placed Modi at the pinnacle of global leadership popularity for five consecutive years. Leaders worldwide extol his virtues: the Australian Prime Minister dubs him “Modi the Boss,” the Italian Prime Minister lauds him as the world’s most cherished leader, and the US President admits to Modi’s compelling power, jokingly lamenting the overwhelming demand for his presence. Even the Russian President acknowledges him as “the fearless, the wise one,” while the British Prime Minister recognizes him as a peer in global leadership. The President of Papua New Guinea’s gesture of prostration is a testament to Modi’s stature.

The Western nations that once ostracized Modi now sing his praises, a testament to his transformative leadership. President Biden’s remarks encapsulate this shift: “You’re a real problem for me. When you visit, everyone clamors for your attention. There’s not a single pass left for your dinner. From celebrities to my own kin, everyone’s vying for a moment with you. You’ve become a phenomenon, reshaping democratic nations.” Modi’s leadership of the G20 in 2022 marked a turning point, steering the group towards unprecedented success.

The thaw in relations with America and Europe post-2014 is a direct result of Modi’s indefatigable efforts. His global tours, initially mocked by domestic political parties and media, fostered strong international bonds. His historic visits to Australia, a rarity for an Indian PM, have cemented Australia as one of India’s staunchest allies. Modi’s accolades are not personal triumphs but national pride, akin to the reverence for figures like Abraham Lincoln or John F. Kennedy in America. Modi’s statesmanship is rooted in the growth and development of India, captivating the world under his leadership.

Economic Resurgence: From Vulnerability to Vigor

The decade preceding 2014 was marked by economic turbulence in India, with growth rates faltering and inflation rates climbing amidst a series of high-profile scams and questionable economic policies. The era saw Indian enterprises amassing unsustainable debts, which morphed into non-performing assets, edging state-owned banks toward insolvency. Internationally, India’s reliance on costly foreign loans for its foreign exchange needs earned it a spot among the “Fragile Five” economies identified by global financial analysts.

Fast forward to the present, and India’s narrative has undergone a dramatic reversal. Now heralded as the world’s fifth most robust economy, this transformation is no serendipitous event but the fruit of Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s stringent economic strategies, ambitious national projects, and an unwavering commitment to governance that has set a benchmark for ministerial and bureaucratic performance.

Under Modi’s stewardship, high-level corruption has seen a significant downturn, and a decisive battle against financial malfeasance has been waged. Business magnates, once celebrated, found themselves compelled to seek refuge overseas as the government clamped down on willful loan defaulters, leveraging legal avenues to repossess companies and recoup funds. Public sector enterprises, previously beleaguered by losses and teetering on the edge of collapse, are now posting record profits. A renaissance is evident in foundational sectors such as transportation infrastructure, with highways, airports, and ports experiencing an unprecedented surge in development. The stock market, often regarded as a nation’s economic pulse by global financial institutions, has witnessed a meteoric rise from 20,000 points in 2014 to over 73,000 points today. This remarkable turnaround has not only reshaped India’s economic landscape but has also garnered newfound respect and trust from the international community.

Monumental Milestones

Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s tenure has been marked by a series of transformative initiatives that have commanded global attention. Here’s an exploration of six significant achievements that have reshaped India’s narrative:

1. Vaccine Development: Amidst the 2020 Covid-19 pandemic, Modi championed the vision of a self-reliant India, pledging to produce indigenous vaccines. Defying global skepticism, his administration not only achieved this ambitious goal within eight months but also launched two homegrown vaccines. This feat was further amplified as India successfully administered double doses to over 1.02 billion citizens, a triumph that resonated worldwide.
2. Financial Inclusion: Modi’s government undertook a massive financial inclusion drive, opening bank accounts for 520 million previously unbanked individuals, issuing Aadhaar identification to all, and directly transferring ₹5.53 trillion in subsidies, curtailing a potential ₹3.48 trillion in leakages. Today, these accounts hold savings amounting to ₹2.30 trillion, empowering the economically disadvantaged.
3. Healthcare Accessibility: By providing health insurance to 340 million citizens, Modi’s policies facilitated medical treatments valued at ₹660 billion for 58 million people, eradicating the international perception of India’s neglect towards public healthcare.
4. Sanitation Revolution: The construction of 115 million toilets across 530,000 villages has eradicated the practice of open defecation, a subject of past international ridicule.
5. Clean Cooking Initiative: The provision of cooking gas connections to 100 million households has been lauded globally for its positive impact on women’s health and environmental conservation.
6. Housing for All: The ambitious project of granting free houses to 26 million rural families has astonished the international community, showcasing India’s commitment to improving living standards.

