Search

By Prof. (Dr.) Santishree Dhulipudi Pandit That the Ram temple in Ayodhya took nearly 76 years after Independence to build because of the uproar surrounding it, is totally unwarranted. The temples that were destroyed by the Islamist invaders and mosques built on their very site are never discussed nor the lives of the crores who were massacred as the genocide of Hindus. Even today one says the mosque must be rebuilt; but what about the temple that was destroyed and the mosque built over it? While Abrahamic faiths have their holy cities, Hindus have been denied in the name of secularism of the Nehruvian and Left variety their basic rights to have their asmita and aastha restored. For them secularism is the preferential treatment of all except the majority Hindus. By this definition one is secular if one criticises Hindus and is blind to the Abrahamic faiths. If you practise real secularism, that is criticise all, then you are branded a coward and a communal person. It is a moment of civilizational pride for every Bharatiya that the symbol of Ram unites a diverse people across continents. Ram is the symbol of the civilization where unity of Ram in a diversity of interpretations has fascinated us from several centuries. Every civilization is proud of its symbols of pride and identity and who are these detractors to deny that, while they themselves practise all forms of false consciousnesses? These individuals have, for decades, arrogated to themselves the right to define Hinduism as they deem fit and only as they deem fit. Two eminent distortions have the unique distinction of being among the most vocal and unrelenting voices opposing the archaeological results of the excavations in Ayodhya against the backdrop of the dispute over the land demolished at the erstwhile Babri Masjid. Another group are foreigners who do not know the classical languages but wax eloquent positions on Hinduism and Hindutva. Their whitewashing of the temple destructions that took place under Aurangzeb’s rule, their blatant misrepresentations of incidents from the Ramaya a through mistranslations and other important aspects are studied through a careful analysis of their writings. The Ram Mandir movement wasn’t just a movement for any temple. It was a struggle for a temple at the Janmabhoomi of Lord Ram, who is India’s identity. Over 3.7 lakh sacrificed their lives for this movement. This is reassertion of the Bharatiya identity, a pride, an announcement that the Hindus have arrived to be treated as equals with other faiths who have always hegemonically determined as to what they should define as who we are. 22 January 2024 declares we are ready to say what it means to be a Bharatiya and there is nothing to be ashamed of it. It is a reclamation and a reminder for each of us with our age old civilization that has been proven scientifically to be beyond 8,000 years. When the legal battle was won, it was decided that a grand and magnificent temple would be built in Ayodhya. It was also decided that the Ram temple shouldn’t be built by the government or any businessman like the Laxminarayan temple had been and became more popular as Birla temple. The larger society had fought for 500 years for the temple at Ayodhya, so it was decided that they should approach society for the construction of the Ram temple. It was a people’s movement, a democratic struggle against hegemonic interpretations of distorted history. As a grand temple has come up in Ayodhya, it will be a Ram Mandir of the crores of people who gave whatever they could. The masses have a stake in Ram Mandir, which is now their mandir of connecting tradition with modernity, continuity with change, realm with region and myth with reality. It is true that Hindus are not dogmatic. Hindus indeed are decentralised in the sense that Hindu Dharma is more a family of spiritual traditions, than a single path. The family of traditions that is today called Hinduism has a certain rootedness. That rootedness is evident outwardly in the Hindu’s sacred geography. This begins to culminate in specific important kshetras. These kshetras, spread throughout India, are held sacred across spiritual traditions of the country. It has created the very nation of India and it is this movement which is still the civilizational life force of India. When this movement ceases, Bharat as a nation will cease to exist. If Bharat as a nation ceases to exist, then India as a state cannot stand a decade. In fact, the destruction of the holy shrines in kshetras of teertha yatra have a more devastating impact on Hindus as a nation than for the holy shrines of the so-called Abrahamic faiths. For the Abrahamic faiths a holy site is historical. Its recovery or possession is a symbol of victory of the faith. But for Hindus the loss of a teertha kshetra is the very loss of a part of their civilizational life. The Ayodhya movement at its heart not only challenged the Islamist destruction of the temple, but also the neglect and systematic destruction in slow motion of the holy cities themselves by the Nehruvian state. Prime Minister Narendra Modi has become the redeemer of a nation searching for its soul and that is in the persona of Ram. The persistence of this idea reinforced by the imaginations of a people and as a ruler who turns his every working day into a renewal of the pledge and promise of an Amrit Kaal, is democracy’s most compelling story today. Those who are in a state of anxiety and panic will be left by the wayside. It has created the very passion of Bharat and it is this movement which is still the civilizational and national life force of India. Since 2014, PM Modi is the sole spokesperson of a civilizational state in search of cultural justice, his faith in the possibilities of Bharat, where he played the moderniser and the cultural restorer consolidating all social identities into the civilizational unity in the image of Ram the redeemer is a masterstroke and a paradigm shift. #RamMandir #Ayodhya Originally Published : The Sunday Guardian, 7th January' 2023 https://sundayguardianlive.com/opinion/civilizational-connect-of-ayodhyas-ram-temple#:~:text=It%20is%20a%20moment%20of,fascinated%20us%20from%20several%20centuries. Prof. (Dr.) Santishree Dhulipudi Pandit is Vice Chancellor, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi, India

By Prof. (Dr.) Swaran Singh While globalisation is known for heralding faster cross-border movement of capital and people thus expanding their exposure and opportunities, these movements have become increasingly securitised, radicalised, gendered and sexualised. Like most other things, globalisation has pulled issues of human dignity out of their isolated, local spatial or cultural confines into the centre-state of global narratives. This has had both positive and negative outcomes: it has helped universalise various best practices as also exposed human dignity to novel instruments of discrimination and to other previously unknown fault lines. Globalisation has made our world increasingly awake to our interconnectedness and to its shared opportunities and challenges. It has also made sovereign states and international organisations increasingly engaged with ensuring human dignity especially through legal instruments for protection of human rights and humanitarian laws. Global conventions, courts and civil society interventions have made states obliged to meet agreed parameters on ensuring human dignity. But globalisation has also created newer challenges further exacerbating both narratives and initiatives about ensuring human dignity for all. It is in this fast changing backdrop that this paper examines the impact of globalisation on human dignity. It begins by briefly engaging with problems of conceptualising globalisation and human dignity which itself creates formidable challenges. Then second section explores into connection between globalisation and human dignity and how former has impacted the later. The third section looks at major milestones that world has achieved in creating universal standards for ensuring human dignity for all and it is followed by brief outline on world’s largest population country, India, and its challenges and approaches to ensuring human dignity. Finally conclusion section underlines the persistence of binaries of positive and negative spinoffs of globalisation especially those that have impacted human dignity related policies and practices. It recommends constant work in strengthening legal regulatory measures and mechanisms to ensure human dignity against this fast changing tide of everyday newer challenges that need to be identified and address in time and in full measure. Definitional Dilemmas To begin with, narratives and initiatives with regards to both globalisation in general and human dignity in particular remain mired in definitional dilemmas. In short, globalisation entails increasing trends of cross-border transactions, interdependence, integration of processes of exchange of goods, services, information and free flow of people and ideas. But spatial distribution of these trends have had variations of speed, scale and scope with varying acceptance and outcomes. Moreover, these trends have had their proponents (e.g. Jagdish Bhagwati) as opponents (e.g. Joseph Stiglitz) highlighting both their transformative and disruptive consequences. There are contentions on whether or not Western-led globalisation has made it into nothing but westernisation. There are also are contentions on its origins, nature and contours as also what it includes and excludes. Likewise, the mercurial concept of human dignity has also witnessed competing contentions. Varying, value vs. justice or law vs. morality based conceptions of human dignity from ethical, philosophical, political and legal perspectives make adjudication between various connotations frustrating. Most of its narratives have also remained culture specific. Broad western consensus remains around the belief that conception of human dignity had mainly evolved from Immanuel Kant’s ethical position of human beings being an end in itself; possessing inherent dignity. In simple terms, human dignity implies their inherent quality of being honourable and worthy. This leads to the notion that every human being is uniquely valuable and therefore ought to be accorded the highest respect and care to achieve his/her full potential. This Kantian notion of human dignity seek to disassociate itself from any indices of utility though this is where increasing western trends of commoditisation have come to be its most fundamental nemesis. In international relations, Kantian approach has been carried forward and expanded by school of Liberalism built around the axis of individualism that must thrive by creating conditions for liberty, equality, fraternity. Conversely, Liberalism also seeks to explore into conditions that could threaten human dignity or undermine it. Experts have identified four conditions in which a person can be stripped of dignity. These are: humiliation, instrumentalization, degradation and dehumanisation. Fight against such conditions has always been tough but recent trends of globalisation have created multiple new possibilities on how these four conditions can be accentuated and how these must be mitigated. Moreover, globalisation has witnessed these four conditions reappearing in many imperceptive new shapes and styles like internet bullying or ethical hacking etc. Pros and Cons To begin with, globalisation has clearly expanded access to information about diverse practices and perspectives on multivariate challenges as also various best practices and protection measures to ensure human dignity for all. But this has also seen emergence of borderless internet, especially social media, become powerful propaganda and misinformation machine. Likewise, globalisation has heralded a new