Past as a prelude: On the Nagpur riots and Aurangzeb ( THE HINDU )
Past as a prelude: On the Nagpur riots and Aurangzeb :
There is ample empirical evidence that riots in India are often orchestrated by vested interests and are not spontaneous eruptions of social tensions. It would therefore be inaccurate to attribute the violence in Nagpur, which left dozens injured, solely to rumour-mongering or impulsive reactions. For days since the Budget session began on March 3 in Maharashtra, the ruling right-wing parties have persistently invoked the legacy of Mughal emperor Aurangzeb as a political talking point.
That a medieval ruler remains a recurring subject in contemporary political discourse not only highlights the misplaced priorities of governance but also raises suspicions that these controversies are being deliberately manufactured to distract from pressing livelihood issues. The evidence supports this view — Maharashtra, its rural regions in particular, is grappling with inflation, farmer suicides, and economic distress.
Yet, instead of addressing these urgent concerns, the political machinery appears focused on stoking public discord through inflammatory rhetoric, manipulating communal loyalties for electoral gains. These tactics were evident during the recent Assembly election campaign, where prominent leaders of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and its allies repeatedly invoked Aurangzeb as a campaign issue.
The intent behind this rhetoric was clear: a dog whistle designed to mobilise the majority community by casting Muslims as inheritors of a long-dead ruler’s legacy. Research indicates that riots are less likely to occur in societies where interfaith civic engagement is strong. The fact that riots erupted in Nagpur — a city with significant political and historical importance — stands as an indictment of the ruling establishment, which claims to represent all communities.
Also, the recent box office success of Chhaava, a film depicting the historical conflict between the Marathas under Chhatrapati Sambhaji and the Mughals under Aurangzeb, has fuelled the communal discourse. However, Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis’s assertion that the film’s popularity triggered the unrest is a convenient deflection — one that absolves the government of responsibility for fostering an atmosphere of hostility through its recurring rhetoric.
For Maharashtra to regain its stature as a leader in comprehensive development, its government must shift focus from divisive narratives to real socio-economic challenges. Civil society, too, must push back against communal forces attempting to exploit historical figures for cynical political ends. Only by resisting these polarising tactics can the State move towards genuine progress.
Safe from space: On the return of the NASA mission space crew
Safe from space: On the return of the NASA mission space crew :
In the early hours (IST) of March 19, 2025, a SpaceX crew capsule bearing NASA astronauts Sunita Williams, Barry Wilmore, Nick Hague, and Roscosmos cosmonaut Aleksandr Gorbunov splashed down off Florida. Ms. Williams and Mr. Wilmore had returned to the earth after nine months in the International Space Station (ISS), whereas they had originally been expected to spend eight days in the course of testing Boeing’s Starliner crew capsule.
The Starliner saga has now concluded, but not before it twisted the reality of human spaceflight out of context, making it sound like a caper rather than a testament to the virtues of protocol. Following Starliner’s launch in June 2024, a series of malfunctions left Ms. Williams and Mr. Wilmore onboard the ISS before the capsule returned empty to the ground in September.
The events spurred concerns and indignation in the popular imagination, swirling around a dearth of information both NASA and Boeing were reluctant to fill. As their stay was expanded to nine months, curiosity swelled over their well-being. While this response was natural, speculation fuelled by insufficient updates and political propaganda in the U.S. also fanned misinformation that cast Ms. Williams and Mr. Wilmore as having been “stranded” in space.
If the “stranded” narrative captures the gist of Starliner’s failure, it misses the inalienable contingencies at the heart of human spaceflight. Ms. Williams herself has sought to downplay the use of such terms. Over the years, but especially in the wake of the Challenger and Columbia shuttle disasters in 1986 and 2003, NASA has instituted procedures its personnel are required to follow in a variety of situations where events buck a pre-planned sequence.
One is that astronauts onboard malfunctioning spacecraft can move to the ISS, which is always prepared to host such visitors. But many actors framed NASA as weak-willed for sticking to its protocols. When it scrubbed a prior launch attempt of the capsule that returned the astronauts for technical reasons, supporters of U.S. President Donald Trump accused the agency of infirmity rather than acknowledging it as a well-known safety measure. Narratives that overlook the simple fact that two veterans were picked to pilot Starliner’s first crewed flight belie the existence of multiple safety checkpoints and the great lengths to which space agencies go to ensure one unexpected outcome does not spell catastrophe.
People, including in India — where concern for Ms. Williams parallels a growing pride in the country’s budding human spaceflight programme owing to her Indian ancestry — would do well to replace notions of triumphalism in space with good old “safety first”. Also, space agencies should realise the importance of clear, timely communication as an integral part of safety protocol.
Funds alone can’t secure global heft (ECONOMIC TIMES )
Funds alone can’t secure global heft : The Parliamentary Standing Committee on External Affairs has rightly argued that MEA’s budget is ‘disproportionately low’ given India’s ambition to play a larger global role and opportunities presented by shifting geopolitics.
It recommended that GoI increase the allocation by at least 20% in the next fiscal to meet expanding needs and ensure more effective global engagement. Additional funds are needed to address three key areas: strengthening the diplomatic cadre through human resource development, expanding the number of missions and acquiring diplomatic real estate. However, while more money is welcome, funds alone won’t be enough to boost India’s global heft.
Equally crucial is the need to better leverage existing resources, many of which are overlooked or underutilised. The complexity, interconnectedness and speed of global systems demand a shift from siloed approaches across all areas of engagement – foreign affairs is no exception. MEA, while serving as the nodal ministry, is not the sole custodian of India’s global engagement.
The scope of international interaction has expanded significantly, encompassing specialised sectors. To be more effective, MEA must collaborate with other ministries and agencies, functioning as a coordinated team with a plan. This means recognising expertise, leveraging strengths and building synergies to enhance foreign policy outcomes. It also calls for engaging a broad range of stakeholders and embracing diverse approaches to achieve shared goals.
The panel’s suggestion to boost development assistance is timely. The increased budget should be directed towards expanding these efforts. With the US and other traditional providers pulling back, India stepping up could significantly advance its foreign policy goals.