Why Does the West Persist in Casting India in a Negative Light?

"Why does the western media persist in casting India in a negative light?" This question has lingered as I observe a pattern in western media, recently reinforced by my doorman's query about Sikh-Hindu conflicts in India, influenced by articles he had seen about the persecution of Sikh minorities in India.

This interaction highlighted to me how repetitive negative portrayals in media can shape misperceptions. The Time article cited above among many others in the western media exemplifies this. These articles rarely present any factual data. Often anecdotal narratives are generalized and opinions are presented as facts. In the case of the article above, The Time presents unsubstantiated, speculative allegations as facts, supported only by distorted reminders of historical events. This is akin to claims of UK persecuting the Irish or Canada using the military to suppress popular voices in Quebec even today. When the distorted past is shown as the present, it fosters misconceptions, distorting the perceived realities of today.

The story highlighted above is not an isolated case; it reflects a broader pattern where the West and Western media seem fixated on casting India in a negative light. This tendency not only misrepresents the situation but also perpetuates misconceptions about India's socio-political dynamics. Here are a few additional examples that echo this theme.

Misrepresentation of India's Citizenship Policies

An example of biased reporting can be seen in the criticism of India's Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) juxtaposed against similar U.S. policies like the Lautenberg Amendment. While the Lautenberg Amendment has facilitated refugee status for certain religious minorities and is rarely criticized in Western discourse, the CAA has been heavily condemned for its exclusion of Muslim immigrants from its list of beneficiaries, despite both laws serving similar humanitarian purposes. For example: Globe & Mail, CBC, New York Times, BBC. The Western media's portrayal often omits these parallels, instead highlighting the CAA's perceived flaws. Ironically, the U.S. State Department and the USCIRF have also expressed concerns about the CAA's exclusion of Muslim migrants, labeling it a threat to religious freedom, while choosing to gloss over the parallels with the U.S.'s own Lautenberg Amendment.

Distortion of Prime Minister Modi's Speeches

Another recent instance of misrepresentation is the reporting on speeches by Prime Minister Narendra Modi. For example, Modi’s comments during a rally about India's right to self-defenses, specifically referring to the Balakot airstrike, were reported by some outlets as a threat to foreign nations, stripping the context which spoke to national security and anti-terrorism. The phrase used by Modi was "ghar mein ghus ke maarta hai" which translates to "strike inside the enemy's home," referring to a proactive approach to national defense. Globe & Mail reported this in its article titled “Narendra Modi’s threat to kill foreigners ‘in their homes’ can’t simply be ignored”. Such coverage can skew public perception, painting a picture of aggression instead of the intended message of strength and defense against terrorism.

The Balakot airstrike was a bombing raid conducted by Indian warplanes on 26 February 2019 in Balakot, Pakistan, against a training camp of the terrorist group Jaish-e-Mohammed. It was in response to the groups attack in Jammu and Kashmir on the 14th of February, 2019 which killed 40 Indian police personnel.

Economic Misrepresentations

A recent CBC article discussing unemployment in India serves as another example of selective reporting. Despite data showing a significant decline in both overall and youth unemployment rates in 2022, with figures dropping to 4.82% and 17.83% respectively, the article focused on the narrative of persistent economic challenges without acknowledging these improvements. This omission contributes to a skewed perception of India's economic situation, particularly post-COVID-19 recovery, and illustrates a pattern of highlighting negative aspects while ignoring positive developments.

Contradictions in Criticism of Energy Purchases

The criticism of India for purchasing oil from Russia, which is seen as supporting Moscow's war efforts against Ukraine, contrasts sharply with the less vocal criticism of European countries that continue to buy Russian gas (The Wall Street Journal). This selective scrutiny points to a double standard in how energy dependencies are discussed in Western media. While Europe’s reliance on Russian gas is a significant economic and geopolitical issue, the focus on India's purchases without equal criticism of European actions highlights inconsistencies in international criticism.

Uniform Civil Code

The western media is so obsessed with casting India in negative light that they gave a negative spin even to something that they should have celebrated.

India's proposed Common Civil Code aims to unify personal laws, potentially benefiting women, particularly from the Muslim community, by ensuring equal legal rights in marriage, divorce, and inheritance. Historically, Muslim women have been subject to personal laws that may not always provide equal rights compared to their male counterparts. By standardizing laws across all religions, the Common Civil Code will offer a more equitable legal framework, empowering Muslim women to have the same legal standing as women from other communities in India.

Under the current legal framework in India, Muslim women are subject to the Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act of 1937, which governs aspects of marriage, divorce, and inheritance. However, these laws have been criticized for not providing equal rights to women, particularly in matters of divorce and inheritance where women often receive less favorable treatment than men. The Shah Bano case in 1985 highlighted these issues when the Supreme Court of India ruled in favor of granting alimony to an elderly divorced Muslim woman, which led to widespread debate and the controversial passage of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act in 1986 that limited the right to alimony for Muslim women to the period of iddat (about three months post-divorce). This amendment was seen as a step back in the rights of Muslim women. A uniform civil code will potentially rectify such inequalities by providing a consistent set of laws for all citizens, irrespective of their religion, thereby enhancing the rights of Muslim women alongside other Indian women.

Interestingly National post among several other media outlets managed to make even this controversial in its articles such as "Indian state passes uniform marriage legislation opposed by Muslims as a Hindu code applied to all".

The Case of Hardeep Singh Nijjar

CBC's coverage of Hardeep Singh Nijjar's killing, the arrest of three accused Indian nationals and the speculative claims of links between the Indian government and organized crime without substantial evidence is yet another instance of negative portrayal.

I will stop here, as the examples are numerous. However, I remain troubled by the persistent negative portrayal of India by Western media. Without delving into speculation, I share these observations hoping to uncover why this portrayal persists.