Category: Media

Uttar Pradesh: Brutal Attacks Against Journalists Spotlight Threat to Press Freedom in India

These incidents have fuelled a strong response from media organisations and journalists who are demanding urgent action to ensure their safety.

Uttar Pradesh has witnessed two brutal attacks against journalists, sparking outrage and raising concerns over press freedom and safety in India’s most populous state. On the intervening night of October 30-31, a journalist was murdered in Fatehpur district, and on October 27, two journalists from Hamirpur district were allegedly stripped, beaten and humiliated by a panchayat chairman and his henchmen. These incidents have fuelled a strong response from media organisations and journalists, who are demanding urgent action to ensure their safety.

Two local journalists from Hamirpur, Amit Dwivedi and Shailendra Kumar Mishra, filed a complaint alleging they were violently assaulted by Sarila Nagar Panchayat chairman Pawan Anuragi and his henchmen. According to their complaint, Anuragi’s men not only beat them but also disrobed them at gunpoint, recorded humiliating videos and even forced them to drink urine.

Dwivedi and Mishra reported the incident to Jariya police station, claiming they were held captive and subjected to severe humiliation. The journalists allege that they were summoned to the Jariya bus stand around 6:20 pm on October 27 by a man named Gangaprasad alias Babu, who had requested a meeting on behalf of Anuragi. Upon their arrival, they were reportedly led to a room in the house of one Akash, where they were confronted by Anuragi and several henchmen, including Akhilesh Rajput, Vikram Yadav, RK. Soni, Akash Anuragi, and Narendra Vishwakarma.

Inside the room, the situation escalated as the chairman’s men allegedly switched off the lights and began to physically assault them. The journalists further claimed they were stripped, threatened with death and coerced into handling weapons for staged photos and videos. During the assault, their phones were confiscated, and they were warned that if they reported the incident, both they and their families would face severe consequences.

Following the journalists’ complaint, a case was registered against Anuragi and his henchmen under various sections of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita (BNS), including charges of rioting, voluntarily causing hurt, wrongful confinement and criminal intimidation.

However, in a controversial turn of events, the police also filed a counter-complaint against both journalists, alleging house trespass, intentional insult and criminal intimidation under BNS, as well as charges under the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The move has led to concerns about a possible attempt to intimidate the journalists or weaken the case against the chairman.

Additional Superintendent of Police (ASP) Manoj Kumar Gupta stated that the police are actively investigating the complaint lodged by the journalists and are in contact with journalist unions. Gupta added that the police have conducted raids to apprehend the suspects but have yet to make any arrests. The police have reassured the journalists and media associations of an impartial investigation and prompt action.

Despite assurances from the police, Dwivedi and Mishra claim that law enforcement is acting under pressure from the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). They also say that chairman Anuragi is from the ruling saffron party. According to the journalists, while there is video evidence of the incident, the police have registered a weak case against the chairman, allegedly under pressure from influential political leaders. “Police have registered a frivolous case against us in stringent sections, aiming to pressure us into withdrawing our complaint,” they alleged.

This incident in Hamirpur is not an isolated one. Just days earlier, on October 30-31, a journalist named Dilip Saini was murdered in Fatehpur district. Saini, who worked for a news agency, was killed in what police initially described as a property dispute with financial undertones. An FIR was filed, and five suspects have been arrested in connection with the case. However, four suspects remain at large. According to ASP Vijay Shanker Mishra, efforts are ongoing to apprehend the remaining suspects.

The recent attacks have been viewed as part of a worrying trend, with Uttar Pradesh seeing increasing violence against journalists. The Uttar Pradesh Accredited Correspondent Committee (UPACC) condemned these incidents, with association president Hemant Tiwari calling for immediate action against the accused. “These attacks create an atmosphere of hostility toward journalists and undermine the government’s claims of zero tolerance toward crime,” Tiwari said. He added that he had raised the matter with senior state officials, emphasising the need for swift and decisive action.

Veteran journalists and press associations argue that the state’s response to these incidents is crucial for maintaining press freedom. Former editor of a Hindi daily, Kumar Bhawesh Chandra noted that many journalists, particularly those in smaller towns and rural areas, face threats from influential political and criminal figures. “The government must prioritise the safety and security of journalists, as these attacks are a direct challenge to freedom of expression,” Chandra stated. He further urged chief minister Yogi Adityanath to take personal responsibility for ensuring a secure environment for journalists in the state.

Hemant Tiwari of the UPACC remarked that “any laxity in handling these cases could imply government complicity in the crimes against journalists.” He said that the attacks have left many journalists feeling vulnerable and worried about their safety. “If the government fails to act decisively, it will erode public trust in the state’s commitment to law and order,” Tiwari said.

These incidents come amid increasing concerns over press freedom in India. According to the 2024 Press Freedom Index by Reporters Without Borders, India ranks 159th out of 180 countries. The country’s low ranking reflects growing pressures on journalists, particularly those covering critical or sensitive topics.

Journalists’ associations and press freedom advocates argue that targeted attacks, intimidation and the misuse of legal provisions against journalists have worsened the climate for media in India. The recent incidents in Uttar Pradesh underscore this growing threat and have led many journalists to call for stronger protection.

Chandra further said that the state government needs to take visible action, not only to punish the perpetrators but also to send a strong message that attacks on journalists will not be tolerated.

India, Globally: Effects of a ‘Diplomatic Disaster,’ Umar Khalid, G.N. Saibaba and Hate

A fortnightly highlight of how the world is watching our democracy.

The Narendra Modi government frequently posits India as a ‘Vishwaguru’ or world leader. How the world sees India is often lost in this branding exercise.

Outside India, global voices are monitoring and critiquing human rights violations in India and the rise of Hindutva. We present here fortnightly highlights of what a range of actors – from UN experts and civil society groups to international media and parliamentarians of many countries – are saying about the state of India’s democracy.

 Read the fortnightly roundup for October 16-31, 2024.

Canada-India

On October 14, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP), Canada’s national police, held a press conference to publicly disclose allegations that officials of the government of India are implicated in criminal acts (including murder) targeting Sikh dissidents in Canada. Most recently, Canada has alleged India’s Home Minister, Amit Shah, is involved. We present below a dedicated section on media reports and reactions (from this fortnight) to Canada’s allegations, touching not only on Canada-India relations, but on India’s standing in the world. 

Toronto Star, Canada, October 16

In his opinion piece, Robin Sears writes that India will “pay a heavy price” for the “diplomatic disaster” brewing, as criminal allegations against the Indian government are being investigated by Canadian police. Sears writes that “India has for many years ordered killing, or at least indulged its intelligence agency in spying on, harassing, and threatening” Indian-origin citizens in many countries.

He reveals that more than 20 countries with significant South Asian populations have intel about India’s Research and Analysis Wing (RAW) and its “criminal behaviours in their country”, from alleged poisoning, murdering Sikh activists, to arming a military regime. In light of the Canadian police’s revelations of evidence against Indian agents, Sears says countries may now want to move from private nudges to “make it clear publicly that India’s behaviour is intolerable”.

He warns that past thinking among countries that India’s flawed international diplomacy could be accommodated in light of “strategic and economic interests” has to shift to now “wonder when their day will come; when their national police will feel compelled to call a press conference to denounce the Indian government as a criminal in their country”.  

Toronto Star, Canada, October 17

The Toronto Star’s Editorial Board writes that while Canadian prime minister Justin Trudeau can be accused of “naiveté in international affairs”, he had “no option” but to “aggressively expel” Indian diplomats in light of India’s “brazen and dangerous disregard for the rule of law in a sovereign nation”. The Board recognises there may have been “more diplomatic ways” of dealing with this, “but India would not allow it”.

Indian officials have repeatedly rebuffed Canadian and American attempts to get India to cooperate with the investigation, and have “rejected” detailed evidence recently presented to them by Canadian police. The scale of allegations is “stunning”, eight people are charged with murder and “22 are charged with intimidation, coercion, harassment and uttering threats”. While the ‘Five Eyes’ partners (the US, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, and the UK) are backing Canada’s calls for India to cooperate, the Board also points out that they are “all walking a fine line supporting Ottawa while trying not to alienate Modi”. 

Read a summary of the Five Eyes responses here.

CBC News, Canada, October 16

Benjamin Lopez Steven presents “ key takeaways” from Justin Trudeau’s testimony delivered on October 16 at a public inquiry on foreign interference. With regard to India, Trudeau shared two important revelations. He said that the initial investigative assessment on the killing of Hardeep Singh Nijjar was that it was a gang or criminal-related, and it was South Asian leaders and parliamentarians who “suggested the government of India was involved”. It was only after this input that Trudeau requested agencies to investigate this angle. He also shared that his government decided they would not go public with the allegations against the Indian government on Nijjar’s killing, before the G20 summit in September 2023, as India was hosting the summit. When Trudeau shared the allegations and his concerns in a private conversation with Narendra Modi at the summit, he said Modi responded by saying there are people who are “outspoken against the Indian government in Canada that he would like to see arrested”.  

