The hypocrisy of India’s democracy and why the Middle East should rethink its ties
Middle East Monitor
October 25, 2025
People of the Muslim community stage a rally on the occasion of Prophet Muhammad’s birthday in Kolkata, India, on September 5, 2025.
[Debarchan Chatterjee/NurPhoto via Getty Images]
by Ronny P Sasmita
The recent case reported in international media of Muslims in India being harassed over their religious identity once again reveals the uncomfortable truth that India’s democracy is steadily eroding its moral foundations. It is no longer credible to argue that these incidents are isolated or accidental. They reflect a systemic pattern of hostility toward Islam that has intensified dramatically during the tenure of Prime Minister Narendra Modi and the Bharatiya Janata Party. For a nation that proclaims itself the world’s largest democracy, the intolerance emerging from its political and social institutions is nothing less than hypocritical. India speaks the language of pluralism abroad while enabling exclusion at home. This contradiction should serve as a wake up call for countries in the Middle East that have eagerly expanded economic and diplomatic relations with New Delhi.
Consider the disturbing trend of mob lynchings associated with cow vigilantism where Muslim men have been beaten to death under flimsy allegations of transporting cattle. These acts have occurred with alarming regularity over the past decade and have seldom resulted in serious legal consequences. Meanwhile discriminatory laws such as the Citizenship Amendment Act signal a troubling willingness by the state to codify religious preference in ways that disadvantage Muslims. Add to that the ghettoization of Muslim communities across several Indian cities where housing is denied through informal but widespread prejudice and a clear picture emerges of a democracy selectively applied.
This pattern is made more troubling by the fact that India’s political leadership is fully aware of these abuses yet publicly downplays them. Modi’s speeches are often framed around unity and development, but his political base remains energized by a majoritarian Hindu nationalism that views Muslims with suspicion or outright hostility. His party has mastered the art of dog whistle rhetoric signaling to supporters that aggressive behavior toward minority groups can be tolerated. In many instances state authorities have been slow to investigate violence against Muslims or have shown indifference to inflammatory speeches by local officials. The hypocrisy is glaring. India demands respect on the world stage but refuses to offer basic protections to its own citizens identified by their faith.
Democracies are tested not by how they treat their dominant group but by how they safeguard minorities. On that score India is failing. Global indices measuring civil liberties and religious freedom have documented a clear downward trend. Newspapers and activists inside India face intimidation when they report on anti Muslim discrimination. Journalists face legal harassment and risk imprisonment under vaguely worded laws. These actions are intended to obscure the truth and maintain a narrative of unity while the social fabric frays from within. When a democracy begins policing information to preserve its image, it crosses into the territory of hypocrisy.
The Middle East should take note. Several governments in the region have dramatically expanded trade ties with India particularly in energy security and infrastructure investment. Yet these relationships should not be unconditional. The Gulf Cooperation Council and other regional blocs have the leverage to demand accountability. Oil producing nations hold significant power over India’s energy lifeline. Rather than deepening ties automatically, these countries should condition cooperation on measurable improvements in religious freedom and protection of minorities. Why should nations built on Islamic heritage reward a government that permits hostility toward Muslims within its borders
Furthermore direct investment flowing from the Middle East into Indian infrastructure and real estate has been celebrated by Indian politicians as evidence of rising global status. But prestige should not come cheap. Middle Eastern sovereign wealth funds should insist on policy reforms that reaffirm secularism and equal citizenship. The argument that economic engagement encourages moderation has proven misleading in this case. As trade and investment have increased, India’s intolerance has worsened. If financial incentives are not redirected toward accountability, the trajectory will remain negative.
There is also a geopolitical dimension. India seeks to position itself as a leader of the Global South and a partner to Muslim majority nations. At the same time it allows narratives domestically that portray Muslims as security threats or cultural outsiders. This dualism should not be ignored. When a nation rhetorically celebrates diversity abroad but cultivates division at home, its diplomatic credibility erodes. It is naïve for Middle Eastern leaders to assume that such contradictions will not affect their own interests in the future.