These milestones are not merely domestic achievements but have significantly enhanced India’s stature on the world stage, reflecting Modi’s influential leadership and India’s progressive trajectory.

“India’s Ascendant Path”

The transformative initiatives of recent years have not only reshaped India’s domestic landscape but have also garnered global acclaim. The multidimensional economic strides have drawn praise from international leaders, with French President Macron acknowledging, “India is changing the world.” This sentiment is echoed in a recent Ipsos opinion poll conducted across 29 major democracies. The survey revealed that 77% of respondents view India as progressing in the right direction, a stark contrast to the perception of other nations like the US (65%), Germany (72%), Canada (70%), England (79%), and France (82%), which are seen as veering off course. Furthermore, these nations regard India’s economy as the most luminous, a testament to the country’s burgeoning influence and promising future.

Navigating Geopolitical Tides

The global community recognizes Prime Minister Narendra Modi as the linchpin of India’s dynamic growth and resurgence. Esteemed figures like Henry Kissinger and George Soros observe the waning of Western hegemony, a trend accelerated by the Covid pandemic and the conflict in Ukraine. Modi’s assertive diplomacy during the Ukraine crisis has shifted the balance of power, bolstering the influence of neutral countries and signaling a significant realignment in international relations.

India’s firm stance against Chinese aggression, from Doklam to Ladakh, has commanded the West’s attention, underscoring the strategic imperative of partnering with India. Beyond its traditional alliances, India has forged new bonds with nations across Asia, Europe, and the Global South, positioning itself as a pivotal mediator on the world stage. In moments of heightened tension, such as the threat of nuclear escalation in Ukraine, the world has looked to India for mediation, reflecting Modi’s engagement with both Russian and Ukrainian leadership.

Amidst this geopolitical flux, the established Western liberal order perceives a challenge from the emerging Indic paradigm. Allegations of a concerted effort to infiltrate India’s political landscape and undermine its trajectory through foreign-funded NGOs and mass protests have surfaced. Despite these claims, India’s resolve remains unshaken, with Modi’s governance providing a beacon of moral and spiritual leadership during a period marked by global conflicts and transitions.

“India’s Sovereign Choice”

The narrative of India’s ascent on the global stage has become a focal point of international discourse. The Western establishment, long accustomed to setting the global agenda, now observes India’s rise with a mix of interest and apprehension. The crux of their concern is not merely India’s growing influence but the assertive leadership of Prime Minister Narendra Modi, which challenges the status quo. As the 2024 elections approach, there is palpable anticipation among Western media and think-tanks about the potential outcomes and their implications for global dynamics.

The cultural ethos of the West, characterized by individualism and liberal values, finds itself at a crossroads with the cultural revival of Asian and Global South nations. This resurgence is seen as a counter-narrative to the Western model that has dominated for decades. President Xi Jinping’s recent embrace of China’s ancient heritage exemplifies this shift towards civilizational pride.

Modi’s leadership is emblematic of India’s civilizational reawakening. Representing one-sixth of humanity, India’s burgeoning economic, military, and technological capabilities, coupled with its rich cultural legacy, present a new paradigm. This has led some in the Western liberal order to view Modi’s India as a challenge to their traditional hegemony.

The upcoming general elections in India are thus cast in a broader light, with potential consequences that extend beyond national borders. The choice of leadership is not only about domestic governance but also about India’s role in the world. The outcome will be closely watched, as it could signify a reaffirmation of India’s path and its civilizational values on the global stage.

Note to the Reader: This article originally appeared in Thuglak Tamil Weekly Magazine. It was translated in English by Shri Venkateshwaran from Thuglak Digital for www.gurumurthy.net.

The remarks made by Prime Minister Modi in 2024 and those events that unfolded between 1957 and 1992  

Before delving further, it's imperative to recollect the Prime Minister's retort during the conclusive parliamentary session, particularly directed at those propagating the North-South fiscal division narrative. "The notion that taxes collected within our state belong solely to us, that river waters within our borders are exclusively ours, that minerals extracted from our land are ours, and that agricultural produce cultivated within our boundaries is exclusively ours, represents a perilous ideology that undermines national cohesion," he elucidated. The empirical validity of his assertion resonates deeply.

In the aftermath of independence, the mineral wealth abundant in Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, Jharkhand, Chhattisgarh, and West Bengal—termed as backward states—was not solely channeled for their own advancement. Rather, the central government crafted policies designed to benefit not only these regions but also foster the development of the southwestern states. This policy remained in effect for a span of 35 years, from 1957 to 1992. Consequently, while the pace of development in the North-Eastern states languished, the South-Western states flourished significantly, emerging as bastions of progress and prosperity in contemporary times.

