Identity Politics: The SIR and NRC Debate

The ongoing implementation of the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in Bihar has sparked controversy, with critics like AIMIM chief Asaduddin Owaisi alleging it is a backdoor attempt to introduce the National Register of Citizens (NRC). The concern stems from fears that SIR, which involves door-to-door verification, could disproportionately target marginalized communities, particularly Muslims, under the guise of cleaning up voter lists. While the Election Commission maintains that SIR is a routine exercise to ensure accurate voter data, the timing and political context have raised suspicions, especially given the BJP’s push for NRC and Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) in recent years.

The NRC, first implemented in Assam, was designed to identify undocumented immigrants, but its execution led to widespread chaos, with over 19 lakh people excluded—many of them poor and lacking
proper documentation. Critics argue that a nationwide NRC, combined with the CAA—which fast-tracks citizenship for non-Muslim migrants from neighboring countries—would effectively render many Indian Muslims stateless if they cannot prove their ancestry. Supporters, however, contend that NRC is necessary to curb illegal immigration and protect national security. The BJP’s rhetoric around NRC has often conflated illegal migrants with religious identity, deepening anxieties among minorities.

Proponents of SIR argue that updating electoral rolls is essential to prevent voter fraud and ensure fair elections. A clean voter list strengthens democracy by eliminating duplicate or fraudulent entries. However, the lack of transparency in the verification process and past instances of bureaucratic overreach—such as in Assam’s NRC—have eroded trust. If SIR is conducted fairly, it could enhance electoral integrity, but if misused, it risks disenfranchising vulnerable groups. The challenge lies in ensuring that such exercises are neutral, non-discriminatory, and free from political agendas.

The debate over NRC and SIR ultimately reflects a larger tension between national security and civil liberties. While identifying illegal residents is a legitimate state function, any such measure must be implemented with safeguards to protect genuine citizens from undue hardship. The Assam NRC experience showed how poorly designed policies can create humanitarian crises, with many lifelong residents struggling to prove their citizenship. A nationwide NRC without robust documentation infrastructure and legal support would repeat these failures on a larger scale.

India’s pluralism demands policies that unite rather than divide. Electoral reforms like SIR must be pursued with caution, ensuring they do not become tools of exclusion. Similarly, the NRC debate requires a balanced approach—one that addresses security concerns without undermining the citizenship rights of legitimate Indians. The government must prioritize fairness, transparency, and inclusivity to prevent these initiatives from deepening societal fissures. The real test lies not in identifying outsiders but in securing the rights of those who belong.

 Social Security Coverage: India’s Remarkable Leap

India’s recent recognition by the International Labour Organisation (ILO) as the second-ranked country in the world for social security coverage marks a historic achievement. The ILO report highlights an unprecedented 45 percentage point surge in India’s social protection coverage over the past decade, rising from 19% in 2015 to 64.3% in 2025. This expansion now ensures that 94 crore Indians—nearly two-thirds of the population—are covered under at least one social protection benefit. Such progress underscores India’s commitment to inclusive growth and aligns with the global vision of universal social protection as a cornerstone for achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) by 2030.

The ILO’s acknowledgement reflects the success of India’s legislatively backed, pro-poor welfare schemes under Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s leadership. Schemes like the Pradhan Mantri Jan Dhan Yojana, Ayushman Bharat, and the Direct Benefit Transfer system have played pivotal roles in extending financial and health security to marginalised communities. The ILO’s stringent criteria—requiring schemes to be cash-based, active, and backed by verified data—further validate the robustness of India’s social protection framework. Labour and Employment Minister Mansukh Mandaviya’s emphasis on “Antyodaya” (empowering the last mile) during his discussions with the ILO Director General Gilbert F. Houngbo exemplifies India’s resolve to leave no one behind.

This achievement is particularly significant in the context of global efforts to promote social justice. Universal social protection is not just a policy tool but a human right, essential for reducing inequality and fostering sustainable development. India’s rapid expansion of coverage demonstrates how targeted policies can transform lives, especially for the labour class and vulnerable groups. The ongoing Phase II of the Social Protection Data Pooling Exercise, which includes verification of additional schemes, is expected to push India’s coverage beyond the 100-crore mark, setting a global benchmark.

However, challenges remain. Ensuring the sustainability of these schemes, improving delivery mechanisms, and addressing regional disparities will be critical as India moves toward universal coverage. The ILO’s recognition should serve as both a validation and a catalyst for further innovation in social security. By continuing to prioritize inclusivity and transparency, India can not only consolidate its gains but also inspire other nations to accelerate their own social protection agendas.

In a world grappling with economic uncertainties and widening inequalities, India’s progress offers a blueprint for leveraging social security as a tool for equitable growth. As the country strides toward the 100-crore coverage milestone, its journey reaffirms the transformative power of visionary leadership and people-centric policies. The ILO’s ranking is not just a badge of honor but a call to action—to ensure that every citizen, regardless of their socio-economic status, enjoys the safety net they deserve.

Drones Dominance: The Future of Modern Warfare

The evolution of warfare has always been driven by the desire to minimize human casualties while maximizing tactical advantage. From trenches to tanks, and now to drones, nations prioritize preserving soldiers' lives while escalating the intensity of conflicts. The United States, for instance, has long been cautious about "boots on the ground," preferring air strikes and unmanned systems to reduce risks. Today, this trend has reached new heights with unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) and counter-drone technologies reshaping battlefields, enabling fiercer engagements with fewer human losses but greater collateral damage and prolonged hostilities. 

India’s recent experiences underscore this shift. During Operation Sindoor, India effectively neutralized Pakistan’s drone threats using a mix of kinetic and non-kinetic measures, as highlighted by Chief of Defence Staff General Anil Chauhan. The operation demonstrated the critical role of indigenous UAVs and Counter-Unmanned Aerial Systems (C-UAS) tailored to India’s terrain and needs. Pakistan’s attempted drone strikes on May 10 were largely thwarted, with many drones recovered intact—a testament to India’s growing prowess in this domain. The Harop loitering munition, for instance, outmanoeuvred Pakistan’s Songar drones, proving the value of homegrown technology in asymmetric warfare.

The lessons from Ukraine further validate this paradigm. Ukraine’s innovative use of drones in multi-domain attacks has exposed the vulnerabilities of traditional military platforms, signaling a seminal moment in warfare. Drones are no longer mere supplements; they are central to offensive and defensive strategies, capable of shifting the tactical balance disproportionately. As General Chauhan emphasized, reliance on foreign technology weakens preparedness and limits scalability. Adversaries can predict capabilities based on known systems, whereas indigenous solutions offer unpredictability and strategic autonomy.

India’s push for self-reliance in drone and counter-drone technologies under the Atmanirbhar Bharat initiative is not just a policy choice but a strategic imperative. The recent workshop on indigenization highlighted the need for a comprehensive ecosystem—from components to architectures—to safeguard national security. Brigadier Arabiman Narang’s insights from Operation Sindoor and global conflicts like Ukraine reinforce that no drone can be ignored, and the entire defense infrastructure must adapt. The Russia-Ukraine war has shown how cheap, mass-produced drones can overwhelm expensive air defenses. India must heed this lesson—investing not only in high-end systems but also in scalable, cost-effective solutions. The integration of AI for swarm tactics and real-time decision-making will be decisive, turning drones from mere tools into autonomous game-changers on the battlefield.

The future of warfare will be decided by which nation can innovate faster and integrate unmanned systems more effectively into its military doctrine. As conflicts increasingly pivot toward attritional drone battles, the country that masters this domain will dominate the skies—and the outcome of wars. India’s progress is promising, but the race has just begun.