The Dark Side of Indian Politics: The Fate of Political Prisoners Under Modi’s Government
Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s visit to the United States this week has been touted as a blossoming friendship between two of the world’s largest democracies. However, the rosy optics have clouded out a darker story: the increasingly grim fate of Indian political prisoners, including many well known to Western nongovernmental organizations and media establishments, under the right-wing Modi government.
Khurram Parvez, a Kashmiri human rights activist and chair of the Asian Federation Against Involuntary Disappearances, is perhaps the most emblematic example. Parvez, 45, has for years been at the forefront of documenting human rights violations in Kashmir, particularly torture, extrajudicial detention, and mass killings, during a long-running insurgency in the territory. He was arrested in November 2021 amid a broader Indian government crackdown and has been in prison ever since. Despite his prominent status, the fate of Parvez and others like him has not figured much into the celebratory pronouncements about the U.S.-India relationship.
India’s prisons have begun to fill with many of its own highly educated citizens, even as the BJP continues to grow in popularity, in part through flashy economic and infrastructure projects planned for completion across the country. Modi is widely expected to win in elections scheduled for next year. The Indian leader, whose star has risen in the U.S. years after he was banned from the country for his alleged involvement in serious human rights abuses, is also set to give a speech to a joint session of Congress on Thursday.
A perception of democratic backsliding in India under his rule has led several progressive U.S. politicians to announce a boycott of the address, including members of the so-called Squad: Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y.; Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich.; and Ilhan Omar, D-Minn. Despite the symbolic value of the boycott, these members of Congress are clear outliers in the U.S. establishment, which has shown minimal reservations about embracing Modi.
The strategic reasons for doing so seem compelling on the surface, including tapping into what is believed to be a major market in the future for Western companies and shoring up military cooperation to contain China in case of a conflict. However, letting human rights fall entirely by the wayside risks making a mockery of the oft-repeated claim that India and the U.S. are bound by values as opposed to merely interests.
Despite calls to prioritize human rights matters in the context of the U.S.-India bilateral relationship, there is little indication that the fate of political prisoners in India has figured into discussions between the two leaders at all, which have seemed more prominently focused on securing lucrative weapons deals for the future. In that context, human rights — and the fate of activists like Parvez, among others — has come to be seen by many as merely a distraction from more important matters.
“People in policy circles have a notion that if they speak about human rights issues, Indians will get very angry,” said Mir, the Kashmiri legal advocate. “So they don’t want to ruffle any feathers.”
In conclusion, while Modi’s visit to the United States has been touted as a blossoming friendship between two of the world’s largest democracies, it is important not to overlook the increasingly grim fate of Indian political prisoners under his government. The strategic reasons for embracing Modi seem compelling on the surface, but letting human rights fall entirely by the wayside risks making a mockery of the oft-repeated claim that India and the U.S. are bound by values as opposed to merely interests. It is time for Western countries to prioritize human rights matters in the context of their bilateral relationships with India and speak out against the systematic muzzling of civic space in the country.