era of economic empowerment thus enhancing human dignity but at the same time globalisation remains associated with growing inequalities of income and opportunity both within and between nations thereby undermining dignity of those ‘left behind’ while igniting their unfulfilled expectations. Without doubt, globalisation has facilitated poverty alleviation efforts in multiple countries with impressive results yet, at the same time, it has exposed citizens of less developed nations to the economic exploitation by rich industrialised countries. Western multinational corporations are often accused of opting for poorer wages and poor working conditions as they seek to outsource their menial and manufacturing jobs to such distant places. Globalisation has facilitated great cross-country flows of populations resulting in exposure to different cultures thereby reinforcing the naturalness of cultural diversities. But concerns have also been raised about potential homogenisation with loss of cultural diversity with rise of singular dominant globalised, Western-centric, values. Globalisation promoting pursuit for pure material growth has witnessed disregard for nature resulting in widespread environmental degradation and climate crisis. First, this has affected traditional communities’ livelihoods pushing them to the margins; indeed making them victims of market and profit-driven industrialisation and urbanisation models of development. This is where multinational corporations have replaced local crafts, trades and industries that can easily co-exist. Indeed such material pursuits of globalisation have triggered climate crisis threatening life itself. Especially least developed countries, that are least responsible for greenhouse gases as also least capable in addressing climate crisis, have become its main victims with rising sea levels threatening to simply drown small island states. Long promised transfers of technology and finance from advanced industrialised countries — that are primarily responsible for climate crisis — have remain a pipe dream adding a new category of climate refugees or displaced persons in their own country. Cyberspace, that often reflects the realities of extant social structures, has also since 1990s come to be one new arena witnessing instances of both empowerment and discrimination. However, given its excessive focus on State- and data-security or sometimes on right to privacy, there have been hardly any provisions for ensuring human dignity in cyberspace. Result? Cyber insecurities for minorities or marginalised sections like blacks, LGBTQI, even young and women have lately become part of human dignity discourses. Then there are Dalits and Adivasis that was originally an issue limited to Indian subcontinent but has become global with over 25 million people of Indian ethnic origin now living around the world. In absence of global initiatives, cyber platforms have seen a few civil society initiatives that have sought to highlight and address these inflictions on human dignity. CasteistTwitter or International Dalit Solidarity Network provide two apt examples for this. The most promising outcome of globalisation is that increasing global connectivity and consciousness about opportunities and discriminations on the basis of race, colour, class, language, ethnicity, gender etc have become part of global narratives. This has made sovereign states increasingly circumscribed and guided by global benchmarks for ensuring human dignity though there still remain disjunctions given their contestations and their varying interpretations on each of these globally agreed indices of human dignity. Measures taken Evolution of humankind has been a sojourn striving to ensure human dignity in face of persistent and emerging new challenges. It is in this long sojourn that the history of modern nation-states since 17th century saw narratives shifting from religious-ethnical to politico-legal provisions and perspectives becoming the guiding light. Over the years, therefore, legal protections for human dignity have been incrementally enacted by various states and international organisations like the United Nations, its organs and agencies. Also, human rights and humanitarian laws have come to be seen as most agreed instruments that both flow from as also ensure protection of human dignity. But globalisation has also seen rise in formidable new threats to human dignity in terms of gross violations of human rights and humanitarian laws on everyday basis. Ongoing wars in Ukraine and Gaza provide immediate examples of such dehumanisation. Amongst various measures for ensuring human dignity for all, the 1948 United Nations Declaration of Human Rights remains the most powerful central axis for all such efforts worldwide. This declaration had evolved in the backdrop of unprecedented violence against innocent civilians during the first half of 20th century and it had put the onus on nation-states that were now seen primarily responsible for ensuring human dignity for their citizens. Article 1 of this declaration reads: “All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.” Similarly from middle of 19th century international humanitarian laws (that resulted from conferences in Brussels, Geneva, Hague etc.) had come to recognise the centrality of human dignity principles though the formal expression of humanitarian laws appeared only in 1950s. Similarly, at the end of Cold War, the June 1998 United Nations Diplomatic Conference of Plenipotentiaries on the Establishment of an International Criminal Court had adopted Rome Statute creating such a court for this purpose of ending such impunity of national leaders. It was brought into force in July 2002 with 60th country ratification and has since heard several cases against war crimes, genocide, crime against humanity and crimes of aggression. In July 2000, the UN Economic and Social Council set up a Permanent Forum for Indigenous Issues. This had brought focus on issues of indigenous people (e.g. First Nations) and minorities and their right to their culture, spirituality, language, tradition, intellectual properties and forms of self-governance to the global centre-stage. But the most revolutionary change in international relations engagement with human dignity came in year 2001. The International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty that was set up in September 2000 for addressing humanitarian crisis. In its 2001 report it had created a Responsibility to Protect doctrine authorising UN Security Council to militarily intervene if a state was not able to provide security to its citizens facing conditions of ethnic cleansing or genocide etc. This was first time in the history of oder nation-state that human dignity was clearly privileged over the sanctity of state sovereignty. More recently, pandemic also reinforced the inherent shared destiny of humankind as it saw coronavirus undoing man-made territorial borders. While it revealed pious sentiments of world coming together to ensure human dignity, it also betrayed instances of disregard for human dignity with law of jungle prevailing in several locations. Especially, lack of pathogen-specific treatment saw nations, for several months, relying on preventive measures (e.g. lockdowns, travel bans, preventive medicines). This showed how social practices and legal mechanisms for ensuring human dignity had remained skewed and fragile. In several instances, prevention and care were often viewed from the prism of citizens falling into categories based on privilege and hierarchy. India: half glass full With the 21st century global focus shifting to the Asia-Pacific, alternative narratives on human dignity from Asia have become part of the mainstream (read western) comparative dignity jurisprudence and other religious and philosophical discourses. Amongst these comparative narratives on human dignity, writings and experiments of Mahatma Gandhi and Dr B.R. Ambedkar in ensuring dignity for India’s untouchables have drawn great interest of such experts world over. Moreover, India being world’s largest population country, fastest growing economy slated to become world’s third largest by 2030 and a continuing ancient civilisation for 5,000 years that has now witnessed explosive social transformation makes its opportunity and challenges for human dignity even more complex case for scrutiny. India’s unique ancient traditions and fault lines determining state of human dignity even today remain bound by several unique old and outdated legacies like Caste, Dalits, Adivasis etc. Accordingly, during late 1940s debates, the makers of India’s constitution — driven by India’s prolonged freedom struggle against subjugation and discrimination — had anticipated the notion of human dignity in empowerment of their people; especially India’s vulnerable sections like untouchables, tribals, minorities, women etc. As a result, the Preamble of India’s constitution begins with ‘We the People…” and swears to ensure equality, liberty, fraternity for all followed by detailed chapters on Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles of State Policy. Last 75 years have seen hundred plus constitutional amendments to make it more inclusive and effective in ensuring human dignity. But like rest of the world India also continues to struggle with challenges in addressing the gaps between its practices and prophecies and with its struggle to resolve various anomalies in its social, political and legal beliefs, practices and institutions. Especially, India’s recent economic rise and rapid social transformation have introduced new divides between rich and poor, urban and rural, elite and folk while the old social segregations based on caste, language, region, religion etc. have not been completely eliminated. This is where the innovative approach of Judicial-Activism of India’s courts and dedicated of some non-governmental organisations has earned them distinctions for their contribution to ensuring human dignity for all. Indian Supreme Courts September 2018 judgement striking down section 377 of Indian Penal Code to decriminalise same sex relations between consenting adults provides one such apt example though this remains but work in progress. Conclusion As change has been the only permanent reality; each epoch of human history has had its own unique story of fights for ensuring human dignity. First phase of globalisation that modern historian believe began with gold rush, slave trade and industrial revolution of early 1800s had surely exacerbated challenges to human dignity policies and practices. Kantian narratives debates on his Theory of Moral Philosophy had coincided around same time highlighting centrality of human dignity in human affairs. Since then, a multitude of broad definitions and legal instruments and arrangements have continued to grow to ensure human dignity mainly through instrumentalities of human rights and humanitarian laws. But ensuring human dignity requires much deeper change and internalising the inherent nature of human dignity while also working for improving existing practices and perceptions. Without doubt, the current phase of globalisation has universalised both recognition of the centrality as also of challenges for human dignity thus making it once more acutely challenging and complicated. While globalisation is known for heralding faster cross-border movement of capital and people thus expanding their exposure and opportunities, these movements have become increasingly securitised, radicalised, gendered and sexualised. While technology has empowered masses, world’s wealth and power have become far more centralised in the hands of global elites resulting in widespread groundswell of grievances of those ‘left behind’ often resulting violence becoming increasingly imperceptive and unending. In many ways these constant and invisible violations of human dignity have further strengthened culture of repression, oppression and exploitation. While overall opportunities and awareness have expanded incrementally yet the gap between the powerful and disempowered has also increased, or at least the awareness about has surely increased, thus keeping goal of human dignity for all in sight yet far. #Globalisation #HumanDignity #HumanRights Originally Published : International Affairs Review, January 3'2024 https://internationalaffairsreview.com/2024/01/01/globalisation-and-its-impact-on-human-dignity/ Posted in SIS Blog with the Authorization of the Author. Prof. Swaran Singh is visiting professor at the University of British Columbia, fellow of the Canadian Global Affairs Institute in Calgary, Alberta, and professor of diplomacy and disarmament at the School of International Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi, India