Read an editorial in the Canadian paper, The Globe and Mail, with criticisms of Justin Trudeau’s stance towards India at his October 16th testimony. 

Toronto Star, Canada, October 19

Allan Woods reports that the investigation into criminal activity by Indian officials in Canada is revealing “suspicious incidents from Brampton to British Columbia, and as far away as California, Italy and Australia”. Across countries, Sikhs who criticise the Indian government or advocate for an independent Sikh homeland have reported “verbal or physical threats that they believe are linked to their activism”. This continues the long-known “obsessive focus on Sikh separatists” of Indian security services.

Woods writes that even after Canada went public with accusations of the Indian government being involved in Nijjar’s killing in September 2023, threats to Sikh activists have not declined. He documents life-threatening incidents against activists in California (USA) and Australia as well as numerous cases in which activists have been told they will be denied visas to India or “threatened with arrest”. Priya Chocka, an associate professor at the University of Adelaide in Australia, says “this has all come out in the open because India has just refused to cooperate with Canada”.  

Washington Post, USA, October 29 

A report states that Canada’s deputy foreign affairs minister David Morrison alleged that India’s home minister Amit Shah “ordered a campaign of violence, intimidation and intelligence-gathering” targeting Sikh activists in Canada, in his testimony before Canada’s parliamentary committee on national security held on October 29. Morrison also confirmed that he had passed Shah’s name to the Washington Post, which first reported the allegations. He did not divulge how Canada knew of Shah’s suspected involvement. In her testimony to the Committee, Nathalie Drouin, Trudeau’s national security adviser, said that Canada has evidence the Indian government “first gathered information on Indian nationals and Canadian citizens in Canada through diplomatic channels and proxies”. Drouin also said that the Canadian government decided to go public with the allegations against India “when it became evident the Indian government would not cooperate with Canada on proposed accountability measures”. 

Read more here and here about the RCMP’s evidence on the involvement of the “highest levels” of the Indian government

And in other media updates…

Al Jazeera, Qatar, October 15

Mukta Joshi traces the journey of the Hindu American Foundation (HAF) which despite “its claims of non-partisanship” has emerged as an “effective advocate” of Narendra Modi’s Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). Joshi says when it was first established 20 years ago, HAF “was not formed to champion the Indian government” but it has done so since Modi became Prime Minister in 2014. HAF has met legislators to “influence” the American government to push for laws it wants on US foreign policy on India. It has also “acted in the US to counter the Modi government’s critics”.

Joshi points to several instances where HAF has   refuted reports that minorities in India are being persecuted. While HAF publicly denies its relations with the Indian government and the BJP, Joshi writes that it is “treading a fine line” as its partisan activities raise questions whether it should register as a “foreign agent” under US law. Joshi also documents that HAF Board members are political donors and several are affiliated to Hindu nationalist organisations in the US.   

Rest of World, USA, October 15

Parth MN reports on how Hindu nationalists are using WhatsApp to mobilise targeted attacks on Christians and Christian places of worship in Bastar, Chhattisgarh. He further exposes that organisations like the Vishva Hindu Parishad (VHP) are carrying out forced conversions of Christians to Hinduism. Since 2022, “according to local VHP officials, hundreds of Christian families in Bastar have been converted”. The VHP imposes conversions through “funeral attacks” in which it organises mobs (through WhatsApp) to reach Christian families just as they are about to bury a deceased family member and forcibly prevent burials until they convert. Parth writes that the VHP wants Bastar’s residents, mostly from indigenous tribes with no organised religion, “to identify as Hindus”. The VHP also claims that conversions to Christianity are the “real problem”. While forced conversions are illegal in Chhattisgarh, Degree Prasad Chouhan, president of the state chapter of the People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL), says “the laws are not applied equally for Hindus and Christians”.  

The New Statesman, UK, October 19

Naomi Klein presented Arundhati Roy with the PEN Pinter Prize on October 10 and in this edited version of her speech at the ceremony, she underscores “why we need Arundhati Roy”. She reminds the audience that just as PEN announced the 2024 award to Roy, it was reported that “she could face charges under India’s draconian anti-terrorism laws” and media frenzy of the kind “that has brought angry mobs to her door before”. She describes Roy’s nonfiction work as similar to a “war correspondent” on the “places and people experiencing maximum pain, maximum injustice, maximum state violence” like “Kashmir, the Maoist insurgency, the aftermath of the Gujarat Massacre”.

Klein stresses that Roy, and an Egyptian writer being honoured while he is in jail, are “in danger” and we must face “the reality that we have entered a brazen new stage of state violence”. Klein concludes by saying while there is fear, “there are many new alliances to make, new solidarities to forge, new strategies to devise”. 

New York Times, USA, October 22 

Suhasini Raj profiles Umar Khalid, a young Indian Muslim political activist, whom Raj describes as a “a symbol of the wide-ranging suppression of dissent under Prime Minister Narendra Modi”. While Khalid has been speaking out against anti-Muslim hate for a long time, “he became more vocal after Mr. Modi’s rise to national power, which injected deeper violence into the existing anti-Muslim prejudice”. Khalid has been in jail for four years without a trial on terrorism charges. He has been accused of making anti-government speeches and participating in WhatsApp groups that were organizing protests against a citizenship law with grave implications for Indian Muslims. Khalid’s time in pretrial detention shows how the “process is the punishment”, said his father Syed Qasim Rasool Ilyas. His bail applications have been rejected thrice in lower courts, the Supreme Court has postponed his bail hearings “at least a dozen times”, and often when Khalid is taken to court, judges will recuse themselves. Mr Ilyas says, “In India today, one has to pay a price for speaking the truth, and it is very easy to frame someone with a Muslim name these days.”

Climate Home News, UK, October 28

An investigation by Climate Home, an climate justice journalism initiative based in the UK, shows that the Indian government “weakened rules to curb pollution” after “lobbying” by “state-run” Indian coal “giants”. Coal India Limited and the National Thermal Power Corporation “pushed back hard” against regulation of disposal of “fly-ash”, a “by-product” of coal fired power plants which can “blow away” or “leach into groundwater”, causing air pollution and damaging crops.  Stringent fly-ash disposal is necessary after  “decades of public health impacts for local communities”.

In 2021, the Indian government introduced requirements for companies to use and clean up all accumulated ash, and heavy fines for non-compliance of its proper disposal. The companies lobbied to get the fines reduced and “loopholes” introduced to lessen the other requirements. For instance, in their correspondence, the companies argued high fines risked coal plants being shut down and could lead to a “power crisis”. Shripad Dharmadhikary, a member of a fly-ash watch group, says that “loopholes” and “lack of technical parameters” means that it is not possible to “guarantee that no more leaks would occur” even when the government certifies that pollution has been addressed. These companies are expanding at “record speed” despite India having “agreed internationally to phase down the use of coal”.

Parliamentarians and public officials advocate

In a press briefing on October 15, Mathew Miller, a spokesperson for the US State Department was asked about India’s response to Canada’s public allegations against the Indian government. Miller replied that the US perceived the allegations against India as “extremely serious” and they wanted to “see India take them seriously and cooperate with Canada’s investigation”, but India “has not chosen that path”. Miller also said India “continues to be an incredibly strong partner of the United States”. He shared that the US government has been having “conversations” with the Indian government “at the senior-most levels” over the last few months.  

On October 17, the US Justice Department announced that “murder-for-hire and money laundering charges” have been filed against an Indian government employee, Vikash Yadav, “in connection with his role in directing a foiled plot to assassinate a U.S. citizen in New York City”, with co-conspirator Nikhil Gupta. Yadav was still at large. “Today’s charges are a grave example of the increase in lethal plotting and other forms of violent transnational repression targeting diaspora communities in the United States,” said Assistant Attorney General Matthew G. Olsen of the Justice Department’s National Security Division, and “let there be no doubt that the Department of Justice is committed to disrupting and exposing these plots and to holding the wrongful actors accountable no matter who they are or where they reside”. Notably, Gupta told American undercover officers, about a day after the Nijjar murder in Canada, that Nijjar “was also the target” and “we have so many targets.”  

Dr. Philipp Ackerman, the current German Ambassador to India, sent a condolence letter to Manjeera, Dr. G.N. Saibaba’s daughter, dated October 17 expressing his shock and sadness at Saibaba’s “early death”. He shared that meeting Saibaba left a “deep impression” on him and wrote that “your father’s story, his long imprisonment and his unwavering commitment to civic rights in India commanded a tremendous amount of respect from me”. 

Thierry Mathou, the current French Ambassador to India, sent a condolence letter to Dr. Saibaba’s wife, Vasantha Kumari, about “how saddened” he was at the news of Saibaba’s passing. He wrote about how “as a committed academic, writer, and human rights activist”, Saibaba’s work “was known and appreciated in India and beyond”. The Ambassador also conveyed heartfelt condolences “on behalf of the Embassy of France in India”.

