Bangladesh Defense Forum- Copy to clipboard
- Thread starter
- #196
What purpose does the Indian media propaganda about Bangladesh serve?
BJP's media allies demonstrated the lengths to which they would go to mask India's domestic challengers under Modi's leadership.
images.thedailystar.net
What purpose does the Indian media propaganda about Bangladesh serve?
Hindus in Bangladesh themselves called on the Indian media to display facts.
In his Independence Day speech, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi emphasised that 1.4 billion Indians are worried about the safety of Hindu minorities in post-Hasina Bangladesh, in New Delhi, on August 15, 2024. FILE PHOTO: AFP
Since the student-led mass uprising toppled Sheikh Hasina's regime in Bangladesh on August 5, a new reality dawned on the horizon for the nation grappling with uncertainty. But in neighbouring India's media, an alternate reality of what was not seen on the streets of Bangladesh emerged. An incessant flow of misinformation and largely disinformation flooded social media. The attacks on Hindu minorities, which did indeed take place, was put on steroids to detract and distract from the real sentiments of the movement.
There was a clear and apparent campaign by the "Godi media"—a term coined by veteran Ramon Magsaysay award-winning Indian journalist Ravish Kumar to refer to media outlets that share unobjective alliances with the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)—to paint Bangladesh's democratic uprising against its former dictator as purely "anti-Indian" (in a roundabout way) and claim it was engineered by everything ranging from religious extremist forces to the US "Deep State." The latter claim came from none other than Republic TV's Arnab Goswami, who was initially reportedly funded by a prominent BJP politician, but he claims the shares have been bought back. Appearing on his channel, Goswami said, "When Rahul Gandhi goes to London and says America must save Indian democracy, this is the intervention he is probably talking about," as he pointed towards videos of Gono Bhaban being ransacked, buses being burnt in Dhaka and so on playing in the background. BJP MP Anurag Thakur called out Congress party's supposed hypocrisy in Lok Sabha by saying, "You spoke about Gaza but not about minorities in Bangladesh." The same sentiments were echoed by Aaj Tak's Sudhir Chaudhary when he compared the attacks against minorities in Bangladesh to the genocide in Gaza. "No country, no community in the world stepped forward to stop this genocide. Like how they did for Rafah," he said.
Hindus in Bangladesh themselves called on the Indian media to display facts. Bipra Prasun Das, a 21-year-old Hindu student from North South University in Dhaka, whose ancestral home was burnt down during the week of Hasina's fall, told Indian media watchdog Newslaundry, "If the Indian media had done its job properly, we would've had an easier time talking about what we are facing." This account itself shows that the endless distortion of the violence against minorities in Bangladesh in the pro-establishment media in India has taken attention away from the real attacks that happened and, in fact, caused more harm. So then, who does this propaganda about Bangladesh serve?
Before Hasina's ousting, writer Aakar Patel in The Wire had written an article, interviewing people in these pro-establishment channels, who said the overt majoritarianism under Narendra Modi has produced a condition where "existent bigotry is given a platform to be amplified." Along with this, this section of the Indian media used the situation in Bangladesh to attack the Congress party and the Indian National Developmental Inclusive Alliance (I.N.D.I.A.) and breed further division in India itself.
The necessity of an aggressive stance against the opposition has been clear after the elections where BJP failed to reach a majority on its own, in spite of its slogan, "Abki baar 400 paar," which means, "This time surpassing 400" of the 543 seats in Lok Sabha. BJP did not even reach the magic 272 seats needed to form a government, and had to rely on the National Democratic Alliance (NDA). Opposition leader Rahul Gandhi called the results "a moral and political defeat for Mr Modi." Although Modi did in fact bring home a third term, his grip on the nation seems to be dwindling and the difference between the parties widening, which can be further seen by analysing the contrast in their approaches towards Prof Muhammad Yunus-led interim government in Bangladesh.
For instance, External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar said it was "natural that we will deal with the government of the day," and that the relationship between the two countries has had its "ups and downs." Jaishankar's comments were stiff, steering clear of any jubilation or adversity, which was in sharp contrast to how Congress leader and former diplomat Shashi Tharoor addressed it. Speaking to NDTV, Tharoor said Prof Yunus taking over was "a very good sign, he is a highly respected figure, he has a reputation that goes beyond politics," elaborating that he is also "a figure that would certainly contribute to stability in Bangladesh" and that "stability is in our [India's] interest." When asked about reports on attacks on minorities, Tharoor said there was indeed anarchy for a couple days, but he also stated, "I have also seen reports of Bengali Muslims protecting Hindu temples and protecting Hindu homes," adding that "we should be telling both sides of the story."
In this context, it's also important to note the BJP's realpolitik foreign policy. Debidatta Mahapatra of the Times of India explained India's current foreign policy as it stood on the sidelines of the Russia-Ukraine war, until Prime Minister Modi's recent historic visit to Ukraine. "As realist prudence demands, India cannot simply undertake a moralist standpoint and ignore the dictates of realpolitik," described Mahapatra. This very use of realpolitik in India's neighbourhood policy—which is understandable as nations do act in their own interests—has bred the anti-India sentiments that we saw in the Maldives earlier this year.