By Prof. (Dr.) Santishree Dhulipudi Pandit Two archaeological excavations, Rakhigarhi and Keeladi, have demolished two major myths of the Aryan invasion/migration theory and the Aryan/Dravidian divide or the North-South divide. “Power is knowledge.”- Michael Focault “The AIT (Aryan Invasion Theory) is based purely on linguistic conjectures which are unsubstantiated.”Klostermaier, A Survey of Hinduism, 2007, p. 21. The National Education Policy (NEP 2020) has raised the aspirations of all stakeholders, calling for a pursuit of a holistic architecture of knowledge. The most important being how the nationalist epistemic community is going to construct the Bharatiya narrative architecture. The Left and Nehruvians cleverly followed the policy of the invaders and the colonials. While the Islamist iconoclasts straightaway attacked temples, looted, plundered and committed rape, the British were more cunning as they systematically lowered the values of these holy cities in the state machinery and in the commercial empire they built. And these false conjectures have been put into textbooks at all levels. Advances in science and the tools it provided exposed the false interpretations. Two such archaeological excavations—Rakhigarhi and Keeladi—have demolished two major myths they constructed. One the Aryan invasion/migration theory and the Aryan/Dravidian divide or the North-South divide. Rakhigarhi is a village and an archaeological site belonging to the Indus Valley civilisation in Hisar district of the Indian state of Haryana, situated about 150 km northwest of Delhi. It was part of the mature phase of the Indus Valley civilisation, dating to 2600-1900 BCE. The Aryan invasion theory of the Left historians has been debunked. Also called the Indo-Aryan migration theory, it is part of a larger theoretical framework of downgrading the Ancient Indic Civilization as being established by invaders. This framework explains the similarities between a wide range of contemporary and ancient languages. It combines linguistic, archaeological and anthropological research. This provides an overview of the development of Indo-European languages, and the spread of these Indo-European languages by migration and acculturation. This was a colonial project. The research—published in Cell, one of the world’s top journals—not only sets aside the Aryan migration theory but also notes that the hunter-gatherers of Southeast Asia changed into farming communities on their own and were the authors of the Harappan population. It demolishes the hypothesis about mass human migration during Harappan time from outside South Asia or before, said V.S. Shinde, an archaeologist at Deccan College Post-Graduate and Research Institute in Pune and one of the lead authors of the study. The Rakhigarhi samples do have traces of genes of Iranian lineage. However, the antiquity of such genes is 11,000-12,000 years, way before the Harappan civilisation. Since 7000 BCE, there is no evidence of the South Asian genes being mixed with the Central Asian genes. “Research showed the Vedic culture was developed by the indigenous people of South Asia,” Shinde asserted. The knowledge of agriculture was indigenous as the pre-historic hunter-gatherer learnt how to do farming. Neraj Rai, a scientist at the Birbal Sahani Institute of Paleobotany, Lucknow, and Rai said the research also pointed towards an “Out of India” theory around 2500-3000 BCE. The evidence comes from a related study by the same set of researchers, published simultaneously in the journal Science on Friday. The Rakhigarhi woman’s genome matched those of 11 other ancient people who lived in what is now Iran and Turkmenistan at sites known to have exchanged objects with the Indus Valley Civilisation. All 12 had a distinctive mix of ancestry, including a lineage related to Southeast Asian hunter-gatherers and an Iranian-related lineage specific to South Asia. The Indus Valley Civilisation, which at its height from 2600 to 1900 BCE covered a large swath of north western South Asia, was one of the world’s first large-scale urban societies. IIT Kharagpur released its 2022 calendar, “Recovery of the Foundations of Indian Knowledge Systems”, in which among the various topics (some of which are controversial and bound to raise some hackles) one is on: “Why an Aryan invasion myth was forged” (September 2022). Some of the reactions on social media were negative about the topics chosen and some “mistakes” were pointed out based more on ideological differences. All those who were completely okay for many years with distortions and false information being fed to children and adults alike in the name of history, are suddenly raising their voices on seeing actual historical data and evidence being presented to the common people. Keeladi could also provide crucial evidence for understanding the missing links of the Iron Age (12th century BCE to sixth century BCE) to the Early Historic Period (sixth century BCE to fourth century BCE) and subsequent cultural developments. The similarity of the Tamil Brahmi script to the Indus Valley Brahmi script shows the Indus valley inhabitants as those who did outward migration instead the reverse being suggested. The great Indian divide along north-south lines now stands blurred. A pathbreaking study by Harvard and indigenous researchers on ancestral Indian populations says there is a genetic relationship between all Indians and more importantly, the hitherto believed “fact” that Aryans and Dravidians signify the ancestry of North and South Indians might after all, be a myth.“This paper rewrites history… there is no north-south divide,”’ Lalji Singh, former director of the Centre for Cellular and Molecular Biology (CCMB) and a co-author of the study concluded. Senior CCMB scientist Kumarasamy Thangarajan said there was no truth to the Aryan-Dravidian theory as they came hundreds or thousands of years after the ancestral North and South Indians had settled in India. The study analysed 500,000 genetic markers across the genomes of 132 individuals from 25 diverse groups from 13 states. All the individuals were from six-language families and traditionally “upper” and “lower” castes and tribal groups. “The genetics proves that castes grew directly out of tribe-like organizations during the formation of the Indian society,” the study said. Thangarajan noted that it was impossible to distinguish between castes and tribes since their genetics proved they were not systematically different. A holistic and interdisciplinary approach has exposed the Nehruvian-Left lobby, who manufactured history and narratives for some persons and purposes. #NEP2020 Originally Published : The Sunday Guardian, 31st December' 2023 https://sundayguardianlive.com/opinion/how-science-exposes-the-left-distorians Prof. (Dr.) Santishree Dhulipudi Pandit is Vice Chancellor, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi, India

By Prof. (Dr.) Bharat H. Desai On December 27, 2023, the School of International Studies (SIS) of Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) witnessed the unveiling of the ‘Wall of Honour’ as an ode to all the former faculty members. The SIS alumna and JNU V-C, Santishree D. Pandit and the SIS Dean, Srikant Kondapalli, joined the faculty on this historic moment. Resembling an ‘art gallery’, the Wall of Honor comprises photo portraits (arranged superannuation year wise) of some 120 faculty members who build the edifice of ISIS (Indian School of International Studies) and its successor – SIS – as the pioneering institution for International Studies in India. It became a touching moment to look back at the past journey of SIS from its ISIS days to look ahead into the future. The ISIS was established as a registered society on October 03, 1955 by the Indian Council of World Affairs (ICWA). In the wake of the 68 years long journey, the School has shifted base from Sapru House (1955-1968) to 35 Firozshah Road (1968-1970) to JNU Old Campus (1970-1989) and, finally, to the current location (since 1989) in JNU New Campus. The Wall of Honour: Mandate and Motivation On the basis of the proposal mooted by this author on April 19, 2023, the School’s Committee of Advanced Study (CASR) gave him a mandate to design and install the SIS Faculty Wall of Honor. It was reaffirmed in CASR decision of August 25, 2023 thus: “the Committee requested Prof. Bharat H Desai to take lead in the matter and authorized him…for establishment of ‘Wall of Honour’ in physical mode”. As indicated in this author’s concept note (August 25, 2023), the rai·son d'être for the Faculty Wall of Honour is to: “collectively help the School to have a Wall of Honour to memorialise all the past faculty members whose contributions have made the SIS. In fact, all of us stand on the shoulders of those who sow the seeds and did the groundwork to the best of their abilities. By honouring these past SIS faculty members, the School would honour itself. As a pioneer of international studies in India, we need to continue the legacy of resolute scholarship, consistent traditions and empathy”. In the course of my interactions, several colleagues sought ‘exclusion’ of some from the Wall of Honour on the ground that "so and so did this" (in appointments, promotions, refusal to permit leave, not allowing foreign visits, use of false inquiries or use of students as targets etc.).  