Highlighting the adverse impact of the 'Freight Equalization Scheme' (FES) on the developmental prospects of the North-Eastern states while bolstering the progress of the South-Western states, it unequivocally rebukes those decrying the purported exploitation and financial backing of the Northern states. Had the FES policy not been enforced, the clamour today regarding the exploitation of mineral-rich states for the development of others would ring hollow. It is no hyperbole to assert that the implementation of the FES policy, which facilitated the growth of the South-Western states, dealt a crippling blow to the developmental aspirations of the Northern states.

"FES: Devastation in the North-East, Prosperity in the South-West"

In the heartland of India, Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, West Bengal, Chhattisgarh, and Jharkhand stand as bastions of mineral wealth, boasting vast reserves of coal, iron ore, dolomite, and limestone. These regions serve as epicentres for steel mills, thermal power plants, and cement factories strategically positioned near the mineral deposits. This symbiotic relationship ensures the easy accessibility of raw materials crucial for the production of steel, electricity, and cement. The historic establishment of Tata Group's steel plant in Jamshedpur, Bihar, in 1907 under the banner of Indian Iron and Steel Company (IISCO) underscores the strategic importance of these mineral-rich territories. Furthermore, state-owned behemoth, Steel Authority of India Limited (SAIL), strategically positioned steel mills and thermal power plants in Banda, Uttar Pradesh; Bhilai, Chhattisgarh; Rourkela, Odisha; Durgapur, West Bengal; and Pokhran, Jharkhand, leveraging the proximity to these valuable resources to bolster industrial prowess and economic vitality.

During the 1950s and 1960s, the states endowed with abundant natural resources experienced a surge in steel, electricity, and cement industries, igniting a wave of industrialization and economic prosperity. However, the trajectory abruptly shifted in the late 1960s, as the once-thriving states encountered a stagnation in growth while witnessing a mass exodus of steel, electricity, and cement industries to the southwestern states. The Freight Equalization Scheme (FES), a concessionary policy ushered in by the Nehru-led government, emerged as a critical factor in this upheaval. Designed to alleviate the transportation costs of ferrying raw materials from resource-rich states to distant counterparts, it incentivized industries to relocate to the southwestern regions, regardless of the availability of raw materials. Consequently, the momentum of production and development in the resource-rich areas ground to an abrupt halt, heralding an era of stagnation and economic disarray.

"Unveiling the Enigma: The Ascendance of Southern and Western States"

The purported mission of the FES appears noble on the surface—a purported endeavour to harness a state's natural resources for the collective benefit of the nation. Ostensibly, it aims to facilitate the equitable distribution of mineral wealth, propelling development even in regions devoid of such resources. However, the reality paints a starkly different picture—a portrait of calamity and misfortune. The implementation of the FES system wrought havoc upon states blessed with natural abundance, facilitating the unfettered transportation of mineral resources at subsidized rates to distant corners, including the southern, western, and northern states such as Punjab. The exodus of industries from resource-rich states ensued, gravitating towards the industrialist hub of the West-South, characterized by robust financial markets and educational institutions. Industrial magnates like Tata who ventured Bihar, the others found solace in establishing enterprises within their own states post-FES, obviating the need for external ventures.

The lopsided repercussions are evident: the South-Western states burgeoned in industry, economy, tax revenue, and per capita income, while the mineral-rich states languished in the shadows of neglect. This stark reality underscores the enigmatic growth of the South-Western states over the past half-century. The policy, enforced from 1957 to 1992, served as a catalyst, fostering prosperity in one region at the expense of another. However, with the advent of liberalization, this paradigm shifted, prompting the return of manufacturing industries like steel and electricity to the mineral-rich states they once deserted. Nonetheless, the scars of the 35-year FES regime continue to mar the economic landscape of these states, impeding their recovery. Multiple studies corroborate the narrative: the South-Western states thrived at the detriment of their counterparts, perpetuating a tale of disparity and injustice.