Undoubtedly, the portrayal of India's international strength by the BJP, the hosting of the G20 Summit and its renewed importance on the world stage are all causes for national pride for India. BJP capitalises on it for its own party's incentives, reframing what would have historically been Indian pride into Hindu nationalistic pride. This is a page out of a cultural populist's playbook, the use of "us vs them," as we have seen time and time again by Prime Minister Modi. The "Hindu pride"—which is more to do with politics and little, if none, with religion—is sold to the public because real metrics don't indicate the best picture.
Raghuram Rajan, former governor of India's central bank who resigned two years into BJP taking power, stated that Modi's goals of becoming a developed economy by 2047 is unachievable, citing high dropout rates and lack of high school education in the country of 1.4 billion where more than half are below the age of 30. Youth unemployment stands at 45.4 percent, one of the highest in the world. The Global Hunger Index rated their child wasting rate as the highest in the world—at 18.7 percent—exceeding countries with active conflicts such as Yemen. This makes it imperative for the BJP to hold onto realpolitik policies to sell its position in the world to its people at the cost of fostering antagonistic attitude with its neighbours—which are all a part of what the Hindustan Times calls the "Modi-Doval-Jaishankar" playbook. The playbook can be summarised as "shaping democratic verdicts" when deemed necessary.
Many commentaries have been written to understand the purpose of the Indian media's propaganda, aligned with the ousted Awami League, such as Sajeeb Wazed Joy's recent post on Facebook about controversial journalist Chandan Nandy's report suggesting, without evidence, that "Bangladeshi student movement 'coordinators' met ISI, US handlers in Pakistan, Dubai and Doha between April and September (in) 2023." By painting the democratic uprising as Islamist or anti-Indian and leveraging it to attack the Congress party, the BJP's media allies demonstrated the lengths to which they would go to mask the domestic challenges India is currently facing under the BJP rule. This includes the prevailing communalism and violence in Manipur which the pro-establishment media and BJP politicians have ignored, while Modi recently wrote on X (formerly Twitter) that he discussed the issue of "Hindu minorities" in Bangladesh, with US President Joe Biden.
Irregardless, at the end of the day, Bangladesh and India need to maintain a good relationship. For the pro-establishment media in India to continue pursuing the divisive commentaries and the current brand of unethical journalism will needlessly harvest an anti-India sentiment in Bangladesh and cultivate harmful sentiments between ordinary citizens of the neighbouring countries. And that is the last thing that South Asia needs right now.
Ramisa Rob is in-charge of Geopolitical Insights at The Daily Star.
Mahadev Ghosh is an independent researcher and a columnist for Geopolitical Insights at The Daily Star.
Hindus in Bangladesh themselves called on the Indian media to display facts.
In his Independence Day speech, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi emphasised that 1.4 billion Indians are worried about the safety of Hindu minorities in post-Hasina Bangladesh, in New Delhi, on August 15, 2024. FILE PHOTO: AFP
Since the student-led mass uprising toppled Sheikh Hasina's regime in Bangladesh on August 5, a new reality dawned on the horizon for the nation grappling with uncertainty. But in neighbouring India's media, an alternate reality of what was not seen on the streets of Bangladesh emerged. An incessant flow of misinformation and largely disinformation flooded social media. The attacks on Hindu minorities, which did indeed take place, was put on steroids to detract and distract from the real sentiments of the movement.
There was a clear and apparent campaign by the "Godi media"—a term coined by veteran Ramon Magsaysay award-winning Indian journalist Ravish Kumar to refer to media outlets that share unobjective alliances with the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)—to paint Bangladesh's democratic uprising against its former dictator as purely "anti-Indian" (in a roundabout way) and claim it was engineered by everything ranging from religious extremist forces to the US "Deep State." The latter claim came from none other than Republic TV's Arnab Goswami, who was initially reportedly funded by a prominent BJP politician, but he claims the shares have been bought back. Appearing on his channel, Goswami said, "When Rahul Gandhi goes to London and says America must save Indian democracy, this is the intervention he is probably talking about," as he pointed towards videos of Gono Bhaban being ransacked, buses being burnt in Dhaka and so on playing in the background. BJP MP Anurag Thakur called out Congress party's supposed hypocrisy in Lok Sabha by saying, "You spoke about Gaza but not about minorities in Bangladesh." The same sentiments were echoed by Aaj Tak's Sudhir Chaudhary when he compared the attacks against minorities in Bangladesh to the genocide in Gaza. "No country, no community in the world stepped forward to stop this genocide. Like how they did for Rafah," he said.
Hindus in Bangladesh themselves called on the Indian media to display facts. Bipra Prasun Das, a 21-year-old Hindu student from North South University in Dhaka, whose ancestral home was burnt down during the week of Hasina's fall, told Indian media watchdog Newslaundry, "If the Indian media had done its job properly, we would've had an easier time talking about what we are facing." This account itself shows that the endless distortion of the violence against minorities in Bangladesh in the pro-establishment media in India has taken attention away from the real attacks that happened and, in fact, caused more harm. So then, who does this propaganda about Bangladesh serve?