This author has also personally suffered deep scars caused by some of the SIS colleagues. Notwithstanding all, since we can't undo the past, the author reasoned that such people were only humans (not infallible). It matters that one survives and is still able to make scholarly contribution. It’s a professional hazard faced by all the teachers especially those who do not take vocation as a mundane job (to earn money). In a pioneering institution for International Studies in India, it made great sense to put into place an institutionalized positivity, a source of inspiration and a healing process. Hence, it was a fitting tribute to have the ‘living’ scholarly gallery that displays a photo, duration (years of joining and leaving) and one-line specialization of every former faculty member of SIS (and some from the ISIS) to be on the Wall of Honour. Due to lack of tradition to keep complete faculty records, this author faced a big challenge to procure even a photo and duration of many of the former faculty members. In a similar ideational initiative, the author was engaged in SIS ‘visibility’ initiative during 2008-2013. It comprised an arduous process that gave shape to the idea by curating 46 monthly faculty meetings over a period of full 5 years – Making SIS Visible (2008-2013). Hence, after a gap of 10 years (2013-2023), it made great sense to once again conceive and design the SIS Faculty Wall of Honour. It is a sequel and in the footsteps of the spirit of Making SIS Visible. Hopefully, the Wall of Honour would sensitise the SIS community about the pioneering foundational objectives, impeccable credentials, legacy and contribution made by a galaxy of scholars over a period of 68 years. As this author explained in his remarks (on December 27, 2023 unveiling), the SIS Wall of Honour is a result of that powerful logic and 'audacity of hope' for a bright future for the author’s own home turf – the SIS. In effect, it became an ode to the land - भूमि; भूः – of SIS. From ISIS to SIS: Merger with JNU In the wake of the pioneering experiment for the “objective study of international affairs in India”, it was proposed in 1951 to start the SIS for post-graduate research. A committee comprising Pandit Hriday Nath Kunzru, G.S. Mahajani, D.R. Gadgil, N.V.Gadgil, K.M.Panikkar, B.C. Ghose and A. Appadorai was set up to examine the proposal. The Committee’s recommendations were considered by the ICWA’s executive committee. They were duly processed by the University of Delhi (DU), Ministry of Education and University Grants Commission. It was approved by DU in March 1955 and “admitted the School to the privileges of the University for the purpose of preparing students for the Ph.D. degree”. As a corollary, the pioneering effort for the ISIS became a reality upon its registration as a “society” (under the Societies Registration Act of 1860). The idea, the process and the vehicle used were unique at the time. The then Vice-President of India, S. Radhakrishnan inaugurated the ISIS on October 3, 1955. In September 1961, the Union Government granted ISIS the status of a “deemed to be a University” under the UGC Act 1956. Once again, the status of the School changed when it had to merge, in 1970, with the newly established JNU. A futuristic approach could be seen in the rigorously designed original structure that enabled the ISIS to generate outstanding pioneers. Some contours of it can be visible even today in the successor SIS. In a three-year Ph.D. program, the students were to be given instruction in the first year in courses as follows: (1) International Organization (2) International Law (3) History and institutions of one of the regions: East Asia; Southeast Asia; South Asia; West Asia; United States (4) One language of the selected region for study (5 & 6) Two of the following: Geography; International Economics, International Relations (20th century at the time); Modern Indian History. In the second year, it was followed by preliminary work on the subject selected for thesis. Finally, the third year was to be devoted for completion of the Ph.D. thesis. Apart from study of the language specific to an area study, a field trip was an integral part of the doctoral program. This ISIS tradition for a field trip was carried forward for decades by SIS (when ISIS merged with JNU in 1970) till the funding support dried up. This author vividly recalls the story told by his supervisor (Rahmatullah Khan who joined ISIS in 1965) about (Khan’s) voyage on board a ship (duly facilitated by Khan’s doctoral supervisor Nagendra Singh, ISIS visiting professor and then Director-General of Shipping) to New York for a field trip to the UN headquarters. Since, as an academic discipline, International Studies was new in India and due to paucity of expertise to teach the subjects, ISIS reached out to the best scholars abroad by inviting them for short durations as much as possible. This author learned from his second teacher R.P. Anand (who joined the ISIS as Reader in International Law on October 14, 1965) that the School approached the Ford Foundation (FF) to procure a grant for various purposes including sponsoring the experts for teaching ISIS courses. In July 1955, the FF provided to ISIS an initial four-year grant of US $ 200, 000. Initially, it comprised International Law and then expanded to cover other areas of the ISIS. Therefore, some of the early expert visits (1959-60) comprised International Law scholars such as Quincy Wright (Chicago); Percy Corbett (Princeton); Myres MacDougal (Yale); Julius Stone (Sydney) as well as J.D.B. Miller (Leicester); Morris-Jones (Durham); D.F. Fleming (Vanderbuilt); Max Lerner (Brandeis) etc. As one of the lasting legacies of these scholarly visits to ISIS, the visit of Julius Stone (Sydney) led to introduction of the course on: Legal Controls of International Conflict. For many years, this author has been teaching the said MA (IS 455 N) Core Course that draws exact title from Julius Stone’s 1959 classic text: Legal Controls of International Conflict (London: Stevens & Sons). After a year-long (2023) effort, this author has obtained a copy of the famous Quincy Wright report comprising a blueprint for the expansion of ISIS. It will be addressed in the subsequent Blog Special article. SIS: A Unique Knowledge Tradition In this SIS Blog Special article, the author has sought to provide a bird’s eye-view of the early pioneering effort in the launch of ISIS. From its origin (the Gangotri) at Sapru House, the ISIS and its successor SIS have continued the unique tradition that has generated scores of outstanding scholars and institutionalized the knowledge architecture to address the challenges of international affairs for India and the world at large (especially through an Indian lens). The imprint of SIS (since 1970 merger with JNU) can be seen in numerous scholars who now head and run International Law and International Relations programs both in the public and private Indian Universities. It provides the best example as to how this least-cost efficient SIS scholarly tradition has produced, among others, scholars, diplomats, civil servants, strategic experts and the decision-makers in government (including the current External Affairs Minister and a former MoS for External Affairs). The Wall of Honour, in effect, celebrates this unique Indian knowledge tradition in International Studies. The said quest for knowledge propelled this author to undertake an audacious mission to give effect to the adage ‘charity begins at home’ as well as for walking-the-talk (the Sabarmati Effect on whose banks he grew up). It seeks to translate into action – at least on the home front of SIS – the essence and spirit of Sanskrit adage:  विद्वान् सर्वत्र पूज्यते (learned are worshipped, everywhere). This author ensured that ‘lighting the lamp’ of knowledge at the unveiling ceremony on December 27, 2023 is done by women (Santishree Pandit, the VC as SIS alumna as well as an assistant professor, a student and a staff member). It also gave a powerful symbolic effect to JNU’s new (2023) motto: तमसो मा ज्योतिर्गमय (darkness unto light). The very idea has resuscitated the life-time contributions of scholars of yesteryears by invoked their spirit, energy and legacy. The existing corpus of SIS faculty members sit on the shoulders of those early torchbearers. The onus is now on the present generation of SIS faculty members to build upon that legacy for the future generations. It is indeed a humbling experience as well as a challenge to step into the shoes of the pioneering SIS teacher-scholars. Let me end this preliminary reflection with the morale and powerful inspirational story of Pandit Hriday Nath Kunzru, Chairman of the ISIS Governing Body. One of the members of the ISIS Governing Body, Zakir Hussain, became the 3rd President of India. The Secretary to President, Nagendra Singh (future President of the World Court), visited Pandit Kunzru on January 25, 1968 to persuade him to give consent for acceptance of the ‘Bharat Ratna’. It was to be announced on the Republic Day (next day). Panditji firmly declined the offer on the ground that it was he, as a member of the Constituent Assembly, who opposed the conferment of such awards in the new Republic of India. When Nagendra Singh persisted with the request and argued that: "Panditji, nobody remembers that you had opposed the institution of awards in the Assembly". To this the feisty Panditji replied: "I remember it, and that is enough" [47 ISQ (2-4) 2010 at 100]. In the wake of questions by some colleagues as regards “why create such a Wall of Honour that no one else would imagine to do”, this author has recalled and drawn inspiration from the above-mentioned powerful message of Pandit Kunzru. Thus, the SIS Wall of Honour is a very modest offering of the author at the altar of SIS as his 'karma-bhoomi'. That is enough. Time will decide the rest. #SIS #WallofHonour #KnowThePioneers This Article is an Original Contribution to the SIS Blog and is a part of the Author’s New SIS Blog Series on ‘Know the Pioneers’. Prof. (Dr.) Bharat H. Desai is Professor of International Law and Chairperson of the Centre for International Legal Studies (SIS, JNU), who served as a member of the Official Indian Delegations to various multilateral negotiations (2002-2008), coordinated the knowledge initiatives for Making SIS Visible (2008-2013) and the Inter-University Consortium: JNU; Jammu; Kashmir; Sikkim (2012-2020) as well as contributes as the Editor-in-Chief of Environmental Policy and Law (IOS Press: Amsterdam)

By Dr. Sakti Prasad Srichandan Though core engagements are unlikely to be affected, the revival of Gaullism may put certain challenges which India has to deal with very carefully keeping the sensitivities of the French in mind. The year 2023 marks the 25th anniversary of the establishment of a strategic partnership between India and France. Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s presence in this year’s Bastille’s Day Parade on July 14 as a Guest of Honour is a recognition of the growing synergies and the importance France attaches to its ties with India. But before Modi, former Prime Minister Manmohan Singh had this honour in 2009. While Singh’s visit was at a time when France was an integral part of the transatlantic bandwagon with the centrality of the United States, the visit of Modi comes in the backdrop of Macron’s France is seen as reviving Gaullism with a pitch for “European sovereignty” and “strategic autonomy”. While the Cold War strategy was to “keep the Soviet Union out, the Americans in, and the Germans down”, at present European countries are favouring a strategy to “keep Russia down, the United States in, and China out”. But Macron has thwarted a genuine European global strategy from emerging especially in China and alienated many due to the revival of Gaullism. As for India, the bilateral relations with France may not be affected, but the likely dilution of the French Indo-Pacific approach and diverging strategies in the EU will have an indirect impact on its interests. Revival of Gaullism Founder of the Fifth Republic and former President of France Charles de Gaulle along with former West Germany Chancellor Konrad Adenauer were instrumental in the European integration process that provided a lasting peace to the continent. While the integration process was underway Gaulle also navigated his country’s relations with other powers with a focus on France’s strength, influence and independence. Emphasis on national sovereignty, autonomy and flexibility in international relations, multilateralism, nuclear deterrence, and a pro-European orientation were some of the features identified with Gaullism. Gaulle’s approach restored his country’s primacy in Europe, kept the United States out of European affairs, brought flexibility to build relations with other great powers and made France and Germany the twin engines of the European Union (EU). Macron, while inheriting Gaullism, has warned against France becoming a vassal of any other power with tacit reference to the United States. Just like during Gaulle’s times, Macron’s simultaneous bilateral outreach to countries sitting at different corners of the fence like the US, Russia, Iran, China, and India has confused many. Some even opine that by playing on different sides, France may be reduced to a pawn in the great power game. India France relations There has been consistency