G.N. Saibaba was an Indian scholar and activist who was severely disabled and incarcerated for about a decade, after being sentenced to life imprisonment on terrorism charges. Saibaba was exonerated of all charges and released in March 2024. He passed away on October 12, 2024.

Experts say

The Bridge Initiative at Georgetown University published a factsheet on October 15 on Ekal-USA (Ekal Vidyalaya Foundation), a sister organisation of Ekal Vidyalaya Foundation of India (Ekal-India). Ekal-USA is Texas-based with over 70 chapters in several US cities, and Ekal-India is a “Hindu nationalist group that operates single-teacher schools in India”. Two prominent members of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), a Hindu “supremacist paramilitary organisation”, were the first to develop the concept of these schools. Ekal-USA was founded by an RSS leader and funds “more than 74,401” Ekal schools in India. The schools are run by eight organizations in coordination with the Vishwa Hindu Parishad. These one-teacher schools teach curriculum which is designed by Ekal-India to students in rural and tribal areas of India. Prominent Hindu nationalist leaders are listed as promoting and expanding Ekal schools; school officials, in turn, hold positions in Hindu far-right groups. Ekal-India has been “accused of promoting hatred towards religious minorities”. After an incident of anti-Christian violence in Madhya Pradesh in 2004, peace activist Harsh Mander said part of the mobilisation included “local teachers” of Ekal Vidalayas. 

As the Indian government vies for a permanent seat on the United Nations Security Council, Amnesty International said in a statement dated October 21 that India “is falling short of its domestic and international human rights obligations”. Amnesty states that if India is serious about its bid, “it needs to demonstrate that it can engage responsibly with UN human rights entities” and “commit to upholding the highest standards in the promotion and protection of human rights”. Amnesty recounts that since 2019 India has been “the subject of around 25 statements from UN human rights experts” expressing concerns about human rights violations by India. Over several rounds of Universal Periodic Reviews (UPR), India has “not shown progress in implementing recommendations”, including failing to ratify the Convention Against Torture. Between 2011 and 2024, the Indian government “received over 200 communications from UN Special Procedures”, and has responded to “less than a third”. According to the statement, in response to two reports on the situation of human rights in Kashmir by the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, Indian authorities have vilified the reports rather than engaging.  

China Global South Project podcast hosts Eric Olander and Cobus van Staden interviewed Sushant Singh, lecturer of South Asian Studies at Yale University on October 22, about the recent agreement between India and China to disengage along the Line of Actual Control (LAC). In four main points, Singh focussed on India’s willingness to reach a compromise. First, a continuing border conflict with China was “very, very embarrassing” for Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s “strong man image”. In light of the “power differential” with China, said Singh, Modi turns “very timid and very shy”. Secondly, it is Pakistan, not China, which is India’s “primary nationalist target” and the military’s focus on the border with China lessens India’s ability to threaten Pakistan. Third, India needs China for its  own economic, trade and technology interests.  Lastly, India wants to pursue an “independent foreign policy.”  It also wants to continue to be “authoritarian” and “Hindu majoritarian” despite what the West says, including on “transnational repression”. For a path of aggression with China, India would need help from the West.  On the other hand, “peaceful” relations with China allow India less Western interference in its domestic and foreign policies.  .  

The World Association of News Publisher (WAN-IFRA) and the Inter American Press Association (SIP-IAPA), supported by UNESCO, jointly released a report entitled “Misuse of Economic Charges to Silence, Threaten and Attack the Press” on October 23. Based on 8 case studies including NewsClick in India, the report “highlights how effective the misuse of financial crimes allegations is in silencing journalists and media outlets”. Bringing charges of financial crimes – ranging from tax evasion to money laundering to terrorism financing – is used to attack both “financial viability” and the “reputation” of journalists. The prosecutions of these crimes often lead to closure of offices, freezing of assets, prison time, and financial ruin of the media organisation. On NewsClick in India, the report notes that it is a “worrying example of where broad anti-terrorism laws are applied to silence critical media outlets”. It states that the “misuse” of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) and the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA) against NewsClick indicate the “abuse of anti-terror laws for political purposes.”  Andrew Heslop, Executive Director, Press Freedom, WAN-IFRA describes such actions as “lawfare” forcing media “to fight for the right to do journalism”. 

Reporters Without Borders (RSF), a global organization which works for “the freedom, pluralism and independence of journalism”, called upon Prime Minister Modi to “immediately loosen the stranglehold on local media” in Jammu and Kashmir, in a statement dated October 24. Drawing attention to the recent elections in the region which brought into power those who promised “restoring press freedom”, RSF says that the “clear signal” to the Prime Minister is that “the repression of Kashmiri reporters must stop”. Celis Mercier, Head of RSF’s South Asia desk, notes that “over the past five years, a quarter of the journalists imprisoned under false pretexts in India come from Jammu and Kashmir.”  Three journalists currently in detention include Abdul Aala Fazili, Irfan Mehraj and Majid Hyderi. RSF  also notes that “at least 10 journalists are currently being denied passports.”  Given such “assaults on the rule of law and press freedom”, Mercier declares that “this reign of terror must come to an end.”

The Global Nature Conservation Index, released on October 24, ranks India among the top 5 worst performers in conservation efforts.  On the basis of 4 key pillars and 25 performance indicators, the Index places India at 176 among 180 countries.  Described as home to among the world’s most diverse wildlife and habitats, India scored well on ratification of international treaties on biological diversity and endangered species, and on the full range of ecosystems and habitats present in its existing protected areas. However, India’s performance plummets in several areas. Because of “habitat loss and fragmentation by agriculture, urbanization, and infrastructural development” India ranks a very low 177 under the key pillar, “Threats to Biodiversity”. Under the pillar “Land Management”, India ranks a low 174 on the indicator “protected areas terrestrial” with the Index stating that “7.5% of India’s terrestrial area is protected” and only 0.2% of national waters are protected. The Index stresses the need for “sustainable land use” in India since “land conversion for urban, industrial, and agricultural purposes has reached 53%”.  

The Global Tuberculosis Report 2024 report, published by the World Health Organization (WHO) on October 29, monitors progress in prevention, diagnosis and treatment of Tuberculosis (TB) at global, regional and country levels. Based on 2023 data, the report shows that India is the highest contributor to the global incidence of TB (26%); to the incidence of drug-resistant TB at 27%, and to the gap between estimated and reported TB incidence (16%).  India is also among the 30 high TB burden countries where more than 15% of the population faces “catastrophic health expenditure”. An article in The Wire explains that spending  “more than 20% of a household’s annual income” on TB treatment is considered “catastrophic”. The Wire also analyses the data of the WHO report and finds that “India has missed the goals set for two out of three interim milestones for 2025” towards the WHO goal of elimination of TB by 2035. It notes that unlike any other country in the world, India has declared a target of achieving TB elimination by 2025 itself. 

Indian diaspora and civil society groups

Political Research Associates (a US-based social justice research and strategy centre offering support to change makers) and SAVERA (a US-based multiracial, interfaith, anti-caste coalition) jointly published a report profiling the Hindu American Foundation (HAF).  They describe HAF as a “key node in the global Hindu supremacist (or Hindutva) movement” and part of “an emerging multiracial far right in the US”. The report lists three key aspects of HAF’s far-right advocacy in the US. First, HAF has “furiously fought” to prevent legal protection against caste discrimination, akin to “white supremacist tactics”. Second, it has “demonized Indian American Muslims, Christians, and Sikhs in the U.S”. Third, it makes “great efforts” to justify human rights violations by India’s ruling BJP. Savera warns that “HAF was often able to enter U.S. civil society spaces”, enabling it “to advance the marginal and supremacist politics of Hindutva into spaces the movement had previously failed to reach”. The report documents HAF’s “deep and ongoing financial, organisational and interpersonal ties” with “Hindu supremacist actors” in the US and India. 

12 Ummah (a platform of voices of Muslims around the world), released a video titled “The Long Shadow of UAPA: The story of Prof G.N. Saibaba” on October 12, the day of his death.  Images and video clips of Saibaba, as well as those who spoke in his support, are accompanied by a commentary that recounts that he endured almost a decade of incarceration after being arrested on terrorism charges in May 2014, shortly after the BJP came to power under Narendra Modi. The video also documents the support received by Prof Saibaba in April 2020 from a UN panel of human rights experts who urged the Indian government to release Saibaba immediately due to his deteriorating health, despite which he was not released. In March 2024, Saibaba was exonerated of all charges against him for lack of evidence and procedural irregularities. The video captures the  shock and disbelief expressed by friends and supporters at his “untimely demise” on October 12. “Lamenting that he could not enjoy the freedom he fought so hard to attain after enduring prolonged repression by the state”, Saibaba’s death is declared to be a “profound injustice and institutional murder”. 

