Trust Deficit: Electoral Reforms Now Imperative

The recent allegations by Congress leader Rahul Gandhi about "vote theft" in Karnataka and Bihar, alongside similar complaints from political parties in Delhi, West Bengal, and Maharashtra, highlight a deepening crisis of confidence in India’s electoral process. The controversy over the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of voter lists in Bihar, where 52 lakh voters were found absent and 18 lakh declared dead, has further fuelled suspicions. While the ruling BJP and allies like Chirag Paswan defend the exercise as necessary to purge bogus entries, the opposition sees it as a targetted disenfranchisement of marginalised communities. This polarization underscores an urgent need for systemic reforms to restore trust in democracy’s cornerstone—free and fair elections.

The grievances are not limited to voter lists alone. Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs), despite their widespread use, remain a lightning rod for controversy. Opposition parties routinely question their reliability, alleging tampering or manipulation, though conclusive evidence is scarce. The Election Commission’s (EC) insistence on EVM integrity has done little to assuage doubts, as the opacity surrounding their operation persists. Combined with discrepancies in voter rolls, these concerns create a perfect storm of mistrust, eroding public faith in electoral outcomes.

The way forward demands a multi-pronged approach. First, the EC must prioritize transparency in voter list revisions. While weeding out duplicates and ineligible voters is essential, the process should be collaborative, with political parties granted real-time access to data and allowed to raise objections at every stage. The current adversarial climate, where revisions are viewed as partisan tools, only deepens divisions. Second, EVM-related apprehensions can be mitigated by enhancing verifiability. Expanding the Voter-Verified Paper Audit Trail (VVPAT) system to mandate full cross-verification of slips in a statistically significant sample of booths, as suggested by experts, would bolster confidence without compromising efficiency.

Moreover, the EC should institutionalize pre-election audits of voter lists in sensitive constituencies, involving neutral observers and civil society representatives. The Bihar SIR, though contentious, sets a precedent for proactive cleanup; replicating it nationwide with bipartisan oversight could preempt disputes. Simultaneously, leveraging technology for real-time voter registration updates and grievance redressal would minimize errors and curb malpractices.

Critics argue that electoral malfeasance is an inevitable byproduct of India’s complex democracy, but resignation is not an option. The EC’s credibility hinges on its ability to act as an impartial referee, not just in letter but in perception. Political parties, too, must move beyond opportunistic rhetoric and commit to constructive engagement. The alternative—a perpetual cycle of allegations and counter-allegations—risks reducing elections to a battleground of distrust rather than a celebration of popular will. India’s democracy deserves better. The time for electoral reforms is not tomorrow; it is today. 

 Wings of Change: India’s Aerospace Evolution

The retirement of the MiG-21, India’s legendary fighter aircraft, marks the end of an era in the nation’s military aviation history. For over six decades, the MiG-21 served as the backbone of the Indian Air Force (IAF), defending the skies with its agility and speed. Yet, its high accident rate (“flying coffin”)  and outdated technology made its phase-out inevitable. As the last squadron, the No. 4 “Oorials,” prepares to bid farewell, the IAF ushers in a new chapter with advanced fighter jets that promise to redefine India’s aerial dominance.

The MiG-21’s legacy is bittersweet. Introduced in the 1960s, it was a marvel of its time, playing a pivotal role in the 1971 war. However, its ageing design and frequent crashes—over 400 pilots lost in five decades—underscored the urgent need for modernisation. The IAF’s current focus is on inducting cutting-edge aircraft to replace the MiG-21 and bolster India’s combat readiness. Leading this transformation are the Rafale, Tejas, and the upcoming indigenous Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft (AMCA).

The Rafale, a French-origin multirole fighter, is already a game-changer. With superior avionics, stealth features, and the deadly Meteor air-to-air missile, it outclasses the MiG-21 in every aspect. Its combat performance in the Balakot airstrike demonstrated its precision and lethality. Meanwhile, the indigenously developed Tejas Mk-1A, though lighter, offers modern electronics and lower maintenance costs, making it a viable replacement for the MiG-21 in ground-attack roles. The upcoming Tejas Mk-2 and AMCA will further bridge the gap between fourth and fifth-generation fighters, ensuring self-reliance in defence manufacturing. Beyond these, India is also investing in the Sukhoi-30MKI upgrades and the potential procurement of additional squadrons of fifth-generation fighters like the Russian Su-57 or collaboration on futuristic programs. The focus remains on achieving a balanced fleet—combining heavy, medium, and light fighters—to address diverse threats, from dogfights along the borders to long-range strikes. However, budget constraints and bureaucratic delays in procurement remain hurdles in this transition.