The Fallacy and Danger of North-South Political Divide

Shashi Tharoor's assertion of framing the Central-State allocation issue as a North-South matter is erroneous and cannot be endorsed. Demonstrating its fallacy is straightforward; consider the distribution of total direct tax collections amounting to ₹16.63 lakh crore: ₹6.05 lakh crore in Maharashtra, ₹2.22 lakh crore in Delhi, ₹2.08 lakh crore in Karnataka, and ₹1.07 lakh crore in Tamil Nadu. Notably, these four states contribute a cumulative total of ₹11.42 lakh crore (69%). This statistical breakdown illustrates that the entities generating such income operate across various states, thereby distributing tax contributions across state borders. The notion that tax revenues are solely attributed to the state where they are collected is absurd. For instance, the ₹2.22 lakh crore collected in Delhi encompasses profits generated nationwide, not solely within Delhi's borders. A significant number of the central government employees who belongs to various states pay taxes in Delhi, is it right to say those taxes belong to Delhi?, Likewise, Chennai, Mumbai, and Bengaluru contribute three-quarters of tax revenues in their respective states. Tax payments transcend the boundaries of the state where profits accrue. The constitutional mandate granting businesses nationwide operations mandates the fair distribution of tax revenues among states where profits originate. Hence, claiming exclusive ownership of tax collections by the state of collection, whether direct or indirect, is erroneous and impractical. Engaging in North-South politics based on this flawed premise not only perpetuates misunderstanding but also poses a significant danger to political discourse and national unity.

Annamalai’s Answer

Shashi Tharoor contends that the more populous northern states receive greater funding allocations. Tamil Nadu BJP President Annamalai provided a resolute response at the 54th Anniversary of Thuglak Magazine. He emphasized the role of the Finance Commission, constituted every five years per constitutional provisions, in determining revenue distribution between the Center and the States. The 15th Finance Commission, established in 2021, allocates funds to states based on several factors: (1) per capita income disparity within states - 45 points, (2) land area - 15 points, (3) population - 15 points, (4) family planning - 12.5 points, (5) Afforestation, Environment – 10 points, (6) Financial Sector Regulation – 2.5 points. Annamalai highlighted the significance of population, allocated 15 points, contrasting it with the 1970s during the Indira regime when 50% of the population was prioritized in fund allocation, which has now reduced to 15% in 2021.

During the Congress rule, the allocation of more funds to northern states based on their larger population is no longer applicable. Annamalai further asserted that while the 15 points allotted to population may favor the northern states, the 12.5 points allocated to family planning effectively balances the scales for the southern states.

Annamalai underscored the absurdity of implying revenue disparities among states, particularly noting that the six western districts of Tamil Nadu single-handedly contribute a substantial 54% of the total revenue. Despite this significant contribution, the Tamil Nadu government channels the funds received from these districts to bolster the development of underprivileged regions within the state. Annamalai raised a critical question: without such equitable distribution, how can the overall development of Tamil Nadu be sustained?

Similarly, states like Punjab, Uttar Pradesh, Uttarakhand, Rajasthan, West Bengal, and the Northeast constitute border states in the country, warranting special attention and allocation of resources. Likewise, Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Jharkhand, Chhattisgarh, West Bengal, and Madhya Pradesh, which have endured developmental setbacks, have relinquished their mineral resources to the South-Western states under concessional terms. It is undeniable that such states necessitate greater allocation of resources. Those who frivolously debate allocation of funds are doing so with incomplete information, engaging in divisive north-south politics. They must substantiate their claims with comprehensive evidence or refrain from perpetuating this perilous political discourse.

Betrayal of the Northern and Eastern States

Stuart Corbridge, a British expert, starkly equated the exploitation of natural resources in Africa to the plundering of mineral-rich regions in North and East India through the Freight Equalization Scheme (FES) policy. This policy facilitated the unabated extraction of cheap raw materials from the North-Eastern states, only to bolster cement production in Gujarat, Maharashtra, South India, and Punjab at concessional rates. Consequently, states like West Bengal, Bihar, Jharkhand, Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Uttar Pradesh, and Odisha were stripped of their natural resource endowments, spiraling into financial bankruptcy and industrial backwardness.Even after the abolition of the FES policy in 1992, these states struggled to bridge the developmental chasm with their more affluent counterparts. The reverberations of injustice endured by mineral-rich states echoed as late as 1996, with the West Bengal Industry and Commerce Minister said that the abolition of the FES policy failed to rectify the historical exploitation inflicted upon these regions.

References:
Freight Equalization Policy (1)).

&

Manufacturing under development by John Firth, a French expert, and Ernest Liu, an American expert. A study on India's Freight Equalization Scheme stated that the FES policy reduced productivity in North and East India and promoted growth in South-West India over 50 years (2).

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freight_equalisation_policy
[2] http://barrett.dyson.cornell.edu/NEUDC/paper_316.pdf

Note to the Reader: This article originally appeared in Thuglak Tamil Weekly Magazine. It was translated in English by Shri Venkateshwaran from Thuglak Digital for www.gurumurthy.net.