On October 17, South Asian Left (SALAM), a diaspora group based in the US, announced the launch of  the ‘Tata Bye Bye” campaign in a press release.  The campaign demands that the “Tata Group disclose all contracts with Israel, and divest from them”. As a “major player in the U.S. economy”, the release stresses the Tata Group’s “extensive involvement in defence projects” including “military operations in occupied Palestinian territories”. These include joint ventures with Israeli defence firms that provide “missile systems and electronic warfare technologies”.  The campaign also calls upon the New York Road Runners “to drop Tata Consultancy Services (TCS) as a sponsor of the New York City Marathon due to TCS’s critical role in enabling Israel’s genocidal and apartheid regime”. TCS, “the most valuable subsidiary of Tata Group”, has provided Israel with digital services (such as cloud computing), which are “essential to Israel’s military operations and its broader system of digital control, which enables the surveillance and repression of Palestinian civilians”.

On October 30, 25 South Asian organisations and allies in Canada sent an open letter to Prime Minister Trudeau, calling for “listing of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) and its affiliates in Canada as hate groups/far right extremist entities”.  Recalling the RCMP allegations against Indian government agents being involved in criminal activity targeting Sikh dissidents in Canada, the letter cites an “extensive report” from 2023 which links “anti-Sikh violence in Canada to extremist groups like the RSS and their family of organizations, the Sangh Parivar”. The letter also calls on the Canadian government to investigate the influence of, and any human rights violations by the RSS and its affiliates in Canada and take measures to protect South Asians and other minorities. 

Read the previous roundup here.

Why Is a War Correspondent’s Profession a Calling?

In ‘I Brought the War with Me’, British journalist Lindsey Hilsum has the courage to introduce the human interest despite the brutality, and by and large, with welcome non-romanticism.

Of the 50 short on-the ground narratives about various conflict zones, British journalist and war correspondent Lindsey Hilsum has structured her autobiographical text in ten segments. Within those segments, the events are neither chronological nor confined to one country.

‘I Brought the War with Me: Stories and Poems from the Front Line’, Lindsey Hilsum, Chatto & Windus, UK, 2024.

The narratives refer to warzones in the Middle East, Africa and Europe, with less than a handful in Asia and one in North America, and in terms of specific countries, the maximum references are to Syria, followed by Ukraine, Palestine/Israel, Rwanda and Russia.  The absence of Asia, by and large, and Latin America is explained by British priorities and possibly the journalist’s available budgets.

Why is a war correspondent’s profession a calling? Because, in Hilsum’s words, ‘the act of documenting someone’s story makes it count for something, or at least for something more than if it had never been recorded at all.’ She finds reporting from warzones ‘rewarding and exciting,’ the feeling of ‘living through history’ in which ‘nightmares, anger, tears and bouts of despondency are all normal…it is hard to believe that humans are inherently good.’

Sometimes she was an eyewitness to history; at others, among the first on the scene. In 1994, Hilsum served with UNICEF in Rwanda, the only foreign reporter when the Hutu genocide of the minority Tutsis began and led to 800,000 killed, one of the most brutal mass crimes of the 20th century. She reports that ‘I was alone in a city I scarcely knew with no petrol in my car. Barricades manned by red-eyed drunken men armed with broken beer bottles, machetes and nail-studded clubs had sprung up all over town.’ And on the Palestine West Bank, ‘we were the first outsiders in nearly two weeks who hadn’t come to kill them.’

Hilsum has the courage to introduce the human interest despite the brutality, and by and large, with welcome non-romanticism. She states that some ‘details were tantalizing in their mundanity…There was nothing that could be called victory. There was certainly no glory,’ pointing out the ‘futility and cruelty of war which never achieves the results promised by those who start it.’ In using the words of interviewees verbatim, Hilsum notes that the most courageous people in war have been civilians, and ‘war brings out the best and worst in people.’ In countless instances of inhumanity, she saw that in Uganda ‘children became the most feared fighters because they knew no restraint,’ and one with ‘a louring volatility I have never seen in an adult soldier.’

Lindsey Hilsum. Photo: Chatham House, CC BY 2.0.

Hilsum has no respect for American overseas interventions; the Afghans did not believe bin Laden had orchestrated the 9/11 attack from Afghanistan, and regarded the Americans as just another foreign invasion. The USA had equally little impact with its ‘reckless and aggressive behaviour’ in Iraq when its invasion had brought anarchy in its wake – ‘an ignorant, ahistorical intervention by outsiders.’ The Iraqis that had welcomed the US intervention ‘were now trembling with fury and outrage…US troops were regarded as liberators for less than 24 hours.’ So, is ‘totalitarian oppression’ better than the bedlam that follows it more often than not? This remains an imponderable question.

Hilsum considers terrorism in Europe: ‘If you thought about it too much it was unnerving so on the whole, we didn’t…Jihadism only has currency because their generation is looking for identity and meaning.’ Like W.H. Auden, she ‘knew human folly like the back of [her] hand.’ Therefore, she writes that ‘the online world increasingly demands binary attitudes; the only authentic response [varies] between happy warrior and bitter pacifist,’ whereas ‘experience tells me that that war never turns out as planned, and taints everyone it touches.’

Hilsum predicts that the ongoing conflict in the Sahel presages wider wars and greater African numbers who will try to escape to Europe and the US, and that refugee flows caused by climate change are only starting. She observes that the top five refugee-hosting countries include only one developed nation – Germany. Western societies are riven by polarising politics, AI disassociates the decision-makers from the killed while she regrets that ‘journalists focus on what is critical now.’ Deploring the destruction of ancient monuments, she states ‘the moment of history in which they [the combatants] were living was more important to them than preserving emblems of the country’s past.’

With unsentimental but often evocative prose, Hilsum notes that ‘Nothing bonds you to your colleagues as intensely as being under fire.’ Her own experiences were ‘too painful to recall but too searing to forget,’ for example, ‘In Mexico it’s more dangerous to be a journalist than a drug trafficker.’ And there are also rare flashes of humour – as in Ukraine when ‘statements of questionable veracity [about the author’s alleged connections with the British Queen] would speed up our passing through almost any roadblock.’

The poems are sometimes more eloquent than the text. After all, from time immemorial poetry has dealt with the tropes of passion and battle. Assessing a poem is a deeply subjective exercise, but the context for the poems is apposite, the poets sometimes familiar, others unexpected like Enheduanna, the world’s (2300 BC) earliest poet with her hymns to Sumerian goddesses Inana and Nanna; and touching when they concern the futility of settlement of disputes through force.

A student or practitioner of international relations would be on the lookout for any suggestion of bias, and to the author’s credit there are few, save a predisposition to oppose actions by Russia and Syria on account of ‘dictatorships’, irrespective of the legitimacy of their positions, and when ‘similarities between enemies can be almost unbearable.’ Russia according to the author has ‘belligerent imperial ambition’ which reflects the UK’s government and media’s prejudices.

It has to be questioned whether the non-chronological, non-geographical system of the book best serves the author’s interest. It seems so designed to appeal to the emotions rather than a reasoned train of sequence. It is for each reader to judge the validity of this format.

Krishnan Srinivasan is a former foreign secretary.

Should Newspapers – Owned by Billionaires – Endorse Presidential Candidates?

From the conduct of the owners of the ‘Los Angeles Times’ and ‘The Washington Post’, it is clear that the bigger threat is not engaging with the public on important issues and allowing multiple voices to be heard.

This past week, there has been a great deal of controversy in the United States over surprising developments at two of the country’s largest newspaper companies – the Los Angeles Times and The Washington Post – related to traditional presidential endorsements, or in this case the decisions not to endorse.

On the surface, what transpired at the Los Angeles Times and The Washington Post appears to be much the same. However, a closer look based on reports would indicate that the decisions made by the owner of The Times, Dr. Patrick Soon-Shiong and Post owner Jeff Bezos differ in at least one important way.

As reported, Dr. Soon-Shiong decided not to publish the endorsement after his editorial board had already presented their endorsement of Vice President Kamala Harris, because he did not agree with their decision. As the owner of the Times, that is indeed his prerogative, but it also clearly undermined the work of his editorial staff.

The Washington Post editorial board was also clearly preparing to endorse US vice-president Harris for president, but that endorsement never materialised. Rather, the owner, Bezos, recently made it known that he no longer wanted the newspaper to make any presidential endorsements. His motive is less clear and naturally became open to widespread speculation. His argument, as he explained after the fact (and amid massive subscriber cancellations) in a Post opinion piece, was that presidential endorsements have no impact on voters’ decision and that presidential endorsements run the risk of further eroding the public’s trust of news media.

He essentially argues that publishing such an endorsement only reinforces the public’s perception of “news bias.” Therefore, The Post would break from recent tradition and no longer engage in any presidential endorsements. Again, as the owner of The Post he is entitled to make that call, but given the timing of his decision he should expect the same outcry as The Times received.

From my perspective, had either of these two owners made their decisions not to endorse known even six to nine months earlier, they would face much less criticism if any at all. As it stands, they have opened themselves up to the current storm of criticism over “billionaire bias” and meddling.