Comparatively, the MiG-21’s limitations—limited payload, outdated radar, and lack of stealth—pale against these modern jets. Yet, its retirement symbolises more than just technological progress; it reflects India’s strategic shift from reliance on Soviet-era hardware to a diversified, future-ready fleet. Challenges remain, including delays in indigenous projects and the need for higher squadron strength, but the MiG-21’s exit is a necessary step toward a more advanced and safer IAF.

As the MiG-21 flies into history, its lessons endure. The IAF’s future lies in a mix of imported prowess and homegrown innovation, ensuring that the skies remain secure. The next generation of fighters must not only replace the old guard but also elevate India’s position as a formidable air power in an increasingly contested region.

 Identity Politics: Mamata’s Battle for Bengal

With less than a year to go for the West Bengal Assembly elections, Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee has sharpened her rhetoric, shifting from “Bengal under threat” to “Bengalis under threat.” Her recent stance ahead of the Martyrs’ Day Rally of Monday made it clear that identity politics will be her central plank in 2026. By framing the contest as a battle for Bengali culture, language, and cuisine, she aims to consolidate her core vote bank while countering the BJP’s aggressive push into the state.

Mamata Banerjee is no stranger to political theatrics, and her ability to reinvent narratives is unmatched. Her earlier campaigns painted the BJP as an outsider force threatening Bengal’s secular fabric. Now, she has tweaked that narrative to position herself
as the sole defender of Bengali identity. This pivot is strategic—it allows her to counter the BJP’s Hindutva appeal with a regionalist, sub-nationalist pitch. However, critics argue that her rhetoric risks polarizing the state further, especially given her overt reliance on Muslim vote banks, which has, over the years, led to accusations of fostering “mini Muslim regions” within Bengal.

Mamata’s rise was itself a revolt against Bengal’s entrenched Marxist regime, which ruled for over three decades. She broke the Left’s stranglehold by positioning herself as the voice of the oppressed, channeling public fatigue with communist stagnation. Yet, some argue she has adopted the same autocratic tendencies she once opposed—using state machinery to crush dissent, much like the Left did in its heyday.

Yet, Mamata’s resilience cannot be underestimated. She remains one of the few opposition leaders who has consistently opposed Prime Minister Narendra Modi, refusing to align with him even as others have softened their stance. Her victory in the 2021 elections, despite the BJP’s massive campaign, proved her ability to mobilize voters against a national wave. Her street-fighter image, combined with welfare schemes and a fiercely regionalist stance, makes her a formidable opponent.

However, the 2026 elections will test her like never before. The BJP has deepened its organizational roots in Bengal, and Mamata’s anti-CAA, anti-NRC stance may not resonate as strongly as before. Moreover, her governance record—marked by allegations of corruption, political violence, and sluggish industrial growth—could undermine her cultural nationalism pitch.

Mamata’s strength lies in her ability to make every election a referendum on Bengali pride versus “outsider influence.” But whether identity politics alone can override anti-incumbency and BJP’s growing clout remains uncertain. As Bengal braces for another high-stakes battle, Mamata’s survival hinges on convincing voters that she—and not the BJP—is the true guardian of Bengal’s soul. The coming months will reveal if her narrative holds, or if the electorate seeks change beyond symbolism.

Chips & Clouds: The Future of Sovereign AI

The rise of sovereign AI reflects a growing belief among nations that controlling their own artificial intelligence infrastructure is a matter of strategic importance. Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang has successfully pitched the idea to Gulf countries and other governments, framing it as essential for national security and cultural preservation. However, his advocacy isn’t entirely altruistic—Nvidia faces increasing competition from tech giants developing their own AI chips, threatening its dominance. Sovereign AI, built on open-source models and localized cloud computing, offers Nvidia a lucrative market while allowing nations to assert digital independence.

At its core, sovereign AI is driven by the perceived threat of data crossing borders. Countries fear that relying on foreign AI systems could expose sensitive information or leave them vulnerable to geopolitical pressures. By developing homegrown AI, they aim to secure critical data and maintain control over their digital ecosystems. For nations like India, sovereign AI isn’t just about security—it’s about representation. Local models can prioritize regional languages, customs, and cultural nuances, ensuring AI serves domestic needs rather than global homogenization.