in India-France relations, regardless of who comes to power in either country. India and France while accommodating and respecting each other’s sensitivities have a deep engagement that encompasses strategic cooperation, economic ties, sustainable development, cultural exchanges and shared values. The strategic component includes defence, space, cyber security, counter-terrorism, intelligence, civil nuclear energy and a strong Indo-Pacific tilt. In recent years, this strategic partnership has been broadened to include issues like climate, environment, blue economy, ocean governance, clean energy, smart cities, new technologies and health. The bilateral trade touched USD 15.1 billion in 2021-22, double from the last decade. With an investment of around USD 10 billion, France has emerged as the 11th largest foreign investor in India in 2022. France helped India to get out of isolation after the 1998 nuclear tests and even favoured India’s early entry into the Nuclear Suppliers Group. France also supports India’s aspiration to become a permanent member of the United Nations Security Council. As India tries to diversify its arms supplier base, France has emerged as the second-largest arms supplier in 2018-22 unseating the US. Challenges ahead Though core engagements are unlikely to be affected, the revival of Gaullism may put certain challenges which India has to deal with very carefully keeping the sensitivities of the French in mind. First, France wants the United States to have less involvement in European continental affairs. While in the past, the United States had arm-twisted many European countries to act against India’s interests (e.g. sanctions after the Pokhran test), the geopolitical realities have changed with India’s rise as a global actor and new thrust in India-US ties. The United States remaining relevant in Europe will check China’s influence which will be in India’s favour. Second, France was the first country in Europe to come up with an Indo-Pacific strategy as it considers itself as a residential power due to its territories spread across from West Indian Ocean to the South Pacific and therefore has a military presence. Many countries including France count India as an essential partner of their strategy. Apart from bilateral engagements, India and France are also developing trilateral frameworks in the Indo-Pacific with countries like the UAE, Australia, Indonesia, and Japan. France, just like India, wants to avoid getting entangled in the US-China binary politics, and seek to diversify partners in the region. But while distancing itself from the EU’s emerging strategic consensus on China, Macron has called for a “close and solid global strategic partnership” between Paris and Beijing which has the possibility of denting its earlier stand on Indo-Pacific. India needs to moderate emerging French posturing on China. Third, India’s Foreign Minister S Jaishankar made a point by saying “Europe’s problems are the world’s problems but the world’s problems are not Europe’s problems”. During his visit to China, Macron sparked an international backlash over his remarks that Europe must resist dragged into the US-China conflict over Taiwan, which made Jaishankar right. European leaders can now be reasoned to think twice before nudging India to take sides (e.g. Ukraine war) as they have diverging views on their home turf. Among the European leaders, Modi has the highest number of meetings with Macron which shows the priority leaders attach to the bilateral relationship. After Brexit, for India, France remains a reliable and predictable gateway to the European Union. Modi-Macron chemistry, mutual interests and diplomatic manoeuvring will play important roles in ensuring India is suitably accommodated in the French Gaullist worldview. #IndoFrench Originally Published : The Financial Express, 5th December 2023 https://www.financialexpress.com/business/defence-india-france-relations-in-changing-times-3328873/ Posted in SIS Blog with the Authorisation of the Author Dr. Sakti Prasad Srichandan is Assistant Professor at the Centre for European Studies, School of International Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru Universities, New Delhi, India.

By Dr. Surajit Mahalanobis The meeting of the OPEC Secretary General Dr Haitham Al Ghais with the youth in Doha after the COP 28 summit declaration is significant as an aftermath development of the international call for restraining fossil fuels use in development activities. Dr Ghais has called for rejection of any language that targets fossil fuels and not the emissions. Indeed, the OPEC wants that the emission of the greenhouse gases (GHGs) be addressed for worldwide solution, without targeting the production and use of fossil fuels, though these are the sources of the most GHGs. Way back in 2000, at the Caracas conference, the OPEC Summit had already included the environment pollution issues out of the production from fossil fuels in the charter of the OPEC. That has since been in force ardently by the producers. The Arab producers have wasted no time after the Framework Convention of Climate Change’s 28th meeting (COP28) at Dubai that ended on 12 th December last, to speed up their outreach to stress the point that climate change needs to be addressed and not the fossil fuels. This was rather an expected aftermath, considering the fact that world’s 79.5 percent petroleum crude reserves are held by the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) to which Arab producers are the 67.2 percent contributors. Total West Asian region reserves amount to be 48.3 percent of the entire world reserves. Following 2022 chart (below) of the OPEC explains the minute details: The world’s economy runs on the fossil fuel, an unavoidable reality that stormed the world communities from Stockholm in 1972 to the COP28 at Dubai in 2023. The elephant was always there, but seldom taken head on, until now. Even now the formidable task remains inaccessible. The COP28 Declaration believes the 1.5ºC goal of the Paris Convention 2015 by mitigation, adaptation, and financing are doable. It would be incorrect to think that the move out of the dominating concern is just what the Arab producers of the petroleum crude started alone. In moral support to them are also likely to be the countries enjoying huge fossil fuels reserves, which they profusely use to build up their economies world over. Indeed, it is possible, if only the countries with abundant fossil fuel reserves had options to do away from using them. It is not the petroleum crude alone which is the bone of contention, that the Arab producers of crude oil and also many observers would find out, there are huge reserves of coal and coal-based gases in large countries like the USA, Russia, China, India, Australia, and others, which are used as the principal fuel to generation of domestic electricity. Over 90 percent world’s proven coal reserves are located in twelve countries, USA (22.3%), Russia (15.5%), Australia (14%), China (13.1%), India (9.5%), Germany (3.5%), Ukraine (3.3%), South Africa (3.1%), Poland (2.5%), Kazakhstan (2.5%), Indonesia (2.2%) and Turkey (1.1%) of total world reserves. Phasing out the use of these reserves is not an easy proposition. Besides the supply chain practices, development and maintenance, the reality that the sectors using the fossil fuels are creators of the most jobs world over, thus sustain most people’s livelihood. Therefore, the tension of targeting the fossil fuels is unmitigable. Top of it, anything we dig out from the Mother Earth would create greenhouse gasses (GHGs). There is no escape from it. How then the world should address the climate change issues? The argument proffered by the concerned producers of the petroleum crudes for oils and gasses, and the tacit concern of the world’s coal-bed owning countries to look at the climate change and not at the fossil fuels is futile, because the argument ignores the inherent connect of the two basics: fossil fuels and climate change challenge. What is more important is the fact that manufacturing of new machines in development of novel technologies, that would ensure less production of the GHGs, would again use fossil fuel energies, because the alternatives are not adequate to meet the necessity. Will this necessity mother the new inventions in technologies, is anther queer question dogging the humanity today? International politics apart, for now, the COP28 has four options to speed up the processes of development of alternatives to the fossil fuels: energy generation from Hydro, Solar, Wind and Biofuel sources. Naturally emerges the understanding how much progress have the world leaders been able to trigger for successful efforts in these domains, since the Stockholm promises? Connected with this question is the more dormant one: How much are the national budget financing effectively done for these efforts for transition to the alternatives in member countries? Let us not forget the transition which is being thrust rather too much in this COP, was already advocated in the Stockholm Conference way back in 1972. The GHGs are creating global warming, hence the melting of the icebergs is a natural fall out. With this the rise in water in oceans, seas and rivers is a natural consequence. The COP28 needs 3 to finance as a priority national budget expenditure in all countries for hydroelectricity generation by arresting the surplus water outflow. More and more dams in almost all countries are necessary, sustainably, without causing water crises to neighbouring countries for food production in fields. With these also possible are tidal wave arresting for electricity generation and passing them into the grids of the respective countries for use as alternative power to that created by burning the fossil fuels. International Solar Association (ISA) launched in 2015, considered to be a prospective formidable agency for alternatives to wean away dependence on the fossil fuels, is dogged by challenges, if not already proved an expensive damp squib. The ISA already could have started yeomen’s services to emerge as a formidable alternative to share the transition requirement from the world’s current consumption necessity of petroleum crude of 104 billion barrels a day, which could have been emerged as formidable effort to stop their use. The ISA aims to institute a forum for “an exchange of experiences” for developing sustainable energy technology, which however is dogged because of the absence of adequate funding by countries. The international conferences come and go, the problems remain realistically unaddressed. The ISA was formulated with this goal in its objectives that the conferences and meetings would ensue real-time fruitful action for stopping the GHGs emission, yet it too fails like other COPs. The business models are differed, with political one upmanship in practice not the objectives are tried. The difference of business models can be removed only by developing the clarity about them for all to understand and well explicated. So far, the ISA is experiencing staggard progress toward the objectives. The world affected by global warming wants to know when exactly the COPS’ agreements would fructify in real time successful mitigation of the GHGs, This world also looks forward to seeing the financing enough to save their humanity from drowning. #RenewableEnergy #OPEC #SDGs #COP28 #Energy #EnergyMix #EnergyTransition Originally Published : 20th December' 2023 https://www.news18.com/opinion/opinion-roadmap-for-a-life-under-water-or-above-it-8711512.html Posted in SIS Blog with the Authorisation of the Author Dr. Surajit Mahalanobis is an Alumni of the School of International Studies (SIS), Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi, India. He earned his PhD degree from the Centre for West Asian Studies, SIS, JNU, India.