As a former publisher and CEO of major newspapers in the U.S. for many years, I have had a front row seat at seeing how the impact of newspaper endorsements have changed over the past few decades.

Frankly, I would agree with Bezos’ argument that any news organisation’s formal endorsement of a presidential candidate has little to no impact on a voter’s decision when they cast their vote for president these days. Regardless, if, for that reason, a news organisation makes the decision not to make a presidential endorsement, they should make that position clear to their readers and audience well in advance. Being on the record early makes a big difference. Stating that position weeks before the election is wrong.

Having reflected on these recent developments over the past few days, at least two other thoughts occur to me.

First, while indeed presidential endorsements may not have the impact they once did, other endorsements do indeed matter, and news organisations still play an important role. This is especially true in local and state elections. Whether it is the election of local judges, mayors or state representatives, the insights of the local news media can provide important, additional insight to voters in considering who can best represent their communities’ interests. I would hope news organisations would continue to do their homework and weigh in on these important decisions.

Secondly, regarding the issue of “trust” in media and the idea that allowing opinions to be expressed necessarily show a direct correlation to bias is missing the point on at least one very important component of any responsible news organisation.

To really understand this point, we have to remember that a well-rounded news organisation generally is comprised of at least two distinct components: 1) news, and 2) opinion. We owe it to our readers and audiences to be clear how we distinguish between these two components.

Hard news is to be factual, accurate and unbiased in describing the events as they happened. This is a fundamental tenet for all professional journalists and cannot be compromised.

However, there is and should also be a place for opinion pieces. This is certainly true for individual columnists whose expertise and insights provide a certain personal perspective on things. And traditionally this has also always been true for great Editorial and Opinion sections of a newspaper.

In fact, this is where the institutional voice of an editorial page works to serve the community. Strong editorial positions offer a community a well thought out opinion or “point of view” on a subject generally advocating a position that the editorial board believes best serves the community. Importantly, the editorial position should also be complimented by various alternative voices and opinions to provide readers and audiences with opposing or alternative points of view.

I would argue that such an approach, that of offering both the institutional voice of the editorial page and alternative points of view, is more important today than ever. We live in a world where too many of us are only exposed to “echo chambers” of like thinking. We all benefit from learning and understanding alternative thinking.

Bezos may feel that there is a threat to trust in journalism by the editorial page of a news organisation taking a position on an important issue like a presidential election, but the bigger threat is not engaging with the public on important issues and allowing multiple voices to be heard.

Terry Egger has worked in newspapers in the United States for more than 40 years. Most recently he was CEO and publisher of The Philadelphia Inquirer. Prior, he served as the CEO and publisher of The Plain Dealer in Cleveland for eight years as well as publisher of The St Louis Post-Dispatch.

This article was republished under a Creative Commons licence. The Wire has changed the headline and made slight edits to accommodate style demands.

The Power of Writing

Ta-Nehisi Coates in his new book, ‘The Message’, would like us to believe that stories can offer us serious redemption in these unsettling times.  

Ta-Nehisi Coates in his new book of essays, The Message, offers us an eloquent defence of why writing matters most as a political gesture. It is a compelling read, structured around four beautifully crafted essays on diverse themes – the true calling of journalism, the place of Africa in the world, the challenges of censorship and the Israeli state’s ‘apartheid’ vis-à-vis the Palestinians.

Coates breaks fresh ground on each of these counts in his own persuasive idiom. The essays demonstrate empathy, nuance and attention to facts in equal measure. Although the themes are substantive, the style is accessible and a pleasure to engage with.

Ta-Nehisi Coates,
The Message,
Published by One World (October 2024).

The opening essay is titled ‘Journalism is not a luxury’. It advances a number of thoughtful propositions but I shall confine myself to three. The first is an admission by Coates that for writers emerging from a particular historical and intellectual crucible ‘…there can be no real distance between writing and politics’. Coates tells us something about his debt to Afro-American traditions of thinking. It was Howard University in particular that instilled in him the urgency and value of working towards an ‘emancipatory mandate’. The challenges and trajectories of these emancipatory projects could transform over time, but Coates recognises that there is always work to be done. The dismantling of ‘easy bromides’ and ‘national fictions’ remains an incessant task that journalists must dedicate themselves to. The Message needs to ring home in contemporary India.

Second, Coates argues that ‘…what must be cultivated and cared for must first be seen’. The task of the writer here is to render palpable what has oftentimes been hidden from view. Illustratively, ‘…it should do the work of illuminating, of confronting and undoing, the violence…’ witnessed from close quarters. Coates embarks on an interesting distinction between two kinds of writers. The first who can conjure worlds from ‘imagination’, the second who have to rely much more on tangible ‘knowledge’ to advance their claims. He lets us know that he belongs to the latter category and is keen to secure knowledge to excavate a truth. In other words, The Message here is not to hesitate to dig deep and get into the trenches whenever and wherever warranted.

Third, Coates also identifies another stellar quality of good journalistic writing, namely the capacity to ‘haunt’ the reader. Readers must feel an irrepressible urge to ‘…think about your words before bed, see them manifest in their dreams, tell their partner about them the next morning, to have them grab random people on the street, shake them and say, “Have you read this yet?”’. This is a high bar for most writers, but when it does meet the criterion, it elevates your being. The best of journalistic prose embodies a visceral dimension.

In ‘On Pharaohs’, Coates embarks on a journey to discover his ancestry and the story behind his name. He travels to Dakar in Senegal and laments the many misplaced claims of western commentators with deep racial biases, who are bent on portraying Africa in unpalatable terms. Coates spends some time examining the anxieties of these racists in conceding that there is a Black Egypt or a Black civilisation. They cannot come to terms with Senegalese physical beauty. Nor can they extricate themselves from their unexamined premises of colonialism, enslavement, racial stereotyping and most sadly, the denial of humanity to the people of Africa. White supremacy, we learn from Coates, is not without ‘…its syllabus, its corpus, its canon’.

The Message also carries a riveting account of what transpired in Chapin, South Carolina when it comes to a book ban. A school teacher who is keen to expose students to Ta-Nehisi Coates’ book Between the World and Me invites attention and flak for transgressing her ‘Advanced Placement English’ teaching brief. Coates offers us an alternate account of American history through the work of Nikole Hannah-Jones, author of The 1619 Project, which traces the origin story of the United States to slavery. Coates focuses on pieces of legislation like Executive Order 13950 which takes censorship to draconian proportions. The murder of George Floyd, the hostility towards critical race theory and the attempt to coral our future through regressive legal and political decisions, all secure the attention they merit in this narrative arc. For some readers, Coates’ own struggles with ADHD in school and the acknowledgment that ‘…all readers do not come to a text equally’ may indeed be liberating on a more fundamental plane.

The best is always saved for the last. Coates’ final essay, ‘The Gigantic Dream’, takes us on a journey from Yad Vashem through a variety of checkpoints in Gaza, the West Bank and Tel Aviv. What is fascinating in this account is the recognition of a common cause among Palestinian freedom fighters and radical Black activists in their evaluation of layers of oppression and their struggles to combat it. Imperialism authored by the United States with local chapters (Israel) is a running thread in this essay. It weaves its way through stories of Confederate flags, slavery, settler colonialism, the nakba, communal intimacy and the deliberate ‘erasures’ of Palestinians in a ‘Jewish democracy’ (Israel) and Blacks in another democracy (the United States). This is an invitation to take a leaf out and ask how Dalits, religious and sexual minorities fare in Indian democracy. Sceptical of the smokescreen of ‘objectivity’ in journalism, Coates reminds us of the vital need to recount ‘other stories’ that only writers with deeper political convictions can bring to bear from the margins of the world. These stories count and good writers, Coates would like us to believe, can offer us serious redemption in these unsettling times.

A final nugget from the book that is worth sharing. Coates claims that ‘…you can see the world and still not see the people in it’. This is a genuine possibility. If you listen to a more boisterous slice of the Indian middle class, it is not hard to discern that many have precisely accomplished this. They have learnt little from their travels and lapse into their ethnocentric habits of mind without self-reflexivity. The challenge is not to replicate this blindness in our classrooms. It is to ensure that a new generation of Indians learn to ‘see’ better than this and appreciate the nuances of political writing and its possible afterlives. The Message provides us an excellent vantage point for this self-reflection.

Siddharth Mallavarapu is Professor of International Relations and Governance Studies at the Shiv Nadar Institution of Eminence. Views are personal.

Governments Increasingly Using Financial Laws to Target Independent Media, Says Report

‘Financial crimes prove effective in silencing media and journalists as they do not require the need for a link to content produced and are not subject to the same international scrutiny as laws explicitly targeting media.’

New Delhi: A new joint report by the World Association of News Publishers (WAN-IFRA) and the Inter American Press Association (IAPA) states that governments worldwide are increasingly using financial laws to target independent media, undermining their financial stability and damaging their reputation.