Before Hasina's ousting, writer Aakar Patel in The Wire had written an article, interviewing people in these pro-establishment channels, who said the overt majoritarianism under Narendra Modi has produced a condition where "existent bigotry is given a platform to be amplified." Along with this, this section of the Indian media used the situation in Bangladesh to attack the Congress party and the Indian National Developmental Inclusive Alliance (I.N.D.I.A.) and breed further division in India itself.
The necessity of an aggressive stance against the opposition has been clear after the elections where BJP failed to reach a majority on its own, in spite of its slogan, "Abki baar 400 paar," which means, "This time surpassing 400" of the 543 seats in Lok Sabha. BJP did not even reach the magic 272 seats needed to form a government, and had to rely on the National Democratic Alliance (NDA). Opposition leader Rahul Gandhi called the results "a moral and political defeat for Mr Modi." Although Modi did in fact bring home a third term, his grip on the nation seems to be dwindling and the difference between the parties widening, which can be further seen by analysing the contrast in their approaches towards Prof Muhammad Yunus-led interim government in Bangladesh.
For instance, External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar said it was "natural that we will deal with the government of the day," and that the relationship between the two countries has had its "ups and downs." Jaishankar's comments were stiff, steering clear of any jubilation or adversity, which was in sharp contrast to how Congress leader and former diplomat Shashi Tharoor addressed it. Speaking to NDTV, Tharoor said Prof Yunus taking over was "a very good sign, he is a highly respected figure, he has a reputation that goes beyond politics," elaborating that he is also "a figure that would certainly contribute to stability in Bangladesh" and that "stability is in our [India's] interest." When asked about reports on attacks on minorities, Tharoor said there was indeed anarchy for a couple days, but he also stated, "I have also seen reports of Bengali Muslims protecting Hindu temples and protecting Hindu homes," adding that "we should be telling both sides of the story."
In this context, it's also important to note the BJP's realpolitik foreign policy. Debidatta Mahapatra of the Times of India explained India's current foreign policy as it stood on the sidelines of the Russia-Ukraine war, until Prime Minister Modi's recent historic visit to Ukraine. "As realist prudence demands, India cannot simply undertake a moralist standpoint and ignore the dictates of realpolitik," described Mahapatra. This very use of realpolitik in India's neighbourhood policy—which is understandable as nations do act in their own interests—has bred the anti-India sentiments that we saw in the Maldives earlier this year.
Undoubtedly, the portrayal of India's international strength by the BJP, the hosting of the G20 Summit and its renewed importance on the world stage are all causes for national pride for India. BJP capitalises on it for its own party's incentives, reframing what would have historically been Indian pride into Hindu nationalistic pride. This is a page out of a cultural populist's playbook, the use of "us vs them," as we have seen time and time again by Prime Minister Modi. The "Hindu pride"—which is more to do with politics and little, if none, with religion—is sold to the public because real metrics don't indicate the best picture.
Raghuram Rajan, former governor of India's central bank who resigned two years into BJP taking power, stated that Modi's goals of becoming a developed economy by 2047 is unachievable, citing high dropout rates and lack of high school education in the country of 1.4 billion where more than half are below the age of 30. Youth unemployment stands at 45.4 percent, one of the highest in the world. The Global Hunger Index rated their child wasting rate as the highest in the world—at 18.7 percent—exceeding countries with active conflicts such as Yemen. This makes it imperative for the BJP to hold onto realpolitik policies to sell its position in the world to its people at the cost of fostering antagonistic attitude with its neighbours—which are all a part of what the Hindustan Times calls the "Modi-Doval-Jaishankar" playbook. The playbook can be summarised as "shaping democratic verdicts" when deemed necessary.
Many commentaries have been written to understand the purpose of the Indian media's propaganda, aligned with the ousted Awami League, such as Sajeeb Wazed Joy's recent post on Facebook about controversial journalist Chandan Nandy's report suggesting, without evidence, that "Bangladeshi student movement 'coordinators' met ISI, US handlers in Pakistan, Dubai and Doha between April and September (in) 2023." By painting the democratic uprising as Islamist or anti-Indian and leveraging it to attack the Congress party, the BJP's media allies demonstrated the lengths to which they would go to mask the domestic challenges India is currently facing under the BJP rule. This includes the prevailing communalism and violence in Manipur which the pro-establishment media and BJP politicians have ignored, while Modi recently wrote on X (formerly Twitter) that he discussed the issue of "Hindu minorities" in Bangladesh, with US President Joe Biden.
Irregardless, at the end of the day, Bangladesh and India need to maintain a good relationship. For the pro-establishment media in India to continue pursuing the divisive commentaries and the current brand of unethical journalism will needlessly harvest an anti-India sentiment in Bangladesh and cultivate harmful sentiments between ordinary citizens of the neighbouring countries. And that is the last thing that South Asia needs right now.
Ramisa Rob is in-charge of Geopolitical Insights at The Daily Star.
Mahadev Ghosh is an independent researcher and a columnist for Geopolitical Insights at The Daily Star.