By Prof. (Dr.) Santishree Dhulipudi Pandit Last week marked a pivotal moment as Prime Minister Narendra Modi inaugurated a groundbreaking initiative titled “Viksit Bharat@2047: Voice of Youth”. This initiative sounded a resounding call to action for Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) and students, providing the youth with a platform to contribute their ideas to the vision of Viksit Bharat@2047. This initiative stands out as the most thrilling and ambitious among all the endeavours in the recent decades. The palpable excitement, keen interest, and burgeoning hopes since its launch in less than ten days ago attest to its significance. This is indeed an excellent example of participatory democratic development by involving all the stakeholders. One might enquire about the reasons fuelling this fervour, and the answer lies in several compelling factors. However, three stand out and demand our utmost attention: First, amid the multifaceted transformations that India, as a nation and a civilization, is currently undergoing on both local and global fronts, this is the time, the right time (Yahi Samay hai, Sahi Samay hai) for such an initiative. Deliberately acknowledging the profound significance of “Amrit Kaal,” the initiative resonates with a compelling sense of urgency and opportunity. PM Modi underscored that India now stands where the world observes it with awe and scrutiny as it ascends the ladder of achievements and approaches its independence centenary. This reality adds a layer of responsibility to every citizen, particularly the youth. The explicit encouragement to the youth to actively engage in the Viksit Bharat initiative and share their suggestions through the Ideas Portal reflects a deep commitment to inclusivity and incorporating diverse perspectives. As the Prime Minister rightly emphasized, the vision for Viksit Bharat should be a collective effort shaped by every citizen. The success of this initiative hinges on the combined endeavours of all, aptly encapsulated by the mantra, “Sabka Prayas” (everyone’s efforts). Second, this vision is not just a superficial aspiration, as we have seen with numerous plans since India’s independence. It is a meticulously crafted strategy with precise details and modalities that are genuinely actionable, significantly increasing the likelihood of its promises turning into successful outcomes. How can one discern this? Consider the stakeholders involved; it is not a random assortment like students or teachers, as seen in many past government policies. Instead, the initiative identifies four key stakeholders: administration, academic institutions, teachers, and students. While the onus rightfully rests on the shoulders of the youth, the recognition of administration and academic institutions as stakeholders signifies the government’s understanding. It acknowledges that to bring about a substantial difference in the conduct of students and teachers, fostering innovation and excellence requires mechanisms, processes, and, most importantly, a platform. This might appear as a simple or intuitive observation to some, but a closer examination of higher education policies and legislation reveals how rare such comprehensiveness in planning has been. Another testament to the excellence of this initiative is the launch’s adherence to Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) prepared for universities, colleges, and students. This ensures that it is not all rhetoric and platitudes but a call to action. Universities and university-level institutions are designated as anchors, serving as the focal point for the government. They must appoint a dedicated team to promote, organize, disseminate information, and mobilize students for this initiative. The government outlines four clear interventions: They are firstly, raising awareness through workshops, organizing fests involving debates and events, and leveraging existing alumni networks and networked engagement through email groups for swift dissemination. Secondly, developing the requisite infrastructure through dedicated feedback loops in libraries and labs, establishing “Viksit Bharat Ideation Centres,” and allocating specific slots for students to submit feedback. Thirdly, ensuring holistic participation through wide circulation of forms, recognition of student clubs, including NCC and NSS, and certification. Lastly, tracking progress through daily reports and implementing monitoring and accountability measures. This comprehensive approach sets Viksit Bharat@2047 apart, promising tangible and impactful results. Third, the initiative underscores a crucial yet underemphasized facet—elevating higher educational institutions to unprecedented prominence and ambition. Throughout the post-Independence era, successive governments have endeavoured to introduce structures, regulations, and initiatives within the higher education sector. However, the limelight has consistently eluded higher education, overshadowed by the pressing concerns of primary and secondary education. While the dearth of attention on primary education may explain this discrepancy, it has persisted for decades without serious rectification. This oversight led external observers to infer that higher education did not hold a prime position on India’s list of priorities. Enter the Modi government and a paradigm shift in perspective occurs. This administration not only comprehends but boldly asserts that higher education is a challenging yet integral cornerstone of the country’s development as a global juggernaut of ideas, innovation, and strength. Whether it is the establishment of AIIMS facilities nationwide, representing the apex of medical education, or the proliferation of IITs (engineering) and IIMs (management), the government’s impetus and vision are crystal clear—higher education is paramount for India’s growth as it aspires to ascend to the mantle of a world leader. To conclude, the launch of Viksit Bharat@2047 marks a transformative initiative bringing students and higher learning to the forefront of India’s developmental landscape. With an explicit call to action for higher education institutions (HEIs) and students, this strategic and actionable plan resonates with urgency and opportunity, symbolized by the acknowledgement of “Amrit Kaal.” The comprehensive approach, involving critical stakeholders like administration, academic institutions, teachers, and students, demonstrates a profound commitment to inclusivity and innovation, positioning higher education as a pivotal driver for India’s ascent to global leadership. The Prime Minister has taken us from rule-takers to be ruleshapers, and in 2047, India will move from rule shapers to rule-makers. #ViksitBharat@2047 Originally Published : The Sunday Guardian, 24th December'2023 https://sundayguardianlive.com/opinion/viksit-bharat2047-a-clarion-call-for-institutes-and-students#:~:text=This%20initiative%20sounded%20a%20resounding,endeavours%20in%20the%20recent%20decades. Posted in SIS Blog with the Authorisation of the Author Prof. (Dr.) Santishree Dhulipudi Pandit is Vice Chancellor of the Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi, India.

By Prof. (Dr.) Srikanth Kondapalli In 1910, China’s warlord Zhao Erfeng dreamt of controlling the five Himalayan states of Tibet, Bhutan, Ladakh, Nepal and Sikkim. China’s current leadership has stepped up efforts to fulfil that dream, with the latest inroads being made in Bhutan. Read more at: https://www.deccanherald.com/opinion/bhutan-under-chinas-shadow-2794475 Originally Published : Deccan Herald, 3rd December' 2023 https://www.deccanherald.com/opinion/bhutan-under-chinas-shadow-2794475 Posted in SIS Blog with the Authorisation of the Author. Prof. (Dr.) Srikanth Kondapalli is Dean of School of International Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi, India

By Prof. (Dr.) Santishree Dhulipudi Pandit Unfortunately, the social sciences have refused to take a thinker like B.R. Ambedkar seriously. Any discussion on law in India and outside must include and begin with one of the strongest proponents of the rule of law, the father of our Constitution, B.R. Ambedkar Imagined histories produced agenda setting and biased interpretations. Caste has been used and abused as a word and a category of analysis. Caste is not just in one faith but in every faith, especially in South Asia. It sticks out like a sore thumb. Are we more casteist for getting political and economic benefits? The dream of the greatest Indian, Babasaheb Dr B.R. Ambedkar, who was marginalised by the powers that be until 2014 is one we need to take very seriously today. The Left and Liberal academia avoided him for he was very critical of their hypocrisy. At best they praised a selected few who were in power and helped them to exercise power without ever winning elections. There are major gaps in the writing of Indian history where by design or on purpose there has been a clear attempt to agenda set in favor of a Republican dynasty, where its name continued to fill textbooks and publicly funded institutions. Are we saying that only one family won us freedom and all the others who sacrificed their lives have been marginalized? One such historical icon, B.R. Ambedkar critically analysed and fought for the annihilation of caste. He, by pursuing true and original thinking, followed Brahma-vidya and as per the scriptures was a true Brahmin in the Vedic sense, a person who pursues and produces knowledge. There is enough proof that the seminal Hindu texts were written by Valmiki (Ramayana), Vyasa (Mahabharata), and B.R. Ambedkar, the architect of our Constitution and a lot of his writings. On 26 November we all celebrated the Constitution Day and reaffirmed our faith in its Preamble which embodies liberty, equality and fraternity to all. On 6 December is Mahanirvana Diwas the day we lost this great thinker, the tallest Indian and Modern India’s icon. It is in the idea of Dissent that Lord Gautama the Buddha was the first Dissenter of the Bharatiya tradition to Babasaheb. We celebrate Dissent and Diversity in our Bharatiya tradition through “Ekam Sat Vipraha Bahuda Vadanti”. They warned of the social evils that has crept in into an inclusive and diverse parampara or tradition. All political parties in India are caste ridden, even the Left. Left liberals among the academia practise it more vigorously, though do a lot of doublespeak. Unfortunately, the social sciences have refused to take a thinker like B.R. Ambedkar seriously. Why? Any discussion on law in India and outside must include and begin with one of the strongest proponents of the rule of law, the father of our Constitution, B.R. Ambedkar. B.R. Ambedkar, a visionary leader and the chief architect of the Indian Constitution, held a nuanced perspective on the intersection of law and economics, particularly in pursuing social justice and uplifting marginalized communities. Many of his insights, while not always captured verbatim in quotes, can be extrapolated from his extensive writings and speeches. He famously noted, “Political democracy cannot last unless there lies at the base of it social democracy. What does social democracy mean? It means a way of life which recognizes liberty, equality and fraternity as the principles of life.” Dr Ambedkar’s concern for economic inequality was deeply ingrained in his philosophy. He went beyond guaranteeing political rights, advocating for legal frameworks that would actively contribute to addressing economic disparities. In his vision, a just society required not only political and social equality but also economic parity. In pursuit of this economic equality, Ambedkar championed the cause of land reforms. He recognized that the equitable distribution of land was pivotal for empowering the marginalized sections of society. His conviction lay in the belief that without addressing economic disparities at the grassroots, the lofty ideals of democracy would remain incomplete. One of Ambedkar’s notable stances was his emphasis on labour rights and fair wages. He saw protecting workers’ rights as a fundamental step towards achieving economic justice. For him, the toiling masses—those who tilled the soil, cultivated raw materials, and created goods—were indispensable contributors to the production and distribution of wealth. Ambedkar’s vision of a just society was intricately woven with the fabric of economic empowerment. He recognized that the quest for social justice would be incomplete without dismantling exploitative labour practices and ensuring fair economic opportunities. While specific quotes capturing these sentiments directly may be limited, delving into his seminal works, such as “Annihilation of Caste,” and examining his contributions to the framing of the Indian Constitution provide a richer understanding of Ambedkar’s profound views on the symbiotic relationship between law and economics in the pursuit of a fair and inclusive society. Today some people are asking for a caste census, which is so ironic given that our history is full of people who fought and struggled to make caste disappear from society. What never ceases to captivate me is the resilience and foresight embedded in our Constitution, a testament to the brilliance of its creators, including the visionary B.R. Ambedkar. In an era witnessing myriad changes across sectors, including the emergence of previously non-existent ones, our Constitution continues to adapt and keep pace with the evolving times.Emerging concerns, such as environmental issues and sustainability have now assumed central importance. Surprisingly, the concept of sustainability, championed in recent decades, finds its roots in the foresight of Indian lawmakers, including the visionary B.R. Ambedkar, dating back to the 1950s. This early endorsement highlights the enduring relevance of sustainable principles, demonstrating a remarkable prescience on the part of Ambedkar and his contemporariesPromoting diversity and inclusivity within the legal sphere, encompassing jurisprudence and law practice, are paramount. Such inclusivity ensures a more comprehensive understanding of the multifaceted challenges posed by evolving technologies, fostering a legal landscape that is not only adept but also reflective of the diverse society it serves. As underscored in his extensive writings, Ambedkar illuminated a crucial truth: a nation’s development remains incomplete until every individual, irrespective of their station in life, reaps its benefits. The recent milestone achievement of India, soaring to a $4 trillion economy, is undoubtedly cause for celebration. Successes like these are not just the triumph of economic numbers but a testament to a society embracing a more inclusive and equitable distribution of resources—a journey championed by many stalwarts over the years. #BRAmbedkar #Imagination #History #India #Constitution Originally Published: 3rd December'2023 https://sundayguardianlive.com/opinion/imagined-histories-in-independent-india#:~:text=Imagined%20histories%20produced%20agenda%20setting,faith%2C%20especially%20in%20South%20Asia. Posted on SIS Blog with the Authorisation of the Author. Prof. (Dr.) Santishree Dhulipudi Pandit is Vice Chancellor of the Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi, India.