The recently published report highlights cases from eight countries where journalists and media outlets have encountered extensive financial accusations. The case studies cover authoritarian regimes such as Azerbaijan, Hong Kong, and El Salvador, as well as actions against NewsClick in India and Rappler in the Philippines.

“Financial crimes prove effective in silencing media and journalists as they do not require the need for a link to content produced and are not subject to the same international scrutiny as laws explicitly targeting media. Being aware of how such laws are being used – or misused – will hopefully better insulate us from their effects. Sharing the case studies featured in this report is an important step,” wrote executive director, press freedom, WAN-IFRA, Andrew Heslop.

Edward Pittman, one of the report’s authors, stated that their study revealed “misuse and abuse of financial crimes to target journalists and media is a growing phenomenon in all regions.” He added, “In a growing number of countries, constraints on funding media are so high that the business of running an independent media is effectively criminalised. This forces journalists and media outlets into exile.”

The report highlights that, because financial charges fall under criminal law, many prosecutions lead to prolonged pre-trial detention, prison terms, and significant fines.

Additionally, during criminal investigations and trials, journalists and media organisations may be denied access to bank accounts, with assets often frozen, severely impacting their finances. For instance, in the Philippines, Nobel laureate Maria Ressa and her news organisation Rappler were targeted with tax evasion charges, which led to significant financial losses.

Legal defence against such charges is notably expensive, requiring tax and criminal lawyers, accounting specialists, and other forms of expertise that are not readily available to most journalists and media outlets. “The narrative behind such charges intends to label journalists as criminals, erode public support, and attack the journalist’s or media outlet’s reputation,” it said.

The international report highlights the case of NewsClick whose offices and staff were raised in 2021 and 2023. While 380 electronic devices were confiscated from staff, the NewsClick founder and editor Prabir Purkayastha and head of human resources Amit Chakravarty were arrested in October 2023 as “part of an investigation into suspected foreign funding of the media outlet”.

Purkayastha was released following a Supreme Court order that his fundamental rights had been violated on procedural grounds relating to his arrest.

The report noted that the crackdown on the outlet followed its coverage of the farmers’ protests and the government’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic.

“While other media in the country have been sold to government-aligned owners, NewsClick remains defiant. In targeting the outlet in this costly and complex way, the government has sought to make it financially unviable and to send a chilling effect among the independent journalists in the country,” it said.

The other cases were of Abzas Media in Azerbaijan, six staff journalists of which were charged with foreign currency smuggling, illegal foreign funding and money laundering in December 2023 and August 2024.

In Hong Kong, Jimmy Lai, founder of Apple Daily was jailed on fraud charges connected to lease violations and faced National Security Law accusations for pro-democracy efforts.

After reporting on negotiations between criminal gangs and the Guatemalan government, El Faro faced accusations of money laundering and tax evasion from President Nayib Bukele. With accounts frozen, the outlet moved operations to Costa Rica to evade financial obstruction and continued reporting amidst government hostility.

Scholar Alleges BBC Plagiarised Her Seminal Work on Bengal Famine in Podcast; Erased Churchill’s Role

‘I submit that this erasure is systematic and deliberate. By reproducing only those of my findings that have made it into the popular press, and dealing with them in a cursory way, the BBC seeks to change the narrative around the Bengal famine.’

New Delhi: Scholar Madhusree Mukerjee has written an open letter to the BBC, in protest against what she alleges is the extensive and unacknowledged use of research detailed in her book in the outlet’s famed podcast series on the Bengal famine.

Mukherjee’s book Churchill’s Secret War: The British Empire and the Ravaging of India during World War II came out in 2010 and is largely credited with reviving conversation around former United Kingdom prime minister Winston Churchill’s role in creating and sustaining the Bengal famine of 1943, which killed an estimated three million people.

Mukherjee has alleged that the BBC’s acclaimed podcast Three Million at once rips off her book and also erases the central role played by Churchill. Mukherjee says that this is a deliberate erasure, meant to alter the narrative around the famine.

Mukherjee’s open letter carries a denial by BBC. The Wire wrote to the BBC on the allegations and received a response on October 31. A BBC spokesperson said: “As we have made clear to Dr Mukherjee in our earlier correspondence with her, we reject the claims she is making.”

The BBC said that its research was conducted over a year across the world and that Churchill was covered in the podcast.

“BBC documentary series Three Million explores the devastating impact of the Bengal famine of 1943, which saw at least three million lives lost in British India during the Second World War. The aim of the series was to focus on the lived experiences of the people directly affected by the famine and those who were eyewitnesses. The team spent over a year researching the story, drawing on a wide range of academic books, primary sources and conducting their own archival research across the world, as well as working with historical consultants and interviewing a broad range of academics.”

“We cannot talk about this historical event without mentioning Churchill – and we do cover his role throughout the series as well as the criticisms levelled against him.”

The seven-episode podcast aired from March to August this year.

Mukherjee’s original letter notes that despite BBC’s claim that its team conducted its own extensive research, their research included reviewing some sources which she discovered as relevant to the famine.

In a detailed episode-wise argument presented after her open letter, Mukherjee also highlights how some claims made by the BBC – some to do with offering hitherto un-presented information in the podcast – are false because of prior Bengali reporting by the BBC itself.

Several noteworthy scholars and journalists have noted that they are in solidarity with Mukherjee, including journalists P. Sainath and Sukumar Muralidharan, author and activist Silvia Federici, MP and author Shashi Tharoor, Cambridge professor Priyamvada Gopal, filmmakers Nilita Vachani, Diego D’Innocenzo and Partho Bhattacharya, physicists Vandana Singh and Rahul Mahajan, ecologist Debal Deb, Ghosh Literary founder Anna Ghosh, author John Horgan, former BBC World Service head Nazes Afroz, author Romi Mahajan, researcher Raghav Kaushik, professors Sipra Mukherjee and Anirban Bandopadhyay, mathematician Seema Nanda, anthropologist Felix Padel and lawyer Sarmila Bose.

The Wire is producing the whole letter and Mukherjee’s detailed comments below. Her original emphases have been retained.

§

An Open Letter to the BBC

I am writing to protest the extensive and unacknowledged use of the research and findings detailed in my book, Churchill’s Secret War (2010), in your acclaimed podcast series, Three Million.

In this book, which I will henceforth call CSW, I charged Prime Minister Winston Churchill with significant responsibility for the death toll of at least 3 million people in the Bengal famine of 1943. Expecting to be attacked by his defenders, I painstakingly documented my findings so that they could be easily verified. What I did not expect was that my meticulousness would enable my findings to be selectively reproduced and discussed while eliminating me and CSW from the discourse—and that too by the BBC.

When I sent an official complaint to BBC about the unacknowledged use of my work in Three Million, I received a denial: “We disagree that we relied heavily on your book. The team spent months researching the story, drawing on a wide range of academic books, primary sources and conducting their own archival research around the world.” This research included reviewing some of the sources I discovered as relevant to the famine, such as the diaries of Secretary of State for India, Leo Amery.

Author Yasmin Nair describes as “extractivist plagiarism” the “plundering of another’s work by going so far as to chase down their very same sources and presenting a provocative thesis as one’s own.” In this case, I charge, BBC has chased down a few of my sources, but altered my thesis to one more amenable to the powers the broadcaster answers to.

“We can’t talk about this historical event without mentioning Churchill,” the BBC also wrote back to me, inadvertently acknowledging the central importance of CSW to discussions about the Bengal famine. Why then refuse to mention the book that established the connection between Churchill and the famine?

I submit that this erasure is systematic and deliberate. By reproducing only those of my findings that have made it into the popular press, and dealing with them in a cursory way, the BBC seeks to change the narrative around the Bengal famine.

Since CSW was published, I have been repeatedly approached by BBC producers who wanted to feature my work in a standalone documentary or a series. They invariably wrote back weeks or months later, saying that more senior officials or producers had decided against including my book or my voice. This happened as recently as April 2023, when a producer wrote back: “I can no longer go further with exploring this with yourself. I hope you understand. It is a decision that is out of my hands.” These communications, as well as the elimination from your podcast of any mention of CSW, suggest that the book has been blacklisted by sections of the BBC.

In effect, the Three Million podcast series focuses negative attention away from Churchill onto lesser actors like Bengal Governor John Herbert, the topic of Episode 6. (The episode blames Herbert for the “denial policy” and fails to mention that the original scorched-earth order, for which denial policy is a euphemism, came from Churchill and was relayed to India by Amery. See CSW pages 63-64.) Further, by refusing to name CSW even while selectively reproducing its findings, BBC ensures that listeners don’t get the opportunity to read and understand the full, detailed and devastating case against Churchill and, more broadly, against British imperialism in India.

“Are we ready to touch those bits of our history that are too painful to acknowledge?” presenter Kavitha Puri asks in Episode 4 of Three Million. The linguistic gymnastics required to avoid mentioning CSW (see below) even while using so much material from the book makes it clear that the BBC may be able to “touch” some painful aspects of British imperialism, but it is still unready to empower its audience to explore the full story of Churchill’s and the Empire’s culpability.