Yet the path to sovereign AI is fraught with challenges. Building and maintaining state-of-the-art AI requires massive investments in infrastructure, talent, and energy—resources many nations lack. Smaller economies may struggle to compete with the scale of American or Chinese tech giants, raising questions about long-term viability. Additionally, the rush to establish sovereign AI could lead to fragmentation, with incompatible systems hindering global collaboration on pressing issues like climate change or healthcare.

Tech giants like Google, Microsoft, and Amazon argue that their cloud computing platforms offer better data security than most sovereign AI systems can achieve. With vast investments in encryption, zero-trust architectures, and AI-driven threat detection, these companies provide enterprise-grade security at a scale few nations can match.

For Nvidia, sovereign AI represents both an opportunity and a hedge. As cloud providers and Big Tech firms design their own chips, Nvidia risks losing its grip on the AI hardware market. By encouraging nations to build independent AI capabilities, Huang ensures continued demand for Nvidia’s GPUs and software. Still, the long-term impact remains uncertain. If countries succeed in creating self-sufficient AI ecosystems, they may eventually reduce reliance on external vendors altogether.

 

The future of sovereign AI will likely be shaped by a mix of ambition and pragmatism. While some nations will push for full autonomy, others may opt for hybrid models, blending domestic infrastructure with strategic partnerships. What’s clear is that AI is no longer just a technological race—it’s a geopolitical one. As countries navigate this complex landscape, the balance between sovereignty, security, and collaboration will define the next era of artificial intelligence.

 Terror Designation: US Move Reshapes Regional Dynamics

The US decision to label The Resistance Front (TRF) as a global terrorist outfit marks a pivotal moment in the geopolitics of South Asia, particularly for India, Pakistan, and China. This designation not only validates India’s long-standing claims about TRF being a proxy of Pakistan-based Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) but also exposes the intricate web of cross-border terrorism orchestrated under the guise of local insurgency. The timing, following the brutal Pahalgam attack, underscores the urgency of international action against groups exploiting regional instability. 

India’s response has been measured yet firm, with Operation Sindoor demonstrating its resolve to retaliate against terror infrastructure. The operation, coupled with diplomatic efforts to isolate Pakistan-backed groups, reflects a strategic shift from defensive postures to proactive counterterrorism. The US designation amplifies India’s stance, lending global legitimacy to its fight against terrorism. However, the muted reactions from Pakistan and China reveal deeper geopolitical fault lines.

China’s call for “stronger regional anti-terror cooperation” rings hollow given its history of shielding Pakistan-based terror groups at the UN Security Council. The omission of TRF and LeT from the UNSC’s April 25 statement, allegedly due to Chinese objections, highlights Beijing’s dual standards. Its rhetoric of cooperation contrasts sharply with actions that undermine collective security. For India, this underscores the need to leverage multilateral platforms like the FATF and the Quad to counter state-sponsored terrorism.

Pakistan, meanwhile, faces mounting pressure as the TRF’s links to its military establishment grow increasingly untenable. The group’s rebranding as a “homegrown” entity has failed to deceive international observers. Intelligence intercepts tracing TRF operations to Pakistani safe houses and the involvement of former SSG commanders expose Islamabad’s complicity. The US designation isolates Pakistan further, forcing it to reckon with its role as a terror incubator.

The TRF’s evolving tactics—targeting civilians, infrastructure, and tourists—signal a dangerous escalation aimed at destabilizing Jammu and Kashmir. The Pahalgam attack, with its communal overtones and military precision, exemplifies this shift. The US move disrupts TRF’s logistical and financial networks, but sustained action is needed to dismantle its ecosystem. India must collaborate with allies to enforce sanctions, monitor digital terror financing, and expose Pakistan’s duplicity.

Ultimately, the US designation is a diplomatic victory for India, but the road ahead demands vigilance. The region’s stability hinges on holding Pakistan accountable and compelling China to abandon its obstructive stance. For now, the message is clear: terrorism, in any guise, will face global condemnation. The challenge lies in translating this momentum into lasting security. The TRF’s designation sets a precedent for targeting similar proxies, but unilateral actions alone won’t suffice. A coordinated global effort is vital to dismantle the infrastructure of terror thriving under geopolitical cover.

 

 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.