Rice University's premier undergraduate journal of scholarship in domestic and international policy.
Rohini Pillay
Mar 19
“Hindi, Hindu, Hindustan”: The Impact of Modi's Hindutva Policies on India's Secular Fabric
Photo by Money Sharma/AFP via Getty Images
Introduction
As India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi vies for an unprecedented third term, the nation stands at a critical crossroads. This period of political ambition coincides with controversial cultural and religious shifts, most notably the opening of the Ram Mandir in Ayodhya. In the last month, tens of millions across India celebrated the opening of the Ram Mandir in Ayodhya––a new temple dedicated to the Hindu god Rama. However, on the international stage, the celebration of the construction of the Ram Mandir has struck controversy as a result of its location which was previously the site of the Babri Masjid, a mosque demolished by the Hindu activist group Vishva Hindu Parishad in 1992. The inauguration of the Ram Mandir is seen by many Indians as a symbol of Modi’s commitment to Hindu majoritarianism. Modi’s previous position as the Chief Minister of Gujarat is marred with allegations of his involvement in the mass anti-Muslim pogroms that followed a decade after the demolition of the Babri Masjid (Lodhi 2024).
The Ayodhya temple dispute represents a significant ideological shift toward the rise of Modi-style populism and the erosion of Indian secular democracy. The dispute reflects a series of Hindutva-based policies enacted by the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). Hindutva, or "Hinduness," is an ideology seeking to establish the hegemony of Hindus within India and is attributed to independence activist Vinayak Savarkar (Rafiq 2023).
Current Hindutva-based policies
The current political landscape in India, under the leadership of Prime Minister Narendra Modi and the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), has seen a pronounced emphasis on Hindutva-based policies. First, the revocation of Article 370 removed the special status and autonomy that Jammu and Kashmir––the only Muslim-majority state in India––had enjoyed and brought the region under the same legal and constitutional framework as the rest of India (Medha 2019). This move fulfills a longstanding ideological goal of the BJP to integrate Kashmir fully into India, which they consider an essential part of the Hindu-majority nation. Another aspect of the Hindutva agenda is the amendment of the Citizenship Act of 1955 to grant Hindu, Sikh, Buddhist, Jain, Parsi, and Christian illegal migrants from Afghanistan, Bangladesh, and Pakistan eligibility for citizenship in India, while excluding Muslims (Jaffrelot 2020). This policy has sparked widespread protests, with critics arguing that it undermines the secular foundation of the Indian constitution by discriminating against Muslims. Supporters of the act, however, argue that it provides refuge to persecuted minorities from neighboring Islamic countries. In total, the Citizenship Amendment Bill in combination with promises to implement the northeastern state of Assam’s National Register of Citizens nationwide marks a shift toward a more exclusionary citizenship framework. The NRC’s implementation aimed to identify and exclude those deemed illegal immigrants, a move that has disproportionately affected Muslims from Assam whose ancestors originated from Bangladesh. The publication of the NRC in 2019 resulted in the exclusion of approximately 2 million people––the majority being Muslim (Samuel 2019). These individuals were given a limited timeframe to prove their citizenship or face detention or potential deportation. However, the most controversial aspect of Modi's Hindutva-driven policy framework is his proposal to change India's name to Bharat. Bharat is grounded in Hindu nationalism primarily due to its deep historical and cultural roots in Hinduism, which shapes the national identity, and the political and social movements advocating for Hindutva that have gained prominence in recent decades. While proponents argue that the name 'Bharat' unifies its citizens under a common identity, critics view it as a symbolic erasure of India's secular and pluralistic ethos, marginalizing non-Hindu communities (Saaliq 2023).
Impact on U.S. Relations
The BJP’s Hindu-nationalist policies under Modi have harmed India’s relationship with the U.S. On the one hand, the United States recognizes India as a crucial strategic partner in the Indo-Pacific region, particularly in countering China’s growing influence. Upon taking office, U.S. President Joe Biden placed significant emphasis on engaging with New Delhi within the framework of the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue, a strategic alliance of the United States, India, Japan, and Australia, primarily seen as a counterbalance to Chinese advances in the Indo-Pacific (“Modi's Hindu Nationalist” 2023). However, this has created a dilemma in Washington as the United States seeks to reconcile the pursuit of strategic interests with concerns over India's domestic political trajectory. The “defense of liberal democratic values” has been a central theme of Biden’s foreign policy concerning China, which has led to speculation about the compatibility of India as a strategic partner, considering its illiberal turn under Modi (“Modi's Hindu Nationalist” 2023). While President Biden has not directly addressed Modi’s human rights violations, he has nodded on several occasions to India’s need for a continued commitment to “democratic values” (Lemire and Haberkorn 2023). This dilemma was further accentuated by India's neutral stance on the Russian invasion of Ukraine and its reluctance to align with the U.S. position at the United Nations.