I list below the statements in the first four episodes of Three Million that draw upon my original research and findings, as well as the statements that are partial and misleading. The page numbers below refer to the US paperback edition, published in 2011. Statements made in the podcast are in blue, with particularly significant sections noted in boldface. My comments are in black.

Sincerely,

Madhusree Mukerjee

§

Introduction

“It’s been called one of the darkest chapters in modern British history and the debate quickly veers in on the wartime prime minister Winston Churchill, blaming or defending him.”

CSW is the original source of this debate.

“There is no voice of the three million people.  This is the story of the Bengal famine told for the first time by those who were there.”

This is false.  I found and interviewed several famine survivors and witnesses, whose stories were recounted in CSW. I wasn’t the first, either. I was inspired to look for survivors by the 1997 documentary The Forgotten Famine, directed by Mark Halliley, which had remarkable filmed testimonies from famine survivors. These testimonies were collected by Nazes Afroz, whose own 8-part series on the Bengal famine was broadcast on BBC Bangla in August-September 1997. The BBC Bangla series contained eyewitness accounts of the scorched-earth policy and interviews with civil servants. Michael Portillo’s episode on Bengal Famine, as part of his BBC 4 series, Things We Forgot to Remember, was broadcast in January 2008, using Afroz’s recordings. There were also survivor and witness testimonies in the 2018 documentary Bengal Shadows. Among others, this film featured an interview with Chitto Samonto, a famine survivor and freedom fighter who is a key protagonist in CSW.

Episode 1

The sequence of events listed in the podcast as leading up to the famine follows the narrative laid out in CSW. All the factors noted in the podcast as contributing to the famine were described in CSW in detail, some of them for the first time ever.

India reluctantly pulled into the war

Indian political leaders were furious at being dragged into the conflict

See CSW pages 7-8

Japanese getting closer to Bengal

War transformed the city… soldiers on the streets

Bengal exporting rice in record amounts

Export of rice from Bengal was something CSW noted for the first time. See page 129.

“By the second world war, the British Raj was in its twilight years. Calls for Indian independence were louder than ever. Bengal had long been a crucible of anticolonial activity, but now its streets were full of soldiers in a war no one had asked to be part of. Allied troops had started arriving in large numbers once Singapore and major military strongholds were taken by the Japanese in 1942.”

CSW was the first to connect the famine with repression of “anticolonial activity,” a.k.a., the Indian freedom movement. See pages 22-30, among others.

The rice supply from Burma… came to an abrupt stop.

The colonial government was printing money to pay for all the resources, issuing sterling IOUs to be paid after the war.

The fall of Burma meant that the Japanese were on the border of India. Colonial authorities ordered the seizure of surplus food and transport from villages across the delta. It was known as the denial policy and the aim was to ensure that if Japan invaded it couldn’t access food.

CSW described all these factors in detail. It also showed that the scorched-earth orders, for which “denial policy” is an imperial euphemism, originated with Churchill and were conveyed by Amery to the Viceroy of India, Linlithgow. See page 63-64.

“Without these tens of thousands of vessels, fishermen couldn’t go to sea, farmers weren’t able to go upstream to their plots, and artisans weren’t able to get their goods to the market.”

Note the similarity of this text to “Boats took traders to the market, fishers to the sea, potters to their clay pits, and farmers to their plots.” CSW Page 65.

Soldiers and wartime workers putting pressure on food resources.

The war was already driving up the price of rice. After denial it spiraled even higher.

“There were as many colonial soldiers policing the restive Indian population as were fighting the Japanese.

CSW was the first to link the famine with British repression of India’s freedom struggle during WWII.

“For the British, keeping a tight grip on India, its food, its transport, and its people was vital for controlling its empire and winning the war.”

This was a key theme in CSW. See page 102, for example.

Cyclone, rice destroyed, crop disease.

See CSW pages 89-90.

“Viceroy Linlithgow sounded the alarm with London and asked for urgent grain imports. Britain’s War Cabinet was busy with the Allied invasion of North Africa. Some food was sent to other parts of India, but not to Bengal. In fact, it was asked to export even more rice for the war effort.”

CSW was the first to discuss these requests for food. See page 103.

It was Churchill who refused to authorize the shipping ministry to send grain to India. It was also Churchill who insisted on Bengal continuing to export rice even as it faced severe shortages, as Three Million does not note.

Episode 2

This section continues to follow the narrative first described in CSW.

Hundreds of thousands of troops had to be fed… fixed prices removed.

CSW showed that the fixed prices for rice were lifted when colonial authorities panicked over their inability to feed soldiers. The reason was that Churchill had removed most of the shipping from the Indian Ocean, so that the imports of wheat that India needed to feed the army could not be sent. The lifting of price controls precipitated famine. See CSW 94-97, 110-112.

“By early 1943, the Viceroy, the most important colonial figure in British India, was worried. He wrote to London, saying, a rice crisis was coming and asked for imports to stave it off. The request was rejected. Ships, they said, were needed for the war effort to keep up Britain’s food reserves. Prime Minister Winston Churchill wrote in a memo a few days later, “Indians must learn to look after themselves as we have done. The grave situation of the UK import program imperils the whole war effort and we cannot afford to send ships merely as a gesture of goodwill.’”

This entire section, including the quote, was originally described in CSW page 103.

“India was producing the majority of goods and weapons for the Asian front… but for now sending more food to Indians who were British subjects was far from a priority.”

This section is to be found in CSW pages 45-46.

“In Delhi, Viceroy Linlithgow was increasingly concerned. He once again asked London for imports of half a million tons of grain, noting that famine conditions had begun to appear in Bengal and it could threaten the war effort. In early August, the war cabinet, who were about to engage in a major offensive in Italy, said it may be able to deliver 150,000 tons. The Viceroy was dismayed, writing, ‘I cannot be responsible for the stability of India now.’ And that stability was coming under greater threat. The immense suffering in Bengal was fueling the independence movement, the last thing the British wanted in the middle of the war.”

This section summarizes pages 138-142 of CSW. I discovered the War Cabinet’s discussions on the Bengal famine and detailed the one on August 4, 1943, as well as two others.

“Winston Churchill had vowed never to seek the disintegration of the Empire but the famine was now hastening the end of British rule.”

Again, this is a key message of CSW. See, for example, pages 129-130.

Episode 4

“Everything was subordinated to the necessities of the war… . Fighting the war and keeping the Japanese out, he said, took priority over feeding the hungry masses. “

See CSW page 192.

“While relief efforts struggled in Bengal, the quest for more help from London were still not being fully heeded. By autumn 1943, the world knew about the extent of famine in Bengal, but the war cabinet, chaired by Winston Churchill, had promised only fractions of the aid asked for, saying, there was not enough of shipping space because of the war. The Secretary of State of India, Leo Amery, recorded in his diary in September, ‘Churchill was prepared to admit that something should be done, but very strong on the point that Indians were not the only people starving in the war.’ Amery goes on: Churchill thought that ‘starvation of anyhow underfed Bengalis is less serious than sturdy Greeks.’ ” 

This entire section, including the quotes from the Amery diaries, draws from my original and exhaustive research. See CSW page 196.

[Voice of historian Max Hastings]: “‘Even a historian such as me is sometimes shocked by some of the phrases that Churchill used in those days.’ This question matters. It’s at the heart of accusations leveled against Churchill that his attitudes to Indians affected his response to the famine. Time and time again there were requests for food imports, which were either denied or only met by promises of a fraction of the total amount. “

The podcast brings up these “accusations” without a hint of where they came from and where the full, devastating indictment can be found.

“A few days later, the Secretary of State for India, Leo Amery, asked for more food imports. Noting in his diary, he said Churchill broke into ‘a preliminary flourish on Indians breeding like rabbits.’ His requests for immediate imports were denied.”

Again, this is a summary of a longer account in CSW, along with the quotes I found and published for the first time. See CSW page 205.

The rice harvest came at the end of 1943. This time it was plentiful. Even so, Wavell was concerned about second famine. He demanded over a million tons of food grains. 

See CSW page 220

Only in April 1944 did Churchill ask for help from America. Churchill wrote to US president Roosevelt, asking for assistance. But they declined: they needed their ships for the D-Day landing.

See CSW page 230

In Churchill’s six-volume autobiography of his wartime premiership, the Bengal famine, which occupied many war cabinet discussions, is absent.

See CSW page 265.

Note: This article was updated with the BBC’s response on November 1, 2024.

Gujarat Police File Third FIR Against Journalist Mahesh Langa, This Time Over ‘Cheating’ Allegation

Meanwhile, Langa was also denied bail in the GST evasion case against him, the ‘Times of India’ reported.

New Delhi: Gujarat’s police registered an FIR against The Hindu journalist Mahesh Langa after a businessman accused him of cheating, PTI cited Ahmedabad police commissioner G.S. Malik as saying on Tuesday (October 29).