By Prof. (Dr.) Santishree Dhulipudi Pandit Kissinger’s academic and intellectual journey shaped his conviction that personal beliefs, ideologies, values, and moral considerations often take a back seat when dealing with intricate actors on the world stage. The most controversial US Secretary of State, Henry Kissinger, passed away last week. Kissinger celebrated his 100th birthday in May earlier this year and held the rare distinction of counselling successive American Presidents since the 1960s. The statesman’s legacy is larger than life and varies incredibly depending on whom one asks. He personified the American ideal during the turbulent Cold War era. His endeavours in fostering peace with the Soviet Union, evident in disarmament treaties and détente, resolving the Vietnam War (earning him a Nobel Peace Prize), and notably, the diplomatic opening to China, are hailed as achievements that positioned Washington advantageously in the Cold War. However, critics point to his flouting of international law, human rights abuses—especially in Cambodia—and the forceful manipulation of American power. As a result, Kissinger remains a controversial figure in international politics, leaving a lasting impact on how he navigated the complexities of his time. A brilliant academic and professor who was a realist, many professors would aspire to be as powerful as he was and many professional diplomats would love to have his academic brilliance and well-studied writings. In the context of India, Kissinger’s narrative was often tinged with negativity, primarily stemming from his role during the 1971 war with Pakistan. This conflict, a pivotal event in South Asian history, resulted in the creation of Bangladesh and significantly altered the regional power dynamics in India’s favour for the subsequent three decades. The animosity toward Kissinger in Indian strategic circles is multifaceted. The US decision to deploy the USS Enterprise in the Bay of Bengal was undeniably a source of tension and concern for India during that critical period, which is attributable to Kissinger. There is also the personal language of Kissinger aimed at Indians as a populace and against Indira Gandhi. Another source of resentment lies in the perception that he played a role in integrating China into the global community. Critics argue that Kissinger’s policies allowed China to emerge as a formidable economic force on the world stage. As such, he is viewed as accountable for enabling China’s partnership with the US that invariably left India on the sidelines vis-à-vis the US. Therefore, the suspicion and disdain directed at Kissinger in Indian strategic circles are rooted in the belief that his actions ultimately undermined Indian interests. By fostering ties with China, Kissinger inadvertently contributed to a geopolitical landscape where India found itself in a precarious position vis-à-vis the United States. The repercussions of this perceived neglect continue to reverberate, shaping India’s stance on global affairs and its diplomatic relationships.Kissinger’s enduring legacy casts a profound shadow over the annals of international politics. Whether one deems his actions virtuous or misguided, the repercussions are destined to echo across the corridors of global power for years to come. Despite dissenting voices that downplay his impact, a closer examination underscores the magnitude of his influence, especially in the ongoing discourse surrounding China’s role in world affairs. Detractors may dismiss the notion of Kissinger’s far-reaching effects but consider the contemporary conversations on China’s ascendancy in global politics. The debate intensifies as analysts ponder the consequences of Kissinger’s pivotal encounter with Mao Zedong. Speculation arises: Without that historic meeting with Mao that Islamabad enabled, would China wield the same geopolitical influence it does today? The implications extend to its ominous spectre over the South China Sea, China’s expansive reach into the Indo-Pacific region, military interventions abroad, and the controversial Belt and Road Initiative. While some may question the validity of such hypothetical scenarios, it is imperative to confront the reality before us. Embracing the principles of realism in international relations, Kissinger navigated the complex terrain of diplomacy with an unwavering commitment to perceiving things as they are. His application of realist theories in practical diplomatic scenarios has given rise to what is commonly known as realpolitik—a legacy that continues to shape the course of global affairs.Acknowledging the negative impact of Kissinger’s actions on India, especially during the 1971 war with Pakistan, is crucial. At the same time, it is important to recognize the nuances of Kissinger’s approach and the strategic lessons embedded in his realpolitik philosophy. While his actions may have had detrimental consequences for India in certain instances, they also provide valuable insights into the pragmatic application of realpolitik—the pursuit of national interests through practical and realistic means. Indeed, Kissinger’s academic background plays a pivotal role in understanding the foundation of his approach, as highlighted in Niall Ferguson’s book “Kissinger: 1923-1968: The Idealist”. The core tenet of Kissinger’s scholarly and later policy endeavours revolves around the centrality of power in global politics. His emphasis on power dynamics underscores a realist perspective where self-interest serves as a fundamental guiding principle for state actions. Kissinger’s academicand intellectual journey shaped his conviction that personal beliefs, ideologies,values, and moral considerations often take a back seat when dealing with intricate actors on the world stage. The pragmatic realization that pursuing a national interest is a driving force in international relations is a key takeaway from his academic insights. This perspective influenced his policymaking, where a clear-eyed understanding of power dynamics and the prioritization of self-interest guided his approach to navigating the complexities of global politics. Kissinger’s pragmatic and calculated approach can serve as a valuable tool for India in navigating complex strategic matters, complementing the empathetic elements introduced by the Modi government. Whether addressing issues related to Hindus or facing scrutiny over citizenship policies, Kissinger’s thoughts and ideas provide a framework for advancing national interests with a resolute focus. Countries like Israel have successfully employed a similar approach by blacklisting, denying or even withdrawing investments from the groups and institutions associated with anti-Semitism, showcasing the efficacy of strategic assertiveness. In India, figures like K. Subramaniam have championed a mindset that places national interests as paramount, indifferent to sentimental considerations. Subramaniam’s influence is particularly evident in shaping India’s nuclear policy, a decision that defied conventional wisdom and mainstream opinions, including reservations from figures like Nehru. In conclusion, while delving into the discourse on Kissinger provides insights into the complexities of statesmanship, it is essential to critically approach his practices in diplomacy and realpolitik. Adapting such strategies to India’s diplomatic endeavours requires a nuanced understanding, acknowledging the need for a foreign policy that is both assertive and self-reliant. Striking a balance between pragmatism and a commitment to being a force for good in international politics is the key as India charts its course on the global stage. #HenryKissinger Originally Published: 10th December'2023 https://sundayguardianlive.com/opinion/henry-kissinger-academic-and-diplomat Posted on SIS Blog with the Authorisation of the Author. Prof. (Dr.) Santishree Dhulipudi Pandit is Vice Chancellor of the Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi, India.