Strategically, Middle Eastern countries should begin exploring alternative supply arrangements that reduce India’s privileged access to energy markets. Temporary restrictions on crude exports or tighter contractual terms would send a powerful signal. India depends heavily on imported oil, and leverage on this front could force introspection. Conditions could include stronger criminal penalties for hate crimes, reinforced protections for Muslim places of worship, and the dissolution of discriminatory local ordinances that enable segregation.
READ: Islamophobia is the new global currency of power
In addition, academic and cultural exchange agreements could be suspended until India demonstrates tangible improvements in minority rights. India benefits immensely from soft power diplomacy, using its diaspora and cultural industries to project an image of peaceful coexistence. Yet this image often masks domestic hostility. If Middle Eastern cultural institutions insist on equitable treatment for Indian Muslims before renewing partnerships, pressure will build from within India’s own elite circles.
Some argue that isolating India risks pushing it closer to major powers such as China or undermining regional stability. This perspective overestimates India’s strategic options. India’s ambitions require access to Middle Eastern energy and capital. No alternative market can easily replace the Gulf’s share. Middle Eastern nations must recognize this and stop underestimating their influence.
Others fear that conditional engagement may fuel Hindu nationalist resentment. In truth, that resentment already exists. Pretending otherwise simply rewards bad behavior. It is time to normalize the idea that economic privilege must be accompanied by moral responsibility.
Ultimately, India’s democracy is at a crossroads. It cannot continue preaching pluralism abroad while practicing exclusion at home. Muslim citizens deserve equal rights not as a concession but as a constitutional guarantee. If India refuses to uphold these principles, then it is entirely reasonable for the international Muslim community and especially Middle Eastern governments to limit partnerships. Diplomatic silence is complicity. Financial generosity without conditions is encouragement. Oil supply without leverage is surrender.
Until India demonstrates real change enforced through law and defended by political leadership, Middle Eastern countries should rethink the depth of their ties. Only when discrimination is confronted directly within India’s borders will the world’s largest democracy regain the moral clarity it once claimed to possess.
The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.
by Ronny P Sasmita
The recent case reported in international media of Muslims in India being harassed over their religious identity once again reveals the uncomfortable truth that India’s democracy is steadily eroding its moral foundations. It is no longer credible to argue that these incidents are isolated or accidental. They reflect a systemic pattern of hostility toward Islam that has intensified dramatically during the tenure of Prime Minister Narendra Modi and the Bharatiya Janata Party. For a nation that proclaims itself the world’s largest democracy, the intolerance emerging from its political and social institutions is nothing less than hypocritical. India speaks the language of pluralism abroad while enabling exclusion at home. This contradiction should serve as a wake up call for countries in the Middle East that have eagerly expanded economic and diplomatic relations with New Delhi.
Consider the disturbing trend of mob lynchings associated with cow vigilantism where Muslim men have been beaten to death under flimsy allegations of transporting cattle. These acts have occurred with alarming regularity over the past decade and have seldom resulted in serious legal consequences. Meanwhile discriminatory laws such as the Citizenship Amendment Act signal a troubling willingness by the state to codify religious preference in ways that disadvantage Muslims. Add to that the ghettoization of Muslim communities across several Indian cities where housing is denied through informal but widespread prejudice and a clear picture emerges of a democracy selectively applied.
This pattern is made more troubling by the fact that India’s political leadership is fully aware of these abuses yet publicly downplays them. Modi’s speeches are often framed around unity and development, but his political base remains energized by a majoritarian Hindu nationalism that views Muslims with suspicion or outright hostility. His party has mastered the art of dog whistle rhetoric signaling to supporters that aggressive behavior toward minority groups can be tolerated. In many instances state authorities have been slow to investigate violence against Muslims or have shown indifference to inflammatory speeches by local officials. The hypocrisy is glaring. India demands respect on the world stage but refuses to offer basic protections to its own citizens identified by their faith.
