India, which claims to be the world’s largest democracy, stands today at a crossroads where its domestic politics, the credibility of democratic institutions, the rights of religious minorities, economic inequality and global image have become interconnected and serious questions. Under the leadership of Narendra Modi, the BJP has made Hindutva the fundamental reference point for acquiring political power and shaping national identity. However, the question is whether politics built on the concept of religious majority can provide lasting stability to a multi-religious and multicultural society. And is Modi’s political rise laying the foundation for its own decline under the burden of this very narrative?
India’s real strength has been its diversity, democratic institutions and the concept of coexistence among different religions and cultures. However, according to critics, Hindutva politics has placed this concept under severe pressure. Hate-filled statements against Muslims and other minorities, allegations of discrimination on the basis of religious identity and incidents such as the demolition of Muslim homes and businesses in some states have raised questions about the practical status of Indian secularism. Measures such as the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) and the removal of the special constitutional status of Indian-occupied Jammu and Kashmir are also part of this debate. Democracy is not merely the name of holding elections; rather, its real standard is determined by civil liberties, respect for opposing voices, a free press, a transparent electoral process and the equal application of the law. Concerns about democratic freedoms in India expressed by international organisations such as V-Dem and Freedom House indicate that the strength of democratic institutions and electoral success cannot be measured by the same standard. If the tendency to label political disagreement as hostility, protests as rebellion and criticism as anti-state activity increases, the outward structure of democracy may remain intact, but its spirit begins to weaken.
India’s real strength has been its diversity, democratic institutions and the concept of coexistence among different religions and cultures.
Controversies surrounding the revocation of Article 370 in Indian-occupied Jammu and Kashmir, prolonged restrictions, and communication blackouts have also made India’s democratic claims a subject of international debate. Similarly, ethnic violence in Manipur and the displacement of thousands of people have raised important questions regarding state administration, the protection of minorities and national unity. It is the responsibility of every democratic state to provide protection to citizens affected by violence, bring the perpetrators before the law, and ensure justice regardless of religious or ethnic identity.
Another fundamental problem facing India is the growing gap between claims of economic development and the lived experiences of ordinary citizens. Employment for young people, quality education, control of inflation and the fair distribution of economic opportunities are basic measures of any government’s success. If the perception grows stronger that the benefits of economic development are limited to a few major business groups and ordinary young people are unable to obtain employment according to their abilities, political unrest is a natural consequence. Allegations of possible collusion between state policies and the interests of major capitalists also become significant in this context. The real success of development is not the number of billionaires but an improvement in the standard of living of ordinary citizens.
These same internal contradictions also affect India’s global credibility. Crimes linked to Indian citizens abroad or certain Indian-origin networks, financial fraud, alleged misuse of visas and cases involving organised crime have given rise to legal scrutiny and public debate in various countries. Actions related to the Bishnoi gang in Canada and investigations into alleged international criminal networks in the United States are presented as examples of this debate. However, attributing the crime of a group or individual to the entire Indian community is neither fair nor a correct analytical approach. Similarly, investigations into allegations of fraud in the US visa system, fake educational certificates and the provision of false information for employment are important in their own right, but in these matters, authentic evidence and official statistics should be decisive. The fact that a large number of Indian citizens pursue education and employment abroad is not in itself a negative matter. In fact, the Indian diaspora has made significant contributions in various fields, including science, technology, medicine, business and education. The issue is not the identity of a nation but specific behaviours involving violations of the law, exploitation and damage to the trust of host societies.
The real diplomatic challenge for India is to make the achievements of its citizens abroad part of its national strength rather than allowing such controversies to dominate its global identity. Similarly, incidents of hatred and prejudice against South Asians in Western countries are also condemnable. Suspecting an entire community on the basis of the crimes of a few individuals in any society is contrary to the principles of justice, equality and the rule of law.
Modi’s political future will not be decided merely by predictions made by opponents or slogans on social media. It will depend on electoral results, public support, economic performance, the strength of institutions and government policies. However, the lesson of history is clear: no government can permanently ignore public unrest, economic deprivation and questions relating to fundamental rights. Nationalism may secure political support temporarily but lasting national stability requires justice, equality, economic opportunities and equal rights for all citizens.
The fundamental choice facing India today is whether it will deepen its social divisions by making the supremacy of the religious majority the centre of its national identity or return to its constitutional commitments, secular traditions and democratic values. Regardless of Modi’s rise or decline, India’s future is linked to this very decision. The real strength of democracy lies not in silencing opposing voices but in listening to them, tolerating disagreement and providing justice. If New Delhi fails to understand this reality, the crisis of internal divisions and global trust could create long-term political and diplomatic difficulties for it.
The writer is a freelance columnist.