By Dr. Ankita Dutta The opening of accession talks with Ukraine and Moldova appears to be a key agenda item for the EU leadership during their annual Summit in December 2023. Enlargement has been a critical issue for the member states with opinions ranging from “yes to not yet to outright no”. With the EU leadership agreeing to begin formal membership talks with Ukraine and Moldova, and to grant candidate status to Georgia - the process of enlargement is at the forefront again. The EU had defined the criteria for the inclusion of new members in 1993. The Copenhagen criteria laid out three critical conditions to be fulfilled by the candidate country – ”first is the political criteria which included stability of institutions, democracy, rule of law, human rights and respect for and protection of minorities; second was economic criteria which required a functioning market economy and the capacity to cope with competition and market forces; and third was administrative and institutional capacity to effectively implement this Acquis and ability to take on the obligations of membership”. Along with this emphasis was also laid on the bloc’s ‘capacity for absorption of new member, while maintaining the momentum of European integration’ and that the bloc reserves the right to decide when the candidate has met the criteria and the Union was ready to accept the new member. So far, ten countries in the EU’s neighbourhood are either official or potential candidates for accession to the EU, including seven Western Balkans states - with the process beginning as early as 2003 (at the Thessaloniki summit where the EU committed towards integration of the Western Balkan countries within its structures). However, the Ukraine crisis brought with it a sense of urgency into this process of approving new member states as the EU worked towards fortifying its own eastern borders. With the outbreak of conflict in Ukraine, Kiev signed the application for the EU membership on 28 February 2022, which was followed by Moldova and Georgia submitting their respective applications. In June 2022, the EU Council granted both Ukraine and Moldova status of candidate country, while recognising the European perspectives of Georgia. The process of affirmation as among fastest measures taken by the EU member states. However, it raised certain critical questions over the fact that there were several other countries which have been waiting in sidelines for the process to pick up pace and if there was no conflict, was there any question that Kiev would have received the candidate status? This is primarily because there were two key roadblocks for Ukraine in its quest for membership -- first, territorial conflict with Russia - with Moscow annexing Crimea and occupying parts of Donbas along with lack of implementation of Minsk agreement by both Kiev and Moscow; and second was the poor governance structures and rampant corruption in Ukraine. Therefore, the EU needs to assess whether the conflict and the granting of candidate status to Ukraine as well Moldova has somewhat improved the situation with respect of territorial integrity or issues of governance. No doubt, efforts have been put by both countries to meet the EU criteria, however, the question is are they enough to open the accession talks. Moreover, Europeans remain divided on the benefits of EU enlargement and have mixed feelings towards the potential admission of Ukraine or of any other country. According to the EU Barometer Survey of Spring 2023 of Spring 2023, while there is an overall support for the EU enlargement (53%) - there are substantial divisions among the member states. The prevailing view in Austria (60%), Germany (49%), France (55%) is that the EU should not add new members any time soon, while there is widespread support for enlargement in Poland (67%) and Lithuania (77%). On the subject of Ukraine’s accession - according to the ECFR Polls - while the Europeans are open to the idea of Ukraine joining the EU, there are concerns relating to the security and economic impact of accession - “45% believe that Ukraine joining the EU would have a ‘negative impact’ on the security of the EU, against 25% who see it as having a ‘positive impact’ and 39% believe Ukraine’s accession would have a ‘negative impact’ on the security of their country – while only 24% expect a ‘positive impact’.” While the public opinion represents the fluctuations on the issue - there are also political concerns over possible integration of Ukraine - whose GDP is far below the EU’s smallest economies. This has raised concerns among the member states over the potential destabilisation of the Union budgetary structures as well as many member states becoming net contributors from net beneficiaries. While Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban had earlier expressed reservation on the accession talks for Ukraine raising concerns over its the issue, the way in which the decision was reached was interesting. The Hungarian Prime Minister walked out of the room - thereby voluntarily giving up his vote, so that the decision could be taken unanimously. However, this did not stop him from criticising the agreement adding that “Hungary did not want to be part of this bad decision” Herein lies the paradox of the situation - while the Western Balkans have waited for over a decade for the accession process to move effectively, Ukraine’s progress towards accession has created negative ripples within the region. The delays and vetoes on the part of the EU and its member states has undermined the Union’s credibility in the region. While, the Western Balkan countries, with their years of reforms and agenda-setting, have been unable to sway the EU to move forward, on the other hand with Ukraine, there appears to be a sense of urgency to move forward. This disillusionment was very much visible in the Albanian Prime Minister Edi Rama’s statement that “the Ukraine example shows that war can accelerate membership”. This dichotomy has further led the Western Balkan countries to question the enlargement process as well as the political will and preparedness within the EU to support them. #EU #Enlargement This Article is an original contribution to the SIS Blog. Dr. Ankita Dutta is Assistant Professor at the Centre for European Studies, School of International Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi, India.

By Prof. (Dr.) Santishree Dhulipudi Pandit When the discourse on human rights is swayed by political expediency rather than an unwavering commitment to justice, the very essence of the term is compromised. The intellectual class often takes pride in their commitment to humanity, frequently emphasizing their advocacy for human rights. However, this commitment remains selective, myopic and politically influenced. For instance, Hamas’ brutal attacks on civilians, including children, women, and the elderly, failed to elicit their concern. Only when Israel responded to what is considered the most severe attack against the Jewish population since the Holocaust did human rights become a focal point. Same thing happened with the humanitarian crisis involving Afghans in Pakistan. These individuals faced atrocious and inhumane expulsion by Pakistan. Yet, the intellectual class’ response to this crisis has been noticeably muted. This raises questions about the genuine commitment to humanity and whether such concerns are driven by political motivations rather than an unwavering dedication to human rights. But can these two be isolated examples? Let’s take another case of Sudan. Africa has been a neglected continent despite its rich heritage and natural resources. It has faced the worst effects of colonialism and genocide and now we are watching like mute audiences the replay of another such genocide. In the recently concluded G20 under India’s Presidency, Prime Minister Narendra Modi took the courageous step of including the African Union as G20+1 member at the New Delhi summit. This was indeed once again informing the international community of the voice of the Global South especially Africa. Sudan is grappling with a severe humanitarian crisis and one of the worst human rights situations in its history. The Human Rights Watch’s World Report 2023 presents a sombre depiction of widespread abuses and attacks against civilians in Darfur, compounded by the lingering aftermath of the October 2021 coup. To comprehend the gravity of the situation, one must consider the humanitarian crisis detailed by the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (UNOCHA). In 2023, a staggering eight million people in Sudan will require assistance, with seven million internally displaced individuals, including over 350,000 displaced in 2022. The funding shortfall, currently standing at US$862 million out of the required US$1.9 billion, starkly underscores the inadequacy of the international response to address the urgent needs of the Sudanese people. A majority Muslim country, Sudan is entangled in a complex web of ethnic and religious tensions that have persisted for decades. The current struggles the nation faces are not solely a contemporary crisis but rather a legacy of past conflicts that have left an indelible mark on its landscape. The enduring repercussions of conflicts in Darfur, South Kordofan, and Blue Nile, as well as the scars of the civil war in South Sudan, contribute to the simmering tensions. In addition to the militia violence that has escalated over the past two years, existing government institutions are proving inadequate in delivering justice. Individuals are subjected to ill-treatment within judicial proceedings, underscoring the alarming nature of the human rights crisis in Sudan. This crisis demands urgent attention, yet the global response has been insufficient, clouded by political considerations and diplomatic manoeuvring. The plight of the Sudanese people, particularly the violation of religious freedom and the erosion of justice, calls for a more concerted and principled international effort to address the unfolding human rights tragedy. Compounding the suffering, outbreaks of malaria, hepatitis, measles, and dengue fever in 2022 have further burdened a population already grappling with the consequences of conflict and political instability. It is disheartening to acknowledge that, often, human rights violations only seem to capture attention when they pertain to a specific religion. This trend is, once again, observable in the case of Sudan. Earlier, in 2019, the removal of President Omar al-Bashir sparked optimism for an end to the persecution of Christians in Sudan, as the transitional government committed to abolishing discriminatory laws. However, since the 2021 coup, a distressing reality has unfolded, marked by the attack and confiscation of church properties, harassment, and detention of leaders. The once-promised religious freedom has crumbled under the weight of political turmoil. Yet, amidst these dire circumstances, a pertinent question arises: will this grave situation awaken the conscience of intellectuals and the global community to protect the vulnerable? The enormity of the crisis demands a collective and conscientious response to alleviate the profound suffering experienced by the Sudanese population. The trend among self-proclaimed intellectuals in India is to incessantly question and critique India’s responses through their news articles. The Palestinian issue has dominated recent parliamentary and public discourse, subjecting MEA responses to microscopic examination. Doubts are cast on the human nature of India’s policy and its commitment to the Palestinian cause, with questions raised about whether India has abandoned Palestine. Strikingly absent from their discussions is any notable concern or awareness about Sudan, except when they wish to criticize the handling of the crisis by the MEA. Also missing are the marches or extensive opinion pieces one might expect in the face of such a grave crisis. Instead, the discourse is relegated to smaller pieces on the margins of editorials, often questioning India’s perceived inadequate response. It is worth mentioning that such an indifferent and, in some cases, ignorant attitude demeans India’s proactive actions. The successful Operation Kaveri, which saw the evacuation of over 3,000 Indians from Sudan, received little attention. A case in point is India’s recent hosting of the G20 summit. In its rare opportunity to host the event, India actively collaborated with the Global South, advocating for the inclusion of the African Union as a G20 member. However, those viewing the world through ideological lenses dismiss these accomplishments as irrelevant and inadequate. Ultimately, the glaring hypocrisy surrounding human rights violations in Sudan highlights the selective attention and subdued responses of the intellectuals. When the discourse on human rights is swayed by political expediency rather than an unwavering commitment to justice, the very essence of the term is compromised. It is incumbent upon the global community to confront this hypocrisy and translate rhetoric into meaningful action to alleviate the profound suffering of the Sudanese people. Unfortunately, this disparity is particularly notable in India, where the intellectual class, often quick to criticise the government and institutions for human rights violations, appears indifferent to the plight of Sudan. Essentially, this underscores the need for readers to approach discussions on human rights with caution, as they may often be characterised by selectivity and lack of objectivity. The imperative lies in fostering a more just and compassionate world where humanity takes precedence over political considerations. #SudanCrisis #HumanRights Originally Published: 26th November'2023 https://sundayguardianlive.com/opinion/sudans-human-rights-crisis-and-an-exercise-in-global-hypocrisy Posted on SIS Blog with the Authorisation of the Author. Prof. (Dr.) Santishree Dhulipudi Pandit is Vice Chancellor of the Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi, India.