Policy Solutions
The Indian government should initiate a policy approach that helps reconstruct India’s electoral system. While India’s system of democratic federalism has been accredited with bonding a country with vast religious, ethnic, cultural, and linguistic differences, in recent years flaws within the system have been exposed. One major flaw would be the unwillingness of India’s political class to “reallocate parliamentary seats in light of the country’s changing demographics” which has led to severe malapportionment (Vaishnav and Hintson 2019). This has significant implications for the democratic process, as it leads to disproportionate representation in the Lok Sabha, where some states are overrepresented while others––particularly those with faster population growth––are underrepresented. The reluctance to address this issue undermines the principle of "one person, one vote" and exacerbates regional disparities and tensions. As a consequence, the system inadvertently fuels divisive politics, including the rise of Hindutva-oriented policies that may not accurately reflect the diverse aspirations and needs of India's pluralistic society (Vaishnav and Hintson 2019). To remedy this, the government must prioritize electoral reform that includes updating the allocation of parliamentary seats based on current population data. Additionally, actions can be taken to minimize the effects of the first-past-the-post electoral system, which often marginalizes minority communities and discourages voters from participating in the electoral process. Such reforms should aim to ensure that India's legislative bodies more accurately represent its demographic realities, thereby fostering a more inclusive and equitable political environment. This step is crucial for sustaining India's democratic fabric and addressing the challenges posed by majoritarian politics.
In navigating its relationship with India, the United States should encourage policy solutions which address concerns of India’s eroding secularism and religious freedom while respecting India's sovereignty. As a result of Biden’s determination to maintain positive relations with its Quad partner, the United States has not applied the same pressures and standards for securing military aid under the Leahy Law. The U.S State Department has recorded several incidents of human rights violations “including torture, forced disappearances, and extrajudicial killings” by India’s military, notably in Kashmir (Chakrabarty 2022). In 2022, the U.S passed the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) which included provisions for human rights conditions on military and security assistance to Columbia, Saudi Arabia, the Philippines and Egypt. Furthermore, an amendment by Representative Jim McGovern was added to prohibit arms sales to governments implicated in genocide or breaches of international humanitarian law while Representative Sara Jacobs proposed an amendment to strengthen the Leahy Law, mandating its application to security allies receiving U.S. security aid for counterterrorism and unconventional warfare efforts. Despite these changes, the NDAA’s human rights conditions did not extend to India in 2022. In order to address India’s Hindutva-focused policies the U.S. should employ a more comprehensive approach that includes diplomatic engagement to emphasize the importance of upholding secular and religious freedoms, along with introducing targeted conditions on security assistance that align with human rights standards (Chakrabarty 2022). The U.S. should extend the NDAA’s human rights conditions to India. This approach, while controversial, would put more pressure on Modi’s government to address and reform policies that undermine religious freedom and secular values.
Conclusion
As India navigates a period of political and ideological transformation under Modi, it faces challenges to its secular and democratic foundation. The rise of Hindutva-oriented policies have not only reshaped the domestic landscape but also posed questions for strategic partners like the United States. The U.S. could engage in open diplomatic dialogues which emphasize the importance of religious freedom and secularism, and strengthen partnerships in defense and counter-terrorism. However, the U.S should also implement targeted incentives like extending the NDAA’s human rights conditions to India to incentivize a shift away from Hindutva-centric policies. Ultimately, the path India chooses in dealing with its current challenges will have significant implications both domestically and internationally. The outcome of this journey will not only define the future of India but will also have a profound impact on the geopolitical dynamics of the region beyond.
The views expressed in this publication are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect the position of The Rice Journal of Public Policy, its staff, or its Editorial Board.
Medha. The Revocation of Kashmir’s Autonomy: High-Risk Hindutva Politics at Play. German Institute of Global and Area Studies (GIGA), 2019. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/resrep24808. Accessed 9 Feb. 2024.
Comments