Democracies are tested not by how they treat their dominant group but by how they safeguard minorities. On that score India is failing. Global indices measuring civil liberties and religious freedom have documented a clear downward trend. Newspapers and activists inside India face intimidation when they report on anti Muslim discrimination. Journalists face legal harassment and risk imprisonment under vaguely worded laws. These actions are intended to obscure the truth and maintain a narrative of unity while the social fabric frays from within. When a democracy begins policing information to preserve its image, it crosses into the territory of hypocrisy.
The Middle East should take note. Several governments in the region have dramatically expanded trade ties with India particularly in energy security and infrastructure investment. Yet these relationships should not be unconditional. The Gulf Cooperation Council and other regional blocs have the leverage to demand accountability. Oil producing nations hold significant power over India’s energy lifeline. Rather than deepening ties automatically, these countries should condition cooperation on measurable improvements in religious freedom and protection of minorities. Why should nations built on Islamic heritage reward a government that permits hostility toward Muslims within its borders
Furthermore direct investment flowing from the Middle East into Indian infrastructure and real estate has been celebrated by Indian politicians as evidence of rising global status. But prestige should not come cheap. Middle Eastern sovereign wealth funds should insist on policy reforms that reaffirm secularism and equal citizenship. The argument that economic engagement encourages moderation has proven misleading in this case. As trade and investment have increased, India’s intolerance has worsened. If financial incentives are not redirected toward accountability, the trajectory will remain negative.
There is also a geopolitical dimension. India seeks to position itself as a leader of the Global South and a partner to Muslim majority nations. At the same time it allows narratives domestically that portray Muslims as security threats or cultural outsiders. This dualism should not be ignored. When a nation rhetorically celebrates diversity abroad but cultivates division at home, its diplomatic credibility erodes. It is naïve for Middle Eastern leaders to assume that such contradictions will not affect their own interests in the future.
Strategically, Middle Eastern countries should begin exploring alternative supply arrangements that reduce India’s privileged access to energy markets. Temporary restrictions on crude exports or tighter contractual terms would send a powerful signal. India depends heavily on imported oil, and leverage on this front could force introspection. Conditions could include stronger criminal penalties for hate crimes, reinforced protections for Muslim places of worship, and the dissolution of discriminatory local ordinances that enable segregation.
READ: Islamophobia is the new global currency of power
In addition, academic and cultural exchange agreements could be suspended until India demonstrates tangible improvements in minority rights. India benefits immensely from soft power diplomacy, using its diaspora and cultural industries to project an image of peaceful coexistence. Yet this image often masks domestic hostility. If Middle Eastern cultural institutions insist on equitable treatment for Indian Muslims before renewing partnerships, pressure will build from within India’s own elite circles.
Some argue that isolating India risks pushing it closer to major powers such as China or undermining regional stability. This perspective overestimates India’s strategic options. India’s ambitions require access to Middle Eastern energy and capital. No alternative market can easily replace the Gulf’s share. Middle Eastern nations must recognize this and stop underestimating their influence.
Others fear that conditional engagement may fuel Hindu nationalist resentment. In truth, that resentment already exists. Pretending otherwise simply rewards bad behavior. It is time to normalize the idea that economic privilege must be accompanied by moral responsibility.
Ultimately, India’s democracy is at a crossroads. It cannot continue preaching pluralism abroad while practicing exclusion at home. Muslim citizens deserve equal rights not as a concession but as a constitutional guarantee. If India refuses to uphold these principles, then it is entirely reasonable for the international Muslim community and especially Middle Eastern governments to limit partnerships. Diplomatic silence is complicity. Financial generosity without conditions is encouragement. Oil supply without leverage is surrender.
Until India demonstrates real change enforced through law and defended by political leadership, Middle Eastern countries should rethink the depth of their ties. Only when discrimination is confronted directly within India’s borders will the world’s largest democracy regain the moral clarity it once claimed to possess.
The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.
No comments:
Post a Comment