This is the third FIR against Langa – the first was registered in an alleged GST evasion case and the second in a theft case against him after documents belonging to the Gujarat Maritime Board were allegedly found in his home.

Langa has been jailed in the GST evasion case since October 9.

According to Malik, who was speaking to reporters on Tuesday about the cheating case, a businessman in the advertising industry accused Langa of duping him of Rs 28.68 lakh and threatening to smear his business when asked to return the money.

“Langa offered to assist the complainant with his advertising business through his connections and positive news coverage. He then borrowed Rs 23 lakh from the businessman in June and promised to repay him in cash,” PTI quoted Malik as saying.

Malik then said Langa allegedly billed the businessman for Rs 5.68 lakh for a birthday party for the latter’s wife and promised to reimburse the amount on the day of the party.

But when the businessman “requested Langa to return the money, he resorted to intimidation and warned of consequences citing his connections” and allegedly said he “can damage his business through negative media coverage”, Malik said as per PTI.

The news agency also cited the police officer as saying that the businessman decided to complain to the police after learning of the other cases against Langa.

In the GST evasion case, where it is alleged that a network of 200 bogus firms worked to defraud the government of GST, Langa is accused of operating a firm called DA Enterprise, which is named in the FIR.

On Tuesday the Enforcement Directorate claimed that Langa ‘controlled’ DA Enterprise and that unaccounted-for cash was found at its premises, PTI reported.

“DA Enterprise was being used to route money by artificially increasing expenses in the form of fake billings and receiving cash in return. Money was transferred to Dhruvi Enterprise and it was then withdrawn as cash and routed back to Mahesh through hawala network,” Malik alleged on Tuesday.

Malik noted that Langa’s wife as well as his cousin Manoj – who reportedly owns DA Enterprise – claimed that Langa operated the firm and that the police found the two to be ‘innocent’. Neither was arrested in the case.

He also claimed that Langa lived a ‘lavish’ lifestyle despite him and his wife earning Rs 15 lakh a year, reported PTI.

However, Langa’s lawyer Vedanta Rajguru told The Hindu earlier this month that his client was neither a director nor a promoter of DA Enterprise and that no transactions or signatures were made in his name.

Rajguru also said that Langa, who reportedly called his arrest in the case “politically motivated”, was not named in the primary FIR.

Meanwhile, the Times of India reported that an Ahmedabad court denied bail to Langa in the case on Monday, finding that he “seems to have played an active role in this offence”. “The investigation is underway and there is a possibility of evidence being tampered with.”

Langa’s arrest and the cases against him have generated misgivings in the media. On Monday, four journalists’ bodies, including the Press Club of India, condemned the second FIR being registered against him.

“It is shocking that the mere possession of documents can be used by the state to register a FIR against a citizen and in this case, a journalist of considerable standing,” the journalist bodies said.

Their statement highlighted that a journalist would, by the very nature of his work, need to peruse sensitive documents.

“It is axiomatic that journalists will, due to the nature of their profession and in the pursuance of public interest, be in possession of all kinds of material, including documents, accessed from various sources. To implicate and incriminate mediapersons for the mere possession of documents is tantamount to a fundamental assault on the profession itself.”

It also said that Langa’s being named in the second FIR amounted to his being “hounded” by the police.

Bengal CPI(M) Suspends Leader After Journalist Alleges Sexual Harassment

The journalist detailed her harassment in a public Facebook Live video, alleging that Tanmoy Bhattacharya had crossed boundaries during an interview.

Kolkata: The Communist Party of India (Marxist) has suspended a prominent face in Bengal, Tanmoy Bhattacharya, following serious allegations of sexual harassment by a woman journalist. The incident, which gained attention on October 27, has sparked widespread outrage, embarrassing the party.

The journalist detailed her harassment in a public Facebook Live video, alleging that Bhattacharya had crossed boundaries during an interview. She claimed that he had engaged in inappropriate physical contact, specifically sitting on her lap. The video quickly went viral, triggering a storm of criticism and condemnation.

In response to the allegations, the CPI(M) took swift action, suspending Bhattacharya pending an internal investigation. The party’s state secretary, Mohammad Salim, issued a statement expressing deep concern over the matter and assuring that justice would be served.

“A journalist is upset with Tanmoy’s behaviour. Women understand very well what kind of touch is good and what is inappropriate. When such a complaint comes, the party takes it very seriously. Tanmoy has committed a grave act. We have referred this to ICC. Tanmoy will remain suspended until the ICC inquiry is completed,” announced Salim.

A few hours after CPI(M) suspended Bhattacharya, the journalist lodged a police compliant against him. Trinamool Congress (TMC) spokesperson Kunal Ghosh has demanded the arrest of the accused.

“The victim journalist has given her statement. Why hasn’t he been arrested yet? We don’t want to play politics. Otherwise, we could have gone straight to the police station at Barrackpore police station. Why hasn’t the police arrested the CPM comrade yet?” posted Ghosh on his social media accounts.


A former MLA, Bhattacharya has a history of controversy within the party, including factional politics and strained relations with the current leadership. Recently, he lost the Baranagar assembly by-election. He could not be reached for comment as his phone was switched off.

Earlier, he denied the allegations, calling them a “planned defamation.” Bhattacharya has expressed willingness to cooperate with an investigation. The incident has been embarrassing for the party which has been mobilising support for the movement in the aftermath of the R.G. Kar rape and murder incident.

CPI(M) central committee member Sujan Chakraborty said, “We’ve heard the complaint; it is a serious, inexcusable allegation. We will take prompt action. There is no question about upholding the respect of women. But note, in the past, individuals we expelled for similar reasons went on to become leaders in Trinamool.”

Recently, a district secretary of CPI(M) was removed from his position after an intimate video of his went viral. A few years ago, former Rajya Sabha MP, Ritabrata Bhattacharya, was expelled following allegations of inappropriate relationships with multiple women. Bhattacharya later joined TMC and is now the state secretary of Trinamool Congress’s labour organisation.

Translated from the Bengali original by Aparna Bhattacharya.

‘Fundamental Assault on the Profession’: Journalists’ Bodies Condemn ‘Hounding’ of Mahesh Langa

The Delhi Union of Journalists, Indian Women’s Press Corps, Press Association and Kerala Union of Working Journalists have together with the Press Club of India called on the ‘Press Council of India to step in.’ The Editors Guild of India has released a statement expressing concern as well.

New Delhi: Four journalists’ bodies have released a statement under the Press Club of India condemning action against senior journalist Mahesh Langa by Gujarat Police. The Editors Guild of India has also released a similar statement.

The Delhi Union of Journalists, Indian Women’s Press Corps, Press Association and Kerala Union of Working Journalists have together with the Press Club of India, called the second FIR (first information report) against Langa, “hounding” by the police. Langa, as the statement notes, was already in judicial custody when this FIR was registered on allegations that he possessed official documents.

The journalists’ bodies have called the FIR on the basis of document possession shocking:

“The second FIR was registered against him on October 22 following a complaint by the Gujarat Maritime Board for allegedly being in possession of certain documents. It is shocking that the mere possession of documents can be used by the state to register a FIR against a citizen and in this case, a journalist of considerable standing.”

The statement has also highlighted that a journalist would, by the very nature of his work, need to peruse sensitive documents.

“It is axiomatic that journalists will, due to the nature of their profession and in the pursuance of public interest, be in possession of all kinds of material, including documents, accessed from various sources. To implicate and incriminate mediapersons for the mere possession of documents is tantamount to a fundamental assault on the profession itself.”

Langa was arrested earlier this month by the Ahmedabad crime branch on an alleged case of GST fraud, even though, as the statement notes, he was not mentioned by name in the primary FIR.

The organisations have appealed and demanded that the FIR be withdrawn and the harassment caused to Langa ended.

“We also call upon the Press Council of India to step in and perform its mandate of safeguarding the freedom of the press,” it said. Unlike the Press Club which is an association of journalists, the Press Council was formed by the parliament to act for and on behalf of the press.

The statement is signed by Gautam Lahiri, president of the Press Club of India, along with the four aforementioned bodies.

EGI statement

In a statement, the Editors Guild of India has noted with concern the registration of the second FIR against Langa, higlighting similar points.

“Journalists are often required to access and review sensitive documents in the course of their work, and initiating punitive action against them for doing their work is worrisome,” it has said.

The EGI expressed hope “that Mr. Langa will not be deprived of fair and speedy justice. It is important that the Gujarat police disclose details about the second set of accusations leveled against him over possessing the confidential documents.”

It also highlighted that it was a matter of grave concern that the second FIR is not accessible to the public online, especially since the police have reportedly put it under the “sensitive category”.

“The Editors Guild stands for the freedom of the press and reiterates the need to create a conducive environment across the country that allows all journalists to pursue their professional duties responsibly,” it has noted.

Note: This report was updated with details on the EGI’s statement after publication.